Coprolites From Florida

[Harry Pristis]

I was browsing  the Forum and came across an excellent (Jan 25, 2018) post by @GeschWhat listing some characteristics of coprolites.  Unhappily, Lori did not provide illustrations.  I want to quote her list later.  

 

I have here a few coprolites from different rivers, including the Peace River.  I'll post some images,  and let you judge how well these specimens fit Lori's list of characteristics. 

 

This one (two images) is from the Peace River:

 

 

This one (two images) is from the Suwannee River, a bear-dog site: 

 

 

This one (two images) is from the Peace River:

 

 

This one (two images) is from the Peace River:

 

 

 

•  
•  

• Report post
•  

 

Quote

 

Posted January 25  by @Geschwhat

Not all rocks that look like poop have a fecal origin. Here are a few things to consider when trying to determine whether or not you have a coprolite:

 

1. Location, Location, Location – If you haven’t guessed, the first and most important thing to consider is the location your rock was found. Don’t expect to find a coprolite unless you find it in geologic area/layer where other fossils are found. If you find things like bones, teeth and fish scales, or prehistoric tracks, you may just be in in luck.

 

2. Shape – While fecal matter can be rather free-form when exposed to the elements or when digestion issues arise, most coprolites are shaped like poo. As with modern extrusions, fossilized feces can be shaped like pellets, spirals, scrolls, logs, piles, etc. Their shape is dependent on shape of their producers intestinal and anal structure. Look for things like compaction folds and pinch marks.

 

3. Texture - Most coprolites are fine grained. If your specimen appears granular under magnification, it is most likely not a coprolite. There are some exceptions, such as marine creatures that feed on bottom sediments or coral. That is why knowing the location and geology of the area where it was discovered is so important.

 

4. Inclusions – Many times, coprolites will have visible inclusions. Things like fish scales, bone fragments, and teeth may not get fully digested, and can be visible on the surface. Some animals ingest stones for ballast or digestive purposes. These are known as gastroliths, and if present, are generally smooth.

 

5. Composition – Because herbivore scat tends to break a part and decompose rapidly, it rarely survives the fossilization process. So most fossil poo that is found is from carnivores. The reason for this is that their poo is usually high in calcium phosphate, the same mineral found in bone. This mineral can appear in many forms. It can be hard and dense or soft and porous. If the potential coprolite appears soft and porous, there is a quick test that is often used in the field. If you touch to stone to the tip of your tongue and it sticks, chances are, it is high in calcium phosphate and could be a coprolite. If you are not that brave, you can also touch it with wet fingers to see if it feels sticky, but this is not nearly as fun. If the calcium phosphate takes a harder, more dense form, the “lick test” won’t work. In some instances, chemical analysis is required to definitively identify the mineral composition.

 

 

I don't subscribe to the 'lick test,' and Lori has heard all of the scatological jokes by now, so let's get down to serious 'business.'  Feel free to provide further illustration or commentary on the identification of coprolites.

 

[Plantguy]

Hey Harry, I was wondering if someone had a collection of these somewhere. Great material-thanks for the thread!

 

I have drug home alot of stuff that had odd shapes/or form that I couldnt readily identify and only have one that falls into the probable/possible category. I wish I was more aware in years gone by as I wasnt really aware of the variety and characteristics and I know I've left things. I think I left/threw away what I thought were phosphatic blobs/masses that I should have spent more time with. Hoping others have lots to show/discuss.  

Regards, Chris 

[Harry Pristis]

Thanks for the response, Chris.  Those Peace River phosphatic nodules can be foolers, for sure.  I think the best characteristic for quick ID are "grunt rings" or Lori's  "pinch marks."   These 'gator coprolites are good examples:

 

 

Then, occasionally, there are mammal coprolites with no grunt rings, like this one.  It's been years and years since I cleaned out a "cat box," but I have the distinct impression this is a cat scat.  There must be a wealth of experience here with pet cats . . . any cat owner care to opine?  

 

 

 

[ynot]

Nice pieces Harry!

 

@GeschWhat @Carl

[JohnBrewer]

[Plantguy]

Hey Harry, 

More interesting ones you have! Very neat. I cant comment on the feline characteristics of yours from our recent experience either...other than to say they seem to fit those distant memories.

 

I am really curious about your examples and how dense/heavily mineralized they seem to be. Are they all relatively lightweight? 

 

Regards, Chris 

P.S. Here's my oddity....

Edited November 6, 2018 by Plantguy
added photo

[Harry Pristis]

 

Wow!  That's a whopper, Chris!  What do you speculate produced your specimen?  . . . 'gator?

 

My few examples are well-mineralized, dense (= heavier than might be expected).  But not as dense as the dinosaur coprolite below.  I bought a few of these in Tucson one year.  This one has been cut and polished:

 

exterior view

 

cut and polished face

 

 

[Al Dente]

1 hour ago, Harry Pristis said:

But not as dense as the dinosaur coprolite below.  I bought a few of these in Tucson one year.  This one has been cut and polished:

These have been falsely sold for years as dinosaur coprolites. They are actually agate or chalcedony replacement of soil nodules.

[Harry Pristis]

5 minutes ago, Al Dente said:

These have been falsely sold for years as dinosaur coprolites. They are actually agate or chalcedony replacement of soil nodules.

 

That's interesting.  Agate or chalcedony, no doubt.  But, what is a "soil nodule"?

[Al Dente]

33 minutes ago, Harry Pristis said:

But, what is a "soil nodule"?

Precipitated minerals in the soil or paleosol.

[GeschWhat]

Those are some beautiful examples, Harry.

 

I have to agree with @Al Dente regarding the siliceous "coprolite" from the Morrison. I have numerous examples of these. Their fecal origin are dubious. I do have one specimen from Dugway that may contain bone. The cell structure very much resembles gem bone from the area. These are old photos, so forgive the quality.

 

I have a similar "soft serve" example. It is very difficult to attribute coprolites to their "poopetrator." (Sorry, the puns are half the fun). As the proud owner of 3 felines, I find it doubtful that these can be attributed to a cat...unless it is one sick kitty. 

 

@Plantguy that is a nice size specimen you have there. That type is generally attributed to crocodilians because of their shape and lack of inclusions. Crocs have very acidic digestive systems. Base on a study done on modern species, Jesper Milan found that only hair and feathers survive their digestive process. In the link I provided with his name, he came up with a formula for calculating the length of the croc based on the diameter of the coprolite/scat. I reworked the formula a little so it is easier to plug in the numbers: Total Length of Croc (cm) = Coprolite Diameter (cm) – 1.10)/0.012 

 

 

[Harry Pristis]

 

Gosh, I hate that!  I sold some of these soil nodules as dino coprolites.  They were so interesting . . . but not interesting enough to keep one.  They sold well at the time (well before the inception of TFF).  

 

 

[Carl]

What a wonderful assortment of fecal beauties there! (Except for the faux feces from Utah...) 

[Plantguy]

On 11/6/2018 at 1:43 PM, GeschWhat said:

 

@Plantguy that is a nice size specimen you have there. That type is generally attributed to crocodilians because of their shape and lack of inclusions. Crocs have very acidic digestive systems. Base on a study done on modern species, Jesper Milan found that only hair and feathers survive their digestive process. In the link I provided with his name, he came up with a formula for calculating the length of the croc based on the diameter of the coprolite/scat. I reworked the formula a little so it is easier to plug in the numbers: Total Length of Croc (cm) = Coprolite Diameter (cm) – 1.10)/0.012 

 

 

Thanks Lori for looking again and the math problem! So if the widest diameter is 7cm, it seems to work out as 5.9/0.012 = 491.6666 cms. With 30.48 cms per foot, we're talking about the critter being around 4.92 meters or just over 16 feet long...that's fascinating to think about. 

 

Regards, Chris 

[Plantguy]

Hey Harry, thanks for the comments. You should have kept one of those soil nodules!...interesting none the less.

 

Here's one of the other oddities that seems to pass the stickyness test and has potential form...its broken and I dont see obvious inclusions but its kind of worn...

Regards, Chris 

[Harry Pristis]

In my experience, Chris, these 'gator coprolites readily separate into discrete sections.  The scat often seems to made up of rounded 'turdlets' barely stuck together.  I don't know if this is a result of sporadic feeding -- a fish today, a turtle tomorrow -- or if it results from the mechanics of the 'gator gut.  It is different from (modern) large pythons, my only other reptile observation.

[Plantguy]

Hi Harry, so I went thru some other finds in the garage from trips with some of the fossil clubs years ago (Mosaic and others) and the finds are skinny but thought I'd show you some of the oddities that sometimes get mistaken for coprolites. I pick up almost anything! Anyways, here's a pic of a couple of non-coprolites---2fine grained well worn possible burrow casts/maybe just odd sandstone pebbles on the left and the other two on the right seem to have wood material within a sandy exterior so I'm thinking mangrove root material.

I also found this nifty little 3 cm piece that I do think is a coprolite that I kept that has small darker bone fragments within and a convoluted/lumpy surface. 

 

I'll keep looking for more stuff in my garage...

Regards, Chris  

[GeschWhat]

This one was found along/in the Suwannee River. The photo was taken when the specimen was still drying. The darker areas are where it was still somewhat damp. What I find interesting is the area near the blue arrow. While I don't know for sure what this is from, it reminds me of what I have seen when dog poo freezes. I wonder if it could have been deformed by water crystals.

[Harry Pristis]

7 hours ago, GeschWhat said:

This one was found along/in the Suwannee River. The photo was taken when the specimen was still drying. The darker areas are where it was still somewhat damp. What I find interesting is the area near the blue arrow. While I don't know for sure what this is from, it reminds me of what I have seen when dog poo freezes. I wonder if it could have been deformed by water crystals.

 

 

Suwannee River. . . I don't know the source of this specimen either.  The sections (in my imagination) resemble 'gator droppings that have been compressed into a single element. 

 

I don't think that freezing or dessication is a satisfactory explanation for the feathery traces because the specimen would have to be buried to preserve it).  One possibility is that this is a trace of some coprophagous insect.

 

We know this specimen would have to be from a meat-eater.  'Gators defecate in the water.  Underwater is gravity-free (at least, gravity-reduced), and it's hard to imagine compressive forces acting on the specimen post-pooping.  The water would not eliminate insect feeding, though I know little of insect feeding habits (what do hellgrammites eat?).  I haven't encountered such traces.

 

Perhaps the most likely source is a land carnivore defecating on a beach or sandbar, followed shortly by insect feeding, followed by fairly quick burial.

 

Interesting specimen, Lori.

 

 

 

[JohnBrewer]

On 11/5/2018 at 2:28 PM, Harry Pristis said:

Thanks for the response, Chris.  Those Peace River phosphatic nodules can be foolers, for sure.  I think the best characteristic for quick ID are "grunt rings" or Lori's  "pinch marks."   These 'gator coprolites are good examples:

Then, occasionally, there are mammal coprolites with no grunt rings, like this one.  It's been years and years since I cleaned out a "cat box," but I have the distinct impression this is a cat scat.  There must be a wealth of experience here with pet cats . . . any cat owner care to opine?  

I so  want one of those ‘soft serve’ type of hutnahs 

[ynot]

6 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

what do hellgrammites eat?)

Helgramites are carnivorous and eat anything they can catch, small fish, tadpoles and other insects.

[GeschWhat]

22 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

 

Suwannee River. . . I don't know the source of this specimen either.  The sections (in my imagination) resemble 'gator droppings that have been compressed into a single element. 

 

I don't think that freezing or dessication is a satisfactory explanation for the feathery traces because the specimen would have to be buried to preserve it).  One possibility is that this is a trace of some coprophagous insect.

 

We know this specimen would have to be from a meat-eater.  'Gators defecate in the water.  Underwater is gravity-free (at least, gravity-reduced), and it's hard to imagine compressive forces acting on the specimen post-pooping.  The water would not eliminate insect feeding, though I know little of insect feeding habits (what do hellgrammites eat?).  I haven't encountered such traces.

 

Perhaps the most likely source is a land carnivore defecating on a beach or sandbar, followed shortly by insect feeding, followed by fairly quick burial.

 

Interesting specimen, Lori.

 

 

 

Thanks, Harry! I've had this one for quite some time and don't know why I never peaked at it under the microscope until now. Most of the marks appeared to be raised so I didn't really look at it further. After reading your comment, I took a closer look. I think these are indeed feeding traces. The raised portion between the marks almost looks like it was somewhat pinched with teeth marks on either side. Unlike other feeding traces I've seen on coprolites, these appear to have dried out and cracked to some extent prior to fossilization. Thank you for suggesting this. I will post photos of these traces later.