Jump to content

Is this a coral?


D.R. Johnson

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, ynot said:

Size?

Oh sorry, always forget that. The part you see in the photo measures only 2X2 cm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ynot said:

Bryozoan(?)

Had to look that up (I'm still learning) but yeah I see what you mean. So that's not a coral at all but an invertebrate animal? Something similar to a crinoid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, D.R. Johnson said:

So that's not a coral at all but an invertebrate animal? Something similar to a crinoid?

Yes, but closer to coral than crinoid.

Coral is also an invertebrate animal.

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

3 minutes ago, ynot said:

Yes, but closer to coral than crinoid.

Coral is also an invertebrate animal.

Brilliant. Thank you very much for the information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ynot said:

Yes, but closer to coral than crinoid.

Coral is also an invertebrate animal.

Well,  you just have to look reeeeeally close to spot the coral spines. :rofl:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, caldigger said:

Well,  you just have to look reeeeeally close to spot the coral spines. :rofl:

They may have spines, but they got no backbone!:P

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

1 hour ago, BobWill said:

I've seen bryozoans that look a bit like that but it also reminds me of the impression left by a Trigonia.

Are/were Trigonia existant in the Jurassic?

I supppse there are smaller Trigonia than we find here in North Texas. 

I agree it does resemble an impression of a bivalve or brachiopod.

Would you be able to get a closer in shot of the detailed part of the specimen?

Also, on the bottom center of the pic is this.

505C9C60-76D1-4D82-84F1-8B7D92315513.jpeg.4f32cbf6e8386f4f9dad02a508a908fe.jpeg

It is fuzzy, but it appears to be another fossil shape. May we have a clearer shot of it? Other unique features in the rock may also aid in confirming what it is. May we see the whole of it and from other sides or angles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, KimTexan said:

Are/were Trigonia existant in the Jurassic?

 

They range from 298mya to 56mya!  That's what I would call a successful run. I don't know about sizes of different species.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My vote is also for an imprint of Trigonia. Not a coral. Trigonia itself is extinct, but another genus of the family (Neotrigonia) reached the extant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The matrix looks close to the holding matrix of the Osmington Mills Trigonia beds, so I guess it could be a bivalve imprint similar to Myophorella (maybe M. clavellata?).

 

" 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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...