A sunny afternoon in the Selzerbeek, South Limburg, Netherlands

[Mart1980]

At the end of October 25°C, much too warm for the time of year against a long-term average of 10.9°C. On the other hand, perfect weather to go looking for fossils in the stream. The village of Mamelis near Vaals looked magical. Behind these houses is the stream and here it is only 10 to 20 centimeters deep.
 

 

 

The Selzerbeek rises on the Vaalser Berg and has a length of approximately 13 kilometers. At Gulpen (ZL) the stream flows into the Geul. The stream runs mainly through Vijlener limestone (Upper Cretaceous / Maastricht Formation / Vijlen Limestone). This means that you can encounter all fossils from this stratigraphic layer. In particular, brachiopods, sea urchins, belemnites and bivalves are among the finds. Many amateurs, but also professional palaeontologists have known the stream for a long time as a location for fossils from various eras.

 

 

I especially found a lot of parts of belemnites. Fortunately also some whole belemnites, a part of a flint sea urchin and what and some other Cretaceous material.

 

 

 

The stream was crystal clear, you could see the belemnites with some luck, look at this photo,  which gives a magical image

 

 

The day was successful. Although I didn't find much it was a lovely afternoon in this beautiful setting.  Just before sunset, I was able to take a few nice pictures of the beautiful Limburg landscape at sunset.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2022 by Mart1980

[minnbuckeye]

Thanks for sharing your trip! The countryside looks lovely and the stream so inviting! 

 

Mike

[FranzBernhard]

Simply fantastic Central Europe fossil adventure! Thanks for sharing!

Franz Bernhard

[Fossilsforever]

Nice finds. But always respect nature, do not dig and do not go were is it not allowed.

Edited October 31, 2022 by Fossilsforever

[Mart1980]

3 hours ago, Fossilsforever said:

Nice finds. But always respect nature, do not dig and do not go were is it not allowed.

 

Beautiful indeed! What makes you think I'm disturbing nature? I am always very careful, in my spare time I monitor 2 small nature reserves for amphibians and fish. So I know very well what I'm doing. Don't suggest things you don't know about.

[Fossilsforever]

I am not suggesting anything... (do I say you are disturbing nature? what has 2 small nature reserves to do with it?). 

 

But other then that, you have to give correct information.

Your text is from Paleontica and you copy it without checking the facts.

The 'Kalksteen van Vijlen' is not from the Maastricht Formation, but the Gulpen Formation (Formatie van Gulpen). 

Therefore, the sediments (and fossils) are older then the those from the Maastricht Formation. 

Just like your description of belemnites from Beutenaken (you just copy the text from another website without fact-checking). 

You described them als B. mucronata (Schlotheim, 1813), which is false (many belemnites there are B. (pachybelemnella) sp.). 

Mucronata is a kind of wastebasket name were (long ago) many belemnite species were 'dumped' into (all called B. mucronata). 

So, please check your info before posting.

But your finds are really cool! (your fragment of a sea urchin is probably Echinocorys sp.) (perhaps E. scutata (Leske, 1778). 

 

 

 

Edited November 1, 2022 by Fossilsforever

[Mart1980]

You certainly suggest that in your text, that's how I take it.

 

As for your Limestone van Vijlen's comment is correct. It is not from the Maastricht Formation, but the Gulpen Formation. I wrote my own story with the information from this website. But simply copying is not the case, here I have simply misread and confused it with Maastrichtian. That's all and Maastrichtien should have been here. Simple typo, now corrected. I take this website very seriously, so using information is not such a bad idea after all.

 

I know the discussion surrounding the name Belemnitella. I stick to the old name, which is a collectionbox of speciesI know. But these pieces, often incomplete, cannot be named at all. Let's not make that decision, we're not going to get out of it.

 

I am annoyed by the fact that you write in such a conducting manner. You suggest things and order to check for facts. Why this attitude towards me? You can give directions, but it is the tone that makes the music. I share my adventures for fun, not to prove anything. I'm not here yet to defend myself against you. Maybe you can share a nice report yourself about nice experiences and explain more about Belemnites in detail. And let others enjoy their hobby.

Edited November 1, 2022 by Mart1980

[Fossilsforever]

No offensive. Just enjoy fossil hunting.

I said it because others read the information and then it is important to be accurate or at least try to give correct info.

 

 

Edited November 1, 2022 by Fossilsforever

[Mart1980]

4 minutes ago, Fossilsforever said:

No offensive. Just enjoy fossil hunting.

I said it because others read the information and then it is important to be accurate or at least try to give correct info.

 

That's right! See your PM for a good fossil hunting walk in South Limburg .

[Fossilsforever]

do you know which species of koral you have found? Kinda interesting. Or what is that tube fossil?

Edited November 1, 2022 by Fossilsforever

[Mart1980]

It looks like coral, but only two small fragments. Determining the species is difficult for me, because I can't find any documentation about finds from this Vijlen Member (Gulpen Formation) regarding this subject. Do you have online documentation?

[Fossilsforever]

Hmm. I will try to help. The bivalve is, I think, Acutostrea uncinella (Cocquand, 1869). See:

https://www.paleontica.org/fossildb?page=1&filter[genus]=[{"value":"Acutostrea"}]&filter[species]=[{"value":"uncinella"}]

I will contact someone who perhaps has more info about the other fossils (coral like). 

The sea urchin fragment probably belongs to E. scutata (Leske, 1778) or Echinocorys sp. (E. scutata is one of the more common fossil sea urchins in Limburg).

Did you know that the green stuff on the belemnites is glauconite? (green with black dots). Evidence of marine life/sea/water. 

 

Edited November 2, 2022 by Fossilsforever

[Mart1980]

Thank you very much!

 

Yes, I think you are right about the bivalve Acutostrea uncinella (Cocquand, 1869). I found it at the edge of the stream, not among the boulders, but among the sand. It was completely devise with algae.

 

I think the sea urchin fragment is also from Echinocorys scutata (Leske, 1778). I follow the theory that all Echinocorys found in our country must be scutata (apart from the various 'variables') and there is no reason to divide them into subspecies. Although there will probably be more research in Echinocorys in the future.

 

As for the piece of coral? can I use some help. I don't know anything about that myself.

Edited November 2, 2022 by Mart1980

[rocket]

a lovely region and it looks like a really nice day , thanks for sharing.

About the coral (if it is one), it will not be possible to determine it finally. Most of them are name "Thecosmilia", "Parasmilia", "Coecosmilia" and so on. But, the base for this determination is bad, you have to do slices and do not know more at the end. Best is, to write Coral on it and perhaps (depending on your literature) something like ?Coecosmilia or aff. Coecosmilia on it. But, Coral will be enough I guess.

Echinocorys is sure, but scutata, no one knows. You need complete or 80% complete ones to be sure. Depends on some measurements and the plates on the base. Not easy. The part you find will be Echinocorys for sure, but more, hm. 

As I know B. mucronata is a guilty species. The tip gives it the name, and some measurements of the guard and phragmokon. Yours are very nice, and if they are you can use them as stratigraphic markers. The mucronata-Zone is part of the upper Campanian.

Do you know if it is possible to find Crinoid-stems there?

Last time I was in Limburg was long ago, have to go there again some day to dig and eat some of the wonderful fritjes 

 

Do you know NAHM1987076005005.pdf ? Helps perhaps a little bit 

 

Edited November 2, 2022 by rocket

[rocket]

Had a close look on your belemnites again. Could you post pics of the end?

I add a pic showing the direction.

One of two I am a bit unsure, could be Gonioteuthis, but...

thanks 

 

 

[Fossilsforever]

Its not Gonioteuthis sp. That species did not live in this area and not in this time period (72-66/70-68 mya). Only older literature named some belemnites Gonioteuthis sp. (and B. mucronata) in Limburg and surroundings. According to much more recent literature , its probably Belemnella (pachybelemnella) sp., perhaps Belemnella (pachybelemnella) sumensis/cimbrica (one of the species or a intermediate variant) or a representative of Belemnitella (Belemnitella sp.).  

Correction, according to this article https://natuurtijdschriften.nl › pub › 1000192 › GenH2012066001015.pdf Gonioteuthis quadrata quadrata (de Blainville, 1827) do occur, lived there, but mostly in the Formatie van Vaals. If you want 100% certainty, you have to split the rostrum and meet the internal characteristics. 

 

As for Echincorys, you are right but I think it is E. scutata (Leske, 1778). Because thats the main species in the south of the Netherlands (aside from Hemipneustes sp., in this case H. striatoradiatus (Leske, 1778) but also in many other Cretaceous sediments. These Echinocorys have different forms and shapes but I think that there is (perhaps) only one species (apart from the subspecies or forms that are, in my opinion variations within the species). See for more info about sea urchins the publication 'Zee-egels uit het vuursteeneluvium van Zuid-Limburg, de Voerstreek en Aachenerwald' door Van der Ham Raymond W.J.M. Also see http://www.chalk.discoveringfossils.co.uk/echinocorys.htm

@rocket: crinoid stems are not present or are very rare finds. Did not found one in years. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Fossilsforever