GuidesMagazineShopBuy FossilsJoin Hunts
Steve Whatley
Hi all

This tooth was amongst my finds at Beltinge in Kent. As you can see, it's very small and so it's difficult to pick out detail in a photo. Using a hand lens I can see it has no striations on the cusp. The cutting edge extends to the side cusps. It's hard to tell if the side cusps are complete or have been broken off, probably the latter. The root is worn, so any evidence of a nutrient groove has been lost. The image shows both labial and lingual sides of the tooth. Hope you can help. Click image for larger version - Name: Mystery.png, Views: 49, Size: 330.63 KB
Quote 0 0
FossilHunter06
Could it possibly be a striatolamia macrota shark tooth? I thought that it might be this because it has a similar structure where the sharp section of the tooth is quite skinny and is not very big. I had a look at past UKAFH blogs on past visits to Beltinge, Herne Bay in Kent and one of the leaders had found a shark tooth which looked like the one in your picture. If your tooth was to be from a striatoatlamia macrota shark then the age of it would be around 61.7 to 10.3 million years old (Early Paleocene to Late Miocene). I might not be correct at all but I thought that I might as well have an attempt at identifying it because this information might get you closer to identifying your tooth. I hope this information will help you.
Quote 0 0
prep01
t does look like a S. mucrota, but that is small!
Colin Huller
Quote 0 0
Steve Whatley
Hi FossilHunter06

Thanks for your reply. I'm pretty sure it's not S.macrota as there are no striations on the main cusp, and the cusplets are in the wrong position for what looks like an anterior tooth. But you're right, it's around 54 million years old - it's from the late Palaeocene or early Eocene.
Quote 0 0
FossilHunter06
Glad I could help with something! I hope you identify it soon! Good luck!
Quote 0 0
Steve Whatley
I originally assigned this to Carcharius hopei but the position of the cusplets looked wrong. It's the same problem for S.macrota, plus there is no hint of striations.

So now I'm thinking it's a Sylvestrilamia teretidens where the cusplets have been broken off. The position of the cusplets would be right, and S.teretidens doesn't always have striations. What do you think?
Quote 0 0
FossilHunter06
I have looked at Sylvestrilamia teretidens teeth and it does look similar to your tooth but I think there are some differences.
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