Hello,

This appears to be a rock rather than a fossil.

Unfortunately, I believe this is stone rather than bone.

Hello,

Thank you for sharing! Unfortunately, it will be difficult to verify this is a fossil without some more information and photos. Since it is a landscape boulder, it will likely be very hard or impossible to determine where the rock originated from. Knowing where it came from would be extremely important for determining the age and what…[Read more]

Hi Pete, I think you are correct. The tooth appears to be from the marine crocodile, Thecachampsa. The fossils at Holden Beach come from multiple stratigraphic layers, so it is difficult to narrow down the age of your tooth and the specific identity.

You may also want to compare your tooth with mosasaur teeth, which can also be found at Holden.…[Read more]

<span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@bm”>@bmacfadden</span> Hey Bruce, can you confirm the ID on this tooth?

The image is too blurry to tell what it is, but it does not appear to be teeth.

This appears to be an ironstone concretion.

Hi Sammy,

This is not a tooth.

Hi Sammy,

We’ll need more photos to confirm an ID, but it doesn’t look like a bone to me.

Looks like a scallop impression in limestone.

Honestly, some parts of it look like a limestone or dolomite and other parts of it look like chert. It may not be from the Avon Park Formation, but it could be from a unit that is the same age in Alabama. This website mentions the “Claiborn/Jackson Group” which include “fossiliferous chert and limestone boulders”.…[Read more]

Hi David, Rachel is 100% correct. What you are seeing is a calcite vein within the rock.