Search the Community

Between 2020-23, two collectors who scuba dive for fossils throughout Florida and Georgia have recovered 5 chesapecten (including two paired valves) with morphological characteristics that signal a Miocene age. These characteristics include an acute byssal notch and a byssal fasciole that is strongly differentiated from the shell’s auricle in terms of sculpture and elevation. The largest of the adult shells also displays an active ctenolium. Additionally, one of the paired specimens displays significant gapes between valves when matched (the other pair was preserved as found by glue according to the collector and cannot be matched). These aforementioned traits are also emblatic of Miocene age for Chesapecten. These shells were recovered from the following areas in Georgia and Florida: Savannah River, Effingham County, Georgia (Collector 1) Specimen 1 (W = 108.0 mm) R valve L valve R valve - close up of byssal notch and fasciole (most of fasciole has been degraded) R valve - close up of ornamentation L valve - close up of ornamentation Profile Close up of matrix, gray sand Savannah River, Effingham County, Georgia (Collector 1) Specimen 2 (W = 101.6 mm) R valve R valve - interior R valve - close up of byssal notch and fasciole L valve - note barnacles are modern species, not fossilized L valve - interior L valve - close up of ornamentation on auricle Side profile of pair, showing gapes Front profile of pair, showing gapes Cumberland Island, Camden County Georgia (Collector 2) Specimen 3 (W = 114.3 mm) R valve, note encrustation is recent not fossilized R valve interior, thick shell apparent Close up of byssal notch and fasciole Close up of ctenolium, although modern encrustation makes it difficult to see what is going on in the ctenolium Close up of ornamentation St Mary’s River, Nassau County, Florida (Collector 2) Specimen 4 (W = 117.5 mm) R Valve R valve interior, active ctenolium and thick shell apparent Byssal notch and fasciole Close up of original sediment, note the olive and gray coloration Profile Suwanee River, Hamilton County, Florida (Collector 2) Specimen 5 (W = 69.9 mm) R valve, subadult specimen R valve interior, shell is thick for a subadult Unfortunately, stratigraphic data are unavailable for these shells. However, among the Miocene strata from Coastal Georgia and NE Florida currently described in the literature, the Ebenezer Formation of Weems and Edwards (2001), of Upper Miocene (Tortonian age), appears to be the most suitable match based on the age of the Ebenezer and the characteristics of the shells found. The shells collected resemble Chesapecten middlesexensis of the Upper Miocene of Virginia and North Carolina. The Ebenezer was originally defined by Huddleston (1988) as a member of the Coosawhatchie Formation (Middle Miocene). Weems and Edwards later elevated it to formational rank based on differences in lithological and dinoflagellate composition compared to the rest of the Coosawhatchie. The Ebenezer formation consists of gray to olive-gray, fine- to medium-grained micaceous sand and stretches from South Carolina to NE Florida. Five mappable members are apparent and separable by distinct unconformities. The lower four members correspond to dinoflagellate zone DN 8, while the uppermost member corresponds to DN 9. Revision of the Ebenezer to Formational Rank from Weems and Edwards (2001) According to the dinoflagellate zonation of de Verteuil and Norris (1996), DN 8-9 aligns with the Little Cove Point Member (DN 8) and the Windmill Point Member (DN 9) of the St Mary’s Formation of Maryland and Virginia. Alignment of the Ebenezer to St Mary's Formation of MD and VA from Weems, Self-Trail and Edwards (2004) These specimens share characteristics such as an acute byssal notch, differentiated byssal fasciole, slightly inflated right valve, and a hinge size in adult specimens that is relatively small for adult chesapecten with the exception of Chesapecten covepointensis (DN 8 St Mary’s Formation) and in some cases Chesapecten santamaria (DN 9 St Mary’s Formation). Also, these shells could possibly be divided into two distinct variants although issues with preservation which appears to be somewhat better outside the Savannah River region may exaggerate these differences. Nevertheless, the Chesapecten collected outside of the Savannah River Region exhibit stronger, more raised ribs and have thicker, heavier shells compared to the specimens collected within the Savannah River region whose shells are thinner and ribs are lower and less pronounced. This is especially true of Specimen 1. These variants might originate from different members of the Ebenezer Formation. According to Weems and Edwards, “outside of the Savannah region, beds no older than dinoflagellate zone DN 9 occur”. This suggests that the shells collected outside of the Savannah River Region could belong to Bed 5 of the Ebenezer Formation. Figure 3 of Weems and Edwards (2001) [shown below] suggests that someone scuba diving for fossils in the Savannah River is likely to collect in Bed 4 - at least from my POV. So, perhaps the Chesapectens recovered from the Savannah River belong to Bed 4 of the Ebenezer Formation. This stratigraphic information aligns with the observed morphological differences among the specimens and tentatively supports the significance of these variations. Needless to say, more specimens accompanied by detailed fieldwork are needed to confirm. Otherwise, these thoughts are largely speculation. Lateral Gradation of the Ebenezer from Georgia to Florida - Fig. 3 from Weems and Edwards (2001) Ward (1992) has remarked that the period between Chesapecten santamaria (DN 9) and Chesapecten middlesexensis (DN 10) represents a considerable loss of the fossil record in the stratigraphic succession of chesapecten. These Chesapecten, which bear a strong overall resemblance to Chesapecten middlesexensis while displaying traits of preceding species (smaller hinge, more differentiated byssal fasicole), could help bridge this apparent gap. Notably, no other Chesapecten in this age range outside of Maryland and Virginia have been reported in the literature. Personal Remarks The equivalency of these shells to the St Mary’s Formation, not the Eastover formation is surprising to me given the strong resemblance to C. middlesexensis. If anyone knows of any findings correlating DN 8-9 to the Eastover, or of the Ebenezer to DN 10 please let me know. Also, if anyone has any additional samples of similar shells from similar sites, even in SC please let me know. Thank you! References de Verteuil, L., and Norris, G., 1996, Miocene dinoflagellate stratigraphy and systematics of Maryland and Virginia: Micropaleontology, vol. 42 (Supplement), 172 p. Huddlestun, P.F., 1988, A revision of the lithostratigraphic units of the coastal plain of Georgia; the Miocene through the Holocene: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin, no. 104, 162 p. Ward, L.W, 1992, Molluscan biostratigraphy of the Miocene, Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain of North America, VMNH Memoirs, no 2, 152p. Weems, R.E, Edwards, L.E., 2001, Geology of Oligocene, Miocene, and younger deposits in the Coastal Area of Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey, no 131, 129 p. Weems, R.E, Self-Trail J., Edwards, L.E., 2004, Supergroup stratigraphy of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains (Middle? Jurassic through Holocene, eastern North America): Southeastern Geology, volume 42, p 191-216

Hi everyone! I have some unexpected footprint-y finds to share . Back in June, June 1st to be exact, I visited the old locality where I found my first dinosaur track which ultimately led me to join this forum, linked below. This is a stream locality in Maryland close to DC that belongs to the Early Cretaceous Patuxent Formation of the Potomac Group. I have returned to this locality on occasion when I am in the area. It is very unproductive nowadays. Even back when I found that track, I got very lucky. The site has a limited exposure along a creek that has been reduced due to development. The stream has also significantly changed, covering the beaches where slabs of rock could be found, often bearing tracks. Nevertheless, it was the first Mesozoic locality I ever searched on my own and the site of one of my proudest finds. I occasionally visit it to have lunch after volunteering at Dinosaur Park, where I enjoy some time in a pretty location, as well as beside a memorable locality of sorts. On this day in June, I did just that. However, old habits die hard, and despite not planning to collect, I couldn't help but look around a bit on the limited beach as I enjoyed my sandwich. It was a beautiful early summer day, one of the last ones before it got really hot here on the East Coast. We are finally getting some storms today, though! After just a few minutes of looking around, I identified three possible specimens. One was the cycadeoid fossil I posted in Fossil ID a while back. I will take a minute to mention that I finally got my items IDed by Dr. Rob Weems last week (he helped me with my old track). I meet with him on occasion and I brought the items from this day with me when I met with him. He confirmed this specimen to be a cycadeoid bark cast. Anyway, I found two other items nearby the plant fossil. Both looked like possible tracks, but I was honestly unsure. The track-collecting game is very difficult, I must say, at least in the Patuxent. So much of the rocks are very vague and difficult to interpret, but very frequently are indeed tracks as the depositional environment was fantastic for the preservation of tracks. You need a lot of imagination to agree you have found a track, at the risk of much pareidolia. The best thing you can do is to show it to a scientist who has more experience reading tracks. In fact, because of the difficulty of track identification at this site, I rarely attempt at explicitly searching for tracks on rocks. I also never attempt to ID them in the field. Instead, I search for anomalous structures on rocks. With experience, you can begin to differentiate geologic sedimentary structures from those that may be created by organisms. Honestly, I use this technique in much of my collecting. Don't look for fossils, look for things that are odd or cannot be explained from an elementary understanding of geology. You notice a lot more when you're not narrowing your vision to one specific area. I find strange specimens that match this description and bag them for later. When I get home, I clean them and complete a more investigative analysis, eventually sending photos to others to get additional opinions. Because so much is left to imagination with track interpretation, I don't like posting them for ID or in a trip report right away. Either I lose myself to pareidolia, or sometimes real tracks could be voted geologic because it's hard to see from a few photos. I digress. I collected the two possible tracks and thought about returning to my car. However, the weather was nice and the water was cool. I mentally debated for a moment before throwing caution to the wind, taking off my shoes, rolling up my pant legs and wading in. The water was fantastic. I was able to access rocks at the bottom of the creek which provide the greatest selection of large, flat sandstone slabs that typically have tracks. One such rock was quite strange, with an obvious extrusion that looked not at all geologic and definitely the result of a track, at least to me. I thought the extruded portion of this slab was a raised track cast, the negative of an actual track. I carried the heavy rock back through the creek, hunched over and maneuvering through the sharp, rough creek bottom. It was quite a feat of fortitude, staving off mosquitoes and unstable footing while cradling a very heavy rock like a caveman all while muttering to myself, trying to remember how I charted my course through the shallower regions of the creek. Some random guy walked in on me looking very strange like this. All of a sudden, I looked up and locked eyes with a guy who had just witnessed a crazy person ambling through a creek, clutching a rock to his chest, and mumbling intermittently. I made it back to the shore safely, and contemplated my possible finds as I dried off and put my shoes back on. I had a very interesting set of possible footprint preservation mediums. One was a classic sandstone slab with a footprint-like structure. I have seen many rocks like this, including my previous track find. The next one was a small blob of ironstone, akin to a cowpatty. It had much lumpy layering around the possible track. I have only seen these occasionally, they sometime preserve the cast of tracks. The third item was a classic Patuxent rock. It consisted of a pottery-like shard or siderite, one side preserving the ground from 115 million years ago, the other side retaining a more-granulated concretionized surface, with a few flecks of lignite. I'm not sure why there are so many lithologies that allow for tracks to be preserved, but they are interesting. Anyway, I took all the items back and left for home, where I placed the specimens on a shelf, out of mind until my meeting with Dr. Weems. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I have rambled on too long without showing any of the fossils! I just felt this specific report fit into two "episodes" since the collecting was very separate from the study and IDing of the specimens. I am trying to be more descriptive with my reports, providing more of a story along with the fossils. I have taken much inspiration from members like @SPrice, @Mikrogeophagus, and @Jared C, whose reports I greatly admire. Let me know if I'm being too wordy, or if I have glossed over details that require more explanation. Now, into the fossils! First up, we have the sandstone slab: Can you see it? Here, the black lines represent the extruded portion that I thought was part of a track. But instead, it's the red outline, with the blue lines representing the impression! Never even saw this shape at first. Ornithopod Track cf. Caririchnium kortmeyeri Patuxent Fm., Aptian/Albian Prince George's County, MD This track likely belongs to an ornithopod dinosaur. Similar tracks can be found by googling the genus Caririchnium, including some at the famous Dinosaur Ridge in Morrison, CO, like this one: The ichnospecies I listed above was created by an Iguanodontid dinosaur, one of the last few which were dying out right as the basal hadrosaurs were starting to emerge. On to the next track! Possible Turtle Track cf. Emydhippus ichsp. Patuxent Fm., Aptian/Albian Prince George's County, MD This is a very small track created by a small creature like an early mammal, lizard, or turtle. The rock may have other residual scratch marks, but this is the main one, though the heel is cut off. Based on the size and morphology (spacing of the claw marks), we think the track belongs to a turtle. I should mention that the ichnospecies that I am "cf."ing are the reported ichnospecies that match the trackmaker closest based on our analysis. Please let me know if I'm using my taxonomic vocabulary incorrectly. Lastly, we have my personal favorite! Palm-sized, rather uncommon, and adorable... Please meet (drumroll, please): Juvenile (!!!) Basal Tyrannosauroid Track cf. Tyrannosauripus bachmani Patuxent Fm., Aptian/Albian Prince George's County, MD This one is quite cute, but you need a few lighting angles to see all the toes just right. This likely belongs to a baby theropod, and not just any theropod, a basal tyrannosauroid! You can see the little toes, though the leftmost digit is not fully preserved. You can see it branch off before it stops. The middle toe is most clear, complete with knuckle marks and a pointed claw mark, but not as sharp as older theropods and the tyrannosaurs that would come later on in time. I was incredulous that a track so small could be preserved like this, but it really is unmistakable when you get the light on it. It's so satisfying that I've been carrying around the little guy in my pocket all week, pretending I have a baby pet dinosaur. Until I find my first osteological theropod fossils, I will be quite content with this track. And unlike most tracks which are hard to distinguish for non-paleo people and quite large and heavy, I can carry this one around and brag to my friends . Anyway, that is all for now. I don't know when I will have another chance to go looking in the Patuxent again as I am quite busy with the Culpeper Basin in VA, where I am slowly making progress I can hopefully share soon. I hope everyone enjoyed reading and looking at these tracks as much as I have! Let me know if I have made any egregious errors. Have a good night. References (used for ID purposes): Weems, Robert. (2021). ADDITIONS AND A TAXONOMIC UPDATE TO THE DINOSAUR ICHNOFAUNA FROM THE PATUXENT FORMATION IN VIRGINIA, USA. 82. 475-485.

Hi everyone, A family friend asked me for advice on where to take their kids (around the DC area) who are into marine biology for some fossil hunting fun. I immediately thought of Calvert Cliffs since that’s the location that I went to the most as a kid. I always went to the state park even though it had limited success at times. I figured it’s a great place for kids, there’s a beach, a solid chance at finding some teeth, and not too much difficulty or danger. However, I am asking if anyone here has any advice or updates on how the state park beach or Flag Ponds is doing. Are the yields acceptable (for kids), is the water quality alright (bacteria, jellyfish), are there any other issues to be aware of? I haven’t been in years, I’m sure it’s changed very much. If you have any other suggestions for suitable locations for kids in the DMV (DC, MD, VA), I’m all ears. I already provided them with a few others, such as dinosaur park. I am trying to balance decent fossil yield with safety and family-friendly-ness (for example, flag ponds still has a decent beach to enjoy if fossil hunting isn’t working out) which is quite challenging.

WOW has it been hot in the DMV. No real weather patterns have been through the area in what feels like forever, things are dry, dusty, and uncomfortably hot. So what do I do? Look for fossils! I came to the beach with the understanding that I may not find much, considering there has likely been next to no movement in the material along the beaches besides the tides. But to say that I am pleasantly surprised is an understatement! It was a great day, despite the hot sun beating down on me. I spent a little more than 3 hours out searching, some highs and some lows, at certain times I’d hit a stretch of beach and find literally nothing, and other times there was a nice collection of fossilized items for me to grab. They came in groups. I found the nice little busted Otodus fairly early peeking out at me, some nice sand tigers mixed in, baked a light color from sitting out in the sun for so long. Among the numerous ray plates and tiny teeth, I managed to find 3 Otodus (I think? The tiny ones are either Otodus or Cretolamna, they are hard to tell apart sometimes), 2 Croc teeth (I guess 1.5 again 🙄), and my second, and largest complete sting ray mouth plate! I wish I had taken an insitu shot of it, but I was in shock seeing it poking out of the dry desert like sand, I had to grab it! All in all, a pretty darn successful day considering the poor weather patterns over the last 2-3 weeks, and the sun burn! Looking forward to the next one!

My girlfriend found this about 20 years ago on a beach on Assateague Island, Maryland, and no one has been able to ID it. It's about 5.5" long

Hi all, A week ago, I visited the old locality where I found my first dinosaur track quite a while back now. The locality (close to DC) represents an exposure of the Patuxent Formation, a member of the Early Cretaceous Potomac Group. It consists of siderite-rich gravel beds and frequent clay lenses. The formation is rich with ironstone concretions and sandstones that have well-preserved instances of plant matter as well as the occasional track. Plant matter commonly includes abundant lignite, both preserved in-situ in the exposure as well as concreted onto ironstones, as well as plant impressions and casts preserved in great detail on ironstones. This locality specifically is far past its prime; it has been graded and destroyed many times severely decreasing productivity. However, it’s on the way home from Dinosaur Park and I have lunch outside occasionally for old times’ sake. That’s when I found this small piece of well-preserved tree in a gravel wash. The specimen is roughly 4 cm long and 2.7 cm wide. I have seen and heard of tree material preserved like this often, but I’ve never seen both the internal structure and external bark present and preserved in this great detail, which is why I wondered if it could be IDed. It seems like it could be some sort of cycad? Thanks! Looking forward to hearing your input.

Back to what I know well! Kind of an up and down day. More people at the spot than I’d want, but beggars can’t be choosers 🤷🏻‍♂️. It was a beautiful day for fossil hunting. Great gravel bars today, but not much fossil action and next to no sea glass in comparison. This area hasn’t seen much influential weather over the last few weeks, so I couldn’t be expecting much. Its been pretty dry lately. I cant help but get my hopes up though! A couple nice sand tigers, quite a few ray plates and such. Felt like a somewhat meh day, after the highlight being a pretty cool wrasse fish mouth plate. That is, until I found these croc teeth in about a 20 minute span towards the end of the trip! Awesome! Well… more like 1.5 croc teeth, but you get the picture! These croc teeth and the wrasse fish mouth plate are truly some quality finds on a bit of a roller coaster of a day. Looking forward to some more warm and sunny hunts like this one in the future.

Hi all! I hope you are well! I recently made my annual trip to the Washington, D.C. area, which always includes a trip to the Miocene deposits of the Calvert Cliffs. I think I have a general idea on these IDs but wanted to confirm with others, especially the first two sets of images. I’ve tried to group like fossils as well. Thanks for looking! 1 (ray dermal plate?): 2,3, and 4 (otoliths?): 5, 6, and 7 (with 6 and 7 magnified at the end, respectively; cetacean ribs?): 8 (crab claw?): 9 (ray mouth plate part?): 10 (?): 11 (third image is root zoomed in; cetacean tooth?): Plus, here are a couple of finds that I just wanted to share for fun! Thank you again!

Hello, my friends, and a jolly warm welcome to one and all. Many moons ago, my friend, the exceedingly kind and generous Brett @Elmo sent me nearly 6 lbs of micromatrix from the Purse State Park in Maryland, USA. The tiny fossils found in this gravel are from the Piscataway Member of the Aquia Formation which is Late Palaeocene in age and about 60 million years old, give or take. I have been trying to sort through a little every day and am about two-thirds of the way through and have found lots and lots of goodies. Now, this is well out of my comfort zone as there is not a brachiopod to be seen, but lots of teethies from sharks, rays, skates, and bony fish. I have no idea what I am doing at all, and so Brett, who is also seeking some IDs, and I decided it might be useful and fun to start a thread to show off our finds, hopefully get some help with identification, encourage others to post their own finds and have a fun time, really. I don't have any Palaeocene material at all, except a couple of larger sharks' teeth from this location. So, please feel free to comment, just watch and enjoy or tell me off for my obviously stupid attempts at ID. I'll start this off with a really beautiful tooth that I think might be Delpitoscyllium africanum. On second thoughts, perhaps Ginglymostoma cf. subafricanum is a better fit? Because of the multiple side cusps.

Have a trip coming up in two weeks to calvert cliffs. First time going was wondering if I would be ok going even when the tide is high since high tide is around 10am. Also any tips would be appreciated.

Hello! Reporting again with another successful Paleocene epoch hunt! Got there quite early in the morning and had the whole beach to myself for 3 hours, pays to get up early! The tide was great, amazing fossil beds all up and down the beach, I couldn’t keep myself from vacuuming up every interesting fossil insight! The usual collection of sand tigers, ray plates and turrittela, with some nice sea glass scattered around, as well as what was a bread crumb trail to my find of the day. I found the corner of an Otodus first, my initial thought was, “Well, at least I’m not getting skunked by the otodus gods today!” Followed by the tiny otodus, always a fun find. I was getting warmer until, finally, laying out beautifully in the shadows of the cliffs, was this awesome, great quality Otodus. Grinning from ear to ear, I felt that my day was made from that point on. I found it early in the hunt, so it felt like it was going to be a great Otodus day. Alas, it was simply just a great day instead. No complaints in the slightest! Fossil hunting for me is like therapy, every fossil is a dopamine bump. From a cool shell, to a blade-less shark tooth root. But when you find that tooth that you were hoping for, your week is always made.

So good/bad luck today on the Potomac. Rainy, humid, but a bounty was collected regardless over 2.5 hours. Sharks teeth, ray plates, and sea glass were everywhere! Unfortunately however, not every great day is perfect, the decent sized Otodus root was a real shame 😢. Luckily I was able to score a small Otodus in good condition, quite a few nice sand tigers, a small vert, and a few pieces of blue sea glass. I’ll take it!

I took a trip down to Flag Ponds yesterday and the finds were plentiful, but so were the midges. Little tiny gnats that love to teach you what true pain is were out in mass for the full 6 hours that I stayed. I managed to push through being eaten and managed to get some stuff to add to my collection. CoralBone FragsSharks TeethRay Plates( My favorites )Misc Some of the Misc fossils I’ll be listing for identification help. I’ve figure most of them out, but a few are questionable to me. The bottom one in the misc pic is a little ray plate in a rock matrix. I’ve never found any in a rock matrix before and honestly thought that all the ones from Calvert just came out of the clay as it eroded. Now I’ll probably be picking up every rock on the beach just to make sure that it doesn’t have a fossil in it.

About a month ago I used my hotel points from work and dragged a few friends down to Maryland for the weekend with the promise of beer and maybe some good shark teeth. We did one day at Flag Ponds and another at Matoaka Cabins, which is what I did last year as well. I still can't say one place is better than the other. My friends who are not fossil collectors had more luck finding teeth in general at Flag Ponds, but I think the quality of finds were slightly better overall at Matoaka. It really all comes down to luck if you are going to any of the public spots. Day one was flag ponds I tried experimenting with some hunting methods: sifting, searching the wave-line, digging up sand, and searching below the water line with a clear bin. Using the bin method, a bit more than knee deep I was able to find a nice Mako. This was the best one found at Flag Ponds by our group. A few other nice ones were found by shoveling up sand and letting the waves sort it out for us, these were not found by me. Second day was Matoaka Cabins, it was a clear and calm day. Using the same bin method, even on the clear day, I was not able to find a tooth below the water line. There were far too many grey-black shells that appeared similar. We had the most success just walking along the beach, sifting especially was a bust. Another very nice Mako was found by a friend as we were on our way out just tumbling against the cliffs in the waves. Pictured below under my thumb. These were some of the best finds from the whole group. Here are my best finds next to a ruler. A bit puzzled by the tooth at the 3 inch mark. Has the shape of a meg, but far too small.

I found this in Charles County, Maryland along the Potomac River along with the typical ray plates and shark's teeth. Any thoughts?

Hi! Hope all is well with everyone!! I have a half ironman in Cambridge MD in June. I know all the popular spots in MD for fossil hunting. I am going to be in Cambridge and swimming in the Choptank. I assume there are cool places to look for shark teeth. Am I wrong? Anywhere specific? I have never been to that area? Or is it just better to go to one of the popular places. Thank you for any advice! You guys are awesome.!! I getting back into hunting more! Looking forward to being more active!!!

Hello all, First of all, thrilled to find this website--I've had this fossil for about a year now after finding it on a lark and I had not been able to make even anything close to an identification/match to any example or description in easily-found online guides to fossils in the MD region. It has this almost chemistry-structural-formula hexagonal pattern that turns into a series of...fine/leafy branches in parallel? It also appears to have some regular hollow cavities on the rim, as if whatever it was was honeycombed/hollow. My guess is some sort of coral but as I said I haven't been able to find any match at all, so any notions would be appreciated! Also please do feel free to let me know what other info/images would be of help, I read the "New Users Please Read" guides for this sort of thing but definitely want to be sure I cover all the steps. Thanks so much--it'd be really cool to put a name to this lil' guy, even if it's qualified with a "we THINK it's a _____"!

I just took a trip to Douglas Point, MD (Paleocene, Aquia Formation). I found two great Otodus teethwhich is a first for me in several trips, actually (you can see them in the first image along with some other shark teeth). There are a few other items I found that I could use some help with ID on. For #1, I know it's a crocodile tooth, but what genus/species would it be from this formation? #2 I'm thinking might be turtle shell or plastron? #3 I believe would be reptile bone. Is it possible to be more specific what bone it is based on its shape? #4 Could this also be some piece of turtle shell? #5 I can see enamel in two areas on this piece. I can't tell if this is just a very deteriorated shark tooth or another fossil entirely. #6 I'm not certain if this fossil or concretion. If a fossil, it looks close to resembling part of an osteoderm? Thanks for any help on these and happy hunting. Chris

Hello! Found this while digging in our yard. Not sure if it's anything, but my son is convinced it's a dinosaur tooth so I told him I'd try to find out. Anyways, we live in Anne Arundel County in Maryland and this was found only 2-3 feet down in very sandy soil. Any insight is appreciated! Lauren

Hey TFF! First post! Not making my appearance with a bang, but had a decent quick trip to the Potomac, about an hour and 15 minutes. Nice handful of sea glass, decent amounts of ray plates and turritella. A few solid sand tigers. And what I believe to be a small, busted otodus in the palm of my hand. I usually always come away with at least one small complete otodus, so when I don’t, it makes a great day fossil hunting turn into merely a very good day 🤷🏻‍♂️. Let me know what you think!

I’ve been wanting to post this trip on here for a while, so today is the day! Pretty awesome one, showed up to the beach at the scheduled low tide only to see turbulent water up to the top of the beach due to incoming weather patterns. Gave it a chance anyway and very happy I did! Found my first Otodus (along with a busted blade of one), my hunting partner found the smaller one on the right in the second picture on the same day. Also found my first complete ray dental plate. Great day for firsts!

Hi everyone! I’m a high schooler who is very interested in paleontology and archeology. I visited Calvert Cliffs in Maryland and found these fossils. The first photo contains teeth and I’m interested what creatures they may be from. The second photo is full of random things that could be something but may just be pieces of shells (I think there may be a fossilized crab pincer/claw). Take a look!

This was found near the Calvert formation in Maryland. It does seem to be fossilized. Thanks for helping out a newbie and I will take proper photos for future posts.