paleoflor Posted March 19, 2011 Author Share Posted March 19, 2011 Dear all, Thank you for your input, interesting information and opinions. This really makes the 'hunt' for the correct identification a lot more fun for me. Since Don (FossilDAWG) advised me to send Dr. David Grimaldi an email about the specimen and today I got the following reply: Your find is very interesting, as these photos do appear to be of insect wings. Although, I cannot see tiny crossveins between the main veins, which would be a definitive id these are insectan. It does seem that the venation of several wings is overlapping, which makes it difficult to reconstruct the branching pattern. You should also send the photos to Andre Nel at the Paris Museum and to Michael Engel at the Univ. of Kansas, for their opinions. Seems the experts are just as divided about the specimen as we are. Where Prof. Dr. Carsten Brauckmann wrote it is unlikely to be an insect and supports the plant-identification, Dr. David Grimaldi seems to lean towards insect. I'll keep you posted about more replies! I don't have much time now, I'll respond more in full later... Tim Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Seems the experts are just as divided about the specimen as we are. Where Prof. Dr. Carsten Brauckmann wrote it is unlikely to be an insect and supports the plant-identification, Dr. David Grimaldi seems to lean towards insect. Tim Considering the appreciable expertise of Messrs. Braukmann & Grimaldi this specimen turns out to be quite enigmatic indeed. With great deference of course to Dr. Grimaldi I have once again scrutinized the treatise volumes of wing diagrams. The Family Eucaenidae has one genus represented from Mazon Creek, Eucaenus sp. (Teneopteron), that appears a bit closer at least. Still, I can find no Paleozoic wings that have a terminating vein structure within. There is one group, Perlaria (Plecoptera), in The Evolution of the Insects by Grimaldi et al., with a figured forewing that has elliptical terminated veins within the wing structure. It should be noted that the treatise does not corroborate this and they are recorded only from the Permian-Holocene. Great follow-up Tim, a wonderful whodunit !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted March 23, 2011 Author Share Posted March 23, 2011 Hi all, The story continues! And the plot twist is quite interesting I must say... I received reply from Chris Cleal (Museum of Wales), the person who has helped me with my identification of fossil plants many times before. I wonder if this is an insect wing - there is no scale so it is difficult to be sure. I have sent the photo to Ed Jarzembowski to see if he has any idea. Haha, nice. Total disagreement between experts. Those who specialise in insects suggest this is a plant, those who specialise in plants reckon it is something insectan. And I simply don't know. David Grimaldi suggested I email Michael Engel, which I did today. If I hear from him or Ed Jarezembowski (via Chris Cleal) I will keep you posted! Best regards, Tim Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziepe Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Haha, nice. Total disagreement between experts. This will be interesting S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdevey Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Jest thinking out side the box...could we be seeing both, wing with leaf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I just had another close look at the photograph... The central vein looks to be very 3D almost as in tubular... I dont know if this is due to the lighting... I wouldnt expect to see that on a wing... So we got a 'very rare plant' Vs 'very rare wing (or wing casing)'... I'd be happy with either and at the moment you got both ...lol Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted March 24, 2011 Author Share Posted March 24, 2011 @ Steve: haha, very much true. I am happy with the specimen! Angelika Leipner, curator of the Museum am Scholerberg (Osnabrueck, Germany) and Carboniferous insect expert wrote me this: It´s difficult, to interpret the fossil after the foto. But I tend to plant residues, because I can´t see a corrugation or a venation between the main veins. Unfortunately I have no idea what sort of plant it could be. Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 The lack of subcosta could wipe this argument off the table. I agree. The presence of subcosta in insect wings seems to me to be a feature that is intrinsically linked to insect ontogeny. And therefore, likely generally present from very early on in insect evolution. From that perspective, the lack of it is a stronger argument against the wing hypothesis than the strong central vein (some cocroach examples already illustrate the possible presence of a well developed centrally positioned vein). Next step would be to make a schematic drawing of the venation -I suppose you have to have the fossil in your hand for that- and look specifically into the subject of insect wing development to see whether the (apparent) lack of subcosta can be explained. If not, ditch the wing hypothesis. Ofcourse, all just thoughts. Paleo database, information and community Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Edonihce Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 It seems like it's possible that the reason we can't see any subcosta (if they're even there) is the preservation of the specimen or the photo. So, not seeing them here in this photo can't be absolute. However, what about the base of the wing/leaf? It seems like every insect wing I've ever seen kinda breaks off at the base, whereas these specimens seem to have an extension continuing beyond the base, like the 'stem' (terminology?) we find on leaves. Has that angle been discussed yet and I missed it? . ____________________ scale in avatar is millimeters ____________________ Come visit Sandi, the 'Fossil Journey Cruiser' ____________________ WIPS (the Western Interior Paleontological Society - http://www.westernpaleo.org) ____________________ "Being genetically cursed with an almost inhuman sense of curiosity and wonder, I'm hard-wired to investigate even the most unlikely, uninteresting (to others anyway) and irrelevant details; often asking hypothetical questions from many angles in an attempt to understand something more thoroughly." -- Mr. Edonihce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 It seems like it's possible that the reason we can't see any subcosta (if they're even there) is the preservation of the specimen or the photo. So, not seeing them here in this photo can't be absolute. Indeed. That is where a schematic drawing of the veins might help. Paleo database, information and community Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCFossils Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Wow! what a fascinating fossil. I am very familiar with both plants and insects from similar aged fossils from the Mazon Creek deposit in North America. My personal opinion is that you have found a pair of insect wings. The veination is perplexing and I am not aware of any insect group that would conform well with what you found. Having said that, the fossil "wings" seem to symetrical to be some random plant bits. This is definately a fossil worthy of further examination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Edonihce Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Indeed. That is where a schematic drawing of the veins might help. Indeed, and if the preservation is such that the owner of the specimen can't make them out, they're not getting drawn. Certainly, if they are there, then a good, clear photograph (or shots from different angles, in differing lighting conditions, with various kinds of dust and/or solutions, or a light tracing with pencil/chalk with very thin paper if the fossil is tough enough for that kind of treatment) should be good enough for us to see them. Not saying drawing them out wouldn't help too, but that seems like a bit of a chore if the person isn't good with the kind of thing, and perhaps getting a better photo would suffice. ...perhaps not, but if he can't see them in the first place (though they may be there), then he's not going to be able to draw them anyway....and maybe one of these other methods could 'bring them out' even if he can't see them (if they're there). :-) . ____________________ scale in avatar is millimeters ____________________ Come visit Sandi, the 'Fossil Journey Cruiser' ____________________ WIPS (the Western Interior Paleontological Society - http://www.westernpaleo.org) ____________________ "Being genetically cursed with an almost inhuman sense of curiosity and wonder, I'm hard-wired to investigate even the most unlikely, uninteresting (to others anyway) and irrelevant details; often asking hypothetical questions from many angles in an attempt to understand something more thoroughly." -- Mr. Edonihce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted March 24, 2011 Author Share Posted March 24, 2011 Using a simple hand lens you can distinguish much more than I can make visible with my camera equipment. I would like to share better photos or some venation diagrams, but I do not have the time to produce them at the moment. However, some of the people I sent emails have expressed their interest to study the specimen in more detail. So probably someone who is better equipped to make such diagnostic observations will take over soon. Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy784 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Congrats on a real puzzler Tim. You have everyone trying to figure this one out. i'm suprised Roman hasn't jumped on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyguy784 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Is it possible this particular piece was actually from a later strata? As in the overburden from the strip mine. Can you get hold of lithostratigraphic diagram? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhacophyllum Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Hello guys, For me this specimen is a Lesleya foliage. Lesleya is very rare and still very enigmatic plant, that occurred in the Upper Carboniferous. Description from book "Paleobotany and the Evolution of Plants" "This genus is known from Mississippian to Late Permian of Europe and North America , with less than 15 species described to date. Lesleya consists of individual , strap-shaped leaves, each up to 20cm long and 5 cm wide, with entire or dentate margins and massive midvein. The systematic affinities of Lesleya remain uncertain. Florin (1933) regarded the genus as a primitive gymnosperm, not closely related to either late Paleozoic seed ferns or Mesozoic gymnosperms based on morphological and epidermal features." This genus has been suggested to be ancestral to cycads ( Remy & Remy, 1978, Leary 1990). Best regards and wishes from Poland Maciek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziepe Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Hello Maciek, I just checked the Lesleya species in 'Paleobotany: the biology and evolution of fossil plants' and indeed it looks similar at first sight. In Remy and Remy's 'Die Floren des Erdaltertums' (1977) there are many detailed descriptions and leaf-reconstructions of LesLeya (Lesleya sp, L. delafondi, L. eckardti, L. grandis and L. weilerbachensis). It's hard to see on the image but imho it's all about the nervature of the leave, so, Tim, check it out! Very curious on the outcome! And Maciek, good observation. Sven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 ...For me this specimen is a Lesleya foliage... Is there, or was there, a picture? "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...
Bullsnake Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Is there, or was there, a picture? http://books.google.com/books?id=_29tNNeQKeMC&pg=PA669&lpg=PA669&dq=lesleya+foliage&source=bl&ots=_YT1bcmCd4&sig=LWfKtgNQkrRb8bNt2-34uq5HHgE&hl=en&ei=H-aaTtr1JKOLsAKi-YizBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=lesleya%20foliage&f=false 1 Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Thank you, Bullsnake! That's even better than just a picture (The way I read the post, I thought there was supposed to be a picture with it). And, thank you Rhacophyllum for bringing this possibility to our attention "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...
piranha Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 The midvein of Lesleya divides the leaf symmetrically. The midvein of the mystery specimen(s) has an asymmetrical division. Additionally, there is no evidence of any similar venation in Lesleya from the link provided. Perhaps Ziepe can post clear images of L. delafondi, L. eckardti L. grandis and L. weilerbachensis that will better illustrate those details for evaluation? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziepe Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Perhaps Ziepe can post clear images Here are a few. Sven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted October 16, 2011 Author Share Posted October 16, 2011 (edited) Hi Maciek, Thank you for your input. I do not have copies of Florin (1933) and Simunek (1996) and must say I have overlooked the possibility when going through Taylor et al. (2009) and Remy and Remy (1977). The dimensions of my specimen (~5-10cm) are much smaller than those any of the published species I (just) read about (~20cm; see relevant pages of Remy and Remy (1977) attached). Otherwise, I can see your point. Many of the people who I wrote that specialise in insects from the Carboniferous do not think it is "something insectan", which leaves little more than "something vegetative" as an option. Although Scott has a very good point, noting that the mid-vein is off-centre on the photo's, I must say that the three dimensional geometry (poorly visible on the photo's) is such that the leaf could actually continue underneath the rock there (conchoidal-type fracture defines the upper edge of the "leaf"???). Anyway, I am going to look for Florin (1933) and Simunek (1996) in the library; it is worth further investigation! I'll also mail your suggestion to some of the paleobotanists I know to hear their opinion on it. Ciao, and thanks to all for their input! Tim EDIT: Ziepe already added the photo's and beat me to the punch there, haha... Edited October 16, 2011 by paleoflor Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted October 16, 2011 Author Share Posted October 16, 2011 Here are a few. Sven Looks like your computer is up-and-running again Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stocksdale Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 Six years later I wondered if you ever got the mystery leaf/wing resolved? It looks like it could also be related to Megalopteris. It appears to have an asymmetrical form with one side of the "mid-rib" being larger than the other. Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.–Carl Sagan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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