MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 I was very lucky to land a gig with the fossil collections manager at GCSU for service hours in financial aid, and now I have my first chance to more seriously look into trilobite morphology, as they're the first specimens I'm working with! Will be uploading pictures every wednesday (collection work days(P.S., I know it's friday right now, sorry for being a little late)), and would appreciate experts like @piranha teaching me a thing or two about the morphology as I go to go along with what I read up on in the available literature. For those looking to ID, please know that we don't have location info and whatnot on all of the specimens. If we do have that logged, it should be on the cards. First, my little work space in the room: And now for the start of the ID parade! First up, a Dalmanitid (Dalmanities sp.?) Next up, a thorax fragment from Pennsylvania's Ordovician: Up next, an agnostid (Agnostus sp.?) Cont. 1 Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 Then we have A pygidium accompanied by what looks like an eye with some unknown inclusions on the back: Cont. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 Next, we have what I believe is a Calymenid (Flexi?), from Swatara Gap: Next, a Calymenid that I'm 99% sure is Gravicalymene sp.: This next one, I'm almost certain it is Isotelus sp.: Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 A head-scratcher that could use some prep: And lastly, another bug I was unsure about: Cont. 1 Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 Stay tuned in next week for more! Will be updating weekly (or as close to a semblance of weekly as I can get). Until next time! 2 Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 awesome,Meargl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson g Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Check out this site, its packed with useful information on trilobites. https://www.trilobites.info 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 The "head scratcher" looks like a Calymenid. The last onemay be a Illaenula (Ductina) vietnamica. The Swatara Gap full body impression looks like an Isotelus sp. I'm sure @piranha can help out more. 1 Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 __________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 It would help if you numbered the specimens when you have so many to ask about. Otherwise it's hard for people to Make it clear what specimen they are talking about. The first Trilobites is a Dalmanites limurus, probably from the Silurian Rochester Shale of New York. The third is probably Itagnostus interstrictus from the Wheeler Shale (Cambrian) of Utah. The fourth is a Dechanella or Pseudodechenella. Devonian of.New.York or Ohio. Hamilton Group or Silica Shale.probably. The Swarta Gap "calymenid" is an odontopleurid. Don 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 4 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said: It would help if you numbered the specimens when you have so many to ask about. Do you mean the numbers on the cards for the first photos of every specimen, or making a numbered list in the comments? Was a little confused at first, since the cards have specimen #s on them. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Number your photos or the requests for ID. Either that or do one ask per post, so people can respond just to that ask. You can add all your requested IDs to the thread by responding to yourself so each specimen has its own post. I spent too much time scrolling up and down and trying to count specimens. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 The specimen numbers on the cards should be adequate to reference for ID's. 1 The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 1 hour ago, JohnJ said: The specimen numbers on the cards should be adequate to reference for ID's. Yeah, that was my thought process, as the cards have all info that the department was able to put to the trilos and other specimens, including #s denoting which specimen was which. I was going on the assumption everyone would use these #s for specifying which specimen they were talking about. Would it be easier for you guys if I just numbered them in order of posting (like "1. This is blah blah, 2. This is bleeh blah, etc."), or would you be fine with me continuing the system I'm using? Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Monodechenella macrocephala Diacanthaspis sp. Diacanthaspis sp. Flexicalymene granulosa – Swatara Gap 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Finally got to getting a second round of specimens photographed for you guys. Wasn't able to last week as I had a very painful ear infection that kept me out of order last wednesday. The collection manager is thrilled that you guys have been able to help us up to this point. Let's keep that going! Just a little bit of a heads up, we're going by the designation # on each card as far as referring to any given specimen. The first picture for each specimen will always include card with ID # (also known as GCIP). Please refer to these #s when IDing, as this makes it easier for us to catalogue quickly and efficiently. First, a "Redlichiida" bug that I'm certain is really supposed to be labeled Elrathia kingii: Next, one labeled as Elrathia. That seems much closer to the mark for this one: Next, a fairly large pygidium: Cont. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Next, a headshield in a nodule. Asaphid? Next, one of the bigger bugs here. I believe it was purchased: Cont. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 I'm curious, is this teaching collection or reference collection material? Seems funny that they have so little locality documentation on these specimens. I agree with you that 154 has the "Elrathia kingi" vibe to it. The matrix, and even the fact that it looks like it was prepped with a wire brush, seem typical of a Wheeler Shale Elrathia. Don 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 69 looks like a Dipleura. These occur in nodules in Bolivia so that could be the source, though they are also known to occur in nodules at some old US localities. Don 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Next, we have a bug that I am pretty sure is a composite. Has airbubbles that really drive the composite vibe home: Air bubbles: Next, a bug that really got the short end of the stick in the looks department, most likely due to metamorphism of some kind. My first thought is Phacopid because of the eye: Cont. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, FossilDAWG said: I'm curious, is this teaching collection or reference collection material? Seems funny that they have so little locality documentation on these specimens. From what I can gather based on what Ashley has told me, it's a certain mix of purchases, outdated catalogs and a decent helping of years since they were last seriously looked at. There's a lot in the collection as a whole that's being sorted out since we're getting a new science building in 2021. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Next, another nodule bug. I was thinking Dalmanitid with this one: Next, a pair of thorax segments that were kept together for some reason. I'll call them 77A (left), and 77B(right): Lastly for today, a roller that is missing cheeks: Cont. Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Well it's great that you can help them out. Perhaps you should, however, indicate in some way that the localities are "educated guesses", so people down the road do not assume the data was associated with the specimens from the time they were collected. Don 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeargleSchmeargl Posted October 10, 2019 Author Share Posted October 10, 2019 Until next week, my friends! @piranha Every single fossil you see is a miracle set in stone, and should be treated as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 216 is likely another Bolivian Devonian specimen. 96 looks like a Ditomopyge from Lake Brownwood Texas (Pennsylvanian). @BobWill can probably confirm or refute that suggestion. Don 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted October 10, 2019 Share Posted October 10, 2019 Cryphaeoides rostratus Dipleura dekayi boliviensis Huntoniatonia sp. Odontocephalus aegeria Zlichovaspis rugosa 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now