 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / February 2004Please help id fossils (Yorkshire coast UK)
Hi, Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? http://www.scarlettmist.com/FOSSIL/fossils.htm Obviously some are wood, others are shells etc but I'd love to know more details, I don't have any good enough books to id them from (neither does my local library) and I've googled for hours and am still not much wiser! I have loads more odd fossils too which I have not photographed as yet. My email address is on the webpage linked above, Thanks for any help, Hayley Fossil 1: ? Fossil 2: Burrow of some sort. (Planolites?) Fossil 3-5: Coral Fossil 6: ? Fossil 7: Clam (Pelecypod). It appears to be a cast of the interior of the shell. Fossil 8: Snail (Gastropod) Because of heavy wear, the fossils probably aren't identifiable as to Genus-species. <pb> -- > Hi, > Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Thanks for any help, > Hayley > Hi, > Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? > http://www.scarlettmist.com/FOSSIL/fossils.htm > Obviously some are wood, others are shells etc but I'd love to know more Phillip Bigelow's identifications in this thread are likely accurate. I would add that the specimen listed as Fossil #1 could be a rudist, an extinct bivalve. Fossils From Pleistocene Lake Manix, California http://esmeralda.topcities.com/manix/manixlakebeds.html > > Hi, > > Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Fossils From Pleistocene Lake Manix, California > http://esmeralda.topcities.com/manix/manixlakebeds.html It dawned on me after I posted that probably the best person to consult regarding rudists is Dr. Thomas Steuber through his web page at http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/sediment/steuber.htm ; Dr. Steuber is a leading rudist specialist. Rudists, of course, appear in the geologic record during the late Jurassic--and that age is indeed present at Cayton Bay, where your specimen was collected. It sure looks like a typical "elevator" rudist...but then again, the majority of your specimens are poorly preserved: paleontological mimicry could well be working its mischief here, admittedly. Anyhow, check out an image of a Cretaceous rudist from Texas at http://www.scarlettmist.com/FOSSIL/Fossil_1_image1.htm . Fossils From The Kettleman Hills, California http://mywebpage.netscape.com/inyo1/kf/kettleman.html >Hi, >Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Thanks for any help, >Hayley Number 1 looks like it might (and I emphasize "might") be a fragment from the shell of a very large pecten. Pecten are bivalve mollusks. The shell used in the logo for Shell Oil in the US is a pecten. I have a specimen of Chesapecten from the Miocene of Maryland that is broken into fragments some of which look much like your fossil. But about half the size. The complete Chesapecten is about 10cm across. I'd guess that if your fossil is a pecten fragment, the complete shell might be 20cm or more across. > >Hi, > >Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I'd guess that if your fossil is a pecten fragment, the complete shell > might be 20cm or more across. I was thinking, along with the rudist idea stated elsewhere in this thread (and if I'm mistaken on that identification, it will, of course, be one of the "rudist" paleontological awakenings I've ever experienced...), that the specimen could possibly be a fragment of a Pinna (Carboniferous to Recent), a Mytiloid bivalve of the Superfamily Pinnacea. Fossils From Pleistocene Lake Manix, California http://esmeralda.topcities.com/manix/manixlakebeds.html > Hi, > Could anyone possibly shed any light on what any of these fossils are? > http://www.scarlettmist.com/FOSSIL/fossils.htm Thank you to everyone who has replied, I am going to read your replies more closely now and have a look at the web links too. I had thought that #3 & 5 were tree bark or wood of some sort, I had not considered that they could actually be corals. I had no real idea at all what #1 could be, I am embarrased to admit that I initially thought it might be plant or leaf stems! Thank you once again for all your help, it is much appreciated :-) Hayley |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.