Stellate Hair-Like Fossil In New Jersey Cretaceous Amber

[NZ_Fossil_Collecta]

today i have found another inclusion from my raw lot of cretaceous NJ amber. it bears resemblance to a stellate fern hair (comparison picture shown below) and also to stellate fern hairs I have found in a piece of (presumably baltic or dominican) amber that is 30 MYO. i'm not sure about this and i was wondering if anyone could shed some light on it, have these been documented in NJ amber before? (probably)

anyway, here are the pictures:

the fossil in NJ amber i found--->

comparison picture of another stellate fern hair i found this one on the internet--->

another stellate fern hair i found in 30 MYO amber (probably baltic, maybe dominican) -->

[Sélacien34]

These are polypiformes vegetable inclusions that are found only in the Baltic amber, which allows also to ensure authenticity.

So it's strange to see that in NJ amber, are you sure it is from NJ ?

Edited June 9, 2014 by Sélacien34

[NZ_Fossil_Collecta]

I am 99 percent certain. I trust the seller and the nature and feel of the piece just does not match baltic I have seem. The texture, the color the shape, it has rough sides and is very narrow. It just doesn't match with Baltic. I also trust the seller and he has a 100% positive record regarding authenticity.

[Sélacien34]

Well, i have some dominican amber, from the Baltic and NJ too and i have found what i have read about those polypiforms, i have only seen that in Baltic amber, but i'm really not a specialist about amber, maybe just ask about this to the seller ?

Edited June 10, 2014 by Sélacien34

[painshill]

The stellate hairs commonly found in Baltic amber are attributed to angiosperms – specifically Fagaceae of the genus Quercus (ie oaks). They’re from the protective leaf scales of the buds.

Although they’re sufficiently common in Baltic material that they’re used as a “characterising” feature which assists in authentication, it would be wrong to say that they are unique to Baltic material (which is frequently stated as if it were a fact).

Such hairs have been reported in some Dominican material and also rarely in Chiapas (Mexican) amber. Recently, they were also reported in Colombian copal/amber (Allen, 2010). I’ve not seen them reported in New Jersey material or any other Cretaceous origin, but that statement relates only to stellate hairs attributable to oaks – not to stellate hairs in general.

As ‘NZ_Fossil_Collecta’ says, hairs of similar morphology originate from other plants too… particularly from tree-ferns. The second picture posted is, incidentally, an inclusion from Cretaceous Ethiopian material and has a strong resemblance to stellate hairs from modern tree-ferns of the family Cyatheaceae.

My botany isn’t good enough to help you with detailed morphology of stellate hairs in relation to the source plant. It’s gonna need more than just counting the number of stellae, which is about as far as my expertise goes!

I don’t see any reason to be suspicious of stellate hairs in Cretaceous material or to doubt the NJ origin of what you have if the inclusions are from tree-ferns rather than oaks.

[Sélacien34]

Thank you for this information, I have suspected nothing, stating that I am not expert in this field, I merely report what I found some time ago about these forms. Your answer is instructive, I can add this on the subject and correct the data that I had so far.

[NZ_Fossil_Collecta]

Would this be a rare/unusual specimen and should I take any action to inform anyone of it or shoul I just... Put it in my collection and be done with it?

[painshill]

In an interview for the New York Times in January 1996, David Grimaldi of the American Museum of Natural History gave preliminary details of Cretaceous flora and fauna recently found in “80 pounds of amber drawn out of deep mud” in New Jersey. He was quoted as having found (among many other interesting fossil inclusions) “a tiny bouquet of miniature flowers from an oak tree of 90 million years ago…” It was also stated that “an article describing the world's oldest preserved flowers, written by Dr. Grimaldi and his colleagues Kevin Nixon and William Crepet of Cornell University, is to be published soon in The American Journal of Botany. It notes that the three flowers in the little bouquet are the only known flowers preserved from the Cretaceous period, which ended 65 million years ago.” A picture of the flowers was provided but it’s no longer in the archive – only the text remains. The flowers are mentioned elsewhere but no pictures, and I couldn’t find a picture on the AMNH website.

If oak flowers were found then it’s highly likely that stellate hairs from oaks would also be present, although I have seen no mention of them.

As a “first”, it has now been superceded (several times) by both direct and indirect evidence from elsewhere. I didn’t pay too much attention at the time since I was waiting for the full published paper, but I’m not sure it ever appeared in the manner suggested. The find is perhaps mentioned in passing in:

Fossil Clusiaceae from the late Cretaceous (Turonian) of New Jersey and implications regarding the history of bee pollination - William L Crepet and Kevin C Nixon, American Journal of Botany 85(9): 1122–1133. 1998:

http://www.amjbot.org/content/85/8/1122.full.pdf

Grimaldi’s co-workers state: “Thus far, these sediments have yielded the oldest flowers of hamamelidaceous affinity (Crepet et al., 1992), the oldest fossil Fagales (unpublished data), a suite of ‘‘dilleniid’’ taxa including the oldest fossil flowers of ericalean affinity and other ericaleans (Nixon and Crepet, 1993; Crepet and Nixon, 1995; Crepet, 1996; Nixon, Weeks, and Crepet, in press), a host of rosidean taxa (Crepet and Nixon, 1995; Gandolfo, Nixon, and Crepet, in press a), and a variety of ‘‘magnoliid’’ taxa (e.g., Herendeen, Crepet, and Nixon, 1993, 1994; Crepet and Nixon, 1994).”

The “Fagales (unpublished data)” may be an acknowledgement of the oak flowers since Fagales includes the family Fagaceae, which includes the genus Quercus but that’s the only formally published possible reference of which I’m aware.

There’s also this:

“The most abundant and frequently reported fossil trichomes are the “stellate hairs” from oaks (Fagaceae), which are characteristic of the mid-Eocene Baltic amber. Stellate trichomes have also been reported from Mexican amber (Early Miocene) and, along with those from the Baltic deposits, have been characterized using confocal laser microscopy. Cretaceous amber trichomes have been scarcely studied. Branched, nondendritic trichomes have been discovered in mid-Cretaceous Ethiopian amber and likely originate from ferns of the families Cyatheaceae and Hymenophyllaceae). Although the occurrence of trichomes has been reported in Cretaceous ambers from New Jersey, Myanmar, and Spain, they lack further characterization.” [Pérez-de la Fuente et al, 2012]

My take from all of that would be that stellate hairs from Cretaceous NJ Amber are therefore known, not necessarily rare, but poorly studied and with little or no published data. Also that stellate hair fom NJ material may or may not be from oaks. I don’t have reason to doubt Grimaldi’s comments from 1992; just that I can’t find the claimed oak flowers in any publication. Finally, the attribution of stellate hairs to particular taxa requires more sophisticated microscopy than is available to ordinary folk. That kind of examination has been conducted on Baltic amber inclusions because it’s a much more widely studied material. More than a dozen stellate hair variants have been described which are attributed to oaks.

[alex brown]

I can say that I have specimens of trichome material from all of the ambers and copal mentioned. I've separated them out over 20 years of collecting. Most are similar and probably related to oak and fern, but the burmite amber forms are fantastic and unique. Totally undescribed as of 2017.

[abyssunder]

They remind me of silver berry scaly hair .

[Plax]

On 6/11/2014 at 9:46 AM, painshill said:

In an interview for the New York Times in January 1996, David Grimaldi of the American Museum of Natural History gave preliminary details of Cretaceous flora and fauna recently found in “80 pounds of amber drawn out of deep mud” in New Jersey. He was quoted as having found (among many other interesting fossil inclusions) “a tiny bouquet of miniature flowers from an oak tree of 90 million years ago…” It was also stated that “an article describing the world's oldest preserved flowers, written by Dr. Grimaldi and his colleagues Kevin Nixon and William Crepet of Cornell University, is to be published soon in The American Journal of Botany. It notes that the three flowers in the little bouquet are the only known flowers preserved from the Cretaceous period, which ended 65 million years ago.” A picture of the flowers was provided but it’s no longer in the archive – only the text remains. The flowers are mentioned elsewhere but no pictures, and I couldn’t find a picture on the AMNH website.

If oak flowers were found then it’s highly likely that stellate hairs from oaks would also be present, although I have seen no mention of them.

As a “first”, it has now been superceded (several times) by both direct and indirect evidence from elsewhere. I didn’t pay too much attention at the time since I was waiting for the full published paper, but I’m not sure it ever appeared in the manner suggested. The find is perhaps mentioned in passing in:

Fossil Clusiaceae from the late Cretaceous (Turonian) of New Jersey and implications regarding the history of bee pollination - William L Crepet and Kevin C Nixon, American Journal of Botany 85(9): 1122–1133. 1998:

http://www.amjbot.org/content/85/8/1122.full.pdf

Grimaldi’s co-workers state: “Thus far, these sediments have yielded the oldest flowers of hamamelidaceous affinity (Crepet et al., 1992), the oldest fossil Fagales (unpublished data), a suite of ‘‘dilleniid’’ taxa including the oldest fossil flowers of ericalean affinity and other ericaleans (Nixon and Crepet, 1993; Crepet and Nixon, 1995; Crepet, 1996; Nixon, Weeks, and Crepet, in press), a host of rosidean taxa (Crepet and Nixon, 1995; Gandolfo, Nixon, and Crepet, in press a), and a variety of ‘‘magnoliid’’ taxa (e.g., Herendeen, Crepet, and Nixon, 1993, 1994; Crepet and Nixon, 1994).”

The “Fagales (unpublished data)” may be an acknowledgement of the oak flowers since Fagales includes the family Fagaceae, which includes the genus Quercus but that’s the only formally published possible reference of which I’m aware.

There’s also this:

“The most abundant and frequently reported fossil trichomes are the “stellate hairs” from oaks (Fagaceae), which are characteristic of the mid-Eocene Baltic amber. Stellate trichomes have also been reported from Mexican amber (Early Miocene) and, along with those from the Baltic deposits, have been characterized using confocal laser microscopy. Cretaceous amber trichomes have been scarcely studied. Branched, nondendritic trichomes have been discovered in mid-Cretaceous Ethiopian amber and likely originate from ferns of the families Cyatheaceae and Hymenophyllaceae). Although the occurrence of trichomes has been reported in Cretaceous ambers from New Jersey, Myanmar, and Spain, they lack further characterization.” [Pérez-de la Fuente et al, 2012]

My take from all of that would be that stellate hairs from Cretaceous NJ Amber are therefore known, not necessarily rare, but poorly studied and with little or no published data. Also that stellate hair fom NJ material may or may not be from oaks. I don’t have reason to doubt Grimaldi’s comments from 1992; just that I can’t find the claimed oak flowers in any publication. Finally, the attribution of stellate hairs to particular taxa requires more sophisticated microscopy than is available to ordinary folk. That kind of examination has been conducted on Baltic amber inclusions because it’s a much more widely studied material. More than a dozen stellate hair variants have been described which are attributed to oaks.

Some of Grimaldi's work is only available in very expensive books. Facts on paper don't always make their way to the web.