The Beautiful Miocene Insect Preservation That Comes Out of Turin Piedmont, Italy

[FossilRhino18]

I was looking through my collection and couldn't help to just talk about some of the beautiful miocene aged insects that come from Turin the capital city of Piedmont in Italy. 

The preservation of insects in this area is quite nice compared to some other areas of insect preservation. 

In my collection I have an example of Fossilized Dragonfly Larvae, Libellula doris that shows quite nice preservation.  Insect fossils have been known to have a poor fossil record due to their poor preservation potential of their exoskeleton.  In this area we are able to get very nice preservation of these Miocene aged insects and help understand their body features in closer detail. 

Below is a picture of three dragonfly larvae and a unidentified insect wing from my collection. 

Sorry if the camera quality is not the best but in person you can see the head in great detail and the preservation much better.  

 

[Ludwigia]

Thanks for sharing this. Do you have any more info on the site and other finds?

[FossilRhino18]

I dont have any other pieces from this area in my collection.  I did some more research and these dragonfly larvae and nymphs, libellula doris, seem to be the most common from that area.  The preservation of these insects in the area has been known to show great detail in the legs and head for insects.  From what I have researched they can be found in areas ranging from Germany, Italy and France.  I have reserched that they have been known to have the best detail from this site in Italy.  I haven't seen any other significant insect finds online except for these coming from this area, but I do believe at this site if you search hard enough there might be other species of dragonfly larvae and flies coming from the site.  Thats all I know right now. 

Edited March 26, 2022 by FossilRhino18

[marguy]

@FossilRhino18  and @Ludwigia

52 minutes ago, Ludwigia said:

Do you have any more info on the site and other finds?

this should interest you

Dragonflies-preserved-in-transparent-gypsum-crystals-from-the-Messinian-Upper-Miocene-of-Alba-northern-Italy.pdf

[FossilRhino18]

Thank you this provided a better insight of this area 

[siteseer]

On 3/27/2022 at 1:31 AM, FossilRhino18 said:

Thank you this provided a better insight of this area 

 

I think that is actually a different deposit.  I have had a few specimens that look like yours.  My Label says, "Early Miocene, San Vittoria D'Alba, Italy.  A large number of these specimens were commercially available in the U.S. 30 years ago.  I had seen far fewer at shows between 5-15 years ago.  I've seen mostly just the dragonfly nymphs from there but I also have a fish (scroll down to see the piece):

 

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/41331-associated-fossils-from-different-species-together/page/7/

 

I have also seen dragonfly nymphs preserved in gypsum from Texas/Mexico - uncommon find.

[FossilRhino18]

Interesting I wasnt entirely sure on what deposit it was from.  I had only heard from someone else about it being from Piedmont Italy.  Im interested on how the preservation differs in Mexico and Texas though for the dragonfly nymphs.  I also saw online from Alba Italy of them being preserved in gypsum.  

[Crusty_Crab]

I'd be skeptical about the species ID. A search of the EDNA fossil insect database (https://fossilinsectdatabase.co.uk/search.php) does not turn up that name. I could also not find it in PBDB (https://paleobiodb.org/classic/basicTaxonInfo?taxon_no=178151) nor GBIF (https://www.gbif.org/species/1427882). There is only a wikipedia entry for that species name, and the citation is Heer, 1849, which appears to describe specimens from Germany and Croatia. Interestingly, this citation is also not found in the aforementioned databases.  

 

I would speculate that dealers slapped a vague label onto the specimen for a quick sale since fossils with specific epithets sell better and that ID was simply duplicated without any verification. If a correct species ID matters to you, I would check EDNA first, although it has its limitations (it may not be up to date and does not reflect records of occurrences, only holotypes). For example, I know of an example of Libellulidae from the US, but it is not in the database since it was only identified to genus, and a new species was not raised for whatever reason (lack of time, insufficient detail, lack of corroborating specimens). A search of the family Libellulidae has many records from Italy. The next step would then be to track down the references and verify what is described vis-à-vis what you have.  

[FossilRhino18]

Thank you for that feedback, I will look more into it and the species id

[siteseer]

On 3/28/2022 at 6:22 PM, FossilRhino18 said:

Interesting I wasnt entirely sure on what deposit it was from.  I had only heard from someone else about it being from Piedmont Italy.  Im interested on how the preservation differs in Mexico and Texas though for the dragonfly nymphs.  I also saw online from Alba Italy of them being preserved in gypsum.  

 

The specimen from Texas that I saw was inside a crystal so it was quite different from the Italian specimens.  I wasn't sure if I was seeing the insect or a molt of it.  I can't find a similar photo on the web.

 

 

[jdp]

On 3/28/2022 at 3:53 PM, siteseer said:

I had seen far fewer at shows between 5-15 years ago. 

 

Italian heritage laws prohibit private collection of Italian fossils (with a handful of exceptions) these days.

[siteseer]

On 4/5/2022 at 8:37 AM, jdp said:

 

Italian heritage laws prohibit private collection of Italian fossils (with a handful of exceptions) these days.

 

Even 30-35 years ago, not much was coming out of Italy (some Eocene crabs, some of those dragonfly nymphs, and some trumpet fish, pipefish, and the occasional seahorse from the Pliocene).

[vincentB]

 

Scientific name: Doris scaleya. Dragonfly larvae
Location: Toscana, Italy
Geological Formation: Upper Miocene outcrops of Toscana. Is it real or a fake fossil

Edited February 18 by vincentB

[piranha]

On 2/18/2024 at 5:36 AM, vincentB said:

Scientific name: Doris scaleya. Dragonfly larvae
Location: Toscana, Italy
Geological Formation: Upper Miocene outcrops of Toscana.

Is it real or a fake fossil

 

 

These specimens are authentic.  The correct name is: Oryctodiplax gypsorum

 

"Earlier authors had these fossils always assigned to “Libellula doris”, a species described and named by HEER (1849) from the Late Miocene of Oeningen in Bavaria, and based only on pre-imaginal stages. CAVALLO & GALLETTI (1987) considered this identification as being incorrect, since the specimens from the Alba area possess a shorter and broader abdomen than Libellula doris, and have occasionally short lateral spines on their 8th and 9th segments, which are completely missing in Libellula doris. Additionally, in contrast to Libellula doris the fossil compression larvae from the Alba area possess a shorter 10th segment, the anal appendages are much smaller, the legs are slightly larger and the size of the mature larvae is apparently a bit smaller (Fig. 5). The bulk of larvae preserved as compression fossils from the Alba area, which exhibit quite some morphological variety, have therefore only been assigned for practical reasons to a single extinct genus and species under the collective name Oryctodiplax gypsorum of the family Libellulidae. From the observable morphological characters it appears reasonable to include the fossil specimens embedded in gypsum crystals also into the same systematic unit."

 

text from:

 

Schlüter, T., Kohring, R., Gregor, H.J. 2002

Dragonflies Preserved in Transparent Gypsum Crystals from the Messinian (Upper Miocene) of Alba, Northern Italy.

Acta Zoologica Cracoviensia, 46:373-379  PDF LINK

 

 

Cavallo, O., Galletti, P.A. 1987

Studi di Carlo Sturani su Odonati e altri Insetti Fossili del Messiniano Albese (Piemonte) con Descrizione di Oryctodiplax gypsorum n. gen. n. sp. 

[Studies by Carlo Sturani on Odonati and other Fossil Insects of the Messinian Alba (Piedmont) with Description of Oryctodiplax gypsorum n. gen. n. sp.]

Bollettino della Societa Paleontologica Italiana, 26(1-2):151-176  PDF LINK

[vincentB]

Thanks for correcting the name.  I could not find any info with the previous name.

[marguy]

1 hour ago, piranha said:

The correct name is: Oryctodiplax gypsorum

(in March 2022 I put the first pdf file that you cite, see above ), but I did not have the second Cavallo and Galletti), thank you for this addition

[piranha]

3 minutes ago, marguy said:

(in March 2022 I put the first pdf file that you cite, see above ), but I did not have the second Cavallo and Galletti), thank you for this addition

 

 

Always glad to assist! BTW: I had already posted these back in February 2020