NEUROTRICHINI Hutterer, 2005

Rzebik-Kowalska, Barbara, 2014, Review of the Pliocene and Pleistocene Talpidae (Soricomorpha, Mammalia) of Poland, Palaeontologia Electronica (26 A) 26, pp. 1-26 : 9-11

Tribe NEUROTRICHINI Hutterer, 2005 ? NEUROTRICHUS Günther, 1880 ? Neurotrichus polonicus Skoczeń, 1980

Figures 2.9-10, 3.1-4

1980? Neurotrichus polonicus Skoczeń ; Skoczeń, p. 427, pls. 5, 6.

1993 Neurotrichus polonicus Skoczeń ; Skoczeń, p. 133, fig. 4.

1994 “? Neurotrichus polonicus ” Skoczeń ; Rzebik-Kowalska, p. 80, 89, 90, 91.

2004 Quyania polonica (Skoczeń) ; Popov, p. 71, figs. 6, 7, 8.

2005 Neurotrichus? polonicus Skoczeń ; Rzebik-Kowalska, p. 128, 128, 130, 131.

2009 Neurotrichus polonicus Skoczeń ; Rzebik-Kowalska, p. 9, 22, 24, 25, 26, 51.

Material. Rębielice Królewskie 1 A. One right P4, two right and one left M1, one right M2, one right and one left m2, one right and one left m3, four fragments of mandibles (three left) with m1 – m3, three right and three left clavicles, eight right and five left humeri and right fragment of ulna. MNI = 8, catalogue number MF/ 1015. Kielniki 3 B. One right humerus. MNI = 1, catalogue number MF/1020. Kadzielnia 1. Holotype - right fragment of mandible with roots of p3 and p4 – m2, no. MF/1016/1, right fragment of mandible with m1-m2, one right and one left humeri. MNI = 2, catalogue number MF/ 1016. Zamkowa Dolna Cave C. Two right and one left M1, one left M2, one right m2, one right and one left m3, one right humerus. Minimal number of individuals = 2, catalogue number MF/ 1017.

They are housed in the collection of the ISEAPAS in Kraków.

In comparison with the description of Skoczeń (1980) one right mandible with p3, one right m1, one right m2, and one radius are lacking in the materials from Rębielice Królewskie 1A and one m1 from Zamkowa Dolna C. Also two molars in Rębielice Królewskie 1A were incorrectly determined.

Description. A detailed description and measurements of the material are given in Skoczeń (1980, 1993). In general it is compatible with the present examination. There are, however, some differences. According to Skoczeń (1980) the upper molars of? N. polonicus have protoconules while in reality they are absent except for one tooth from Rębielice Królewskie 1A in which it is vestigial. Skoczeń (1980, 1993) did not mention that some lower m1s from Rębielice Królewskie 1A have traces of mesoconids and small notches between the end of the crista obliqua and the posterior wall of their trigonid. He also did not point out the “scalopine ridge” in the humerus of? Neurotrichus polonicus , which is quite prominent.

Measurements. See Table 2.

Systematic position and distribution. In his work of 1980, Skoczeń included these specimens in the genus? Neurotrichus Günther, 1880 and the new species? N. polonicus n. sp. Storch and Qiu (1983) indicated several characters of? N. polonicus common with Recent American Neurotrichus gibbsi ( Baird, 1858) and fossil Quyania chowi from the Late Miocene and the Early Pliocene of China described by them in the same paper. The dental formula of both genera ( Neurotrichus and Quyania ) is, however, different. Neurotrichus has 36 teeth (I3/3; C1/1; P2/2; M3/3) and Quyania ?38-40 (I3/3; C1/1; P?3/3; M3/3).

Unfortunately the lack of antemolars anterior to P4 and p 3 in? N. polonicus complicate its correct identification and Storch and Qiu (1983, p. 101) “provisionally leave the taxonomic status (of this species) as given by Skoczeń unchanged.”

On the other hand Popov (2004) described a mole similar to? N. polonicus from the Early Pleistocene (former MN17) locality of Varshets in Bulgaria and named it Quyania aff. polonica . He was of the opinion that some characters of? N. polonicus (e.g., double rooted lower premolars and broad posterior wall of the protoconid in p3) mentioned by Storch and Qiu (1983) in Quyania from China speak in favor for its inclusion into the genus Quyania .

The revision of the specimens from Poland shows that the species? N. polonicus combines characters of both genera, Neurotrichus and Quyania ( Table 3). It is as large as Neurotrichus and larger than Quyania (both teeth and humeri) and intermediate in morphology or closer to Quyania . Its first mental foramen in the mandible is situated anteriorly before p3 as in Quyania or below the first root pf p3 as in Neurotrichus . Some lower molars of specimens from Rębielice Królewskie 1A are characterized by vestigial mesoconids and small notches between the end of crista obliqua and the posterior wall of the trigonid as in Quyania . In the younger teeth from Zamkowa Dolna Cave C and Kadzielnia 1 the lower molars are devoid of mesoconids and notches as in Neurotrichus . On the other hand, the upper and lower teeth ( Table 2) of? N. polonicus are wider than the teeth of Neurotrichus , and similar to those of Quyania .

This comparison shows that, as mentioned by Storch and Qiu (1983),? N. polonicus fits well in an ancestor – descendant relationship with Q. chowi and together with Q. showi belongs to one phyletic lineage of the Old World moles. However, its affiliation with Neurotrichus or Quyania is still open, and it is left tentatively as given by Skoczeń (1980, 1993).

Similar to the Recent Neurotrichus gibbsi ,? N. polonicus together with Q. showi and Q. europaea n. sp. discussed below should be included into the tribe Neurotrichini . In his first paper Skoczeń (1980) described specimens from Poland as? Neurotrichus polonicus . In the second paper Skoczeń (1993) abandoned the question mark which was repeated by Rzebik- Kowalska in 2009. Now, after detailed analysis of the material and lack of teeth before p3, it seems clear that the question mark is still necessary and an inclusion of the Polish specimens into the genus Quyania by Popov (2004) is premature (see Q. europaea n. sp.). Assumed remains of fossil Neurotrichus (? N. columbianus ) were described by Hutchison (1968) from Oregon.