Theropod tooth (Labelled as Nano)

[FF7_Yuffie]

Ok, I have given a go at doing some ID on this myself, using the very helpful "identifying theropod teeth from the Hell Creek/Lance Formation." thread. But hit a brick wall.

 

So, if anyone could A) Let me know what this tooth is and B -- If I am on the right track with my amateurish ID attempts, that would be amazing.

 

So, I got to eliminating it as being a Nano (Because Nano teeth are apparently rectangular and this is quite ovalish.

And eliminating it as being a small version of a T-rex tooth because it isn't fat and the tip doesn't look right.

And eliminated Archaeoraptor as it being a bit big.

Eliminated Dakoraptor because the recurve isn't enough.

 

This is my first time having a proper go at IDing a tooth for sale beyond googling similar--so odds are I've missed something obvious or got it completely wrong.

 

So, it is labelled as theropod Nanotyrannus, Lance Formation, 0.5 inches in length.

 

Any help, as always, much appreciated.

[Troodon]

In identifying theropod teeth from the Lance/Hell Creek is not always just about size or recurve but overall morphology.  Acheroraptor teeth can be 1/2" but it needs to have vertical ridges, mesial serrations greater than distal and be very compressed. Dakotaraptor are not only distinguished by how recurved they are but by many other characteristics which can be hard to identify and more similar to Nano than Acheroraptor.  Nano teeth of this size do have a rectangular base with a pinch in the center, smooth sides and can have serrations density similar to dromaeosaurids.  The morphology of juvenile Trex is best identified by looking at the base to look for an oval base and a blunt tip which seems to fit your tooth.

[FF7_Yuffie]

1 minute ago, Troodon said:

In identifying theropod teeth from the Lance/Hell Creek is not always just about size or recurve but overall morphology.  Acheroraptor teeth can be 1/2" but it needs to have vertical ridges, mesial serrations greater than distal and be very compressed. Dakotaraptor are not only distinguished by how recurved they are but by many other characteristics which can be hard to identify and more similar to Nano than Acheroraptor.  Nano teeth of this size do have a rectangular base with a pinch in the center, smooth sides and can have serrations density similar to dromaeosaurids.  The morphology of juvenile Trex is best identified by looking at the base to look for an oval base and a blunt tip which seems to fit your tooth.

 

Thanks as always.

Looks like morphology and the differences between adult and juvenile teeth will be my next stop! I find it interesting--when I first started collecting fossils, about 12 years ago, I just liked having on my shelf. Now, I've started collecting again after an 8 year or so absence, I'm finding it more interesting taking a good detailed look at them. Shame the bulk of my collection is in England and I'm in Asia.

 

So, back to the tooth. This seems to match juvenile Trex? Neat. It's at a pretty good price, so if there's a good chance of it being a Rex, I'l probably pick it up.  Thanks again.

 

[FF7_Yuffie]

@Troodon

 

Oh, and would you mind taking a quick peek at another tooth from same seller? That I believe is probably a maxilliary T-Rex? (It has the rectangularish base but concaving in in the middle like one of the examples you posted)

 

Thanks again

[Troodon]

7 minutes ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

@Troodon

 

Oh, and would you mind taking a quick peek at another tooth from same seller? That I believe is probably a maxilliary T-Rex? (It has the rectangularish base but concaving in in the middle like one of the examples you posted)

 

Thanks again

Just post your teeth

[FF7_Yuffie]

4 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Just post your teeth

Thanks. I'm just worried about eating up too much of your time

 

From Judith River -- 0.41 inch.

 

Described as theropod, possible dromaesaur.

 

[Abstraktum]

Regarding your first tooth: I knew I saw this tooth somewhere before and I found the topic  

 

[FF7_Yuffie]

9 minutes ago, Abstraktum said:

Regarding your first tooth: I knew I saw this tooth somewhere before and I found the topic  

 

 

 

It's only got a day and a bit left, but if @dinosaur man is planning to pick it up, I'll hold off from getting it. 

I've got a pretty good Rex tooth in my collection already and can put the money instead towards another, much more expensive fossil I have my eyes on.

[dinosaur man]

1 minute ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

 

 

It's only got a day and a bit left, but if @dinosaur man is planning to pick it up, I'll hold off from getting it. 

I've got a pretty good Rex tooth in my collection already and can put the money instead towards another, much more expensive fossil I have my eyes on.

It’s ok, I have found some other stuff that I got since then 

[Troodon]

19 minutes ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

Thanks. I'm just worried about eating up too much of your time

 

From Judith River -- 0.41 inch.

 

Described as theropod, possible dromaesaur.

 

 

Well on this tooth the preservation looks like Hell Creek do you have a locality its from?  Its a Tyrannosaurid tooth.

[FF7_Yuffie]

3 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Well on this tooth the preservation looks like Hell Creek do you have a locality its from?  Its a Tyrannosaurid tooth.

 

 

The item description just says "Theropod tooth-- Judith River Formation, Hill County, Montana.  Seller labels it as Theropod or possible Dromaesaur

 

Cheers

[Troodon]

Okay teeth from Hill County are typically not that color but its a Tyrannosaurid either way.

[FF7_Yuffie]

4 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Okay teeth from Hill County are typically not that color but its a Tyrannosaurid either way.

 

Cool, maybe a mistake with location then.

Thanks for the help.