dirtdauber Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Collected this specimen this past week in my favorite creek in south-central Alabama. Geology is Ripley Fm., Selma Group, Upper Cretaceous (early Maastrichtian). It is about 11.5 cm. long by 4.5 cm wide at its' widest point, and about 1.5 cm thick. I don't see any bone or cartilaginous structure on the ends, and there is no evidence of sutures observed in baculites from the same formation. I would appreciate any comments as to its' ID. Thanks.-- George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darktooth Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Interesting, but I don't have any idea of what it could be. I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 worn baculite? I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeschWhat Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Interesting. It looks phosphatic. Lori www.areallycrappystory.com/fossils www.facebook.com/fossilpoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtdauber Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 4 hours ago, jpc said: worn baculite? I don't know. Possibly, but I don't think so. Can't see any evidence of sutures, and all other specimens of baculites that I've seen from this creek have sutures visible. But it does have that baculite shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtdauber Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 31 minutes ago, GeschWhat said: Interesting. It looks phosphatic. It is phosphatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I agree. Looks like Baculites. I'm not familiar with the region, so it will be an adventure for me to find out at least the genus name of this specimen. I'll try, in a starting point, to consider the following species as candidates: Baculites claviformis, Baculites undatus. (Nostoceras alternatum zone of the Coon Creek/ Ripley Formation - - Type species -- Baculites vertebralis Lamarck, 1801) "Discussion.—This species is characterized by large size, an ovate whorl section, a flattened dorsum in adults, and flank ornament of closely spaced lateroventral and ventral ribs and distant crescentic dorsolateral ribs. It most closely resembles Baculites undatus Stephenson (1941, p. 405, pl. 79, figs. 5–10), which has a similar whorl section but quite distinct ornament of strong crescentic flank ribs that extend out onto the lateroventral region. Occurrence. —This species first occurs in the Gulf Coast region associated with N. (N.) hyatti in the Coon Creek Tongue at the base of the Ripley Formation and ranges as high as the Owl Creek Formation, which overlies the Ripley where it is associated with Eubaculites carinatus (Morton, 1834) and Sphenodiscus pleurisepta (Conrad, 1857). Baculites claviformis is known from northeastern Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, New Jersey, and possibly Colorado. " - W. A. Cobban, W. J. Kennedy. 1991. Upper Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) Ammonites from the Nostoceras alternatum Zone in Southwestern Arkansas. USGS Bulletin 1953. " Name Derivation: Baculites = (baculum = staff) + (ites = stone) = stone staff (Lamarck, 1799).Type species: The type for the genus of Baculites is Baculites vertebralis Lamark (1799), by subsequent designation in Meek (1876, p. 391). (...) " - * N. L. Larson. The Late Campanian (Upper Cretaceous) cephalopod fauna of the Coon Creek Formation at the type locality. The Journal of Paleontological Sciences: JPS.H.2012.01 * text + plates I'm leaning toward the latter species. 5 " 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...
FossilDAWG Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 I also lean towards Baculites undatus. I think it is the living chamber without any of the phragmacone, which would account for the lack of suture lines. Don 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtdauber Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 Thanks for all the help in identifying this specimen, especially for the efforts of 'abyssunder'. The lack of sutures threw me off the baculites, but I agree that it is similar to Baculites undatus. I appreciate the expertise of all of you. -- George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now