Buffalo or "pre-old" cow?

[Stackerlee]

Wondering if the experts wouldn't mind weighing in on an ID for these. They were found half-submerged in a spring creek near an old cow pasture and they seem to be in at least the beginning stages of mineralization. They don't quite pass the burn test though I've heard that's not necessarily definitive, and they're quite rock-like - the pieces I used for the test make a nice clink when dropped on cement. My question is mostly whether or not, in these conditions, the process of mineralization could occur in 100 years or less (which is about the length of time the land had been used as pasture), making them "pre-old" as I've read is possible in other threads.

 

As per the sticky thread, the creek in question is in the driftless area of Minnesota. Also I can provide measurements if that would help, but I'm under the impression that cow and buffalo femurs are too similar for that to make much difference. Thanks!

 

 

Edited April 8, 2023 by Stackerlee

[Maniraptora]

I believe when a modern bone is submerged like that, minerals contained in the water can seep into the porous bone and make it feel heavier and more "rock-like" without actually replacing the original material and making it a true fossil. Thus, a modern cow bone could seem "fossil-y" rather quickly. Someone else here can correct me if I've got this mixed up, though! Personally, I'd call these an interesting find either way.

[Harry Pristis]

There seems to be endless misunderstanding about the term "fossilized."

"Fossilized" (along with "petrified") is a near meaningless term in this specialized forum. The term is often substituted for "permineralized" or simply "mineralized" in describing a bone or tooth. But, fossilized doesn't always equate to mineralized because many fossils are not reinforced or replaced by minerals.

Bone is primarily composed of hydroxyapatite and collagen. Hydroxyapatite is an inorganic compound of calcium, phosphate, and hydroxide which is organized in a crystal latticework that gives bone (and teeth) structural rigidity. It preserves well as a fossil under some conditions.

Collagen is a fiberous protein that serves as connective tissue in bones and muscles. It does not preserve well in a fossil. As collagen decomposes, it may be replaced in the hydroxyapatite latticework by minerals from the depositional environment (e.g. silica dioxide dissolved in groundwater).

Bone reinforced with exogenous minerals is said to be "mineralized." If the bone components (including the hydroxyapatite) are entirely replaced by exogenous minerals such as silica, it is said to be "replaced by -". If a bone is mineralized, it is more likely to be a fossil. If a bone is not mineralized, it is less likely to be a fossil. No absolutes, only likelihoods, because there are exceptions.

In the case of leaves and wood, as with bones, permineralization depends on the circulation of mineral-saturated groundwater. If there is limited or no circulation (or no suitable minerals in solution), then there is no permineralization. BUT, the organic remains - the leaves, or wood, or bone - are still fossils ("fossilized" if you like).

A 'burn test' or 'match test' will indicate only whether there is collagen remaining in a bone -- scorched collagen has an awful smell. Briefly apply an open flame (I prefer a butane lighter) to an inconspicuous area of the object . . . you cannot keep a pin hot enough long enough to scorch collagen. Tooth enamel contains hydroxyapatite, but doesn't contain collagen, so the 'burn test' on tooth enamel would be a waste of time.

The 'click test' - tapping a putative fossil against your teeth - was a joke that caught on. There are plenty of other things in the environment against which you can click a bone. Don't put the remains of dead, decomposed animals in your mouth.

 

[Stackerlee]

Thanks for the input. Yes most likely a cow judging by the angle view and considering where it was found. Must've been one hell of a cow though, if this measurement diagram is to be trusted. Comparison pic is next to the dog's beef bone which matches the suggested measurements. Bone in question measures 3.375" x 4.5". Dare I say... a beefcake?

[ClearLake]

On 4/8/2023 at 2:55 PM, Stackerlee said:

Yes most likely a cow judging by the angle view

Hmmm, I'm not sure that is the conclusion I would have come to in looking at the picture you posted and the diagram that @Harry Pristis posted.  Maybe it is the viewing angle of your bone, but the shape and angle of yours looks a lot more like #11 in the diagram for Bison than Bos.  And then when I look at a cow femur I have, it makes me feel even more like Bison for yours.  You found two femurs, I'd go back and look for some more, maybe there is a nice skull in there!!

[CDiggs]

I always fall back on https://archive.org/details/postcranialskele00olse/page/54/mode/2up when I'm trying to sort Bos from Bison, but it's tough...

[Brandy Cole]

@CDiggs. I have Olsen's book of bison and bos comparisons at home.  Had no idea this was online!  Great resource.