Yes, Discovering Undescribed Fossils Is Still Possible

[erose]

Along with new species or even genera better fossils can also be important. There are many old species named for scrappy or incomplete material and a better specimen can lead to new understanding about its place in the scheme of things. How often do we hear that two different vertebrates are combined because someone finally found a more complete skeleton.

[Mike Pocock]

I think that part of the fascination with fossil hunting is the possibility of finding that new species, as I have said on a previous post "I live in hope".

Regards

Mike

[Ridgehiker]

I was in our mountains yesterday. On a slab of matrix there may be a couple hundred specimens....maybe 10 types of organisms of which 2 or 3 have been identified. I was looking for lower Carboniferousshark teeth..3 or 4 types of which none have been studied and certainly not identified to species.

Anyone can discover 5 or 10 undescribed species in an outing...just as anyone could take a walk in the Amazon and discover as many undescribed beetle species. I could find 2 or 3 undescribed 'micro moths' this evening if I was so inclined. Maybe swallow one while cycling around the park.

There is a myth that paleontologists get all excited when someone brings in a specimen that is 'new'. The finder expects some type of 'stop the presses' and bells to chime. The reality is that at the Geological Survey of Canada there are literally a few thousand drawers full of specimens collected over the last century that have barely been looked at. In other institutions there are rooms full of vertebrates still in plaster casts from 75 years ago.

Most paleo studies are extremely focused. 'Brachiopods from the early Tournaisian of the Banff Formation of the western Cordilleran'. About 80 species described about which a third were new. There may be another 50 species not yet discovered in that strata. Nobody has written anything extensive on the brachiopods just before or after these....hundreds of more species.

Edited August 29, 2015 by Ridgehiker

[Wrangellian]

I know I have found a few new things myself - I have heard from the experts more than once that "this area has not been studied much" (though it seems like it to me, but obviously not enough to have found every possible species that the local formation/group might contain) "and it is always possible for an amateur/casual collector to find something new", though I'm sure the low-hanging fruit are all picked. What I wonder about is, there is a certain collector here who has at least 3 things named for him now, and I wonder how he does it. These were not found more than about 15 years ago as far as I can tell. Apparently he has an 'in' with the pros who are capable of writing them up for him (or with him as co-author - I am not sure if he can do a paper on his own, maybe he can, but I have not seen the papers for his 2 more recent species. He is quite knowledgeable but I don't think he has a PhD or anything high like that). Me, if I bring in something that is undescribed, I get a non-committal answer about how there is "nobody working on these right now, maybe someday there will be and if you donate your specimens they will eventually be found in the museum drawers and written up", and we have all heard these stories about items that have been in the drawers for 100 years. There seems to be no guarantee that 1) your items will get studied any time soon if you are not one of the researchers yourself, or 2), if you're not, that you will get anything named after you by the researcher who will write your item up. Is it just "who you know"? If you have connections you can pull strings and have them make your discovery a priority?

[Ludwigia]

I was in our mountains yesterday. On a slab of matrix there may be a couple hundred specimens....maybe 10 types of organisms of which 2 or 3 have been identified. I was looking for lower Carboniferousshark teeth..3 or 4 types of which none have been studied and certainly not identified to species.

Anyone can discover 5 or 10 undescribed species in an outing...just as anyone could take a walk in the Amazon and discover as many undescribed beetle species. I could find 2 or 3 undescribed 'micro moths' this evening if I was so inclined. Maybe swallow one while cycling around the park.

There is a myth that paleontologists get all excited when someone brings in a specimen that is 'new'. The finder expects some type of 'stop the presses' and bells to chime. The reality is that at the Geological Survey of Canada there are literally a few thousand drawers full of specimens collected over the last century that have barely been looked at. In other institutions there are rooms full of vertebrates still in plaster casts from 75 years ago.

Most paleo studies are extremely focused. 'Brachiopods from the early Tournaisian of the Banff Formation of the western Cordilleran'. About 80 species described about which a third were new. There may be another 50 species not yet discovered in that strata. Nobody has written anything extensive on the brachiopods just before or after these....hundreds of more species.

I find that this is a realistic assessment of the situation. You are obviously speaking from experience.

By the way, I sent you a PN a while ago, but haven't had a response from you yet. Did you recieve it?

[Ridgehiker]

I know I have found a few new things myself - I have heard from the experts more than once that "this area has not been studied much" (though it seems like it to me, but obviously not enough to have found every possible species that the local formation/group might contain) "and it is always possible for an amateur/casual collector to find something new", though I'm sure the low-hanging fruit are all picked. What I wonder about is, there is a certain collector here who has at least 3 things named for him now, and I wonder how he does it. These were not found more than about 15 years ago as far as I can tell. Apparently he has an 'in' with the pros who are capable of writing them up for him (or with him as co-author - I am not sure if he can do a paper on his own, maybe he can, but I have not seen the papers for his 2 more recent species. He is quite knowledgeable but I don't think he has a PhD or anything high like that). Me, if I bring in something that is undescribed, I get a non-committal answer about how there is "nobody working on these right now, maybe someday there will be and if you donate your specimens they will eventually be found in the museum drawers and written up", and we have all heard these stories about items that have been in the drawers for 100 years. There seems to be no guarantee that 1) your items will get studied any time soon if you are not one of the researchers yourself, or 2), if you're not, that you will get anything named after you by the researcher who will write your item up. Is it just "who you know"? If you have connections you can pull strings and have them make your discovery a priority?

It's not the low hanging fruit or the connections.

What most collectors do not understand is that few fossils are studied just because they may be a a new species.. The vast majority Paleo studies have some other value. They are used for purposes of such as biostratigraphy, the location of past continents, dating formations, etc. Nobody can study all the fossils of all phyla from 500 million years.

Most paleontologists are extremely specialized. The resident paleo guy at a museum doesn't know anymore about 98% of fossils than a newbie on this forum. I know zip about fossil shark teeth from Florida or bryozoan from Ohio. For instance, he wouldn't have a clue how to begin to write up an article on a specimen of fasciculate Permian coral .. If sent off to the GSC, the only person doing research on them has a zillion other priorities that could occupy ten careers. In those studies the researcher is likely not naming 'a species' but looking at specimens in a specific strata and 'may' name a few new species as part of the study.

As for publishing your own work. Why not? You can follow all of the methodology expected of recognized research and produce some positive source for others to use. Amateurs have contributed all types of knowledge to the fossil record.

[Wrangellian]

There's no way I could do it on my own. Even with someone else I'm not sure there'd be much I could contribute. "This is what I found and here's where I found it." You need access to all the previous, related literature.

I still wonder about this guy's 3 new species, and what papers he got them published in. Will have to look into that next chance I get. It seems like he gets them written up almost as soon as he finds them, and I think it's usually the same specialists from California who deal with the West Coast Cretaceous mollusks, but I might have to correct myself on that later... I recall that the first one wasn't about much more (if anything) than the new type of bivalve, and I bet the other two are similar. I have seen papers that don't seem to be much more than a description of a few new species, probably including their stratigraphic and geographic ranges as I would expect and an attempt to classify them or reclassify the previously known relatives of the new species.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Wrangellian

[Bill Thompson]

If anyone has any undescribed echinoids from Texas, I am interested.  Please contact me.  I will gladly assist in moving forward with your specimens.  My specimens are all donated to the University of Texas - 2 full drawers in their type room.