Jump to content

Recommended Posts

mikemH

Hi,

I've started to do a little exploring around the lower Hunter. Started off with some of the more well known sites mention elsewhere in this forum, also some of the fossil localities marked on the 1;100,000 geological series (Camberwell, Dungog, Bulahdelah) http://www.resourcesandenergy.nsw.gov.au/miners-and-explorers/geoscience-information/products-and-data/maps/geological-maps/1-100-000

The explanatory notes focus on geology, but also give a little info on fossils. Some localities yield very little, others more rewarding.

 

DSC00785.JPG.4ffb0ce0cc2f3bb11047503658aa7e12.JPG

 

My first Trilobite (Pygidium?), from the Williams River, (Bonnington Formation, early Carboniferous, 340Ma).

Not that easy to find, took a lot of rock splitting.

 

DSC00788.JPG.c9d184e6988c5fa8fe7b7ebad9223577.JPG

 

On the left, fragmented Crinoids, from the Williams River. On the right, Crinoid (arm with pinnules?) and a Bryozoan, from Cedar Tree Creek,(Ararat formation, early Carboniferous, 350Ma).

Williams River has quite a bit of marine fauna, but it is mostly fragmented or crushed. In some rocks it forms a layer 5mm thick.

 

I could use a little help with this one!

 

DSC00799.JPG.8a426f66273f53bb4d41a881099ab687.JPG

 

On the right is a "piece of shell" I picked up at Cedar Tree Creek, it was unattached on a sandy/pebbly bank. I was going to pass it by, thinking it a modern species. But not being sure, put it in my bag  ïncase". On the left is a specimen from Kitchener, (Branxton formation, mid Permian, 265Ma).

Uncanny resemblance!

Is there enough of it for ID?

If it is the same, is it likely to have made it thru the extinction event to modern times?

My best guess is Spiriferid, (Neospirifer??), but only based on the size and fine plications.

Most Spiriferid became extinct at the end of the Permian.

 

Cheers,

Mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foozil

Thanks for sharing! 

Sending PM :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19
3 hours ago, mikemH said:

 

If it is the same, is it likely to have made it thru the extinction event to modern times?

My best guess is Spiriferid, (Neospirifer??), but only based on the size and fine plications.

Most Spiriferid became extinct at the end of the Permian.

 

Cheers,

Mike.

 

Mike, 

Your last item is a pelecypod (clam), whereas Spiriferids were brachiopods. 

Here is a picture that describes the differences between the two:

 

brachiopods_versus_bivalves_illustrated1_t.jpg

 

Hopefully someone more familiar with the area will weigh in. :) 

Nice finds, all in all, though.

Regards, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mikemH

Tim, thanks for the feedback.

Done a bit of digging for info on modern local clams (mussels), the ones I have found so far have concentric rings.http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/animals/musselid.htm

Will search some more!

Mike

Ah, I'm such a goose! Saw straight lines and thought radial, but of course the piece missing curves again to form concentric rings.

Sure have a lot to learn.

Edited by mikemH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piranha

These Bonnington pygidia match well with: Conophillipsia subtriangularis 

 

IMG.jpg.e7846ea35acc6055ac3ecd3f67f83abc.jpg

 

Engel, B.A., & Morris, N. (1984)

Conophillipsia (Trilobita) in the early Carboniferous of eastern Australia.

Alcheringa, 8(1):23-63

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
piranha

Label it: Monodechenella subtriangularis

Update since Engel & Norris 1984: Conophillipsia has been synonymized as: Monodechenella

 

text from:

 

Vanderlaan, T.A., & Ebach, M.C. (2015)

A review of the Carboniferous and Permian trilobites of Australia.

Zootaxa, 3926(1):1-56

 

The genus Conophillipsia Roberts 1963 is herein considered a junior synonym of Monodechenella Stumm 1953, following the arguments presented by Lieberman (1994) and Owens (1994, 2006).  Conophillipsia was described as a new genus based on its age, only being found in the Carboniferous (Hahn & Hahn 1993; Hahn & Brauckmann 1993; Engel & Morris 1997).  However, the striking similarities to Monodechenella species convincingly places Conophillipsia species within the generic concept of Monodechenella.  These features include a broad, flat proetid-like cephalon, with a multisegmented phillipsiid-like pygidium (Lieberman 1994; Owens 1994).  Owens (1994) has discussed the possibility of pseudo-extinctions in proetid trilobites from the late Devonian, which circumvents the biostratigraphic arguments for a new genus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mikemH

A few more pieces from the Williams River, Bonnington formation, Early Carboniferous.

 

GW015aa.jpg.a4a77aea7e94a3aef40a33e4c5f2625e.jpg

 

The Crinoid segments show some nice detail, axial canal, radial markings.

 

Given the amount of material, I've been looking for more than just stems. There are arms scattered about, but I was hoping to find Dorsal Cup.

 

GW034.JPG.fad0c5efacbcf5a2b5826a26766e041c.JPG

 

Its a bit obscure, but could this be an external mould. The photo shows circular form, but it has been flattened. Longer axis is 30mm.

 

GW033.JPG.fa1d67d2b6d9ef76ea37a560edbc0321.JPG

 

Are these Brachials?

 

There are some species more intact.

 

GW035.JPG.6f36b78affac9c6c9fef8955253a460c.JPG

 

Brachiopods and Bryozoan.

 

GW023a.JPG.dadc70d91bff778451d96db86339021c.JPG

 

Gastropod? The only reference to Early Carboniferous Gastropods I can find is Yoo, E.K. 1994 (Australian Museum) https://australianmuseum.net.au/uploads/journals/17803/18_complete.pdf , but they are all small to minute!

 

Each time I look something new catches my eye.

 

GW004aa.thumb.jpg.add217ca563e9b010d92422822c81f2c.jpg

 

What could this little creature(?) be ?

 

mike

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foozil

Very cool finds. I believe your gastropod is a Turritella sp. We find them around lake St. Clair in carboniferous rocks. 

Again, very cool stuff you got there :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mikemH

Lewinsbrook Rd. quarry, near Gresford, locations 79 and 80 on geomap 9233, Dungog, is a site worth visiting.( Bonnington Formation, Gilmore Volcanic Group, early Carboniferous )

Although in the same formation as the Williams River site, it differs in that Crinoids are less profuse and I failed to find any Trilobites. It is quite a large quarry and I did not explore completely, so perhaps there is more to find.

 

DSC00979.thumb.JPG.1d8bd09759160676fdf7349a57c051b3.JPG

There are Brachiopods, Productids and Spirifids.

 

DSC00983.thumb.JPG.fb72256facd3e574f210e55852f15c1f.JPG

As well as bivalves.

 

A site mentioned elsewhere in the forum is easily accessed, Old North Rd., Allandale, ( Allandale Formation, Dalwood Group, early Permian )

It is a small exposure in a road cutting just south of the rail line, access is from the Lochinvar station end. It must be part of the larger exposure in the rail cutting described here http://www.resourcesandenergy.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/447048/QN138.pdf

 

DSC00986.thumb.JPG.9f56264632416837078f853fc4a79681.JPG

Eurydesma predominate, also a few Gastropods ( Keeneia ?? ), but mainly fragmented.

 

DSC00993.thumb.JPG.ab7dd1fed4e022bb4db2b5981f4157c9.JPG

Other bivalves are present and I was lucky enough to find 2, complete, attached pair.

 

Cheers,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FossilDAWG

Foozil,

 

Turritella only goes back as far as the Cretaceous, so whatever you are finding around Lake St Clair is not Turritella if it is Carboniferous.  It is common for amateur collectors to refer to any high-spired snail as Turritella but many genera have this growth form.

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Foozil
On 04/10/2017 at 4:19 AM, FossilDAWG said:

Foozil,

 

Turritella only goes back as far as the Cretaceous, so whatever you are finding around Lake St Clair is not Turritella if it is Carboniferous.  It is common for amateur collectors to refer to any high-spired snail as Turritella but many genera have this growth form.

 

Don

That's what I thought too, but everyone in our club refers to them as Turritella, so I just went along with that. Thanks for the correction. 

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.

×