Texas NSR fossils, need help

[strochim]

OK, I posted about going to the North Sulphur River on Friday (Hwy 24 bridge), and now I could use some help to identify some of these specimens. 

I know these are oysters, but in this first photo of 12, these shells all look different.

1) Are they all different species, or just variations of the same species?

Photo #1:

 

 

2) Is this a clam, or an oyster?

Photos #2a, 2b, 2c, 2d

 

 

 

3) Clam, oyster, other bivalve, or just a rock?

Photos #3a, 3b:

 

 

4) What about the red one? Clam, oyster, bivalve, or awesome rock?

Photos # 4a, 4b:

 

 

5) Is this an Ammonite impression, or something else?

Photos # 5a, 5b:

 

 

6) I know I'm stretching this one, but are these shinier, or round ball spots, possibly pearls?

Photos # 6a, 6b, 6c:

 

7) Tooth, claw, or shell fragment? Very small. What possible creature could it be from?

Photos #7a, 7b:

 

 

8) These dark gray markings were inside the rocks when I split them open. Is this anything?

Photos # 8a, 8b:

 

 

9) And finally, is this red spot anything?

Photo #9:

 

Thanks in advance to everyone who might respond. I appreciate it.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by strochim
Added photo numbers and question numbers.

[Coco]

I can’t help you, but to make the answers easier, you should number your pictures

 

Coco

[FranzBernhard]

47 minutes ago, Coco said:

you should number your pictures

Yeas, please*! It´s a matter of respectfulness. Many thanks, @strochim!

*You can still add the numbers to your pics within the next 20 hours or so (24 hour time frame for editing posts).

Franz Bernhard

[Al Dente]

This is Pyrgopolon, a type of worm tube. 
 

 

[Thomas.Dodson]

Picture 1.

Yes, these all appear to be Exogyra ponderosa oysters. The differences are explained by differences in mineral properties of the fossil (affects color), state of wear (the smooth ones are well tumbled), and also by the fact that oysters in general have morphologic variability based on their environment (less so for these). Note that the bottom valve of these oysters also differs quite a bit. I don't think any are pictured here although I can't tell with #5.

 

Picture 2.

Not sure.

 

Pictures 6, 7, 8. probably rocks although NSR fossils can get so tumbled they resemble normal rocks. Even if they are fossils you won't be able to identify them.

 

Picture 8, 9.

Correct, an ammonite negative.

 

Picture 10, 11.

Picture 10 could just be a fossil cavity filled with silica but it is hard to tell. Thicker areas of the shells (like umbos) often show the difference in luster like picture 11. This appears to be what pic 11 is showing. They don't look like pearls.

 

12, 13.

Al Dente answered this one. They were previously called Hamulus sp. if you come across that name. There are 2 species known from the NSR but I don't remember off hand how to identify them.

[abyssunder]

 

[strochim]

Thanks so much for the responses so far. Definitely some helpful information.  I'm on my phone now, but I'll try to get on my computer tonight and see if I can edit the photos and add numbers. Not sure how to do that,  but hopefully I'll figure it out.

I would have never guessed a worm tube. Already learning.  Thanks

[strochim]

I've edited this post and added question numbers, and photo numbers. Thanks for the suggestion/recommendation.

[BobWill]

Consider whether items 2, 3 and 6 may be internal molds that came from the inside of an Exogyra. Look at the muscle attachment points in the external shell of the fossils in item 1 to see if these may be molds of their interiors.

The worm tubes usually found at NSR have been identified as Hamulus squamosus.