North Carolina Ammonites, Mosasaurs, Sharks, and More!

[fossil_lover_2277]

I recently went on two fossil hunting trips to Cretaceous sediments of Eastern North Carolina, the second of which was earlier today. Today’s trip to the Bladen formation yielded baculites ammonites, some worn mosasaur teeth, the nicest goblin shark teeth I’ve personally collected, some fish mouth plates, turtle shell fragments, and some other goodies. 
 

My first trip a couple weeks ago was to Tar Heel formation sediments and I collected several small mosasaur teeth, a mosasaur vertebra, a piece of petrified lignite, lots of goblin and crow shark teeth, lots of turtle shell, a very worn Deinosuchus tooth, and some coprolites (I’ve posted a few of the images from this trip in the ID section of the forum already).

 

North Carolina is an amazing U.S. state for fossils, it has loads of fossils from the Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic (although if you want Jurassic look elsewhere). If you haven’t already, you should come check it out!

 

Pics from today’s trip:

 

 

Pics from the first trip:

 

 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[Agent_Zigzag]

Nice findings! The teeth are fantastic! 

[Al Dente]

Nice finds. What are these?

 

 

[Manticocerasman]

2 minutes ago, Al Dente said:

Nice finds. What are these?

 

 

 

I think dentalium.

[sixgill pete]

We would love to see some pictures of the Baculites. I have one section of one in all the years I have been collecting from NC and it camefrom PeeDee sediments. As have all of the ammonites I know of from NC.

[Tidgy's Dad]

Nice haul! 

[fossil_lover_2277]

4 hours ago, Manticocerasman said:

 

I think dentalium.

 

4 hours ago, sixgill pete said:

We would love to see some pictures of the Baculites. I have one section of one in all the years I have been collecting from NC and it camefrom PeeDee sediments. As have all of the ammonites I know of from NC.

These:

 

They’re definitely not dentalium, they’re sectioned, which I assume are the individual “chambers”. The second image here shows they’re not hollow (thus ruling out dentalium), it looks like the break is along a chamber wall (it’s not dirt except a small bit in the center where the siphuncle would be, it’s clearly a flat wall, if you look closely you can see textured ridges on the cross section of the chamber wall). Also by looking at the cross sectional break at the rear of the shell of the smaller one, it did not break along a chamber wall, so it is very briefly hollow (like a depth of 1-2mm, just the length of the chamber, it matches up with the segmented ridging on the outside) until it reaches the next chamber wall, where obviously it is solid (so the break left half a chamber). It is possible there’s something I haven’t seen before out there, I’m not an expert in ammonites, but these are consistent with baculites, I’m almost certain that’s what they are. Or at least some type of straight-shelled ammonoid/nautiloid, but these aren’t known from the Cretaceous, except for baculites as far as I’m aware. The preservation is unique in that they’re not infilled with mineral, the “chambers” are still hollow. My claim they are baculites is based on them being consistent with ammonoid/nautiloid orthocones as far as I can tell, and there’s nothing else I know of that they could be from the Cretaceous than baculites. I guess my question would be, if not baculites ammonites, then specifically what are these? 

Edited October 21, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[fossil_lover_2277]

4 hours ago, Al Dente said:

Nice finds. What are these?

 

 

The baculites. They are not dentalium, each of those textured sections is a chamber, looking at the cross section where the break is, you can see the wall of the outermost chamber. And looking in from the cross sectional break at the rear of the fossil, again, it’s not hollow, you can see a wall of a chamber. At least as far as I can tell, again I’m not an expert in ammonites, but everything about these is consistent with a baculites or a straight-shelled ammonoid/nautiloid (but only baculites is known from Cretaceous strata as far as I’m aware). Maybe there’s something out there I haven’t heard of that these are though. If so, please let me know, I’d definitely be interested to learn!

Edited October 21, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[MikeR]

Perhaps they are Annelida?  Below is a picture of Pyrgopolon walkerensis from the Ripley Formation of Georgia.  At the site that I collected these, they are quite common and many times upright in life position.  For years I had this as unclassified, at one point considering and then rejecting Baculites until I came across Hamulus walkerensis in The Cretaceous Fossils of New Jersey Volume 1 by Horace Richards (1953) LINK.  Running Hamulus through WoRMS, it is unaccepted with Pyrgopolon now the properly accepted name.  Look at Diploconcha cretacea which has a similar internal structure to yours.

 

Mike

 

[fossil_lover_2277]

55 minutes ago, MikeR said:

Perhaps they are Annelida?  Below is a picture of Pyrgopolon walkerensis from the Ripley Formation of Georgia.  At the site that I collected these, they quite common and many times upright in life position.  For years I had this as unclassified, at one point considering and then rejecting Baculites until I came across Hamulus walkerensis in The Cretaceous Fossils of New Jersey Volume 1 by Horace Richards (1953) LINK.  Running Hamulus through WoRMS, it is unaccepted with Pyrgopolon now the properly accepted name.  Look at Diploconcha cretacea which has a similar internal structure to yours.

 

Mike

 

Thanks! I think it’s definitely a possibility. Diploconcha cretacea (also known as “Serpula cretacea”) is known from the Black Creek group. The issue is I’m having trouble finding any pics of it, although I’m still looking. You’re right, the fossils, whatever they are, are consistent with baculites in many ways. The two issues I have are I don’t see any prominent sutures in my fossils, and ammonites in general are rare in NC. However, some baculites, for example, Baculites inornatus, don’t show evidence of sutures externally. I don’t know much about tube worms, the ones I know of don’t have tubes with that orthocone-type shape, but the one in the pic you sent certainly does. It’s certainly reasonable, but I need to see what I can find online about them.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[MikeR]

1 minute ago, Lando_Calrissian_4tw said:

Thanks! I think it’s a possibility. Diploconcha cretacea (also known as “Serpula cretacea) is known from the Black Creek group. The issue is I’m having trouble finding any pics of it, although I’m still looking. You’re right, the fossils, whatever they are, are consistent with baculites in many ways. The two issues are I don’t see any prominent sutures in my fossils, and ammonites in general are rare in NC. I don’t know much about tube worms, the ones I know of don’t have tubes with that orthocone-type shape, but the one in the pic you sent certainly does. It’s certainly reasonable, but I need to see what I can find online about them.

Look in my previous response.  There is a link to the Richards publication which pictures different species of Cretaceous annelids.

[fossil_lover_2277]

33 minutes ago, MikeR said:

Look in my previous response.  There is a link to the Richards publication which pictures different species of Cretaceous annelids.

Thanks just saw the pics in it, but I’m trying to find some more online that are clearer and that diagram what the organism might’ve looked like alive. I have no idea what the internal anatomy of this thing would’ve been, since it’s not a hollow tube, very interesting. Most tube worms don’t look like this, only this species and a few that are closely related from what I can tell. I think there’s a good chance it could be a match though. Thank you so much for the help.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[FossilDAWG]

Here is a photo of Diploconcha cretacea (on the left) and "Hamulus" walkeri (on the right) from plate 5 of the document MikeR linked above.  The photo of Diploconcha cretacea shows the operculum in place.  The operculum is a "lid" that closes the opening to the tube, it is not a repeating structure that divides the tube into sections, such as cephalopod septa.  This is what you are seeing in your specimen; if you were to remove the operculum (do not do that BTW, your specimen is quite nice and that would mess it up) you would find that the interior is in fact hollow.  BTW the specimen in the photo is an internal mold which is why it looks a bit different from yours, which has the shell material preserved.

 

Baculites has a nacreous shell that is totally different from your specimen.  If you remove the outer shell from a Baculites you will see the complex ammonitic sutures.  The surface of the septa looks entirely different from the feature in the opening of your specimen, which looks just like the operculum in the photo of Diploconcha.

 

Don

[fossil_lover_2277]

On 10/21/2021 at 12:25 PM, FossilDAWG said:

Here is a photo of Diploconcha cretacea (on the left) and "Hamulus" walkeri (on the right) from plate 5 of the document MikeR linked above.  The photo of Diploconcha cretacea shows the operculum in place.  This is what you are seeing in your specimen; if you were to remove the operculum (do not do that BTW, your specimen is quite nice and that would mess it up) you would find that the interior is in fact hollow.  BTW the specimen in the photo is an internal mold which is why it looks a bit different from yours, which has the shell material preserved.

 

Baculites has a nacreous shell that is totally different from your specimen.  If you remove the outer shell from a Baculites you will see the complex ammonitic sutures.  The surface of the septa looks entirely different from the feature in the opening of your specimen, which looks just like the operculum in the photo of Diploconcha.

 

Don

Thanks for the information Don, I appreciate it. I am aware of the sutures in Baculites but I thought it was possible they’d been broken to where you couldn’t recognize them on the inside, perhaps that ridging was all that remained, and on the outside simply weren’t there. I’ve also seen Baculites where the outward nacreous layer isn’t well preserved. Why I didn’t post in the ID section first.  Definitely not trying to mislabel things on the forum, I know it’s an important source of information.

 

 

[FossilDAWG]

I never thought you were trying to mislabel anything!  Rather, you posed an interesting question.  Like MikeR, I have found tube-shaped fossils that I thought (hoped!) might be Baculites in the Georgia Cretaceous, only to learn that there are a number of unrelated taxa that produce good mimics.  Another potentially confusing group are the calcareous tubes produced by some bivalves such as Kummelia and Martesia (see plate 38 in MikeR's link).

 

Don

[fossilhunter21]

Awesome finds!

 

Thank's for sharing!

[fossil_lover_2277]

1 hour ago, FossilDAWG said:

I never thought you were trying to mislabel anything!  Rather, you posed an interesting question.  Like MikeR, I have found tube-shaped fossils that I thought (hoped!) might be Baculites in the Georgia Cretaceous, only to learn that there are a number of unrelated taxa that produce good mimics.  Another potentially confusing group are the calcareous tubes produced by some bivalves such as Kummelia and Martesia (see plate 38 in MikeR's link).

 

Don

Thanks, hopefully if people find something like this in the future this thread will help give them some information.

[PaleoPastels]

*waves from Texas* Super congrats on your mosasaur teeths! I might just have to come to NC to *finally* find one! I love that your finds look just like what I typically find in the Eagle Ford over here! It feels comforting! Ive been there for mineral hunting 3 times, never knew NC has a Cretaceous patch out there! Thank so much for sharing! 

[Jared C]

I did not know North Carolina had great cretaceous stuff too, holy smokes! Great finds

[fossil_lover_2277]

8 hours ago, AmmoniteDelight said:

*waves from Texas* Super congrats on your mosasaur teeths! I might just have to come to NC to *finally* find one! I love that your finds look just like what I typically find in the Eagle Ford over here! It feels comforting! Ive been there for mineral hunting 3 times, never knew NC has a Cretaceous patch out there! Thank so much for sharing! 

If you do come to NC for mosasaur teeth, the creek Greens Mill Run in Greenville, NC is where I’d recommend heading. Lots of gravel bars to sift through, decent chance you’ll find some croc or mosasaur teeth. It also has stuff from Pliocene sediments. Lots of people go there, it’s easy to access and well known, and I guarantee you’ll find fossils

Edited October 22, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[sixgill pete]

17 hours ago, AmmoniteDelight said:

*waves from Texas* Super congrats on your mosasaur teeths! I might just have to come to NC to *finally* find one! I love that your finds look just like what I typically find in the Eagle Ford over here! It feels comforting! Ive been there for mineral hunting 3 times, never knew NC has a Cretaceous patch out there! Thank so much for sharing! 

 

8 hours ago, Jared C said:

I did not know North Carolina had great cretaceous stuff too, holy smokes! Great finds

 

North Carolina has lots of Cretaceous sediments. They are located in the central and southern coastal and southeastern peidmont counties. The Black Creek Group consists of the Bladen, Tar Heel and Donoho Creek Formations. Then there is the PeeDee Formation, it has 2 members  the Rocky Point and the Island Creek. 

There are closely gaurded locations that have pristine teeth. Also the PeeDee has at least 5 different ammonite species.  Many of the Cretaceous river deposits are lag Formations, producing mostly worn fossils however.

[hemipristis]

7 hours ago, sixgill pete said:

 

 

North Carolina has lots of Cretaceous sediments. They are located in the central and southern coastal and southeastern peidmont counties. The Black Creek Group consists of the Bladen, Tar Heel and Donoho Creek Formations. Then there is the PeeDee Formation, it has 2 members  the Rocky Point and the Island Creek. 

There are closely gaurded locations that have pristine teeth. Also the PeeDee has at least 5 different ammonite species.  Many of the Cretaceous river deposits are lag Formations, producing mostly worn fossils however.

Lots of fun screening creek gravels!   Many an hour spent in knee-deep water in Greenville and Lumberton.

 

Nice batch!

 

 

16 hours ago, Lando_Calrissian_4tw said:

If you do come to NC for mosasaur teeth, the creek Greens Mill Run in Greenville, NC is where I’d recommend heading. Lots of gravel bars to sift through, decent chance you’ll find some croc or mosasaur teeth. It also has stuff from Pliocene sediments. Lots of people go there, it’s easy to access and well known, and I guarantee you’ll find fossils

 

Never had any luck with mosasaurs at Greenville, despite easily 30 trips there.  Some beautiful Pliocene and Creataceous shark teeth, ratfish, belemnites, ammo sections and some fishy (Enchodus and Xiphactinus (?)), but nary a single mosasaur tooth or bone. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2021 by hemipristis

[fossil_lover_2277]

1 hour ago, hemipristis said:

Lots of fun screening creek gravels!   Many an hour spent in knee-deep water in Greenville and Lumberton.

 

Nice batch!

 

 

 

Never had any luck with mosasaurs at Greenville, despite easily 30 trips there.  Some beautiful Pliocene and Creataceous shark teeth, ratfish, belemnites, ammo sections and some fishy (Enchodus and Xiphactinus (?)), but nary a single mosasaur tooth or bone. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the only mosasaur tooth I’ve found at greens mill run, but I haven’t gone looking for them much there either, for what that’s worth.  Found literally in that first big gravel bar right when you enter the creek at Green Springs park. I imagine it’d be hard to know the mosasaur bones from one of the Pliocene whale bones there unless you got one in pretty good condition. Loads of goblin shark teeth too, albeit most are pretty worn or beat up from there.

Edited October 23, 2021 by Lando_Calrissian_4tw

[Hipockets]

15 hours ago, sixgill pete said:

 

 

North Carolina has lots of Cretaceous sediments. They are located in the central and southern coastal and southeastern peidmont counties. The Black Creek Group consists of the Bladen, Tar Heel and Donoho Creek Formations. Then there is the PeeDee Formation, it has 2 members  the Rocky Point and the Island Creek. 

There are closely gaurded locations that have pristine teeth. Also the PeeDee has at least 5 different ammonite species.  Many of the Cretaceous river deposits are lag Formations, producing mostly worn fossils however.

Hey Don,.  What are the 5 ammonite species?