Pennsylvanian Oddity

[shorty]

Auspex, I'm kind of excited about this, too! I'm sooo glad it's a real something and not just a figment of my giant imagination! Feel free to ask for any photos that will help!

This is the best I can do for tonight. Camera on Macro, zoomed & magnifying lense! I didn't reduce the size of the images this time, so I apologize to everyone with dial up if they're too large.

I'll borrow a better camera & tripod tomorrow.

Have a wonderful evening & thanks again to everyone for their help!

[Terry Dactyll]

Ive found glacial erratics that after time are very difficult to differentiate from 'actual nodules' as the Iron rich environment has coloured them all the same.... making them blend in......very often Ive carted the 'ideal nodule' in my pocket for luck, only to find out its not even a nodule when i finally whack it with the hammer......So I suppose it is possible to easily be confused........One thing about fossils and nature that never ceases to fool me is 'chance'..... what chance is there of 3 seperate Calyx heads being sat on a rock showing no evidence of connections to other parts of the crinoid head or other bits of stem, considering they are all facing stem up...... you can use chance to see four trilobites sat on a big rock all facing one another is fake, the chance of an undamaged dinosaur egg, very slim, etc etc...... I'll be honest, I know nothing about crinoids, I have a very narrow field of interest, but relatively speaking whats the chance of there being no other segments displayed.... id say pretty slim.....

I suppose you could argure that whats the chance of three fruiting bodies all facing the same way...... maybe the branch which connected them was in the adjoining block in situ.....lol

Fruiting bodies or seeds sound good to me.... I would say again send images and contact the Field Museum, dont they hold the best collection from Mazon Creek?

[Shamalama]

I'm still doubtful of an plant origin for those fossils, even more so now since that last batch of pictures showed a brachiopod that you found on the other side of the hill you were exploring. Are there marine shales that over/under lay the Francis Creek Shale? The "wonderstone" theory sounds plausible but I'd think shale would break down rapidly under a glacier.

[shorty]

I'm still doubtful of an plant origin for those fossils, even more so now since that last batch of pictures showed a brachiopod that you found on the other side of the hill you were exploring. Are there marine shales that over/under lay the Francis Creek Shale? The "wonderstone" theory sounds plausible but I'd think shale would break down rapidly under a glacier.

Shamalama,

"Richardson's Guide to the Fossil Fauna of Mazon Creek" has a good diagram of all the layers they dug through to get to the coal seam. I'll post it when I get home tonight. I'm pretty sure there are marine layers listed above the concretions - shale layers & limestone.

Terry Dactyl,

I bring lots of whats-its home too. They look like they're the right type until they get home & washed off and then I wonder what I was thinking!

But, are you wondering if this is a fake? or if it's something I bought on ebay and then claimed to find? I promise it's not. Really and truly. It was found on Sunday, exactly where I said in the beginning, and a couple of people at the site that day looked at it. I met a man named Pete, he said he was a paleontologist from Chicago but it was his first trip there. He said he was stumped. He thought it looked like part of a concretion, but he didn't know what it was. The man running us back and forth from the island has been hunting down there for years and is the one who said it's the outside of a tree. I 'spose that doesn't prove I'm not lieing, but I'm a good person, honest.

[MikeD]

They do look a lot like crinoid holdfasts, but I've never seen them with the first segment still attached. A few good, well lit, hi-res (sorry dial-up guys), closeups of the segment sticking out might help a little more with the ID.

[shorty]

Ok, here's the information about the Francis Creek Shale & the layers above it.

They're from Richardson's Guide to the Fossil Fauna of Mazon Creek. The first picture is from Ch. 3 Geologic Setting of the Mazon Creek Fossil Deposit by Gordon C. Baird. The 2nd is from Ch 5A Paleoenvironmental Setting of the Mazon Creek Biota, also by Gordon C. Baird.

If I've broken any rules by posting these, please let me know and I'll remove them.

I'll have closeup pictures later tonight.

Thanks again!

edited to make attachments smaller. sorry about that!

[shorty]

They're iridescent in the bright sun

If the full size photos would help you, let me know and I'll email them to you. They're too large to post here.

[MOROPUS]

We need Solius for his opinion... Hummmm! Still looking like invert part to me, rather than veggie. Strange, very strange and interesting piece.

[Guest solius symbiosus]

We need Solius for his opinion... Hummmm! Still looking like invert part to me, rather than veggie. Strange, very strange and interesting piece.

I have never studied that stuff from Mazon Creek, and I would like to see it under some magnification, but if I had to make a guess, I think that it looks like a Lichenocrinus???

[MOROPUS]

I have never studied that stuff from Mazon Creek, and I would like to see it under some magnification, but if I had to make a guess, I think that it looks like a Lichenocrinus???

I`ve seen some pìcs of it, and it looks very similar to it...

[shorty]

A couple people suggested emailing a specialist for help! It worked! Dr. Jeff Saunders of the Illinois State Museum replied! Here's his reply:

After asking two colleagues here, Drs. Leary and Widga, who are more familiar with Mazon Creek fossils than I am, it is their consensus that the object you have is a series of stem or leaf nodes from a Lycopod, either the genus Lepidodendron or Sigillaria.

Dr. Widga tried to make it a crinoid holdfast, but found disagreements with these and the indicated small size (ca 1 cm diameters) of your specimen(s).

Dr. Leary, who is a paleobotanist, found a stem or leaf node in our Langford Collection from Mazon Creek and noted good visual agreement with the objects shown in your images (although of much greater size). He called my attention to a photograph of the bark of Sigillaria orbicularis on page 58 of Raymond Janssen's "Leaves and Stems from Fossil Forests, Second Printing (revised), 1957, Illinois State Museum Popular Science Series Vol. I. I attach a scan of that page. Re: the latter, the first word on the following page (pg. 59) is "round."

Thanks for everyone's help!

[docdutronc]

A couple people suggested emailing a specialist for help! It worked! Dr. Jeff Saunders of the Illinois State Museum replied! Here's his reply:

After asking two colleagues here, Drs. Leary and Widga, who are more familiar with Mazon Creek fossils than I am, it is their consensus that the object you have is a series of stem or leaf nodes from a Lycopod, either the genus Lepidodendron or Sigillaria.

Dr. Widga tried to make it a crinoid holdfast, but found disagreements with these and the indicated small size (ca 1 cm diameters) of your specimen(s).

Dr. Leary, who is a paleobotanist, found a stem or leaf node in our Langford Collection from Mazon Creek and noted good visual agreement with the objects shown in your images (although of much greater size). He called my attention to a photograph of the bark of Sigillaria orbicularis on page 58 of Raymond Janssen's "Leaves and Stems from Fossil Forests, Second Printing (revised), 1957, Illinois State Museum Popular Science Series Vol. I. I attach a scan of that page. Re: the latter, the first word on the following page (pg. 59) is "round."

Thanks for everyone's help!

Sorry but I do not understand the relationship between the photograph of your pseudo-fruits and the BARK Sigillaria ... can you clarify?

[shorty]

Sorry but I do not understand the relationship between the photograph of your pseudo-fruits and the BARK Sigillaria ... can you clarify?

I think what he's saying is that the little round things are the leaf nodes from a Lycopod. The Sigillaria in the photo is supposed to have "round" leaf nodes.

Does that seem right you?

[docdutronc]

I think what he's saying is that the little round things are the leaf nodes from a Lycopod. The Sigillaria in the photo is supposed to have "round" leaf nodes.

Does that seem right you?

No , that does not suit me, on the trunk sigillaire there are two types of scars, "leaf nodes "I do not know, there are scars left by the falling of the leaves, leaf-cushions and scars left by falling strobus (Sigillariostrobus) I find this very slight response on the part of a scientist, your fossils could be large fruit or ovules , but I doubt it , I think an animal perhaps Crinoids ......

best regards

that just my opinion ....

pl_sigillariostrobus_1.pdf

pl_sigillariostrobus_2.pdf

planche_reconstitution_sigillaria.pdf

[shorty]

No , that does not suit me, on the trunk sigillaire there are two types of scars, "leaf nodes "I do not know, there are scars left by the falling of the leaves, leaf-cushions and scars left by falling strobus (Sigillariostrobus) I find this very slight response on the part of a scientist, your fossils could be large fruit or ovules , but I doubt it , I think an animal perhaps Crinoids ......

best regards

that just my opinion ....

Docdutronc,

Thanks, I appreciate your opinion!

An inexpensive digital microscope is on my wish list so I can get clearer close up pictures for you. Besides that, is there anything else I should do?

Thanks again for your help.

Kim

[Auspex]

..An inexpensive digital microscope is on my wish list so I can get clearer close up pictures for you...

Check out the one Pat's been using:

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?sh...amp;#entry75014

[shorty]

Perfect! Thanks! It should be here in a few days.

[docdutronc]

Docdutronc,

Thanks, I appreciate your opinion!

An inexpensive digital microscope is on my wish list so I can get clearer close up pictures for you. Besides that, is there anything else I should do?

Thanks again for your help.

Kim

yes, continue to share photos of your beautiful fossils mazon creek .....

bruno

[shorty]

The little Zorb is here already! Just let me know what you need close-ups of.

Here are a couple to start.

Thanks!

[docdutronc]

The little Zorb is here already! Just let me know what you need close-ups of.

Here are a couple to start.

Thanks!

Hi Shorty

I watched your "nodes" with curiosity, I think I can say that are not nodes in the bark lepidophytes , look nodes on the Lepidoploios and Sigillaria ,they are two kinds of scars left by those falling strobus (sigillariostrobus) and those left by the fall leaves, lepidophloios for this part of the tree called Halonia, you can see scraps of bark ,I do not see any bark details on your specimens, I say definitivly it not a node barks ....,your oddidy sems unknow for me ......

bruno

picture 1 Halonia from Lievin France ,Westphal C

picture 2 Halonia counterpart from Lens France

[docdutronc]

halonia cast , sigillaria barks with scares

[Auspex]

Still, there are certain strong similarities to Halonia; since there is still adhering matrix, could the bark pattern be obscured?

[docdutronc]

Still, there are certain strong similarities to Halonia; since there is still adhering matrix, could the bark pattern be obscured?

Hi Auspex

Yes the matrix is still adhering,the bark pattern can be obscured ,the "nodes" are too salient,too much prominent ,It seems to me !!!..... I joined a plate about the halonia and lepidophloios ,Zeiller 1886 "Description of the Fossil floras" .....in french "Description de la Flore Fossile ,Bassin Houiller de Valenciennes "...

best regards

bruno

[shorty]

Docdutronc,

Thanks for the information! You've been very helpful and informative! Your pictures are amazing, too.

Any guess if it's a different part of a plant or a seed, or not even a plant at all?

For now I'll just file it as 'unknown'.

Thank you to everyone who's looked at this and helped figure out what it could & couldn't be. (and I apologize for the cruddy pictures through out!)

Shorty

[Mr. Edonihce]

I know this is old by now, but did you ever figure out any more on these things?

One thing I can add regarding where it was found (I mean, in close proximity to marine fossils) is that sometimes you just can't really know for sure unless you were there to see it die and get buried. I have found both terrestrial material in marine deposits and marine specimens in what we had previous thought of as just terrestrial deposits.

Having said that, it seems more likely to me that these things are land plant-related than marine animal. Also, being as into Crinoids as I am, I doubted that particular idea from the get-go.....they just don't appear to have any of the characteristic patterns of crinoids (or of any echinoderm, for that matter).

However, as good as the photos are, they are not hi-res and are not moving. Either an in-person examination and/or high resolution video would probably be necessary to get any closer on an ID than what the group has come up with thus far (good job, by the way).