Inaugural Trip With Ray's Magic "CUBES"

[RJB]

  You guys can go back and forth about what is what, but to me, just a very interesting report.  Oh, and nice to see Ray's Majic Cube in there as well. 

 

RB

[SailingAlongToo]

All,

 

For those who are interested, here is the response I got from Dr. Matthew Lamanna, Asst. Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, PA, after I sent him the same photos I included in my 1st and 2nd posts starting this thread. Looks like the 3 verts shown in the photo together are all Hadrosaurid sp. meaning I've finally collected my first dino vert.  I have included the plate he provided from Leidy's (1865) publication at the bottom of this post as well as the Longrich (2016) professional paper he mentions, in case anyone is interested. I also removed specific mention of the exact location and changed it to "your locale" for obvious reasons.  We feel truly privileged to have found 3 dinosaur verts, 5 theropod teeth and a possible dinosaur arm bone (still awaiting ID, if possible, from the professionals) in the same weekend. WOW!! What a trip!

 

Jack (and Cathy),

 

Thanks for your email. It’s nice to get interesting fossils to identify for a change J . (Most of what people send me photos of are, sadly, just rocks.)

 

I shared your pics with a number of knowledgeable colleagues (all cc’d), and our consensus is that the three ‘not in situ’ vertebrae are those of hadrosaurid dinosaurs. At least two of them are caudal (tail) vertebrae; the other is either another caudal (from the anterior part of the tail) or a dorsal (back) vertebra. Please see the attached plate from Leidy’s (1865) publication on the famous New Jersey hadrosaur Hadrosaurus foulkii and other Cretaceous reptiles (kindly provided by my student Dale Malinzak) and judge for yourself. Hadrosaurid remains are not common at "your locale" but have definitely been found before – see, for instance, the attached paper by Miller (1967).

 

I hope this helps. Happy hunting down there! As you probably know, Late Cretaceous dinosaur fossils are extraordinarily rare in eastern North America. Because the continent was likely divided into multiple pieces by the Western Interior Seaway for most of the mid- and Late Cretaceous, eastern North America (‘Appalachia’) may well have hosted an endemic dinosaur fauna for a lot of that time (as evidenced, for instance, by the weirdly archaic tyrannosauroid Dryptosaurus from the latest Cretaceous of NJ, and possibly also by the ?ceratopsian jaw fragment from a site near "your locale" described by Longrich [2016; see attached]).

 

As for the fourth, in situ vertebra, the general consensus is “not dinosaur,” either a large-bodied croc (e.g., Deinosuchus) or perhaps a mosasaur (a very large taxon such as Mosasaurus hoffmanni).

 

Cheers!

Matt

 

Here is his second response on the in situ vertebrae photograph I provided him (same as posted at beginning of this thread) when he got additional information from Dr. Barbara Grandstaff of the University of Pennsylvania.

Matt,

 

I've looked a couple more times at the 'in situ' vertebra, and have only one vague thing nagging at me about it. There is a clear ball joint on the left end - could be a big croc, all right. But the right end looks almost like it's sweeping out into a fairly wide, strong transverse process extending toward the bottom edge of the picture. This is naggingly similar to a mosasaur vertebra. Since the Black Creek is marine mosasaurs are another possibility that should be kept in mind. I can't be sure because the vert is not well enough exposed, but just wanted to pass the possibility on. If so, it's a big one - something like Mosasaurus rather than a little guy like Clidastes.

 Barbara

 

I can honestly say, looking at the other photo angles of the in situ vert, it definitely has the thick transverse process extending down. It might actually be a Mosasaurus. Once @Daleksec cleans it up and puts it back together we will post additional photos.

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

 

 Longrich 2016 - leptoceratopsid from Appalachia (L K Black Creek Grp of NC).pdf

[aerogrower]

Well that pretty much seals it then. Has to be the magic CUBES .  Congratulations maybe find of the month or.......

[jpc]

I disagree... Although I respect Matt's diagnosis, I will calmly disagree with him.  I still think the rounded one (round on end view) is too rounded to be hadrosaurian.  Note the very different shape of the one that is heart shaped (again, end on view), and how similar that is to the one in the Leidy publication.  And I only  am familiar wot one species of mosasaur and its tail verts are much squarer than this long thing.  I am sticking with croc on the little one.       

[Ridgehiker]

16 minutes ago, jpc said:

I disagree... Although I respect Matt's diagnosis, I will calmly disagree with him.  I still think the rounded one (round on end view) is too rounded to be hadrosaurian.  Note the very different shape of the one that is heart shaped (again, end on view), and how similar that is to the one in the Leidy publication.  And I only  am familiar wot one species of mosasaur and its tail verts are much squarer than this long thing.  I am sticking with croc on the little one.       

 

I'm sure that jpc and I have collected a hundred times as many hadrosaur and ceratopsian vertebrae than Matt. Perhaps a thousand.   One needs to hold these in the hand.

 

It's a ceratopsian vertebra.

[FossilDudeCO]

looks like a great trip!

Cant wait to get my magic cube out in the field!

[SailingAlongToo]

30 minutes ago, Canadawest said:

 

I'm sure that jpc and I have collected a hundred times as many hadrosaur and ceratopsian vertebrae than Matt. Perhaps a thousand.   One needs to hold these in the hand.

 

It's a ceratopsian vertebra.

 

I agree, photos aren't the best to make a determination from. May end up shipping it up to him for him to look at and show around.

[SailingAlongToo]

AS PROMISED - MORE PHOTOS FROM OUR TRIP

 

These are from @Daleksec's finds. Blame him if they are a tad blurry, don't zoom much or don't have a beautiful cube in the photo for scale (especially, since his dad has one so Trevor would never again send me a photo with NO SCALE!  #$@!!&*)

 

Let's start with a shark vert, "with scale."                                                                        And, then go to Hybodus spine pieces and tooth, "without a beautiful cube scale."

   

 

Here's one of his Theropod teeth with nice serrations. It's 1 1/2" long, the other view with scale cube is more blurry than this one. I will get better photos this weekend cause this is a nice tooth.

 

Here is one of his Deinosuchus rugosus teeth. I think he ended up with 3 or 4 on the weekend including one right at 3 inches. The other photos are too blurry. (At least we have a scale cube.)

 

  

 

Here are 3 croc ? verts. The black ones are probably Deinosuchus rugosus. Not sure about the whitish one. (At least all 5 photos have scale cubes.) 

 

  

 

  

 

 

And, last but not least, here are photos, with scale, of a vert that his dad found on our trip to this location last year. To me, it looks like it's partially digested in stomach acid. @Canadawest & @jpc, I realize it is pretty roached out, but any guesses?

 

    

 

 

Even MORE photos of the goodies to come.

[jpc]

curious to know what makes you say Deinosuchus?  The first one maybe; it looks pretty big, based on the Magic Cube.  Are there morphological differences between D and other cretaceous corcs.  I'll admit, I am not up to date on Deinosuchus bones.   Yes, I would say they are all three crocodilian.   That last bone, though, yikes.  

[SailingAlongToo]

16 hours ago, jpc said:

curious to know what makes you say Deinosuchus?  The first one maybe; it looks pretty big, based on the Magic Cube.  Are there morphological differences between D and other cretaceous corcs.  I'll admit, I am not up to date on Deinosuchus bones.   Yes, I would say they are all three crocodilian.   That last bone, though, yikes.  

 

JPC,

 

Good question. I'm basing my assumption / statement on a paleontologist who specializes in reptile / croc fossils, who examined the croc verts from this general area that my wife and I have in our personal collection. He identified all of the larger/thicker ones as Deinosuchus. There are fossils from several other smaller croc species identified from this general area also including, Borealosuchus sp., Leidyosuchus and another starting with an "S" I can't remember off the top of my head. We have some verts and quite a few teeth from those too. To me as an amateur, the Deinosuchus verts seem much more stout, robust and/or beefy (I know, "beefy" is not a technical term but I think you get my intent.) Whichever adjective you choose to describe it's fossils, it isn't that they just appear bigger/larger, but also have more mass. Just my opinion.

 

Interestingly, in this general area most of the fossil bones we find that are recognizable/identifiable, are verts. Occasionally you can find a long bone like this one from a trip 2 years ago, but not that often. There is always a plethora of bone shards and fragments.

 

 

 

 

  

 

Cheers,

 

SA2