MarcoSr Posted July 16, 2016 Author Share Posted July 16, 2016 Wow! Nice fossils and great discussion. Looking forward to see what the papers have to say. Tony Looking forward to when you can post more about this, Marco. This kind of cooperation just makes me smile. Congrats. Thank you. Hopefully I will be able to post a link to the presentation after it is given. If not, I'll cite it and at least say a little about the specimens in the original post of this thread. Marco Sr. 1 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 Wonderful, Marco! Can't wait! Thanks for the update and donation. ~Charlie~ "There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why.....i dream of things that never were, and ask why not?" ~RFK ->Get your Mosasaur print ->How to spot a fake Trilobite ->How to identify a CONCRETION from a DINOSAUR EGG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted July 17, 2016 Author Share Posted July 17, 2016 Wonderful, Marco! Can't wait! Thanks for the update and donation. Charlie I'm anxious myself to see how the presentation will finally turn out. Marco Sr. "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike from North Queensland Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Marco Sr Interesting thread and what should be an interesting paper. This interests me as I tend to collect quite a few coprolites and some with remains visible. I am wondering if as an additional hypothesis the original specimen may have been gut contents. As I have a shark vertebrae specimen with what a believe is its stomach contents of its last meal attached full of bone fragments, however this would be the exception not the rule. Mike D'Arcy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Marco Sr Interesting thread and what should be an interesting paper. This interests me as I tend to collect quite a few coprolites and some with remains visible. I am wondering if as an additional hypothesis the original specimen may have been gut contents. As I have a shark vertebrae specimen with what a believe is its stomach contents of its last meal attached full of bone fragments, however this would be the exception not the rule. Mike D'Arcy Mike This is also from the GSA paper abstract "Amorphous bromalites rich in bone fragments (e.g., actinopterygian vertebrae and skull fragments) may represent regurgitalites. " Stomach contents are called gastrolites which are found in situ with the stomach. Marco Sr. 1 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted October 18, 2016 Author Share Posted October 18, 2016 Below is the complete abstract for the GSA presentation on these coprolites which was made in Denver the end of September. I did review the abstract before it was submitted and was very happy with it. The Fisher/Sullivan site is located at the base of bed B of the Potapaco Member of the Nanjemoy Formation (Early Eocene: middle Wasatchian), Stafford County, Virginia (NMMNH [New Mexico Museum of Natural History] locality L-10143). This locality has yielded over 100 species of fossil vertebrates, including abundant specimens of chondrichthyans and actinopterygians, as well as reptiles, birds and mammals. The locality also yields invertebrate fossils and a diverse fruit and seed flora. The environment of deposition was high energy, shallow marine. Initial reports mentioned the presence of coprolites, but they were generally ignored until one of us (MGN) collected over 12,000 specimens and donated them to NMMNH. This represents the largest known pre-Quaternary coprofauna. The coprolites display diverse morphotypes. The majority of specimens are small (less than 20 mm in length), elongate, narrow and rod- or spindle-shaped. Many coprolites are spiral-shaped, and a smaller number have a scroll morphology. Amphipolar morphotypes are more common than heteropolar. Scroll coprolites tend to be larger than spiral. Inclusions are more common in non-spiral coprolites. Most of the smallest specimens are non-spiral. The majority of specimens represent actinopterygians and chondrichthyans. Large, non-spiral coprolites (up to 60 mm in length) are less common and probably pertain to crocodiles. Amorphous bromalites rich in bone fragments (e.g., actinopterygian vertebrae and skull fragments) may represent regurgitalites. The coprofauna is distinctive from other shallow marine ichnofaunas in: (1) large sample size; (2) proportion of small coprolites; (3) diversity of morphotypes; and (4) relative abundance of non-spiral forms. The Fisher/Sullivan coprofauna differs from other large Eocene samples (middle Eocene Fürstenau Formation of northern Germany, late Eocene Yazoo Clay of Louisiana) in the lower percentage of spiral and scroll morphotypes and the smaller size of specimens. However, I only got to see the presentation after the conference in Denver was over even though I was a co-author, donated all of the coprolite specimens, and all of the pictures used were mine. I was extremely disappointed. All I can say is you win some (Like the great paper that Dr. Mayr just published on my Eocene bird bones) and you lose some (like the GSA presentation on my marine Eocene coprolites) Marco Sr. 2 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 Good news. As an update, a Brazilian coprolite researcher, Paula Dias, just spent three months at the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science studying the now 18,000+ Virginia, Eocene, marine coprolites that I donated. Two United States coprolite researchers, Spencer Lucas and Adrian Hunt, consulted with her throughout her visit. She took some coprolites back to Brazil with her for chemical and SEM analysis. A detailed draft manuscript is expected around the end of this year with hopefully a very detailed paper published on these coprolites in 2018. I will help with the site and collecting details in the paper. Marco Sr. 5 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Great and important efforts ,Marcosr. Hats off,extremely valuable work,hope the finished article(pun intended) ends up free access,BTW so,no problems with sample size,huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Good to see your efforts are being recognized and immortalized in the published literature. Don C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Like I have always said (well, maybe once): Your coprolites don't stink. I am glad they've been treated well this time. "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...
MarcoSr Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 1 hour ago, doushantuo said: Great and important efforts ,Marcosr. Hats off,extremely valuable work,hope the finished article(pun intended) ends up free access,BTW so,no problems with sample size,huh? I definitely agree on free. Individual papers can be very expensive if you don’t have a free source. This coprolite sample size is very large. It may be the largest coprolite assemblage collected from a single site in any museum collection. The coprolite papers that I’ve read were written on much smaller coprolite sample sizes. Also most of these coprolites are much smaller in size than those in a normal sample from surface collecting or sifting with ½ inch or ¼ inch size screens. The majority of these coprolites fell through those mesh sizes and were collected by window screen underneath. Marco Sr. 1 hour ago, FossilDAWG said: Good to see your efforts are being recognized and immortalized in the published literature. Don C It is ironic that my main interest and the vast majority of specimens that I have collected are shark, ray and fish teeth specimens and no papers have been written or are in progress on them. I have hundreds of thousands of these specimens with a number of them definitely of scientific interest. There have been papers written or there are currently papers in progress on my mammal, or bird, or squamate or amphibian specimens and odd ball specimens like tracks and coprolites. Maybe because I pretty much donate all of these specimens fairly quickly after collecting them but like to hang on to the shark, ray and fish teeth although I am always willing to donate any specimens of scientific interest. Marco Sr. 1 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 42 minutes ago, Auspex said: Like I have always said (well, maybe once): Your coprolites don't stink. I am glad they've been treated well this time. I washed the coprolites in my ultrasonic cleaner before I donated them. I probably had expectations that were too high for the GSA poster presentation on these coprolites. I had hoped to learn something new about them and I didn’t. I hope the paper will answer a number of questions about them that were posed in this post/thread by me and by other TFF members. Marco Sr, "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted September 16, 2018 Author Share Posted September 16, 2018 As an update to this post, an abstract has been submitted for a presentation, “Traces on the surface of coprolites from shallow marine deposits from the Nanjemoy Formation (Early Eocene), Virginia”, at the IV LATIN AMERICAN SYMPOSIUM Ichnology (SLIC 2018) in SANTA MARTA, COLOMBIA on OCTOBER 7TH TO 14TH 2018. The presentation deals with analyzed coprolite specimens that have surface marks identified as invertebrate burrows or bite traces. This presentation is only a part of the current study. The most interesting bit of information from the abstract to me is contained in the below excerpt: “The chemical composition, inclusions and morphology suggest that only carnivore fish scats were preserved.” I will try to post a link to the presentation after it is given. Marco Sr. 3 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted October 29, 2018 Author Share Posted October 29, 2018 As an update to this post the abstract for a presentation, “Traces on the surface of coprolites from shallow marine deposits from the Nanjemoy Formation (Early Eocene), Virginia”, given at the IV LATIN AMERICAN SYMPOSIUM Ichnology (SLIC 2018) in SANTA MARTA, COLOMBIA on OCTOBER 8TH 2018 is below: Marco Sr. 3 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 29, 2018 Share Posted October 29, 2018 5 hours ago, MarcoSr said: “Traces on the surface of coprolites from shallow marine deposits from the Nanjemoy Formation (Early Eocene), Virginia”, Great! Some interesting trace fossils within a trace fossil. Can't do much better than that. Hey @GeschWhat get a load of this! Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted March 31, 2019 Author Share Posted March 31, 2019 Study of these coprolites is ongoing. I've received some additional items which I thought I would post. Below are some microscope pictures and some chemical analysis of a few coprolites which will eventually be used in a future paper. Maybe a chemist here on TFF can comment on the chemical composition shown in the analysis below. Weight % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 2.00 41.85 6.43 0.55 13.12 35.27 0.79 Base(1)_pt3 0.75 11.19 0.95 1.05 8.10 1.80 66.95 9.21 Weight % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 +/-0.10 +/-0.79 +/-0.47 +/-0.13 +/-0.27 +/-0.46 +/-0.24 Base(1)_pt3 +/-0.12 +/-1.41 +/-0.21 +/-0.33 +/-0.64 +/-0.30 +/-1.67 +/-1.84 Normalized Wt. % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 2.00 41.85 6.43 0.55 13.12 35.27 0.79 Base(1)_pt3 0.75 11.19 0.95 1.05 8.10 1.80 66.95 9.21 Norm. Wt. % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 +/-0.10 +/-0.79 +/-0.47 +/-0.13 +/-0.27 +/-0.46 +/-0.24 Base(1)_pt3 +/-0.12 +/-1.41 +/-0.21 +/-0.33 +/-0.64 +/-0.30 +/-1.67 +/-1.84 Atom % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 3.73 58.62 7.58 0.54 9.49 19.72 0.32 Base(1)_pt3 2.09 23.42 1.18 1.25 8.75 1.88 55.91 5.52 Atom % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 +/-0.19 +/-1.10 +/-0.55 +/-0.13 +/-0.19 +/-0.26 +/-0.10 Base(1)_pt3 +/-0.34 +/-2.96 +/-0.26 +/-0.39 +/-0.69 +/-0.31 +/-1.39 +/-1.10 Formula C-K O-K F-K Na-K Al-K Si-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(1)_pt1-No Data. Base(1)_pt2 C O F Na P Ca Fe Base(1)_pt3 C O Al Si P S Ca Fe Weight % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 2.07 44.51 6.57 0.77 0.27 12.37 31.32 2.13 Base(4)_pt2 1.29 25.69 1.45 0.31 14.58 0.89 53.10 2.70 Base(4)_pt3 1.76 32.79 4.54 0.76 0.27 14.78 43.64 1.46 Weight % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 +/-0.15 +/-0.97 +/-0.95 +/-0.11 +/-0.09 +/-0.32 +/-0.54 +/-0.37 Base(4)_pt2 +/-0.12 +/-1.17 +/-0.79 +/-0.11 +/-0.34 +/-0.19 +/-0.94 +/-0.60 Base(4)_pt3 +/-0.12 +/-1.09 +/-0.60 +/-0.12 +/-0.09 +/-0.39 +/-0.74 +/-0.45 Normalized Wt. % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 2.07 44.51 6.57 0.77 0.27 12.37 31.32 2.13 Base(4)_pt2 1.29 25.69 1.45 0.31 14.58 0.89 53.10 2.70 Base(4)_pt3 1.76 32.79 4.54 0.76 0.27 14.78 43.64 1.46 Norm. Wt. % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 +/-0.15 +/-0.97 +/-0.95 +/-0.11 +/-0.09 +/-0.32 +/-0.54 +/-0.37 Base(4)_pt2 +/-0.12 +/-1.17 +/-0.79 +/-0.11 +/-0.34 +/-0.19 +/-0.94 +/-0.60 Base(4)_pt3 +/-0.12 +/-1.09 +/-0.60 +/-0.12 +/-0.09 +/-0.39 +/-0.74 +/-0.45 Atom % C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 3.77 60.97 7.58 0.73 0.24 8.75 17.13 0.83 Base(4)_pt2 2.93 43.70 2.07 0.37 12.81 0.75 36.06 1.32 Base(4)_pt3 3.59 50.35 5.87 0.81 0.28 11.72 26.74 0.64 Atom % Error (+/- 2 Sigma) C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 +/-0.27 +/-1.33 +/-1.10 +/-0.11 +/-0.08 +/-0.22 +/-0.30 +/-0.15 Base(4)_pt2 +/-0.28 +/-1.98 +/-1.13 +/-0.13 +/-0.29 +/-0.16 +/-0.64 +/-0.29 Base(4)_pt3 +/-0.25 +/-1.67 +/-0.78 +/-0.13 +/-0.10 +/-0.31 +/-0.46 +/-0.20 Formula C-K O-K F-K Na-K Mg-K P-K S-K Ca-K Fe-K Base(4)_pt1 C O F Na Mg P Ca Fe Base(4)_pt2 C O F Na P S Ca Fe Base(4)_pt3 C O F Na Mg P Ca Fe Marco Sr. 4 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 I am not very familiar with these type of analysis, but have some comments. Per Wikipedia, coprolites are made of mostly calcium phosphate, Ca3(PO4)2. You would expect to see calcium, phosphorus and oxygen as major constituents. You up may also try to find a reference graph of pure calcium phosphate to see how they compare to your results. The graph for Base 1 pt1 shows oxygen, phosphorus and calcium. The Base 1 pt2 graph is confusing. How come the furthest left peak is labeled both oxygen and iron? If you do not get a helpful response here in the Forum, you should sign up and post it on Mindat. Mineralogist there have much more experience with this type of analysis. My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted April 2, 2019 Author Share Posted April 2, 2019 (edited) 18 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said: I am not very familiar with these type of analysis, but have some comments. Per Wikipedia, coprolites are made of mostly calcium phosphate, Ca3(PO4)2. You would expect to see calcium, phosphorus and oxygen as major constituents. You up may also try to find a reference graph of pure calcium phosphate to see how they compare to your results. The graph for Base 1 pt1 shows oxygen, phosphorus and calcium. The Base 1 pt2 graph is confusing. How come the furthest left peak is labeled both oxygen and iron? If you do not get a helpful response here in the Forum, you should sign up and post it on Mindat. Mineralogist there have much more experience with this type of analysis. The iron in that one graph is a little strange. Finding iron in the chart isn't unusual for Virginia as there is lots of Pleistocene bog iron high up in a lot of these sites which seems to leach down into the much older formations. I find lots of fossils with iron stains. So my guess is that the iron was from an iron stain on the surface of the coprolite. It is good that the graphs do show calcium, phosphate and oxygen. These coprolites are full of fish bone fragments and many have evidence of spiral and scroll valves so there is no doubt that they are coprolites and not just phosphate nodules. I agree that it would be interesting to see the chemical difference between a phosphate nodule and a coprolite. Is there something in the chemical analysis that easily distinguishes them? Marco Sr. Edited April 2, 2019 by MarcoSr added content 1 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 First set of analyses is a little bit strange, as the count rate is highly variable. This points to some orientation problems of the analyzed spot relative to the electron beam and detector. However, first two are clearly a Ca-phosphate, most probably apatite. Third one seems to be some sort of "grain" and the analysis a "mixture" of Ca-phosphate, "clay mineral", calcite, "limonite". Impossible to say exactly. Second set is more "stable". All 3 analyses seem to be the same Ca-phosphate. A little bit unexplained is the variable S-content. Maybe the Ca-phosphate has variable S-contents or there is some sub-micron gypsum admixed. 22 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said: The Base 1 pt2 graph is confusing. How come the furthest left peak is labeled both oxygen and iron? Maybe they just forgot to remove the label for iron? 22 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said: You up may also try to find a reference graph of pure calcium phosphate to see how they compare to your results. Very good idea! But peak high ratios in this kind of analyses depend on accelerating voltage, detector response curve and, last but not least, orientation of the analyzed surface relative to the electron beam and detector. Franz Bernhard 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted June 24, 2019 Author Share Posted June 24, 2019 As an update to this post, there will be another GSA poster presentation presented on these coprolites in Phoenix, Arizona in September 2019. The abstract is below. I'm much happier with this poster presentation than the first GSA poster presentation which had several major errors that I didn't agree with at the time. The "shark paradox" was not at all supported by the coprolites from the Fisher/Sullivan Site as stated in the earlier poster presentation. I clearly knew this (There were many more bony fish coprolites versus shark coprolites which is the exact opposite and a direct contradiction of the "Shark Paradox"), as I had pulled out from matrix and looked at each one of the 20,000 coprolites that I donated for this study. However, I wasn't afforded the opportunity to review that poster presentation itself even though I was supposedly an author and the majority of the poster presentation was pictures of the coprolites and the site that I had provided. In addition all of the coprolites originally identified as Spiral Valve in that poster presentation were determined to be Segmented upon closer examination. Abstract #336098 FISH COPROLITES FROM THE NANJEMOY FORMATION, LOWER EOCENE, VIRGINIA, USA DENTZIEN-DIAS, Paula, Núcleo de Oceanografia Geológica, Instituto de Oceanografia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil, HUNT, Adrian P., Flying Heritage & Combat Armor Museum, 3407 109th St. SW, Everett, WA 98204, FRANCISCHINI, Heitor, Laboratório de Paleontologia de Vertebrados, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Bento Gonçalves 9500, Porto Alegre, NM, Brazil and GULOTTA Sr., Marco N., 4546 Whispering Woods Lane, King George, VA 22485 The Eocene Nanjemoy Formation crops out in Maryland and on the Virginia Coastal Plain, along the eastern coast of the USA. This formation is composed of glauconitic sands, silts and clays and is divided into the Potapaco and Woodstock members. Fossils of bivalves, sharks, rays, actinopterygian fishes, reptiles, birds and mammals, and of fruits and seeds are common in the Potapaco Member. Here, we present the results of an analysis of more than 2000 vertebrate coprolites from the Potopaco Member at the Fisher/Sullivan Site in Virginia. The chemical composition (phosphatic), inclusions and morphology suggest that only carnivorous scats were preserved. The analyzed specimens were grouped into six morphotypes: (1) the Cylindrical morphotype is a cylinder with rounded ends; (2) the Segmented morphotype is a cylinder segmented with rounded ends, and on some one end is concave; (3) the Oval morphotype is a bean-like coprolite; (4) the Scroll morphotype is cylindrical to conical in lateral view and has coils seen only at the ends; (5) the Folded morphotype is a spiral that is concentrically folded; and (6) the Sinuous morphotype is serpentine with rounded ends. Different surface marks produced by coprophagy occur in different morphotypes, and represent both invertebrate burrows and bite traces made by fishes. The bitten coprolites were at least mouthed by exploring or foraging animals, probably by fishes that are known to be coprophagous. Several invertebrates are known to feed and/or dwell in feces habitually. Larvae of invertebrates are the probable producers of the burrows. All the morphotypes, except the Folded morphotype, contain undigested food material such as fish bones. The mineralogical and chemical analysis shows an early precipitation of phosphate and pyrite minerals, probably induced by the microbial community. All Nanjemoy coprolites were produced by fishes, and the Folded and Scroll morphotypes were made by chondrichthyans, Carcharhiniformes sharks producing the Scroll, and lamniform sharks, probably the genus Carcharias, produced the Folded morphotype. Oval, Cylindrical, Sinuous and Segmented morphotypes were produced by actinopterygian fishes. The surface marks and the lack of flatness on most coprolites indicate different taphonomic histories, suggesting early lithification. There is also a major paper in the works on these coprolites. I have already made several reviews of the draft and made (IMHO) a number of significant suggestions for improvement of this paper. Marco Sr. 3 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike from North Queensland Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 Nice to see work being done on your donated specimens and when the major paper comes out that will be interesting. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted June 25, 2019 Author Share Posted June 25, 2019 13 hours ago, Mike from North Queensland said: Nice to see work being done on your donated specimens and when the major paper comes out that will be interesting. Mike Mike The study and description of these coprolites has been a very slow process. I began donating them in early 2015. However, the paper is coming along and I have learned a good amount about marine coprolites in the process. Marco Sr. "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 As an update to this post, a major paper on these coprolites is now through final peer review and has been updated to address all peer review comments. This paper will be published by Lethaia, a quarterly peer-reviewed scientific journal of Earth science, covering research on palaeontology and stratigraphy. The paper is now with the editor of Lethaia for final approval and hopefully it will be published in Lethaia this year. Marco Sr. 5 "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Congratulations! I'm looking forward to reading this paper. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcoSr Posted February 1, 2020 Author Share Posted February 1, 2020 9 hours ago, FossilDAWG said: Congratulations! I'm looking forward to reading this paper. Don Don Thank you. It has been a very long process to get to a written paper. I'm really looking forward to the paper being published. Marco Sr. "Any day that you can fossil hunt is a great day." My family fossil website Some Of My Shark, Ray, Fish And Other Micros My Extant Shark Jaw Collection 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