Show Us Your Fossils Challenge Mode: Ordered By Geologic Time Period!

[Troodon]

16 minutes ago, Nimravis said:

Cretaceous-

 

I picked up these pieces and a couple other things from this formation in Argentina about 30 years ago at a MAPS show that was held in Macomb, Illinois. The dealer was from Argentina and had so many great fossils, I wish I bought more at the time, but I figured that he would be back, but it was not to be.

 

 

Here is a piece that is not great, but I really love this wind blown sand polished dinosaur bone from the same formation as noted above.

 

 

 

 

Here are a couple of my favorite dinosaur teeth from the family Troodontidae (Troodon), from the Cretaceous of Albert, Canada. 
 

(Frank @Troodon is it okay to ID them as this? I always call them Troodon teeth.)

 

Nice

They are Troodontid teeth not Troodon but where where they found.  Depending on formation/locality might have a better name.  

[Nimravis]

6 minutes ago, Troodon said:

Nice

They are Troodontid teeth not Troodon but where where they found.  Depending on formation/locality might have a better name.  

Thanks Frank , alas, that is the only info that I have on them. 

[Troodon]

Just now, Nimravis said:

Thanks Frank , alas, that is the only info that I have on them. 

Okay then it's Troodontid.

Lots of different Troodontid's in AB.   Dinosaur Park Fm has two: Latenivenatrix mcmasterae and Stenonychosaurus inequalis.  Dinosaur Park Formation: Albertavenator curriei.  The Scollard Fm: Indet Troodontid are just a few examples

Troodon formosus is known from the Judith River Fm in MT

[Nimravis]

Here is a rarer piece from the Oligocene- White River Badlands of South Dakota.

 

Lower Jaw Section with four teeth.

 

Perchoerus probus 

 

 

 

 

 

[Wrangellian]

4 hours ago, Nimravis said:

I love trace fossils and have a number from this site.

I know you do, and better than mine as I recall. I don't often see these any more so I'll have to be happy with my example.

[Wrangellian]

OK I'll replace my duplicate post with a quick Miocene item... I meant to rephoto these - old photos, not seen in a while, but they can be found out there somewhere...

Clypeaster sp. (scillae? -maybe the one on the left only)

Miocene - Langhian?

From mountains on Turkey/Syria border, in or near Harbiye, Antioch region.

My mother brought these back from a trip to Turkey in 1999. I hope the info I have pieced together is accurate, I'm not sure.

 

Edited December 4, 2022 by Wrangellian

[siteseer]

Here are two specimens of Scutellaster interlineatus from a site in the San Andreas Fault Zone in northern California.  Fossil sand dollars there are often cracked or broken, especially the larger ones.  Sometimes, they are distorted and/or cracked but not broken, oddly offset in places.  Here is an essentially-complete larger specimen (uncommon find) and a complete, smaller one.

 

Scutellaster interlineatus

Pliocene

Merced Formation

Daly City, San Mateo County, California 

larger one is 89mm wide; smaller one is 28mm wide

 

Edited December 5, 2022 by siteseer

[JamieLynn]

Pleistocene of Texas

Shark 

Size 1/2 inch

[sixgill pete]

8 hours ago, siteseer said:

Here are two specimens of Scutellaster interlineata from a site in the San Andreas Fault Zone in northern California.  Fossil sand dollars there are often cracked or broken, especially the larger ones.  Sometimes, they are distorted and/or cracked but not broken, oddly offset in places.  Here is an unusually-complete larger specimen and a smaller one.

 

Scutellaster interlineata

Pliocene

Merced Formation

Daly City, San Mateo County, California 

larger one is 89mm wide; smaller one is 28mm wide

 

Fantastic Jess.

[Missourian]

Just a placeholder for the Precambrian until something better shows up...

 

Accretionary lapilli in rhyolite tuff. I like to call it "fossil rain"

Proterozoic

Reynolds County, Missouri, USA

 

[siteseer]

16 hours ago, sixgill pete said:

Fantastic Jess.

 

Thanks.  I forgot to mention that the site was a hillside on the edge of a residential area.  I collected therein the 90's and once heard it had been relandscaped since so that it can't be collected from any longer.  I've been meaning to stop there to see what it looks like these days.  I remember a Best store down the road from it.

 

I collected a couple of gastropods and a crab claw but most of what I found were that species of sand dollar - lots of fragments of larger ones lying around.  A friend gave me that larger one.  I found that smaller one and a few even smaller ones.

Edited December 5, 2022 by siteseer

[Tidgy's Dad]

Nisusia vaticina. 

An example of the Cambrian class Kutorginata from the Middle Cambrian Lancara Formation, Leon, Spain

 

[Paleorunner]

From Ordovice an Edrioasteroid - Isorophus africanus, 1.5 centimeters in diameter.
  Kataoua Formation - El Kaid Errami - Morocco.
It is one of my last acquisitions of this year.

[Paleorunner]

On 12/4/2022 at 5:53 AM, Wrangellian said:

OK I'll replace my duplicate post with a quick Miocene item... I meant to rephoto these - old photos, not seen in a while, but they can be found out there somewhere...

Clypeaster sp. (scillae? -maybe the one on the left only)

Miocene - Langhian?

From mountains on Turkey/Syria border, in or near Harbiye, Antioch region.

My mother brought these back from a trip to Turkey in 1999. I hope the info I have pieced together is accurate, I'm not sure.

 

 

The Clypeaster on the left is scillae. 

[rocket]

ou, some days not on the thread and some billion years are gone 

So, back with a nice small plate with Scyphocrinites elegans, upper Silurian, Djebel Issomour near Alnif, Morocco

 

e.g. small means, more than a squaremeter, 120 x 110 cm, full of crinoids, not mounted

 

 

[JamieLynn]

Devonian of Oklahoma

Brachiopod Orthostrophia strophomenoides 

 

 

[Jeffrey P]

Punctospirifer kentuckyensis

Spiriferid Brachiopods

Upper Mississippian

Leitchfield Limestone

Glen Dean Member

Leitchfield, Kentucky

 

[Misha]

Do we consider the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian separate for this?

 

Here's my Upper Pennsylvanian Acanthodes bridgei from Kansas

[Wrangellian]

4 hours ago, Misha said:

Do we consider the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian separate for this?

 

I almost think we could allow another stage within the same period(system) as long as it comes after the previous one posted. For instance, if someone posts a Santonian item, you could (optionally) follow with a Campanian or Maastrichtian item, or go on to the Paleocene as usual. This topic goes along quick enough, but everyone seems to miss the period they want to post and they have to wait for the whole cycle to come around again, and still might miss it then too. This would allow more items from the more popular periods to be shown.... that is unless the original intent was to allow each period to be represented equally. In that case, never mind! I think it's a good exercise for people to learn the geologic time scale.

[FranzBernhard]

50 minutes ago, Wrangellian said:

For instance, if someone posts a Santonian item, you could (optionally) follow with a Campanian or Maastrichtian item, or go on to the Paleocene as usual.

You will get a point from me in any case ! (as long as it is in correct order )

Franz Bernhard

[Wrangellian]

1 hour ago, FranzBernhard said:

You will get a point from me in any case ! (as long as it is in correct order )

Franz Bernhard

Yup! (Not that I'm playing to win)

We'll see what the powers that be think... There's always a naysayer.

[Ludwigia]

3 hours ago, Wrangellian said:

I almost think we could allow another stage within the same period(system) as long as it comes after the previous one posted. For instance, if someone posts a Santonian item, you could (optionally) follow with a Campanian or Maastrichtian item, or go on to the Paleocene as usual. This topic goes along quick enough, but everyone seems to miss the period they want to post and they have to wait for the whole cycle to come around again, and still might miss it then too. This would allow more items from the more popular periods to be shown.... that is unless the original intent was to allow each period to be represented equally. In that case, never mind! I think it's a good exercise for people to learn the geologic time scale.

I agree. The same could apply in my opinion, for instance, to my Period of particular interest, the Jurassic, where we have not only 3 Epochs, but also all together 11 Stages within these....but this could also apply to all of the other Periods as well, couldn't it? Specialists in those areas have probably got finds from practically all Stages which could be shown. I think, as you are suggesting, that we could add things from younger Epochs or Stages within a particular System ad hoc, rather than as a rule, if it fits. I'm pretty sure that the fellow who started this off would have nothing against this idea, since he's hardly contributed anything much more than the original basic idea since he got this going and the impulse to keep it going has been taken over by others. What do you others think about this suggestion?

[Wrangellian]

2 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

I agree. The same could apply in my opinion, for instance, to my Period of particular interest, the Jurassic, where we have not only 3 Epochs, but also all together 11 Stages within these....but this could also apply to all of the other Periods as well, couldn't it? Specialists in those areas have probably got finds from practically all Stages which could be shown. I think, as you are suggesting, that we could add things from younger Epochs or Stages within a particular System ad hoc, rather than as a rule, if it fits. I'm pretty sure that the fellow who started this off would have nothing against this idea, since he's hardly contributed anything much more than the original basic idea since he got this going and the impulse to keep it going has been taken over by others. What do you others think about this suggestion?

Right, just if someone has something they've been itching to post from the same period as something that has just been posted... otherwise keep going onto the next period. (I'm sure the thing would soon stall if we had to wait for someone to post every single stage.) Just keep it in chronological order as the only firm guideline. I don't know if I would allow one person to post a whole slew of things from one period, if it were up to me, but if someone else has something from a younger epoch or (st)age in the same period, why not let them post it?

Edited December 6, 2022 by Wrangellian

[JamieLynn]

agreed, I like that idea, but I can see how someone like me, who knows a lot about Cretaceous and which is younger or older but I don't know about the stages  of the Jurassic, I wouldn't know if this random Jurassic fossil I have fits in what chronological order.  So if I don't know what formation it is, I just hope it fits! And yes, it should be just one post per person. That is kind of a "rule" anyways. When Ludwigia started doing the points system it was to discourage multiple posts by the same person. 

[JamieLynn]

And since no one has yet posted a Permian...I shall do so!

Texas Permiab

Amphibian Jaw Bone and tooth sockets.  Possibly Eryops

Size 1/2 inch