Cuvierimops, Legendre & Sige, 1983
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5252/g2014n4a4 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4837392 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D6987B-447C-B123-FEA7-1400FE1EE45E |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Cuvierimops |
| status |
|
Cuvierimops sp.
MATERIAL AND MEASUREMENTS ( MM). — One left m2 (L = 1.75, w = 1.29, talonid = trigonid), one left m3 (L = 1.58, wtrig. = 1.15, wtal. = 0.97), one fragment of left mandible bearing p4-m1 (p4: L = ṙ1.09, w = 0.81, m1: L = 1.62, w = 1.00); one right C (L = 1.27, w = 1.06, H = 2.04), one left P4, one left M1 (L1, at the paracone-metacone level = 1.79, L2, at the hypocone level = 1.23, w = 2.15), two right M2 (L1-broken-, L2 = 1.39, w = 2.33, L1 = 1.74, L2 = 1.33; H = 2.15), one posterior fragment of M3.
DESCRIPTION ( Fig. 3 View FIG C-I)
Size greater than in Cuvierimops sp. from Le Garouillas ( Sigé 1995); dental features more advanced than in the latter (myotodonty, hypocone with a continuous edge from the postprotocrista to the posterior cingulum). It probably represents a new species.
Lower teeth
All morphological elements of the premolar (p4) are not visible because this tooth is set in a fragment of dentary. Hence its talonid is fitted under the front part of the m1. Ŋe peripheral cingulum is well marked, except on the lingual side where it is partially offset by wear. Ŋe protoconid is high. Two lingual cuspids are visible, although they are worn. Ŋe anterior cuspid, at the anterior lingual base of the protoconid, is a swelling of the lingual cingulum which also bears a bulge (metaconidṙ) at the contact with m1. Ŋe talonid is about ¼ of the length of the p4. Two out of three molars (m2 and m3) are myotodont, a doubt remains for the third one, the m1 (SPV810), which is too worn out posteriorly; in addition to the direct connection between hypoconid and entoconid, the m2 shows a small low connection with the hypoconulid, this cuspid being, however, reduced. Ŋe third molar is labially damaged.
Upper teeth
Canine size and P4 structure are comparable to those of Cuvierimops from Le Garouillas( Fig.3F View FIG ; Sigé1995: pl. 1,fig.10). Upper molars are slightly larger than that of the Le Garouillas species. Ŋe presence of lingual and posterior cinguli is constant. Ŋe lingual side of the crown appears wider and higher than that of the teeth from Le Garouillas (see profiles; Fig. 3 View FIG H-I). A cutting edge develops there, and continues on M2 from the postprotocrista to the posterior cingulum, through the crista obliqua running along the hypocone and its lingual slope. Ŋis makes this cusp losing the conical shape seen on the other species of Cuvierimops . Ŋis edge is also found on M1, but it is short. Ŋe posterior fragment of M3 is similar to M3 from Le Garouillas ( Sigé 1995: fig. 14) with a little more compressed metacone.
DISCUSSION
Ŋe small population of bats from Saint-Privat-des- Vieux clearly fits with the Molossidae , and more precisely, it can be referred to the genus Cuvierimops . Ŋis is indicated in particular by a well developed hypocone, forming a well characterized lobe, a deep ectoloph, and valleys narrow and pinched, mesostyle and parastyle rounded.
However, as our specimens show more advanced characters, they are different from Cuvierimops from Le Garouillas ( Sigé 1995). Ŋese differen- cies mainly concern myotodonty – generalized on lower teeth–, pinched ectoloph or development of the crista obliqua on hypocone, elevation of this hypocone relative to protocone and elongation of lingual edge of the crown. Ŋese teeth most likely belong to a new species, not named here given the small number of specimens.
| MM |
University of Montpellier |
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.