abm Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Hi, I've just joined The Fossil Forum to try and find out something about my fig. It's a family heirloom, I have no idea where it was found / bought, all I know is that my grandfather (long dead) gave it to my mother on condition it became mine when she died. I have dug around online and found very little about petrified figs and stumbled across this forum. So, here it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I wonder whether it mightn't be a flint echinoid? LINK "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) Welcome. It's a strange piece. Without the proper information it's a bit difficult to suggest anything in certainty. But to me it looks like a very worn type of echinoid. Edit: ahh, beat by the Aus man. Edited December 13, 2015 by fossilized6s ~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...
RickNC Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Sure looks like the figs on our tree out here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TqB Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I think it's a flint sponge. Very fig like though! Tarquin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Hi, I think that this fossil has more luck to be a sponge that a sea urchin. I not distinguish any ambulacral or interambulacral area, and what would be the mouth is too prominent. Coco ---------------------- OUTIL POUR MESURER VOS FOSSILES : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 1 (Poissons et sélaciens récents & fossiles) : ici Ma bibliothèque PDF 2 (Animaux vivants - sans poissons ni sélaciens) : ici Mâchoires sélaciennes récentes : ici Hétérodontiques et sélaciens : ici Oeufs sélaciens récents : ici Otolithes de poissons récents ! ici Un Greg... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 It really does look like a fig, though... Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I agree that it looks like a fig. Maybe it is something appropriate to Spinifructus antiquus (Ficus ceratops) from the Cretaceous Hell Creek formation. " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squali Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 That is pretty neat. My second thought after fig would be a sponge. It seems less likely that it would be a purchased fossil since your grandfather insisted It be passed on to you. Did he travel or was he mainly local to his town? The type of fossilization may be a clue. Sponges aren't commonly fossilized. Thanks for posting. How about some cheese with the fig? It's hard to remember why you drained the swamp when your surrounded by alligators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TqB Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 (edited) That is pretty neat. My second thought after fig would be a sponge. It seems less likely that it would be a purchased fossil since your grandfather insisted It be passed on to you. Did he travel or was he mainly local to his town? The type of fossilization may be a clue. Sponges aren't commonly fossilized. Thanks for posting. How about some cheese with the fig? Depends on the formation - Chalk flint sponges are very common around this part of Europe and people frequently pick them up from the beaches wondering what they are. It is very neat! (and I'd love for it to be a fig...) Edited December 13, 2015 by TqB Tarquin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I think it's a flint sponge. Very fig like though! Hi, I think that this fossil has more luck to be a sponge that a sea urchin. I not distinguish any ambulacral or interambulacral area, and what would be the mouth is too prominent. Coco Quite probably so. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I'm wondering if anyone has seen the hardly visible poligonal structered "plates" (what I supposed to be) in the lower part of pic 3 in a closer view, or just my mind taking tricks? If..., could be Echinoderm. " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 ...I not distinguish any ambulacral or interambulacral area... There is only this suggestive shape: "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I'm referring to this : May be some kind of Cystoid? " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 I'm referring to this : 2.jpg ... Yes, my friend I was thinking further about a possible ambulacral. This one does not place easily! "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TqB Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 (edited) Looking again, I'm not sure it's flint. I'll still argue for sponge for now and throw in a worn Astylospongia (Ordovician/Silurian) as a possibility. It may help that it's found as an erratic in the Netherlands and Germany. Edited December 14, 2015 by TqB Tarquin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 I agree that looks older than Cretaceous, probably around Ordovician. A cross section through the specimen may be a good guide to exclude a lot of variants. " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 (edited) looks like a fig to me. fossil figs Edited December 14, 2015 by Herb "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgcox Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 Could this be a crinoid float chamber? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 looks like a fig to me. Yes, it does, and therein lies the problem. It looks like a fresh, succulent fig; not at all like one that underwent petrifaction. If it is stone (which has not actually been stated), it pretty much has to be something else that wound up looking like a fig, or it has to have been made as a decorative sculptural object. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Yes, it does, and therein lies the problem. It looks like a fresh, succulent fig; not at all like one that underwent petrifaction. If it is stone (which has not actually been stated), it pretty much has to be something else that wound up looking like a fig, or it has to have been made as a decorative sculptural object. Respectfully,I don't see why it has to be something else other than a fig. A possibly it is something else. But from the evidence, or lack thereof, there is no clear evidence it is not a fossil fig. The top area is the same, the bottom is the same. It has the slight indentations on the sides and the structure. The "ambulacral area" could have been a split in the skin. I dont see it looking 'fresh and succulent' it looks like a well preserved fossil. If you compare the fresh figs in f.1 above to the fossil f.2 the markings are identical. f.3 and f.4 are also fossil figs. There has been no proof it is something else, and until I see new evidence, I for one will still consider it a fig. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Not sure about this specimen, but the images you show of "fossil figs" (originally published under the name Ficus ceratops Knowlton 1911) have been reinterpreted as palm fruits and transferred to Spinifructus antiquus (Dawson) McIver 2002. I don't know any other records of fossil figs, so if this would be one, it would be a considerably rare occurrence. Regardless, I have trouble interpreting the fossil as a fig, given the deep depression on the underside. This feature would seem odd to me, given the "flawless preservation" of the rest of the "fruit". 2 Searching for green in the dark grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I cannot dismiss the idea that it could be a carved decorative facsimile: LINK An antique, but not a fossil. 2 "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paleoflor Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I cannot dismiss the idea that it could be a carved decorative facsimile: LINK An antique, but not a fossil. Ha, that may be spot on... Why on earth do people make those? Searching for green in the dark grey. 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