What In The World Is This Thing?

[MarqusandDad]

It is the stacking that has me at a loss right now. Have you found a smaller piece you could cross cut a slice off of?

[Tennessees Pride]

It is the stacking that has me at a loss right now. Have you found a smaller piece you could cross cut a slice off of?

No sir, this is the only example i've ever laid eyes on....but maybe, just maybe this weekend, i can recover more @ site....gonna go over it w/ a fine tooth comb. .

[Wrangellian]

If you don't want to cut this one, consider cutting another piece if you find another. I think a number of us would like to see the cross-section.

It looks to me like the polygonal units have a finer-scale grain to them that all aligns with the other grains - this makes me thing it is burnt or dessicated wood that has had quartz or calcite deposited into the cracks later. In any case I would bet on it being biogenic though I can't say why other than that. (Did you say it was heavy? It looks coaly but if it were primarily coal I think it would be lighter. If there is any coal though, that is a giveaway that it is plant matter.)

[squali]

Joshua I guess I mistakenly thought the photo in post 51 was of matrix insitu. I didn't realize it was an object sitting on a mat. Haha.

If it is organic I'd have to go with a really cool lignite log. Could you post a pick of the outcrop/matrix the piece came out of? Is it fine sand?, coarse sand gravel?

[MarqusandDad]

Could it be somthing like a burnt carbonized peat that was exposed to petroleum and mineralization due to leaching?

[Tennessees Pride]

If you don't want to cut this one, consider cutting another piece if you find another. I think a number of us would like to see the cross-section.

It looks to me like the polygonal units have a finer-scale grain to them that all aligns with the other grains - this makes me thing it is burnt or dessicated wood that has had quartz or calcite deposited into the cracks later. In any case I would bet on it being biogenic though I can't say why other than that. (Did you say it was heavy? It looks coaly but if it were primarily coal I think it would be lighter. If there is any coal though, that is a giveaway that it is plant matter.)

I have recently been back to the site of the find area.(took that "fine-tooth comb" w/ me )...& i combed over the area for hours and hours, because it was as important to me as everyone else to recover another specimen of this. There was no place there i didn't look, intensely studied every single piece of material there, from the smallest to the largest. There's not another single example of this material there!!! That fact has certainly peaked my interest in this specimen, as i sure expected to find atleast a small sample of this same material...this stuff must be extremely unique! I wouldn't be surprised if another specimen doesn't exist there, but if it does, it hasn't eroded out yet.

Sir, i'm down here in Tennessee wanting to see a cut section of this material so bad that i'm doing back-flips! but, i must wait and let a professional look this specimen over good first, cause i surely don't want to damage such a curious and rare item. (I should say insanely rare item!) As i type this, i decided to break out the good stuff and do a shot in celebration for this Specimen! Shot is in hand, it's going down.....Cheers to you all! Though i don't know exactly what this material is, i know the Creator has truly poured a blessing on me,amen. After a qualified professional handles this material, and if they think a cut is going to be acceptable, we're gonna do a cut. And yes sir, it sure is heavy...but i am presuming because it has been somewhat infused w/ marcasite, but also, the item is very dense.

Also when i said "coalified", perhaps a better word i should have used would be "carbonized". In regards to the specimen being burnt wood that has been infilled w/ mineralized material, that certainly is a good guess!....in this instance though sir, i don't think such will be the case. True enough some of the material from this layer apprears to have burnt prior to deposition, but most doesn't.....but your's and other's suggestion of the same did stimulate me to test that suggestion, in a few, i'll post a pic of a sample of what i think is burnt material which came from the same layer.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Tennessees Pride

[Tennessees Pride]

Joshua I guess I mistakenly thought the photo in post 51 was of matrix insitu. I didn't realize it was an object sitting on a mat. Haha.

If it is organic I'd have to go with a really cool lignite log. Could you post a pick of the outcrop/matrix the piece came out of? Is it fine sand?, coarse sand gravel?

Hey squali, good morning to you sir. Here is the requested photos of the sedimentology of what the specimen came out of. I'm all but certain the specimen came from the layer of deposited ancient deposited drift wood in pic 1, but when i went back to the site, made sure to search that layer, and also the one above and below. The lignitic layer is kinda like a boundry between a clay and sand layer. Pic 2 is of the sandy stuff above the lignitic layer. (It looks like heavy minerals may be present in those sands, but i haven't viewed under magnification yet) pic is over the more clayey type stuff below the lignitic layer...not much sand present in that layer, what grains present seem very fine grained, and the clay is consolidated well.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Tennessees Pride

[Tennessees Pride]

Sorry, pics 2 & 3 were to big to load w/ the above post....here's #2

[Tennessees Pride]

#3

[Tennessees Pride]

This is an example of wood which was burned (i presume) prior to deposition in the same find layer. The origins of all the wood in the lignitic layer are diverse....most aren't burnt, some are,some very rounded showing signs of long-term flotation prior to deposition (drift-wood), and then others have retained more of their original definition (short-term flotation). Because the specimen was deposited amongst all this wood doesn't prove it is botanical...like i say, everything seems diverse here. Now, as can be discerned, the probable burnt lignite has square shapes that were formed during the burn process....completely unlike the polygonal structure of the material in question. Upper right hand of the probable burnt material actually shows marcasite infill between the cracks....that isn't unusual for burnt wood infused w/ marcasite here....i have found one item in a different layer here where the burnt wood cracks was completely infilled w/ marcasite. What is extremely unusual is the white mineralized material (like in the specimen that started this thread) to be found in anything coming out of these layers! The specimen that started the thread is actually the only example i've ever seen that has the mineralized material in it!....& i've handled untold hundreds of lignites in my area....i still don't think the unidentified specimen is botanical in nature.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Tennessees Pride

[Tennessees Pride]

Could it be somthing like a burnt carbonized peat that was exposed to petroleum and mineralization due to leaching?

Good afternoon MarqusandDad, hopefully post 85 helped to resolve that question.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Tennessees Pride

[lordpiney]

There's always the possibility that it's carbonized bone.

[Tennessees Pride]

There's always the possibility that it's carbonized bone.

Yes sir, i've considered the same, just haven't been able to match up a bone w/ the characteristics of this material....even thought maybe a boney plate like something from the Ankylosauridae genus.....but couldn't match anything there either....wish there was a dino bone database available of every kind of dinosaurian bone, where people like me could spend weeks searching all known bone types for a possible i.d. w/ unknown specimens.

[Wrangellian]

I guess there's no more that can be said until you show it to a professional..? Waiting with bated breath.. my interest is piqued

[non-remanié]

im going with Plax.... it looks to have weathered oddly, but I think its teredo bored wood. the side view gives the best view of the burrow remnants. shipworms line their burrows with calcite so that would account for the mineral accumulations filling the "cracks"

Edited April 27, 2014 by non-remanié

[Tennessees Pride]

im going with Plax.... it looks to have weathered oddly, but I think its teredo bored wood. the side view gives the best view of the burrow remnants. shipworms line their burrows with calcite so that would account for the mineral accumulations filling the "cracks"

Sir, pardon me for saying, but i see nothing @ all in the specimen that speaks of Teredo bored wood....infact, that was another thing that stuck out to me, cause lots of the lignite from the layer had Teredo boreings, but this had none. (In my opinion.)

[non-remanié]

teredo can present quite differently in different formations and ages and even within the same layer. does the layer produce completely bored specimens or is the boring usually more isolated on just some pieces from the layer? any pictures perhaps of a typical teredo specimen from the layer?

http://www.thefossilforum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2014/post-14571-0-36128800-1398392146.jpg

thats the view that to me says teredo. just my best guess! if its not, then i have no clue.... good luck!

Sir, pardon me for saying, but i see nothing @ all in the specimen that speaks of Teredo bored wood....infact, that was another thing that stuck out to me, cause lots of the lignite from the layer had Teredo boreings, but this had none. (In my opinion.)

Edited April 28, 2014 by non-remanié

[Plax]

teredo can present quite differently in different formations and ages and even within the same layer. does the layer produce completely bored specimens or is the boring usually more isolated on just some pieces from the layer? any pictures perhaps of a typical teredo specimen from the layer?

http://www.thefossilforum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2014/post-14571-0-36128800-1398392146.jpg

thats the view that to me says teredo. just my best guess! if its not, then i have no clue.... good luck!

this is thoroughly teredo bored wood, the white material may be actual shell of the mollusk or its burrow, or it may be mineral redeposited in the gap left by the dissolution on the calcareous material, will take pics of a couple of examples and post in the next day or so

[Tennessees Pride]

this is thoroughly teredo bored wood, the white material may be actual shell of the mollusk or its burrow, or it may be mineral redeposited in the gap left by the dissolution on the calcareous material, will take pics of a couple of examples and post in the next day or so

Sir, i've emailed photos of this specimen to so many paleo-botanists and paleontologists in this and other countries that i've lost count on how many i've actually sent emails to. I've emailed the best experts i can think of, surely if this were a specimen of teredo bored wood, atleast one of them would have known. As it stands, no one has still been able to conclusively identify this material. I have received several good speculations....but all of the speculations conflict w/ other speculations. Most won't even speculate! I do thank very much the one's who would though! Still, the specimen is unidentified to date....which is quite remarkable! If i have to, i'm about to road-trip it, and am gonna take this specimen over the whole country till somebody gives a positive identification, because i know this material being so extremely hard to i.d., will be worth the effort in the end.

[MarqusandDad]

Hey Josh hang in there. I know you will find out what it is soon you are a go getter. How bout someone at the Smithsonian?

[Tennessees Pride]

Hey Josh hang in there. I know you will find out what it is soon you are a go getter. How bout someone at the Smithsonian?

Thank you very much sir. Also, i did send an email of this to the Smithsonian,but come to find out, i sent it to the wrong person in their paleontology department, after talking with them over the phone, they told me they had forwarded the email to another person there in the paleontology department. Have had no replies from there yet.

[NZ_Fossil_Collecta]

This is an example of wood which was burned (i presume) prior to deposition in the same find layer. The origins of all the wood in the lignitic layer are diverse....most aren't burnt, some are,some very rounded showing signs of long-term flotation prior to deposition (drift-wood), and then others have retained more of their original definition (short-term flotation). Because the specimen was deposited amongst all this wood doesn't prove it is botanical...like i say, everything seems diverse here. Now, as can be discerned, the probable burnt lignite has square shapes that were formed during the burn process....completely unlike the polygonal structure of the material in question. Upper right hand of the probable burnt material actually shows marcasite infill between the cracks....that isn't unusual for burnt wood infused w/ marcasite here....i have found one item in a different layer here where the burnt wood cracks was completely infilled w/ marcasite. What is extremely unusual is the white mineralized material (like in the specimen that started this thread) to be found in anything coming out of these layers! The specimen that started the thread is actually the only example i've ever seen that has the mineralized material in it!....& i've handled untold hundreds of lignites in my area....i still don't think the unidentified specimen is botanical in nature.

that wood seems similar in surface texture to some fossil bark i found (although much more recent age, mine is)

[Tennessees Pride]

that wood seems similar in surface texture to some fossil bark i found (although much more recent age, mine is)

Hey NZ, good to hear from you sir! I sure see the similarity to certain bark types your talking about, in this instance,the burnt specimen shouldn't be bark, as it is heavily water worn=fossil driftwood. If it had of been bark, there is a good possibility the wear it has undergone wouldn't have allowed for bark to be retained on the specimen, also, there is no layer seperation indicating bark and inner wood. I'll tell ya what is sometimes hard to tell the difference in (for myself anyway) is lignite that has eroded from an outcrop and dried in the sun alittle....just enough to start decomposing before geting wet again....when that happens, those same surface cracks (like in the example of the burnt wood specimen only) form that look very similar to wood burnt prior to deposition. In this case however, one can tell this had to have been wood burnt prior to deposition, because of the marcasite infill between the crack in the upper right hand of this particular specimen in question....because of that small amount of infill, it was one of the factors that lead to me to use it as an example of a burnt wood specimen from the same layer as the unknown specimen.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Tennessees Pride

[Tennessees Pride]

1,848 views in less than a month, and still no conclusive I.D.! Nothing even remotely similar posted to compare it against or anything! What's going on with this material?!?!?!

[Wrangellian]

I guess there's only so much one can tell from photos alone... You still haven't sliced any I guess?