Ordovician in Tennessee (Help!)

The hidden link vs the exposed link is more esthetics than anything else and sometimes can be missed as a link. There is no requirement to make it pretty :biggrin2:

I will never, ever be able to see trace or touch marks! I do think I could find fossils in Hajar's last trek since they seem to be openly laying around just waiting for someone to spot them :biggrin2: and I am hoping to find some in the spring but I sure I will not "see" the touch and go markings :oops:
 
...and the first three here, show possible cone and arms/tentacale marks
 

Attachments

  • conv_297598.jpg
    conv_297598.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 86
  • conv_297599.jpg
    conv_297599.jpg
    2.3 MB · Views: 111
  • conv_297600.jpg
    conv_297600.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 90
The second pic. below struck me as possible touch? All of the pics. above were a little scattered and more defined than the next few which cover the entire surface of a few of these big rocks.
 

Attachments

  • conv_297601.jpg
    conv_297601.jpg
    2.5 MB · Views: 78
  • conv_297602.jpg
    conv_297602.jpg
    714.2 KB · Views: 65
Please note that I am using the word possible A LOT! With the masses of brachiopods in these rocks it looks like a good place to graze for a chephalopod. :biggrin2:
 

Attachments

  • conv_297603.jpg
    conv_297603.jpg
    2.5 MB · Views: 83
  • conv_297604.jpg
    conv_297604.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 66
dwhatley;169270 said:
I will never, ever be able to see trace or touch marks! I do think I could find fossils in Hajar's last trek since they seem to be openly laying around just waiting for someone to spot them :biggrin2: and I am hoping to find some in the spring but I sure I will not "see" the touch and go markings :oops:


I'm going to wait for Kevin or Hajar to look at these (I may not be seeing them either) I think that something had to make these marks on the seabed, and to me they look like "tentacular markings", given all the brachiopods in the matrix I would think grazing. I may be :oops: again after the pics. are looked at by the pros. But if I don't ask I will never know the answer.:hmm:
 
Terri;169276 said:
.....D? What happened to my quote wrap thing?

Fixed Terri, you probably deleted the bracket or it's just a glitch??? I just did a reply with quote on D's post, copied the first set of brackets, and pasted it to the front of the quote on your post. :smile:

I have seen a picture in a book or paper that is almost identical to your trace fossils, it too was regarded as tentacle touch marks. Now to just remember where it was, find it, and report back...:oops:
 
In the picture above at first I was thinking "touch" or it could be cone trail, siphon mark, and apertural lip, which would make it "trace". I'm not sure if the hyponome of an empty shell would leave that deep of an impression. I was assuming touch because I am not seeing tentacle marks, but there could be a lot of reasons to explain that.

OR it could just be some odd marks on the sea floor:bonk: They appear too organized to be random.
 
Terri;169295 said:
The post above was meant for the second pic. in post #250!
Sorry Kevin can you fix it?
It looks fixed to me. :sly:

Alternatively you could edit post #257 (just as you did to #258), add the qualifier to post #250, then delete post #258. then I can delete this post. This will leave deleted post spaces in the thread or foul up the numbers on this post, but it will be fixed.
 

Shop Amazon

Shop Amazon
Shop Amazon; support TONMO!
Shop Amazon
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Back
Top