Are these "Dakotaraptor" tooth fragments

[Joseph Fossil]

As I've continued my awesome Internship work with Late Cretaceous microfossils at the Chicago Field Museum of Natural History (aka the Best Museum in Chicago), I've recently found two large dromaeosaurid teeth I would like a proper ID for. The micro fossils are 68-66 Million Years old and are from the Maastrichtian Cretaceous age Hell Creek Formation in what is now the U.S. States of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana.
 
I think these two specimens belong to the taxon previously called "Dakotaraptor".

[Joseph Fossil]

Specimen 1 

(Note: Specimen 1 has a crown length of at least 0.5 mm.)

 

 

 

 

 

[Joseph Fossil]

Specimen 2

 

 

 

[Joseph Fossil]

@jpc @Runner64 @hadrosauridae @digit Any thoughts you guys on the ID of these specimens?

[Runner64]

Specimen 1 is an Acheroraptor tooth. I believe specimen 2 is too fragmentary to ID.

[hadrosauridae]

7 hours ago, Joseph Fossil said:

@jpc @Runner64 @hadrosauridae @digit Any thoughts you guys on the ID of these specimens?

 

2 hours ago, Runner64 said:

Specimen 1 is an Acheroraptor tooth. I believe specimen 2 is too fragmentary to ID.

 

I agree that #1 is likely Acheroraptor, and #2 is too incomplete to make a good ID.

[Kikokuryu]

7 hours ago, Runner64 said:

Specimen 1 is an Acheroraptor tooth. I believe specimen 2 is too fragmentary to ID.

I agree as well, it's Acheroraptor as clear as day. The ridges are a dead give away.

 

Fragment is fragment.

[digit]

19 hours ago, Joseph Fossil said:

@jpc @Runner64 @hadrosauridae @digit Any thoughts you guys on the ID of these specimens?

Dinosaur material is above my pay grade--Florida was underwater during the time of dinosaurs so they never appear while I'm picking micro-matrix.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Joseph Fossil]

Thanks for the ID guys! I appreciate it!!

[jpc]

I am a lazy IDer.... or maybe I am too busy.  I am generally happy saying 'dromaeosaurid', or even just theropod.  I prefer to spend my IDing time on mammals.   : )