Jump to content
Recker

Fossil, concretion, pipe coral or fossilized corn cob? LOL

Recommended Posts

Recker

Here is a map showing the Brookville Reservoir and the location of where I found the "fossil" on the Whitewater River.

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recker

I tried the vinegar test, no fizzes on the outside at all, although when I filled the opening up it did a little but was reacting to the fine sandy sediment that was inside of the fossil.  I hope this helps, I'm obsessed LOL

Linda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
abyssunder

If it is a silicified / geodized fossil (e.g. coral), that would explain why it doesn't react to vinegar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recker
On 12/13/2018 at 7:34 AM, Al Tahan said:

Those lines running down do seem to have some connection to the photos there!! Maybe it’s just a large weathered cephalopod 

 

On 12/13/2018 at 7:22 AM, minnbuckeye said:

 

 

I hunt the Ordovician, so when something this large presents itself, I think "could it be a cephalopod". Some cephalopods locally will be hollow, some with quartz deposits. this exhibits both. 

 

The picture that interests me the most was the one quoted above. There are longitudinal ridges similar to the cephalopod  Kionoceratids. Just a thought. It still doesn't explain the outer layer.

 

Kionoceratids from the Moroccan Devonian (A-G) and from the Czech Silurian (H-O), all natural size. A-G . Ames- souiceras enneagon gen. et sp.nov., PIMUZ 27079, Sellanarcestes wenkenbachi goniatite Zone, Late Emsian (Early Devonian), northern limb of the Jebel Amessoui, Tafilalt (Anti-Atlas, Morocco), B, C, D, F coated with ammonium chloride, x 2. A, oblique cross section to show septal perforation (arrow). B, ventral view. C, lateral view. D, dorsal view. E, cross section to show the suborthochoanitic subcen - tral septal necks (arrows); the same septal necks are shown in the magnification to the right. F, apical view. G, two suture lines at 29 mm diameter. H-J . Kionoceras doricum (Barrande, 1868), two specimens, Middle to Late Gorstian, Viskočilka (Czech Republic), reproduced from Barrande (1868, pl. 269). H, cross section showing the straight tubular connecting rings. I, lateral view, with fragmentary shell remains. J, last preserved septum. K , L . Kionoceras ponderosum (Barrande, 1868), Silurian, hill between Bubovitz and Lodenitz (Czech Republic), re - produced from Barrande (1868, pl. 271). K, septal view, note the almost central siphuncle. L, lateral view, M-O . Kionoceras bacchus (Bar- rande, 1868), Late Wenlock, Czech Republic, reproduced from Barrande (1868, pl. 271). M, specimen from Lochkov; cross section showing the straight tubular connecting rings with siphuncular deposits. N, O, specimen from the hill between Bubovitz and Lodenitz. N, septal view. O, lateral view, fragmentary shell remains with longitudinal striae and lirae. 
 

 

 
 
 

I've been doing some more research and I am really leaning towards Cephalopod.  Figures O and L are exactly what this looks like.  Used the vinegar test, nothing on the outside, fizz on the inside, at first I thought the vinegar was reacting to the fine silt in the opening but I've rinsed it until the water runs clean and tried again, still fizzes.  Got some really small flakes of thin white material out of it.  Looked up info in my book, "A Sea Without Fish, Life in the Ordovician Sea of the Cincinnati Region", by David L. Meyer and Richard Arnold Davis.  What really stuck out was this off of page 137 of chapter 9 Molluscs.  "The material of the outer wall of each shell was preserved only when encrusted by bryozoans, but the septa and siphuncular structures of the shell interiors were replaced by calcite (the fizz I'm getting with vinegar even thought it's rinsed clean).  Body chambers and phragmocones were infilled with claystone, but, in some cases, the ccamerae remained empty or were infilled with calcite crystals.  Removal of encrusting bryozoans revealed the remarkable preservation of remnants of color patterns on the exterior of the shell."  Not sure, trying to learn but I wonder what is under the bryozoan encrustation, and how do I remove it safely?  Curious as all hell, and eager to learn more.  Appreciate everyone's replies to get me digging and finding more info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
minnbuckeye

@Recker, the bad news is that I am usually wrong when I open my mouth, so keep an open mind!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Recker
26 minutes ago, minnbuckeye said:

@Recker, the bad news is that I am usually wrong when I open my mouth, so keep an open mind!!!!

LOL!!!  I am just trying to figure this thing out.  I appreciate everyone on this forum...learning alot from all you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
9 hours ago, minnbuckeye said:

the bad news is that I am usually wrong when I open my mouth

but don't you hate it when you were right on and weren't quite sure enough to say anything ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
minnbuckeye

@Rockwood, yes, I have had plenty of those moments!!! Thanks for reminding me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MRfossilMISTER

could it be a coprolite of some sort? im not exprienced (not like i will be able to, fossiless lousiana)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Johannes

Hi @ all,

 

not very attractive, but very interesting fossil!

 

First part is relativly easy, the inner part is "mummyfied" by bryozoa, like @Rockwood shows in his post from thursday, 03:29pm. The inner one is tricky. from its lithology and shape I think it is neither a coprolit nor a phosphorite. the shape reminds me first on some similar ceph-shells, but in my opinion it is to unregular, and under bryozoan "mummyfication"/immuration usually surface details of the inner fossil are well preserved, and we can not see something fo this on the pictures. I'm absolutely not sure, and not finally excluding the ceph-idea, I can follow @Fossildude19 first opinion of an immurated sponge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
minnbuckeye
8 hours ago, MRfossilMISTER said:

could it be a coprolite

 

Not likely in the Ordovician sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb

The Brookville reservoir is U. Ordovician in age

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb
On 12/13/2018 at 7:03 AM, Rockwood said:

Not sure if it's what you intended to indicate, but just to be clear, fossils do sometimes have quartz veins running through them.

yes as in the stromatolite I pictured above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb

looks like a cephalopod encrusted with bryozoa.  You can see the pores of the bryozoa in one photo. Bryozoa encrusted cephalopods are very common in the U. Ordovician in that area.

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.

×