A broken Miocene Tooth

[Shellseeker]

I was hunting in an area that might produce Miocene whale fossils and a little less likely Megalodons. I did find a dolphin or whale Vertebra.  This type is very thin.

and also a small Meg.  So the location lived up to its reputation.

 

But, I did not expect to find this broken mammal tooth:  I almost tossed it,  but got a glimpse of the inside enamel.

Love that blue... Remember... Miocene... All suggestions and comments appreciated !!

 

[val horn]

I don’t recognize it. But anything of that size suggests elephant /gomphothere.  Which would have mastodon like teeth and would be Miocene.  Just a thought. No real info.

[Shellseeker]

So,  I will do some of my thinking on TFF, while I attempt to  identify this tooth fragment.

Quote

The Florida Hemphillian is divided into four subintervals: the Hh1 from 9.0 to 7.5 million years ago; the Hh2 from 7.5 to 6.8 million years ago; the Hh3 from 6.8 to 5.7 million years ago, and the Hh4 from 5.7 to 4.75 million years ago (Tedford et al., 2004). The Hh1 and Hh2 together form the early Hemphillian and the Hh3 and Hh4 the late Hemphillian. There are no fossil localities in Florida that are known to fall in the Hh3 interval.

Quote

Characteristic species for the late Hemphillian in Florida: Carcharocles megalodon, Carcharodon hastalis, Galeocerdo cuvier, Hesperotestudo hayi, Borophagus pugnator, Enhydritherium terraenovae, Lynx rexroadensis, Pleiolama vera, Hexameryx simpsoni, Eocoileus gentryorum, Balaenoptera cortesii, Goniodelphis hudsoni, Corystosiren varguezi, Cormohipparion emsliei, Nannippus aztecus, Neohipparion eurystyle, Tapirus polkensis, and Teleoceras hicksi.

 

So, Megalodon was a characteristic species in Florida 7 MYAs. In looking at the 2nd photo above, I am struck by the similarity of the enamel to Mastodon (or its ancestors)....

 

Quote

Index species for Hh1 in Florida: Siren simpsoni, Pseudemys williamsi, Heterodon brevis, Anhinga grandis, Thinobadistes segnis, Mylagaulus kinseyi, Borophagus secundus, Amebelodon floridanus, Prosthennops serus, and Calippus hondurensis

 

https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/florida-vertebrate-fossils/land-mammal-ages/hemphillian/

 

 

So, Amebelodon floridanus is one possibility !!! There are likely a couple of more.   !!!

[Shellseeker]

10 minutes ago, val horn said:

I don’t recognize it. But anything of that size suggests elephant /gomphothere.  Which would have mastodon like teeth and would be Miocene.  Just a thought. No real info.

 

RIGHT ON!!!!!

[Shellseeker]

Quote

The genus Amebelodon is known from three well-recognized late Miocene species from North America, the type species Amebelodon fricki (Great Plains only), Amebelodon floridanus (Florida and Great Plains), and Amebelodon britti (Florida and Great Plains) (Tassey and Shoshani, 1996; Shoshani and Lambert, 1998). Other North American species formerly placed in this genus are now either considered synonyms of one of those three or are referred to different genera

 

So another possibility is Amebelodon britti. A. floridanus is early Hemphillian, A. britti is late Hemphillian.

 

Just looking at the fragment I have, it seems more likely for A. britti.  I have sent an email to Richard Hulbert.  He has actually excavated entine skulls of Shovel_Tuskers from the Miocene of Florida.  I am almost as pleased with this fragment as anything whole I have found in the last couple of months.

 

[Shellseeker]

Well,

What I have speculated so far is good background for what it is not. (A. flordanius or A. britti) Now for some real expertise from Richard Hulbert, Director of the Vertebrate Research Lab at the University of Florida.

Quote

Amebelodon floridanus is restricted to the early Hemphillian, ca. 7 to 9.5 mya, so is an unlikely candidate.  Such a fragmentary tooth is not diagnostic at the genus level, and I am not positive if you can tell if it came from a gomphothere or an early species of mastodon (two different families of proboscidians).

The most common gomphothere in Florida during the late Miocene and Pliocene is Rhynchotherium. I am not listing a species name, as there is strong disagreement about which species names are valid in this genus and their chronological distribution. We currently have a graduate student at UF who is working on this issue.

There is a second type of gomphothere in Florida at this time known as Gomphotherium simplicidens. Its teeth are much smaller than those of Rhynchotherium, with lower crowns, tend to lack cement, and have a more simple crown pattern.

Finally, there is a true member of the mastodon family. It is always rarer than contemporary gomphotheres. Originally placed in the genus Pliomastodon, it is now usually regarded as belonging to the same genus as the well known Pleistocene species Mammut americanum, but in a different species. It currently goes by the name of Mammut matthewi. You would not see obvious differences between fragmentary molar teeth of these two mastodon species, as they are mostly distinguished by features of the skull, lower jaw, and tusks.

Cheers,  Richard

 

I always get a wealth of current scientific information from Richard's responses. and a lot of leads to follow up on... He is a tremendous resource for Florida fossil hunters.

 

Based on Richard's comments, my high probability assumption is Rhynchotherium .sp just based on probability. I will try to compare teeth from  Gomphotherium simplicidens   versus Rhynchotherium from what photos are available on the Internet.

 

 

 

[DD1991]

On 9/7/2020 at 10:07 AM, Shellseeker said:

 

So another possibility is Amebelodon britti. A. floridanus is early Hemphillian, A. britti is late Hemphillian.

 

Just looking at the fragment I have, it seems more likely for A. britti.  I have sent an email to Richard Hulbert.  He has actually excavated entine skulls of Shovel_Tuskers from the Miocene of Florida.  I am almost as pleased with this fragment as anything whole I have found in the last couple of months.

 

When Amebelodon britti was described as a new taxon, Lambert (1990) coined Konobelodon for this species as a subgenus of Amebelodon. Konidaris et al. (2014) and Wang et al. (2016) elevated Konobelodon to full generic rank based on comparisons of the teeth of K. britti and K. atticus with those of Amebelodon. Also, Amebelodon floridanus has been placed in the new genus Stenobelodon by Lambert (2023) due to it having a more primitive dental and lower tusk morphology than that of the Amebelodon type species (the paper by Lambert 2023 also notes that even though Amebelodon hicksi, A. paladentatus, and A. sinclairi are known from deposits of early Hemphilian age like those yielding fossils of Stenobelodon, they also differ from Stenobelodon in having lower tusks with flatter profiles [although not as flat as that of Amebelodon]). 

 

Konidaris, G., Roussiakis, S., Theodorou, G., and Koufos, G., 2014. The Eurasian occurrence of the shovel-tusker Konobelodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea) as illuminated by its presence in the late Miocene of Pikermi (Greece). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 34 (6): 1437–1453.

 

Lambert, W. D., 1990. Rediagnosis of the genus Amebelodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae), with a new subgenus and species, Amebelodon (Konobelodon) britti. Journal of Paleontology 64: 1032–40.

 

Lambert, W. D., 2023. Implications of discoveries of the shovel-tusked gomphothere Konobelodon (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae) in Eurasia for the status of Amebelodon with a new genus of shovel-tusked gomphothere, Stenobelodon. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.2023.2252021

 

Wang, S., Shi, Q., He, W., Chen, S., and Yang, X., 2016. A new species of the tetralophodont amebelodontine Konobelodon Lambert, 1990 (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the late Miocene of China. Geodiversitas 38 (1): 65–97.

[Shellseeker]

On 10/6/2023 at 11:52 PM, DD1991 said:

When Amebelodon britti was described as a new taxon, Lambert (1990) coined Konobelodon for this species as a subgenus of Amebelodon. Konidaris et al. (2014) and Wang et al. (2016) elevated Konobelodon to full generic rank based on comparisons of the teeth of K. britti and K. atticus with those of Amebelodon. Also, Amebelodon floridanus has been placed in the new genus Stenobelodon by Lambert (2023) due to it having a more primitive dental and lower tusk morphology than that of the Amebelodon type species (the paper by Lambert 2023 also notes that even though Amebelodon hicksi, A. paladentatus, and A. sinclairi are known from deposits of early Hemphilian age like those yielding fossils of Stenobelodon, they also differ from Stenobelodon in having lower tusks with flatter profiles [although not as flat as that of Amebelodon]). 

 

Konidaris, G., Roussiakis, S., Theodorou, G., and Koufos, G., 2014. The Eurasian occurrence of the shovel-tusker Konobelodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea) as illuminated by its presence in the late Miocene of Pikermi (Greece). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 34 (6): 1437–1453.

 

Lambert, W. D., 1990. Rediagnosis of the genus Amebelodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae), with a new subgenus and species, Amebelodon (Konobelodon) britti. Journal of Paleontology 64: 1032–40.

 

Lambert, W. D., 2023. Implications of discoveries of the shovel-tusked gomphothere Konobelodon (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae) in Eurasia for the status of Amebelodon with a new genus of shovel-tusked gomphothere, Stenobelodon. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.2023.2252021

 

Wang, S., Shi, Q., He, W., Chen, S., and Yang, X., 2016. A new species of the tetralophodont amebelodontine Konobelodon Lambert, 1990 (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the late Miocene of China. Geodiversitas 38 (1): 65–97.

During the recent site disruptions and subsequent glitches in my browsers, I briefly saw that you had posted a response, but lost track of it. 

 

You post infrequently,  but your responses are always insightful and packed with information. They provide me the opportunity to learn new concepts around the more unusual fossils I find. The idea that I can better identify this find is exciting.   Thank you,  Jack

[Family Fun]

Can’t help at all Jack, but the meg is amazing, at least to me.

 

Rick

[Shellseeker]

23 hours ago, Family Fun said:

Can’t help at all Jack, but the meg is amazing, at least to me.

 

Rick

I liked the Meg also and it was what I was trying to find that day land hunting,  but getting a chunk of gomph with color triggered my puzzle solving gene.