The traces of equisetum and unknown insect from Jurassic period presumably

[Lupine]

This piece of stone was found by me in the Crimea Peninsula. It contains the traces of equisetum and insect. I’ve decided that it is dated very close to Jurassic periods, because this fossil could appear during volcanic activity in the peninsula. Maybe it had been storing in the kind of resin when it had been buried under volcanic ash of Kara-dag volcanoes.

 

What do you think about it?

 

off topic:

Sorry for my English, I try to do my best.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Lupine
Grammar mistakes

[Ludwigia]

I think that this is extremely difficult to determine from a couple of photos. In my opinion, you should show it to a paleontologist or geologist who specializes in these sediments.

[Fossildude19]

Welcome to the Forum.

I'm having a hard time making out anything resembling equisetum or insect.

How did you come about this ID, and how have you decided it is dated close to the Jurassic period?

 

Early Jurassic Equisetites sp. :

 

[FossilNerd]

I was curious about this as well. I did find a geological map from 2013 done by the SPK-Geoservice. According to this map, there is Jurassic aged rock in the mentioned area. So it is possible the rock is Jurassic.

 

However, I agree with Tim. I’m not seeing anything that looks like equisetum or an insect.  You also mentioned volcanic activity. If this is volcanic rock, it is igneous and not likely to contain fossils. 

 

[Lupine]

Dear guys and girls, I appreciate you for your answers, and I understand your doubts.

That's why I've decided to clarify my point of view.

 

[Kane]

To my eye, the potential insect lacks much by way of diagnostic detail, including expected symmetry (particularly around what you identified as the head). I would expect a bit more clear demarcations between head and thorax, if not also a less irregular shape to the head. The lack of distinctions overall lend it the appearance of being one uniform piece. 

[Fossildude19]

While I see a slight resemblance to the items you have identified and you have outlined, I think you may be mistaken. 

The cobble appears (to me)  to be chert or flint, with differential erosion features. In other words, I think the rock has eroded/been worn away by weather or water,

and the harder parts/different minerals in the piece did not wear away at the same pace as the rest of the rock.

 

Insects rarely preserve in 3 dimensions.  Plant casts or reeds such as calamites are known to preserve as casts, but they generally have fairly distinct features that are identifiable. 

 

I admit the small "twigs" are interesting looking, but I can not be sure they are fossils, or that they can be identified if they are, based on looks alone in these photos.   

 

Your best bet would be to find a local museum or university to bring this to, and have a paleobotanist or paleontologist look at this, in hand.  

Perhaps they will be able to identify something in that for you. 

Regards,  

 

[westcoast]

I agree with @Fossildude19, Differential erosion of irregular nodules appears to have resulted in a shape resembling an insect. I would have picked it up.

[Lupine]

1 hour ago, Fossildude19 said:

The cobble appears (to me)  to be chert or flint, with differential erosion features. In other words, I think the rock has eroded/been worn away by weather or water,

and the harder parts/different minerals in the piece did not wear away at the same pace as the rest of the rock.

The cobble (appears to me) is neither chert nor  flint, it's more like a kind of mudstone. I'll try to appeal to the local Paleontological Institute for help, thank you.

[GeschWhat]

While I am unfamiliar with the location. I am seeing a resemblance between your specimen and coprolite from the Rhaetic (I am on my phone, so I may have spelled this wrong) bone beds in England. Any chance it could be Triassic? 

[abyssunder]

I'm wondering also if the " There is also a trace of another kind of twigs on the UNDERSIDE of the stone " can't be a ctenostome bryozoan or similar?