Distribution of cretoxyrhina vraconensis and your thought on these teeth

[Vinnies fossils]

Hi everyone, 

Some time ago, I made a couple of finds in the Lower Cenomanian grey chalk of northern France.

I’ve found a couple of nice Cretalamna appendiculata here before.

 

But these teeth were standing out because of the cusp and root structure.

 

Normally Cretalamna has a square root, but these roots seemed a bit more rounded off.

All teeth have cusps one is more anterolateral situated, missing one root lobe - the other also misses one root lobe, and the last is more lateroposterior situated.

 

Cretoxyrhina mantelli is present at this location but I thought my teeth looked like Cretoxyrhina vraconensis. When I asked about at some local collectors they said it wasn’t possible to find C. vraconensis in France.

 

What do you think? 

 

 

This first tooth is 15mm  in width 

 

 

 

I’m not sure about this one could still be Cretalamna 20mm on longest side 

 

 

 

 

This last tooth is still in the matrix, which makes an id difficult, but it has very rounded of root lobes.

Unfortunately it also misses one . 19mm wide 

 

 

 

[Fossildude19]

@MarcoSr  @Al Dente  @Coco

[ynot]

1 hour ago, Vinnies fossils said:

 

What is the comment here?

Be patient - it may take a few days for an answer.

[Vinnies fossils]

3 hours ago, ynot said:

What is the comment here?

Be patient - it may take a few days for an answer.

I’m new to the platform.. didn’t mean to comment anything:)

[Coco]

Hi,

 

10 hours ago, Vinnies fossils said:

When I asked about at some local collectors they said it wasn’t possible to find C. vraconensis in France. What do you think? 

This first tooth is 15mm  in width 

 

Where in the north would it have been found ? I did not dig much the Cenomanian, I know more about the Miocene teeth.

 

I have not found anything conclusive on the web, but according to this document (p. 26) this species was only found in Kazakhstan and the USA : http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:825951/FULLTEXT01.pdf

 

Coco

 

[Fossildude19]

3 hours ago, ynot said:

What is the comment here?

 

Accidental quote button click. 

[Fossildude19]

Cropped and brightened:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Vinnies fossils]

1 hour ago, Coco said:

Hi,

 

Where in the north would it have been found ? I did not dig much the Cenomanian, I know more about the Miocene teeth.

 

I have not found anything conclusive on the web, but according to this document (p. 26) this species was only found in Kazakhstan and the USA : http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:825951/FULLTEXT01.pdf

 

Coco

 

They where found at escalles (Calais). There’s a lot of variety in age here. From albian to turonian.

[Coco]

I tag @Anomotodon

 

Coco

[ynot]

@MarcoSr @Al Dente

[MarcoSr]

12 hours ago, Fossildude19 said:

@MarcoSr  @Al Dente  @Coco

 

1 hour ago, ynot said:

@MarcoSr @Al Dente

 

Sorry, but I can't help with this as I'm not familiar with the species Cretoxyrhina vraconensis.

 

Marco Sr.

[Notidanodon]

I’m familiar with them as I hunt the grey chalk of southern England. The second tooth’s root is very unusual, could it be pathological or just an extreme tooth position?

either way I’m looking at this website and it’s very helpful 

http://www.chalk.discoveringfossils.co.uk/5 BRITISH CHALK SHARKS.htm#Elasmobranchs

1. I’d still go C.appendiculata

3. could be cardabiodon but likely still cretolamna

4. Still C.appendiculata

[Vinnies fossils]

4 hours ago, Notidanodon said:

I’m familiar with them as I hunt the grey chalk of southern England. The second tooth’s root is very unusual, could it be pathological or just an extreme tooth position?

either way I’m looking at this website and it’s very helpful 

http://www.chalk.discoveringfossils.co.uk/5 BRITISH CHALK SHARKS.htm#Elasmobranchs

1. I’d still go C.appendiculata

3. could be cardabiodon but likely still cretolamna

4. Still C.appendiculata

Thanks for the help! Normally I don’t have that many problems with an id but these species are difficult to keep apart sometimes. This website is very useful thanks! 

[Al Dente]

I don’t have any experience with Cretoxyrhina. The first tooth is nicely preserved but it is a posterior tooth which probably won’t help much with an ID.

[Vinnies fossils]

1 hour ago, Al Dente said:

I don’t have any experience with Cretoxyrhina. The first tooth is nicely preserved but it is a posterior tooth which probably won’t help much with an ID.

I have had a lot of different opinions on this tooth but nothing certain. That’s the problem with isolated teeth from a location that isn’t properly described.

[Anomotodon]

I think these are Cretoxyrhina teeth, the rounded blunt cusplets and root protuberances are typical of early Cretoxyrhinas. As for the species - C. vraconensis, C. denticulata and C. mantelli are essentially chronospecies showing gradual reduction of lateral cusplets. C. vraconensis is known from a few Albian-early Cenomanian deposits - including Europe (Poland & Ukraine). C. denticulata is Cenomanian, and has no cusplets on anterior teeth, at least according to the original description by Glikman. Especially if this deposit is early Cenomanian C. vraconensis is probably a good choice.

 

 

All are C. vraconensis from Ukraine

 

 

M-U are C. vraconensis from Poland.

[Vinnies fossils]

22 hours ago, Anomotodon said:

I think these are Cretoxyrhina teeth, the rounded blunt cusplets and root protuberances are typical of early Cretoxyrhinas. As for the species - C. vraconensis, C. denticulata and C. mantelli are essentially chronospecies showing gradual reduction of lateral cusplets. C. vraconensis is known from a few Albian-early Cenomanian deposits - including Europe (Poland & Ukraine). C. denticulata is Cenomanian, and has no cusplets on anterior teeth, at least according to the original description by Glikman. Especially if this deposit is early Cenomanian C. vraconensis is probably a good choice.

 

 

All are C. vraconensis from Ukraine

 

 

M-U are C. vraconensis from Poland.

Thanks for your reply. I also thought at least some of them had to be cretoxyrhina.