|
|
|
|
|
by dkga
53 days ago
|
|
What a treasure indeed! I just didn‘t understand why this particular site had so well-preserved soft tissue fossils? I assume it is probably related to the geology of the site during formation of the fossils, and probably the researchers themselves are not quite sure. But I would love to know more, if anyone here understands about this sort of thing. |
|
From memory, to get fossilised soft tissues you want the remains to be buried extremely rapidly in an environment where the soft tissues don't decay (typically an anoxic environment, so for a shale basically covered in mud). So a mudslide is one option, and I think there are some lovely fossils North American from the end of the Cretaceous that are hypothesised to have been buried by the tidal wave caused by the Chicxulub impact.
Edit: After some googling, the Cretaceous fossils I was thinking of is Tanis,[0] which is in fact plausibly (but not universally) thought to be covered by the earthquake caused by the impact, before the tidal wave arrived.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanis_(fossil_site)