RED FLAG on Dromaeosaurus Teeth For Sale

[Troodon]

A member asked me to check out some auction offerings for Morrocan Dromaeosaurus teeth and I did and they of course they were improperly identified.  Not being familiar with the identification of these teeth I tried to help him by checking around on different dealer websites and was appalled at what I found.  What I refer to as key dinosaur suppliers, on the web, were selling Dromaeosaurus teeth from the Hell Creek Formation of Montana.   What makes me more upset is that I told one of them that they do not exist.   All the listings were beautiful teeth however they were not Dromaeosaurus but looked like Nanotyrannus.    

 

Reminder to all those that are interested in purchasing teeth or bones from the species Dromaeosaurus it does not exist in the Hell Creek Formation or Lance Formation or Morocco.    That species can only be found in the States from the campanian deposits of the Judith River Formation and Two Medicine Formation of Montana.   Canada also has a number of formations where it can be found also in Campanian deposits but you rarely see them offered for sale.

 

The Hell Creek and Lance Formations have only two Dromaeosaurids described Acheroraptor and Dakotaraptor.   So if your interested in purchasing a Dromaeosaurid tooth from those faunas it needs to be from one of those dinosaurs.   

 

Since domestic Dinosaur dealers don't seem to have their act together I suggest that you post any interest in these type of teeth here on the forum before you buy to be sure its properly identified. 

[Miocene_Mason]

A little off topic as it’s a not technically a Dromaeosaurid, but do you know if those Richardoestesia you see for sale are identified correctly? I know that genus itself is a little dubious.

[-Andy-]

It's just as sad when unsuspecting collectors purchase these teeth, and continue the cycle of misidentification.

 

To add on, whether or not you believe in Nanotyrannus is irrelevant here. The teeth you believe to be a Hell Creek raptor is far, far more likely to be a tyrannosaur than a raptor. A proper Acheroraptor has ridges on the side; please refer to this thread by Troodon: 

 

[Troodon]

4 hours ago, WhodamanHD said:

A little off topic as it’s a not technically a Dromaeosaurid, but do you know if those Richardoestesia you see for sale are identified correctly? I know that genus itself is a little dubious.

There are two types of Richardoestesia found in the Hell Creek, R. gilmorei and R. isosceles but they are NOT formally described. R. isosceles is usually identified correctly by dealers simply because it looks like an isosceles triangle.  The other one is usually misidentified or most sellers do not know it even exists or how to ID them.  R. gilmorei is a very valid taxon but until it get described it's name may change.  R. isosceles is the questionable one and being studied simply because the jaw I provided the ROM contained those teeth and a Paronychodon tooth in the same jaw.   The initial research is not conclusive enough to warrant describing a new species but they are leaning toward it being a Pterosaur.  More specimens are needed.

[Miocene_Mason]

2 hours ago, Troodon said:

The initial research is not conclusive enough to warrant describing a new species but they are leaning toward it being a Pterosaur

Didn’t see that coming! That’s one scary pterosaur tooth. Thanks for the information.

[Haravex]

Quick question I know there is no possibility of labeling them but correct me if i am wrong in saying there is at least one unidentified dromaeosauridae from the kem kem correct? and teeth as such should be either labeled theropod indet or dromaeosauridae sp yes?

 

Again feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding this.

[Troodon]

 

23 minutes ago, Haravex said:

Quick question I know there is no possibility of labeling them but correct me if i am wrong in saying there is at least one unidentified dromaeosauridae from the kem kem correct? and teeth as such should be either labeled theropod indet or dromaeosauridae sp yes?

 

Again feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding this.

We only have one research paper suggesting that Dromaeosaurid like teeth may exist but no further definitive proof exists.  In fact, a TFF member responded to a post who was working on isolated small Kem Kem teeth stated that none exist.   I have yet to see a members tooth that is a slam dunk candidate for one.  So the possibility is there that one exists but nothing certain at this time.   Labeling with either nomenclature you suggested is fine.