ID help please. Weird fossil?

[Scottnokes2015]

Hello everyone,

I have this fossil I found years back and need help to confirm what it's is. I found in

Chester, Illinois, Mississippian.

I've been told it might be a partial Crinoid Calyx.

It's this correct, thank you

Edited August 6, 2021 by Scottnokes2015

[ChristineR]

A couple things would be helpful for making an ID. Include a ruler for scale, and clearer pictures. There are several separate areas on the matrix that are blurred upon zooming. If using a phone you may need to back off of the item just a bit to get good focus.

 

 

[Scottnokes2015]

1 hour ago, Christine.Rowland said:

A couple things would be helpful for making an ID. Include a ruler for scale, and clearer pictures. There are several separate areas on the matrix that are blurred upon zooming. If using a phone you may need to back off of the item just a bit to get good focus.

 

 

Here you go

[Scottnokes2015]

I know this would puzzle people because it has since 2015 when I initially found it

[Scottnokes2015]

Hi everyonei have reposted my id request as I'm having trouble with my other post. This is the fossil in question.

It is from Chester, Illinois which is Mississippian formation and it's a limestone. In that area, fossils tend to be very heavily calcite.

I found this we're the questionable part was circular but broke while removing and leaning what I have. I have had various ideas from local enthusiasts that it is a crinoid basal plate. Can anyone give me a more detailed ID or possibilty.

Thank you

 

[Scottnokes2015]

This is what is would have  like as a profile picture too give and idea

 

[Fossildude19]

Topics Merged.   

[Scottnokes2015]

13 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Topics Merged.   

Thank you

Does anyone know if this is at least a fossil? Just wondering what to put it under in my trilobase software thank you

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

I dunno.

It looks mineralogical to me, calcite. 

But then a lot of echinoderms, both crinoids and other weirdies preserve as calcite crystals and your specimen could be of animal origin. 

[Scottnokes2015]

7 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

I dunno.

It looks mineralogical to me, calcite. 

But then a lot of echinoderms, both crinoids and other weirdies preserve as calcite crystals and your specimen could be of animal origin. 

Ok thank you, what do you mean animal origin in connection to the Mississippian formation

Edited August 9, 2021 by Scottnokes2015
Misspelling

[Tidgy's Dad]

1 hour ago, Scottnokes2015 said:

Ok thank you, what do you mean animal origin send reflection to the Mississippian formation

I have no idea at all what your sentence is supposed to mean as to the sending reflections bit. 

As it says "what do you mean" in the middle, I'll assume there's a question in there and it isn't simply rhetorical despite there being no question mark. 

The specimen in question is seemingly formed from calcite crystals, but these might not be geological, natural calcite but have an organic origin, being potentially plates from part of an animal such as an echinoderm.  

[Mainefossils]

@Tidgy's Dad, I was thinking that the crystals was an orthoclase feldspar. I would like to hear your view on the type of mineral this specimen is made of. Thanks for your time! 

[Tidgy's Dad]

1 hour ago, Mainefossils said:

@Tidgy's Dad, I was thinking that the crystals was an orthoclase feldspar. I would like to hear your view on the type of mineral this specimen is made of. Thanks for your time! 

Mmm.

I don't think so. Orthoclase forms mostly in intrusive igneous rocks. If this is limestone, as claimed by the OP, it's not going to be orthoclase. If the rock is igneous, then you may be right. Some of those crystals do look much like orthoclase. Other parts of the rock look like calcite / quartz with a touch of iron? 

A fizz test may be in order.  

Edited August 9, 2021 by Tidgy's Dad

[Mainefossils]

4 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

Mmm.

I don't think so. Orthoclase forms mostly in intrusive igneous rocks. If this is limestone, as claimed by the OP, it's not going to be orthoclase. If the rock is igneous, then you may be right. Some of those crystals do look much like orthoclase. Other parts of the rock look like calcite / quartz with a touch of iron? 

A fizz test may be in order.  

Ah, I see. I missed the part on the limestone. 

[FossilDAWG]

I agree with the people who suggested this is a broken section through a crinoid calyx, likely the basal area as this is the part that tends to hold together when the rest disarticulates.  Echinoderm plates are made of crystalline calcite and look exactly like this when they are broken.  The circular structure is what strongly suggests a crinoid calyx to me.  That being said, there is no way to ID this further, as you can't see the exterior and anyway the informative bits are all gone.

 

Don

[Scottnokes2015]

2 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

I have no idea at all what your sentence is supposed to mean as to the sending reflections bit. 

As it says "what do you mean" in the middle, I'll assume there's a question in there and it isn't simply rhetorical despite there being no question mark. 

The specimen in question is seemingly formed from calcite crystals, but these might not be geological, natural calcite but have an organic origin, being potentially plates from part of an animal such as an echinoderm.  

Hello, sorry about that, the first time, my auto correct made the words wrong. After I posted it, I read my post and noticed that what it said and I went back in and edited it.

This is what the edited reply read.

 

Ok thank you, what do you mean animal origin in connection to the Mississippian formation

Edited 2 hours ago by Scottnokes2015
Misspelling

 

 

[Tidgy's Dad]

The Mississippian subperiod contains many formations that preserve echinoderm remains, particularly crinoids. 

Your specimen may be a cross-section through a main body or calyx of an echinoderm such as a crinoid. 

Don knows the Mississippian of the USA better than I; see his answer above, it's a good one.   

[Scottnokes2015]

3 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

I agree with the people who suggested this is a broken section through a crinoid calyx, likely the basal area as this is the part that tends to hold together when the rest disarticulates.  Echinoderm plates are made of crystalline calcite and look exactly like this when they are broken.  The circular structure is what strongly suggests a crinoid calyx to me.  That being said, there is no way to ID this further, as you can't see the exterior and anyway the informative bits are all gone.

 

Don

Thank you Don. So should I put it in my database as Crinoid Calyx or would Crinoid Calyx/Basal.

Do you know what species it likely would have been or would I just list as Crinoid, Unidentified sp.

 

 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Scottnokes2015