Odontocete or squalodon?

[FossilizedJello]

Looking to purchase the tooth, seller has it listed as odontocete but I believe it is squalodon. If it is squalo I will definetly be buying immediately. 

Also figured that it would be a good thumbnail when people search squalodon on the forum as you dont see them very often.

 

Thanks all

[frankh8147]

Wait for more answers but I'm thinking Squalodon.

[FossilizedJello]

4 minutes ago, frankh8147 said:

Wait for more answers but I'm thinking Squalodon.

It looks near identical just lesser quality.

Thanks for the reply!

Im very interested in squalodon or anything other then the normal dolphin, seal or whale teeth so this is exciting.

 

[Brett Breakin' Rocks]

1 hour ago, FossilizedJello said:

ooking to purchase the tooth, seller has it listed as odontocete but I believe it is squalodon. I

Where was it found .. collected ? .. Location is important. ie. If it was found in South Carolina ?  North Carolina .. ? No squalodonts described in SC etc..

 

Cheers,

Brett

[FossilizedJello]

9 minutes ago, Brett Breakin' Rocks said:

Where was it found .. collected ? .. Location is important. ie. If it was found in South Carolina ?  North Carolina .. ? No squalodonts described in SC etc..

 

Cheers,

Brett

Is this certain? I thought they have been found in the Carolina's. I sent the buyer a message but all he says is that it came in a box with other stuff so he guesses Miocene in age. However, it has been listed along with stuff like this picture so it makes me assume he has Calvert materials. Then again I guess this Odontocete tooth could be from Bakersfield

[Brett Breakin' Rocks]

27 minutes ago, FossilizedJello said:

Is this certain? I thought they have been found in the Carolina's.

North Carolina Pungo/Calvert Formation in Maryland, yes it is a possibility ... The color does not look like something found in the bone-beds of Southern California .. but someone that collects there could help. 

 

Very cool tooth nonetheless .. too bad he doesn't have a locality.

 

Bobby B's Blog post on this very subject.

https://coastalpaleo.blogspot.com/2016/12/no-you-dont-have-prosqualodon-tooth-and.html

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

 

[FossilizedJello]

2 hours ago, Brett Breakin' Rocks said:

North Carolina Pungo/Calvert Formation in Maryland, yes it is a possibility ... The color does not look like something found in the bone-beds of Southern California .. but someone that collects there could help. 

 

Very cool tooth nonetheless .. too bad he doesn't have a locality.

 

Bobby B's Blog post on this very subject.

https://coastalpaleo.blogspot.com/2016/12/no-you-dont-have-prosqualodon-tooth-and.html

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

 

Lets see when he gets back to me tomorrow during business hours, maybe he will have more information. Nice post. See the large Odontocete tooth in the article is rounded. I really think Squalodons general are two sides dagger like teeth. This makes me think my tooth is Squalodon but still curious if anyone else can chime in. Thanks Brett!

[siteseer]

It's tough to pin it down to a particular genus.  It doesn't help that the site is unknown.  The problem is that many early odontocetes had conical anterior teeth that graded into coarsely-serrated posterior teeth.  I can only say that it appears to be an Oligocene to perhaps middle Miocene tooth of the general "squalodont" form.

[siteseer]

Mr. Jello,

 

I have never seen a whale tooth of that form from Bakersfield (and I've seen some big collections) if we're talking the Sharktooth HIll Bonebed.  There were whales with similar teeth from the Pyramid Hill Sand, which is an older layer (early Miocene).  The preservation doesn't look right for anything around Bakersfield.

 

Jess

[FossilizedJello]

9 hours ago, siteseer said:

Mr. Jello,

 

I have never seen a whale tooth of that form from Bakersfield (and I've seen some big collections) if we're talking the Sharktooth HIll Bonebed.  There were whales with similar teeth from the Pyramid Hill Sand, which is an older layer (early Miocene).  The preservation doesn't look right for anything around Bakersfield.

 

Jess

Okay well thank you ! I will have to look into Pyramid Hill Sand which I have not heard of but I think we can say its something from the east coast.

[siteseer]

8 hours ago, FossilizedJello said:

Okay well thank you ! I will have to look into Pyramid Hill Sand which I have not heard of but I think we can say its something from the east coast.

 

Yeah, I'd be guessing but I was thinking it could be from Lee Creek or maybe the Calvert cliffs or Summerville, SC, Chandler Bridge Formation.  You get a range of colors in the Chandler Bridge.

 

Jess

[Brett Breakin' Rocks]

4 hours ago, siteseer said:

Summerville, SC, Chandler Bridge Formation.

 

13 hours ago, FossilizedJello said:

Okay well thank you ! I will have to look into Pyramid Hill Sand which I have not heard of but I think we can say its something from the east coast.

Yeah, and if it does turn out to be from South Carolina then you can be confident his original odontocete description is correct. Or rather, there are many candidates for the tooth from that area, just not a Squalodon. Here are the teeth of the previously undescribed Genus Y that Bobby and his team recently described and named Ankylorhiza tiedemani.

 

A few teeth for comparison. A. tiedemani was a large dolphin ancestor that used its ridiculous size to potentially pummel it's prey ? 

 

Image Credit: Mace Brown Museum of Natural History at the College of Charleston 

 

 

Image Credit: Mace Brown Museum of Natural History at the College of Charleston 

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

[FossilizedJello]

12 hours ago, Brett Breakin' Rocks said:

 

Yeah, and if it does turn out to be from South Carolina then you can be confident his original odontocete description is correct. Or rather, there are many candidates for the tooth from that area, just not a Squalodon. Here are the teeth of the previously undescribed Genus Y that Bobby and his team recently described and named Ankylorhiza tiedemani.

 

A few teeth for comparison. A. tiedemani was a large dolphin ancestor that used its ridiculous size to potentially pummel it's prey ? 

 

Image Credit: Mace Brown Museum of Natural History at the College of Charleston 

 

 

Image Credit: Mace Brown Museum of Natural History at the College of Charleston 

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

Wow a new candidate. I need to do some more research on the other cetaceans that were around during the age of the formations in various spots of the east coast. KNow any good starters?

 

So my thing here is Odontocete teeth are quite common and all all generally circular. I am fairly confident that this is not a Odontocete tooth. It may be squalo but it may also be another species that isn't thrown around much. (Which is still very cool). I have to also say that the tooth is from some predatory species as well.

 

Still open to any input from anyone but I feel like this is going to be thrown in the out of the norm cetacean category.

 

But Brett, can I hear your opposition to my point about it not being an Odontocete tooth. Say he is right that it is from SC (even though its not factual), why are you saying it is definitely Odontocete?

 

Thanks , this thread is becoming very useful for future ID's of cetacean teeth!

[Shellseeker]

On 12/11/2020 at 4:38 PM, FossilizedJello said:

Looking to purchase the tooth, seller has it listed as odontocete but I believe it is squalodon. If it is squalo I will definetly be buying immediately. 

Also figured that it would be a good thumbnail when people search squalodon on the forum as you dont see them very often.

Thanks for posting.  I love the photos of whale teeth. Unfortunately,  I do not have Squalodon in south Florida. I have found a lot of whale teeth in my hunting areas, just no Squalodon. Here is one of my favorites.

My view is that is is almost impossible to identify the location found after the fact.  Many of my whale teeth have exact locations because I found them. If we could pay fossil sellers an extra 20% based on the excellence of provenance associated with a fossil, it might be different.  But they might just lie to get the 20% for something they did not know.

 

[FossilizedJello]

8 minutes ago, Shellseeker said:

Thanks for posting.  I love the photos of whale teeth. Unfortunately,  I do not have Squalodon in south Florida. I have found a lot of whale teeth in my hunting areas, just no Squalodon. Here is one of my favorites.

My view is that is is almost impossible to identify the location found after the fact.  Many of my whale teeth have exact locations because I found them. If we could pay fossil sellers an extra 20% based on the excellence of provenance associated with a fossil, it might be different.  But they might just lie to get the 20% for something they did not know.

 

Yes, I follow a lot of fossils online because I know as much as I love personally collecting my own stuff that I will never obtain all that I want so I wait for great deals. In my time I easily see stuff get a ton more just because its from Bone Valley. However, something like a whale tooth or cetacean the price can definitely be influenced by location and they are all useful for producing the species because as you can see there is a lot of unknowns and many discoveries still waiting to be had. I definitely think a decent portion of people lie and say something is from somewhere else.

 

Question, have you ever seen a whale tooth that is two sides rather than rounded? Thanks.

 

Nice find btw, must be awesome to find something such a big tooth :p.

[Shellseeker]

17 minutes ago, FossilizedJello said:

Question, have you ever seen a whale tooth that is two sides rather than rounded? Thanks.

 

Nice find btw, must be awesome to find something such a big tooth :p.

I have been overly fortunately or as my hunting friends frequently intone :  insanely lucky!   Usually I do a little rain dance to thank the river gods.

You might be interested in this thread.

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/107546-tusk/

 

What do you think of this one?

Is it rounded or not?

 

[FossilizedJello]

3 minutes ago, Shellseeker said:

I have been overly fortunately or as my hunting friends frequently intone :  insanely lucky!   Usually I do a little rain dance to thank the river gods.

You might be interested in this thread.

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/107546-tusk/

 

What do you think of this one?

Is it rounded or not?

 

Glad to hear you had some luck over time :). Interesting tooth. I would still say generally round. The thing is with whale teeth is there are many layers and when they get worn can take off the conical shape. Just reiterating what siteseer said. My tooth doesnt look worn enough to change the shape though.

[Brett Breakin' Rocks]

4 hours ago, FossilizedJello said:

why are you saying it is definitely Odontocete?

Ahh .. Odontocetes pretty much covers all toothed whales (dolphins,Sperm whales etc..)  He is essentially saying "I know it comes from a toothed whale, I just don't know which one" .. which I think is a much better description than attempting to specify a Genus without location information. 

 

As Jack was saying, sellers will often times just tag a tooth with a genus and species because it will sell. So they slap Squalodon on the tooth and move on ..  

 

Maybe @Boesse  could add a few words on the morphology and potentially a candidate but as mentioned before this tooth shape is shared with quite a few animals. 

 

Cheers,

Brett

[Boesse]

Hey all - here are some long awaited comments.

 

1) Squalodon - the genus - is not known from South Carolina. However, some specimens of Eosqualodon are (different genus, and not clearly in the same family).

 

2) Some specimens of Ankylorhiza have serrated teeth, though I think this specimen in question might be too small. It *could* be an Eosqualodon tooth if small enough, given that some of those teeth are also serrated.

 

3) Then again, it could also be Squalodon calvertensis IF derived from Calvert Cliffs. This highlights the arguments above why locality data is critical. Without it, isolated teeth like this can only be identified as Odontoceti indet.

 

4) The other conical tooth is likely to be from a delphinoid, though we do find rare teeth like that in the Oligocene of SC.

 

5) Squalodon and Ankylorhiza, along with delphinoids, are all odontocetes. So "Squalodon or odontocete" is not a question that makes much sense.

[FossilizedJello]

3 hours ago, Boesse said:

Hey all - here are some long awaited comments.

 

1) Squalodon - the genus - is not known from South Carolina. However, some specimens of Eosqualodon are (different genus, and not clearly in the same family).

 

2) Some specimens of Ankylorhiza have serrated teeth, though I think this specimen in question might be too small. It *could* be an Eosqualodon tooth if small enough, given that some of those teeth are also serrated.

 

3) Then again, it could also be Squalodon calvertensis IF derived from Calvert Cliffs. This highlights the arguments above why locality data is critical. Without it, isolated teeth like this can only be identified as Odontoceti indet.

 

4) The other conical tooth is likely to be from a delphinoid, though we do find rare teeth like that in the Oligocene of SC.

 

5) Squalodon and Ankylorhiza, along with delphinoids, are all odontocetes. So "Squalodon or odontocete" is not a question that makes much sense.

Nice, some good information here. I guess what I was trying to get at with the title is usually odontocete is termed on teeth that are round from the normal whale teeth you see all the time while squalodon, still odontocete, is usually labeled squalodon or something else. Overall, just not paying attention to what im saying but yes they both imply whale. I definitely think it is Ankylorhiza or some type of squalodon. But yes I usually never have data as when the people I get my purchased fossils usually dont. I hunt for bargains and usually its people who dont know what they have ;). So therefore they cannot tell me locality.