Tooth or Tusk?

[darkwaterdivr]

I found something on a recent fossil hunting trip to South Carolina that I have yet to positively identify. Based on the varied responses that I've gotten from people that I know (other hobby enthusiasts), and from a few other people that I have sent some pics to, I know that a positive ID here is not likely. However, I'm curious to see what some of y'all might think because the opinions that I've gotten so far are all over the place. For the sake of objectivity, I won't mention those other guesses, but I will say that I'm fairly certain that it is not walrus. If you think I'm wrong about that, by all means don't hesitate to tell me why you think so. Thanks in advance for your consideration!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Carolina Tom]

Not a walrus tusk, for sure. Not sure it is a tooth either.

It looks like a claw to me.

 

[darkwaterdivr]

It's kind of funny that you say that. My group of friends that I dive with are all really good divers and fossil hunters that tend to usually one up me on the really cool finds. When we're all pulling out our finds on the boat after a dive and I don't really have anything cool to show, I'll always pull out a dolphin or whale tooth and say, "Well, I found this claw". It's been a running inside joke for a while that we all use now. I actually made that same statement when I pulled this thing out of my goodie bag.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I agree with Carolina Tom. It looks like a claw to me.

 

[Harry Pristis]

I don't think it is a claw or a tooth. The end view reveals chips on a massive, fine-grained material . . . it looks like some form of silica. That said, I am at a loss to explain the morphology. Perhaps it's a cast of some animal part. I think you should take it to a museum for the best ID.

 

[darkwaterdivr]

I don't think it is a claw or a tooth. The end view reveals chips on a massive, fine-grained material . . . it looks like some form of silica. That said, I am at a loss to explain the morphology. Perhaps it's a cast of some animal part. I think you should take it to a museum for the best ID.

I have sent some pics and inquiries to a couple of professionals, but every one of them has given me a different opinion on it. Because of this, I realize that's what it's ultimately going to take to get a positive ID on it, but due to the fact that one museum asked if I would consider donating it to them, and a possible candidate mentioned by another, I'm somewhat paranoid about letting it out of my sight in the small off chance it might actually be something fairly rare.

 

[Ninjafossils]

Sperm whale ivory?

 

[darkwaterdivr]

I could certainly be wrong, but I don't think it's whale. I've picked up quite a few whale teeth over the years, and it doesn't have much of anything in common with any of the whale teeth that I personally have. The most notable difference is how this thing flattens and widens as it goes up. I suppose a patho deformity could always be possible though. I really appreciate the input from everyone.

 

[old digger]

With the ribbing and curvature shown in the first and second photos, and the narrow cross-section in the fourth photo your item looks like the tip of a Bighorn Sheep horn.

 

[darkwaterdivr]

It's not too hard to see some basic resemblances in shape there old digger. I've personally never heard any bighorn stuff come from the area where I found this, but that doesn't mean that its never happened.

Here are a couple of pictures that I took with my fossil next to an image in a fossil ID book. I didn't post these to begin with because there is an obvious mistake with the book itself that I believe calls its overall credibility into question. It could be an honest mistake, but I don't know enough about the book or the author to say one way or another. The problem is that S. populator was not indigenous to North America. I am not educated enough in the field of paleontology to begin making any claims related to an ID, but whatever the image in the book actually is, my fossil does look a whole lot like it; even the dimensions given are almost the same. Of course all of this could strictly be coincidence.

 

[Inyo]

It's not too hard to see some basic resemblances in shape there old digger. I've personally never heard any bighorn stuff come from the area where I found this, but that doesn't mean that its never happened.

Here are a couple of pictures that I took with my fossil next to an image in a fossil ID book. I didn't post these to begin with because there is an obvious mistake with the book itself that I believe calls its overall credibility into question. It could be an honest mistake, but I don't know enough about the book or the author to say one way or another. The problem is that S. populator was not indigenous to North America. I am not educated enough in the field of paleontology to begin making any claims related to an ID, but whatever the image in the book actually is, my fossil does look a whole lot like it; even the dimensions given are almost the same. Of course all of this could strictly be coincidence.

View attachment 1190845View attachment 1190846

If the photograph in the book is of genuine Smilodon derivation, I would certainly agree that the specimen you found could well be a match.

See the technical discussion over at The Status Of Smilodon In North And South America (pdf document) that determined that North American specimens assigned to Smilodon populator are synonymous with the South American Smilodon populator.

Note, too, that according to the scientific paper linked above: (1) nearly all the specimens of Smilodon populator from South America fall "within the observed range of variation" for the Smilodon populator identified from Rancho La Brea; and (2) all the characters diagnostic of North American Smilodon floridanus (AKA, S. fatalis) also typify Smilodon populator.

Links To All The Fossils-Related Pages I've Created

 

[darkwaterdivr]

If the photograph in the book is of genuine Smilodon derivation, I would certainly agree that the specimen you found could well be a match.

See the technical discussion over at The Status Of Smilodon In North And South America (pdf document) that determined that North American specimens assigned to Smilodon populator are synonymous with the South American Smilodon populator.

Note, too, that according to the scientific paper linked above: (1) nearly all the specimens of Smilodon populator from South America fall "within the observed range of variation" for the Smilodon populator identified from Rancho La Brea; and (2) all the characters diagnostic of North American Smilodon floridanus (AKA, S. fatalis) also typify Smilodon populator.

Links To All The Fossils-Related Pages I've Created

Thanks for the links Inyo!! I'm looking forward to reading the article and checking out some of your websites.

 

[Harry Pristis]

Here's the thing: I detect no pulp cavity or other vascular canals. There is no evidence of trabecular bone. The broken end shows conchoidal fractures (ivory and bone don't break like that). It is not a sabercat tooth . . . or a tooth of anything else I recognize. Even a claw core (the exterior keratin doesn't preserve) has vascular canals.

I think you should take this to a museum or university to get someone to give you an in-hand opinion.

 

[darkwaterdivr]

I think you should take this to a museum or university to get someone to give you an in-hand opinion.

I agree that's what it's ultimately going to take to ever figure it out. I was mainly interested to hear some opinions from the folks on here, and to see if by chance if there was any consistency with other opinions that I've been given.

 

[Inyo]

Thanks for the links Inyo!! I'm looking forward to reading the article and checking out some of your websites.

You're very welcome, indeed.

I would be very interested to learn what your experienced, fossil-knowledgeable diving buddies had to say about the mystery specimen, since they were able to view it in person, to begin with.

 

[darkwaterdivr]

I would be very interested to learn what your experienced, fossil-knowledgeable diving buddies had to say about the mystery specimen, since they were able to view it in person, to begin with.

Most of the people that have actually seen and held it find it very interesting but don't really know what to think. Some the responses that I've gotten from people that have only seen the pics have suggested walrus, dugong tusk, and cat as a possibility.

 

[MrBlueSkyNM]

Fascinating find! Congratulations!

 

[Harry Pristis]

Most of the people that have actually seen and held it find it very interesting but don't really know what to think. Some the responses that I've gotten from people that have only seen the pics have suggested walrus, dugong tusk, and cat as a possibility.

So, what have you concluded about the object after all these months?

It's not dugong, and it's not cat, so walrus is the best candidate. When we say "walrus," most people think "Odobenus," but there are other, earlier walrus. I recommend sending your images (or the specimen) to Bobby Boessenecker for an identification. I don't have an email address for him, but you can contact him through The Fossil Forum. Here are highlights from the abstract of a recent publication.

THE MOST COMPLETE FOSSIL WALRUS FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROVIDES INSIGHTS ON PATTERNS OF WALRUS DIVERSITY THROUGH TIME

MAGALLANES, Isaac, Department of Geological Sciences, California State University, Fullerton, 800 N State College Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92831, PARHAM, James F., John D. Cooper Archaeological and Paleontological Center, Department of Geological Sciences, California State University, Fullerton, Fullerton, CA 92834 and BOESSENECKER, Robert W., Department of Geology and Environmental Geosciences, College of Charleston, 66 George Street, Charleston, SC 29424, [email protected]
. . .
Our reassessment of walrus phylogeny reveals two distinct Miocene radiations: a middle Miocene radiation and a late Miocene radiation. Our analysis shows that during the middle Miocene radiation, as many as nine lineages of walruses are known to exist at one time. During the late Miocene there are as many as seven coeval species (including the lineage represented by the Capistrano specimen). Despite the high level of diversity found in the late Miocene, the maximum known number of coeval lineages drops to five by the late Pliocene.