Jump to content
PalmaShell

Shark tooth need help with

Recommended Posts

PalmaShell

Purchased at a fair today since I won't be getting out for a month or so to get my itch. Need help with ID as I'm a noob. I'm thinking either Lemon, Mako, or Great White but could be completely wrong. was purchased with a Trilobite just to start the collection going. Thanks for all help. 

43374033_331676660940386_798843258263306240_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darktooth

Otodus obliquus, cusps are missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Darktooth

Looks like it is from Morocco. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Macrophyseter

I agree, the tooth is that from a megalodon ancestor, scientific name Otodus obliquus. Based on the color of the tooth, it looks like it's from Morocco. The tooth appears to be broken a bit and missing cusps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harry Pristis

 

 

I'm not so certain that this is Ototdus.  For comparison:

 

5bbb74bf2d68b_shark_cretalamnaorotodus.thumb.jpg.1dd96e1db6b8d8feec20938e41ee5391.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PalmaShell

Haha I'll take what info I can get. Figured it was "different" because it in a bin with all the same looking teeth and was the odd one out. Not having the cusps is what made me grab it. Contrary to popular belief, you're not different, just damaged lol. Thanks guys. I'm still happy with it cause it looks better than the others how it is IMO. I'm sure the cusps threw me off but I should have figured it would be the same as the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harry Pristis

 

For comparison:

 

 

shark_cretalamnaappend.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anomotodon
9 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

 

 

I'm not so certain that this is Ototdus.  For comparison:

 

 

C. appendiculata is a purely Turonian species (Siversson et al., 2015), check discussion here

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harry Pristis
2 hours ago, Anomotodon said:

 

C. appendiculata is a purely Turonian species (Siversson et al., 2015), check discussion here


I think you've overstated Siverson's position on Cretolamna, that poorly-known genus from the Maastrichtian and Danian.  Unfortunately, MikaelS didn't respond to @Untitled.

Quote

 

     On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 5:34 AM, MikaelS said:

First or second upper anterior of Cretalamna ex gr. borealis.

This was, btw, the dominant Cretalamna group in the Paleocene with several undescribed species. Maastrichtian Cretalamna are poorly known (apart from C. lata).

Cretalamna appendiculata sensu stricto appears to be restricted to the Turonian of northwest Europe as far as I can tell.

 

 

Untitled responded:

Quote

Thank you for this insight!  I know that Cretalamna Appendiculata used to be a waste-bucket of sorts for several similar species, but how does one identify these similar species from each other; what traits would separate this species from these other ones?  Based on Moroccan teeth alone, it seems that there are a few different 'styles' that would all likely be considered Cretalamna, but how would you classify these- as different forms of that same species, or as different ones entirely?  

 

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.

×