Bob Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Hopefully there is a starfish expert out there that could help me ID this starfish . There isn't much to go on when I bought it there was no age, no locality ,or name, the size of it is 3.8 cm from the end of extended arm to the centre . I usually don't buy fossils with no info but there is a few that came like that in a collection I bought . Thank You Very much in advance for all your help with this . Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Could it be a weathered evactinopora bryozoan? "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...
piranha Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Could it be a weathered evactinopora bryozoan? It appears to be comprised of ossicles, so Evactinopora is not possible. Without locality info Asteroidea sp. is a good starting point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I believe you. Since it is posed gracefully draped across what appears to be a well-worn cobble, but really revealing only two dimensions, I thought it could be a section through an embedded object, showing internal structure. "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...
piranha Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Looking at the large central disc could also suggest an ophiuroid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I believe you. Since it is posed gracefully draped across what appears to be a well-worn cobble, but really revealing only two dimensions, I thought it could be a section through an embedded object, showing internal structure. It DOES seem to be a section through a well worn pebble... you can see other calcified objects in cross section on the surface. And yet the starfish is almost perfect. That's a weird one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I'll defer to Al Dente on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted August 30, 2014 Author Share Posted August 30, 2014 Thanks everyone for your input , I will leave this post here for awhile to see if anything else comes up . Have a great day Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewcuse Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I've been researching Devonian stars of NY, and while this doesn't look like any of the photos I've seen, it definitely seems like it could fit the category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share Posted September 6, 2014 Thank You very much everyone for all the info Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coelacanth Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Your fossil looks similar to some fossil ophiuroids that I know of from the hunsrück slate at bundenbach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilshale Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 Your fossil looks similar to some fossil ophiuroids that I know of from the hunsrück slate at bundenbach. May be Ophiurida, but not from Bundenbach - the slab seems to show a grainy structure. Slabs from Bundenbach are homogeneously black to very dark grey. Thomas Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coelacanth Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 I was not saying that the fossil was from bundenbach, merely that it appeared similar to some genera i know of that are, among other places, found at bundenbach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coelacanth Posted September 9, 2014 Share Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) Another more likely possibility is that the fossil is a weathered ophiuroid in a flint nodule from England. Edited September 11, 2014 by Coelacanth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 That's a fine specimen Bob! Another more likely possibility is that the fossil is a weathered Paleocoma sp. in a flint nodule from England. The rock does not look like flint in my opinion. I was under the impression that Paleocoma sp was Jurassic, while the British chalk (and so flint) date back to the Cretaceous. Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coelacanth Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) Post corrected! Thanks for the information. I forgot about Paleocoma being from the Middle Lias. Edited September 11, 2014 by Coelacanth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stauranderaster Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Hi first post from me on this forum but as i know what this really is now it seemed a good time to start. Its another very deceptive one for sure & the starfish like appearance threw me off track as well but i was never convinced it was a starfish nothing looked right for one but it does for an echinoid. Its the ambulacra & apical disk of an irregular echinoid, you can see the rows of pores quite clearly in places also the pores in the apical disk. It also explains the odd draped over appearance. I have no doubts with this & its obvious to me now but lets wait & see if i am all alone or not! Keith 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 (edited) It seems grossly wrong that this starfish should be so 2 dimensionally exposed on an obviously warped 3 D surface. It is disturbing. Can you should any illustrations of what your opinion is? Edited September 12, 2014 by tmaier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Hi first post from me on this forum but as i know what this really is now it seemed a good time to start. Its another very deceptive one for sure & the starfish like appearance threw me off track as well but i was never convinced it was a starfish nothing looked right for one but it does for an echinoid. Its the ambulacra & apical disk of an irregular echinoid, you can see the rows of pores quite clearly in places also the pores in the apical disk. It also explains the odd draped over appearance. I have no doubts with this & its obvious to me now but lets wait & see if i am all alone or not! Keith This settles my misgivings nicely! I couldn't 'see' this idea until it was pointed out "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...
tmaier Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 This settles my misgivings nicely! I couldn't 'see' this idea until it was pointed out Draw me a picture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 (edited) Keith has hit the nail on the head IMHO. For those unclear on this - Source: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/research/projects/echinoid-directory/morphology/JPEG/SPATIN.JPG Thomas Edited September 12, 2014 by Kosmoceras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 I'm still disturbed by it... If the whole echinoid is inside, then why don't we see more of the test in places? And we never have seen more views of this piece. Is there anything else showing on other angles? And it sure is tempting to clean it up and start working the surface to look for features, but it would most likely ruin this nice looking fossil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 The cobble seems to have been treated harshly by the environment; I can visualize the raised portions having been abraded away, leaving the sunken areas as we see them. "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...
tmaier Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 There might be more evidence if we had more views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Hi, I don't think it is a sea urchin because I can't see interambulacral plates. For me, it looks like more asteridae than sea urchin. Coco ---------------------- OUTIL POUR MESURER VOS FOSSILES : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 1 (Poissons et sélaciens récents & fossiles) : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 2 (Animaux vivants - sans poissons ni sélaciens) : ici Mâchoires sélaciennes récentes : ici Hétérodontiques et sélaciens : ici Oeufs sélaciens récents : ici Otolithes de poissons récents ! ici Un Greg... 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