taxonID	type	description	language	source
7B23EDC9FA205A76932CD302BDAECBD3.taxon	description	Figs 5, 6, 7	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
7B23EDC9FA205A76932CD302BDAECBD3.taxon	description	Measurements. Suppl. material 2.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
7B23EDC9FA205A76932CD302BDAECBD3.taxon	description	Description. (See Suppl. material 3). m 1 (MAB 3; Fig. 5 C – F): the anteroconid is simple and it may be located close to the metaconid (8 out of 13) or slightly further away (5 out of 13), and they may be contacting (2 out of 13) or not (11 out of 13). The labial anterolophid is low and may be in contact with the base of the protoconid (11 out of 12) or not (1 out of 12). The anterolophulid may be short (10 out of 15), connected to the protoconid (3 out of 15), or absent (2 out of 15). The metalophulid may be anterior (13 out of 15) or transverse (2 out of 15). The hypolophulid is anterior. The mesolophid may be short (2 out of 15), medium (4 out of 15), long (7 out of 15), or absent (2 out of 15). The ectomesolophid is absent. The sinusid is directed anteriorly, and may be closed by a ridge (5 out of 12), not closed by a ridge (1 out of 12), or have neither ridge nor cusp (6 out of 12). The posterolophid may connect with the entoconid (5 out of 13) or not (8 out of 13). Variability in other sites: In MCX 3 the metalophulid is absent and the hypolophulid is transverse. In MTR 2 (Fig. 5 A), the hypolophulid is transverse. In BC 1 (Fig. 5 B), the posterolophid has a posterior ridge; in MAB 5 (Fig. 5 G, H), the anteroconid is typically closer to the protoconid. In one specimen, the anterolophulid contacts the metaconid. The metalophulid is anterior or absent, and the mesolophid is invariably present. In MAB 10 (Fig. 5 I), the anterolophulid does not contact the metalophulid. In MAB 0 A, MAB 11 (Fig. 5 J), and CBR 1, there are no significant morphological differences from the m 1 of MAB 3. Biometrically, the earliest material from the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin, categorised as belonging to the local L. florancei biozone, exhibits a slightly larger size relative to more recent material classified as the L. ellipticus biozone (Fig. 6 A, Suppl. material 4). m 2 (MAB 3; Fig. 5 O – R): the labial anterolophid contacts the anterolabial edge of the protoconid. The lingual anterolophid may be weak and fused to the metaconid (7 out of 10) or absent (3 out of 10). The metalophulid and hypolophulid are anterior. The mesolophid may be short (7 out of 9) or medium (2 out of 9) in length. The ectomesolophid is absent. The sinusid is directed anteriorly. The labial mesocingulum may be a ridge (5 out of 7), cusp-shaped (1 out of 7), or neither cusp-shaped nor ridge (1 out of 7). The posterolophid may be either connected to the entoconid (5 out of 8) or not (3 out of 8). The posterolophid has a posterior ridge. Variability in other sites: In MTR 2 (Fig. 5 L – N), there is one specimen with an incipient ectomesolophid. In MAB 5 (Fig. 5 S), the labial anterolophid may or may not contact the labial mesocingulid around the protoconid, in another the lingual anterolophid is long, in another the sinusid is perpendicular. Finally, two specimens have no posterior crest of the posterolophid. In MAB 11 (Fig. 5 T, U), there is one specimen in which the labial anterolophid contacts the mesocingulum. There are no significant morphological differences in MTR 1, MAB 0 A, CBR 1, and CBR 0 B (Fig. 5 V). Biometrically, the older material from the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin, belonging to the local L. florancei biozone, is similar to the more modern material belonging to the L. ellipticus biozone (Fig. 6 B, Suppl. material 4). m 3 (MAB 3; Fig. 5 Z – AC): the labial anterolophid may connect to the antero-labial edge of the protoconid (10 out of 11) or connect to the labial mesocingulum (1 out of 11). The lingual anterolophid may be medium (1 out of 11), short (6 out of 11), or incipient (4 out of 11). The mesolophid is mostly absent, with only one specimen showing an incipient one. The metaconid and posterolophid are connected. The mesosinusid is occluded by a ridge (6 out of 10) or opens to the labial side unobstructed (4 out of 10). Variability in other sites: In MTR 2 (Fig. 5 W), the mesolophid is double, with the anterior one being incipient. In MAB 0 B (Fig. 5 X), the mesolophid is incipient, with the posterior part of the tooth narrower than in other sites. In FS 1 (Fig. 5 Y), there is an incipient mesolophid, and the sinusid has a cusp on the labial edge. In MAB 5 (Fig. 5 AD – AE), the labial anterolophid may be short or absent as well as long, the lingual anterolophid may be long, and the metaconid and posterolophid are not connected in two specimens. In MAB 11 (Fig. 5 AF), there is one specimen with a strong lingual anterolophid, and the mesosinusid has a cusp on the labial margin. A biometric analysis reveals a decrease in size of the specimens over time in the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Fig. 6 C, Suppl. material 4). M 1 (MAB 3; Fig. 7 C – F): The anterocone may be simple (13 out of 14) or shallowly divided (1 out of 14), with a platform on the anterior side. The labial part of the anterocone may be larger than the lingual part (12 out of 13) or they are of similar size (1 out of 13). The labial anteroloph may connect to the paracone (12 out of 13), but in one specimen, the labial anteroloph runs from the anterocone to the mesosinus. The lingual anteroloph may connect with the protocone (7 out of 13) or not (6 out of 13). The anteroloph connects the lingual part of the anterocone with the protocone. The labial ridge of the anterolophule may be incipient (4 out of 15) or absent (11 out of 15). The protoloph may be double (1 out of 14), almost double with incipient or short anterior protoloph (3 out of 14), or posterior, connecting with the longitudinal ridge near the protocone (10 out of 14). The metaloph may connect with the posteroloph (11 out of 13) or the hypocone (2 out of 13). The mesoloph may be short (3 out of 13), medium (3 out of 13), or long (7 out of 13). The mesostyle may be present (6 out of 9) or not present (3 out of 9). The ectoloph may be incipient (6 out of 13) or absent (7 out of 13). The metacone ridge is absent. The entostyle may take the form of a cusp (3 out of 11) or a cingulum (8 out of 11). The posterosinus may be small (4 out of 9), medium (1 out of 9), long (2 out of 9), or absent (2 out of 9). The posteroloph may be connected with the metacone (6 out of 9) or not (3 out of 9). Variability in other sites: In MCX 1 (Fig. 7 A), the metalophule is absent. In MTR 2 (Fig. 7 B), a ridge may be present in front of the anterocone. In MAB 5 (Fig. 7 G), there is a decrease in the number of individuals where the contact between the lingual anteroloph and protocone is present, and there is one specimen with a short labial crest of the anteroloph. The ectoloph is less common; there is one M 1 with a metacone ridge, and the posterosinus is smaller. In MAB 11 (Fig. 7 H – J), two specimens were observed with a ridge in front of the anterocone, the lingual anteroloph consistently contacts the protocone, and the labial ridge of the anteroloph may be double (2 out 6), with the anterior one developed and the posterior one incipient (2 out 6) or absent (2 out 6). There are two specimens with a double protolophule. Two specimens exhibit a double metalophule, one of these with the formation of a double mesoloph, and the other one surrounding the mesoloph. In the latter, the surrounding mesoloph is longer. The ridge of the metacone is present in two specimens, and the posterosinus is smaller. Biometrically, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become larger over time (Fig. 6 D, Suppl. material 4). M 2 (MAB 3; Fig. 7 M – P): the lingual anteroloph may be of three distinct lengths: it may be long and reach the antero-lingual border of the protocone (9 out of 16), of medium length (1 out of 16), or short (9 out of 16). The labial anteroloph may either be long and connect to the paracone (15 out of 17) or be disconnected (2 out of 17). The protolophule may be double (7 out of 17), and there are two protolophule, but the posterior one is incomplete (9 out of 17) or simple and connected to the antero-labial part of the protocone (1 out of 17). The metalophule may be anterior (9 out of 18), posterior (2 out of 18), or there are two metalophules, but the anterior one is incomplete (1 out of 18), double (1 out of 18), or disconnected from the metaconule (1 out of 18). The mesoloph may be long, contacting the labial border (3 out of 18), long (12 out of 18), or medium (3 out of 18). The ectoloph may be present (5 out of 16) or absent (11 out of 16). The metaconal ridge may be present (2 out of 17) or not (15 out of 17). The lingual mesocingulum may close the sinus (10 out of 15) or not (5 out of 15). The mesostyle is present in 9 of 16 specimens. The sinus is transverse. The posteroloph may either connect to the metacone (15 out of 17) or not (2 out of 17). Variability in other sites: In MTR 2 (Fig. 7 K, L), the sinus is posterior in one specimen. In MAB 5 (Fig. 7 Q), the lingual anteroloph is shorter, and the metalophule may be transverse. MAB 11 (Fig. 7 R – T) has one specimen with a posterior metalophule. No significant morphological differences were observed in MAB 0 A, CBR 0 B, and FS 1. Biometrically, the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin sites were found to be similar, except for MAB 11, where they were generally narrower (Fig. 6 E, Suppl. material 4). M 3 (MAB 3; Fig. 7 W – Z): The labial anteroloph may reach the antero-labial side of the paracone (6 out of 12), or not (6 out of 12), it may be long (7 out of 11) or of medium length (4 out of 11). The lingual anteroloph reaches the protocone base; it may be long (2 out of 12), medium in length (5 out of 12), short (4 out of 12), or platform-shaped (1 out of 12). The hypocone may be either large (3 out of 12) or small (9 out of 12). The metacone’s position relative to the tooth’s ridge is another distinguishing factor: it may be incorporated within the ridge surrounding the tooth (8 out of 10) or not (2 out of 10). The metalophule is connected to the anterior ridge of the hypocone (7 out of 11), does not reach the metacone (1 out of 11), is connected to the neo-entoloph (2 out of 11), or connects to the anterior ridge of the hypocone and the axioloph (1 out of 11). The mesoloph may be long (1 out of 13), short (7 out of 13), incipient (1 out of 12), or absent (2 out of 12). The axioloph may be long (3 out of 12), long with contact to the paracone / protolophule (3 out of 12), short (3 out of 12), incipient (1 out of 12), or absent (2 out of 12). The sinus may be relatively long (3 out of 12), medium (4 out of 12), or short (5 out of 12). The mesosinus may be wide (4 out of 12) or narrow (8 out of 12). Variability in other sites: The mesoloph contacts the paracone in MTR 2 (Fig. 7 U). In MAB 5 (Fig. 7 AA – AC), the hypocone may be absent, and the mesoloph is more often absent. In MAB 11 (Fig. 7 AD), there is one specimen without a hypocone, and the mesoloph is shorter. No significant morphological differences were observed in BC 1 (Fig. 7 V), MAB 13, and FS 1. A biometric analysis reveals that the different sites in the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin are morphologically similar (Fig. 6 F, Suppl. material 4).	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
54385458995854BE8DB1539FA71E8762.taxon	type_taxon	Type species. Democricetodon crassus Freudenthal, 1969. Sansan, Middle Miocene.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
7E46BB1091C65B429709B21C5A5003B6.taxon	type_taxon	Type species. Cricetodon medium Lartet, 1851 (= Cricetodon helveticum Schaub, 1925). Sansan, Middle Miocene.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
604F7AFCF92852BB85D8BE950A8B8191.taxon	description	Figs 8 A – T, 9	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
604F7AFCF92852BB85D8BE950A8B8191.taxon	description	Measurements. Suppl. material 2.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
604F7AFCF92852BB85D8BE950A8B8191.taxon	description	Description. m 1 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 A, B): the anteroconid is simple. The anterolophulid may be complete (1 out of 3), low (1 out of 3), or incomplete (1 out of 3). In the latter case, the anterolophulid is a ridge that starts from the protoconid. A ridge begins from the metaconid and may contact the anteroconid (2 out of 3) or not (1 out of 3). The anterior metalophulid is directed slightly forward, and it may either connect with the anterolophulid (2 out of 3) or not (1 out of 3). The posterior metalophulid may contact with the posterior ridge of the protoconid (1 out of 3), there is only a spur (1 out of 3), or absent (1 out of 3). The protosinusid is almost closed by a low ridge coming from the anteroconid. The anterosinusid may be well developed (1 out of 3) or practically disappear by the anterior spur of the metaconid (2 out of 3). The posterior ridge of the protoconid may be short, and does not connect with the mesolophid (1 out of 3) or is of medium size and contacts the mesolophid (2 out of 3). The mesolophid is of medium length. The ectomesolophid may reach the labial margin (2 out of 3) or be absent (1 out of 3). The hypolophulid is transverse and connects with the ectolophid. The posterior ridge of the hypoconid may be present (2 out of 3) or not (1 out of 3), resulting in a high posterolophid connected to the entoconid, which encloses the posterosinusid. Variability in other sites: in MAB 5 (Fig. 8 C, D), the anterior ridge of the metaconid does not contact the anteroconid, the anterior metalophulid is a spur, while the posterior one is directed towards the mesolophid in one specimen. In one, the mesolophid is long, while the ectomesolophid is either a spur or absent. The m 1 from MAB 5 is comparatively larger than that of MAB 3 (Fig. 9 A). m 2 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 F, G): the lingual anterolophid is of medium length, and it may not reach the lingual margin (4 out of 5) or be absent (1 out of 5). The anterosinusid is closed by the anterolophid (4 out of 5) or absent (1 out of 5). The labial anterolophid connects to the base of the protoconid. The metalophulid is simple and connects to the anterolophid. On the lingual side, the posterior ridge of the metaconid connects with the lingual part of the posterior ridge of the protoconid (4 out of 5), or not (1 out of 5), almost completely enclosing the mesosinusid. The posterior ridge of the protoconid is of medium length, and two specimens contact the mesolophid. The mesolophid is medium length (1 out of 6), short (4 out of 6), or absent (1 out of 6). The ectomesolophid may be short (1 out of 5), medium (1 out of 5), or absent (3 out of 5). The posterior crest of the hypoconid is long (2 out of 6) or only a spur (4 out of 6). The posterolophid is high and connects with the entoconid, enclosing the posterosinusid (4 out of 6) or not contacting the entoconid (2 out of 6). Variability at other sites: FS 1 (Fig. 8 E) exhibits no notable differences. However, in MAB 5, the lingual anterolophid is shorter (Fig. 8 H, I). Additionally, the m 2 of the study material appears to lengthen with time in terms of biometry (Fig. 9 B). m 3 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 J, K): the lingual anterolophid is short, and the labial one connects with the base of the protoconid. The metalophulid contacts obliquely forward. On the lingual side, the posterior ridge of the metaconid connects with the anterior ridge of the protoconid and with the entoconid, enclosing the mesosinusid. The posterior ridge of the protoconid is of medium-long length. The ectomesolophid may be short (1 out of 5) or absent (4 out of 5). The hypolophulid is transverse and complete. The posterolophid is high and connects with the entoconid, enclosing the posterosinusid. Variability in other sites: in MAB 5 (Fig. 8 L, M), the posterior ridge of the protoconid is more delayed. However, no difference in size is apparent (Fig. 9 C). M 1 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 N, O): The tooth surface is rough. The anterocone is simple and extends transversely. One specimen has an anterior ridge on the labial side of the anterocone. The postero-labial ridge of the anterocone is attached to the labial side of the tooth in one individual, and in another it is isolated. The anterocone has a central posterior ridge: in one specimen it is directed towards the labial side, in another towards the protocone, and in the last one it is straight. The anteroloph may be present (2 out of 3) or absent (1 out of 3). The labial ridge of the anterolophule may be incipient (1 out of 3) or absent (2 out of 3). The anterior ridge of the protocone is directed forward and, in one specimen, connects with the median ridge of the anterocone. The posterior protoloph is transverse and connects labially to the entoloph, posterior to the protocone. The ectoloph may be present (2 out of 3) or absent (1 out of 3). In one individual, there is a double mesoloph. In the latter case, the anterior mesoloph is incipient and is directed towards the posterior mesoloph. The posterior or main mesoloph is long. The ectomesoloph may be absent (2 out of 3) or only a spur (1 out of 3). The sinus is relatively narrow and directed forward. The metaloph is connected to the entoloph. The posteroloph is long, and it may connect to the base of the metacone (1 out of 3) or not (2 out of 3). Variability is present in other sites: in MAB 5 (Fig. 8 P), the absence of a posterior ridge of the anterocone is observed, and the metaloph is connected to the anterior part of the hypocone. No significant disparities in size are detected (Fig. 9 D). M 2 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 Q): The surface is rough. The lingual anteroloph is short. The protoloph is transverse and connects with the protocone. The mesoloph is of medium length. The ectomesoloph is absent. The sinus is narrow and directed forward. The metaloph is transverse and connects with the hypocone. The posteroloph is long and isolated labially. M 3 (MAB 3; Fig. 8 R – T): the labial anteroloph is characterised as either long (2 out of 3) or medium (1 out of 3) in length, with the possibility of either connecting to the protocone (1 out of 3) or the protoloph (2 out of 3). The lingual anteroloph is either small (2 out of 3) or absent (1 out of 3). The protoloph is simple, transverse, or shifted slightly forward, connecting to the anterior part of the protocone. The posterior ridge of the paracone connects to the base of the metacone, forming a labial cingulum that closes the mesosinus. The neo-entoloph may be complete and high (1 out of 3), short and weak (1 out of 3), or incomplete (1 out of 3). The axioloph may be complete and located in the central part of the tooth (2 out of 3), or long and incomplete (1 out of 3). The mesoloph may be medium (1 out of 3) or long and connects to the labial cingulum (2 out of 3). The metaloph is long and directed forward. The metaloph may connect to the metacone and the neo-entoloph through the axioloph (1 out of 3), the metacone and the posterior part of the protocone (1 out of 3), or the anterior part of the hypocone (1 out of 3). The hypocone may be well developed (1 out of 3) or absent (2 out of 3). The posteroloph may be high and short, connecting the neo-entoloph and the metacone, enclosing a small posterosinus (1 out of 3), which is small and isolated (1 out of 3), or high, short, and not connected to the metacone (1 out of 3). Variability is present in other sites: the tooth from MAB 5 is similar to the one described before.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
92F8A1CE7FE1509893323EDEBD1463B7.taxon	type_taxon	Type species. Megacricetodon gregarious (Schaub, 1925), La Grive M, Upper Miocene.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
CA97BFB8994B5D1F8B931FF183CCAF9F.taxon	description	Figs 2, 3, 4	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
CA97BFB8994B5D1F8B931FF183CCAF9F.taxon	description	Measurements. Suppl. material 2.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
CA97BFB8994B5D1F8B931FF183CCAF9F.taxon	description	Description. (See Suppl. material 3). Mandible (MCX 3; Fig. 2 A): In occlusal view, the mandible exhibits a slight inclination, which does not obscure the mental foramen. This foramen is located between the incisor and the first molar on the labial side. The masseteric process is deep and originates at the level of the anterior part of the m 1 with a ridge. Concerning other sites, no significant disparities were observed in the material of MCX 2. m 1 (MAB 5; Fig. 2 F – I): the anteroconid is simple and rounded, and slightly lower than the rest of the cusps (between morphology B and C as described by Oliver and Peláez-Campomanes (2016) (Fig. 2 H )). The labial spur of the anterolophulid may be developed (1 out of 16), incipient (1 out of 16), or absent (14 out of 16). The metalophulid is positioned anteriorly and is directed forward, not connected to the protoconid. The mesolophid may be categorised as follows: long and developed to the lingual side (1 out of 16), long without reaching the lingual side (4 out of 16), medium (8 out of 16), or short (3 out of 16). The ectomesolophid is absent. The hypolophulid is directed forward. The posterolophid descends towards the base of the entoconid but does not connect to it. Variability in other sites: In the remains of MCX 2 and MCX 3 (Fig. 2 B), the anterolophulid is consistently absent, and the mesolophid is either short or medium. In MTR 1, the anterolophulid is absent. In the remains from MTR 2 (Fig. 2 C), two specimens have a double metalophulid, one has no mesolophid, one has an ectomesolophid and one has the posterolophid attached to the entoconid. In BC 1, the mesolophid is shorter (Fig. 2 D). In one individual, the posterolophid is joined to the entoconid, and there is greater development of the labial ridge of the anterolophulid. In MAB 0 B (Fig. 2 E), one individual is observed to possess two ridges at the lingual-anterior and labial side of the anteroconid; the anterolophulid is more developed, and in another, the metalophulid is isolated. In FS 1, an individual is noted with the metalophulid isolated from the protoconid. In MAB 3, a tooth with an incipient ectomesolophid is observed. The material from the other sites (MAB 2, MAB 0 A, MAB 11, and CBR 1) shows no significant differences. Generally, there seems to be a slight tendency for the mesolophid to elongate over time. As illustrated in Fig. 3 A, Suppl. material 4, the biometric values of M. primitivus from localities MCX 2 and MCX 3 are the smallest observed in this basin. In addition, there is a tendency for specimens to lengthen in time. m 2 (MAB 3; Fig. 2 M – P): the lingual anterolophid may terminate at the antero-lingual border of the metaconid (2 out of 16), fail to reach the corner (10 out of 16), or be absent (4 out of 16). The anterosinusid may be small and narrow (7 out of 16) or absent (9 out of 16). The labial anterolophid is long and descends towards the base of the protoconid. The mesolophid can be categorised into several distinct forms, including long and reaching the lingual margin (2 out of 18), long without reaching the lingual margin (3 out of 18), medium (6 out of 18), short (5 out of 18), or absent (3 out of 18). The ectolophid is continuous. The ectomesolophid is absent, and the posterolophid is not connected to the entoconid. Variability in other sites: In MCX 3 (Fig. 2 K), the lingual anterolophid is always present and longer, and the mesolophid is short or medium in length. In BC 1 (Fig. 2 L), the lingual anterolophid is always present; in one specimen, the labial anterolophid joins the labial mesocingulum, and the mesolophid is usually longer. In MAB 0 A, the mesolophid is usually longer. In MAB 0 B, the posterolophid may be connected to the entoconid. In MAB 5 (Fig. 2 Q), the anterolophid is always present. In CBR 1, the posterolophid is connected to the entoconid; in another specimen, the labial anterolophid is connected to the labial mesocingulum. The m 2 morphology of MTR 2, FS 1, MAB 3 A, MAB 11, CBR 0 B (Fig. 2 R), and CBR 0 F does not differ significantly from that of MAB 3. About the biometry (Fig. 3 B, Suppl. material 4) between the material from the different sites of this species in the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin, the material from MCX 3 is slightly smaller, while that from MAB 11 is slightly longer, and that from BC 1 is slightly narrower. In addition, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become larger over time. m 3 (MAB 3; Fig. 2 V – Z): The lingual anterolophid may be of medium size (7 out of 19), short (6 out of 19), or absent (6 out of 19). A small anterosinusid is present in six specimens. The labial anterolophid may be long (9 out of 18) or short (9 out of 18), descending towards the base of the protoconid (9 out of 18). The metalophulid is short and complete, while the mesolophid is absent. The mesosinusid is narrow and transverse. The posterosinusid is medium to large in size. The protoconid and the hypoconid may be separate (6 out of 18) or not (12 out of 18). The metaconid, entoconid, and posterolophid form a continuous wall along the lingual margin (10 out of 17), or the metaconid is independent (7 out of 17). Variability in other sites: In MCX 3 (Fig. 2 S), the lingual anterolophid is shorter and the labial is longer, with the anterosinusid occurring more frequently. In BC 1 (Fig. 2 T), there is a tooth with an anterior cingulum in front of the anterolophid. In MAB 2 (Fig. 2 U), an individual is observed with a developed mesolophid. In MAB 5 (Fig. 2 AA – AB), the lingual anterolophid is long in two individuals, while the metalophulid is absent in another and the mesolophid is present in a third specimen. In CBR 1, in addition to the mesolophid, the metaconid has a ridge that contacts the lingual part of the ectolophid in one specimen. In the more modern sites of the basin, such as MAB 5 and CBR 1, the presence of mesolophids is more prevalent. The morphology of m 3 from localities MTR 2, MAB 0 A, MAB 0 B, FS 1, MAB 11, MAB 12, and CBR 2 does not differ significantly from that described in MAB 3. The comparison of the biometry (Fig. 3 C, Suppl. material 4) of the m 3 of M. primitivus from the various localities of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin shows that the specimen from MAB 0 B is the largest, while that from CBR 2 is the smallest (MAB 0 B). In addition, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become shorter and wider over time. M 1 (MAB 3; Fig. 4 E – I): the anterocone may be not subdivided (1 out of 15), be slightly subdivided and the sulcus shallow (1 out of 15), or deeply subdivided and have a deeply subdivided with a platform in front of the anterocone (10 out of 15) and with even a cingulum (3 out of 15). The labial part of the anterocone may be larger (13 out of 15) or equal (2 out of 15) to the lingual one. The protolophule may be posterior to the protocone (5 out of 15), posterior almost double, formed by the labial ridge of the anteroloph or by the front ridge of the paracone (10 out of 15). The anterolophule may connect over the lingual cusp (8 out of 15) or between the two cusps of the anterocone (7 out of 15). The labial spur of the anterolophule may be short (4 of 15), incipient (7 of 15), or absent (4 of 15). The lingual mesocingulum is present but poorly developed (8 of 16) or absent (8 out of 16). The ectoloph (or paracone ridge) may be long (8 out of 16) or short (8 out of 16). The length of the mesoloph is recorded as either long and reaching the labial margin (2 out of 17), long (11 out of 17), medium (2 out of 17), or short (2 out of 17). The connection between the mesoloph and ectoloph of the paracone is categorised as either present (4 out of 18) or absent (14 out of 18). The metalophule is directed backwards, thereby reducing the posterosinus. The posterosinus may be narrow (10 out of 17) or of medium width (7 out of 17), being either deep (8 out of 15) or deep (8 out of 15) or shallow (7 out of 15). Variability in other sites: In the M 1 of MCX 3, there is a higher prevalence of uniform size anterocone cusps, the absence of a double protolophule, the anterolophule connection with the lingual cusp, the ectoloph is absent in one specimen, and the mesoloph is long and lack of contact with the posterior crest of the paracone. In M 1 from MTR 2 (Fig. 4 A), the protolophule is posterior, the anterolophule connects to the lingual cusp, the labial crest of the anterolophule is absent, the lingual mesocingulum is rare, the mesoloph and ectoloph of the paracone never seem to be connected, and finally the metalophule usually connects to the most anterior part of the posteroloph. It may even be directed more posteriorly, even transversely. In BC 1 (Fig. 4 B, C), there are two specimens with a deeply divided anterocone without platform or cingulum, the protolophule is simple and posterior, the anterolophule connects with the lingual cusp, its labial crest is always absent, the lingual mesocingulum is less frequent, the mesoloph never connects with the ectoloph of the paracone and finally the metalophule connects with the posteroloph posterior to the hypocone in six out of fifteen cases. In MAB 0 A (Fig. 4 D), most individuals have an anterior cingulum of the anterocone, the protolophule is usually posterior, the ectoloph is long in three out of six individuals, and in another, the metalophule does not reduce the posterosinus. In FS 1, the anterocone is deeply divided and has no anterior platform or cingulum; in one individual, the protolophule is double; in another, the protolophule is double; in another, the ectoloph is absent. In MAB 5 (Fig. 4 J), the anterocone is less divided and there are no specimens with a cingulum, the proportion of material with anterocone cusps of equal size is higher, the lingual mesocingulum is less common, the protolophule is mostly posterior, the ectoloph is absent in one tooth, and there are four specimens with a metalophule that connects posteriorly but without reducing the posterosinus. In MAB 11 (Fig. 4 K), the anterocone is less divided; in another, the metalophule does not reduce the posterosinus. In CBR 1 (Fig. 4 L), the protolophule is posterior, the anterolophule touches the lingual cusp, and the metalophule does not reduce the posterosinus in three individuals and is transverse in another. In the remaining sites (MCX 4, MTR 3, BC 2, MAB 0 B, CBR 0 E, and CBR 4), no significant morphological differences were observed. About biometrics (Fig. 3 D, Suppl. material 4), the material from the study sites belongs to the L. florancei local biozone, which is generally slightly smaller in size. In addition, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become larger over time. M 2 (MAB 5; Fig. 4 Q – T): the protolophule may be single and transverse, connected to the protocone (11 out of 14), or double with an incomplete posterior protolophule (3 out of 14). The ectoloph may be long and contact the labial side (4 out of 13), long (2 out of 13), short (4 out of 13), or absent (3 out of 13). The mesoloph is long and reaches the labial edge (4 out of 13), long without reaching the labial edge (6 out of 13), or medium length (3 out of 13). The ectoloph and the mesoloph may be connected (5 out of 13) or not (6 out of 13), with two specimens in which the ectoloph is connected to the labial border. The sinus may be directed slightly anteriorly (2 out of 16) or perpendicular (14 out of 16). The metalophule may be directed posteriorly, connecting with the posteroloph posterior to the hypocone (3 out of 13), or directed forward and connecting with the entoloph (10 out of 13). The posteroloph may be connected to the posterior part of the metaconid (8 out of 13) or not (5 out of 13). The posterosinus may be either long (8 out of 13) or short (5 out of 13). Variability in other sites: In MCX 3 (Fig. 4 M), there is one individual with a double protolophule, another with a lingual mesocingulum, and the ectoloph is usually longer. In BC 1 (Fig. 4 N), the morphology of the protolophule is more variable, even with a double protolophule, a double protolophule with both protolophules complete in one individual, the mesoloph is short in another. It does not appear to be connected to the ectoloph. In MAB 0 A, the protolophule may be directed either anteriorly or posteriorly. In FS 1 (Fig. 4 O), there is one individual with a double protolophule and another with a metalophule attached to the posteroloph. In MAB 3 (Fig. 4 P) there are three individuals with the protolophule attached to the anteroloph anterior to the protocone another with a double protolophule, the ectoloph always present, another with a short mesoloph, and three others with a transverse metalophule. In MAB 11 (Fig. 4 U) has one specimen with an anterior protolophule and another with a transverse metalophule. In CBR 1 (Fig. 4 V), there is one individual with an incomplete anterior protolophule, an oblique sinus in three out of four specimens, another with a transverse metalophule, and another with a reduced posterosinus. No significant differences exist in MTR 1, MTR 2, MTR 3, and MAB 4. Regarding biometry (Fig. 3 E, Suppl. material 4), the examined material belonging to local biozone L. florancei tends to be smaller than that belonging to local biozone L. ellipticus. In addition, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become larger over time. M 3 (MAB 5; Fig. 4 AC – AF): the lingual anteroloph and the protosinus may be poorly developed (2 out of 11) or absent (9 out of 11). The labial anteroloph may be short (5 out of 11) or long (6 out of 11), connecting with the paracone (7 out of 11) or not (4 out of 11). This morphology of the labial anteroloph influences the presence of a short but relatively wide anterosinus (2 out of 11), a long anterosinus (6 out of 11), or the absence of an anterosinus (3 out of 11). The metalophule (centroloph) may be connected to the neo-entoloph (3 out of 11), to the anterior ridge of the hypocone (4 out of 11), to the anterior ridge of the hypocone and protolophule (2 out of 11), to the posterior ridge of the protocone (1 out of 11) or the axioloph (1 out of 11). The sinus may be shallow (4 out of 11) or deep (7 out of 11). The mesoloph may be long (2 out of 11), short (4 out of 11), incipient (2 out of 11), or absent (3 out of 11). The neo-entoloph may be short and connected to the protocone and hypocone (8 out of 11) or absent (3 out of 11). The axioloph may be incipient (3 out of 11) or absent (8 out of 11). The posteroloph may be long and curved (10 out of 11) or straight (1 out of 11), forming a labial wall together with the metacone and the posterior wall of the paracone (7 out of 11), and may not connect with the metacone (4 out of 11). Variability in other sites: In MCX 3 (Fig. 4 W), the labial anteroloph is shorter; in two out of eight individuals, the neo-entoloph is absent, and the protocone and hypocone are directly connected. In MTR 2 (Fig. 4 X), there is one individual without a labial anteroloph, and the metaloph seems more often connected to the hypocone. In BC 1 (Fig. 4 Y), there is one individual without a metalophule; the sinus is always deep, and the mesoloph is absent. In MAB 3 (Fig. 4 Z – AA), the metalophule disappears in some individuals, while the mesoloph is less common. There are no significant differences in FS 1, MAB 0 A, MAB 11 B, and CBR 1. Regarding biometry (Fig. 3 F, Suppl. material 4), no significant differences can be observed between the different sites in the Ribesalbes-Alcora basin. In addition, there is a slight tendency for specimens to become larger over time.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
B8CDB4FA63D05A668306D1A62FEC49DD.taxon	type_taxon	Type species. Melissiodon dominans Schaub, 1925. Wintershof-West. Early Miocene.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
E62062C7CCE00F06244D9C1AE4B76A03.taxon	description	Fig. 8 Z Localities. MAB 0 A.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
E62062C7CCE00F06244D9C1AE4B76A03.taxon	materials_examined	Material (number of remains). MAB 0 A (1): 1 M 2.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
E62062C7CCE00F06244D9C1AE4B76A03.taxon	description	Description. M 2 (MAB 0 A; Fig. 8 Z): small broken tooth. The protoloph is double, the anterior one being transverse and connected to the protocone, and the posterior one incomplete, without contacting the paracone. The mesoloph is double: the anterior is short and the posterior is medium, both parallel. The crest of the protocone is short and does not contact the mesoloph. The ectomesoloph is absent. The sinus is narrow and directed forward. The metaloph is anterior and connects with the entoloph. The posteroloph is long and isolated labially. There is a small posterior ridge of the hypocone, in the posterosinus.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
E62062C7CCE00F06244D9C1AE4B76A03.taxon	discussion	Remarks. The tooth fragment displays characteristics consistent with those observed in Eumyarion, Pseudocricetodon, or Eucricetodon, including the presence of double mesolophs and the posterior crest of the hypocone. Given its diminutive dimensions and the presence of a double protoloph, it seems not plausible that this specimen can be attributed to the Eumyarion species identified at other localities. The Turkish fossil record is replete with small Eumyarion species, yet one m 1 has been described from the Blanquàtere 1 location, which belongs to one of these species (Aguilar et al. 2010 b). It is imprudent to draw comparisons between the two, as they represent distinct elements. However, this combination of characteristics is absent in E. intercentralis or E. microps from Keseköy (de Bruijn and Saraç 1991). A specimen from Sabuncubeli exhibits some resemblance but displays a longer mesoloph, and the two crests are fused. Additionally, it is larger in E. orhani (de Bruijn et al. 2006). The presence of double mesolophs or the posterior crest of the hypocone has been documented in Eucricetodon aquitanicus Baudelot & Bonis, 1968 from the Early Miocene (Hugueney 1999 b), and in addition, the presence of double mesolophs has been documented in Eucricetodon atavoides Freudenthal, 1996 from the early Oligocene (Freudenthal 1996; Gomes-Rodrigues et al. 2013), within the Eucricetodon genus. The species Sindemys aguilari (Lindsay, 1988) from Pakistan and certain Asian Eucricetodon forms (see plate 7.3, fig. 12; Wessels 2009; Gomes-Rodrigues et al. 2012) exhibit this or a similar configuration, despite originating from outside the European and Turkish regions. The complicated primitive morphology of the taxon precludes its categorisation within any specific genus. If the specimen were determined to belong to Eumyarion, it would represent the earliest known appearance of this genus in the Levantine basins from the Iberian Peninsula. Conversely, if the specimen belonged to Eucricetodon, it would represent the surviving member of the genus following the absence of representatives of the European MN 3 following the Cricetid Vacuum (Hugueney 1999 b). Alternatively, it could be an exotic immigrant species from Asia or another continent during a period of widespread intercontinental migration.	en	Crespo, Vicente D., Ríos, María, Marquina-Blasco, Rafael, Montoya, Plini (2025): The Early Miocene muroids (Muroidea, Rodentia) of the Ribesalbes-Alcora Basin (Spain): A thriving haven during a time of migration. Fossil Record 28 (1): 187-218, DOI: 10.3897/fr.28.138478
