Jump to content

Gerry Peters

Recommended Posts

Just now, Al Dente said:

Looks a lot like Hemipristis which is Eocene and younger. Is this a personal find? 

Found by a friend and definitely Cretaceous . The only Cretaceous shark teeth I have personally found are all squalicorax and one (probable) hybodus -attached. 

image.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Gerry Peters said:

The only Cretaceous shark teeth I have personally found are all squalicorax and one (probable) hybodus -attached. 


Do you have a photo of the other side of the “hybodus” tooth? Looks like it might be a fragment of fish jaw.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Al Dente said:


Do you have a photo of the other side of the “hybodus” tooth? Looks like it might be a fragment of fish jaw.

I agree with you and I’m open to changing my identification. Here’s some more pics. 

IMG_7641.jpeg

IMG_7640.jpeg

IMG_7638.jpeg

IMG_7637.jpeg

IMG_7631.jpeg

IMG_7630.jpeg

IMG_7634.jpeg

IMG_7632.jpeg

IMG_7633.jpeg

  • Enjoyed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI this “hybodus” tooth is from the Millwood Member of the Pierre Formation not from the Favel. Campanian not Cenomanian. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first tooth looks like a worn Hemipristis serra, which is from the Miocene. And even if it's not, it is not a Cretaceous shark. The only Cretaceous shark with serrated teeth were Squalicorax.

  • I found this Informative 1
  • I Agree 4

Dipleurawhisperer5.jpg

I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK with Hemipristis serra.

 

Coco

  • I found this Informative 1

----------------------
TOOL TO MEASURE YOUR FOSSILS : here

My PDF library 1 (Recent & fossil fishes and selachians) : here
My PDF library 2 (Alive animals - without fishes and selacians) : here
Recent selachian jaws : here
Heterodontic and selachians : here
Recent Selachian Eggcases : here
Recent fish otoliths ! here

A Greg...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MarcoSr said:

The first tooth is definitely a Hemipristis tooth and definitely not from the Cretaceous.

 

Marco Sr.

Thanks to everyone for their input.

This tooth was found in the northern Great Plains (southern Manitoba) where we have next to no Miocene deposits surviving due to extensive glaciation which removed up to two kilometers of Cenozoic sediments, including Miocene.
Without the Cretaceous age Western Interior Seaway, we are over 1000 kilometres from the nearest marine environment. 

This tooth is creating a bigger mystery than expected, I’ll have to keep digging…

 

I am attaching a pic of another tooth that was found in the same bed. 

IMG_8016.jpeg

  • Enjoyed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be a Lemon shark, again from the Miocene. Not a Cretaceous tooth.

  • I Agree 1

Dipleurawhisperer5.jpg

I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gerry Peters said:

I am attaching a pic of another tooth that was found in the same bed. 

 

Did you find this one? If you are collecting in a well-known fossil site, I would suggest that someone dumped some fossils from their collection there, either to let their kids enjoy finding a fossil or playing a trick on other collectors. Here's another misplaced Hemipristis that was posted yesterday- https://www.thefossilforum.com/topic/137717-identify-tooth/#comment-1459035

  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Al Dente said:

 

Did you find this one? If you are collecting in a well-known fossil site, I would suggest that someone dumped some fossils from their collection there, either to let their kids enjoy finding a fossil or playing a trick on other collectors. Here's another misplaced Hemipristis that was posted yesterday- https://www.thefossilforum.com/topic/137717-identify-tooth/#comment-1459035

It was found in the Assiniboine River bank at a fairly remote location but I am starting to suspect it is someone’s idea of a joke. I’ve found hundreds of Cretaceous fossils as well as Ordovician since these are the only significant fossil ages in Manitoba. Not all are identifiable due to lack of detail but this is the first recognizable fossil that doesn’t fit with our strata. I have contacted the Paleo Dept. at the University of Manitoba for any insight.

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...