How to exactly study fossils in your collection ?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Hello everybody,

 

I have question that I always wanted to ask,but it was so dumb that I always avoided asking it.

However,curiosity was stronger and I finally decided to go for it and ask it.

OK,I would like to know how can someone who collects fossils learn more about fossils he got and find out more about that particular specimen?

Is there any sort of ''study'' that can be done with some fossilized specimen like etc. seashell in matrix that would provide more information about that specimen as well as specie?

I would like to know more about fossils I have,but to me it's just fossilized organism that I don't know much about except it's etc. seashell.

I would really like to do some study on my fossils,but I don't know what kind of study is possible to do without any lab equipment?

For example,I uploaded one seashell fossil I have in my collection.

It's still in matrix and I know where it came from and approximately age,but nothing else.Not even specie since it's not some more ''famous'' animal that is well known and I can't find any guide for fossils that would tell me more about local species in my area (this fossil was found by my friend in creek few miles from my home).

Do you have any advice for learning more about fossils I have,since I don't have list of species found in my area because they are considered of ''low importance'' and only place that I may get some list is University of Natural Science,but they are too busy and don't have policy to give that kind of info to individuals outside University.

 

So,back to original question,is there any way to study fossil we have in our collections that would tell us more info about that particular organism?

Again,I'm sorry for dumb question,but I'm big newbie and I don't even consider myself an amateur tho I know many things about paleontology that are above ''standard/basic'' knowledge,but as far as ID'ing and studying fossils themself,I don't have almost any knowledge.

 

 

EDIT:I recently got compound microscope and I manage to use it on minerals and some fossils despite it's not stereo microscope that is made for studying 3-D things like fossils among others.

Trick was using very bright light source close to specimen near the objective and it works very well actually.

It's not same as stereo microscope,but it's nice experience to try.

Would you recommend some studies on fossils that are possible with help of a microscope perhaps?

 

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by Tyrannosaurus Rex

[ThePhysicist]

2 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

I have question that I always wanted to ask,but it was so dumb that I always avoided asking it.

I'm of the opinion that there are no "dumb" questions - if it has the potential to increase your knowledge/understanding, it's always worth asking.

 

 

2 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

I would like to know how can someone who collects fossils learn more about fossils he got and find out more about that particular specimen?

Is there any sort of ''study'' that can be done with some fossilized specimen like etc. seashell in matrix that would provide more information about that specimen as well as specie?

It sounds like you're asking about a general "strategy" for identifying your fossils, and so I'll give a general answer (correct me if I'm misunderstanding). The easiest thing you can do is post them on the forum for ID. Over time, you'll learn how to identify them by experience - it's also very useful to ask how others identified a particular fossil (e.g. what features they base it off of, etc.) The forum is a great beginning resource with many previous ID topics and informative posts to browse. You can also read scientific papers which discuss your fossil(s) of interest. These are the most reliable sources, however more difficult to access and interpret than perhaps a forum post. 

 

For example, you're off to a good start on the shell - locality is crucial to determining the age, which is also an important factor in ID. Knowing the age significantly narrows down the possibilities since many animals only existed for a sliver of time. You can then search for literature on "[age/period] shells from Croatia" or something along those lines for starters. 

 

2 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Would you recommend some studies on fossils that are possible with help of a microscope perhaps?

Some fossils are small enough that a microscope is necessary to view identifying features, but not all fossils require a microscope for ID. 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by ThePhysicist

[FranzBernhard]

As already said, there is nothing like a dumb question. Only dumb answers . I will try to give a hopefully not completely dumb answer, well, its somewhat the answer of @ThePhysicistworded differently:

- Have a look at geological maps, as detailed as possible. That is, to pin down the formation your fossil came from as exactly as possible.

- With that info, google for that formation and their fossil content. You might try also google scholar for this.

- Your fossil in question seems to be a bivalve, so focus on information about bivalves in that formation. As you stated, there seems not to be much info available in your area!

- If that is the case, expand your search for similar aged formations around that particular formation. You will need something like a regional stratigraphic chart, with various formations of the same age depicted side-by-side.

- You can always post it here on TFF. There are very knowledgeable members around. Sometimes you may get lucky, sometimes not.

- Fell free to ask, ask, ask!

- Have fun!
Franz Bernhard

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

5 hours ago, ThePhysicist said:

I'm of the opinion that there are no "dumb" questions - if it has the potential to increase your knowledge/understanding, it's always worth asking.

 

 

It sounds like you're asking about a general "strategy" for identifying your fossils, and so I'll give a general answer (correct me if I'm misunderstanding). The easiest thing you can do is post them on the forum for ID. Over time, you'll learn how to identify them by experience - it's also very useful to ask how others identified a particular fossil (e.g. what features they base it off of, etc.) The forum is a great beginning resource with many previous ID topics and informative posts to browse. You can also read scientific papers which discuss your fossil(s) of interest. These are the most reliable sources, however more difficult to access and interpret than perhaps a forum post. 

 

For example, you're off to a good start on the shell - locality is crucial to determining the age, which is also an important factor in ID. Knowing the age significantly narrows down the possibilities since many animals only existed for a sliver of time. You can then search for literature on "[age/period] shells from Croatia" or something along those lines for starters. 

 

Some fossils are small enough that a microscope is necessary to view identifying features, but not all fossils require a microscope for ID. 

 

 

3 hours ago, FranzBernhard said:

As already said, there is nothing like a dump question. Only dump answers . I will try to give a hopefully not completely dump answer, well, its somewhat the answer of @ThePhysicistworded differently:

- Have a look at geological maps, as detailed as possible. That is, to pin down the formation your fossil came from as exactly as possible.

- With that info, google for that formation and their fossil content. You might try also google scholar for this.

- Your fossil in question seems to be a bivalve, so focus on information about bivalves in that formation. As you stated, there seems not to be much info available in your area!

- If that is the case, expand your search for similar aged formations around that particular formation. You will need something like a regional stratigraphic chart, with various formations of the same age depicted side-by-side.

- You can always post it here on TFF. There are very knowledgeable members around. Sometimes you may get lucky, sometimes not.

- Fell free to ask, ask, ask!

- Have fun!
Franz Bernhard

 

 

 

 

Thanks so much guys!

You gave me great start directions and I'm very grateful.

Problem was I didn't know where to start since I didn't knew what exactly to look for and on what should I focus first.

Good news is I know exactly from what quarry my fossils came from and they are presumably all from Miocene so like you said,that narrows down organisms from that particular era.

I manage to found undergraduate thesis written on 20 pages that contains good info about local flora and fauna of my city as well as some info about geological details.

PS

Quick question,can I determine exact rock type if I look at the matrix of the particular fossil under the microscope and if so,how exactly?

Thanks once again.

 

 

[FranzBernhard]

1 hour ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

on what should I focus first

A feeling for that formation .

 

1 hour ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

I determine exact rock type if I look at the matrix of the particular fossil under the microscope and if so,how exactly?

Would you like to try the wikipedia entry?

Sedimentary rocks

It this is tooo much (or you know this already), please let us know!
Franz Bernhard

[Fossildude19]

Many scientific papers on localities and fossils will mention what type of rock matrix the fossils are in.

Studying the geology of an area is similar to studying the fossils of an area. Google search for the Formation name + Geology.

Read as much as you can about that area, concerning geology, paleontology, taphonomy, and stratigraphy.

 

 

[RuMert]

As to studying fossils, it doesn't necessarily mean any given specimen. More important is having general knowledge in your field of interest, for example: bivalves, Cretaceous, Morrison formation, etc.  Reading gives you more in terms of studying than dissecting your shells. Actually, dissecting them and putting under microscope is the last thing to do. When you know your field well, you will easily know what is valuable for science today. Finding such specimens, discussing and donating them is much more useful. For example, with ammonites magnum opus find would be a soft body, but there are lots of more usual ones: aptichi, signs of predation, muscle marks, ephibionts, crustaceans living in shells, presence of hooks, eggs and so on. Always useful is correcting the stratigraphy by finding specimens in unusual places and finding complete specimens in general, as most are known from incomplete remains. In short, reading literature, communicating with scientists and discussing stuff on TFF is more. important than anything else

Edited November 17, 2021 by RuMert

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

2 hours ago, FranzBernhard said:

A feeling for that formation .

 

Would you like to try the wikipedia entry?

Sedimentary rocks

It this is tooo much (or you know this already), please let us know!
Franz Bernhard

Sure I will.

I was looking for more ''generic'' information to begin with and I focused mainly on various websites related to paleontology/geology,but I totally forgot about wikipedia for some reason despite using it fairly often.

I know some things that are written there,but not much like main types of rocks and process how they were made (igneous,metamorphic and sedimentary),process of fossilization and few things about erosion,but not much more than those kind of things.

It certainly looks like very interesting read and I'll sure take a look at it this evening and try to soak in as much info as I can.

If I have any questions I'll ask them if that's OK.

 

2 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Many scientific papers on localities and fossils will mention what type of rock matrix the fossils are in.

Studying the geology of an area is similar to studying the fossils of an area. Google search for the Formation name + Geology.

Read as much as you can about that area, concerning geology, paleontology, taphonomy, and stratigraphy.

 

 

You're right.I manage to found and read some of the rock types in papers published by Geological Institute about local quarries where most fossils are found as well as many other interesting facts.

I will read as much as I can dig up online.

It's a bit hard to get that kind of  info if you don't have direct access to Geological Institute and their archives,but info that I need can be found if you know where to look for.

Fortunately,I manage to found papers for students in PDF format that are shared by students on various sites when they need help with homework and those kind of stuff.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, RuMert said:

As to studying fossils, it doesn't necessarily mean any given specimen. More important is having general knowledge in your field of interest, for example: bivalves, Cretaceous, Morrison formation, etc.  Reading gives you more in terms of studying than dissecting your shells. Actually, dissecting them and putting under microscope is the last thing to do. When you know your field well, you will easily know what is valuable for science today. Finding such specimens, discussing and donating them is much more useful. For example, with ammonites magnum opus find would be a soft body, but there are lots of more usual ones: aptichi, signs of predation, muscle marks, ephibionts, crustaceans living in shells, presence of hooks, eggs and so on. Always useful is correcting the stratigraphy by finding specimens in unusual places and finding complete specimens in general, as most are known from incomplete remains. In short, reading literature, communicating with scientists and discussing stuff on TFF is more. important than anything else

 

I couldn't agree more.

Papers that are published by scientists contain all info that is needed for learning about certain things.After all,they used advanced techniques and technology to get all crucial information that are released to public for study.

I certainly agree that the best way to learn about something is by reading various scientific papers published based on that topic.

I wanted to do both studying from papers and examination under microscope,but papers comes first,than physical observation once I gather enough knowledge to actually know what to observe.

I always wanted to donate precious specimens and important findings to local Natural History Museum,but I couldn't find any that are above ''average'' quality and of course,they don't bother with those kind since they already own top quality specimens used for study.

 

 

[Fossildude19]

12 minutes ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

It's a bit hard to get that kind of  info if you don't have direct access to Geological Institute and their archives,but info that I need can be found if you know where to look for.

Fortunately,I manage to found papers for students in PDF format that are shared by students on various sites when they need help with homework and those kind of stuff.

 

Check Google Scholar, Academia.edu, and Researchgate. 

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

28 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

Check Google Scholar, Academia.edu, and Researchgate. 

I most certainly will,thanks a lot!

[ClearLake]

Read, read read!  I know it sounds simple, but really, the easiest and best way to figure all this out is to read as much on the subject as you can.  And start with reading at the level of your current knowledge.  If you don't know anything about the different kinds of animals, then read material on that.  If you just try and jump into technical literature and you are not familiar with the more basic concepts, it will be very confusing and you may get frustrated.  Start simple and work up.  If you are reading something and you find you know all that already, then move on to a topic or detail you are less familiar with.  Google is your friend, so is a bookstore if you have one nearby.  Maybe they have some basic books on fossils, geology, etc.  You sound like you have a lot of curiosity and that is a great way to start!  Good luck (and always feel free to ask questions on here)!

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

5 minutes ago, ClearLake said:

Read, read read!  I know it sounds simple, but really, the easiest and best way to figure all this out is to read as much on the subject as you can.  And start with reading at the level of your current knowledge.  If you don't know anything about the different kinds of animals, then read material on that.  If you just try and jump into technical literature and you are not familiar with the more basic concepts, it will be very confusing and you may get frustrated.  Start simple and work up.  If you are reading something and you find you know all that already, then move on to a topic or detail you are less familiar with.  Google is your friend, so is a bookstore if you have one nearby.  Maybe they have some basic books on fossils, geology, etc.  You sound like you have a lot of curiosity and that is a great way to start!  Good luck (and always feel free to ask questions on here)!

 

I used to know much more about paleontology when I was still actively in it as an amateur,but life took me in so many directions that I had to neglect my love toward paleontology because I was so occupied with other things.

I planned to became paleontologist,but I had to chose different profession because few factors back then.

 

Now I finally have time and want to renew my knowledge that is little rusty and of course learn much more than I ever knew.

I showed my first interests in dinosaurs when I was 3 years old when I saw Jurassic Park that blew my imagination and I always got thrilled when I saw dinosaurs in books,TV,toys and basically everything.

Paleontology is my first and biggest love and I always resented myself that I didn't have time to get involved in it much more than I did.

Now I finally can and I want to expand my knowledge as far as possible.It's such an interesting field of science where mystery and questions never stop.

 

[Auspex]

16 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

I have question that I always wanted to ask...

I am very glad that you did! A whole world opens-up when you take the step from amassing a collection to studying it. How you study them depends on your specimens, and what resources you have at hand for the task. The simple act of drawing them is an intimate learning experience, as you thus give full attention to the specimen. Reference materials will expand your capability to see, and understand, the fossils. This is the big payoff, and there is always more things to learn and more discoveries to make.

There is a lot of good advice being offered; start with what you have and build on it. Minds, like fossils, should not be allowed to gather dust!

[FranzBernhard]

2 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

It's such an interesting field of science where mystery and questions never stop.

Indeed! Its one of the few fields, where non-professionals can still contribute very significantly.

 

2 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Now I finally have time and want to renew my knowledge that is little rusty

Oh well!! 

 

2 hours ago, ClearLake said:

If you just try and jump into technical literature and you are not familiar with the more basic concepts, it will be very confusing and you may get frustrated.  Start simple and work up. 

Very important advice! Just go ahead from where you are standing now.

 

Franz Bernhard

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

15 hours ago, ThePhysicist said:

I'm of the opinion that there are no "dumb" questions - if it has the potential to increase your knowledge/understanding, it's always worth asking

 

Hear, hear. 

 

"asking for help isn't giving up, but refusing to do so"

 

 

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

I may not be able to offer much advice, and certainly none of the wisdom some of our older (dare I say, prehistoric) members can share, but I can tell you my experience.

 

One particular phenomena I've found beneficial by keeping in mind is the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Many members, namely @Lone Hunter have acknowledged its presence. I myself being not too knowledgeable in the field, constantly learning, have very recently gone through the stages in it. It's a fascinating model showing the individual's confidence in a subject versus their knowledge. As their knowledge is null, so is there confidence, as it goes up, it goes up misproportionately. Enough jibber jabber, lemme show you!

This here, is the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Now, why am I showing you this? It's very important to bear in mind one's bias with identification, but that wasn't the point, oh no!

 

A while ago, I got completely scared of the field of palaeontology, and, dare I say it, almost completely put off. What brought this on? As I gained new knowledge, I 'realised' how little I knew, and entered... The valley of despair... I felt ever-useless and unknowledgeable, and that my presence was pointless.

 

This is not the case, I was learning, I still am. I think I speak for everyone when I say there's always something new to learn, someone's opinion to listen to, a new fossil to study.

 

Read news reports, give the papers behind that report a go (if you're feeling brave! they were the ones who unfortunately made me feel somewhat useless, all the technical heehoo in there - remember, they have degrees, and we are mere mortals!). Post here, learn from the responses. Don't feel shy, ask why the user who replied thinks that it's X or Y species, and above all, keep your head up! We were all in your position, and many of us weren't brave enough to ask.

 

Ooh, also, take notes on the responses, there's this thing called 'Digital Amnesia' - if we Google an answer, we're more likely to forget it, as our brains think "I can just find that information again, no need to store it!". Think: how many times have you googled the name of that actor in that film?

 

Thank you for asking, I'm sure there are many members who can give valuable advice.

 

With all the wisdom I can muster;

Isaac

 

[FranzBernhard]

"Mount Stupid"

Great!!

 

9 hours ago, IsaacTheFossilMan said:

This here, is the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Now, why am I showing you this? It's very important to bear in mind one's bias with identification, but that wasn't the point, oh no!

 

A while ago, I got completely scared of the field of palaeontology, and, dare I say it, almost completely put off. What brought this on? As I gained new knowledge, I 'realised' how little I knew, and entered... The valley of despair... I felt ever-useless and unknowledgeable, and that my presence was pointless.

 

This is not the case, I was learning, I still am. I think I speak for everyone when I say there's always something new to learn, someone's opinion to listen to, a new fossil to study.

 

Read news reports, give the papers behind that report a go (if you're feeling brave! they were the ones who unfortunately made me feel somewhat useless, all the technical heehoo in there - remember, they have degrees, and we are mere mortals!). Post here, learn from the responses. Don't feel shy, ask why the user who replied thinks that it's X or Y species, and above all, keep your head up! We were all in your position, and many of us weren't brave enough to ask.

 

Ooh, also, take notes on the responses, there's this thing called 'Digital Amnesia' - if we Google an answer, we're more likely to forget it, as our brains think "I can just find that information again, no need to store it!". Think: how many times have you googled the name of that actor in that film?

 

Thank you for asking, I'm sure there are many members who can give valuable advice.

 

@IsaacTheFossilMan, this is one of greatest posts ever!! Thanks so much!!

Franz Bernhard

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

19 minutes ago, FranzBernhard said:

"Mount Stupid"

Great!!

 

 

@IsaacTheFossilMan, this is one of greatest posts ever!! Thanks so much!!

Franz Bernhard

 

 

Aw, shucks! Thanks buddy, I just wrote all that was on my mind. Hope you're doing alright!

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

On 11/17/2021 at 7:55 PM, Auspex said:

I am very glad that you did! A whole world opens-up when you take the step from amassing a collection to studying it. How you study them depends on your specimens, and what resources you have at hand for the task. The simple act of drawing them is an intimate learning experience, as you thus give full attention to the specimen. Reference materials will expand your capability to see, and understand, the fossils. This is the big payoff, and there is always more things to learn and more discoveries to make.

There is a lot of good advice being offered; start with what you have and build on it. Minds, like fossils, should not be allowed to gather dust!

Thanks!

I honestly didn't want to bother you guys since you're all pretty much experts and have much,much larger knowledge then someone like me who honestly just ''started'' to learn on right and detailed way.

I couldn't agree more,fossils aren't simply decorations,they are valuable and precious source of info about lost world that we wouldn't even be aware of if we haven' found them more importantly study them.It's like finding Chinese porcelain that looks nice,but not knowing anything about it and use it simply for decoration,but then you dig up for info,make a extensive research and found out it's belong to the Ming dynasty and it's more than a thousand years old.It's indescribable better feeling and experience if you own something that beautiful and know it's origin and history/prehistory.

On 11/17/2021 at 8:28 PM, FranzBernhard said:

Indeed! Its one of the few fields, where non-professionals can still contribute very significantly.

 

Oh well!! 

 

Very important advice! Just go ahead from where you are standing now.

 

Franz Bernhard

Well,it's amazing fact that amateurs and random people that don't have anything to do with science discovered so much groundbreaking discoveries that completely changed our view on prehistory.

Wonderful thing about paleontology is that every single specimen and discovery is unique in some way.

Yes,we found many fossils of feathered dinosaurs,but then you stumble on one that has unique pose and unique preservation level with feather texture that doesn't resemble to previous discoveries.It's a same specie,but you found it and it's completely new creature that saw the sunlight for the first time in millions of years and you helped in that process.

 

On 11/17/2021 at 10:15 PM, IsaacTheFossilMan said:

I may not be able to offer much advice, and certainly none of the wisdom some of our older (dare I say, prehistoric) members can share, but I can tell you my experience.

 

One particular phenomena I've found beneficial by keeping in mind is the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Many members, namely @Lone Hunter have acknowledged its presence. I myself being not too knowledgeable in the field, constantly learning, have very recently gone through the stages in it. It's a fascinating model showing the individual's confidence in a subject versus their knowledge. As their knowledge is null, so is there confidence, as it goes up, it goes up misproportionately. Enough jibber jabber, lemme show you!

This here, is the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Now, why am I showing you this? It's very important to bear in mind one's bias with identification, but that wasn't the point, oh no!

 

A while ago, I got completely scared of the field of palaeontology, and, dare I say it, almost completely put off. What brought this on? As I gained new knowledge, I 'realised' how little I knew, and entered... The valley of despair... I felt ever-useless and unknowledgeable, and that my presence was pointless.

 

This is not the case, I was learning, I still am. I think I speak for everyone when I say there's always something new to learn, someone's opinion to listen to, a new fossil to study.

 

Read news reports, give the papers behind that report a go (if you're feeling brave! they were the ones who unfortunately made me feel somewhat useless, all the technical heehoo in there - remember, they have degrees, and we are mere mortals!). Post here, learn from the responses. Don't feel shy, ask why the user who replied thinks that it's X or Y species, and above all, keep your head up! We were all in your position, and many of us weren't brave enough to ask.

 

Ooh, also, take notes on the responses, there's this thing called 'Digital Amnesia' - if we Google an answer, we're more likely to forget it, as our brains think "I can just find that information again, no need to store it!". Think: how many times have you googled the name of that actor in that film?

 

Thank you for asking, I'm sure there are many members who can give valuable advice.

 

With all the wisdom I can muster;

Isaac

 

Isaac,thank you for sharing your experience.It's surreal how identical I feel like you did in the past.I'm currently in Valley of Despair and going to slope of Enlightenment I never felt too much confidence in my knowledge to be honest.I always knew that I know more than random person,but nowhere near to call myself an amateur paleontologist.

I heard about Dunning-Kruger effect however I heard it mostly when someone described person that underestimates others and acts intellectually superior despite being fairly inferior.

First time I heard of it was few years ago when one guy that is really smart and loves all fields of science,messed up with some FlatEarther who insulted him and saying biggest nonsense I ever heard in my whole life literally.

Then he told him he's perfect example of Dunning Kruger syndrome and he was totally correct I must say.

I'm keeping notes of everything I've heard from you guys.Every info I get I consider extremely valuable.

Your comment really boosted me up when it comes to not giving up.I wasn't thinking of giving up of course,but I had that feeling that some knowledge and expertise is simply unachievable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I read articles that Franz and Fossildude19 gave me,plus many others I manage to dug up.

It's seems a bit complicated at first,but if I repeat it several times after some time I'll think I'll manage to get it,at least enough to recognize something without need for googling that term.

I even manage to found list of many taxons that are found in my area as well as location where they found it.

They are dated to Middle Miocene if I got it right,since text was written in Croatian and I'm more familiar with English terms when it comes to things like that.

Here are examples of some organisms they found in location that is nearest to me and the one I hope I'll manage to visit next summer:

Clypeaster aff. crassicostatus Sismonda 1841.

Cardita sp.

Pectunculus (Axinaea ) bimaculatus Poli, 1795.

Phacoides borealis Linnaeus, 1767

Cytherea sp. div.

Chlamys latissima nodosiformis (Pusch)

 

However,problem is that the list doesn't contain any photos of specimens so I'm having troubles finding how they looked before I see if any of them resemble fossils from my collection.

I tried looking at various sites,but I only manage to found small info like what clade,kingdom etc. but not photos or actual info about animals themself.

When I looked at The Paleobiology Database I didn't found anything in base and the only thing I did found was mostly living relatives of certain taxon that was listed as fossilized on list for my local fossils.

Do you perhaps know where/if can I found photos of those fossils and more info about them overall?

Also,I found that many species from Middle Miocene were in rocks like lithothamnian,limestones and marl which will help me in next few days when I'll do research about those specific rocks and compare them with fossils/matrix in my collection.

Hopefully I'll know a bit more after that.

 

 

 

[Coco]

Write the genus or genus + species on G00gle and clic on "photos".

 

Here is an example :

 

https://www.google.com/search?q="Clypeaster+aff.+crassicostatus"&client=firefox-b-d&sxsrf=AOaemvJrj0oglngj4URQybyV9-Z-P99_gQ:1637393963345&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwju-qrst6b0AhVP1BoKHdLmD8sQ_AUoAXoECAIQAw&biw=1560&bih=803&dpr=0.9#imgrc=qhfdHCFxr734xM

 

Coco

[FranzBernhard]

 

4 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Clypeaster aff. crassicostatus Sismonda 1841.

Cardita sp.

Pectunculus (Axinaea ) bimaculatus Poli, 1795.

Phacoides borealis Linnaeus, 1767

Cytherea sp. div.

Chlamys latissima nodosiformis (Pusch)

Some of these sound familiar to me.

There is a bivalve in the middle Miocene beds around me, that is called "Cordiopsis islandicoides". This species was assigned to at least 9 different genera, one of them Cytherea:

This is often a big problem. I myself got very confused at the beginning with all those species shuffling between different genera. My solution was to give all the ID work to a real amateur paleontologist, with the results checked by a Miocene professional in Vienna.

 

4 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Middle Miocene were in rocks like lithothamnian,limestones

This sounds also familiar! I don´t know where you are exactly located in Croatia, but we have something similar in Austria, called "Leithakalk" or "Weissenegg-Formation". You may try googling for Weissenegg and limestone, resulting in some papers in English.

Franz Bernhard

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

18 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Isaac,thank you for sharing your experience.It's surreal how identical I feel like you did in the past.I'm currently in Valley of Despair and going to slope of Enlightenment I never felt too much confidence in my knowledge to be honest.I always knew that I know more than random person,but nowhere near to call myself an amateur paleontologist.

I heard about Dunning-Kruger effect however I heard it mostly when someone described person that underestimates others and acts intellectually superior despite being fairly inferior.

First time I heard of it was few years ago when one guy that is really smart and loves all fields of science,messed up with some FlatEarther who insulted him and saying biggest nonsense I ever heard in my whole life literally.

Then he told him he's perfect example of Dunning Kruger syndrome and he was totally correct I must say.

I'm keeping notes of everything I've heard from you guys.Every info I get I consider extremely valuable.

Your comment really boosted me up when it comes to not giving up.I wasn't thinking of giving up of course,but I had that feeling that some knowledge and expertise is simply unachievable.

 

I'm very sorry you're going through that, mate. It's very hard, but, hey, at least it shows you that you're progressing!

 

You may not be confident in your knowledge in this moment, but I am very confident in your willpower to better that knowledge, as evidenced by this post. I'm very glad I've brought you up, and, hey, remember the definition:

 

A paleontologist is a scientist who studies fossils. If your basement is filled with fossils found while out on hikes, then you're an amateur paleontologist.

 

Happy hunting,

Isaac

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

18 hours ago, Tyrannosaurus Rex said:

Clypeaster aff. crassicostatus Sismonda 1841.

Cardita sp.

Pectunculus (Axinaea ) bimaculatus Poli, 1795.

Phacoides borealis Linnaeus, 1767

Cytherea sp. div.

Chlamys latissima nodosiformis (Pusch)

 

 

Note:

 

When using the binomial system (genus + species), the text goes in italics, but nothing else.

E.g.:

Cardita sp.

 

[Coco]

Small precision: "sp." should not be in italics, it is used only for the genus and for the species

 

Example : Cardita sp.

 

Coco

[IsaacTheFossilMan]

5 hours ago, Coco said:

Small precision: "sp." should not be in italics, it is used only for the genus and for the species

 

Example : Cardita sp.

 

Coco

 

Interesting! I did not know that.