Jump to content

Bob Hickerson

Recommended Posts

Found in the Peace River, Florida yesterday. Appears to be a tooth. ID Please??

246671976_586922869287504_2452364219165241054_n.jpg

246962366_905797296709991_3032509008424511876_n.jpg

249383624_226225946187187_8638958900747624236_n.jpg

Edited by Bob Hickerson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to see a picture of the chewing surface straight down onto it.

 

Tim_Photo_Diagram_.jpg

  • I found this Informative 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

We need to see a picture of the chewing surface straight down onto it.

I don't think that is going to be possible. Do you see it there ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rockwood

 

I see it at an oblique angle. Looking straight down might help.  :headscratch:

More information is always better than less.

  • I found this Informative 1
  • I Agree 3

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I'll believe it when I see it. I think it's missing.

So, you believe that the chewing surface of this tooth is damaged or worn off? What harm is there in asking for a photo of the damaged, worn off, or missing chewing surface?

 

I am far from believing that this is Mastodon.. I might be convinced if we can see the chewing surface .

 

Jack

  • I Agree 3

The White Queen  ".... in her youth she could believe "six impossible things before breakfast"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I'll believe it when I see it. I think it's missing.

Me too. That's why I asked to see it. ;)

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM  --- APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."

John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bob Hickerson said:

Here is a view of the chewing surface:

249482342_221621020074274_8910019569730179766_n.jpg

Bob,  I should have said this 1st.  Welcome to TFF.  It is a fantastic fossil resource and full of friendly people including Florida fossil hunters who hunt the Peace River.

I love your tooth !!! It is amazing.

It might be Mastodon or Gomphothere, but I think I am voting for Dugong.

Let's see what the consensus of the many knowledge experts on Florida is....   Jack

  • I found this Informative 1
  • Thank You 1

The White Queen  ".... in her youth she could believe "six impossible things before breakfast"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Shellseeker said:

So, you believe that the chewing surface of this tooth is damaged or worn off? What harm is there in asking for a photo of the damaged, worn off, or missing chewing surface?

 

I am far from believing that this is Mastodon.. I might be convinced if we can see the chewing surface .

 

Jack

Yes I thought it was gone. Obviously I was wrong.

I'm glad things worked out well in spite of my blunder.

  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

It appears to be a well-worn Sus scrofa (domestic pig) second lower molar (m2).

 

pig_sus_scrofa_m2_m3.thumb.JPG.da2ddb2c246ad01c3793cac5b06ae29c.JPG

Hello Harry, I admit that there are similarities with the domestic pig molars but, comparing them side by side, there are significant differences in the angles and lengths of the roots. Is this an acceptable allowance of differences in the fossil ID process? Remember, I am new here. Not challenging your ID, just trying to understand the process. Also, would ours be considered a relative of what is now the "domestic pig"? If so, what would it have been? Thanks!!

Comparison cropped.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the Forum, Bob.

Your "side by side" illustration is actually an "end by side" comparison.

 

Have I provided with my image a perfect match?  No.  The appearance of the occlusal surface changes substantially with wear.  I had to decide which pig molar you had, m2 or M1, but I have no severely worn M1 for comparison.  (I am still somewhat prejudiced toward M1 because of the root structure of your find.)

 

There are no close relatives of Sus scrofa to be found as a fossil in the Peace River . . . or in Florida . . . or in the New World.  Sus is an import from the Old World. (Peccaries are not pigs.)

 

Feral pigs are common in the Peace River Valley, and the teeth are not uncommon finds when fossil hunting.

 

pig_sus_scrofa.JPG.42fb5093dc5882cc77abbcd0f5b2ba6e.JPG

 

pig_uppers.jpg.21f4729ddd497c1733ed84aee68763fc.jpg

  • I found this Informative 2

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Pristis said:

Welcome to the Forum, Bob.

Your "side by side" illustration is actually an "end by side" comparison.

 

Have I provided with my image a perfect match?  No.  The appearance of the occlusal surface changes substantially with wear.  I had to decide which pig molar you had, m2 or M1, but I have no severely worn M1 for comparison.  (I am still somewhat prejudiced toward M1 because of the root structure of your find.)

 

There are no close relatives of Sus scrofa to be found as a fossil in the Peace River . . . or in Florida . . . or in the New World.  Sus is an import from the Old World. (Peccaries are not pigs.)

 

Feral pigs are common in the Peace River Valley, and the teeth are not uncommon finds when fossil hunting.

 

pig_sus_scrofa.JPG.42fb5093dc5882cc77abbcd0f5b2ba6e.JPG

 

pig_uppers.jpg.21f4729ddd497c1733ed84aee68763fc.jpg

OK Harry, thanks for the additional information on our find. Is it possible that this molar is from a Tapir?

 

tapir-fossils-3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry Pristis said:

It's possible.  We'd need an occlusal view of the teeth.

Got it, but since this specimen is so well worn, we won't have it, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the Sus molar is not from a tapir.

I assumed you were asking about the two teeth in the post to which I responded. Those are the teeth which require an occlusal view.

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...