Fossil finds, Newbie. I.D. Help appreciated 😊

[Arc61]

Hey all, 

I'm a newbie and would like to ask if someone here on this forum will please assist me in I.D.ing my fossil finds 😊  I've done some research but I'm still learning. I'll post a few different fossils here but with list them by #  (please refer to the # when responding).   Specifics on fossil types would be great.  Any help is greatly appreciated.  Firstly, I apologize that I didn't have a ruler when I snapped the pics. I'll do my best to include measurements listed with the pics below.  

All Fossils were found in North Attleborough, Massachusetts, Wamsutta Formation, Exposure w/ red shale.  

 

Thanks in advance! 😉

 

 

#1 - Thick flat red shale rock, measures about 6 inches high x 5 inches wide with what appears to be FAINT impressions of ferns throughout as well what looks like a round shaped leaf in the bottom right corner.  

Very hard to photograph since they're hard to see! What am I looking at here? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#2 - Interesting find between split shale layer.

Rock Measures about 3 inches long.

1 side is negative impression, other is positive. It's very interesting, but what is it?! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#3 - This piece of red shale measures about

3 inches long and has bumps all over it.  Bark? 

Curious what someone thinks made this impression. 

 

 

 

 

 

#4 - Small red shale fossil measures 1 inch wide.  Not sure if it's a type of grass fossil.

 

 

 

 

 

#5 - Another tiny piece of red shale. Measures 1 inch long.  Another plant? 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 12 by Arc61

[Jaybot]

The first two seem like geological formations rather than fossils to my unprofessional eyes, not sure on #3, and #4 reminds me of petrified wood.  #5 could just be how the shale ended up breaking, but again, I'm no expert.

[Lone Hunter]

#4 is slickenside I think.

[Fossildude19]

For me, #1 looks like decorticated tree limb of some sort of tree. The fern looking bit is just the way the stone fractured.

#2 looks like just the way the stone fractured - conchoidally.

#3 looks like some sort of sedimentary structure.

#4 looks to  me like some sort of plant.

#5 May be a bit of Calamites, but I think plant of some sort, at least.

[westcoast]

None of these are fossil, most are related to mud ripples, which can produce this type of feature on the interface between thin mud and sandstone layers. 2 is conchoidal fracture.

[Ludwigia]

Hmmmm.....there seem to be diverging opinions here. I find it difficult to determine whether some of these are plant impressions or geological features, since they look like both in a few cases. I'm not familiar with this formation, so I googled it and discovered that plant fossils are relatively common there, so this might be the case here. Maybe it depends on which horizon they were found in?

[Arc61]

9 hours ago, Ludwigia said:

Hmmmm.....there seem to be diverging opinions here. I find it difficult to determine whether some of these are plant impressions or geological features, since they look like both in a few cases. I'm not familiar with this formation, so I googled it and discovered that plant fossils are relatively common there, so this might be the case here. Maybe it depends on which horizon they were found in?

 

 

Yes, differing opinions here and appreciated.  To be clear, this is a locality with a history of known fossil finds.  I apologize for posting my finds as "fossils".  I should have posted, "possible fossil finds?" Or "What are these?" 🤔

My finds came from a cut that has a red shale horizon in between 2 conglomerate layers.  These are from the middle shaly layer of the cut of the Wamsutta formation, Attleboro, Ma, USA.

I'm a beginner with very little knowledge but collected these pieces because they caught my attention and I want to learn from them, (fossils or not).  I believe some are plant impressions and wanted to get input on the all of these to determine if they are geological impressions or otherwise. I'm still learning, thank you for your patience and understanding.  My thoughts:

#1  Are these super faint markings geological or plant impressions? The additional round "impression" reminds me of a Cyclopteris orbicular shade leaf 🤔

#2 looking into conchoidal fracture as mentioned. Interesting.

#3 reminds me of tree bark or mud bubbles.

#4 & #5 remind me of plant impressions, Cordaites? 

 

Here is the cut that I explored

 

 

[Arc61]

On 2/12/2024 at 10:32 PM, Fossildude19 said:

For me, #1 looks like decorticated tree limb of some sort of tree. The fern looking bit is just the way the stone fractured.

#2 looks like just the way the stone fractured - conchoidally.

#3 looks like some sort of sedimentary structure.

#4 looks to  me like some sort of plant.

#5 May be a bit of Calamites, but I think plant of some sort, at least.

Thanks for the reply. Very interesting. I had to look up "decorticated" LOL.  The conchoidal fracture is kinda neat. #3 is so interesting to me. Bubbly effect that grabbed my attention.

I tend to agree that #4 & #5 could be plants. 

Appreciate your input 👌 

Someday will return to this locality and search for more. Much to explore and learn! 😊