Auspex Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Well, that would explain why the stuff was thrown up. "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...
glacialerratic Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 I gotta say, that's a great series of photos, Missourian! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DE&i Posted April 26, 2013 Share Posted April 26, 2013 I did find a pdf online that shows the stratigraphy, the suspected environment, rate of deposition and some characteristic fossils. Granted, it is for tulsa county and the place I found the concretions is in Rodgers county (one county north west of tulsa county). I was wondering if this pdf might help eliminate possible ids and narrow things down. Penn-Strat-Section.pdf Hi Pete…Terry Dactyll mentioned you were looking for some carboniferous shark spine references. I’ve found a small reference to Xenacanthus sp from the Lower Permian of Oklahoma not sure if that’s any use to you ill make it avalible to download if you’d like it. Darren. Regards.....D&E&i The only certainty with fossil hunting is the uncertainty. https://lnk.bio/Darren.Withers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 27, 2013 Author Share Posted April 27, 2013 Hi Pete…Terry Dactyll mentioned you were looking for some carboniferous shark spine references. I’ve found a small reference to Xenacanthus sp from the Lower Permian of Oklahoma not sure if that’s any use to you ill make it avalible to download if you’d like it. Darren. That would be great. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 27, 2013 Author Share Posted April 27, 2013 (edited) Another couple interesting breaks... the first looks like a bone of some sorts The second, I have no idea on. the surface is mostly smooth without much detail. Its shape is also curious, Edited April 27, 2013 by PetrolPete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DE&i Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 That would be great. Thank you. Here you go. New and little known genera and species of vertebrates from the Lower Permian of Oklahoma (1970) Darren. Regards.....D&E&i The only certainty with fossil hunting is the uncertainty. https://lnk.bio/Darren.Withers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 Pete... The enlarged image of the first photo....The brown streak going vertically on the left side of the photo, is that attached to the other bit or does it look associated with, ' preserved in the same nodule '....reason I ask is the patina on that find I have seen on some carb fish scales.... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 27, 2013 Author Share Posted April 27, 2013 Pete... The enlarged image of the first photo....The brown streak going vertically on the left side of the photo, is that attached to the other bit or does it look associated with, ' preserved in the same nodule '....reason I ask is the patina on that find I have seen on some carb fish scales.... I'm not entirely sure what your asking, but the brown streak is a ridge that fits into the grove on the other half of the nodule, it appears to be made of the same material that is on two of the edges of the other half of the nodule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 28, 2013 Author Share Posted April 28, 2013 And a few unknowns from my last trip out there : I know the upper right one is a partial petrodus, but I have no idea on the other two. Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Pete... I'm asking is it part of whats in the nodule or is it additional, but fossilised together.... Like this... I found a fish scale but it got fossilised with a fern frond... just associated in the same nodule... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 28, 2013 Author Share Posted April 28, 2013 Pete... I'm asking is it part of whats in the nodule or is it additional, but fossilised together.... Like this... I found a fish scale but it got fossilised with a fern frond... just associated in the same nodule... SSA51572a.jpg First off, I have to say, that's a really cool nodule you have there. But as far as I can tell it is all one fossil in the nodule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_colorado Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 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? IMG_1177.JPG IMG_1176.JPG I also found what appears to be lawrencia, but I'm not sure and it's hard to get pictures of it. That curved "bone" might be a partial Physonemus dorsal finspine. I am not sure because it still has some matrix around it. If it is Physonemus and the surface is preserved, there should be some small nodes or bumps, possibly with ridges radiating from the center. Zidek reported a large one from Oklahoma in Oklahoma Geology Notes, 1977, vol. 37, no. 5, p. 151-156 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 28, 2013 Author Share Posted April 28, 2013 That curved "bone" might be a partial Physonemus dorsal finspine. I am not sure because it still has some matrix around it. If it is Physonemus and the surface is preserved, there should be some small nodes or bumps, possibly with ridges radiating from the center. Zidek reported a large one from Oklahoma in Oklahoma Geology Notes, 1977, vol. 37, no. 5, p. 151-156 I'll try and clean it a bit, but I couldn't see any Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_colorado Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 The nodes could be smooth bumps. If ornamented they would look like little Petrodus denticles. It could also be some other kind of shark dorsal finspine. Can you tell if it has bilateral symmetry? If not, that would rule it out as a shark spine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 29, 2013 Author Share Posted April 29, 2013 The nodes could be smooth bumps. If ornamented they would look like little Petrodus denticles. It could also be some other kind of shark dorsal finspine. Can you tell if it has bilateral symmetry? If not, that would rule it out as a shark spine. quick clarification, are you talking about the comet shaped one or the one that looks like a 'curved bone' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_colorado Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 I mean the one that is curved and tapers as it curves: IMG_1177.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 30, 2013 Author Share Posted April 30, 2013 okay, I looked closer, but I didn't see any nodes, flat or otherwise. It is bilaterally symmetric though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_colorado Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 I am new on this forum, and this is my first attempt at uploading photos. The first photo is a large Pennsylvanian-age Physonemus spine from Oklahoma. The second photo shows my daughter holding it, to give some idea of scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetrolPete Posted April 30, 2013 Author Share Posted April 30, 2013 Wow, nice spine. Certainly a lot bigger than this thing I've found. Unfortunately, I don't think the shape is quite right, with or without the nodes, unless it is a very juvenile version, but that seems unlikely since my friend had found a couple almost identical to the one I've found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 I'll second the wow on the spine. I have a couple similar spines, but they are tiny in comparison: Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_colorado Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Missourian, those are some interesting spines. As for the big one my daughter is holding, I "found" it, but not in the field. It is the same one that was written up by Zidek in the paper I cited earlier. In that paper, it was said to be in a private collection. I was familiar with the paper when I happened to see it, and other Pennsylvanian vertebrate fossils, for sale by a fossil dealer. it turned out that he had gotten them from the widow of the collector. I bought the whole collection and donated it all to the American Museum of Natural History in New York after taking photos. This was about 15 years ago. The curator, John Maisey, gave me casts of the more interesting specimens, like the big Physonemus. The photo is the actual specimen. PetrolPete, if the spine is completely nodeless, they could be worn off or it might be something else like Stethacanthus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphactinus Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Wayne - Stupendous spine!!! Biggest complete one I've ever seen. I have fragments of one from Jefferson Co, MO that would have been around that same size, but there's not a lot of it left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted April 30, 2013 Share Posted April 30, 2013 Wayne, thank you for your contribution to this topic! Fabulous fossil, and the back story adds a lot "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...
PetrolPete Posted May 2, 2013 Author Share Posted May 2, 2013 Another interesting one: Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Pete.... I have no idea's on this one... But great to see this rare material... I hope someone can help.... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... 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