Jerrychang Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 It’s about 1.875 inches long in the longest side,and the seller said it was found in Chandler Bridge Formation. So I guess it’s angustidens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilselachian Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 Sounds correct 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lesofprimus Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 As far as I'm aware, it's Otodus angustidens not Carcharoles.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilselachian Posted November 18, 2021 Share Posted November 18, 2021 On 11/18/2021 at 9:23 AM, lesofprimus said: As far as I'm aware, it's Otodus angustidens not Carcharoles.... Yes, correct it is Otodus angustidens - sometimes hard to get past taxonomy that was in place for decades. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boesse Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 Not so fast there with Otodus! PLEASE stop incessantly correcting people who use Carcharocles. The evidence is quite weak and at present, taxonomically unnecessary. I refer you to Kent (2018) in the Calvert Cliffs volume as well as the taxonomic comments in a paper I published with a student earlier this year on a Carcharocles angustidens nursery from South Carolina. https://palaeo-electronica.org/content/2021/3372-oligocene-shark-nursery 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 @hxmendoza reference your email to me, checkout Boesse comments 1 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