worthy 55 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 I find these some times but I really am not sure what to tag them as. I have just been calling them tube worm cases. Anyone know it's real name? It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Edonihce Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 I have no idea what the overall structure is, but I think the pattern we see there may be made up of beekite rings... http://www.lakeneosho.org/Paleolist/99/index.html http://www.lakeneosho.org/Paleolist/74/index.html http://www.lakeneosho.org/Paleolist/74/1A.html http://v10.lscache6.c.bigcache.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/33519105.jpg http://www.mindat.org/min-600.html . ____________________ scale in avatar is millimeters ____________________ Come visit Sandi, the 'Fossil Journey Cruiser' ____________________ WIPS (the Western Interior Paleontological Society - http://www.westernpaleo.org) ____________________ "Being genetically cursed with an almost inhuman sense of curiosity and wonder, I'm hard-wired to investigate even the most unlikely, uninteresting (to others anyway) and irrelevant details; often asking hypothetical questions from many angles in an attempt to understand something more thoroughly." -- Mr. Edonihce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted August 30, 2011 Author Share Posted August 30, 2011 All of these that I have found all look the same. The rings that make these things up are very small . Thanks for all the info Mr. E . It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted August 31, 2011 Author Share Posted August 31, 2011 The hole tube is made up of these rings their not covering anything? It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 I find these some times but I really am not sure what to tag them as. I have just been calling them tube worm cases. Anyone know it's real name? My guess is that it is the lining of a shrimp burrow, rather than a worm burrow. That's very cool -- I've never found one like that. I would ask the invert guy at the FSM to identify this. http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page What seest thou else In the dark backward and abysm of time? ---Shakespeare, The Tempest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted August 31, 2011 Author Share Posted August 31, 2011 (edited) Thanks, Harry I'll send a picture to Roger. I have not heard any thing about the other find yet but when I do I'll let you know. Edited August 31, 2011 by worthy 55 It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 um, woah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted August 31, 2011 Author Share Posted August 31, 2011 It is a silicified tube fragment of a clam named Kuphus and can grow up to 2 meters long. This is what Mr. Portell of the Invertebrate Paleontology Division at the FMNH in Gainesville called it so I guess I have a name to tag it with. Thanks Roger It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 i'm not sure i can go with that concept. gotta keep looking... do you have others you could post too? and does it look like the thing is layered, as if it could have been a plain calcareous tube that something else later laid all those little circle thingees on? if you had like a teredo-esque boring clam making his siphon tube that way, it's like the most rube-goldbergesque way of making a tube i can think of. nature can't be that inefficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted September 1, 2011 Author Share Posted September 1, 2011 It is not layered and the circle thingees are smooth and flat on the inside of the tube. It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 you do realize how bizarre that is, don't you? i mean, some strange little beast was extruding miniature cinnamon rolls out of some orifice of its body and building a tunnel out of them, just so you could have a stumper for an internet forum... you can tell it was being paid by the hour, not the job... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teres Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Cool fossil! Isn't beekite a form of replacement?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted September 1, 2011 Author Share Posted September 1, 2011 Cool fossil! Isn't beekite a form of replacement?? Yes,I think beekite are the things that are what tracer calls miniature cinnamon rolls but what are they and how long does it take them to form or does the clam extrude them? It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teres Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 I've found horn corals with beekite replacement in the Ridley Limestone of Tn. it's cool stuff but it seems it can really mess up a good id. by replacing all the detail with ... um..cinnamon buns . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 wait, wait, wait! i looked up that beekite stuff yesterday and didn't find a good reference on it, although i'll grant you i saw some fairly similaresque cinnamon rolls but not quite the same, but those weren't stuck together side-by-side to form a tube and ok now i'm thinking, and i suppose if a calcareous tube was there and the beekites concreted/precipitated/poofedoutofthinaired onto the tube which subsequently said to itself "to heck with this nonsense!" and wisely dissolved itself, then i suppose you could have a cinnamon psuedobunomorph, but please allow me to just remark - SHEESH! on the one hand, from my experience with the treachery of other concretionisms, i can relate, and it does make a whole lot more sense that this phenomenon wasn't the work of some crazed crustacean or something, but still. i can't deal with this. somebody find a good article showing how beekite cinnamon buns form and perfectly size themselves to fit into whatever little spaces exist on the surface of whatever and i guess we'll all know how two of 'em got stuck on either side of princess leia's head, which solves yet another mystery i've wondered about for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Edonihce Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 It is a silicified tube fragment of a clam named Kuphus and can grow up to 2 meters long. This is what Mr. Portell of the Invertebrate Paleontology Division at the FMNH in Gainesville called it so I guess I have a name to tag it with. Thanks Roger i'm not sure i can go with that concept. gotta keep looking... I can totally get with the Kuphus idea. When I first thought about the idea of these things being shrimp burrows as suggested earlier, I could see how that could be, but my string of seeing these beekite rings primarily on the surfaces of mollusks was getting to me. Now that I hear (and see, because I looked it up on Google) that there is a mollusk that can have a tube like this, it is reassuring. Cool fossil! Isn't beekite a form of replacement?? Correct. Yes,I think beekite are the things that are what tracer calls miniature cinnamon rolls but what are they and how long does it take them to form or does the clam extrude them? I am not an expert in this stuff, but from what I've seen of and read about it, beekite is a mineralization pattern; specifically, it is chalcedony that forms these 'rings', producing pseudomorphs after fossils. To be clear, the rings themselves appear to have nothing to do with anything ring-like about the structure of the organism that they are replacing. It's just the shape of the mineralization patter, and that's it....it just happens to be that as these 'rings' are forming, they are forming in place of whatever was there before. Outside of this 'beekite rings' arena, chalcedony seems to take on a more bulbous and amorphous form... http://www.charmsofl.../Chalcedony.jpg http://www.metaphysi...Chalcedony1.jpg http://www.rocksfork...y%20Geode01.jpg http://ethnology.fil...edony_02_01.jpg http://www.realgems....cedony%2002.jpg http://i.pbase.com/u...lcedony004m.jpg http://stoneflake.ne...-Chalcedony.jpg ...perhaps the tight confines of the fossilized organism's skinny shell walls (or whatever) provides an arena in which we can see something about the crystallization pattern of chalcedony that we just can't normally see when it has gobs and gobs of space in which to expand into more quickly......whether it has to do with smaller, more cramped quarters, or simply a matter of it taking a lot longer for the crystallization process to occur. The only place I see it making these 'rings' is when it forms as a psudomorph after fossils. The thing I don't know for sure is, does it form these beekite rings when it forms directly after the original material of the fossilized organism, or just any time that it happens to replace material in a fossil (like in even a secondary replacement)? I would assume it is only when it is replacing original material, and that this somehow has something to do with why it ends up forming this 'ring' shape as it is 'crystallizing', but that's just my un-specifically-educated guess. Here are some other links I found... Dictionary definition of beekite http://www.merriam-w...tionary/beekite looks like a good article, but didn't read yet http://australianmus...97_complete.pdf more fossil examples http://viewsofthemah...ed-fossils.html . ____________________ scale in avatar is millimeters ____________________ Come visit Sandi, the 'Fossil Journey Cruiser' ____________________ WIPS (the Western Interior Paleontological Society - http://www.westernpaleo.org) ____________________ "Being genetically cursed with an almost inhuman sense of curiosity and wonder, I'm hard-wired to investigate even the most unlikely, uninteresting (to others anyway) and irrelevant details; often asking hypothetical questions from many angles in an attempt to understand something more thoroughly." -- Mr. Edonihce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 well, i just found a super-old reference that seems to explain the phenomenon in a way to which i can relate. look at page 97 link sounds like somehow there are nucleation sites on the calcareous fossils and somehow the chemistry occurs between the fossil and water saturated with chalcedony in a manner that causes the chalcedony to precipitate at the nucleation sites, which if that was all happening at once, would explain how the cinnamon buns all grow together like they're all in an oven expanding at once (don't they smell wonderful?). hey! that's probably why all those corals got's botryoidal agate in 'em!! CaCO3 + SiO2 = Gnar! hmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossil dude Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 here's my 2cents: i don't know, but what i do know is that i like it and hope you get a satisfactory answer as to what it is, God bless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teres Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 looks like a good article, but didn't read yet I read the article, pretty good explanation, much shorter than Tracers', which gave me a headache, was very long and very old. BUT very, very interesting! I actually think I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthy 55 Posted September 1, 2011 Author Share Posted September 1, 2011 Cool, so beekites are mineralization patterns like or the same as what happens in the fossil corals it replaces the poylops and in the tubes case it replaces the slim left on the tube walls more or less. Thanks now I know. It's my bone!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 i didn't really get the chance to try to study up on the chemistry side of the equation, but i don't feel like this stuff is always a "replacement" issue. it seems almost as if the silicificious material is precipitating out as a result of some chemical snarge the calcariferousinous material is doing, and they end up sort of passing like ships in the night, only stopping, very close, sort of like i imagine happens with those green anole lizards that are diurnal and the mediterranean geckos that are nocturnal. anyway, so then after the siliceroferous material establishes its manifestly physical presence (if you're not part of the solution, then you're the probl precipitate), the calcibonatitudinous stuff thinks to itself "my work here is done" and it rides off into the chemical sunset, whistling the theme song from the good, the bad, and the ionic. note to those who subject themselves to these laborious non sequitur(d)s - all i really said above was that i think the glass overlies the chalk rather than replacing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teres Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Looking at worthy 55's fossil, it "appears" to be absolutely totally replaced, I see no sign of any remaining shell material. But in the past, with the Horn Corals I've found, I've described them as having Beekite ON them..because that's what it looks like and there is shell material remaining to some extent. It's really interesting to see the inside and out of Worthy's fossil. So the beekite formed and then the shell dissolved totally away from the chemicals or minerals washing through the beekite? These are just the thoughts and questions of an untrained laymen so please forgive any wrongly used terminology or confusion. Love this thread, a great specimen and discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Worthy raised a good question: What is the relationship between beekite and botryoidal quartz? I mean, is beekite a preliminary stage of the growth of these bubbles of cryptocrystalline quartz? (as in the agatized coral) Does beekite represent an early stage of growth that was terminated by some change in the depositional environment? After all, beekite is cryptocrystalline quartz laid down in circular patterns. I don't have the answer; but, maybe someone here does. http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page What seest thou else In the dark backward and abysm of time? ---Shakespeare, The Tempest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 there's no "relationship" between the two. i mentioned it as an epiphany regarding the abundance of probably biogenic silica in the part of florida ya'll frequent and the tendency for silica to precipitate out on calcareous fossils for some reason that i attributed to some chemical reaction. and i just found an answer plausible enough to suit me regarding why it happens. scroll up one page to 144 on the document in the link and start reading at the first paragraph on that page... link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teres Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 The second paper in Mr. Edonhices' post is well worth the read! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now