Real frog (Liaobatracus sp.)?

[MohammadAAK]

Hello,

 

I was offered a couple of fossils and this is the second one to the previous keichousaurus post. It’s a fossil frog, genus Liaobatracus, from early Cretaceous, Yixian formation, Liaoning province, China, exported in the 80s. 20 cm. Any ideas whether it’s a genuine piece. These are the best photos I was able to get. 

 

Best wishes

[Troodon]

I'm always weary of Chinese material but this looks good, I dont see any paint or composite bones, the hands look good. 

Please wait for other comments always better to get multiple opinions.

 

 

Image from paper 

Ji, S. and Ji, Q. (1998). "The first Mesozoic frog from China (Amphibia: Anura), Liaobatrachus grabaui gen. et sp. nov." Chinese Geology, March 1998: 39-49.

 

[MohammadAAK]

4 hours ago, Troodon said:

I'm always weary of Chinese material but this looks good, I dont see any paint or composite bones, the hands look good. 

Please wait for other comments always better to get multiple opinions.

Image from paper 

Ji, S. and Ji, Q. (1998). "The first Mesozoic frog from China (Amphibia: Anura), Liaobatrachus grabaui gen. et sp. nov." Chinese Geology, March 1998: 39-49.

Thank you, the paper is really helpful. If I’m not wrong, the current specimen seems more complete than the published one, especially when considering the phalanges

[MohammadAAK]

Any idea what the circle forms are around the frog?

[Troodon]

Guess shells.  Definitely looks more complete if it's the same one, not a frog expert

[marguy]

44 minutes ago, MohammadAAK said:

Any idea what the circle forms are around the frog?

maybe Eosestheria  (crustacea)

[oilshale]

Check this paper: Anurans from the Lower Cretaceous Jehol Group of Western Liaoning, China

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0069723

" The diagnosis of Liaobatrachus is revised, and a new diagnosis is provided for each species of this genus"

 

I don't think this frog is from the Early Cretaceous of Liaoning. The very large Eosestheria rather speak for the Late Cretaceous of Jiayin Jiamusi, Heilongjiang Province (Yuliangzi Formation).

As far as I know the anurans from there are not yet described.

Thomas

Edited October 7, 2020 by oilshale
misspelling

[-Andy-]

It's a real frog based on the details. Those round things around it are clam shrimps

[MohammadAAK]

3 hours ago, marguy said:

maybe Eosestheria  (crustacea)

 

2 hours ago, oilshale said:

Check this paper: Anurans from the Lower Cretaceous Jehol Group of Western Liaoning, China

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0069723

" The diagnosis of Liaobatrachus is revised, and a new diagnosis is provided for each species of this genus"

 

I don't think this frog is from the Early Cretaceous of Liaoning. The very large Eosestheria rather speak for the Late Cretaceous of Jiayin Jiamusi, Heilingjiang Province (Yuliangzi Formation).

As far as I know the anurans from there are not yet described.

Thomas

Thank you both. The seller admitted he's not certain of the locality information, which could it make possible to be from elsewhere

[MohammadAAK]

6 minutes ago, -Andy- said:

It's a real frog based on the details. Those round things around it are clam shrimps

Thank you

[RJB]

  This looks purty good to me.  Obviously was in pieces and not the best repair job and I would love to be able to look at it with my #10 opti-visor on to be able to check out every detail.  But looks purty good.

 

RB

[Crazyhen]

The presence of the clam shrimps, Eosestheria sp., which occurs in large quantity in Yixian formation, indicates the authenticity of the frog.  The bones look very genuine to me though I am not sure if there is any painting over the body.

[Pemphix]

On ‎07‎.‎01‎.‎2020 at 9:05 AM, Crazyhen said:

The presence of the clam shrimps, Eosestheria sp., which occurs in large quantity in Yixian formation, indicates the authenticity of the frog.  The bones look very genuine to me though I am not sure if there is any painting over the body.

I agree to that.

Especially the "skin-shadow" and some of the bones should be watched carefully under a microscope. Photos provided are not close enough to see those details.