Auriculatus vs Angustidens based on location/formation?

[MrR]

Greetings all. I hope you're ready to give 2020 a good boot in the butt to bring in 2021. I know my foot is locked and loaded.

 

A while back I purchased this shark tooth fossil from an online auction. It was listed as a "great white". Despite the description being wrong, the price was right. I believe that Angustidens are tricky to tell apart from Auriculatus teeth. Since, and if, this is the case, would the color of a tooth, the root in particular, be enough to establish a tooth that is likely from the Suwanee River environs? From a quick web search it seems that teeth that look like this one does tend to be from the Suwanee River and are labeled Auriculatus rather than Angustidens. So maybe the quick question is, which type of shark tooth is most likely to come from the Suwanee?

 

The seller didn't provide any location to go with the description. It just seems that the muddy brown color of the root seems to often come from the Suwanee River. Any input is greatly appreciated. Have a safe and healthy New Year, all !

 

 

[Brett Breakin' Rocks]

1 hour ago, MrR said:

The seller didn't provide any location to go with the description. It just seems that the muddy brown color of the root seems to often come from the Suwanee River. Any input is greatly appreciated. Have a safe and healthy New Year, all !

This guide may help. My assumption is that these teeth are coming from the older aged material and are always described (at least from sellers) as O. auriculatus. 

 

All of that being said these are always found at the bottom of a river (and not sitting in the formation) and being a chrono-species there has always been debate as to if they are synonyms (subauriculatus-anugustidens-sokolowi etc.) Not sure you could describe a specific Suwannee look, there have been a few members that have found O. Angustidens looking teeth from younger deposits that have a similar root look/feel. Having all come from the bottom of a river I think that would be hard to determine exact location based on the look (color/condition) alone ... 

 

 

 

MIOCENE PALEONTOLOGY AND STRATIGRAPHY OF THE SUWANNEE RIVER BASIN OF NORTH FLORIDA AND SOUTH GEORGIA

https://segs.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/SEGS-Guidebook-30.pdf

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

 

[MrR]

41 minutes ago, Brett Breakin' Rocks said:

Having all come from the bottom of a river I think that would be hard to determine exact location based on the look (color/condition) alone ...

Thanks, Brett Breakin' Rocks. That makes sense. Cheers.

[siteseer]

I would say that is more likely an angustidens specimen just because teeth of that species are generally flatter and with smaller lateral cusplets than those of auriculatus.  Teeth with that preservation come out of the Summerville area, South Carolina (land sites) but that's not to say it came from there either.  I've seen too many colors from there to characterize it.  It could be a tooth from one of the South Carolina rivers and their tributaries too.

 

Jess

[Miocene_Mason]

Latest Eocene teeth really are extremely similar to C. angustidens, in some cases indistinguishable but in others they look a little more on the ric side. They could be called C. sokolovi, which is the catch-all usually applied to Bartonian-Priabonian teeth. I believe these teeth are in that time range, Ocala fm if memory serves. Strictly applied, classic C. auriculatus is restricted to the Lutetian which I don’t think outcrops along the river (not sure though), I haven’t seen any of the classic ric morphology from there. IDing a location or formation from a tooth is usually little more than a guess. Yours looks like either an angustidens or a late sokolovi. Balance of probability favors the former.