Is this a modern animal tooth?

TheTh3rd · Feb 26, 2015

I know it is a tooth, not sure how old. Does every animal tooth have similar inner qualities or do they vary? TIA

Harry Pristis · Feb 26, 2015

The features of the occlusal surface change substantially . . . the contours of the enamel shell
constrict or expand and some eventually disappear when the tooth is worn out. Your tooth is an
example of a very worn -- senile -- equid horse tooth. It appears to be an upper second premolar --
a P2. Most probably modern.

TheTh3rd · Feb 26, 2015

Thanks for the info.

So after the tooth is fossilized, will it still have defining features of a tooth and not a nature/weather worn rock or concretion?

Basically, is there a way to tell if a claw/tooth-looking rock is in fact an actual fossil.

Harry Pristis · Feb 27, 2015

Only surviving characteristics of a tooth enable identification as a tooth. (There is
a philosophical truism in there somewhere.) Claw/tooth-looking is in the mind of the
viewer . . . more experience with teeth usually means better discernment.

TheTh3rd · Feb 27, 2015

Im not trying to get philosophical haha. Just curious. I was told fossils rarely form in chert but lets say you have 2 identical shark teeth, one fossilizes in chert, the other in limestone... in a perfect world would they still look like teeth? Sorry for the dumb question

Harry Pristis · Feb 27, 2015

I don't know about a perfect world. All I know about is my world experience. My guess is, since chert is a sedimentary rock -- like limestone -- there is nothing inherent in chert to prevent a tooth from being preserved.

But, you seem to be asking about the nature of teeth, rather than the nature of chert. The preservation of a tooth depends on depositional factors -- forces and chemistry where it is buried. (Teeth don't survive very long if they are not buried. Quick burial is the universal requirement for preservation.) This is the science of taphonomy.

Sooo . . . Teeth may be preserved as fossils in a sedimentary situation. Chert is a relatively slow accretion of SiO2, usually as lenses within limestone. Therefor, it seems reasonable to assume that fossil teeth within the limestone could be incorporated into a lens of chert without destroying the tooth.

Though I have never found a tooth in Florida Coastal Plain Chert, I have seen many echinoid and mollusk casts and molds therein. I cannot speak about other cherts in which the original fossil may be preserved (such as "turritella agate").

TheTh3rd · Feb 27, 2015

Harry Pristis said:
I don't know about a perfect world. All I know about is my world experience. My guess is, since chert is a sedimentary rock -- like limestone -- there is nothing inherent in chert to prevent a tooth from being preserved.

But, you seem to be asking about the nature of teeth, rather than the nature of chert. The preservation of a tooth depends on depositional factors -- forces and chemistry where it is buried. (Teeth don't survive very long if they are not buried. Quick burial is the universal requirement for preservation.) This is the science of taphonomy.

Sooo . . . Teeth may be preserved as fossils in a sedimentary situation. Chert is a relatively slow accretion of SiO2, usually as lenses within limestone. Therefor, it seems reasonable to assume that fossil teeth within the limestone could be incorporated into a lens of chert without destroying the tooth.

Though I have never found a tooth in Florida Coastal Plain Chert, I have seen many echinoid and mollusk casts and molds therein. I cannot speak about other cherts in which the original fossil may be preserved (such as "turritella agate").

Thanks, that should help. It looks to me like these are some teeth/skeletal like properties. I posted these in the NA forum a while ago and I was told they are just weatherd stones.
What think you?

This really looks like a small shark skull, but could just be a sectarian nodule.