2ynpigo Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 These are Pennsylvanian fossils, the left from the Los Moyos Limestone east of Albuquerque, and the right from the Madera Formation in the Jemez Mountains. I'm wondering if these are cephalopods. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 5, 2009 Author Share Posted July 5, 2009 A couple more photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 With some randomness to the coiling, and no segmenting, they look like worm tubes to me. "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...
Shamalama Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 Agree.... very little ornamentation or evidence of suturing that I can see in the pics. Not gastropods because the tubes look too narrow and do not progress in width very much. Probably not Crinoid holdfasts either as again, no evidence of segmentation. Nice examples of worm tubes tho... the right hand one especially. -Dave __________________________________________________ Geologists on the whole are inconsistent drivers. When a roadcut presents itself, they tend to lurch and weave. To them, the roadcut is a portal, a fragment of a regional story, a proscenium arch that leads their imaginations into the earth and through the surrounding terrain. - John McPheeIf I'm going to drive safely, I can't do geology. - John McPheeCheck out my Blog for more fossils I've found: http://viewsofthemahantango.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 i agree that the presented fossils appear to be some sort of "worm tubes". having said that, i did not find examples of similar fossils in my reference information on the pennsylvanian of texas. i did, however, find an article that might provide several leads regarding what direction to pursue in attempting to identify the things, if in fact they represent worm tubes. article hopefully it might be of interest. regards, tracer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommabetts Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 They are cool looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Cepholopod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 Three votes for worm tubes and one for cephalopods. I hadn't thought about worm tubes, so I'll look into this possibility some more. Thanks for link to the paper on worm tubes. There doesn't appear to be any evidence of segmentation. I looked into one of my references and there are a few genera of gastropods that have whorls that don't contact adjacent whorls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Three votes for worm tubes and one for cephalopods. I hadn't thought about worm tubes, so I'll look into this possibility some more. Thanks for link to the paper on worm tubes.There doesn't appear to be any evidence of segmentation. I looked into one of my references and there are a few genera of gastropods that have whorls that don't contact adjacent whorls. Please have a look at the near bottom of the page. Gyrocone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Please have a look at the near bottom of the page.Gyrocone lookin' GOOD, man! where can you find one this time of night? gyro cone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 lookin' GOOD, man! where can you find one this time of night? gyro cone A Greek Restaurant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 JP - the link didn't work to "Gyrocone". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 JP - the link didn't work to "Gyrocone". Figure 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 8, 2009 Author Share Posted July 8, 2009 Figure 15 OK. Got it to work. So it looks like cephalopod could still be in the running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 OK. Got it to work. So it looks like cephalopod could still be in the running. Sir, those little guy's are hard to find and yours are in good shape. See if yours have chamber lines on them and then you will know. Never mind, they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 You're certainly right that they are uncommon. BTW - forgot to mention that there is a trilobite pygidium exposed on the matrix in the first photo, specimen on the left from the Los Moyos Limestone. Preservation is so so. Purely coincidence -- there is a "famous" Pennsylvanian-age trilobite locality not far from where this piece came from. When it gets cooler, I'll be looking for trilobites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest solius symbiosus Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Though, somewhat, unfamiliar with upper Paleozoic stuff, they appear to be worm tubes. A scale would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ynpigo Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 .... A scale would be nice. They are a bit smaller than a quarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest solius symbiosus Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 They are a bit smaller than a quarter. How did I miss that??? I guess you can call me "Mr. Obvious". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpbowden Posted July 12, 2009 Share Posted July 12, 2009 How did I miss that??? I guess you can call me "Mr. Obvious". How you been doing, seems like we haunt this site at different times. 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