Eptesicus cf. aurelianensis ZIEGLER , 1993
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.2478/if-2019-0026 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FF8F57-F33A-FFA3-D0A6-6286FC3F1DE8 |
treatment provided by |
Diego |
scientific name |
Eptesicus cf. aurelianensis ZIEGLER , 1993 |
status |
|
Eptesicus cf. aurelianensis ZIEGLER, 1993
Text-fig. 8g View Text-fig
M a t e r i a l a n d m e a s u r e m e n t s. Erkertshofen 1: BSP 1962 XIX 4197, right M2, 1.45 × 1.90.
Petersbuch 2: BSP 1980 XXII 5366, right M2, ≈1.45 × ≈1.90
D e s c r i p t i o n a n d c o m p a r i s o n. The M2 crowns from Erkertshofen 1 and Petersbuch 2 show a welldeveloped cingulum and paralophs ( Text-fig. 8g View Text-fig 1 View Text-fig ). The absence of a large hypocone suggests that the tooth belongs to a vespertilionid bat. Both molars have para- and metalophs but lack the paraconules. The trigon basins are closed, the hypocones are weakly developed ( Text-fig. 8g View Text-fig ). The upper molars from Erkertshofen 1 and Petersbuch 2 share these features with Miostrellus or Eptesicus . Nevertheless, they are larger than all Miostrellus species ( Tab. 8) and, thus, more similar in size to E. aurelianensis (compare with e.g. specimen SMNS 45744 H1; Ziegler 1994: 113, pl. 5, fig. 6). However, they differ from E. aurelianensis in having some undulated metaloph and a less developed hypocone (Textfig. 8g 2).
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.