Can anyone identify these fossils from the Cambrian?

[Geodog]

Hello, everyone, these fossils were collected from the basal Cambrian in South China, all of which are organic. But I do not know what are they? Does anyone can identify them.

Please see the attachments!

Many thanks.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Geodog

[Coco]

Hi,

 

Please put your pics directly on TFF.

 

Coco

[Geodog]

33 minutes ago, Coco said:

Hi,

 

Please put your pics directly on TFF.

 

Coco

Dear Coco,

Thanks for you reply.

I am a new user of this web, I don't konw how to put the picture directly, but I am exploring.

[Geodog]

56 minutes ago, Geodog said:

Hello, everyone, these fossils were collected from the basal Cambrian in South China, all of which are organic. But I do not know what are they? Does anyone can identify them.

Please see the attachments!

Many thanks.

The web can't dispay the TIFF pic. All the pictures have been translated to JPEG.

[Geodog]

5 minutes ago, Bob Saunders said:

your'e size equals 0.00787402 mm 

Hello Bob, 

Thanks, but I don't understand what you said.

[Geodog]

11 minutes ago, Bob Saunders said:

what type of microscope are you using please?

the lower right of the image say's 200.0um which in millimeters equals 0.00787402 mm of one inch wide which is the scale. I assume you are using a digital microscope that adds the measurement. WD is 12.9 mm actual width of object. at 221 x magnification. sorry I should have looked more at your'e posted image before my reply. I only have a digital camera on a binocular microscope. as for your question I cannot answer what they are.  

It doesn't matter，thanks

[Coco]

You have to use an image host, like this one, very easy to use : https://goopics.net/

 

Coco

[Pumpkinhead]

What's the name of the stratigraphic unit these were collected from?

[Geodog]

10 hours ago, Pumpkinhead said:

What's the name of the stratigraphic unit these were collected from?

The Liuchapo Formation in South China, which is dominated by black chert.

[SilurianMan]

Based on my own professional experience, these images were produced by a scanning electron microscope (SEM).  Also, WD is not the width of the object.  WD refers to the working distance within the SEM.  HV refers to the accelerating voltage, and Det:ETD refers to a particular type of detector for secondary and backscattered electrons.  Finally, the scale bars shows a length in micrometers (um).  300um = 0.3 millimeters = 0.01176 inches, so these specimens are quite small.    I spent some time last year looking for micrometeorites (which are similar in size) using a 50X stereomicroscope.  This was screened material off a rooftop. I don't think I found any real micrometeorites, but I did see a lot of random bits like this.  How was it determined that these specimens are "organic"?

[Pumpkinhead]

I've seen SEM images of coccoid cyanobacteria colonies that have "openings" that appear similar to some of the "holes" in these SEM images. That's the best comparison that I can think of and its fairly weak. Some of these might not necessarily be biological, unless there's some evidence you're aware of that we are not

[LabRatKing]

14 minutes ago, SilurianMan said:

Based on my own professional experience, these images were produced by a scanning electron microscope (SEM).  Also, WD is not the width of the object.  WD refers to the working distance within the SEM.  HV refers to the accelerating voltage, and Det:ETD refers to a particular type of detector for secondary and backscattered electrons.  Finally, the scale bars shows a length in micrometers (um).  300um = 0.3 millimeters = 0.01176 inches, so these specimens are quite small.    I spent some time last year looking for micrometeorites (which are similar in size) using a 50X stereomicroscope.  This was screened material off a rooftop. I don't think I found any real micrometeorites, but I did see a lot of random bits like this.  How was it determined that these specimens are "organic"?

Tech Specs Correct.

[LabRatKing]

To be honest, I see lots of unidentifiable random bits, however there are a few specimens that have the distinct possibility of being pollen. #5 (counting from the top of the post) in particular. However, this is far outside my area of expertise (I run SEM on extant biologicals that are quite a bit bigger).

[SilurianMan]

Pollen might be a good guess for a few of these specimens, but the timing is off.  They were identified as being from the basal Cambrian.  However, the first flowering plants (and the first pollen) didn't emerge until the Cretaceous.  If it is pollen, it's the result of cross-contamination somewhere along the way.

[jpc]

most SEM pix I have seen of pollen are much more distinctly shaped than these.  I do not see pollen.  

[Coco]

There are two quotes from Bob Saunders, but where did the original posts go ? Were they deleted ?

 

Coco

[JohnJ]

36 minutes ago, Coco said:

There are two quotes from Bob Saunders, but where did the original posts go ? Were they deleted ?

 

Coco

@Bob Saunders removed them.  

[Geodog]

11 hours ago, SilurianMan said:

Based on my own professional experience, these images were produced by a scanning electron microscope (SEM).  Also, WD is not the width of the object.  WD refers to the working distance within the SEM.  HV refers to the accelerating voltage, and Det:ETD refers to a particular type of detector for secondary and backscattered electrons.  Finally, the scale bars shows a length in micrometers (um).  300um = 0.3 millimeters = 0.01176 inches, so these specimens are quite small.    I spent some time last year looking for micrometeorites (which are similar in size) using a 50X stereomicroscope.  This was screened material off a rooftop. I don't think I found any real micrometeorites, but I did see a lot of random bits like this.  How was it determined that these specimens are "organic"?

Thanks!

Yes, you are quite correct!

These specimens were collected by hydrofluoric acid solution etching. The organic or carbonaceous composition were determined by EDX.

  

[Geodog]

12 hours ago, Pumpkinhead said:

I've seen SEM images of coccoid cyanobacteria colonies that have "openings" that appear similar to some of the "holes" in these SEM images. That's the best comparison that I can think of and its fairly weak. Some of these might not necessarily be biological, unless there's some evidence you're aware of that we are not

Thanks, Pumpkinhead!

It's possible that they have affinities with cyanobacteria.  But abiological origin can't explain the carbonaceous composition.

 

[Geodog]

13 hours ago, LabRatKing said:

To be honest, I see lots of unidentifiable random bits, however there are a few specimens that have the distinct possibility of being pollen. #5 (counting from the top of the post) in particular. However, this is far outside my area of expertise (I run SEM on extant biologicals that are quite a bit bigger).

As SilurianMan addressed, if it is pollen, it must drived from contamination. It seems that another experiment needs to be done, to verify this assumption.

[Geodog]

12 hours ago, jpc said:

most SEM pix I have seen of pollen are much more distinctly shaped than these.  I do not see pollen.  

How about spores? 

[Geodog]

13 hours ago, SilurianMan said:

Pollen might be a good guess for a few of these specimens, but the timing is off.  They were identified as being from the basal Cambrian.  However, the first flowering plants (and the first pollen) didn't emerge until the Cretaceous.  If it is pollen, it's the result of cross-contamination somewhere along the way.

Although these specimens are collected from two differnent sections, cross-contamination can not be excluded. I'm not familiar about spore, thus I'm not sure whether they are like spores?