Coral or Mastodon Molar?

[Samurai]

Hello! one of my coworkers brought in this fossil since they knew I was interested in that sorta thing and when I first saw it my mind went to coral but they said it was from California and was told it was a Mammoth molar, so I had to change my theory. While I know it is not a Mammoth molar it definitely has a tooth like structure, and in my opinion, could look like a heavily worn down Mastodon molar but I wanted someone who is an expert in this field/ knows more information than me to help with the identification. 

 

I didn't get to measure it exactly but my rough estimate was around 13cm

[PaleoNoel]

Looks like the rudist bivalves which I've seen our Texan members post frequently. If it is a rudist, it was most likely found in Cretaceous deposits.

[Samurai]

6 minutes ago, PaleoNoel said:

Looks like the rudist bivalves which I've seen our Texan members post frequently. If it is a rudist, it was most likely found in Cretaceous deposits.

Thank you! I haven't really seen anything like this before as I never see these where I hunt and don't live in California. Thank you once again for the useful information!

[Creek - Don]

That is a nice complete Rudist colony.   Rare to find intact piece like that, since most we find are broken down here. 

Edited May 9, 2021 by Creek - Don

[Al Dente]

It could be a California fossil barnacle. Tamiosoma gregaria is very similar.

 

 

[digit]

My thoughts also went to rudist but the unusual barnacle, which is new on my fossil radar, also seems a good fit. The only thing I am certain of is that it is 100% NOT a mammoth molar. Cool fossil nonetheless.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken