Unknown Green River fish

[Fossil legend]

When I was preparing this fossil I didn’t 100% know what it was but now am even more confused. The vertebrae’s do not match up with the fossil and the body seems pretty weird to. So if anyone could help me with this fish that would be awesome. And no it’s not a fake a prepared it myself.

[Ludwigia]

I think you'll have to give us much sharper photos. All I can tell with these ones is that it's a fish

[Fossil legend]

1 minute ago, Ludwigia said:

I think you'll have to give us much sharper photos. All I can tell with these ones is that it's a fish

 I’ll get some better pictures 

[Fossil legend]

Here are some better pictures 

[Fossil legend]

[Fossil legend]

[Rockwood]

There is something very odd about this. 

[Fossil legend]

1 hour ago, Rockwood said:

There is something very odd about this. 

I agree. Stuff just isn’t matching up 

[Randyw]

Decaying before fossilized would be my guess. I think it’s what Ptychodus calls a blown up fish. But the experts will probably chime in soon with the best info.

@Ptychodus04 @RJB

[Fossildude19]

This looks like a slightly disarticulated Knightia alta, to me.

 

The slight disarticulation and the need for a bit more prep makes this fish look a bit funky. 

Neat specimen, though.

 

 

 

[Rockwood]

It just doesn't look blown up, or out to me. It's tail looks more imploded even. Could it have been regurgitated ?

[Fossildude19]

It really isn't blown up or out. Just very slightly disarticulated. 

Could it have been swallowed then regurgitated? Possibly. But I think it is just an artifact of the way it was preserved. 

Some of the bones started to loosen, and maybe moved a bit, then it was covered by sediments. 

[Ptychodus04]

I agree with the Knightia ID. It’s hard to tell from the pics but it is VERY easy to prep through the more delicate parts of the fish. I also agree that there are areas of matrix that need to be prepped further. Also, it is not uncommon to find fish preserved oddly. There are billions of these guys in the GRF so some are going to be misshapen simply by compression.

 

All these factors can contribute to a generally weird fish.

[Auspex]

The bones and connective tissues of small fry are less robust that in older individuals. They are also more easily disturbed by currents. But, in calm sedimentation situations, they can become buried quicker.

Lots of factors affect the state of preservation, and the clues can make a fascinating study of their own. The fancy name for this discipline is "Taphonomy".

[caldigger]

To be politically correct, they prefer to be called "Anatomically Challenged". 

[Ptychodus04]

1 hour ago, caldigger said:

To be politically correct, they prefer to be called "Anatomically Challenged". 

Me too.

[Rockwood]

3 hours ago, Auspex said:

Taphonomy

I can see parallels to a shipwreck here. The fantail telescoped into the cargo hold when it nosed in . 

[Fossil legend]

8 hours ago, Ptychodus04 said:

I agree with the Knightia ID. It’s hard to tell from the pics but it is VERY easy to prep through the more delicate parts of the fish. I also agree that there are areas of matrix that need to be prepped further. Also, it is not uncommon to find fish preserved oddly. There are billions of these guys in the GRF so some are going to be misshapen simply by compression.

 

All these factors can contribute to a generally weird fish.

I agree with all of that. The only thing is I prepped it as much as I could. Those places that look like they need more preparation. There is Just nothing there. At first I thought they were maybe bite marks or the fish just decaying but I just didn’t know. Thanks for all the help guys 

[Ptychodus04]

2 minutes ago, Fossil legend said:

I agree with all of that. The only thing is I prepped it as much as I could. Those places that look like they need more preparation. There is Just nothing there. At first I thought they were maybe bite marks or the fish just decaying but I just didn’t know. Thanks for all the help guys 

I'm following you. These little fish are actually a real nightmare to prep. The bones are super delicate and the fish is squished paper thin and often will disintegrate if looked at wrong! Even in the harder layers of the GRF, they can be troublesome.

[Mark Kmiecik]

There's more than one fish here. Who's tail is this:

 

 

[Randyw]

11 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

It really isn't blown up or out. Just very slightly disarticulated.

Yes. I didn’t mean blown up in the literal sense just that the bones were not in the normal positions. I should have used the correct term disarticulated.

[Fossildude19]

Just now, Randyw said:

Yes. I didn’t mean blown up in the literal sense just that the bones were not in the normal positions. I should have used the correct term disarticulated.

I often use the term blown up, to describe disarticulation where the scales or bones are really moved around.  

No worries.

[Fossildude19]

27 minutes ago, Mark Kmiecik said:

There's more than one fish here. Who's tail is this:

Missing piece from the tail?

[Mark Kmiecik]

13 minutes ago, Fossildude19 said:

Missing piece from the tail?

Yes, it is. But who's tail. We weren't there when it happened. 

 

Aah, looked at it again. Still attached to the spine and moved with it? Probably rear-ended by a bus or a train. Ouch!

[Fossildude19]

1 hour ago, Mark Kmiecik said:

Yes, it is. But who's tail. We weren't there when it happened. 

 

Aah, looked at it again. Still attached to the spine and moved with it? Probably rear-ended by a bus or a train. Ouch!

Actually, I think it is from just the one fish, and hasn't moved. 

I think the distal part of the caudal fin has detached, just slightly. 

 

See the comparison below...