Eocene - Miocene Shark tooth from NJ, first thought was Auriculatus?

[QuestingFossils]

As in the title I started off my guess with this being Auriculatus. After doing a double take and researching potential IDs with what appears to be serrated cusps, but looking more at it why would it have striations if it is one and the weird serrated cusps and lack of serrations on the rest of the tooth? Another guess a friend of mine brought up was a type of sand tiger shark tooth cause of the striations and the nutrient groove. Any thoughts, help, input on the ID for this tooth are very much appreciated in advanced. Can and will take more photos later when I return to the homestead with any more physical info required to narrow down the shark.

Edited July 13 by QuestingFossils

[sixgill pete]

First question is where in N.J. was this found? What formation? 

 

It is not an Otodus auriculatus. If Cretaceous possibly Anomotodon toddi. If Paleocene or Eocene possibly a  Stiatolamia species. I do not think this is a Miocene tooth.

[QuestingFossils]

38 minutes ago, sixgill pete said:

First question is where in N.J. was this found? What formation? 

 

It is not an Otodus auriculatus. If Cretaceous possibly Anomotodon toddi. If Paleocene or Eocene possibly a  Stiatolamia species. I do not think this is a Miocene tooth.

Found in Lower member of the Kirkwood formation; contacting near the Vincentown formation. Definitely does remind me of some Cretaceous teeth I have but I think I can rule that out for the most part. 🤔 and with narrowing down most likely not Miocene. Could this tooth have been from the Paleocene/Eocene then worked it’s way and forming into a lag deposit? 

[njcreekhunter]

This is a well preserved example of a lateral Carcharias cuspidata. Miocene in age. 

[sixgill pete]

1 hour ago, njcreekhunter said:

This is a well preserved example of a lateral Carcharias cuspidata. Miocene in age. 

 

I stand corrected. After seeing the response and where it was found, I agree with Carcharias. Could it be autissima?

[QuestingFossils]

On 7/13/2024 at 4:34 PM, njcreekhunter said:

This is a well preserved example of a lateral Carcharias cuspidata. Miocene in age. 

Is there any way it can be an Isurus Desori that’s well preserved instead, I was going through some fossil stuff on the web today and stumbled upon this example that’s not as well preserved and strikingly similar now that I give it another look. Also what is the reasoning of it being a Carcharias cuspidata to look out for when IDing them?

Edited July 14 by QuestingFossils
Forgot to add picture