Mosasaur: Prognathodon?

[Max-fossils]

Hi all,

 

Usually you see these fossils in the "Is it real?" thread, but I decided to make a change. 

This mosasaur block contains several teeth, and I think they are real, and it is possible that the block was found as such (if you think any of it is fake/reconstructed, let me know).

As usual, it's from our favorite mosasaur location Khouribga (Morocco), meaning it's from the late Cretaceous (like all mosasaurs).

Now I would like to put a species (or several species) on these teeth.

Here's a list I found of the different mosasaurs found in Khouribga (it may be wrong):

• Globidens phosphaticus (definitely not this one)
• Halisaurus arambourgi 
• Halisaurus walkeri
• Mosasaurus hoffmani
• Platecarpus ptychodon
• Prognathodon curii
• Liodon anceps (?)

 

All of them (except for Globidens) seem like possible solutions for my block. 

So, what species do you think it is? Maybe there are different species for the different teeth?

 

Thanks!

 

Max

[Troodon]

Cannot comment on the ID of the crowns but I think your big tooth may have been composited to the root.   See white/cream area under crown looks like a glue mix.  That other tooth may have been placed there.   The matrix block may have been fabricated but need to see it under brighter light. Let's see what others say.

 

An expert @LordTrilobite

[LordTrilobite]

I agree with Troodon that the tooth has been placed on there. The join between the tooth crown and root looks just slightly off. The yellow colour around it also looks off and unnatural. The tooth crown is definitely Prognathodon sp.. There's also a layer of glue on the tooth that makes the colour look off. There almost no shine at all. Which is what you'd expect from a clean tooth. But this can generally just be scraped off to reveal a nice shiny tooth.
The block looks natural to me. Like a typical jaw fragment with an erupting tooth in it. The erupting tooth looks like it also might be Prognathodon sp.

The tooth on the bottom seems a bit recurved and more slender. Makes me think its a more anterior tooth. Possibly also Prognathodon sp. but from the front of the jaw. While the fatter teeth are from the middle to back of the jaw.

 

Many would name this Prognathodon anceps. but the literature is kinda unclear if this species is actually present. Same with Prognathodon giganteus. I don't think either have properly beeen described form the area. So Prognathodon sp. is a better label.

 

So probably a composite. But not the worst since the species seems to match up.

[Max-fossils]

12 hours ago, Troodon said:

Cannot comment on the ID of the crowns but I think your big tooth may have been composited to the root.   See white/cream area under crown looks like a glue mix.  That other tooth may have been placed there.   The matrix block may have been fabricated but need to see it under brighter light. Let's see what others say.

 

An expert @LordTrilobite

 

10 hours ago, LordTrilobite said:

I agree with Troodon that the tooth has been placed on there. The join between the tooth crown and root looks just slightly off. The yellow colour around it also looks off and unnatural. The tooth crown is definitely Prognathodon sp.. There's also a layer of glue on the tooth that makes the colour look off. There almost no shine at all. Which is what you'd expect from a clean tooth. But this can generally just be scraped off to reveal a nice shiny tooth.
The block looks natural to me. Like a typical jaw fragment with an erupting tooth in it. The erupting tooth looks like it also might be Prognathodon sp.

The tooth on the bottom seems a bit recurved and more slender. Makes me think its a more anterior tooth. Possibly also Prognathodon sp. but from the front of the jaw. While the fatter teeth are from the middle to back of the jaw.

 

Many would name this Prognathodon anceps. but the literature is kinda unclear if this species is actually present. Same with Prognathodon giganteus. I don't think either have properly beeen described form the area. So Prognathodon sp. is a better label.

 

So probably a composite. But not the worst since the species seems to match up.

Alright, thanks both! Shame it's not 100% real, but thanks for the ID!

[LordTrilobite]

Well, it's real. But it's just composited from different specimens.

[Troodon]

Agree it's all real.   Good experience for future purchases.  With Moroccan material you always have to be extra cautious.

[Max-fossils]

30 minutes ago, LordTrilobite said:

Well, it's real. But it's just composited from different specimens.

That's what I understood 

(sorry if I wasn't very clear)

[Max-fossils]

22 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Agree it's all real.   Good experience for future purchases.  With Moroccan material you always have to be extra cautious.

Indeed! But when I got this fossil, I didn't have a passion for them yet, and I didn't really know what it was.