Hadrosaur Egg

[HamptonsDoc]

Hi everyone, I am new to collecting Fossils and recently bought one of those "Dinosaur Eggs" Coming out of Malaysia. I was wondering if anyone can tell me if this is an authentic Dinosaur egg? It's supposed to belong to a Hadrosaur...1.JPG2.JPG

I'm also new to collecting and bought 4 of these from this seller from Malaysia off of eBay . If you read the responses above and the other thread from April about these eggs (the link is in one of my earlier posts) where someone actually broke it open, the responses are mixed as to whether they are real or not. It seems that unless you find the egg yourself or purchase it from some one who is known in the fossil world and reputable, its near impossible to know for sure. I Cat Scanned some of my other eggs (I'm a physician) and they (Hadrosaur) were too dense to penetrate. Maybe electron microscopy could be used to look for pores to tell if it truly is shell, but that won't tell us if the shell belongs together or was reconstructed, and I don't have access to one of them!

I have a close friend who has a collection that rivals the pictures that I've seen Troodon post in other threads who expected these eggs in person. He wasn't sure . He thinks the egg shell is real, but all the eggs are a little too perfect from this guy. No deep cracks, no area of missing shell. The reddish/brown areas on the shell that resemble the matrix almost has a pattern as if someone sprayed it on to make it look old. Your egg looks like mine which looks like the ones on eBay right now. His final opinion is that someone spent a lot of time making the eggs look this way. We don't think they are completely fake, but we are both uncertain if this is how the egg was over the last 100 million years. They may be reconstructed from pieces of real shell found. I'm going to show another person with a very large collection for another in-hand opinion.

Moral of the story- if you like it and it didn't break the bank then keep it. If you don't like living with the doubt send it back and put the money towards one from a more reliable dealer. Hope that helps!

Edited September 17, 2015 by HamptonsDoc

[Gevxena]

Well I appreciate the input. I wanted to have mine cat scanned somehow. I'm so fascinated that you attempted to cat scan it, but it wasn't possible. I am going to have this looked at by a few Paleontologist and see what they say...

[mudbug]

Hi everyone, I am new to collecting Fossils and recently bought one of those "Dinosaur Eggs" Coming out of Malaysia. I was wondering if anyone can tell me if this is an authentic Dinosaur egg?

Your egg looks exactly like the one I purchased from a seller in Malaysia (probably the same seller). I'm 99% sure that mine is a fake however I would like to have a professional take a look at it first hand rather than through pics shared on the internet.

If you do return the egg make sure you follow ebay.s return procedures. Do not ship it back if the seller does not provide a return shipping label. The seller is required to pay for return shipping when their items are misrepresented.

[mudbug]

I can't believe how many dinosaur eggs are being offered on ebay right now. And the sellers claim their's are the only real ones, everyone else's eggs are fake.

I'm going to hold out for one with a "real" fossilized baby hadrosaur hatching out.

[Redlichia]

I do not have to defend any seller, but what makes you think that your egg is fake or made of shells glued? You have made some tests with fire or other tests to see something of more?

As do the shells to be fully in conjunction....

If they were different shells glued could be so perfect? And if someone wanted to do it so perfect, if he could there, how long it would take to make one? It would cost so cheap? Or is a shell of plastic?

It is just to understand of more.

Thanks.

Your egg looks exactly like the one I purchased from a seller in Malaysia (probably the same seller). I'm 99% sure that mine is a fake however I would like to have a professional take a look at it first hand rather than through pics shared on the internet.

If you do return the egg make sure you follow ebay.s return procedures. Do not ship it back if the seller does not provide a return shipping label. The seller is required to pay for return shipping when their items are misrepresented.

[Redlichia]

About the shells, in the first place I have always maintained that these were original but this night I arose a terrible question ..... that with liquid ceramic products, specially coated on an egg-shaped and put in the oven for different time, layer after layer they can become like these shells .. ...all broken but in a original shape with the cracks......a terrible thing.

A serious thing would be that an expert who studies dinosaur eggs did a cross-section of these shells and did photos to show if there is the growth of the shell that under a microscope looks very good, in the web there are studies with photos of these sections.

If through this practice would not show the growth then they are artificial.

A further investigation could be made by a chemical lab with pieces of shell in dust could understand that substance is made, another investigation still could very well be made from a museum or a university with the Carbon-14 always with pieces of shell, not of rock, (has a cost but once for all could understand if the shells are fake or not and to avoid that anyone spend money for the fakes).

[aeon.rocks]

From what I have seen on photos here some of these eggs could be at least partialy authentic... What makes you think they are fake*?

I have had a few of these (resembled these from "Malaysia seller" to be more specific) in hand a while ago. More or less restored/with shell added to look perfect, but definitely not what I would consider a total fake. Unless this method of "liquid ceramic products, specially coated on an egg-shaped and put in the oven for different time, layer after layer" can produce results like seen here and even replicate calcite cracks?

It`s always difficult to judge from photos, but there are a few things you can do when you have them in hand: check with UV lamp (both short and long wave), check for details at magnification and use acetone. Look for texture on the shell, ridges or nodes, although some egg types can also have smooth outer surface and poores, could be covered with calcite or matrix (added or natural). Another thing to check is the matrix, structure, color, texture, if it appears homogenous... If you notice traces of glue, the egg is probably repaired or restored, which is common, but doesn`t necessarily mean it`s a fake. Or at least *depending on your definition of fake...

- partialy restored/repaired, but have parts of authentic fossil. Depending on the degree of restoration I wouldn`t call these fake. It`s a shame though that sellers usually don`t mention restorations...

- composites of authentic shell pieces from different eggs - fake

- resign/ceramic moulds/casts - fake

Here is a photo of Dendroolithus/Hadrosaur egg manufactured from different fossil egg shell pieces. Probably glued together from different broken egg parts.The shell which forms the upper part of the egg (above the red line) is mostly built from pieces of real fossil shell mixed with dirt/matrix inbetween. The lower part of the egg (below the red line) is "authentic", probably as it has been found (with more than 70% of the shell missing and then built up from "scratch"). Although all parts are more or less reall fossil this is a composite and thus a fake. It`s not a good fake so it`s even obvious or at least suspicious without UV or close inspection, but if the shell pieces were of more uniform/homogenous color, would you still be certain?

A composite - fake fossil egg:

https://www.facebook.com/AeonsAgo/photos/pb.530669760309989.-2207520000.1444256535./827894747254154/?type=3&theater

And an authentic example:

https://www.facebook.com/AeonsAgo/photos/pb.530669760309989.-2207520000.1444256535./821694204540875/?type=3&theater

Edited October 8, 2015 by aeon.rocks

[Gevxena]

Well I actually had my egg looked at by two very experienced collectors and by a paleontologist who works for the Natural History Museum in my hometown and they all came to the same conclusion, that the shells on the egg are real but they are glued on. Basically, for the price you pay, you get what you pay for.

[Redlichia]

Thank to aeons.rocks for the your detailed explanation and for the your photos of partially reconstructed eggs and for the original eggs, very nice and congrats!!!

Thanks also to Gevxena for ask to the Palaeontologist that surely understand better in hands these eggs,

maybe it was the surface covered with glue or with a kind of Paraloid to consolidate the shell cracked?

Well, as my first impression was that these eggs were original and not fake.

Thanks to all for all the info's for understand better these materials in the market, of course about the quality for the price you pay, you get what you pay for.

Cheers!

[aeon.rocks]

Thank you for the update on review by experienced collectors and by a paleontologist. So the conclusion is that it`s a complete composite (egg shape modeled from matrix and glue, shell pieces glued on and then set in a matrix base)? Or restored/repaired in some spots?

In case of 4 specimens I had in for a review 3 out of 4 had shell repaired/glued, but mostly on "top" and in some areas where it flaked off to make the specimen look more perfect. The fourth was almost completely composited (specimen in the first photo from my previous post above) and even appeares slightly polished.

Also, note that I`m not an expert on these, but I think this is not the same egg/spieces type as "100% authentic examples for comparison" shown in some photos in this forum/topic (or the second example from my previous post). Identifying which dinosaur laid a particular egg is not always easy and comparing 2 eggs (of which one is believed to be real) not always adequate. There are differences in size, color, matrix and texture on the shells, preservaton can be better in some sites, matrix could also suggests different sites or layers or perhaps also the fact that it is modeled...

Regarding "you get what you pay for", in my opinion 300$ is not much if it`s mostly real with some repairs, but in case this are composites they are overpriced. There are tons of dinosaur eggs and shells in China and Mongolia. Before the ban real Hadrosaur eggs from China used to be quite cheap, up to 200$ for good ones not so "long ago". It`s supply and demand basicaly (and embargo/law restrictions), but you can get a genuine hadrosaur egg for 400-500$ in US market today, with some luck even less...

Edited October 14, 2015 by aeon.rocks

[mudbug]

I would agree that a composite is not a actual dinosaur egg and that these "dinosaur eggs" are being greatly misrepresented by the sellers. Anytime a fossil is sold the buyer should be informed of the amount of restoration/repair/reconstruction that has been done to the fossil. Even if there is some actual dinosaur egg present these eggs really are little more than reconstructions of the actual item.

This does bring up another question for me and that is: How much restoration/repair/reconstruction should be allowed before we can no longer consider it a fossil? In the case of Russian trilobites the original seller almost always lists the amount of restoration done to the fossil. However, when the buyer puts the fossil up for sale again the amount of restoration is rarely if ever noted. It seems the buyers just don't maintain this information. Assuming we can trust the original seller this is usually less that 10% (an estimate I'm sure). But, in the case of Megalodon shark teeth, collectors seem to be willing to accept quite a bit of restoration and still consider it an authentic fossil. Russian trilobites and shark teeth are hardly rare and I personally don't accept more than 2% restoration/repair/reconstruction on either one. I would be willing to accept more restoration/repair/reconstruction on fossils that are rare or at least less common.

Even though authentic dino eggs are not so common it does appear that they can be obtained quite easily and rather affordably. I look at my fossils as an investment not neccessarily as an investment that is going to make me a fortune someday (my daughter will probably sell them at my estate sale for pennies on the dollar). But that I want to get the best value for the hard earned money that I'm putting into them. A fake dino egg is not worth the same amount of money that an authentic one is. If you want a nice display piece by all means purchase one. But, do the research, purchase from a reputable dealer and don't buy what amounts to an overpriced paperweight. And most certainly make sure that it is not sold at a later date as the real thing.

[aeon.rocks]

"This does bring up another question for me and that is: How much restoration/repair/reconstruction should be allowed before we can no longer consider it a fossil?"

I think this is rather subjective, some collectors prefer natural fossils, other don`t mind slightly repaired good looking/display specimens. It also depends on the fossil/species and how it`s collected and preped.

In the case of Russian trilobites the original sellers indeed almost always lists the amount of restoration done to the fossil, but this is imho not enough. Description should also state what areas are restored at least. Besides, trilobites, megalodon teeth and dino eggs are all common fossils. There are thousands of eggs in China, the problem for collectors are laws and export restrictions in China only. Most meg colectors I know don`t accept any restoration and I prefer them all natural also. There are tons of megs and that`s not a problem, unless you are looking for a perfect 6"+ specimen or a meg from Cuba. With trilobites it`s a bit more tricky though, some species are very rare. Anyway all trilobites before preparation are mostly all broken in two or more parts, sometimes pieces of shell are lost or fly away and need glueing, spines are sometimes reattached during prep... All perfect looking trilobites have repairs. Could be just the crack or a few percent, I think that is normal with bugs and doesn`t decrease market value (much).

Edited October 14, 2015 by aeon.rocks

[-Andy-]

I am on the side of "If the fossil is repaired/restored professionally, and the seller declares the % and area, I can accept it" school.

[amour 25]

What exactly is an 'experienced collector friend' who knows dinosaur eggs. I live in a region where dinosaur eggs are found. I have been to two nest sites that have been researched. I have found egg shell, etc.

I would not be able to tell a real egg from a good fake. If any one tells you that an egg looks like their 'real' egg, then ask them how they know that their own egg is 'real'. If they didn't find it themselves and have complete documentation then it is almost certainly not a Dino egg. The Chinese are not stupid but experienced technicians who use the latest in technology to produce quality fakes in everything from Rolex watches to Gibson Guitars to Dino eggs.

Have to agree there.

[aeon.rocks]

Experienced technicians who use the latest in technology? Seriously? Like what, 3D printing?

While I agree to some point about good fakes getting harder to spot with the naked eye or by amateurs, it`s stil a silly argument. There are ways to tell real fossils from fakes, repairs from natural, just not always easy on photos...

Edited October 19, 2015 by aeon.rocks

[Runner64]

I do not collect restored, repaired, enhanced, nor composited fossils. I prefer my fossils to look like the way they did when they came out of the ground. However, I do have a repaired tooth in my collection. Was broken in two pieces so they put it back together.