clfossils Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 Good day everyone, I found a fossil during the summer from the Williamsville Formation, Bertie Group in Fort Erie. I have had a few people take a look at it but have not had any luck identifying it. I was wondering if anyone might have any idea: 1 cm in diameter Almost perfectly circular Radial rings Can't see a verticle cross section Does not carry on to the bottom Photos are the only visible section THANK YOU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeymig Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 It looks like an inarticulate brachiopod to me. Many times I've wondered how much there is to know. led zeppelin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 It looks like an inarticulate brachiopod to me. I'm surprised at how concentric it is...would a brachiopod not be at least a little 'off center'? "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...
clfossils Posted November 24, 2012 Author Share Posted November 24, 2012 I can see how that would make sense. Looked at some images such as: http://viewsofthemahantango.blogspot.ca/ The radiating circles appears to be similar, other then be more oval shape. Although, if the layer was broken at the right angle it could produce a perfec circular pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
araucaria1959 Posted November 24, 2012 Share Posted November 24, 2012 Orbiculoidea? Here is a link to a similar specimen: http://www.google.de/imgres?q=Orbiculoidea&num=10&hl=de&tbo=d&tbm=isch&tbnid=VioasilKB7djZM:&imgrefurl=http://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/object.php%3Firn%3D1353268%26QueryPage%3D&docid=BlrokpX5QuM40M&imgurl=http://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/webmedia.php%253Firn%253D255557%2526size%253D300x224&w=2048&h=1536&ei=rQqxUMf2NMf1sgbLzoCoCQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=691&vpy=189&dur=1656&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=141&ty=95&sig=100291377134541896537&page=1&tbnh=145&tbnw=195&start=0&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:25,s:0,i:166&biw=1246&bih=857 and still another one: http://www.google.de/imgres?q=Orbiculoidea&hl=de&tbo=d&tbm=isch&tbnid=tmsqRlDz-6o2dM:&imgrefurl=http://www.geoffbroughton.talktalk.net/WrensNest/Brachiopods/Inarticulate/album/slides/Orbiculoidea%2520forbesii%25201.html&docid=XPacIZ2L_wWjWM&itg=1&imgurl=http://www.geoffbroughton.talktalk.net/WrensNest/Brachiopods/Inarticulate/album/slides/Orbiculoidea%252520forbesii%2525201.jpg&w=369&h=533&ei=mwuxUOHOG8rMswafr4DgBA&zoom=1&biw=1246&bih=857&iact=rc&dur=875&sig=100291377134541896537&page=1&tbnh=154&tbnw=118&start=0&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:16,s:0,i:138&tx=78&ty=64 araucaria1959 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clfossils Posted November 24, 2012 Author Share Posted November 24, 2012 That does look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracefossilnut Posted December 21, 2012 Share Posted December 21, 2012 I have one of these. I can't find much about them. It is called a Kullingia type scratch circle. It is believed to be the trace fossil of a plant- like organism anchored in the center. It doesn't make much sense to me. It is also known as Kullingia concentrica and thought to be something else, but no one seems to know what. I was going to post a photo of mine. I just joined the Fossil Forum today. I found mine in the Pennsylvanian Atoka formation of northwest Arkansas at a location with abundant trace fossils and very few body fossils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Is the fossil completely flat? I thought of an external mold of a shark vert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 22, 2012 Share Posted December 22, 2012 Looks too regular to me to be an inarticulate brachiopod. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itwasntme Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Aspidella of some sort? See here: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspidella is the closest I have found so far. Edited December 23, 2012 by itwasntme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleecan Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 This is Silurian... marine... hypersaline lagoon environment don't think it is a asipidella ... missing radial portions and the environment is wrong for mushroom. I thought that it might be stem of a crinoid? But I have not seen crinoids in the Williamsville formation.... so I really don't know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Are there ant forams similar to Nummulites in that formation? "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...
Dromiopsis Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) Hello! Could it be a negative print from the bottom of the rugosa coral Paleocyclus porpita(porpitus), very common in the silurian reef in Gotland Here and the picture, you can see the septae(TOP) and a specimen upside down( Bottom) they mesure one centimeter and we can distinguish a sort of "battlement", perhaps relative to the stripe of the septae...and the circles looks similar it's just a supposition.... D Edited December 23, 2012 by Dromiopsis Gallery pictures http://www.flickr.com/photos/supergrevling/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dromiopsis Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) I just make a mold... D Edited December 23, 2012 by Dromiopsis Gallery pictures http://www.flickr.com/photos/supergrevling/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 Could it be a negative print from the bottom of the rugosa coral Paleocyclus porpita(porpitus), very common in the silurian reef in Gotland That is some wonderfully detailed and diverse stuff. Do you have any more? Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dromiopsis Posted December 27, 2012 Share Posted December 27, 2012 That is some wonderfully detailed and diverse stuff. Do you have any more? Hello, That's the only plate whith such diversity: In a quare of 10 cm son 10 cm : 2 Paleocyclus porpita (both side) One another rugosa coral, genus Cystiphyllum one brachiopod genus Megastrophia 3 ostracods genus Eoleperditia one bryozoan genus Ptilodictya lanceolata And..pieces of Trilobite Visby formation, Llandovery Gotland Normally, you find easily 4 differents fossils together(ex on picture with a mix of Tentaculites, Bryozoans, small ostracods and Brachiopods), not 5-6 different genus Dromiopsis 1 Gallery pictures http://www.flickr.com/photos/supergrevling/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 The coral base imprint is a great hypothesis! "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleecan Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 The coral base imprint is a great hypothesis! Only thing is that I have never seen coral in the Williamsville formation..... no rugose coral, no tentaculites as this was a hypersaline enviroment with salt hoppers... the high salt content would have killed off most things.... never seen a trilobite .... brachs are rare..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamalama Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I'd accept the solitary coral hypothesis as lots of other non-usual items show up in those rocks. Maybe one got swept in by a storm like the occasional brach or cephalopod that is found? -Dave __________________________________________________ Geologists on the whole are inconsistent drivers. When a roadcut presents itself, they tend to lurch and weave. To them, the roadcut is a portal, a fragment of a regional story, a proscenium arch that leads their imaginations into the earth and through the surrounding terrain. - John McPheeIf I'm going to drive safely, I can't do geology. - John McPheeCheck out my Blog for more fossils I've found: http://viewsofthemahantango.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolmt Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 I accept that it looks pretty close in the mold but as Peter indicates I have never seen any signs of any coral in the quarry where this was found. The quarry area we dig is pretty much eurypterids, phylocarids, cephalopods, occassional horseshoe crabs, primitive plant material and the very occassional brach. In fact I have never found a brach in hundreds of hours of hunting there, though I have seen one found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quarryman Dave Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 (edited) Good day. Althought the quarry exposes the williamsville formation, there are other formations as well in the Ridgemount quarry. The Bois Blanc (Devonian) is the top most member followed by the silurian akron formation, the williamsville formation (Where the Eurypterids are found) then the barren scajaquada layer and finally the fiddlers green. There are fragments of all these formations in the area so its likely that your photo is not williamsville rock as it is a very fine grained dolostone. Your pic looks like a coarse grained rock that could possibly be the fiddlers green or the Akron formation as it is brown and corals can be found, but are rare in these formations. The Devonian Bois Blanc is rich in corals though. Can you provide a larger photo of that piece of rock so we can be certain of this? Edited December 28, 2012 by Quarryman Dave Quarrycomber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itwasntme Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 (edited) Im not familiar with the formation or environment but came across this today : "Some paleontologists argue that circular impressions are not the fossil impressions of hydrozoans or other animals, but instead are scratch circles—sets of concentric grooves cut in sand or mud by the action of objects anchored at one end. For example, a plant swept around by waves or wind can trace circles in the ground around its stem, which is anchored at the center of the scratch circles." Could this be a possibility as well? Edited December 28, 2012 by itwasntme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleecan Posted December 28, 2012 Share Posted December 28, 2012 Good day. Althought the quarry exposes the williamsville formation, there are other formations as well in the Ridgemount quarry. The Bois Blanc (Devonian) is the top most member followed by the silurian akron formation, the williamsville formation (Where the Eurypterids are found) then the barren scajaquada layer and finally the fiddlers green. There are fragments of all these formations in the area so its likely that your photo is not williamsville rock as it is a very fine grained dolostone. Your pic looks like a coarse grained rock that could possibly be the fiddlers green or the Akron formation as it is brown and corals can be found, but are rare in these formations. The Devonian Bois Blanc is rich in corals though. Can you provide a larger photo of that piece of rock so we can be certain of this? Hi Dave: I was there when Corey found the fossil... Williamsville formation for sure. ROM is not sure what it is... PL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolmt Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 I was there as well when it was found, definately split out of the Williamsville A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 Im not familiar with the formation or environment but came across this today : "Some paleontologists argue that circular impressions are not the fossil impressions of hydrozoans or other animals, but instead are scratch circles—sets of concentric grooves cut in sand or mud by the action of objects anchored at one end. For example, a plant swept around by waves or wind can trace circles in the ground around its stem, which is anchored at the center of the scratch circles." Could this be a possibility as well? I wouldn't think random wave action would result in an almost perfect set of concentric rings. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks 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