pawlmawl Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 (edited) Hey, This fossil is from Northern Iraq, I'm sorry I have little more info than that currently. I read some papers that distinguished a few beds from each other based on the presence or lack of red/brown mud, if that is at all helpful. It looks similar to Lopha marshii but may be too big. Anyway, I'll post some pictures and hope you recognize it. It is in great condition it seems to me. Some of the pictures are too big to load so I will attach more as I sort that out. Thank you Edited August 20, 2014 by pawlmawl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawlmawl Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawlmawl Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 Hopefully that was enough shots. I'll take more if anyone needs them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tethys Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 It is an oyster. It accords very well with the figure in this paper named Ostrea subangulata. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawlmawl Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 It is an oyster. It accords very well with the figure in this paper named Ostrea subangulata. That feels a little anticlimactic hah. Thank you for the paper and answer, I appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhw Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 For what it's worth, I think that's a pretty awesome oyster! Good find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 It's a really beautiful specimen! "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanNREMTP Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 I think it's amazing that the two pieces fit together. Most of those I find are just one part and I can never find the mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharko69 Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 Very cool find! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tethys Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 That feels a little anticlimactic hah. Oh, sorry. Is this better? It is a Miocene fossil oyster!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 (edited) I'm quite certain that you are correct with your ID of "Lopha" marshii, although the name for the specific form which occurs mostly in the Jurassic was revised a few years ago to Actinostreon marshii, since it was discovered that it doesn't correspond with the more recent genus of Lopha. We find them in great abundance here in Germany and they take on quite varied forms and dimensions. Edited August 20, 2014 by Ludwigia 1 Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Here's a Florida plio-pleistocene oyster. I haven't got it classified yet. 83 mm width. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plantguy Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Pawlmawl, welcome to the forum! Yes, that is a cool addition from a not so common location paritcularly if you are a US collector. Don't let them oysters fool you....they sneak up on you and before you know you'll have unidentified piles of the dang things like me! Thanks again for the post! Regards, Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawlmawl Posted August 23, 2014 Author Share Posted August 23, 2014 Oh, sorry. Is this better? It is a Miocene fossil oyster!! Pawlmawl, welcome to the forum! Yes, that is a cool addition from a not so common location paritcularly if you are a US collector. Don't let them oysters fool you....they sneak up on you and before you know you'll have unidentified piles of the dang things like me! More Oysters.jpgOysters b.jpgOysters.jpg Thanks again for the post! Regards, Chris Thank you Tethys, I was holding out for an easy entry post-doc position with this find but I'll settle for forum fireworks. Ludwigia, your pictures are awesome I think that settles it. The color differences are interesting to me. Thanks for the welcome Chris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plantguy Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Hi pawlmawl, Not sure where the post went that had your question so I'll create this entry--I also had problems with creating this entry...had some fatal memory error...anyways, I believe you asked....Is that some sort of corynactis on the darker of the large fossils in Oysters.jpg ? Good eyes! That oyster is one of the Hyotissa's and has quite a bit of stuff going on that I havent gotten ID's for them yet...Seems to have sponge borings, clam borings, worm casings and coral encrustation...I think the latter is one of the Oculina's but that is just a guess on my part...maybe you are an invert/coral person and can straighten me out. Here's a couple different views of that one. Its a common find in many of the Plio-Pleistocene fossil beds here in Florida. Regards, Chris ---------------------------------- Edited August 24, 2014 by Plantguy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kauffy Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Oysters are tricky, there is a lot of inter-specie variation in rugae/sulcus morphology... Your specimen has great preservation of the muscle scars and ligament pits which are important. Anterior posterior length ratio in relation to the beak is also key when identifying bivalves. I like the idea of the Miocene Ostrea subangulata rather than lopha, ludwiga can you get a pic of the inside of your specimen? Relavent literature is usually helpful as all the systematics have been done for you. Regards, Chris. Edited August 24, 2014 by kauffy "Turn the fear of the unknown into the excitment of possibility!"We dont stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Oysters are tricky, there is a lot of inter-specie variation in rugae/sulcus morphology... Your specimen has great preservation of the muscle scars and ligament pits which are important. Anterior posterior length ratio in relation to the beak is also key when identifying bivalves. I like the idea of the Miocene Ostrea subangulata rather than lopha, ludwiga can you get a pic of the inside of your specimen? Relavent literature is usually helpful as all the systematics have been done for you. Regards, Chris. I can very well understand your doubts on this one. My head still starts spinning when I look into the Treatise. The problem with the indication Norther Iraq is that you've got everything to choose from betweem Miocene and Triassic. Actinostreon is of course a guess, but I'm still relatively convinced that we've at least got a Lopha here. But that's anyway not so easy just by looking at photos. I can't provide a photo of the inside of the above "dentures" since that's just a partial, but here are a couple of other ones. Edited August 24, 2014 by Ludwigia Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now