Jump to content
Chesapeeker

It's a coincidence, I swear (another Mazon Creek ID post)

Recommended Posts

Chesapeeker

Hi, everyone, it's been a minute -- I hope y'all are well and that you and your families are healthy and safe.

 

I'm required to say "y'all" since we moved to New Orleans last summer.  Fantastic city, great people, but I won't be peeking in the Chesapeake or anyplace else on the East Coast again any time soon.

 

Then, *this* all happened.  During this lockdown, it occurred to me that I could finally get around to trying to identify some of the material I've had sitting in boxes for years (and I'll post a few others).   But what do I find when I log onto the FF after ages?  A positive gaggle of Mazon ID posts.  Love it!

 

I collected this little fish in 2010 from the South Unit at Mazonia-Braidwood.  He measures a whopping 13mm from nose to tail.  I've been poking around on the web but I'm having a hard time with the ID.  It looks like he has two spiky fins sticking up from just behind his head (they're clearest in the last photo).  My brain itches with knowing that I've seen this guy someplace before, but I just can't find him again.  Thoughts? 

 

Thanks...y'all. 

Fish1A.jpg

Fish1B.jpg

Fish1C.jpg

Fish1D.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoons
10 minutes ago, Chesapeeker said:

I'm required to say "y'all" since we moved to New Orleans last summer.

Nice find! :thumbsu: Could it be a shrimp? Is picture #2 the other half of the concretion or am I getting a case of the dreaded “reverse lighting syndrome”?

 

I hope your staying safe and healthy as well.

-Nick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chesapeeker
16 minutes ago, Spoons said:

Nice find! :thumbsu: Could it be a shrimp?

 

Thanks, Nick! I thought about a shrimp, but under a 10x loupe -- I *really* need to find a good photomicrography setup, getting a decent photo of the negative impression was a challenge --  that eye looks (ahem) pretty fishy. And, below the eye seems to be a fin part. That's what's had me banging my cranium.  On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit that I'm the rankest of rank amateurs, so if the Collective says it's a shrimp, I'll mix up the remoulade and start my roux.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spoons
1 minute ago, Chesapeeker said:

 

Thanks, Nick! I thought about a shrimp, but under a 10x loupe -- I *really* need to find a decent photomicrography setup, getting a decent photo of the negative impression was a challenge --  that eye looks (ahem) pretty fishy. And, below the eye seems to be a fin part. That's what's had me banging my cranium.  On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit that I'm the rankest of rank amateurs, so if the Collective says it's a shrimp, I'll mix up the remoulade and start my roux.   

It’s just a guess. I’m really not familiar with mazon creek material at all. I’d possibly wait for members more familiar with the locality to thrown in their their two cents before you call the case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chesapeeker

And yes, photo #2 is the other half of the concretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carboniferouspat

Sorry it is not anything. That’s just the way the rock fractured. No fossil material showing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FossilNerd

These folks may be able to help. :) 

 

@RCFossils @Nimravis 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digit
3 hours ago, Carboniferouspat said:

Sorry it is not anything. That’s just the way the rock fractured. No fossil material showing at all.

I agree. We'll wait for a definitive assessment from our members mentioned above who've seen more Mazon Creek concretions than I'll ever see but the second photo is all I needed to see as it shows that there is no difference in texture of coloration in the middle of the concretion only a place where the concretion did not pop on the same plane as the rest of the concretion. Mazon Creek fossils can be quite faint and enigmatic and are often the fossil equivalent of a Rorschach Test.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RCFossils

I agree, unfortunately this is not a fossil.

The rock just fractured in a strange way which is not unusual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chesapeeker

Thanks, all. I swear I'm not nuts, this concretion is a whole different story under a 10x loupe...:look: The next couple I post will be no mystery (other than their species), I promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Kmiecik

There may be a fragment of something there that, in combination with how the concretion cracked, suggests more than what is there. Mazon Creek material is often problematic in this regard. In spite of excellent preservation in some specimens, others can be vague enough to drive one crazy, even with the specimen in hand. A photo of one that is not exactly screaming out its ID can make you pull your hair out. I know; I've seen thousands of them. From what I can see so far, my guess is shrimp fragment, but I'm probably wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nimravis

Not seeing anything in this piece and that is the problem with Mazon Creek concretions, they look like all kinds of things, but in the end most are duds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×