zekky Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 (edited) I recently got a lot of Bull Canyon Formation (Late Triassic) teeth from N.E. New Mexico. Most are bits and pieces but three of them look fairly interesting. Tooth #1, about 1/4". I have no idea whatsoever what this tooth is. Tooth number is a nice tip, likely a theropod? About 1/3 of inch, looks compressed. Tooth number 3 is missing it's tip but is much bigger. Around 3/4", tooth looks compressed but thick for a Triassic theropod. The posterior serration do end, they go most of the down the tooth but end. The posterior serrations kind of wiggle back and forth down the tooth Edited May 26, 2016 by zekky 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFOOLEY Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Excellent photos. Awesome teeth. "I am glad I shall never be young without wild country to be young in. Of what avail are forty freedoms without a blank spot on the map?" ~Aldo Leopold (1887-1948) New Mexico Museum of Natural History Bulletins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runner64 Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Number 1 looks like a prosauropod tooth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Dente Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 I'm not very familiar with Triassic teeth but the first tooth looks similar to Revueltosaurus. Here is an illustration from "The Late Triassic pseudosuchian Revueltosaurus callenderi and its implications for the diversity of early ornithischian dinosaurs" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 (edited) Not a lot of information out there on triassic teeth from the Bull Canyon Fm it's very scattered in different publications. You can reference material from the Chinle Formation it's basically equivalent. The best source I've found for information is the New Mexico Museum of Natural History Online Publications and Bulletins especially their online digital link. Bulletin 4 is the most comprehensive but illustration of teeth are very limited. http://www.nmnaturalhistory.org/publications/publications-and-bulletins With respect to your first tooth many dealers call this tooth a Prosauropod tooth but Bulletins 21 has an illustration of that tooth. Some similarities but the center ridge is missing. I agree with Al Dente looks more like a Revueltosaurus tooth and a good picture of one is A in the attached figure. Other triassic teeth are also shown for reference. Figure 8 Teeth assigned to Triassic ornithischians. ( A ) Revueltosaurus callenderi premaxillary tooth (NMMNH P- 4959) in lingual view; ( B ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-4959; ( C ) Revueltosaurus hunti holotype tooth (NMMNH P-29356) in labial view; ( D ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-29356; ( E ) cast of Galtonia gibbidens holotype tooth (AMNH 2339) in lingual view; ( F ) Interpretive drawing of AMNH 2339; ( G ) Crosbysaurus harrisae paratype tooth (NMMNH P-34201) in labial view; ( H ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-34201; ( I ) Tecovasaurus murryi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-18192) in labial view; ( J ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-18192; ( K ) Pekinosaurus olseni holotype tooth (YPM 8545) in lingual view; ( L ) Interpretive drawing of YPM 8545; ( M ) Protecovasaurus lucasi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-34196) in labial view; ( N ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-34196; ( O ) Lucianosaurus wildi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-18194) in labial view; ( P ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-18194; ( Q ) Lesothosaurus diagnosticus maxillary teeth (SAM unnumbered) in labial view; ( R ) Interpretive drawing of the teeth of Lesothosaurus . Scale bars = 1 mm ( C , D , G J , M P ), 2 mm ( A , B , E , F , K , L ) and 10 mm ( Q , R ). Q , R from Sereno (1991). B , E , F , I , J , K , L , O and P from Hunt & Lucas (1994). A , C and D from Heckert (2002). G , H , M and N from Heckert (2004). Your other teeth are hard to determine since they are not complete. They are not Coelophysis which are recurved, compressed: Great publication from the Museum of Northern Arizona is bulletin 57 : The Triassic Dinosaur Coelophysis Your other teeth could be Chindesaurus, will see If I can find an photo. Paper of attached figure 8 TRNAdino.pdf Edited May 26, 2016 by Troodon 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekky Posted May 26, 2016 Author Share Posted May 26, 2016 (edited) Tooth number 1 is likely Revultosaurus from the research I've seen. Really a unique tooth to be honest. Edited May 27, 2016 by zekky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekky Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 Here are a bunch more from the lot. I don't expect to ever be able ID them so just enjoy! These start getting a little bigger 1/2" 3/4" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted May 29, 2016 Share Posted May 29, 2016 Troodon, I agree. You really have to invest in some publications to gain an understanding of that stuff. I have a couple of other volumes from NMMNH including Bulletin 21 which has an article on a hybodont shark, Reticulodus, from the Bull Canyon Formation. I also agree that the first tooth is from Revueltosaurus. Yeah, it's tough putting a name to partial teeth especially when they are also worn. Years ago, a friend gave me a sandwich bag full of matrix from the Bull Canyon. It was fun going through it because everything was so different from what I've collected personally (Miocene-Pliocene marine). Revueltosaurus was relatively common in the bag I got. Many were worn or broken. I got a few Reticulodus teeth including one complete one which was cool. I think I ended up with 6-7n Coelophysis teeth with maybe 2-3 decent ones. There were a number of unserrated conical teeth which I figured were amphibian (not sure you can narrow it down to even a genus) and one oddball partial tooth that does look like a prosauropod tooth. I can't remember the name (away from home today). A friend went through even more matrix and he found at least one tooth that looks like it's from one of those early pterosaurs and two teeth that are from early mammals or relatives of early mammals - multiple cusps. Jess Not a lot of information out there on triassic teeth from the Bull Canyon Fm it's very scattered in different publications. You can reference material from the Chinle Formation it's basically equivalent. The best source I've found for information is the New Mexico Museum of Natural History Online Publications and Bulletins especially their online digital link. Bulletin 4 is the most comprehensive but illustration of teeth are very limited.http://www.nmnaturalhistory.org/publications/publications-and-bulletinsWith respect to your first tooth many dealers call this tooth a Prosauropod tooth but Bulletins 21 has an illustration of that tooth. Some similarities but the center ridge is missing.20160526_063303_20160526074259902.jpgI agree with Al Dente looks more like a Revueltosaurus tooth and a good picture of one is A in the attached figure. Other triassic teeth are also shown for reference.Figure-8-Teeth-assigned-to-Triassic-ornithischians-A-Revueltosaurus-callenderi-1.pngFigure 8 Teeth assigned to Triassic ornithischians. ( A ) Revueltosaurus callenderi premaxillary tooth (NMMNH P- 4959) in lingual view; ( B ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-4959; ( C ) Revueltosaurus hunti holotype tooth (NMMNH P-29356) in labial view; ( D ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-29356; ( E ) cast of Galtonia gibbidens holotype tooth (AMNH 2339) in lingual view; ( F ) Interpretive drawing of AMNH 2339; ( G ) Crosbysaurus harrisae paratype tooth (NMMNH P-34201) in labial view; ( H ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-34201; ( I ) Tecovasaurus murryi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-18192) in labial view; ( J ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-18192; ( K ) Pekinosaurus olseni holotype tooth (YPM 8545) in lingual view; ( L ) Interpretive drawing of YPM 8545; ( M ) Protecovasaurus lucasi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-34196) in labial view; ( N ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-34196; ( O ) Lucianosaurus wildi holotype tooth (NMMNH P-18194) in labial view; ( P ) Interpretive drawing of NMMNH P-18194; ( Q ) Lesothosaurus diagnosticus maxillary teeth (SAM unnumbered) in labial view; ( R ) Interpretive drawing of the teeth of Lesothosaurus . Scale bars = 1 mm ( C , D , G J , M P ), 2 mm ( A , B , E , F , K , L ) and 10 mm ( Q , R ). Q , R from Sereno (1991). B , E , F , I , J , K , L , O and P from Hunt & Lucas (1994). A , C and D from Heckert (2002). G , H , M and N from Heckert (2004).Your other teeth are hard to determine since they are not complete. They are not Coelophysis which are recurved, compressed:20160526_052213.jpgGreat publication from the Museum of Northern Arizona is bulletin 57 : The Triassic Dinosaur CoelophysisYour other teeth could be Chindesaurus, will see If I can find an photo.Paper of attached figure 8TRNAdino.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 @Troodon What do you think of the ID of this one? Identified as a Prosauropod Dinosaur Tooth from Bull Canyon Formation, San Miguel County, New Mexico and the centre ridge is present looking at the photos I think. The seller does however go on to say that there are no described prosauropod species from this formation and therefore the species is inconclusive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 I do not believe its dinosaurian but not much is published.. Might be A or C in the illustration. Both have been classified as an ornithischian, are actually a non-dinosaurian archosaur. You might want to ask the seller to show you the evidence to support his ID. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 2 hours ago, Troodon said: I do not believe its dinosaurian but not much is published.. Might be A or C in the illustration. Both have been classified as an ornithischian, are actually a non-dinosaurian archosaur. You might want to ask the seller to show you the evidence to support his ID. Thanks so much, that's what I thought closely fit it a or c however I've checked with the seller re the ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 @Troodon This was their response. Let me know what you think, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Thats happy talk by someone who is trying to support an ID and does not demonstrate any scientific evidence on his claim. Nesbitts 2007 paper actually states "No unambiguous sauropodomorph fossils have been collected from North American Triassic sediments". Show me the technical paper... deal in facts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 11 minutes ago, Troodon said: Thats happy talk by someone who is trying to support an ID and does not demonstrate any scientific evidence on his claim. Nesbitts 2007 paper actually states "No unambiguous sauropodomorph fossils have been collected from North American Triassic sediments". Show me the technical paper... deal in facts Should I go back to him on this or would you advise me to move on due to a lack of scientific evidence provided by the person to support his claim? I guess it depends on how much I actually care about pursuing it further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 @Jaimin013 Have you bought this tooth yet? Even as an unidentified tooth it is very interesting. Maybe someday someone will write a paper that describes this tooth. I believe that Troodon thought that it was possibly a archosaur and not a dinosaur. 1 My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 8 minutes ago, DPS Ammonite said: @Jaimin013 Have you bought this tooth yet? Even as an unidentified tooth it is very interesting. Maybe someday someone will write a paper that describes this tooth. I believe that Troodon thought that it was possibly a archosaur and not a dinosaur. I haven't as it's quite a lot for me to spend right now due to having bought a few fossils this month so have a spending limit unfortunately. Ok thanks regardless of what the tooth might be I think it's still a cool looking tooth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracorex_hogwartsia Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 3 hours ago, Jaimin013 said: @Troodon What do you think of the ID of this one? Identified as a Prosauropod Dinosaur Tooth from Bull Canyon Formation, San Miguel County, New Mexico and the centre ridge is present looking at the photos I think. The seller does however go on to say that there are no described prosauropod species from this formation and therefore the species is inconclusive. I don't claim to be an expert but from my understanding there have been no ornithischian dinosaurs found in the Bull Canyon Formation. I have been buying this type of tooth for years starting back when they were thought to be ornithischian teeth. Since then they have determined that this is the tooth of an Pseudosuchian. This tooth is not from a prosauropod. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Yes its a cool looking tooth buy it if you like it. If he had any scientific evidence to support his claim it would have already been provided. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 @Troodon @DPS Ammonite The seller has responded about the point re: archosaur when I asked him if it could be this rather than a dinosaur tooth. "Archosaur is a derivative title referring to a particular group of reptiles that includes primitive crocodiles and dinosaurs. I do not know of any primitive crocodile/phytosaur that possesses leaf shaped teeth. Please look up the tooth shape of thecondontosaurus to compare. My thesis was on Triassic bones from England so I am pretty confident this is a prosauropod tooth. I suspect this is actually a fabrosaurus tooth" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Yes its a cool looking tooth buy it if you like it. If he had any scientific evidence to support his claim it would have already been provided. Farbrosaur ? This is whats fact.. Parker 2007 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimin013 Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 4 minutes ago, Dracorex_hogwartsia said: I don't claim to be an expert but from my understanding there have been no ornithischian dinosaurs found in the Bull Canyon Formation. I have been buying this type of tooth for years starting back when they were thought to be ornithischian teeth. Since then they have determined that this is the tooth of an Pseudosuchian. This tooth is not from a prosauropod. I think you may be correct. I have just googled pseudosuchian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Stop guessing and throwing names at these type of teeth. Thats what scientific papers do not google Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dracorex_hogwartsia Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 2 minutes ago, Troodon said: Yes its a cool looking tooth buy it if you like it. If he had any scientific evidence to support his claim it would have already been provided. Farbrosaur ? This is whats fact.. Parker 2007 I agree it is a cool looking tooth. It really does look like an ornithischian tooth but unfortunately it's not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPS Ammonite Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 I am not arguing what kind of tooth this is. I have no idea. I found many purported fabrosaurus teeth for sale from the same Bull Canyon Fm. More than one person thinks (they may be wrong) that fabrosaurs are found in New Mexico even if the literature does not support it. Even if a fossil is is not described from a formation, a look at a range of fossils for sale might reveal a new or new to the area fossil. @Troodonplease look at photo of purported fabrosaurus tooth from NM and see what you think it is. Does it look similar to the tooth posted by the OP? Thanks, John My goal is to leave no stone or fossil unturned. See my Arizona Paleontology Guide link The best single resource for Arizona paleontology anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 Im not an expert on the Triassic so I like to refer to current papers written by experts. Heckerts paper "TRIASSIC VERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY IN NEW MEXICO" , November 2015 looks at all the Triassic deposits (including Bull Canyon) in NM and makes no mention of Fabrosaurus. Your tooth is most likely similar to the one already shown. 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