Dinosaur Tooth ID

[fossils-uk]

hello,

many of you will have seen recent posts about this tooth. Alarmingly rather than help me to improve my services to you the great fossil community by helping me to rectifying my mistakes by supplying me with a more professional opinion of what this tooth might be sadly it was seen to be more of an exercise in ridicule at my expense.

Therefore here is a chance for those peoples to redeem themselves with an apology by helping to correctly identify this tooth!

 

Background... 

This tooth was bought as part of a private collection at the recent Tucson show. Sadly alot of the dinosaur material that I purchased had no to little identification apart from the formation with which it came and/or some vague location details. When I bought the collection I was privileged that @troodon was there to look over some of my purchases for me which I am very grateful for. This tooth was in this collection however the label that accompanied called it an Chirostenotes tooth from the two medicine, Teton county (with I presume is in Wyoming state). This was all the information I have. Hence why I stupidly did not question the validity of the identification and do more home work on the tooth before posting for sale.. my bad. 

However I recognised the tooth as being rather different to all the other teeth I had seen from my travels from the two medicine formation.

 

Assessment so far...

It clearly (now that I know) not a chirostenotes tooth nor an oviraptor tooth. (would have been pretty rare if so right! haha)

to me it does not look tyrannosaurid.

to me it is HUGE (measuring 2 cm long) for the usual raptorial teeth you see from this location.

but clearly it is a theropod tooth.

For me there is nothing to let me not think that it is from the two medicine formation. the collection came from a very reputable source and I was told that many of the teeth were found by the original owner.

 

Conclusion...

SO WHAT IS IT?

 

Thank you for your time in looking at this post and for maturely assessing this tooth for me. Dealers can only improve their services if their knowledge base expands and their knowledge base improves to do this they need guidance from time to time. 

best wishes and look forward to your debate. 

fossils-uk 

 

[fossils-uk]

oh I forgot to add.

One kind gentleman has suggested that it could be a Saurornitholestes tooth... although a very big one. Could this be possible? 

[Troodon]

Without having a serration density count it appears that both edges are similar hence it cannot be a Dromaeosaurid (raptor) like Saurornitholestes.  Would like a count to confirm that observations (midline -5mm wide) on both edges.  

Currently I would lean toward this being a Tyrannosaurid indet. tooth either Daspletosaurus or Gorgosaurus. 

[Fossildude19]

It is refreshing to see this from the seller's point of view. 

 

The unwarranted piggy pile derailment of the supplied ID of this tooth could have been avoided.  

Had someone just contacted the seller, and asked him to post it here for identification, this would have (as eloquently stated by UK-Fossils) been a learning experience for him.

I for one am glad he gave us a second chance to have a stab at the ID of this tooth. 

 

Sellers cannot always know everything about items they purchase. They can only know as much as the information that comes with something.

Many of these sellers are honestly just trying to run a business. It is good to see one here trying to identify the item. 

 

[fossils-uk]

@Troodon thank you.

I have a count of 28 on both edges.

It Just looked so recurved, small in size, lingually-labially compressed and anterior-posterially broad at the base to be a tyrannosaur? so you really do learn something new every day. 

if you believe it to be tyrannosaur would this condition occur if it were a juvenile or do adults have this , (what appear to me) strange shaped tooth. I used to the more definitively shaped tyrannosaur teeth. 

thanks in advance. 

[fossils-uk]

@Fossildude19  to be honest most dealers don't know they are being talked about on here. I only knew when a customer notified me.

[Fossildude19]

8 minutes ago, fossils-uk said:

@Fossildude19  to be honest most dealers don't know they are being talked about on here. I only knew when a customer notified me.

Generally, we don't talk about the dealers, but about the fossils they are selling.  

We try to keep the focus on the fossils. Once in a while, we may miss something, but we try to make sure there isn't any dealer bashing here. 

I apologize for the oversight in this instance.  

[TyBoy]

33 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

Sellers cannot always know everything about items they purchase. They can only know as much as the information that comes with something.

Many of these sellers are honestly just trying to run a business. It is good to see one here trying to identify the item. 

While I agree most sellers are honest they have a definite responsibility to verify what they are selling.  Diggers are the worst people to provide IDs.  Buyers are spending good money and rely on sellers to be accurate.  A basic understanding is all that is needed like how to identify a Dromaeosaurids raptor tooth or what dinosaurs dont have teeth.   They should also know who to go to to verify IDs if they do not have the expertise.   

[JoeS]

Hi, beautiful tooth! With this serration count and level of compression, could it be a Richardoestesia gilmorei? Similar sized or similar shaped teeth have been described from Judith River FM.

[Fossildude19]

2 minutes ago, TyBoy said:

While I agree most sellers are honest they have a definite responsibility to verify what they are selling.  Diggers are the worst people to provide IDs.  Buyers are spending good money and rely on sellers to be accurate.  A basic understanding is all that is needed like how to identify a Dromaeosaurids raptor tooth or what dinosaurs dont have teeth.   They should also know who to go to to verify IDs if they do not have the expertise.   

 

While this is true, it does not excuse the snark that was being heaped on the seller in this instance.   

Here, we should be concentrating on the fossils, rather than the lack of fossil knowledge of the seller.  

[fossils-uk]

1 minute ago, Fossildude19 said:

Generally, we don't talk about the dealers, but about the fossils they are selling.  

We try to keep the focus on the fossils. Once in a while, we may miss something, but we try to make sure there isn't any dealer bashing here. 

I apologize for the oversight in this instance.  

by the very fact your talking about the fossil they are selling you are indirectly talking about the dealers and their reputations or am I missing something. :-)

dealer bashing occurs when one person dislikes what they see about the fossil being sold. or usually where they are a disgruntled customer (which if your doing it right in the first place should never happen)

a more sensible approach would be to let the dealers know that their item is being discussed in an effort to have a more balanced debate. 

 

 

[fossils-uk]

@JoeS thank you. does that species occur in the two medicine? also as discussed this tooth is more anterior posterior broad I always thought Richardoestesia to be thin and narrow? 

interesting though. thank you.

[JoeS]

Two Medicine and Judith River are equivalent formations, so yes. Currie in 'Dinosaur Systematics' describes dentary teeth that are very wide anterior to posterior. Let's see what the more experienced people on the forum have to say - it was just an ID suggestion to spur the scientific debate.

[Fossildude19]

22 minutes ago, fossils-uk said:

by the very fact your talking about the fossil they are selling you are indirectly talking about the dealers and their reputations or am I missing something. :-)

dealer bashing occurs when one person dislikes what they see about the fossil being sold. or usually where they are a disgruntled customer (which if your doing it right in the first place should never happen) a more sensible approach would be to let the dealers know that their item is being discussed in an effort to have a more balanced debate. 

At the same time, there is no denying that there are fossils sold as real, not restored, not enhanced, or re-touched, or mis-identified,  that actually are re-touched, enhanced, restored, mis-identified, or downright fakes.    I have yet to see the ammonite /trilobite association pieces sold as enhanced or as artistic placements of fossils. Or the tons of  "Mosasaur jaws" that are real tooth crowns with plaster roots and "bones" described as art or restored.  Fish fossils and Keichousaurs are not generally marked as having been enhanced with paint or ink. 

 

As far as the more sensible approach, I myself have tried in the past to correct seller's identifications in a calm, helpful and rational matter, only to be told off in no uncertain terms where I can put my helpful identification. 

 

We see it as our job here to educate people about the fossils they buy, so that they are not deceived, (innocently or intentionally), into buying something that isn't what it is advertised as being. 

We only allow photos, no ad-copy, and no distinguishing water marks.  Like I said, we try to make it about the fossils, not the dealers. 

 

In fact, we don't allow recommendations of dealers, one way or the other, on the open Forums.   

 

The consumer has a right to know what they are buying, be it cheaply made, carved, enhanced, or restored fossil like artwork, or actual fossils.   

 

 

 

[fossils-uk]

5 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

At the same time, there is no denying that there are fossils sold as real, not restored, not enhanced, or re-touched, or mis-identified,  that actually are re-touched, enhanced, restored, mis-identified, or downright fakes.    I have yet to see the ammonite /trilobite association pieces sold as enhanced or as artistic placements of fossils. Or the tons of  "Mosasaur jaws" that are real tooth crowns with plaster roots and "bones" described as art or restored.  Fish fossils and Keichousaurs are not generally marked as having been enhanced with paint or ink. 

 

As far as the more sensible approach, I myself have tried in the past to correct seller's identifications in a calm, helpful and rational matter, only to be told off in no uncertain terms where I can put my helpful identification. 

 

We see it as our job here to educate people about the fossils they buy, so that they are not deceived, (innocently or intentionally), into buying something that isn't what it is advertised as being. 

We only allow photos, no ad-copy, and no distinguishing water marks.  Like I said, we try to make it about the fossils, not the dealers. 

 

In fact, we don't allow recommendations of dealers, one way or the other, on the open Forums.   

 

The consumer has a right to know what they are buying, be it cheaply made, carved, enhanced, or restored fossil like artwork, or actual fossils.   

 

 

 

fair valid points indeed. 

[fossils-uk]

11 minutes ago, JoeS said:

Two Medicine and Judith River are equivalent formations, so yes. Currie in 'Dinosaur Systematics' describes dentary teeth that are very wide anterior to posterior. Let's see what the more experienced people on the forum have to say - it was just an ID suggestion to spur the scientific debate.

 

very interesting. thank you

[Troodon]

There are two species of Richardoestesia:  R.gilmorei and R. isosceles both have very different morpholgies one being recurved and the other shaped like a triangle.  You can see them in hell creek post and what distinguishs them from other theropod teeth is that they have the tiniest serrations of all theropods in these faunas.  

http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/61069-identifying-theropod-teeth-from-the-hell-creeklance-fm/

 

Im comfortable with saying this is a Tyrannosaurid indet.  most likely a juvie but size does not always determine age since you have unerupted teeth and replacement teeth.

 

I would be glad to assist with any ID just post it here or drop me a PM.

 

Not sure if you've see this post but the topics may be helpful to you.  I would pay specific attention to the one on theropod teeth from Morocco 

 

[fossils-uk]

thank you @Troodon

[fossilsonwheels]

I agree with @Troodon on the ID. I also give you a lot of credit for the post and how you handled this.

[Auspex]

2 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

Sellers cannot always know everything about items they purchase.

And TFF is here to assist them, too!

[fossils-uk]

thank you everyone

[jpc]

and to add my two cents... I imagine this is from Teton County, MONTANA, not Wyoming.  Our Teton County has only a wee bit of Cretaceous rocks, and these in places that are illegal to collect (National Forests).  Montana's Teton County is home to a ton of Two Medicine Formation, much of it on private land.  

[Dracorex_hogwartsia]

9 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

It is refreshing to see this from the seller's point of view. 

 

The unwarranted piggy pile derailment of the supplied ID of this tooth could have been avoided.  

Had someone just contacted the seller, and asked him to post it here for identification, this would have (as eloquently stated by UK-Fossils) been a learning experience for him.

I for one am glad he gave us a second chance to have a stab at the ID of this tooth. 

 

Sellers cannot always know everything about items they purchase. They can only know as much as the information that comes with something.

Many of these sellers are honestly just trying to run a business. It is good to see one here trying to identify the item. 

 

In my defense, I had no idea who this seller was nor do I now. His name or website was never mentioned as far as I know. How then am I supposed to contact him?

[Haravex]

I'm not an expert on north American fossils, however I would go with troodon's opinion as for american material he has the best and most experience in this market as well as personally digging in many of these sites.

[JohnJ]

24 minutes ago, Dracorex_hogwartsia said:

In my defense, I had no idea who this seller was nor do I now. His name or website was never mentioned as far as I know. How then am I supposed to contact him?

PM the OP and ask for a link.

 

To the broader audience when posting, no one should ever negatively characterize a seller or any other individual (named or unnamed) per TFF guidelines.