Frank Menser Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 And a Gar from Florida. Be true to the reality you create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenixflood Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 The teeth you have in the jaw Roz were probably sticking up at one time, but looks like they would curve backward. Maybe some shots of the ends and underside maybe of some use Also notice the weight of the bone and if it is hollow or not. The soul of a Fossil Hunter is one that is seeking, always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossildan Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Hi Roz, thats a very interesting and boggling piece you have there, we find alot of fish on sheppey and that is one strange piece of jaw if it is a jaw. what I find most odd is how straight it appears to be, most jaws have a curve to them if only slightly. could this be some kind of cylindracanthus or possibly a tail spine ?? just another thought for you all to consider. wish you the best of luck with your ID. dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Smilodon Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Hmmm. Hesperornis - pretty close or maybe it's this Roz, I took the liberty of forwarding your images to someone who should know. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Smilodon Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Well, here you go. ID good as gold "That specimen (Kiamichi Shale?)is definitely a fish dentition, (in my opinion), but it’s hard to be more specific. I remember collecting dentitions like that in the Paw Paw Formation at the Motorola Site in Haltom City, Tarrant County. They were as fragmentary as this one, but had those multiple rows of teeth, such as you get in Enchodus and Cimolichthys in later Cretaceous deposits. Presumably they are from earlier fish of the same lineages." DCP (Dave Parris) Just Bob was the closest Hey, If I don't know the answer, I know who does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Congrats for your find, Roz, really nice http://www.mbfossilcrabs.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 ok, look. i can't stand it. get a list of of the probably hundreds of species of teleost fishes from the lower cretaceous and throw a dart at it. that would be as valid a means of arriving at the somehow-always-obligatory specific identification as the anecdotal comparisons to two or three known species of upper-cretaceous fish that lived 20 or 30 million years later. "good-as-gold" ids can oftentimes never be obtained, which in no way justifies making one up, nor standing up a new species to suit one's need for an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 For comparison: 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 More sharing options...
MOROPUS Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Have someone find similarities with snake? A sea snake could be possible, knowing that in the late cretaceous of Morocco bears more than one specie (so, at that time they already existed). In my collection, I`ve got a vertebra that matches with sea snake: Sorry about the quality of the pic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 I also see according to Wikipedia that Ichthyornis, Hesperornis, and Baptornis are all too young but there were a lot more than those... The Hesperornithines are represented in the record back to the lat Early Cretaceous by three described species in the genus Enaliornis. These remains come from near Cambridge, England, but the family was holarctic in distribution. I think now that the jawbone seems too massive for Icthyornis (a lightly-built bird), but I would still want to consider an early Hesperornithine. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordpiney Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Well, here you go. ID good as gold "That specimen (Kiamichi Shale?)is definitely a fish dentition, (in my opinion), but it’s hard to be more specific. I remember collecting dentitions like that in the Paw Paw Formation at the Motorola Site in Haltom City, Tarrant County. They were as fragmentary as this one, but had those multiple rows of teeth, such as you get in Enchodus and Cimolichthys in later Cretaceous deposits. Presumably they are from earlier fish of the same lineages." DCP (Dave Parris) Just Bob was the closest Hey, If I don't know the answer, I know who does id take dave's opinion over anyone's at this point. he is the head of vertebrate paleontology at the state museum, and cretaceous fossils are his speciality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinodigger Posted April 6, 2010 Share Posted April 6, 2010 Hey! Nice jaw; really cool. Is there terrestrial deposits near where you found this because it looks a lot like some Pterosaur/other flying reptile beak/bill section with teeth. Pteranodontids, pterodactyloids, and pterosaurs have been recorded in Eagle Ford and Buda deposits and believe it or not, even Glen Rose formation has a recorded instance. Teeth laden bills, humeri, and phalanges, etc are on the list of found item in and around the Dallas area out to Glenrose. Lemme know when you get the I.D. if you can. Chris I found this at a Cretaceous site. It may be a fish jaw but was wondering it it is, anyone know what kind of fish would be likely. I don't know my fish at all... Hope that pic is good enough to tell. Had a horrid time trying to get one you could even see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted April 6, 2010 Author Share Posted April 6, 2010 Just to give an update, snake was ruled out by a herp. and he in turn sent it to Mike P. at SMU. Mike needed more pics so he could see where the teeth entered the jaw I assume. I haven't heard back. Harry, I see a difference in the teeth. Do you? That jaw doesn't look straight or grooved out as this one. I suppose that could be in the manner it preserved. I don't really know. If it is an enchodus (earlier one) it is one I do not know. While living in AR I found tons of teeth and some small jaws. They looked different that this one. Maybe that curved angle is throwing me off. It's the only teeth I have some experience with (fish). I sure wish it would be bird.......That would be past cool! Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 Just to give an update, snake was ruled out by a herp. and he in turn sent it to Mike P. at SMU. Mike needed more pics so he could see where the teeth entered the jaw I assume. I haven't heard back. Harry, I see a difference in the teeth. Do you? That jaw doesn't look straight or grooved out as this one. I suppose that could be in the manner it preserved. I don't really know. If it is an enchodus (earlier one) it is one I do not know. While living in AR I found tons of teeth and some small jaws. They looked different that this one. Maybe that curved angle is throwing me off. It's the only teeth I have some experience with (fish). I sure wish it would be bird.......That would be past cool! Yes, Roz, I don't think you have an Ichthyodectes jaw there. The utility of any comparision lies in showing small, cylindrical teeth in a relatively substantial bit of fish bone. The curve of your teeth certainly is snakelike, but not so the jaw bone. The curve is a prey-holding adaptation which, I'm sure, has arisen in multiple taxa. We're all curious to see an identification. A bird would be too cool! What I am reminded of, though, is an amiiform like Amia. Here's a line-drawing. 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 More sharing options...
Xiphactinus Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I'm still sticking with bird. I've found tons of fish jaws and nothing looks like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 Send it to me; I'll be happy to take it to the Smithsonian for ID; then I'll send it right back. You have my word on it "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted April 11, 2010 Author Share Posted April 11, 2010 I sure would be happy if it were bird. Mike P. needs me to bring it in because he doesn't want to make any ID until he sees it with his microscope but he thinks it looks fishy. He will be at the DPS meeting on Wednesday and will look at it with my loupe. Then if he still needs a microscope I will have to take it there. Auspex, it's in the mail.... Thanks to all for the good input. I have looked up every suggestion to see more images etc. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 11, 2010 Share Posted April 11, 2010 In all likelihood, it is fish, but hope springs eternal. In any case, like tracer sorta' said: it's reeeeeal pretty "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 I sure would be happy if it were bird. Mike P. needs me to bring it in because he doesn't want to make any ID until he sees it with his microscope but he thinks it looks fishy. He will be at the DPS meeting on Wednesday and will look at it with my loupe. Then if he still needs a microscope I will have to take it there. Auspex, it's in the mail.... Thanks to all for the good input. I have looked up every suggestion to see more images etc. Roz...Did you get an ID on this fossil and then it was re-posted on another thread? If so we should have a cross link here Flash from the Past (Show Us Your Fossils)MAPS Fossil Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boneman007 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 If it has been ID'ed, I'll bet it's a bird. by the way all: Enchodus teeth are not round. The fangs are three sided and the remaining teeth are two sided. I've got half a dozen enchodus skulls to compare to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 I didn't get a positive ID. The person that looked at it with a microscope thought it looked like to fish tooth that is normally found in Portugal but I never got an answer to what the name of the fish was.. I had 2 other possible IDs also.. One maybe a beryciform or a juvenile of many kinds, or a "conservative" ID was possible Pachyrhizodus.. So unfortunately, no positive ID.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I'm way out on a limb here, but... ...it is not completely inconsistent with Icthyornis. This fossil needs to be looked at by someone with access to comparative material. auspex... don't bird teeth have a constriction around te base? I don't see any here. Meanwhile great find, roz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boneman007 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I didn't get a positive ID. The person that looked at it with a microscope thought it looked like to fish tooth that is normally found in Portugal but I never got an answer to what the name of the fish was.. I had 2 other possible IDs also.. One maybe a beryciform or a juvenile of many kinds, or a "conservative" ID was possible Pachyrhizodus.. So unfortunately, no positive ID.. I can with 100% surity say it is NOT a pachy. I have both species of Pachyrhizodus and it has absolutely no similarities. It also doesnt look like Icthyodectids, Plethodids, or any other large bony fish. Now since there are about 5 billion smaller bony fishes, it's a distinct posibility. I have attached the pic of my Sauradon skull with a Pachyrhizodus minimus jaws next to it. Note that they are very thin and tall. That is a 4" X 3" ricker mount. Personally, I am still holding out for bird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 auspex... don't bird teeth have a constriction around te base? When will Auspex be back ??? Flash from the Past (Show Us Your Fossils)MAPS Fossil Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.