Roadrunner Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 The rock below is highly crystalized - seems like quartzite and some quartz crystals. It is around 20 pounds. Most of it appears to be crystalline structured. Yet, in the upper left-hand corner in the first photo, and lower left-hand corner in the next photos - I may be seeing a fossil. What do you think? And to size it; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 11, 2013 Author Share Posted March 11, 2013 (edited) This is probably some sort of bivalve shell, yet the ends of it seem different than what I've seen before. Maybe I'm imagining that, as shells do seem to spread as they go toward the ends. This rock is sedimentary, is about 15-20 pounds and has another shell trace in it that I'll post below. Same one; Other side; Same "other side" trace. Edited March 13, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 11, 2013 Author Share Posted March 11, 2013 (edited) Finally, I always find a LOT of crinoids as you can see on this sedimentary rock. However, I keep finding this oval-shaped traces that I can't identify. The 1st and 2nd pictures shows the crinoids, and the second on the same rock shows the oval shape. Can anyone identify the oval-shaped trace? ....and the oval shape with a folded-type shape to the left of it, that I also keep finding. Edited March 13, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted March 11, 2013 Share Posted March 11, 2013 Very interesting stuff. Do you have any information about the formation these were found in or at least the age of the strata in the area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 13, 2013 Author Share Posted March 13, 2013 (edited) I think most of it is Pennsylvanian Era, but the area is very geologically complex (slightly north of Albuquerque, NM and on the northern foothills of the Sandia Mountains). I'm still trying to positively identify a heavy boulder that I found last year and have in another thread. Edited March 13, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 The 'folded over' shapes might be sections through brachiopods. "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...
jpc Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I also think the oval shapes could be brachiopods cross sectioned at different angles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 Pic 1 and 2.... I'd have to assume it is another crystal unless some finer details could be made out. I'd say pics 5 and 6 indeed are a part of a bivalve. In the last pic, the crescent-shaped thing may be a productid brach, while the oval gray thing on the right resembles a cross section of the brachiopod Composita. Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted March 13, 2013 Author Share Posted March 13, 2013 (edited) Thank you for all the answers and angles to further research!! You guys and gals are GREAT! I'm going to try to get a better picture of what may be a fossil in the first one. Edited March 13, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 7, 2013 Author Share Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) I'm wondering if this might have been a nautilus at some point? ...just a guess. Edited July 7, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 7, 2013 Author Share Posted July 7, 2013 I'm pretty sure this was.... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynodictis Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Your last pictures look like an ammonite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Hi Roadrunner.... Some nice material there.... I think your right with shell imprints in some of the pieces and the last one I think is a worn gastropod.... I think you have posted this one previously I remember the dogs paw pointing it out... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Dactyll Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 PS.... The nautilus.... It certainly looks nautilus shaped and I can see why you would think this but I'm not convinced for sure it is one... Cheers Steve... And Welcome if your a New Member... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 7, 2013 Author Share Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Hi Roadrunner.... Some nice material there.... I think your right with shell imprints in some of the pieces and the last one I think is a worn gastropod.... I think you have posted this one previously I remember the dogs paw pointing it out... PS.... The nautilus.... It certainly looks nautilus shaped and I can see why you would think this but I'm not convinced for sure it is one... Thank you, Terry. I couldn't remember if I'd put the one with the dog paw in before.... I guess that I have to look up the difference between an ammonite, gastropod, nautillus. I'm a bit confused about that. Thank you for your responses! Edited July 16, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 7, 2013 Author Share Posted July 7, 2013 Your last pictures look like an ammonite. Thank you cynodictis. I'm wondering whether an ammonite can be worked out of the rock. It is certainly not a small one and I'm very inexperienced at "preparing" fossils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedrobento Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Tentaculites in the first picture? Pedro Bento, M.Sci. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 10, 2013 Author Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) Tentaculites in the first picture? Why do you think that - back to the Internet. The ones I saw on the internet look a little like crinoids, except that they taper off. That's an interesting idea, though. It might be... . Edited July 10, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 To Size; Closer Pics; I have no clue what these fossils are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) And I think that I may have broken this open about a thousand or million years too soon. Nothing but sediment inside. Edited July 16, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 The photos by the cell phone, labeled "no clue", are solitary rugose corals. The "nautilus" (also called an ammonite by some) is certainly a section through a snail (gastropod), as there is no evidence of internal division into chambers (called "camerae"). Also the "nautilus" in post #10 is a chert (flint) nodule. Overall, with the corals, crinoid stems, gastropods, and chert in massive limestone, I suspect you are looking at the Lake Valley Formation, which is Mississippian in age. Some parts of the formation, such as the Nunn Member, are more shaley and have lots of fossils, including crinoid calicies, that weather out completely. There is also Permian limestone in the area, but the fossils are different, mainly fusilinids. I don't see any fossils in the first photo, I think that is probably a cool mineral specimen. You live in an area with a lot of diversity in therms of ages and types of fossils to be found, once you start to learn the geology. I believe you are close to some Cambrian, and lots of Ordovician, Devonian, Mississippian, Pennsylvanian, Permian, and Cretaceous fossils. If you have not yet seen the book "Paleontology of New Mexico" by Barry Kues, I recommend picking up a copy or seeing if your library has one. You'll probably want a copy of your own though once you have a look at it. Don 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 And I think that I may have broken this open about a thousand or million years too soon.... Nothing but sediment inside. It may have just run out of the organic material needed to sustain diagenesis. "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...
Roadrunner Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) The photos by the cell phone, labeled "no clue", are solitary rugose corals. The "nautilus" (also called an ammonite by some) is certainly a section through a snail (gastropod), as there is no evidence of internal division into chambers (called "camerae"). Also the "nautilus" in post #10 is a chert (flint) nodule. Overall, with the corals, crinoid stems, gastropods, and chert in massive limestone, I suspect you are looking at the Lake Valley Formation, which is Mississippian in age. Some parts of the formation, such as the Nunn Member, are more shaley and have lots of fossils, including crinoid calicies, that weather out completely. There is also Permian limestone in the area, but the fossils are different, mainly fusilinids. I don't see any fossils in the first photo, I think that is probably a cool mineral specimen. You live in an area with a lot of diversity in therms of ages and types of fossils to be found, once you start to learn the geology. I believe you are close to some Cambrian, and lots of Ordovician, Devonian, Mississippian, Pennsylvanian, Permian, and Cretaceous fossils. If you have not yet seen the book "Paleontology of New Mexico" by Barry Kues, I recommend picking up a copy or seeing if your library has one. You'll probably want a copy of your own though once you have a look at it. Don Thank you. We do have that book and we've studied it. The problem - and the blessing, is the specific area where we live has one of the most diverse cross-sections of exposed ages that you can find in the State. A geologist at a local university told me she thought the area was Pennsylvanian - though she also thought the boulder I've been researching was caused from erosion. We are sure that boulder displays mostly organic features. She also thought there was no chert in our area, and yet she agreed that what I discreetly brought in was chert. So she modified what she stated to say there were "chert nodules" in the area. It certainly isn't a simple area. And yet, that makes it all the more interesting! Thank you for your input. It is highly appreciated. Edited July 17, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) It may have just run out of the organic material needed to sustain diagenesis. ...and so far I've found 2 1/2 of these. I found 1/2 of one just yesterday. I sure wish they'd become crystals. Oh well. Again - thank you! Edited July 16, 2013 by Roadrunner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted August 2, 2013 Author Share Posted August 2, 2013 (edited) I'm guessing the main little dude is some kind of rugose coral - along with some scattered crinoids, etc., but I really have no idea as I can't find anything with that shape, and the center piece with lines radiating around it. It is a little more than an inch long. Anyone seen one of these before? Sizing Closer And a little closer... Edited August 2, 2013 by Roadrunner 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