Darko Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 I bought today these two ammonites founded in Serbia (Stara Planina).Can anyone tell me which species is this? Thanks again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantoraptor Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 I think better preparation is needed for a good ID. A size would help too. Greetings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 16, 2017 Author Share Posted September 16, 2017 The size is 15cm ,smaller one is 7cm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andreas Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Hard to tell what genus and species, but it is definitly lower to middle Jurassic in age. Maybe that helps a little. look therein for Rabrenović D., Radulović V., Bošković D. (1997) Kimmeridgian ammonites of Stara Planina (Carpatho balkanides, Eastern Serbia) // Ann. Géol. Penins. Balk. T.61. no.1. P.221-245 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 16, 2017 Author Share Posted September 16, 2017 8 minutes ago, andreas said: Hard to tell what genus and species, but it is definitly lower to middle Jurassic in age. Maybe that helps a little. look therein for Rabrenović D., Radulović V., Bošković D. (1997) Kimmeridgian ammonites of Stara Planina (Carpatho balkanides, Eastern Serbia) // Ann. Géol. Penins. Balk. T.61. no.1. P.221-245 Thanks for info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 16, 2017 Author Share Posted September 16, 2017 Maybe is Aspidoceras acanthicum? Anyone? Help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 I think these are internal molds with the outside somewhat worn, that makes it hard. Aspidoceras is a good guess based on shape I think, but as you know I'm no expert. “...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 More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 I suppose they are Kimmeridgian ammonites from the 'ammonitico rosso' (red micritic limestone) segment. Here is the document recommended by andreas . " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Just to add to the confusion, Andreas is right in saying that they could be lower or middle Jurassic, but they could just as well be upper Jurassic as well. Doesn't look to me like Aspidoceras, which is an upper Jurassic genera. They have nodes on the inner and/or outer bugs and have a wide whorl breadth. Yours look narrow from here. Pity you can't give us more precise stratigraphical information. That would help a lot in narrowing down the possibilities. A bit of preparation would help as well in order to see the sculpture in more detail; that is, if it can even be seen on the steinkern. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 16, 2017 Author Share Posted September 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Ludwigia said: Just to add to the confusion, Andreas is right in saying that they could be lower or middle Jurassic, but they could just as well be upper Jurassic as well. Doesn't look to me like Aspidoceras, which is an upper Jurassic genera. They have nodes on the inner and/or outer bugs and have a wide whorl breadth. Yours look narrow from here. Pity you can't give us more precise stratigraphical information. That would help a lot in narrowing down the possibilities. A bit of preparation would help as well in order to see the sculpture in more detail; that is, if it can even be seen on the steinkern. I can't give you more info cause i bought it from one guy who found these two fellas in Stara Planina Mountain in Serbia...He only knows that he found an ammonite and that's all...That's not enough for me.I search whole day and it says that the most founded specimens are Aspidoceras.Because of that i guess that maybe my two specimens are that species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sagebrush Steve Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 You can definitely see suture lines but unfortunately I am not expert enough to correlate them with species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 The few sutures that can be seen also don't fit to Aspidoceras. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 17, 2017 Author Share Posted September 17, 2017 8 hours ago, Ludwigia said: The few sutures that can be seen also don't fit to Aspidoceras. Then what can that be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 4 hours ago, Darko said: Then what can that be? Sorry, I can't say any more until I know more details about the precise stratigraphy and can see more of the sculpture. Otherwise it's just guess work. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 17, 2017 Author Share Posted September 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ludwigia said: Sorry, I can't say any more until I know more details about the precise stratigraphy and can see more of the sculpture. Otherwise it's just guess work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 Sorry. Maybe someone else is better at this than me, but I need the precise stratigraphy before I can say any more. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 I'm sure no one is more familiar in ammonites than you, Roger. Also, I think that the specimens in question might be from the species described in the document mentioned before. The reddish color of them make me think that they could be from the 'ammonitico rosso'-Kimmeridgian limestone, not the grayish upper one, but it's just a guess. " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 17, 2017 Author Share Posted September 17, 2017 22 minutes ago, abyssunder said: I'm sure no one is more familiar in ammonites than you, Roger. Also, I think that the specimens in question might be from the species described in the document mentioned before. The reddish color of them make me think that they could be from the 'ammonitico rosso'-Kimmeridgian limestone, not the grayish upper one, but it's just a guess. It appears that these ammonites have similarities with Holcophylloceras polyolcum and Tarameliceras compsum compsum.That's my guess of course... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 I hate to disappoint you again, but it's neither the one nor the other. Try following up on Abyssunder's suggestion. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 17, 2017 Author Share Posted September 17, 2017 15 minutes ago, Ludwigia said: I hate to disappoint you again, but it's neither the one nor the other. Try following up on Abyssunder's suggestion. But i'm already following his suggestion... No,it's ok,that's your opinion.I have mine and that's it. I've done some smaller research and for me it does look like one of the two species...I'm probably wrong but for me it does look like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 8 hours ago, Darko said: I'm probably wrong but for me it does look like that. Under those circumstances, it would be best for you to place a question mark beside the name you choose for your data. It's not always possible to give samples an identification down to the species immediately, even with things where all information is available, so sometimes it's just best to give it a non det. id and wait patiently until inspiration comes along. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darko Posted September 18, 2017 Author Share Posted September 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Ludwigia said: Under those circumstances, it would be best for you to place a question mark beside the name you choose for your data. It's not always possible to give samples an identification down to the species immediately, even with things where all information is available, so sometimes it's just best to give it a non det. id and wait patiently until inspiration comes along. Ok,thanks for advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now