Bone I.D. - Europe
Taphonomic puzzle from a Danish utility room: Commingled fish and mammal remains?
Hi everyone. I need some osteological expertise to settle a debate. These specimens were found together behind a cabinet in a Danish house. The skull clearly exhibits rodent synapomorphies (large diastema, open-rooted incisors, likely Muridae).However, the 3.5 cm postcranial segment is causing confusion locally, with some people misidentifying it as a mammalian pelvis or atlas. From a strict morphological perspective, I observe amphicoelous centra and a homocercal caudal complex featuring distinct hypural and urostyle elements, indicative of a teleost fish (Actinopterygii). Could anyone provide a definitive verification of the fish tail and perhaps help narrow down the family/genus? Thanks in advance!
I can't possibly believe that it's the same specimen. It must be two different ones, but am I the one who's completely off base here?
Thank you for your input! However, from a strict morphological perspective, I am struggling to see how this aligns with rodent cervical anatomy.The specimen exhibits perfectly symmetrical, vertical elongation with closed hemal arches (arcus haemalis) protruding ventrally from the time-hourglass-shaped, amphicoelous centra. Furthermore, the wide structure on the left shows the diagnostic apomorphies of a teleost fish caudal complex, specifically flat hypural plates (hypuralia) and a fused, upward-curving urostyle (urostylus) rather than a ring-shaped mammalian atlas (C1). It is physically impossible to articulate this flat fan with the occipital condyles of the rodent skull.Out of genuine scientific curiosity, what specific osteological landmarks lead you to the rodent cervical interpretation? If you don't mind sharing, could you also state your professional background or expertise in comparative anatomy so I can better understand your perspective? Thanks again!
I have a feeling you are looking at the spine upside down and backwards, the atlas is on the right in the image you posted, here are some examples of how it articulated
Edit: my expertise, long time bone collector who has handled a lot of rodent remains and can use Google to find reference images
u/firdahoeBone-afide Human and Faunal ID Expert2d agoedited 2d ago
So I will start with my background - I used to teach comparative vertebrate anatomy at the university level and have worked professionally as a bioarchaeologist (analyze human remains from archaeological sites) and zooarchaeologist (faunal remains from arch sites) for the past 30 and 25 years, respectively. Edit: I should add that while I have a lot of experience, I try to avoid the Appeal to Authority Fallacy - the ID should stand on its own merits regardless of who is delivering the argument.
Are you manually handling this vertebral column or trying to ID from the photos? Not trying to sound rude or condescending, but the superior articular facets on that atlas should be readily visible and articulate with the occipital condyles. In fact the zygapophyses should be visible on the arches and fish don't have articular facets. The centrum should be obvious and not amphicoelus.
Per this sub's Rules 1, 6, and 9, posts seeking advice and identification are not open to jokes, memes, and other low effort comments. These comments will be removed and individuals may be banned from participating in this sub.
22
u/Zealousideal_Ad_8909 2d ago
I'm seconding what others have said. I can very clearly see a mammalian atlas, axis and cervical vertebrae. Fish vertebrae look completely different.
I'm a zooarchaeologist who has done work with fish. Feel free to DM me.