gregando Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 I found this ammonite fossil on the edge of glenbawn dam in the hunter valley NSW , when I first found it, it was completely encased in rock with only what looks to be a break protruding out of it. After myself and a mate discussed what I had found we thought it was a old piece of steel set in concrete so we smacked it a with large rock only to be amazed at what was inside. , I've googled and searched but haven't found any pics or info to help me work out what it is all the images of ammonites I have found show a squid like head and tenticals, what ide like to know is would of these creatures had the same parrot like beak as squid,octopus etc etc? And the piece we thought to be steel could that be its beak. The fossil itself seems to be crystalized but the (beak) looks to be a totally different type of material . Any info will be greatly appreciated thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 (edited) Welcome to the forum. That's a great fossil. I don't know the fauna up there but it looks like an ammonite. Without seeing sutures I can't be sure but maybe someone who's collected there will know it's name. I'm not sure which part you are calling it's beak. They rarely preserve and in life would have been a ways up inside the body chamber. If something looks metallic it could be iron deposits in the matrix (look for it in other rocks from there) or it may be broken parts of the shell that preserved differently. It looks like something took a big bite out of the side with the gap. It's hard to say where the body chamber was because of the absence of sutures and because most of it could be missing if it was eaten. The gap could be due to erosion, but if the bulk of the body was in the missing part of a whorl on the outside of the one with a gap, it could have been bitten into there, taking part of some flotation chambers along with the body and most of the body chamber. Does the large whorl at the bottom of the first picture extend out on the other side, out of view? And if so is that what we see in the second picture? Bob Edited October 12, 2014 by BobWill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 (edited) No it only comes out one end the narrow end of the rock .A mate has the other half it was complete unbroken when i found it and was very symmetrical befor we broke it we had no idea what it was if I did I wouldn't of broke it. What I'm refering to as the beak is the smooth brown tooth like piece protruding out the front or narrow end of the rock. Edited October 12, 2014 by gregando Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 This pic shows what I referred to as the beak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 Sorry, still having a little trouble visualizing it from the pictures but not seeing anything beak-like so far. Thanks for the new photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 12, 2014 Author Share Posted October 12, 2014 Pic 1 side view beak pointed at Pic 2 top view sketch of the fossil befor breaking it and it was totally covered in stone except for what I have been refering to as a beak.dotted lines are breaks and missing piece marked out as well as the (beak) location Pic 3 what I have referred to as a beak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramo Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 Nice looking fossil. If I were you I'd get me a hammer and go back to that spot and start wacking some more rocks like the one you found. More than likely there are more concretions with fossils hiding inside them where this came from. Ramo For one species to mourn the death of another is a new thing under the sun. -Aldo Leopold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramo Posted October 12, 2014 Share Posted October 12, 2014 Oh, and if that is an ammonite, the "beak" that it had, would be super tiny. What I think you are seeing is most likely something else. Ramo For one species to mourn the death of another is a new thing under the sun. -Aldo Leopold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 13, 2014 Author Share Posted October 13, 2014 Ok think I will have to go back the protruding bit seems to be part of the creature as it follows the spiral . Would it be of any benefit to try and remove the stone covering the top part of the protruding piece ?, and this fossil I have is an ammonite correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 If you can remove any matrix without damaging the fossil it may help show what more of the shell looked like. I believe the protruding part is a piece of another whorl. Without seeing the sutures it is unlikely you can say for sure if it is an ammonite, some other ammonoid, a nautiloid or even a gastropod. However, someone familiar with that formation may recognize it from the general shape and knowledge of what is likely to be found there. A closer look with magnification may reveal sutures but I can't detect them in the photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 13, 2014 Author Share Posted October 13, 2014 This fossil is from the UK, I wonder if my fossil has similar under the rock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 No. An external cast would show any ornamentation present on the original shell. Since the shells of these are so thin the ribs would even show up on an internal mold. Most of the ammonites I collect in Texas are internal molds so they often have visible sutures to help with identification. Your fossil is from a shell without obvious ornamentation like the one pictured. That fossil also has a snake's head carved onto it, something commonly done in ancient times to suggest what it was thought to have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kauffy Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 (edited) Hey gregando, firstly welcome! That's a nice looking fossil, but im fairly certain you have a Gastropod from the Carboniferous period. Check out this geological map of nsw : http://www.resourcesandenergy.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0005/307427/NSW3million_surface_geology_2009.jpg You'll see Glenbawn Lake sits in the grey Carboniferous. Unfortunately I'm not too familiar with the Carboniferous fauna of nsw, I've never had an opportunity to head up and collect although I know many people who have. Ill do some looking to see if I can come up with a positive ID, to at least a genus. Otherwise email the Australian Museum, they will be able to give you a lot of great info! Cheers Chris Edited October 13, 2014 by kauffy 2 "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...
gregando Posted October 18, 2014 Author Share Posted October 18, 2014 Ok for staters what are the sutures? Are they the segments and if the piece protruding out of the matrix is another part of another whorl how is it fossilised different to the whorl inside the matrix. Sorry for the questions as I have little knowledge about fossils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 The sutures are the joint that the ammonite creates as it builds its shell. The sutures are a highhly diagnostic feature for classification of the ammonites. http://www.google.com/search?q=ammonite+suture+patterns&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1&tbm=isch If you can find suture patterns, it proves it is ammonite. If not, then it might be a "ram's horn" type of gastropod (snail). http://www.google.com/search?q=ram%27s+horn+snail&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1&tbm=isch So people are trying to figure out the Class of this organism. Both ammonite and ram's horn snail are in the in the same Phylum of Mollusca, but is the Class of this specimen Gastropoda or Cephalopoda? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastropoda http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonoidea Diagnostic features are needed to tell them apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 (edited) To fully understand sutures it helps to see a cephalopod broken or cut open so you can see the chambers sealed off behind the large body chamber. It builds these chamber walls across the inside of the shell to seal off flotation chambers to achieve buoyancy. The suture line marks where a chamber wall (septum) meets the inside of the shell. That's why they're only visible on an internal mold or where the shell cast is transparent. Ammonite sutures reflect the size of the body surface that builds the septa (the mantle) which is much greater than there is room for inside of the shell where it rests to build a wall, so it is folded, often very elaborately. Edited October 19, 2014 by BobWill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Sorry , forgot about your other question. It is common for different parts of a fossil to preserve differently depending on the combination of minerals present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregando Posted October 24, 2014 Author Share Posted October 24, 2014 Found this pic after someone suggested that the part I described as abeak looks to be part of the aptychi on an ammonite . If you look at the aptychi near the body where it yapers off it looks the same as my fossil has. The only way I spose to find out what creature I have I to contact a museum I spose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I don't mean to interrupt the helpful discussion on ammonites, beaks and such, but I agree with kauffy. That's a gastropod, or snail in layman's terms, and not an ammonite. For your information, here are front and back views of a typical aptychus, which has little resemblance to your "beak". They came in pairs in real life. Edited October 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...
BobWill Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I agree, at this point we have no indication that it is a cephalopod. Maybe somebody who has collected in the carboniferous of the area could suggest a possible gastropod for making comparisons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paleoworld-101 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Nice specimen! I went fossil hunting at a Carboniferous age locality in the Hunter Valley near Lake St. Clair and found a gastropod shell, though it looks different to this fossil which really does look like an ammonite. But I agree, based on the location and age it can only be a gastropod. No ammonites to my knowledge have been found in the Sydney Basin. "In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..." -Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Gregando, if your fossil is from the Carboniferous Period there were no ammonites at that time, not for another 60 to 120 million years. The "snakestone" is not nearly this old and like most ammonites has external ornamentation in the form of ribs that is missing from yours. These would not appear below the surface you can see. There were other ammonoids like goniatites and ceratids in the Carboniferous but even most of them show ribs or growth lines, sometimes faint though. Many gastropods coil in a stationary plane like most ammonites so try looking for pictures of whichever snails are normally found there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 That mystery shell material that is being called a beak might be a fragment of the operculum of the gastropod. The operculum is a shell covering of the opening of the gastropod. Operculum can take diverse shapes and contours, depending on the species. http://www.google.com/images?q=snail+gastropod+operculum&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1 More photos of the "beak" might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts