Jump to content

New to Collecting - possible coral remnant?


Kato

Recommended Posts

Hello, thank you in advance for any help. I have recently moved near the southern part of the Sacramento Mountains in New Mexico and have been finding some fossils. This one, I think might be part of a coral, but I can't identify it. It does not appear to be a complete specimen if you look at the end view. Found in Deadman Canyon off of Alamo Canyon just east of Alamogordo, NM.

 

It was found as float in a debris field and I've been unable to identify the rock formation it came from in the surrounding exposed strata at this time. Apologies for the lower quality pics due to cell camera limitations. Around here the primary fossil appears to be crinoids....the black colored object with white striations, is in what appears to be a red sandstone with no other identifying fossils such as crinoids to help date the formation.

 

Side view

image.thumb.png.dae3140cb3b31ea96f93c56d296ba75a.png

 

End view

image.thumb.png.94cfb9cbff88aa7ff46eea5d4ffe8378.png

 

Edited by Kato
improve title
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks! I've started a collection of documents and maps and do already have that document in addition to local geologic maps and other published articles for this immediate area.

 

Unfortunately, none of them provides any photographic information that helps to ID this nor do any articles or documents reference any such object. There are plenty of marine exposures showing corals of various types but nothing that looks like this. Having never found any fish teeth, it just does not appear to be a tooth, so I was thinking a coral (but the black color has thrown me). The only formation to have fish teeth (shark) is known as the Rancheria (Mississippian)....Dark gray, thin bedded , argillaceous and siltylimestone or similar calcareous siltstone, that contains some porous chert. A minor, though significant rock type is medium-gray, silty or sandy, crinoidal grainstone with brachiopods, shark teeth (Pray, 1961) and other fossils. 

 

The object is in red sandstone and no listings for corals (black or any other color) nor teeth in any red sandstone for this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kato said:

Thanks! I've started a collection of documents and maps and do already have that document in addition to local geologic maps and other published articles for this immediate area.

 

Unfortunately, none of them provides any photographic information that helps to ID this nor do any articles or documents reference any such object. There are plenty of marine exposures showing corals of various types but nothing that looks like this. Having never found any fish teeth, it just does not appear to be a tooth, so I was thinking a coral (but the black color has thrown me). The only formation to have fish teeth (shark) is known as the Rancheria (Mississippian)....Dark gray, thin bedded , argillaceous and siltylimestone or similar calcareous siltstone, that contains some porous chert. A minor, though significant rock type is medium-gray, silty or sandy, crinoidal grainstone with brachiopods, shark teeth (Pray, 1961) and other fossils. 

 

The object is in red sandstone and no listings for corals (black or any other color) nor teeth in any red sandstone for this area.

This is an unusual looking piece, but I'm not seeing coral. It almost looks like quartz veins, is it? The top view reminds me of a bivalve with white ribs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is similar to some of the highly eroded coral fragments that can be found at the Beaumaris site in Victoria:

image.jpeg.56567ac247a6688a3758404a0dd67e4b.jpeg

However, the grooves on the above specimen appear in pairs, so I am not entirely sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bronzviking said:

The object is in red sandstone and no listings for corals (black or any other color)

I suspect it may be a fragment of a rugose  coral fossil that has been reworked from an older formation that was the sediment source for this sandstone. 

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well @Rockwood, I am trying two ID opinions today. We will see. At first glance, I thought rugosa coral for this specimen. But when I looked at the picture showing the butt end, The ridges did not appear to be coming to a central point like the rugosas that I am used to. But upon further research, it appears that there exists species that do not, so I am back leaning towards rugosa: 

 

Previous--Introduction | Next--Relationships

Kansas Geological Survey, Geology
Placed on web September 2005; originally published November 30, 1942.
Comments to webadmin@kgs.ku.edu

 

Figure 1. Diagrammatic sketches of the septal groove pattern of rugose corals. A, Septal groove pattern in the cardinal quadrants. B, Septal groove pattern in the counter quadrants. C, Septal groove pattern of the cardinal and counter quadrants seen from the side. D, Sketch of the relationships of septal grooves to septa, fossula, and pseudofossulae. The position of the pseudofossulae is indicated by the stippled areas.

Black and white drawings of four views of rugose coral groove patterns

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone. As a novice I had been thinking along the same lines as Rockwood but I will continue to prowl to find the formation. The only red sandstones I've found have been bursting with crinoids and the occasional white horn coral and some gastropods. Not similar at all to what is holding the specimen. It may no longer exist as I've scaled over 1,500 ft of various exposed formations in the canyon area searching for it.

 

image.thumb.png.247cc7ddf4d86ee3c1a87391e9096790.png

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, minnbuckeye said:

Wonderful crinoidal sandstone! Do you ever find calyxes amongst the stems??

In this matrix things are in disarray but I have found internodes, brachial pieces, portions of holdfasts and lots of other bits. This not so great pic is of a transitional matrix piece towards the lower contact boundary of the formation with a different layer (also encrinites but white in appearance). I am thinking the towards the center is a cup for instance. But I wouldn't bet much on my knowledge since I am new to this hobby.

 

image.png.fd33f4f4c0351a30d77a70e250b3e678.png

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the red sandstone with the specimen is associated with the encrinite red sandstone formation and probably high in the formation. This is a difficult to access location and the cliff is >100 ft tall. The red sandstone is at least 30 ft thick from where the terrain butts against the cliff face. I glassed the formation with my binoculars but all I could see from base to about 50 ft up was crinoids. With the dipping bed I was able to work my way to the left and get some idea of what is higher up but not completely as this red sandstone formation presented itself in a limited area perhaps 150 ft wide and then disappears.

image.png.f4796e3274a2613e36390d899d04bb22.png

 

 

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rockwood said:

My thought is that the center is no longer within the specimen. 

I was thinking the same that it might be a fragment of a horn coral, possibly the interior like in the diagram below. @Rockwood

 

image.png.e00fff9eb2037041186ceb74d4776dd2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bronzviking said:

possibly the interior like in the diagram below.

I've been prepping the reverse side of a Rhacolepis out of concretion, so the break rattled my nerves in a strange way (big breaks are really bad when prepping), but that's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Maybe a good time to invest in a length of climbers rope, gear, and lessons ? 

Yeah., time in life is flying. I am pushing 62 and climbing solo now. 20+ years of bouldering, wall climbing and mountaineering in California's Sierras and another 10+ in the Rockies mountaineering before moving to New Mexico. Being sure footed and minimizing risks is the best I can do. Interestingly, I find the most dangerous parts are the steep the debris and scree fields and not the dry waterfall formations. Most of those fields are >45% from horizontal but some pushing 75%! It is slow going but I am finding great stuff by going off the beaten path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kato said:

I am pushing 62

Understood. I'm pushing 60 and have about reached the same conclusion about driving in major cities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2018 at 6:40 PM, Rockwood said:

Understood. I'm pushing 60 and have about reached the same conclusion about driving in major cities. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Understood. I'm pushing 60 and have about reached the same conclusion about driving in major cities. 

Same here the biggest city I've driven through in 15 years is Albuquerque. After living in Dallas I lost all interest and desire to be in a big city, especially driving a car! 

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...