Jump to content
Zenmaster6

Gastropod Experts?

Recommended Posts

Zenmaster6

I found this gastropod imprint a couple weeks ago in Tertiary sediment (geologic maps) 

I found this gastropod online (Falsifusus ludovicianus) which lived during the same time period and has similar ridges and those tiny crown marking near the top. 
Let me know if this seems reasonable 

 

(I put the pictures of the gastropod I found online in the comments below.)

51452664_279545416073917_2786527678738464768_n.jpg

51518388_297357527639683_6699452011647074304_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6

falsifusus-ludovicianus-eocene-stone-city-formation-brazos-river-bryan-texas-july-2011-solo.jpg

falsifusus-ludovicianus-eocene-stone-city-formation-brazos-river-bryan-texas-july-2011-with-ruler.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erose

Close but no cigar.... you are on the right track but there still are too many differences.  “Tertiary” covers a lot of time.  You need to figure out what formation it is from to get more specific and then find a list of what is known from that formation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
49 minutes ago, erose said:

Close but no cigar.... you are on the right track but there still are too many differences.  “Tertiary” covers a lot of time.  You need to figure out what formation it is from to get more specific and then find a list of what is known from that formation. 

Maybe a more general term such as Fasciolariidae the family. I think that is a certainty 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wrangellian

Those could be related but like erose says, most likely too different to be the same species or even genus.

I have a snail from my local Upper Cretaceous over here on Van Island that is almost a dead ringer for yours, but I don't have a name for it and it's likely that it doesn't even have one yet... but I'll bet they are related.

 

Tz88(2)shr.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad
22 minutes ago, Wrangellian said:

Those could be related but like erose says, most likely too different to be the same species or even genus.

I have a snail from my local Upper Cretaceous over here on Van Island that is almost a dead ringer for yours, but I don't have a name for it and it's likely that it doesn't even have one yet... but I'll bet they are related.

 

I'm not sure about the OP's one, but could this one be Anchura sp? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wrangellian
10 hours ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

I'm not sure about the OP's one, but could this one be Anchura sp? 

That's what some here have suggested, but others (the people at the provincial museum, I think it was) have doubted that ID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erose

Here is a link to a well studied Middle Eocene site in Texas we all know as Whiskey Bridge. Scroll down and look at the various gastropods illustrated. That is only a FRACTION of the genera and species you can find at that local. The list of molluscs alone is close to 200.  https://www.hgs.org/sites/default/files/MGB_FLIS_2_23_15.pdf

 

Without more specific stratigraphy we can barely even offer a SWAG on this. It is a nicely preserved specimen but you need to do some further research. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
3 hours ago, erose said:

Here is a link to a well studied Middle Eocene site in Texas we all know as Whiskey Bridge. Scroll down and look at the various gastropods illustrated. That is only a FRACTION of the genera and species you can find at that local. The list of molluscs alone is close to 200.  https://www.hgs.org/sites/default/files/MGB_FLIS_2_23_15.pdf

 

Without more specific stratigraphy we can barely even offer a SWAG on this. It is a nicely preserved specimen but you need to do some further research. 

I made two posts of this gastropod and only updated one of them. So let me update this one too

 

After reading through an old 1975 PDF of the Eocene marine species of the formation, I have come to a conclusion.
The only shell that looks similar according to this PDF of the fossils found in the Blakeley Formation in Tukwila Washington is the
Drillia Chehalisensis

And by pushing a mold into the fossil, I can see that they are very similar. 
Thank you all for your contributions : )
Let me know if this seems wrong to you.

Clathrodrillia_wolfei_2.jpg

51906505_412921632615518_4969091043359195136_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils

Is it possible to prep your specimen? If it is, I recommend that you take it out of the matrix and uncover the mouth of the gastropod. That could definitely help us in a more certain ID of the shell :) 

 

On 2/15/2019 at 5:36 AM, Zenmaster6 said:

gastropod imprint

So I suppose you're saying that no shell material is left then? And by imprint, do you mean it's a positive or negative one (convex or concave)? The picture makes it look really convex to me, but if it isn't then I'm just seeing stuff wrong :P 

 

Here is a paper I found while googling "Drillia chehalisensis"; is this the one you used? I personally don't find the species to be a very good match to yours... 

However, from that same paper, what do you think about "Rimella canalifera" (plate II)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
7 hours ago, Max-fossils said:

Is it possible to prep your specimen? If it is, I recommend that you take it out of the matrix and uncover the mouth of the gastropod. That could definitely help us in a more certain ID of the shell :) 

 

So I suppose you're saying that no shell material is left then? And by imprint, do you mean it's a positive or negative one (convex or concave)? The picture makes it look really convex to me, but if it isn't then I'm just seeing stuff wrong :P 

 

Here is a paper I found while googling "Drillia chehalisensis"; is this the one you used? I personally don't find the species to be a very good match to yours... 

However, from that same paper, what do you think about "Rimella canalifera" (plate II)?

I agree Rimella canalifera definitely looks similar. They both do indeed look familiar. I wouldn't be sure how to separate Drillia Chehalisensis and Rimella Canalifera

Cowl_canalifera_Kronenberg.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Max-fossils

From the paper:

Drillia chehalisensis

Drilliac.png.2e14e6e014bba7c29580a5a87f951e5d.pngDrilliac2.png.15b0a1ec980d5d051aa327e3cff46f4d.png

 

Rimella canalifera

rimellac.png.b148c8aa76262048ed67de94e7ec8961.png

 

They look pretty different to me. And the latter looks a lot more like your shell. Especially the image you posted in your last reply looks a lot like your specimen :) 

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.

×