Oh-Man Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 To back MikeD's comment up a couple of guys from the museum showed us a whole cuttlefish fossil and the "beaks" we are finding there appear to be at the pointy end of the cuttlefish vice in the mouth. This supports the UK comment about Belosaepia. Anyway, there are certainly beaks out there as we saw on the Waco pit trip. Chase, either way, they are still good and semi-rare finds! What is geology? "Rocks for Jocks!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh-Man Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Well they are beaks, but from the ancestors of modern day cuttlefish. They are certainly mouth parts which came in pairs--lower and upper. I'm not for sure which is which, but my hypothesis is that the beak without the crown is a lower, and the others I have found are all uppers.I'm going to sort my sift material/look it once over from now on before I sift it because I'm afraid I damaged 3 of the 4 while sifting them out. I saved the material that fell through and am currently processing it to be sorted through (washed, dried, soak in H2O2, washed again, now I'm allowing it to dry to be H2O2 dowsed again one last time before the final rinse), so hopefully I'll find what broke off of them. It's hard to find these and even harder to dig, sift, transport, and clean them in one piece, as with just about everything from this site. One of the guys recommended letting the matrix dry for at least a week before hitting it with peroxide again. I'm drying mine out now... What is geology? "Rocks for Jocks!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverphoenix Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 I guess I should go easier on the matrix--wouldn't want to make anything more fragile than it already is I've seen a lot of modern day squid beaks and these seem to look the part. I have no idea what other use they could serve the cuttlefish--it would be interesting to do a comparison to the skeletal parts of their modern day counterparts. And what do you mean semi-rare? lol if they were only semi-rare, I would have a dozen by now...then again, I only discovered the right layer to dig in since the last 4 trips, so y'all may have found a good number by now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Newman Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ChrisThey are from the Eocene. In fact it no wonder that they look similiar to the Belosaepia you get in the Barton Beds or Bracksham because that is what they are, specically Belosaepia ungla. From a stratigraphic point of view the Stone City Formation is probably slightly below the Barton Beds that you are familiar with. JKFoam That’s interesting Jim. In fact at Barton its self Belosaepia were thought to occur but had not been recorded historically, then we found 4 in one shell lens!!! Subsequently we have found another isolated specimen, as far as we are aware these are the only specimens collected from Barton. In the Bracklesham formation [lower than Barton] Belosaepia are not uncommon, one bed at Selsey is even known as the ‘Belosaepia bed’. Some of the specimens are extraordinary, with huge ornate hoods behind the beak – although I am not entirely convinced they are beaks at all!! If anyone is interested I will try and make some images, some of the Bracklesham are extraordinary beasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 i believe the "huge, ornate hoods" basal to the beaks are just usually broken off the extremely fragile, leached fossils at stone city. my son found one there that had been washed mostly out of the matrix by flood water and it had most of the hood you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkfoam Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 i believe the "huge, ornate hoods" basal to the beaks are just usually broken off the extremely fragile, leached fossils at stone city. my son found one there that had been washed mostly out of the matrix by flood water and it had most of the hood you describe. Yes, I also found one that had a significant amount of the ornate hood still attached. Unfortunately, after 30 years and 3 long distance moves the hood did not survive intact. As I remember the ornate structure was several rows of small spikes that I always presumed help anchor the beak to the soft tissue of the critter. It will be interesting to see pictures of the UK Belosaepia. Below is a picture of the specimen as it survived all my moves. Also the specimen shown was not collected at the Stone City location but at a Cook Mountain Formation locality. The Eocene is my favorite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnJ Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Well, I just learned tonight that these Eocene squid beaks may not be beaks after all.See what Dr. Tom Yancey has to say HERE. Great info...thanks, MikeD & JKFoam. The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true. - JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Newman Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Yes, I also found one that had a significant amount of the ornate hood still attached. Unfortunately, after 30 years and 3 long distance moves the hood did not survive intact. As I remember the ornate structure was several rows of small spikes that I always presumed help anchor the beak to the soft tissue of the critter. It will be interesting to see pictures of the UK Belosaepia. Below is a picture of the specimen as it survived all my moves. Also the specimen shown was not collected at the Stone City location but at a Cook Mountain Formation locality. I will try and take some images over the weekend, a couple of the ones from Bracklesham have even more hood than the ones illustrated in that most interesting paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 yeah, i knew all along they weren't beaks <looking around quickly> but the "ornate hood", if it isn't gonna be called that, could just as well have been called a dos equis as a corona. i have discovered from the research an important characteristic of the social behavior of belosapianesque critters. they did not get married to each other. prong/horned squid elope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkfoam Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 That was really interesting information from Dr. Tom Yancy about the posterior prong of the Belosaepia. It seems I am forever picking up the wrong end of the stick, so to speak. JKFoam The Eocene is my favorite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 That was really interesting information from Dr. Tom Yancy about the posterior prong of the Belosaepia.It seems I am forever picking up the wrong end of the stick, so to speak. JKFoam It is an interesting view and explains (to me at least) why these "beaks" look different that others I have seen, fossil and living. I have met Chris Garvie a few times (the guy that collected the specimens) and he is very thorough in his collecting and research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommabetts Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Love the beaks, congrats on your finds. 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