Jump to content
All Things Ocean

Partial Megalodon?

Recommended Posts

All Things Ocean

Found this buried in the sand on a man-made dredge island in the middle of the Savannah River. Guy I was with said it was a partial megalodon... what say you all? 

58CBFF59-B41D-4F4B-8669-00B3AEA7CCD3.jpeg

21247956-C5D8-4FBD-9C8B-B0E4E8346E33.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad

Wait for the meg experts to pop along, but looks like one to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD

100% sure it is, nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot

Yes that is a fragment of a megalodon tooth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jazfossilator

Sweet find!, even the worn meg chunks are precious to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
caldigger
3 hours ago, Jazfossilator said:

Sweet find!, even the worn meg chunks are precious to me

This one really isn't very worn either. The break edges look to be sharp. This may have snapped in the dredging process.

If there's one, there's bound to be more. Keep looking. That bid whole one is out there somewhere with your name on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sixgill pete

Definitely a fragalodon. And as @caldigger said a clean new looking break of what would have been a spectacular tooth. I would absolutely keep checking out that dredge spoil island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils

Why is everyone so sure of megalodon? I am by no means a shark tooth expert, but to me, because I am not seeing any bourlette, which is distinctive of the megalodon, I would lean more towards great white (Carcharodon carcharias)... Maybe I'm blind? Or crazy? Or perhaps both? :headscratch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
4 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

Why is everyone so sure of megalodon? I am by no means a shark tooth expert, but to me, because I am not seeing any bourlette, which is distinctive of the megalodon, I would lean more towards great white (Carcharodon carcharias)... Maybe I'm blind? Or crazy? Or perhaps both? :headscratch:

Way to big for white shark tooth. (maximum size for great white is 3.5 inches.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaimin013

Definitely megladon, although it's not a complete tooth I really like the serrations they are super clean!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD
7 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

 

Why is everyone so sure of megalodon?

 

Proportions are also very different, meg is a lot thicker. You can also see the remnant bump where the cusps used to be, rare in GWs, and if present only in juveniles which this would to big for. Root also has more curve in it, GWs have more of just a bar-shaped root.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shellseeker
23 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

Why is everyone so sure of megalodon? I am by no means a shark tooth expert, but to me, because I am not seeing any bourlette, which is distinctive of the megalodon, I would lean more towards great white (Carcharodon carcharias)... Maybe I'm blind? Or crazy? Or perhaps both? :headscratch:

Good question. How to distinguish Megs from GWs?

Size -- GWs max out at 3 inches, Megs at 7 inches

Bourlette -- gap between enamel & root on Meg; does not exist in GW
Uniformity of Serrations.  Meg every serration like the previous one: GWs seems bumpy and diverse in comparison,

Root -- on a Meg Robust, on a GW not so much

There are likely other differentiators. Jack

IMG_4017.thumb.JPG.9efd4587da7e5e7804863590ed8813f0.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils

@ynot @WhodamanHD @Shellseeker alright thanks guys. So if I understood this correctly,  the main reason why this tooth here can't be a GW is because of the size. But the bourlette is still invisible to me... So is it possible for a meg to have no  bourlette?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD
3 minutes ago, Max-fossils said:

@ynot @WhodamanHD @Shellseeker alright thanks guys. So if I understood this correctly,  the main reason why this tooth here can't be a GW is because of the size. But the bourlette is still invisible to me... So is it possible for a meg to have no  bourlette?

Believe it’s been worn off. Even the juveniles have a little bourlette.

151192B9-78BA-4A98-8803-740E31CFB69A.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
Just now, WhodamanHD said:

Believe it’s been worn off. Even the juveniles have a little bourlette.

Why would it be worn off if the rest of the tooth doesn't seem to be worn at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhodamanHD
Just now, Max-fossils said:

Why would it be worn off if the rest of the tooth doesn't seem to be worn at all?

Well apart from half the tooth, wear can be strangely selective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
Just now, WhodamanHD said:

Well apart from half the tooth, wear can be strangely selective.

Lol okay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
39 minutes ago, Max-fossils said:

But the bourlette is still invisible to me... So is it possible for a meg to have no  bourlette?

The bourlete is only on the lingual side, the one shown is a labial view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
4 minutes ago, ynot said:

The bourlete is only on the lingual side, the one shown is a labial view.

There's a picture for each side... and I don't see the bourlette on either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ynot
5 minutes ago, Max-fossils said:

There's a picture for each side... and I don't see the bourlette on either.

Should have taken a second look. 

There is a bourlette, it is just hard to see because of the shading in the first picture.

58CBFF59-B41D-4F4B-8669-00B3AEA7CCD3.thumb.jpeg.1e7eaca468f07afa3778faba5676e96c.jpeg.4ac3fef58ebfdff4827e3453b58ec9b9.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sixgill pete

The serrations say meg also. Smaller and more uniform than great white. Also on this tooth you can see where the bourlette had been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
55 minutes ago, ynot said:

Should have taken a second look. 

There is a bourlette, it is just hard to see because of the shading in the first picture.

 

 

Aaah yeah, now I see it better. Silly me  :doh!:

Thanks Tony btw!

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.

×