Jump to content
Pippa

Are all of these bryozoans? If yes, what are their specific names?

Recommended Posts

Pippa

Hello, 

I think the rocks below contain at least two different species of bryozoa fossils.  
Is it possible to identify them by name? If not, would better specimens with more visible detail make that possible?

Some, as in the first pic appear as b/w, narrow lacy (sometimes striped) leaf like shapes.

Others, as in the second pic, look more animal like, sometimes "hairy", but sometimes are just wide blobs with no visible detail.  

I'd really appreciate this forum's fossil experts superior knowledge.

Thanks in advance.

 

5d9685cd6285d_Bryozoa(back)P1030022.thumb.JPG.13307f37bd54118038a219762f7874ab.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5d968ac95190c_Furry2P1090378.thumb.JPG.e4fab01b16c38349790b3bc6dcf98f4b.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
connorp

Either bryozoa or coral. How big are these? If they are bryozoans, it will be very hard to get a specific ID. Bryozoa are hard to ID in many cases, often requiring chemical peels to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pippa

connorp, thank you for your reply. 

I see. Chemical peel? Sounds painful  ;-)

 

The rock in the first pic is about 2cm wide, so the individual fossils are tiny. 

The rock in the second photo is about 5cm wide, so the "hairy" fossil about 1/3 from the top, is about 3cm long.

The dimensions are on the photos, 1st pic at the bottom, second pic at the top.

 

I have to say, that none of my Lake Michigan coral fossils looks anything like these fossils and I have lots of them, dozens of favosites and halysites and one tiny, tiny tabulate coral with almost microscopic coralites.

So I'm pretty sure these are both bryozoans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
connorp
2 hours ago, Pippa said:

connorp, thank you for your reply. 

I see. Chemical peel? Sounds painful  ;-)

 

The rock in the first pic is about 2cm wide, so the individual fossils are tiny. 

The rock in the second photo is about 5cm wide, so the "hairy" fossil about 1/3 from the top, is about 3cm long.

The dimensions are on the photos, 1st pic at the bottom, second pic at the top.

 

I have to say, that none of my Lake Michigan coral fossils looks anything like these fossils and I have lots of them, dozens of favosites and halysites and one tiny, tiny tabulate coral with almost microscopic coralites.

So I'm pretty sure these are both bryozoans. 

Ah I missed the measurements, oops. Could we get another picture of the second one? It's a bit blurry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
4 hours ago, Pippa said:

So I'm pretty sure these are both bryozoans. 

:thumbsu: The first one is Ralph, the second George. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

The first one looks like a fenestrate  bryozoan. Not sure you could go further than that.

The second looks to be all cross-sections, so ID beyond bryozoan may be next to impossible..  :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB

I agree the first one looks like a bryozoan - not a fenestrate one but sections through something more solid (trepostome?).

 

I suspect the second is a tabulate coral such as Cladopora - the tubes look a lot wider than the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
1 hour ago, TqB said:

tubes

Where do you see tubes ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
10 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Where do you see tubes ?

Well, mostly transverse sections of tubes (of which there are actually a few in tangential section as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood

It looks more like what gets tracked in the door on a snowy day to me.:shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB

Looking at this bit, and measuring straight off a largish computer screen, there are about 7 or 8 openings per cm. That's about the same as in a Cladopora I have, and lot larger than most or all bryozoans.

Five walls where the arrows are, over about 5mm.

5d971eb9588bc_Screenshot2019-10-04at11_17_10.png.ad613c2e39116803e1c4c6015179622f.png 

 

And here's a clearer specimen from this forum, also from Lake Michigan. http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/48492-fossil-found-in-lake-michigan/

5d97208132fdd_Screenshot2019-10-04at11_31_49.thumb.png.f4734024a49f6dbbd030ad48f88e74de.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood

I guess you see signal where I see background static. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
11 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I guess you see signal where I see background static. 

Try narrowing your eyes. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
29 minutes ago, TqB said:

Try narrowing your eyes. :)

I can detect the information. I'm just not as confident that it can be trusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
35 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I can detect the information. I'm just not as confident that it can be trusted.

Fair enough - but looking at the OP's original photo, the contrast looks excessive and very spotty which I think is muddying it rather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockwood
16 minutes ago, TqB said:

Fair enough - but looking at the OP's original photo, the contrast looks excessive and very spotty which I think is muddying it rather.

Son of a gun ! I hadn't noticed that the fingers holding it look like bryozoans too.

Guess maybe I had the trust on the wrong aspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erose

Corals versus Bryozoans:

 

Note: this is a broad generalization and there are always exceptions. But as a rule of thumb...

 

The individual coralites (I think that is the correct term) will be at the smallest a millimeter and normally bigger

 

versus

 

The individual zooids of a bryozoan will be much smaller. A fraction of a millimeter at most.

 

IMHO both are bryozoans and neither could be easily identified, even to genus.  But I really really like the first specimen. Beautiful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
47 minutes ago, erose said:

Corals versus Bryozoans:

 

Note: this is a broad generalization and there are always exceptions. But as a rule of thumb...

 

The individual coralites (I think that is the correct term) will be at the smallest a millimeter and normally bigger

 

versus

 

The individual zooids of a bryozoan will be much smaller. A fraction of a millimeter at most.

 

IMHO both are bryozoans and neither could be easily identified, even to genus.  But I really really like the first specimen. Beautiful.

I agree with all that, except I'm seeing the second as a coral with corallites at just over 1mm. As I said, looks like 7 or 8 per cm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erose
18 hours ago, TqB said:

I agree with all that, except I'm seeing the second as a coral with corallites at just over 1mm. As I said, looks like 7 or 8 per cm.

Yes, you may be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pippa
On 10/4/2019 at 12:36 AM, connorp said:

Ah I missed the measurements, oops. Could we get another picture of the second one? It's a bit blurry.

It sure is. Since taking the photo under the LED ceiling cans in the kitchen, I've actually managed to misplace the darn stone (a large rock collection is highly overrated when you are looking for one specific one). This Sunday is supposed to be sunny, I'll try to take a photo outside in bright sunlight. Wish me luck. 

 

On 10/4/2019 at 2:33 AM, Rockwood said:

:thumbsu: The first one is Ralph, the second George. :)

Ralph and George? I'll never remember which one is which.  How about Lacey and Harry? I wouldn't mix those up as easily :-)

On 10/4/2019 at 3:18 AM, Fossildude19 said:

The first one looks like a fenestrate  bryozoan. Not sure you could go further than that.

The second looks to be all cross-sections, so ID beyond bryozoan may be next to impossible..  :unsure:

Fenestrate. I like that. Describes the b/w fossils very well.

But TqB below, doesn't agree.

Ah shucks....

On 10/4/2019 at 3:38 AM, TqB said:

I agree the first one looks like a bryozoan - not a fenestrate one but sections through something more solid (trepostome?).

 

I suspect the second is a tabulate coral such as Cladopora - the tubes look a lot wider than the first.

Off to google trpostome/trepostomata? and Cladopora -  oh my, corals after all. And I was so sure. That'l teach me... 

23 hours ago, erose said:

Corals versus Bryozoans:

 

Note: this is a broad generalization and there are always exceptions. But as a rule of thumb...

 

The individual coralites (I think that is the correct term) will be at the smallest a millimeter and normally bigger

 

versus

 

The individual zooids of a bryozoan will be much smaller. A fraction of a millimeter at most.

 

IMHO both are bryozoans and neither could be easily identified, even to genus.  But I really really like the first specimen. Beautiful.

That's interesting. Thanks for that info.   I'm starting to think that at least some of those bryozoans of old are not at all like today's moss animals/bryozoans, but seem similar to corals.

Yeah, I like the first one too, thank you.  The backside is a bit different (what with granny's teeth in there), just wish it was larger. 

5d98ba05dd69e_BryozoaP1030019.JPG.943b6a985700043e8baace2ea533775e.JPG

 

22 hours ago, TqB said:

I agree with all that, except I'm seeing the second as a coral with corallites at just over 1mm. As I said, looks like 7 or 8 per cm.

Wow, TqB. That's a lot of good information you're sharing here. Thank you.

I wonder what you would have to say to my tiny as of yet, unidentified (coral?) pebble on this thread: 

 

 

To all, thanks so much for your informative responses, as well as the funny ones, (Ralph and George, really?  :-)

 

Afterthought:

Do you all  think if I tried to cut and polish the second stone it might improve it like the pic with those beautiful Cladopora you posted?

I've never polished a rock before, but I could give it a try on a friend's grinding/polishing machine. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TqB
33 minutes ago, Pippa said:

 

 

 

I wonder what you would have to say to my tiny as of yet, unidentified (coral?) pebble on this thread: 

 

 

 

Afterthought:

Do you all  think if I tried to cut and polish the second stone it might improve it like the pic with those beautiful Cladopora you posted?

I've never polished a rock before, but I could give it a try on a friend's grinding/polishing machine. 

 

I'm not very well up on the less common ones from there but, as you say, it looks like a small corallite favositid, with long septal spines. Something like Astrocerium, but there are many to choose from and identifying these is usually a bit of a specialist job.

 

Grinding and polishing is always worth trying, especially if a friend has the gear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pippa
21 minutes ago, TqB said:

Grinding and polishing is always worth trying, especially if a friend has the gear!

I will try on some smaller rocks first. See how that turns out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×