Kolya Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 Hello! Help with identification please. Radius - 0,7 mm. Age: Middle Miocene. Western Ukraine. Thanks in advance! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caterpillar Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 Fish tooth? 1 1 http://www.paleotheque.fr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 Looks artificial, like glass to me... 'There's nothing like millions of years of really frustrating trial and error to give a species moral fibre and, in some cases, backbone' -- Terry Pratchett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kolya Posted May 18, 2021 Author Share Posted May 18, 2021 1 hour ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said: Looks artificial, like glass to me... It is not artificial. It is fossils. I found it on a sand quarry. i found before some fishes bones and rays teeth with such colour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 Just now, Kolya said: It is not artificial. It is fossils. I found it on a sand quarry. i found before some fishes bones and rays teeth with such colour. You'll find trash everywhere, so it really depends on whether you've got a solid undisturbed context from which it came to rule out something artificial. In any case, like I said this looks like glass... Haven't seen too many finely detailed calcified fossils before, though I do know they occur... 'There's nothing like millions of years of really frustrating trial and error to give a species moral fibre and, in some cases, backbone' -- Terry Pratchett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahnmut Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 Reminds me of "yabby buttons", crustacean gastroliths, those have been found as opalized fossils. No idea if they occur in that small size. 1 Try to learn something about everything and everything about something Thomas Henry Huxley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted May 18, 2021 Share Posted May 18, 2021 That is really unusual. I would guess some type of dermal denticle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainefossils Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 @caterpillar @pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon@Mahnmut@Al Dente @Kolya I think that I have found what this tooth is. It appears to be a Triakid shark tooth, probably in the genus Mustelus. I found it mentioned in 5 articles, namely: Adnet, S., Cappetta, H. (2008) New fossil triakid sharks from the early Eocene of Prémontré, France, and comments on fossil record of the family. Acta Paleontoligica Polonica, 53(3). https://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app53/app53-433.pdf Leder, R. M. (2013) Eocene Carcharinidae and Triakidae (Elasmobranchii) of Crimea and Kazakhstan. Leipziger Geowissenschaften. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286448766_Eocene_Carcharinidae_and_Triakidae_Elasmobranchii_of_Crimea_and_Kazakhstan Carrillo-Briceno, J. D., Aguilera, O. A., De Gracia, C., Aguirre-Fernández, G., Kindlimann, R., Sanchez-Villigra, M. R. (2016) An Early Neogene Elasmobranch fauna from the southern Caribbean (Western Venezuela). Palaeontologia Electronica. https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/125933/1/Carrillo-Briceño et al.%2C 2016. An Early Neogene Elasmobranch fauna from Venezuela-7.pdf Dyldin, Y. V. (2015) Annotated checklist of the sharks, batoids and chimaeras (Chondrichthyes: Elasmobranchii, Holocephali) from waters of Russia and adjacent areas. Publications of the Seto Marine Biological Laboratory, 43. https://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/197957/1/smbl_043_040.pdf Engelbrecht, A., Mörs, T., Reguero, M. A., Kriwet, J. (2017) New carcharhiniform sharks (Chondrichthyes, Elasmobranchii) from the early to middle Eocene of Seymour Island, Antarctic Peninsula. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, 37(6). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02724634.2017.1371724 Thoughts everyone? 3 The more I learn, the more I find that I know nothing. Regards, Asher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Mainefossils said: I think that I have found what this tooth is. It appears to be a Triakid shark tooth, probably in the genus Mustelus. Thoughts everyone? Although in see where you'd get the idea that the morphology may indicate mustelid shark, I'm not a shark-man myself, and thus have great difficulty evaluating the value of your suggestion. Without doubt there are semblance and it's the best suggestion so far by far... but I'm not convinced: there are plenty of differences with OP's tooth, and I still find the preservation peculiar - although Jan may be right in that the fossil could be opalised. All the same, I find the hollow edge around the foot/pedestal - giving the top the impression of a beer-cap or button - very odd, something I wouldn't expect in nature, certainly have never seen. When it comes down to it, I'm probably not the best person to ask. But those are my thoughts anyway... All that having been said, excellent research on Mustelus spp. Very peculiar dental morphology! Haven't ever seen anything like - but, again, I'm a marine reptile guy One thought, though: what might make it easier for others to evaluate your proposal (and would increase the future referential value of your idea) would have been to include the most telling figure(s) from these articles in your post, using the current references to cite the image sources. For now everyone will need to download the articles themselves and then find the images you were referring to. Much easier and less open to misunderstandings to post the images directly... But those are just my thoughts for improvement of presentation, not meant as critique in any way Edited June 19, 2021 by pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon 2 'There's nothing like millions of years of really frustrating trial and error to give a species moral fibre and, in some cases, backbone' -- Terry Pratchett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainefossils Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 @pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon Thanks so much for the feedback! I always enjoy suggestions on how to improve my posts. I see what you are talking about on it being artificial - I really have not ever seen anything like that before either. The only reason I would think that it is a Mustelus sp is because I have not seen better choices (as far as a tooth or denticle goes). The first paper that was cited above (Adnet, S., et al.(2008)) has a figure of a Mustelus vanderhoefti in figure 6, a - d, and a section that describes it and the genus on pages 440 - 441. The tooth that they show has a markedly triangular crown, with a triangular root that has a wide nutritive groove that runs along the basal face. The crown is approximately as high as the root. This species was first described by Herman(1982). The specimen above has a deeper crown and root than this species. The second paper that was cited (Leder R. M.(2013)) has an illustration of a single tooth of a Mustelus vanderhoefti in abb. 7, figures 4 - 5, and a description of it on pages 13 - 15. The tooth that they illustrate has a crown that is more round, but the root has a very similar structure to the one that was photographed in the previous paper. The third paper (Carrillo-Briceno, J. D., et al.(2016)) has an image of an undefined Mustelus sp in figure 4, 3 -7; the crown has a similar structure to the one illustrated in Leder R. M.(2013) paper. It mentions the genus on page 7. The fourth paper (Dyldin, Y. V. (2015)) mentions two modern species (M. griseus and M. manazo) on pages 51 and 52. The fifth paper (Engelbrecht, A., et al.(2017)) has pictures of multiple specimens of Mustelus sp., on figures 3 - 4, featuring 11 separate specimens, each documented on their labial, lingual, profile, and occlusal views. Pages 2 - 6 contains a description of the genus Mustelus. So, as far as the specimen goes, I am not sure whether it is artificial or not, and whether it actually is a tooth if it is not artificial. The root really does not match anything I know of. I guess that this one will just have to remain a mystery. Thanks so much for reading this! 1 The more I learn, the more I find that I know nothing. Regards, Asher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 @MarcoSr Coco 1 1 ---------------------- OUTIL POUR MESURER VOS FOSSILES : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 1 (Poissons et sélaciens récents & fossiles) : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 2 (Animaux vivants - sans poissons ni sélaciens) : ici Mâchoires sélaciennes récentes : ici Hétérodontiques et sélaciens : ici Oeufs sélaciens récents : ici Otolithes de poissons récents ! ici Un Greg... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted June 20, 2021 Share Posted June 20, 2021 On 5/18/2021 at 3:19 PM, Al Dente said: That is really unusual. I would guess some type of dermal denticle. 14 hours ago, Coco said: @MarcoSr Coco I agree with Eric, some type of dermal denticle. Marco Sr. 3 "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...
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