GuidesMagazineShopBuy FossilsJoin Hunts
Maria62
Hello! I picked up these stones in Eastbourne and I would like to know what caused the markings/imprints? They are probably nothing but I thought i’d ask

Thank you in advance

Maria Click image for larger version - Name: B30E0F20-13CA-4690-91E0-BDF86696678F.jpeg, Views: 36, Size: 181.87 KB Click image for larger version - Name: 91A4F2EF-FA4E-43F0-969E-18F67DCA8C99.jpeg, Views: 37, Size: 266.37 KB Click image for larger version - Name: EDD016A3-2861-44A4-945C-012B004117BB.jpeg, Views: 42, Size: 106.46 KB
Quote 0 0
Barrow Museum
Photo 1: Flint with fragments of a bivalve shell (probably Volviceramus).  This shell has a fibrous structure and consequentlybreaks up easily after the animal has died.  The flint originated as nodular bands in the Chalk, which was laid down in the Late Cretaceous, making it around 80-90 million years old.  You will often find these called Inoceramus, the old name.  There are lots of illustrations here: http://oceansofkansas.com/Inoceramids.html , particularly Fig. 3 from Plate 5 of Parkinson's Organic Remains of a Former World (1811) which illustrates a chunk of one of these shells and showing the fibrous structure and how he shell thickness varies a great deal (eg your specimen)

Photo 2:  This is just a fracture in what looks like flint - not a fossil.

Photo 3:  This is more difficult to determine from the photo alone, but the shape looks like it is the impression of six individual plates from the ambulacral zone of a regular echinoid (sea urchin) which would be consistent with this also being a piece of Upper Cretaceous flint, though the discolouration makes me unsure of this.  Nevertheless, these sea urchins have been around for a very long time and are still extant today.
Quote 0 0
prep01
Hello Maria, as I'm sure you know, these are all flint nodules around 80 million years old. I have tried to enlarge and tweak your photos, but to no avail I'm afraid. The middle one is certainly 'banded flint' and possibly the other two as well. The first photo may contain partial fossils, but I would need closer, clearer photos from several angles and a close up of the top part of the last photo. Even then, I might not be able to help you much more!
Colin Huller
Quote 0 0
Maria62
Thank you all very much! :-)
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...


Discussions on fossils, fossil hunting, rocks, locations, and identifying your finds.
(C)opyright 2019 - UKGE Ltd and UK Fossils - Contact us