Jump to content

Opalised fossil or opalised mineral?


Vopros

Recommended Posts

This is a boulder opal with some kind of crystals in it. It was sold as “vegetation fossil”.

I am attaching a few images that were taken under a microscope. The dimension of the opal is

15.4 x 9 x 4.9mm

And the crystals, or whatever it is, take around 1/3 of the length. 
So, is this a fossil and a fossil of what or these are some minerals?

Thanks.

870BEC83-C916-4825-84E8-66471AE7099C.jpeg

013F78C7-7366-49EE-9939-DC43C890FB93.jpeg

F1EB4674-3A55-4644-BFC1-A89408E0A095.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JBkansas said:

Where is it from?

It is from from Jundah, Queensland, Australia and here is the video

 

  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hazard the guess that those are pseudomorphized minerals, but I coudn't say which. I'm not seeing anything fossiliferous at any rate.

  • I Agree 2

 

Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger

http://www.steinkern.de/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Vopros said:

9495B0CB-CE4D-466A-9E86-AD2243782740.jpeg

This view has a bit of a stromatolite look but that seems unlikely given the crystal structures on the other faces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

I would hazard the guess that those are pseudomorphized minerals, but I coudn't say which. I'm not seeing anything fossiliferous at any rate.

It is possible but then it is a question how it formed. I have heard only about one type of pseudomorphs in Australia opals, and it is a so-called pineapple.  However, I have never heard about some kind of crystals inside an opal. Have you?

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have done some more work and now I believe this opal contains a few tiny cycad cones,  some of which produced leaves.

First notice the structure I circled. See all these small triangles.

Now compare two images from the second picture. The upper image my old opal cycad. The lower image my new opal 

See the similarity in the shapes between the right-hand sides of both images?

it cannot be a coincidence. 

6FACEAA7-BFA6-447F-BA58-B2B5CF64006F.jpeg

6E60B71C-EA1B-4F90-ADC5-03EFB8DF2C2E.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You sound pretty convinced now, and I would grant that it's a good possibility. Why don't you take it to an expert at a natural history museum or university department for confirmation?

 

Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger

http://www.steinkern.de/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

You sound pretty convinced now, and I would grant that it's a good possibility. Why don't you take it to an expert at a natural history museum or university department for confirmation?

Thank you! I will try to take it to an expert.

  • Enjoyed 1
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...