Rockwood Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 This was found as a clast in what I believe to be undisturbed marl in the bank of the creek which runs between the defunct Arlington Archosaur site and the rail road track at the south end of Euless Maine St.. Other clasts of coalified wood were fairly common there. Do I get to declare this rudist debris ? Using, well, you know, the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 If you mean the "rule" for identifying anything a rudist that can't be otherwise identified then, yes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
val horn Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 It does have a little gastropod in it. Does it still count. And for the benefit of those not from texas (me)can you show a couple of pretty rudest photos? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 31 minutes ago, BobWill said: If you mean the "rule" for identifying anything a rudist that can't be otherwise identified then, yes! That's the one. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 27 minutes ago, val horn said: for the benefit of those not from texas (me)can you show a couple of pretty rudest photos? I just posted my entire collection, to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 54 minutes ago, val horn said: It does have a little gastropod in it. Does it still count. And for the benefit of those not from texas (me)can you show a couple of pretty rudest photos? Thanks There may be a bit of an echinoid too. To illustrate why we can call (almost) anything a rudist may I present this illustration: 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieLynn Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 Methinks this might be something displaced. I KNOW there's no Pennsylvanian stuff at the Archeosaur site......but I think this is Pennsylvanian! You can see a bit of bryozoan, that echinoid plate and I am pretty sure that's a crinoid at the bottom. NOW...that being said....all of those things COULD be Cretaceous too. I have found round crinoids in the Glen Rose, and Bryozoans too. So I don't think it's Rudist but I also couldn't definitively say what or when it's from. 2 www.fossil-quest.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Rockwood said: This was found as a clast in what I believe to be undisturbed marl in the bank of the creek which runs between the defunct Arlington Archosaur site and the rail road track at the south end of Euless Maine St.. Other clasts of coalified wood were fairly common there. Do I get to declare this rudist debris ? Using, well, you know, the rule. You only get to use the rule if rudists are expected to occur in the area. I have not heard of any common rudists found in the Eagle Ford Group down to the Main Street Limestone. Bob is right, echinoid shell fragments. Notice the spine attachment point and the semi hollow double-walled urchin fragments. Near the pen point is something that sort of looks like a crinoid fragment which does not really belong in the area. Maybe it is a bivalve or brachiopod. If it is a crinoid then you might have an exotic Paleozoic clast. The echinoids do look similar. My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockwood Posted November 27, 2021 Author Share Posted November 27, 2021 23 minutes ago, DPS Ammonite said: a crinoid fragment which does not really belong in the area. I was too quick to give up the search for something like this I guess. I did find a postage stamp sized plate of these, with a small stem section included, in crushed rock in the same general area. I understand that most of that is upper Paleozoic, and stuff like it has been washed into the area by rivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWill Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 @JamieLynn & @DPS Ammonite I had an idea y'all would thwart my attempt to ignore those details. Considering that most of the crushed rock brought in for construction comes from the quarries in Wise and Jack counties we should not be suprised to see Pennsylvanian hash anywhere in the DFW area. Someone please try again to illustrate the Texas/rudist rule. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Hunter Posted November 27, 2021 Share Posted November 27, 2021 5 hours ago, val horn said: It does have a little gastropod in it. Does it still count. And for the benefit of those not from texas (me)can you show a couple of pretty rudest photos? Thanks Here is a pretty rudist, came from Eagle Ford creek nearby but more than likely it too came from imported crushed rock. I had this in a post awhile back and it was declared Texas rule 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted November 29, 2021 Share Posted November 29, 2021 Inoceramids are the other Cretaceous great imitator. Ya think you have a jaw, tooth, vertebra, etc., etc..... 2 Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now