Jump to content

Recommended Posts

boonxeven

Found this past weekend at the Brownwood dam spillway in Texas. White tip was sticking out. Was on a large stone that tumbled from further up. It's really brittle, and was already cracked in the stone. Was trying to take it out with surrounding stone but it came out as I was doing it in a few pieces. Was hoping for a more specific species beyond the Petalodus genus if possible.

 

PXL_20210320_231446836.thumb.jpg.4407ec57b9f82854554e270624732cc4.jpg

 

PXL_20210320_231512381.thumb.jpg.75491eb484bab3c0458dd4054f0a9bca.jpg

 

PXL_20210320_231458659.thumb.jpg.40e07c8d791026359c52289fe441fd06.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

PXL_20210320_155552605.jpg

  • Enjoyed 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
ThePhysicist

Wow, that is a nice tooth! I can't help, unfortunately. 

Edited by ThePhysicist
Link to post
Share on other sites
boonxeven
11 hours ago, ThePhysicist said:

Wow, that is a nice tooth! I can't help, unfortunately. 

Thank you! I was just thinking that I didn't like the location I was looking, and hadn't found anything good when I spotted it sticking out. I'm super jazzed about finding it!

12 hours ago, DPS Ammonite said:

P. ohioensis is likely since it is the default genus in North America.

 

https://fossil.15656.com/research-pages/petalodus/

Very much appreciated, thank you! That's a great resource to read more about these. I was having a hard time finding much on them, apparently they're not as common of a shark tooth, or maybe just less interest in them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
cngodles

Yikes, that's my webpage!

 

The controversy around P. ohioensis is that the original specimen is currently lost. It was likely in Safford's possession when he passed away 114 years ago. I contacted the university he taught at for years, but nobody could find it. P. allegheniensis was described 3 years later, but since Safford was first, P. ohioensis is the name people use in North America since it's essentially the same tooth morphology. For a while P. allegheniensis was thought to be first because Safford published his in a much more obscure journal that was not well read.

 

There are two casts in existence however. One at Yale, the other at the Field Museum. The Field Museum one was recently found and is of much higher quality than the Yale one. It helped cement it's species ID in North America.

 

The most modern US species named was P. jewetti by Miller in 1957, but it's clearly a P. ohioensis and his reason for naming was that it was the first one ever found in Kansas!

 

I became fascinated with these teeth after reading this article:

http://elibrary.dcnr.pa.gov/GetDocument?docId=1752440&DocName=PaGeoMag_v48no2.pdf

 

First I found a crinidx calax plate that I thought was a tooth. Then later I found the real thing. :)

Edited by cngodles
Link to post
Share on other sites
boonxeven
17 hours ago, cngodles said:

Yikes, that's my webpage!

 

The controversy around P. ohioensis is that the original specimen is currently lost. It was likely in Safford's possession when he passed away 114 years ago. I contacted the university he taught at for years, but nobody could find it. P. allegheniensis was described 3 years later, but since Safford was first, P. ohioensis is the name people use in North America since it's essentially the same tooth morphology. For a while P. allegheniensis was thought to be first because Safford published his in a much more obscure journal that was not well read.

 

There are two casts in existence however. One at Yale, the other at the Field Museum. The Field Museum one was recently found and is of much higher quality than the Yale one. It helped cement it's species ID in North America.

 

The most modern US species named was P. jewetti by Miller in 1957, but it's clearly a P. ohioensis and his reason for naming was that it was the first one ever found in Kansas!

 

I became fascinated with these teeth after reading this article:

http://elibrary.dcnr.pa.gov/GetDocument?docId=1752440&DocName=PaGeoMag_v48no2.pdf

 

First I found a crinidx calax plate that I thought was a tooth. Then later I found the real thing. :)

Your page is very informative and interesting! The additional article too!

I could completely understand mistaking a crinoid calyx plate for a tooth, especially if it was fragmented. Similar texture and shape on the point. I wasn't even aware that petolodus teeth were able to be found where I was looking. Luckily the Austin Paleontological society was around to point me in the right direction! 

  • I Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
cngodles

In "Pennsylvanian Fossils of North Texas" they do a chapter on Late Pennsylvanian Marine Sharks of Texas (Chapter 5) that has about 18 pages of writing on shark teeth and remains in general.

 

Although North Texas can be pretty vague with how huge the state is. I've had the pleasure of driving from Texarkana to a 3 day stay in San Antonio, and off to El Paso to continue to California. When I-10 has signs for Exit 877 over in Louisiana, you know you are in for a trip!

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.

×
×
  • Create New...