Felis sp.
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/g2017n2a8 |
publication LSID |
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:36D6C5E9-8632-41E2-88F0-D470B3DEA72C |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03961919-FD04-FFB4-FBC8-0FAED4272B28 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Felis sp. |
status |
|
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — CD 675, anterior fragment of right mandible with canine alveolus, P 3 and damaged P 4 ( Fig. 5J, K View FIG ; Table 2); CD 17790, proximal right femur and half shaft.
DESCRIPTION AND TAXONOMIC ASSIGNMENT
CD 675 is a right mandible fragment from a very small felid ( Fig. 5J, K View FIG ). The anterior portion of the mandible is present, including a damaged canine alveolus, complete P 3 and a damaged P 4. There are two mental foramina, one is large and halfway along the symphysis, while the other is much smaller and situated below the anterior root of the P 3. The P 4 is broken vertically after the protocone, and the corpus of the mandible is also broken here. The P 3 lacks an anterior accessory cusp and has almost no anterior cingulum, although the posterior accessory cusp and posterior cingulum are present. The P 4 has a well-defined anterior accessory cusp but also lacks the anterior cingulum. In Felis s. lybica the anterior accessory cusp is present on the P 3, the protocones are proportionally higher than that seen on CD 675, and the mandible is less gracile. However, the elongation of the protocone crown in Felis nigripes ( Burchell, 1824) as shown in Salles (1992) and discussed in relation to the Malapa specimen in Kuhn et al. (2011) is not seen in this specimen. While there are minor morphological differences between CD 675 and the F. s. lybica specimens available to study, metrically the specimen falls into the area of overlap between the two species ( Fig. 6 View FIG ). It is therefore referred to Felis sp. ( F. sylvestris lybica / F. nigripes size). CD 17790 is a small proximal femur. The shape of the greater trochanter and the slight curve of the shaft suggest that it is felid, and it is a good match for both the F. s. lybica and F. nigripes specimens in the Ditsong museum collections.
FELIDAE indet.
Many of the specimens listed below as Felidae indet. may be machairodont, but a lack of comparative material means that they are currently only identified to the family level.
FELIDAE indet. large (Lion to Dinofelis -sized)
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — CD 1944, left 3rd metacarpal ( Table 3); CD 1522, right 3rd metatarsal fragment ( Table 3); CD 3847, distal metapodial; CD 5354, left calcaneum fragment; CD 3680, left cuboid; CD 1549, right 3rd metatarsal ( Table 3); CD 1965, right pisiform; CD 3902 left scapholunar; CD 18837, right distal tibia fragment ( Table 3); CD 3861, right astragalus ( Table 3); CD 9860, sesamoid; First phalanges: CD 9729, CD 1532, CD 1547, CD 3867, CD 5955, CD 6760, CD 3223, CD 17479; CD 1550, CD 5974, CD 728, CD 5958, CD 3842; Second phalanges: CD 3869, CD 5439, CD 367, CD 3890, CD 3840, CD 16956, CD 9929.
DESCRIPTION
CD 1944 is the proximal portion of a large 2nd metacarpal. The proximal articulation is slightly damaged dorsally and is also greatly laterally expanded, more so than any Dinofelis specimens in Werdelin & Lewis (2001). CD 1522 is a large proximal 3rd metatarsal fragment. There are similarities to both Dinofelis and Acinonyx , however as only the anterior portion of the articulation is present it is difficult to identify it more precisely. CD 3847 is a heavily gnawed distal metapodial from a large felid. CD 5354 is a short, robust left tuber calcis from a Dinofelis -sized calcaneum. CD 3861, an astragalus, is from a larger cat and does not seem to match any of the machairodonts. CD 3680, a left cuboid, is intermediate in size between the lion and leopard and appears very different to 16201M ( D. darti from Makapansgat). CD 1549 is an almost complete metatarsal, just lacking the dorsal portion of the proximal articulation. It has similarities to both Dinofelis (DN 17) and P. pardus , however the shaft is much more angular in CD 1549 than is seen in these two taxa. CD 1965 is a right pisiform with a flattened head, much more so than the lion. It may represent Dinofelis but there is a lack of suitable comparative material. CD 3902 is a good size match for an un-numbered Dinofelis scapholunar from Makapansgat, but the orientation and depth of facets is very different. CD 18837 is a distal tibial articulation with a fragment of shaft. It is intermediate in size between leopard and Dinofelis , with very pronounced ridges on the shaft and broad distal processes. CD 9860 is a lion-sized sesamoid, it is very similar to a specimen from a lion forefoot (AZ 771), however there are no machairodont sesamoids to compare it with. Phalanges CD 9729, CD 3869 and CD 9929 are robust and lion-like, yet CD 9729 and CD 9929 are almost triangular in crosssection. First and second phalanges CD 1532, CD 1547, CD 3867, CD 5955, CD 6760, CD 3223, CD 17479, CD 1550, CD 5974, CD 3842, CD 3869, CD 5439, CD 367, CD 3890 CD 3840 and CD 16956, are all shorter than lion, but broader than leopard - they may represent Dinofelis . CD 728 is a robust 1st phalange that is broader and shorter than lion, but does not match the Kromdraai Dinofelis material, or published figures of Homotherium ( Ballesio 1963) . CD 5958 is a complete 1 st phalange that looks more similar to the Senèze Homotherium material than any other taxon.
FELIDAE indet. medium-sized ( Megantereon to leopard-sized)
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Craniodental: CD 1892, mandible fragment with condyle and angle of the ramus; CD 8305, left P 3; Postcranial: CD 1623, left 1st metacarpal; CD 6757, 1st phalanx; CD 1534, a right pisiform; CD 3996, right ulna fragment; CD 1530, left ulna fragment; CD 5712, left intermediate cuneiform; CD 3205, metapodial lacking proximal articulation ( Table 3); Distal metapodial fragments: CD 7303, CD 3846, CD 3200, CD 7889, CD 7320, CD 13373; CD 640, CD 688 and CD 1626; 1 st phalanges:CD 17068, CD 1957, CD 3863, CD 1543, CD 2017 (distal only), CD 3864, CD 19951, CD 20004 (damaged), CD 7352, CD 3236, CD 3886 (dorsal surface only); 2nd phalanges, CD 699, CD 5727, CD 5486, CD 7345, CD 11736, CD 1546, CD 1946, CD 1539, CD 17230, CD 3286, CD 1945, CD 7361; 3rd phalanges: CD 7356, CD 6756, CD 7304, CD 5793, CD 11185, CD 3197; CD 5671, right intermediate cuneiform; CD 13342, left 2nd metacarpal ( Table 3).
DESCRIPTION
CD 1892 is a posterior fragment of a mandible, lacking the coronoid process. The condyle is lozenge-shaped and there is only a short distance between the condyle and the angle of the ramus. It does not appear to be Megantereon , and is intermediate in size between caracal and leopard. CD 8305 is a small complete lower premolar, with a large upright protocone, small but distinct anterior and posterior accessory cusps and a posterior cingulum. All cusps are in a straight line from front to back. It is most similar to a cheetah tooth, except that the cheetah lacks a posterior cingulum, and the anterior accessory cusp is greatly reduced in comparison to the posterior accessory cusp, while in the cheetah they are usually of similar size. It refits into the P 3 alveolus of CD 18836 (here identified as Dinofelis cf. aronoki ), although it is from the opposite side. It is much less robust than the equivalent tooth in Dinofelis barlowi (STS 131), and the anterior cusp is in line with the protocone rather than being lingually placed as seen in D. aronoki . The protocone is much higher than that seen in the Motsetse D. piveteaui specimens, and it is considerably shorter (L = approximately 11 mm) than any published Dinofelis P 3 from South Africa (see Lacruz et al. 2006 for comparative measurements). It has therefore been referred to Felidae indet., as it may represent either Acinonyx or Dinofelis . CD 3996 and CD 1530 are both olecraneon processes from a right and left ulna respectively. They may be antimeres, as they are the same size and the proximal epiphyseal line is still visible on both. There are similarities with both leopard and the Senèze Megantereon specimen and thus they are referred to Felidae indet. CD 5712 is a left intermediate cuneiform with damage to the head. Both the cuboid facet and the cuneiform facets are larger and extended more proximally than those of the modern leopard, however the head is much more expanded in Megantereon (KB 6016 and KB 6017) than is seen in CD 5712. CD 1623 is a complete 1st metacarpal, the proportions of the proximal facet make it more similar to a machairodont than a pantherine. However, with no P. pardus specimens for comparison it is listed here as Felidae indet. CD 6757 is an asymmetric 1 st phalanx that has been distally gnawed. First phalanges CD 17068 and CD 1957, and second phalanges CD 699, CD 5727, CD 5486, CD 7345, CD 11736, CD 7352 and CD 3236 are all similar to modern Acinonyx , but Megantereon cannot be excluded. First phalanges CD 3863, CD 1543, CD 19951 and CD 20004 may represent leopard, while CD 2017 and CD 3864 are not leopard or cheetah and may be machairodont. Second phalanges CD 1546, CD 1946, CD 1539, CD 17230 and CD 3286 are all similar to modern leopard specimens, but Megantereon is also a possibility. CD 1945 and CD 7361 are both felid second phalanges that are smaller than leopard. Six 3rd phalanges (CD 7356, CD 6756, CD 7304, CD 5793, CD 11185, CD 3197) are leopard to cheetah size, but are not cheetah. There are two morphotypes, with CD 7356 and CD 6756 more similar to each other, and the remaining four also appearing alike. CD 1534, a pisiform, is strongly curved proximally. CD 3205 is a metapodial in two pieces, lacking the proximal end. The shaft is strongly curved and almost triangular in cross-section suggesting it may be a 5th metatarsal. Nine specimens (CD 7303, CD 3846, CD 3200, CD 7889, CD 7320, CD 13373, CD 640, CD 688 and CD 1626) are all probable felid distal metapodial condyles, some with fragments of shaft. It is worth noting that CD 7889 is unfused and therefore represented a younger individual, and that CD 640 and CD 688 are larger than the others and may plausibly be large leopard or small Dinofelis . CD 5671 is one half of an intermediate cuneiform, it is similar in morphology to leopard, but larger, and there are no Dinofelis cuneiforms to compare it with. CD 13342 is the proximal portion of a left 2nd metatarsal. It is slightly damaged and may have been gnawed. It is similar to CD 1500 (here assigned to Machairodontinae indet.), but the process is slightly sharper in CD 13342 (which is more like DN 772), and the facet for the 1 st metacarpal is not quite as square as the other Cooper’s D specimens. It is therefore assigned to Felidae indet.
FELIDAE indet. small ( Felis sylvestris to caracal-sized)
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Craniodental. CD 3258, a right P3 ( Table 1); CD 13517, broken left Ci.
Postcranial. CD 9431, right distal femur; CD 1592, left calcaneum ( Table 3); CD 13516, 1 st phalanx; CD 1492, 2nd phalanx; CD 19227, 2 nd phalanx.
DESCRIPTION
CD 3258 is an isolated P3, with small anterior and posterior accessory cusps, a cingulum and a relatively low protocone. There is a slight bulge of enamel on the lingual surface, just over the posterior root. It is similar to a leopard P3 but much smaller. A similar tooth was found at Drimolen (DN 743) and also assigned to Felidae indet. CD 13517 is a caracalsized Ci with two ridges visible at the base of the crown, one distal and one lingual; the rest of the crown is broken. CD 9431 is a heavily damaged distal femoral articulation. It has a slight groove on the medial condyle that only appears to be present in cats and is caracal-serval sized. CD 1592 is a left calcaneum with very long facets for the articulation with the astragalus. It is most similar to caracal and serval, but it is difficult to choose between them. CD 13516 is a short, but very broad, first phalanx, it does not match any of the extant felid taxa. CD 1492 and CD 19227 are both similar to caracal second phalanges, but there are no serval specimens available for comparison.
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.