Tragelaphus scriptus Pallas, 1766

Brophy, Juliet K., de Ruiter, Darryl J., Fortelius, Mikael, Bamford, Marion & Berger, Lee R., 2016, Pleistocene Bovidae (Mammalia) from Malapa, Gauteng Province, South Africa, Palaeontologia Electronica 35 (8), pp. 1-22 : 6-7

Tragelaphus scriptus Pallas, 1766

Material. Tragelaphus scriptus is represented by a right mandible that was refit from three broken pieces: UW 88-519, UW 88-518, and UW 1015 ( Figure 3 ). UW 88-519 is a right mandibular fragment with an M 3. UW 88-518 consists of a mandible with right M 1 and M 2 while UW 88-1015 is a mandibular fragment with the roots of P 3 and P 4.

Description. The mandibular teeth are brachydont and reveal simple central cavities ( Table 4). No basal pillars are present on the specimens. All of the teeth are in full eruption and exhibit narrowly pointed mesial and distal lobes on the buccal side. The third molar of UW 88-519 was complete enough to perform EFFA. DFA classified the third molar as T. scriptus with a 0.656 typicality probability. The distal M 2 lobe of UW 88-518 is broken, and

PALAEO- ELECTRONICA.ORG only part of the root and infundibulum remain. The mesial lobe is complete and demonstrates a strong parastylid, mesostylid, and paraconid making a distinct rib, which is consistent with T. scriptus ( Figure 3 ). The mesial and distal lobes of the M 1 are broken; the lingual enamel face is missing. Both lobes retain buccal enamel, dentin, and infundibula.

Comparisons. The Malapa T. scriptus mandible and dentition were compared with the holotype, M 18, and paratype, M 19, of the extinct T. pricei from Makapansgat Member 3 ( Figure 4 ) ( Wells and Cooke, 1956). The Malapa specimens resemble both T. pricei and T. scriptus . The depth of the mandible at M 2 /M 3 / lower molar row (MD/MR) was compared with T. scriptus and T. pricei indices from Sponheimer et al. (1999). The Malapa MD/MR is approximately 0.54, which overlaps with the range of both T. pricei (0.52±0.06) and T. scriptus (0.51±0.053). In fact, the two species overlapped within two standard deviations on every index in Sponheimer et al. (1999). In the absence of a method for clearly differentiating between the two species, the Malapa specimens are conservatively identified to T. scriptus . In addition, the Malapa specimens are comparable to SK 14205 and SK 2329 from Swartkrans Member 2 which Vrba (1976) suggests is Tragelaphus cf. scriptus and describes as indistinguishable from T. scriptus . de Ruiter (2003) reclassified the Swartkrans specimens as T. scriptus . Therefore, the Malapa specimens are conservatively identified as T. scriptus .

Figures

FIGURE 3. Occlusal surface of Malapa UW 88-518, UW 88-519, and UW 88-1015 refit together. The arrows are illus- trating the mesostylid, paraconid, and parastylid, from left to right.

FIGURE 4. Comparison of holotype M 18 (top) and paratype M 19 (center) of T. pricei with Malapa mandible (bottom).