Panthera (Leo) spelaea (Goldfüss, 1810)

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 : 248

Panthera (Leo) spelaea (Goldfüss, 1810)

DESCRIPTION

Thirteen cranio-dental remains (upper and lower teeth, mandible) have been attributed to the cave lion. This material and its stratigraphical distribution within the locality suggest a minimum number of seven individuals.Teeth measurements reveal significant size variability ( Table 7). Many palaeontological, phylogenetic, and biogeographical works have focused on the cave lion (e.g., Burger et al. 2004; Hemmer 2011; Sabol 2011; Stuart & Lister 2011). In Europe, Late Pleistocene lions are both represented by the subspecies Panthera (Leo) spelaea described at Gailenreuth (OIS3, Germany), and the smaller form, P. (Leo) spelaea var. cloueti (Filhol, 1891) ( Filhol & Filhol 1871) of Jaurens ( Ballesio 1980) (OIS3, France).

The taxonomic status of the small morph is a matter of debate, given that such size discrepancy may either reflect ecomorphotypy or sexual dimorphism. At Fouvent, the ratio B/L of the P4 and the m1 compared with fossil and living populations leads to some comments on the size of the different clines ( Fig. 6 ). Thus, on the base of the m1 of Jaurens, a clear distinction appears between large-sized lions (Jaurens in Ballesio 1980) and a smaller form (Jaurens in Ballesio 1980; Espèche in Clot et al. 1984). In addition, many osteometrical datasets for Late Pleistocene cave lions confirm significant variability for the m1 (specimens smaller than P. spelaea var. cloueti and also larger than the biggest form of Jaurens).Moreover, current data confirm the presence of a strongly marked sexual dimorphism, increasing the probability of significant overlap between osteometrical dimensions. In our opinion, the different sizes observed at Jaurens seem to be more related to intraspecific sexual dimorphism than to any evolutionary stage or stratigraphical age-based discrepancy. Consequently, if we consider the small form of Jaurens as characteristic of females, the m1 of Fouvent which are very close in size could belong to females. The same thing is true concerning the two P4s of Fouvent, both presenting extreme values. The larger one could be associated to a large-sized male and the smaller to a female. However, it would be necessary to undertake a thorough revision of cave lion intraspecific variability in order to validate the concerned hypothesis.

Figures

FIG. 6. — Cave lion P. (leo) spelaea upper (P4) and lower (M1) carnassial Breadth and Length ratio compared to extant and extinct populations. Measurements in mm. The male and female lions areas figure the maximum range obtained for each variables (breadth and length).