New Members Lobo Posted October 8, 2013 New Members Share Posted October 8, 2013 I found two broken teeth (along with many other marine fossils) at 11,000 feet in northern New Mexico. I don't know the exact formation, but I do know that the fossils are Cretaceous. The two teeth were found less than 10 feet from each other. The first photo shows the front faces of the teeth, with a penny for scale. The tooth on the left is protruding from a siltstone or mudstone and is in better condition than the one on the right, but is lacking the point of the tooth. The tooth on the right shows a rounded crown with serrations, although the serrations may be difficult to see in the photo. If you use your imagination to fill in the chipped parts of the second tooth, you can see that the tooth has a rounded triangular shape, and probably has more width than length. The second photo shows the back side of the first tooth (and probably some of the root), where the tooth met the gums and jaw. When I first found the teeth I thought they may be from a shark species, but after looking at other shark teeth in the forums I wasn't so sure. I can upload other views if it helps identify the teeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Siphuncle Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 looks pennsylvanian... petalodus Grüße, Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas "To the motivated go the spoils." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 I agree its looks like Petalodus ohioensis but its not cretaceous. The distribution of this species is from the Carboniferous period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 Petalodus - probably Pennsylvanian - not Cretaceous Image search Petalodus Flash from the Past (Show Us Your Fossils)MAPS Fossil Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahuijsmans Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 gotta love those ancient sharkies! nice finds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Members Lobo Posted October 8, 2013 Author New Members Share Posted October 8, 2013 Thanks for the help; after looking at other Petalodus teeth online I'd have to agree. It was difficult to figure out where I was on the geologic map, so I thought I was in a Cretaceous outcrop. There are Pennsylvanian formations all over that area, so it makes sense now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erose Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 The New Mexico geologic map is all mixed up with pockets of this and that scattered willy nilly. There is a small outlier of Pennsylvanian just outside of Santa Fe that always gives me great pleasure. But I bet it isn't a mile or more in length and much less in width and it's confined between metamorphic and possibly igneous rocks. And I agree on Petalodus for the ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Siphuncle Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 Wolf, you should feel no shame in being mistaken on this. Pennsylvanian shark teeth seem to be much more rare than Cretaceous teeth. I wish all my misidentifications resulted in something more rare! Grüße, Daniel A. Wöhr aus Südtexas "To the motivated go the spoils." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgehiker Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 That's a large Petalodus. Is that the norm for the Pennsylvanian in that area? Lobo, mistaken identity can be a positive. Your specimen is like being told your piece of silver is actually gold. Nice find. 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