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 post Share on other sites
Auspex Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I wonder whether it mightn't be a flint echinoid? LINK Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
RickNC Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 Sure looks like the figs on our tree out here. Link to post Share on other sites
TqB Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I think it's a flint sponge. Very fig like though! Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
Ludwigia Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 It really does look like a fig, though... Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
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? Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
Auspex Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 ...I not distinguish any ambulacral or interambulacral area... There is only this suggestive shape: Link to post Share on other sites
abyssunder Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I'm referring to this : May be some kind of Cystoid? Link to post Share on other sites
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! Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
jgcox Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 Could this be a crinoid float chamber? Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
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. Link to post Share on other sites
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". 1 Link to post Share on other sites
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 Link to post Share on other sites
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? Link to post Share on other sites
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