austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 23 hours ago, JohnJ said: Agreed. The geology of that local watershed in Travis County is an Upper Cretaceous marine environment. It would be interesting to know the defining characteristics on which the "staff members" based their Acrocanthosaurus ID. They told me that tooth is from early Cretaceous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, austinswamp said: They told me that tooth is from early Cretaceous What specific defining characteristics did they see on your find that led them to this conclusion? The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 6 minutes ago, JohnJ said: What specific defining characteristics did they see on your find that led them to this conclusion? They said the tooth profile was too slim to be a Tyrannosaurus. The geology of the area matched up as well and this came from a 40-foot face wall in the bend of the creekk. He did point out serrations that were present under a microscope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 The geology would not match up if you found it in Travis County. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erose Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 6 minutes ago, JohnJ said: The geology would not match up if you found it in Travis County. Well, I beg to differ, but only if it wasn't actually Onion Creek. Or at least the very well known Onion Creek flowing out past McKinney Falls and the airport where it most certainly is all Upper Cretaceous. But if we go into the western half of Travis County it's almost all Lower Cretaceous. And Onion Creek does begin further west of I-35 in the Glen Rose Fm. but that is Hays County. I know of a few more "Onion Creeks" scattered around the Hill Country, but just that one in Austin. Hey Austinswamp, this is a serious head-scratcher for many of us. You've had some good feedback and input from folks who do know their stuff. Yet certain aspects of the mix don't jive: Acrocanthosaurus = Lower Cretaceous and Onion Creek = Upper Cretaceous (especially east of I-35 in it's more commonly collected section) So as much as we hate to ask for exact locations it seems that that will be the proof. If you can take a look at the Austin and San Antonio sheets of the Atlas of Texas Geology (link below) and see what formation those paleontologists identified at the "30 foot wall" you will help us better understand this fossil. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/groundwater/aquifer/GAT/ PS this is a great thread! I am completely intrigued by this tooth since dinosaur skeletal material is so rare around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 Here is my Acrocanthosaurus tooth and you can see the fine serrations continue to the base on the distal side and on the mesial edge are slightly more that 50% from the tip. Also the distal carina is very V shaped all the way to the base. Compare these characteristics to the image shown below of the distal side of the specimen in question, it's difficult to do.. Let me also say that I have many Tyrannosaurid teeth that compare well to the thickness of this specimen and that characteristic should not be used to exclude that family of theropod. Albertosaurus & Gorgosaurus teeth this size are not that fat. Still not sure what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 I find it's lack of curvature disturbing, it's not consistent with tyrannosaurs I've seen. It does curve but not much. Could it be from another taxon, maybe a carcharodontosaurid, as that seems to be consistent with the curvature in the tooth, but not acrocanthosaurus, because of the lack of serration. Maybe it is, dare I say it, an undescribed taxon? “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 59 minutes ago, erose said: Well, I beg to differ, but only if it wasn't actually Onion Creek. Or at least the very well known Onion Creek flowing out past McKinney Falls and the airport where it most certainly is all Upper Cretaceous. But if we go into the western half of Travis County it's almost all Lower Cretaceous. And Onion Creek does begin further west of I-35 in the Glen Rose Fm. but that is Hays County. I know of a few more "Onion Creeks" scattered around the Hill Country, but just that one in Austin. Hey Austinswamp, this is a serious head-scratcher for many of us. You've had some good feedback and input from folks who do know their stuff. Yet certain aspects of the mix don't jive: Acrocanthosaurus = Lower Cretaceous and Onion Creek = Upper Cretaceous (especially east of I-35 in it's more commonly collected section) So as much as we hate to ask for exact locations it seems that that will be the proof. If you can take a look at the Austin and San Antonio sheets of the Atlas of Texas Geology (link below) and see what formation those paleontologists identified at the "30 foot wall" you will help us better understand this fossil. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/groundwater/aquifer/GAT/ PS this is a great thread! I am completely intrigued by this tooth since dinosaur skeletal material is so rare around here. My comment was based on the initial post stating Onion Creek in Travis County. It is all Upper Cretaceous. Further, it would be incredible if a single fragile tooth made the journey across the bone crushing rocks of the interim strata in the fault zones in Hays County. As you know, the vast majority of the Lower Cretaceous exposures are marine; as are all the Upper Cretaceous layers. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 I think: lookey here ...maybe... "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erose Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 I think Auspex has pointed us in the proper direction. Also, JohnJ, I probably should should have worded that differently as I wasn't so much pointing things out to you as much as others not familiar with the local terrain. There is a stretch of Onion Creek within the Glen Rose, just not Travis County. But again it puts the diagnosis from the Dallas Museum in questiion...ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 Never would have thought, although something seemed fishy “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 3 hours ago, erose said: Well, I beg to differ, but only if it wasn't actually Onion Creek. Or at least the very well known Onion Creek flowing out past McKinney Falls and the airport where it most certainly is all Upper Cretaceous. But if we go into the western half of Travis County it's almost all Lower Cretaceous. And Onion Creek does begin further west of I-35 in the Glen Rose Fm. but that is Hays County. I know of a few more "Onion Creeks" scattered around the Hill Country, but just that one in Austin. Hey Austinswamp, this is a serious head-scratcher for many of us. You've had some good feedback and input from folks who do know their stuff. Yet certain aspects of the mix don't jive: Acrocanthosaurus = Lower Cretaceous and Onion Creek = Upper Cretaceous (especially east of I-35 in it's more commonly collected section) So as much as we hate to ask for exact locations it seems that that will be the proof. If you can take a look at the Austin and San Antonio sheets of the Atlas of Texas Geology (link below) and see what formation those paleontologists identified at the "30 foot wall" you will help us better understand this fossil. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/groundwater/aquifer/GAT/ PS this is a great thread! I am completely intrigued by this tooth since dinosaur skeletal material is so rare around here. When I get home I will give you an exact reference. I really appreciate y'all's input and I accept that the people at the Museum could very well be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Auspex said: I think: lookey here ...maybe... Would you say this tooth is a shed from a fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 12 minutes ago, austinswamp said: Would you say this tooth is a shed from a fish? Structurally, morphologically, and geologically (Upper Cretaceous marine), Protosphyraena is a pretty good candidate, IMO. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 The base just doesn't match up 17 minutes ago, Auspex said: Structurally, morphologically, and geologically (Upper Cretaceous marine), Protosphyraena is a pretty good candidate, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 I did find this in a creek where violent floods take place. This tooth may have floated from the Glen Rose formation in Hays county Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 6 hours ago, erose said: Well, I beg to differ, but only if it wasn't actually Onion Creek. Or at least the very well known Onion Creek flowing out past McKinney Falls and the airport where it most certainly is all Upper Cretaceous. But if we go into the western half of Travis County it's almost all Lower Cretaceous. And Onion Creek does begin further west of I-35 in the Glen Rose Fm. but that is Hays County. I know of a few more "Onion Creeks" scattered around the Hill Country, but just that one in Austin. Hey Austinswamp, this is a serious head-scratcher for many of us. You've had some good feedback and input from folks who do know their stuff. Yet certain aspects of the mix don't jive: Acrocanthosaurus = Lower Cretaceous and Onion Creek = Upper Cretaceous (especially east of I-35 in it's more commonly collected section) So as much as we hate to ask for exact locations it seems that that will be the proof. If you can take a look at the Austin and San Antonio sheets of the Atlas of Texas Geology (link below) and see what formation those paleontologists identified at the "30 foot wall" you will help us better understand this fossil. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/groundwater/aquifer/GAT/ PS this is a great thread! I am completely intrigued by this tooth since dinosaur skeletal material is so rare around here. I found the tooth along the tributary terrace deposits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Mud Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 The similarity between this and the Protosphyraena specimens is quite striking. I'm definitely in favour of that identification. Not dinosaur, but still a very cool find I think. A very ferocious looking fish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 On 7/16/2017 at 0:56 AM, zekky said: The bottom dentin just doesn't look right. Those pit like structure are bugging me. They are very uniform, any specific characteristic of marine animal or theropod? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 19, 2017 Author Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 7/13/2017 at 10:24 AM, Troodon said: Ditto what the others said, need more pictures. The Austin Chalk (Gulfian Series) is located in that county and dinosaur material has been found in that fauna. If it's that we are looking at its a late cretaceous deposit and just because of size definitely a Tyrannosaurid. Nothing more specific has been describe. Awaiting pictures of distal edge and base to confirm Not to keep this thread dragging on, but I did notice Austin chalk is present along the stretch of onion creek where I found this. I didn't notice the thin light blue line marked Kau ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanDye Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Hello, @austinswamp I've been doing some very, very in-depth research on your fossil specimen I've found very intriguing information however the Onion river is a very large one at that, making it strenuously difficult to get accurate geography I request a more exact area then Travis County thank you in advance. Note: I do not wish to prove anyone wrong with research I am mainly doing the research of possible ID's besides Acrocanthosaurus atokensis and more proof of it's identity simply because I want to answer misconceptions made I feel as a single question answered would make a difference as many voices of significance have placed their professional opinions here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanDye Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 This is Travis county. Please inform me of which color you collected your specimen from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 19, 2017 Author Share Posted July 19, 2017 4 hours ago, Ryan Dye said: This is Travis county. Please inform me of which color you collected your specimen from. Ha OK right about where the yellow and purple marks meet SW of Garfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 19, 2017 Author Share Posted July 19, 2017 On a geologic map of Travis it would be the section of Austin chalk that starts wide and narrows as it reaches the confluence of the Colorado river Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinswamp Posted July 19, 2017 Author Share Posted July 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Ryan Dye said: This is Travis county. Please inform me of which color you collected your specimen from. Thanks for the input Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.