AJ58 Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Some have ID these as horn corals.My argument with that is no sign of septa. the closest I came up with is Rousseauspira from Ordovician of Alaska and California. but those specimens are tiny compared to mine. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynot Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Welcome to TFF! These look like sponges to Me, but wait for others to chime in. 1 Darwin said: " Man sprang from monkeys." Will Rogers said: " Some of them didn't spring far enough." My Fossil collection - My Mineral collection My favorite thread on TFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tidgy's Dad Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 I agree with Tony, these are surely sponges. They are rather wonderful. Rugose corals didn't appear til the Middle Ordovician, so if these are Lower Ordovician, they must be sponges, i would have thought. Life's Good! Tortoise Friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 These look like Ceratopea sp. operculums, to me. 5 Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER 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 More sharing options...
AJ58 Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 Maybe Ceratopeas big Brother.I have a large collection of Ceratopea .The biggest one is only 1 inch.And the makeup is not the same. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minnbuckeye Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Here is a post made by JimB88 171 Posted May 22, 2014 Ceratopea 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 2 hours ago, AJ58 said: Maybe Ceratopeas big Brother.I have a large collection of Ceratopea .The biggest one is only 1 inch.And the makeup is not the same. Hmm. I see what you mean. I am not seeing the same type of growth lines in yours that I see in the others posted here. Maybe sponge is something to investigate. Or, perhaps Monoplacophoran? Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER 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 More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Here is a USGS paper by about Ceratopea opurcula. The Lower Ordovician Gastropoda Ceratopea. by Yochelson. Geological Survey Professional Paper 294-H. In the paper, opurcula are up to 46mm or 1.8 inches in maximum dimension which is short of the ones shown by the OP (~ 2.8 inches). Based on variations of opurcula we should still consider opurcula even if there are problems with size. We need to see how large Ceratopea get to see how large their opurcula might be. See sample plate. Link 1 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 We may also consider the possibility that these fossils are siphuncles of pilocerid nautiloids, possibly Bisonoceras or something similar. Some nautiloids are represented in the fossil record mainly (or entirely) by their massive siphuncles, with the fragile septa, external shell, and living chamber rarely or never preserved. Don 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ58 Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 Has someone looked into Rousseauspira;A new gastropod operculum from the Ordovician of Alaska and California? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 12 minutes ago, AJ58 said: Has someone looked into Rousseauspira;A new gastropod operculum from the Ordovician of Alaska and California? Yes, after you said that. pdf " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 8 hours ago, FossilDAWG said: We may also consider the possibility that these fossils are siphuncles of pilocerid nautiloids, possibly Bisonoceras or something similar. Some nautiloids are represented in the fossil record mainly (or entirely) by their massive siphuncles, with the fragile septa, external shell, and living chamber rarely or never preserved. Don Attached for comparison some siphuncles that have similar features and matching scale. Ulrich, E.O., Foerste, A.F., Miller, A.K. 1943 Ozarkian and Canadian Cephalopods: Part II: Brevicones Geological Society of America Special Papers, 49:1-240 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Thanks Scott! That is just what I was thinking of. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 Great detective work, Scott! Well done, sir. Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER 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 More sharing options...
AJ58 Posted March 14, 2019 Author Share Posted March 14, 2019 Siphuncle ; This is exactly the fossil that I have. Thank you.Your knowledge of fossils is amazing.Do you know what age these are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted March 14, 2019 Share Posted March 14, 2019 "Ozarkian" and "Canadian" are old terms for the Lower Ordovician, which agrees with the age you indicated in the tags. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ58 Posted March 14, 2019 Author Share Posted March 14, 2019 Thank You.I am glad I was right about the age.I have not been to the site that I find these at in years.Its only walking distance from my house.Since then we have had a 1000 year and a 500 year flood so I am planning a fossil hunting trip soon. there should plenty to pick up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now