Trilobite Molt/moult Questions

[Jersey]

I have a few questions about this:

1. I see the term written both ways regarding trilobites - sometimes as "molt" and sometimes as "moult." Are they both correct or is one incorrect?

2. My other question is how are they both regarded by collectors? I know that fossil trilobite molts/moults are much more plentiful than the fossil animal itself. Do collectors look down on the molts/moults and feel that they are MUCH less desirable than the fossil animal or are they also eagerly collected?

I look forward to your thoughts.

[jpc]

In the UK and other places where the Queen still plays a role, trilobites moult. Here in the USA they molt. That's all. Molts often have the free cheeks separated or missing.

[Fossildude19]

I would think # 2 depends on the collector, and the prevalence of complete trilobites in the area.

There are those who would love to find a pygidium, thorax, or cephalon.

In some places, like upstate NY,... sometimes the complete ones are common enough that you don't have to resort to collecting the molts.

If I find a complete if slightly disarticulated trilobite molt, it still counts for me!

I am collecting less and less partials as I find more complete trilobites.

I will still pick them up if they are a species I do not have yet, ... or if they are of unusual size. Really tiny or really big.

Regards,

[FossilDAWG]

Molt or moult, color or colour, neighbor or neighbour, aluminum or aluminium, hemostasis or haemostasis; as JPC said it's all in the difference between the Queens (or Kings) English or the Americanized version. In Canada as well, people still have a use for the letter "u".

As far as pieces vs whole specimens are concerned, as Tim said in part it depends on the relative abundance and the chances of finding an intact specimen. That being said, most trilobites are known entirely or almost entirely from disarticulated parts. Only a minority of the described species are known from intact specimens, and in most of those cases intact specimens are very rare. For every Elrathia kingi, or Flexicalymene meeki, or Eldregeops rana, there are hundreds of species based on molted parts. A serious student of trilobites would be delighted with a cephalon or pygidium that shows the diagnostic characters of the species. Also, disarticulated pieces sometimes show features, such as the underside or hypostome, rarely or never seen in complete specimens, as they are usually prepped to show the dorsal surface. Anyone who would look down on such a specimen as "not complete", or who only keeps complete specimens in their collection, is more of a "curio collector" than a serious student of paleontology, in my opinion.

Don

[aplomado]

Noah Webster simplified American English with his dictionary, removing extra "u"s among other things.

[Fossildude19]

Funny, that's my favourite dictionary.

Whut?