Plesiosminthus bavaricus Freudenberg, 1941

Freudenthal, Matthijs & Martín-Suárez, Elvira, 2017, A revision of European Plesiosminthus (Rodentia, Dipodidae), and new material from the upper Oligocene of Teruel (Spain), Palaeontologia Electronica 9 (1), pp. 1-25 : 5-6

Plesiosminthus bavaricus Freudenberg, 1941

Type locality. Gaimersheim, MP28, Germany.

Synonymy. Plesiosminthus promyarion in Kristkoiz (1992).

Holotype. Not designated, but marked as holotype in the Munich collection: Mandibula dext. with m1 –

m3, SNSB-BSPG 1939 XI 23, figured in Freudenberg (1941, figure 8 and plate 12, figure 17) and Kristkoiz (1992, plate 1, figure c) (information kindly provided by Dr. G. Roessner, Munich).

Measurements. Appendix 1 (from Kristkoiz, 1992). Emended diagnosis. Extracting the most important features from Kristkoiz (1992) we propose the following diagnosis: in m1 the anteroconid is isolated and the mesostylid is weakly developed; the protoconid hind arm is nearly always bent, rarely straight; the ectolophid is rarely interrupted at the protoconid; an ectostylid or cingulum is present in the sinusid in about half the cases. In m2 the protoconid hind arm (or posterior metalophulid) is complete in 50% of the specimens. In m3 the protoconid hind arm is generally absent and the mesolophid is nearly always long, reaching the molar border. In M1 an antecingulum is rarely present, the mesostyle is small. In M2, besides the anterior one, the posterior protolophule is present in more than half the cases, either interrupted or rarely complete; the entoloph is never connected to the protocone.

Plesiosminthus bavaricus differs from P. moniqueae n. sp. by: the less frequent ectostylid/ cingulum in m1 (44% vs. 93%); the better developed protoconid hind arm in m2; the less frequent antecingulum in M1; the poorly developed mesostyle in M1, which is always well developed in Pech Desse; the more frequent posterior protolophule in M2.