Post oak creek finds

[SharkySarah]

We got a donation at work of a lot of little finds from post oak creek Texas. I’m not familiar with the site at all and the labels for these appear to have gotten wet some time in the past. I looked at the book on Cretaceous sharks and rays of Texas and it made me more and more confused. Would love any help to get these relabeled. If not, they’ll sit for a decade, be thrown out or given away 

 

here are my really unsure ideas- 

1. Texatrygon sp. or ptychodus sp. 

2. Pseudocorax sp. 

3. Not enough there ?

4. Not enough there ? 
5. Goblin ? 
6. Carcharias sp. 

7. Carcharias sp. 

8. Carcharias sp. 

9. Not positive enough to guess 

10. Carcharias sp. 

11. Hybodus sp. 

12. Not enough there ? 
13. Ptychodus sp. 

14. Too broken ?

15. Ptychodus sp. 

16. Too broken ?

17. Fish tooth?

18. Enchodus tooth 

19. Drum tooth? Not a vert. The bottom is flat and shiny 

20. Small fish tooth

21. Slag? Super shiny in person 

22. Stumped here. Bone? Coprolite? Straight shelled cephalopod? Just rocks ? 

 

[jikohr]

Nice finds!

 

The first one definitely isn't Ptychodus, although that might be a typo for Ptychotrygon which is what I would call that one.

 

5 looks goblin to me. Good ol Scapanorhynchus is a Post Oak Creek staple!

[Mosasaurhunter]

9 might be a Cretodus tooth, 10 and ll looks like Cretolamna Appendiculata. Nice finds.

[Notidanodon]

Could we get more angles of 9 please  I suspect it is a carcharias but need to have a closer look at other root angles

[SharkySarah]

Thank you all for the feedback so far! 
 

@Notidanodonhere you go! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JamieLynn]

Going to chime in with my two cents. I have gone through a LOT of POC material and tried my best to ID (and have had some help from FF members!) so while I am not 100% confident in all my IDs, I think I can help at least a little. And of course, anyone please correct MY Ids if off!! 

1. Definitely Ptychotrygon and NOT ptychodus.

2. Definitely NOT pseudocorax. Those are typically only found in Atco formation, so not in POC.

4 and 5 both look to be waterworn Goblin - Scapanorhynchus raphiodon.

6 7 and 8 too waterworn to determine. Notice that 7 has a small nutrient groove, so it would not be the same as the other two which lack the nutrient groove.

9 might be a Cretolamna woodwardi

11 Definitely NOT a hybodus. 

13 Definitley NOT a ptychodus. Looks more like an Enchodus tooth and jaw fragment

 Same as above with 15

18 Not Enchodus tooth but rather fish tooth Amia sp.

19 Yes, Fish tooth

21  I have no idea...i find them all the time! 

[ThePhysicist]

I think @JamieLynn mostly got them all. A plurality of fossils from POC are broken and worn, so precision ID is oftentimes not possible, as we see here. 

 

2. Agreed, not Pseudocorax - but - I have found one Pseudocorax in POC (could be reworked, but similar preservation and not surprising?). This is a worn goblin anterior.

 

9. Not C. woodwardi, it's not a valid species (Welton and Farish confused some Cretalamna teeth for Dwardius woodwardi). Though I do agree it's Cretalamna (anterior, juvenile). No nutrient groove, thin lingual dental band, cusplets. The cusplets are narrower than some are used to seeing in lateral teeth, but that's what they can look like on anteriors. I would doubt it being Carcharias. Sweet little guy. 

 

22. I suspect these are fish coprolites.

[SharkySarah]

Thank you all for the feedback!