Better pictures of possible dinosaurian teeth from flints of Lithuania

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

Dear Guys, 

 

I recently photographed these small reptile teeth with maximum contrast and got quite good pictures. 

They are already sent to dinosaur specialist but until I wait for an answer I would like to dicuss about these finds judging by better picture qualities. 

The first tooth from three sides (2.7 mm length):

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

The second tooth (3.6 mm length):

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

And the last (7.2 mm length) tooth that I was thinking belongs to Richardoestesia. Although serration is quite weak, the pterosaur (especially pterodactyl) teeth do not have any serration and their cross section is rounded as far as I have seen. 

Any ideas are very welcome!

 

Regards

Domas 

[Bone guy]

interesting finds! That first one looks like it has a spur. Possibly a sawfish rostrum spike? 

[Troodon]

My comments are similar to the ones I made before.  Not dinosaurian and definitely does not belong to Richardoestesia even though both are in the shape of an isosceles triangle.   

[Fossildude19]

These look like fish teeth, to me.  

[Auspex]

41 minutes ago, D.N.FossilmanLithuania said:

And the last (7.2 mm length) tooth that I was thinking belongs to Richardoestesia.

Fish tooth, me thinks.

THIS is a (probable) Richardoestesia tooth:

[Max-fossils]

Also look like fish teeth to me, not dinosaur. The first two are very likely sawfish (similar to Onchopristis) because of that little spur.

Still cool finds! Good job!

 

Best regards,

 

Max

[Peat Burns]

+1 on fish.  I believe I see acrodin caps.

[Carl]

Another vote for fish teeth

[sixgill pete]

They are very very similar to Trichiuridae teeth.  Cutlassfish.

[Plax]

1 hour ago, sixgill pete said:

They are very very similar to Trichiuridae teeth.  Cutlassfish.

I'm liking this ID also. Like Sixgill I'm influenced by Trichuroides? or Eotrichiuris? from the Eocene Castle Hayne Formation. Not sure how far back they go; but google does!

[hxmendoza]

Definitely fish teeth

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

Yes, the Trichiurus teeth look the same! Then Eocene is the oldest possible age of these teeth...

The scientists have very big doubt if there are flints from Eocene- Oligocene in Baltic Region or not. Now it seems like the question is already answered!  

Thank you all for this reliable ID!  

[Al Dente]

Another possibility is one of the barbed Enchodus teeth. Enchodus gladiolus has been reported from Europe. Here is an Enchodus gladiolus from the Fossil of New Jersey website:

 

[Kosmoceras]

We do have Cretaceous fish teeth with the "barb" in the European Chalk deposits, but I don't have access to my books right now. Could possibly be Enchodus gladiolus.

[Anomotodon]

Have you found any shark teeth in the same location? They could help in determining exact age. I agree with others that none of these are reptilian, but knowing the exact age will help with precisely identifying fish species since many fish in both Cretaceous and Paleogene had barbs.

P.S. Probably Cretaceous Enchodus is the most likely option.

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

Dear Anomotodon, 

Yes I have found few shark teeth in flint erratics but I also can tell that flints in Lithuania are different in age. 

By the scientist Yury Zaika, the dark flints usually are Cretaceous in age, light or brown color- Paleogene. 

Talking about two smaller teeth with hook apex in this topic, I think they are too small to Enchodus so Trichiuridae is more possible ID in my opinion.

Only the last needle like tooth can be from Enchodontid but not for sure because until these days some fishes have long fangs (vampire fish, etc.) and 7,2 mm length in my opinion should be too small size for Enchodus fang tooth.

I will show you some sharks and other vertebrates from light and brown flints in this reply.

1. Carcharhinidae tooth (Eocene- present): 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

2. Synechodus tooth (lived until Paleocene, but more common in Cretaceous): 

 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

3. Spyraenidae (barracuda) tooth (Eocene- present): 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

Alligator fang tooth from different sides (in Europe they appeared in Eocene, lived from Uppermost Cretaceous): 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

5. Small odontocete incisor crown (7 mm length), this group is known from Late Eocene:

 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

6. Frog remains (ilium and tibiofibula) in light and brown flints:

 

[D.N.FossilmanLithuania]

7. Lizard remains (Anguidae, Cordylidae) in lighter flints (the both groups appeared in the End of Cretaceous, more common in Cenozoic):

 

[Anomotodon]

Well, I think you are assigning species names to these specimens prematurely. I highly doubt tooth #1 and #2 can be positively identified to the genus level due to its poor preservation and no knowledge of age. I was expecting more complete shark teeth. 

So, tooth #1: might be Synechodus sp., but with such a poor preservation we can't be sure about any ID. No reason to call it Carcharhinus.

Tooth #2 - I think it is more likely a fish, but better photos are needed, don't see any Synechodus features (in addition, Synechodus teeth have straight crowns in the lingual plane).

Teeth #3,4,5 - all fit decriptions of Enchodus teeth. There were many species of Enchodus around in Cretaceous - E. ferox, E. gladiolus, E. petrosus, E. faujasi, etc. - and all had variable teeth depending on the tooth position. Size is not a significant parameter here - you can see some tiny teeth here, for example. Don't see any alligators: firstly, they usually don't have carinae and compressed teeth; secondly they, as all reptiles, always have open pulpar cavities (a hole in the tooth cross-section) and much thicker enamel. None of these features can be found here.

Can't say anything for certain about bones, but I would suspect fish bits for both #6 and #7.

In addition, I think the most likely option is that the age of these specimens is around Albian-Cenomanian stages of Cretaceous. I have found descriptions of Albian shark fauna in Vareykay assemblage (Варейкяй) in Mertinene 1975, 1994 and Glikman & Averianov, 1998. They studied several locations somewhat north of Varena and concluded that they are similar in age and species structure to Kanev dislocations in Ukraine, being Albian-maybe also Cenomanian. You can see my collection of Kanev specimens here. Again, none of you findings, in my opinion, contradict proposed Albian age of your deposits, while great abundance of small Enchodus species and potential Synechodus even support that. It was much later in the Cretaceous when Enchodus became big sabertooth predators like E. libycus, Early and 'Middle' Cretaceous species were usually fairly small.