Jump to content

Ordovician Unknown


minnbuckeye

Recommended Posts

I need help with another specimen that popped out of the Ordovician matrix I was busting up last week. I have NO clue as to what this is, or if it is even a fossil. I have split literally a ton of matrix on this roadcut and have not seen this before:

 

DSC_0310-001.thumb.JPG.0d3bc2b10e222694173d21c4342b542b.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

trilo bit

 

  • I found this Informative 1

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen

No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go.

" I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes

"can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Johannes, I looked up Byronia and it seems like it was a land plant, impossible in my neck of the woods, Ordovician sea life. Could you explain it's possibility? I zoomed in on this specimen, so the picture is as good as I can take.

 

 Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know is Bryonia (with an age of upper Cambrian to Ordovician) at least assigned to the Scyphozoa (?), not to plants (and I guess for sure not to vascular land plants). But maybe I'm wrong and you have a source for validation of Upper Cambrian early land plants, I would really like to read about them. Can you post the book/paper/reference?

 

In the picture I see well preserved high Mg brachiopod shells, and recystallized (low Mg calcite/aragonite) shell fragments. Some sparitic material is around the darker material, which might be an (inner?) organophosphatic coating of a calcified tube (more likey than a carbon one). There are some groups, including some tracefossils with such an inner lining, and some with organophosphatic shells. I have never seen something similar from ordivician carbonates in this sedimentological facies, belonging to trilobites... For any interpretation better pictures should show some structures, without them determination is like sticking in the fog.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to imagine how you would take a better photo, the one you provided is fine.  

I agree with the certain spine suggestion.

 

Don

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...