My First, My Favorite

[PaleoGenesis]

This is my first ever fish fossil.

[Fossildude19]

Very cool! 

Where is it from?

Do you know the genus/species of fish?

[Al Dente]

Artwork? Not seeing any bones and the fish’s color pattern is preserved. Never seen that in a fossil fish. Can you show us an uncropped version of this photo so we can see the whole specimen?

Edited July 14, 2021 by Al Dente

[Ludwigia]

It's certainly not "carbonaceous", if you're meaning carboniferous.

[PaleoGenesis]

Carbonaceous vs carboniferous, How would you describe the difference? I was told that these types of fossils were formed at high enough temperatures to turn all the biological material to carbon and therefore are "carbonaceous". This one apparently is not quite that high since there is still color left. Is that what you are saying? Or are we using different definitions altogether? Thanks

[PaleoGenesis]

These fish are only about 1 1/2 to 2 inches long so I assume they are minnows. There were no bones at all when I cracked it open so I assumed it was because they were so young. I have no idea what species they are but they look like Bass minnows to me....

[JohnJ]

How did you acquire this piece?  Do you have a photo of the entire piece?

[Fossildude19]

Again, where is the fossil from?

[Ludwigia]

Carboniferous means from that geological Period in the time scale. Do you have a photo of the entire piece and also one of what it looked like before you "cracked it open"? And please tell us, as Tim is asking, where it is from and to which geological period it belongs.

[Paleorunner]

21 hours ago, PaleoGenesis said:

This is my first ever fish fossil.

 

 

I have never seen a fossil fish like these, they seem current.
Why so much trouble in cropping the photo that way, did you want to hide something?

 

[Top Trilo]

He says this is his first fish fossil and in his first forum post he said "My most recent fossil is from the Green River formation in Wyoming" which this is definitely not. I think this creates more questions then answers but in that other thread he also talks about high temperatures and carbonaceous. However this is all speculation until @PaleoGenesis lets us know where he found/acquired it.

His profile picture may be a bit better but since its so small its a little blurry

[PaleoGenesis]

Good evening, My purpose for putting this picture in this particular forum was to get unbias opinions of the fish and the fossil impressions themselves. I just wanted to know what you see. I felt that if I gave up too much at once, it would heavily bias that evaluation. Thank you El Dente and Ludwigia for sharing what you noticed. 

As you may have guessed already I am brand new to all this but I have a specific interest in this area regarding some research that I am trying to get into. Hence the question of pressures and temperatures. I am not having much luck finding answers by the way. My first introduction to this area of research was this paper by Evan Saitta. I was so intrigued and wanted to know more so I started making my own fossils according to the data listed in Evan's paper, ~3000psi, 500degF. The picture above is my first attempt at making a fish fossil. Paleorunner was exactly right, they are current and I cropped it to keep the focus on the fish themselves.

My most recent fish fossil however, came from the Green River formation as a kit and was my first attempt (lesson) at prepping my own fossil manually. My finger tips are still numb but it was very satisfying. My personal goals are to learn more about the pressures involved both from overburden and hydraulic head pressure of water, temperatures, mineralization etc. Now that I'm retired I figure it's time to get down to some serious fun. If any of you have suggestions for specific studies, I would love to hear them. I feel like I'm trying to drink from a fire hose, there is so much to learn and I need all the help I can find if anything meaningful is to come out of this.

Thanks for all your comments.

 

1.     “Sediment-Encased Maturation: A Novel Method for Simulating Diagenesis in Organic Fossil Preservation” by Evan T. Saitta, Thomas G. Kaye, and Jakob Vinther. [Palaeontology, 2018, pp. 1-16]

[Top Trilo]

Mystery solved  How did you create this? thanks for letting us know very interesting.

[JohnJ]

43 minutes ago, PaleoGenesis said:

to get unbias opinions of the fish and the fossil impressions themselves

 

43 minutes ago, PaleoGenesis said:

wanted to know more so I started making my own fossils

 

43 minutes ago, PaleoGenesis said:

making a fish fossil

 

With respect, your art piece is not a "fossil".  Referring to it as a "fossil" is an inaccurate and misleading identification.  You could accurately describe it as the result of your personal experiment or an artistic project...but, it is not a fossil.  That would be a small sip from the "fire hose".  

[Kane]

I feel a bit deceived…and likely not the only one. Not a way of building trust in a community, just FYI.

[JohnJ]

9 hours ago, PaleoGenesis said:

These fish are only about 1 1/2 to 2 inches long so I assume they are minnows. There were no bones at all when I cracked it open so I assumed it was because they were so young. I have no idea what species they are but they look like Bass minnows to me....

 

Indeed, your comment was deceptive.  When you experiment with a 'community's trust', you often lose it.  Then, the lack of bias you sought is overwhelmed by the bias you created.

[PaleoGenesis]

The sample chamber is 3 inches in diameter so I made a piston/cylinder clamping fixture that would apply approximately 30,000 lbf on the piston and then stuck it in my wife's oven. She didn't appreciate that very much. We've done this for a couple years now for half a dozen 6th grade classes also, trying to encourage them to go into science. They seem to love "cracking them open" to find their bugs, flowers, ferns etc., But that was just a hobby until I realized that with some serious upgrades in equipment and instrumentation I might be able to do some real research. Maybe even publish something. So this is just the beginning of that journey, I hope I've piqued some interest.

Thanks.

[digit]

Synthetic diamonds are made in an industrial process that mimics the natural forces and temps in which real diamonds are produced. Small amounts of gem quality diamonds can be produced this way but most are destined to be used as industrial abrasives.

 

Your heat and pressure process may be preserving these fishes in a way that transforms the organic materials keeping the result stable and preventing decomposition but it does not mimic a fossilization (mineralization) process. I don't know what type of research you might imagine this experiment spawning. I do not see it as an alternative to taxidermy and I hope that the intent is not to manufacture these and market them as "fossils" as that would be dishonest.

 

Interesting process which I don't doubt intrigues 6th graders but I'm not sure what the science lesson is the take home message from doing this.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[PaleoGenesis]

fossil

[ˈfäsəl]

 

NOUN

1. the remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.

    

    Other than age, I believe I was using the term Fossil in the strictest sense or definition of the word. My intent is to make "NEW" fossils, according to the most current research articles, in an attempt to better understand how "OLD" fossils were formed. I am very sorry if anyone felt deceived. If I had wanted to deceive I am sure I could have fabricated a pretty convincing story to go along with it. Instead I simply posted a picture of "my First" one in a forum called "IS IT REAL? How to Recognize Fossil Fabrications". I thought that was very safe and appropriate actually.

   AND I still have no idea what species they are, and I still think they look like Bass. That's absolutely true.

    

    I have never made a dime off this hobby and would never even think of selling them as old natural fossils. 

    

   This forum came highly recommended as having the depth of experience and knowledge to answer any and all questions I might have in this new venture I'm starting so I am really sorry I may have started off on the wrong foot. I hope you can accept my apologies.

    

   Again, I am very sorry that anyone should feel deceived, that was certainly not my intention.

   Thank you,

   Gordon 

[DPS Ammonite]

18 minutes ago, PaleoGenesis said:

Again, I am very sorry that anyone should feel deceived, that was certainly not my intention.

Thank you,

Gordon

Welcome to the Forum. Stick around. Lesson learned.

 

Where did the fish come from? A Forum fisher(wo)man might know what they are.

 

You are trying to study taphonomy: the study of fossilization. See this great definition:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/taphonomy

[Coco]

Hi,

 

I was under the impression that these were sardines taken out of their tin...

 

 

Coco

[Ludwigia]

As you have certainly noticed by now, we had our strong suspicions right from the beginning that we were being decieved. Although this may not have been your intention, your method of presentation generated exactly that effect. It is not possible to give an unbiased opinion on something where valuable information is deliberately withheld, so you have sabotaged your hopes for knowledgeable opinions from the beginning. Apologies accepted however.

[Fossildude19]

People post in this sub-forum to find out if their fossils or fossils being offered for sale are real, restored, fake, or enhanced. 

Posting under PALEO RE-CREATIONS would have been more transparent.  

 

In my opinion, you were trying to deceive, if only to get a point across.

Apologies are helpful, but when the source cannot be trusted from the start, then EVERYTHING said going forward is suspect. 

Trust is already broken.  

 

You have lost any credibility with me.  

[RJB]

you certainly wasted a lot of peoples time. 

 

RB

[Fossildude19]

Topic has been LOCKED.  

 

In experimenting with "creating" fossils, one thing missing from the equation was TIME. 

The amount of time while under pressure, or heat, is not nearly the same as when going through hundreds of millions of years, with pressure and sometimes heat added at different times, throughout the ages. 

 

I think it was naive of the OP to try to define the word FOSSIL to people who have been studying them much longer than he has.

He completely overlooked the TIME aspect. Fossils are generally defined as being over 10,000 years of age.

I don't quite get what angle he was going for, but creating fossils is not possible without the application of TIME to create fossils.

There is no way to reproduce the actual process of fossilization without the application of Time.