TyrannosaurusRex Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Got it for $10. Not bad eh? The teeth are not associated. Enjoy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Cool piece. I would have bought it for $10. 1 ~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...
TyrannosaurusRex Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 Cool piece. I would have bought it for $10. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Nice piece. Just wondering how the conclusion came to Spinosaurus as oppose to a crocodile jaw for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 thanks. Theropod bone has a thick layer encasing the marrow unlike croc. Also the sensors are too large and there are not enough of them. Thirdly the sockets aren't croc, fourthly the color is wrong for croc, 5thly the marrow it typical of any theropod. I also bought a nice croc jaw from the same guy. They are wholey and totally different. Your reasoning is pretty good.. except for color. Color is NOT usable to ID fossils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Your reasoning is pretty good.. except for color. Color is NOT usable to ID fossils. Not sure about some of your other points, but I gotta go to lunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Honestly, looking at the photos you provided does not support your case. The tooth sockets on the Spinosaur jaw are much further apart than your specimen and a better match is with the croc jaw image. I was in Moussa's room at the tucson show and they had pictures of nine different croc's currently described from the Kem Kem all with different jaw configurations. When I first looked at your specimen I thought it was Croc. The socket area is roughly flat across the top typical of croc jaws while that is not the case on spino jaws there is a big lip on the labial side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I am also leaning towards croc. See those little raised rings around the alveoli (=tooth sockets). I don;t think Spinosaurus has those. I went to look at our T rex skull, and it certainly doesn't have those. I also looked at our alligator cast and the lower jaw does not have them so much, but the upper jaw does. The "sensors" are very variable in croc jaws, matter of fact, the alligator jaw I just looked at has very few below the teeth. The maxilla on the other hand is loaded with them. Also, I don't buy this: "Theropod bone has a thick layer encasing the marrow unlike croc. " Theropod bones are actually very delicate, whereas croc skull and jaw bnoes are pretty darn robust (except for the splenial bone). Hard to say without the specimen in hand, but I am leaning crocodilian. Stioll a cool piece of bone. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Well let's put the debate side to side. Attached is a top view of a spino jaw in my collection with your jaw. Its supports the comments made by jpc about the lack of raised rings on a spino jaw. It also shows how close the alveoli are to the edge of the lingual side which I have not seen on Crock or your specimen. Final determination for me is to always to hold the specimen in my hand but without that need to base my conclusions with what's in front of me and still leaning toward crocodilian. Like the others have said still a nice pickup. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 A bit of friendly advice, i wouldn't dismiss Troodon and JP's observations. Since the teeth obviously aren't associated i would see this jaw frag as a beautiful way to display your Spinosaurus teeth. It's still really cool. Asking questions usually will lead to answers and gained knowledge. To dismiss something without a single thought gains nothing. ~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...
sseth Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Honestly, looking at the photos you provided does not support your case. The tooth sockets on the Spinosaur jaw are much further apart than your specimen and a better match is with the croc jaw image. I was in Moussa's room at the tucson show and they had pictures of nine different croc's currently described from the Kem Kem all with different jaw configurations. When I first looked at your specimen I thought it was Croc. The socket area is roughly flat across the top typical of croc jaws while that is not the case on spino jaws there is a big lip on the labial side. I too looked over the Jaws Kendal and Brian had in Tucson and even ended up bringing one home with me. Given the limited views and dimensions we can see in the picture, it does have a few features that suggest crocodile but given that I have not seen this in person it may very well may look different if I were to hold it. Very cool fossil. It is absolutely a spectacular collectors piece. Thanks for allowing us to see it. _____________________________________ Seth www.fossilshack.com www.americanfossil.com www.fishdig.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossilgrove Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Just saw this post,this is certainly NOT a Spinosaurus jaw section,the is crocodilian and more than likely from Elosuchus which was the largest of the cretaceous crocs in Morocco ,I have seen many jaws and owned many Spinosaurus jaws and this does not have the distinctive raised ridge running along the tooth line,the sockets are also too closely together ,this is crocodilian and no doubt about that.Please not the very distinctive raised lip??Ridge line that runs parallel to the tooth sockets on a real Spinosaurus jaw and note the tooth sockets in particular.Hope this helps, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordTrilobite Posted October 13, 2016 Share Posted October 13, 2016 Croc or not. It's still a cool little piece. Olof Moleman AKA Lord Trilobite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyrannosaurusRex Posted October 14, 2016 Author Share Posted October 14, 2016 On 2/11/2015 at 5:32 PM, fossilized6s said: A bit of friendly advice, i wouldn't dismiss Troodon and JP's observations. Since the teeth obviously aren't associated i would see this jaw frag as a beautiful way to display your Spinosaurus teeth. It's still really cool. Asking questions usually will lead to answers and gained knowledge. To dismiss something without a single thought gains nothing. I never dismissed it in the least Fossilized6s. I assure you, being on this site as long as I have I know to respect other people's opinions, even if they differ from my own. On 2/11/2015 at 3:19 PM, Troodon said: Well let's put the debate side to side. Attached is a top view of a spino jaw in my collection with your jaw. Its supports the comments made by jpc about the lack of raised rings on a spino jaw. It also shows how close the alveoli are to the edge of the lingual side which I have not seen on Crock or your specimen. Final determination for me is to always to hold the specimen in my hand but without that need to base my conclusions with what's in front of me and still leaning toward crocodilian. Like the others have said still a nice pickup. I'm going to see about having someone take a look at it in person, as it is SO hard to tell just from photos, rather than in person, as you said. Where on earth did you get ahold of that jaw?! I've never seen a piece of Spinosaurus material that was that good of quality in a private collection! Amazing piece! On 2/13/2015 at 1:07 PM, sseth said: I too looked over the Jaws Kendal and Brian had in Tucson and even ended up bringing one home with me. Given the limited views and dimensions we can see in the picture, it does have a few features that suggest crocodile but given that I have not seen this in person it may very well may look different if I were to hold it. Very cool fossil. It is absolutely a spectacular collectors piece. Thanks for allowing us to see it. I will see about taking some better photos and posting them. Thanks for the opinion, it is greatly appreciated! 11 hours ago, Fossilgrove said: Just saw this post,this is certainly NOT a Spinosaurus jaw section,the is crocodilian and more than likely from Elosuchus which was the largest of the cretaceous crocs in Morocco ,I have seen many jaws and owned many Spinosaurus jaws and this does not have the distinctive raised ridge running along the tooth line,the sockets are also too closely together ,this is crocodilian and no doubt about that.Please not the very distinctive raised lip??Ridge line that runs parallel to the tooth sockets on a real Spinosaurus jaw and note the tooth sockets in particular.Hope this helps, It helps some, but I still struggle seeing it as crocodilian. In my hand it just doesn't feel like it, or look like it. 4 hours ago, LordTrilobite said: Croc or not. It's still a cool little piece. Agreed. It is whatever it is, and that cannot be changed. I'm determined to find out what left it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyrannosaurusRex Posted October 14, 2016 Author Share Posted October 14, 2016 I realized in looking back at this post there were some kind of harsh comments made, which should not have been said. Some of them were mine. My apologies if they sounded rude, they were not meant to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyrannosaurusRex Posted October 14, 2016 Author Share Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) On 2/11/2015 at 0:27 PM, jpc said: Your reasoning is pretty good.. except for color. Color is NOT usable to ID fossils. Sorry, it's a thing I use that works well for my area to id various species. You are probably correct though, as I don't have nearly as much experience in the non invertebrate field. Edited October 14, 2016 by TyrannosaurusRex Misspelling 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