Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937 )
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/g2017n2a8 |
|
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:36D6C5E9-8632-41E2-88F0-D470B3DEA72C |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5206081 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03961919-FD07-FFB2-FE89-0FEED3B92AAF |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937 ) |
| status |
|
Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937)
( Fig. 5 View FIG )
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Craniodental. CD 5963, right posterior mandible fragment with M 1 roots ( Fig. 5A View FIG ); CD 5997, left mandible from symphysis to M 1 ( Fig. 5B View FIG , and see Hartstone-Rose et al. 2007); CD 10452, damaged right M 1 ( Fig. 5C, D View FIG ; Table 2); Postcranial: CD 3221, left proximal tibial epiphysis; CD 7336, left navicular; CD 5978, right navicular.
DESCRIPTION AND TAXONOMIC ASSIGNMENT
The three craniodental specimens are clearly attributable to Megantereon ( Fig. 5 View FIG A-D). The most complete, CD 5997, is shown in Fig. 5B View FIG and fully described by Hartstone-Rose et al. (2007). The other two specimens are also from the lower jaws.
CD 5963 is a posterior fragment of mandible, broken horizontally above the condyle and also anterior to the M 1 alveolus ( Fig. 5A View FIG ). The masseteric fossa is shallow and extends to the posterior root of the M 1, but the most notable feature is the very small distance (22 mm) between the angle of the ramus and the condylar process. The coronoid process must have been correspondingly small, and this indicates that the specimen can only have belonged to a very small machiarodont. CD 5963 is of similar size to CD5997, although the carnassial in CD 5963 may have been slightly larger. CD 10452 is an unworn M 1 that is broken across the protoconid ( Fig. 5C, D View FIG ). The paraconid is small (length: 8.7 mm) with a relatively larger protoconid. It is much smaller than KA64, and is most similar to the heavily damaged type specimen of Megantereon whitei (TM 856) from Schurveberg ( Broom 1937; Turner 1987b). In contrast, both the P 4 and M 1 of CD 5997 are smaller than those of TM 856. As discussed by Hartstone-Rose et al. (2007) the previously known Megantereon whitei material from Coopers D is very small, and these specimens fit within that hypodigm. They most closely fit with the morphology of the type specimen of M. whitei , and there is growing consensus that M. whitei is the only Pleistocene species of the genus Megantereon in Africa ( Palmqvist et al. 2007; Werdelin & Peigné 2010). Therefore the Cooper’s D specimens are assigned to this species.
Three postcranial specimens have also been assigned to M. whitei . An isolated proximal epiphysis from a left tibia with some damage to the ventral edge (CD 3221) is an excellent match for KB 5333M, a partial skeleton of Megantereon whitei published by Vrba (1981). The two naviculae (CD 7336 and CD 5978) may be antimeres and are very similar to the illustrations of M. cultridens ( Cuvier, 1824) from Senéze ( Christiansen & Adolfssen 2007) and KB 6018 ( Megantereon whitei ). In comparison with DN 2571 (here referred to D. cf. aronoki ) the two Cooper’s D naviculae are smaller, not so thick and have less clearly defined facets.
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.