bivalvia near Fernie, British Columbia

[elaliquo]

Please help us identify the fossil in the picture. It was found near Fernie, British Columbia, Canada.

[Arizona Chris]

Hard to tell without a clear side view, but appears to be like a brachiopod from the  family Athyrididae (Order Athyridida).  Maybe you can dissolve this from the limestone and get a good 3d look at it!

[elaliquo]

Thank you, Arizona Chris! Any wild guess how old it might be?

Edited August 16, 2017 by elaliquo

[Max-fossils]

Hi @elaliquo,

 

Nice find! Here is a geological map of Canada. If you more or less situate Fernie there, it is probably in the blue. This means that it's from somewhere in the Paleozoic. Both bivalves and brachiopods existed back then, but brachiopods were way more common. Though with these pictures I am more leaning towards bivalve, I can't be sure, as the pictures are kinda fuzzy. Could you please take better quality pictures, and from more angles too?

 

Best regards,

 

Max

[FranzBernhard]

Bivalve or brachiopod, whatever it is - I like this specimen with its perfect prep work by mother nature very much!

Franz Bernhard

[elaliquo]

Thank you all! I don't have access to the fossil at this point, so no more pictures, but your info is fantastic.

[fifbrindacier]

Hi, according to me, seeing the first photo, it might be a brachiopod. Maybe could you try to take a pic of this part from the side in order that we can see its profile.

[elaliquo]

I just did find another couple of pictures. I took them before fifbrindacier's advice, so they may not help with the profile.

[FossilDAWG]

A generalized geological map of the second largest country in the world will not provide nearly enough local resolution to help determine the age of this fossil.  The geology around Fernie is particularly complicated as it sits in a valley underlaid by Jurassic shales, surrounded by high mountains composed of Paleozoic rocks ranging from Ordovician to Mississippian in age.  The fossil has eroded from its limestone matrix in a manner that indicates it has been replaced by silica.  This preservation excludes an origin in the Jurassic shales.  The Ordovician and Silurian are not extensively exposed in the area, and the rock is mostly limestone that has been altered to dolomite, quite different from the fossil in question.  Most of the mountains is composed of Mississippian limestone of the Banff  and Rundle Formations.  In many layers the fossils are silicified and weather free from the rock.  One of these Mississippian formations is certainly the source of the specimen.

 

It is unfortunate that none of the photos clearly show the "beak" of the shell, but the overall aspect is very suggestive of a brachiopod such as Athyris (as has been suggested) or Composita.  Also, it is common for the brachiopods (and corals) to be silicified but not the bivalves in the area formations, likely reflecting differences in the original shell composition.

 

Don C

[doushantuo]

agree with Don ,that kind of biconvex shell is rare in Paleozoic bivalves

[elaliquo]

Thank you, Don C, for the detail of your analysis!