bone2stone Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 (edited) A few years ago a friend of mine told me he had found a crinoid or something...stuck on some red ironstone. What he had found turned out to be one of the finest fossil starfish I have ever seen. Knowing that there had not any been found in the Britton Member of the Eagleford or any of the Eagleford as far as that goes. I was given the honor of temporiarily giving it a name by Steve, my friend who found it. I dubbed it Coppellaster Adamsi. As it turns out it had been identified from some "fragments" found in France. It made a trip to Illinois first then went to France for further detailed identification! It had been previously identified as Comptonaster, "from fragments mind you". The specimen has been ccompletely removed from the matrix, it was found on, so bottom could be observed. It since has made it's way home and has the distinction of being the best! Considering the complete nature of the specimen, the Adamsi stuck! (Coppellaster) Comptonaster Adamsi. It's home is now back in Texas, where it belongs!!!!!! Found: Coppell Texas Deposit: Eagleford formation/Britton member Congratulations Steve nice to have a friend with that distinction. Bone2stone Edited August 8, 2012 by bone2stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ailsa Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 It looks amazing, Congrats to your friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 It could have been named Carl Jr. Very nice specimen! Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bone2stone Posted August 8, 2012 Author Share Posted August 8, 2012 Sorry, I did not give size. Approximately 10cm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramo Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 That's a cool little satrfish. Ramo Is "adamsi" the official name? I've always thought that the first name given had priority over any new names to come along. I know with the big Cope/Marsh race to name new species, many were named from only fragments of fossils. They also made a lot of names for things that were allready named, and the new name was always thrown out I thought. For one species to mourn the death of another is a new thing under the sun. -Aldo Leopold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 If the French fragments had only been assigned a Generic name, and not a full bi-nomial, then there would be no conflict of precedence. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erose Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Great story. Excellent fossil. And 10cm is a pretty decent size as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bone2stone Posted August 10, 2012 Author Share Posted August 10, 2012 Thanks for the replys gals and guys. As for the naming rights on a fossil I personally think that if fragments are all you have well......... It did take them over four years to make that determination. I personally dissagree with them but I am far from being an expert on the subject or echinoidea. The span of area between France and Texas that is certainly a broad distance for two of the same species to be distributed. It does happen to be sure to find a species of marine fauna on two different continents. Bone2stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 What a beautiful specimen. And at 10 cm it's a monster! I'm not clear if it is going to be the type specimen of a new species (Comptonaster adamsi)? If so, do you have any idea of when and where the paper was or will be published? It sounds as if the specimen was returned to your friend, but type specimens are (or should be) curated into museum collections where they can be available to future researchers, which is why I'm confused as to whether or not a new species will actually be described from this specimen. And, there isn't any big problem describing such specimens from individual ossicles or from fragmentary specimens, as long as such specimens show features that distinguish the new species from all previously described ones. Of course, the more complete the specimen the more complete the description can be. When it comes to vertebrates the situation is often different, as hundreds of names can be proposed for each of the hundreds of bones in the skeleton, which generates a real mess that can only be sorted out when complete (or largely so) skeletons are discovered. When it comes to the distance between France and Texas, remember that the Atlantic had barely started to open when the Britton Member was deposited; both sites were much closer together, on the Tethys seaway. All (or almost all) of the Britton ammonites, for example, can also be found in France and elsewhere in the Tethyan province. As far as I know, though, there is no overlap in the decapod fauna, so different fossil groups ranged from cosmopolitan to very local in their distribution; so who knows which one applies to the asteroidia. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bone2stone Posted August 10, 2012 Author Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) I am waiting for a reply from Steve as to it's present location, but I know it's back here in Texas. I will try to get the researchers papers on their description. He has a perfect replica in his display case not the real deal. But it sure looks good. I'll get some info who reconstructed it into it's present condition. Bone2stone Edited August 10, 2012 by bone2stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foshunter Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Awesome specimen, thanks for posting and welcome to the Forum---Tom Grow Old Kicking And Screaming !!"Don't Tread On Me" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Siphuncle Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 great find, excellent execution of tough prep Grüße, Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas "To the motivated go the spoils." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crinoid Queen Posted August 11, 2012 Share Posted August 11, 2012 Beautiful Specimen! Great story too I love it when You have a narrative on how stuff was identified makes the fossil more memorable. -CQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted August 11, 2012 Share Posted August 11, 2012 (edited) If it is a new species named for your friend, congrats! Every fossil-hunter's dream, finding something new. Edited August 11, 2012 by Wrangellian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bone2stone Posted August 19, 2012 Author Share Posted August 19, 2012 That's a cool little satrfish. Ramo Is "adamsi" the official name? I've always thought that the first name given had priority over any new names to come along. I know with the big Cope/Marsh race to name new species, many were named from only fragments of fossils. They also made a lot of names for things that were allready named, and the new name was always thrown out I thought. Yes, Adamsi. Not fully described previously. 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