Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937 )
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.5252/g2017n2a8 |
|
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:36D6C5E9-8632-41E2-88F0-D470B3DEA72C |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5206081 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03961919-FD07-FFB2-FE89-0FEED3B92AAF |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937 ) |
| status |
|
Megantereon whitei ( Broom, 1937)
( Fig. 5 View FIG )
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Craniodental. CD 5963, right posterior mandible fragment with M 1 roots ( Fig. 5A View FIG ); CD 5997, left mandible from symphysis to M 1 ( Fig. 5B View FIG , and see Hartstone-Rose et al. 2007); CD 10452, damaged right M 1 ( Fig. 5C, D View FIG ; Table 2); Postcranial: CD 3221, left proximal tibial epiphysis; CD 7336, left navicular; CD 5978, right navicular.
DESCRIPTION AND TAXONOMIC ASSIGNMENT
The three craniodental specimens are clearly attributable to Megantereon ( Fig. 5 View FIG A-D). The most complete, CD 5997, is shown in Fig. 5B View FIG and fully described by Hartstone-Rose et al. (2007). The other two specimens are also from the lower jaws.
CD 5963 is a posterior fragment of mandible, broken horizontally above the condyle and also anterior to the M 1 alveolus ( Fig. 5A View FIG ). The masseteric fossa is shallow and extends to the posterior root of the M 1, but the most notable feature is the very small distance ( 22 mm) between the angle of the ramus and the condylar process. The coronoid process must have been correspondingly small, and this indicates that the specimen can only have belonged to a very small machiarodont. CD 5963 is of similar size to CD5997, although the carnassial in CD 5963 may have been slightly larger. CD 10452 is an unworn M 1 that is broken across the protoconid ( Fig. 5C, D View FIG ). The paraconid is small (length: 8.7 mm) with a relatively larger protoconid. It is much smaller than KA64, and is most similar to the heavily damaged type specimen of Megantereon whitei (TM 856) from Schurveberg ( Broom 1937; Turner 1987b). In contrast, both the P 4 and M 1 of CD 5997 are smaller than those of TM 856. As discussed by Hartstone-Rose et al. (2007) the previously known Megantereon whitei material from Coopers D is very small, and these specimens fit within that hypodigm. They most closely fit with the morphology of the type specimen of M. whitei , and there is growing consensus that M. whitei is the only Pleistocene species of the genus Megantereon in Africa ( Palmqvist et al. 2007; Werdelin & Peigné 2010). Therefore the Cooper’s D specimens are assigned to this species.
Three postcranial specimens have also been assigned to M. whitei . An isolated proximal epiphysis from a left tibia with some damage to the ventral edge (CD 3221) is an excellent match for KB 5333M, a partial skeleton of Megantereon whitei published by Vrba (1981). The two naviculae (CD 7336 and CD 5978) may be antimeres and are very similar to the illustrations of M. cultridens ( Cuvier, 1824) from Senéze ( Christiansen & Adolfssen 2007) and KB 6018 ( Megantereon whitei ). In comparison with DN 2571 (here referred to D. cf. aronoki ) the two Cooper’s D naviculae are smaller, not so thick and have less clearly defined facets.
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.