Zlichovaspis - which species?

[Wafflero27]

Hi everyone! Just wanted to share my new trilobite and see if anybody can help me identify what species of (what I believe is) Zlichovaspis this ~3inch specimen belongs to.

 

Seller mentioned the location as Atchana, Morocco, and the specimen listed as Zlichovaspis. I am wondering if it is really a Zlichovaspis rugosa, as I have been comparing images and I have a feeling this one has a more prolonged anterior process and the pygidial spine seems to be proportionally larger IMO. Another thing that throws me off a bit is that there are many tiny bumps/pustules covering almost the entirety of the axial and pleural lobes, although in my opinion it looks that they blew off many during the preparation (they look like “flat” spots). Please pardon my poor attempt at describing the anatomy of my trilobite. I’m new in this hobby and I’m trying to learn the basics. 

 

I would appreciate any comments on the ID as well as on your overall opinions on the specimen (from a collectors perspective). I am very happy with it! 

Edited June 5 by Wafflero27
Forgot to mention specimen size

[Newbie_1971]

Did this happen to come from a Russian seller?

[Wafflero27]

1 minute ago, Newbie_1971 said:

Did this happen to come from a Russian seller?

I dont think so. They are based in the U.S. and this was listed as a Moroccan trilobite (Atchana). Their other listings are all moroccan trilobites.

[Newbie_1971]

I believe you're right,iand believe it is a trilobite Zlichovaspis fossil Devonian.... but I could be wrong. It is a nice specimen though!

[Newbie_1971]

Rugosa. .. sorry

[Kane]

This is a pretty good piece, and it is indeed a Zlichovaspsis rugosa. I do suspect they had to break one or both of the genal spines and reattach them later. They also coated it to hide the scribe dings. That is fairly common as the Devonian Moroccan material is brutally hard with little separation between shell and matrix (think of it like trying to remove glue from wood with a razor blade and not nick the wood!). The prosopon (the shell texture details) seem authentic as those are very challenging to fake. With this species, it is not uncommon to see some compositing from other parts, but I am not seeing that in this specimen. Congrats on a good acquisition!

[Wafflero27]

4 hours ago, Kane said:

This is a pretty good piece, and it is indeed a Zlichovaspsis rugosa. I do suspect they had to break one or both of the genal spines and reattach them later. They also coated it to hide the scribe dings. That is fairly common as the Devonian Moroccan material is brutally hard with little separation between shell and matrix (think of it like trying to remove glue from wood with a razor blade and not nick the wood!). The prosopon (the shell texture details) seem authentic as those are very challenging to fake. With this species, it is not uncommon to see some compositing from other parts, but I am not seeing that in this specimen. Congrats on a good acquisition!

Thank you very much for the detailed insight  I am happy to read that this is a good specimen and also I love learning more stuff about the fossil trade and what is considered normal and what is not. Thank you!