HI Thomas,

I've done quite a bit of work on diagenetic change to bone, but I have never seen anything like this. Was thing terrestrial or lacustrine deposit?

Lynne

I did not dig up the bone so i can't say with any certainty. I am pretty sure it is a modern invader though. The Haversian canals are still open in most HC bones as you are probably aware. Strangest thing I have seen in fossil bones after hundreds of hours on my personal SEM.

Anything similar in the Haversian cannel or Lacunae of compact bone?

Tom,

I would also say that it is modern. Bugs are digging into the net. Is it mineralized?

"Anything similar in the Haversian cannal or Lacunae of compact bone?"

No this was the only example I have ever seen.

I doubt it's mineralized. It would flex from the heat when I put the SEM beam on it.

Thomas:

You are probably right in thinking that it's a MODERN invader of presently unknown affinity but with superb preservation.

Best

Syed

My best guess would be a mite (or exuviae). However, those appendages are far too strange for an arachnid.  

Tom,

exuviae (spider, insect) can be a good idea. Check also nymph or naiad, e.g. of tick.

Good luck! I love SEM!

Tom:

I tend to agree with Ziggy. It could be a tiny Spider with distinct hair morphology seen under SEM (see link):

http://www.atl.semtechsolutions.com/node/28/gallery

http://www.uleth.ca/emf/mmadhavji/mmadhavji.htm

http://jeb.biologists.org/content/215/7/1084

Best

Syed

It is probably not a bug. I should have posted this longer view that shows this thing is part of a larger structure. You can see the original "bug" lower center. This shot gives more context at the expense of detail.

Thomas:

It is almost certain that:

1. This has nothing to do with Dinosaur preservation and its likely to be a modern contamination.

2.Some distortion of specimen (partially preserved) is expected during Sputtering and Electron beam targeting.

3. It is unlikely to be a plant entity.

4.Affinity with Spider hair morphology under SEM is pretty striking.

5. If it's a contamination, more fragmented specimens are likely to be seen in fossil dinosaur bone.

Preservation is so good that soon conclusive identification would be forthcoming.

Best

Syed

Syed,

Spiders have never have pseudosegmentations on their appendages. Spiders do not get that small and spiders do not have segmented looking hairs, only serrations occur.

The scale is too small for almost everything leggy.

Uemit:

Thank you so much for your comments. Its a fragmented specimen - so what's your firm opinion about this creature, which is so well preserved?

Best

Syed

It would be good to hear from some fungus people.

Thomas:

Not a bad idea to look at fungal bodies, but the attached link about ultrastructure of a detached and fragmented cuticle of a tiny creature should also be examined:

http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/11/99/20140619

Best

Syed

Thomas:

Just a casual guess. Could these be Osteocytes? See link:

http://www.creationmoments.com/sites/creationmoments.com/files/pdf/Armitage_Triceratops_final.pdf

Definitely not osteocytes. Could be a shed skin of something but the "hairs" look like they came off intact.

I keep wanting to say "Fluff Bunny!", but realize that is not very scientific of me.

Thomas et al.:

Solemnity of the matter demands that, if possible, a few more images of the specimens be uploaded so that possibly with higher resolution a fool proof identification could be made. The material is definitely challenging and of great interest.

Best

Syed

These are the only other pics I have of the "fluff bunny" :)

Thomas:

Thanks Thomas. Great pictures of "Fluff Bunny". Sustained optimism holds the key to correct identification.

Best

Syed

Thomas:

What about some possibility of resting cysts of terrestrial Ciliates? Please see link:

http://www.academicjournals.org/journal/AJMR/article-full-text-pdf/5DF5FEC20509

Best

Syed

I don't think that those cysts are a very good match. But you are coming up with some interesting suggestions! 

Tom

Tom:

This may not be a match but affinity is suggested in this link:

http://zookeys.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=2464

Best

Syed

Tom,

Syed might be close. Springtail seems to be similar. Compare

http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/564951/view

with your fungus 3.

Ziggy

Tom,

Collembola!? See fot. 7 from https://testvb.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17878637

Size matters.

The last one giving the apperarence of spirally arranged cords anchored to a tube with regular ribs adds new details.

Spiral arrangement reminds quickly collagen fibers. The hyphae looking ones should also be tightly coiled collagen fibers. Thorny look may be caused by microfibers undone.

Perfectly preserved and patterned tube is a mystery. The first fluffy bunny photograph shows depressions at attachment points which may mean as if they arise from there (like filopodia of fibrocytes but not likely as filopodia are round extrusions formed by the cell membrane). A little complicated.

The springtail looks very interesting but the scale is pretty far off.

Tom:

Magnitude or Size in insects is governed by several factors but ultrastructural similarities take priority.Therefore, you need to factor this into your scale assessment for both juveniles and adults. See link:

http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-ento-010814-020841?journalCode=ento

Best

Syed

Sayed,

Veeery interesting paper. Thx.

Ziggy

Some more "Fluff Bunny":

http://www.nmbe.ch/sites/default/files/uploads/pubinv/aposphragisma_red.pdf

Best

Syed

Tom et al.:

In view of the evidences provided for possible nature of organism which could have produced the fragment depicted in SEM images, it would be prudent to take a decision now than none at all.

Best

Syed

It is the size I find puzzling. Some kind of spore seems likely, but then rather large; pollen spore, segmentation on surface is wrong; wrong for osteocyte, but really can not expect it to survive in that state; fragment of something larger a possibility such as the Goblin Spider; or,.....a Fluff Bunny.

Lynn et al.:

Yes, chances that these are fragments of Goblin spider or nest containing juveniles are strong and as such Size should not be a problem. See link:

http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/bitstream/handle/2246/6172/N3743.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Best

Syed

Syed, 

Unfortunately. there is no trace of cuticular structure having appearence of regular bumps or symmetrical view of collembolan outer skeleton (basically a cellular secretion). If it was cuticular, regular folds on the bunny would be thickenings, like armor. But they seem to be foldings of a softer material or rather outlines of internal structures.  

Tom you have driven us mad with this! We have enough discourse to write a Nature April 1st letter......I am half-way serious....

Uemit:

We are interested in knowing what it is than what it is not ! What do you say?

Lynne:

Take it easy and seriously. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't. - Shakespeare. Our best bet at the moment is fragmentary remains of tiny Goblin Spider !

Best

Syed

Dear all,

My conclusion at least partially exists on the other page. Good reasoning is essential before moving forward,  If I am wrong in any of the justifications made and there is some way out, I would be more than pleased. I am gladful for your contributions as I am practising and learning (like the fact that my university has no longer provides access to annualreviews).

Please note the spiral arrangement, small dimensions, ribbed pattern, more or less tubular appendages without any hint of segmentation, bilateral symmetry or claws.  No plates or cephalization either.

Do you have any explanation for the ribbed body of the bunny?  

Ümit

Uemit:

We are happy that you are a part of this exciting discussion. We are also a part of mutually learning process. Who is right or wrong would be decided by peers who would either refute or support this, based on concrete evidences. However please note:

1. What do you mean by "ribbed body"?

2. If you compare numerous high resolution SEM images attached with the links and the ones provided by Tom, you would see a close resemblance. Here we are not dealing with complete specimens of Goblin Spider (ca. 1-2 mm) but their fragmental remains. The preservation is superb and you could observe that the size is no problem.

3. We are waiting to hear from some Entomologist specialising in ultrastructure of Goblin Spiders to pronounce final verdict.

Best

Syed

Hi again,

It is the longest series that I joined.  In the second photo of the second series the 'ribbed body' is the distorted cylinder what looked like two flattened 'bugs' in the the very first photo.

I agree on that both the preservation and imaging are of superb quality.

European oonopids are not very diverse and I don't know any European person who mastered on this particular group. Dr Norman Platnick and other AMNH workers has had a global oonopidae project. 

In the miniature world of arachnids, on the other hand, by far the winners are the mites and palpigrads.

Ümit

A former arachnologist



Antonio Domingos Brescovit

To

syeda jafar

Mar 29 at 11:44 PM

Tom, Uemit et al.:

Our madness seems to have worked and the mystery of Bunny is out. Experts in Brazil have suggested that these are probably Mites, which are similar to Spiders but differ in having no separation between thorax and abdomen. Like spiders, adults have 8 legs but larvae only 6 legs. Thrive in moist places inhabited by Mosses and Lichens. Here is the response to my query: 

Dear Syed, the SEM images are very interesting. I lost the first message and not remember on what structure it is.

But, I did look and for me not is a part of Goblin Spider and could be a leg of Acari. Legs of spiders that I know don´t have these large hairs with this rounded base. I did show for colleague’s acarologists that work in Butantan and the opinion is that this tarsi/tibiae could be an Acari parasitic of arthropods order Parasitaengonina, maybe larvae of the families Trombidiidae or Erythraeridae.

Sorry, but is the maximum that we get with this structures.

Best regards.

Antonio D. Brescovit

Best

Syed

2016-03-29 11:13 GMT-03:00 syeda jafar :

All,

I am very glad for the enthusiastic response to this mystery! I think the conversation is covering lots of interesting ideas. With the amount of detail present in the pictures, it seems we should be able to come up with the perfect match somewhere.

I am currently in Germany laser fluorescing the Solnhofen fossils so I may not respond as quickly as usual.

Thanks,

Tom

Tom et al.:

Tom as you are happily hunting Solenhofen fossils, here are opinions from two other experts of US.:

Dear Syeda

the part that you show of the mite is a tarsus of a prostigmatid mite. I did ask my coleague Cal Welbourn for his opinion as well, and we come with simirlar findings.

"Ron,

Interesting images. The leg is of a eupodid either Eupodidae or possibly Bdellidae. More images are needed to make a more definite identification. Cal

Cal Welbourn, Ph.D.

Acarologist

Division of Plant Industry - Entomology

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services ""

Best wishes to "Fluff Bunny"

Syed

Thanks Syed. When I get back I will lookup SEM images of these mites. I hope it solves the mystery!

Tom

Ok I looked up mite legs and yes this does look like a tarsus. No exact matches but enough features look the same that it most likely is a tarsus of something very small, likely a mite. Bravo all!  Thanks for the help!

Tom