Jurassicz1 Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 I have started labeling my fossils. But a few questions. For example a Mosasaur and dino from Morocco Theropod dinosaur teeth Abelisaurid indet. Kem Kem Beds, Morocco Late Cretaceous ~95 million years Mosasaur teeth Igdamanosaurus aegyptiacus Oulad Abdoun Basin, Morocco Upper Cretaceous, Maastrichtian (~70 million years) Are these labels right? I wonder about the "Eocene, Ypresian" Does that work or should I do "Eocene Ypresian" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsaacTheFossilMan Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) It's really up to personal discretion. The taxonomic name should be italicised. If it has all the information you deem to be necessary, then that's good. Personally these are alright. 21 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: Abelisaurid indet. You have incorrectly used a binomial here; I would just put Abelisauridae. 21 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: Igdamanosaurus aegyptiacus Again, watch the italics. Identification should be in it. As for this: 21 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: "Eocene, Ypresian" It's really up to personal discretion! As the Ypresian is a sub-age, I'd do "Eocene (Ypresian)" to show that the latter is more specific. Edited October 27, 2021 by IsaacTheFossilMan 1 1 ~ Isaac; www.isaactfm.com "Don't move! He can't see us if we don't move!" - Alan Grant Come to the spring that is The Fossil Forum, where the stream of warmth and knowledge never runs dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 16 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: Theropod dinosaur teeth Abelisaurid indet. Kem Kem Beds, Morocco Late Cretaceous ~95years Abelisaurid indet. Age: Cenomanian-Turonian Formation: Kem Kem Group Location: Kem Kem Beds, Morocco 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Andy- Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 I encourage everyone to label their fossils. It helps immensely in case you ever forget their original name or locality. Here's how I label mine: Abelisaur tooth Abelisauridae indet. 98 - 92.5 Ma | Kem Kem Group Southeast Morocco Mosasaur tooth Igdamanosaurus aegyptiacus 68 - 66 Ma | Oulad Abdoun Basin Khouribga Phosphate Beds, Morocco 1 Looking forward to meeting my fellow Singaporean collectors! Do PM me if you are a Singaporean, or an overseas fossil-collector coming here for a holiday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardo Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 1 hour ago, IsaacTheFossilMan said: You have incorrectly used a binomial here; I would just put Abelisauridae. The family name shouldn't be italicised. Only genus and specific epithet should be in italic. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 correction... in scientific literature, only the genus and species are italicized. Abelisauridae indet should not be italicized. Igdamanosaurus aegyptiacus should indeed be italicized Oh, I just saw that ricardo already mentioned this. Well I am going to post it anyway so as not to waste my 5 minutes of typing. 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erose Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 My one comment would be to make them as consistent as possible. If you are stating age in terms of periods and ages/stages do them all that way. Don't mix in numbers. Keep Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy straight. And as stated above look at proper use of Binomial terminology. Also do you also have a catalog of these going and are you numbering your specimens as well. Labels can get mixed up but if the specimen has a number attached and the label has the same number then you have no worries. Also you can put much more detail into your catalog entry and thus keep labels simpler. 2 cents... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsaacTheFossilMan Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 2 hours ago, ricardo said: The family name shouldn't be italicised. Only genus and specific epithet should be in italic. Ah, I forgot about that, my bad! 1 ~ Isaac; www.isaactfm.com "Don't move! He can't see us if we don't move!" - Alan Grant Come to the spring that is The Fossil Forum, where the stream of warmth and knowledge never runs dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsaacTheFossilMan Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) 29 minutes ago, erose said: My one comment would be to make them as consistent as possible. If you are stating age in terms of periods and ages/stages do them all that way. Don't mix in numbers. Keep Lithostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy straight. And as stated above look at proper use of Binomial terminology. Also do you also have a catalog of these going and are you numbering your specimens as well. Labels can get mixed up but if the specimen has a number attached and the label has the same number then you have no worries. Also you can put much more detail into your catalog entry and thus keep labels simpler. 2 cents... +1 for numbering specimen. I have an online database I have set up where each of my specimen in person just have their ID tag attached to them, which corresponds to a plethora of information on the page for that specimen, collected by a web scraper I wrote. I just give the program the identification of the fossil, and it gathers all sorts of information Edited October 27, 2021 by IsaacTheFossilMan 1 ~ Isaac; www.isaactfm.com "Don't move! He can't see us if we don't move!" - Alan Grant Come to the spring that is The Fossil Forum, where the stream of warmth and knowledge never runs dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassicz1 Posted October 28, 2021 Author Share Posted October 28, 2021 18 hours ago, Troodon said: Abelisaurid indet. Age: Cenomanian-Turonian Formation: Kem Kem Group Location: Kem Kem Beds, Morocco So I should not put Dinosaur in the label? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 21 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: So I should not put Dinosaur in the label? Its redundant, thats all. Most important thing is locality info, as specific and accurate and precise as possible. Even formation can be derived from an accurate and precise locality info. Did I mention that locality info is important ? Franz Bernhard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kikokuryu Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: So I should not put Dinosaur in the label? That's personal preference. The only thing that really matters is the "location" / provenance followed by formation. If you already have Abelisauridae indet. on the label, theropod dinosaur doesn't feel very necessary. In the case where you have a Theropoda indet., it's going to look redundant, at least IMO. It looks great at first, but after the 50th dinosaur tooth, the theropod tooth on each label starts to overstay its welcome. At some point, I tried stuff like having Abelisaur Tooth above species like Chenanisaurus or Kryptops, but that eventually got old as well. My first few labels used to have a lot of stuff crammed into them, but now my labels only have ID/Formation/Location since after 600 or so specimens, there's multiple instances where putting age or common name looks really bad when it isn't very clear or of obscure genera like dinosaur, crocodile, or fish. But, my labels are all 4x2.5cm so I don't have a lot of space to work with to begin with. Edit: @FranzBernhard beat me to it, but yea, that's gist of it is, as long as you got a good and strong provenance on there, everything else is just personal preference. Whatever you think makes it look the best. Edited October 28, 2021 by Kikokuryu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassicz1 Posted October 28, 2021 Author Share Posted October 28, 2021 1 hour ago, FranzBernhard said: Its redundant, thats all. Most important thing is locality info, as specific and accurate and precise as possible. Even formation can be derived from an accurate and precise locality info. Did I mention that locality info is important ? Franz Bernhard Ok but as an example of my own finds. Belemnites Belemnitella mucronata Ignaberga Quarry, Sweden Kristianstad Basin Upper Cretaceous (~80 million years). Crow shark Squalicorax lindstromi Ignaberga Quarry, Sweden Kristianstad Basin Upper Cretaceous (~80 million years) Does this work? As i'm printing alot of labels and want to be 101% sure the labels are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) 59 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: 101% sure the labels are correct. Sure it might be correct . The centerpiece of the info is Ignaberga Quarry. Everything else could be derived from that info. But can you be more specific about the site? Is there only one fossil-bearing formation in the quarry? Can you specify a specific bed? Was it collected from the outcropping rocks or from rubble? When was it collected (This info can be also important in some cases)? Well, this could be too much information for a label. Thats the point where some kind of catalogue comes in, where you can put down all that detailed info. Franz Bernhard Edited October 28, 2021 by FranzBernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 I try to keep my labels very small and only have basic info on them otherwise they get too large and take up too much space. However each label has a Catalog number that is cross-referenced to files on my computer that have all the detailed information. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calli99 Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 I always add collection date. Sites can change over time in lots of different ways and it can be useful for anyone who may be looking at your collection in the future. Plus I like it for myself as a record of my own fossil adventures and good times, less scientific, but nostalgic I suppose. 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 4 hours ago, Troodon said: I try to keep my labels very small and only have basic info on them otherwise they get too large and take up too much space. However each label has a Catalog number that is cross-referenced to files on my computer that have all the detailed information. I agree 100% with this... any additional info you have on the labels is just to make it easy to remember what you have without looking it up. That info is pretty much up to the individual. As long as you have a specimen number on the fossil and a database (computer or index cards) that the number refers to which contains a ton more info. Honestly, I don't even have labels... I just have the specimen number on the fossil or on the fossil's container if it is too small. Everything else I can look up (on a paper file, not yet computerized). I do dream of having the time to make labels, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 1 hour ago, Calli99 said: I always add collection date. Sites can change over time in lots of different ways and it can be useful for anyone who may be looking at your collection in the future. Plus I like it for myself as a record of my own fossil adventures and good times, less scientific, but nostalgic I suppose. yeah, this is important info, but it can be in the database, not really needed on the actual label. Again, up to the individual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassicz1 Posted November 1, 2021 Author Share Posted November 1, 2021 On 10/28/2021 at 11:35 AM, FranzBernhard said: Sure it might be correct . The centerpiece of the info is Ignaberga Quarry. Everything else could be derived from that info. But can you be more specific about the site? Is there only one fossil-bearing formation in the quarry? Can you specify a specific bed? Was it collected from the outcropping rocks or from rubble? When was it collected (This info can be also important in some cases)? Well, this could be too much information for a label. Thats the point where some kind of catalogue comes in, where you can put down all that detailed info. Franz Bernhard There are some zone layers or how you call it. But most of my fossils are collected by sifting in piles of gravel and rocks that the machines dumped. from different zones so it is pretty hard to locate the specific zone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassicz1 Posted November 1, 2021 Author Share Posted November 1, 2021 On 10/28/2021 at 1:47 PM, Troodon said: I try to keep my labels very small and only have basic info on them otherwise they get too large and take up too much space. However each label has a Catalog number that is cross-referenced to files on my computer that have all the detailed information. Alright thanks. A few questions I found a Mosasaur tooth a few weeks ago. Sadly its too beat up to tell what species. So what do I label it as? Mosasaur sp. ? And if I got a fish tooth that could as an example possibly be Enchodus but not certain. Should i then label it "Enchodus?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 20 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: But most of my fossils are collected by sifting in piles of gravel and rocks that the machines dumped. from different zones so it is pretty hard to locate the specific zone. So you might add "from processed gravel" or "unspecified layer/bed". Franz Bernhard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 32 minutes ago, Jurassicz said: Alright thanks. A few questions I found a Mosasaur tooth a few weeks ago. Sadly its too beat up to tell what species. So what do I label it as? Mosasaur sp. ? And if I got a fish tooth that could as an example possibly be Enchodus but not certain. Should i then label it "Enchodus?" Have you posted them here to see if others can ID them? I would label the Mosasaur tooth as your indicated or Indeterminate Mosasaur. On the fish tooth that fine if you feel its close to one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusty_Crab Posted November 1, 2021 Share Posted November 1, 2021 (edited) I'd also like to make the case to include the author citation with your species. The citation is the author's last name and year published when the type specimen was first published. This is important as science must always be reproducible. The citation is the original description of the type specimen. To verify that your specimen belongs in that species, it must be compared to the description of the type specimen. As previously mentioned, the species name is typically italicized. The citation is not. If the genus has been reassigned, the citation is put in parentheses. If it has not, there are no parenthesis. This is a very good explanation: http://rsquirespaleo.blogspot.com/search?q=author. For example, let's take the Great White Shark. This was first described by Linnaeus in 1758 as Squalus carcharias. Subsequent workers have placed it in the genus Carcharodon. Therefore, the current species is Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758). If no one had reassigned the genus, the citation would hypothetically be Squalus carcharias Linnaeus, 1758. It is incumbent upon the collector to be up to date with the names. In a perfect world, this would involve being up to date with all of the publications. Since this is unrealistic, GBIF (https://www.gbif.org/), and the Paleobiology Database (https://paleobiodb.org/#/) are both good resources to start, For those that are interested in naming conventions, it is codified in: https://www.iczn.org/the-code/the-code-online/ Edited November 1, 2021 by Crusty_Crab 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 (edited) 10 hours ago, Crusty_Crab said: It is incumbent upon the collector I don´t think that there is something incumbent in that way . Its mostly a nightmare. Some species have changed genus for up to 9 times: http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/86206-maximum-number-of-genera-for-a-species/&tab=comments#comment-931346 A friend and I are calling this "Playing chess with extinct species". There is also a school that does not "believe" in genera, only in species. But this opens a can of worms, of course . Franz Bernhard Edited November 2, 2021 by FranzBernhard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 (edited) 21 hours ago, Crusty_Crab said: It is incumbent upon the collector to be up to date with the names. In a perfect world, this would involve being up to date with all of the publications. Since this is unrealistic, GBIF (https://www.gbif.org/), and the Paleobiology Database (https://paleobiodb.org/#/) are both good resources to start, Just because someone changes the genera of a species doesn’t mean that the consensus of workers agree. The same thing goes for renaming and organizing formations. One of the taxonomy sites above has a pie chart to describe the names that the species goes by in the various collections that list the species. Both of the GBIF and PaleoBioDB sites can be assessed on Mindat. Just place the taxon name in the search field at the top. https://www.mindat.org Hopefully @FranzBernhard already knows that. Edited November 2, 2021 by DPS Ammonite 1 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. 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