rod Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Nice crab! With the pics available, I would feel comfortable saying Dakoticancer sp.. The differences between Tetracarcinus and Dakoticancer are very subtle and it is hard to tell form these pics. - ROD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trout hunter Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 nice quarter, i have one too but in bit better condition...but too bad mine is not the super valuable one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vordigern Posted September 23, 2011 Author Share Posted September 23, 2011 thanks everyone for the info and help IDing this fossil, this is my first crab so I am in no way qualified to give a definitive decision on this crab but from my perspective Im going with Dakoticancer. The 2 crab species are very similar but the one proportion that I am basing my decision on is the center "pointy hourglass" details. The same area on Tetracarcinus seems to cover a much larger surface area but on Dakotacancer, as well as my specimen ,it is more compact. So for purposes of lableing this specimen I am going with Dakotacancer until I find a better specimen to change my mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vordigern Posted September 23, 2011 Author Share Posted September 23, 2011 nice quarter, i have one too but in bit better condition...but too bad mine is not the super valuable one. what is the super valuable one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 what is the super valuable one? 1916. "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...
The Jersey Devil Posted November 8, 2019 Share Posted November 8, 2019 Definitely a Tetracarcinus. Looks like a steinkern. “You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one.” ― Mikhail Tal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted November 8, 2019 Share Posted November 8, 2019 19 hours ago, The Jersey Devil said: Definitely a Tetracarcinus. Looks like a steinkern. A steinkern wouldn't likely preserved the pustulose ornamentation. This is almost certainly the actual shell or possibly a cast, although these sediments are way more likely to have preserved the actual carapace. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jersey Devil Posted November 9, 2019 Share Posted November 9, 2019 4 hours ago, Carl said: A steinkern wouldn't likely preserved the pustulose ornamentation. This is almost certainly the actual shell or possibly a cast, although these sediments are way more likely to have preserved the actual carapace. Hey Carl, I agree with you on that now that I see the external ornament. At first I thought it looked like a steinkern because of the coloration, but it just appears to be very mineralized. “You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one.” ― Mikhail Tal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankh8147 Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 @Vordigern I know this is an old post that got brought back but that is a really exceptional fossil! Whatever happened to this specimen - is it still around? I ask because there were a good amount of studies on New Jersey crabs since this post... 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