Greg.Wood Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Here are my finds from the Verulam fm in Brechin Ontario. I had never been to an active quarry before so it was cool to see some of the machinery in addition to the unending supply of rocks to split. The temperature was amazing for December and we didn't get any rain. The very bottom of the quarry exposes the Bobcaygeon fm but it was flooded this time. @Malcolmt thanks for taking me to your spot! I remember what you said most of these are but will need reminding on a couple... 1. Pleurocystite - sadly missing the stalk and one of the arms but great to find one (Didn't know they existed until Saturday) A few of the plates fell off so I got a better look at the structure underneath before gluing it back together 2. Ceraurus trilobites 3. Isotelus trilobite 4. (forgot the name) partial trilobite Needs some cleaning but I'm afraid to damage it 5. Crinoid calyx (forgot the name) 6. Unknown cephalopod 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsailor Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 That Crinoid is spectacular Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Nice haul! You certainly have a talent. I think your mystery trilobite may be a Thaleops. The big cephalopod with the bottle appearance might be Endoceras proteiforme, pretty much the biggest nautiloid in that formation. 2 ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimB88 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Wow! Any of those would be a trip maker! Grats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimTexan Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Very nice and cool finds. We don’t have those kinds of fossils down here in Texas. So thanks for sharing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Trilobite number 3 is: Failleana indeterminata figure from: Ludvigsen, R. (1979) Fossils of Ontario - Part 1: The Trilobites. Royal Ontario Museum Publication, 96 pp. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Sharks Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 HI Greg: It was nice to meet you in the pit. We didn't get too much chance to talk, but I'm sure we'll run into each other again. Kane is right, your one mystery trilobite is Thaleops laurentiana and I see Piranha just told you about the other. Most of your finds likely came from Bobcaygeon formation rocks as the bottom floor of the pit is already several feet into the Bob. and all the rocks you were looking at, at least while I was there, came from the pool. My day got me one so-so edrioasteroid from the very top, so not nearly as productive as yours. 1 There's no limit to what you can accomplish when you're supposed to be doing something else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey P Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 That looks like an incredible day in the Boby. Spectacular finds. Congratulations on finding them and thanks for sharing them. Love to see them after they've been prepped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamalama Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 46 minutes ago, Northern Sharks said: HI Greg: It was nice to meet you in the pit. We didn't get too much chance to talk, but I'm sure we'll run into each other again. Kane is right, your one mystery trilobite is Thaleops laurentiana and I see Piranha just told you about the other. Most of your finds likely came from Bobcaygeon formation rocks as the bottom floor of the pit is already several feet into the Bob. and all the rocks you were looking at, at least while I was there, came from the pool. My day got me one so-so edrioasteroid from the very top, so not nearly as productive as yours. 1 hour ago, Kane said: Nice haul! You certainly have a talent. I think your mystery trilobite may be a Thaleops. The big cephalopod with the bottle appearance might be Endoceras proteiforme, pretty much the biggest nautiloid in that formation. *Cough* Nanillaenus *Cough* -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...
Malcolmt Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Was a great day with spectacular weather, glad you enjoyed yourself. I also had a decent day a cupulocrinus calyx and 2 plates of multiple pleurocystites. Unfortunately looks like the end of the unseasonably nice weather is upon us. Yes I also told him in the field it was a Nanillaenus but Northern Sharks brought up the Thaleops word And it is still Phacops to me..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, Shamalama said: *Cough* Nanillaenus *Cough* Could be! ... Thaleops laurentiana and Nanillaenus conradi look very similar from behind! Perhaps if you mail me some of your specimens for an indefinite amount of time so that I could inspect them in hand... ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamalama Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Just now, Kane said: Could be! ... Thaleops laurentiana and Nanillaenus conradi look very similar from behind! I'm just trying to start a kerfluffle since both names seem to be used interchangeably for specimens from the Verulam/Bobcaygeon. -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...
Malcolmt Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Two votes Nanillaenus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Sharks Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Piranha can verify this, but Nanillaenus was synonymized with Thaleops, with the latter taking naming precedence. So for now, the "official" name is Thaleops, but plenty of us, especially the other Kevin, feel there are enough differences to bring back the Nanillaenus name. 1 There's no limit to what you can accomplish when you're supposed to be doing something else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 2 hours ago, Shamalama said: *Cough* Nanillaenus *Cough* 2 hours ago, Malcolmt said: And it is still Phacops to me..... 2 hours ago, Shamalama said: I'm just trying to start a kerfluffle since both names seem to be used interchangeably for specimens from the Verulam/Bobcaygeon. 2 hours ago, Malcolmt said: Two votes Nanillaenus Amati & Westrop 2004 synonymized Nanillaenus as Thaleops. Amati, L., & Westrop, S.R. (2004) A systematic revision of Thaleops (Trilobita: Illaenidae) with new species from the Middle and Late Ordovician of Oklahoma and New York. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 2(3):207-256 PDF LINK Years ago I remember not wanting to change labels, preferring the 'old school' names. In Europe Phacops was originally designated as Calymene latifrons Bronn 1825, then in North America as Calymene bufo var. rana, Green 1832. And don't forget the first description of 'Phacops' in North America as Somatrikelon megalomaton McMurtrie, 1819. Emmrich, 1839 finally established the genus Phacops. Surely no one is interested in resurrecting those antiquated names nearly 200 years old, so the same principle should apply for changes in taxonomy that have occurred more recently, even if it requires the changing of labels. Perpetuating the use of invalid taxa is counter productive to TFF and a disservice to others who will view this in the future. McMurtrie, H. (1819) Fossil Organic Remains. In: Sketches of Louisville and its environs. Louisville, S. Penn, pp. 74-75 Bronn, H.G. (1825) Über zwei neue Trilobiten-Arten zum Calymene-Geschlechte gehörig. Taschenbuch für die gesammte Mineralogie, pp. 317-321 Green, J.M. (1832) Monograph of the trilobites of North America: with coloured models of the species. J. Brano Publishing, Philadelphia, 93 pp. Emmrich, H.F. (1839) De Trilobitis: Dissertatio petrefactologica quam concensu et auctoritate amplissimi philosophorum ordinis. Berolini: Berlin, 56 pp. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 30 minutes ago, Northern Sharks said: ...but plenty of us, especially the other Kevin, feel there are enough differences to bring back the Nanillaenus name. That's fine and perhaps there are enough differences to reestablish Nanillaenus. Three words come to mind: peer reviewed paper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 "Somatrikelon megalomaton" seems like a name of a Transformers character. It makes Eldredgeops rana sound positively euphonious. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 11 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said: "Somatrikelon megalomaton" seems like a name of a Transformers character. It makes Eldredgeops rana sound positively euphonious. Unfortunately no figured drawing was produced at the time, but the details of a snapping turtle-like creature with prominent eyes was most likely a Phacops. It is listed in the Treatise Trilobita O (1959) as Phacops [=?Somatrikelon McMurtrie, 1819], also probably the first description of any North American trilobite. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kane Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 "[...] but the underlip was accidentally broken off by some careless person who was examining it." I can imagine the earlier draft naming and shaming: "And I'm looking at you, Jenkins, you insufferable butter-fingers! Hands off my Somatrikelon megalomaton!" 1 ...How to Philosophize with a Hammer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamalama Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 2 hours ago, piranha said: Amati & Westrop 2004 synonymized Nanillaenus as Thaleops. Amati, L., & Westrop, S.R. (2004) A systematic revision of Thaleops (Trilobita: Illaenidae) with new species from the Middle and Late Ordovician of Oklahoma and New York. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology, 2(3):207-256 PDF LINK Years ago I remember not wanting to change labels, preferring the 'old school' names. In Europe Phacops was originally designated as Calymene latifrons Bronn 1825, then in North America as Calymene bufo var. rana, Green 1832. And don't forget the first description of 'Phacops' in North America as Somatrikelon megalomaton McMurtrie, 1819. Emmrich, 1839 finally established the genus Phacops. Surely no one is interested in resurrecting those antiquated names nearly 200 years old, so the same principle should apply for changes in taxonomy that have occurred more recently, even if it requires the changing of labels. Perpetuating the use of invalid taxa is counter productive to TFF and a disservice to others who will view this in the future. McMurtrie, H. (1819) Fossil Organic Remains. In: Sketches of Louisville and its environs. Louisville, S. Penn, pp. 74-75 Bronn, H.G. (1825) Über zwei neue Trilobiten-Arten zum Calymene-Geschlechte gehörig. Taschenbuch für die gesammte Mineralogie, pp. 317-321 Green, J.M. (1832) Monograph of the trilobites of North America: with coloured models of the species. J. Brano Publishing, Philadelphia, 93 pp. Emmrich, H.F. (1839) De Trilobitis: Dissertatio petrefactologica quam concensu et auctoritate amplissimi philosophorum ordinis. Berolini: Berlin, 56 pp. Points to Pirhana for shutting the Nanillaenus supporters down. Somatikelon is starting to rub off on me though. If I ever get to name a fossil I will Eldregdeops that one up. *wacky horn* -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...
Ludwigia Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Er...getting back to the original post @Greg.Wood, it looks like you had a very good day for a first visit! Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Shamalama said: Points to Pirhana for shutting the Nanillaenus supporters down... 4 hours ago, piranha said: That's fine and perhaps there are enough differences to reestablish Nanillaenus. Three words come to mind: peer reviewed paper It is not about 'points' or 'likes'. If Nanillaenus is still a valid genus, it has to be published in a peer reviewed journal. Until then, Amati & Westrop 2004 is the prevailing classification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossil-Hound Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 @Greg.Wood those are some gorgeous looking trilobites. Hopefully I'll get a chance to dig there in the spring. Do or do not. There is no try. - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monica Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Hi again, Greg! I like your nautiloid!!! Is that the siphuncle poking out of the left side of your specimen? Monica On 12/6/2017 at 11:55 AM, Greg.Wood said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now