Layers, layers. Need help to ID

[MeargleSchmeargl]

Neat ivory ya got there!

[Malone]

Just a possiblity please don't take offense for my suggestions. I thought the patterns were unique. I believe fossilized palm might explain the white of the interior as well as fit the location. The variety of grain structures are numerous.

[Fossildude19]

No Carboniferous/Mesozoic aged fossils found in Florida.   

Simplest explanation is proboscidean ivory. 
That is definitely found in Florida. 

It helps to know about the geology of the area, to know what can and cannot be found there.  

 

 

[Malone]

1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said:

No Carboniferous/Mesozoic aged fossils found in Florida.   

Simplest explanation is proboscidean ivory. 
That is definitely found in Florida. 

It helps to know about the geology of the area, to know what can and cannot be found there.  

 

 

That's why I defer to your knowledge and said you are most likely right. I enjoy being part of the discussion and to be able to have my thoughts to be a part.

[Malone]

But on a shore line it's possible the material could be from a long way away. Debris from the most recent tsunami Japan washes up the shores here. 

[dodo4]

21 hours ago, abyssunder said:

I'm pretty sure you were inspired by this recent topic.

Your specimen has a part of the dentin revealing the Schreger pattern necessary to diagnose proboscidean tusk.
Try to measure the angle between the Schreger lines (it will be good to have more samples), then see if they are acute or obtuse. Usually the measurements are made near the dentine-cementum junction.
The cementum is a thin layer of the external part of the tusk. In gomphothere tusk the thin cementum layer covers the dentin proximally, but is lost distally by abrasion in life. It's not clear if the cementum overlapped the enamel, also, the enamel is present only in the upper tusks of gomphothere as a continuous band (1-3mm thick) with a width of several centimeters.
As far as I can see, the angles in your specimen are obtuse, so it might be from mastodon or gomphotere.

 

 

The layers in question are the annual/seasonal/weekly/daily increments.

 

 

 

Oh yes, I was inspired. When I tell people that "my life went to the dogs", I know exactly the dogs I am talking about.

 

As for measuring angles, I dont have a tool to handle such a small sample.

 

[dodo4]

On 2/15/2018 at 5:00 PM, abyssunder said:

I'm pretty sure you were inspired by this recent topic.

Your specimen has a part of the dentin revealing the Schreger pattern necessary to diagnose proboscidean tusk.
Try to measure the angle between the Schreger lines (it will be good to have more samples), then see if they are acute or obtuse. Usually the measurments are made near the dentine-cementum junction.
The cementum is a thin layer of the external part of the tusk. In gomphothere tusk the thin cementum layer covers the dentin proximally, but is lost distally by abrasion in life. It's not clear if the cementum overlapped the enamel, also, the enamel is present only in the upper tusks of gomphothere as a continuous band (1-3mm thick) with a width of several centimeters.
As far as I can see, the angles in your specimen are obtuse, so it might be from mastodon or gomphotere.

 

The layers in question are the annual/seasonal/weekly/daily increments.

 

 

 

Oh yes abyssunder, I was inspired. When I tell people that "my life went to the dogs", I know exactly the dogs I am talking about.

 

As for measuring angles, I dont have a tool to handle such a small sample.

[abyssunder]

Only proboscidean tusks have the Schreger pattern, which can vary depending on the position in the tusk. The pattern types are nicely exemplified in J. Trapani, D. C. Fisher. 2003. Discriminating Proboscidean Taxa Using Features of the Schreger Pattern in Tusk Dentin. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 429–438 .

 

[dodo4]

7 hours ago, Malone said:

Do you have an approximate weight?

 

I would say about 50 grams. I dont have a scale.

[Malone]

1 hour ago, dodo4 said:

 

I would say about 50 grams, I dont have a scale.

Thank you for responding! I would go with the experience. It just looked like wood with a strange grain pattern. but these guys been doing this for quite while and it has proven to me many times they know a lot better than I. 

[dodo4]

6 hours ago, abyssunder said:

Only proboscidean tusks have the Schreger pattern, which can vary depending on the position in the tusk. The pattern types are nicely exemplified in J. Trapani, D. C. Fisher. 2003. Discriminating Proboscidean Taxa Using Features of the Schreger Pattern in Tusk Dentin. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 429–438 .

 

 

Thank you so much abyssunder!

[Malone]

45 minutes ago, dodo4 said:

 

Thank you so much abyssunder!

I just wanted to show why I thought what I did about the patterns.

[doushantuo]

apologies if repost:

 

 

 

[Malone]

4 minutes ago, doushantuo said:

apologies if repost:

I learn every day.

[dodo4]

9 minutes ago, doushantuo said:

apologies if repost:

 

 

 

 

Thank you so much doushantuo!

[Malone]

11 hours ago, abyssunder said:

Only proboscidean tusks have the Schreger pattern, which can vary depending on the position in the tusk. The pattern types are nicely exemplified in J. Trapani, D. C. Fisher. 2003. Discriminating Proboscidean Taxa Using Features of the Schreger Pattern in Tusk Dentin. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 429–438 .

 

Thank you for taking the time to enlighten me! I don't learn if questioning isn't possible. I understand that can be annoying! I hope you will have patience with me! Your knowledge is very important to all the people that receive it and pass it on!

[ynot]

9 hours ago, Malone said:

I just wanted to show why I thought what I did about the patterns.

In Your example the pattern is a surface structure, whereas the schreger lines are an internal feature. (only visible in a cross section view.)

[Malone]

1 hour ago, ynot said:

In Your example the pattern is a surface structure, whereas the schreger lines are an internal feature. (only visible in a cross section view.)

I agree! I only posted that to explain my line of incorrect thought. It was an attempt to explain the unusual patterns and location. I thought the patterns and location would fit an old palm tree. I try figure things correctly,  but that's how I learn what is correct. I am willing to wrong and willing to be right. I was wrong on this one. I learned some good things. Thank you!

[dodo4]

On 2/16/2018 at 12:37 PM, Fossildude19 said:

No Carboniferous/Mesozoic aged fossils found in Florida.   

Simplest explanation is proboscidean ivory. 
That is definitely found in Florida. 

It helps to know about the geology of the area, to know what can and cannot be found there.  

 

 

 

Could you look at the pictures below? Over the last few years, I found it at the same beach near South Ponte Vedra, FL. It looks like petrified wood, but I am not sure. Also, some white mineral came to the surface of the first piece and the layers are not visible as much as they were.

[dodo4]

[dodo4]

This is the next piece of what I think is petrified wood

[dodo4]

[abyssunder]

Proboscidean tusk and wood in transverse section looks similar due to the concentric growth lines, but only the tusk has Schreger pattern.

[ynot]

3 hours ago, dodo4 said:

some white mineral came to the surface of the first piece and the layers are not visible as much as they were.

That is possibly salt. It can destroy the piece. Soak in fresh water for about a week (change the water daily) and let dry. then @Ptychodus04 can tell You what needs to be done to preserve it.

 

Your pieces "wood" are pieces of bone.

[Ptychodus04]

Definitely salt or some similar evaporite. Do as @ynot suggests. Soak, soak, soak. If the pieces are stable, they can then be left to dry in the open air. If they are brittle, you will need to control the drying.

 

Di this by wrapping each wet piece in a wet towel or newspaper. Then wrap in a dry towel and put them in a closed box for a few weeks.

 

Once dry, determine if the pieces need to be stabilized. If they are trying to come apart on their own, they need it for sure.

 

get some Paraloid, McGean B15, or Butvar. Dissolve 1 part plastic in 50 parts acetone. The best method to apply is soaking. Make enough solution to submerge your largest piece and put it in. Let it sit until the bubbles stop coming out. Remove the piece and place it on cardboard to dry out.