Jump to content

Pliocene boring sponge traces on tooth?


Bradley Flynn

Recommended Posts

Hoping someone could help me identify the traces on this tooth? I found the tooth with pliocene fossil shells and the location does have middle to late pleistocene mammal fossils. I'm 90% sure this tooth is from a cape porcupine Hystrix africaeaustralis and the species still thrives in the area, from the pleistocene. If these are traces of a sponge then the tooth is a little older than thought. If it's another organism that has left the traces it could be late pleistocene or holocene with some mineralization taken place. 

IMG_20200907_132843.jpg

IMG_20200907_132818.jpg

IMG_20200907_132748.jpg

IMG_20200907_085155.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Osedax worm traces maybe? From what I have read Osedax are aquatic and attack fresh bones of dead animals by secreting an acid that dissolves the bone. I am in the process of looking into a terrestrial organism that can make these marks.

Do these marks look familiar to anyone? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that Dermestid beetles are used to clean a carcass, but can't find anything that confirms that they will eat hard bone let alone teeth. Other bone boring beetles are just to big, while the traces on the tooth are quite narrow and shallow. Maybe a fungus or bacteria? 

Feel free to chime in at anytime:headscratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fungi and cyanobacteria could also be responsible for the traces on the tooth. My conclusion for now is that the tooth is modern and the traces where formed due to bioerosion. I'm awaiting some info from a paleontologist friend, although this is not his field I'm sure he can help me out and I will update here. 

Another thread where I ask a question that I end up answering myself:DOH: For all I know no one has even looked at this thread:default_rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you would need to look at a modern version to see the difference. I think it could be just how a weathered old tooth looks. Not sure if traces are original or made after original animal died. Cool tooth though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In which kind of sediment was the tooth found, terrestrial or marine?

" We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. "

Thomas Mann

My Library

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, abyssunder said:

In which kind of sediment was the tooth found, terrestrial or marine?

Hi, the tooth was found with some plio-pleistocene marine shell fossils,the area is about 100m above sea level. It is totally possible that the tooth is recent as the species Hystrix Africaeaustralis still thrives in the area. I'm trying to figure out what the marks are on the tooth as some of the shells have the same kind of markings. My thinking is that if the tooth was found with plio-pleistocene shells and has matching markings it could be from the same time period. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your reply.

If the tooth stays too long in a marine bed, sometimes could be considered to be in different category than osteic.

It could be in the realm of a marine bioerosional environment, so Meandroplydora, Caulostrepsis, Rogerella, etc. could be considered as possible trace fossils.

 

Edit: Maeandropolidora would be the correct name for what I've suggested before, as an example. Sorry for the misspelling.

" We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. "

Thomas Mann

My Library

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, abyssunder said:

Thank you for your reply.

If the tooth stays too long in a marine bed, sometimes could be considered to be in different category than osteic.

It could be in the realm of a marine bioerosional environment, so Meandroplydora, Caulostrepsis, Rogerella, etc. could be considered as possible trace fossils.

Yes:b_idea:thank you:dinothumb: did a quick search on your suggestions and it seems like viable possibilities. Going to look into it further and see what I come up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/8/2020 at 12:41 PM, Bradley Flynn said:

I know that Dermestid beetles are used to clean a carcass, but can't find anything that confirms that they will eat hard bone let alone teeth.

I have had a colony of dermestid beetles and never observed anything like this on bones. They generally move on after the meat is gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/09/2020 at 4:49 AM, ClearLake said:

I have had a colony of dermestid beetles and never observed anything like this on bones. They generally move on after the meat is gone. 

Thanks

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...