Cretaceous (?) Jaw

[Auspex]

This thing came up for sale; it came to my attention because it's listed as a "possible toothed bird beak", which I'm pretty sure it isn't. Not much of a description to go by:

"I purchased this fossil from a friend who bought it from Bradley University in 2004. I don't have any information as to where it was collected, or any definite age information..."

It does say that the jaw fragment is 27mm long (just over an inch).

Does anybody care to weigh in on what is might be?

[Mike Owens]

This thing came up for sale; it came to my attention because it's listed as a "possible toothed bird beak", which I'm pretty sure it isn't. Not much of a description to go by:

"I purchased this fossil from a friend who bought it from Bradley University in 2004. I don't have any information as to where it was collected, or any definite age information..."

It does say that the jaw fragment is 27mm long (just over an inch).

Does anybody care to weigh in on what is might be?

I agree with you. The exposed surface appears to be the "inside" of the specimen. I would suggest you stablize the exposed side then remove the matrix from the other. I think you will be better able to identify it from there. As to what it is, I wouldn't hazzard a guess.

[Guest bmorefossil]

wait wait wait is auspex asking for help!!!!! this is a first, lol. sorry man cant help on this one

[Archimedes]

Is it in a limestone or a chalk, its a nice piece,

the rock it is in should tell you a lot of were its from and the age, hopefully.

[Auspex]

I don't have it in my posession (this being sort of a pig-in-a-poke situation), so I can't assess it the way I'd like too.

The seller thinks it's "limestone?", and it doesn't look like chalk at all, but who knows? All it has going for it, birdwise, is the size, and the angle and curvature of the teeth. Problems include: Teeth are way too wide for their height; Mandible is way too deep; Apparent curvature of the mandible.

If it's a fragment from the back of the jaw, and if broke in such a way as to imply a curve that isn't there, and if all the teeth are just erupting....but that's a lot of ifs. I'm not tempted to lay my money down until my misgivings are assuaged.

[JohnJ]

...The seller thinks it's "limestone?", and it doesn't look like chalk at all, but who knows? All it has going for it, birdwise, is the size, and the angle and curvature of the teeth. Problems include: Teeth are way too wide for their height; Mandible is way too deep; Apparent curvature of the mandible.

...

Auspex,

The matrix seems to have some translucence. You can notice it in various fractures. Just guessing...maybe a dolomitic limestone, or granular form of gypsum. Our mineral members will know.

Also, could the "curvature of the mandible" be the result of a break that appears to run through the fossil about a "tooth's" width to the left of the last exposed tooth?

[va paleo]

it might be a dinosaur

[va paleo]

i think if it is a dinosaur it would be form something like Majungasaurus the jaw look like a Majungasaurus jaw Majungasaurus is the same dinosaur as Majungatholus they now call it Majungasaurus but used 2 be know as Majungatholus a relative is Carnotaurus i wall get you a id for sure i wall show the picture 2 some palaeontologists

[ebrocklds]

is there any chance to get other pictures. possibly the cross sectional view and some close ups of the teeth. also a picture of the whole rock would aid to id the rock. if the guy really thinks it is bird he will supply more pictures to help convince you.

Brock

[Auspex]

is there any chance to get other pictures. possibly the cross sectional view and some close ups of the teeth. also a picture of the whole rock would aid to id the rock. if the guy really thinks it is bird he will supply more pictures to help convince you.

Brock

Here's the only other pic I have right now; I'll ask for more.

[Mike Owens]

Here's the only other pic I have right now; I'll ask for more.

Sure looks like some type of crystal to me.

[va paleo]

mike their are crystal but their a jaw 2 in that rook

[Auspex]

Here's the only other pic I have right now; I'll ask for more.

It certainly appears to be chrystaline, like hard dolomitic limestone. I've requested close-ups of the teeth from the seller, and also wrote to the paleo professor at the university from which it is purported to have come.

Overall (to me) it has a reptillian look. The close-ups may help, and if the professor responds with any info as to it's origin, it will narrow the possibilities considerably.

[lawooten]

This thing came up for sale; it came to my attention because it's listed as a "possible toothed bird beak", which I'm pretty sure it isn't. Not much of a description to go by:

"I purchased this fossil from a friend who bought it from Bradley University in 2004. I don't have any information as to where it was collected, or any definite age information..."

It does say that the jaw fragment is 27mm long (just over an inch).

Does anybody care to weigh in on what is might be?

Hemmm the teeth lean towards the back of the throat like sharks teeth do. So that means when it put something in its mouth it tares its meat and the meat is pulled toward the throat. There is no escaping by the way the teeth flow kind of the way snakes also do. These types of teeth are used to rip meat so it is a carnivore. Because teeth flow toward the back I myself would say it has no claws or hands therefore the flow of teeth. The rock looks like calcite and I find calcite in cretaceous limestone rock too. I think it is a bird a Ichthyornis dispar Marsh and here is a site that has a pic of the bird and teeth. I would buy it if it was not over priced.

http://www.oceansofkansas.com/Marsh72a.html

[kauffy]

Auspex, your issue with the teeth being too wide for their length could be solved by the fact that there could be matrix covering up the tips, thus the teeth are still slightly burried making them appear shorter. Although i cant actually tell from the pictures if this is the case.... just a thought?

Its very interesting....

[lawooten]

This thing came up for sale; it came to my attention because it's listed as a "possible toothed bird beak", which I'm pretty sure it isn't. Not much of a description to go by:

"I purchased this fossil from a friend who bought it from Bradley University in 2004. I don't have any information as to where it was collected, or any definite age information..."

It does say that the jaw fragment is 27mm long (just over an inch).

Does anybody care to weigh in on what is might be?

Try this site for that jaw with teeth you have

http://www.oceansofkansas.com/marsh73.html

[lawooten]

Try this site for that jaw with teeth you have

http://www.oceansofkansas.com/marsh73.html

also check this site out http://www.abc.net.au/science/ozfossil/age.../nannantius.htm

[va paleo]

\Auspex is their a number written on it or any thing like that one of my palaeontologists friends asked and if their is that can help or a catalog number form the University for it he said if their any of that it wall help him and who found it and when and where but he is sure it not bird

[Carl O'Cles]

I have no clue as to what it could be. But i would imagine if a university was willing to sell it it must not be that special unless it was an inside job.

[Auspex]

...unless it was an inside job.

My concern exactly, which is why I've been trying to contact the paleo guy there. I did find a report, in a journal, of the theft of a fossil fish from Mazon Creek biota from his basement display case in 2007. (Though this certainly doesn't look like Mazon Creek material).

[Auspex]

I now have the fossil in my posession. The matrix is very hard, very dense chrystaline limestone (very similar to Fox Hills material). On examination, I'm not willing to rule out Icthyornis, as it has many consistant characteristics.

I need to prep it out a bit, and it's going to be a bear of a job. Any tips on exposing very fragile bones from very hard limestone? I'm thinking about testing the ability of a weak acid to soften the matrix a little, and going at it with a pin vise.

Here are a couple pics I just took with the digital microscope.

[JohnJ]

I now have the fossil in my posession. The matrix is very hard, very dense chrystaline limestone (very similar to Fox Hills material). On examination, I'm not willing to rule out Icthyornis, as it has many consistant characteristics.

I need to prep it out a bit, and it's going to be a bear of a job. Any tips on exposing very fragile bones from very hard limestone? I'm thinking about testing the ability of a weak acid to soften the matrix a little, and going at it with a pin vise.

Here are a couple pics I just took with the digital microscope.

Now aren't you having fun this evening! Can't wait to see the final results and your final ID.

[Gatorman]

Cool!

[Mike Owens]

Cool! What did the seller have to say when you told him it wasn't from Bradley U?

[Auspex]

Cool! What did the seller have to say when you told him it wasn't from Bradley U?

He maintains what is probably the truth: "This is what I was told; Bradley sold off some excess fossils in 2004, and I acquired it from a guy who bought it then". (Of course, he's lost touch with him).

My work is cut out for me...