Suchomimus tooth

[Pterygotus]

I saw this suchomimus tooth tooth for sale on online. Does anybody have any thoughts on it? Is it real or not and is it worth the price or buying? Sorry, I am just not that good at recognizing fake or real fossils. I have attached images below.

 

 

 

Edited January 18, 2019 by Kane
Removed images; OP can supply new ones without prices included.

[gigantoraptor]

It's a real tooth, and from what I can see on the pictures a beautifel one too. From the Elhraz formation in Niger. 

 

I don't think it's allowed on here to post screenshots or prices, could you please post the pictures directly one here?

[paulyb135]

I believe he was referring to the attached tooth which is my suchomimus and it’s genuine

 

Happy for others to comment their opinions so I’m not seen as biased 

[Bobby Rico]

Nice tooth. 

[JohnBrian]

Sweet tooth! (pun intended)

[SailingAlongToo]

Thumbs UP to @paulyb135 for providing full disclosure to the other TFF members. 

 

Well played sir!! 

 

[-Andy-]

Yes, it's a real Suchomimus tooth

[paulyb135]

5 hours ago, SailingAlongToo said:

Thumbs UP to @paulyb135 for providing full disclosure to the other TFF members. 

 

Well played sir!! 

 

 

Thank you! It’s all about transparency 

[Abstraktum]

Beautiful tooth. Grab it as long as it's available  

 

While we're at the topic Suchomimus. I got one question in general: 

Is this the only Spinosaurid found in Niger? So can any Spinotooth from Niger described as Suchomimus tenerensis?

 

Thank you

[paulyb135]

21 minutes ago, Abstraktum said:

Beautiful tooth. Grab it as long as it's available  

 

While we're at the topic Suchomimus. I got one question in general: 

Is this the only Spinosaurid found in Niger? So can any Spinotooth from Niger described as Suchomimus tenerensis?

 

Thank you

 

It is still available and all these positive comments are making me think I should keep it 

 

I believe spinosaurus can be found in Niger too but they differ massively to suchomimus teeth

[gigantoraptor]

1 hour ago, Abstraktum said:

While we're at the topic Suchomimus. I got one question in general: 

Is this the only Spinosaurid found in Niger? So can any Spinotooth from Niger described as Suchomimus tenerensis?

 

Not all Spinosaurid teeth from Niger are Suchomimus tenerensis. Suchomimus is from the Aptian-Albian Elrhaz but there are as wel younger and older Spinosaurids from Niger known. From the Cenomanian Echkar formation there are fossils known from what might be Spinosaurus sp. or Sigilmassasaurus sp. and in the Jurassic Tiourarén formation there are also teeth of (multiple?) Spinosauridae found. There is also the Cenomanian Farak formation (I don't know if this one is stil valid), but not Spinosaurids are found there yet. There will probably be even more formations but I don't know of any others.

[TyBoy]

This post by Troodon points to multiple spinosaurids in the Elrhaz deposits so its difficult to call the tooth in question a Suchomimus.  Its best called Spinosaurid indet.  Like gigantoraptor points out others are found in older deposits and this post shows the Jurassic ones.

 

 

.

[gigantoraptor]

14 minutes ago, TyBoy said:

This post by Troodon points to multiple spinosaurids in the Elrhaz deposits so its difficult to call the tooth in question a Suchomimus.

I don't see anything about a possible second Spinosaurid in the Elrhaz formation in that post? The only other Spinosaurid that was once desribed from the Elrhaz (that I know of) is Cristatusaurus lapparenti, but I heard that name is not valid anymore. 

 

[TyBoy]

33 minutes ago, gigantoraptor said:

I don't see anything about a possible second Spinosaurid in the Elrhaz formation in that post? The only other Spinosaurid that was once desribed from the Elrhaz (that I know of) is Cristatusaurus lapparenti, but I heard that name is not valid anymore. 

 

Not an expert in this area but this was published in 2016.  

[paulyb135]

4 hours ago, TyBoy said:

Not an expert in this area but this was published in 2016.  

 

This tooth is from the Elhraz formation therefore it is suchomimus as described

[TyBoy]

1 hour ago, paulyb135 said:

 

This tooth is from the Elhraz formation therefore it is suchomimus as described

Cristatusaurus lapparenti is also a baryonychine like suchomimus.  Same situation as we have in the Kem Kem, very little knowledge of whats going on, multiple Spinosaurids and little agreement by paleontologists,  fragmentary remains, so what else is new...  Please note that the authors of this paper recognize  Sigilmassasaurus and an indeterminate Spinosaurid in Morocco a view that appears to be shared my many.

[Runner64]

Hmm just read something interesting but Cristatusaurus is another baryonchinae from the Elrhaz Formation in Niger.  This then means that if two baryonchinae were found in the same location that they may be indistinguishable.  However, if Suchomimus and Cristatuasaurus are found to be the same species, Suchomimus would be invalid because Cristatusaurus takes priority (named earlier).  Crazy to think that a relatively common and well-known dinosaur (Suchomimus) may (and appears very likely) be renamed.

 

@TyBoy I just read that there is a high likelihood of them being from the same species because the Cristatuasaurus type specimen may have been juvenile.  If that were the case, Suchomimus would be invalid.

[Jaimin013]

2 hours ago, Runner64 said:

Hmm just read something interesting but Cristatusaurus is another baryonchinae from the Elrhaz Formation in Niger.  This then means that if two baryonchinae were found in the same location that they may be indistinguishable.  However, if Suchomimus and Cristatuasaurus are found to be the same species, Suchomimus would be invalid because Cristatusaurus takes priority (named earlier).  Crazy to think that a relatively common and well-known dinosaur (Suchomimus) may (and appears very likely) be renamed.

 

@TyBoy I just read that there is a high likelihood of them being from the same species because the Cristatuasaurus type specimen may have been juvenile.  If that were the case, Suchomimus would be invalid.

Good point re the naming convention of what was named earlier but this is only the case if in fact they are the same otherwise it be the same situation as what happened with Brontosaurus and Apatosaurus as an example which are of different genus.

[TyBoy]

2 hours ago, Runner64 said:

Hmm just read something interesting but Cristatusaurus is another baryonchinae from the Elrhaz Formation in Niger.  This then means that if two baryonchinae were found in the same location that they may be indistinguishable.  However, if Suchomimus and Cristatuasaurus are found to be the same species, Suchomimus would be invalid because Cristatusaurus takes priority (named earlier).  Crazy to think that a relatively common and well-known dinosaur (Suchomimus) may (and appears very likely) be renamed.

 

@TyBoy I just read that there is a high likelihood of them being from the same species because the Cristatuasaurus type specimen may have been juvenile.  If that were the case, Suchomimus would be invalid.

Show me a paper that is more current than the 2016 by Cau that makes those comments.  Bottom line is that this is very much like the Kem Kem where very little is really undertood or known and there is much disagreement by paleontologists of whats out there.   

[Runner64]

2 hours ago, TyBoy said:

Show me a paper that is more current than the 2016 by Cau that makes those comments.  Bottom line is that this is very much like the Kem Kem where very little is really undertood or known and there is much disagreement by paleontologists of whats out there.   

 

Spinosaur taxonomy and evolution of craniodental features: Evidence from Brazil 

 

By Sales and Schultz 2017. Declare that more info is needed and that the Cristatusaurus type specimen may be synonymous with Suchomimus.

 

I was trying to back you up and provide up to date information regarding the Cristatusaurus identification and the topic for an educational conversation, not an argument.