Jump to content
KimTexan

North Sulfur River reptile bone and skin?

Recommended Posts

KimTexan

I found this yesterday at North Sulfur River.D2B787CB-FAAD-4D56-977F-B87A29C19F3B.thumb.jpeg.41c427e93c9f9cc9d2cd0da5fa95877a.jpeg

It was pretty amorphous looking, but I thought it might be a bone fragment or vertebra stuck in the mud.

 

I took a chisel to the outside edge of the mud clump to see if I could crack the mud and pull some of it off. This is what it looks like.

87D8EC01-14C1-4CCA-B0AA-353BAB0C8DA7.thumb.jpeg.9861e06b166eaaa297785e8ee24d6c70.jpeg

It looks a lot like reptile skin. It looks like some of the skin texture came off on the other piece. 

 

What on earth is this? 

 

I’m still trying to get the rest of the mud off only more carefully though. I think there may be a small bone in some of the mud around it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Can not say what it is, but I will say it is not a skin fossil.

The type of preservation and the overall pattern are wrong for skin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

As an example:most mammal skin is gone in about 138 days in a temperate(moderately arid)climate and subaerial exposure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Also, I am not seeing any bone in the piece either.

 

It is interesting. I look forward to hearing what others will say.:popcorn::popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Regarding skin pattern:

 

BD3105AE-7BD4-446D-8535-09CF7F43116C.jpeg.22c93c7473d3af70d5586382c28ba6b3.jpeg

 

The skin on the leg and neck of this sea turtle I think resemble the pattern on the piece I have reasonably well. Preservation, I’ll have to go check that out. I know we found skin patterns in Wyoming, but I don’t recall what they looked like as far as preservation. 

 

@doushantuo

I am not set that it has to be skin. I totally get organic mater and decomposition. I have worked with clinical pathology for years and know a few people who have worked in forensics for the coroner. Skin will come off the flesh quite easily after just 4 days dead in the water in normal room temp, much less tropical temps with carnivorous critters swimming around. 

 

It will take me a while to work it down to where I can tell anything more about it. The material is very hard too so it doesn’t clean up easily. I’m pretty sure there are very small bones there. If it were a foot I guess they’d be toe bones, but for all I know they could be sea shell fragments

I have another much larger piece, about 10 pounds from NSR that has me even more curious that I am also working to remove the exterior matrix to figure it out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

well,keep us informed,anyhow.

BTW: no need to show me vertebrate integumentary structures of any kind.:dinosmile:

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
8 minutes ago, KimTexan said:

skin on the leg and neck of this sea turtle I think resemble the pattern on the piece I have reasonably well.

The 2 do not look anything alike to Me.

The turtle skin has a distinct pattern that is repeticoes. The fossil in question has a random pattern with no repetitive structuring. 

There is a definite symmetry to the turtle skin that is totally lacking in the fossil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Ok well I’m all ears to find out what it is. I’m certainly no pro at this. I work in organ transplant. So geology and paleontology are just hobbies.

Do take into consideration that the pattern is a bit confusing. Ideally you’d have a positive and a negative side on the two halves, but I think some of the negative got stuck on the positive side and vice versa so it is a mix on each half.

 

There was a slightly different pattern on the bottom that peeled off when I broke another mud clump off.

 

9E996134-F2B7-4B9F-BFE2-61D042513ED9.thumb.jpeg.5459e2ab124cd1273c6d79df768b7836.jpeg

 

You can just barely see a pattern on the far right and left. The right looks like the positive and the left the negative or imprint vs actual pattern. They are little irregular squares or trapezoid like in shape.

 

Looking at my pics close up, rather than the object I tend to agree it doesn’t look like skin. I wonder if it could be some type of coral or Bryozoa, but even they usually have a repeating pattern or a regularity in shape and size of the individual little structures.

Could it be geologic? Maybe a mud cracking pattern?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
3 minutes ago, KimTexan said:

Could it be geologic?

Maybe a mud cracking pattern?

It is a possibility. But not one I am familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Still looking at my pic. Could it be a mineral formation pattern? Try looking just at the vertical lines.

Maybe it is almost like a septarian nodule that didn’t quite finish forming. 

 

The other piece I am working on I think may be part septarian nodule encased in a lot of matrix. This is the part that made me think the mud ball was septarian.

834F1B75-FF36-4A86-8EF2-577460F6082F.thumb.jpeg.56317437720da2a44b53c0f667365920.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Micah

Can you take a closeup of the top edges? It looks like there are regular bumps of some kind on but it’s hard to see them in these pics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan
On 11/26/2017 at 11:25 PM, doushantuo said:

well,keep us informed,anyhow.

BTW: no need to show me vertebrate integumentary structures of any kind.:dinosmile:

Sorry, no ill intent there.

I have no idea what people’s backgrounds are on here. You are clearly quite knowledgable, but I have no idea what your specific area of expertise is or what your training is. People don’t exactly wear ID badges on here with their credentials or titles on them like in the workplace. I assume you’re a paleontologist and I know you’re great with coming up with fantastic and relevant references so I assume you’re likely a professor of paleontology or at the least one who has done paleontelogical research. 

Some people I can remember what they’re most knowledgeable about. There are those who are very knowledgeable about trilobites, crinoids, ammonites, poo or fossils from a particular region and so on. You comment across the board on many topics so I haven’t figured out what you’re expertise is. Maybe it’s because I don’t post vertebrate fossils. Your knowledge seems broad and that’s all I’ve figured out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad

It does look like some sort of cracks in the original substrate or later rock have been infilled with silica to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doushantuo

Thanx for the compliments,Kim.:P

I believe in an interdisciplinary attitude when it comes to science.*

Frankly,I think I'm too dumb to have ever made even a pretty mediocre scientist.(is there a wistful smiley?:ighappy:)

 

*you have accurately surmised that i have sacrificed depth of knowledge of a single subject for the benefit of width.

Various very relevant pieces of vertebrate integument literature have gone under because of their perceived relevance for e.g.skin grafts,medical applications)

A stratigraphic gap analysis of exceptional fossil skin preservation has appeared recently(Roy.Soc.Lond,Proc.B ,I believe),but it's (still)

paywalled.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plax

my guess is mineral latticework filling the gap between a steinkern and mold of a mollusk shell. If the minerals completely filled the void you would have a pseudomorph of the mollusk shell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan
11 hours ago, Micah said:

Can you take a closeup of the top edges? It looks like there are regular bumps of some kind on but it’s hard to see them in these pics.

I’ll have to do it this evening after I get home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taogan

I've seen similar mineral deposits when the mineral doesn't form a vein, but a lattice, over here it usually turns out to be calcite, but I don't know what you might get over there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Calcite is probably the most common crystalline mineral in the area. In fact I found this nice little piece of calcite slickenside in the same area, the same day.

 

1570D441-C78D-4D15-A1A6-18BA1F65D329.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
4 hours ago, KimTexan said:

t I found this nice little piece of calcite slickenside 

Nice piece of calcite, but not slickenside. Look up "satin spar". Could also be selenite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Gypsum is fairly common here too, but I’m not sure how to tell the difference. I know some calcite fluoresces under UV light and is phosphorescent, but I don’t know if that can be used to distinguish if it isn’t the fluorescent variety.  

As far as slickenside, is it because there are no transverse striations or what which makes it NOT a slickenside? One side is pretty flat and smooth, but that could be just because of what it was up against when it formed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad

gypsum is hardness 2, calcite is 3, so you can scratch gypsum with calcite but not the other way around. 

Selenite is clear in it's pure form, satin spar more milky and fibrous. They are both gypsum varieties. 

I think you have calcite, but test the hardness. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Slickensides are created when rocks are pushed past each other. This movement causes an uneven streaking on the plane of contact. The piece in question has an even fibrous appearance to it that goes all the way through the piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD
19 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

gypsum is hardness 2, calcite is 3, so you can scratch gypsum with calcite but not the other way around. 

Selenite is clear in it's pure form, satin spar more milky and fibrous. They are both gypsum varieties. 

I think you have calcite, but test the hardness. 

 

Also vinegar can be used. Calcite will bubble and fizz with acid whereas selenite will not.

For what it’s worth I think it’s some sort of cracked nodule that water seeped into and left a calcite lattice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sagebrush Steve
6 minutes ago, ynot said:

Slickensides are created when rocks are pushed past each other. This movement causes an uneven streaking on the plane of contact. The piece in question has an even fibrous appearance to it that goes all the way through the piece.

Here is an example of the polished surface of serpentine that was formed as rocks pushed past each other in a subduction zone.  This is from Shell Beach in Sonoma County, part of the Franciscan Complex in the San Francisco Bay Area.  This one is pretty highly polished, unlike others that have distinct lines in the direction of travel.

DSC_0121.thumb.JPG.8fabad52d8a3221d6f36b9c77338580f.JPG

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.

×