How to ID dino teeth from Jurassic of Morocco

[Runner64]

Lately lots of teeth have been popping up being offered as theropod teeth from the Jurassic of Morocco. As these teeth become more available to the casual collector, it’s important to know what you are buying. However, @Down under fossil hunter and I have started to notice that some of the Jurassic teeth in fact looked a lot like Cretaceous Carchardontosaurid and Abelisaurid teeth seem in the Kem Kem beds.

 

For example, 2 teeth:

Wrinkling on the serrated edges appears to indicate a Cretaceous Carchardontosaurid tooth. However, both of these were offered as from the late Jurassic Ksar Metlili Formation in the Atlas Mountains.

 

Potential Abelisaurid teeth:

 

And for example, a tooth from the El Mers formation jurassic:

Large serrations and fat, robust tooth.

 

When you look at the geology of this location, you may notice there’s lots of overlap between Cretaceous and Jurassic sites:

The El Mers and Guettioua are both around the middle Jurassic yet the Ksar Metlili is at the very end of the Jurassic (almost Cretaceous) and is part of the Moroccan “ red beds” which also contains some cenomanian units. I would hypothesis that the current diggers in the Atlas are in the Red Beds which is how they are finding late Jurassic sauropod teeth (Ksar Metlili formation) in close proximity to Spino and Carch teeth as that part of the Red Beds are the exact same age as both the Aoufous and Ifezouane formations you would find in the Kem Kem group. For this reason, Cretaceous and Jurassic theropod teeth are being mixed together in what appears to be the same matrix (marl). I don’t believe this is being done with malicious intent but rather some confusion on which outcrop they are in.
 

My advice for collectors is don’t buy any tooth based off location. This should always be the case but especially for this location where provenance is poor and there’s a lot of overlap and confusion. Check to make sure the tooth doesn’t have any characteristics of a cenomanian tooth (carchar, abelisaur, etc.). Buy a complete tooth where you can see all serrations, this will be the best way to confirm what age your tooth may be. Serrations are very important for not only these teeth but for any theropod tooth.

 

[JoeS]

very interesting indeed! I thought along the same lines looking at this tooth up for sale from the Ksar Metilili Fm, looks like an Abelisaurid indet. premaxillary tooth, I might be wrong though!
With basically nothing described from the Jurassic of Morocco this is quite a challenge.

 

 

So you are saying that looking at the matrix on this particular tooth here, even though it is not the 'usual' Kem Kem red is not a good indicator?

[Runner64]

1 hour ago, JoeS said:

very interesting indeed! I thought along the same lines looking at this tooth up for sale from the Ksar Metilili Fm, looks like an Abelisaurid indet. premaxillary tooth, I might be wrong though!
With basically nothing described from the Jurassic of Morocco this is quite a challenge.

 

 

So you are saying that looking at the matrix on this particular tooth here, even though it is not the 'usual' Kem Kem red is not a good indicator?

This looks like an Abelisaurid tooth from a cenomanian site in the Atlas Mountains. It may come from one of the green regions in the geologic map I have in my initial post.

 

From what I’ve found, this undescribed Cretaceous site and the Jurassic sites share a common formation material (marl). Which makes identifying based off preservation and matrix composition very difficult, if not, impossible.

[Anomotodon]

Middle Jurassic El Mers formation specimens are quite distinct because of gypsum crystals, which are easy to notice on unprepared teeth. Also most of the definite mid-Jurassic teeth come Boulemane, while this more controversial late Jurassic material is described as from a geographically distant Talsint/Annoual area. The issue is that Ksar Metlili formation occupies only a small portion of that area (see attached geologic map), with Mid Jurassic and 'Mid' Cretaceous deposits in close proximity. So most of these teeth could very well be Carcharodontosaurids/Abelisaurids from Albian-Cenomanian formations in the area. Also there is no evidence of large theropod material being common in either Ksar Metlili or Annoual formations, all vertebrate remains there are restricted to microsites. The only way to know for sure where they come from is to have precise stratigraphic information and coordinates of the finds. 

 

[Runner64]

27 minutes ago, Anomotodon said:

The only way to know for sure where they come from is to have precise stratigraphic information and coordinates of the finds. 

Agreed. Unfortunately this information is not well kept so it may be purely guesswork in some instances.

 

27 minutes ago, Anomotodon said:

Middle Jurassic El Mers formation specimens are quite distinct because of gypsum crystals, which are easy to notice on unprepared teeth.

Thank you for the correction. Do you have a photo of these gypsum crystals by chance? Might help some collectors that are eyeing a fossil from this location.

[Troodon]

Good that this is raised have similar concerns.  So Ibrahim addressed this in his latest paper.  He is considering the Dekkar 2 and 3 formation part of the new Kem Kem Group.

 

Excerpt from publication 

More recent geological and paleontological work in the Anoual region has resulted in the naming of several formations and the establishment of a better temporal framework based on recovered fossils (Haddoumi et al. 1998). The coarser-grained Dekkar 2 and finer-grained Dekkar 3 formations were named for the beds underlying the Cenomano-Turonian platform (Haddoumi et al. 2016: fig. 2). These formations bear a strong general resemblance to the lower and upper units of the Kem Kem beds, located some 500 km to the south. The Dekkar 2 Formation, for example, is composed of fine-grained marls interleaved with sand- and silt-stones, calcarenitic lenses, and gypsum evaporates. The overlying Dekkar 3 Formation, in contrast, is finer-grained and composed principally of marls interleaved with thin-bedded carbonate and gypsum evaporites (Haddoumi et al. 2016). Haddoumi et al. (2016) tentatively regarded the Dekkar 2 Formation as Aptian in age, although the only fossils on which the date could have been established are charophytes, ostracods and bivalves near the base of the unit. The Dekkar 3 Formation was regarded as Cenomanian in age; it must predate the Late Cenomanian age of the base of the overlying limestone platform. These ages, therefore, broadly correspond with the age of the Kem Kem beds. Dekkar formations 2 and 3 are preceded by Dekkar Formation 1, a coarse-grained unit lacking vertebrate remains and tentatively regarded as Barremian to Aptian in age. These Dekkar formations compose the Dekkar Group, bounded below by an unconformity and above by the Cenomanian-Turonian platform.

[Runner64]

53 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Good that this is raised have similar concerns.  So Ibrahim addressed this in his latest paper.  He is considering the Dekker 2 and 3 formation part of the new Kem Kem Group.

 

Excerpt from publication 

More recent geological and paleontological work in the Anoual region has resulted in the naming of several formations and the establishment of a better temporal framework based on recovered fossils (Haddoumi et al. 1998). The coarser-grained Dekkar 2 and finer-grained Dekkar 3 formations were named for the beds underlying the Cenomano-Turonian platform (Haddoumi et al. 2016: fig. 2). These formations bear a strong general resemblance to the lower and upper units of the Kem Kem beds, located some 500 km to the south. The Dekkar 2 Formation, for example, is composed of fine-grained marls interleaved with sand- and silt-stones, calcarenitic lenses, and gypsum evaporates. The overlying Dekkar 3 Formation, in contrast, is finer-grained and composed principally of marls interleaved with thin-bedded carbonate and gypsum evaporites (Haddoumi et al. 2016). Haddoumi et al. (2016) tentatively regarded the Dekkar 2 Formation as Aptian in age, although the only fossils on which the date could have been established are charophytes, ostracods and bivalves near the base of the unit. The Dekkar 3 Formation was regarded as Cenomanian in age; it must predate the Late Cenomanian age of the base of the overlying limestone platform. These ages, therefore, broadly correspond with the age of the Kem Kem beds. Dekkar formations 2 and 3 are preceded by Dekkar Formation 1, a coarse-grained unit lacking vertebrate remains and tentatively regarded as Barremian to Aptian in age. These Dekkar formations compose the Dekkar Group, bounded below by an unconformity and above by the Cenomanian-Turonian platform.

Thanks haven’t seen this paper before but sure is nice to have a name for the Cenomanian site. I think it also needs to be said that no dinosaur species have been described for Jurassic or Cretaceous sites in the Anoual Regions as well. 

[dinosaur man]

On 12/7/2020 at 2:41 PM, Runner64 said:

Lately lots of teeth have been popping up being offered as theropod teeth from the Jurassic of Morocco. As these teeth become more available to the casual collector, it’s important to know what you are buying. However, @Down under fossil hunter and I have started to notice that some of the Jurassic teeth in fact looked a lot like Cretaceous Carchardontosaurid and Abelisaurid teeth seem in the Kem Kem beds.

 

For example, 2 teeth:

Wrinkling on the serrated edges appears to indicate a Cretaceous Carchardontosaurid tooth. However, both of these were offered as from the late Jurassic Ksar Metlili Formation in the Atlas Mountains.

 

Potential Abelisaurid teeth:

 

And for example, a tooth from the El Mers formation jurassic:

Large serrations and fat, robust tooth.

 

When you look at the geology of this location, you may notice there’s lots of overlap between Cretaceous and Jurassic sites:

The El Mers and Guettioua are both around the middle Jurassic yet the Ksar Metlili is at the very end of the Jurassic (almost Cretaceous) and is part of the Moroccan “ red beds” which also contains some cenomanian units. I would hypothesis that the current diggers in the Atlas are in the Red Beds which is how they are finding late Jurassic sauropod teeth (Ksar Metlili formation) in close proximity to Spino and Carch teeth as that part of the Red Beds are the exact same age as both the Aoufous and Ifezouane formations you would find in the Kem Kem group. For this reason, Cretaceous and Jurassic theropod teeth are being mixed together in what appears to be the same matrix (marl). I don’t believe this is being done with malicious intent but rather some confusion on which outcrop they are in.
 

My advice for collectors is don’t buy any tooth based off location. This should always be the case but especially for this location where provenance is poor and there’s a lot of overlap and confusion. Check to make sure the tooth doesn’t have any characteristics of a cenomanian tooth (carchar, abelisaur, etc.). Buy a complete tooth where you can see all serrations, this will be the best way to confirm what age your tooth may be. Serrations are very important for not only these teeth but for any theropod tooth.

 

I agree there has been a lot, actually in the last week I’ve been offered a least 5 from this area!

[Runner64]

4 hours ago, dinosaur man said:

I agree there has been a lot, actually in the last week I’ve been offered a least 5 from this area!

If you’re considering buying any, please make sure to post on the forum to get some extra eyes to make sure it’s accurate.

[dinosaur man]

23 hours ago, Runner64 said:

If you’re considering buying any, please make sure to post on the forum to get some extra eyes to make sure it’s accurate.

Yes I will do so 

[Runner64]

4 teeth from the high Atlas Mountains were just posted for sale on an auction site. The only location is Figuig Province. This is not adequate enough to be able to tell what formation these teeth are from because there are cenomanian sites (Dekkar Formation) and the Ksar Metlili Formation is here.

 

This one appears to be a Cretaceous abelisaur:

 

I cannot make a call on these 3. Could be Cretaceous or Jurassic without better location info...too bad, these would be cool teeth if they had better records. Essentially scientifically worthless now.

 

Buyer beware, make sure you know what you are getting.

[Troodon]

On 12/15/2020 at 6:00 PM, Runner64 said:

Figuig Province.

Not sure this is a province but its not near the High Atlas Mountains.

 

A publication on theropod teeth from the real Anoual

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248687117_Theropod_teeth_from_the_basalmost_Cretaceous_of_Anoual_Morocco_and_their_palaeobiogeographical_significance.

 

 

 

 

[FF7_Yuffie]

Given how many of these teeth are cropping up now, anyone think that in a couple years they'll be as common and widely available as the usual Kem Kem teeth? Or will it be a temporary influx while they're found during construction of a road or something? I don't know how it works with the Jurassic site there.

[Troodon]

T

19 minutes ago, FF7_Yuffie said:

Given how many of these teeth are cropping up now, anyone think that in a couple years they'll be as common and widely available as the usual Kem Kem teeth? Or will it be a temporary influx while they're found during construction of a road or something? I don't know how it works with the Jurassic site there.

Hard to say but unlikely.  When you attend a show there are thousands KK teeth available for sale. 

[Troodon]

Caution everyone to be careful I've seen a Carcharodontosaurid tooth sold as an indeterminate Allosauroidea.  Although technically accurate if you look way up the family tree its very deceptive form of selling if done intentionally 

[Kikokuryu]

1 hour ago, Troodon said:

On 12/15/2020 at 5:00 PM, Runner64 said:

Figuig Province.

Not sure this is a province but its not near the High Atlas Mountains.

I believe that it is the province where Talsint is located where all of these dubious Jurassic teeth are coming from. I assume the sudden influx of these teeth are all from a single source as they are suddenly popping up every week at a consistent rate. Though, I think people are starting to figure out that these are not Jurassic in nature.

 

There a few specimens I saw on auction like the Spinosaurid and Pterosaur teeth from this locale that are definitely not Jurassic. These are not specimens I bought. Haven't touched any of these yet as the prices seemed kinda unappealing for what is Kem Kem stuff, now in black. These particular specimens along with other Carc and Abelisaurid teeth were all stated to be Cretaceous, Cenomanian from Talsint, which is part of the Figuig Province? It's also stated as coming from a new location, so I assume they are very recent material. Likely not a coincidence that multiple dealers are carrying this material all of a sudden.

[Troodon]

T

10 minutes ago, Kikokuryu said:

I believe that it is the province where Talsint is located where all of these dubious Jurassic teeth are coming from. I assume the sudden influx of these teeth are all from a single source as they are suddenly popping up every week at a consistent rate. Though, I think people are starting to figure out that these are not Jurassic in nature.

 

There a few specimens I saw on auction like the Spinosaurid and Pterosaur teeth from this locale that are definitely not Jurassic. These are not specimens I bought. Haven't touched any of these yet as the prices seemed kinda unappealing for what is Kem Kem stuff, now in black. These particular specimens along with other Carc and Abelisaurid teeth were all stated to be Cretaceous, Cenomanian from Talsint, which is part of the Figuig Province? It's also stated as coming from a new location, so I assume they are very recent material. Likely not a coincidence that multiple dealers are carrying this material all of a sudden.

 

Thanks on the Province.

All of these teeth would be cool buys if priced accordingly they are from a different formation.  Hard to say if it will dry up or continue.  Guess it will depend on collector interest