AJ Plai Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) I found this pic of Mosasaur Jaw from Morocco (Kourhibga) but it doesn't look like one of those ugly-looking composites that are floating in the market (sorry, but no offense to those who love their looks - I just don't like the look of those cheap composites at all!). This one however, looks like this: From the look of it, the teeth seem to be very real as its common for the composite jaws, but the jaw section looks unlike the others that I have seen - they look broken and busted like the real thing. Is this possibly a very nice composite version of mosasaur jaw or this is actually a real excavated specimen? If such nice composites exist, how would u be able to tell the difference? Thx. Edited June 7, 2013 by AJ Plai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Plai Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) I am posting more pics of the specimen just in case they may be useful: I know that with specimen like these repairs and restorations are quite common, but I guess as long as the restoration attempt stay true to the original look and condition in which a specimen was found, i.e. using all the original materials without altering how the fossils looked when it was found, then that would make it "more genuine" in my book, but if the restoration are done to make them look different or much more perfect by taking materials from other non-associated specimens or using modern organic materials like bones of living species then that would make a specimen more like a "fake". Edited June 7, 2013 by AJ Plai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik m Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I think that the teeth do not sit in the good position. Also the size and coller is not the same of all teeth and the order is wrong. The roots do not look orgianal to me also the angle that thy stik out of the bone is not like it has to be. It is hard to see some times or fossils of marocco are orgianal So this is what I think of your jaw piece. It is also good to know where to buy the good stuf. I have a contact in Marocco and he looks for fossils in the hunting spots and also buys fossils from pepole that are living near the quaries. If you like to know how that contact is PM me. On the photo's you can see a vew pieces of him that I did buy and these are all orgianal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down under fossil hunter Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Not an ugly looking composite but definitely a composite! Teeth look real, the roots do not, the bone also looks real but as far as it originating as a Mosasaur jaw..........it doesn't appear to be very diagnostic. It is an interesting piece but not the real thing and it should be priced accordingly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
painshill Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) I agree. The seating of the teeth in the jaw is definitely wrong. It is indeed a better composite than is usually seen, but definitely a composite. There's no way of telling if the bone is Mosasaur (the teeth are definitely genuine). The fakers often use bits of crocodile bone and other stuff. Edited June 7, 2013 by painshill 1 Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelhead9 Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 The glue/sand matrix is also a good indicator of a composite. Still Life Fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axelorox Posted June 22, 2013 Share Posted June 22, 2013 The glue/sand matrix is also a good indicator of a composite. This is always a good thing to know with Moroccan fossils. If the matrix is genuine then it'll have various colors present, not just a single sand color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donckey Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 hi I do not think that most of the matrix is genuine. Most is applied to the piece. This can be well spotted at the left bottom side. It is possible though that the bones and teeth were (partly) prepped out of the original matrix and then put together again with self(man)made matrix. The jawbone structure, especially those parts where the teeth are situated is almost certainly mosasaurus. Some of the bones at the bottom I am not sure about. This fossil has been in a bigger plastercasting. This plaster is made smaller for one or the other reason. About the position of the teeth, this could be genuine as well but is difficult to tell for 100% If this fossil was mine I would remove the upper bit of the plaster and prep the teeth and the adjoining jawsection from the otherside and see if the teeth, all, are really belong to the jawpiece. The roots of the teeth should still be in the jawsection (as they are situated in the picture) and where one tooth is missing you should find the entrance of the root or maybe a piece of a broken root. It is also possible to find a new coming tooth in the whole where the former tooth has been located. So it is very well possible it is an original piece which is prepped and then restored badly. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donckey Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 Some pictures of 100% genuine material to compare. The second picture is the backside of a jawpiece while prepping. Note the sharkteeth (a Squalicorax and an odontaspidea) inbedded in the bone) in red circles. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welsh Wizard Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 Hi Interesting stuff. What about this one? I bought it about 15 years ago and it seems real to me - the bone looks genuine and the teeth appear to be set in sockets. The matrix appears to have bits of shells and other stuff in it. It's about 10 inches long. If I remember correctly, it was described as Platecarpus sp? thanks Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordTrilobite Posted June 23, 2013 Share Posted June 23, 2013 Looks like an authentic jaw. The bone is definitely a jaw piece and the fourth tooth (left most one) seems to be firmly attached to the jaw piece. The other three teeth are a little more unclear though. There seems to be some matrix between the teeth and jaw. So from this photo alone I don't think it's possible to tell if those teeth belong on the jaw. Might be worth it to prep it a little more. Very nice piece though. Olof Moleman AKA Lord Trilobite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik m Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 here you see also a real piece that I bougt from my frind in Morocco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donckey Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 (edited) Looks like an authentic jaw. The bone is definitely a jaw piece and the fourth tooth (left most one) seems to be firmly attached to the jaw piece. The other three teeth are a little more unclear though. There seems to be some matrix between the teeth and jaw. So from this photo alone I don't think it's possible to tell if those teeth belong on the jaw. Might be worth it to prep it a little more. Very nice piece though. Nick, I agree with Lord Trilobite. Nice piece, !5 years ago there were far less morocan fossils which weren't genuine I always have a good look at the matrix. Many small fossils and little bonefragment and a nice variation in the colorpalet are a good sign. Peter Edited June 24, 2013 by donckey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welsh Wizard Posted June 24, 2013 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Hi Lord Trilobite, Erik and Peter. Thanks for the responses. I'm pretty confident this is genuine. The bone looks like bone and the surface structure looks similar to real specimens I've seen. You can even see that the two pieces join together. I have been tempted to remove it from the matrix in the past but always decided not to in the end. As an aside, I've just been given an air abrader and at some point I'll give it a little blast. Regards Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donckey Posted June 25, 2013 Share Posted June 25, 2013 Nick Don't blast it away :D peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts