Unlabelled spinosaurid tooth

[M3gal0don_M4n]

I found this unlabelled tooth I believe to be a spinosaurid. I only have one photo. I am deciding whether to buy it or not.

[Brevicollis]

More and better pictures would be needed, to have an opinion on it.

But if you like it, maybe go for it. Or send better pictures so that we can give you an opinion on it.

[M3gal0don_M4n]

Sure. I’m guaranteed to have them by next week

[Brevicollis]

No time limit is needed, it won't run or rot away.

[FB003]

Locality is always required.  Where is it from? Without that information, anything else is an assumption vs an identification.

[M3gal0don_M4n]

It didn’t have a tag, or any form of information. I’ll have to ask the shopkeeper. 

Edited April 17 by M3gal0don_M4n

[M3gal0don_M4n]

I’ll post more pics tomorrow, when I go. My three guesses are (from having no information) Baryonyx or Suchomimus. My reasoning for not including Spinosaurus is that the rock it was found in does not appear to be from The Kem-Kem beds. 
 

If there is no information provided by the shopkeepers, could I (with a lot of help from you) be able to guess location by the rock it is in? It then again could have been implanted, as I don’t quite remember and there is only one photo.

Edited April 20 by M3gal0don_M4n

[Fossildude19]

I would not hold my breath for guessing a location from the matrix color/texture.

This is why provenance is SO important when collecting fossils.
The fossil's scientific value significantly decreases with inaccurate or nonexistent location information.

[North]

3 hours ago, M3gal0don_M4n said:

I’ll post more pics tomorrow, when I go. My three guesses are (from having no information) Baryonyx or Suchomimus. My reasoning for not including Spinosaurus is that the rock it was found in does not appear to be from The Kem-Kem beds. 
 

If there is no information provided by the shopkeepers, could I (with a lot of help from you) be able to guess location by the rock it is in? It then again could have been implanted, as I don’t quite remember and there is only one photo.

I have hard time to consider it would be Baryonyx, teeth of them are hard to obtain, so loosing locality of that one would be bad for seller.

Also need to remember that it can be crocodyliform for example.

 

Spinosaurus is also known from Dekkar fm, which produces more dark colored fossils.

 

You could guess locality from color, but its still just an guess. Many locations can look similar and color depends a lot from mineral consentration. It works better when it supports the given locality and should not be used as only information.

[FB003]

3 hours ago, M3gal0don_M4n said:

I’ll post more pics tomorrow, when I go. My three guesses are (from having no information) Baryonyx or Suchomimus. My reasoning for not including Spinosaurus is that the rock it was found in does not appear to be from The Kem-Kem beds. 
 

If there is no information provided by the shopkeepers, could I (with a lot of help from you) be able to guess location by the rock it is in? It then again could have been implanted, as I don’t quite remember and there is only one photo.

 

The initial statement in your 1st post states that you assume this is spinosaurid and it has no ID label.  It's a very large leap from assuming its spinosaurid without locality (possible) to guessing its Baryonyx or Suchomimus which have very specific localities and need those localities to justify identification (not possible).  At the end of the day, without better pictures/size, this is simply a "tooth".  Could be anything based on the currently available pictures. I do think with better pictures and size we can probably narrow it down a little bit though.

[Brevicollis]

When I saw teeth like this one, I also thought at first, that they are not Spinosaurus, I thought that they were Sucho teeth. And I was really happy, seeing how cheap most of these teeths are. But then ive researched a bit, and I found out that Sucho is only known from Niger, not morocco. These teeth are most likely from the Dekkar formation, but without more informations, its hard to tell.

[Runner64]

Looks to be a spinosaurini from the Dekkar Group in Talsint, Figuig Province, Morocco.

 

definitely not a baryonchinae tooth and not from the Kem Kem.

Edited April 20 by Runner64

[M3gal0don_M4n]

Thanks! I’ll get more information to give you when I go today.

[M3gal0don_M4n]

I ultimately decided not to buy it and went for a more expensive fossil I preferred more. A Barasaurus Besairiei skeleton that was near complete, only lacking most of its skull.

I did, however, out of interest inquire as to what the tooth was in order to put my question to rest. It turned out to be as you said, A Spinosaurus tooth from what he claimed was “a new formation with darker fossils.” Thanks for all of your help.

 

[jikohr]

2 hours ago, M3gal0don_M4n said:

I ultimately decided not to buy it and went for a more expensive fossil I preferred more. A Barasaurus Besairiei skeleton that was near complete, only lacking most of its skull.

I did, however, out of interest inquire as to what the tooth was in order to put my question to rest. It turned out to be as you said, A Spinosaurus tooth from what he claimed was “a new formation with darker fossils.” Thanks for all of your help.

 

 

Is it the "Dekkar Formation"? I've been seeing an influx of fossils from that on the market in the last couple months. All have been species I typically associate with the Kem Kem Beds (Spino, Carch, Abelisaur, etc.) but noticably darker and from this fancey new formation.

 

Not entirely sure if it's a legit formation or a new flavor of Moroccan embelishment though.

[M3gal0don_M4n]

Potentially. That was what had been suggested to me on this forum, but the fossil guy at the shop couldn’t remember the name. He said it could’ve been when I mentioned the Dekkar formation.