Jump to content

Found with Gryphaea ID Help


pendrak

Recommended Posts

Hi- I found this today at Lake Benbrook, Tarrant County Texas. I was looking for newly exposed large ammonoids. I believe that it is possibly from the Woodbine formation because I also found some nice Gryphaea- looks like maybe Parasmilia but it also looks like has a shell- 3.5 inches x 1 inch.  Your expert help appreciated- Thanks-

 

20190731_152214.jpg

20190731_152148.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your bivalve on the right is a Texigryphea. 

The cone shaped fossil probably is a rudist bivalve, a rare find for the area.

 

Maybe a local can ID the rudist.

@erose @JohnJ @Uncle Siphuncle @FranzBernhard

 

The Goodland Formation at Benbrook has Texigryphea and ammonites. 

  • I found this Informative 2

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to say if it's a solitary scleractinian coral or a rudist. :headscratch:

" We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. "

Thomas Mann

My Library

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's a solitary coral.  Erich @erose would know better which one.

 

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are a couple of rudists that look like horn corals that died out in the paleozoic. They both have the distinctive "Coolie Hat" shaped top shell. Note that the Benbrook fossil, also has a slanted "Coolie Hat" top.

 

First photo is from: http://www.sedgwickmuseum.org/index.php?page=coastal-plains

 

The second one is from the Smithsonian Museum.

 

 

rudist2 b.jpg

download.jpg

  • I found this Informative 3

My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned.   

See my Arizona Paleontology Guide    link  The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JohnJ said:

I think that's a solitary coral.  Erich @erose would know better which one.

 

Think DPS Ammo is on to this with rudist. There are some solitary corals in the Cretaceous, but never seen anything that big. Certainly not Parasmilia. 

 

Being a rudist there should have been many of them. If you can find others that are broken and show a cross section that could help. Coral would show septa filling the cup and a rudist would have a central hollow chamber surrounded by smaller vessicles.

 

PS If it is a rudist it is a very nice specimen.

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

Can you take a picture straight from the top?
As it was said, a cross section (1-1.5 cm below the supposed comissure) would be on help. :)

" We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. "

Thomas Mann

My Library

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are two more pictures. It was on top of the ground and not in the limestone so it washed down from a higher elevation.

20190801_182500.jpg

20190801_182535.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that if rudist, you’d likely find more.  Keep in mind that at super well known sites like Benbrook, collectors often dump or inadvertently drop finds from other sites, and Penn sites an hour +/- west give up lots of horn corals. Site “cross pollination” is most likely at high use sites.

  • I found this Informative 3

Grüße,

Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas

"To the motivated go the spoils."

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...