foxtail Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 There is a spot in MT where I frequently go to get ammonites and fish scale fossils. There are two layers of fossil bearing strata, but with the hundreds of scales and dozens of ammonites, I have never found any evidence of fish except for the scales. Does anyone know why there would be countless scales of different species and sizes, yet no bone or skeletons at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krazy Rick Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I wonder if those "scales", aren't from plants & not fish perhaps ? the lepidodendron clubmoss leaf, for instance,will have a similar pattern. That would explain lack of fish evidence. - Do you have any pics ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarleysGh0st Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 Do you know the geological age of the formation you're collecting from, foxtail? Perhaps these scales are from placoderms, which predate the evolution of bony fishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxtail Posted November 16, 2013 Author Share Posted November 16, 2013 I am pretty sure they are scales as they are called that in the book by Feldman and the fact that I find ammonites in the same pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 Scales for sure! Nice! The lack of preserved bones at the site may be due to the depositional environment, or to the particular preservational charactistcs of the sediment. Taphonomy is as much art as science. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxtail Posted November 16, 2013 Author Share Posted November 16, 2013 Apparently this is part of the Mowry Shale which is Cretacious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichW9090 Posted November 17, 2013 Share Posted November 17, 2013 Cycloid scales. Don't know why they would never be associated, unless there is some reworking of the sediments. The plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxtail Posted November 17, 2013 Author Share Posted November 17, 2013 The ones shown are the size of the end of a AA battery. There are some that are very small, and some that are over an inch long. Different shapes too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Nice scales! Scales are lighter than bones could be just differential sorting when they were deposited. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"_ Carl Sagen No trees were killed in this posting......however, many innocent electrons were diverted from where they originally intended to go. " I think, therefore I collect fossils." _ Me "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."__S. Holmes "can't we all just get along?" Jack Nicholson from Mars Attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Fish bones are fragile. Even with a large fish, what survives of the skeleton is usually a few teeth, maybe a vertebra, and less often a skull piece and the hypural. In the Aguajito Shale Member of the Monterey Shale (Carmel area, California) what you find of fish are mainly just isolated scales (generally barely visible, shiny flecks). A rare find is a section of articulated vertebrae but only as an imprint. If the sun isn't hitting the rock at the right angle, you might overlook it. Even in the Green River Formation where you can find excellent skeletons, you will also find specimens at various stages of disarticulation and disintegration (like still photos of explosions). There is a spot in MT where I frequently go to get ammonites and fish scale fossils. There are two layers of fossil bearing strata, but with the hundreds of scales and dozens of ammonites, I have never found any evidence of fish except for the scales. Does anyone know why there would be countless scales of different species and sizes, yet no bone or skeletons at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsonsian Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I find the same type of scales here in NW Wyoming. I also believe this to be the Mowry Shale. Here are a few photos. I have found three teeth with them, and would be happy to post pics if anyone is interested. Once in A while there is a strange inclusion that I can't identify, but then I am completely new to this. Your post gives me hope that maybe I'll find an ammonite here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Evidently fish scales are preserved in great frequency across the Mowry Shale and typically referred to as the "fish-scale beds". Mowry does have a few opportunities to find some teeth and other fish remains that are detailed in this excellent monograph: Reeside, J.B., & Cobban, W.A. (1960) Studies of the Mowry Shale (Cretaceous) and Contemporary Formations in the United States and Canada. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 355:1-126 OPEN ACCESS PDF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 This post is years old now, but I'd like to add to it. I've been poking around in the mowry shale south of the Yellowstone basin, 50 miles or so. Absolutely fish scales everywhere, ammonites fairly common. Good specimens, are difficult. Fish bone and teeth i had only ever read about, however keep searching I collected an ammonite last week and found this tooth while looking over the matrix around it. It's 4.56mm and was incredibly difficult to see. I prepared it a little bit to bring It out. (Crudly this was my first preparation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fossildude19 Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 49 minutes ago, Curtis said: This post is years old now, but I'd like to add to it. I've been poking around in the mowry shale south of the Yellowstone basin, 50 miles or so. Absolutely fish scales everywhere, ammonites fairly common. Good specimens, are difficult. Fish bone and teeth i had only ever read about, however keep searching I collected an ammonite last week and found this tooth while looking over the matrix around it. It's 4.56mm and was incredibly difficult to see. I prepared it a little bit to bring It out. (Crudly this was my first preparation) Hello, Curtis, and Welcome to the Forum. Are you sure that is a tooth? The picture is not close enough to tell, but I can't make out any enamel on the item. Neat scales, though. Tim - VETERAN SHALE SPLITTER VFOTM --- APRIL - 2015 IPFOTM -- MAY - 2024 _________________________________________________________________________________ "In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks." John Muir ~ ~ ~ ~ ><))))( *> About Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 I am wondering if that is a tooth. we have the same Mowry Shale down here and it is full of fish scales. Bones and teeth can be found but are always negative impressions, not the actual specimen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fossilized6s Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Maybe a type of cephalopod tentacle claw? ~Charlie~ "There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why.....i dream of things that never were, and ask why not?" ~RFK ->Get your Mosasaur print ->How to spot a fake Trilobite ->How to identify a CONCRETION from a DINOSAUR EGG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Maybe this is a bit better image. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 Hmmmm.... Unusual. there is very little 3D stuff in the Mowry that I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts