Tungurictis Colbert, 1939

Wang, Xiaoming, Tseng, Z. Jack, Wu, Wen-yu, Ye, Jie, Meng, Jin & Bi, Shundong, 2020, A new species of Tungurictis Colbert, 1939 (Carnivora, Hyaenidae) from the middle Miocene of Junggar Basin, northwestern China and the early divergence of basal hyaenids in East Asia, Geodiversitas 42 (3), pp. 29-45 : 32

Genus Tungurictis Colbert, 1939

TYPE SPECIES. — Tungurictis spocki, original designation by Colbert (1939).

INCLUDED SPECIES. — Tungurictis spocki Colbert, 1939 and Tungurictis peignei , n. sp.

EMENDED DIAGNOSIS. — A small feliform, Tungurictis has acquired the hyaenid ear region characters of a posteriorly reclined intrabullar septum and a posterodorsal chamber of the bulla floored by the intrabullar septum. Tungurictis is more hypercarnivorous than Protictitherium and Plioviverrops Kretzoi, 1938 in its more elongated upper and lower carnassials (P4 and m1), relatively reduced M2, less high-crowned m1 entoconid, and more reduced m1-2 hypoconulid.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:993B1CF7-DBC3-45C5-8546-00DD0DF80E02

REMARKS

After Colbert’s (1939) initial recognition of Tungurictis spocki, Kurtén (1976) named a second species, T. punica, from the Beglia Formation of Bled Douarah, Tunisia. Werdelin & Solounias (1991) made a detailed comparison of this second species. They suggested that it really should belong to Protictitherium, and emended the species name to P. punicum, an opinion later upheld in Werdelin & Peigné (2010).

Hunt & Solounias (1991) suggested that Tungurictis is a junior synonym of Protictitherium Kretzoi, 1938 and predicted that, when lower cheek teeth become available, the m1 entoconid should not be emphasized over the hypoconid and its talonid reduced relative to trigonid. Continued explorations in the Tunggur area in the last 25 years did eventually produce an associated partial skull and dentaries (IVPP V 13784 ) from the Tairum Nor locality in the lower part of the Tunggur Formation ( Wang 2004), which largely confirmed Hunt & Solounias’ prediction. The Tairum Nor section is substantially older than the Wolf Camp section ( Qiu et al. 2013) and IVPP V 13784 is smaller and slightly more primitive than that of the Wolf Camp individual (holotype), permitting a sense of an evolutionary trend within a single geologic formation.