Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Just looking for some help identifying this object please 😊 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 What general location was it found? The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) A giant textulariid foram,abraded? Just going by general looks/morphology. Biserial chamber arrangement.,slit/porelike aperture on top Edited June 20, 2016 by doushantuo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 It was found on a beach in Australia renowned for marine and terrestrial fossils including whales and sharks. Lots of whale bone fragments and shark teeth found here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 A giant textulariid foram,abraded? Just going by general looks/morphology. Biserial chamber arrangement.,slit/porelike aperture on top Would that make it Cambrian? I had to google your reference - not much there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 What general location was it found? It was found on a beach in Australia renowned for marine and terrestrial fossils including whales and sharks. Lots of whale bone fragments and shark teeth found here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) It would be the biggest textulariid ever,plus i don't see evidence of agglutination. Do you WANT it to be Cambrian? Edited June 20, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) ok,second guess:sphinctozoan sponge(phylum Porifera) http://www.geologicacarpathica.com/data/articles/374/374005.png Edited June 20, 2016 by doushantuo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 It would be the biggest textulariid ever,plus i don't see evidence of agglutination. Do you WANT it to be Cambrian? Ha! I don't want it to be anything :-) I would just like to know what it is. It looks like a big tooth to me. btw - you are using words I have never seen before. 'agglutination'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) Textularid forams build their test("shells") from the particles they find in their immediate environment.The cement("glue") them together(="agglutinate"). sand grains,sponge needles,organic paricles,all buidling materials are allowed,but they are,silly as this may sound,selected for size and suitability An example: http://www.zobodat.at/pdf/AbhGeolBA_41_0013-0021.pdf Edited June 20, 2016 by doushantuo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 Textularid forams build their test("shells") from the particles they find in their immediate environment.The cement("glue") them together(="agglutinate"). sand grains,sponge needles,organic paricles,all buidling materials are allowed,but they are,silly as this may sound,selected for size and suitability An example: http://www.zobodat.at/pdf/AbhGeolBA_41_0013-0021.pdf Thank you - I get it :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I think that it might be an iron rich burrow filling: an ichnofossil. 2 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I can also imagine it being an internal mold of a crustacean shell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 see where you're coming from with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I'm undecided between sponge or iron concretion. The "notch" seems to say this isn't biological, and the high concentration of iron is saying "Don't trust me, I'm sneaky iron deposits". In cases like this you need to look around the formation that it came from and look for signs of iron concretions, to see if this is just a good pseudofossil. There should be clues about this at the site. It also helps to research the formation to see if any sponges have previously been verified to be found, and what they look like. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raggedy Man Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 "It was found on a beach in Australia" This is far from giving a general area. Australia has 25,670 km of coastal shoreline. ...I'm back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 "It was found on a beach in Australia" This is far from giving a general area. Australia has 25,670 km of coastal shoreline. I'm sorry - I'm new at this :-) The little cove it was found in is world famous for fossil finds - i've been collectign there since I was a kid - if you google 'Beaumaris fossil beach' you will find it - biggest ever sperm whale tooth was found there in recent years - amongst other amazing finds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share Posted June 20, 2016 I'm undecided between sponge or iron concretion. The "notch" seems to say this isn't biological, and the high concentration of iron is saying "Don't trust me, I'm sneaky iron deposits". In cases like this you need to look around the formation that it came from and look for signs of iron concretions, to see if this is just a good pseudofossil. There should be clues about this at the site. It also helps to research the formation to see if any sponges have previously been verified to be found, and what they look like. The area it was found is called 'Beaumaris Cove' - if googled you can see it is famous for fossils of many kinds - mostly 3-5 million years old. I am looking up sponges but can't find a record of them being found there. there are pseudofossils though - a collection of phosphate nodules and ironstone structures including ferruginised fossils and burrow casts.. so maybe the gentleman above and you are onto it. Thank yo so much for taking the time :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludwigia Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 (edited) I'd be inclined to go with phosphate or ironstone nodule, perhaps even in the form of a burrow cast. Edited June 20, 2016 by Ludwigia Greetings from the Lake of Constance. Roger http://www.steinkern.de/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abyssunder Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) I'm in the phosphate nodule - ironstone structure camp. Fossils of Beaumaris - Erich Fitzgerald and Rolf Schmidt, Museum Victoria Edited June 21, 2016 by abyssunder 2 " We are not separate and independent entities, but like links in a chain, and we could not by any means be what we are without those who went before us and showed us the way. " Thomas Mann My Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melz Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share Posted June 21, 2016 I'm in the phosphate nodule - ironstone structure camp. Fossils_of_Beaumaris_Feb_2015.jpg Fossils of Beaumaris - Erich Fitzgerald and Rolf Schmidt, Museum Victoria Thank you! That's certainly now looking most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guguita2104 Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 I'm with geological...There are no pores (just that big hole on the top), so it can't be a sponge, IMO. Those are used to inhale the water with nutrients or to expel it (osculum). Here it's a quick link (I know wikipedia is not always very trusted, but this is very well-explained, for me):https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Please do not use wiki,but stuff like this: https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/5449/SCtZ-0596-Lo_res.pdf?sequence=1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Please do not use wiki,but stuff like this: https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/5449/SCtZ-0596-Lo_res.pdf?sequence=1 Many people who are here looking for identifications prefer the "Cliff Notes" versions. Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024 _________________________________________________________________________________ "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...
Guguita2104 Posted June 21, 2016 Share Posted June 21, 2016 Please do not use wiki,but stuff like this: https://repository.si.edu/bitstream/handle/10088/5449/SCtZ-0596-Lo_res.pdf?sequence=1 I think your paper is fantastic (I love sponges ) !It has very nice explanations and illustrations ! However I agree with Fossildude19.I think you can't learn the basis from specific paper like those . Regards, 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