Jaimie Aigner Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 (edited) This was found in a riverbed in Indiana three decades ago. I have yet to figure out exactly what it might be. A gem show expert said it was a Crinoid Sea Lilly but it does not really match Sea Lilly photos posted on line. It is 4 1/2” long, 7” around and weighs 320 grams. Thank you so much for your input! Edited December 23, 2017 by Jaimie Aigner No photo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Welcome to the forum! It looks like a geodized crinoid, to me. Siliceous preudomorph after crinoid, like that in figure 5, below. 3 " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimie Aigner Posted December 23, 2017 Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 20 minutes ago, Jaimie Aigner said: This was found in a riverbed in Indiana three decades ago. I have yet to figure out exactly what it might be. A gem show expert said it was a Crinoid Sea Lilly but it does not really match Sea Lilly photos posted on line. It is 4 1/2” long, 7” around and weighs 320 grams. Thank you so much for your input! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oilshale Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 Welcome to TFF! I agree, It's a Sea Lilly. Google for example Cupressocrinus (not that species - Cupressocrinus is a Devonian crinoid) Thomas 2 Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes (Confucius, 551 BC - 479 BC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimie Aigner Posted December 23, 2017 Author Share Posted December 23, 2017 Thank you for your reply! My fossil does not have a flat bottom like illustration 5. It is pointed at both ends. Does that make any difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 23, 2017 Share Posted December 23, 2017 No. Your specimen is a well inflated crinoid column segment. More details you can find in this old but good document: R. S. Bassler. 1909. The formation of geodes with remarks on the silicification of fossils. Proceedings of the United States National Museum. V. 35 (1637):133-154 3 " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted December 24, 2017 Share Posted December 24, 2017 it is an expanded geodized crinoid calyx. Some crinoids after they died and were buried produced an internal gas upon decomposition that inflated the calyxes 2 "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...
Jaimie Aigner Posted December 24, 2017 Author Share Posted December 24, 2017 Thank you all very much for straightening me out! Happy hunting!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 24, 2017 Share Posted December 24, 2017 If it is a crinoid calyx (which I don't think), where are the plates or the suture lines between them? BTW, a similar topic: " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted December 24, 2017 Share Posted December 24, 2017 2 hours ago, Jaimie Aigner said: My fossil does not have a flat bottom like illustration 5. It is pointed at both ends. Does that make any difference? Can We see pictures from other angles and the back? Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimie Aigner Posted December 24, 2017 Author Share Posted December 24, 2017 Hope this helps ynot. I’ll be happy to send more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted December 24, 2017 Share Posted December 24, 2017 The second picture shows the attachment point of the "stem". I agree that it is a geodized crinoid calyx. When a fossil is geodized it can lose some or all of the distinguishing features. Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted December 24, 2017 Share Posted December 24, 2017 48 minutes ago, ynot said: When a fossil is geodized it can lose some or all of the distinguishing features. I would agree, but never loose the cracks between the plates of the calyx. I don't see any evidence of a calyx, but an inflated geodized and botryoidal crystallized crinoid pluricolumnal. No offence here, just my perception. " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library 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