Frightmares Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 Found this tooth in my Aguja Formation micro matrix. It's about 6mm in length. I know it's in really rough shape, and I actually broke it in half attempting to get pictures of the distal/mesial sides. Can anyone give me an idea of what it may be? Could it be a theropod tooth? I don't see any evidence of serrations on either side. Sorry if the pictures are not the best. It was extremely difficult to take pictures, especially after it broke in half. Base of tooth Distal Mesial 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brevicollis Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 (edited) Where is that formation and how old is it ? I see no serrations but enamel structure. Maybe its an early mammals tooth ? All of them that i saw we're around the same sice. Edited March 3 by Brevicolis Are good signatures really that important ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frightmares Posted March 3 Author Share Posted March 3 3 minutes ago, Brevicolis said: Where is that formation and how old is it ? I see no serrations but enamel structure. Maybe its an early mammals tooth ? All of them that i saw we're around the same sice. It's Cretaceous in age from Brewster County, Texas. Mammal material is also found in this formation, so that may be a possibility. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhysicist Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 Sorry, there aren't enough features left to be identifiable IMO. 1 "Argumentation cannot suffice for the discovery of new work, since the subtlety of Nature is greater many times than the subtlety of argument." - Carl Sagan "I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there." - Richard Feynman Collections: Hell Creek Microsite | Hell Creek/Lance | Dinosaurs | Sharks | Squamates | Post Oak Creek | North Sulphur River | Lee Creek | Aguja | Permian | Devonian | Triassic | Harding Sandstone Instagram: @thephysicist_tff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 (edited) mammal might be possible, but it is only a possibility I add a pic of an upper cretaceous mammal tooth to "compare". Sorry for the bad quality of the pic. I go to do more pics next time, this is part of a new paper and the pic was taken lot of years ago when I found it... Only thing I would say that it looks a bit similar Edited March 3 by rocket 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleoNoel Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 I agree with mammal tooth, the root and cross section seem to fit that ID. What say you @jpc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 I am leaning away from mammal... too thin, but that is just a gestalt thing on my behalf. Most mammal canines would be more conical, as we can almost see in rocket's post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now