BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 Hi everyone, I'm looking to buy a Chubutensis tooth. I know the question of identifying Chubutensis and its confusion with Megalodon gets posted a lot. I read through the previous topics, and tried to learn how one might differentiate it from Megalodon. It's identified as a Chubutensis tooth, found off the coast of North Carolina. Everything I've read leads me to believe this is a Megalodon - most importantly, I don't see the cusps. I do see the cracks where the cusps may have been, but I also read discussion on other threads saying this is somewhat common and doesn't necessarily mean it's a Chubutensis. Here are the photos provided. Could someone kindly let me know if it's more likely to be a Megalodon or Chubutensis tooth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrehistoricWonders Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 I don’t see any pictures, does anyone else(could just be bad internet connection where I am) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 6 minutes ago, Familyroadtrip said: I don’t see any pictures, does anyone else(could just be bad internet connection where I am) It's working from my side, but I'll upload them as an Imgur album in case that works better - https://imgur.com/a/TsQpHOx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelivingdead531 Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 I’m not seeing the photos either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 1 minute ago, thelivingdead531 said: I’m not seeing the photos either. That's weird; do the ones in this link work? https://imgur.com/a/TsQpHOx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelivingdead531 Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, BellamyBlake said: That's weird; do the ones in this link work? https://imgur.com/a/TsQpHOx The link does work for me, but I know it’s not great for posterity. It’s best if the images are uploading directly to the site so that they may be a reference in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 5 minutes ago, thelivingdead531 said: The link does work for me, but I know it’s not great for posterity. It’s best if the images are uploading directly to the site so that they may be a reference in the future. Ofc yeah. Like I say it's weird - I was uploading earlier today just fine, and they continue to show from my side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 @BellamyBlake Please upload the images directly to the Forum rather than via a link. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrehistoricWonders Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 I still don’t see the first pictures, but the uploaded ones are working for me, I do agree with @thelivingdead531 it’s best too have them directly on the forum, as for the tooth itself I can’t say whether it’s a meg or chub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 15 minutes ago, JohnJ said: @BellamyBlake Please upload the images directly to the Forum rather than via a link. I did. Here's a screenshot showing them appearing from my side: No one else can see them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 29 minutes ago, BellamyBlake said: I did. Here's a screenshot showing them appearing from my side: No one else can see them The do not appear to be attached (using the click to choose files text) when I look at how the post was created. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 1 hour ago, JohnJ said: The do not appear to be attached (using the click to choose files text) when I look at how the post was created. I edited it and attached like you noted. Hopefully that worked! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulianP Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 I can see all photos fine now. Whatever you did seems to have worked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 One must understand Carcharocles chubutensis is a transitional chronospecies. The lines between it and it’s descendant is blurry at best. This tooth is the latest stage of C. chubutensis IMO or one could argue an early C. megalodon. The residual cusps are there but fairly fused in. The name is irrelevant as long as you understand where the tooth fits evolutionarily and ecologically. 4 “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 What Mason said above. Chubutensis are commonly found off the coast in the Carolinas (along with megs). Our current thinking is that this chronospecies is the intermediate step between C. auriculatus and C. megalodon. I have some I collected offshore North Carolina that have more pronounced side cusps (more similar to auriculatus) and some where they blend in more like the one pictured above that are more similar to megs. We know that some juvenile meg teeth can sometimes have atavistic cusps and I suspect smaller chubutensis may show the cusps better than the larger teeth. Seems to be that way in the few that I've collected but this is certainly anecdotal given my limited experience with this intermediate species. Though willing to be corrected, I'd agree that the tooth you are looking at purchasing is a chub. If you were planning on making a display of auriculatus (rick) => chubutensis (chub) => megalodon (meg) you might wish to purchase one that shows the cusps a but more prominently but if the price is right and you like the tooth then go for it. Cheers. -Ken 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, digit said: auriculatus (rick) => chubutensis (chub) => megalodon (meg) Side not: this skips Carcharocles angustidens in between ricks and chubs. Also the debatable chronospecies Carcharocles sokolovi (late Rick, early Angy transitional) 2 “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 Ah, yes--how can I forget "angies"? Maybe because all we ever find down here in Florida are megs (not that I'm complaining). auriculatus (ricks) => angustidens (angies) => chubutensis (chubs) => megalodon (megs) I'm not near qualified to get into the Carcharocles sokolovi debate. Cheers. -Ken 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 Richard Hulbert (Ed.) in his THE FOSSIL VERTEBRATES OF FLORIDA (2001) sums up the situation with megatooth sharks as well as anyone. He points to research that says that the type specimen originally labeled as Carcharodon auriculatus is actually another species, C. subauriculatus. Depending on which authors you go with, C. subauriculatus is synonymous with C. angustidens or C. sokolowi. Hulbert favors sokolowi, following Case and Cappetta (1990). Sooo . . . Florida auriculatus teeth apparently are something else, but it is not certain yet (2001) which is the correct species name under the Rules of Nomenclature, pending more study of morphology. And, I wouldn't be surprised if some other reorganization appears. There are eleven mega anna between the Oligocene Chandler Bridge Fm (C. auriculatus) and the Late Eocene Crystal River Fm (C. sokolowi). For illustration: 3 http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page What seest thou else In the dark backward and abysm of time? ---Shakespeare, The Tempest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 18, 2020 Author Share Posted July 18, 2020 I thank everyone here for educating me and for the wonderful discussion. This is more complicated than I assumed, but I mean that in the best of ways. The variations and depth are fascinating. Definitely a lot here for me to think about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 18, 2020 Share Posted July 18, 2020 There's rarely much to learn in simple black/white answers. Nuance leaves much more room for knowledge to creep in (if you are not careful). Someone on the forum some years back collected a series of megatoothed shark teeth to show the sequence of chronospecies in a nice display. You might be able to locate that post by searching the forum for a combination of the species named above. Might give you more grist for the mill. Cheers. -Ken 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BellamyBlake Posted July 19, 2020 Author Share Posted July 19, 2020 4 hours ago, digit said: There's rarely much to learn in simple black/white answers. Nuance leaves much more room for knowledge to creep in (if you are not careful). Someone on the forum some years back collected a series of megatoothed shark teeth to show the sequence of chronospecies in a nice display. You might be able to locate that post by searching the forum for a combination of the species named above. Might give you more grist for the mill. Cheers. -Ken I aim for a similar display so that will be useful. I'll search it out, thanks for letting me know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now