Jump to content
BigJim2500

Permian Reptile Vertebra ID

Recommended Posts

BigJim2500

Hi, looking for some thoughts on identification of a fossil I bought a while ago. 

This is a fairly well preserved vertebra from an early reptile of some kind. Unfortunately I lost the original label for it so all I can say is that it’s from 300-250 mya, and from a formation in Oklahoma or Texas. I’m not very experienced with Permian stuff, so I’m not sure where to begin. Thanks for any help!

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

More photos:

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6

obviously a trilobite jawbone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kane
4 hours ago, Zenmaster6 said:

obviously a trilobite jawbone. 

Trilobites do not have jawbones. They are arthropods. Invertebrates do not have bones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobby Rico
6 hours ago, BigJim2500 said:

Unfortunately I lost the original label

Yes I hate it when this happens. It has happened to me too a couple of time . I now add the info in a notebook too. Because of my dyslexia labelling is very hard work.  @Uncle Siphuncle He maybe able to help as he has collected at Richards Spur quarry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
On 2/15/2019 at 2:13 AM, Kane said:

Trilobites do not have jawbones. They are arthropods. Invertebrates do not have bones.

well yeah its obviously a vert. :hearty-laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kane
31 minutes ago, Zenmaster6 said:

well yeah its obviously a vert. :hearty-laugh:

Yes, which is why your declarative statement that it was obviously a "trilobite jawbone" made no sense. When uncertain, you may wish to use hedging words. For example: "it may be a trilobite", "it looks like a trilobite", or "might it be a trilobite?" Words such as clearly, evidently, and obviously signify absolute certainty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
10 hours ago, Kane said:

Yes, which is why your declarative statement that it was obviously a "trilobite jawbone" made no sense. When uncertain, you may wish to use hedging words. For example: "it may be a trilobite", "it looks like a trilobite", or "might it be a trilobite?" Words such as clearly, evidently, and obviously signify absolute certainty. 

I think even a 3 year old would know that was not a trilobite. Its bigger on its own than most trilobites. But yes, by saying obviously I was being sarcastic. Everyone knows trilobites don't even have bones. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
10 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Or, if joking, at least make sure to use the emoticons to express your humor more openly. 

Tone is hard to pick up in writing on the internet. ;) 

Yeah, I thought we were all on the same page about that one. I guess it might not be as funny as I thought it was. Sorry guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

Don’t worry about the joke, it’s all good. To get back on the subject, I have some beers that have been confirmed as dimetrodon milleri, and they aren’t very similar. It looks sort of like eryops, but not enough for me t confirm (although I’m not very experienced with that material). It is fairly well preserved, so I feel like a genus identification is possible, but I’m a bit stuck. Hmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500
Just now, BigJim2500 said:

Don’t worry about the joke, it’s all good. To get back on the subject, I have some beers that have been confirmed as dimetrodon milleri, and they aren’t very similar. It looks sort of like eryops, but not enough for me t confirm (although I’m not very experienced with that material). It is fairly well preserved, so I feel like a genus identification is possible, but I’m a bit stuck. Hmm...

VERTS, not beers, that was autocorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
On 2/16/2019 at 11:23 PM, BigJim2500 said:

VERTS, not beers, that was autocorrect.

:hearty-laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils
On 2/16/2019 at 4:08 AM, Zenmaster6 said:

Yeah, I thought we were all on the same page about that one. I guess it might not be as funny as I thought it was. Sorry guys.

Nah it was a decent joke, but Tim is right in saying that the emoticons should be used when making a joke like this. If you had written "Obviously a trilobite jawbone :P" it would've been much clearer. And not everyone knows that trilobites don't have bones; most people on the planet have never heard of trilobites, and many others simply deny they ever existed. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tripermiblast

Seems very similar to one of the first few (closest to sacrum) caudal vertebra of Seymouria baylorensis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jdp

Seems a bit large for Seymouria but I wouldn't totally rule it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500
On 2/18/2019 at 2:10 PM, jdp said:

This is definitely not Dimetrodon or Eryops. The swollen neural arch and relatively small vertebral centrum fits pretty well with either a seymouriid (maybe Seymouria) or diadectid (Maybe Diadectes). I think the limnoscelid Limnoscelis might be a good match, actually.

 

Any idea on the locality?

Unfortunately even with the label I couldn’t give you a locality down to formation. The dealer wasn’t too sure himself. Now that I recall, I’m pretty sure it is from somewhere specifically in Oklahoma. I’ll definitely check on the species you suggested for comparisons. Hopefully knowing the state can do something to narrow the time frame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jdp

Unfortunately the sequence in Oklahoma contains much of the Late Carboniferous and nearly the entire Early Permian sequence right up through the earliest parts of the Middle Permian.

 

Preservation seems consistent with Waurika but it could also potentially be Fort Sill. There's a few other places it could be from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigJim2500

Ok, serious new development on this, I found the label! The sight is still left only as Oklahoma, but the date is 225 mya. So that sort of changes things. With this in mind, any new thoughts from anyone?

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.

×