dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Hi everyone! It would be amazing if any of you could help with identifying some marine microfossils I sieved. The origin is campanian (might be santonian) marine sediments. The location has yielded mosasaurs, fish, and sharks in abundance. But I have a few bone fragments that I have absolutely no clue what they are... Here are some of the mysteries: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 Number 3: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 Number 4: The ridge is natural. Its NOT a break in the bone.could this be a turtle carapace fragment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 Number 5: Its very spongy inside, and has this strange bubbly texture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 Number 6: I think it's some kind of jaw fragment. Its supposed to be symmetrical, but one side is gone. The spike is cone like and is made of bone. On its lower side it has a speck of sharp enamel still sticking (gray and shiny). Could this be a turtle jaw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 The first is a fish tooth and the second is a dermal denticle from a ray. I agree that the bone with the ridge looks like turtle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 2 hours ago, Al Dente said: The first is a fish tooth and the second is a dermal denticle from a ray. I agree that the bone with the ridge looks like turtle. Wouldn't the long root of the tooth rule out a fish possibility? I have a bunch of fish teeth, they look nothing like it. I was wondering if it could be a tetrapod..a bird perhaps. Do you happen to know anyone who knows this kind of stuff?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caldigger Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 minute ago, dolevfab said: Wouldn't the long root of the tooth rule out a fish possibility? I have a bunch of fish teeth, they look nothing like it. I was wondering if it could be a tetrapod..a bird perhaps. Do you happen to know anyone who knows this kind of stuff?? No, I have found a couple of fish teeth with very long roots from STH sediments. Although the majority ever found were primarily just the crowns. I gave the two away to one of our members nut can't recall which. Perhaps they might see this and post for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 59 minutes ago, caldigger said: No, I have found a couple of fish teeth with very long roots from STH sediments. Although the majority ever found were primarily just the crowns. I gave the two away to one of our members nut can't recall which. Perhaps they might see this and post for you. Thanks for the info. So is there any way to distinguish between tetrapod and fish teeth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caldigger Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 You did state you were digging into a marine environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Number 5 - looks flint to me. picture from here " 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 More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 35 minutes ago, abyssunder said: Number 5 - looks flint to me. picture from here Definitely not flint. Its porous and soft. Its bone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 7 minutes ago, dolevfab said: Definitely not flint. Its porous and soft. Its bone. Can You do a hardness test on the non porous area of this piece? 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 More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 4, 2018 Author Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, ynot said: Can You do a hardness test on the non porous area of this piece? I can stick a needle into it. It's very fragile and breaks easily. it has the typical brown coloration for preserved bone from the locality. I think it might be a piece of a skull or maybe a acute. But I dont know of anything that looks like it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 My first thought was a fish tooth plate (missing most of the "teeth"), but I an really just guessing. Some fragments just do not have enough to make any determination of what they were. 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 More sharing options...
jpc Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 I agree with the black one being a ray dermal denticle. The possible turtle jaw ... I think that is a good guess. My first impression on the 'flinty' one was croc scute, but the cross section is not croc scute-ish, unless marine crocs do something different. Are there Cretaceous marine crocs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goatinformationist Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 More to the point it looks like knapped flint. Some of this shows a possibility of human impact. Perhaps enlargement would help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 24 minutes ago, goatinformationist said: More to the point it looks like knapped flint. Some of this shows a possibility of human impact. Perhaps enlargement would help? To what object are You referring? 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 More sharing options...
Anomotodon Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 This is a shark tooth root (maybe Scapanorhynchus, but due to the preservation species is just a speculation) I agree that this is a porous flint piece, pores are too irregular and cross section is very similar Might be turtle peripheral (?) plate but could you post some better pictures and from other angles to verify it? Could be an Amiidae fish tooth The Tooth Fairy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 5, 2018 Author Share Posted October 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Anomotodon said: Might be turtle peripheral (?) plate but could you post some better pictures and from other angles to verify Thanks for the feedback! I would disagree that the flint like specimen is flint though. It is too fragile and unlike other flint nodules in the locality. At first I thought the same, until i got a closer look. Here are some better pics of the turtle piece: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goatinformationist Posted October 5, 2018 Share Posted October 5, 2018 On 10/4/2018 at 2:41 PM, abyssunder said: Number 5 - looks flint to me. picture from here Stone tool work on flint is not uncommon in Israel. Some of these edges do look scalloped or knapped. Just saying that enlargement would be helpful. @ynot This is flint, chert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 15 hours ago, goatinformationist said: Stone tool work on flint is not uncommon in Israel. Some of these edges do look scalloped or knapped. Just saying that enlargement would be helpful. @ynot This is flint, chert. Abysunder added that picture as an example of chert for the OP. It is not the piece We thought might be chert, just comparative pieces. 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 More sharing options...
dolevfab Posted October 6, 2018 Author Share Posted October 6, 2018 6 hours ago, ynot said: Abysunder added that picture as an example of chert for the OP. It is not the piece We thought might be chert, just competitive pieces. Guys this is NOT Chert/flint. * First its crubcling on the white bubbly side ( large pieces break off at a touch) * Second I can scratch a groove into the brown glossy surface with a needle. * Third, its COMPLETELY different in all aspects from the sbundunt chert found not far awey. * Fourth, I got it straight out of the geological layer, so no human impact. * Fifth, it's the exact same shade of brown as other fossils from the same geological layer. *its porous on one side. I am certain it's a fossil, leaning toward some sort of acute or skull fragment. I do appreciate that you want to help and are thinking about my question! But the flint discussions aren't helping. Thanks for the help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 On 4.10.2018 at 8:49 AM, dolevfab said: Its very spongy inside, and has this strange bubbly texture. 3 hours ago, dolevfab said: Guys this is NOT Chert/flint. * First its crubcling on the white bubbly side ( large pieces break off at a touch) * Second I can scratch a groove into the brown glossy surface with a needle. * Third, its COMPLETELY different in all aspects from the sbundunt chert found not far awey. * Fourth, I got it straight out of the geological layer, so no human impact. * Fifth, it's the exact same shade of brown as other fossils from the same geological layer. *its porous on one side. I get no fossil feeling on this one, but thats just a feeling. It´s a tough one. Please can you perform some more tests: Can you scratch the glossy areas also with your finger nail? Put a small fragment in HCl or vinegar - what happens? Put a small fragment in water - what happens? I have an idea, but I would not post it before the tests are done... Franz Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted October 6, 2018 Share Posted October 6, 2018 7 hours ago, dolevfab said: 13 hours ago, ynot said: Abysunder added that picture as an example of chert for the OP. It is not the piece We thought might be chert, just comparative pieces. Guys this is NOT Chert/flint. The comment was made to point out a miscommunication, not trying to say Your piece is flint/chert. I had already discounted chert/flint from Your earlier statements. 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 More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now