Echies of Texas (Part 6) - A Dry Spell Broken

[Uncle Siphuncle]

23 hours ago, Al Dente said:

I would be interested in hearing @Uncle Siphuncle 's opinion on the Globator echinoid. I'm not sure how this ended up at Lake Texoma but I would bet money it is an Echinolampas appendiculata from the Eocene of North Carolina. Here's one from Ludwigia's gallery that even has the same oyster spat.

 

 

I realize there is currently a coin shortage, but please allow me to add my $.02 so we can examine something closer to a totality of clues, starting with diagnostic features.  I'm not used to seeing a Texas Globator of any age with such pronounced narrowing of the ambitus posteriorly.  While some astute observations have been noted regarding ambs etc., let's draw focus on the periproct as well.  Diagnostic attributes worthy of comparison between the 2 genera in discussion include orientation of the periproct (does it break the ambitus vs. tuck underneath it when viewed aborally), size of the periproct relative to the peristome, and shape of the periproct (teardrop vs. oval) - all good stuff to examine, and I've added a few Globator parryi (=whiteyae) images for comparison from the Washita of Texas.  Contour of the adoral surface (concave, convex, flat) is another good feature to compare. 

 

I'd have to look back at my notes to mention species of fossils were found associated with these echinoids (I recall Morts and Holasters and Macs, but my memory isn't specific enough to nail down fm).  These were found out of context in some spoil piles, but I have found many G. parryi hundreds of miles away in the contemporaneous  Boracho fm, San Martine mbr of west Texas.

 

While I see no reason why a G. parryi wouldn't show up at Texoma, the matrix and oysters on the specimen in question look more like East Coast limerock than what I'm used to seeing in the Texas Washita.  If the specimen in question is not a personal find, provenance is in serious question since the morphology is inconsistent with the Washita.  Coupled with that, a knowledgeable collector would probably donate an oddball to an institution rather than a private collector.  So I don't doubt the credibility of the current owner, but provenance is in question.  Might be a good idea to ask the donor if he has ever obtained Echinolampas specimens either as personal finds or through trade.  If he insists this was found at Texoma, does he have any of the same species in matrix that could be presented in photos, ideally with other associated fossils?

 

That is my long winded explanation for falling within the Echinolampas camp.  It would be very cool for science if I am completely wrong, and this is indeed something new or at least uncommon for the Washita of Texas.  That is my favorite egg to take on the face.

[Uncle Siphuncle]

And just for fun and comparison, here is an association of Globator vaughni from the Austin Grp of South TX. 

[FossilDAWG]

The morphology seems to me to be distinctly in the Echinolampas camp and quite distinct from Globator. The test is not particularly eroded.so that cannot explain the differences.  Since this was a gift and it was not personally collected by Jamie Lynn (at least that was my understanding of the situation) she cannot personally attest to the provenance.   It would not be the first time specimens got mixed up and ended up with the wrong label in a collection.

 

Don

[JamieLynn]

Firstly, thank you so much for all of your input.  I have sent a message to John to see if he can tell me exactly where he collected it at Lake Texoma. He is an astute fossil collector (has a number of things in the Dallas Musuem so I do trust his judgement, but that's not to say that he could have mixed it up!) Hopefully he will be able to give me a little more info. 

@Uncle Siphuncle - just making sure you know you "quoted" the picture of Al Dente's post of Ludwigias specimen from the Eocene of North Carolina and not my specimen in question. 

[DPS Ammonite]

44 minutes ago, JamieLynn said:

Firstly, thank you so much for all of your input.  I have sent a message to John to see if he can tell me exactly where he collected it at Lake Texoma. He is an astute fossil collector (has a number of things in the Dallas Musuem so I do trust his judgement, but that's not to say that he could have mixed it up!) Hopefully he will be able to give me a little more info. 

@Uncle Siphuncle - just making sure you know you "quoted" the picture of Al Dente's post of Ludwigias specimen from the Eocene of North Carolina and not my specimen in question. 

Thanks Jamie for posting your fossils. An interesting conversation.
 

Don’t dismiss the slight possibility that a human could have left this or the possibility that this may be from Eocene sediments that may have been long since eroded away. Sometimes a newer fossil from an upper layer can fall into a lower layer in a crack, cave or animal burrow. Fossils can get reworked multiple times. 
 

NSR is notorious for non Cretaceous fossils such as petrified wood and Paleozoic corals.

 

I also remember a DPS member that found unusual echinoids at the Heard Museum in McKinney, TX that did not belong to the Austin Group. Another member had placed them there so that museum visitors could find some interesting fossils from an otherwise rather boring area for fossils.
 

I have found misplaced fossils in parking lots near Post Oak Creek.

 

Reworked fossils happen and humans help it to happen too. 

[Tidgy's Dad]

Great thread, everybody! 

[JamieLynn]

1 hour ago, DPS Ammonite said:

Thanks Jamie for posting your fossils. An interesting conversation.
 

Don’t dismiss the slight possibility that a human could have left this or the possibility that this may be from Eocene sediments that may have been long since eroded away. Sometimes a newer fossil from an upper layer can fall into a lower layer in a crack, cave or animal burrow. Fossils can get reworked multiple times. 
 

NSR is notorious for non Cretaceous fossils such as petrified wood and Paleozoic corals.

 

I also remember a DPS member that found unusual echinoids at the Heard Museum in McKinney, TX that did not belong to the Austin Group. Another member had placed them there so that museum visitors could find some interesting fossils from an otherwise rather boring area for fossils.
 

I have found misplaced fossils in parking lots near Post Oak Creek.

 

Reworked fossils happen and humans help it to happen too. 

 

Indeed!! Reminds me of the thread a while back on here of the guy who found a Trilobite in a creek in Austin!!! That was a great read....and mystery! 

[piranha]

4 hours ago, JamieLynn said:

Indeed!! Reminds me of the thread a while back on here of the guy who found a Trilobite in a creek in Austin!!! That was a great read....and mystery! 

 

[JamieLynn]

Well, John says he found it at Eisenhower State Park. So that would be Goodland or Kiamichi. So if it's Eocene.....that's really weird. But heck, could have been dropped. Who knows

[JamieLynn]

well, the mystery of the "out of place echie" has been solved. John says the only place he has collected echinoids is in Texas and Mississippi, back in the 80s.  And they were all stored at his uncles  who apparently "screwed with things" and so proper provenance was lost.  I looked up and Mississippi does have Eocene deposits so it is likely it is from there. Thanks for the initial ID @Al Dente - you were spot on.   Just goes to show... I'd rather find things myself. 

[grandpa]

10 minutes ago, JamieLynn said:

I'd rather find things myself. 

I totally agree!   . . .

 

. . . OTOH, if your friend, John, has any other paracidarid's he'd like to give to a grateful recipient . . .

 

Just sayin' 

 

 

BTW, have you checked to see if Echolampus has previously been recorded in Miss. - Eocene fm., yes, but how about the fossil itself?  Just wondering.