Gulo gulo gulo (Linnaeus, 1758)

Marciszak, Adrian, Hilpert, Brigitte & Ambros, Dieta, 2024, The remarkable record of mustelids from Hunas (Bavaria, Germany), Comptes Rendus Palevol 23 (23), pp. 339-383 : 342-343

Gulo gulo gulo (Linnaeus, 1758)

Gulo gulo Ambros, 2006: 39 ; fig. 49; tab. 52. – Döppes 2005: 421; tab. 7. – Rosendahl, Ambros, Hilpert, Hambach, Alt, Knipping, Reisch & Kaulich 2011: 19; tab. 3/2. – Baumann 2011: 8.

REFERRED MATERIAL. — Metacarpal 4 and pisiform .

DESCRIPTION

A single mc 4 lacking a distal epiphysis, but the total length of the bone can be estimated to c. 53 mm. The bone is elongated and slim, with a gracile proximal end. The proximal epiphysis is flattened laterally and narrows into the ventral side. The outer border of the surface articulating with the hamatum curves into the ventral border. Viewed from the dorsal side, the hamatum surface forms a distinct angle with a plane of the articulation for mc 3. The narrow shaft is equally wide along its entire length.

COMPARISON AND REMARKS

The moderately sized mc 4 from Hunas metrically and morphologically matches the mc 4 of G. gulo . The bone is much longer than the mc 4 of the Late Pleistocene and extant M. meles ( Table 2). The mc 4 of G. gulo differs from those of M. meles in the larger size and in a more elongated and gracile build, mainly in an elongated shaft and slimmer proximal and distal epiphyses.Toward the ventral side, the proximal epiphysis of the mc 4 from Hunas is narrower than that of M. meles . The outer border of the surface articulating with the hamatum curves less considerably into the ventral border. The inner border of the proximal epiphysis is deeply notched near the middle, while in M. meles the indentation is not so distinct. Viewed from the dorsal side, the plane of the hamatum surface forms a gentle angle with a plane of articulation for mc 3. The elongated shaft is much narrower and equally wide along its entire length. In M. meles the shaft of mc 4 is proportionally much shorter and robust and broadens proximally and distally.

Within the evolutionary lineage of G. g. schlosseri = > gulo an increasing in body size is observed. Within this lineage, the late Middle Pleistocene individuals, e.g. Aven 1 (MIS 8-7) and Aven 2 of La Fage (MIS 6) ( Hugueney 1975; Bourgeois & Philippe 2017), layers 19ad of Biśnik Cave (MIS 9-8; Marciszak 2012), layers 1-4 of Deszczowa Cave (MIS 9-8; Krajcarz 2012; Marciszak 2012) and Moggaster Cave (MIS 11; Döppes 2001) are characterised by medium-sized individuals, comparable with extant G. g. gulo . They are smaller than the robust Late Pleistocene G. g. spelaeus , which was on average 15-20% larger than the extant G. gulo ( Döppes 2001, 2005; Marciszak et al. 2017b). In this context, dimensions of the Hunas individual corroborated with the other late Middle Pleistocene European specimens.