Jump to content
2thdoc

Help with ID on fossils from the charleston harbor

Recommended Posts

2thdoc

New here to the forum and to fossil hunting. Found a few teeth over the past few weeks was hoping to get some help with identification and where to find more in the low country. Living in mount pleasant with access to a 23 foot bay boat as well as a few paddle boards. Would love to meet some great people with the same interests as myself and my wife. We would love to host some new friends on our boat for some hunting. If you are in the area and wouldn't mind the company of some newbs that are eager to learn and hunt send me a PM. We are looking forward to becoming knowledgeable on the area and meeting others that share our interests. I have attached a picture of a few of the things we found any help on ID would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

IMG_2057.JPG.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Welcome to the Forum. :) 

 

Here's my best guesses. Not a huge shark tooth guy. 

 

IMG_2057.JPG.jpeg.d90c8805d66c00a9c758ee0395599d6d.jpeg

 

I removed your other post, as it is a duplicate - one should be enough. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brett Breakin' Rocks
1 hour ago, Fossildude19 said:

Welcome to the Forum. :) 

 

Here's my best guesses. Not a huge shark tooth guy. 

 

IMG_2057.JPG.jpeg.d90c8805d66c00a9c758ee0395599d6d.jpeg

 

I removed your other post, as it is a duplicate - one should be enough. ;) 

Hi Guys,

 

   I had mentioned in the last post that the formations around Charleston are predominantly the Chandler Bridge fm. or Ashley marl .. Oligocene in age. 

 

  The teeth with the cusps marked as ariculatus are likely angustidens which I would say are infrequent but common .. at least common in bits and pieces.  The broken cusps sometimes make them harder, at least for me, to discern if they are a meg tooth.  Especially when they are small and/or water worn.

 

  The Sand Tiger shark marked on the far left might possibly be Isurus desori .. Shortfin mako ... (that includes the tooth just above it as well) they are more robust and this is the size that I commonly pull out of the water.  Yours thankfully is whole which is not always the case.  

 

Physogaleus contortus (extinct tiger-like)

 

Physogaleus_001.thumb.jpg.f93bd4c4cd04c751e13f4302a0a83999.jpg

 

Galeocerdo aduncus (tiger)  ... though from the images it is not a solid ID.

 

 Aduncus_001.thumb.jpg.dcaa1a22420e0480fcdba8d8b537ff55.jpg

 

Great finds !

 

Cheers,

Brett

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19
34 minutes ago, Brett Breakin' Rocks said:

Hi Guys,

 

  The teeth with the cusps marked as ariculatus are likely angustidens which I would say are infrequent but common .. at least common in bits and pieces.  The broken cusps sometimes make them harder, at least for me, to discern if they are a meg tooth.  Especially when they are small and/or water worn. 

Cheers,

Brett

 

Thanks Brett !

I couldn't remember "angustidens" -   :blush:   

Thanks for the correction. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brett Breakin' Rocks
51 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

Thanks Brett !

I couldn't remember "angustidens" -   :blush:   

Thanks for the correction. :) 

Sure Mr. Tim,

 

  I guess there is some serious discussion about them all being the same species (?) .... and if you pull them from the bottom of the river (like the Cooper) all bets are off.  Harleyville and NC waters have auriculatus aged formations and there are some morphological differences but in my opinion they are so nuanced to my eyes still, so unless you pull it from a specific layer or site location those ID's are always tough ! :1-SlapHands_zpsbb015b76:

 

Cheers,

B

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
abyssunder

Could you post an image of the wide end of this specimen?

IMG_2057.JPG.jpeg.6d7e403078131f1a1711f9a9518d0da2.jpg.e84884b8b83ea3ca9ae986360a1f4c49.jpg

 

It looks like the remnant core of a rotten wood trunk bifurcation to a branch. I had a similar one kept for years, but I can't find it, unfortunately. :blush:

Your specimen might be from driftwood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macrophyseter

woah, that's a load of carcharocles teeth over there. Nice finds!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2thdoc
On 9/5/2017 at 8:55 PM, abyssunder said:

Could you post an image of the wide end of this specimen?

 

It looks like the remnant core of a rotten wood trunk bifurcation to a branch. I had a similar one kept for years, but I can't find it, unfortunately. :blush:

Your specimen might be from driftwood.

I will definitely get that put up shortly been so busy lately managed to get out once here recently pictures to follow. 

IMG_2096.JPG

IMG_2097.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Nice shark drawing.:meganim:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Cropped, rotated, and brightened this - it is very good!

 

 IMG_2097.thumb.JPG.15d28964702fe182451dcf55d7ac5c2d.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shellseeker
On 9/5/2017 at 8:55 PM, abyssunder said:

Could you post an image of the wide end of this specimen?

IMG_2057.JPG.jpeg.6d7e403078131f1a1711f9a9518d0da2.jpg.e84884b8b83ea3ca9ae986360a1f4c49.jpg

 

It looks like the remnant core of a rotten wood trunk bifurcation to a branch. I had a similar one kept for years, but I can't find it, unfortunately. :blush:

Your specimen might be from driftwood.

Calcified core of a seashell should be considered.  I see a bunch of shorter segments in the Peace River.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
abyssunder

The perpendicular (to the axis) segment's wide is not increasing from a starting point to the opposite side, like in gastropod "cores", or maybe seashell valves (growth lines), no matter how they flattened (deformed) might be after a geological stress of depositional moment, but it could be good for the varying growth lines (years) of a wood structure, in my opinion.
Mine was almost identical with the specimen in question, but it had a - horizontal to the axis - fibrous attachment to the whole structure.

 

I've never thought that the piece, I kept several years (30 or so), might be ever a good resemblance. Sorry, I cant find it at my home. Probably, I dropped it...or my wife... :blush:

Thank you for your inquiry, Jack!

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.

×