Megaloceros giganteus Blumenbach, 1799

Fourvel, Jean-Baptiste, Fosse, Philippe, Fernandez, Philippe & Antoine, Pierre-Olivier, 2015, Large mammals of Fouvent-Saint-Andoche (Haute-Saône, France): a glimpse into a Late Pleistocene hyena den, Geodiversitas 37 (2), pp. 237-266 : 259-260

Megaloceros giganteus Blumenbach, 1799

MATERIAL EXAMINED. — NISP =46; MNI =16.

1842 sample: 2 right mandibles; 1 left mandible; 2 right tali; 1 naviculo-cuboid.

1989-1992 sample: 1 left maxilla; 1 right mandible; 3 left mandibles; 6 left P2; 1 left M1; 3 left M2; 1 left M3; 1 left d4; 2 right p3; 2 right p4; 1 left p4; 1 right m1; 1 left m1; 2 right m2; 1 left m2; 3 left m3; 8 tooth fragments; 1 right humerus; 2 left humeri.

DESCRIPTION

The giant deer M. giganteus is represented by 46 remains (mainly cranial elements including teeth). Sixteen individuals (mainly adults and olds) have been counted based on the dispersion within the stratigraphy. The giant deer is quite common in the Late Pleistocene interval, even if the samples are generally small ( Kurtén 1968; Delpech & Guérin in Guérin & Patou-Mathis 1996; Magniez 2010). Dental morphology of the Fouvent sample closely matches that of published material (e.g., Thenius 1966; Croitor 2008; Magniez 2010). Upper premolars and molars are robust with a strong cingulum. On the lingual face, they have a well developed and individualized interlobar column. The mandibular fragments of Fouvent with m1, m2 and/or m3 also show individualized interlobar column ( Fig.9A, B ). Measurements are summarized in Table 14 and their comparison with published data confirms our attribution to the Megaceros. The basal length and the width of six left P2 are quite similar of the ones recorded at Tournal (23- 23 mm for the length and 22-23 for the width in Magniez 2010) and at Conives (22 mm for the length and 21.4 mm for the width in Fourvel 2008). The comparison dataset concerning lower cheek teeth are rarer but the measurements recorded at Fouvent are close to the values of Tournal. Nonetheless the first lower molars are smaller; the length for example is comprised between 15 and 19.5 mm whereas the only m1 from Tournal is 28.1 mm long ( Magniez 2010). In addition, if the measurements of the m2 are similar at Fouvent and Tournal they are much smaller than the only m2 of the megaceros of Labeko Koba, Spain (L= 34 mm; B= 22.2 mm). Six postcranial elements have been attributed to the giant deer based on their morphology and general proportions. Three humeral shaft fragments (G8.A/B.215, E11.B.71, F10.B.416) have been determined as a giant deer because of their size and morphology excluding each other large species (equids, bovids or rhinoceros). Two right tali (1842.103 and 1842.79) and one naviculo-cuboid (1842.80) present the same characters as described in Breda (2005) and Magniez (2010).

Figures

FIG. 9.— Ungulates (other than rhinoceros) remains from Fouvent: A, B, giant deer Megaloceros giganteus Blumenbach,1799:right 1842.14 (A) and left 1842.13 (B) mandibles; C-E, red deer Cervus elaphus Linnaeus, 1758: basal part of right antler 1842.109 (C) and ingested left talus 1842.97 (D, palmar view; E, dorsal view); F-H, horse Equus germanicus Nehring,1884:right metacarpal 1842.2 (F), first 1842.6 (G) and third H9.A.1 (H) phalanges;I-L, large bovid Bovidae:right calcaneum 1842.78 (I), first phalange G10.E/A.9 (J, dorsal view; K, lateral view) and metapodial distal portion F11.A.50 (L); M-O reindeer Rangifer tarandus (Linnaeus, 1758): basal part of left antler 1842.106 (M), portion of right antler F10.B.329 (N) and right metatarsal G9.24 (O). Scale bar: 20 mm. Pictures by JBF.