Carmel valley shell id

[Coinwalla]

These were found at carmel valley in Monterey at ucmp36217 they might be clam fossils found there but not sure about species

[ynot]

Not a fossil, mineral stain.

[Coinwalla]

No, not that if you look closely there is another shell above that it is faint and also hard to see in person

[Ludwigia]

Whatever it is, even if it is a fossil, since due to a lack of distinguishing characteristics, it's going to be difficult to identify even the family, let alone the species in my opinion. You'd need to research the local fossil fauna and make comparisons.

[Coco]

Hi,

 

6 hours ago, Coinwalla said:

These were found at caramel valley in Monterey at ucmp36217

Country ? State ?

 

Coco

[Ludwigia]

4 minutes ago, Coco said:

Hi,

 

Country ? State ?

 

Coco

I think the OP meant to type Carmel Valley in California but didn't check the spelling. Sounds rather tasty doesn't it?

[ynot]

my bad.

the smother area looks much like a natural fracture along the bedding plane.

[Plantguy]

Could be a Panopea...  they are fairly good sized and have that rectangular shape on one end of the shell. I dont remember having seen any in the Monterey formation up in Monterey near the Navy postgrad school when I collected in that area back in the 60's but i've seen them mentioned in the literature. In amongst the porcellanites which typically had lots of very cool fracture and staining patterns (mimicking fossil clams) we did actual find molds/casts of various other bivalves in the very fine grained diatomaceous shales. Crabs and some other odds and ends as well. Your example looks to be from the softer shaley sediments and when the fossils have no color and are really flat without many raised features they just dont stand out especially in photos and then you throw staining across them they are almost camouflaged..

 

I've found Panopeas here in Florida at various Pliocene/Pleistocene sites. Present day geoduck clams are found now on the westcoast of the US. Could certainly be one of the other bivalve clams and maybe an invert person or person who has messed with the Monterey and other formations out there can offer more without seeing the complete specimen. 

 

Good eyes! 

Continued hunting success! 

 

Regards, Chris 

[Fossildude19]

Definitely a bivalve of some sort - I see growth lines for sure. 

 

Cropped, rotated, and contrasted:

 

 

 

Chris's suggestion is not a bad guess, imo.

[ynot]

Well it looks like I messed this one up.

I will go sit in the corner now.

[DPS Ammonite]

On 6/30/2024 at 8:32 PM, Coinwalla said:

These were found at caramel valley in Monterey at ucmp36217 they might be clam fossils found there but not sure about species

UCMP 36217 (University of California Museum of Paleontology) site is in the Miocene Monterey Formation in the Carmel Valley near Monterey. 

@Coinwalla

 

 

Here is a paper with mention of UCMP 36217 and photos of bivalves.

 

 

 

Kenneth L. Finger, Megan M. Flenniken, Jere H. Lipps; FORAMINIFERA USED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF MIOCENE POLYCHAETE WORM TUBES, MONTEREY FORMATION, CALIFORNIA, USA. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 2008;; 38 (4): 277–291. doi: https://doi.org/10.2113/gsjfr.38.4.277

 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kenneth-Finger/publication/250084185_Foraminifera_used_in_the_construction_of_Miocene_polychaete_worm_tubes_Monterey_formation_California_USA/links/55fc2fa708aeafc8ac437603/Foraminifera-used-in-the-construction-of-Miocene-polychaete-worm-tubes-Monterey-formation-California-USA.pdf?origin=publication_detail&_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QiLCJwYWdlIjoicHVibGljYXRpb25Eb3dubG9hZCIsInByZXZpb3VzUGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19

 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250084185_Foraminifera_used_in_the_construction_of_Miocene_polychaete_worm_tubes_Monterey_formation_California_USA