Lepidodendrales ID: Lepidodendron or recurved Lepidophloios?

[icycatelf]

I found my largest fossil yet yesterday. I assumed that it was Lepidodendron and was curious what species it may be, but it occurred to me after looking through images that I may have some other form of Lepidodendrales. Can anyone confirm?

 

It's about 29cm (about 11.5") long with a circumference of 53.6cm (about 1' 9"). Leaf scars are about 3.5cm (about 1.4") tall by 1cm (about 0.4") wide. The scars wrap around the nearly-cylindrical specimen, only absent on roughly a third of the backside (last photo) where it may have broken off or is still hidden under the matrix. It was found in the Hyden Formation (Middle Pennsylvanian) in Johnson County KY.

 

The closest result I've found has been Lepidodendron lanceolatum, but the pits are more centered than those in my specimen and I haven't been able to find any info on whether or not they occur in my area. Rockwood suggested that it may actually be Lepidophloios that has rolled-up at a 90 degree angle rather than being a Lepidodendron cast, which would be consistent with pit placement. What are your thoughts?
 

[Rockwood]

Not an expert here. It almost looks like they should be rotated 90' centering the ligule pit and making them Lepidophloios.

[icycatelf]

4 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Not an expert here. It almost looks like they should be rotated 90' centering the ligule pit and making them Lepidophloios.

 

The orientation in the photos should be correct, as this appears to be a cylindrical cast. The pits are centered in some of the scars, but it's definitely curious that they're shifted horizontally on most of them.

[doushantuo]

Tidwell's treatment of the Manning canyon shale Lepidondrales mght be slightly helpful

NB:the scans are NOT good,but the line drawings are ok

Oplustil has done great work on Lepidodenrales.

A lot of Czech literature is freely downloadable...

[Rockwood]

22 minutes ago, icycatelf said:

 

The orientation in the photos should be correct, as this appears to be a cylindrical cast. The pits are centered in some of the scars, but it's definitely curious that they're shifted horizontally on most of them.

Could be loose periderm that curled after it sloughed off. Has a recurved  look to it.

[icycatelf]

25 minutes ago, doushantuo said:

Tidwell's treatment of the Manning canyon shale Lepidondrales mght be slightly helpful

NB:the scans are NOT good,but the line drawings are ok

Oplustil has done great work on Lepidodenrales.

A lot of Czech literature is freely downloadable...

 

Is it just that one page with drawings? There are a lot of pages showing up blank for me.

 

15 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Could be loose periderm that curled after it sloughed off. Has a recurved  look to it.

 

Oh wow, that possibility hadn't even crossed my mind! Let's see what others have to say.

[icycatelf]

Added a couple more details to the first post.

[Rockwood]

Cri-cket  cri-cket cri-cket

[Fossildude19]

@fiddlehead  @paleoflor @docdutronc

[piranha]

It looks similar to: Diaphorodendron rimosum

 

 

figures from:

 

Moore, L.C., Wittry, J., & DiMichele, W.A. (2014)

The Okmulgee, Oklahoma fossil flora, a Mazon Creek equivalent: Spatial conservatism in the composition of Middle Pennsylvanian wetland vegetation over 1100km.

Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 200:24-52

 

[Rockwood]

But don't you seriously need to address the dissimilarities ?

I just can't make it fit at all.

[Rockwood]

Anyone care to offer an opinion from a strictly material behavior standpoint ?

To me it seems intuitive that this pattern of shapes in a material that has a certain resistance to drying might curl in this direction as it did dry.

[piranha]

36 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

But don't you seriously need to address the dissimilarities ?

 

 

No, I don't need to seriously address the differences.  It was posted for comparison of overall form, not a definitive ID.

 

 

 

[Rockwood]

25 minutes ago, piranha said:

 

 

No, I don't need to seriously address the differences.  It was posted for comparison of overall form, not a definitive ID.

 

 

 

Agreed. Who am I to assign homework. 

[Fossildude19]

40 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Agreed. Who am I to assign homework. 

 

Those who wish to find answers must seek them out.

Better start hitting the books, Rockwood.  

[Rockwood]

58 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

 

Better start hitting the books, Rockwood.  

Actually it's the first thing I did.

Otherwise I wouldn't know how to spell it 

[fiddlehead]

I will make this quick. This is a poorly preserved example of Diaphorodendron rimosum as Piranha suggested. The leaf cushions are spindle-shaped, elongated about 5 times longer than wide. And have the characteristic symmetrical straight sides, and sharply pointed at the upper and lower corners. This example only has a couple of fairly clear leaf bases which are seen in the upper right in Piranha's left hand picture. They are where they should be for D. rimosum, slightly above center and crossing nearly the entire width of the leaf cushion. 

 

Hope this helps some.

Jack

[icycatelf]

I had a feeling some distortion was going on. The cast seemed to have a squished look to it.

Thanks so much! I can see the resemblance now.

[Rockwood]

On 3/9/2017 at 2:49 PM, piranha said:

It looks similar to: Diaphorodendron rimosum

 

 

figures from:

 

Moore, L.C., Wittry, J., & DiMichele, W.A. (2014)

The Okmulgee, Oklahoma fossil flora, a Mazon Creek equivalent: Spatial conservatism in the composition of Middle Pennsylvanian wetland vegetation over 1100km.

Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 200:24-52

 

 

On 3/9/2017 at 10:39 PM, icycatelf said:

I had a feeling some distortion was going on. The cast seemed to have a squished look to it.

Thanks so much! I can see the resemblance now.

I'm confident that Jack understands the process that leads from the photos on the left to those on the right. I'm frustrated and saddened that the final comment seems to be all the rest of us were able to contribute to the public's understanding of it. It may have been flawed and imperfect, but it's a shame that it is so thoroughly avoided. 

It would have been a fine discussion. 

[icycatelf]

On 3/11/2017 at 1:16 AM, Rockwood said:

 

I'm confident that Jack understands the process that leads from the photos on the left to those on the right. I'm frustrated and saddened that the final comment seems to be all the rest of us were able to contribute to the public's understanding of it. It may have been flawed and imperfect, but it's a shame that it is so thoroughly avoided. 

It would have been a fine discussion. 

Thinking more on your theory, if this had been the cast of a dried and rolled-up bark, would the leaf cushions not be innies instead of outies (for lack of a better term)?

[doushantuo]

This is by someone who knows his Carboniferous paleobotany

botan1978 Carboniferous Lepidodendracese and Lepidocarpaceae.pdf

[doushantuo]

lepi

[doushantuo]

LEPIdimi

this one slightly heavier on ultrastucture

[doushantuo]

ryd

This Last one from 1919/language:Polish,good French summary

Taxonomy probably a bit influenced by the need to establish biostratigraphic zonation in coal seams 

[Rockwood]

3 hours ago, icycatelf said:

Thinking more on your theory, if this had been the cast of a dried and rolled-up bark, would the leaf cushions not be innies instead of outies (for lack of a better term)?

When I try to come up with a mental model for the possibilities the only thought I come up with is, help !

So I guess I shouldn't really complain huh ?