JBMugu Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 Hello everyone, I was hoping someone could help me with the identification with this bone that I found at the Royal Peacock Opal Mine in the Virgin Valley, Humboldt County, Northeastern Nevada, USA. Geologic age is the Miocene. Bones are very rarely found in this area. It is mostly opal, petrified wood, and fossilized wood. I am guessing this came from a land mammal. Possibly a camel. Does anyone have a better idea what it could be? I donated this bone to the mine owner due to its rarity. I thought it should stay where it was found. PS: In the next few days I will post a couple of other rare fossils found at the mine by the owner's son (Jake Anderson). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 7 hours ago, JBMugu said: Hello everyone, I was hoping someone could help me with the identification with this bone that I found at the Royal Peacock Opal Mine in the Virgin Valley, Humboldt County, Northeastern Nevada, USA. Geologic age is the Miocene. Bones are very rarely found in this area. It is mostly opal, petrified wood, and fossilized wood. I am guessing this came from a land mammal. Possibly a camel. Does anyone have a better idea what it could be? I donated this bone to the mine owner due to its rarity. I thought it should stay where it was found. PS: In the next few days I will post a couple of other rare fossils found at the mine by the owner's son (Jake Anderson). Hi Jesse, That looks like the proximal end of an ulna. It might be tough to get an ID to genus or family with just a partial like that. I saw a jaw of a Merychippus-like horse from there before. Jess 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordTrilobite Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 I agree, ulna. Olof Moleman AKA Lord Trilobite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBMugu Posted May 16, 2019 Author Share Posted May 16, 2019 I agree with the proximal end of an ulna. I was thinking about something like a small three toed horse? @Harry Pristis is usualy spot on with bone ID's. Any idea Harry? Jesse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBMugu Posted May 16, 2019 Author Share Posted May 16, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osteobyte Posted May 19, 2019 Share Posted May 19, 2019 This is very flat. What about pelvis? The acetabulum missing the pubis extension? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minnbuckeye Posted May 19, 2019 Share Posted May 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Osteobyte said: This is very flat. What about pelvis? The acetabulum missing the pubis extension? I had the same feeling! Glad you brought it up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBMugu Posted May 24, 2019 Author Share Posted May 24, 2019 On 5/19/2019 at 2:50 PM, Osteobyte said: This is very flat. What about pelvis? The acetabulum missing the pubis extension? Hi Osteobyte, I looked at some photos of horse acetabulum and I think you are right! I always thought it was a little thin to be a leg bone. Thanks for the ID! -Jesse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osteobyte Posted May 27, 2019 Share Posted May 27, 2019 Hi Jesse, Is it possible this is an innominate from a deer or deer-sized animal? It seems on the small side to belong to a horse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peto Lithos Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 They had small horses back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 5 hours ago, Osteobyte said: Hi Jesse, Is it possible this is an innominate from a deer or deer-sized animal? It seems on the small side to belong to a horse. I think the age of the layer there is Middle Miocene, Barstovian age, so it's too old to be a deer (earliest deer are known from the Hemphillian of Florida, I think) but it could be a horse or camel both of which were more diverse at the time. Harry or Larry might be able to ID it. @fossillarry 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osteobyte Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 16 hours ago, Peto Lithos said: They had small horses back then. Right, of course, thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossillarry Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 It's a portion of the innonmnate missing the pubic bone portion. It could be from a horse but I would have to see it in person to be sure. If it is a horse it's from a" merychipine" ,the only other genus from there in Hypohippus. Hay Jess 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted June 29, 2019 Share Posted June 29, 2019 2 hours ago, fossillarry said: It's a portion of the innonmnate missing the pubic bone portion. It could be from a horse but I would have to see it in person to be sure. If it is a horse it's from a" merychipine" ,the only other genus from there in Hypohippus. Hay Jess Hey Larry, I'm glad you checked in. Osteobyte is sharp about bones too. Jess 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