BobWill Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Dallas Paleontological Society hosted a field trip to collect the Pennsylvanian Graham Formation Saturday. I found this partial Orodus variabilis. I'm going back soon to find the rest of it The scale is in mm Labial View Lingual View Top 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharko69 Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Nice find! Congratulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinoMike Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 That is a great find! Pennsylvanian shark teeth are very interesting, not much like what we're used to seeing as "shark." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellseeker Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Love learning something new.. From what I can find on the Net -- you got most of it and the colors are great! Thanks for sharing. The White Queen ".... in her youth she could believe "six impossible things before breakfast" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Wow, the paleozoic shark teeth keep coming! Excellent find, Bob. Thanks for showing it to us. Regards, Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 __________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 LOVE them Paleozoic shark teeth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eboe101 Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Great tooth! However I think you have a Agassizodus tooth, which is even less common. The orodus teeth tend to be more apically compressed while Agassizodus is more bulbous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted April 12, 2016 Author Share Posted April 12, 2016 Thanks eboe. Mark Mckinzie's new book shows Agassizodus variabilis has been found at one of the Bridgeport sites but not in the Finis Shale so we can add that to the fauna list for Jacksboro. There was only a picture of an orodus from Jacksboro for comparison and that was the closest thing to mine but I can see what you mean about the different overall shape. He does show one from the Ada Brick Plant in Oklahoma that is shaped more like mine but labeled it orodus too. I will see him Wednesday so I can ask about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimB88 Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Great tooth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Beauty, Bob. Congrats! ~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...
TNCollector Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 That's a nice-un! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted April 12, 2016 Author Share Posted April 12, 2016 I mentioned the suggestion from eobe about the ID in an email to Mark McKinzie and he sent me this: Here is my take on Orodus versus Agassizodus. I have seen both teeth illustrated in old publications from the 1800’s and many of them look just alike to me. I have NEVER seen a good, recent (post 1970’s after cladistics analysis was introduced), scientific reference that distinguishes between the two. Like a lot of modern-day sharks, their dentitions consisted of hundreds of teeth in the mouth at any one time. And of course the tooth shape varies depending on its placement in the mouth (symphaseal versus lateral; anterior versus posterior, upper versus lower, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised if the two shark names turned out to be synonymous and the older genera name will take priority. But that will await some researcher actively working on it. The species name Orodus variabilis hints that there is “great variability” in the shape of the teeth (hence the name). Very few Paleozoic sharks are known from complete dentitions so there is a lot of similar tooth shapes given different names from the same geologic age but different geographic localities that probably belong to the same shark. I know most fossil collectors want a concrete ID but with Paleozoic sharks in particular there is a lot of “clean-up” research that needs to be addressed today. So the Fossil Forum guy could be right. Proving it one way or another with more than just a single illustrated tooth from an old publication is the hard part. Contrary to what everyone under 30 years old thinks, not every answer can be Googled! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I mentioned the suggestion from eobe about the ID in an email to Mark McKinzie and he sent me this: Here is my take on Orodus versus Agassizodus. I have seen both teeth illustrated in old publications from the 1800’s and many of them look just alike to me. I have NEVER seen a good, recent (post 1970’s after cladistics analysis was introduced), scientific reference that distinguishes between the two. Like a lot of modern-day sharks, their dentitions consisted of hundreds of teeth in the mouth at any one time. And of course the tooth shape varies depending on its placement in the mouth (symphaseal versus lateral; anterior versus posterior, upper versus lower, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised if the two shark names turned out to be synonymous and the older genera name will take priority. But that will await some researcher actively working on it. The species name Orodus variabilis hints that there is “great variability” in the shape of the teeth (hence the name). Very few Paleozoic sharks are known from complete dentitions so there is a lot of similar tooth shapes given different names from the same geologic age but different geographic localities that probably belong to the same shark. I know most fossil collectors want a concrete ID but with Paleozoic sharks in particular there is a lot of “clean-up” research that needs to be addressed today. So the Fossil Forum guy could be right. Proving it one way or another with more than just a single illustrated tooth from an old publication is the hard part. Contrary to what everyone under 30 years old thinks, not every answer can be Googled! OUTSTANDING RESPONSE!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darktooth Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Really nice find! I like Trilo-butts and I cannot lie. 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