GeschWhat Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Hi all, I was perusing the gem show down in Tucson today and came across these interesting little corals. The vendor couldn't identify them except to say they were from Morocco and were coral. Anyone out there know what these are? They measure about 1 1/2" - 2" across. 1 Lori www.areallycrappystory.com/fossils www.facebook.com/fossilpoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Burns Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 It is somewhat reminiscent of the modern coral family Fungiidae, although the underside is quite unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 What you've got there is Cyclolites sp. (formerly known as Cunnolites sp.) They are a common occurrence in the upper Cretaceous Santonian Gosau-Schichten in Middle Europe. 3 Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) Very nice Scleractinians. I agree with Roger in what he said. An orientative guide about this tema may be in this document : http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmcg/v28n2/v28n2a3.pdf " Genus Cyclolites Lamarck, 1801 Type species. Cyclolites elliptica Lamarck, 1801 (="porpite elliptique… Guettard, 1770, mem. Vol. 2, p. 342, pl. 21, fig. 17, 18."). Cyclolites was originally described as "Polypier libre, orbiculaire ou elliptique, convexe et lamelleux en–dessus, applati en desous avec des lignes circulaires concentriques. Il constitue une seule étoile lamelleuse" (Lamarck, 1801, p. 369), presenting four species according to the next order: C. numismalis, C. hemisphaerica, C. elliptica and C. cristata. Milne Edwards and Haime (1849) named C. elleptica [sic] Lamarck as only example of Cyclolites, which we regard as the first secondary designation of C. elliptica as type species for this genus. Alloiteau (1957, p. 331–332) presented a strong reasoning for this selection: Cyclolites as defined by Lamarck is a very polyphyletic group and only appropriate to be used as describing the overall shape of these corals: cyclolitoid, meaning hemispheroid corallite with a flat base, considered to be discoid to cupolate shaped. Cyclolites numismalis, as the first in the list of Lamarck's species, could be regarded as the type species of Cyclolites, but is a junior synonym of the Silurian rugose coral Madrepora porpita Linnaeus, 1767. This would make Palaeocyclus Milne Edwards and Haime, 1849, having the same type species, a junior synonym of Cyclolites. The second species of Lamarck, C. hemisphaerica, was suspected by Alloiteau to be a badly drawn C. elliptica, which was the third species of Lamarck. The last one, C. cristata, became the type species of Aspidiscus Kœnig, 1825. The type specimen(s) of C. elliptica are considered to be lost. To avoid confusion Alloiteau suggested that the main part of the Cretaceous "Cyclolites" were to be reassigned to Cunnolites. Alloiteau (1957) created Cunnolites barrerei as a replacement for C. elliptica and selected a specimen from coll. Depéret (lab. Geol. de Sorbonne) as "Neoholotype", supposedly from Coustouges, France, which is near Perpignan. Cyclolites as a genus name was reestablished by Löser (2009, p. 133) with Faujas de Saint–Fond, 1799 as author of the genus, since in Faujas (1799) referred directly to Lamarck (1801, p. 369) and this would mean that, if the date of publication of Faujas would have been correct, the name would indeed be first published, completely with description in Faujas and the author would have become "Lamarck in Faujas (1799)". However, Pasteur (1802), who translated Faujas (1799) into the Dutch language, stated that the first part of the Dutch translation was published only after the first five parts of Faujas had been published. The reference to Cyclolites and to Lamarck occurred in the second part of the Dutch translation (Pasteur, 1804), meaning that those references occurred in the parts of the French original that were published after 1802, so that Lamarck (1801) remains the correct author and year of publication of the generic name Cyclolites. Cyclolites differs with Funginella in having perforations in their septa. Funginella? isfahanensis differs also from Cyclolites/Cunnolites species in being a lot smaller in its adult stage. " Edited February 4, 2016 by abyssunder 5 " 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...
GeschWhat Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 Peat Burns, the top reminded me of Funginella as well, but the ringed bottom structure reminded me of some of the domed bryozoans (sorry, I forget the name) we find back home. I love finding new things...thank you all for helping identify them! 1 Lori www.areallycrappystory.com/fossils www.facebook.com/fossilpoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Cyclastraea or Funginellastraea. Cyclastraeidae in any case for me. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HansTheLoser Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Agree with Pachy, but I would rule out Cyclastraea (Cenomanian). Nothing to do with Cyclolites and nothing with Cretaceous. Probably Eocene. Corals must be sectionned in order to put a name on them. Funginellastraea is very probable. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 http://www.moussa-minerals.com/ecom-prodshow/cyclolites.html https://georockshop.com/product_info.php/products_id/3109 https://picclick.com/TEN-Fossil-Coral-Pieces-Cyclolites-from-Morocco-282682791184.html https://www.todocoleccion.net/coleccionismo-fosiles/coralarios-connulites-cyclolites-cretacico-goulmine-marruecos~x58333094 Most probably Funginellastraea and Eocene age, yes, but generally sellers reports Cretaceous age for these materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 I have one from the Amellago Gorge between Ait Hani and Goulmima,, near Errachidia, Morocco, which is indeed Cretaceous strata. 3 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Could you put some photos of your material?, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Sure. Let me see, where did I put it? Ah! Here we go! It's 3.8 cm in diameter. 2 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 2 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Thanks. It are clearly what we are commenting on. And clearly it aren´t Cyclolites. Looks like very similar to Funginellastraea, but this is an eocene coral. You and the sellers report Cretaceous age for the materials. Something is wrong. I don´t understand why Mr. Hans The Loser discards Cretaceous for these materials. Perhaps he should explain why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Some specimens of Funginellastraea from the Eocene (Bartonian) of north Spain. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 It certainly looks the same as mine. Except, possibly the concentric growth rings on mine are much stronger than the lines radiating out from the centre? 1 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Could it be found in through the Upper Creataceous to the Middle Eocene? There seem to be lots on the net claiming Cretaceous and Eocene origins. Guess it could be both. 1 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Rico Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 I have this one and it is labelled as Cycloites genus cycloseris . Cretaceous. Morocco. does this help at all? cheers Bobby 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 10 minutes ago, Bobby Rico said: I have this one and it is labelled as Cycloites genus cycloseris . Cretaceous. Morocco. does this help at all? cheers Bobby Yes, i think that helps. Yours has the same strong growth rings as mine and less of the lines radiating out from the centre. Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pachy Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 12 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said: It certainly looks the same as mine. Except, possibly the concentric growth rings on mine are much stronger than the lines radiating out from the centre? Epiteca is very variable, it also depend on conservation. 10 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said: Could it be found in through the Upper Creataceous to the Middle Eocene? There seem to be lots on the net claiming Cretaceous and Eocene origins. Guess it could be both. Mmmmmm, I think not. But .................... who knows. 11 minutes ago, Bobby Rico said: I have this one and it is labelled as Cycloites genus cycloseris . Morocco. cheers Bobby No. Cyclolites absolutely not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Reminds me of nummulites. I don't now if that is relevant but just a thought “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) Interesting is that nobody asked for their thickness. This might rule out something, isn't it? None of the specimens above shows a lateral view. (No, not Nummulites, although they look lenticular. First of all, the spiralling character is missing.) Edited November 13, 2017 by abyssunder 1 " 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...
Shamalama Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 -Dave __________________________________________________ Geologists on the whole are inconsistent drivers. When a roadcut presents itself, they tend to lurch and weave. To them, the roadcut is a portal, a fragment of a regional story, a proscenium arch that leads their imaginations into the earth and through the surrounding terrain. - John McPheeIf I'm going to drive safely, I can't do geology. - John McPheeCheck out my Blog for more fossils I've found: http://viewsofthemahantango.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 42 minutes ago, abyssunder said: Interesting is that nobody asked for their thickness. This might rule out something, isn't it? None of the specimens above shows a lateral view. (No, not Nummulites, although they look lenticular. First of all, the spiralling character is missing.) Good point. Sorry my hands are shaking so not a very clear photo. Maximum thickness, 5mm. 3 Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeschWhat Posted November 14, 2017 Author Share Posted November 14, 2017 I will have to check to see if I have any left (I've been giving them to kids). I will photograph and measure tomorrow if I do. 1 Lori www.areallycrappystory.com/fossils www.facebook.com/fossilpoo 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