Eozhelestes mangit, NESOV, 1997

Archibald, J. David & Averianov, Alexander, 2012, Phylogenetic analysis, taxonomic revision, and dental ontogeny of the Cretaceous Zhelestidae (Mammalia: Eutheria), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 164 (2), pp. 361-426 : 406

EOZHELESTES MANGIT NESOV, 1997

(See Appendix 4 for synonymies, referred illustrations, and referred specimens.)

Holotype: CCMGE 26 /12176, left m1. Found in 2003 from concentrate obtained in 1998.

Type locality and horizon: SSHD-8, Sheikhdzheili, Kyzylkum Desert, Uzbekistan. Upper part of Khodzhakul Formation, Upper Cretaceous (early Cenomanian).

Revised diagnosis: Differs from Eomaia , Prokennalestes , Murtoilestes , and Bobolestes by anteroposterior compression of trigonid; entoconid subequal to or larger than hypoconid or hypoconulid; labial postcingulid present. Differs from Eomaia , Prokennalestes , and Bobolestes by ‘coronoid’ facet absent; i4 greatly reduced; hypoconulid on m1-2 about twice as close to entoconid than to hypoconid. Differs from Eomaia and Prokennalestes by mandibular symphysis posterior margin reaching p3 or more posteriorly; posteriormost mental foramen below p5 or more posterior; p3 shorter than p2. Differs from Prokennalestes and Bobolestes by lower canine enlargement. Differs from Eomaia by p1-p2 diastema absent. Differs from Prokennalestes by lower canine single-rooted. Differs from Bobolestes by oblique protocristid; cristid obliqua lingual to protocristid notch. Differs from the clade Zhelestidae + Paranyctoides by trigonid height twice or more the height of talonid; oblique protocristid; talonid narrower than trigonid; cristid oblique lingual to protocristid notch.

Description: See Averianov & Archibald (2005: 602–603).

Measurements: See Averianov & Archibald (2005: 603).

Comments: Eozhelestes mangit was originally established on a single lower molar and though to be the most ancient and primitive member of Zhelestidae ( Nesov, 1997) , extending the fossil record of the group by about five million years earlier than Dzharakuduk. Kielan-Jaworowska et al. (2004) excluded this taxon from Zhelestidae and considered it to be order and family incertae sedis following a conclusion expressed in ‘note added in proof’ to Nesov et al. (1998: 87). Averianov & Archibald (2005) referred to E. mangit eight additional specimens and provided a revised diagnosis for this taxon citing a unique combination of primitive and derived characters. They noted that this taxon differs from the Turonian zhelestids by a number of ancestral retentions, which is consistent with its older geological age, and classified it within Zhelestidae . According to the phylogenetic analysis by Wible et al. (2004: fig. 3) Eozhelestes forms a clade with Paranyctoides that is less basal than Zhelestidae on the phylogenetic tree, forming a sister relationship to all other eutherians. This result is somewhat surprising because in most characters Eozhelestes is clearly plesiomorphic relative to Zhelestidae . According to the phylogenetic analyses in the last section of the present paper, Eozhelestes is either a sister taxon to a Zhelestidae + Paranyctoides clade or is in a polytomy with other zheletsids. For now we place Eozhe-lestes as? Zhelestidae . Paranyctoides will be treated in a separate publication.