Camelops hesternus Leidy, 1854

Zazula, Grant D., Macphee, Ross D. E., Hall, Elizabeth & Hewitson, Susan, 2016, Osteological assessment of Pleistocene Camelops hesternus (Camelidae: Camelinae: Camelini) from Alaska and Yukon, American Museum Novitates 2016 (3866), pp. 1-46 : 6-8

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.1206/3866.1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4565938

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/140587B4-FFC0-3B39-9E8F-FB640565FA4A

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Camelops hesternus Leidy, 1854
status

 

Camelops hesternus Leidy, 1854

MANDIBLE AND LOWER DENTITION

Referred specimens: F: AM 35172 ( Gold Hill , Alaska), mandible fragment, juvenile, with unworn, partially erupted p4–m1 ( fig. 3 View FIG A–C); F : AM 34631 ( Cripple Creek , Alaska), right mandible fragment, with heavily worn m1–m3 ( fig. 3 View FIG D–F); F : AM 35168 (Fairbanks Creek, Alaska), anterior mandible fragment with symphysis, diastema, and roots of right p4 ( fig. 3 View FIG , G, H); NMC 42549 ( Sixtymile Loc. 3, Yukon), left, juvenile, mandible with dp3–dp4, m1, lacking symphysis and coronoid process ( fig. 3 View FIG I–L); F : AM 144676 ( Cripple Creek , Alaska), heavily worn left m3, roots broken off ( fig. 4 View FIG A–C); F : AM 35154 ( Cripple Creek , Alaska), heavily worn, right m3, roots broken off ( fig. 4 View FIG D–F); F : AM 35169 ( Gold Hill , Alaska), right, moderately worn m2?, root of posterior lobe sampled, anterior root broken off ( fig. 4 View FIG G–I); F : AM 35170 ( Dawson Cut , Alaska), relatively unworn, left m1 or m2, roots and anterior margin broken off ( fig. 4 View FIG J–L); F : AM 35173 ( Gold Hill , Alaska), left m2, anterior cusp and root missing ( fig. 4 View FIG M–O) .

Description: The most complete mandible in this collection represents a juvenile ( NMC 42549), described below. This and others specimens described here exhibit several features consistent with their allocation to Camelops hesternus ( Webb, 1965) , including: (1) sharp, labially concave diastemal crest ( fig. 3H, L View FIG ); (2) deep horizontal ramus featuring slight concavity below diastema and relatively straighter ventral border in lateral view compared to other BARCs ( fig. 3 View FIG I–K); (3) large mental foramen situated low on the mandible, below posterior end of canine root ( fig. 3G, J View FIG ); (4) distinct angular “spur-shaped” process present on posterior margin of ascending ramus, below condyle but above level of horizontal ramus ( fig. 3 View FIG I–K), and lacking inflection seen in other camelines ( Harrison, 1985). The mandibular fragments representing mature adult individuals (F: AM 34631 and F: AM 35168) exhibit horizontal rami that are much broader transversely and more robust than in other BARCs ( table 1 View TABLE 1 ).

Individual mandibular dental loci can be readily differentiated from those of other BARCs. Key features consistent with descriptions and illustrations of Camelops hesternus ( Webb, 1965; Dalquest, 1992) include: (1) lower molars large, highly hypsodont ( fig. 4G, H View FIG ), and relatively long mesiodistally compared to their transverse widths ( fig. 4 View FIG A–F); (2) molar lophs separated by deep, narrow valleys on the labial side ( fig. 4D, F View FIG ), relatively flat on the lingual side ( fig. 4E, F View FIG ); (3) loph crests higher and sharper lingually than labially, and more strongly developed on anterior cusps than posterior ( fig. 4B View FIG ); (4) typical wedge shape when viewed in lateral profile, with the occlusal surface much wider than the base, best exemplified by the unworn m2 F: AM 35169 ( fig. 4G, H View FIG ); (5) long, thin, weakly U-shaped infundibula (lakes) on occlusal surfaces, opening lingually, with thicker enamel on lingual side than labial and lacking internal cementum ( fig. 4C, F, I,L View FIG ). Only one specimen, F: AM 35173 (partial left m2; fig. 4O View FIG ) exhibits infundibular cementum; (6) F: AM 35169, an unworn m2, presents a weakly developed mesiolabial enamel fold or “llama buttress” ( fig. 4I View FIG ), a typical feature of Camelops hesternus lower molars ( Webb, 1965, Dalquest, 1992). However, “llama buttresses” are missing from most of our sample of mandibular molars, presumably as a consequence of wear.

The juvenile NMC 42549 possesses deciduous premolars dp3 and dp4 and an unerupted m1. Both premolars are notably molariform, though splayed roots can be detected radiographically ( fig. 3K View FIG ). The dp4 is strongly trilobate, resembling an m3, while dp3 is weakly bilobate, resembling a deformed m2 ( fig. 3L View FIG ). Due to marked interproximal wear (a common feature of cameline lower dentitions; see Meachen, 2003), the dentition of F: AM 34631 appears very compressed ( fig. 3D View FIG ). Enamel has been almost completely removed from the mesial and distal surfaces of m1 and m2, with the result that the mesial margin of the latter is inset into the distal margin of the former. The degree of mandibular molar wear on this individual suggests that it was an old, but not yet senile, individual (see Dalquest, 1992).

AM

Australian Museum

NMC

New Mexico State University

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Chordata

Class

Mammalia

Order

Artiodactyla

Family

Camelidae

Genus

Camelops

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF