Tungurictis small sp., Colbert, 1939
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/geodiversitas2020v42a3 |
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:344FC2F5-A395-449E-915A-EAC53F366764 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3703736 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/7C6787D2-FFF4-FFFB-C635-EB5DFA573A1B |
treatment provided by |
Valdenar |
scientific name |
Tungurictis small sp. |
status |
|
( Fig. 7 View FIG )
Protictitherium small sp. – Wang et al. 1998: 221, 236.
REFERRED SPECIMENS. — IVPP V 11497 View Materials , left dentary fragment with m1 and m2 alveolus from Botamoyin, lower part of Halamagai Formation ( Wang et al. 1998: fig. 3C) ( Fig. 7 View FIG ). — IVPP V 11498 View Materials , left dentary with c-p1 alveoli, p2 broken, p3-m2 alveoli, from Tieersihabahe, lower part of Halamagai Formation.
COMPARISON WITH JUNGGAR TUNGURICTIS PEIGNEI , N. SP.
Only two dentary fragments are available for this taxon. The length of m1 is only 80% of the average for Junggar Tungurictis
peignei, n. sp. specimens ( Table 2 View TABLE ), much too small to be comfortably included in the latter. Although overall consistent with the latter in dental morphology, this small form stands out for its relatively more cuspidate and lingually slanted entoconid and much smaller hypoconulid, which is consistent with assigning this taxon to Tungurictis . Furthermore, the ramus height at the position of m1 appears to be visibly shallower in this unnamed taxon relative to m1 crown height, compared to T. peignei , n. sp.
Intraspecific variations and sexual dimorphism in extinct basal hyaenids are difficult to evaluate when most species from any single locality amount to no more than a handful of specimens. For the present, the small size and dental morphology seems to suggest a different species, pending additional material.
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.