Fossils B/C

[AwersomeUser]

They should be the same organism, but some things you can write about the fossils are the distribution, commonly found fossils, etc.

So I don't write about how it lived, ate, etc?

Do write about those. It's probably similar to its current lifestyle though.

So I shouldn't put this? The part of what organs and stuff like that the current ones have? However, should I put the comparison of the current ones to the fossils?

Features:
Possess a three-lobed caudal fin (also called a trilobate fin or a diphycercal tail).
A secondary tail extending past the primary tail separates the upper and lower halves of the coelacanth. Cosmoid scales act as thick armor to protect the coelacanth's exterior.
Several internal traits also aid in differentiating coelacanths from other lobe-finned fish.
At the back of the skull, the coelacanth possesses a hinge, the intracranial joint, which allows it to open its mouth extremely wide.
Retain an oil-filled notochord, a hollow, pressurized tube which is replaced by the vertebral column early in embryonic development in most other vertebrates.
Comparisons: Heart is shaped differently from that of most modern fish, with its chambers arranged in a straight tube. The cheeks of the coelacanth are unique because the opercular bone is very small and holds a large soft-tissue opercular flap. A spiracular chamber is present, but the spiracle is closed and never opens during development.[27] Coelacanth also possess a unique rostral organ within the ethmoid region of the braincase.[5][28] Also unique to extant coelacanths is the presence of a "fatty lung" or a fat-filled single-lobed vestigial lung, homologous to other fishes' swim bladder. The parallel development of a fatty organ for buoyancy control suggest a unique specialization for deep-water habitats. There has also been discovered small, hard but flexible plates around the vestigial lung in adult specimen, though not around the fatty organ. The plates most likely had a regulation function for the volume of the lung.[29] Due to the size of the fatty organ, researchers assume it's responsible for the kidney's unusual relocation. The two kidneys, which are fused into one,[30] are located ventrally within the abdominal cavity, posterior to the cloaca.

[UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F]

So I don't write about how it lived, ate, etc?

Do write about those. It's probably similar to its current lifestyle though.

So I shouldn't put this? The part of what organs and stuff like that the current ones have? However, should I put the comparison of the current ones to the fossils?

Features:
Possess a three-lobed caudal fin (also called a trilobate fin or a diphycercal tail).
A secondary tail extending past the primary tail separates the upper and lower halves of the coelacanth. Cosmoid scales act as thick armor to protect the coelacanth's exterior.
Several internal traits also aid in differentiating coelacanths from other lobe-finned fish.
At the back of the skull, the coelacanth possesses a hinge, the intracranial joint, which allows it to open its mouth extremely wide.
Retain an oil-filled notochord, a hollow, pressurized tube which is replaced by the vertebral column early in embryonic development in most other vertebrates.
Comparisons: Heart is shaped differently from that of most modern fish, with its chambers arranged in a straight tube. The cheeks of the coelacanth are unique because the opercular bone is very small and holds a large soft-tissue opercular flap. A spiracular chamber is present, but the spiracle is closed and never opens during development.[27] Coelacanth also possess a unique rostral organ within the ethmoid region of the braincase.[5][28] Also unique to extant coelacanths is the presence of a "fatty lung" or a fat-filled single-lobed vestigial lung, homologous to other fishes' swim bladder. The parallel development of a fatty organ for buoyancy control suggest a unique specialization for deep-water habitats. There has also been discovered small, hard but flexible plates around the vestigial lung in adult specimen, though not around the fatty organ. The plates most likely had a regulation function for the volume of the lung.[29] Due to the size of the fatty organ, researchers assume it's responsible for the kidney's unusual relocation. The two kidneys, which are fused into one,[30] are located ventrally within the abdominal cavity, posterior to the cloaca.

You should definitely put it in your binder.

[AwersomeUser]

Do write about those. It's probably similar to its current lifestyle though.

So I shouldn't put this? The part of what organs and stuff like that the current ones have? However, should I put the comparison of the current ones to the fossils?

Features:
Possess a three-lobed caudal fin (also called a trilobate fin or a diphycercal tail).
A secondary tail extending past the primary tail separates the upper and lower halves of the coelacanth. Cosmoid scales act as thick armor to protect the coelacanth's exterior.
Several internal traits also aid in differentiating coelacanths from other lobe-finned fish.
At the back of the skull, the coelacanth possesses a hinge, the intracranial joint, which allows it to open its mouth extremely wide.
Retain an oil-filled notochord, a hollow, pressurized tube which is replaced by the vertebral column early in embryonic development in most other vertebrates.
Comparisons: Heart is shaped differently from that of most modern fish, with its chambers arranged in a straight tube. The cheeks of the coelacanth are unique because the opercular bone is very small and holds a large soft-tissue opercular flap. A spiracular chamber is present, but the spiracle is closed and never opens during development.[27] Coelacanth also possess a unique rostral organ within the ethmoid region of the braincase.[5][28] Also unique to extant coelacanths is the presence of a "fatty lung" or a fat-filled single-lobed vestigial lung, homologous to other fishes' swim bladder. The parallel development of a fatty organ for buoyancy control suggest a unique specialization for deep-water habitats. There has also been discovered small, hard but flexible plates around the vestigial lung in adult specimen, though not around the fatty organ. The plates most likely had a regulation function for the volume of the lung.[29] Due to the size of the fatty organ, researchers assume it's responsible for the kidney's unusual relocation. The two kidneys, which are fused into one,[30] are located ventrally within the abdominal cavity, posterior to the cloaca.

You should definitely put it in your binder.

Ok! Thanks a lot.

I only have at most 3 pages including photos and some fossils only a page so I am wondering am I putting too little stuff in. I don't think I need to worry about not having enough space to put stuff in so should I include stuff know when/who/where a fossil was first discovered?

And also, for certain fossils there are not many website showing up on google search that are helpful so does it usually mean it is a less well studied fossil so I can almost assume that it is not going to be on the test and therefore I don't have to concentrate as much on those?

[MadCow2357]

Thanks a lot.

I only have at most 3 pages including photos and some fossils only a page so I am wondering am I putting too little stuff in. I don't think I need to worry about not having enough space to put stuff in so should I include stuff know when/who/where a fossil was first discovered?

And also, for certain fossils there are not many website showing up on google search that are helpful so does it usually mean it is a less well studied fossil so I can almost assume that it is not going to be on the test and therefore I don't have to concentrate as much on those?

Yes, it would be helpful to add stuff about a fossil's discovery.

A less well studied fossil might still be on a test. In fact, some test writer might even ask questions about the obscure fossils on purpose. If it's on the fossils list, you should probably prepare for it.

[AWildMudkip]

And also, for certain fossils there are not many website showing up on google search that are helpful so does it usually mean it is a less well studied fossil so I can almost assume that it is not going to be on the test and therefore I don't have to concentrate as much on those?

For fossils that seemingly don't have a lot of info, use scholar.google.com. For test writing I've found a whole bunch of nice stuff to write about in scholarly articles.

[BennyTheJett]

And also, for certain fossils there are not many website showing up on google search that are helpful so does it usually mean it is a less well studied fossil so I can almost assume that it is not going to be on the test and therefore I don't have to concentrate as much on those?

For fossils that seemingly don't have a lot of info, use scholar.google.com. For test writing I've found a whole bunch of nice stuff to write about in scholarly articles.

Another great resource (for basically every event tho) is textbooks. I photocopy certain parts of a textbook for fossil and other events. I would focus more on Identification if the event is in a week, so you can at least be confident in picking up easy ID points.

[StuffyNose45]

Can someone please explain the difference between Replacement, Permineralization, Petrifaction, and Recrystallization? A few proctors use it interchangeably and others have different definitions than our team. I guess I'm asking for what definitions are agreed upon and useable at higher level competitions.

[UTF-8 U+6211 U+662F]

Can someone please explain the difference between Replacement, Permineralization, Petrifaction, and Recrystallization? A few proctors use it interchangeably and others have different definitions than our team. I guess I'm asking for what definitions are agreed upon and useable at higher level competitions.

I've been relying on this: http://www.fossilmuseum.net/fossilrecor ... zation.htm
https://sciencing.com/types-fossil-pres ... 13212.html

[AwersomeUser]

And also, for certain fossils there are not many website showing up on google search that are helpful so does it usually mean it is a less well studied fossil so I can almost assume that it is not going to be on the test and therefore I don't have to concentrate as much on those?

For fossils that seemingly don't have a lot of info, use scholar.google.com. For test writing I've found a whole bunch of nice stuff to write about in scholarly articles.

Another great resource (for basically every event tho) is textbooks. I photocopy certain parts of a textbook for fossil and other events. I would focus more on Identification if the event is in a week, so you can at least be confident in picking up easy ID points.

Ok thanks! But Wikipedia is generally reliable, right?

[AwersomeUser]

Also, do they test the same stuff in division C? (But they make the test harder?)