Unknown

[Plax]

as the clam grows the tube it inhabits is enlarged and lengthened. These are growth rings of a sort. What I say here is opinion of course but on this one I'm fairly certain.

[Al Dente]

Here's Kummelia from Dr. Fossil's website http://drfossil.com/deep_cut_fossils

[Plax]

i recall them from C&D now that I see Ed's pic. Shows the growth rings nicely

[Guguita2104]

In my opinion it's definitely belemnite...It could not be a phragmocone, it could be the internal shell.

Here you have a image of one of my belemnites of Lower Jurassic (I know this fossil is from Cretaceous, but I think there are similarities between both).In it, you can see the growth rings, similar to your's.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Guguita2104

[Guguita2104]

One more:

[Al Dente]

In my opinion it's definitely belemnite...It could not be a phragmocone, it could be the internal shell.

Here you have a image of one of my belemnites of Lower Jurassic (I know this fossil is from Cretaceous, but I think there are similarities between both).In it, you can see the growth rings, similar to your's.

Belemnite.JPG

Belemnite guards are composed of radial calcite. If you look at post #29 you can see that this fossil lacks the radial calcite.

[Foshunter]

Enlarged the Kummelia, what I see, is the large end has ridges but as it tapers down they totally disapear?

Tried to enlarge some of the area John commented on. This is the best that my limited resources can accomplish

Tom

[Guguita2104]

Thanks Al Dente and nice discussion.

I still believe it's belemnite.If it's not a rostrum, it's a phragmocone.

Regards,

[JohnJ]

Identification is a process that makes for a good discussion. I've enjoyed the education.

Thanks for the extra photo, Tom.

[abyssunder]

I know it's destructive, but a median longitudinal cut through the specimen may lead easier to a right conclusion.

[Plax]

http://peabody.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/scientific-publications/ypmB41_1978.pdf

[Guest GemstoneAndFossil]

If you think you know what this piece is please look at my possible belemnite post! thanks and I hope that we have an Id here!

[Foshunter]

Photographed a pic of a Kummelia from my Computer monitor, must say looks pretty good to me. First before this post goes any further, if it does, want to thank everyone that has expressed an opinion , that's what makes the Forum great and a help to the less educated, like me, in the fossil world. Would like opinions on this new information from Plax, must say looks like a match. Pictured are clams found where the piece was found, Pecan Gap Chalk Sulphur R.

Tom

[Wrangellian]

It's a pretty close match, but I am still puzzled by the longitudinal groove which looks like a crack (as I have seen in scaphopods etc that are compacted) - is there anything about the function of the boring clam that explains this feature?

[PFOOLEY]

...the less educated, like me...

You need to give yourself more credit...I've seen your posts.

You are right about this Forum...good to have other viewpoints.

[FossilDAWG]

It's a pretty close match, but I am still puzzled by the longitudinal groove which looks like a crack (as I have seen in scaphopods etc that are compacted) - is there anything about the function of the boring clam that explains this feature?

It is a crack. Kummelia tubes are almost perfectly circular in cross section, but as they lack internal structures they are often flattened (as is Foshunter's specimen) and then they show compression cracks.

Don

[Auspex]

This has been an amazing process! The best of TFF, IMO!

[Plax]

Here is Eufistulana ripleyana from the Lower Peedee at Maple Hill, Pender Co, NC. Scale is centimeterDidn't take a pic of the broken end but there is a pelecyod steinkern in it. Guess we have general consensus?

[JohnJ]

You guys make a strong case, and may well be right; but I would need to see a closer examination of Tom's find before I go over to "the clam side". Regardless, it's been an education and I appreciate learning something new.