Jump to content
Anomotodon

Squalicorax ???

Recommended Posts

Anomotodon

I have recently purchased an associated Squalicorax tooth set from Gove county, Kansas. It is Coniacian in age. However, I have no idea what species it is. These teeth are too gracile for S. falcatus and S. baharijensis. Looks a little bit like S. volgensis, however teeth are too large for it.

Any help will be very appreciated.

DSC_0624-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.d539fe6293895e7adada3ff8dc7900bc.jpg

DSC_0632-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.087173ce326c88e9fd5746967183a20e.jpg

DSC_0636-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.98104322ce906c6e2ced3a51ca0333ba.jpg

DSC_0637-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.e33b1e00d4b5bd7131c1873973e2fbd9.jpgDSC_0643-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.eaf9b6fff9f46509b02ff49487c6d0e8.jpgDSC_0641-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.d76fd63500a0babe0afb94d18ff12170.jpgDSC_0633-iloveimg-converted.thumb.jpg.a80c9fb0f29cf9684113149e40d681d9.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macrophyseter

Hey! I saw this fossil online for sale before! Never knew that YOU'd be the one buying it. It was around 200+ dollars, maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
22 minutes ago, Macrophyseter said:

Hey! I saw this fossil online for sale before! Never knew that YOU'd be the one buying it. It was around 200+ dollars, maybe?

Yes, it took me a long time to decide... But I love fossil sharks and it is a very unique specimen from a place I probably won't visit any time soon. And it was totally worth it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macrophyseter

Knew it! (but isn't post links to fossil shops against the rules? Might be an exception since its sold though)

 

As for the teeth, maybe it could be a S. curvatus? The teeth seem to be small and curved enough to possibly be one, plus most of them posses a little part that sticks out of the root side that the crown is pointing towards (quantifiable to be called a cusp?), just like most S. curvatus teeth. May be wrong though.

 

Here's a few examples

79_2.jpg

Squalicorax-falcatus-1.jpg

[134955024151048-big.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
12 minutes ago, Macrophyseter said:

Knew it! (but isn't post links to fossil shops against the rules? Might be an exception since its sold though)

 

As for the teeth, maybe it could be a S. curvatus? The teeth seem to be small and curved enough to possibly be one.

 

Here's a few examples

79_2.jpg

Squalicorax-falcatus-1.jpg

[134955024151048-big.jpg

Thanks, forgot about this rule.

S. curvatus is considered dubious - a mix of S. baharijensis and S. falcatus (it is explained on elasmo. com). My teeth are still too gracile compared to the ones in your post, except for the last one, which is a juvenile. Roots are not so massive and lingual protuberance is not so pronounced compared to S. "curvatus".

Maybe, it is S. falcatus sp. juv., but I haven't encountered similar specimens in the literature. And, anyways, they are not very small compared to normal S. falcatus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macrophyseter

Some of the posterior teeth of S. falcatus could be the same shape and small enough to be them. Maybe it's after all S. falcatus?

 

[squali02.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
1 minute ago, Macrophyseter said:

Some of the posterior teeth of S. falcatus could be the same shape and small enough to be them. Maybe it's after all S. falcatus?

 

[squali02.jpg

But it is a tooth set with both anteriors and laterals, and they are very different from the ones on your photo (crown width and curvature, root shape). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

Appendix highly recommended

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon

Thank you for the paper! But it describes Maastrichtian Squalicorax, my specimens are Coniacian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

go ahead,sue me:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

complete:

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

I've enlarged this one slightly,for the hard of hearing:

 

fernaristlanthc.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doctor Mud
4 hours ago, doushantuo said:

complete:

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

I've enlarged this one slightly,for the hard of hearing:

 

fernaristlanthc.jpg

What a spectacular specimen.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
19 hours ago, doushantuo said:

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

Appendix highly recommended

Oooh, I am so sorry, I completely missed the appendix. However, I can't find any information about most of the species:( Although I found something somewhat similar in Guinot et al., 2013, it is labeled as S. aff. falcatus. But it is from France. It is weird that I can't find any similar specimens from Kansas, it should be a very researched location. 

There is also S. crassidens from Smoky Hill Chalk, but I can't find any information about it.

image.thumb.png.5063d2cff8d183f836080d8672032572.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
19 hours ago, doushantuo said:

complete:

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

I've enlarged this one slightly,for the hard of hearing:

 

fernaristlanthc.jpg

 

I am totally confused (from the same paper)...

 

5a08fd23e72b1_2017-11-12(1).thumb.png.630291d06ba14f6ee1e4af53a467199a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikaelS

Nice specimen. There is a good chance it belongs to an undescribed species. I have collected similar specimens in the lower Santonian and lower Campanian of the Smoky Hill Chalk.  There are at least half a dozen anacoracid species in the Smoky Hill Chalk, some of which have not yet been named. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
11 hours ago, MikaelS said:

Nice specimen. There is a good chance it belongs to an undescribed species. I have collected similar specimens in the lower Santonian and lower Campanian of the Smoky Hill Chalk.  There are at least half a dozen anacoracid species in the Smoky Hill Chalk, some of which have not yet been named. 

Thank you for help!! I wonder, how effective would it be to use anacoracids as stratigraphic markers once more species are described, as Glikman suggested in 1980?

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.

×