How do you name your fossil when you're unsure of the species, but able to guess somewhat?

[-Andy-]

As I understand, there are several practices when naming fossils.

 

If I have a confirmed mosasaur tooth in which I know the definite species, I name it: Tylosaurus proriger

 

If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I know the genus, and the species resembles T. proriger, but I am slightly unsure, I name it: Tylosaurus cf. proriger

 

If I have a mosasaur tooth which looks just like T. proriger, but I know it's a different species for sure, I name it: Tylosaurus aff. proriger

 

If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I know the genus but not the species, I label it: Tylosaurus sp. OR Tylosaurus indet.

 

If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I cannot identify the genus, but it resembles the Tylosaurus family, I name it: cf. Tylosaurus sp.

 

Did I get that correct?

 

.sp = 'species'

.cf = 'confer' meaning 'compare with'

.aff = 'affinis' meaning 'it has affinities of that species'

.indet = 'indeterminate' meaning 'there's no way to confirm this'

 

Next up, what if I have a mosasaur tooth that is worn down, but comes from an area with high Tylosaurus density. I know it's probably Tylosaurus, but I can't be sure. Is there any way of labeling a fossil with the message: This is probably a Tylosaurus?

 

 

[abyssunder]

When the genus is unknown, a question mark is put in front of the name, e.g. ?Tylosaurus
When the genus is known but the specific epithet is uncertain, a question mark is put in front of the species name, e.g. Tylosaurus ?proriger
When there is doubt over a  name, a question mark is put in front of the name, e.g. ?Tylosaurus proriger

[oilshale]

2 hours ago, -Andy- said:

 

.sp = 'species'

.cf = 'confer' meaning 'compare with'

.aff = 'affinis' meaning 'it has affinities of that species'

.indet = 'indeterminate' meaning 'there's no way to confirm this'

Indet. Can also mean:' haven't had time to confirm' or even 'didn't try to make sure'

Indeterminate: Not accurately determined or determinable.

[ynot]

@-Andy- asked "How do you name your fossil?".

I put a bunch of names in a hat and pull one out to name My fossils.

[Wendell Ricketts]

Here's an article from Fossil News you might find helpful: https://fossilnews.org/online-content/binomial/.

 

In terms of your specific question: ?Tylosaurus sp. is correct.

[Harry Pristis]

In the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Vol. 7, No. 1, 19 March 1987, there is a note by Jiri Zidek concerning "...Syntax in Taxonomic Statements." There follows a response from Richard Estes.

Zidek argues (among other things) that "cf." and "aff." are synomymous. Estes disagrees.

Estes, the Editor of the JVP at the time, says the following:
 

Lucas (1987) also discussed the usage of the qualifiers aff. and cf., stating that "most vertebrate paleontologists understand the meanings of aff. and cf." My discussion with vertebrate paleontologists, and also my reading of their manuscripts, suggests that this may not be the case.

Zidek (1987) believed the two qualifiers to be interchangeable. If he is correct, one of them should probably be abandoned. I think that they often have, and should have, different meanings.

If I have a fossil element that does not differ structurally from that of a particular species, and also does not display diagnostic character states of that species or genus, I may wish to indicate this similarity in a structural sense (there may be stratagraphic and geographic reasons for this as well). The use of cf. in this case indicates a conservative identification, i.e. simply "to be compared with."

To me, the use of aff. indicates a greater degree of confidence. Perhaps I have a specimen that has most of the diagnostic character states of a taxon, or has one or two that differ very slightly, such that I have some minor doubts about referring it directly to that taxon. In this case I use aff. as an indication that I believe this specimen to be very close to the taxon concerned.

Obviously, there is intergradation in these two concepts. and it is certain that different workers will not apply it in exactly the same way. But if there is an attempt to follow such usage consistently, I believe that the author's degree of confidence in the identification is more accurately represented.

Because both [aff. and cf.] are an "alias for tentative identifications" (Zidek, 1987) information content may not be increased; again it is a matter of taste.

 

[Max-fossils]

The way I do it is this: 

5 hours ago, -Andy- said:

 1. If I have a confirmed mosasaur tooth in which I know the definite species, I name it: Tylosaurus proriger

 

 2. If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I know the genus, and the species resembles T. proriger, but I am slightly unsure, I name it: Tylosaurus cf. proriger

 

 3. If I have a mosasaur tooth which looks just like T. proriger, but I know it's a different species for sure, I name it: Tylosaurus aff. proriger

 

 4. If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I know the genus but not the species, I label it: Tylosaurus sp. OR Tylosaurus indet.

 

 5. If I have a mosasaur tooth in which I cannot identify the genus, but it resembles the Tylosaurus family, I name it: cf. Tylosaurus sp.

 

1, same

2, 3, 4, 5, if I'm not sure of the species, or don't know at all, then I put it as Tylosaurus sp. 

4, 5, if I don't know the genus, I just label it as indet. 

 

Actually, my labels are like this:

• Common name (eg. Mosasaur tooth)                    - acquisition (eg. traded 22/11/2017)
• Species name (eg. Tylosaurus proriger)
• Location name (eg. Chugach Mountains, Alaska, USA)
• Age (eg. Maastrichtian, Cretaceous; 66 mya)

 

(Yes, I know, I am missing the formation field... that's because I only properly understood what a formation was a few months ago, and after years of making labels one way, it's hard to change the habit. Anyways, for more than half of my fossils I don't even know what the formation is...).

 

But the way I understood it is that: if you know the genus but not the species, you go Genus sp. . And if you don't know the genus (and also not the species), you just put in indet. Thanks though for clearing up what aff. and cf. mean; I never understood that!  Edit: Actually, thanks Harry for showing what it really means. 

 

Best regards,

 

Max

Edited November 22, 2017 by Max-fossils