Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Mockrabbit

Hello,

 

I found what I believe are marine fossils, but I have not been able to identify them thus far. I'm hoping I might find some help here. The photo lighting isnt the best, but I hope there is enough info here to help.

 

These were all picked up in October 2018, on Vancouver Island in BC, Canada. The area is the Comox valley, and found in shale. The fossils found in this region are marine species from the Cretaceous period.

 

Fossil 1:

 

This was picked up along the Trent River, above the Trent Falls (about 150 yards following the river back up stream from the falls). The area is south of the town of Courtenay.

It was found with the 'point' down in some harder rock that accompanies the shale formation there. It was loose enough that I was able to pick this out after tapping along the edges with a chisel.

 

The fossil is not wet in photos. The 'point' is smooth, for the most part, and shiny.

 

Bottom view - What I seen when I found it:

 

20190624_210450_resized.thumb.jpg.8ab29f9d09da51ba979d6f9ff7201f1a.jpg

 

Close up of bottom:

20190624_211255_resized.thumb.jpg.3555eb4bb86b660a94a370ea84e524c1.jpg

 

 

Top view of 'point' - This was the part embedded in the stone, point down:

 

 

20190624_210902_resized.thumb.jpg.e6684d0561f9e371f9f37f1a8ff7d5bd.jpg

 

Side view:

 

20190624_210932_resized.jpg.60e97e0352b9b7c84fdf66f2111c331b.jpg

 

Another side view:

 

20190624_211152_resized.jpg.ae56f15d18f0426e0347e4d77e713b19.jpg

 

 

A couple of close ups of the point:

 

20190624_211241_resized.jpg.8479b6cce0a9d008ede183acd63436fc.jpg

 

20190624_211228_resized.jpg.6a1dcd4a8cd61758e63b85eefb8d789b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
caldigger

This looks to be a large solitary rugose coral ( also called "horn coral" ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockrabbit

Fossil(s) 2:

 

These following fossils were picked up in the shale at the Brown's River, just east (down stream) from the Brown's falls about 30 yards from the falls following the river bank on the north side. This is also west of the town of Courtenay.

 

I found what I initially though were ribs in the shale, but after looking around the the river bed shale I found that this wasn't the case. The reason for this is because of the shear number of these in the area, the large area they cover, and the lack of any other type of fossil that could resembled bone from a vertebrate animal. They were very dense in the area, and seemed to spread almost light roots. 

 

The shapes of these also varied. Some had slight bends/curves, other were formed into 'U' shapes. I have attached a photo of the samples I collected, and a couple of photos of some of the species in situ. Plant life possibly?:

 

 20190624_211409_resized.thumb.jpg.4f6722dd5efd3aa6fab50bbdeff6371f.jpg

20190624_211430_resized.jpg.e542119506b9da3855f2ff5c927cf5ee.jpg

20190516_150822_resized_1.jpg.10ed43b42f93aeb3a30c43f5a2356d01.jpg

 

20190516_150818_resized_1.jpg.7baf612bf11c54b91ea6c28141f6ae40.jpg

 

I do need to note that I found a smaller collection of these near the Stanton Falls just outside of Courtenay. Also, the grouping was very small, tan in colour, and intermingled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockrabbit
58 minutes ago, caldigger said:

This looks to be a large solitary rugose coral ( also called "horn coral" ).

Well, that helps me out tremendously, thanks :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
caldigger

I would say your second entry looks like infilled burrows of something. But of what, I can not say. :shrug:

Definately not vertebrate bones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FossilNerd
3 hours ago, TqB said:

I think the first one is a nodule showing a slickenside surface due to sediment slip over it. (Not a coral -  there aren't any rugose corals in the Cretaceous although there there scleractinians but it doesn't look like one.)

 

I agree the others are trace fossils - burrows of some sort.

Agreed that number 1 is not a Rugose (horn) coral as they were extinct long before the Cretaceous. I also don’t see any anatomical structures on the flattened side (septa, tablua, growth lines, etc.). With it being as smooth as it is, I would expect to see some structure as it appears to be flattened down halfway through the specimen. As for what it is... :shrug:

 

7 hours ago, Mockrabbit said:

Fossil(s) 2:

 

...

 

I do need to note that I found a smaller collection of these near the Stanton Falls just outside of Courtenay. Also, the grouping was very small, tan in colour, and intermingled.

Number 2 does appear to be burrows like the others have stated, but I don’t know much about them to say for sure. I have seen burrow clusters like the small, intermingled grouping you mentioned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plax

Am defiinitely not saying #1 is a rudist but would welcome someone familiar with them to take a look. TqB may know better than I but the slickensides I've seen are between bedding planes. It's shiny and I'm not sure what all causes shininess but it's common in some formations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockrabbit

Well, this has been interesting for me. Filled burrows, for #2, does make sense based on what I had seen in the shale, never crossed my mind as a possibility.

 

I'll keep reading up to see what the consensus on #1 may be.

 

I'd like to thank everyone for their input thus far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FossilDAWG

The localities you describe are all in the Haslam Formation (previously called the Trent River Formation), which is of Upper Cretaceous (Santonian) age.  I recall seeing concretions with that appearance, which is sometimes called "squish-out".  It happens when a consolidated concretion (perhaps just at the stage where is it firm but somewhat plastic, like modeling clay) is embedded in a less consolidated sediment that moves.  For example, a local slumping or submarine landslide may cause the less consolidated sediment to flow around the concretion, producing the "slickenside" surface.  It's hard to be certain, but it is possible that the concretion formed around a large snail.

 

@fossisle is a very knowledgeable local collector who can probably tell you more about your specimens and what can be collected in the area.  I have several ammonites and crustaceans I collected from that area back in the 1980s, but when I spent a day on the Trent with fossisle last November we left empty handed.  I suspect collecting pressure on the area is much more intense than it was 30+ years ago.

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockrabbit
2 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

The localities you describe are all in the Haslam Formation (previously called the Trent River Formation), which is of Upper Cretaceous (Santonian) age.  I recall seeing concretions with that appearance, which is sometimes called "squish-out".  It happens when a consolidated concretion (perhaps just at the stage where is it firm but somewhat plastic, like modeling clay) is embedded in a less consolidated sediment that moves.  For example, a local slumping or submarine landslide may cause the less consolidated sediment to flow around the concretion, producing the "slickenside" surface.  It's hard to be certain, but it is possible that the concretion formed around a large snail.

 

@fossisle is a very knowledgeable local collector who can probably tell you more about your specimens and what can be collected in the area.  I have several ammonites and crustaceans I collected from that area back in the 1980s, but when I spent a day on the Trent with fossisle last November we left empty handed.  I suspect collecting pressure on the area is much more intense than it was 30+ years ago.

 

Don

Thanks for the info, I'm learning something new.

 

As for collecting in the area, you would be correct, from what I've read. Collecting in the area means far less specimens present. I collected these, quite a few different bivalve specimens, a very tiny snail shell,  some ammonite pieces and casts, but no complete/semi-complete ammonites from the area last October.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fossisle

FossilDawg is correct the first is sediment which has been squeezed under pressure which gives it the unique shape. The second are trace fossils, zoophycos

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
caldigger
16 minutes ago, fossisle said:

FossilDawg is correct the first is sediment which has been squeezed under pressure which gives it the unique shape. The second are trace fossils, zoocophys

Rick

OK, OK...it was from out of my realm. 

You win! It's some squishy geological thingy. :shrug:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Randyw
19 minutes ago, caldigger said:

OK, OK...it was from out of my realm. 

You win! It's some squishy geological thingy. :shrug:

 

Squishy geological thingy is my new favorite saying  for these things! :heartylaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
abyssunder

I think , there are no proper patterns to say something about Zoophycos igen, but I'm inclined to think there are ichnofossils, as it was said. I'm referring to " Fossil(s) 2 " . :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
22 hours ago, Plax said:

Am defiinitely not saying #1 is a rudist but would welcome someone familiar with them to take a look. TqB may know better than I but the slickensides I've seen are between bedding planes. It's shiny and I'm not sure what all causes shininess but it's common in some formations.

This occurs quite commonly around nodules (and some fossils that aren't in nodules) in some beds, and is formed by slippage around the harder object at some stage. So it's a 3-D slickenside of sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockrabbit

Thank you everyone for your help! no I have an idea of what is in my collection :)

Share this post


Link to post
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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×