Archaeomanta sp.
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.26879/1085 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B6B8E985-F1CF-4C10-BB00-602E5BF36C1C |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BA87C1-FFE7-FFF0-C0A6-E563C9F4B40F |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Archaeomanta sp. |
status |
|
Figure 14H View FIGURE 14
2016 Archaeomanta sp. ; Merzeraud et al., p. 14-15, tab. 1.
Material. Material consists of 11 fragmentary teeth, none with complete crown, from the KEB- 1 locality, Souar-Fortuna formations, Djebel el Kébar, Tunisia, and includes the unique figured specimen KEB 1-225 ( Figure 14H View FIGURE 14 ).
Description
Teeth of this genus are clearly distinctive in having a rather high crown, compressed mesio-distally with apex that bends strongly lingually. The cusp curves suddenly lingually at a certain distance from the ovoid base of the crown. Cusps do not bear the usual mediolabial cutting edge nor the mediolingual cutting edge on the apical region. The root is robust ( Figure 14H View FIGURE 14 1 View FIGURE 1 ), globular with a basal face longer than broad, convex, with a heart-shaped contour, and a narrow and shallow axial groove (sometimes with secondary labiolingually orientated grooves).
Remarks
This taxa is usually attributed to mobulids based on its peculiar tooth morphology reminding that of some Mobula with peg-like teeth, but the presence of a large pulp cavity extending to the tip of the cusp (Underwood et al., 2011) makes their supposed position within the mobulids very doubtful (see also Adnet et al., 2012). However, the enameloid of Archaeomanta (Enault et al., 2013) is very thin and closely resembles that of extant Mobulidae or fossil and extant Gymnuridae (e.g., Jacquhermania , Gymnura ). Three species of Archaemanta are currently known in the fossil record. It concerns the Thanetian Archaeomanta priemi Herman and Crochard, 1979 , the Ypresian Archaeomanta melenhorsti Herman and Crochard, 1979 , and the Lutetian Archaeomanta hermani Kozlov, 2001 . A morphological distinction between these chronospecies is evident, notably between the two firsts, known by numerous specimens. Indeed, teeth of A. melenhorsti have more mesiodistally compressed crowns with more elongated and distally oriented cusps and a deep, straight groove on roots compared with A. priemi that possesses a peculiar large collar at base of crowns (Herman and Crochard, 1979). In contrast, A. hermani shows an extreme long cusp strongly compressed mesiodistally compared with those observable in both older species. The morphology of the Bartonian KEB- 1 specimens is clearly different from that of these three species in having more globular and robust roots (compared to A. melenhorsti and A. hermani ), a tooth cusp without any median cutting edge (compared to A. melenhorsti , A. priemi , and? A. hermani ), and no marked collar (compared to A. priemi ). However, the bad state of preservation of specimens does not allow to provide a detailed description of this unnamed species. Often rare in Paleogene deposits, this genus is nevertheless widely distributed in the Middle-Late Eocene of the peri-Tethysian realm (Cappetta, 2012), including in EG (Strougo et al., 2007), in the Priabonian of Egypt (upper GE to QS in Underwood et al., 2011), and in Southwestern Morocco (Adnet et al., 2010), even if the species status is always left in open nomenclature.
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.