My Biggest Tooth Yet; On My First South TX Hunt No Less! Corsicana

[EPIKLULSXDDDDD]

About 3 weeks ago I wrapped up my half year of North TX adventures with one final Kamp Ranch hunt and a beautiful pliosaur tooth to boot. Since then I've made my move five hours south to San Antonio and have endured the first two weeks of dental school. It's been an adjustment, but so far things have gone smoothly I'm happy to say. Although I hadn't done any hunting in that time span, I've been putting in some time towards researching sites in this new section of the state. I guess the symptoms of fossil withdrawal were starting to hit hard yesterday, so I picked a few promising spots from my list and headed out to investigate.

 

Some of the decoration in my new apartment

 

There's a lot of formations I want to explore, but my highest priority was locating the Corsicana in order to find some invertebrate rarities like Codiopsis stephensoni or Dakoticancer australis. The bcfas reports made by @Uncle Siphuncle were a big inspiration and also really useful for figuring out what index fossils to look for. I was working with limited information, so the first spot I visited was chosen more or less because it had a promising look to it. I had already made the short-sighted mistake of sleeping in before the expedition, so the Texas sun was out on full blast with the temps exceeding 100F. 

 

At the first exposure, I was introduced to hundreds of Exogyra costata littering the ground which was a good sign. This is a species common in the Maastrichtian, but at the time I wasn't sure if it was necessarily indicative of the Corsicana Fm. Interspersed between these massive shells were much smaller bivalves such as the delicate Plicatula mullicaensis. A lot of the invertebrates I was finding were familiar species, but this new flavor of preservation made every discovery very exciting. Eventually, I stumbled upon a huge rudist! I had never found one so complete. 

 

Rudist

 

After stowing that and various other bivalves away, I continued creeping along the exposure when I did a double take at a shiny piece of something. Prior to my move, I had come to terms that I may never find marine reptile material here in South TX, yet sitting right in front of me was the glint of enamel... and not just any enamel. As I knelt closer it became clearer and clearer that this was indeed reptilian! I was so happy but also confused as to how such a thing could be possible. I hadn't even snagged my first shark tooth yet and now this!

 

The cutting edge of a mosasaur tooth

 

Labial and mesial views

 

Lingual and distal views

 

Occlusal view

 

As I fished it from the ground I was in awe by its morphology. The tooth has a strong labiolingual compression that had me thinking "dinosaur" for a split second. On the flattened distal carina are very subtle, but visible serrations. The enamel is extremely thin. On the labial side near to the mesial carina, there is a third well-defined carina that reaches a good ways up the tooth. The crown has a very slight labiolingual curvature reserved to the top of the tooth. Around the circumference are some "concave grooves" running longitudinally. I know mosasaurs were extremely diverse in the Maastrichtian, so there are a ton of possibilities. I did a little bit of searching and think it could maybe be Thalassotian atrox? Hopefully an expert or two can chime in here  @pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon @Praefectus @Jared C @PaleoPastels. (Also mosasaur peeps: keep scrolling down for more mosasaur stuff.) Feel free to tag anyone I missed. 

 

By now I had finished this outcrop and already downed 1 of my 2 water bottles. There was another larger exposure in the same site that I wanted to visit while my final bottle could last. As I made my way up, I found similar tumbled bivalves as before.

 

Top L to R: Exogyra costata and Plicatula mullicaensis; Bot L to R: Gyrodes sp. and Trigonia castrovillensis?

 

After some closer searching, I found little speckled pebbles that turned out to finally be some irregular echinoids. I guess the other outcrop didn't expose the layer they were coming from. These little guys were just about everywhere and in super good condition. I thought I had collected a ton of species, but looking at them after cleaning I think I only found the two most common. Still super neat to have Maastrichtian age urchins nonetheless.

 

Top: Hemiaster bexari; Bot: Proraster dalli

 

H. bexari with amazing detail

 

Further up, I found the unmistakable texture of crustacean. It was undeniably Dakoticancer australis, but it had definitely seen better days. The elements split the carapace in half, so I tried my best to wrap it carefully. At some point I'll get to gluing it together and cleaning off the extra matrix.

 

Dakoticancer australis carapace

 

Throughout this entire second part of the hunt, I began to wonder more and more about that mosasaur tooth. Was it a fluke? Did some previous hunter drop a Moroccan specimen? I just had never heard of a mosasaur tooth reported from the Corsicana. As I jumped over a gully, a faint shimmer caught my eye and I began to feel deja vu. I squatted down and tried to rediscover whatever it was before I almost fell on my back. There it was, the biggest mosasaur crown I had ever found!

 

HUGE Mosasaur washed out in the gully!

 

Occlusal and basal views

 

Labial and lingual views

 

Distal view

 

I didn't see any detectable serrations but they could be worn off. The cross-section to this robust tooth is circular with many concave grooves running longitudinally. There is a labiolingual curvature. The tip is missing, but I think it is from feeding damage. I would describe the enamel as moderate in thickness. I think it is "faceted", but I am having trouble telling facets and prism faces apart. Honestly, I don't even have a guess for this tooth . I'm not sure of what mosasaurs are even known to occur in the WIS during this time period.

 

I was waiting for my alarm to wake me up at any second. TWO mosasaur teeth and I had yet to even find a shark tooth. Well, that streak came to an end soon after when I spotted a little Squalicorax lindstromi, Carcharias sp., and aff. Cretalamna sp. cusp in quick succession.

 

Squalicorax lindstromi, Carcharias sp., and aff. Cretalamna sp.

 

Finally, my bottle ran dry. I made a quick and early exit, saving the rest of the place for a future hunt. Hopefully the other formations go this smoothly!

 

Thanks for reading

 

 

 

 

 

 

[historianmichael]

Nice finds! The mosasaur teeth are quite impressive. Your bottom two urchins are Schizaster variabilis, not Proraster dalli.

[pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon]

Wow! That sounds like an awesome hunt, and absolutely spectacular catch! I'm blown away!

 

Thanks for having taken us along through this excellent trip report! Makes me want to go out into the field myself again! (although I shouldn't complain, as I finally got round to cleaning some of the Lophiodon teeth from the jaw I found a few years back - the trouble with having kids and finding time, right? )

 

1 hour ago, EPIKLULSXDDDDD said:

 

 

 

Your second tooth is definitely a prognathodontid, and from counting the labial facets (those on the lingual side are a bit hard to count from the photograph) as around 8-9, I suspect this could be Prognathodon solvayi! Speak about a rare find!

 

1 hour ago, EPIKLULSXDDDDD said:

 

 

The first tooth you found, however, isn't a mosasaur tooth, but I suspect a theropod tooth! No mosasaur tooth I know of has morphology that is so laterally/labiolingually compressed, has an additional carina (yes, the recently described Stelladens mysteriosus does, but does come in pairs, and their teeth aren't compressed) and actual serrations. Mosasaurs have what is best described as "crunalations" only - that is, small bumps along their carinae, though not actual hooklets as in true serrations. The enamel also seems really thin for a mosasaur. Hopefully @Troodon will be able to confirm this as dinosaurian.

 

Absolutely bind-blowing finds, there!

[EPIKLULSXDDDDD]

5 hours ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said:

Your second tooth is definitely a prognathodontid, and from counting the labial facets (those on the lingual side are a bit hard to count from the photograph) as around 8-9, I suspect this could be Prognathodon solvayi! Speak about a rare find!

Thanks for the ID! Prognathodon solvayi is such a cool mosasaur too!

 

5 hours ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said:

The first tooth you found, however, isn't a mosasaur tooth, but I suspect a theropod tooth!

Man I hope you're not getting my hopes up too high on this one!  I feel I should clarify what I meant with serrations. I saw some mosasaur teeth described as having "serrations" so that's why I chose that word. Maybe it's because of wear, but the serrations on my specimen aren't exactly hooked, but may be better described as "crenulations" as you've mentioned. They seem to only be present on the distal carina, but again wear might be a factor.

 

Mosasaurs are great, but dinosaur would be absolutely insane! Just gotta make sure I don't count my theropods  before they hatch! 

 

Here are some additional photos. Those serrations/crenulations are hard to capture. Hope this doesn't tip the scales away from dino too much . Part of me wonders about pathological mosasaur too as an explanation for its flattened shape.

 

 

Thanks again for the thoughtful input

 

 

EDIT: Looking a bit more into it, it seems that crocodiles can have similar serrations to these while also having all kinds of crazy shapes. Starting to think this could be croc.

 

 

Edited August 7 by EPIKLULSXDDDDD
New info

[patelinho7]

That’s amazing! You are truly gifted with great hunting luck and talent! It feels like your last post was just yesterday and now you have found this! Out of curiosity, how would it be possible for that first tooth to be theropod? Isn’t it a fully marine formation?

[EPIKLULSXDDDDD]

4 minutes ago, patelinho7 said:

That’s amazing! You are truly gifted with great hunting luck and talent! It feels like your last post was just yesterday and now you have found this! Out of curiosity, how would it be possible for that first tooth to be theropod? Isn’t it a fully marine formation?

Thanks for the compliments!

 

It is a fully marine environment, but sometimes things show up where they aren't supposed to be. One concept is called "bloat and float" where a carcass on the shore travels out to sea before sinking and getting deposited. This is said to have happened often to anklyosaurs and helps to explain why they are often found preserved upside down (their heavy back armor flips them when they are dead in water). 

 

Pawpawsaurus from the Pawpaw Fm in North TX is a famous example of a dino fossil being found in a marine formation (I have a ton of crabs and ammonites from there). In the Kemp Clay up north, a terrestrial mammal tooth from the Maastrichtian was found in marine sediments too. That being said, it is all exceptionally rare which is why I immediately tossed the notion when I first found the tooth. However, the fact pachy-pleuro thinks this isn't mosasaur definitely makes for some interesting possibilities! I hadn't previously heard of a mosasaur tooth being found in the Corsicana down here yet, let alone a dino tooth, so the sky's the limit!

[pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon]

9 hours ago, EPIKLULSXDDDDD said:

Man I hope you're not getting my hopes up too high on this one!  I feel I should clarify what I meant with serrations. I saw some mosasaur teeth described as having "serrations" so that's why I chose that word. Maybe it's because of wear, but the serrations on my specimen aren't exactly hooked, but may be better described as "crenulations" as you've mentioned. They seem to only be present on the distal carina, but again wear might be a factor.

 

Okay, so "hooklets" may not have been the right way to describe it, although certain theropods do that those as well (I believe, esp. troodontids). However, true serrations are kind of like a compartmentalised elements stacked on atop the other, whereas crenulations are like someone poured out some sand of regular grain size on top of the carina. Here's what serrations look like in theropod dinosaurs (thanks to @ThePhysicist for his excellent photographs!):

 

 

 

 

 

And certainly I would agree with you that, based on your photographs, your carinae would fall more in-line with crenulations than true serrations, as the elements that make up the edges of the carinae aren't as sharply defined as you'd expect in a theropod, but rather match what I've seen in some mosasaurs.

 

It's a pretty confusing tooth, because in these new photographs too, the base seems a lot broader than the tooth appears to be in the earlier photographs of it. In fact, in light of the close-up shots of the carinae and anastomosing enamel, prismatic geometry, as well as the potentially wider base, this has me wondering about the nature of the tooth as possibly mosasaur after all. Moreover, the light-coloured lines on the one side of the tooth appear to be an artefact of preservation, rather than actual striae/ornamentation. As such, a lot of what my initial supposition was based on doesn't appear as strong any more as it did before. So a good thing you're not getting your hopes up just yet...! 

 

I'm still thinking crazy thoughts right now, so would like to ask you whether you could try and photograph the third carina, both in terms of the crenulations/serrations on it, as well as how it's positioned on the tooth versus the other carinae?

[pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon]

10 hours ago, EPIKLULSXDDDDD said:

It is a fully marine environment, but sometimes things show up where they aren't supposed to be. One concept is called "bloat and float" where a carcass on the shore travels out to sea before sinking and getting deposited. This is said to have happened often to anklyosaurs and helps to explain why they are often found preserved upside down (their heavy back armor flips them when they are dead in water).

Pawpawsaurus from the Pawpaw Fm in North TX is a famous example of a dino fossil being found in a marine formation (I have a ton of crabs and ammonites from there). In the Kemp Clay up north, a terrestrial mammal tooth from the Maastrichtian was found in marine sediments too.

 

Another great example of "bloat and float" is Chenanisaurus barbaricus, a theropod mostly known from its teeth found in the phosphate beds of Morocco...

[Jared C]

My shock of the formation you found these in and and jealousy of the taxa is immeasurable,  

 

I know Prognathodon overtoni is pretty unique for a mosasaur in having visible serrations, and it's the expected Prognathodon species in Texas, so that was my original vote. Plus, the enamel on the first tooth has that rugosity so often seen in tribe Gobedensi,  which Prognathodon is a part of. But, few people know their maastrichtian mosasaurs the way Alexander does, so I'll sit this one out at the side for now.

 

REALLY nice work!

Edited August 7 by Jared C

[pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon]

1 hour ago, Jared C said:

I know Prognathodon overtoni is pretty unique for a mosasaur in having visible serrations, and it's the expected Prognathodon species in Texas, so that was my original vote. Plus, the enamel on the first tooth has that rugosity so often seen in tribe Gobedensi,  which Prognathodon is a part of. But, few people know their maastrichtian mosasaurs the way Alexander does, so I'll sit this one out at the side for now.

 

Unfortunately, I haven't really seen or held any P. overtoni teeth, so I can't make a vidimus distinction or identification. However, the Prognathodon tooth does appear to have facets, whereas P. overtoni's teeth are supposed to be smooth. So P. solvayi - while, I believe, not described from the America's yet - seemed the most reasonable option to me. But that could be a bias of me simply having worked with that species more. I, therefore, can't exclude the tooth being P. overtoni, and would love to hear @Praefectus' opinion on the matter

[Jared C]

1 hour ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said:

 

Unfortunately, I haven't really seen or held any P. overtoni teeth, so I can't make a vidimus distinction or identification. However, the Prognathodon tooth does appear to have facets, whereas P. overtoni's teeth are supposed to be smooth. So P. solvayi - while, I believe, not described from the America's yet - seemed the most reasonable option to me. But that could be a bias of me simply having worked with that species more. I, therefore, can't exclude the tooth being P. overtoni, and would love to hear @Praefectus' opinion on the matter

gotcha. I should clarify that that was my guess for the first, serrated tooth that (superficially?) looks therapod. I do not know how to ID the second tooth to genus, I at first thought it was Mosasaurus, probably M. hoffmani (The "expected" Mosasaurus in the Texas maastrichtian). But again, my knowledge of the maastrichtian taxa is poor. So, no challenge to your judgment on the second tooth that you ID'd as Prog. 

 

@Uncle Siphuncle is a veteran in the Corsicana. Perhaps he's seen some mosasaur materiel come out of it before. 

 

@EPIKLULSXDDDDDIt might be worth asking Kim Pervis her opinion, she has found Texan maastrichtian mosasaur materiel a few times. Send me a message and I'll shoot you her instagram, I don't think she's on the forum anymore. 

Edited August 7 by Jared C

[Praefectus]

The first tooth is mosasaur. Super laterally compressed teeth are known in the posterior dentition of mosasaurs from the unofficial "Leiodon" clade (L. mosasauroides, P. kianda, P. sectorius). The lateral compression on your tooth might be somewhat exaggerated though, because it looks like the base of the crown has been broken off. The tooth was probably wider when complete. The serrations fall into what can be called crenulations or pseudo-serrations (false denticulations) and the additional carina on the anterior side is probably pathological. Historically, when North American mosasaur researchers found a tooth like yours, they would lump it into Prognathodon overtoni, meanwhile, European mosasaur researchers would call it Prognathodon sp. Neither approach is optimal as both P. overtoni and Prognathodon in general have became wastebasket taxons for any non-Mosasaurus mosasaurine tooth (recent work has been slowly resolving this). 

 

 

 

 

Type: Leiodon mosasauroides 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your first tooth is some sort of prognathodontine mosasaurinae. Of the three named taxa known in the US, Gnathomortis stadtmanti has smooth, thin enamel (non-anastomosing), unserrated teeth making it a possible match if Maastrichtian age is incorrect. Although, this should be taken with a grain of salt as the type material is covered in paint and plaster making assessment of the teeth difficult. Prognathodon overtoni has wider, more conical, crushing teeth. It also has heavier anastomosing enamel like what you see on Moroccan gift shop teeth. Prognathodon rapax is questionably identifable + about to be invalidated. 

 

I'd recommend using open nomenclature on this tooth until more is described from the area. Prognathodontine indet. Perhaps an unsatisfying answer but also the least likely to be incorrect. 

 

The second tooth is a massive form prognathodontine. One of the big boys (like Prognathodon saturator, Prognathodon lutugini, Prognathodon anceps ...er... Thalassotitan atrox ). None of these are currently described in North America, so just go with Prognathodontine indet for now (again). Unfortunately, the literature has not quite caught up to the collectors, making a lot of situations like this. 

 

The second tooth is not Prognathodon solvayi. P. solvayi has pronounced, deep concave fluting on both sides of the tooth. Its teeth tend to be more pointed and less robust than the rest of the species in the genus. The ridges on the second tooth are less like flutes and more like ...facets? I don't know. They don't exactly create flat planes between them. Despite all the papers that have been written on mosasaur tooth enamel ornamentation, these ridges escape classification. Very similar to the ridges that occasionally occur on Eremiasaurus heterodontus and Thalassotitan atrox teeth. An enamel structure that is not really part of a tooth-wide pattern. 

 

16 hours ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said:

So P. solvayi - while, I believe, not described from the America's yet - seemed the most reasonable option to me.

So, technically, P. solvayi was kindaaaaa described in North America already. Kraig Derstler made a passing comment about a single tooth crown from the upper Demopolis Formation (Campanian/Maastrichtian border) looking like Prognathodon solvayi in an abstract in the 1988 publication of the Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science. It took me forever to hunt down the publication. The tooth is unnumbered, unaccessioned, and seemingly lost somewhere in the collections of the University of New Orleans. Kiernan (2002) mentioned the tooth to include P. solvayi in a summary of gulf coast mosasaurs and Lucas, Ikejiri et al. (2005) noted P. solvayi in Alabama citing Kiernan, but to my knowledge, no one has ever described, illustrated, or photographed it.  If I had to guess, the tooth was probably just a Mosasaurus or Tylosaurus crown with particularly strong enamel ornamentation. 

 

 Derstler 1988

 

22 hours ago, pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon said:

Another great example of "bloat and float" is Chenanisaurus barbaricus, a theropod mostly known from its teeth found in the phosphate beds of Morocco...

Supposedly, a paper naming a third dinosaur species in the phosphates is in peer review right now. I'm not sure which species it is on (I'm guessing the unnamed titanosaur) or how close it is to publishing. 

 

 

15 hours ago, Jared C said:

Mosasaurus, probably M. hoffmani (The "expected" Mosasaurus in the Texas maastrichtian). But again, my knowledge of the maastrichtian taxa is poor. So, no challenge to your judgment on the second tooth that you ID'd as Prog. 

Mosasaurus hoffmannii (spelled hoffmannii like Mantell originally wrote it or hoffmanni with correct Latin genitive grammar. hoffmani is a wrong... but common spelling. At least you didn't write hofmani ) has more hook-like teeth. Flatter labial and lingual surfaces, sharper - less worn- apices, and a strong curvature in the medial direction. 

 

 Hoff

 

[pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon]

3 hours ago, Praefectus said:

The first tooth is mosasaur. Super laterally compressed teeth are known in the posterior dentition of mosasaurs from the unofficial "Leiodon" clade (L. mosasauroides, P. kianda, P. sectorius). The lateral compression on your tooth might be somewhat exaggerated though, because it looks like the base of the crown has been broken off. The tooth was probably wider when complete.

 

Type: Leiodon mosasauroides 

 

Interesting, as I don't think I've seen too many teeth from the 'Leiodon'-clade... However, looking at the tips of posterior marginal teeth of Liodon mosasauroides (as the genus was renamed following a naming conflict with an tetraodontid fish) they are indeed distinctly labiolingually compressed. Very interesting dentition, as the anterior teeth do indeed seem quite like those of Mosasaurus in morphology... A pity not more work has been put into resolving its taxonomy...

 

3 hours ago, Praefectus said:

The serrations fall into what can be called crenulations or pseudo-serrations (false denticulations) and the additional carina on the anterior side is probably pathological.

 

I fully agree... These are crenelations, not serrations. They seemed quite well-defined in the initial photographs, however, which threw me off for a second

 

Quote

The second tooth is a massive form prognathodontine. One of the big boys (like Prognathodon saturator, Prognathodon lutugini, Prognathodon anceps ...er... Thalassotitan atrox ). None of these are currently described in North America, so just go with Prognathodontine indet for now (again). Unfortunately, the literature has not quite caught up to the collectors, making a lot of situations like this.

 

I also don't quite think the tooth can be attributed to any of the species you mention here, as, of those, only Thalassotitan atrox is known to occasionally have prismatic teeth. The others have conical teeth with smooth and unornamented enamel. Compare with Prognathodon saturator from the NHM Maastricht:

 

 

 

And those of Prognathodon lutugini (fig. 9 from Grigoriev, 2013):

 

 

With the teeth being described as follows (ibid., p. 254):

 

Quote

Teeth are described, based on the isolated specimens. Preserved teeth are strongly bicarinate with a weak serration on both carinae (Fig. 9F–J). The carinae divide the tooth into lingual and labial surfaces, the lingual surface is more convex and large in comparison with the labial (Fig. 8J). There is a slight posterior and medial recurvature. The surface of the teeth is smooth, except for the minor wrinkles at the tip of the crowns. They are unfaceted and without fluting. The roots of the preserved teeth are relatively large (about 1.5 of the crown size) and barrel-shaped (Fig. 8A–E). The preserved tooth crowns are up to 54 mm tall and 25 mm wide at the base.

 

So unless this would be T. atrox, I'd say "Prognathodon sp." would indeed be the best label. As far as I know there is no "prognathodontidae" family or "prognathodontinae" subfamily. The alternative would be to use the tribe introduced by Russell (1967) and supported by Longrich, "prognathodontini indet.", which would include Gnathomortis stadtmani, which "Prognathodon sp.", for obvious reasons, does not.

 

Quote

The second tooth is not Prognathodon solvayi. P. solvayi has pronounced, deep concave fluting on both sides of the tooth. Its teeth tend to be more pointed and less robust than the rest of the species in the genus. The ridges on the second tooth are less like flutes and more like ...facets? I don't know. They don't exactly create flat planes between them. Despite all the papers that have been written on mosasaur tooth enamel ornamentation, these ridges escape classification. Very similar to the ridges that occasionally occur on Eremiasaurus heterodontus and Thalassotitan atrox teeth. An enamel structure that is not really part of a tooth-wide pattern.

 

The problem here, of course, is the definitions used to describe dental ornamentation in mosasaurs. If we follow Hornung and Reich (2014), however, Thalassotitan atrox can sometimes have flat prism faces (as opposed to convex ones or none at all), which is true for Eremiasaurus heterodontus as well, especially in anterior teeth. Following these same authors, as soon as ridges are involved, you're dealing with facets, which can either be flat-bottomed or concave and may run across prism faces, complicating their secondary (flat-bottomed vs. concave) identification.

 

The fact that I thought I could make out ridges here, in the knowledge that these can be extremely difficult to photograph sometimes, unless lighting is exactly right, was what made me think P. solvayi. Only OP's own observations - or maybe a video - would, I believe, be able to tell us whether we're dealing with facets or not. 

 

Quote

So, technically, P. solvayi was kindaaaaa described in North America already. Kraig Derstler made a passing comment about a single tooth crown from the upper Demopolis Formation (Campanian/Maastrichtian border) looking like Prognathodon solvayi in an abstract in the 1988 publication of the Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science. It took me forever to hunt down the publication. The tooth is unnumbered, unaccessioned, and seemingly lost somewhere in the collections of the University of New Orleans. Kiernan (2002) mentioned the tooth to include P. solvayi in a summary of gulf coast mosasaurs and Lucas, Ikejiri et al. (2005) noted P. solvayi in Alabama citing Kiernan, but to my knowledge, no one has ever described, illustrated, or photographed it.  If I had to guess, the tooth was probably just a Mosasaurus or Tylosaurus crown with particularly strong enamel ornamentation. 

 

 Derstler 1988

 

Oh boy, that sounds like a right mess, and one of those situations in which incorrect information is just propagated for years and years because no-one is either able or willing to take the time to rectify the situation...!  I agree, though, with only one tooth having been questionably identified, that's a not a very strong foundation to build off of...

Edited August 8 by pachy-pleuro-whatnot-odon

[Jared C]

Man I'm loving this thread...

 

Tyler, no pressure, but if you ever feel the inclination to donate these, SMU would be a very welcoming home. Mike Polcyn doesn't just work on the basal stuff, he has plenty of work cooking with campanian-maastrichtian mosasaurs too.

 

Or, better yet, find a skeleton

 

[flyingpenut]

I know you are going to hate me for saying this but is there any chance that first tooth is just a part of a shark tooth? I am no expert by any means but with the compression and serration just a thought. 
 

[EPIKLULSXDDDDD]

9 hours ago, flyingpenut said:

I know you are going to hate me for saying this but is there any chance that first tooth is just a part of a shark tooth? I am no expert by any means but with the compression and serration just a thought. 

I don't hate you for the suggestion , but I am 100% certain it is not shark for a few reasons.

 

There are crenulations on the cutting edges. The only shark from the Corsicana that doesn't have completely smooth cutting edges is Squalicorax. I actually have one pictured in the OG post. This would be pretty large for Squalicorax, the crown shape doesn't fit, and the crenulations of the first tooth are completely different from the serrations of Squalicorax. The crenulations do, however, match well with that of various mosasaurs and perhaps some oddball crocs.

 

Shark teeth crown faces of the formation tend to be completely smooth or have fine striations/ridges which is not the case with this tooth. Whether they are facets, prism faces, or a combination of both, the "concavities" I've noted for this size of tooth are uniquely reptilian.

 

Some of the pics show the texture of the enamel which is much more rugged (rugose?) in comparison to the relatively smooth enamel typical of sharks.

 

With these in mind plus the previous insightful discussion, I'm certain it is a mosasaur. Anything beyond that is still a bit up in the air