Majungasaurus Tooth?

[Rustdee]

Hello everyone,

I have recently come across a tooth described as a Majungasurus tooth from the Maevarano Formation. However, the tooth in question does not seem to be from an abelisaurid like Majungasuarus. I have consulted Fanti and Therrien's (2007) paper (attached, but also in the pdf library) on theropod morphology from the Maevarano Formation and cannot find a good match. I have requested further pictures of the mesial serrations and a cross-section of the base. The tooth is described as being 37 mm in length. What do you all think?

 

Fanti and Therrien 2007.pdf

[Rustdee]

@Troodon

[gigantoraptor]

Majungatholus is considered a junior synoniem of Majungasaurus. It was described in 1979 and was thought to be a Pachycephalosaurid. 

Majungatholus crenatissimus is never officially used also, it was called Majungatholus atopus.

 

I would like to see the mesial denticles and a denticle density first.

 

Here are some maxillae of Majungasaurus with teeth:

 

Lower jaw:

 

 

[Fossildude19]

Reminder to NOT use advertisement verbiage or ad copy when posting here. PICTURES ONLY, PLEASE! 

Thanks.  

[Rustdee]

@Fossildude19 Sorry about that. Thanks you for the edit and explanation!

 

@gigantoraptor Thanks for the additional illustrations! There just does not appear to be many positions that a tooth this recurved could fit into that jaw. Hopefully, I receive more pictures soon.

[Troodon]

Correct the tooth is not an Abelisaurid so it cannot be a Majungasaurus.  What formation is it from also need age and specific locality.

[gigantoraptor]

13 minutes ago, Rustdee said:

 

@gigantoraptor Thanks for the additional illustrations! There just does not appear to be many positions that a tooth this recurved could fit into that jaw. Hopefully, I receive more pictures soon.

It's a weird tooth that doesn't look like an Abelisaurid tooth. Are you certain this is the correct location of the tooth? It might just be because of the light but I have the impression this tooth has vertical ridges, like they can be seen in Acheroraptor from the HC formation. On the last picture it looks like the anterior denticles are smaller than the posterior, another thing that occurs in Acheroraptor. Third, the denticles stop halfway the mesial carina, with Abelisaurids they run accros the whole mesial carina. This is not an Abelisaurid tooth. I'm not saying it's definetly Acheroraptor or it's definetly a wrong formation, just be cautious.

[Rustdee]

@Troodon The seller lists it as being from the Maevarano Formation, Madagascar. I have asked for more information to illustrate provenance.

 

@gigantoraptor I also thought the preservation was a bit off for Madagascar. This is certainly an interesting tooth.

[Troodon]

18 minutes ago, Rustdee said:

@Troodon The seller lists it as being from the Maevarano Formation, Madagascar. I have asked for more information to illustrate provenance.

 

 

Sorry I missed that in your first line.  The preservation is similar to other teeth I have from that fauna just a bit browner but its all about accuracy of the provenance.   If its accurate nothing is currently described that would fit that tooth and thats cool if you are looking for something different.

[Troodon]

Found the listings actually looks like a maxillary Tyrannosaurid tooth based on shape and but its not Dromaeosaurid.  Have not found any publication that suggest any other large bodied theropod in that formation not to say it does not exist.

[Pemphix]

Whatever it is, it's a beauty

Very nice colour and very good preservation imo...

[Jaimin013]

It is ok.

 

Nice tooth but wish it had accurate provenance and an indeterminate tooth at the end of the day...

[paulyb135]

I would echo what others have said.

 

It looks like a tyrannosaurid and not an abeilosaur. It is certainly different in shape to my majungasaurus.

 

A nice tooth...

[Masp]

If this helps at all for comparison, here’s one I acquired recently from Maeverano Formation, Boina, Madagascar .75” / 1.9 cm 

 

 

 

[JohnJ]

Please remember that comments characterizing any seller are not allowed.  Thanks.

[Rustdee]

Hi all,

 

I really appreciate the insight on this tooth. I have spoken with the seller and there is no further locality information or provenance that can be provided for this tooth. A lot of risk with this tooth!

 

Cheers!

[Runner64]

On 3/27/2019 at 4:15 PM, Troodon said:

Found the listings actually looks like a maxillary Tyrannosaurid tooth based on shape and but its not Dromaeosaurid.  Have not found any publication that suggest any other large bodied theropod in that formation not to say it does not exist.

Even if it were tyrannosaurid, it should not be from the Maeverno formation correct?  Because Madagascar would have been part of Gondwana in the Southern Hemisphere so tyrannosaurs should not be found due to continental drift.

[Troodon]

21 minutes ago, Runner64 said:

Even if it were tyrannosaurid, it should not be from the Maeverno formation correct?  Because Madagascar would have been part of Gondwana in the Southern Hemisphere so tyrannosaurs should not be found due to continental drift.

The assumption you are making is that it comes from Madagascar and we have nothing to support its provenance

[Runner64]

1 hour ago, Troodon said:

The assumption you are making is that it comes from Madagascar and we have nothing to support its provenance

 

Yes but in the original post it was said it came from the Maeverno Formation of Madagascar. If it has tyrannosaur characteristics, shouldn’t this then refute the information given by the original seller therefor not supporting the provenance?  

[Troodon]

3 hours ago, Runner64 said:

 

Yes but in the original post it was said it came from the Maeverno Formation of Madagascar. If it has tyrannosaur characteristics, shouldn’t this then refute the information given by the original seller therefor not supporting the provenance?  

Okay your opinion but when the morphology  of a tooth does not make sense or is not consistent with the fauna a solid provenance is important.

[Dracorex_hogwartsia]

I saw this tooth when he first listed it and my first reaction was this is not a Majungasaurus tooth. It does look like a tooth that would come from the Hell Creek because of the shape and color. Having said that, I have seen a lot of teeth from Madagascar that have a wide variety of colors including this one. I also own a tooth from Madagascar that looks very similar to this one. I purchased it from a dealer many years ago who sold lots of material from Madagascar, mainly sauropod teeth. My tooth is not in as nice condition but I bought it because it didn't look like a Majungasaurus tooth.  My tooth is 28mm.

[dinostock]

Hello, 

 

I know this an old thread but I can add to it. I now own the tooth in question. I was looking for a Majungasaurus tooth and bought it without doing due research. I wish I found this thread earlier! The seller promised me a certificate of authenticity but it did not come with the tooth so that adds to the legitimacy issue. After viewing it in person and reading this thread and others I agree it is not from Majungasaurus. I am not a trained Paleontologist but I do have other fossilized theropod teeth in my collection. It more closely resembles the Tyrannosaurid teeth from the Hell Creek Formation. Interestingly they are selling Hell Creek fossils for sale so it is very possible that is where it came from. I will not be selling or trading this tooth. I am hoping to get it examined by a paleontologist for a more accurate identification. If it proves to be a Tyrannosaurid then that would be exciting, if not it still is a nice unidentified theropod tooth. Am I embarassed by the sitatuion, of course but maybe something good and interesting will come from this purchase.

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2019 by dinostock
Image attachment

[Fossildude19]

47 minutes ago, dinostock said:

Hello, 

 

I know this an old thread but I can add to it. I now own the tooth in question. I was looking for a Majungasaurus tooth and bought it without doing due research. I wish I found this thread earlier! The seller promised me a certificate of authenticity but it did not come with the tooth so that adds to the legitimacy issue.

 

 

 

Please do not be fooled or persuaded by a "Certificate of Authenticity".  

Anyone with a printer and publishing software can create a COA.   

They usually aren't worth the paper they are written on.  

 

Please feel free to post pictures of any fossils you are looking to acquire, (BEFORE you make a purchase) and we can usually help with identification, and verification of the fossil posted.

 

[Troodon]

 Very little is described from Madagascar and most likely other large bodies theropods are present in that fauna.  The preservation however matches other material from Madagascar and not Hell Creek material so my guess its from there and might be an undescribed Theropod.  Sellers provenance has been very weak across the board but without a good one its impossible to ID most theropod teeth...and COA are worthless like Tim said.. 

 

@dinostock

 

[dinostock]

14 minutes ago, Troodon said:

 Very little is described from Madagascar and its most likely other large bodies theropods are present in that fauna.  The preservation however matches other material from Madagascar and not Hell Creek material so my guess its from there and might be an undescribed Theropod.  Sellers provenance has been very weak across the board but without a good one its impossible to ID most theropod teeth...and COA are worthless. 

 

@dinostock

 

 

14 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

 

Please do not be fooled by a "Certificate of Authenticity". 

Anyone with a printer and publishing software can create a COA. 

They usually aren't worth the paper they are written on. 

 

Please feel free to post pictures of any fossils you are looking to acquire, and we can usually help with identification, and verification of the fossil posted.

 

 

Thank you for the replies. I brought up the COA because the lack of one only adds to my skepticism. The seller may have simply forgot to include one but I want to receive one to see what it says and who is supposedly authenticating the said fossil. Very interesting Troodon, thank you for your input. I am familiar with a paleontologist that studies Madagascaran theropods and he would be my source to send photos and possibly the tooth to for him and his researchers to study. 

 

So the most likely scenario is that the seller did in fact get this tooth from Madagascar and because Majungasaurus is the most prevalent and prominent theropod there decided to label it as such. In reality the specimen comes from an unknown theropod that lived at the same time and location as Majungasaurus.

Edited October 22, 2019 by dinostock