What is the difference between fossilization and petrification

This reproduces the tissue in exact detail. Petrified wood is a fossil. It forms when plant material is buried by sediment and protected from decay due to oxygen and organisms. Then, groundwater rich in dissolved solids flows through the sediment, replacing the original plant material with silica, calcite, pyrite, or another inorganic material such as opal.

Petrified fossils form when minerals replace the structure of an organism. This process, called permineralization, occurs when groundwater solutions saturate the remains of buried plants or animals.

As the water evaporates the minerals remain, eventually filling in the spaces left as the organism slowly decays. In geology, petrifaction or petrification is the process by which organic material becomes a fossil through the replacement of the original material and the filling of the original pore spaces with minerals.

Asked by: Dorian Houdin asked in category: General Last Updated: 11th January, What is the difference between fossilization and petrification? When a fossil organism is subjected to mineral replacement, it is said to be petrified. For example, petrified wood may be replaced with chalcedony, or shells replaced with pyrite. This means that out of all fossils, only the creature itself could be fossilized by petrification. But " petrified " has a nice sound to it. What are three types of fossilization?

Fossils form in five ways: preservation of original remains, permineralization, molds and casts, replacement, and compression. Why are fossils so rare? Fossils are rare because their formation and discovery depend on chains of ecological and geological events that occur over deep time. Only a small fraction of the primates that have ever lived has been preserved as fossils.

How does Permineralization happen? One of the common types of fossils is permineralization. Bone is primarily composed of hydroxyapatite and collagen. Hydroxyapatite is an inorganic compound of calcium, phosphate, and hydroxide which is organized in a crystal latticework that gives bone and teeth structural rigidity. It preserves well as a fossil under some conditions. Collagen is a fiberous protein that serves as connective tissue in bones and muscles. It does not preserve well in a fossil.

As collagen decomposes, it may be replaced in the hydroxyapatite latticework by minerals from the depositional environment e. If bone the hydroxyapatite structure is reinforced with exogenous minerals, it is said to be "mineralized. A 'burn test' or 'match test' will usually indicate only whether there is collagen remaining in a bone -- scorched collagen has an awful smell.

Teeth - dentin and enamel - contain hydroxyapatite, but don't contain collagen, so the 'burn test' on a tooth would be a waste of time. Thanks guys! I will pass this along to my dad. Well, I will tell him that neither is necessarily older based upon composition. And if he cares to know the reasoning or science behind it, I will attempt to explain. Or else I will let him read what you have said. He will understand. I understand, but you guys have explained it better than I could.

Yeh,what what he said. You might be able to tighten the age range by identifying the skull to species or subspecies though any two bison researchers may not agree on the subspecies. First, Bison appears in North America south of 55 degrees N latitude roughly , to , years ago.

In general larger-horned species of Bison lived before shorter-horned species but species overlapped too. Since your skull appears to belong to a shorter-horned species, that would indicate that it is much younger than , years old.

I know little about Bison but just thought I would throw out some rough numbers for you to work with. You might want to read this thread from early this year:.

You might want to contact the members who made comments on the species to get their opinions. You might want to look for this book as well:. In Emry, R. Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Just to add to the confusion …. A fossil is defined as the preserved remains of an animal, plant or other organism and would generally infer some kind of lithification, mineralisation, chemical alteration or diagenesis. Various types of preservation processes proceed at different rates for different kinds of tissues and conditions of exposure or burial and chemical interaction.

Some types of mummification beyond simple dehydration would also be regarded as fossilisation processes. Although most ordinary folk tend to think of fossils in millions of years of age, for palaeontologists there is a generally accepted but completely arbitrary cut-off date of 10, years. For recent fossils, the preservation may be dehydration or enrobement coupled with some level of mineralisation — even if only as a surface effect. For ancient fossils, complete mineralisation and replacement of the original organic item or the voids within it is more typical.

Organic material trapped in fossilised tree resin represents a process where the mineralisation may largely be a surface effect and the preservation is assisted by the consequent exclusion of oxygen. Some substances allied to amber many insect-containing copals for example would be excluded from the fossil definition by the 10, year rule rather than excluded by virtue of the preservation process. There are other examples of mineralisation processes which — although recent — are no different than some of the processes which create fossils as we know them.

Such instances have been reported for the buried portions of old fence posts and also modern fruits which have been exposed to highly saline or mineral-rich water. Here in the UK there are several areas of salt-marsh where you can find siderite nodules containing recent items. Sorry, I've been absent from the site for a few weeks and just checked back in.

I have wondered the same thing Ramo. I happen to be visiting my folks as we speak. I will see if I can get a better look. My dad doesn't think so, but I am not sure I will try to take some better photos and get them posted. What percentage of dinosaur fossils are completely permineralized; i. The last estimate I saw was Forty-two point seven percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.

I'm pretty sure that such data has never been systematically collected. My supposition is that the vast majority of dinosaur bones are completely permineralized. I am only I may have mispoke. I think I am talking about Recrystallization. If permineralization is only concerned with filling in gaps. Or perhaps in English.

Is a typical dinosaur bone still bone or has its structure [inorganic] been altered to a point where it should no longer be called bone? You need to be a member in order to leave a comment. Use precise geolocation data. Select personalised content. Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance. Develop and improve products.

List of Partners vendors. Share Flipboard Email. Andrew Alden. Geology Expert. Andrew Alden is a geologist based in Oakland, California.