a bone

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

I found this is southern Poland today. I suppose it is a recent or sub-fossil bone (Pleistocene-Holocene) of a mammal. I'm guessing a proximal tibia of Bovinae. Can you confirm/detail/correct?

[Harry Pristis]

If you post images with the dirt removed, we may have an identification for you.  The images should be at 90 degrees to the bone and straight down on the articular surface.

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

[Harry Pristis]

My opinion, with a moderate confidence level, is horse.

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

Thank you. Any other ideas, anyone?

[Harry Pristis]

1 hour ago, Gen. et sp. indet. said:

Thank you. Any other ideas, anyone?

 

Here are some images of a tibia from my collection:

 

 

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

Thank you

 

Does my bone look any old?

[Max-fossils]

From the looks of it, it definitely looks like a fossil. If it is, it's most probably Pleistocene.

 

To make sure though that this is indeed a fossil, I suggest you do this:  try a flame test. Light a lighter beneath the bone; if the bone burns, it's modern; if it doesn't, then it's fossil (Pleistocene).

 

Looks like the fossil bones I find on the Zandmotor (Netherlands).

 

Nice find

 

Max

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

Thank you very much!

[Harry Pristis]

3 hours ago, Gen. et sp. indet. said:

Thank you very much!

Bone is primarily composed of hydroxyapatite and collagen. Hydroxyapatite is an inorganic compound of calcium, phosphate, and hydroxide which is organized in a crystal latticework that gives bone (and teeth) structural rigidity. It preserves well as a fossil under some conditions.

Collagen is a fiberous protein that serves as connective tissue in bones and muscles. It does not preserve well in a fossil. As collagen decomposes, it may be replaced in the hydroxyapatite latticework by minerals from the depositional environment (e.g. silica dioxide dissolved in groundwater). More minerals, less collagen, the more likely to be a fossil rather than a recent bone.

Bone reinforced with exogenous minerals is said to be "mineralized." If the bone components (including the hydroxyapatite) are entirely replaced by exogenous minerals such as silica, it is said to be "replaced by -". If a bone is mineralized, it is more likely to be a fossil. If a bone is not mineralized, it is less likely to be a fossil. No absolutes, only likelihoods, because there are exceptions.

In the case of leaves and wood, as with bones, permineralization depends on the circulation of mineral-saturated groundwater. If there is limited or no circulation (or no suitable minerals in solution), then there is no permineralization. BUT, the organic remains - the leaves, or wood, or bone - are still fossils ("fossilized" if you like).

A 'burn test' or 'match test' will indicate only whether there is collagen remaining in a bone -- scorched collagen has an awful smell. Briefly apply an open flame (I prefer a butane lighter) to an inconspicuous area of the object . . . you cannot keep a pin hot enough long enough to scorch collagen. Tooth enamel contains hydroxyapatite, but doesn't contain collagen, so the 'burn test' on tooth enamel would be a waste of time.

The 'click test' - tapping a putative fossil against your teeth - was a joke that caught on. There are plenty of other things in the environment against which you can click a bone. Don't put the remains of dead, decomposed animals in your mouth.

[Guguita2104]

6 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

Bone is primarily composed of hydroxyapatite and collagen. Hydroxyapatite is an inorganic compound of calcium, phosphate, and hydroxide which is organized in a crystal latticework that gives bone (and teeth) structural rigidity. It preserves well as a fossil under some conditions.

Collagen is a fiberous protein that serves as connective tissue in bones and muscles. It does not preserve well in a fossil. As collagen decomposes, it may be replaced in the hydroxyapatite latticework by minerals from the depositional environment (e.g. silica dioxide dissolved in groundwater). More minerals, less collagen, the more likely to be a fossil rather than a recent bone.

Bone reinforced with exogenous minerals is said to be "mineralized." If the bone components (including the hydroxyapatite) are entirely replaced by exogenous minerals such as silica, it is said to be "replaced by -". If a bone is mineralized, it is more likely to be a fossil. If a bone is not mineralized, it is less likely to be a fossil. No absolutes, only likelihoods, because there are exceptions.

In the case of leaves and wood, as with bones, permineralization depends on the circulation of mineral-saturated groundwater. If there is limited or no circulation (or no suitable minerals in solution), then there is no permineralization. BUT, the organic remains - the leaves, or wood, or bone - are still fossils ("fossilized" if you like).

A 'burn test' or 'match test' will indicate only whether there is collagen remaining in a bone -- scorched collagen has an awful smell. Briefly apply an open flame (I prefer a butane lighter) to an inconspicuous area of the object . . . you cannot keep a pin hot enough long enough to scorch collagen. Tooth enamel contains hydroxyapatite, but doesn't contain collagen, so the 'burn test' on tooth enamel would be a waste of time.

The 'click test' - tapping a putative fossil against your teeth - was a joke that caught on. There are plenty of other things in the environment against which you can click a bone. Don't put the remains of dead, decomposed animals in your mouth.

What a fantastic explanation!

[Gen. et sp. indet.]

Thank you for all the info

[Harry Pristis]

7 hours ago, Gen. et sp. indet. said:

Thank you for all the info

 

If you find info informative, consider clicking on the "Informative" button.