britishcanuk Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I have these two teeth, the only data I have is that they are from the phosphate mines of morocco. wondering if they are small otodus or something different. Thought and opinions appreciated. cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britishcanuk Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share Posted February 6, 2017 Another angle, to show thickness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieira Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I think both teeth are Otodus Obliquus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darktooth Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I would say those are Cretolamna appendiculata. Or another cretolamna species which I can't remember the name off hand. Both species look similar. I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilshale Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Otodus lived from the Paleocene to the Miocene epoch - Cretolamna lived from the Barremian of the Cretaceous period to the Mid Miocene epoch. The phosphate Basins of Morocco are from Late Cretaceous to early Eocene. In principle, both species are possible. I would also lean to Cretolamna appendiculata. Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darktooth Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 The name of the other Cretalamna species I was thinking of is Cretalamna biauriculata. This I think may be a better fit. I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britishcanuk Posted February 7, 2017 Author Share Posted February 7, 2017 Thanks for the comments guys. darctooth, I have a biauriculata tooth, I've got included a shot of it for comparison (it's on the left). The roots are different and overall look like andiffwrwnt shark to me, I am leaning towards appendiculata but welcome any else's thoughts. cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britishcanuk Posted February 7, 2017 Author Share Posted February 7, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 The "B" tooth is the Cretolamna tooth. The same tooth is in the second image. I posted these images in an extended thread years ago. Do a forum search for that thread. For comparison: http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page What seest thou else In the dark backward and abysm of time? ---Shakespeare, The Tempest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 I remember Diceros answer to my request : " ... the shark tooth seen at far left in the lower left photo of your 5:13AM Apr. 2 post, is an upper lateral tooth of Cretolamna appendiculata biauriculata, seen in labial view. It's a typical Maastrichtian form, and shows the problem with Cretolamna - the pair of accessory cusps on each side is as is seen in the Paleocene/Eocene type species of Otodus, O. obliquus - so it's more closely related to Otodus than it is to typical Cretolamna. " - " 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...
non-remanié Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 For what its worth, diceros, the last professional in the world to not think carcharocles was descended from otodus, just for the record... ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.