Jump to content

Symmetrical pattern in the print of a ????


Rocky Stoner

Recommended Posts

Does anyone recognize this ? I thought it might be a partial print of a cephalon with suture lines but don't see anything resembling this shape or pattern in any of the eldredgeops pics or illustrations I've seen.

The opposing "Y"s appear to be symmetrical.

Thanks.

IMG_9909.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks to me like you've got yourself a crinoid calyx

“...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

Rough outline, I'm still not entirely sure on the difference between cystoid and crinoid. The pattern is the outer layer which has for the most part eroded away, leaving the undetailed cast

IMG_2312.JPG

“...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

10 hours ago, Foozil said:

Very big cystoid?

Hi Foozil, that suggestion prompted a search:

http://www.fossilmall.com/Pangaea/pfossils/pf24/pf-fossils24.htm

The photos there closely resemble an oddity that I found in the same chunk of shale as the firts pic, but not a mirrored split.

I first thought it might be a huge Platyceratid Gastropod .

Take a look.

Thanks.

IMG_9911.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rocky Stoner said:

Hi Foozil, that suggestion prompted a search:

http://www.fossilmall.com/Pangaea/pfossils/pf24/pf-fossils24.htm

The photos there closely resemble an oddity that I found in the same chunk of shale as the firts pic, but not a mirrored split.

I first thought it might be a huge snarge eatin' sea snail.

Take a look.

Thanks.

IMG_9911.JPG

Well now I have no idea. Crushed cystoid? Because the first pic you showed us is identical to my cystoids.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the website you linked doesn't show what I was thinking.This shows the pattern I'm thinking of more: ( I don't think I can show the link to the site, its a web-shop)

XICY81e.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, doushantuo said:

slight carpoid("soluta") vibe,Fooz

I see. The sutures of carpoids and cystoids can be hard to distinguish on their own.

BUT - the positive of the fossil has the wrong shape for a carpoid, I think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In no way is that a crinoid calyx. We can rule that out.

Rocky, any chance you have a ruler for scale. Most of us outside the US don't use flags.

...How to Philosophize with a Hammer

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kane said:

In no way is that a crinoid calyx. We can rule that out.

Rocky, any chance you have a ruler for scale. Most of us outside the US don't use flags.

Hi Kane.

The ruler in the first post is marked in 1/32". The flag is a coaster for my coffee cup.

Most probably don't use INCHES either, but I'm not buying a new tape till this one craps out.:D

 

Thanks Kane.

 

IMG_9909.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, I missed the first post entirely!

 

This one is a real head-scratcher. It's an impression, but of what I have no idea! :headscratch:

...How to Philosophize with a Hammer

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, that's a keeper. I'm also in the Cystoid camp. Geometry is very "echinodermish."  And I can't think of what else it would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's clearly an echinoderm.  Of that group, I think it fits with a cystoid of some description best.  I'm having trouble relating the impression to the rest of the block; is it sitting on a rounded surface with the whitish material in a position to be remnants of a stem?  If so it could be some sort of a rhombiferan, along the lines of Homalocystites or Glyptocycstites (thought a different genus as those are both Ordovician genera).  I also can't make much sense out of the second piece in the photos with the piece with the obvious plated fossil.  Is that the counterpart to the fossil?  If so I can't see how they fit together.

 

Pleurocystids are completely different.

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Any provenance information forthcoming,or thoughts on stratigraphy ?

Glyptocystitid,I think.

Both plates from Haeckel's "Die Cystoideen"

 

 

haeckpl1rcjjomages.jpg

rcjjomages.jpg

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FossilDAWG said:

It's clearly an echinoderm.  Of that group, I think it fits with a cystoid of some description best.  I'm having trouble relating the impression to the rest of the block; is it sitting on a rounded surface with the whitish material in a position to be remnants of a stem?  If so it could be some sort of a rhombiferan, along the lines of Homalocystites or Glyptocycstites (thought a different genus as those are both Ordovician genera).  I also can't make much sense out of the second piece in the photos with the piece with the obvious plated fossil.  Is that the counterpart to the fossil?  If so I can't see how they fit together.

 

Pleurocystids are completely different.

 

Don

Hi Don, thanks for chiming in.

These are two different pieces of a chunk that I broke up and split into several pieces. I'm pretty certain they are from that same chunk, but have no idea where they were in relation to one another. May not have even been in the same "split".

Some additional photos might help determine the possible relationship to the whitish material.

Will also attach additional photos of the other crushed specimen.

 

Thanks again.

111.JPG

222.JPG

333.JPG

.....more

444.JPG

555.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those photos are a big help, thanks.  

I can see that the hexagonally plated structure is not part of an underlying rounded or cylindrical object, and that the white bits are not obviously a part of a stem structure, they seem to be unconnected to the plates.  Unfortunately that leaves us with just the impression of a few partial plates, which are clearly echinoderm but otherwise present too little in the way of diagnostic features.  The "crushed specimen" does not appear to be composed of hexagonal plates and so it is certainly not related to the first fossil.  If it were, the plates should also be discernible on that side of the mold.  I suspect it may be a crushed Platyceras but I'm not confident of that ID.

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...