Wrangellian Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 It's just an impression, but I find so few like this I had to keep it. Looked all over for the positive but could not find it. It seems so long and narrow for a Bostrychoceras, or is that just an aspect of the impression? 5 whorls visible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 It sort of looks as if it has nodes along the top of each whorl. Do you see that or is it a trick of the light on the photo. Bostrychoceras lacks nodes altogether so if nodes are present it can't be that. Nodes would suggest a Didymoceras or Nostoceras. Neither have been reported from the Halsam. Hyphanticeras has been found in the Courtney area but I don't recall that it has nodes. It's a loosly coiled spire with the whorls not in contact, with squared-off ribs. Don @fossilexpress 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 Boy, it almost looks like there are nodes, now that you point them out, but I think I can see them at the bottom of that whorl too. That is unless that's an artifact of the crushed shell, but it is oddly consistent for a randomly crushed thing... I have seen those Hyphantoceras from Courtenay, that had crossed my mind. I guess I should go up there and look harder for that positive side! though that pile of rock has been pushed around so much that might be very unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossisle Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 You can try to make a latex peel, to give you a positive image Cephalopods rule!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 What do you coat the shale with before you lay on the latex? I've tried that before but without some barrier, it leaves an oily stain. I'll try for a better pic whenever we get more sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Maybe it helps. " 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...
Wrangellian Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 Not sure.. I get the best view looking at it in person with my glasses off, and I'm still not sure what I'm seeing. There is one spot where there is a bit of shell left in one of the possible nodes, I could try pulling that out to see if it adds to the appearance of nodes... Raining here now so I can't get any more photos yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 More shots of it with different lighting angles. I still can't decide whether it has nodes or not, because they could be a result of broken shell. In some of these the light comes from below which gives the impression of being a positive. I'm not sure if these help anyone tell, if I can't even tell with it in hand... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossisle Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 That last one is great, Eubostrychoceras 1 Cephalopods rule!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 I think the latest photos make it clear the "nodes" result from the way the whorls are flattened and in places partially crushed. I agree with @fossisle, it is a Eubostrychoceras; the way the whorls seem loosely coiled and not in contact suggests perhaps it is E. japonicus which Jim Haggard has identified from the Halsam. Don 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 21, 2017 Author Share Posted September 21, 2017 OK, well I knew it wasn't the usual Bostrychoceras. Thanks both! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossisle Posted September 22, 2017 Share Posted September 22, 2017 9 hours ago, FossilDAWG said: I think the latest photos make it clear the "nodes" result from the way the whorls are flattened and in places partially crushed. I agree with @fossisle, it is a Eubostrychoceras; the way the whorls seem loosely coiled and not in contact suggests perhaps it is E. japonicus which Jim Haggard has identified from the Halsam. Don Yes and it is the oldest Eubostrychoceras I have seen in the Nanaimo Group, most come from later in the mid Campanian Pender Formation. 1 Cephalopods rule!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 22, 2017 Author Share Posted September 22, 2017 Older than elongatum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossisle Posted September 23, 2017 Share Posted September 23, 2017 Bostrychoceras elongatum is the usual Santonian find, Eubostrychoceras is usually found in younger Campanian deposits in my experience. Cephalopods rule!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted September 23, 2017 Author Share Posted September 23, 2017 Oh I see... I assumed Bostry and Eubostry were synonymous. 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