Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I recently made a trade for some Mazon Creek concretions - original post: http://www.thefossilforum.com/index.php?/topic/48146-unopened-mazon-creek-concretions/ While placing all of them in a bucket to soak, one immediately cracked open - the other half in a few pieces. I have not worked with this material before, thus my desire to acquire some, and was told to be very careful when they open as something that may seem "minor" may actually be a decent find. I'm not one to guess on this one, but the pattern seemed interesting, so I thought I would throw it up here just in case someone really sees something. I will be posting others, obvious or not, as more begin to open in the freeze-thaw process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Yes, you were told right. The fossils are very fragile and sometimes the whole nodule will break apart. And some fossils are tiny in these, so look very carefully. And if you have any questions, don't hesitate to throw it up here. It looks as though you have a plant of some kind. A close up of the "leaves" or pinnules are needed for ID. The slightest of characteristics in these ferns are the determining factor for a true ID. ~Charlie~ "There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why.....i dream of things that never were, and ask why not?" ~RFK ->Get your Mosasaur print ->How to spot a fake Trilobite ->How to identify a CONCRETION from a DINOSAUR EGG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 Yes, you were told right. The fossils are very fragile and sometimes the whole nodule will break apart. And some fossils are tiny in these, so look very carefully. And if you have any questions, don't hesitate to throw it up here. It looks as though you have a plant of some kind. A close up of the "leaves" or pinnules are needed for ID. The slightest of characteristics in these ferns are the determining factor for a true ID. Fossilized6s, thanks for confirming this and I will be as careful as possible! I tried to take close-ups, I think you can zoom in on the images after clicking the thumbnail. If you think it worth while to get higher detail, I can whip out my DSLR. For this first one, I thought the combination of the three-dimensional pattern was interesting, along with the white streaks I've noticed associated with fossils in these nodules after doing some internet searching. I also kept noticing in the bottom right portion of the nodule, that curved features that looks to have "sectioning" to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hopefully the first of many interesting ones. I'm clueless as to what this might be but I agree with Charlie in that it smacks of something botanical. Cheers. -Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 The white you see is Calcite build up. Some people leave it on, but i tend to clean it off. You can clean it by soaking it in a pickling vinegar with a 10% acidity level. After soaking it usually scraps off pretty easily without doing any damage to the fossil. I just like to prep mine a bit to bring out more detail. The shape of the leaf/pinnule, the veining of the leaf and how it attaches to the stem or branch is a big part of the identification process. So yes, i would suggest get some nice closeups if you can. ~Charlie~ "There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why.....i dream of things that never were, and ask why not?" ~RFK ->Get your Mosasaur print ->How to spot a fake Trilobite ->How to identify a CONCRETION from a DINOSAUR EGG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 To be honest, I wasn't even sure if this was anything other than traces of something that may have been something sometime - (Hah! Say that ten times fast). The only reason I didn't discard it was because of the pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Mazon Creek nodules can tend to be a bit of a Rorschach test some times. Until you know what to look for and how to tell a verifiable fossil from some random pattern left by some decomposed organic remains it is best to post some images and learn to develop the eye for what is what. I encourage you to pick up the books Charlie mentioned--this might have the unintended consequence of igniting a passion for these little gift-wrapped fossil nodules that you find yourself in the car one day headed to the Mazon Creek sites with a shovel, work gloves, and several buckets in the trunk--beware, it happens more than you think.... As an example of definite fossils that are still hard to make out, check out images online of Essexella asherae (the very common jellyfish from the marine biota area). Collectors tend to call these fossils 'blobs' which is as apt of a name as could possibly be given. Cheers. -Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) Would love to get my hands on that book - anyone have a link to where I can grab a copy? Looking at this first "one" (whatever it may be) is giving me a headache. One would think a defined lagerstätte wouldn't be such an ink-blob test - I knew going into it some would be hard to spot though. And, until I can get a better understanding, or identification, I am henceforth referring to this first fossil as a Mattully Monster. Just to work my name in there and to make taxonomy even more confusing. Behold! The Mattully plant-animal hybrid holotype. Edited July 17, 2014 by Mattalic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 This might be Mariopteris. "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...
Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 I've outlined on the image the different features I see here - the majority of which may be nothing as this is my first time looking at this material and as Ken said, some of it (especially to me) looks like a Rorschach test... The red (and orange) outline is the original feature I saw which I thought may have been some sort of animal imprint. The green is the three-dimensional patterning I mentioned, that has the white calcite lines going through the middle. The gray circle is some other "needle" like material (also bottom right) that gets shiny with water. Click for enlargement: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) Here's another image to show that imprint a little better below what I thought was plant material. Great fun to peer so deeply into this. Click for enlargement: That indent looks "fin" or leaf-like. The other nodules are sleeping nicely in their watery bed. I will freeze them in a day or two. Edited July 17, 2014 by Mattalic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 This might be Mariopteris. ~.JPG Yup, I see what you mean Auspex--it does kinda resemble Mariopteris (possibly something fairly lobed like M. speciosa or M. sphenopteroides). We'll see what the Node Masters have to say about this when they weight in on it. If it is fern that might point to a Braidwood Biota for this batch of old nodules. Cheers. -Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 23, 2014 Author Share Posted July 23, 2014 Just got a new toy - a desktop 400x microscope. Pretty low res (dont know how to increase quality) and only really good at very close-ups. Here is a look at one of the pieces with tip of a ball-point for scale: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCFossils Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Nice Aphlebia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Would love to get my hands on that book - anyone have a link to where I can grab a copy? Just noticed this in your earlier post. Try this source: http://amzn.com/1932433716 BTW: The author of this and the fauna book is the member 'fiddlehead' on this very forum. Cheers. -Ken P.S.: Box of nodules thawing by the sink at the moment.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Nice Aphlebia! Yup. I could see punting and considering this an incertae sedis--in this case Aphlebia which (while not common) are thought to be "leaves, rachal outgrowths and immature pinnae". This one definitely has a lettuce-like appearance. Mattalic, grab yourself a copy of the bible through the above like (and pick up the matching fauna book as well). You will find Aphlebia described on page 128 of the flora book. BTW: I like the microscope photo. What model microscope did you get? I'd be interested in picking up something to better photograph micro-fossils. Cheers. -Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattalic Posted July 23, 2014 Author Share Posted July 23, 2014 Yup. I could see punting and considering this an incertae sedis--in this case Aphlebia which (while not common) are thought to be "leaves, rachal outgrowths and immature pinnae". This one definitely has a lettuce-like appearance. Mattalic, grab yourself a copy of the bible through the above like (and pick up the matching fauna book as well). You will find Aphlebia described on page 128 of the flora book. BTW: I like the microscope photo. What model microscope did you get? I'd be interested in picking up something to better photograph micro-fossils. Cheers. -Ken Thanks for all the information. It's not the best scope and I am sure you can find better - but I happened to notice a price drop in the Veho-400 Delux series (you can find them on Amazon and Ebay for under $60 dollars). It's only a 2MP interpolated camera, but at 640x3XX resolution it's not bad at all at the price point. There are a few features that help as well, and it can go fully hand-held up to 400 magnification. The stand it comes with is the downfall. If you can finagle yourself a stand that can move and get higher, you have yourself a nice piece of kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digit Posted July 23, 2014 Share Posted July 23, 2014 Thanks. Not a bad photo from a 2MP camera. I've got a 6MP "digital USB microscope" but I still haven't fooled around with it enough to figure out how to get images of the really tiny stuff with a decent depth of field. The images tend to be highly grainy as well. I might just have to spend some big bucks and get a decent macro lens for my DSLR camera and see what I can do with that. Looking forward to more results once your nodules start popping. Cheers. -Ken 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