Found a bone while hiking the Utah high desert.

[Questinia]

Some years ago I found this among the red rocks just beyond Zion National Park.  I thought it was a stone with erosion and wore it around my neck until someone told me it was a petrified bone.  I took it to a place in NYC that specializes in fossils and they told me to go to the Museum of Natural History because they could not identify it but definitely thought it was something.  I thought I should let you guys take a crack at it. 

 

Photos are of two sides with the second side showing a distinct darkness around the putative foramen.  I have additional photos.

 

I am new at this and appreciate any insights or thoughts.  Thank-you!

 

Dimensions:

 

Length:  3.25" (8.5 cm)

Width:   1.25"  (3.0 cm)

Thickness: 0.25" (app. 0.5 cm)

Foramen: 0.25" (app. 0.5cm)

[Miocene_Mason]

Welcome to the forum

Gut is saying stone as they I’ve seen many worn in this fashion. However, is there any worn sections that appear somewhat sponge-y? If so a picture could help us confirm it as a bone. The area is mapped as Jurassic sandstone.

[Questinia]

Hi, and thank-you.

I tried to include sponginess here. It's pock-marked and appears organic. Definitely doesn't feel like sandstone as it is quite hard.

[FreeRuin]

Welcome to the site!

Did you find it by any body of water or an embankment? Or was this just something wedged under a rock in the open?

[Questinia]

I can't recall.  I seem to remember finding it near a group of trees amongst loose sand and rocky rubble.  The topography may have been at the bottom of a high valley.  It definitely stood out as something different from its surroundings.  At first I thought it was an unusual stone with a curiously specific erosion.  Then it was brought to my attention that it was very bone-like.  Also the manager at Evolution a store with fossils in New York thought it was bone.

[ynot]

I agree that it is bone, but there is not enough there to tell what it came from.

[Questinia]

Hi ynot and thanks for the reply.  Do you mean it doesn't fit an identifiable morphology?  

[Macrophyseter]

I'm also feeling some bone-vibes although the shape of the bone kind of makes me uneasy. It's still possible that the bone was worn down, although the hole in the middle is kind of weird.

As for the red rocks you describe, I think you may be talking about the Moenave Formation, which I think is the main red layer in Zion and its outskirts. Moenave is a Jurassic stream/pond, but I might be wrong.

[Questinia]

 

9 minutes ago, Macrophyseter said:

I'm also feeling some bone-vibes although the shape of the bone kind of makes me uneasy. It's still possible that the bone was worn down, although the hole in the middle is kind of weird.

As for the red rocks you describe, I think you may be talking about the Moenave Formation, which I think is the main red layer in Zion and its outskirts. Moenave is a Jurassic stream/pond, but I might be wrong.

 Hi Macrophyseter.  I agree with the shape being odd.  I thought it could be part of a jaw, as I found something on the internet that looked like it with a foramen but I don't see anyplace for teeth on my specimen.  

[Questinia]

In fact I saw it here.  Different color but somewhat similar?

 

[Innocentx]

Being that it's a small fragment, I think it would be difficult to ID to a particular animal, or even body part. However, the foramen is positioned perfectly to make a cool pendant!

Sweet find.

[ynot]

1 hour ago, Questinia said:

  Do you mean it doesn't fit an identifiable morphology? 

It is worn down to the point that there are no distinguishing features left to make an identification.

[Questinia]

I was hoping it was a flat phalanges of an aquatic dinosaur!  But I'll accept a bony nubbin I can wear around my neck.  Thanks all!

[caldigger]

Let's just hope it isn't a remnant of one of those that didn't survive  the hike up the Narrows. 

[Macrophyseter]

48 minutes ago, Questinia said:

I was hoping it was a flat phalanges of an aquatic dinosaur!  But I'll accept a bony nubbin I can wear around my neck.  Thanks all!

Well, as far as I know, it is possible to determine an approximate type of animal by seeing the internal bone structure, but that would mean cutting open the bone....

Also when you are referring to "aquatic dinosaurs", I believe that you are actually talking about marine reptiles. Marine reptiles are not dinosaurs, though are already certain species of aquatic dinosaurs having been discovered recently (mostly spinosaurids). Nevertheless, I think that the Zion area has not reported any marine reptile fossils.

[Rockwood]

5 hours ago, Questinia said:

Do you mean it doesn't fit an identifiable morphology?

I think the problem is that from the available evidence it fits too many morphologies.

[Miocene_Mason]

So it seems the consensus it Chunkosaurus sp. 

[RJB]

Bone with hole in it, so obviously,,,,,,,  Holy Bone.  

 

RB

[Tidgy's Dad]

It may not be identifiable, but i think it's a really nice looking piece. 

Hello, and a very warm welcome to TFF from Morocco! 

[Questinia]

So, if it's unidentifiable but definitely a bone and petrified does that imply an probable age range?  Also, would it be worth going to the Museum of Natural History in NYC?

 

I would do it and report back!

 

Thanks!

[ynot]

1 minute ago, Questinia said:

So, if it's unidentifiable but definitely a bone and petrified does that imply an probable age range?  Also, would it be worth going to the Museum of Natural History in NYC?

 

I would do it and report back!

 

Thanks!

To determine the age You would need to know what formation it came out of. Because it was found as "float" that may be hard to do.

You can start by looking at geological maps of the area and seeing what is exposed in that area, then search those formations in the literature to see if any are known for fossil bone.

 

I doubt the museum could say any more that what has been said here, but it never hurts to try.

[Questinia]

15 minutes ago, ynot said:

To determine the age You would need to know what formation it came out of. Because it was found as "float" that may be hard to do.

You can start by looking at geological maps of the area and seeing what is exposed in that area, then search those formations in the literature to see if any are known for fossil bone.

 

I doubt the museum could say any more that what has been said here, but it never hurts to try.

Thanks, ynot.  That's very helpful.  In actuality I believe the area is not known for fossil bone.

[Rockwood]

2 hours ago, Questinia said:

Also, would it be worth going to the Museum of Natural History in NYC?

It is always worth the trip there. In this case I think your guy has most likely looked in on it already though.

@Carl taught me much of what I know.

[Carl]

You can definitely bring it by the AMNH. In fact, we are having Identification Day on 16 June, which is exactly what you are looking for. I will be there and would be the person you would come to see. However, I strongly agree with the others that it looks like a weathered piece of fossil bone but it's age and identification beyond that are likely to remain mysteries.

 

And @Rockwood, you flatter my unjustly! You know your stuff already and knew it before we ever met!

[Questinia]

2 hours ago, Carl said:

You can definitely bring it by the AMNH. In fact, we are having Identification Day on 16 June, which is exactly what you are looking for. I will be there and would be the person you would come to see. However, I strongly agree with the others that it looks like a weathered piece of fossil bone but it's age and identification beyond that are likely to remain mysteries.

 

And @Rockwood, you flatter my unjustly! You know your stuff already and knew it before we ever met!

Oh wow!  Thanks Carl.  Funny how the fossil weathered but the foramen stayed intact, or at least seems to have.  Thanks all for your input and consideration.  I am now digging a small pond in NW Ct and looking at every rock carefully.  I guess that's how it starts, huh?