Jump to content
Paleoworld-101

Fish or Pterosaur Tooth?

Recommended Posts

Paleoworld-101

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Very nice find would lean more towards fish but no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RyanDye

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LordTrilobite

I would lean towards fish as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnBrewer

Fish I think too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paleoworld-101

What features are suggesting fish as opposed to pterosaur? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hxmendoza

I think its a fish tooth. Just can't say what kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chase_E

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

Edited by Chase_E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foozil
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike from North Queensland

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 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rodrex

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×