GuidesMagazineShopBuy FossilsJoin Hunts
seager07
Any ideas on what this could be? Found in chalk at Coulsdon.

Could be nothing, but unusual to see chalk like this

Thanks
Rick Click image for larger version - Name: 76363305-D635-4B6E-B686-2E6F10D76695.jpeg, Views: 48, Size: 2.20 MB Click image for larger version - Name: 79FD1EA6-693C-48FF-9061-1D45ADCD04BC.jpeg, Views: 50, Size: 1.62 MB Click image for larger version - Name: 3CA5438D-825A-40C0-B1FE-3A483A1BE6DC.jpeg, Views: 47, Size: 1.64 MB Click image for larger version - Name: A4DBC957-D778-4B22-804B-787AC93A2674.png, Views: 47, Size: 4.81 MB
Quote 0 0
prep01
Hello Rick, I'm not convinced to be honest that it is a sponge, but without prepping it and having it 'in my hand' it's very difficult. Thinking aloud - is it harder than the surrounding matrix? It also doesn't help that the chalk range is large (72 - 90 myo) in that area, covering 3 stages in that area!
Colin Huller
Quote 0 0
seager07
Thanks Prep01.

It is definitely a little softer than the surrounding matrix, a lot like the sea urchin's I have previously found. 

I'm sure this is something other than chalk. I may try to clean it up a little more and re-post some photos. Hopefully this will help to identify it further...

Thank you for taking a look. It was most appreciated

Regards,
Rick


Quote 0 0
Gerald Gibson
Hello Prep01:

This looks like sponge-like or coral-like fossils I found in South Laguna, California.  They are Miocene in age.  What leads me to believe that they are sponge is the fact they are mixed with pelecypod fossils.  Please check out the attached file (the circled fossils).

---- Phacops Click image for larger version - Name: image018.jpg, Views: 25, Size: 80.16 KB
Quote 0 0
prep01
The pics don't enlarge very well and having no Miocene here in the UK I am reluctant to say anything! I suggest you do your own internet research - good luck and keep us informed.
Colin Huller
Quote 0 0
seager07
prep01 wrote:
The pics don't enlarge very well and having no Miocene here in the UK I am reluctant to say anything! I suggest you do your own internet research - good luck and keep us informed.


Thanks both Prep and Gerald. It does look very much like the two at the bottom of your last photo.

I appreciate both of your time. I will keep searching and keep you posted.

Thanks,
Rick
Quote 0 0
Weald on Bed
I'd say it looks like an eroded specimen of Ventriculites - Cretaceous sponges similar in form to the modern 'glass sponge'. 
For comparison, here's a slightly fresher specimen I found at Overstrand a couple of years ago:
vent.jpg
It's possible that the structure of the ostia might be clearer if you removed some of the matrix, though you can never tell with chalk.

Stuart
Quote 0 0
seager07
Weald on Bed wrote:
I'd say it looks like an eroded specimen of Ventriculites - Cretaceous sponges similar in form to the modern 'glass sponge'. 
For comparison, here's a slightly fresher specimen I found at Overstrand a couple of years ago:
vent.jpg
It's possible that the structure of the ostia might be clearer if you removed some of the matrix, though you can never tell with chalk.

Stuart


That’s a great specimen Stuart. And could possibly be the answer to what I have found.

I will remove some more of the matrix, clean it up and post some more photos once it’s done.

Thanks for your help Stuart. Have a great day

Rick
Quote 0 0
MicroFossilMan
Gerald Gibson wrote:
Hello Prep01:

 pelecypod

---- Phacops

Now there's a word you don't hear very often, at least not in the UK! Is it in common usage among US geologists?
MFM
Quote 0 0
MicroFossilMan
Weald on Bed wrote:
I'd say it looks like an eroded specimen of Ventriculites - Cretaceous sponges similar in form to the modern 'glass sponge'. 
For comparison, here's a slightly fresher specimen I found at Overstrand a couple of years ago:

It's possible that the structure of the ostia might be clearer if you removed some of the matrix, though you can never tell with chalk.

Stuart

Very nice specimen! I have one, from the Sewerby Sponge Beds of East Yorkshire, but not as good as yours. The "holes" on seager07's specimen look a bit rounder to me, so maybe something else, but not sure ...
MFM
Quote 0 0
Dirty Pete
I remember using Pelecypod in the 70's.  Pelecypod, lamellibranch sound far more scholarly than 'bivalve'
but I guess with bivalve you don't need to do Latin and Greek courses first.

Pete 
Quote 0 0
Weald on Bed
MicroFossilMan wrote:

Very nice specimen! I have one, from the Sewerby Sponge Beds of East Yorkshire, but not as good as yours. The "holes" on seager07's specimen look a bit rounder to me, so maybe something else, but not sure ...


You may be right about the shape of the ostia - though there does seem to be a lot of variation within the genus (and at the gross morphology level, within species). There are some nice examples on the Hanover Museum/APH website at http://www.cretaceous.de/Ventriculites.html
Quote 0 0
MicroFossilMan
Weald on Bed wrote:

 There are some nice examples on the Hanover Museum/APH website at http://www.cretaceous.de/Ventriculites.html


An excellent site. I love the sponge that still has its roots! I never found anything like that.
MFM
Quote 0 0
MicroFossilMan
Dirty Pete wrote:
I remember using Pelecypod in the 70's.  Pelecypod, lamellibranch sound far more scholarly than 'bivalve'
but I guess with bivalve you don't need to do Latin and Greek courses first.
Pete 

I was only ever taught lamellibranch (in the 60s), but I discovered pelecypod later, and I still use it when telling people about the "pods" [smile] I vaguely remember that it was the preferred Victorian term???
MFM
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