Mtskinner Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Is it possible to identify the species of mosasaur by the teeth alone? I have several that I've found over the years that I want to segregate and display by species but there's just not a lot of info on the net that helps when discussing solitary teeth. I've narrowed the four most common species found in Alabama to Tylosaurus, Platecarpus, Clidastes, and of course Globidens. This basically leaves me with three choices for Id-ing these teeth after I cross out Globidens. A few of these are repost teeth but hopefully you all will let me slide this one time! Thanks in advance for any help/comments!The first two teeth are my largest and are unlike any others in my collection. One has smooth enamel while the other is faceted. The first tooth is round in cross section, it's 1-15/16" long and 1-1/8" wide. The 2nd tooth is oval in cross section, it's 2" long and 1" wide. The first four pictures are of the first tooth, while the last four are of the second tooth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichW9090 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I don't know about the others, but I find it very hard to decide if there are two teeth, or more than two teeth, in your set of pictures. Perhaps making separate posts within the thread for each tooth would help, and number them to facilitate discussion? The plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 Heres three of the medium sized teeth we find here in Alabama. These average just over an inch long and 3/4" wide. The differences among these teeth are easy to spot...but again I have no clue how to read the differences in order to distinguish species! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 Sorry Rich, The first four pictures in the first post are of a single tooth...the second set of four pictures are of the second tooth. Again Sorry for the confusion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichW9090 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 OK, that helps, Mtskinner. Thanks. The plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 The very thin outer surface of the enamel has been worn away from the first tooth. Possibly from being digested, or just mechanical wear after fossilization/burial. ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 I'll take some better pics of it tomorrow. The enamel is all there, it just looks distorted due to the paleobond I had to coat it with. The enamel was splitting and that was the recommended fix. Still think it looks too shiny but it's still a killer piece for my area! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 There are different types and layers of enameloid. Somehow the thin outer enamel has been altered or removed. If it were un-altered it would have a surface similar to all the others. There are no marine reptiles that have teeth with enamel like that in a natural state. This is a common state of preservation for mosasaur teeth from NJ. The specimens that exhibit this type of preservation are always more rounded and polished which suggest mechanical wear (tumbling around in the ocean surf for some time) or biological wear (digestion) or some other post-fossilization diagenetic (chemical/mineral) process- or a combination of these processes. Can't help with precise IDs on them, but they are all beautiful specimens! ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 There are different types and layers of enameloid. Somehow the thin outer enamel has been altered or removed. If it were un-altered it would have a surface similar to all the others. There are no marine reptiles that have teeth with enamel like that in a natural state. This is a common state of preservation for mosasaur teeth from NJ. The specimens that exhibit this type of preservation are always more rounded and polished which suggest mechanical wear (tumbling around in the ocean surf for some time) or biological wear (digestion) or some other post-fossilization diagenetic (chemical/mineral) process- or a combination of these processes. Can't help with precise IDs on them, but they are all beautiful specimens! So it's possible that this tooth originally had facets similar to the other tooth? Thanks for the info! Never ceases to amaze me at the knowledge on this site! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Oddly my largest mosasaur tooth from NJ is one of those that have the outer enamel stripped as well. I don't think that specimen of yours would have had facets, but thats because I am leaning towards it being Prognathodon sp. or something closely related. ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Identifying mosasaur teeth to genus will be tough. In addition to the wear, erosion, and other physical alteration, you have the added dimensional attributes of pterygoid teeth and almost fully formed replacement teeth. Like many animals, mosasaurs had a variety of tooth types within any given animal. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Identifying mosasaur teeth to genus will be tough. In addition to the wear, erosion, and other physical alteration, you have the added dimensional attributes of pterygoid teeth and almost fully formed replacement teeth. Like many animals, mosasaurs had a variety of tooth types within any given animal. I figured that was the case due to the lack of data I could find online but had to give it a shot! Thanks for the comments though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Here's a few more and some of the smaller sizes we find...knowing these would be even harder to ID! If yall are like me though...you never get tired of seeing teeth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think the probability of the more 'hooked' teeth being pterygoid teeth is greater—given their function in the roof of the mouth. Online images tend to support the idea. You're making some awesome finds over there. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 Thanks for the comments guys! It is appreciated! Here's a few pictures of the 1st tooth before I applied Paleobond to help stabilize it. After a looking over the tooth a little more, it is somewhat faceted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 27, 2015 Author Share Posted January 27, 2015 Here's another little bugger that I can't figure out, it's unlike anything else I have. It's just over 1/2" long and 1/2" wide at the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plax Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 It may be possible that if someone took the time to compare teeth from identified skeletons it might be possible to quantify differences in the teeth between the genera. This could then be applied to our disassociated finds for identification. A "key" would be ideal as many of them are obviously similar. I would also like to see some type of key to differentiate crocodilian from Mosasaur and the various genera of crocs differentiated from each other. This would be a lot of work of course..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 27, 2015 Author Share Posted January 27, 2015 It may be possible that if someone took the time to compare teeth from identified skeletons it might be possible to quantify differences in the teeth between the genera. This could then be applied to our disassociated finds for identification. A "key" would be ideal as many of them are obviously similar. I would also like to see some type of key to differentiate crocodilian from Mosasaur and the various genera of crocs differentiated from each other. This would be a lot of work of course..... I couldn't agree more! It's hard to tell the many differences about the teeth from looking at a zoomed out skull online. You would figure someone would've already accomplished this with the amount of study done on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plax Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 my guess is that the isolated teeth are less significant or that the segregation of the disassociated teeth into specific genera is impossible. It would be a time consuming project requiring a lot of travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truceburner Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Really enjoy seeing what you find in south Alabama. I lived in Selma for a while as a kid - would have been ALL ABOUT fossils then if only I'd known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 Really enjoy seeing what you find in south Alabama. I lived in Selma for a while as a kid - would have been ALL ABOUT fossils then if only I'd known. Thanks TB, I know the feeling...we used to throw the bigger stuff back before we knew what they were. No telling how many verts and bones I've thrown back over the years. The old timers always told us they were simply old blackened cow bones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 This looks like an even better example of a specimen that was somehow stripped of the outer enamel surface. Here's another little bugger that I can't figure out, it's unlike anything else I have. It's just over 1/2" long and 1/2" wide at the base. ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 I thought of that as I was taking the picture!!! Is it possible that when the outer layer is stripped off that it also loses the carinae? The reason I ask is that neither tooth has any, and they are both perfectly round. If that's not the case, you would think it would be easy to identify them since they are round in shape and have no carinae! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macrophyseter Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 i think i can identify some of your mosasaur teeth. The first one is liklely to be tylosaurus or platecarpus, but im not so sure. ive never seen a real tylosaurus tooth up close before, but i have plenty of platecarpus teeth, and i know the characteristics. That tooth has "pinched parts" so it might be platecarpus, but it also has flat sides like beaugei (beaugeis are only found in africa), so it might be a tylosaurus. The small and straighter ones are likely to be clidastes, the one with lines going down are platecarpus (you might not get what i am saying), and absolutly none of those teeth are globidens. But also, mosasaurs teeth can be found in alabama, and there are tons of different mosasaurus species, and i dont know all of them, and .... yea. If you're a fossil nut from Palos Verdes, San Pedro, Redondo Beach, or Torrance, feel free to shoot me a PM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtskinner Posted January 30, 2015 Author Share Posted January 30, 2015 Thanks SHD, I'm getting close to having most of them labelled! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.