D.N.FossilmanLithuania Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Dear Guys, Last week I was in the coal quarry, Donbass (Ukraine) and found this skin impression in coal shale. The age is Gzhelian- Early Aselian (Carboniferous and Permian boundary) and judging by the scale texture I can see that scales were very thin (like in the birds and dinosaurs) so I think it was quite proggressive reptile and it could be the early synapsid. In synapsids scales could be gradually dissapearing like in dinosaurs and birds- they do not look like thick osteoderms. I tried to find information about Carboniferous reptile skin fossils but I not found anything... I think it could be very rare find, so please help to identify this if you could Best Regards Domas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izak_ Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Could they be fish scales? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.N.FossilmanLithuania Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 Dear Foozil, I agree that specimen looks similar to fish but it is one strange feature- the different form and size of scales in the fossil. So the reptile (e.g. lizard) head scales look much more similar to me. Regards Domas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izak_ Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 4 minutes ago, D.N.FossilmanLithuania said: Dear Foozil, I agree that specimen looks similar to fish but it is one strange feature- the different form and size of scales in the fossil. So the reptile (e.g. lizard) head scales look much more similar to me. Regards Domas Interesting. Could we have some close ups of the scales? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Very interesting. It could be plant material though? A close up, please. Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 The similarity of the dark shapes beneath suggests that the shapes are molds of whatever those are. Plant material seems most likely. Close ups showing finer surface texture could easily change the thought though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*THEO* Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Looks like reptile skin to me too.Pretty interesting find congrats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 What is the size of this item? Could you post pictures with a ruler or scale in them? The Donbass area is well known on here for it's plant fossils, thanks to Forum Member RomanK Have a look through his Album of Carboniferous Fossil Plants. A few pictures in that album of Bothrodendron bark look similar to your item. This is, in my opinion, a much more likely explanation of your item. @RomanK @paleoflor @docdutronc @fiddlehead Maybe one of these plant experts can chime in. 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...
LordTrilobite Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said: What is the size of this item? Could you post pictures with a ruler or scale in them? But he's already got scales in the picture! Olof Moleman AKA Lord Trilobite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Russell Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 My first thought was a bark impression, also. Coupled with the age, and the mention of coal measures, it seems most likely. Hopefully someone will pin it down. Neat specimen. Finding my way through life; one fossil at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dewbunny Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 With out looking at it with my magnifier, at a glance it looks like the trunk base of Sigillaria. I've found that at the base of the tree (I'm guessing close to the ground) the bark forms little bumpies that eventually turn into the bark 'scales'. This info is just from what I've learned by sight,not from any books or written papers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.N.FossilmanLithuania Posted November 22, 2017 Author Share Posted November 22, 2017 Dear Guys, Thank you very much for the first impressions. Now I made the close ups of the skin parts and scales, I also found one isolated leaf like scale about 4 mm from the main fossil. The size of skin impression is 25 mm. Look at these textures of one fossil and tell, what do you think. Best Regards Domas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dewbunny Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Ok,now I'm 99% positive... Sigillaria: Lepidodendron possibly from the base of trunk or cone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Dewbunny said: Ok,now I'm 99% positive... Sigillaria: Lepidodendron possibly from the base of trunk or cone. The OP's item has rounded imprinted bumps, whereas the Lepidodendron shows diamond shapes, so I would question Lepidodendron as an ID. Can you please post the source of your picture. 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...
Dewbunny Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 16 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said: The OP's item has rounded imprinted bumps, whereas the Lepidodendron shows diamond shapes, so I would question Lepidodendron as an ID. Can you please post the source of your picture. Yes Lepidodendron does have diamond shaped scales but when they are at the base of the cone and sometimes the base of the trunk they take on a bumpy rounded scale. I have a piece/fossil showing this but I currently have 154 specimens out on the table and I've lost tract of a few. My apologies for the lack of source: Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology Volume 131, Issues 1–2, August 2004, Pages 49-89 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034666704000430 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 No worries. It's just proper to source pictures when they don't belong to you. Link to the Free PDF. I'm not really seeing anything in that paper that compares favorably with the OP's item. OP's original photos, enlarged and contrasted: 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...
Herb Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 cool specimen. Kind of look like scales to me also, but the pattern is so random "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taogan Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 What I see is slightly irregular leptoid scales on a block of shale with fusain. I can't make them into reptile though, even though it does look a bit like modern reptile skin, especially thinking about the age of the sample. Reptiles at the end of the Carboniferous were not so common. I am more inclined to say plant as it is more likely, but we need some really clear close up pictures to see if there is any structure to the individual scales that might give a few more clues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashcraft Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 Ocam's razor..........plant material Brent Ashcraft ashcraft, brent allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBrewer Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 7 hours ago, D.N.FossilmanLithuania said: Dear Guys, Thank you very much for the first impressions. Now I made the close ups of the skin parts and scales, I also found one isolated leaf like scale about 4 mm from the main fossil. The size of skin impression is 25 mm. Look at these textures of one fossil and tell, what do you think. Best Regards Domas A quick iPhone tweak John Map of UK fossil sites Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamalama Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 I could see it being from a fish but I think most fish in the Carboniferous had angular scales rather than the rounded variety. At least that is what I seems like whenever I see a pic of a fossil fish from that period.If you found it in the Coal though then it's more likely plant based. Perhaps some layer underneath a trees exterior bark where it was pithy and the tree fluids flowed? -Dave __________________________________________________ Geologists on the whole are inconsistent drivers. When a roadcut presents itself, they tend to lurch and weave. To them, the roadcut is a portal, a fragment of a regional story, a proscenium arch that leads their imaginations into the earth and through the surrounding terrain. - John McPheeIf I'm going to drive safely, I can't do geology. - John McPheeCheck out my Blog for more fossils I've found: http://viewsofthemahantango.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdp Posted November 22, 2017 Share Posted November 22, 2017 If it's a fish, then it's definitely sarcopterygian. Looks vaguely megalichthyid but it might be rhizodontid or lungfish. The bigger elements might be parts of the back of the skull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 I have no opinion other than that is a super cool find! Congrats whatever it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace river rat Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 First impression was scales but need more pics, with a scale. Inclined to say "not a rock" More input needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted November 23, 2017 Share Posted November 23, 2017 I think they are gas bubbles preserved in an algae like decomposition product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.