Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 19, 2018 at 1:49 pm #34876Sean MoranKeymaster
I think Evan is right on. Certainly looks like White River preservation to me. To narrow it down, it is the lower right jaw with the first and second molars of an oreodont, not Mesohippus. Without knowing where in the White River stratigraphy it came from and with no premolars present it’s hard to say which oreodont species it is, but like Evan said it could be Merycoidodon sp. or possibly Miniochoerus sp.
June 21, 2017 at 11:08 am #24027Sean MoranKeymasterSorry @muhammad-usman not sure I’m going to be of much help here either. I’m pretty confident saying it’s a fragment of a mammal lower jaw bone with two roots still in the mandible. Unfortunately, without the crown of the teeth preserved I’m not familiar enough with fossils from the Siwaliks to go much further than that.
June 21, 2017 at 11:04 am #24026Sean MoranKeymasterHard to say since it’s a little beat up, but it’s certainly an astragalus of an artiodactyl (the class that contains camels, deer, bovids, etc.). I’m not great with artiodactyl astragali…they all look pretty similar to me, but I’m actually thinking it’s a little big for a deer. Camel seems like a reasonable ID.
October 18, 2016 at 1:21 pm #14274Sean MoranKeymaster@lance-comfort I think it’s going to be tricky to identify much further with the bone being sheared and worn. From what I’ve seen in the photos I’m still sticking with an artiodactyl proximal phalanx, but I’m my no mean convinced. It might help to go to our collections website database (http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/vertpaleo-search) check the “Only results with images” box at the top, enter “Mammalia” into the Class field, and “phalanx” into the nature of specimen field (while also changing equals to contains in the drop down). That should give you some more images to compare to. I took a quick glance, but it’s hard to compare the images of your fossil without having the bone in my hand. Hope that helps!
October 12, 2016 at 4:45 pm #13675Sean MoranKeymaster@lance-comfort This is another ID I’m going to struggle with. I can say with almost 100% certainty that it is a proximal phalanx, and not a metacarpal. That said, it take us into a similar vein of issues as the rib fragment…phalanges can also be tricky to identify. My first thought is that it sort of looks like it’s from an artiodactyl. A few more photos of other angles might help us to get closer, though!
October 10, 2016 at 1:22 pm #13551Sean MoranKeymasterHi Lee! @lcone
Looks like a left, camelid astragalus to me. I’ll talk to Aldo, our resident artiodactyl expert, to see if he can narrow it down any further, but I think you’re definitely on the right track.
One easily way to compare different astragali is to go to our database website (http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/vertpaleo-search) and:
- Check “Only Results with Images” at the top of the page
- Enter Artiodactyla in the Order field (or Mammalia within the Class field for a broader search)
- Enter astragalus in the Nature of Specimen field and select “contains” in the drop down menu
That should bring up all the images we have of a given specimen in our collections, with information on taxonomy and skeletal element.
October 6, 2016 at 11:40 am #12991Sean MoranKeymasterHi Lance @lance-comfort,
Unfortunately I am not going to be able to be much of a help here. Mammalian ribs are notoriously difficult to identify down to any precise lower taxonomic level. For example, out of the 400,000+ fossil we have here at the FLMNH none have been positively identified as Castoroides (in fact, only two have been identified as beaver at all, and they are complete ribs). So, I guess what I am trying to say is it might be, but it might not be… sorry I can’t be more helpful!
Sean
February 29, 2016 at 12:48 pm #3354Sean MoranKeymaster@bmacfadden, I extended the invite to Julie, Jessica, and Jennifer. Hopefully they will join and help to continue the conversation.
@taorminalepore, it is always to great to hear all of the work that was put into the curriculum is paying off in big ways!November 16, 2015 at 3:54 pm #2572Sean MoranKeymasterThese look great, @bmacfadden! I think there are quite a few specimens in there that will be of use in the study sets. If I remember correctly the color of the enamel tended to be a deep gray with a lighter gray to tan root. Does this sound right, @vperez? I can’t remember if we saw any teeth on the trip we took to Capitola.
November 16, 2015 at 3:48 pm #2571Sean MoranKeymasterBruce, I think Megalodon and Hexanchus would be great to include in the Capitola study. It would be beneficial for the students to be introduced to vast differences in shark dental morphology. I am just a little worried that we are going to struggle to find enough Hexanchus specimens to include, but perhaps not.
Re: Capitola crab claws. I am not sure if brought any back to the east coast with me…and if I did how many. Let me poke around a little bit and I will get back to you.
-
AuthorPosts