Jump to content
Zenmaster6

Jurassic / Cretaceous Oregon fossil?

Recommended Posts

Zenmaster6

Hey, I posted my trip to California from Washington yesterday. I have now looked through my rocks and noticed that one of these rocks are different from the rest. 
I took a picture of the Buchia Bivalve in the first image, to show that it has a different shape and markings than the bivalves I found there. 
If anyone can give me a genus that would be great. Is this another shell or something more? Thanks guys :) 

1.jpg

2.jpg

3.jpg

4.jpg

5.jpg

6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6

Also this is found in Riddle Oregon. Here is the info of this formation 

General Geology marine sedimentary rocks
Age Jurassic/Cretaceous
Terrane Group Myrtle Group
Formation Days Creek Formation
Rock Type fine grained sediments
Description Marine sandstone, siltstone, mudstone and conglomerate deposited over the top of older exotic terranes after accretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad

Interesting. 

But still looks like a fragment of Buchia to me. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
3 minutes ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

Interesting. 

But still looks like a fragment of Buchia to me. 

 

I respect that, but also, could you tell me how you came to that conclusion? The markings seem significantly more spaced out than the Buchia, the shape is more triangular. 
Could it be another species of Buchia?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tidgy's Dad
Just now, Zenmaster6 said:

I respect that, but also, could you tell me how you came to that conclusion? The markings seem significantly more spaced out than the Buchia, the shape is more triangular. 
Could it be another species of Buchia?

Maybe.

But there seems to be quite considerable species differentiation. 

Somebody else may know better than I. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
1 minute ago, Tidgy's Dad said:

Maybe.

But there seems to be quite considerable species differentiation. 

Somebody else may know better than I. :)

 

  • Yes, I suppose so. Thanks for always helping out. :dinothumb:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike from North Queensland

A photo of the broken end may help as this will give a cross section of the specimen.

Further preparation may also help.

 

Mike 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
31 minutes ago, Mike from North Queensland said:

A photo of the broken end may help as this will give a cross section of the specimen.

Further preparation may also help.

 

Mike 

What do you mean. The bottom where it becomes wide? I will try to remove the fossil from the matrix in a minute. Lets all hope I don't break it in the process

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6

Here it is mostly removed from the matrix

10.jpg

11.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6

I was thinking a Myophorella which lived in the Jurassic / Cretaceous 

Port_GEO00267.jpg

11.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wrangellian

Why did you remove it from the matrix? I don't see any change that would help with identification, and I thought it looked nice as it was.

Anyway I'm not really sharp on my Jurassic and am not sure what either of them are so I can't help you at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zenmaster6
16 hours ago, Wrangellian said:

Why did you remove it from the matrix? I don't see any change that would help with identification, and I thought it looked nice as it was.

Anyway I'm not really sharp on my Jurassic and am not sure what either of them are so I can't help you at the moment.

Mike from north quee said further preparation may also help. I wanted to show the shape of it as well. I agree it looked better in the rock :c 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wrangellian

I haven't seen shots from other angles, but it probably would have been sufficient for the edges to have been exposed a little more to show the full outline, and that may be all Mike was suggesting...

Oh well!

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.

×