Roz Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 At first I assumed it was a shell but looking through my loupe I no longer think so.. It might be something that a lot of you find but it's a first for me.. It is not inside a nodule.. I sure hope someone will recognize it.. Thanks Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lissa318 Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Nice Roz but geesh.... I want to say coral but that is the most recent search of mine. Very nice and I like it! Horn coral? Probably not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 (edited) Is it not within a concretion? Or is it not associated with a concretion at all? What kind of fossils is it associated with? Edited July 25, 2013 by Missourian Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 25, 2013 Author Share Posted July 25, 2013 Hi Lissa I find a ton of horn coral and sure it's not.. I don't see it being coral at all. Now you watch, it'll turn out to be coral since I said that! Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 I would guess it's sections of a productid brachiopod. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 26, 2013 Author Share Posted July 26, 2013 Thanks, Herb! I will compare some! Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bone2stone Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 (edited) I would guess it's sections of a productid brachiopod. Check! This is what it appears to be to me as well. Roz, maybe you can go with my hunting bud (Lady from Dallas) and myself sometime. I only found four trilobites this past weekend. Jess B. Edited July 26, 2013 by bone2stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fowells Posted July 27, 2013 Share Posted July 27, 2013 I would guess it's sections of a productid brachiopod. Roz, I vote for brach shell impressions also. That's a hunk a hematite, isn't it? About every thousandth hunk a hematite will have fossil. I have found one discreet brachiopod fossil in hematite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 27, 2013 Author Share Posted July 27, 2013 I am not sure what it is.. It's very hard though.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Impression from a rostoconch. This only occurred to be because I found my first one today. A big thanks to Fowells for showing me around Lake Bridgeport today. I believe he found one too. There's no sunlight for a picture now but compare it to the rostoconch Lance has on his site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 28, 2013 Author Share Posted July 28, 2013 Small things throw me off, the color on this one and the flatness.. I have found some of those before.. Yes, I believe that is what it is. I hope you post yours.. I really love those.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Impression from a rostoconch. This only occurred to be because I found my first one today. A big thanks to Fowells for showing me around Lake Bridgeport today. I believe he found one too. There's no sunlight for a picture now but compare it to the rostoconch Lance has on his site. I'll go with Bob's rostroconch (Apotocardium) id instead of a brachiopod as I first stated. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 Check! This is what it appears to be to me as well. Roz, maybe you can go with my hunting bud (Lady from Dallas) and myself sometime. I only found four trilobites this past weekend. Jess B. Thanks, Jess.. That's very generous of you.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 Roz, I vote for brach shell impressions also. That's a hunk a hematite, isn't it? About every thousandth hunk a hematite will have fossil. I have found one discreet brachiopod fossil in hematite. After closely inspecting it and asking someone, I think it is a mud rock.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 What the pattern represents ... I don't know any morethan those who have posted suggested possibilities. It does have a general Slickenside appearance.However, the uniform ribbing features leads me to believethe specimen is not a just a mud rock. Flash from the Past (Show Us Your Fossils)MAPS Fossil Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 What the pattern represents ... I don't know any more than those who have posted suggested possibilities. It does have a general Slickenside appearance. However, the uniform ribbing features leads me to believe the specimen is not a just a mud rock. Well I agree that it's a fossil but I was commenting on the rock itself. I do not know my rocks at all but I don't think the rock itself looks like hematite to me anyway. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted July 30, 2013 Share Posted July 30, 2013 (edited) Could it be a piece of gastropod shell with ribbing and growth lines? Your close-up photo is so good, I thought it was bigger than it is. Edited July 30, 2013 by Missourian Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted July 30, 2013 Author Share Posted July 30, 2013 That is also a possibility.. Thanks for the compliment on the images.. I would probably step on and not see a large fossil, I seem destined to find only tiny creatures but it sure is easier to have my collection not take up much room. Actually the tiny fossils are my favorites.. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fowells Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Well I agree that it's a fossil but I was commenting on the rock itself. I do not know my rocks at all but I don't think the rock itself looks like hematite to me anyway. Roz, Pretty sure it's hematite. If you heft it, it will be much heavier by volume than the other types of nodules because of the iron content. The oily sheen and black with red color are also indicators and, as you mention, the hematite is a lot harder than the other types of Bridgeport nodules. Since you are the main maven of the Pennsylvanian fossil bearing nodules, I've been waiting for you to post a nice fossil in hematite and now you have. My take on the Bridgeport fossil bearing nodules is that they fall into three main types: 1. The orange/red limonitic nodules that tell me I should stop and look. The fossil on these is usually on or pressed into the surface.; 2. The black/gray phosphate nodules that are relatively small and can contain such a variety of fossil material in them and; 3. Hematite nodules which are mixed in with the other two types but are also found in shoals where the other types are absent. As I mentioned before, it seems like you have to look at a thousand pieces of hematite before you find one with a fossil. I've found a couple of dozen, but I haven't photographed them and my photo-skills don't do them justice. I found the attached on a stretch of beach where they are being exposed by wave action and no other fossil material was there. Also pictured are some pieces of hematite with the characteristic bumps and circles that make it hard for me not to pick them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 I agree that I was mistaken.. Yes, looking at your images and some online, I see mine is hematite. Thanks! I had my mind stuck with the visual of hematite that is often used in jewelry (silver/black variety). The ones with the bumps are really common in the Pawpaw Formation or maybe it's Eagleford. I just can't recall which one but the formation is sure loaded with them. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fowells Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 Impression from a rostoconch. This only occurred to be because I found my first one today. A big thanks to Fowells for showing me around Lake Bridgeport today. I believe he found one too. There's no sunlight for a picture now but compare it to the rostoconch Lance has on his site. Good eye, Bob. I think you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fowells Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 I agree that I was mistaken.. Yes, looking at your images and some online, I see mine is hematite. Thanks! I had my mind stuck with the visual of hematite that is often used in jewelry (silver/black variety). The ones with the bumps are really common in the Pawpaw Formation or maybe it's Eagleford. I just can't recall which one but the formation is sure loaded with them. Thanks Roz. Actually some of the hematite here is pure enough to cut and polish, if I was still cutting and polishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted August 8, 2013 Share Posted August 8, 2013 If you look at page #17,fig 2-11 of "Penn. Fossils of N.Texas," you will find a virtual match to your fossil. "Apotocardium sp." "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roz Posted August 8, 2013 Author Share Posted August 8, 2013 I looked at a few I had found when Bob mentioned it and that's what it is.. I had forgotten it was in the book though so thanks, Herb.. It's a nice example they show and I think Bob posted a nice one he found recently. They are beautiful fossils. Welcome to the forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.JPG.3a1778fd4fed4623e03d62617112cc00.JPG)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now