Jump to content

Paleoworld-101

Recommended Posts

Collected recently at a marine Cretaceous location near Richmond, QLD, Australia (Toolebuc Formation). 100 million years old. Fossils of both fish (some quite large) and pterosaurs are known from the location. There were also marine reptiles but i think fish or pterosaur are the only two possibilities in this case. I have a number of other definitive fish teeth from this location but they all look somewhat different which is why i am confused with this one. 

 

There appears to be a bit of bone attached to the bottom of the tooth, and maybe a little bit to one side of the specimen as well (the large object however i think is a worn belemnite).

 

It measures 18 mm long, but note the tip of the tooth is broken. 

 

 IMG_1778.thumb.JPG.85ba54ba7f7ec54073d94d736e82db22.JPG

 

IMG_1783.thumb.JPG.97e2a399f3b30aae6e22c49dd0b984b0.JPG

 

IMG_1785.thumb.JPG.a41839d2cfff2d03bbf474abc0eaf86a.JPG

"In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..."

-Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a nice find (whatever it is.).

I would like to see the bone exposed a little better. It would probably help with an id on it.

 

@LordTrilobite @hxmendoza @Troodon

Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys."

Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough."

 

My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection

My favorite thread on TFF.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How exciting! A Pterosaur would be quite spectacular, more voices could shed some light on the ID.

rydysig.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What features are suggesting fish as opposed to pterosaur? 

"In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..."

-Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think it could be from some species of lizard fish. They've been found around Australia, and they're also from around that 100 mya period. 

IMG_3844.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chase_E said:

I honestly think it could be from a lizardfish.  They've been found around Australia, and they're also from around that 100 mya period. 

IMG_3844.JPG

It could be, but putting a specific ID on it like that isn't possible. There are many other fish in the area, and it could be any one of them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the several species of bony fish, some times they come with more of the jaw and other teeth attached.

I do not think any one has found any pterosaur material complete with teeth in Australia so they can be used for comparison.

 

Mike 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I would suggest that it could be part of a sawfish jaw. Woodward described some of these from the Toolebuc, but mostly regarded as miss-identified fish teeth. I don't think that they belong to the lizard fish either as they normally have a cutting edge either side of the tooth (kinda like a sharks tooth, not as wide though). I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am leaning towards Enchodus sp. tooth. This tooth is definitely not thecodont, therefore it is not a reptile. Thecodont teeth, as present in all archosaurs, are located in the jaw sockets and are not a part of the jaw. This tooth, on the other hand, is completely attached to the jaw, in the same way as bony fish teeth.

The Tooth Fairy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...