Fossil unknown

[boomershouse]

[Rockwood]

It's unclear how the two different textures relate to each other, but I think it adds up to sedimentary rock being the more likely explanation.

[Ludwigia]

I'd say sedimentary schist with mineral intermediate layers. There doesn't appear to be any sign of wood grain or boniness to it.

[boomershouse]

Thank you for the input I couldn’t make heads out tails out of it. It piqued my curiosity. 

[erose]

Where in Texas. Not much schist here to speak of.  Kinda reminds me of some dark petrified wood a friend showed me.

 

[Jerry W.]

Looks like petrified palm wood to me.  Pieces of that wood will have the spots or rods running parallel to each other and those rods will make something that looks like lines running along on the other sides of the specimen.  Dip the rock in some water and take a better look since those features show up better wet.

Edited January 29, 2020 by Jerry W.
Added information.

[Ludwigia]

Hmmm. Looks like I might have spoken too quickly. I can see what you guys mean with palm wood now.

[Rockwood]

Spots, lines, rods running. 

We need a perspective that shows how it all relates.

[Ludwigia]

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

Spots, lines, rods running. 

We need a perspective that shows how it all relates.

Maybe this helps. Looks like a possibility at any rate.

[Rockwood]

28 minutes ago, Ludwigia said:

Maybe this helps. Looks like a possibility at any rate.

Well, it shows what palm wood would look like.

Honestly it looks like things could easily be 90' off from where they should be in these photos though.

[Jerry W.]

Being neither a botanist nor a paleobotanist, admittedly my previous description of palm wood lacks correct terminology of its anatomy.  I considered that Boomershouse, as a new member, may also be unfamiliar with the proper names of the bits and parts of his fossilized plant so I opted for common descriptions.  As for perspective, palm wood is quite similar in structure to that of celery, bamboo and  ferns, all of which have fibrous vascular bundles, previously referred to as "spots", that do the same thing; carry water and nutrients through the stem of the plant.  The outer structure of these stems generally do not have exposed vascular bundles, though some may have a similar appearing "spots" that are actually thin root bundles that penetrate the outer surface of the stem.  If Boomershouse's specimen was found where he lives in Texas, perhaps it is similar to the Texas State Stone, Petrified Palmwood.  

Edited January 29, 2020 by Jerry W.
Spelling correction

[Spoons]

Looks like a Rectangular drainage pattern too me.

 

However, the presence of the "spots" does have me convinced that the origin of this specimen is not purely geological. 

[boomershouse]

Thank you for all the input yes I’m new to fossils which is ironic as old as they are. Seems the consensus fossilized palm on this one.  I’ll keep hunting have a few other different things I want to post. Going hunting in a week or two in south Texas. Posting a few more pictures same find just to be sure 

[boomershouse]

Side view

[boomershouse]

[boomershouse]

[boomershouse]

[Ludwigia]

Thanks for the well-focussed photos. I'm afraid I'll have to back down on the palmwood possibility now that I've seen this piece in a better light and shall return to my original analysis as sedimentary rock.

[Jerry W.]

On 1/30/2020 at 1:22 PM, Ludwigia said:

Thanks for the well-focussed photos. I'm afraid I'll have to back down on the palmwood possibility now that I've seen this piece in a better light and shall return to my original analysis as sedimentary rock.

I would tend to agree.  I'm finding, even in my own submissions here, so much guesswork in the "Fossil ID" section could be eliminated with the use of a good rock saw.

[jpc]

22 minutes ago, Jerry W. said:

I would tend to agree.  I'm finding, even in my own submissions here, so much guesswork in the "Fossil ID" section could be eliminated with the use of a good rock saw.

Um, but what if it is a fossil and now it is a fossil with a chunk sawed off.  

[Jerry W.]

1 hour ago, jpc said:

Um, but what if it is a fossil and now it is a fossil with a chunk sawed off.  

That is the price of being too poor to own an M.R.I. machine.  Scientists had to even cut off a bit of the Shroud of Turin in an attempt to validate it.  If something is unidentifiable, you can keep a curiosity or do what it takes to identify it, I guess.  To each their own.  I'm lazy, myself.  That's why I come here to ask others to do my identifying for me.    

[Pbassham]

Omg! I died! So candid! I too am lazy but I’m afraid I’m more ignorant.  I should’ve paid more attention in earth science.  I loved history, never made below 100 even through college, not smart enough to realize history and science go hand in hand

[Rockwood]

2 hours ago, Jerry W. said:

That is the price of being too poor to own an M.R.I. machine.  Scientists had to even cut off a bit of the Shroud of Turin in an attempt to validate it.  If something is unidentifiable, you can keep a curiosity or do what it takes to identify it, I guess.  To each their own.  I'm lazy, myself.  That's why I come here to ask others to do my identifying for me.    

A saw capable of cutting thin sections would more cost effective. You could spend some of the savings on a dissecting microscope.  

[jpc]

If you are OK with it, you could also hit it with a hammer to look inside.  A gentle tap on the corner.   

[Rockwood]

48 minutes ago, jpc said:

If you are OK with it, you could also hit it with a hammer to look inside.  A gentle tap on the corner.   

Can't beat it for cost, and it stands a fair chance of being effective.