Jump to content

Mammal Tooth Fragment?


Kosmoceras

Recommended Posts

Anyone recognise what this is? Could it be part of a broken mammal tooth? If not it is likely a fish bit given the location. Eocene age, 54.4 myo, Lessness Shell Bed, England. It is 9mm along the longest edge. The pictures might not be adequate so let me know if more are needed.

post-4683-0-07246600-1414705931_thumb.jpg post-4683-0-67482000-1414705934_thumb.jpg post-4683-0-47061000-1414705937_thumb.jpg

Many thanks,

Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be an amphibian vert... partial. What does the en look like that we can't see... left edge on the first photo? Is it concave? If so I would go with amphibian vert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be an amphibian vert... partial. What does the en look like that we can't see... left edge on the first photo? Is it concave? If so I would go with amphibian vert.

Thanks for your interest. Left edge first photo is what you can see in the second picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it is not a tooth but it is very interesting. I was also leaning towards partial vert. Looking forward to finding out what it is.

A fossil hunter needs sharp eyes and a keen search image, a mental template that subconsciously evaluates everything he sees in his search for telltale clues. -Richard E. Leakey

http://prehistoricalberta.lefora.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is confusing but rather interesting. As long as I know it is not any mammal denture (and so of importance to the formation) I don't need to go much further with it, but if anyone has any thoughts I am happy to get it out of the archive. Sometime I will get it down to the NHM to have it looked at in person with other fishy bits from the same place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a look through my material from Abbey Wood, the closest fit I've found is a partial sturgeon plate. The second picture is a very close match, the others not so close. A lot of partial material from there is unidentifiable, I have a matchbox full from my first trip twenty years ago. Every year I get it out and look through it, then put it away again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never thought about Sturgeon as I always considered them from this location to be thin and have a layered appearance which is quite the opposite on this specimen. Here are a few from Acipenser sp dermal scutes from the same site.

post-4683-0-86948200-1415130462_thumb.jpg post-4683-0-58336600-1415130488_thumb.jpg

The mystery continues...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those on the left, especially the one on the bottom left, looks like croc scute to me.

A fossil hunter needs sharp eyes and a keen search image, a mental template that subconsciously evaluates everything he sees in his search for telltale clues. -Richard E. Leakey

http://prehistoricalberta.lefora.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those on the left, especially the one on the bottom left, looks like croc scute to me.

I agree... those are more croc scute-ish than Acipencer plates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...