Fat Boy Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 I found this along the James River and have no friggin clue what it is. At first I thought it was a shark spine, then perhaps a swordfish rostrum, but now I don't think so. It almost looks like it has scales on it. I will try and get better pics, but here is what I have so far: End view, propped up on a tissue...sorry for the bad pic. I gotta find a better way to do this, perhaps using clay. The other end: Kevin Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metopocetus Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 I'm going with fossil corn on the cob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 It looks like a conglomerate of coarse, water-rounded grains. "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...
tracer Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 it's very interesting. i'd really like to know what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makoken Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 I found this along the James River and have no friggin clue what it is. At first I thought it was a shark spine, then perhaps a swordfish rostrum, but now I don't think so. It almost looks like it has scales on it. I will try and get better pics, but here is what I have so far: End view, propped up on a tissue...sorry for the bad pic. I gotta find a better way to do this, perhaps using clay. The other end: I believe it looks like a fish mouth plate. What kind ? is the question. Poss. Sturgeon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 looks like it could be calcified shark/skate cartilage perhaps. maybe a piece of sawfish rostrum ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 This reminds me of a pharyngial grinding mill from Lepomis sp., the freshwater sunfish. I've collected quite a few; but, I don't think I have one in my drawer. 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 More sharing options...
Carl Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I fully agree with toothpuller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bmorefossil Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 looks like it could be calcified shark/skate cartilage perhaps. maybe a piece of sawfish rostrum looks to much like rock and not like cartilage but there are similarities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 This reminds me of a pharyngial grinding mill from Lepomis sp., the freshwater sunfish. I've collected quite a few; but, I don't think I have one in my drawer. I think this is a pharyngial grinding mill from some fish, though I don't have an exact ID. Here are a couple of illustrations with which you can compare your find. 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 More sharing options...
Auspex Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I think this is a pharyngial grinding mill from some fish, though I don't have an exact ID. Here are a couple of illustrations with which you can compare your find. Bingo! "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...
non-remanié Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I think the wear pattern and especially the "coarse-grained look" of the underlying material is confusing things. The outer black surface has a distinct pattern and texture, honeycomb-like as in chondrichthyan cartilage. This is what we should be focusing on. Bonefish mouthplates seem to be composed of more randomly placed grinding surfaces and each individual "tooth" is round. It could be from a different type of fish mouthplate perhaps but if its from the Yorktown formation, someone on the forum should have seen something that is a better match. Also I think Fat Boy is definitely experienced enough to not be posting rocks -steve ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I think the wear pattern and especially the "coarse-grained look" of the underlying material is confusing things. The outer black surface has a distinct pattern and texture, honeycomb-like as in chondrichthyan cartilage. This is what we should be focusing on. Bonefish mouthplates seem to be composed of more randomly placed grinding surfaces and each individual "tooth" is round. It could be from a different type of fish mouthplate perhaps but if its from the Yorktown formation, someone on the forum should have seen something that is a better match. Also I think Fat Boy is definitely experienced enough to not be posting rocks -steve Golly, Steve . . . I don't have any preserved chondrichthyan cartilage in my drawer. How about showing us some examples. 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 More sharing options...
Guest bmorefossil Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Golly, Steve . . . I don't have any preserved chondrichthyan cartilage in my drawer. How about showing us some examples. im still not sure thats what it is harry, yours are flat. Now i know your going to say something about it being a differnt species, but I think what he found is older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 im still not sure thats what it is harry, yours are flat. Now i know your going to say something about it being a differnt species, but I think what he found is older. Well, Bmore', I've provided my opinion and also the basis of my opinion; what is it that you are offering? Thanks, but I don't need you to make my arguments for me. LOL You think that "what he found is older." Older than what? Older than boney fish?? Makoken has already suggested it might be a sturgeon mouth-part. How old do you suppose Acipenser is??? What we need here are informed opinions; do you have a similar fossil in your collection? . . . in a book? Here is a scanning electron micrograph from the Welton & Farish book. Notice the scale of the tesserae which average roughly .3 mm (that's 3/10ths of a millimeter) in diameter. Check your ruler to see if you can discern .3 mm. 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 More sharing options...
Guest bmorefossil Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Well, Bmore', I've provided my opinion and also the basis of my opinion; what is it that you are offering? Thanks, but I don't need you to make my arguments for me. LOL yes i see what your saying harry but i was thinking that was not from fish at all and more on the lines of coral. Also after talking with another member we thought it could be shark cartilage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 permit me, please, to take a different, holistic analytical viewpoint regarding why the specimen is not a pharyngeal tooth plate. looking at the specimen as a whole is necessary. the overall shape is long and more or less three-sided, with one end more or less cleanly broken off and the other looks to have one or more "layers" progressively abraded away. if anything, the shape looks like it could be broken off the tail of something. it bears no resemblance whatsoever to the shape of a mouth "plate", on which on the occlusal surface, the sides, and the bottom differ dramatically from each other, and on broken parts shows voids and cancellous-looking bone inside. the black, more "patterned" area on one side of the current specimen grabs the attention, but it should be noted that there are the "tan" granulated areas and at least some modicum of black on ALL sides and even on the ends of the object. this implies that the black may be staining or mineralization that has worn away differentially, as opposed to it being evidence of phosphatic material. also, none of the "granules" seem elevated and protruding to serve as a tooth grinding surface. it should be noted that on pharyngeal mouth plates, where teeth are missing, there are pock marks or sockets where the teeth were. there are no such depressions on the specimen here. the manner of preservation of this specimen also does not seem consistent with "normal" fossilization of bony mouthplates. it has sort of a translucent look to it, almost like some calcite. i don't know what it is, but it certainly didn't mineralize in the same manner as any bone that i've found, which would include a good number of drum mouthplates. the bottom line is that there always seems a strong tendency to "shoehorn" unknowns into knowns, but the one characteristic in this case which seems familiar should not distract from the pieces of the puzzle that in no way fit. i like the pronouncement that the thing is a fossilized corncob. that succinctly and with humor makes the statement that the object has been run through the databases available in one's mind and not gotten a hit on a match, and therefore shall remain unknown until such time as a match is available from exterior data. pound til it fits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
non-remanié Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 FB: Is the black layer only on 2 sides? Whats the third side look like? I think it must only be that coarse grained material, is that correct? ---Wie Wasser schleift den Stein, wir steigen und fallen--- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitbat Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Interestingly...the specimen seems to resemble the basibranchial dentition of an albulid fish. The Albulidae are the bone fishes and I've seen illustrations of similar structures from the Cretaceous . I don't pretend to be an expert on fish dentition but the fossil in question looks very much like the illustrations I have available. Here's a picture from A Pictorial Guide to Fossils by Gerard R. Case: Maybe this will help, Joe Illigitimati non carborundum Fruitbat's PDF Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Pristis Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Interestingly...the specimen seems to resemble the basibranchial dentition of an albulid fish. The Albulidae are the bone fishes and I've seen illustrations of similar structures from the Cretaceous . I don't pretend to be an expert on fish dentition but the fossil in question looks very much like the illustrations I have available.Here's a picture from A Pictorial Guide to Fossils by Gerard R. Case: Maybe this will help, Joe Thanks, Joe. Gerard Case is a fish guy; and, clearly I am not. "Basibranchial dentition" . . . I love it. 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 More sharing options...
Fat Boy Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 Also I think Fat Boy is definitely experienced enough to not be posting rocks FB: Is the black layer only on 2 sides? Whats the third side look like? I think it must only be that coarse grained material, is that correct? Well, I dunno Steve, LOL, I've posted some iron fake fossils before! Anyway, yeah, all three sides have the black scaly look to them. I was at the same location the past three days and lo and behold, I found another chunk of it. The cross section of the first piece was triangular, this one has an indentation to it. I don't think it's a random rock, but if it ain't a fossil, then perhaps it's an artifact of some sort. This area was near Jamestown so it's possible that it's man made? The corn on the cob comment had me cracking up! Here are some pics of the second piece: The first two sides: Larger end view: Smaller end view: Kevin Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bmorefossil Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 wow this one is even more interesting, whatever they are im going to say they are fossils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Boy Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 Here's another view: Kevin Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bmorefossil Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Here's another view: this one has really great detail, Ill post some pictures of my shark cartilage , its starting to look alot like what you are finding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Boy Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 this one has really great detail, Ill post some pictures of my shark cartilage , its starting to look alot like what you are finding. That would be cool, both if it is cartilage and for posting pics of yours! Thanks! I have a lot of pics to share from my trip...these things were just my question marks. Those should show up in the trip report section in the next day or two. Kevin Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now