ynot Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, Max-fossils said: The team of new scientists that published "Studies of the intraspecies differences within the Homo ynotonyius"... Uh yeah, that's the story! Have a good day Max! Tony Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 18, 2019 Author Share Posted January 18, 2019 Just now, ynot said: Uh yeah, that's the story! Have a good day Max! Tony You too Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notidanodon Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 Just asking how can you tell the difference between modern and fossil shells, i it just a matter of learning the speciesthanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 19, 2019 Author Share Posted January 19, 2019 11 hours ago, will stevenson said: Just asking how can you tell the difference between modern and fossil shells, i it just a matter of learning the speciesthanks Hi Will, It's a very good question. I'm gonna start by saying that it's not always very obvious. There are certain things that can help you already make a conclusion pretty fast: if there's matrix on the specimen, good chance it's a fossil (but there are several excpetions) if it was found far away from the sea, fossil is very likely (but again, not certain, I've seen exceptions) if there is still some periostracum (ie 'skin') on the shell, it's probably modern (but from time to time, very rarely though, it can get preserved under just the right conditions) if the animal is still inside, it's definitely modern. You also really shouldn't bring it home then, as you said, knowing which species are found only fossil, only modern, or both, can help make a decision too. But you need to be sure of your ID in that case (which is not always easy when it comes to shells!) But of course there are many scenarios where it can get very confusing. Many of the shells I collected here can very easily be mistaken for modern ones. They are beach finds, so close to the sea and with (usually) no matrix attached, just like the modern shells you find on the beach. Also, many of the species I found here appear both in the fossil record as well as the modern seashell record of the area. So there are no easy ways of telling them apart, and unfortunately this is the case for many of the fossil shells along the Dutch coasts, which is exactly where I hunt and what I hunt for! But luckily there are a few hints to determine whether a shell is fossil or not, if you can't tell by the species (take into account, these following criteria are only for the shells I find on the beaches of Zeeland such as the Banjaard; they don't apply to most other locations!): the color of the shell: shells often lose their bright colorations when fossilizing and get much duller colors (gray, brown, cyan, cream-white, etc) but some species do the opposite (such as the Aequipecten opercularis which can turn a bright yellow) this can be misleading too, because sometimes the shells only lose their color due to sun-bleaching sometimes the shells just barely change color, making it really hard to tell (often the case with oysters) fossil shells are often dull, they're not shiny there are quite a few exceptions again many modern shells leave light pass through them, but lose this trait as they fossilize of course, a very thick modern shell won't let light pass through; and sometimes a very thin fossil shell might let some through for some shells (scallops and mussels) it's the other way around: when modern they don't usually let light through, but allow more to pass once they fossilize some shells (such as the bigger oysters) just never let light through, modern or fossil you'll never find both valves of a fossil bivalve still stuck together if the valves are still together, unless they're fixed by matrix, you can immediately assume that they're modern however, most modern bivalves lose their other valve simply by tumbling in the waves and on the beach, so finding a lone valve doesn't really make the shell more likely to be a fossil So yeah, for each criteria there are a bunch of exceptions. It's a matter of learning them I guess. There's no perfect method! That's all I can think of for now. If you hunt A LOT for fossil shells, like me, eventually it becomes much easier to discern the fossil shells from the modern ones, simply because you get used to what they look like. But of course this takes time (and passion/perseverance, especially concerning shells, which most people aren't so interested to delve deeply into). When I see a shell on the Banjaard, it usually only takes me a quick eye glance to judge whether or not it's a fossil or not (although I usually judge more by "does this look interesting/weird/unusual?", because that gives me more interesting finds ). But of course, I still often end up being wrong; it still happens regularly that when I come home and look at my haul more closely, I notice a couple shells that I thought were fossils which turn out to be modern (or, when I'm lucky, the other way around, but that's more uncommon). To make it all more complicated, the Dutch coasts have this bad habit of having tons of early Holocene shells, which are informally called "sub-fossils". Shells that have 'started' their fossilization but aren't done yet. These can make it all even more confusing (I don't like these Holocene shells much )! This probably doesn't answer your question very clearly, but that's simply because there is no clear answer to your question. It takes a lot of time to be able to recognize easily what is what. Also, the criteria change according per location; it could very well be that there's a location whose fossil shells conform to none of the Zeeland criteria! So when you're hunting at a new location which you know can yield fossil and modern shells, the best advice I can give you is to look up how to recognize the specific species of that location, and what the criteria are to recognize them. Luckily, quarries and inland exposures usually only give fossil shells It's mainly the beaches that make life difficult in this aspect. So, the most important thing to consider, when in doubt, is the location itself, and what you know about it(s shells)! Hope this helps at least a little bit! Best regards, Max 9 Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notidanodon Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 11 hours ago, Max-fossils said: Hi Will, It's a very good question. I'm gonna start by saying that it's not always very obvious. There are certain things that can help you already make a conclusion pretty fast: if there's matrix on the specimen, good chance it's a fossil (but there are several excpetions) if it was found far away from the sea, fossil is very likely (but again, not certain, I've seen exceptions) if there is still some periostracum (ie 'skin') on the shell, it's probably modern (but from time to time, very rarely though, it can get preserved under just the right conditions) if the animal is still inside, it's definitely modern. You also really shouldn't bring it home then, as you said, knowing which species are found only fossil, only modern, or both, can help make a decision too. But you need to be sure of your ID in that case (which is not always easy when it comes to shells!) But of course there are many scenarios where it can get very confusing. Many of the shells I collected here can very easily be mistaken for modern ones. They are beach finds, so close to the sea and with (usually) no matrix attached, just like the modern shells you find on the beach. Also, many of the species I found here appear both in the fossil record as well as the modern seashell record of the area. So there are no easy ways of telling them apart, and unfortunately this is the case for many of the fossil shells along the Dutch coasts, which is exactly where I hunt and what I hunt for! But luckily there are a few hints to determine whether a shell is fossil or not, if you can't tell by the species (take into account, these following criteria are only for the shells I find on the beaches of Zeeland such as the Banjaard; they don't apply to most other locations!): the color of the shell: shells often lose their bright colorations when fossilizing and get much duller colors (gray, brown, cyan, cream-white, etc) but some species do the opposite (such as the Aequipecten opercularis which can turn a bright yellow) this can be misleading too, because sometimes the shells only lose their color due to sun-bleaching sometimes the shells just barely change color, making it really hard to tell (often the case with oysters) fossil shells are often dull, they're not shiny there are quite a few exceptions again many modern shells leave light pass through them, but lose this trait as they fossilize of course, a very thick modern shell won't let light pass through; and sometimes a very thin fossil shell might let some through for some shells (scallops and mussels) it's the other way around: when modern they don't usually let light through, but allow more to pass once they fossilize some shells (such as the bigger oysters) just never let light through, modern or fossil you'll never find both valves of a fossil bivalve still stuck together if the valves are still together, unless they're fixed by matrix, you can immediately assume that they're modern however, most modern bivalves lose their other valve simply by tumbling in the waves and on the beach, so finding a lone valve doesn't really make the shell more likely to be a fossil So yeah, for each criteria there are a bunch of exceptions. It's a matter of learning them I guess. There's no perfect method! That's all I can think of for now. If you hunt A LOT for fossil shells, like me, eventually it becomes much easier to discern the fossil shells from the modern ones, simply because you get used to what they look like. But of course this takes time (and passion/perseverance, especially concerning shells, which most people aren't so interested to delve deeply into). When I see a shell on the Banjaard, it usually only takes me a quick eye glance to judge whether or not it's a fossil or not (although I usually judge more by "does this look interesting/weird/unusual?", because that gives me more interesting finds ). But of course, I still often end up being wrong; it still happens regularly that when I come home and look at my haul more closely, I notice a couple shells that I thought were fossils which turn out to be modern (or, when I'm lucky, the other way around, but that's more uncommon). To make it all more complicated, the Dutch coasts have this bad habit of having tons of early Holocene shells, which are informally called "sub-fossils". Shells that have 'started' their fossilization but aren't done yet. These can make it all even more confusing (I don't like these Holocene shells much )! This probably doesn't answer your question very clearly, but that's simply because there is no clear answer to your question. It takes a lot of time to be able to recognize easily what is what. Also, the criteria change according per location; it could very well be that there's a location whose fossil shells conform to none of the Zeeland criteria! So when you're hunting at a new location which you know can yield fossil and modern shells, the best advice I can give you is to look up how to recognize the specific species of that location, and what the criteria are to recognize them. Luckily, quarries and inland exposures usually only give fossil shells It's mainly the beaches that make life difficult in this aspect. So, the most important thing to consider, when in doubt, is the location itself, and what you know about it(s shells)! Hope this helps at least a little bit! Best regards, Max Thanks max this is very helpful, one last question if they are found in gravel like I find often, even in driveways and stuff, they seem to fit the description so is there a chance that they are fosiils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 20, 2019 Author Share Posted January 20, 2019 1 hour ago, will stevenson said: Thanks max this is very helpful, one last question if they are found in gravel like I find often, even in driveways and stuff, they seem to fit the description so is there a chance that they are fosiils If they're found in gravel there is a chance that they're fossil indeed. But they might've just been brought there as extra "filling" material. If you post some pictures I may be able to tell Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notidanodon Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, Max-fossils said: If they're found in gravel there is a chance that they're fossil indeed. But they might've just been brought there as extra "filling" material. If you post some pictures I may be able to tell Sorry it’s just in the past I can’t take pictures of it right now but thanks so much for the help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fifbrindacier Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 Great finds Max, you must be so happy ! "On ne voit bien que par le coeur, l'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux." (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry) "We only well see with the heart, the essential is invisible for the eyes." In memory of Doren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam86cucv Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 3 hours ago, Max-fossils said: If they're found in gravel there is a chance that they're fossil indeed. But they might've just been brought there as extra "filling" material. If you post some pictures I may be able to tell From what I understand the lower Eastern shore of Maryland they have used oyster shells for that purpose. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 20, 2019 Author Share Posted January 20, 2019 2 hours ago, fifbrindacier said: Grat finds Max, you must be so happy ! I am indeed, thanks! 1 Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 Nice finds Max! Here are some of the fossils I found at the Banjaard beach last summer: https://english.fossiel.net/id_system/fossil_id_search.php?vindpl_id=752 Cheers, Johan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 21, 2019 Author Share Posted January 21, 2019 13 hours ago, Johan said: Nice finds Max! Here are some of the fossils I found at the Banjaard beach last summer: https://english.fossiel.net/id_system/fossil_id_search.php?vindpl_id=752 Cheers, Johan Thanks! I like your ray scute particularly, it's a very interesting find. I think your Mactra stultorum cinerea is actually a Spisula solida. I'm not sure though... I see from the photos you added on the location site that you hunt quite far away from the sluis. I usually hunt much closer. Would you recommend that I go closer to where you were next time? Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johan Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 On 21-1-2019 at 12:57 PM, Max-fossils said: Thanks! I like your ray scute particularly, it's a very interesting find. I think your Mactra stultorum cinerea is actually a Spisula solida. I'm not sure though... I see from the photos you added on the location site that you hunt quite far away from the sluis. I usually hunt much closer. Would you recommend that I go closer to where you were next time? Hi Max, You might be right about the Spisula. I will look into that. Actually, I have been hunting all the way from the sluices all the way to Breezand. It really depends on the situation. The last time I mostly looked to the right (i.e. West) of the Strandpaviljoen Banjaardstrand (so indeed away from the sluices). There were loads and loads of Tridonta's there. Nonetheless, you did find quite a few gastropods yourself, so I would not change your strategy too much, it clearly works out as well! Cheers, Johan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Great thread, Max! Not sure how I missed it earlier. Very interesting and lots of excellent finds. Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 6 hours ago, Johan said: Hi Max, You might be right about the Spisula. I will look into that. Actually, I have been hunting all the way from the sluices all the way to Breezand. It really depends on the situation. The last time I mostly looked to the right (i.e. West) of the Strandpaviljoen Banjaardstrand (so indeed away from the sluices). There were loads and loads of Tridonta's there. Nonetheless, you did find quite a few gastropods yourself, so I would not change your strategy too much, it clearly works out as well! Cheers, Johan Okay thanks for the info. I guess it's worth to take a look there too, but I'll remember my initial point too. Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 4 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said: Great thread, Max! Not sure how I missed it earlier. Very interesting and lots of excellent finds. Thanks Adam, I'm glad you like it! Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-fossils Posted March 18, 2019 Author Share Posted March 18, 2019 Alright, I've just finished making an album with an inventory of all the different fossil Mollusca species you can find at the Banjaard! If any of you ever go there and find some fossil shells too, you can use this (and me) to ID your finds! Let me know what you think of them 2 Max Derème "I feel an echo of the lightning each time I find a fossil. [...] That is why I am a hunter: to feel that bolt of lightning every day." - Mary Anning >< Remarkable Creatures, Tracy Chevalier Instagram: @world_of_fossils Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now