Pterosaur? Bone From Kem Kem

[talon22]

Hi everyone,

 

I saw this nice small bone fossil for sale online and the seller has it listed as a possible unidentified Pterosaur fossil. It is from the Kem Kem and is just over 1.5 inches long. It is hollow inside and i just want to hear the possibility of this being a Pterosaur bone. Are there any other groups of animals this fossil could belong to? Birds or theropod dinosaurs? or maybe fish?. I know that Pterosaurs and other animals are poorly understood from that formation so i guess it is near impossible to tell, but maybe it could be narrowed down. Thanks.

 

 

Edited September 1, 2017 by talon22
Doubled posted the same images

[Fossildude19]

Welcome to the Forum.  

 

@LordTrilobite  @Seguidora-de-Isis

[Miocene_Mason]

I'm no expert, but I don't think a pterosaur bone could come out of the stone very easily, they are incredibly thin and fragile. I'd say dromaeosaur but wait for others to confirm or deny.

[Auspex]

To me, it looks to be too thick-walled for anything designed to fly.
Non-avian theropod is a better fit.

[Seguidora-de-Isis]

In fact Kem Kem in Morocco is one of the few regions in the world where pterosaur bones are fossilized in 3D, and still with remarkable fossil preservation. In Kem Kem, has already discovered fossils of Pterosaurs: Alanqa saharica and also the Siroccopterix moroccencis. But some scientists have also found evidences of the presence of Tepejarids and Pteranodontids. But this bone of yours, in particular, I do not see in it the characteristics that should have a pterosaur bone, such as thin bone walls. In addition, the photos are insufficient for a more precise opinion, and the fragment itself is very small and broken (incomplete).

 

Usually the bones of pterosaurs have incredibly thin bone walls, and in the pictures below I give you an example of comparison with some specimens that are part of my private collection:

 

[doushantuo]

"None of the Pterodaustro bones sampled showed the ‘‘plywood-like’’ structure that Ricqles et al. (2000) described as a unique bone tissue among pterosaurs. It

seems that this orthogonal ‘‘plywood’’ tissue is not commonly distributed among pterosaurs, and it appears to be restricted to smaller bones of fairly large pterosaurs
(Steel, 2008). Recently, Sayao (2003) found this plywood bone tissue in an oblique section of the second phalanx of the fourth digit of a pterodactyloid from the Romualdo Member

of the Santana Formation, and Steel (2008) documented this tissue in transverse sections of pteroids of an ornithocherid."

Sometimes ,histology can help out.(distribution of arrested lines of growth,e.g.,lack of erosion cavities,sporadic osteon ocurrence)

[doushantuo]

 

From Steel(2008):

"In the diaphyses of many of the bones examined in this study, ridges were found on the endosteal surfaces. Similar structures occur in large mammalian femora (FOOTE 1916; pers. obs.) and were noted in a pterosaur bone by CURRIE & RUSSELL (1982). It is likely that these ridges have a biomechanical function, as suggested by DE RICQLÈS et al. (2000). However, it is difficult to explain why Warren struts (transverse trabeculae) should be found in some pterosaur bones and endosteal ridgesshould be found in others. One possible explanation is that endosteal ridges are found when the lumen of the bone was occupied by a soft tissue structure such as an air sac, whose function may have been impaired by intervening trabeculae. However, although Warren struts are well documented in modern bird bones (e.g., FOOTE 1916; BELLAIRS & JENKIN 1960; CURREY 1984), endosteal ridges have not been reported. Alternatively, it is possible that endosteal ridges and Warren struts provide bones with different biomechanical properties, a hypothesis that requires testing. Occasionally, endosteal ridges are hollow, and form a system of longitudinal tubes between the compacta and the lumen (the three-dimensional structure is confi rmed by longitudinal and transverse sections). They were first noted in pterosaur bones by DE RICQLÈS et al. (2000), who described them as ‘pipes’ and suggested that they were pneumatic channels, an idea accepted by SAYÃO (2003). They mainly occur in the epiphyseal and metaphyseal regions of smaller long bones with an ovoid cross section.."

 

[talon22]

12 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Welcome to the Forum.  

 

@LordTrilobite  @Seguidora-de-Isis

Thanks!

10 hours ago, Seguidora-de-Isis said:

In fact Kem Kem in Morocco is one of the few regions in the world where pterosaur bones are fossilized in 3D, and still with remarkable fossil preservation. In Kem Kem, has already discovered fossils of Pterosaurs: Alanqa saharica and also the Siroccopterix moroccencis. But some scientists have also found evidences of the presence of Tepejarids and Pteranodontids. But this bone of yours, in particular, I do not see in it the characteristics that should have a pterosaur bone, such as thin bone walls. In addition, the photos are insufficient for a more precise opinion, and the fragment itself is very small and broken (incomplete).

 

Usually the bones of pterosaurs have incredibly thin bone walls, and in the pictures below I give you an example of comparison with some specimens that are part of my private collection:

 

Thanks for the photos. I agree, looking at your pictures, the fossil bone wall may be too thick to be Pterosaur.

 

 

So if the fossil is unlikely to be from a Pterosaur, does anyone have an idea on what group is the most likely candidate such as non-avian theropod dinosaur (possibly a small theropod), fish, crocodile, turtle or even mosasaur? I appreciate all the replies and help since an isolated bone like this is a mystery.

[Seguidora-de-Isis]

It is true!

Where went to stop my hospitality? Welcome to The Fossil Forum!

 

I have no doubt that this your bone is very interesting. But the fact is that it is not in good repair, but it is broken on both sides, and anything that can be said now, later with new discoveries, could prove to be something else entirely. Based on the photos of this your bone, what I can tell you is that the morphology is not compatible with pterosaur. At least not with the species of Moroccan Pterosaurs I have known so far ... The fact is that the overwhelming majority of the fossils discovered at Kem Kem are unfortunately misunderstood, and over time, after I had many headaches, I ended up realizing that in Kem Kem, answers simply do not exist, and only with new discoveries, over time many mysteries can be understood, including this bone of yours. I do not think this bone is fish, crocodile, nor even I think of Mosasaurus (There are no Mosasaurs in Kem Kem's beds in Morocco, because Kem Kem beds only have Albian and Cenomanian deposits).

 

For now, I would have identified this bone as only an undetermined Theropod.

[talon22]

Hi,

 

I recently received the fossil and i took a couple of photos of the other broken end just to show everyone since the original photos didn't show that end, and it does look like it has a thin bone wall at one end and the bone is quite fragile.

 

 

 

[Seguidora-de-Isis]

I study very much the pterosaurs of Kem Kem, in Morocco.... Everyone here at the Forum knows my fight very well, but the fact is that both dinosaurs bones and fully articulated pterosaurs are completely unpublished at Kem Kem. It is very rare to find associated bones, and the overwhelming majority of the findings are isolated bones, and often quite damaged as is the case of this your bone. But with these new photos you posted here in the Forum, I change my opinion, and now I agree that it's definitely a pterosaur bone. 90% of the pterosaurs  fossils that are deposited in my private collection have been purchased from the same seller who sold you this bone, so I have this seller as extremely reliable. He is also a member here of the Forum. What I learned in my Kem Kem Pterosaur studies is that they are unique, and there is not much material out there that we can use as a means of comparison, as well as as I said earlier, your bone is badly damaged at both ends . The best guess I can give at this point is that it may be a metatarsal bone.

 

 

[talon22]

3 hours ago, Seguidora-de-Isis said:

I study very much the pterosaurs of Kem Kem, in Morocco.... Everyone here at the Forum knows my fight very well, but the fact is that both dinosaurs bones and fully articulated pterosaurs are completely unpublished at Kem Kem. It is very rare to find associated bones, and the overwhelming majority of the findings are isolated bones, and often quite damaged as is the case of this your bone. But with these new photos you posted here in the Forum, I change my opinion, and now I agree that it's definitely a pterosaur bone. 90% of the pterosaurs  fossils that are deposited in my private collection have been purchased from the same seller who sold you this bone, so I have this seller as extremely reliable. He is also a member here of the Forum. What I learned in my Kem Kem Pterosaur studies is that they are unique, and there is not much material out there that we can use as a means of comparison, as well as as I said earlier, your bone is badly damaged at both ends . The best guess I can give at this point is that it may be a metatarsal bone.

 

 

Thank you for the reply. When the fossil arrived and i saw the other end, i thought i would post the pictures of it because i thought the other end was very similar to the photo you showed before with the thin bone wall and i trust your opinion on this fossil very much since you have been very helpful and seem very knowledgeable about Moroccan Pterosaurs (as hard as it is to study Moroccan Pterosaurs). Metatarsal bone sounds like a good guess. Thanks again

 

 

[Seguidora-de-Isis]

11 hours ago, talon22 said:

Thank you for the reply. When the fossil arrived and i saw the other end, i thought i would post the pictures of it because i thought the other end was very similar to the photo you showed before with the thin bone wall and i trust your opinion on this fossil very much since you have been very helpful and seem very knowledgeable about Moroccan Pterosaurs (as hard as it is to study Moroccan Pterosaurs). Metatarsal bone sounds like a good guess. Thanks again

 

 

 

It's always a pleasure to help! Actually I must confess that I was quite uncomfortable giving a guess, but I think it's always better to have a guess than to have nothing in mind. After all, great studies always start with an initial guess that may later, prove to be true or not. But I think this guess might be a good start for your studies. Pterosaurs of Kem Kem are poorly understood, and studying them is fantastic! Huge hug!