Jump to content

b. bartron

Recommended Posts

I found a rare tooth from my local miocene exposure in calvert county md. Found along the choptank formation. Believed to be carnivorous dog. But not positive. Any help with a confirmed id would be appreciated 

20190606_201947.jpg

received_612046629263588.jpeg

received_617215735411993.jpeg

received_323703428525401.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Harry Pristis said:

The tooth appears to be a canid M2, but I am not aware of a land mammal element in the Miocene Choptank Fm.  

I think they are known to be found, but less common.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

The tooth appears to be a canid M2, but I am not aware of a land mammal element in the Miocene Choptank Fm.  

Any idea of how i can find out the species? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, b. bartron said:

Any idea of how i can find out the species? 

Calvert Marine Museum might be able to help.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately its rare enough that Mr. Godfrey wasn't familiar with the species either. Canid m2 left side is as far as it goes so far. It spent a lengthy time at the Smithsonian in d.c also.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, b. bartron said:

Unfortunately its rare enough that Mr. Godfrey wasn't familiar with the species either. Canid m2 left side is as far as it goes so far. It spent a lengthy time at the Smithsonian in d.c also.....

So new species? Or just too difficult to ID with certainty?

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guest sent this in:

@b. bartron

"I think the tooth is probably a mustelid. I would like to examine it if possible. Suggest you contact John Nance at Calvert Marine Museum"

  • I found this Informative 1

    Tim    -  VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER

   MOTM.png.61350469b02f439fd4d5d77c2c69da85.png      PaleoPartner.png.30c01982e09b0cc0b7d9d6a7a21f56c6.png.a600039856933851eeea617ca3f2d15f.png     Postmaster1.jpg.900efa599049929531fa81981f028e24.jpg    VFOTM.png.f1b09c78bf88298b009b0da14ef44cf0.png  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

Mustelid?  Maybe so.  The tooth would have to be an M1, rather than an M2.  Here's a line-drawing with a comparison of canid M2 to mustelid M1:   http://what-when-how.com/marine-mammals/mustelidae-marine-mammals/

  • I found this Informative 3

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carl said:

Way out of my area of expertise, I'm afraid.

Strange, I don't recall tagging you. :headscratch:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2019 at 9:17 AM, Fossildude19 said:

A guest sent this in:

@b. bartron

"I think the tooth is probably a mustelid. I would like to examine it if possible. Suggest you contact John Nance at Calvert Marine Museum"

Mr Nance and Mr. Godfrey have examined it. But it's nothing common from our exposure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2019 at 9:17 AM, Fossildude19 said:

A guest sent this in:

@b. bartron

"I think the tooth is probably a mustelid. I would like to examine it if possible. Suggest you contact John Nance at Calvert Marine Museum"

 

On 6/10/2019 at 8:17 AM, Scylla said:

So new species? Or just too difficult to ID with certainty?

Its possible that its new. Or its likely that its just very uncommon to find in our locality and may just be an update to the range. Im an amateur so im pretty much clueless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, b. bartron said:

Im an amateur so im pretty much clueless.

And here is your opportunity to work with some of the professionals and not only absorb some knowledge from them but represent all us avocational fossil hunters by strengthening the cooperation with those that have made a career in paleontology. I've always enjoyed my encounters with the geologists, coral reef scientists, marine taxonomists, and paleontologists I've had the privilege to work with on projects. It's very exciting to find a rarity that stumps the experts. Keep us informed and let us know how this plays out.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is Cynarctus wangi present as well as C. marylandica.

  • I found this Informative 1

“...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin

Happy hunting,

Mason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

mustelid_canid_uppers.thumb.JPG.984b5ab6c4095f222b1ef87e62b35b85.JPG

 

The tooth better resembles the canid example, doesn't it.

the only thing ive found similar is bear dog. The difference is they are larger and the root structure  is straighter where as mine is half the size and one root has a hook shape to it. The nature of the bite seems the same . Having a grinding edge and a cutting edge. im considering different options on what to do with the tooth at the moment.  A positive id would be great. But do i really just want to donate it for the purposes of study? Ive donated a fair amount of stuff. And I'll admit i kinda regreat the rare thing i have already let go of. So. Im stuck with wanting to and not wanting to equally.  

Its not the collectors fault than science demands ownership for scientific purpose.  And if it turns out that the 3d imaging will solve the issue and backup collection finds for study than id be totally down to lend it for that process. I hope the project works out and we have a way around the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, WhodamanHD said:

There is Cynarctus wangi present as well as C. marylandica.

can you locate occlusal veiw of C wangi! Youve peaked my interest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, b. bartron said:

can you locate occlusal veiw of C wangi!

Indeed I can, see below. (From here)

 

52 minutes ago, Harry Pristis said:

don't think this tooth is from an amphicyonid.

 

I was suggesting it as it is the first thing that pops into my head when someone says “canid” at Calvert. 

EDEDB584-13A9-4C5B-8A3C-FB493902DFC0.jpeg

  • I found this Informative 1

“...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin

Happy hunting,

Mason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, b. bartron said:

the only thing ive found similar is bear dog. The difference is they are larger and the root structure  is straighter where as mine is half the size and one root has a hook shape to it. The nature of the bite seems the same . Having a grinding edge and a cutting edge. im considering different options on what to do with the tooth at the moment.  A positive id would be great. But do i really just want to donate it for the purposes of study? Ive donated a fair amount of stuff. And I'll admit i kinda regreat the rare thing i have already let go of. So. Im stuck with wanting to and not wanting to equally.  

Its not the collectors fault than science demands ownership for scientific purpose.  And if it turns out that the 3d imaging will solve the issue and backup collection finds for study than id be totally down to lend it for that process. I hope the project works out and we have a way around the issue.

 

 

I understand your dilemma.  You're not against donating something weird because you've done it before.  You'd like to keep it but you don't know what it is so maybe you should donate it for that reason.  It's not really a good display piece but you haven't found anything like it before and are unlikely to again.  I get it.

 

It's not the scientists' fault that science demands ownership either.  There are numerous instances from the old days when scientists officially described type specimens and then let the amateur keep it, but when a scientist tried to find the owner later so he could examine it as part of another study, the owner had died or moved or the specimen was sold or lost in a move.  And 3D imaging won't solve everything either.  You can't do an isotope analysis on the "enamel" of a replica.  You can't do a chemical analysis (or any other test) of any of the adhering matrix either.  You just have the size and shape of it.

 

To me if you don't know what it is and are unlikely to study the range of mustelids and/or dogs known from the time frame (approx. 11-14 million years ago), you should donate it and leave it to the mammal people.  It's probably something new or at least significantly extends the range of something known in time and or paleogeography.  Land mammals are poorly known from the Miocene of the east coast north of Florida and mustelids (if that's what it is) are poorly known from the Miocene of that coast period.

 

If you're going to keep it, make a good label for it (clearly print exactly where you found it and why you say it's from the Choptank) and put it in your will where that tooth should go.  Something like that doesn't have much of a monetary value, though it is weird if it is a dog or mustelid, so it has real scientific value.  If you don't have a will and don't get around to writing one, the tooth will almost certainly be lost forever.

  • I found this Informative 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...