Pennsylvanian Fish Bone

[Bullsnake]

According to the Tulsa County stratigraphic chart it does have phosphatic nodules, and it says it contains many of the same fossils as I've seen you post, but I'll have to see what I can find.

[Missourian]

Some close-ups of specimen #3....

 

 

 

 

[JohnJ]

Mitch, have you considered a tetrapod lower limb bone? Some look very similar....

[Missourian]

On 5/9/2013 at 8:05 AM, JohnJ said:

Mitch, have you considered a tetrapod lower limb bone? Some look very similar....

 

Again, I would love for that to be the case, but I doubt it for a number of reasons.

 

First is the bilateral symmetry:

 

 

Are there examples of known tetrapods with bones like this?

 

Also, I would not expect to find terrestrial bones in the deep-water depositional environment of the Muncie Creek. There's a chance that a small number of the bones could somehow end up out in the open sea, but so many have been found. Since I managed to find four in a few relatively small outcrops, there must be millions of them scattered throughout the unit.

 

Finally, I haven't seen or heard of any other bones from a tetrapod that would be expected to be found along with them.

[Xiphactinus]

Have you shown it to anyone at KU? You've got about a week before everyone hits the road for summer....

[Indy]

Networking with those at KU is a good suggestion

[JohnJ]

Again, I would love for that to be the case, but I doubt it for a number of reasons.

First is the bilateral symmetry:

5326-Muncie-bone-3.jpg

Are there examples of known tetrapods with bones like this?

Also, I would not expect to find terrestrial bones in the deep-water depositional environment of the Muncie Creek. There's a chance that a small number of the bones could somehow end up out in the open sea, but so many have been found. Since I managed to find four in a few relatively small outcrops, there must be millions of them scattered throughout the unit.

Finally, I haven't seen or heard of any other bones from a tetrapod that would be expected to be found along with them.

Ahh, I hadn't considered the depositional environment. Like you said, since there are so many, it does seem strange there is not more published information. They are interesting specimens. I'm hoping you can get an accurate ID.

[Missourian]

On 5/9/2013 at 2:31 PM, JohnJ said:

it does seem strange there is not more published information.

 

As far as I know, there is nothing on the Muncie Creek in the literature. Considering the interesting fauna and that the bed is well exposed in and around a major metropolitan area, I would think at least a graduate student would have tackled it by now.

[Roz]

It might be time for a few emails to go out?

[piranha]

It might be time for a few emails to go out?

Agreed!

Just for comparison attached are diagrams (fibula, tibia) of a Pennsylvanian synapsid reptile: Haptodus garnettensis

Laurin, M 1993

Anatomy and Relationships of Haptodus garnettensis, a Pennsylvanian Synapsid from Kansas.

Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 13(2):200-229

[Missourian]

Question: Is the structure of the bone (shown above in the close-ups) indicative of the class of the animal?

[Auspex]

Question: Is the structure of the bone (shown above in the close-ups) indicative of the class of the animal?

I think that, based on the elegant, sweeping curvature, the animal definitely had class.

Seriously, this (these!) are very, very intriguing fossils. The curve and the 'two headed' end are pretty rib-like, and not in a fishy way.

[Missourian]

On 5/9/2013 at 5:57 PM, Auspex said:

The curve and the 'two headed' end are pretty rib-like, and not in a fishy way.

 

How would the distinctive curved joint surface fit into the rib anatomy?

 

(And yes, I will email an expert at some point. )

[RichW9090]

I'm betting it is a tetrapod - you should get it to someone like Ted Daeshler at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, or Neil Shubin, wherever he is now.

Rich

[Missourian]

For reference, I've included some images of the Muncie Creek Shale, which is sandwiched between the limestone members of the Iola Formation.

 

The Muncie is usually about 8 inches thick, and varies from gray shale to black platy shale. The concretions can be found embedded in the surfaces of the limestones as well as in the shale. They are easier to collect when the shale is non-platy. The shale is usually platy in the northern part of the Kansas City metro, where my photos below were taken.

 

Highway cut. The Muncie is the faintly banded stuff just above the hammer. The underlying Paola Limestone is always a single bed. The shale is not quite platy here, but I didn't find too many concretions:

 

 

Creek exposure. Not much to pull out of the hard plates:

 

 

Ramp cut. The shale is just above the lowest limestone bed:

 

 

 

The above outcrops are all in Clay County, Missouri.

 

Occasionally, the Muncie swells to 2 or 3 feet. Conularids seem to be common where the bed is thicker. I borrowed a pic from one of Kehbe's threads. This spot is in Jackson County, Missouri:

 

[Missourian]

Bone #4:

 

Unlike the other three, this one is only a partial. The blade-like end is preserved:

 

 

Surface details:

 

[Roz]

Wow! This one looks completely different to me from the others..

That is so odd looking that I can't imagine what it is.. I sure hope

the puzzle gets solved. Your area sure kicks out some unique

treasures.. It's so thick looking too.

[Missourian]

On 5/10/2013 at 3:14 AM, Roz said:

This one looks completely different to me from the others..

 

Unlike with the other bones, the outer sheath is well preserved.

[piranha]

After looking at quite a few papers my guess on this one is a skull element. There is plenty of variability depending on the genus but it really looks like a good match for the epipterygoid. The attached figured drawing is also from the Kansas synapsid reptile.

[Auspex]

Very promising, Scott: good job!

Now, how do we reconcile that idea with the relative abundance of this piece, and just this piece? Two per critter...

Maybe it is a very durable bone, compared to the other skeletal elements, and the others are gone or unrecognizable?

[Missourian]

On 5/10/2013 at 11:36 AM, piranha said:

After looking at quite a few papers my guess on this one is a skull element. There is plenty of variability depending on the genus but it really looks like a good match for the epipterygoid. The attached figured drawing is also from the Kansas synapsid reptile.

epipterygoid.jpg

 

I wish that was the case, but it appears to be the same as the others:

 

 

On 5/10/2013 at 11:54 AM, Auspex said:

Now, how do we reconcile that idea with the relative abundance of this piece, and just this piece? Two per critter...

Maybe it is a very durable bone, compared to the other skeletal elements, and the others are gone or unrecognizable?

 

Perhaps they took longer to break down, or they made it further out to sea because they were more bouyant than the others (I'd like to find the deposit with the rest of the skeletons. ).

 

But still, there are a few other 'repeating', thickly-built bones in the nodules that could be related.

[Bullsnake]

...(I'd like to find the deposit with the rest of the skeletons. ).

But still, there are a few other 'repeating', thickly-built bones in the nodules that could be related.

Hypothesizing that it is reptile, what deposit(s) could be a candidate?

[Missourian]

On 5/10/2013 at 2:04 PM, Bullsnake said:

Hypothesizing that it is reptile, what deposit(s) could be a candidate?

 

Most likely something eroded ages ago or buried under a thousand feet of strata.

[Missourian]

FYI, I emailed a couple people, but no responses yet....

[Roz]

Have you ever heard back yet? I just recently found one that looks like a good match with

your specimen 3. What do you think?