Jump to content

Is It A Meg Tooth?


MOROPUS

Recommended Posts

I buy it for a few bucks to a trader in a show.The shape is very similar to the meg`s, and even the "saw" margins.I have been looking for a meg long time ago, because here are very difficult to find...Even if you buy them, they a very expensive...

post-62-1191951908_thumb.jpgpost-62-1191951962_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i see signs of cusplets on the sides which makes me think it might be a Carcharocles chubutensis not a meg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No cusplets or signs of them around! Look at it carefully.And that shark you mention;is it worldwide spread? I`ve never heard that name in European books I`ve got... :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-1-1192050459_thumb.jpg

if you look at the area's I circled, those are what I believe to be cusplets the one on the left hand side is almost a double cusplet megs can sometimes have what almost appears to be cusplets but are much more shallow and are less noticeable. chubutensis teeth can be found in most places megs are found it seems there is some debate on whether or not the two lived at the same time or if it was simply the precursor shark to the meg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-1-1192050459_thumb.jpg

if you look at the area's I circled, those are what I believe to be cusplets the one on the left hand side is almost a double cusplet megs can sometimes have what almost appears to be cusplets but are much more shallow and are less noticeable. chubutensis teeth can be found in most places megs are found it seems there is some debate on whether or not the two lived at the same time or if it was simply the precursor shark to the meg.

You're correct, Anson, that there is lack of clear distinction between Carcharocles megalodon and Carcharocles chubutensis. Bretton Kent in his FOSSIL SHARKS OF THE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGION (1994) gives a reasoned argument that these ARE distinct species, while he discusses the unknowns of this taxonomic challenge.

Kent asserts that small (younger sharks) examples from each species are found in the same sediments, though he identifies C. chubutensis as an Early through Middle Miocene species in the Chesapeake Bay exposures. He writes that this species also has been reported from Argentina, Germany, and North Carolina. No mention is made of the Late Miocene phosphates of South Central Florida.

Here is a pair of Carcharocles teeth from the Florida phosphate. I think of them both as C. megalodon. What do you think?

-------------Harry Pristis

post-42-1192127090_thumb.jpg

  • I found this Informative 1

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I would agree that the one on the left is a chubutensis. Also, shark teeth are measured from the tip of the blade to the tip of the root (the longest possible measurement) and anything over 3 inches from bone valley is considered scarce. Great teeth and great color as well

There's no limit to what you can accomplish when you're supposed to be doing something else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...