Brad s. Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 I know that tooth shape depends on where it is located in the sharks jaw. When looking closely at the teeth I noticed not just different blade characteristics, but also differences in the root and cusps. On the larger tooth the cusps are much less pronounced. As for the roots, one has a “u” shape and the other a “v” shape. My intuition tells me they are from different stages of evolution of the Angustidens shark, but I don’t know. Are thes differences just a result of the size of shark and tooth position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hemipristis Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 (edited) A few things: They are differently sized, as you note. There is a difference in weathering/preservation. Lastly, there are positional differences (i.e., the location of the teeth in the mouth). I don't believe you can look at the two teeth and certain age other than in a very broad sense (i.e., they are both from the middle Cenozoic). Unless you know the provenance of each, you really won't know their ages relative to one another other than what I stated above. I'm assuming by the glove in the photos that you found these. Where from? Did you collect them directly from the formation or were they in float (e.g., steam gravels)? If found in stream gravels, I'm afraid you're out of luck. Edited February 16, 2022 by hemipristis 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' George Santayana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad s. Posted February 16, 2022 Author Share Posted February 16, 2022 They both were found in Summerville, sc and were not embedded in a layer. Thank you for your explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts