Robstone Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Max-fossils Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Hi @Robstone! What you think is a tooth is not one... In fact I don't think it's a fossil at all, but rather a mineral. If you show us the inside, maybe some mineral experts can tell you what you have. And those are some stunning ammonites! But I can't help with ID... Do you perhaps know the age of the fossils? Best regards, Max Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darktooth Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 I agree with max on the second pic. Definately not a tooth. But very nice ammonite. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Robstone Posted February 8, 2017 Author Share Posted February 8, 2017 Some more I found, sorry I have no idea about age, found them between the villages of tashigang and gete at over 4000m. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ludwigia Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Sorry I can't help with id, but your "tooth" appears to be a broken off part of the venter of the phragmocone of an ammonite. It looks like a minerally infilled part of a septal chamber 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Robstone Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share Posted February 9, 2017 Thank you for the information, had no idea really but just looked most like a tooth to me so I'm just happy to now have some idea what it is. I've done a bit more research and it seems they are probably around 500million years old from the ancient sea Tethys. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Ludwigia Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 7 hours ago, Robstone said: Thank you for the information, had no idea really but just looked most like a tooth to me so I'm just happy to now have some idea what it is. I've done a bit more research and it seems they are probably around 500million years old from the ancient sea Tethys. Ammonites are not that old, which prompted me to do a bit of detective work. There are certainly lots of ammonites to be found in Spiti Valley, and I saw lots of photos of ones like yours. The only thing is, there are lots of ads for trekking and looking for fossils, but no one mentioned anywhere what their names are. Just "ammonites". I did however learn, as I was thinking, that they originate from early Triassic Formations, which make them "only" 200-250 million years old. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
abyssunder Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 I'm wondering ,also, which genus/species could they belong to? There are not much references (except photos) to compare with. As I see, most of the ammonites are related to Langza, Spiti Valley. " The Himalayas were formed as a result of the collision of the Indian and the Eurasian plate millions of years ago which led to the disappearance of the ancient Tethys Sea leaving behind fossilized clues of the sea life of that era. In short, if fossils interest you, then Spiti is your place. The route to the natural fossil centre starts at Langza, from where it is about a half hour walk to its base. The fossil centre ranges from an average altitude of 4400 meters to 4600 meters along a narrow stream and is best explored here. The geological history of Spiti Valley dates back 500 million years with a remarkable plethora of Precambrian/Cambrian era fossils and a recent study by the Geological Society of America shows that Spiti contains various marine fossils. These Paleozoic Era fossils represent some of the earliest legged creatures, relatives of crabs and spiders. It’s then not without reason that Spiti has come to be known as the fossil park of the Himalayas. " - from here The Ammonites are younger in age, as Roger said before, and I think they could belong to the genus Himalayites . 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.