Differences In Bone Structure?

[Jesta384]

Differences in bone structure?

I've looked and searched...high and low..but yielded nothing conclusive. Some of you "pros" out there can look at a bone fragment and can tell what animal it came from, based off the smallest of details. I know from other hobbies, practice makes perfect. Just like a gear head can listen to a car and from the type of grind, noise or click, can determine what the root cause is.

My question is....is there a definitive break down, with pictures, of types of bones and their owners, based on composition, structure and shape? I have a bucket of spare parts collected from beaches which I am sure could be isolated to at least genus, if not species to the trained eye. Perhaps i will post some later. In the mean time....does any one have any links or tips?

[Jesta384]

As an after thought; i have seen threads with onesies and and twosies - where a call is made on one or two fossils. "left is turtle, the right is dugong" I was looking for maybe an all inclusive guide of sorts to marine/land animals. And yes...i figured non-porous is the first step to making a lovely chert collection.

Thanks

Edited October 5, 2009 by Jesta384

[Guest Smilodon]

Hi Jesta,

I am unaware of anyone who would brag that they could ID a bone, or who it belonged to, just by looking at its composition. I am also unaware of any source of information about that. However, there are some truisms.

1. Reptilian and bird bones look roughed up at their ends. I don't know why, but that's the way they are

2. Bird bones are said to be hollow and while that is partially right, they usually have thin struts of bone inside. Some reptilian bones are truly hollow for much of their length.

3. Whale and dolphin bones usually have an unusually thin cortex (outer layer)

That's all I can think of right now.

[Guest Smilodon]

As an after thought; i have seen threads with onesies and and twosies - where a call is made on one or two fossils. "left is turtle, the right is dugong" I was looking for maybe an all inclusive guide of sorts to marine/land animals. And yes...i figured non-porous is the first step to making a lovely chert collection.

Thanks

Well, if you are looking for a source of bone identification just by looking at its shape, I would suggest your first and best amateur reference book to vertebrate fossils is called, Discovering Fossils by Garcia and Miller. I know the authors.

Otherwise, you just need to put in time.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Smilodon

[Auspex]

As regards identification through morphology, there are a few (very few) "osteology" books out there, many written for archaeologists. As for the "gestalt" method, based on structure more than form, what is required is an intimate knowledge of the fossils from specific sites. Many of the quick replies offered here to ID questions are made by members with a lifetime of experience. For the rest of us, there is deep research (and a lot of luck).

[Jesta384]

snargeit. the internet is supposed to answer ALL my questions... quickly and easily without much effort or input.

...stupid technology....

[Guest Smilodon]

MODIFIED - Some of the QUICK replies offered here to ID questions are WRONG but some are made by members with a lifetime of experience. For the rest of us, there is deep research (and a lot of luck).

Remember, this is the Internet. It's not always right.

Edited October 5, 2009 by Smilodon

[tracer]

there are a few books out there, and some websites. scientific papers. get good at googling. but there really aren't too many shortcuts to experience or studying. and unfortunately, it seems that some can't "see" detail the way others can and "fill in" too much to reach a conclusion where it isn't reachable. lots of things that are fragments and just too little detail remains to identify. some will just "decide" what those are. i don't. i consider it a "whatzit" forever unless there's a valid reason to change that classification.

context is important. one needs to know what the geology was in the area at the time of the fossil's placement there. i'll give you one example. say you find a very large bone that's way too large to be from anything living in that area now. if you know the geologic period or the strata the bone came from, then you may well know, or can look up, if the area was under water then, or high and dry. also knowing when stuff lived is important. that giant bone - is it from a whale, a mammoth, or a dinosaur. my point here is that you might be able to eliminate two out of three just by knowing something about where you found it, let alone the morphology of the bone.

this forum has some really great threads on it in which hard-to-id stuff is analyzed, so reading the stuff here is a good start. i look up pictures of skeletons of living creatures and try to memorize the differences between different bones. the problem is, that unless you have access to a large university comparative collection, then you've just got to do quite a bit of research looking for things. i've even gone to study museum fossils. read dan woehr's reports. gone to the library. post stuff here. buy books. etc. ad nauseum.

post pictures of some of your stuff, and see what people here can do to help.

[Guest Smilodon]

Tracer,

I agree completely. The first question I ask someone who wants something identified is "Where did it come from? or Where did you find it?" and they look at me like I'm crazy. I learned the importance of context once when someone emailed me some photos. It kinda looked like something so I replied that it was X. They emailed back with more information. Ok, I said, then it's probably Y. Then they sent me more info at which point it was then clearly Z.

At that point I suggested they take it to a local museum (they always get it right.) :lolu: :lolu: :lolu: :lolu: :lolu: