Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Weather was really good today so I went out hiking near my home and picked some rocks/fossils up on the way. I was along a stream the entire time, and the stream exposed sediments from the Potomac Formation, a Cretaceous deposit that has some plants and reptilian stuff in it, as well as Piedmont schist. Top down I think it's a bone fragment (?), bone/tooth/plant (?), plant, and silicified wood (??). Some of the stuff is still covered in dirt, so sorry if i's not clean/covered in mica flakes (there's a lot of that around here.)

potomac group stuff 1.jpg

potomac group 2.jpg

potomac group 3.jpg

potomac group 4.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, the bands are too irregular for a fossil. I'm going with banded...something geological. :) The last one (4) looks to be just a micaceous rock. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

No 4 looks like it could be a worn hadr jaw frag, but the picture is too out of focus.  Can we see clear pix of all sides?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the other two?

 

 

PS, if I can find the coprolite I have I'll post it. Could be a dinosaur one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some closer ups. It looks more like silicified wood to me (by the way, the mica is from the dirt that's on it. The stream was full of the stuff too).

potomac group 3.jpg

potomac group stuff 1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a mica schist to Me.

It will always help if You would clean the rocks off before taking pictures, dirt can hide the fine details.

Tony

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The first two are definitely fossils, the later two I'm not really sure. The thing is that the fossils may not be Potomac Formation, since it's possible some construction crew dumped gravel from elsewhere in the woods and it eroded down to where I found them.

 

Maybe a fragment of a turtle shell mold/cast from an ironstone concretion like in C?

 

FIGURE 9. Turtles from the Cloverly Formation. A , USNM 546760, Naomichelys speciosa , left epiplastron, ventral/external view; B , USNM 546709, “ Glyptops ” pervicax , carapace fragment, external view; C , USNM 546762, Testudinata indet., shell fragment, external? view. Scale bars equal 5 mm.  

potomac group stuff 1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

This last one is not a turtle piece.  The striations seem to be in the rock not part of its texture.  Keep in mind that I say this as a guy who has collected thousands of turtle pices.  Still looking for more pix of the possible gadr jaw frag.

Link to post
Share on other sites
fifbrindacier
On 8 février 2017 at 3:09 AM, ynot said:

Looks like a mica schist to Me.

It will always help if You would clean the rocks off before taking pictures, dirt can hide the fine details.

Tony

And a humid piece reveals details.

I agree with the identifications of Mica Schist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2017 at 6:06 PM, EMP said:

Here's some closer ups. It looks more like silicified wood to me (by the way, the mica is from the dirt that's on it. The stream was full of the stuff too).

potomac group 3.jpg

potomac group stuff 1.jpg

This one.

But pictures of the rocks after a cleaning would be very helpful!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, EMP said:

Do you honestly think so? 

NO, I like to post erroneous id's just to confuse people.:P

Ynot

 

PS Better pictures of clean pieces may change My opinion, but it looks like a mica schist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
fifbrindacier
On ‎10‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 1:50 AM, ynot said:

NO, I like to post erroneous id's just to confuse people.:P

Ynot

 

PS Better pictures of clean pieces may change My opinion, but it looks like a mica schist.

:P:P

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see some rocks and possible wood. The early Cretaceous plant material found in streams in and around College Park are poorly preserved. Am making this observation based on a single collecting trip there. Not sure where you are collecting though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the second one. Any that you are fairly sure are just rocks may respond to a hammer blow and show more woody characteristics. I'd like to see a nicely focused close up of the first one also. It's been a really long time since I've been there but I remember the local expert (Bob Weist) showing me the fossils which I would have taken as rocks until we made fresh surfaces on them. Your #3 looks like a banded piedmont crystaline rock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Ok I finally got some "dirt" (:P) on these.

 

The third one is either ripple marks or a mold of the plant Dioonites. The Patuxent Formation does have some scattered sandstone type beds that are often marked by these structures since they were formed during floods.

 

The second one is a plant thing.

 

The first one is rock (:()

 

The last one I'm not entirely sure. It could be Pleistocene stuff re-worked into the stream bed or it could be from some Piedmont exposure further up. Any rate, not Cretaceous.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 years later...

A long time ago I posted about this in a thread on Cretaceous fossils. After going through some labels again, and looking back at geologic maps, I'm 99% sure this "dinosaur" remain (or whatever I thought back then XD) isn't even from the Coastal Plain, but the Piedmont. 

 

As you can see, the reason I thought Coastal Plain initially is pretty forgivable. The Piedmont is known as an area of metamorphic units, but this specimen almost looks like some kind of sedimentary feature? Almost looks like ripple marks. 

 

Just wondering what anyone's thoughts on this was. The bed I think this came from is a meta-arenite unit within the Glenarm Group. Doesn't look like anything I'd associate with jointing. 

 

589b91d7aeb84_potomacgroupstuff1.jpg.02ec8c74687260e0ed8256459a1562fc.jpg

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
6 minutes ago, EMP said:

As you can see, the reason I thought Coastal Plain initially is pretty forgivable. The Piedmont is known as an area of metamorphic units, but this specimen almost looks like some kind of sedimentary feature? 

You realize that metamorphic rock is sedimentary rock. I think these are sedimentary layers that have been 'cooked'.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 99.99% sure this is not dinosaur remains.  : )

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...