Terry Dactyll Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Pete... Great find....Its very unusual material... Certainly somewhere you can continue to collect and aquire a representation from there... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted March 28, 2013 Author Share Posted March 28, 2013 Hey everyone, just an update. I've been talking with a paleontologist at the Sam Noble Museum, and while he now thinks that the site isn't terrestrial, it does contain a large amount of shark material and he still wants to write a paper on it. So, myself and Mick69 (who originally found the site) will be meeting with him in a couple weeks to get some ID's and help him with his paper. He did already ID some of the concretions. All of the striated concretions, including the comet shaped one, he ID'd as Listracanthus hystrix shark dermal denticles. Thanks again Also here is a new concretion that appears to be bone. Any ideas? I also found what appears to be lawrencia, but I'm not sure and it's hard to get pictures of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Hey Pete, Exciting news! In the fossil you just posted, is there a groove that runs almost the entire length? I can't tell.. It does look like bone to me.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted March 28, 2013 Author Share Posted March 28, 2013 Hey Pete, Exciting news! In the fossil you just posted, is there a groove that runs almost the entire length? I can't tell.. It does look like bone to me.. No groove that I can clearly see, it's kinda hard to tell though. What would the groove mean and where would it have been so I can check again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 No groove that I can clearly see, it's kinda hard to tell though. What would the groove mean and where would it have been so I can check again? It would be almost in the center in your first image. I thought it might be a part of the shoulder girdle (cleithrum) of a fish but the more I look I think the shape is off for that.. If you don't get an ID on here maybe it's time to email some pics off.. Is there anyway you could take pics in natural light? It might help.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted March 28, 2013 Author Share Posted March 28, 2013 It would be almost in the center in your first image. I thought it might be a part of the shoulder girdle (cleithrum) of a fish but the more I look I think the shape is off for that.. If you don't get an ID on here maybe it's time to email some pics off.. Is there anyway you could take pics in natural light? It might help.. Ya, I don't see the grove there either, just a couple small fractures from coming out of the concretion, so it still probably isn't the shoulder bone. I'll still be meeting with the paleontologist so he can get a good look at it then too. Sorry about the lighting issue, I would use natural light be the winters here tend to be gray and cloudy most of the time without much good light. I realized what the problem was with the light though, I was using a white sheet for a background and my phone had been compensating for the glare off the paper by darkening the image. I'll try and get a better picture when I can. Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I realized what the problem was with the light though, I was using a white sheet for a background and my phone had been compensating for the glare off the paper by darkening the image. I'll try and get a better picture when I can. Try placing the nodule on some of Steve's black shale. That will trick the phone. With my last conodont pic, I had to place bits of white paper on the shale around it to get a decent balance. Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted March 30, 2013 Author Share Posted March 30, 2013 Hopefully there pictures are better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 2, 2013 Author Share Posted April 2, 2013 Here's a new one on me, internal view of a petrodus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted April 2, 2013 Share Posted April 2, 2013 Here's a new one on me, internal view of a petrodus? IMG_1258.JPG IMG_1259.JPG Yes. Very nice. Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick69 Posted April 21, 2013 Share Posted April 21, 2013 I had to review all of this again when I got home, because my memory sucks. I had a great time hunting with you again. Too bad we haven't gotten together more. I will talk to the land owner of that ravine to see if we can set something up before you leave. Otherwise, I might just have to discover it alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 Here is another mystery. Possibly some type of brach? Anyone have any idea? thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 You will get some that are organic remains but will be impossible to ID as they are just preserved as 'blobs'.... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 (edited) Here is another mystery. Possibly some type of brach? IMG_1306.JPG IMG_1305.JPG Anyone have any idea? I've found a few of those in the Muncie Creek Shale. Here is one in some fish regurgitation. It is in the nodule on the right: I figure it's part of some fish. Edited April 24, 2013 by Missourian Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 You will get some that are organic remains but will be impossible to ID as they are just preserved as 'blobs'.... ya... unfortunately that appears to be the vast majority of them, but this one seemed to have enough detail to try an ID I've found a few of those in the Muncie Creek Shale. Here is one in some fish regurgitation. It is in the nodule on the right: 15-Muncie-coprolites.jpg I figure it's part of some fish. I've found some like that, but this one isn't like it. Although it doesn't look like it, it is actually a single piece. On the lower picture, there is an outer 'shell' of some sort that fits on the piece in the top pic, where the piece in the top pic is a large ridge. I know it's very hard to tell, but on the outside of the 'shell' there is some markings similar, but not exactly, like the pattern on this lingula http://www.bluesinheaven.com/img/paleo/Hwy51/Lingula.jpg. There is also a small ridge running along the middle, near the pointed end. It is most visible on the top picture. thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Are you certain it's shell material around it? I am just throwing this out there but it sure reminds me of a fish shoulder girdle.. See what you think. The opposite side of mine (not pictured) would have the indented groove .. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 Are you certain it's shell material around it? I am just throwing this out there but it sure reminds me of a fish shoulder girdle.. See what you think. The opposite side of mine (not pictured) would have the indented groove .. 101_4331-001.JPG No, I'm not sure it is shell. It is just a thin layer of something separating the patterned side from the ridge. It could be, it's hard to tell, There is no evidence of how far mine might or might not continue into the rock. The way a lot of these oxidize makes it difficult to tell Here is a close up of the pattern: And of the ridge: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 and here is another odd one. It is also badly oxidized, so it's hard to make out any details, but it has that fairly distinct series of ridges running along one side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 The closeup you posted looks like the pattern that I see on so much of my fish material.. I have another one that looks almost dead-on to yours. Someone borrowed my camera but I will get it back later today and post what I am talking about.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Ok, Pete Here is another one to compare with yours.. Note the groove.. I have found quite a few of these. The pattern on the last shot is fish ornamentation.. Looks the same as yours to me. See what you think.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 (edited) I frequently find similar fingerprint-looking stuff in Muncie Creek nodules. I don't have an ID yet. So perhaps some critter had an appetite for Lingula? Edited April 24, 2013 by Missourian Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 Ok, Pete Here is another one to compare with yours..101_4590.JPG Note the groove.. I have found quite a few of these. 101_4604-001.JPG 101_4606-001.JPG The pattern on the last shot is fish ornamentation.. Looks the same as yours to me. See what you think.. Ya, that looks the same to me, yours just looks better preserved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 I frequently find similar fingerprint-looking stuff in Muncie Creek nodules. I don't have an ID yet. So perhaps some critter had an appetite for Lingula? Hmm.. Interesting idea. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 ...So perhaps some critter had an appetite for Lingula? I don't know about then, but today, Linguilas are toxic. "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...
Missourian Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I don't know about then, but today, Linguilas are toxic. Well, that would explain why the stuff was thrown up. Context is critical. 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