SE Texas - Tusk fragment?

[johnnyvaldez7.jv]

I don't see any Shreger lines on this but I think it is a piece of tusk found yesterday,  Wednesday on a gravel bank. I know those lines are present on tusk but can this be so worn smooth on the edges it's not visible?

I guess a cleaner unworn cross section might show them or could this be something else?

Edited August 31 by johnnyvaldez7.jv

[Carl]

Very interesting. I think the lack of Schreger lines would rule out proboscidean tusk, but maybe it's some other kind of tusk. Does not look like petrified wood or non-fossil mineral. Excellent photos, by the way!

Edited August 31 by Carl

[Brandy Cole]

Try taking some more pictures of the ends in natural light.  When I look at the overall shape, my gut is shouting 'tusk,' and maybe the lines are worn down and hard to make out.

 

That said, the other option would be a beautiful piece of petrified wood.  The side views greatly resemble some of the wood pieces I have.

[johnnyvaldez7.jv]

Thank you @Brandy Cole. It doesn't feel as hard or heavy as petrified wood. It does seem similar underneath and has these lines like this other piece I found on this one side but my other find did have Shreger lines where I can't see it on this subject piece. These 3 images are from an earlier post for comparison. See how you can see the lines on the top portion of the tusk but not the bottom.  Perhaps the flaky portion on top of my subject piece was that piece and why I can't see it is because it's the bottom section? Or it could be serious wear but I'll get better pictures for sure.

Edited August 31 by johnnyvaldez7.jv

[grandpa]

I'm in the Pet. Wood camp; with a nice piece of bark remaining as well.  Either way, nice find.

[johnnyvaldez7.jv]

 Hello there @grandpa. Hope you're staying cool and outta this heat. Yes sir, I'd think wood too if it were a solid piece but its not. The undersides match perfectly with my known tusk piece and these lines all ray outward from a center like a clock. I think I'm missing that top or outer layer that might have had more discernable Schreger lines other than that small piece and this is worn. The feel is comparable with my tusk sample also. Even on some of my known tusk images the lines are wore smooth. Could there be other possibilities? A tooth? A tusk of something not proboscidean?

[johnnyvaldez7.jv]

[johnnyvaldez7.jv]

@grandpa Here are both bottom sections from the subject and past tusk fragment.

[grandpa]

I agree, they look darn near identical.

[garyc]

@johnnyvaldez7.jv I’m in the tusk camp. Pretty sure these are Schregers 

[Lorne Ledger]

I am seeing schreger lines, I am in the tusk camp

[SPrice]

Here's two modern pieces of ivory( preban ) and passed down through my family with provenance. The one is 2 inches in diameter the other is a 3.25 diameter man's bangle bracelet which I wear on occasion. The Schreger lines in fossil tusks are usually narrower than a 90 degree line and wider in elephants at over 115 degrees. These two elephant tusk pieces show the lines well. They also depending on the lighting appear to have chatoyancy...meaning not the cat's eye look but they appear to move or refract light.  My thought is the one sure way to reveal the Schreger lines is to cut one end or grind and polish a large enough window in one end.  Your call on that.

 

This piece does not show the Schreger lines on the bottom due to the rough original saw cut.  But are very clear in this image.