South Carolina Stream Teeth ID

[Vin]

Hey everyone,

 

Recently took a trip with a buddy of mine down to South Carolina to search for megalodon teeth. We found many small teeth along with some decent sized ones.

 

These were found in the general area between Charleston and Summerville. The ruler is imperial. Big thanks to everyone who offers their guesses

 

Pictured are three of my biggest from the whole trip. What are they?

[digit]

Numbers 2 and 3 are Carcharocles megalodon ("Megs") and #2 is a real beaut with some lovely color. Hard to tell from the image but #1 seems to be free from serrations along the edge of the blade. I'm guessing it's also a bit thinner of a tooth than the other two. If so that is what we used to call a "mako" but now more properly call an ancient relative of the Great White Shark (though old time fossil hunters find it hard to keep from calling these makos).

 

https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/florida-vertebrate-fossils/species/carcharodon-hastalis

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Vin]

Thanks for the quick reply Ken.

I will take a closer, clearer shot of #1 because it does have very faint worn out serrations (I almost thought it was a great white.)

 

Amazing so #2 really could be a Meg? My guess was Angus, but I didn't see prominent cusps.

[digit]

If you take a closer image of the middle tooth right where the edge of the enamel meets the root, that would be helpful. Photos taken outside in bright light can sometimes help a camera focus better. The right edge in the above photo nearly looks like it has a bit of a bulge there but it is probably nothing. It does not appear to be an angustidens with broken side cusps as I don't see evidence of (or room for) the cusps. I believe South Carolina has a wide range of exposures covering a greater time period for these chronospecies: C. auriculatus => C. angustidens => C. chubutensis => C. megalodon but it doesn't look like the much the earlier species and C. chubutensis would seem to be the only other candidate other than being a meg.

 

If #1 does have serrations (even if worn) then that would indicate a Great White Shark tooth (Carcharodon carcharias). That species is pretty rare down here in Florida but they seem to be much more abundant in the Carolinas.

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Vin]

On 8/9/2019 at 1:03 PM, digit said:

If you take a closer image of the middle tooth right where the edge of the enamel meets the root, that would be helpful. Photos taken outside in bright light can sometimes help a camera focus better. The right edge in the above photo nearly looks like it has a bit of a bulge there but it is probably nothing. It does not appear to be an angustidens with broken side cusps as I don't see evidence of (or room for) the cusps. I believe South Carolina has a wide range of exposures covering a greater time period for these chronospecies: C. auriculatus => C. angustidens => C. chubutensis => C. megalodon but it doesn't look like the much the earlier species and C. chubutensis would seem to be the only other candidate other than being a meg.

 

If #1 does have serrations (even if worn) then that would indicate a Great White Shark tooth (Carcharodon carcharias). That species is pretty rare down here in Florida but they seem to be much more abundant in the Carolinas.

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

Here are the photos of the corners of tooth #2.

Also a closer shot of the worn out serrations on tooth #1. 

What do you guys think? 

[Vin]

[Vin]

[Vin]

I'm more convinced now that tooth #2 is a lower jaw Meg but still not 100%.

 

[digit]

Yup. I'd concur. Even though some (younger) meg teeth can show some signs of what appear to be faint side cusps, this one looks to be well within the limits of C. megalodon (and a fine one at that).

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Vin]

21 minutes ago, digit said:

Yup. I'd concur. Even though some (younger) meg teeth can show some signs of what appear to be faint side cusps, this one looks to be well within the limits of C. megalodon (and a fine one at that).

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

Thank again Ken!

Do you think tooth #1 is a great white shark based on the closer shots?

[digit]

5 minutes ago, Vin said:

Do you think tooth #1 is a great white shark based on the closer shots?

Yup. Definite worn serrations. A "mako" would have been smooth edged (with no signs of previous serrations before being tumbled and worn away).

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Vin]

Thanks for the confirmation man! I can't believe we found great whites, megs and angustidens (not pictured) on our first trip down to SC. Super excited haha

[digit]

Go where the fossil are and you won't be disappointed--as long as you put in the effort.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[grahamguti]

Where exactly did you go to find these?

 

[sixgill pete]

8 hours ago, grahamguti said:

Where exactly did you go to find these?

 

I am seeing a pattern with many of your posts. Personally, I would not answer any of these questions. Do some research online, read scientific papers. Use google earth  find places to explore and find spots like many of us. 

Spots are lost every day due to unethical hunting from people asking the same questions and getting answers. I am not saying you would do such things, but we don't know you.

[grahamguti]

@sixgill pete No trust me, I have read pages of the peer reviewed journal articles discussing the quadrangle in my area and its layers exposures (and if I'm lucky they include a locality). I have also looked at what elevation the formations rest at---and respectfully topographic maps of my county. I also spend hours on Google maps to find exposed lands, recent LIVE satellite imagery to make sure they are still there, and Google street view to know what the access point looks like or if it is fenced up. I have driven an hour away to find nothing before, but I've also found Megs 20 minutes away. I have also texted real estate brokers to ask them if they would allow me to look for fossils on their property, and most of them all said the same thing "I sold that property years ago".

 

I understand the hunt, I was simply asking a question to those nearby my area, thought that was the other half of fossil hunting---the community.

 

P.s. I don't understand how asking someone right down the road from me where they found something is "unethical"? Explain.

[Plax]

The question isn't unethical. Sixgill was referring to unethical collecting practices. It's perhaps just not proper etiquette to ask blunt questions. Not saying you're rude of course.

[Boesse]

I'll provide an example of why many are loathe to share locality data with anyone, and why our museum has an extremely strict confidentiality policy meaning that we keep locality records confidential with individual collectors and do not share them - unless the locality is a construction site that is completely finished and no longer producing fossils, after which the sharing of information would not affect the integrity of the site.

 

A couple years ago I was invited to collect for the museum in a privately owned gravel pit in the area by two collectors and friends of the museum who had secured verbal permission to be there. So long as either of these collectors were present, the museum could tag along; this worked quite well and for about three months went out there nearly every weekend and our proclivity for Sunday mornings lead to us jokingly calling it "Fossil church". A couple other collectors were invited, and they mostly kept mum about it - but a couple of enthusiastic but inexperienced collectors spilled the beans, and by the end of the second month, there were other collectors who had never been invited showing up. Sometimes there would be 10-15 people there, 2/3 of which had never been invited. By the third month there, at least two dozen collectors were routinely trespassing and trespassing at night. Two commercial diggers, only caring about big meg teeth, went right through a 1.5 meter long baleen whale mandible while I was there - I managed to pick up all the pieces and put them in a bucket so I could attempt to reconstruct the mandible at the museum (ironically, it was riddled with shark tooth bite marks and even had an embedded tooth, and if collected properly, could have fetched far more cash than the waterworn meg teeth they were digging for). Without providing too much detail, I'll note that this was a site of unusual scientific interest for the lowcountry - and shortly after this episode the landowner walked by and asked why there were 20 people in his gravel pit - and he kicked everyone out, including the two collectors who had received his verbal permission. And so science stopped at that locality. It's been two years and now the gravel pit is flooded. I am of course bitter at the irresponsible collectors who ruined it, but glad that some of them trusted us enough to invite us along, and feel fortunate that we even had as much as a few months of fieldwork there.

 

Sometimes, shark teeth manage to bring out the worst in some people.

[digit]

If you find someone in your local area who is willing to share sites that have been productive for them, the non-public communication channel of using PM (personal messages) is the appropriate way to conduct that discussion.

 

There are some publicly known sites that are so insanely productive that erosion produces more fossils than a continuous swarm of fossil hunters could ever carry away (like the Ordovician road cut in St. Leon, Indiana). Most sites though can't take extensive hunting pressure before they are played out. Posting information about small slowly regenerating sites on public forums is a good way of killing those sites. Content posted here is available through search engines so sharing the location of a personal "honey hole" on a public forum is basically giving that information to the world (not just the members here).

 

Members who have taken the time to investigate the maps and formations (as it appears you are doing) have invested time and effort into finding spots that are not the well-known hunted-out public sites. They are usually very protective of these sites since once that information is given to someone it can be hard to control. Many hunters are honorable about not revisiting a private site that they are given access to unless they go out again with the person who let them in on the secret--and not "re-sharing" that site with others. We have many members here who have learned the hard way that it can often be difficult to judge character and find out later that someone has cleaned out their honey hole or shared it with others. Once the genie is out of the bottle you can't go back.

 

 

Cheers.

 

-Ken

[Shellseeker]

1 hour ago, digit said:

We have many members here who have learned the hard way that it can often be difficult to judge character and find out later that someone has cleaned out their honey hole or shared it with others. Once the genie is out of the bottle you can't go back.

 

Unfortunately, it is not always a "character" problem. Just decent people who are clueless and talkative.  Those who tend not to value what they get for "free".  They tell a trusted associate or worse yet just take friends/family to the spot who in turn blab to their friends.

More than a decade ago, I had my own sad story similar to Bobby's where a spot I shared in confidence soon after was cleaned out by 10-15 fossil hunters.

1 hour ago, Boesse said:

our museum has an extremely strict confidentiality policy meaning that we keep locality records confidential with individual collectors and do not share them

It also hurts on the donation of scientifically important fossils. People I hunt with get angry with me for donating fossils because they do not trust the museum not to somehow share location information, unlike Bobby's process described above. I donate fossils to the UFMNH because I trust the curator based on years of interaction and because it is the right thing to do.  Jack

 

 

[Mark Kmiecik]

9 hours ago, grahamguti said:

I understand the hunt, I was simply asking a question to those nearby my area, thought that was the other half of fossil hunting---the community.

Just like fishing. I'm not going to take you to, or tell you where my "honey hole" is until I get to know you. Give it some time. I can see now that you are willing to do some research and footwork to find fossils. Patience. Stay involved. It will come.