Jump to content
KimTexan

Bison site: trip 4

Recommended Posts

Ludwigia

:popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad

:popcorn::popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kato

"The issue was called “cold agglutinin antibodies.” 

 

Sorry to hear about that! I know it is a very limiting factor and one of the prime reasons why I am in New Mexico. My first symptom was Raynaud's and blood tests showed I had red blood cell clumping, not to mention always feeling tired and weak.  

 

While I am not a fan of the super hot days here I've had far more productive days in NM in one year than I've had in the prior 5 before moving here. Keep warm and keep digging!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan
3 minutes ago, Kato said:

"The issue was called “cold agglutinin antibodies.” 

 

Sorry to hear about that! I know it is a very limiting factor and one of the prime reasons why I am in New Mexico. My first symptom was Raynaud's and blood tests showed I had red blood cell clumping, not to mention always feeling tired and weak.  

 

While I am not a fan of the super hot days here I've had far more productive days in NM in one year than I've had in the prior 5 before moving here. Keep warm and keep digging!

I’m sorry to hear about it for you. I was out there for almost 3 hours until it hit me so it wasn’t terribly limiting to me. Texas doesn’t hang out in the 30s very often.

 

The bison is kind of cramping my style a bit. I’m thrilled to have found it, but I’ve spent so much time on it I am missing out on hunting the Cretaceous during the cooler months. It gets too hot come June to do much hunting.

I’m getting ammonite fever. I haven’t found one in maybe 6 weeks. I’m vacillating between staying home and getting stuff done that I need to and going to explore some new territory over in Hurst for ammonites. I’m feeling a bit on the lazy side where I may get nothing done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kato
1 minute ago, KimTexan said:

I’m sorry to hear about it for you. I was out there for almost 3 hours until it hit me so it wasn’t terribly limiting to me. Texas doesn’t hang out in the 30s very often.

 

The bison is kind of cramping my style a bit. I’m thrilled to have found it, but I’ve spent so much time on it I am missing out on hunting the Cretaceous during the cooler months. It gets too hot come June to do much hunting.

I’m getting ammonite fever. I haven’t found one in maybe 6 weeks. I’m vacillating between staying home and getting stuff done that I need to and going to explore some new territory over in Hurst for ammonites. I’m feeling a bit on the lazy side where I may get nothing done. 

It's easy to get sidetracked but a good learning experience for you. Myself...I accidentally found permineralized material in a formation where none had been reported in prior university research. Like a rabid dog I fixated on that and managed to spend the better part of a month finding an additional 20 specimen sites. 

 

Like you, there were other things I wanted to be looking for, but I could not let it go.  Maybe you have enough to call it quits for now...box things up and work on it during the summer? I'm guessing, unless there is massive flooding, that soil bank will be there next winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan

Speaking of getting distracted.

I do get so easily distracted. While out yesterday at the bison site I picked up a piece of brick red sandstone. I’ve seen it in the creek and it’s always peeked my curiosity. It is something I have never seen before, but I am certain it is native and washing out of the Eagle Ford most likely. Parts of the Eagle Ford are brick red, but I’ve never seen the red sandstone. Another member of the Eagle Ford has sandstone type material that is tan.

Anyway, the brick red stuff is filled with little black specks. I can never see anything overt in them, but black specks are usually phosphatic in these parts. And phosphatic hear means Cretaceous marine environment and marine fossils.

So I picked the small piece up and brought it home yesterday despite not seeing anything in it. 

I just looked at it in my dissecting microscope. All those black specks are microscopic fish bits! There are even teeth in there. One you can see with the naked eye and it looks a bit like an Encodus tooth. Most everything is 1-2 mm or smaller. Very cool though. Now I feel compelled to go in search of the source of this material and start collecting more of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gwestbrook

Those are sweet! Enjoying your posts very much! That coyote's a big one! Looks like a wolf. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 Humper

Hi Kim...Your phalanx is a proximal phalanx.  It is one of 8 proximal phalanxes in the skeleton of a bison.  Two per each limb.  There are also medial phalanxes.  Eight as well.  Medial phalanxes occur between the proximal and ungual or distal phalanxes (also known as hoof cores in a bison!) Do you have all the medial phalanxes?  Love that patella, too.  So, keep yourself a list of bones you have, and ones that are missing, and keep going back to recover the ones that still likely are in the bank. You're doing an amazing job of rescuing that critter for posterity.  Keep up the good work, and don't get too sidetracked with ammonites!   (Oh, BTW, your turtle shell fragment is from a Pseudemys or Trachemys, cooter or slider, and part of the plastron).    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KimTexan
3 hours ago, 5 Humper said:

Hi Kim...Your phalanx is a proximal phalanx.  It is one of 8 proximal phalanxes in the skeleton of a bison.  Two per each limb.  There are also medial phalanxes.  Eight as well.  Medial phalanxes occur between the proximal and ungual or distal phalanxes (also known as hoof cores in a bison!) Do you have all the medial phalanxes?  Love that patella, too.  So, keep yourself a list of bones you have, and ones that are missing, and keep going back to recover the ones that still likely are in the bank. You're doing an amazing job of rescuing that critter for posterity.  Keep up the good work, and don't get too sidetracked with ammonites!   (Oh, BTW, your turtle shell fragment is from a Pseudemys or Trachemys, cooter or slider, and part of the plastron).    

I am missing quite a few of the feet and small lower bones. I’m missing 1 tibia and 1 metatarsal. Otherwise I have all the large leg bones.

I’m still missing a few vertebrae too. 

For the turtle I posted it on the TexasTurtles.org Facebook group and the head curator for the amphibian and reptile research center at UT Arlington invited me to come by and he would ID it for me and compare it to examples in their collection. Hopefully I can swing by there on Friday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 Humper
On 2/12/2019 at 9:53 PM, Harry Pristis said:

For anatomical uses, it is "phalanx" (singular) and "phalanges" (plural).  Not "phalanxes" which is used for ancient Greek military formations or other large groups of people or things.

Singular:  phalanx.  Plural:  phalanxes.  Singular: phalange.  Plural: Phalanges.  The origin of the word phalanx/phalanxes is as Harry states.  It historically referred to a closely ranked unit of people, usually on the field of battle.  What most of us learned in school to refer to finger/toe bones was one "phalange" and two or more "phalanges."  But based on some recent definition searches for the singular/plural of "phalanx(es)," it appears that "phalanx(es)" is now interchangeable with "phalange(s)," in reference to finger/toe bones.  But apparently not vice versa.  That is, one would not call a unit of soldiers a "phalange."  Language can evolve faster than species!  Maybe this is a questions for the NPR radio show:  "A way with words?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Harry Pristis
14 hours ago, 5 Humper said:

Singular:  phalanx.  Plural:  phalanxes.  Singular: phalange.  Plural: Phalanges.  The origin of the word phalanx/phalanxes is as Harry states.  It historically referred to a closely ranked unit of people, usually on the field of battle.  What most of us learned in school to refer to finger/toe bones was one "phalange" and two or more "phalanges."  But based on some recent definition searches for the singular/plural of "phalanx(es)," it appears that "phalanx(es)" is now interchangeable with "phalange(s)," in reference to finger/toe bones.  But apparently not vice versa.  That is, one would not call a unit of soldiers a "phalange."  Language can evolve faster than species!  Maybe this is a questions for the NPR radio show:  "A way with words?"

 

I can't speak for your schooling, but there are numerous Google hits which will help you currently.  The anatomical singular and plural are "phalanx" and "phalanges."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plantguy

Cool finds/images/updates Kim...I like that idea mentioned above about keeping a list of bones and then figuring out how much of the critter you have. 

Continued hunting success!

Regards, Chris 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 Humper
7 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

I can't speak for your schooling, but there are numerous Google hits which will help you currently.

Thank you, but numerous google hits, along with my schooling, were what led to the formation of my above stated opinion.  Anyone interested in this topic can perform their own searches to reach their own opinions, and I hope they will. 

 

And WOW, Kim, that is great about a positive ID of Bison antiquus from an expert in local vertebrate paleontology!  Congratulations!   

Share this post


Link to post
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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×