MashOr Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Found this just south and west of St. Louis, Missouri. Lots of sandstone, flint and limestone nearby in a unique-to-this-area "hollow". Found while cutting a bench for hiking trail along a small rock face on steep sideslope. Roughly 600' above current sea level. Swift flowing Meramec River is within a mile but about 100' below even at (modern)historic flood levels. Most material on the hillside has migrated down from a much higher point. I don't generally keep rocks so will need to revisit for additional images. I've found lots of small fossils in a white, coral like stone as there seems to be a band of it that runs throughout the area. The car key is for scale but it's roughly the size of my open hand. The symmetry is incredible. Thank you in advance! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Burns Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Looks like a receptaculid, and it's magnificent! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 That's beautiful! “...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...
Fossildude19 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Welcome to the Forum. + 1 for Receptaculites. Regards, Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 __________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Old habits die hard, lol. Receptaculites is now classified as Fisherites: Finney, S.C., & Nitecki, M.H. (1979)Fisherites n. gen. reticulatus (Owen, 1844), a new name for Receptaculites oweni Hall, 1861. Journal of Paleontology, 53:750-753 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MashOr Posted October 17, 2017 Author Share Posted October 17, 2017 Instant gratification! Any suggestions as to a good educational home or is it even worth the trouble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 1 minute ago, MashOr said: Instant gratification! Any suggestions as to a good educational home or is it even worth the trouble? I'm sure a local school would be incredibly happy, maybe even a local museum. Also would look cool in a personal collection if you keep one. Good luck! “...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...
Bobby Rico Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Wow that is beautiful. I don't think you will have to much trouble rehoming this detailed fossil. Cheers Bobby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peat Burns Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 1 hour ago, MashOr said: Instant gratification! Any suggestions as to a good educational home or is it even worth the trouble? PM sent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Nice specimen. I'm sure the educational facility will appreciate it. Although I knew exactly what it is, I couldn't remember the name. Now I have another chance to file it away. Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalmayshun Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Cant get over how beautiful it is , what a wonderful find. I don't know much about this algae...can someone knowledgeable indicate whether it was soft, "soupy like" common algae today, or Plant like , was this the head part...did it float on top of the water? thanks. Always fascinated by new things, and this is gorgeous. So happy you were there...often such things are simply buried during construction projects even as simple as this one, making a pathway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Dalmayshun,a technical paper(as some here would call it) app38-233.pdf Receptaculids were not uncommon constituents of paleozoic reefs,but i would like to warn against too much unwarranted actualism in paleozoic reef ecology 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 20 minutes ago, dalmayshun said: Cant get over how beautiful it is , what a wonderful find. I don't know much about this algae...can someone knowledgeable indicate whether it was soft, "soupy like" common algae today, or Plant like , was this the head part...did it float on top of the water? thanks. Always fascinated by new things, and this is gorgeous. So happy you were there...often such things are simply buried during construction projects even as simple as this one, making a pathway. Fisherites had a calcareous skeleton. It was firm, like modern, reef building corals. So it would have been a stationary organism. Link 1 Link 2 Link 3 Link 4 2 Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 __________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalmayshun Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 wow, thanks so much, isn't that amazing, that the skeleton is a bio process...I really appreicate the information.You guys are the best. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 If the whole organism was photosynthetic,the immediate environment of the thingy might have been supersaturated with the carbonate ion Most (if not all)algal calcification is brought about by extrusion of the H2+ ion through the cell wall k would the receptaculitids have caused carbonate drawdown?If so ,would it show up in the Carbon isotope curves? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBrewer Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 That is stunning! John Map of UK fossil sites Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilshale Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 5 hours ago, doushantuo said: If the whole organism was photosynthetic,the immediate environment of the thingy might have been supersaturated with the carbonate ion Most (if not all)algal calcification is brought about by extrusion of the H2+ ion through the cell wall k would the receptaculitids have caused carbonate drawdown?If so ,would it show up in the Carbon isotope curves? But not H2+ .... H+ is enough Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Thanks for pointing out the gaffe,Tom. **redfaced** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Welcome to the Forum and congrats for opening with a show-stopper! I see a receptaculitid like the rest, of course. But I'm not certain Receptaculites as a genus has been sunk - I think some of the taxa within Receptaculities were amended to Fischerites, i.e., both taxa are currently valid. Anyone know more on that? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Fisherites and Receptaculites are both valid genera. Finney & Niticki (1979) (link for those who can get JSTOR) described Fisherites [type species F. reticulatus (Owen, 1844)] and distinguished it from Receptaculites (for example, R. neptuni) based on a number of features but primarilily the way growth introduces new elements into the thallus, affecting the arrangement of components and the "sunflower"-like pattern. Don 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Carl said: ...But I'm not certain Receptaculites as a genus has been sunk - I think some of the taxa within Receptaculities were amended to Fischerites, i.e., both taxa are currently valid. Anyone know more on that? I should have been more precise. Receptaculites is restricted to the Devonian. All the 'Receptaculites' from the Ordovician are now classified as: Fisherites "The best-known receptaculitids are the Ordovician to Carboniferous family Receptaculitidae, which in the Ordovician consists of a single genus, Fisherites, with nine species ranging from TS.2c through 6b. They are the largest receptaculitids known and are widely distributed in limestones and dolomites. Their wide geographic distribution is comparable to that of soanitids, except that the concentration of their distribution is in central North America. They are also found in the Canadian Arctic, Greenland, Baltoscandia, Burma, North Korea, Thailand, and the Argentine Precordillera but have not been reported from China." Nitecki, M.H., Webby, B.D., Spjeldnaes, N., & Yong-Yi, Z. (2004) Receptaculitids and algae. In: Webby, B.D., Paris, F., Droser, M.L., & Percival, I.G. (eds.) The Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event. Columbia University Press, 484 pp 5 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