Unknown Nautiloid/Ammonite, Cretaceous, Bear Paw Montana

[Bone Daddy]

I have this nautiloid/ammonite that I *think* comes from the "Bear Paw" locality of Montana (Cretaceous) - or at least that is the info I have for it. Can anyone tell me if this is correct, and what species/type of fossil ammonite this is?

 

Thanks! 

 

 

[Fossildude19]

@RJB   @jpc  @PFOOLEY

[FossilDAWG]

We need a photo of the outside edge of the whorl.  All your photos are side views, please post one that shows the ventral surface (turned 90 degrees from the side view), and also one that shows the opening to the living chamber (sort of the "mouth).  The ornament along the ventral surface, and the cross-sectional shape of the whorl, are essential to ID these shells.

 

It might be some sort of an acanthocerid, though I think these were extinct by Bearpaw time.  I have a nagging feeling it might be a small Douvielliceras from Madagascar.

 

Don

[caldigger]

3 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

I have a nagging feeling it might be a small Douvielliceras from Madagascar.

I share your thoughts on this piece. 

[Bone Daddy]

This could be mixed in and from the a different locality. I would not rule that out. It was mixed in with some material that looks like the photos here. But this piece looks semi-prepared and does not have any matrix attached like the rough material it was mixed with. It does look different now that you folks mention it. There was a lot of stuff I acquired and some was not labeled and some stuff was mixed together, so I had to sort through the best I could.

 

 

 

[FossilDAWG]

The new photos look like typical Bearpaw/Fox Hills/Pierre Shale scaphitids.  The cone-in-cone calcite is also something that occurs in concretions from that area.

 

Don

[RJB]

  Your 1st photo's does not appear to be from Bear Paw.  I wish I could be of more help but going to agree with  FossilDawg on this one. 

 

RB

[jpc]

I agree with RJB et al, the first fossil does NOT look Bearpawish.