Jump to content
FF7_Yuffie

Coelophysis, or something else?

Recommended Posts

FF7_Yuffie

Sold as Coelophysis tooth, claw and vert set. From Bull  Canyon. Seller has quite a few, so I just picked two at random. 

 

Is it coelo, or something else?

 

Thanks

Screenshot_20200504-125410_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20200504-125318_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PaleoNoel

While it's the right age for Coelophysis, the no definitive remains have been found in the formation. Sellers tend to label the smaller dinosaur looking teeth as coelophysis as it's among the most recognizable names for any Triassic dinosaur. Some of the time the teeth aren't even from dinosaurs, but labeling them as such will lead them to sell better. 

I am only repeating what I have read and inferred from posts on here. I haven't bought any Bull Canyon fossils yet (although I probably will eventually as Triassic fossils are almost absent in my collection).

I will defer to more knowledgeable members in this subject.

@Troodon @Jaimin013 @Runner64 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Runner64

Here is a good starting point and will help with ID:

Likewise, I know very little on Bull Canyon material except that it is very difficult to ID properly and archosaur fossils are commonly sold as dinosaurian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
20 minutes ago, Runner64 said:

Here is a good starting point and will help with ID:

Likewise, I know very little on Bull Canyon material except that it is very difficult to ID properly and archosaur fossils are commonly sold as dinosaurian.

 

 

Thanks. Ill have a look after work. The seller has a fair few triassic bits.

 

He has archosaur teeth which, to me, do look different to the possible coelophysis.

Screenshot_20200504-135733_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie

So, looking at the Triassic ID link, I'm gonna go with them not being a coelophysis teeth. 

 

But, I am probably gonna buy it --- good price for a Triassic tooth, claw and vert.

 

But, still curious if anyone has any suggestions what they might be. 

 

Is it possible it could be bird--protoavis? A shot in the dark, maybe. But they dont seem to match the archosaur teeth i see on google.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

None of items shown are coelophysis.   Most are  likely not dinosaurian other than the partial claw in the second photo but who knows.  Again like I mention in my topic coelophysis has yet to be described from the Bull Canyon Fm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
25 minutes ago, Troodon said:

None of items shown are coelophysis.   Most are  likely not dinosaurian other than the partial claw in the second photo but who knows.  Again like I mention in my topic coelophysis has yet to be described from the Bull Canyon Fm.

 

 

Cheers. I had my doubts after reading your link.

 

Only thing is, looking around the web, I dont know what they could be or even vaguely dinosaur, archosaur etc.

 

I want it cos of the excellent price, but having unidentified fossils on my display bugs me so much lol. Still, I cant fault the price even if misidentified

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

You are not going to get an ID on the teeth, might be dinosaurian or most likely some Archosauriform.  Just not that much known.  They are cool teeth 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
5 hours ago, Troodon said:

You ard not going to get an ID on the teeth, might be dinosaurian or most likely some Archosauriform.  Just not that much known.

 

Thanks for the help. Its much appreciated :)

 

If I can trouble you for a quick peek at a pair of different teeth from same seller, one as unidentified theropod and the other as possible Herrerasaurid (which I think is actually an Archosaur)  would that be ok?

 

I dont wanna be a pain.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
7 minutes ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

If I can trouble you for a quick peek at a pair of different teeth from same seller, one as unidentified theropod and the other as possible Herrerasaurid (which I think is actually an Archosaur)  would that be ok?

Of course, here to try to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
9 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Of course, here to try to help.

 

Thanks very much, I reallu appreciate it.

 

This the herrerasaurid (Chindesaurus? Its mentioned as being from there) they are10mm

 

 

Screenshot_20200504-193444_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie

These are the three theropod teeth. 3mm long. My unexpert view says middle one  definitely not.

Screenshot_20200504-193854_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20200504-193916_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20200504-193932_Chrome.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Th

7 minutes ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

 

Thanks very much, I reallu appreciate it.

 

This the herrerasaurid (Chindesaurus? Its mentioned as being from there) they are10mm

 

There are partial teeth and we have no information  published on Chindesaurus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
7 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Th

There are partial teeth and we have no information  published on Chindesaurus

So these, you dont think are dinosaur at all? Cool, I will probably leave these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
2 minutes ago, Troodon said:

They could be but so little is published on teeth cannot positively say but good candidates.  If you get them I would send photos to Ken Carpenter for his opinion.

 

Nice, they are quite cheap, so I will get them bought.

 

Shows how mych I know haha. I had middle one as not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

All are candidates but the top and bottom one are not very recurved.  I think the middle one is the best candidate.   Do get them and send photos to Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
6 minutes ago, Troodon said:

All are candidates but the top and bottom one are not very recurved.  I think the middle one is the best candidate.   Do get them and send photos to Ken

 

Thanks very much, I'll get them bought and get in touch with Ken Carpenter about them. I appreciate the suggestion :)

 

Any of the three labelled Hererasaurus possible? Or are those not worth?

 

Thankd again, I appreciate your time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Hard enough to ID complete teeth.  Not worth it since they are partial teeth.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
27 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Hard enough to ID complete teeth.  Not worth it since they are partial teeth.  

 

Thanks very much for your help.

 

I need to brush up more on my ID skills I think. So, just to check, a legit Triassic era theropod tooth will be much more recurved than other teeth (archosaur, amphibian etc) for sale?

 

A straighter tooth is one to avoid.

 

Thanks again. You've been a big help.  Once I have the ordered teeth and have heard back from Ken, I'll be sure to let you know his thoughts if you're interested?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Well recurved teeth are more typical of theropod but you have lots of positional variations so lots of unknowns. The species Tawa hallae may be an exception but not a lot to clmpare against.  

Hey anything you find out from Ken or others please pass on they are the experts not us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie

I heard back from Ken Carpenter about the teeth. Two likely Coelophysis, one he is uncertain.

 

"Tooth 1 @ 3 are probably Coelophysis.

Tooth 2 MAY be Coelophysis, but the serrations on the back edge look proportionally larger and seem to angle a little towards the tip. Also it APPEARS that there are no serrations along the front edge. So this tooth is less certain.

Download this article:

Buckley, L.G. and Currie, P.J., 2014. ANALYSIS OF INTRASPECIFIC AND ONTOGENETIC VARIATION IN THE DENTITION OF COELOPHYSIS BAURI (LATE TRIASSIC), AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SYSTEMATICS OF ISOLATED THEROPOD TEETH: Bulletin 63 (Vol. 63). New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science.

https://econtent.unm.edu/digital/collection/bulletins/id/3739/rec/5"


I emailed them in the same order as I posted them on here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
3 hours ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

I heard back from Ken Carpenter about the teeth. Two likely Coelophysis, one he is uncertain.

 

"Tooth 1 @ 3 are probably Coelophysis.

Tooth 2 MAY be Coelophysis, but the serrations on the back edge look proportionally larger and seem to angle a little towards the tip. Also it APPEARS that there are no serrations along the front edge. So this tooth is less certain.

Download this article:

Buckley, L.G. and Currie, P.J., 2014. ANALYSIS OF INTRASPECIFIC AND ONTOGENETIC VARIATION IN THE DENTITION OF COELOPHYSIS BAURI (LATE TRIASSIC), AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SYSTEMATICS OF ISOLATED THEROPOD TEETH: Bulletin 63 (Vol. 63). New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science.

https://econtent.unm.edu/digital/collection/bulletins/id/3739/rec/5"


I emailed them in the same order as I posted them on here. 

Fantastic, thanks if you get them they should be labeled  cf coelophysis since they are not described from the Bull Canyon Fm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF7_Yuffie
1 hour ago, Troodon said:

Fantastic, thanks if you get them they should be labeled  cf coelophysis since they are not described from the Bull Canyon Fm.

 

I have ordered them. Will do. Thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Praefectus

Hi @Troodon. Does this mean that teeth with similar recurve and serrations can also be labeled as cf coelophysis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

 

35 minutes ago, Praefectus said:

Hi @Troodon. Does this mean that teeth with similar recurve and serrations can also be labeled as cf coelophysis?

This morphology is not described in the papers I've seen but Ken is more knowledgeable than all of us put together.  I would do it with the First and Third tooth only.  I think the middle one is theropod but not Coelophysis.  I edited my Triassic tooth topic to include these two teeth as references 

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.

×