sharkdoctor Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I think I saw this tooth form in an identification book at some point and laughed at it. It's such a weird tooth. However, I can't find the reference now. It's driving me crazy. Any ideas what this is? It is possible that the tooth was reworked from an earlier formation (Old Church or Piney Point). From the Calvert Formation, bed 3. The scale box=5mm. Lingual surface? Labial surface? @jcbshark @MarcoSr @Al Dente @Gizmo @fossilsonwheels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I think that's a dermal denticle of a ray. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I think it is a Carcharhinus symphyseal tooth. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilcrazee Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 Agree Carcharhinus but might have suggested far posterior rather than symphyseal. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I agree with Eric that the tooth is a Carcharhinus symphyseal tooth. Marco Sr, 2 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokietech96 Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I have found 3-4 of the same shaped teeth in Lee Creek Matrix. I have them labeled as Carcharhinus symphyseal teeth. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilcrazee Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 Thank you for the correction. I am happy to be able to label those correctly now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted February 26, 2021 Share Posted February 26, 2021 The root has very thick, more laterally-extended lobes than I would expect for a symphyseal tooth. Two fossil teeth I've seen that were identified as Carcharhinus symphyseals were narrower, flatter and the root didn't split off into lobes - more like a single, flatter lobe. Jess 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted February 26, 2021 Share Posted February 26, 2021 The J-elasmo has some nice examples of modern ones that are similar. It looks like the lower symphyseals are more similar to the fossil one posted above. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkdoctor Posted February 26, 2021 Author Share Posted February 26, 2021 @siteseer @Al Dente @fossilcrazee @MarcoSr @hokietech96 @Gizmo Thanks so much for your thoughts and the resources! I sent a note to Brett Kent and he weighed in: "The tooth looks like a late fetal, or perhaps neonatal, Carcharhinus." Given the weight of the evidence at hand, I am leaning toward "Carcharhinus sp., Likely neonatal or symphyseal" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilcrazee Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Cool! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Al Dente, Those are great photos. Thanks. I should have checked J-Elasmo. I guess the couple of Carcharhinus symphyseals I've seen must be uppers. Jess 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now