Jump to content
Cowboy Paleontologist

Triassic Tooth

Recommended Posts

Cowboy Paleontologist

This is my first post, so please bear with me.  I found this tooth this summer in the Rendonda formation in Quay county New Mexico.  This should date it to the late Triassic, 202-204 mya.  The area where it was found contains almost exclusively Phytosaur fossils, but I am 99% certain that this one is not.  It measures about 2.5 cm in length and has one edge with fine serrations.  Based on the general shape and serrations, I am guessing some sort of theropod, however I do not know enough about other crocodilian species such as Postosuchus to rule something like that out.  Any help would be appreciated, and if you need more pictures/information, feel free to let me know!

 

 

 

Tooth ID serations from top.jpg

Tooth ID serations from side.jpg

Tooth ID.jpg

Tooth ID 1.jpg

Tooth ID 2.jpg

Edited by Cowboy Paleontologist
Pictures now visible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Welcome to TFF!

It is better if You upload Your pictures here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowboy Paleontologist

I seem to only be able to insert links to download the images.  How do you actually make them show up?

 

Tooth ID.bmp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kane

Can you save your photos in jpg rather than bmp format?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Tooth ID (1).jpg   Tooth ID serations from side.jpg

 

Tooth ID serations from top.jpg  Tooth ID.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

I personally click the “click to choose files” link, go to my Photo Library or camera roll and select the one I want. Then click “done” it will automatically insert them if they’re under 3.95 MB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowboy Paleontologist

Aha!  Using jpg seems to help :) 

Tooth ID 1.jpg

Tooth ID 2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowboy Paleontologist

There are about 6 serrations/2mm by the tip, and they get finer to about 9 serrations/2mm at the base.  It seems that about 8/2mm is a good estimate for the majority of the tooth though.  They do continue all the way down the length of the tooth.  I don't know how well you can see in the picture, but it would seem that the carina does have some very fine serrations, about half as large as those on the distal edge, but I could not tell that they continued beyond about 4-5 mm from the point.

Also, I am certain that it was the Redonda formation.  More specifically, from what would have been a gravel river bed at the time where similarly sized rocks, teeth, and bits of bone collected.

Base.jpg

Carina Serrations.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon

Thanks Need serrations count midline thats the comparison point with others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowboy Paleontologist

~8 serrations/2mm.  There is a little variation depending on just where I measure, but 8 seems to be a pretty good average for midline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cowboy Paleontologist

Thanks Troodon, this is very informative!  How do you find these sources?  I spent a fair amount of time looking and never found anything relevant.

 

 

Pfooley, I would really like to know what Mr. Lucas thinks and appreciate you sending that to him.  I also will definitely be perusing those papers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesuslover340

May I enquire as to why you think it isn't phytosaur? It reminds me of an anterior tooth of Redondosaurus, but I may be wrong-I have no knowledge of the area or of the creatures that can be found there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
39 minutes ago, Jesuslover340 said:

May I enquire as to why you think it isn't phytosaur? It reminds me of an anterior tooth of Redondosaurus, but I may be wrong-I have no knowledge of the area or of the creatures that can be found there.

It could be not that familiar with phytosaurs do you have something that documents the teeth of this species

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PFOOLEY
10 hours ago, Cowboy Paleontologist said:

Pfooley, I would really like to know what Mr. Lucas thinks...

He thought it was definitely an Archosaur tooth, but saw nothing definitively dinosaur about it. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PFOOLEY

 

5a27e55dd67db_redondasaurusa.thumb.png.19f91d40b5df8583941ae790b6c3e32a.pngredondasaurus.thumb.png.43a658b79d3ce00115855c728b031636.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
2 minutes ago, PFOOLEY said:

redondasaurus.thumb.png.43a658b79d3ce00115855c728b031636.png

Anything in the paper that describes the teeth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PFOOLEY
9 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Anything in the paper that describes the teeth?

Page 37...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesuslover340
23 minutes ago, Troodon said:

It could be not that familiar with phytosaurs do you have something that documents that species

Nothing that describes the teeth. Just a free book on Google Books describing the holotype. The holotype was found in the same county, though.

 

https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=qbP9CQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA193&dq=redondasaurus+holotyoe&ots=WxFsaVKEDj&sig=Z1B7LzIAPjmykdYQbNrc0YXn4wE#v=onepage&q=redondasaurus holotyoe&f=false

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
11 minutes ago, PFOOLEY said:

Page 37...

In reading the description of the teeth its definitely not Redondasaurus.  Those teeth are conical lacking a carinae just the opposite of the tooth in question.  Isolated triassic teeth are very hard to ID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesuslover340

Screenshot_20171206-231244.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troodon
38 minutes ago, Jesuslover340 said:

Screenshot_20171206-231244.png

I don't think we are dealing with the large rostral teeth in the bulb or premaxilla but the other teeth. " The posterior two teeth are more indicative of the rest of the premaxillary dentition; they are conical teeth lacking carinae."  Not much is said in the paper of the dentary or maxillary teeth but the morphology in the photographs look similiar to the posterior Premaxillary ones.

 

Let me add that the round base is more indicative of non dinosaurian archosaurs but I don't have enough knowledge of Triassic dinosaur teeth to know if any exhibited that morphology 

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.

×