Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Last summer, on the last day of a long weekend of backcountry fossil hunting around Lake Diefenbaker, Saskatchewan, my friend and I decided to stop our canoe at a beach where on a previous morning I had found a large baculites cuneatus specimen. This beach was an outcropping of a unit of the Bearpaw formation known as the Demaine sand, and dated roughly to the late Campanian. The locality was chock full of golfball to softball-sized nodules, each with a delicate, coalified fossil inside, ranging from crustacean parts, chips of driftwood, to loose vertebrae. It wasn't long before I was looking down at a split nodule containing the symmetrical lines I knew were a skull. So of course, I assembled it together as best as I could, wrapped it in a sock, and we loaded back into the boat to head home.

 

Some typical terrain in the area. The formerly glacial South Saskatchewan River carves deep into the marine clays and sands of the Bearpaw formation:

 

2042e63e05.jpg

 

45ff1e1d8c.jpg

 

0eeb81da34.jpg

 

The nodule, rather unceremoniously wrapped in a wool sock:

 

8ef3199ff6.png

 

And unwrapped. Note the cervical vertebra just above the posterior end of the skull, and how part of the end of the snout is missing (sorry about the lack of scale bar, there's a photo further down the post with proper scale):

 

e45517e0ae.jpg


I sent a photo to a paleontologist friend, and was quickly referred to the Royal Saskatchewan Museum, who of course were eager to accept the fossil (not to mention that I was technically legally obliged to hand it over, per the Saskatchewan Heritage Property Act... But it's what I wanted to do anyway!). About a month later, my friend and I met with two other paleontologists down at Lake Diefenbaker to deliver the fossil (this time more carefully wrapped in a shoebox...) and to show them the site where we had found it. One long and wet trip in the zodiac raft later, we were there. We assisted in the collection of more samples, this time coming up with an even broader variety of flora and fauna, including a small crinoid, some wood chips with amber, and some more decapods. One of the two paleontologists was excited to suggest that the locality probably represented a near-shore lagoon environment, and that the museum would likely be back to do some more work there at a later date. Unfortunately, we were unable to do so that summer because of the seasonally rising water levels of the lake, which flooded the site, but I've been told that my friend and I will be invited to assist with the operation again this following season.

 

As for the fossil, it has since been delivered to McGill University to be CT scanned. Apparently, distinguishing the bone from the matrix has been long and tedious work, and not much news has reached us since the specimen was delivered some time last September. Here is an individual slice from the CT scan, from near the back of the braincase - notice how porous the bone material is, which is apparently another indicator that this skull belonged to a juvenile:

 

646471a311.PNG

 

I have been in close correspondence with the paleontologist from the Royal Sask. Museum who will be writing the paper to describe the find, but everything is more or less at a standstill until the work on the CT scan is finished. It's been a rather long wait, but I'm looking forward to its publication - I have been told that the museum intends to hold a press conference after the specimen has been described, and that my friend and I will be credited and involved in the reveal.

 

So far, the museum has kept everything about the discovery deliberately vague, aside from a brief mention in a press conference, which informed an article that circulated around the Canadian media late last summer: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/scientists-in-saskatchewan-discover-new-multimillion-year-old-fossils

 

It's been an exciting and fulfilling experience overall, and I can't wait to get back into the field, this time with a more meticulous and careful attitude, knowing that there's scientific potential to be had from my future contributions.

 

Anyway, here are some more photos from the lab at the RSM, with scale bar:

 

b376a885c2.jpg

 

Decapod claw:

 

9dcfff29be.jpg

 

Crinoid crown:

 

2143496228.jpg

 

Thanks for your attention. :)

  • I found this Informative 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this exciting account. I very much enjoyed the scenic photos as well. The first and the one with crepuscular rays were especially appealing to me.

  • I found this Informative 2

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, also are remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. - Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also thoroughly enjoyed the photos of landscapes as well as the ones of fossils.

Thank you for sharing.:)

  • I found this Informative 1

Life's Good!

Tortoise Friend.

MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png.a47e14d65deb3f8b242019b3a81d8160-1.png.60b8b8c07f6fa194511f8b7cfb7cc190.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't take credit for the landscape photos - those would be the work of my friend - but thank you anyway!

Edited by Norki
  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing finds and lovely scenery. Sounds like a exciting site! Can't wait to see what else comes from there. Any chance of the amber containing fossils? 

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very cool report, finds, and pictures. 

I took the liberty of cropping and brightening the CT scan image.

 

stitchA.PNG

  • I found this Informative 4

    Tim    VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  VFOTM APRIL - 2015  

__________________________________________________
"In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks."
John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~   ><))))( *>  About Me      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Heteromorph said:

 Any chance of the amber containing fossils? 

Nothing on a macro scale. The amber was only present as small particles within the grain of the lignitic wood. It excited one of the paleontologists because it meant that she'd be able to get the attention of one of the senior researchers, their "amber guy",  and have another reason to come back to the site. :D

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good fortune, a keen eye, and a canoe are always a good recipe for great memories.  Congratulations. :)

  • I found this Informative 1

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing find indeed!

 

Processing CT scans can certainly take a while depending on the quality of the scan and fossil. Sometimes parts can be done completely automatically but in other cases everything has to be done by hand and can take a long time to complete.

Olof Moleman AKA Lord Trilobite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonderful account! Wonderful fossils and fossil location -

that elasmosaur skull is simply beautiful!!

Can't wait to hear more about this discovery :) Also looking forward to the paper!

-Christian

Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy!

 

Q. Where do dinosaurs study?

A. At Khaan Academy!...

 

My ResearchGate profile

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your posts.

 

I have a few questions relating to the process of describing the fossil that I hope someone may have the answers to...

 

1. Considering that this fossil has not been described yet, is it prudent of me to me sharing photos publicly over the internet? What determines the "rights" of a scholar or institution to a fossil's description, and am I in breach of their trust by sharing the information in my main post? As I mentioned, the museum has already released news about the discovery of a "baby elasmosaur" skull in a press conference last summer, so to me it seems to be fair game.

 

2. I know that it's common for vertebrate fossils to be missing their skulls (particularly long-necked plesiosaurs), so what I'd like to know is just how rare this specimen is, and how far up the taxonomic tree the new description will likely climb. I know that it's also common for skull holotypes to be described as new species, but I can imagine that the taxonomic classification becomes a bit muddied the further you climb, particularly in a case where the holotype in question is an isolated skull, and many of the animal's closest relatives are known only from post cranial skeletons.

 

3. It's common academic courtesy to name the species after the person who discovered it, right? :fingerscrossed:

 

Thanks.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent find and tale.  Thanks for sharing.  Concerning your questions.... 

 

1.  There is indeed reason to be concerned about this.  The best (and only ) way to handle this dilemma is to just ask them if you can post p[ix of the unprepped fossil on social media.  If they say yes, yippee, if they say, not til we publish, then do so later.  And if you go against their wishes question number 3 becomes a strong NO. 

 

2. Yes, this is wicked rare.  I am not sure I understand your question about how high up the taxonomic tree will climb.   It will be a challenge to put into a classification if it is being compared tomostly headless beasts. 

 

3. This is all up to those who do the describing, but it can't hurt to ask, with a smile on your face.  And see Question 1.

 

Keep us posted, even though I fear it will be slow process.  

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked, and it turns out that it's fine to keep the photos that I've already shared posted online. Apparently there's not enough scientific information available in the single plane that's exposed in the photos, not to mention that the museum is chiefly concerned about the possibility of locality information being shared than photos of specimens.

 

I'm glad that I cleared this up with them anyway - I'll definitely be more prudent about this in future.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, I should probably refrain from posting images of the CT scan here when they're done, right?

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Just re-uploading some of these images for posterity, since I didn't upload them correctly in the OP.

 

20180522_171848.thumb.jpg.4c1030b66aae59c8d19c4c35f82fc0a6.jpg

 

5e46456285202_DSC_0326(1).jpg.c4184b1291ff8309b2b20b7926a78fd6.jpg

 

stitchA.PNG.0c9e19aed1eb3e5533be489302d1a3d4.PNG

 

Also included some other vertebrate fossils from a subsequent trip to the same site that were also passed off to the museum (xiphactinus, mosasaur bits n pieces):

 

60590077_435263667252279_3596394073646170112_n.jpg.beae55fe3023890c8fa0434439c28292.jpg.a53383918afb08d80389c22048ac5bac.jpg
 

60625939_2104911299617693_170268914683478016_n.jpg.feb4cc128b13e30c1b5ca36251bdd3bc.thumb.jpg.fc2df0c0c4fba4b45dfff3d14fd623dc.jpg

 

60930365_302903513996803_6786565729505247232_n.jpg.c3f2055118949f7866ddd45c2b542066.jpg.fe29fce0c8352fa3b8d1b33ca0ea7730.jpg

 

61059906_305980686966982_813533369265553408_n.jpg.ab0bfd603c13a75a9e56b44205edb61e.jpg.ae731d572b98549ec3b20ebfa4353477.jpg

  • I found this Informative 4
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...