CalGregg Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) Hi Fossil Forum! I was down at the Mannum Cliffs in South Australia today collecting some wonderful Lovenia Forbesi and brachiopod specimens. I came across this odd looking rock, I I picked it up and saw that this indent was on it. It very much reminded me of 'Dickinsonia', but what do you guys think? Edited March 17, 2013 by CalGregg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evgeny Kotelevsky Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It looks like Dickinsonia! ))) Can you upload photos from different sides of this specimen? http://evgenykotelevsky.wordpress.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalGregg Posted March 17, 2013 Author Share Posted March 17, 2013 It's very unusual. I didn't think Dickinsonia could be found in the Mannum area. And note the indent line in the centre. This is a view from the side Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangellian Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Interesting.. it sure does look like a Dickinsonia given the symmetry but maybe it's a slightly deformed negative (imprint) of the top of a horn coral? I dont know the geology of your area but it might help to narrow down the possibilities if we knew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 It looks like the internal mold of a coral similar to Flabellum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalGregg Posted March 17, 2013 Author Share Posted March 17, 2013 It looks like the internal mold of a coral similar to Flabellum. Ahh yes! The area I collected it in has thousands of Lovenia Forbesi fossils among it, but they all differed in colour compared to this fossil. This is what I found Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalGregg Posted March 17, 2013 Author Share Posted March 17, 2013 Here's the Dickinsonia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evgeny Kotelevsky Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 My opinion: it is Dickinsonia! ))) http://evgenykotelevsky.wordpress.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FossilDAWG Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Looks like an obvious coral to me. Actually it's a cast (impression) of the calyx, the opening on top where the coral polyp lived . You can see primary and secondary septa clearly, maybe tertiary septa too. There doesn't seem to be any actual shell left, just rock that filled the calyx, which may account for the color difference from other local fossils. The resemblance to Dickinsonia is superficial; Dickinsonia was a flat organism with wrinkles on it's surface, whereas the fossil in question is clearly fairly 3-dimensional judging from the side view. Also Dickinsonia, like all the other Ediacarian organisms, was apparently soft bodied and was preserved only as an impression in very fine grained rock, whereas the the fossil in question is preserved in a fairly coarse sandstone so it was evidently fairly hard shelled. Isn't Lovinia a Miocene echinoid? Dickinsonia is an Ediacarian (late Precambrian) fossil of uncertain affinities. There is approximately a 600 million year difference in age. Finding a Miocene Dickinsonia would be like finding a fossilized bird on a slab with an Olenellus trilobite, except the age gap for the bird/trilobite would be less. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nala Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Mannum ?,it's a coral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izak_ Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Well, if it was dickinsonia… explain the brachiopods Brachiopods appeared in the cambrian… whereas dickinsonia is ediacaran (Late precambrian) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen. et sp. indet. Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Coral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I am firmly in the coral camp. Dickinsonia is quite different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I am firmly in the coral camp. Dickinsonia is quite different. Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 coral to me also. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izak_ Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Coral! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooth_claw Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Isn't Lovinia a Miocene echinoid? Dickinsonia is an Ediacarian (late Precambrian) fossil of uncertain affinities. There is approximately a 600 million year difference in age. Finding a Miocene Dickinsonia would be like finding a fossilized bird on a slab with an Olenellus trilobite, except the age gap for the bird/trilobite would be less. Don Spot on. Mannum fossils are Miocene, there have even been whale fossils recovered from the cliffs. 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