# Turtle Fossil



## Moozillion

The purpose of this thread is to show my turtle fossil and my efforts to preserve it.
In 1996, while working overseas, I bought a turtle fossil at a gem and mineral show:






It is about 10 inches long and 9 inches wide at the widest point. It weighs 9.5 pounds. I was told it was from the Gobi Desert in China. Over the years, I noticed that it sheds tiny bits of black crumbs from the scutes on its back, but had NO IDEA how to protect and preserve it. Fast forward to January 2018- TFO member, Tidgey's Dad is a paleontologist, and he directed me to The Fossil Forum! They are a group of really lovely people who are incredibly knowledgable!  They quickly determined that my fossil was genuine, which was a concern for me since counterfeit fossils is a  huge business!!!! They also identified the genus and species: Anosteira maomingensis!!!
The majority of these are found in the Guangdong Province of southern China, although the Anosteira genus had a wide range, including North America. They are related to soft shelled turtles and to Carettochelyidae, which are the Pig Nosed Turtle (aka Fly River Turtle) that live in Australia! 

Pig Nosed Turtle:







Much like the Fly River Turtle, my Anosteira was a fresh water turtle that inhabited rivers and lagoons. Its front limbs were paddles with 2 claws. So I imagine my turtle probably looked a lot like the adorable Pig Nosed Turtle!

Later in the spring, when the temperatures are warm enough for me to work outside, I will post the preservation method that the Fossil Forum gurus are recommending. This involves the use of plastic polymer beads dissolved in acetone; since acetone is highly volatile and flammable, it's NOT something you want to do  inside!!!!

Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!


----------



## Bambam1989

Very awesome! If I had a fossil I would give a little show and tell too.
I hope other members that have some interesting fossils will be interested in showing them off.[emoji16]


----------



## Yvonne G

How cool is that!

Way long time ago, in the '50s and '60s when my kids were young, we found quite a few rocks with embedded clam shells here in the Fresno/Clovis area. I've always wondered if that was because of Noah's flood, as this is way far from any water. I never saved any of them, not thinking they were important at all.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> The purpose of this thread is to show my turtle fossil and my efforts to preserve it.
> In 1996, while working overseas, I bought a turtle fossil at a gem and mineral show:
> 
> View attachment 227755
> 
> View attachment 227756
> 
> 
> It is about 10 inches long and 9 inches wide at the widest point. It weighs 9.5 pounds. I was told it was from the Gobi Desert in China. Over the years, I noticed that it sheds tiny bits of black crumbs from the scutes on its back, but had NO IDEA how to protect and preserve it. Fast forward to January 2018- TFO member, Tidgey's Dad is a paleontologist, and he directed me to The Fossil Forum! They are a group of really lovely people who are incredibly knowledgable!  They quickly determined that my fossil was genuine, which was a concern for me since counterfeit fossils is a  huge business!!!! They also identified the genus and species: Anosteira maomingensis!!!
> The majority of these are found in the Guangdong Province of southern China, although the Anosteira genus had a wide range, including North America. They are related to soft shelled turtles and to Carettochelyidae, which are the Pig Nosed Turtle (aka Fly River Turtle) that live in Australia!
> 
> Pig Nosed Turtle:
> 
> View attachment 227757
> 
> 
> View attachment 227758
> 
> 
> Much like the Fly River Turtle, my Anosteira was a fresh water turtle that inhabited rivers and lagoons. Its front limbs were paddles with 2 claws. So I imagine my turtle probably looked a lot like the adorable Pig Nosed Turtle!
> 
> Later in the spring, when the temperatures are warm enough for me to work outside, I will post the preservation method that the Fossil Forum gurus are recommending. This involves the use of plastic polymer beads dissolved in acetone; since acetone is highly volatile and flammable, it's NOT something you want to do  inside!!!!
> 
> Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!


All wonderful stuff. 
I was very happy that I was right and it was real, though i had no idea of the genus. 
It's a very precious thing, very few of these get out of China now, you can be executed for exporting vertebrate fossils. 
Here is a modern _Anosteira sp.




_


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> All wonderful stuff.
> I was very happy that I was right and it was real, though i had no idea of the genus.
> It's a very precious thing, very few of these get out of China now, you can be executed for exporting vertebrate fossils.
> Here is a modern _Anosteira sp.
> 
> 
> 
> _



WOW!!!! [emoji33]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Yvonne G said:


> How cool is that!
> 
> Way long time ago, in the '50s and '60s when my kids were young, we found quite a few rocks with embedded clam shells here in the Fresno/Clovis area. I've always wondered if that was because of Noah's flood, as this is way far from any water. I never saved any of them, not thinking they were important at all.


Your area used to be underwater, but the sea level has dropped and the land has been pushed up so one can find marine fossils even at high altitude. 
This sea-urchin,/sand dollar / echinoid is a fossil from Fresno County and is 10 million years old. 




Not my specimen, obviously.


----------



## Oxalis

Moozillion said:


> The purpose of this thread is to show my turtle fossil and my efforts to preserve it.
> In 1996, while working overseas, I bought a turtle fossil at a gem and mineral show:
> 
> View attachment 227755
> 
> View attachment 227756
> 
> 
> It is about 10 inches long and 9 inches wide at the widest point. It weighs 9.5 pounds. I was told it was from the Gobi Desert in China. Over the years, I noticed that it sheds tiny bits of black crumbs from the scutes on its back, but had NO IDEA how to protect and preserve it. Fast forward to January 2018- TFO member, Tidgey's Dad is a paleontologist, and he directed me to The Fossil Forum! They are a group of really lovely people who are incredibly knowledgable!  They quickly determined that my fossil was genuine, which was a concern for me since counterfeit fossils is a  huge business!!!! They also identified the genus and species: Anosteira maomingensis!!!
> The majority of these are found in the Guangdong Province of southern China, although the Anosteira genus had a wide range, including North America. They are related to soft shelled turtles and to Carettochelyidae, which are the Pig Nosed Turtle (aka Fly River Turtle) that live in Australia!
> 
> Pig Nosed Turtle:
> 
> View attachment 227757
> 
> 
> View attachment 227758
> 
> 
> Much like the Fly River Turtle, my Anosteira was a fresh water turtle that inhabited rivers and lagoons. Its front limbs were paddles with 2 claws. So I imagine my turtle probably looked a lot like the adorable Pig Nosed Turtle!
> 
> Later in the spring, when the temperatures are warm enough for me to work outside, I will post the preservation method that the Fossil Forum gurus are recommending. This involves the use of plastic polymer beads dissolved in acetone; since acetone is highly volatile and flammable, it's NOT something you want to do  inside!!!!
> 
> Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!


That is pretty super cool! I love fossils too and it looks like you have a very nice one in pretty darn good condition!  Let me know if you need any additional help with storing your artifact. I am an archivist and I can recommend some good storage solutions. I'm sure you have lots of good info from the Fossil Forum though.  Can't wait to hear more!


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> The purpose of this thread is to show my turtle fossil and my efforts to preserve it.
> In 1996, while working overseas, I bought a turtle fossil at a gem and mineral show:
> 
> View attachment 227755
> 
> View attachment 227756
> 
> 
> It is about 10 inches long and 9 inches wide at the widest point. It weighs 9.5 pounds. I was told it was from the Gobi Desert in China. Over the years, I noticed that it sheds tiny bits of black crumbs from the scutes on its back, but had NO IDEA how to protect and preserve it. Fast forward to January 2018- TFO member, Tidgey's Dad is a paleontologist, and he directed me to The Fossil Forum! They are a group of really lovely people who are incredibly knowledgable!  They quickly determined that my fossil was genuine, which was a concern for me since counterfeit fossils is a  huge business!!!! They also identified the genus and species: Anosteira maomingensis!!!
> The majority of these are found in the Guangdong Province of southern China, although the Anosteira genus had a wide range, including North America. They are related to soft shelled turtles and to Carettochelyidae, which are the Pig Nosed Turtle (aka Fly River Turtle) that live in Australia!
> 
> Pig Nosed Turtle:
> 
> View attachment 227757
> 
> 
> View attachment 227758
> 
> 
> Much like the Fly River Turtle, my Anosteira was a fresh water turtle that inhabited rivers and lagoons. Its front limbs were paddles with 2 claws. So I imagine my turtle probably looked a lot like the adorable Pig Nosed Turtle!
> 
> Later in the spring, when the temperatures are warm enough for me to work outside, I will post the preservation method that the Fossil Forum gurus are recommending. This involves the use of plastic polymer beads dissolved in acetone; since acetone is highly volatile and flammable, it's NOT something you want to do  inside!!!!
> 
> Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!


The pig nosed turtle is so cute.


----------



## CarolM

Yvonne G said:


> How cool is that!
> 
> Way long time ago, in the '50s and '60s when my kids were young, we found quite a few rocks with embedded clam shells here in the Fresno/Clovis area. I've always wondered if that was because of Noah's flood, as this is way far from any water. I never saved any of them, not thinking they were important at all.


Oh such a pity.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Your area used to be underwater, but the sea level has dropped and the land has been pushed up so one can find marine fossils even at high altitude.
> This sea-urchin,/sand dollar / echinoid is a fossil from Fresno County and is 10 million years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not my specimen, obviously.



BEAUTIFUL!!! [emoji2]


----------



## Moozillion

Oxalis said:


> That is pretty super cool! I love fossils too and it looks like you have a very nice one in pretty darn good condition!  Let me know if you need any additional help with storing your artifact. I am an archivist and I can recommend some good storage solutions. I'm sure you have lots of good info from the Fossil Forum though.  Can't wait to hear more!



Cool!!! [emoji2] Thanks! [emoji106]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> BEAUTIFUL!!! [emoji2]


Notice the thing like a barnacle on the urchin? 
This is a crinoid holdfast.
This means when the little echinoid was chugging along just under the substrate surface he had one of these :


sticking out of him like a flag!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Notice the thing like a barnacle on the urchin?
> This is a crinoid holdfast.
> This means when the little echinoid was chugging along just under the substrate surface he had one of these :
> View attachment 227772
> 
> sticking out of him like a flag!



It’s WONDERFUL!!!! [emoji2] Looks like feathers!!!!! [emoji173]️


----------



## domalle

Moozillion said:


> The purpose of this thread is to show my turtle fossil and my efforts to preserve it.
> In 1996, while working overseas, I bought a turtle fossil at a gem and mineral show:
> 
> View attachment 227755
> 
> View attachment 227756
> 
> 
> It is about 10 inches long and 9 inches wide at the widest point. It weighs 9.5 pounds. I was told it was from the Gobi Desert in China. Over the years, I noticed that it sheds tiny bits of black crumbs from the scutes on its back, but had NO IDEA how to protect and preserve it. Fast forward to January 2018- TFO member, Tidgey's Dad is a paleontologist, and he directed me to The Fossil Forum! They are a group of really lovely people who are incredibly knowledgable!  They quickly determined that my fossil was genuine, which was a concern for me since counterfeit fossils is a  huge business!!!! They also identified the genus and species: Anosteira maomingensis!!!
> The majority of these are found in the Guangdong Province of southern China, although the Anosteira genus had a wide range, including North America. They are related to soft shelled turtles and to Carettochelyidae, which are the Pig Nosed Turtle (aka Fly River Turtle) that live in Australia!
> 
> Pig Nosed Turtle:
> 
> View attachment 227757
> 
> 
> View attachment 227758
> 
> 
> Much like the Fly River Turtle, my Anosteira was a fresh water turtle that inhabited rivers and lagoons. Its front limbs were paddles with 2 claws. So I imagine my turtle probably looked a lot like the adorable Pig Nosed Turtle!
> 
> Later in the spring, when the temperatures are warm enough for me to work outside, I will post the preservation method that the Fossil Forum gurus are recommending. This involves the use of plastic polymer beads dissolved in acetone; since acetone is highly volatile and flammable, it's NOT something you want to do  inside!!!!
> 
> Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!




I'm an old turtle fossil myself but nobody's ever picked me up and placed any value on me.

Great idea for a thread!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> It’s WONDERFUL!!!! [emoji2] Looks like feathers!!!!! [emoji173]️


It's actually another echinoderm, distant relative of the sea urchins and starfish.


----------



## Oxalis

When it comes to fossils, I'm a fan of the ammonite (because I think the Nautilus is cute) and trilobites (of which pill bugs are a descendant).  Pictures of these guys are below:


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> When it comes to fossils, I'm a fan of the ammonite (because I think the Nautilus is cute) and trilobites (of which pill bugs are a descendant).  Pictures of these guys are below:
> View attachment 227797
> 
> View attachment 227798


The ammonite is a _Cleoniceras _from the Upper Cretaceous and is about 110 million years old. 
The trilobites are K_ainops sp _from the basal Devonian about 410 million years old. 
Trilobites left no descendants, sadly.  
They're beautiful fossils, are they yours?


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> It's actually another echinoderm, distant relative of the sea urchins and starfish.


DELIGHTFUL!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Oxalis said:


> When it comes to fossils, I'm a fan of the ammonite (because I think the Nautilus is cute) and trilobites (of which pill bugs are a descendant).  Pictures of these guys are below:
> View attachment 227797
> 
> View attachment 227798


Oh, how COOL!!!!!
I have 2 ammonites, one of which was purchased as a necklace pendant. 
I LOVE PILL BUGS!!!!!!!!! Now I love them even MORE knowing they are TRILOBITE descendants!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The ammonite is a _Cleoniceras _from the Upper Cretaceous and is about 110 million years old.
> The trilobites are K_ainops sp _from the basal Devonian about 410 million years old.
> Trilobites left no descendants, sadly.
> They're beautiful fossils, are they yours?



Oops! Oh, well- I STILL love pill bugs!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

My youngest sister and her family live in Montana. They know of several places where trilobites are very plentiful and have collected some. Hubby and I haven't been to Montana yet, but I told my sister I'd really like to find a trilobite. She's happy to take me, but says that the locations where you get the best trilobites are only accessible in the summertime (the areas are snowed in for winter). The only TINY problem with THAT is summertime is when they routinely get massive WILDFIRES all through that area.  Dang. I don't want to go fossil hunting badly enough to outrun wildfires!!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

I love how the ammonites swirl inward to infinity!!!!! I have 2 ammonites: one from Madagascar and one from Who-Knows-Where .
The one of unknown origin is mounted as a pendant.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> My youngest sister and her family live in Montana. They know of several places where trilobites are very plentiful and have collected some. Hubby and I haven't been to Montana yet, but I told my sister I'd really like to find a trilobite. She's happy to take me, but says that the locations where you get the best trilobites are only accessible in the summertime (the areas are snowed in for winter). The only TINY problem with THAT is summertime is when they routinely get massive WILDFIRES all through that area.  Dang. I don't want to go fossil hunting badly enough to outrun wildfires!!!!!!!


Some of the TFF peeps have been out in the snow and ice collecting in frozen rivers and snow filled quarries, on beaches hacking things out of the frozen sand. 
But then I used to do that sort of thing.
Not any more. 
I wait til spring. 
These lovely ammonites and clams are from Montana, part of my Secret Santa. But i don't have any trilobites from there, though i know there are sites for them in the State.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Some of the TFF peeps have been out in the snow and ice collecting in frozen rivers and snow filled quarries, on beaches hacking things out of the frozen sand.
> But then I used to do that sort of thing.
> Not any more.
> I wait til spring.
> These lovely ammonites and clams are from Montana, part of my Secret Santa. But i don't have any trilobites from there, though i know there are sites for them in the State.


Oh, my GOODNESS!!! ANYONE who would be out collecting in this weather is TRULY dedicated- or a bit mad, or both!!!


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Trilobites left no descendants, sadly.
> They're beautiful fossils, are they yours?


Aww, if I remember where I read that, I'll have to contact their editor! 
Oh well, at least we have pill bugs and horseshoe crabs to remind us of cute little trilobites...
Not my photos; they're just from Google. I do have a trilobite fossil; sometime I will have to take a photo just for you!


Moozillion said:


> Oh, how COOL!!!!!
> I have 2 ammonites, one of which was purchased as a necklace pendant.
> I LOVE PILL BUGS!!!!!!!!! Now I love them even MORE knowing they are TRILOBITE descendants!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I'd love to see your necklace!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I love how the ammonites swirl inward to infinity!!!!! I have 2 ammonites: one from Madagascar and one from Who-Knows-Where .
> The one of unknown origin is mounted as a pendant.


_Cleoniceras , _mentioned earlier will almost certainly be the one from Madagascar.
For the other, post a picture and i may be able to name it.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Oh, my GOODNESS!!! ANYONE who would be out collecting in this weather is TRULY dedicated- or a bit mad, or both!!!


Yup, bit of both, I reckon.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Aww, if I remember where I read that, I'll have to contact their editor!
> Oh well, at least we have pill bugs and horseshoe crabs to remind us of cute little trilobites...
> Not my photos; they're just from Google. I do have a trilobite fossil; sometime I will have to take a photo just for you!
> 
> I'd love to see your necklace!!


Indeed horseshoe crab larvae are known as trilobite as trilobite larvae because they look so much like them, but the relationship is quite distant.
Yes please, to your trilobite photo and to Bea's necklace!


----------



## Moozillion

Oxalis said:


> Aww, if I remember where I read that, I'll have to contact their editor!
> Oh well, at least we have pill bugs and horseshoe crabs to remind us of cute little trilobites...
> Not my photos; they're just from Google. I do have a trilobite fossil; sometime I will have to take a photo just for you!
> 
> I'd love to see your necklace!!



I’ll take a photo and post it- probably tomorrow. 
I also have a pendant of raw amber that has “forest debris” in it. I’ll post that, too. [emoji2]


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Indeed horseshoe crab larvae are known as trilobite as trilobite larvae because they look so much like them, but the relationship is quite distant.
> Yes please, to your trilobite photo and to Bea's necklace!



WOW!!!! They really DO look like little Trilobites!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

OK the first one is obviously my ammonite pendant. No idea where it's from. It looks brighter in better light.



And this is my raw amber pendant with twigs and stuff in it:


----------



## Moozillion

Although I found this tooth in the St. Francisville loess area many years ago, I have NO CLUE what it is. it is NOT the equine tooth that I mentioned before- that was much bigger.


----------



## Moozillion

These earrings were a gift from my Hubby before we were married. They are fossil walrus bone. 
Which bone, you ask? Why, it's slices of petrified walrus penis bone! 
I only wear them to select gatherings. Depending on who asks what they are, I may just say "fossil bone" or I may tell them exactly which bone!  The Inuit word for this bone is oosik.


----------



## Moozillion

And here is my Madagascar ammonite:


----------



## Moozillion

I also have an insect in amber around here somewhere but can't seem to put my hands on it just now.
That meerkat that John send me has been lurking around...I wonder it he's got it...


----------



## DE42

Moozillion said:


> And here is my Madagascar ammonite:
> 
> View attachment 227828


I have two halves of one of those.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> OK the first one is obviously my ammonite pendant. No idea where it's from. It looks brighter in better light.
> View attachment 227821
> 
> 
> And this is my raw amber pendant with twigs and stuff in it:
> 
> View attachment 227822


Very nice, but no way of telling exactly what they are or where they're from, I'm afraid.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Although I found this tooth in the St. Francisville loess area many years ago, I have NO CLUE what it is. it is NOT the equine tooth that I mentioned before- that was much bigger.
> 
> View attachment 227824
> View attachment 227825
> View attachment 227826


That is a shark tooth, i'm pretty sure from a fin-spined hybodont shark, designed to crush shells. 
I think it's a species of _Orodus _from the Upper Pennsylvanian , 300 million years old or so. .


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> These earrings were a gift from my Hubby before we were married. They are fossil walrus bone.
> Which bone, you ask? Why, it's slices of petrified walrus penis bone!
> I only wear them to select gatherings. Depending on who asks what they are, I may just say "fossil bone" or I may tell them exactly which bone!  The Inuit word for this bone is oosik.
> 
> View attachment 227827


Ha de ha! 
Yes, i've seen these bones for sale


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I also have an insect in amber around here somewhere but can't seem to put my hands on it just now.
> That meerkat that John send me has been lurking around...I wonder it he's got it...


mmmm.
i've never seen a fossilized meerkat.


----------



## Jacqui

Yvonne G said:


> How cool is that!
> 
> Way long time ago, in the '50s and '60s when my kids were young, we found quite a few rocks with embedded clam shells here in the Fresno/Clovis area. I've always wondered if that was because of Noah's flood, as this is way far from any water. I never saved any of them, not thinking they were important at all.



We have them here too, but then at one time we were under water.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> That is a shark tooth, i'm pretty sure from a fin-spined hybodont shark, designed to crush shells.
> I think it's a species of _Orodus _from the Upper Pennsylvanian , 300 million years old or so. .
> View attachment 227843



Oh, MY!!!! I thought all shark teeth were those triangular ones !!!!!COOL!!!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Oh, MY!!!! I thought all shark teeth were those triangular ones !!!!!COOL!!!!


Ptychodont shark teeth.





For crushing molluscs.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Mooz, Lori's (Geschwhat) avatar is a coprolite. 
She is one of the resident coprolite experts.
So it's poop!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Mooz, Lori's (Geschwhat) avatar is a coprolite.
> She is one of the resident coprolite experts.
> So it's poop!



HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! [emoji38][emoji38][emoji38][emoji38][emoji38]


----------



## Jacqui

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Mooz, Lori's (Geschwhat) avatar is a coprolite.
> She is one of the resident coprolite experts.
> So it's poop!



My favorite of all!


----------



## CarolM

This is a fossilized shark tooth that my brother gave my eldest son. He told me how old it was but I have already forgotten.
He did say though that it isn't really a good one and that there are better ones. It also has a little bit of clay on as he wanted to make it into a necklace. But then gave it to my son.


----------



## Moozillion

CarolM said:


> This is a fossilized shark tooth that my brother gave my eldest son. He told me how old it was but I have already forgotten.
> He did say though that it isn't really a good one and that there are better ones. It also has a little bit of clay on as he wanted to make it into a necklace. But then gave it to my son.
> View attachment 227872
> View attachment 227873
> View attachment 227874
> View attachment 227875



COOL!!!! [emoji2]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Jacqui said:


> My favorite of all!





Fossil carnivore poop recently sent to me by an American friend. 
This is the second time I've been sent pooh in the post. 
What are people trying to say?
These are 30 million years old and possibly from this extinct dog :


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> This is a fossilized shark tooth that my brother gave my eldest son. He told me how old it was but I have already forgotten.
> He did say though that it isn't really a good one and that there are better ones. It also has a little bit of clay on as he wanted to make it into a necklace. But then gave it to my son.
> View attachment 227872
> View attachment 227873
> View attachment 227874
> View attachment 227875


That's very pretty, but not enough of the base and root to make an positive id. 
It is a fossil Great White, though, I think.
_Carcharodon carcharias. _


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

A tooth from _Megalodon _compared to the Great White.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> View attachment 227911
> 
> Fossil carnivore poop recently sent to me by an American friend.
> This is the second time I've been sent pooh in the post.
> What are people trying to say?
> These are 30 million years old and possibly from this extinct dog :



That looks more like a cat or a weasel than a dog!!! [emoji33]


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A tooth from _Megalodon _compared to the Great White.



I would NOT want to meet Megalodon!!!
[emoji33][emoji33][emoji33][emoji33][emoji33]


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A tooth from _Megalodon _compared to the Great White.


Wow that is huge.


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> I would NOT want to meet Megalodon!!!
> [emoji33][emoji33][emoji33][emoji33][emoji33]


Neither would I


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A tooth from _Megalodon _compared to the Great White.


I just googled a _Megalodon_ ... that is scary!


----------



## Oxalis

I was already in the basement to do laundry today, so I fished out my little fossil for you guys. I've had it for a long time so I don't remember who gave it to me or where it's from. It's only about 7 cm (3 in) at its longest, I'm guessing.


----------



## Moozillion

Oxalis said:


> I was already in the basement to do laundry today, so I fished out my little fossil for you guys. I've had it for a long time so I don't remember who gave it to me or where it's from. It's only about 7 cm (3 in) at its longest, I'm guessing.
> 
> View attachment 227955
> 
> 
> View attachment 227956



WOW!!! [emoji2] Is that a trilobite? [emoji2]


----------



## bouaboua

Moozillion said:


> Oh, my GOODNESS!!! ANYONE who would be out collecting in this weather is TRULY dedicated- or a bit mad, or both!!!


What a cool thread.......

I agree with you. It is both.


----------



## Oxalis

Moozillion said:


> WOW!!! [emoji2] Is that a trilobite? [emoji2]


I was told it is, but I definitely no fossil expert! 

I'll have to wait until all the snow melts to take more photos of the fossils in my tort's garden.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> I was already in the basement to do laundry today, so I fished out my little fossil for you guys. I've had it for a long time so I don't remember who gave it to me or where it's from. It's only about 7 cm (3 in) at its longest, I'm guessing.
> 
> View attachment 227955
> 
> 
> View attachment 227956


Nice trilobite! 
This is Silurian _Calymene _sp. I think.
420-440 million years old, or so


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

bouaboua said:


> What a cool thread.......
> 
> I agree with you. It is both.


Hi, Steven, hope you are well!


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Nice trilobite!
> This is Silurian _Calymene _sp. I think.
> 420-440 million years old, or so


Any idea which species mine is?

That's an awesome photo -- a lovely specimen!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Any idea which species mine is?
> 
> That's an awesome photo -- a lovely specimen!


It is a Phacopid, and I'm pretty sure from the family Calymenidae, possibly the genus _Calymene, _but for the exact species you'd need more detail on location, age and formation as well as better preservation of diagnostic features. 
Sorry.


----------



## Kristoff

Tidgy's Dad said:


> mmmm.
> i've never seen a fossilized meerkat.


Ahem... Not yet?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Kristoff said:


> Ahem... Not yet?







I shall bury this meerkat skull in the garden and wait for a very long time.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

The winner of the 2017 Fossil Forum Vertebrate of The Year Award was :








Here is a complete specimen from a museum :




And a drawing of it struggling during the ice age in Florida.


----------



## Kristoff

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I shall bury this meerkat skull in the garden and wait for a very long time.



But will it work? Only time can tell...
(So silly it’s bad, I know  )


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The winner of the 2017 Fossil Forum Vertebrate of The Year Award was :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a complete specimen from a museum :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a drawing of it struggling during the ice age in Florida.


I forgot to include it's name! 
This is _Hesperotestudo, which means Western tortoise! 
Beautiful. _


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> It is a Phacopid, and I'm pretty sure from the family Calymenidae, possibly the genus _Calymene, _but for the exact species you'd need more detail on location, age and formation as well as better preservation of diagnostic features.
> Sorry.


Thanks so much! It's very cool; I love it! 


Tidgy's Dad said:


> I forgot to include it's name!
> This is _Hesperotestudo, which means Western tortoise!
> Beautiful. _


Awesome indeed!  It looks very much like our Galapagos tort.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Thanks so much! It's very cool; I love it!
> 
> Awesome indeed!  It looks very much like our Galapagos tort.


There were many different species of this tortoise, known from North and Central America down as far as El Salvador and the Bahamas and ranging from 20 million years ago up to just a few thousand years before the present day. 
Sadly, all gone now.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> There were many different species of this tortoise, known from North and Central America down as far as El Salvador and the Bahamas and ranging from 20 million years ago up to just a few thousand years before the present day.
> Sadly, all gone now.


That is sad. How cool it would be to go outside almost anywhere in the western hemisphere and see giant torts roaming around...! At least that is a reminder to cherish the Galaps and Aldabras that we have around now.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> That is sad. How cool it would be to go outside almost anywhere in the western hemisphere and see giant torts roaming around...! At least that is a reminder to cherish the Galaps and Aldabras that we have around now.


Indeed. 
Especially as most of the last species of H_esperotestudo _vanished not long after the first traces of _Homo sapiens _appeared on the scene, especially with the last few island species. There's no proof, but I think we can infer what happened.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's addition, a few bits and pieces from Morocco's phosphate mines. 
Shark's teeth :


_In _more detail, the long, slender teeth are _Striatolamia sp, _a sand tiger shark, now extinct.






And the two big triangular ones are from _Squalicorax, _an extinct lamniform shark. 






The other little curved tooth above is _Cretolamna maroccana.



_
Then we have a broken piece of _Otodus obliquus, _the tooth should look like this

I have several of these,and big ones too, but here only one of the side-points is still intact.
_





_
A small _Odontaspis (_left), which still survives and a _Serratolamna _complete the days tooth finds.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oh, they are Upper Cretaceous, so about 70 to 80 million years old.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's addition, a few bits and pieces from Morocco's phosphate mines.
> Shark's teeth :
> View attachment 229112
> 
> _In _more detail, the long, slender teeth are _Striatolamia sp, _a sand tiger shark, now extinct.
> View attachment 229113
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the two big triangular ones are from _Squalicorax, _an extinct lamniform shark.
> View attachment 229114
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The other little curved tooth above is _Cretolamna maroccana.
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Then we have a broken piece of _Otodus obliquus, _the tooth should look like this
> View attachment 229116
> I have several of these,and big ones too, but here only one of the side-points is still intact.
> _
> View attachment 229115
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> A small _Odontaspis (_left), which still survives and a _Serratolamna _complete the days tooth finds.
> View attachment 229117


Wow, very cool! I just can't believe some of these megafauna lived on earth at one point. Their size is crazy!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Wow, very cool! I just can't believe some of these megafauna lived on earth at one point. Their size is crazy!


And the seas were swarming with sharks at this time. This is only a few of them. 
I also found these: 


They're small, only 3 cm for the biggest one.






These are a couple of vertebra from a small Mosasaur, a giant swimming lizard.




The oceans must have been terrifying places.
The giant turtle Archelon also lived at the same time, but i don't have any bits of that :


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I shall bury this meerkat skull in the garden and wait for a very long time.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Kristoff said:


> But will it work? Only time can tell...
> (So silly it’s bad, I know  )


HAHAHA!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The winner of the 2017 Fossil Forum Vertebrate of The Year Award was :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a complete specimen from a museum :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a drawing of it struggling during the ice age in Florida.



Ermmm....He doesn't look like he's struggling much to me...unless he's wishing he had put on some sunscreen!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I forgot to include it's name!
> This is _Hesperotestudo, which means Western tortoise!
> Beautiful. _


This is SO cool!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's addition, a few bits and pieces from Morocco's phosphate mines.
> Shark's teeth :
> View attachment 229112
> 
> _In _more detail, the long, slender teeth are _Striatolamia sp, _a sand tiger shark, now extinct.
> View attachment 229113
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the two big triangular ones are from _Squalicorax, _an extinct lamniform shark.
> View attachment 229114
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The other little curved tooth above is _Cretolamna maroccana.
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Then we have a broken piece of _Otodus obliquus, _the tooth should look like this
> View attachment 229116
> I have several of these,and big ones too, but here only one of the side-points is still intact.
> _
> View attachment 229115
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> A small _Odontaspis (_left), which still survives and a _Serratolamna _complete the days tooth finds.
> View attachment 229117



 WOWIE-ZOWIE!!!!! Note to self: Do not, I repeat DO NOT ANNOY OTODUS OBLIQUUS!!!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> And the seas were swarming with sharks at this time. This is only a few of them.
> I also found these:
> View attachment 229175
> 
> They're small, only 3 cm for the biggest one.
> View attachment 229176
> 
> View attachment 229177
> 
> View attachment 229178
> 
> These are a couple of vertebra from a small Mosasaur, a giant swimming lizard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The oceans must have been terrifying places.
> The giant turtle Archelon also lived at the same time, but i don't have any bits of that :



SO INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

I've been away from this thread too long!!!! Thanks so much for the nudge, Adam!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I've been away from this thread too long!!!! Thanks so much for the nudge, Adam!


I'll keep it ticking over when you're not about, if you don't mind, Bea. 
But it's your thread. 
And i'm aware you have other things on your mind at the moment.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I'll keep it ticking over when you're not about, if you don't mind, Bea.
> But it's your thread.
> And i'm aware you have other things on your mind at the moment.



I always LOVE your input, Adam! [emoji2]
I googled that giant aquatic lizard to learn more!!!! [emoji2][emoji106]


----------



## Moozillion

Adam, the way I see this thread is that I just LAUNCHED it- where it goes depends on where the participants steer it! [emoji38]
I have NO proprietary feelings about it!!!!
I don’t have any other fossils to share and my knowledge on the topic is zip. The only other posts I plan to add is when I do the preservation work on my fossil turtle, which is weeks away.
So please, PLEASE feel free to post away!!!!!!!!!
Paleontology is fascinating but it and it’s conjoined twin, geology are SO vast that for a newbie to get any sort of traction without quickly getting overwhelmed is nearly impossible. You present fascinating and easily digestible “bites” of the field. That helps us, or me at least, poke around and develop areas of particular interest. [emoji2][emoji173]️[emoji2][emoji173]️[emoji2][emoji173]️
@Tidgy’s Dad


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Thank you, Mooz. 
So here's today's offering, just some little brachiopods but the preservation for 460 million years old is exquisite. 


Sent to me by a kind chap on the Fossil Forum recently. 
Brachiopods are not the same as bivalves and clams which are molluscs and thus related to snails, squids and octopuses, the nautilus and ammonites. 
Brachiopods are their own group and are different in their morphology. 




The animal inside has long lophophores for filter feeding. 




The pedicle is the fibrous anchor by witch it attaches to the substrate (beans not recommended).


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
The earliest known possible turtle relative is _Eunotosaurus africanus _an ancient reptile from the Middle Permian period that existed from about 265 to about 250 million years ago. Long before the dinosaurs appeared. 
This is not a direct turtle ancestor, but it's close relatives may have been. It had wide, flat ribs that formed a partial shell and had vertebrae almost identical to that of turtles. 



Found in South Africa.
And looked something like this :


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thank you, Mooz.
> So here's today's offering, just some little brachiopods but the preservation for 460 million years old is exquisite.
> View attachment 229229
> 
> Sent to me by a kind chap on the Fossil Forum recently.
> Brachiopods are not the same as bivalves and clams which are molluscs and thus related to snails, squids and octopuses, the nautilus and ammonites.
> Brachiopods are their own group and are different in their morphology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The animal inside has long lophophores for filter feeding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pedicle is the fibrous anchor by witch it attaches to the substrate (beans not recommended).


How old is earth exactly according to whoever neasures that kind of thing? And since this is a fossil thread how do you guys date the fossils? As a matter of interest.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

The Earth is 4.54 billion years old, give or take a little. 
As for dating, it's pretty complicated but we use absolute dating or relative dating. 
Absolute dating involves dating the fossil or the rock it's in and relative dating rocks directly above or below our layer. 
It uses radioactive decay as the main agent, we know precisely how quickly different radioactive particles decay and they thus have a half life, the time it takes for half of them to decay, and then half again in the same period and so on. But these particles are mainly in volcanic rocks, so not usually with the fossils themselves, but we can correlate rocks from around the world and once you date a fossil that is only found in a roc of a precise age (a zone fossil) then whenever you find that fossil the rock has to be that old . 
Lots of other methods too, but it's really complex. But with modern technology really accurate and certainly very nearly correct.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thank you, Mooz.
> So here's today's offering, just some little brachiopods but the preservation for 460 million years old is exquisite.
> View attachment 229229
> 
> Sent to me by a kind chap on the Fossil Forum recently.
> Brachiopods are not the same as bivalves and clams which are molluscs and thus related to snails, squids and octopuses, the nautilus and ammonites.
> Brachiopods are their own group and are different in their morphology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The animal inside has long lophophores for filter feeding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pedicle is the fibrous anchor by witch it attaches to the substrate (beans not recommended).



Gosh, they sound so much like snails and LOOK so much like clams, it's hard to understand how they're not related!!!
Adam, are there any modern brachiopods alive today?


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> The earliest known possible turtle relative is _Eunotosaurus africanus _an ancient reptile from the Middle Permian period that existed from about 265 to about 250 million years ago. Long before the dinosaurs appeared.
> This is not a direct turtle ancestor, but it's close relatives may have been. It had wide, flat ribs that formed a partial shell and had vertebrae almost identical to that of turtles.
> 
> 
> 
> Found in South Africa.
> And looked something like this :




Were the expanded ribs on the belly, the back or both?
And when were the first real turtle, do you reckon?


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The Earth is 4.54 billion years old, give or take a little.
> As for dating, it's pretty complicated but we use absolute dating or relative dating.
> Absolute dating involves dating the fossil or the rock it's in and relative dating rocks directly above or below our layer.
> It uses radioactive decay as the main agent, we know precisely how quickly different radioactive particles decay and they thus have a half life, the time it takes for half of them to decay, and then half again in the same period and so on. But these particles are mainly in volcanic rocks, so not usually with the fossils themselves, but we can correlate rocks from around the world and once you date a fossil that is only found in a roc of a precise age (a zone fossil) then whenever you find that fossil the rock has to be that old .
> Lots of other methods too, but it's really complex. But with modern technology really accurate and certainly very nearly correct.



So calculating the age of fossil cheese would be child's play!!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Gosh, they sound so much like snails and LOOK so much like clams, it's hard to understand how they're not related!!!
> Adam, are there any modern brachiopods alive today?


Yes, some relatives of the fossil ones i posted still survive and the terebratulids are doing well also.
And there are still some primitive forms.
A rhynchonellid, related to my fossils.




A terebratulid the most important group since the time of the dinosaurs began.




And a very primitive inarticulate brachiopod, _Lingula _almost unchanged for 440 million years, the species for which the term 'living fossil' was coined by Darwin.



And my fossil of one of it's ancestors from 490 million years ago, _Lingulella _or 'Little Lingula" 2 cm long.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Were the expanded ribs on the belly, the back or both?
> And when were the first real turtle, do you reckon?


The 'shell' was just on the top, the plastron probably didn't evolve until the group returned to the water and needed protection from attack from below. 
As for the first 'real' turtle, watch this space!


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The 'shell' was just on the top, the plastron probably didn't evolve until the group returned to the water and needed protection from attack from below.
> As for the first 'real' turtle, watch this space!


Was it _Proganochelys_?


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The Earth is 4.54 billion years old, give or take a little.
> As for dating, it's pretty complicated but we use absolute dating or relative dating.
> Absolute dating involves dating the fossil or the rock it's in and relative dating rocks directly above or below our layer.
> It uses radioactive decay as the main agent, we know precisely how quickly different radioactive particles decay and they thus have a half life, the time it takes for half of them to decay, and then half again in the same period and so on. But these particles are mainly in volcanic rocks, so not usually with the fossils themselves, but we can correlate rocks from around the world and once you date a fossil that is only found in a roc of a precise age (a zone fossil) then whenever you find that fossil the rock has to be that old .
> Lots of other methods too, but it's really complex. But with modern technology really accurate and certainly very nearly correct.


Wow. And humans managed to mess up earth in such a short time compared to how long she has been around. Sad really!


----------



## CarolM

Thank you Mooz for starting this thread. And thank you Adam for all the very interesting posts. I most probably cannot repeat it as my memory is like a gold fishes memory. But I love reading it none the less.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Was it _Proganochelys_?


Patience, Grasshopper.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Wow. And humans managed to mess up earth in such a short time compared to how long she has been around. Sad really!


It is. 
But the Earth has done pretty well on her own. 
There have been five Great Extinctions as well as hundreds of smaller ones before the Sixth Great Extinction that we maybe living through and contributing to today. 
The biggest was the end Permian event when 96% of all species on the planet were lost. 
We have a long way to go to match that!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today we look at a community of fossils from the Pierre Shale from near Glendive, Montana posted to me as part of my Secret Santa over on the Fossil Forum.
They are interesting because this communities fossil representatives are entirely molluscs, no other animal group is represented.
They are Upper Cretaceous in age about 70 to 80 million years old.
First off ammonites, this is _Jeletzkytes planus . _These are much more beautiful than they look but the mother of pearl type lustre doesn't show up well in the photographs.
_





_
And the straight shelled ammonite B_aculites eliasi . _The top photo shows the internal joints between chambers and the bottom one the outside of the shell.
_









_
Next a couple of species of bivalve, filter feeders and food for the larger ammonites.
_Inoceramus sagensis.



And Corbicula cytheriformis


_
Lots of matrix containing lots of the above plus other things :









This last one's my favourite.
The long, striated tube is the shell of the scaphopod _Dentalium gracile._
Scaphopods are a minor group of molluscs that still exist, known a s tusk shells. A gastropod / snail is coiled and has one aperture for foot and head while a scaphopod is curved and has an opening at each end. 





There are a few small snails in these rocks too if you look very closely.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Patience, Grasshopper.



Ha de ha! [emoji38]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
The next known link in the trail of turtle evolution is P_appochelys rosinae . Pappochelys _means grandpa turtle @Grandpa Turtle 144 
It is intermediate between _Eunotosaurus _and the first definite stem-group turtle _Odontochelys. _
It comes from the Middle Triassic of Germany and lived 240 million years ago. 








It was about 8 inches long. It has a more advaanced carapace and the beginnings of a basic plastron. ribs underneath closely spaced and sometimes fused together. However, it is still not a true turtle but is on the line to get there.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> The next known link in the trail of turtle evolution is P_appochelys rosinae . Pappochelys _means grandpa turtle @Grandpa Turtle 144
> It is intermediate between _Eunotosaurus _and the first definite stem-group turtle _Odontochelys. _
> It comes from the Middle Triassic of Germany and lived 240 million years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was about 8 inches long. It has a more advaanced carapace and the beginnings of a basic plastron. ribs underneath closely spaced and sometimes fused together. However, it is still not a true turtle but is on the line to get there.



SO COOL!!!!!!!
LOVING your fossil posts, Adam!!!!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> SO COOL!!!!!!!
> LOVING your fossil posts, Adam!!!!!


Thank you! 
Did you like my American stuff from Montana at the top of the page?


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> It is.
> But the Earth has done pretty well on her own.
> There have been five Great Extinctions as well as hundreds of smaller ones before the Sixth Great Extinction that we maybe living through and contributing to today.
> The biggest was the end Permian event when 96% of all species on the planet were lost.
> We have a long way to go to match that!


You see. This is so interesting to read. I never knew that. Except for the extintion of the dinosaurs of course. And the dodo bird.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> The next known link in the trail of turtle evolution is P_appochelys rosinae . Pappochelys _means grandpa turtle @Grandpa Turtle 144
> It is intermediate between _Eunotosaurus _and the first definite stem-group turtle _Odontochelys. _
> It comes from the Middle Triassic of Germany and lived 240 million years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was about 8 inches long. It has a more advaanced carapace and the beginnings of a basic plastron. ribs underneath closely spaced and sometimes fused together. However, it is still not a true turtle but is on the line to get there.


I can see a tortoise tail in the end of the tail of the above drawing. Interesting to see the similarity.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thank you!
> Did you like my American stuff from Montana at the top of the page?


Yes. I DID.!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today we look at a community of fossils from the Pierre Shale from near Glendive, Montana posted to me as part of my Secret Santa over on the Fossil Forum.
> They are interesting because this communities fossil representatives are entirely molluscs, no other animal group is represented.
> They are Upper Cretaceous in age about 70 to 80 million years old.
> First off ammonites, this is _Jeletzkytes planus . _These are much more beautiful than they look but the mother of pearl type lustre doesn't show up well in the photographs.
> _
> View attachment 229258
> View attachment 229259
> View attachment 229260
> 
> View attachment 229261
> _
> And the straight shelled ammonite B_aculites eliasi . _The top photo shows the internal joints between chambers and the bottom one the outside of the shell.
> _
> View attachment 229262
> View attachment 229263
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Next a couple of species of bivalve, filter feeders and food for the larger ammonites.
> _Inoceramus sagensis.
> View attachment 229266
> View attachment 229267
> 
> And Corbicula cytheriformis
> View attachment 229268
> View attachment 229269
> _
> Lots of matrix containing lots of the above plus other things :
> View attachment 229270
> View attachment 229271
> 
> View attachment 229272
> 
> View attachment 229273
> 
> View attachment 229274
> 
> This last one's my favourite.
> The long, striated tube is the shell of the scaphopod _Dentalium gracile._
> Scaphopods are a minor group of molluscs that still exist, known a s tusk shells. A gastropod / snail is coiled and has one aperture for foot and head while a scaphopod is curved and has an opening at each end.
> View attachment 229275
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are a few small snails in these rocks too if you look very closely.



WOW!!!!! These are amazing!!!
HOW LONG did Baculites get????!?!? That looks terribly awkward for swimming!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thank you!
> Did you like my American stuff from Montana at the top of the page?


 YES!!!!!
I will have to ask my sister about taking me fossil hunting when I go visit (although I don't know when that will be)


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today we look at a community of fossils from the Pierre Shale from near Glendive, Montana posted to me as part of my Secret Santa over on the Fossil Forum.
> They are interesting because this communities fossil representatives are entirely molluscs, no other animal group is represented.
> They are Upper Cretaceous in age about 70 to 80 million years old.
> First off ammonites, this is _Jeletzkytes planus . _These are much more beautiful than they look but the mother of pearl type lustre doesn't show up well in the photographs.
> _
> View attachment 229258
> View attachment 229259
> View attachment 229260
> 
> View attachment 229261
> _
> And the straight shelled ammonite B_aculites eliasi . _The top photo shows the internal joints between chambers and the bottom one the outside of the shell.
> _
> View attachment 229262
> View attachment 229263
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Next a couple of species of bivalve, filter feeders and food for the larger ammonites.
> _Inoceramus sagensis.
> View attachment 229266
> View attachment 229267
> 
> And Corbicula cytheriformis
> View attachment 229268
> View attachment 229269
> _
> Lots of matrix containing lots of the above plus other things :
> View attachment 229270
> View attachment 229271
> 
> View attachment 229272
> 
> View attachment 229273
> 
> View attachment 229274
> 
> This last one's my favourite.
> The long, striated tube is the shell of the scaphopod _Dentalium gracile._
> Scaphopods are a minor group of molluscs that still exist, known a s tusk shells. A gastropod / snail is coiled and has one aperture for foot and head while a scaphopod is curved and has an opening at each end.
> View attachment 229275
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are a few small snails in these rocks too if you look very closely.


Awesome! I love ammonites! Thanks for teaching me so much; I love this thread. 


CarolM said:


> You see. This is so interesting to read. I never knew that. Except for the extintion of the dinosaurs of course. And the dodo bird.


The poor dodo bird. I wish we could bring them back...


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> WOW!!!!! These are amazing!!!
> HOW LONG did Baculites get????!?!? That looks terribly awkward for swimming!!!!


About two metres. 
But this design evolved independently several different times in groups of the cephalopods. It must have been effective. 
It gives protection, streamlining and the gas filled chambers buoyancy and control in the same way a submarine operates.
The earlier _Cameroceras ,_a nautiloid not an ammonite had a shell of at least 6m and don't forget that doesn't include body and tentacle length.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Awesome! I love ammonites! Thanks for teaching me so much; I love this thread.
> 
> The poor dodo bird. I wish we could bring them back...


We probably will be able to shortly.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> We probably will be able to shortly.


What bring back the dodo bird?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> What bring back the dodo bird?


Yup, using cloning or DNA splicing, you add the DNA from dodo remains (which are very rare) to an egg from a close living relative (some sort of dove or pigeon) and it will be possible to replicate a genetically very similar animal. 
But they'll do it with the mammoth first, i think.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> About two metres.
> But this design evolved independently several different times in groups of the cephalopods. It must have been effective.
> It gives protection, streamlining and the gas filled chambers buoyancy and control in the same way a submarine operates.
> The earlier _Cameroceras ,_a nautiloid not an ammonite had a shell of at least 6m and don't forget that doesn't include body and tentacle length.



 WOW!!!! That a is AMAZING!!!!! I wonder if there are any marine animals with this same shape today- MOBILE ones, I mean- not shells in the sand.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Yup, using cloning or DNA splicing, you add the DNA from dodo remains (which are very rare) to an egg from a close living relative (some sort of dove or pigeon) and it will be possible to replicate a genetically very similar animal.
> But they'll do it with the mammoth first, i think.


This sort of thing boggles my mind. 
Jurrasic Park, here we come!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Yup, using cloning or DNA splicing, you add the DNA from dodo remains (which are very rare) to an egg from a close living relative (some sort of dove or pigeon) and it will be possible to replicate a genetically very similar animal.
> But they'll do it with the mammoth first, i think.


Does actual Dodo DNA really exist????


----------



## Moozillion

My only other remaining fossil is a piece of amber with an insect in it. Maybe we should get it cloned and see what it was!
Probably a  killer ant or something...so maybe not....


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Yup, using cloning or DNA splicing, you add the DNA from dodo remains (which are very rare) to an egg from a close living relative (some sort of dove or pigeon) and it will be possible to replicate a genetically very similar animal.
> But they'll do it with the mammoth first, i think.


Amazing what they can do. The Mammoth wouldn't do very well in this heat. Isn't that why there are Elephants now and not Mammoths? What I mean is, isn't the elephant a mammoth without all the hair and reduced in size over the years?


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> My only other remaining fossil is a piece of amber with an insect in it. Maybe we should get it cloned and see what it was!
> Probably a  killer ant or something...so maybe not....


Lol


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> WOW!!!! That a is AMAZING!!!!! I wonder if there are any marine animals with this same shape today- MOBILE ones, I mean- not shells in the sand.


Many of the squid, which are related have the same shape, but no external shell. 





Nothing else now.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> Does actual Dodo DNA really exist????


I believe so. 
But most Dodos in museums re reconstructions and fakes. 
But I think they have a very few feathers and bones that should have what they need.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> My only other remaining fossil is a piece of amber with an insect in it. Maybe we should get it cloned and see what it was!
> Probably a  killer ant or something...so maybe not....


Some of the latest finds in amber are incredible.
A bird's foot :


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Amazing what they can do. The Mammoth wouldn't do very well in this heat. Isn't that why there are Elephants now and not Mammoths? What I mean is, isn't the elephant a mammoth without all the hair and reduced in size over the years?


Most mammoths were the same size or slightly bigger. 
Other elephants smaller than ours today.
No, it wouldn't do well in the heat. 
One of the ethical reasons for not bringing things back that we didn't exterminate. 
There time is up.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Many of the squid, which are related have the same shape, but no external shell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing else now.


Quite interesting how mother nature changes things. And redesigns all the time.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Most mammoths were the same size or slightly bigger.
> Other elephants smaller than ours today.
> No, it wouldn't do well in the heat.
> One of the ethical reasons for not bringing things back that we didn't exterminate.
> There time is up.


The only thing which stayed more or less the same were the feet.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Many of the squid, which are related have the same shape, but no external shell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing else now.


Would a squid be able to be fossilized? As there is no external shell.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's specimen is another brachiopod sent to me from the US recently. 
The spines on it are still a little sharp. 
It is about 390 million years old.


The spines would have ended in longer structures that grew into the substrate to anchor the creature which lived in rough waters and didn't want to be washed about.




Other brachiopods developed fine hair-like spines for the same job.




And some amazing spines.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Would a squid be able to be fossilized? As there is no external shell.


Very rarely, soft parts of animals are preserved, like my jellyfish.


So squid sometimes get preserved too.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Very rarely, soft parts of animals are preserved, like my jellyfish.
> View attachment 229370
> 
> So squid sometimes get preserved too.
> View attachment 229371


Oh okay. It would be sad if those kinds of species were lost in time.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's specimen is another brachiopod sent to me from the US recently.
> The spines on it are still a little sharp.
> It is about 390 million years old.
> View attachment 229367
> 
> The spines would have ended in longer structures that grew into the substrate to anchor the creature which lived in rough waters and didn't want to be washed about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other brachiopods developed fine hair-like spines for the same job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And some amazing spines.


It amazes me how much information you guys actually get from the fossils. Like your explanation above about the spines helping them to anchor down.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
Step three in turtle evolution is _Odontochelys._
These come from the Late Triassic 220 million years ago and have been found in China.
Not a solid carapace but wide, biny ribs and it still had teeth and not a beak. But it was the first one to live in the water, though it was a fresh water lake.







It was amphibious so shared it's time between land and the water and is still not a true turtle, but definitely stem-group turtle, which means not a turtle but more closely related to turtles than to anything else.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> It amazes me how much information you guys actually get from the fossils. Like your explanation above about the spines helping them to anchor down.


They are found still in life position in the sediment sometimes. 
So we can be certain.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> Step three in turtle evolution is _Odontochelys._
> These come from the Late Triassic 220 million years ago and have been found in China.
> Not a solid carapace but wide, biny ribs and it still had teeth and not a beak. But it was the first one to live in the water, though it was a fresh water lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was amphibious so shared it's time between land and the water and is still not a true turtle, but definitely stem-group turtle, which means not a turtle but more closely related to turtles than to anything else.


The first one looks like a scorpion gone wrong.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> They are found still in life position in the sediment sometimes.
> So we can be certain.


Oh. I know you guys know for certain. And i am not questioning it. I just find it fascinating that you can tell so much of the story from so long ago. I hope you understand what I am trying to say here. Maybe it would be better to say that: it is fantastic that so much of the story is not lost and that it is still possible to go so far back in history and tell their stories.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Some of the latest finds in amber are incredible.
> A bird's foot :


Incredible INDEED!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's specimen is another brachiopod sent to me from the US recently.
> The spines on it are still a little sharp.
> It is about 390 million years old.
> View attachment 229367
> 
> The spines would have ended in longer structures that grew into the substrate to anchor the creature which lived in rough waters and didn't want to be washed about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other brachiopods developed fine hair-like spines for the same job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And some amazing spines.



 WOW!!!!! Quite beautiful, really...


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Very rarely, soft parts of animals are preserved, like my jellyfish.
> View attachment 229370
> 
> So squid sometimes get preserved too.
> View attachment 229371



I cannot imagine how anyone would recognize that jelly fish as a jellyfish and not just a discoloration in the rock...


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Very rarely, soft parts of animals are preserved, like my jellyfish.
> View attachment 229370
> 
> So squid sometimes get preserved too.
> View attachment 229371


I like that squid!!!!


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> I cannot imagine how anyone would recognize that jelly fish as a jellyfish and not just a discoloration in the rock...


I thought the same. But did not say anything as i thought to myself what do i know? Nada.


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> I like that squid!!!!


Also snap.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Oh. I know you guys know for certain. And i am not questioning it. I just find it fascinating that you can tell so much of the story from so long ago. I hope you understand what I am trying to say here. Maybe it would be better to say that: it is fantastic that so much of the story is not lost and that it is still possible to go so far back in history and tell their stories.


I understand.
But there is still much that we don't know.
And a lot of educated guesswork.
It's like doing a million piece jigsaw puzzle with only a hundred of the bits.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I cannot imagine how anyone would recognize that jelly fish as a jellyfish and not just a discoloration in the rock...


Experience and the fact that they find so many in this particular formation.




You sort of piece them all together to get the whole picture.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I understand.
> But there is still much that we don't know.
> And a lot of educated guesswork.
> It's like doing a million piece jigsaw puzzle with only a hundred of the bits.


A very difficult job.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Very rarely, soft parts of animals are preserved, like my jellyfish.
> View attachment 229370
> 
> So squid sometimes get preserved too.
> View attachment 229371


Definitely an awesome squid fossil, I agree!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Experience and the fact that they find so many in this particular formation.
> View attachment 229410
> View attachment 229411
> View attachment 229412
> 
> You sort of piece them all together to get the whole picture.



FASCINATING!!!![emoji2]


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Moozillion said:


> The purpose of this thread is to show
> Although I won't start the preservation until March or April, if you're interested in fossils, join in this thread!



I have 3 potentially 4 turtle fossils. I say 3-4 because 1 I know is real. 2 likely China fakes and one likely a cool rock. 

First 3 are of a fossilized plastron






The following 3 are likely a cool rock the seller found it some 800’ down in a mine in Arkansas 






These final ones are from what I’m figuring came out of China. Ya know, if everything looks good it’s probably to good. 




This is the backside of the slate of the last one


I’m thrilled with fossils. I’ve got a pair of cave bear canine teen. Unfortunately they are at a silversmiths to be made into the tails of my cowboy hatband. 
Here are a couple non turtle/tortoise fossils that I have;


others are packed up still.


----------



## CarolM

Cowboy_Ken said:


> I have 3 potentially 4 turtle fossils. I say 3-4 because 1 I know is real. 2 likely China fakes and one likely a cool rock.
> 
> First 3 are of a fossilized plastron
> View attachment 229451
> 
> View attachment 229452
> View attachment 229453
> 
> 
> The following 3 are likely a cool rock the seller found it some 800’ down in a mine in Arkansas
> View attachment 229454
> View attachment 229455
> 
> View attachment 229456
> 
> 
> These final ones are from what I’m figuring came out of China. Ya know, if everything looks good it’s probably to good.
> View attachment 229457
> 
> View attachment 229458
> 
> This is the backside of the slate of the last one
> View attachment 229459
> 
> I’m thrilled with fossils. I’ve got a pair of cave bear canine teen. Unfortunately they are at a silversmiths to be made into the tails of my cowboy hatband.
> Here are a couple non turtle/tortoise fossils that I have;
> View attachment 229460
> View attachment 229461
> others are packed up still.


Wow. I can't tell the difference. But then that is why it is not my job.[emoji6]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

The first one is definitely real. 
The question is, " Real what?" 
I can't remember if you knew where it is from, but my guess with recently acquired knowledge is that it's part of the carapace of the giant land tortoise _Hesperotestudo. (_see earlier post here) . It's very nice indeed.
The next two are partially faked but I believe may have genuine bits in there, but have been added to by someone.
https://www.paleodirect.com/fake-chinese-fossils-fossil-forgery-from-china/
And hundreds of other example about. 
What is interesting though, is the reverse of the second one. That's real and of considerable interest and some value. I can't remember exactly what it is, but it will come to me, but it also goes to suggest that some of the turtle material on the reverse is genuine. 
They come from the same beds as these in Ghizhou province, China




The last ones are mosasaur jaws from here in Morocco, the first one is a composite. That is to say three separate bits of jaw and five separate teeth have been added together to create the piece for sale. 99% of mosasaur jaws on the market are done this way. So it's all genuine (except for the sand, cement and glue holding it together) but from several different animals. 
The last one only the tooth crowns are real (and maybe two species! ), the jaws and roots are fake.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

A special post for Jane @JSWallace who visited the Lincoln Plesiosaur yesterday. 
Here it is : 








An idea of what the complete specimen would have looked like


Amazingly, it was killed by another lage predator in an attack that broke its spine. 
It had survived several previous attacks.
http://plesiosaur.com/page.php?pageID=00000000005


----------



## JSWallace

Thanks Adam!! It's neck looks unfeasbly long! It has been upgraded though and now has a very fancy display cabinet!


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A special post for Jane @JSWallace who visited the Lincoln Plesiosaur yesterday.
> Here it is :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An idea of what the complete specimen would have looked like
> View attachment 229485
> 
> Amazingly, it was killed by another lage predator in an attack that broke its spine.
> It had survived several previous attacks.
> http://plesiosaur.com/page.php?pageID=00000000005


Murphy's law. But as I saw the glass I thought that would be nice for a tortoise enclosure with a few modifications of course.[emoji6]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Murphy's law. But as I saw the glass I thought that would be nice for a tortoise enclosure with a few modifications of course.[emoji6]


SNAP !
I did too! 
There's no hope for us.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> SNAP !
> I did too!
> There's no hope for us.


Whahaha.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossil from my collection is another bullet shaped cephalopod. 
This one is the belemnite _Belemnitella mucronata _from the chalk of Germany and about 70 to 80 million years old. 
@Bee62 
It's a bit like a bee stinger, no? No probably not, but it is from Germany.


Unlike the straight-shelled ammonites or nautiloids, the belemnites had no external shell but an internal guard, which is what these fossils are. it acted much like a cuttlefish ( a distant relative) bone and provided strength, balance and a point for tissue attachment.







It is the brown section in the above diagram, made of calcite, that is the part that is most often preserved.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossil from my collection is another bullet shaped cephalopod.
> This one is the belemnite _Belemnitella mucronata _from the chalk of Germany and about 70 to 80 million years old.
> @Bee62
> It's a bit like a bee stinger, no? No probably not, but it is from Germany.
> View attachment 229488
> 
> Unlike the straight-shelled ammonites or nautiloids, the belemnites had no external shell but an internal guard, which is what these fossils are. it acted much like a cuttlefish ( a distant relative) bone and provided strength, balance and a point for tissue attachment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is the brown section in the above diagram, made of calcite, that is the part that is most often preserved.


Too cool.  Also very scary about the Chinese fossil forgeries. That angers me!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
Our next turtle, once thought to be a true turtle but now usually called a stem group turtle is _Proganochelys _from the Late Triassic (210 million years ago) of Germany (@Bee62 again) and Thailand. 
It was a metre long, had a full carapace a beak and almost no teeth, but had armour protecting parts of the legs and a spiked tail. 
It was mostly terrestrial but spent some of it's time hiding out in ponds. 











It is interesting that the group, which had been evolving steadily towards a more aquatic lifestyle, now started to evolve into more terrestrial creatures again. This was probably because the Triassic was extremely hot and dry and most of the lakes and rivers dried up. Notice all the defensive adaptations. These would have been necessary for survival as the dinosaurs were evolving and many other fierce land carnivores were at large.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Too cool.  Also very scary about the Chinese fossil forgeries. That angers me!


The Moroccans are pretty good at this too, I'm afraid. 
And the Americans are probably number three on the list.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> Our next turtle, once thought to be a true turtle but now usually called a stem group turtle is _Proganochelys _from the Late Triassic (210 million years ago) of Germany (@Bee62 again) and Thailand.
> It was a metre long, had a full carapace a beak and almost no teeth, but had armour protecting parts of the legs and a spiked tail.
> It was mostly terrestrial but spent some of it's time hiding out in ponds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 229491
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is interesting that the group, which had been evolving steadily towards a more aquatic lifestyle, now started to evolve into more terrestrial creatures again. This was probably because the Triassic was extremely hot and dry and most of the lakes and rivers dried up. Notice all the defensive adaptations. These would have been necessary for survival as the dinosaurs were evolving and many other fierce land carnivores were at large.


The second pic looks like a turtle version of 'The Thing' and the 4th pic is really cool. Even though they had the spikes and stuff it couldn't have been much help against dinosaurs. How big were they exactly?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> The second pic looks like a turtle version of 'The Thing' and the 4th pic is really cool. Even though they had the spikes and stuff it couldn't have been much help against dinosaurs. How big were they exactly?


About a metre long, but remember the dinosaurs were much smaller then, too.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> About a metre long, but remember the dinosaurs were much smaller then, too.


Aaahhh okay. That then makes sense. And a metre long is actually quite big.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> Our next turtle, once thought to be a true turtle but now usually called a stem group turtle is _Proganochelys _from the Late Triassic (210 million years ago) of Germany (@Bee62 again) and Thailand.
> It was a metre long, had a full carapace a beak and almost no teeth, but had armour protecting parts of the legs and a spiked tail.
> It was mostly terrestrial but spent some of it's time hiding out in ponds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 229491
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is interesting that the group, which had been evolving steadily towards a more aquatic lifestyle, now started to evolve into more terrestrial creatures again. This was probably because the Triassic was extremely hot and dry and most of the lakes and rivers dried up. Notice all the defensive adaptations. These would have been necessary for survival as the dinosaurs were evolving and many other fierce land carnivores were at large.


Sweet! Love the spikes!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> Our next turtle, once thought to be a true turtle but now usually called a stem group turtle is _Proganochelys _from the Late Triassic (210 million years ago) of Germany (@Bee62 again) and Thailand.
> It was a metre long, had a full carapace a beak and almost no teeth, but had armour protecting parts of the legs and a spiked tail.
> It was mostly terrestrial but spent some of it's time hiding out in ponds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 229491
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is interesting that the group, which had been evolving steadily towards a more aquatic lifestyle, now started to evolve into more terrestrial creatures again. This was probably because the Triassic was extremely hot and dry and most of the lakes and rivers dried up. Notice all the defensive adaptations. These would have been necessary for survival as the dinosaurs were evolving and many other fierce land carnivores were at large.



[emoji33]GOSH!!!! That looks VERY like a turtle!!!! 
...or maybe a turtle-iguana!!![emoji12]


----------



## Stuart S.

Tidgy's Dad said:


> The Moroccans are pretty good at this too, I'm afraid.
> And the Americans are probably number three on the list.



Americans are probably number one on buying the forged fossils as well [emoji849].


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Moozillion said:


> GOSH!!!! That looks VERY like a turtle!!!!
> ...or maybe a turtle-iguana!!


I like that the carapace looks like it shows signs of pyramiding towards the tail area!! LOL


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Stuart S. said:


> Americans are probably number one on buying the forged fossils as well [emoji849].


Yup.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Cowboy_Ken said:


> I like that the carapace looks like it shows signs of pyramiding towards the tail area!! LOL


Well it was the driest time in Earth's history. 




_Longisquama _from the same period.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossil from my collection is a brachiopod I collected in Spain at the end of last month. The top of it first.


And now the underside. 


And side view


As you can see, this brachiopod has a hole running all the way through it, though i haven't removed all the matrix yet. 
It grew around this so the hole is not actually in the brachiopod but outside it!




We don't know why, but my guess is that because it lived on a soft ooze sediment, this provided it with extra stability when young, but when older the weight of the body was enough.
Or something.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossil from my collection is a brachiopod I collected in Spain at the end of last month. The top of it first.
> View attachment 229568
> 
> And now the underside.
> View attachment 229569
> 
> And side view
> View attachment 229570
> 
> As you can see, this brachiopod has a hole running all the way through it, though i haven't removed all the matrix yet.
> It grew around this so the hole is not actually in the brachiopod but outside it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We don't know why, but my guess is that because it lived on a soft ooze sediment, this provided it with extra stability when young, but when older the weight of the body was enough.
> Or something.


Okay. This one I don't see.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Okay. This one I don't see.


Photos not showing ?


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Photos not showing ?


No they are showing. Just don't understand them. My ignorance obviously showing but looks like a rock to be honest. I must google what a Brachiopod looked like.


----------



## CarolM

CarolM said:


> No they are showing. Just don't understand them. My ignorance obviously showing but looks like a rock to be honest. I must google what a Brachipod looked like.


Okay understand now.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE*
The descendants of _Proganochelys _split into two groups.
The first of these were to become the side-necked turtles, one of the two sub-orders of turtle that still exist today.
An early representative was _Proterocheris _found at the end of the time of _Proganochelys 



_
Difficult to see, i know, but it would have looked like a desert living version of the side-neck _Matamata _from South America.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Well it was the driest time in Earth's history.
> View attachment 229566
> 
> 
> 
> _Longisquama _from the same period.



HOLY MOLY!!!!![emoji33] How did that creature even move around??!?!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Well it was the driest time in Earth's history.
> View attachment 229566
> 
> 
> 
> _Longisquama _from the same period.



I Googled Longisquama!!!! How fascinating!!!! Are those “plumes” actual feathers on its back??!!!


----------



## Moozillion

CarolM said:


> No they are showing. Just don't understand them. My ignorance obviously showing but looks like a rock to be honest. I must google what a Brachiopod looked like.



I’m also not quite understanding...


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE*
> The descendants of _Proganochelys _split into two groups.
> The first of these were to become the side-necked turtles, one of the two sub-orders of turtle that still exist today.
> An early representative was _Proterocheris _found at the end of the time of _Proganochelys
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Difficult to see, i know, but it would have looked like a desert living version of the side-neck _Matamata _from South America.



Do you know if the modern side-neck turtles are phylogenetically older than the “regular” turtles?


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> I’m also not quite understanding...


This one is more difficult to see, as we have been spoilt with very clear definitions with the other fossils. But it definitely demonstrates that what a normal person (the layman) would see as a rock, others can quite clearly see the fossil in it.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I Googled Longisquama!!!! How fascinating!!!! Are those “plumes” actual feathers on its back??!!!


Seem to be elongated tubular scales, though there is a lot of debate about this. 
Function : Unknown, but I think defensive, it would make the creature look bigger and more threatening and possibly, if bitten, could detach and allow the reptile to escape much as happens with a lizards tail.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I’m also not quite understanding...


I don't understand what you are not understanding ?


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I don't understand what you are not understanding ?


The fact that it is a fossil and not a nicely shaped rock. We look at it and see a rock with a bit of a shape. You look at it and can see the fossil in it. That is where the expertise comes in I think. And most probably where a fossil would be disregarded as a rock by us but picked up by you as a fossil.


----------



## CarolM

CarolM said:


> The fact that it is a fossil and not a nicely shaped rock. We look at it and see a rock with a bit of a shape. You look at it and can see the fossil in it. That is where the expertise comes in I think. And most probably where a fossil would be disregarded as a rock by us but picked up by you as a fossil.


It is actually your own fault you know. You have completely spoilt us by giving us nicely defined fossils to see so far. So it is not a bad thing either, as the next time a I pick up a rock with a little shape to it, I will look at it closely and try and see if it isn't in fact a fossil.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

This is what I see in that fossil.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> This is what I see in that fossil.


That does help us to understand better. That is what I googled last night, and was able to understand better.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossil from my collection is a tiny blind Agnostid trilobite.
It was sent to me by a friend in America and is from Utah, the Middle Cambrian Wheeler shales so 507 million years old. That's more than half a billion!
When it came to me it was upside down in the matrix alongside a bigger trilobite, _Elrathia kingii . _trilobite is _Itagnostus interstrictus. _
Here it is as it arrived :


It's the little one in the top of the picture.
Last night i popped it (dug a trench around it and then levered underneath it until it popped out) and then cleaned it up.

This is the result, only 5.5 mm long :


It is the same one, just under different lighting.
Here it is with some cephalon and pygidium (heads and tails) bits from the same species i popped out of the three rocks the guy sent me :


And the hole left in the rock from where it was popped :


Notice at the top of the rock is another tiny _Itagnostus _that I uncovered.
This one is 2 mm long.



Lovely!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oh, and the underside of an agnostid with walking and swimming legs. Trilobites had a hard exoskeleton on the top , but were soft and vulnerable underneath.



So to protect the soft underbelly they would roll up like a woodlouse/ pill bug :


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossil from my collection is a tiny blind Agnostid trilobite.
> It was sent to me by a friend in America and is from Utah, the Middle Cambrian Wheeler shales so 507 million years old. That's more than half a billion!
> When it came to me it was upside down in the matrix alongside a bigger trilobite, _Elrathia kingii . _trilobite is _Itagnostus interstrictus. _
> Here it is as it arrived :
> View attachment 229665
> 
> It's the little one in the top of the picture.
> Last night i popped it (dug a trench around it and then levered underneath it until it popped out) and then cleaned it up.
> 
> This is the result, only 5.5 mm long :
> View attachment 229668
> View attachment 229669
> It is the same one, just under different lighting.
> Here it is with some cephalon and pygidium (heads and tails) bits from the same species i popped out of the three rocks the guy sent me :
> View attachment 229670
> 
> And the hole left in the rock from where it was popped :
> View attachment 229671
> 
> Notice at the top of the rock is another tiny _Itagnostus _that I uncovered.
> This one is 2 mm long.
> 
> View attachment 229672
> 
> Lovely!


Very cool! Where in the world do these trilobites come from? 


Tidgy's Dad said:


> Seem to be elongated tubular scales, though there is a lot of debate about this.
> Function : Unknown, but I think defensive, it would make the creature look bigger and more threatening and possibly, if bitten, could detach and allow the reptile to escape much as happens with a lizards tail.


Do you think the scales helped it keep cool?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Very cool! Where in the world do these trilobites come from?
> 
> Do you think the scales helped it keep cool?


It's possible, temperature control is sometimes a feature of frills, sails or spines. 
These trilobites are from Utah, but It_agnostus _has been found elsewhere in North America as well as Asia, Australia and Europe. 
The bigger one, _Elrathia, _is found only in Utah and British Colombia. But it is the most commonly sold trilobite in the world and is mined commercially. One collector alone found one and a half million in twenty years collecting.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
Today's turtle is a representative of the other surviving group of turtles, the hidden necked turtles. 
It was found in Poland, and if confirmed as a true turtle is the oldest proper turtle fossil at about 215 million years old. 
It was discovered in 2012 but still doesn't have a name. 
The head has been added as the skeleton was found without one.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Oh, and the underside of an agnostid with walking and swimming legs. Trilobites had a hard exoskeleton on the top , but were soft and vulnerable underneath.
> 
> 
> 
> So to protect the soft underbelly they would roll up like a woodlouse/ pill bug :



Reminds me of a horseshoe crab, too!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLES*
> Today's turtle is a representative of the other surviving group of turtles, the hidden necked turtles.
> It was found in Poland, and if confirmed as a true turtle is the oldest proper turtle fossil at about 215 million years old.
> It was discovered in 2012 but still doesn't have a name.
> The head has been added as the skeleton was found without one.
> View attachment 229695



SOOOOO cool!!!


----------



## Raqib Farid

Hello everyone!
Good evening.
How you guys doin'?


----------



## NorCal tortoise guy

Here is my little fossil collection I'm told the one is a turtle otherwise I know nothing about them just think they are cool!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Hi, thanks for posting. 
Nice group of fossils.
The first one seems to be an ammonite, Though the picture is not to clear. 
Number 2 does indeed look like a steinkern (internal mold) of a tortoise, rather than a turtle. Very special. How big is it ? i'm not sure from just one angle but i think it's _Stylemys _from the Oligocene of North Dakota, Nebraska, somewhere round there.About 25 to 30 million years old and very closely related to your modern _Gopherus _desert torts. This was Americas first species of land tortoise.




Number 3 the fish could be _Diplomystus _from the Green River Formation of Wyoming, Eocene and about 50 million years old, but that's a pretty wild guess.
Finally, a vertebra, possibly from a small mammal but i'm not so good on vertebrae of mammals. 
Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

My fossil of the day is:


These occurred in their millions in these deposits and the stone is often polished to produce turritella agate (though this is a misnomer as _Turritella _is a different marine snail.)


----------



## NorCal tortoise guy

Thanks for the info!!! So interesting!! The tortoise is around 3 inches long I'd say I can measure it later if you would like


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossil from my collection is a tiny blind Agnostid trilobite.
> It was sent to me by a friend in America and is from Utah, the Middle Cambrian Wheeler shales so 507 million years old. That's more than half a billion!
> When it came to me it was upside down in the matrix alongside a bigger trilobite, _Elrathia kingii . _trilobite is _Itagnostus interstrictus. _
> Here it is as it arrived :
> View attachment 229665
> 
> It's the little one in the top of the picture.
> Last night i popped it (dug a trench around it and then levered underneath it until it popped out) and then cleaned it up.
> 
> This is the result, only 5.5 mm long :
> View attachment 229668
> View attachment 229669
> It is the same one, just under different lighting.
> Here it is with some cephalon and pygidium (heads and tails) bits from the same species i popped out of the three rocks the guy sent me :
> View attachment 229670
> 
> And the hole left in the rock from where it was popped :
> View attachment 229671
> 
> Notice at the top of the rock is another tiny _Itagnostus _that I uncovered.
> This one is 2 mm long.
> 
> View attachment 229672
> 
> Lovely!


Wow. That is interesting. I love how you say "popped it" . Is it really that easy to pop.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Oh, and the underside of an agnostid with walking and swimming legs. Trilobites had a hard exoskeleton on the top , but were soft and vulnerable underneath.
> 
> 
> 
> So to protect the soft underbelly they would roll up like a woodlouse/ pill bug :


You sure that is not a tortoise in the last pic? And the drawing makes me think of a scarab. If that is the correct spelling. I know it is not. But it just makes me thunk of one.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

NorCal tortoise guy said:


> Thanks for the info!!! So interesting!! The tortoise is around 3 inches long I'd say I can measure it later if you would like


Yes, please, I'm always interested in such things, though at three inches this would make it a very small or young one.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Wow. That is interesting. I love how you say "popped it" . Is it really that easy to pop.


Quite easy with this particular soft shale, but one has to be careful as the trilobites can beak along the segment joins.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE*
Today, another unnamed early turtle from the late Triassic of Poland, this one 215 million years old.








Not much else to be said about this one. 
Except it's beautiful.


----------



## NorCal tortoise guy

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Yes, please, I'm always interested in such things, though at three inches this would make it a very small or young one.



Guess it's more like 2.5 inches


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

NorCal tortoise guy said:


> View attachment 229793
> View attachment 229794
> View attachment 229795
> View attachment 229796
> View attachment 229797
> 
> 
> Guess it's more like 2.5 inches


I'll stick with my initial id.
It's a very young one, poor thing and mostly an internal mold of the carapace, but some of the marginal scutes have been replaced in fossilization and preserved. 
Very nice.


----------



## Destben

This was posted on Linkedin. It just sold for $130,000.00


----------



## Moozillion

NorCal tortoise guy said:


> Here is my little fossil collection I'm told the one is a turtle otherwise I know nothing about them just think they are cool!
> 
> View attachment 229733
> View attachment 229732
> View attachment 229735
> View attachment 229734


Cool stuff!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE*
> Today, another unnamed early turtle from the late Triassic of Poland, this one 215 million years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not much else to be said about this one.
> Except it's beautiful.



 WOW!!!!! It really is gorgeous!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> My fossil of the day is:
> View attachment 229753
> 
> These occurred in their millions in these deposits and the stone is often polished to produce turritella agate (though this is a misnomer as _Turritella _is a different marine snail.)


I think "Turitellia" agate is beautiful!!! More than once I've considered getting a pendant of it- I may yet!


----------



## Moozillion

Destben said:


> View attachment 229842
> 
> This was posted on Linkedin. It just sold for $130,000.00


It's almost TOO completely preserved. I wonder if it's real or fake? I bet Adam [email protected]'s Dad


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Destben said:


> View attachment 229842
> 
> This was posted on Linkedin. It just sold for $130,000.00


That's bonkers. 
It's a good one, but that's silly money for these. 
Do you know where it was from ?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> It's almost TOO completely preserved. I wonder if it's real or fake? I bet Adam [email protected]'s Dad


Real, though there may have been a bit of restoration. 
But not worth 10% of that money.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossil from my collection :
Not all fossils are millions of years old. 
These river limpets are of species still around today


I have one of the same species as the one in the middle from Southern England.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE
*
After the Triassic period came the Jurassic when the turtles evolved into many different forms and sizes. 
*
Here is *_Glyptops plicatulus _from a famous dinosaur formation in Utah, About 150 million years old.


----------



## Destben

Tidgy's Dad said:


> That's bonkers.
> It's a good one, but that's silly money for these.
> Do you know where it was from ?



I tried to find the post that had it but this all I know for sure


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

_Baena arenosa _is a turtle from the green River Formation in Wyoming. 
That's Eocene and around 50 million years old.
It is very, very rare.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE
> *
> After the Triassic period came the Jurassic when the turtles evolved into many different forms and sizes.
> *
> Here is *_Glyptops plicatulus _from a famous dinosaur formation in Utah, About 150 million years old.



Soooo cool!!!! [emoji2][emoji106]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

A fossil from my collection. 








This is _Perisphinctes, _a nice ammonite from Madagascar. 
This is a fairly small one at just 3 inches diameter, they get to more than a foot across.
It is Late Jurassic so about 150 million years old.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A fossil from my collection.
> View attachment 229913
> 
> View attachment 229917
> 
> View attachment 229918
> 
> View attachment 229919
> 
> This is _Perisphinctes, _a nice ammonite from Madagascar.
> This is a fairly small one at just 3 inches diameter, they get to more than a foot across.
> It is Late Jurassic so about 150 million years old.


BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!!


It will be even more so when I get round to cleaning it up!


----------



## Kristoff

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A fossil from my collection.
> View attachment 229913
> 
> View attachment 229917
> 
> View attachment 229918
> 
> View attachment 229919
> 
> This is _Perisphinctes, _a nice ammonite from Madagascar.
> This is a fairly small one at just 3 inches diameter, they get to more than a foot across.
> It is Late Jurassic so about 150 million years old.



That is absolutely stunning! 
We went to the geological museum in Copenhagen yesterday. Daughter picked up this souvenir from the museum shop:




We saw some crystals, minerals and a small dinosaur exhibition, including some authentic dino eggs and fossils but mostly replicas.


----------



## Moozillion

Kristoff said:


> That is absolutely stunning!
> We went to the geological museum in Copenhagen yesterday. Daughter picked up this souvenir from the museum shop:
> View attachment 229946
> 
> View attachment 229947
> 
> We saw some crystals, minerals and a small dinosaur exhibition, including some authentic dino eggs and fossils but mostly replicas.
> View attachment 229948



Wonderful stuff!!!! [emoji2][emoji106]


----------



## Oxalis

Kristoff said:


> That is absolutely stunning!
> We went to the geological museum in Copenhagen yesterday. Daughter picked up this souvenir from the museum shop:
> View attachment 229946
> 
> View attachment 229947
> 
> We saw some crystals, minerals and a small dinosaur exhibition, including some authentic dino eggs and fossils but mostly replicas.
> View attachment 229948


Very lovely indeed! I love the ammonite!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Kristoff said:


> That is absolutely stunning!
> We went to the geological museum in Copenhagen yesterday. Daughter picked up this souvenir from the museum shop:
> View attachment 229946
> 
> View attachment 229947
> 
> We saw some crystals, minerals and a small dinosaur exhibition, including some authentic dino eggs and fossils but mostly replicas.
> View attachment 229948


Nice footprint! 
The ammonite is probably a _Cleoniceras _from Madagascar. Cretaceous period, 110 million years old.


----------



## Kristoff

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Nice footprint!
> The ammonite is probably a _Cleoniceras _from Madagascar. Cretaceous period, 110 million years old.



Just by looking at a picture!!!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Kristoff said:


> Just by looking at a picture!!!


Firstly, it is commonly sold around the world cut and polished as Madagascar is one of the few countries left that allows mass export of fossils. 
Secondly, on the natural uncut half of the specimen you can see the shell material and ribs (patterns). Not diagnostic but a clue.
Thirdly, on this side, near the aperture are some zigzag lines, these are the interior suture marks, visible where the shell has come away,where each chamber wall joined the outer shell. each species of ammonite has a unique suture pattern, and though i can't see all of it, this looks like _Cleonoceras _to me.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Prepping is cleaning a fossil up to make it look nicer. This can be done in a number of ways, using hammers and chisels, dental picks, acids and polishers for example. 
A couple of pages back i showed my little _Itagnostus _trilobites and you could see they came from a matrix of mudstone containing the larger trilobite _Elrathia kingii. _
My American friend sent me three of these from Utah. Middle Cambrian, 507 million years old. 
Here they are before prepping.






And after prepping using just a jeweller's loupe to see and a board pin

to clean off the mostly soft matrix.


The above one (1.8 cm long) has a smaller cephalon (head) lying on top of the main one and has damage to the right hand mid pleura which may be what killed it. 
The one below (1.2 cm) has damage to the front of the cephalon, also a possible cause of death.


The next one is my favourite, first I had to pop it free of the matrix as it was upside down. 
Here it is free and with prep just started :


Then finished. ( 2.3 cm long)


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

As a bonus, i then got to smash up the remaining matrix where I found most of the _Itagnostus _pieces posted earlier. 
And a few more bits of _Elrathia. _
This little cephalon is 1.5 mm at it's widest point!


And this one is 1.2 cm long. Note it has no free cheeks or pygidium (tail) as this one is a shed that the animal leaves behind when they need to grow. 


Likewise this large cephalon was shed as this trilobite grew. This would have been a big one for this species as the head is 1.8 cm wide!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

_Elrathia kingii




_


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE*
> Today, another unnamed early turtle from the late Triassic of Poland, this one 215 million years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not much else to be said about this one.
> Except it's beautiful.


Yes it is. Also well preserved for something that is 215 million years old.


----------



## CarolM

Destben said:


> View attachment 229842
> 
> This was posted on Linkedin. It just sold for $130,000.00


Wow.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossil from my collection :
> Not all fossils are millions of years old.
> These river limpets are of species still around today
> View attachment 229855
> 
> I have one of the same species as the one in the middle from Southern England.


The one on the right looks like a caramel meringue.


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> Soooo cool!!!! [emoji2][emoji106]


I agree. They should have had one of these in the Jurassic movie just for fun.[emoji1]


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> A fossil from my collection.
> View attachment 229913
> 
> View attachment 229917
> 
> View attachment 229918
> 
> View attachment 229919
> 
> This is _Perisphinctes, _a nice ammonite from Madagascar.
> This is a fairly small one at just 3 inches diameter, they get to more than a foot across.
> It is Late Jurassic so about 150 million years old.


Ooooohhhhhh. I LIKE this one. Very pretty.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> It will be even more so when I get round to cleaning it up!


Really!! That is not cleaned up. Wow definitely want to see it when cleaned up then.


----------



## CarolM

Kristoff said:


> That is absolutely stunning!
> We went to the geological museum in Copenhagen yesterday. Daughter picked up this souvenir from the museum shop:
> View attachment 229946
> 
> View attachment 229947
> 
> We saw some crystals, minerals and a small dinosaur exhibition, including some authentic dino eggs and fossils but mostly replicas.
> View attachment 229948


Very nice. The first picture is very beautiful.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Firstly, it is commonly sold around the world cut and polished as Madagascar is one of the few countries left that allows mass export of fossils.
> Secondly, on the natural uncut half of the specimen you can see the shell material and ribs (patterns). Not diagnostic but a clue.
> Thirdly, on this side, near the aperture are some zigzag lines, these are the interior suture marks, visible where the shell has come away,where each chamber wall joined the outer shell. each species of ammonite has a unique suture pattern, and though i can't see all of it, this looks like _Cleonoceras _to me.


You sure do know your stuff.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Prepping is cleaning a fossil up to make it look nicer. This can be done in a number of ways, using hammers and chisels, dental picks, acids and polishers for example.
> A couple of pages back i showed my little _Itagnostus _trilobites and you could see they came from a matrix of mudstone containing the larger trilobite _Elrathia kingii. _
> My American friend sent me three of these from Utah. Middle Cambrian, 507 million years old.
> Here they are before prepping.
> View attachment 230520
> 
> View attachment 230521
> 
> View attachment 230522
> 
> And after prepping using just a jeweller's loupe to see and a board pin
> View attachment 230525
> to clean off the mostly soft matrix.
> View attachment 230528
> 
> The above one (1.8 cm long) has a smaller cephalon (head) lying on top of the main one and has damage to the right hand mid pleura which may be what killed it.
> The one below (1.2 cm) has damage to the front of the cephalon, also a possible cause of death.
> View attachment 230529
> 
> The next one is my favourite, first I had to pop it free of the matrix as it was upside down.
> Here it is free and with prep just started :
> View attachment 230531
> 
> Then finished. ( 2.3 cm long)
> View attachment 230532


OMW that is just Wow. What a big difference.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> As a bonus, i then got to smash up the remaining matrix where I found most of the _Itagnostus _pieces posted earlier.
> And a few more bits of _Elrathia. _
> This little cephalon is 1.5 mm at it's widest point!
> View attachment 230534
> 
> And this one is 1.2 cm long. Note it has no free cheeks or pygidium (tail) as this one is a shed that the animal leaves behind when they need to grow.
> View attachment 230536
> 
> Likewise this large cephalon was shed as this trilobite grew. This would have been a big one for this species as the head is 1.8 cm wide!
> View attachment 230537


I am so impressed.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> I am so impressed.


Than you very much for all your kind comments, Carol! 
I have loved all this stuff since preschool.


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Than you very much for all your kind comments, Carol!
> I have loved all this stuff since preschool.


I think it's great to have a continued interest and passion in the same field for so long. Very cool! It's quite a work of art after it's cleaned up. 



CarolM said:


> They should have had one of these in the Jurassic movie just for fun.


I also agree with you on this one: let's get some trilobites in _Jurassic Park_!!! XD


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> I think it's great to have a continued interest and passion in the same field for so long. Very cool! It's quite a work of art after it's cleaned up.
> 
> 
> I also agree with you on this one: let's get some trilobites in _Jurassic Park_!!! XD


Thank you very much!




And absolutely ! regarding the trilobites In Jurassic Park. 
I love dinosaurs but for me trilobites are better. 
And some of them got quite big.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Prepping is cleaning a fossil up to make it look nicer. This can be done in a number of ways, using hammers and chisels, dental picks, acids and polishers for example.
> A couple of pages back i showed my little _Itagnostus _trilobites and you could see they came from a matrix of mudstone containing the larger trilobite _Elrathia kingii. _
> My American friend sent me three of these from Utah. Middle Cambrian, 507 million years old.
> Here they are before prepping.
> View attachment 230520
> 
> View attachment 230521
> 
> View attachment 230522
> 
> And after prepping using just a jeweller's loupe to see and a board pin
> View attachment 230525
> to clean off the mostly soft matrix.
> View attachment 230528
> 
> The above one (1.8 cm long) has a smaller cephalon (head) lying on top of the main one and has damage to the right hand mid pleura which may be what killed it.
> The one below (1.2 cm) has damage to the front of the cephalon, also a possible cause of death.
> View attachment 230529
> 
> The next one is my favourite, first I had to pop it free of the matrix as it was upside down.
> Here it is free and with prep just started :
> View attachment 230531
> 
> Then finished. ( 2.3 cm long)
> View attachment 230532


 WOW!!!! FASCINATING work and job well done, sir!!!!!!


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> _Elrathia kingii
> 
> 
> 
> _



 WOWIE-ZOWIE!!!!!!! 
Just how BIG did trilobites get????? Vegetarian or scavengers?


----------



## Moozillion

I MUST get my sister in Montana to send me a trilobite- one I can clean up a bit, just for fun!


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thank you very much!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And absolutely ! regarding the trilobites In Jurassic Park.
> I love dinosaurs but for me trilobites are better.
> And some of them got quite big.


Wow, I had no idea they had obtained that size. Sweet! I have a relative in the fossil arts; I will ask him if he's on this Fossil Forum. If not, I think he'd really enjoy it!


Moozillion said:


> I MUST get my sister in Montana to send me a trilobite- one I can clean up a bit, just for fun!


That sounds like an excellent idea for grade-school students!! And adults (like me too).


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> WOW!!!! FASCINATING work and job well done, sir!!!!!!


Thank you very much. 
It takes a long time but is very relaxing.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> WOWIE-ZOWIE!!!!!!!
> Just how BIG did trilobites get????? Vegetarian or scavengers?


You can see the maximum size in a previous post on this page. 
Trilobites performed all the different functions fish do now, so hunters, stalkers, bottom dwelling foragers, plankton eaters, detritivores etc. A rich and diverse group that survived 250 million years. Much longer than the dinosaurs or mammals have existed.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Moozillion said:


> I MUST get my sister in Montana to send me a trilobite- one I can clean up a bit, just for fun!


Do so. It's lovely.
(and send some to me! )


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Wow, I had no idea they had obtained that size. Sweet! I have a relative in the fossil arts; I will ask him if he's on this Fossil Forum. If not, I think he'd really enjoy it!
> 
> That sounds like an excellent idea for grade-school students!! And adults (like me too).


Wish i had one this big.
Mine are tiddlers in comparison. 
Though i do have some reasonable sized ones as will be seen......................


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE*
The Jurassic _Platychelys oberndorferi _from Germany. 150 million years old.


----------



## CarolM

Moozillion said:


> I MUST get my sister in Montana to send me a trilobite- one I can clean up a bit, just for fun!


Yip then you can post it on here.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE*
> The Jurassic _Platychelys oberndorferi _from Germany. 150 million years old.


Also a stunning and nice clear one. I am really enjoying this fossil thread.


----------



## Moozillion

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Do so. It's lovely.
> (and send some to me! )


Most certainly!!!!


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Oh, and the underside of an agnostid with walking and swimming legs. Trilobites had a hard exoskeleton on the top , but were soft and vulnerable underneath.
> 
> 
> 
> So to protect the soft underbelly they would roll up like a woodlouse/ pill bug :


I picked this up on the beach today and it reminded me of the pic in your post. I just need to keep it for about 150 million years and then bobs your uncle I will have my own fossil.[emoji1] [emoji6]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> I picked this up on the beach today and it reminded me of the pic in your post. I just need to keep it for about 150 million years and then bobs your uncle I will have my own fossil.[emoji1] [emoji6]
> View attachment 230713
> View attachment 230714
> View attachment 230715


Golly, it's lovely. 
Is that a chiton?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

More trilobites today, this time from the Upper Cambrian, a little younger than the _Elrathia _496 million years old. These are from Georgia, USA and are very very rare, though not as pretty as some. I may be the only chap in Africa with this species. 
Here is _Aphelaspis brachyphasis. 









_


----------



## Oxalis

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I may be the only chap in Africa with this species.


Well that's a pretty cool thought! 


Tidgy's Dad said:


> Golly, it's lovely.
> Is that a chiton?


I just looked up this creature—how weird!!!  That just expanded my little universe a little.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Well that's a pretty cool thought!
> 
> I just looked up this creature—how weird!!!  That just expanded my little universe a little.


Yes, everyone knows the main groups of molluscs; the gastropods (snails) pelecypods (bivalves and clams) and cephalopods ( octopuses, squid and cuttlefish) but no one much knows about the chitons. Really weird and beautiful things.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE*
Jurassic turtles again, 160 million years old.




These are _Annemys _and are part of a mass grave of 1.800 specimens! 
It seems that the lake they were living in dried up and they all congregated and died in the final pool of water. 
The rains came just too late and swep mud into the old lake burying the poor turtles so they were all fossilized en masse.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Golly, it's lovely.
> Is that a chiton?


I have no clue what it is. I was hoping you would know.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> *TURTLE*
> Jurassic turtles again, 160 million years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are _Annemys _and are part of a mass grave of 1.800 specimens!
> It seems that the lake they were living in dried up and they all congregated and died in the final pool of water.
> The rains came just too late and swep mud into the old lake burying the poor turtles so they were all fossilized en masse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 230732


A nice find. Poor turtles.


----------



## Bambam1989




----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Bambam1989 said:


>


Thanks for this, Bambam.
A guy on Fossil Forum posted hundreds of photos during the couple of weeks of Tucson. Incredible. 
I would pass out. 
But still lots of fakes on sale as well as dream specimens.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> I picked this up on the beach today and it reminded me of the pic in your post. I just need to keep it for about 150 million years and then bobs your uncle I will have my own fossil.[emoji1] [emoji6]
> View attachment 230713
> View attachment 230714
> View attachment 230715


It looks superficially like a chiton.



Armoured, segmented marine molluscs that anchor to the rocks like limpets. But a limpet is a variety of snail and these are a different group. 




But the underside of a chiton is like this, you can see the mouth and muscular foot quite clearly. 
Your specimen appears to have eyes and legs so must be an arthropod.
So I now think it's a lovely big fish louse.


----------



## Bambam1989

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Thanks for this, Bambam.
> A guy on Fossil Forum posted hundreds of photos during the couple of weeks of Tucson. Incredible.
> I would pass out.
> But still lots of fakes on sale as well as dream specimens.


I would be terrified to buy anything for fear of it being a fake! Except some gorgeous geodes.. I'd go home with a smaller one[emoji1]


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> It looks superficially like a chiton.
> 
> 
> 
> Armoured, segmented marine molluscs that anchor to the rocks like limpets. But a limpet is a variety of snail and these are a different group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the underside of a chiton is like this, you can see the mouth and muscular foot quite clearly.
> Your specimen appears to have eyes and legs so must be an arthropod.
> So I now think it's a lovely big fish louse.


Lol. I think it is a louse as well. The upside is now I find myself looking at rocks etc. Just in case I find a fossil.[emoji6]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Bambam1989 said:


> I would be terrified to buy anything for fear of it being a fake! Except some gorgeous geodes.. I'd go home with a smaller one[emoji1]


Geodes are often artificially coloured.


----------



## Bambam1989

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Geodes are often artificially coloured.


Damn, learned something new again[emoji28]


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossil from my collection.


A lovely pea crab, 15 million years old from California. 
Modern pea crabs live as parasites or, according to others, in a symbiotic relationship with other animals. 
They can live inside the shells of oysters mussels and clams or in the case of the modern species of _Pinnixa,_ sharing the tube home of a marine worm.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLES*
The skull of the early Jurassic _Australochelys africanus _from South Africa.
Unfortunately they haven't found much else of this one, but we know it was an early sea turtle from an extinct group more closely related to _Proganochelys _than to modern turtles but seemed to have excellent hearing. .


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Adam mentioned to many “fake” fossils from overseas being purchased was reminded to me recently with this item I posted in the “Personal Promotion” section of the forum, titled “fake-research-paper” Anyone read it yet? It’s a fun read regardless of the source matter.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Hi, Ken! 
I'll take a look.


----------



## Kristoff

Bambam1989 said:


>



Is the Indiana Jones hat part of the uniform? 
I’d love one of those coffee tables of what looks like fossilized wood!


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Kristoff said:


> Is the Indiana Jones hat part of the uniform?
> I’d love one of those coffee tables of what looks like fossilized wood!


Those tables were madly expensive, I recall, but very nice. 
Yes, the hat is part of the uniform.


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

NATURAL HISTORY Ancient trail of Columbian mammoths uncovered in south-central Oregon FOOTPRINTS OF MAMMOTHS, DATED TO 43,000 YEARS AGO, ARE SEEN IN A PORTION OF A TRACKWAY THAT WAS UNCOVERED BY RESEARCHERS IN 2017 IN AN ANCIENT DRY LAKE BED IN LAKE COUNTY, OREGON. CREDIT PHOTOS BY GREG SHINE, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
A FOSSILIZED TRACKWAY ON PUBLIC LANDS IN LAKE COUNTY, OREGON, MAY REVEAL CLUES ABOUT THE ANCIENT FAMILY DYNAMICS OF COLUMBIAN MAMMOTHS.



Recently excavated by a team from the University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History, the Bureau of Land Management and the University of Louisiana, the trackway includes 117 footprints thought to represent a number of adults as well as juvenile and infant mammoths.

Discovered by Museum of Natural and Cultural History paleontologist Greg Retallack during a 2014 class field trip on fossils at the UO, the Ice Age trackway is the focus of a new study appearing online ahead of print in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.

Retallack returned to the site with the study’s coauthors, including UO science librarian Dean Walton, in 2017. The team zeroed in on a 20-footprint track, dating to roughly 43,000 years ago, that exhibited some intriguing features.

“These prints were especially close together, and those on the right were more deeply impressed than those on the left-as if an adult mammoth had been limping,” said Retallack, also a professor in the UO Department of Earth Sciences and the study’s lead author.

But, as the study reveals, the limping animal wasn’t alone: Two sets of smaller footprints appeared to be approaching and retreating from the limper’s trackway.

“These juveniles may have been interacting with an injured adult female, returning to her repeatedly throughout the journey, possibly out of concern for her slow progress,” Retallack said. “Such behavior has been observed with wounded adults in modern, matriarchal herds of African elephants.”

The tracks were made in a layer of volcanic soil at Fossil Lake, a site first excavated by UO science professor Thomas Condon in 1876 and today administered by the Bureau of Land Management.

“America’s public lands are some of the world’s greatest outdoor laboratories. Localities such as this mammoth tracksite are unique parts of America’s heritage and indicate that there are many special sites still to be discovered,” said study co-author Brent Breithaupt, a paleontologist in the Wyoming State Office of the Bureau of Land Management.

Specimens from the 1876 Fossil Lake excavation-along with the rest of Condon’s extensive assemblage of fossils and geologic specimens-were donated to UO in the early 1900s and form the core of the museum’s Condon Fossil Collection, now under Retallack’s direction and boasting upwards of 50,000 fossil specimens.

Last month a new state law went into effect, making the UO museum Oregon’s default repository for fossils found on state lands. The museum is also a designated repository for artifacts and paleontological specimens collected from BLM-administered lands in Oregon, ensuring they are available to future generations for education and research.

As part of the 2017 study, Neffra Matthews of the BLM’s National Operations Center in Denver, helped survey, map and document the trackway using photogrammetry, which helps scientists perform accurate measurements based on land-based or aerial photographs.

“There is a vast storehouse of natural history found on BLM-managed land, and it’s exciting to work with researchers like Professor Retallack in capturing 3D data on fragile paleontological resources,” she said.

Retallack said that trace fossils such as trackways can provide unique insights into natural history.

“Tracks sometimes tell more about ancient creatures than their bones, particularly when it comes to their behavior,” he said. “It’s amazing to see this kind of interaction preserved in the fossil record.”

Elephants once roamed across much of North America. Woolly mammoths (Mammuthus primigenius) were common in Canada and Alaska. Columbian mammoths (Mammuthus columbi) occupied the region that became Washington state to South Dakota and south into Mexico. Most mammoths went extinct about 11,500 years ago, but some isolated Arctic island populations of woolly mammoth persisted until 4,000 years ago.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Cowboy_Ken said:


> NATURAL HISTORY Ancient trail of Columbian mammoths uncovered in south-central Oregon FOOTPRINTS OF MAMMOTHS, DATED TO 43,000 YEARS AGO, ARE SEEN IN A PORTION OF A TRACKWAY THAT WAS UNCOVERED BY RESEARCHERS IN 2017 IN AN ANCIENT DRY LAKE BED IN LAKE COUNTY, OREGON. CREDIT PHOTOS BY GREG SHINE, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
> A FOSSILIZED TRACKWAY ON PUBLIC LANDS IN LAKE COUNTY, OREGON, MAY REVEAL CLUES ABOUT THE ANCIENT FAMILY DYNAMICS OF COLUMBIAN MAMMOTHS.
> View attachment 230849
> 
> 
> Recently excavated by a team from the University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History, the Bureau of Land Management and the University of Louisiana, the trackway includes 117 footprints thought to represent a number of adults as well as juvenile and infant mammoths.
> 
> Discovered by Museum of Natural and Cultural History paleontologist Greg Retallack during a 2014 class field trip on fossils at the UO, the Ice Age trackway is the focus of a new study appearing online ahead of print in the journal Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology.
> 
> Retallack returned to the site with the study’s coauthors, including UO science librarian Dean Walton, in 2017. The team zeroed in on a 20-footprint track, dating to roughly 43,000 years ago, that exhibited some intriguing features.
> 
> “These prints were especially close together, and those on the right were more deeply impressed than those on the left-as if an adult mammoth had been limping,” said Retallack, also a professor in the UO Department of Earth Sciences and the study’s lead author.
> 
> But, as the study reveals, the limping animal wasn’t alone: Two sets of smaller footprints appeared to be approaching and retreating from the limper’s trackway.
> 
> “These juveniles may have been interacting with an injured adult female, returning to her repeatedly throughout the journey, possibly out of concern for her slow progress,” Retallack said. “Such behavior has been observed with wounded adults in modern, matriarchal herds of African elephants.”
> 
> The tracks were made in a layer of volcanic soil at Fossil Lake, a site first excavated by UO science professor Thomas Condon in 1876 and today administered by the Bureau of Land Management.
> 
> “America’s public lands are some of the world’s greatest outdoor laboratories. Localities such as this mammoth tracksite are unique parts of America’s heritage and indicate that there are many special sites still to be discovered,” said study co-author Brent Breithaupt, a paleontologist in the Wyoming State Office of the Bureau of Land Management.
> 
> Specimens from the 1876 Fossil Lake excavation-along with the rest of Condon’s extensive assemblage of fossils and geologic specimens-were donated to UO in the early 1900s and form the core of the museum’s Condon Fossil Collection, now under Retallack’s direction and boasting upwards of 50,000 fossil specimens.
> 
> Last month a new state law went into effect, making the UO museum Oregon’s default repository for fossils found on state lands. The museum is also a designated repository for artifacts and paleontological specimens collected from BLM-administered lands in Oregon, ensuring they are available to future generations for education and research.
> 
> As part of the 2017 study, Neffra Matthews of the BLM’s National Operations Center in Denver, helped survey, map and document the trackway using photogrammetry, which helps scientists perform accurate measurements based on land-based or aerial photographs.
> 
> “There is a vast storehouse of natural history found on BLM-managed land, and it’s exciting to work with researchers like Professor Retallack in capturing 3D data on fragile paleontological resources,” she said.
> 
> Retallack said that trace fossils such as trackways can provide unique insights into natural history.
> 
> “Tracks sometimes tell more about ancient creatures than their bones, particularly when it comes to their behavior,” he said. “It’s amazing to see this kind of interaction preserved in the fossil record.”
> 
> Elephants once roamed across much of North America. Woolly mammoths (Mammuthus primigenius) were common in Canada and Alaska. Columbian mammoths (Mammuthus columbi) occupied the region that became Washington state to South Dakota and south into Mexico. Most mammoths went extinct about 11,500 years ago, but some isolated Arctic island populations of woolly mammoth persisted until 4,000 years ago.


Thanks, Ken.
Here is a little more on this story.
http://bgr.com/2018/02/13/mammoth-footprints-track-fossils-oregon/


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Today's fossils from my brachiopods sent to me by a Fossil Forum chap and just labelled as _Rhynchotrema sp_ There were three of them, pretty nice specimens from the Cummingsville Formation, near Rochester, Minnesota. 
They are from the top of the Middle Ordovician and thus 452 million years old. 
I noticed immediately that they were two different species. All rhynchonellid (wrinkled) brachiopods, but clearly different in some respects. Mostly you can't tell rhynchonellids apart without checking internal features, not possible with these,but with a good deal of research into what species come from this location and studying the details of each of them. Luckily, there aren't many species recorded here and most of the similar looking ones are much smaller than my speciemens. By studying the number of costae (ribs) on the shell I am fairly certain that my friend was right and this first one is indeed _Rhyncotrema; Rhynchotrema ainslei _to be precise. Only this species found in rocks of this age around Rochester has so many ribs as this (30). It is only 1.4 cm across at the widest point. 




This made identification of the second specimen easy, at it is clearly the same species, but smaller and thinner , so is a juvenile as they don't develop the central sulcus and fold until they get older. So a juvenile _Rynchotrema ainslei. 1 cm _across. 




The final one proved much harder to id., and I'm still not sure. Two rynchonellids from here fit the bill, but based on shell shape, rib numbers, size and lack of growth lines I'm going for _Rostricellula minnesotensis. _Not only a different genus, but from a different family! So that makes me very happy. It has fewer ribs and is far more globose. 1.3 cm wide.


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

*TURTLE*
_Bashuchelys _from the Middle Jurassic of China.




This primitive turtle still had teeth.


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Today's fossils from my brachiopods sent to me by a Fossil Forum chap and just labelled as _Rhynchotrema sp_ There were three of them, pretty nice specimens from the Cummingsville Formation, near Rochester, Minnesota.
> They are from the top of the Middle Ordovician and thus 452 million years old.
> I noticed immediately that they were two different species. All rhynchonellid (wrinkled) brachiopods, but clearly different in some respects. Mostly you can't tell rhynchonellids apart without checking internal features, not possible with these,but with a good deal of research into what species come from this location and studying the details of each of them. Luckily, there aren't many species recorded here and most of the similar looking ones are much smaller than my speciemens. By studying the number of costae (ribs) on the shell I am fairly certain that my friend was right and this first one is indeed _Rhyncotrema; Rhynchotrema ainslei _to be precise. Only this species found in rocks of this age around Rochester has so many ribs as this (30). It is only 1.4 cm across at the widest point.
> View attachment 230945
> 
> View attachment 230946
> 
> This made identification of the second specimen easy, at it is clearly the same species, but smaller and thinner , so is a juvenile as they don't develop the central sulcus and fold until they get older. So a juvenile _Rynchotrema ainslei. 1 cm _across.
> View attachment 230947
> 
> View attachment 230948
> 
> The final one proved much harder to id., and I'm still not sure. Two rynchonellids from here fit the bill, but based on shell shape, rib numbers, size and lack of growth lines I'm going for _Rostricellula minnesotensis. _Not only a different genus, but from a different family! So that makes me very happy. It has fewer ribs and is far more globose. 1.3 cm wide.
> View attachment 230949
> 
> View attachment 230950
> 
> View attachment 230951


Wow, What a lovely colour. Is it that colour because of the area they were found in?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

CarolM said:


> Wow, What a lovely colour. Is it that colour because of the area they were found in?


They mentioned that on the Fossil Forum too! 
No, it's artificial colour from the light I used for the photos. 
Natural colour :


----------



## Oxalis

Cool posts! I loved catching up today!  It made me think of our somewhat embarrassing claim to fame in northern Michigan: the man-eating clam. The sign says it is a _Tridacna gigas_ located a tourist attraction called Sea Shell City off I-75 not far south of the Mackinac Bridge. Here's an article with photos about it, but do watch out for some terrible puns! 

http://www.mlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2017/08/sea_shell_city_cheboygan_michi.html


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Oxalis said:


> Cool posts! I loved catching up today!  It made me think of our somewhat embarrassing claim to fame in northern Michigan: the man-eating clam. The sign says it is a _Tridacna gigas_ located a tourist attraction called Sea Shell City off I-75 not far south of the Mackinac Bridge. Here's an article with photos about it, but do watch out for some terrible puns!
> 
> http://www.mlive.com/travel/index.ssf/2017/08/sea_shell_city_cheboygan_michi.html


Yes, the famous giant clams, wonderful molluscs. 
But not really man-eaters or even harmful. 
_Inoceramus seenstrup, _the biggest fossil pelecypod (bivalve) .


----------



## CarolM

Tidgy's Dad said:


> Yes, the famous giant clams, wonderful molluscs.
> But not really man-eaters or even harmful.
> _Inoceramus seenstrup, _the biggest fossil pelecypod (bivalve) .
> View attachment 231202


Wow, that is HUGE!


----------



## Raqib Farid

Tidgy's Dad said:


> I'll stick with my initial id.
> It's a very young one, poor thing and mostly an internal mold of the carapace, but some of the marginal scutes have been replaced in fossilization and preserved.
> Very nice.


How to reserve these fossils?
I mean my cousin had a red ears slidder turtle. It died some days ago, he buried it in sand. So how much time it will take to completely decompress? So he will retrieve its shell?


----------



## Tidgy's Dad

Raqib Farid said:


> How to reserve these fossils?
> I mean my cousin had a red ears slidder turtle. It died some days ago, he buried it in sand. So how much time it will take to completely decompress? So he will retrieve its shell?


It won't be fossilized.
You are just talking about decomposition of the soft parts to leave just the shell and bones, I think.
In normal conditions this would take a minimum of five months but in dry desert sand I would think mummification is possible and it may take much longer.
I would wait at least 8 months.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100611200419AALeJa4


----------



## Kristoff

Sad news - Tooth of ancient megashark stolen in Australia


----------



## CarolM

Kristoff said:


> Sad news - Tooth of ancient megashark stolen in Australia


That is sad news. It has little value other than to the national park. Just so wrong when people take things that don't belong to them.[emoji22]


----------



## Oxalis

Kristoff said:


> Sad news - Tooth of ancient megashark stolen in Australia


This kind of news always breaks my heart.


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Here’s the megshark tooth that I have. But it’s mine free and clear and stollen from no one other than the ground it was in


originally I had two large ones, but at Christmas I gave my daughter her pick, and she picked the one I would have. I’ve got a handful of the usual small ones out in the garage but I’m not gonna go get them.


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Maybe I’ve posted this in the past, or maybe someone beat me to it, regardless here y’all go…
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/c...edium=feed&utm_source=feedburner#.WqsERCJlCEc


----------



## Oxalis

Cowboy_Ken said:


> Maybe I’ve posted this in the past, or maybe someone beat me to it, regardless here y’all go…
> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2018/02/16/big-data-paleontology/?utm_campaign=Feed:+AllDiscovermagazinecomContent+(All+DISCOVERmagazine.com+stories)&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=feedburner#.WqsERCJlCEc


As I'm currently working in the digital asset management field, I could really relate to this article. I shared it with my coworkers. Cheers!


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Fossil Brain Case Reveals New Insights About Ancient Sharks 



A new study led by Museum scientists provides new insights into a 320 million-year-old shark that was previously only known by its unusual teeth and fragmented jaws. A newly uncovered fossilized brain case of Carcharopsis wortheni, found in the Fayetteville Shale of Arkansas, is helping researchers better place the ancient shark in the tree of life.
Carcharopsis lived during a critical point in evolutionary history, following the end-Devonian extinction event, when nearly 95 percent of vertebrate species went extinct. The late Paleozoic shark was originally described in 1843 based on its distinctive serrated teeth, a feature that is common in modern sharks but rarely found in early shark specimens.

Great white shark swims through a school of fish.
Great white sharks, Carcharodon carcharias, are named for their serrated (carcharos) teeth (odon).
Courtesy of Terry Goss/Wikimedia Commons

“They look a little like what you’d see in a great white shark, but 320 million years old and with different enamel,” said lead author Allison Bronson, a Ph.D. student in the Museum’s Richard Gilder Graduate School. “This is really early to see serrated teeth.”

CT scan of fragmented Carcharopsis skull.
The first known cranium fossil belonging to Carcharopsis was discovered in 2007 by Royal Mapes, a research associate at the American Museum of Natural History.
Allison Bronson

The first known cranium belonging to the extinct shark was discovered in 2007 by Royal Mapes, a retired Ohio University professor and Museum research associate, who donated the specimen along with some 540,000 other fossils to the Museum. Mapes is a coauthor on the new Carcharopsis study, published in the journal Papers in Palaeontology, along with Division of Paleontology Curator John Maisey.
[Watch the video below for more about the Mapes collection at the Museum, including fossil shark specimens.]


The researchers used high-resolution computed tomography (CT) imaging to examine the cranium, a tooth, and an isolated tooth base. Using the scans, they were able to reconstruct the internal canals of the teeth for the first time and found that these are similar to those found in modern sharks.
The arrangement of the shark’s blood vessels—also revealed through CT scans—suggests that Carcharopsis was probably closely related to the group of ancient cartilaginous fish from which today’s sharks and rays evolved. However, more complete fossils are needed to firmly position it in the tree of life.


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

FIELD HERPETOLOGY OF THE SOUTHWEST
Southwestern Research Station 27 July–5August, 2018
This 9-day course will introduce participants to an outstanding diversity of am- phibians and reptiles of Arizona’s Chiricahua Mountains and surrounding deserts.
Labs and lectures will focus on identi cation and ecology of herps. The majority of time will be spent in the eld, hiking through low and high elevation habitat.
For more information about the course, contact Geoffrey Bender. Ph: 520-558-2396; email: [email protected] http://www.amnh.org/our-research/southwestern-research-station/education/ field-herpetology-of-the-southwest


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Turtle shells help decode complex links between modern, fossil species
March 28, 2018 
Source: Florida Museum of Natural History
Summary: A new study shows how scientists can use animals' physical features -- also known as morphology -- to make connections between a modern species and its fossilized relatives, even if they look strikingly different.


Eastern box turtles display a dizzying amount of variation, both in modern and fossil specimens. But plotting shell shape reveals patterns and captures aspects like curvature -- things that are hard to measure in just a single linear feature.
Credit: Coleman Sheehy / Florida Museum


Imagine that Labradors and golden retrievers died out a million years ago, leaving only fossilized skeletons behind. Without the help of DNA, how could we determine that a fossil Labrador, a fossil retriever and a modern Chihuahua all belong to the same species, Canis lupus familiaris? And could we look at the wide variety of dogs today to gain clues about lost diversity in the past?

A new study by Florida Museum of Natural History researcher Natasha Vitek shows how scientists can use animals' physical features -- also known as morphology -- to make connections between a modern species and its fossilized relatives, even if they look strikingly different.
"We can't magically create more fossils," said Vitek, a doctoral candidate in vertebrate paleontology. "A lot of it is trying to figure out what we can do with what we have at hand to find diversity within a species -- diversity we no longer have.”

Scientists often use color, sexual differences, soft tissues, signs of age and DNA to analyze variation within modern species. But these can be missing in fossil specimens.

Vitek relied on a technique known as geometric morphometrics, a way of quantifying an object's shape, to test whether shape is a reliable way to tease out the subtle relationships between species, subspecies and individuals of the same species that just look different from each other.
She used eastern box turtles, Terrapene carolina -- a species that comes in all kinds of shapes, sizes and colors -- to make links between the rich variation in modern specimens and their fossil relatives from as far back as the Pleistocene, from about 2.6 million to about 11,700 years ago.
Unfortunately, turtles don't make anything easy.

Modern eastern box turtles display a dizzying amount of variation. A box turtle in Oklahoma can be straw-colored while the same species in Florida is dark with yellow sunburst patterns. Adult box turtles also come in a wide array of sizes with no direct link between size and age. A small turtle in one location could be the same size or older than a large turtle of the same species in another location, even within a short distance.

Similar levels of variation also crop up in fossil eastern box turtles. How different must two turtles be to indicate that they belong to different species or subspecies?

To make sure she was "comparing apples to apples," Vitek only analyzed the shape of eastern box turtle shells, which preserve well and are common in the fossil record.

In doing so, she was wading into a debate about eastern box turtle variation that has lasted more than 80 years, with some scientists suggesting that fossil and modern box turtles are all the same species, while others -- pointing to a distinction in size or shape -- hypothesizing that some fossils represented a separate, extinct species. Some researchers have also argued that certain subtle differences between fossils are evidence of various subspecies.

Vitek, who began the study as a master's student at the University of Texas at Austin, compared 435 shells of modern eastern box turtles and 57 shells of fossil specimens, analyzing changes in location, shape, size and sex.

"It's almost 'more money, more problems,'" Vitek said. "You'd think that with so many fossils, it would be great, but it just means that you can't hide from all the natural complexity.”

To find a signal in the noise, she used geometric morphometrics to plot shell shape into a series of coordinates, "like a connect-the-dots puzzle," she said, which created a more complete model of a shape in space.
"This allows you to see how that overall constellation of points is changing from shape to shape," Vitek said. "You might see whole new patterns you would never have thought to measure before and capture things like curvature -- things that are really hard to measure in just a single linear feature.”

Her results showed that scientists on both sides of the debate are partially right.

The argument that modern variation in eastern box turtles mirrors variation in fossil specimens of the same species does have some merit.

"It's not like we hit the fossil record and there's a hard boundary between what's extinct and what still exists today," she said. "Just like we'd expect from evolution, there is a gradient of variation that carries through to modern box turtles. Having some shells that aren't that different is reassuring in the sense that, yes, some species do go back in time."
But, she added, some shells likely do belong to lost subspecies, existing subspecies or closely related extinct species.

"Some sites have shells that are not only bigger than modern eastern box turtles but also very different," she said. "There is lost variation in the eastern box turtle record. It turns out that if you go back to fossils, there is even more diversity than you would be able to pick up just by studying today's box turtles.”

Vitek said she is hopeful her study will spur more researchers to look deeper at bony structures within species as a means of detecting variation in fossils.

"We're doing a great job of seeing what drives patterns like mouse coat color, but let's also see what drives patterns in things like mouse teeth and arm bones," she said. "There's a lot of opportunity to start better documenting what the morphology we pick up in the fossil record might actually mean in terms of evolution."

Story Source:
Materials provided by Florida Museum of Natural History. Original written by Natalie van Hoose. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:
Natasha S. Vitek. Delineating modern variation from extinct morphology in the fossil record using shells of the Eastern Box Turtle (Terrapene carolina). PLOS ONE, 2018; 13 (3): e0193437 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193437


----------



## Cowboy_Ken

Ancient turtles: scientists find ancestor of modern sea turtles
ZME Science, 4/19/20 by Mihai Andrei 

Paleontologists have found a new sea turtle species from the Cretaceous epoch which they believe to be an ancestor of all modern sea turtles.
pastedGraphic_4.png
This is a reconstruction of the new species (Peritresius martini). Image credits: Drew Gentry.


If you look at turtles today, it’s easy to guess that they’ve been around for a very long time. Like crocodiles and other reptiles, they had ancestors that lived alongside the dinosaurs in the Mesozoic times. Such an ancestor was Peritresius ornatus, who lived in North America during the Late Cretaceous epoch — from around 100 to 66 million years ago. Researchers thought that P. ornatus was the sole member of its group but now, a new study has found a sister species.

Named Peritresius martini after its discoverer, George Martin, the species was discovered based on fossils found in Alabama, US. Its shell measured over 90 cm long and 75 cm wide, which is far larger than known P. ornatus specimens. Researchers also note that the P. martini shell was rather plain, whereas the P. ornatus one had sculptured skin elements that were supported by blood vessels. This feature suggests that P. ornatus was capable of thermoregulation, self-regulating its body temperature based on the environmental conditions. This might have allowed it to keep warm and survive the global cooling that occurred throughout the Late Cretaceous, unlike most turtles, which went extinct.

“The heavily vascularized and sculptured dermal elements characteristic of P. ornatus are interpreted here as potentially indicative of a thermoregulatory capability and may have been one of the key factors contributing to the survival of Peritresius into the Maastrichtian, a period of cooling when other lineages of Campanian marine turtles (e.g., Protostegids, Toxochelys, and Ctenochelys) went extinct,” the study authors write.

The finding also shows that turtles belonging to this clade were far more widespread than previously believed. It’s unclear if other species belonging to the group existed.
Lead author Drew Gentry says:

“This discovery not only answers several important questions about the distribution and diversity of sea turtles during this period but also provides further evidence that Alabama is one of the best places in the world to study some of the earliest ancestors of modern sea turtles.”

Journal Reference: Gentry AD, Parham JF, Ehret DJ, Ebersole JA (2018) A new species of Peritresius Leidy, 1856 (Testudines: Pan-Cheloniidae) from the Late Cretaceous (Campanian) of Alabama, USA, and the occurrence of the genus within the Mississippi Embayment of North America. PLoS ONE 13(4): e0195651. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195651


----------

