Jump to content

Insect fossil?


Geojonser

Recommended Posts

Hello

 

My first post, Nice to meet you all, in advance. I am an amateur geology enthusiast/fossil hunter. Purely as a hobby and for my personal enjoyment.

 

I found this stone in a very unusual place, stuck in the tire of a piece of construction equipment in The Netherlands close to Rotterdam. Pure random chance. Not where I would normally hunt. Unfortunately, this piece of mobile equipement could be used all over the country so it is impossible to say exactly what its origins are. It looks to me, to be a piece of shale or oil shale that has spent a considerable amount of time in the sea, as it is smooth and well rounded. I noticed the shell cast right away, but after I got it home, cleaned it up and examined it under light and magnification, I noticed something very curious. What looks to be some sort of fossilized/crystallized (?) insectoid. In the photos, you will see what looks to be some sort of insect abdomen, larva or pupa (plant seed?) along with some other interesting things I noticed that I thought might help with identification.

 

Please see the photos. I have added notes to them. It is approximately 2.5 mm long. Under direct light and magnification it appears to have a green hue and translucence.

 

Next to the "insectoid-looking-thingy" is a curious round cast (?) form. Crinoid, perhaps? It is approximately 3 mm below (downhill) from the insectoid-looking-thingy.

 

The stone is black with, what I believe to be, quartz inclusions and possibly (always a tough call) extremely small bits of fossil material.

 

Thanks in advance for your input. Looking forward to future collaborations and shares.

 

Have a nice day

 

 

1.thumb.jpg.61ef642f7ee23bb8cba7b0dd630acc0a.jpg 3-1.thumb.jpg.caf21d47c43cc5270a4df396cd62b299.jpg 3-2.thumb.jpg.39cec9d4ae7b2880b5977485e593e351.jpg 

 

2.thumb.jpg.de79a888e142805fa4e6be007134d3da.jpg 4.thumb.jpg.1c7c02d4ca8145287deaeeb26c48856a.jpg 5-1.thumb.jpg.4ceb30cff4969c736be1c70005aff8a6.jpg 

 

5-3.thumb.jpg.e4ba15a5d5b5ad99fdafb917da1b3aaf.jpg 5-2.thumb.jpg.10505eed862eab9e7d6ecb658441c83d.jpg 5-4.thumb.jpg.40d23ecb10be60b565784f70d372d04e.jpg

 

5-5.thumb.jpg.086c2356b3c0145f8999f2700daf002a.jpg

 

:)

 

 

  • Enjoyed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Geojonser, and welcome to the forum!

nice method of fossil hunting!

 To me the tiny "capsule" does look like another bivalve- or maybe brachiopod shell.

Maybe @Tidgy's Dad knows more? I think I remember him being a brachiopod-connoisseur?

Best regards,

J

  • Thank You 1
  • I Agree 1

Try to learn something about everything and everything about something

Thomas Henry Huxley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, looks to me like lots of fragments of shell, I would lean more toward brachiopod than bivalve except for the one on the left in the photo where it is marked as 'one of the same'. 

The one in the final picture, which I believe to be the OPs main object of interest, looks like an athyrid to me. 

But I suffer from brachiopoda-pareidolia. 

  • I found this Informative 2

Life's Good!

Tortoise Friend.

MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png.a47e14d65deb3f8b242019b3a81d8160-1.png.60b8b8c07f6fa194511f8b7cfb7cc190.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

But I suffer from brachiopoda-pareidolia.


I got a good chuckle out of this. :heartylaugh:

  • Enjoyed 1

The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.  -Neil deGrasse Tyson

 

Everyone you will ever meet knows something you don't. -Bill Nye (The Science Guy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would it be a juvenile at 2.5 mm?

Try to learn something about everything and everything about something

Thomas Henry Huxley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

17 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

I suffer from brachiopoda-pareidolia. 

 

Hahaha...You hit that nail on the head...Pareidolia is what brought me here...at first I thought an unusual inclusion fracture...while I was entertaing the idea of larva or pupa, I heard someone say seed...I then realized we were getting dangerously close to the E word (Its never an egg)...so here I am

 

Anyway, thanks all for the feed back (and reality check)...much appreciated...

 

17 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

 I would lean more toward brachiopod than bivalve except for the one on the left in the photo where it is marked as 'one of the same'. 

The one in the final picture, which I believe to be the OPs main object of interest, looks like an athyrid to me. 

 

I agree...after reading about Athyrid's (Athyris?) and comparing to another stone (?) I, too am leaning in that direction...thanks

 

598103360_Burrowing1.thumb.jpg.a5a53f708dc34545f100f9af23d41221.jpg

 

1123615609_Burrowing2.thumb.jpg.8317dc29543ce93b473a239427b87fec.jpg

 

The green hue and translucence is still a curious point to me...is it possible that it has fossillized into the same material as the inclusuons surrounding it in the following photo? 

 

Athyris.thumb.jpg.7d53cc38511a45cce9a590897e9d3634.jpg

 

The inclusions are quartz crystal, I suspect, the right color and being crystal would explain the translucence?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for getting me pointed in the right direction. I think I got it identified.

I believe it is a Gryphaeae. A fossil oyster aka Devils Toenail.

Common to the UK and Scotland, so I suppose it could have migrated across the North Sea to The Netherlands or been carried to the Dutch coastline during a Dutch land build-up operation...its tricky determining origins of things here...a friend of mine found a shark tooth on a bicycle path in Amsterdam during a 'pit-stop'...go figure...maybe I will start a new trend, Urban Fossil Hunting...anyway, my apologies, I digress...

Gryphaeae. A fossil oyster aka Devils Toenail.

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Mollusca
Class: Bivalvia
Order: Ostreida
Family: Gryphaeidae
Genus: †Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801

Internet examples, 3x:

 

image.thumb.png.57a403b02939a3719cfe2190a4fc6462.png

image.thumb.png.7d299ba342f0f096b34825c31f135fb3.png

1882639681_GryphaeaarcuataDevilstoenails.jpg.55b4aff056c6d17f90534965205a9a1e.jpg
 

My find:

Gryphaeae.thumb.jpg.d275ff50aa07413f395dfa45434c2175.jpg


Can I call this ID'd?...What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, if its a Gryphea its a real baby at 2.5 mm, they can reach 10 cm easily. Not sure if a positive ID is possible .

Best regards,

J

  • I Agree 1

Try to learn something about everything and everything about something

Thomas Henry Huxley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you thought about maybe the rest of that oyster is still in that matrix? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Donna Straw said:

Have you thought about maybe the rest of that oyster is still in that matrix? 

 

That is what I am thinking...Perhaps, in the first photos, where I noted the 2.5 mm insectoid, could be the Apex, Umbonal Zone or both and the "one-in-the-same" parts could be a valve or valves...making the three points visible parts of one very small specimen that is buried in the matrix.

 

Gryphaea Arcuata

Gryphaea.thumb.png.cc341c30e350836f0bd0cd96f2fc5471.png

 

200164005_GryphaeaArcuata.thumb.jpg.516763208d395bc067bf75c5c7fa09f5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...