Cone from Isle of Wight wealden

[Gideon]

Hi piranha 

 

sorry for the late reply. My internet has been down for a few days. British telecom isn’t what it used to be! Probably brexit kicking in early. 

 

Thank you so much for checking with your colleague. It sounds very interesting indeed! I’ll pm you in a bit. 

 

All the best

henry

[djcobham]

I hope you don't mind me adding a new find to this thread.  My sons found what also looks like a cone on the Isle of Wight last week.  We were at Yaverland, which is the other side of the island from Chilton but also has Wealden clay, I think.  We found this partially exposed in the soft grey rock, uncovered by the tide.

The pattern of 'scales' is not hexagonal like the ones here, and the cone is a little larger (5-6 cm in length), but this was the closest picture I could find in my searches, so I wondered if it was similar.  Can anyone help please?

[Mark Kmiecik]

I believe it is. Very nice find.

[Plantguy]

Yep, as Mark said... another nice find!

I dont know but the shapes look more rhomboid/diamond like to me than the earlier ones..beyond my level of experience though...

Mr. Scott have you had a chance to dig into those yet and can offer any opinions? @piranha

Regards, Chris 

 

[hemipristis]

Wow! 

[piranha]

On 7/14/2019 at 9:20 AM, djcobham said:

I hope you don't mind me adding a new find to this thread.  My sons found what also looks like a cone on the Isle of Wight last week.  We were at Yaverland, which is the other side of the island from Chilton but also has Wealden clay, I think.  We found this partially exposed in the soft grey rock, uncovered by the tide.

The pattern of 'scales' is not hexagonal like the ones here, and the cone is a little larger (5-6 cm in length), but this was the closest picture I could find in my searches, so I wondered if it was similar.  Can anyone help please?

 

 

 

@djcobham  I sent a PM with contact info for the specialist working on this important research.

 

 

Here is the response:

 

It’s interesting to find a lot of cones – if I may say so – because in the more modern literature known to me, no one really reported cones or seems interested in cones from the Wealden (maybe except for bennettite cones).

 

I really had to dig a little deeper after a first hint I found in Seward (1895) who published a few cones as Pinites but these look more like modern day Spruce and not like your cones. Step by step I came “down” to two publications by Carruthers from 1867 and stumbled over a plate (on my hard drive actually – so I should have been aware of it!! – what a shame!) that exactly showed this cone! I couldn’t believe it. Even more, it probably also showed Henry’s cones …! It’s so funny that no newer publications include similar cones – well that’s the fun fact about palaeontology. Taking that into account, I am quite convinced that the cone sent recently can be identified as “Cycadeostrobus” ovatus.

 

From the original description by Carruthers 1867:

 

“1. Cycadeostrobus ovatus. Cone ovate; scales somewhat broader than deep. (Plate LVII. Figs. 1 and 2.)

The specimen of this cone, which is two inches long by a little more than one and a half broad, is less compressed than the other specimens figured. (…) From the Wealden at Brook Point, Isle of Wight.”

 

Concerning the cones of Henry, I am happy that I was on the right path, but couldn’t go further at that moment (in my last email to Henry, I assumed the cones being cycad cones). According to the deeper literature research from today, Henry’s cones might be identified as “Cycadeostrobus” elegans, even if they are much smaller than the two reported by Carruthers (2.5 by 1.5 inches) but that doesn’t exclude the cones from the species. “Cycadeostrobus” sphaerica would fit almost even better, based on the figures by Carruthers (Figure 8 on the attached plate), but that specimens are from the Oxford Clay, thus being a good 40 million years older; however, this does not exclude the cones from being assigned to the latter species either.

 

From the original description by Carruthers 1867:

 

“4. C. elegans. Cone ovoid, truncate below; scales nearly as deep as they are wide. (Plate LVII. Fig. 9.)

There are two specimens of this cone in the British Museum, from the collection of Lady Hastings. They are two and a half inches long by one and a half broad. The base is not only truncate but somewhat indented, and there is the remains of a large peduncle, having a diameter of nearly half an inch. From the Wealden, Brook Point.”

 

I put the generic name in quote signs as I am not sure (or better: have not yet traced), whether the generic name is still valid and applicable. I think “Brook Point” relates to Brook Bay or Brook Chine, which is just a few hundred meters west of Chilton Chine, where Henry found the cones. I will trace this down and gather even more information on specimens and species as this really interests me now.

 

If you both agree (or the finder of the cone just sent), as identification most likely has been settled now, I would like to start writing up a small scientific publication reporting on these cones as apparently this has not been done for one-and-a-half centuries. In addition, we together might think of doing a little report for the Deposits Magazine? Would make a nice story I guess. What do you think of the latter?

 

For both possible publications, would the finder of this recently discovered cone also agree to send me the specimen for further (non-destructive) examination, measuring and photography? If so, I could assume a scientific publication to be completed for submission by end of November … and maybe the assumed one for Deposits Magazine a bit earlier, such as October.

 

All my best wishes and thank you so much bringing these cones to my attention!

 

 

Carruthers, W. 1867

On Gymnospermatous Fruits from the Secondary Rocks of Britain.
The Journal of Botany, British and Foreign, 5:1-21  PDF LINK

[djcobham]

Piranha,

Thank you so much for this information and for putting us in touch with your specialist contact.  

This find came from a very simple family holiday to the Isle of Wight, with fossil hunting as one of the main attractions, but we are very new to it and never hoped to find something as special as this.  To have so much detailed information is fantastic.

My 11 year old son, who first spotted the fossil, now can't wait for the summer holidays to finish so he can tell his friends and his science teacher.

Thanks to everyone else who posted too.

Best wishes,

The Jones Family

[piranha]

On 2/1/2019 at 9:08 AM, Gideon said:

 

UPDATE: Thanks to my introduction of the OP with Christian Pott back in 2019, an excellent new paper has just been published:

 

Pott, C. 2021. First Record of Intact Equisetalean Strobili from the Wealden (Lower Cretaceous) of the Isle of Wight, Southern England. Fossil Imprint, 77(1):43-52  PDF LINK

 

[FossilDAWG]

I guess you could say you were the accoucheur (male midwife) for the birth of this paper.

[Gideon]

Piranha- thank you so much for the introduction to Christian pott. He has done a superb job of getting that paper together and published. Many thanks Christian! It turned out to be a far more interesting fossil than I originally thought. Thanks again. Henry