Misc unknowns , ID help requested

[Balance]

Howdy All ! 
Got some interesting ones today. 
 

Please and Thank you for any suggestions. 
 

Jp

 

#1

 

5” or 13cm long

Appears fossilized - all I smell in a burn test is the butane and it dings when you tap it. It’s a 

sand bar pickup. 

Bone valley formation

south Florida 

I admit i haven’t even started to look. My new plan is to ask first, before I deep dive and it’s suddenly tomorrow. 😉

 

#2

 

What in the ??? I believe this is a Chama  heilprini. Fairly certain of that, but what in the heck is going on here? Look closely, they aren’t stuck that way. One is fused into the other and visa versa…  Who orders breakfast in this situation? 😉

 

#3

 

Found this in the road fill piles. Assumption is caloosahatche formation because I also found M. Bispinosa in the same stuff. 
 

1.25” or 3.5 cm long. 
Early to mid Pleistocene material. 
 

[Notidanodon]

1st is either turtle or crocodile I would think, probably leaning towards turtle 

[Daniel82]

Number three can be Brissopsis hofmani(one arm).

 

[fossilus]

Number 1 may be a distal radius, it's hard to tell with your photos.

If it is a radius, I can see some similarities to carnivore.

 

[Al Dente]

Number 3 is a crab leg. Maybe Persephona.

[Balance]

@Notidanodon and @jpc I’ll look into that. Thanks 

 

@Al Dente I see that clearly now. Thank you. 
 

@Daniel82 I need to look again but that suggestion came up as an echinoid. 🤔
 

@fossilus how can I take better pictures? Happy to shot anything you like. 🙂

[Balance]

Alligator humerus sure does fit #1. Went back and forth with the crocodile humerus but they seem straighter than my example. 
 

Crab definitely fits #3. ( kinda makes me hungry. )

 

It’s down to you, #2! “Who does #2 work for?! 🦸‍♂️”

 

Thanks again to the suggestions. 

 

Jp

 

Edit: we have a late entry, folks! 
#4

 

It is on #2.  Single coral polyp?
 

 

Edited January 11 by Balance

[fossilus]

Sorry I should have said proximal when I said distal on a radius. There are not many long bones with this much curvature.

 

Regardless, looking at alligator, femur looks like another possibility to me, along with humerus as @Balance@Notidanodon said.

I would like to see straight on photos, at right angles to the length and end views, not at an angle, as these photos were taken. Also, I would lighten up by editing to give more contrast to a black bone.

Edited January 11 by fossilus

[Balance]

@fossilus Thank you!  I knew you meant proximal earlier. It missing the distal end completely probably flip the switch. 
 

I’ve headed in for the night but when I’m back in the shop tomorrow I’ll get some better images. Thanks for the help. I think artistically and the categorical format makes way more sense for recording information on anatomy!

 

Jp

 

Added: when I say artistically I mean in terms of ratio and proportion instead of sense and reason. Fibonacci versus logic 

Edited January 11 by Balance

[Shellseeker]

16 hours ago, Al Dente said:

Number 3 is a crab leg. Maybe Persephona.

Had to figure out what crab...

 

Mottled purse crab, found in Western Atlantic, Florida, Georgia,  South Carolina... Claw segment closest to the body. 

18 hours ago, Daniel82 said:

Number three can be Brissopsis hofmani(one arm).

Could not get a match on Google,, please add a photo

 

13 hours ago, Balance said:

Edit: we have a late entry, folks! 
#4

It is on #2.  Single coral polyp?

Chama macerophylla below in Sanibel surf..

Leafy Jewel Box, from December 13th, 2008 in the tide line, when I lived up to my avatar name.  Miker has a comment on Pliocene Chama also.

My experience on finding the modern versions mixed with fossil was that many small chama attached to their brethren in couplets or triplets.

 

I already have a single polyp from Palatka.  Not a lot of success.  Is this one yours to ID?  I'll think about the bone.. I have seen it before, but can not recall...

[oyo]

6 hours ago, Balance said:

 

It’s down to you, #2! “Who does #2 work for?! 🦸‍♂️”

 

 

 

Edit: we have a late entry, folks! 
#4

 

It is on #2.  Single coral polyp?
 

 

It was hard for you to see it. No wonder, it's a very small coral.

Again a larva beginning its development attached to something. Difficult if not impossible to identify.

Let's go with the risky bet. It seems to me like something that could end up developing more or less elongated tubes. Something Galaxea type or similar.

More than anything so that number 4 does not go unanswered and in case someone else is encouraged by it.

Edited January 11 by oyo

[Balance]

Thanks so much for the overnight support! 
 

@fossilus here are your photos. I turned on all the lights this time so contrast is much better. Im also adding an image from Harry’s gallery with the Alligator and narrow snout Croc together . 

 

5” long 
 

@Shellseeker

 

Thank you! I need to go through the Chama group because I have several as small heilprini that are incorrect. Mikes link was helpful. -

 

ID on the Chama  are further complicated by decay. Turns a willcoxi into an Emmonsi real quick when it’s rotten looking.  Mikes thread will help in the future because I’ll use the underside and clockwork directions to aide.
 

It seems the layer of the caloosahatche with these in it (bottom of the upper C.) is starting to rot like the middle C is. Maybe it’s just the exposure I’m in? Or will I find this regularly when the layers are present? Basically I assume it’s all in transition to “the marl” (lower C)
 

Im having trouble with something. Perhaps the forum can enlighten. My go too is the Neogene atlas but I find these post use many species names that are just not in the atlas. My books are old. 80’s. So I expect they have been amended to modern so I will occasionally see a species in the book that’s no longer recognized in the current era… 

 

An example being the Chama. Mike and Harry both list names that’s aren’t there. Mike list a complete species name that’s not listed in the atlas and Harry adds the author after the species which nobody else does. Books or online in the atlas. So is the atlas incomplete or is this another area where these scientists are not agreeing or…  when you find 3 answers to the same question in 3 different spots??? 
 

If you can’t tell, this is frustrating because I’m just having fun with a hobby. 
 

@oyo

 

Thank you! I’ll search that species today. I honestly didn’t expect an answer. I just discovered it while zooming in on the other photos to inspect the connection/fusion. 
 

Since you apparently are a coral whisperer, look what is drying this weekend 

 

I think I have two species. hyades and bournoni. 
 

I have good info for both so once they dry I’ll start inspecting the coral polyps and put my counting hat on. 

 

 

 

[hemipristis]

19 hours ago, Notidanodon said:

1st is either turtle or crocodile I would think, probably leaning towards turtle 

Agree

[Balance]

@hemipristis “ those who cannot remember the past or condemned to repeat it.”

 

Those that can are condemned to sit helplessly and watch the rest. 😉

 

Jp

[fossilus]

20 hours ago, Notidanodon said:

1st is either turtle or crocodile I would think, probably leaning towards turtle 

I would probably agree also.

[oyo]

48 minutes ago, Balance said:

 

@fossilus 

@Shellseeker

 

 

 

@oyo

 

Thank you! I’ll search that species today. I honestly didn’t expect an answer. I just discovered it while zooming in on the other photos to inspect the connection/fusion. 
 

Since you apparently are a coral whisperer, look what is drying this weekend 

 

I think I have two species. hyades and bournoni. 
 

I have good info for both so once they dry I’ll start inspecting the coral polyps and put my counting hat on. 

 

 

 

 

I like corals, yes.

You have some pretty "big heads" there.

If you take macro photos of the corallites, please show them to me.

Solenastrea seems reasonable to them, yes.

Thanks and greetings.

Edited January 11 by oyo

[Coco]

1 hour ago, Balance said:

An example being the Chama. Mike and Harry both list names that’s aren’t there. Mike list a complete species name that’s not listed in the atlas and Harry adds the author after the species which nobody else does. Books or online in the atlas. So is the atlas incomplete or is this another area where these scientists are not agreeing or…  when you find 3 answers to the same question in 3 different spots???

@Balance the atlas may not be up to date. If two people quote Latin binominal names, it is likely that this genus + species name exists or has existed.

 

The true form of quotation for a Latin name is "Genre" + "Species" (both in italics) + "Original author’s name or, in brackets, the original author’s name when the name or species was changed later" + "year of the first scientific description").

 

For example, the correct way to write the great white shark is : Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758). It is deduced that this name given in the first scientific description was not this one since Linnaeus is in parentheses.

 

If we go to the WoRMS site, which is regularly updated, we will see that the 1st latin name of this shark was Squalus carcharias and will also see all intermediate names given between the 1st name and the currently accepted name. Here is the link : https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=105838

 

I agree with you that we never write it like this (probably because of ignorance, but also for speed or other reasons). Already look at the number of people here who write a full Latin name, that is with the gender name or at least its initial! Almost nobody! And yet, giving a species name without its gender name means nothing ! And let’s not talk about those who write the Latin names in italics, they are even fewer !

 

Sorry for disturbing your topic by answering your question. Thanks to those who read the whole thing !

 

Coco

 

 

Edited January 11 by Coco

[Balance]

@coco THANK YOU!!!! 

 

Harrys notations make sense now. As he uses the complete version compared to even the Neogene Atlas.  
 

I’ll try using WORMs with the atlas and see if I confuse myself more or if I can get more accurate information. 
 

Jp

[Coco]

What is very valuable on this site is that you can enter current species or fossils. Just tick the corresponding boxes. Good research !

 

Coco

Edited January 11 by Coco

[Balance]

@Notidanodon and @fossilus  I think it might just be crocodile after all. 
 

After an afternoon researching loggerheads, green, hawksbill, and a couple other sea turtles nothing was coming together. Since I had looked at alligator humerus I figured maybe check femur like fossilus suggested. Well, I think it might be a femur after all. 
 

Gavialosuchus americanus 

 

Thoughts? 

 

Here’s the thread that got me here  

 

[fossilus]

Cool!!