PetrosTrilobite Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) Hi, i read in a website that "The best thing about fossil teeth is that they consist of the actual bone and have not been replaced by minerals from the ground." How true it is? Edited January 17 by PetrosTrilobite Link to post Share on other sites
JBkansas Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) Seems like a bit of both (original minerals and secondary minerals) though that appears to be true of bone as well (not specific for teeth, diagram is from an article on bone): https://anthropology.ucsd.edu/_files/Faculty Files/schoeninger-publications/Kohn etal. 1999.pdf Edited January 17 by JBkansas 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Opabinia Blues Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 Eh, generally partially true and partially false, though this is true of bones as well. Permineralization involves mineral replacement, and this is true in both fossil bones and of course dinosaur teeth. Fossil dinosaur teeth are absolutely not chemically identical to how they were when the animal was alive. However, there is some original material present. The same is also true of permineralized bones, though I would not be surprised if a greater amount of original material survives in teeth rather than in bones due to compositional differences. Link to post Share on other sites
Ludwigia Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 The same principal also applies to fossilized shells. Many shells were originally made up of aragonite, which was then mostly rather quickly converted to the more stable calcium carbonate calcite. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JimB88 Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 Preservation depends on many factors. It's an over-generalization to say all fossils are preserved the same way. The teeth may be permineralized at one location but not at another. Link to post Share on other sites
FranzBernhard Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 (edited) 7 hours ago, Ludwigia said: The same principal also applies to fossilized shells. Calcite shells can sometimes also have "parts"* of their original composition retained. For example, Sr-isotope composition in rudist shells. *Minus the organic content but plus some trace elements, for example Fe and Mn in many cases. Here is a revived thread about this topic: Fossils Aren't Real Bones/teeth? - Questions & Answers - The Fossil Forum Franz Bernhard Edited January 22 by FranzBernhard Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now