1. Incadelphys antiquus Marshall & Muizon 1988
- Author
-
Muizon, Christian de and Ladevèze, Sandrine
- Subjects
Incadelphys ,Didelphidae ,Mammalia ,Animalia ,Biodiversity ,Didelphimorphia ,Chordata ,Incadelphys antiquus ,Taxonomy - Abstract
Incadelphys antiquus Marshall & Muizon, 1988 HOLOTYPE. — YPFB Pal 6151, partial upper and lower jaws of the same juvenile specimen including the left maxilla with base of P1, P2, dP3, unerupted P3, M1-M3 (M3 erupting and missing tip of protocone); the right maxilla with dP3 unerupted P3, M1-M3 (M3 erupting); the right mandibular ramus with p1, p2, dp3, unerupted p3; m1-2, talonid of m3, unerupted m4; the left mandibular ramus with talonid of dp3, m1-2, m3 broken, m4 unerupted (Fig. 2) EMENDED DIAGNOSIS. — Dental formula I5/i4, C/c, P3/p3; M4/ m4; skull slightly smaller than Pucadelphys but distinctly larger than Szalinia; approaching the size of the extant didelphid Thylamys, proportions of the rostrum approaching those of Pucadelphys with the apex more slender; palatal vacuities absent. Incadelphys antiquus differs from Pucadelphyidae in the following features: occurrence of a distinct lacrimal-nasal contact; extremely narrow and blade-like upper premolars, with weaker labial and lingual posterocingula (in pucadelphyids upper premolars are wider with thick labial and lingual posterocingula); upper molar smaller and more gracile; M1 strongly asymmetrical; distolabial angle of M1 conspicuously extended distolingually with angle between labial edge of tooth and postmetacrista varying from 34° to 37° (in pucadelphyids the angle vary from 49° to 62°; mean = 51.4°); protocone mesiodistally shorter; mesiodistal constriction (i.e. shortening) at lingual base of para-metacone more pronounced, especially on M3, (in pucadelphyids constriction is weak to absent); posterolingual inflation of protocone absent or faint (in pucadelphyids posterolingual inflation present); centrocrista weakly V-shaped (in pucadelphyids V-shaped centrocrista is generally conspicuous); anterior stylar shelf on M1 narrower; stylar cusp C absent on M3, absent or small on M1-M2 (in pucadelphyids stylar cusp C is generally present in M1- M3); when present, stylar cusp C much smaller than B and D (in pucadelphyids stylar cusp C is generally subequal to slightly smaller than D); distolabial angle of M1 extending distolabially to a greater extent, with angle between postmetacrista and lingual edge of the tooth smaller; ectoflexus totally absent on M1 (present in pucadelphyids) and shallower on M2-M3 (deep in pucadelphyids); ventral edge of dentary less convex; coronoid process distinctly narrower at apex and not recurved posteriorly (in other words posterior edge of process straight) (in pucadelphyids apex of coronoid process is strongly recurved posteriorly); retromolar space longer (almost as long as m4) (in pucadelphyids it is generally as long as or shorter than talonid of m4); lower molars proportionally narrower; entoconid proportionally larger, slightly higher as compared to hypoconid (in pucadelphyids the entoconid is approximatively as high as the hypoconid). Incadelphys antiquus differs from Aenigmadelphys archeri in that the paracone is slightly smaller in height and volume than the metacone (reversed in A. archeri); paraconule subequal to metaconule (in A.archeri paraconule is larger than metaconule); ectoflexus absent on M1 (present and shallow in A. archeri); anterior stylar shelf narrower than posterior (in A. archeri the anterior stylar shelf is wider than the posterior on the holotype only [an M3], but it is narrower on OMNH 23460, [an M3 lacking the protocone], OMNH 20120 [an M2], and OMNH 22898 [an M1]); stylar cusp B and D subequal in size (in A. archeri stylar cusp B is consistently larger than D); stylar cusp C absent on M3 (in A. archeri it is small but distinct); trigonid lower as compared to talonid; paraconid distinctly smaller than metaconid (in A. archeri paraconid is subequal in size to metaconid or slightly smaller). HYPODIGM. — The holotype; MHNC 13906, anterior half of a skull including both premaxillae, maxillae, nasals, lacrimals, anterior part of the frontals, anterior part of the jugals, right I3-M4, left I1-M4 (crown of I1-2 broken at base; labial edge of stylar shelf of M3-4 missing); left dentary (missing coronoid process) with i1-m4; right dentary with i2-m4 (labial edge of protoconid of m1- m3 abraded, associated to the skull, the specimen also includes seven caudal vertebrae, three metacarpals and three metatarsals; MHNC 13947, a partial maxilla with M1-M3; MHNC 8270, a left mandible, with c-m3 and alveoli of m4 (on molars lingual edge of para- and metaconid is scratched), MHNC 13933, a left M2, MHNC 13935, a left M2. GEOLOGICAL SETTING AND AGE. — All the specimens of Incadelphys antiquus are from beds of the Santa Lucía Formation at Tiupampa and have been discovered in the locality called “the Quarry” by Gayet et al. (1992) and Marshall & Muizon (1995). As discussed by Gelfo et al. (2009), Muizon et al. (2015, 2018), Muizon & Ladevèze (2020), the age of the Tiupampa beds is regarded as early Danian in age (c. 65 Ma) contra Zimicz et al. (2020). COMPARATIVE DESCRIPTION The new specimen of Incadelphys antiquus described here is an anterior part of a skull including the upper tooth rows and the palate, and both dentaries (Fig. 3). The specimen has suffered some distortion and the left maxilla has been displaced dorsally. In spite of this distortion, it seems that the width of the rostrum has not been strongly affected. The specimen includes the premaxillae, the maxillae, the lacrimals, the nasals, the anterior part of the frontals and jugals. The dentaries are almost complete with all their teeth. However, during collection of the specimen, the lateral side of the left tooth rows have been damaged; on upper teeth, the posterolabial angle of M3 and the labial edge of the stylar shelf of M4 have been destroyed. On the lower teeth, the labial edge of the protoconid and hypoconid of m1-m3 have been scratched during the collection of the specimen. Dentition The dental formula is the plesiomorphic pattern for metatherians: I5/i4, C/c, P3/p3, M4/m4 (Kielan-Jaworowska et al. 2004). The upper dentition will be described first, followed by the lower dentition. Upper dentition Upper incisors (Figs 4; 5). the crowns of I1 and I2 are missing and the roots of these teeth are preserved only on the left premaxilla. I1 has a slightly smaller diameter than I2. This condition contrasts with that of extant didelphids and Andinodelphys, in which I1 is distinctly larger than I2. In contrast, it resembles the condition observed in the only Pucadelphys specimens that preserve the I1s (YPFB Pal 6105, the holotype, and MHNC 8378, referred to females by Ladevèze et al. 2011). A small diastema is present between I1 and I2. The diastema is approximately as long as the diameter of I1. A similar condition is present in some specimens of Pucadelphys (MHNC 8378) and in didelphids but is absent in Andinodelphys. The crowns of the other incisors are preserved. They are subequal in size to I2, with I5 being slightly smaller. Their crown is peg-like. It is slightly compressed labiolingually on I3 and I4 and roughly conical on I5. Upper Canine (Figs 4; 5). The upper canine is large and sharp and is approximately three times as high as the P3. It is larger than in Marmosa, in which it is twice as high as P3, and Thylamys, in which it is less than twice the high of P3. It is similar in height to the canines of Didelphis and Caluromys, in which they are approximately three times (or more) as high as the P3. Among the Tiupampa metatherians, the canine of Incadelphys is similar in relative height to those of Andinodelphys and specimens interpreted by Ladevèze et al. (2011) as males of Pucadelphys (e.g., MHNC 8266, 8377, 8382). In contrast, it is clearly higher than the canines of the specimens referred to females of Pucadelphys by these authors (e.g., MHNC 8376, 8378), in which the canine height is less than twice that of P3. As in all didelphids and pucadelphyids, the upper canines of Incadelphys are transversely compressed being approximately twice as long as wide. As in didelphids and pucadelphyids, they are strongly curved posteriorly. The upper canine of Incadelphys is slightly procumbent as indicated by the position of the apex of the tooth, which is ventral to the anterior edge of the crown base. Upper premolars (Figs 4; 5). The three premolars are doublerooted and distinctly increase in size from P1 to P3. As observed on the right side of the skull, the increase in size is progressive. In other words, the increase in size between P1 and P2 is similar to that between P2 and P3. This condition differs from that observed in Andinodelphys, in which a great increase in size is observed between P1 and P2 and a smaller increase exists between P2 and P3. A small diastema is present between P1 and P2, and a smaller one between P2 and P3. P1 and P2 are extremely narrow transversely and blade-like, whereas P3 is slightly wider (Table 1). The blade-like morphology of the P1-P2 is not observed in any of the other Tiupampa metatherians. As shown on Table 2 the ratio W/L for the P2 of Incadelphys is 0.31 (three measurements), 0.45 for Andinodelphys (seven measurements), and for Pucadelphys 0.56 (ten measurements). Therefore, the relative width (as compared to length) of the P2 of Incadelphys is 31% smaller than in Andinodelphys and 45% smaller than in Pucadelphys. Given these results, the blade-like morphology of the anterior upper premolars of Incadelphys is regarded as a significant characteristic of the genus. P1 is triangular in lateral view. It is slightly asymmetrical, with its apex located below the anterior root. It is less asymmetrical than in Andinodelphys, in which the apex of P1 is ventral to the posterior edge of the posterior root. The P1 of Incadelphys has no posterior accessory cusp, nor cingulum. Its anterior root contacts the posterior edge of the canine, but it is not closely appressed against it, thus differing from the condition of Andinodelphys. P2 is less asymmetrical than P1 and its apex is ventral to the inter-alveolar septum. Similarly to P1, it is as long as high. Its anterior and posterior edges are straight. The tooth bears a small cingulum at the anterior edge of the crown, which forms a hint of an anterior basal cuspule. The cingulum extends on the lingual aspect of the crown, below the anterior root. Posteriorly a conspicuous basal cusp is present. P3 is more robust and more inflated than P2. Its anterior edge is slightly convex and its posterior edge slightly concave. The apex of the crown is located below the anterior edge of the posterior root. The anterior border of the crown is rounded, whereas the posterior edge becomes thinner, sharp, and crest-like. The lateral edges of the crown, in this region, are distinctly concave. The anterior cingulum is strong (as compared to that of P2). It extends on the mesiolabial and mesiolingual angles of the crown but remains at the level of the anterior root. Posteriorly, the basal accessory cusp is well developed. It imbricates in the mesiolingual angle of M1 with the stylar cusp A. Labial and lingual to the basal cusp are small cingular shelves. Upper molars (Figs 4; 5). The description of the upper molars will consider the five available specimens: the holotype YPFB Pal 6251, which includes both maxillae and mandibles of a subadult individual (i.e. upper M4 are missing and m4 are unerupted); MHNC 13906 (which preserves complete maxillae and mandibles and 13931 a partial maxilla with M1-3). M1 is relatively different from the other molars and will be treated first. M2-M3, which have a more typical morphology as compared to most of the other Tiupampan metatherians will be described jointly. M4, which strongly differs from the preceding molar, as in most metatherians, will be studied next. M1 is a distinctive tooth of Incadelphys in the distolabial extension of its metastylar angle. As a consequence, the labial edge of M1 is much longer than on the other molars (Table 1). The anterior edge is shorter than on the posterior molars, and the tooth is longer than wide (1.56 mm vs 1.54mm; mean of five measurements, seeTable 1), a condition that contrasts with that of Andinodelphys, Pucadelphys, and Mizquedelphys. A condition of the M1 similar to that of Incadelphys is observed in the Campanian genus Aenigmadelphys of Utah. Table 3 compares the angle between the line joining stylar cusps D and E and the postmetacrista. Because the postmetacrista is often curved, and because the posterolabial part of the crista is relatively straight, the latter has been used for the measurement. As observed inTable 2, the mean of the angle obtained for pucadelphyids (53.2°) is approximately 48% and 32% greater than the angle of Incadelphys and Aenigmadelphys respectively. Because of this difficulty of measurement, the value of the angle obtained is certainly somewhat imprecise. However, because of the great difference observed, this result is probably significant. As a consequence of the posterolabial extension of the M1, its mesial edge is distinctly shorter than its labial edge. A similar condition is also observed in Aenigmadelphys. Marmosopsis from the early Eocene of Itaboraí, clearly ranges close to Incadelphys, whereas Monodelphis and Thylamys are closer to pucadelphyids than to Incadelphys and Aenigmadelphys. The protocone of M1 is relatively massive, being mesiodistally longer than wide on the three specimens. It is roughly symmetrical mesiodistally and does not present the distolingual inflation observed in didelphids and pucadelphyids. The mesial and distal bases of the protocone are smooth and bear no cingulum. Para- and metaconules are well-developed (almost as large as stylar cusps B and D). From the paraconule, a conspicuous paracingulum (i.e. labial extension of the preparaconular crista) extends up to stylar cusp A. Distally, the metaconule abuts the distal base of metacone but no metacingulum (i.e. labial extension of the postmetaconular crista) is present. The paracone is slightly smaller in height and volume than the metacone. Both cusps are widely separated at base, as in didelphids and pucadelphyids. A deep trigon basin is bordered by the distolingual aspect of the paracone, the mesiolingual aspect of the metacone and the labial aspect of the protocone. The lingual aspect of the para- and metacone is strongly convex, whereas their labial aspect is flat to slightly concave. As a consequence, the cusps are triangular in section and the pre- and post- paracristae and pre- and post-metacristae are shifted labially, forming the lingual wall of the stylar shelf. The junction of the postparacrista and premetacrista (i.e. the median point of the centrocrista) is displaced labially, and the centrocrista is slightly V-shaped in occlusal view. This condition, which is present in Aenigmadelphys, didelphids, and pucadelphyids, differs from that observed, for instance, in Kokopellia, alphadontids, peradectids, and sparassodonts, in which the labial and lingual aspects of the para- and metacone are markedly convex (generally slightly less convex labially than lingually), the pre- and post- paracristae and pre-and post-metacristae are in a median position relative to the para- and metacone and therefore the centrocrista is straight. The stylar shelf of Incadelphys is narrow, being almost absent anteriorly since the stylar cusp B is almost connate to the paracone to which it is connected by a very short preparacrista. The stylar cusp A is smaller than B but conspicuous. It surrounds posterolabially and imbricates with the posterobasal cusp of P3. Stylar cusp B and D are large and subequal in size, but variation exists. In MHNC 13906, StB is slightly smaller than StD, whereas in MHNC 13931 StB is slightly larger than StD; these cusps are subequal in the holotype. Stylar cusp B is conical, whereas stylar cusp D is transversely compressed. Between StB and StD, a small stylar cusp C is present in the holotype and MHNC 13906. Stylar cusp C is lacking in MHNC 13931. Stylar cusp E is indistinguishable. The labial edge of M1 is straight and features no ectoflexus. M2 and M3 are conspicuously wider than long. They differ from M 1 in the protocone, which is approximately as long as wide on M2 and clearly wider than long on M3. The stylar shelf is wider than on M1, especially its anterior part. As a consequence, the stylar cusp B is well separated from the paracone, and the preparacrista is as long as the postparacrista on M2 and slightly longer on M3. The preparacrista contacts stylar cusp B on its anterior edge, almost between cusp B and A on MHNC 13906. Stylar cusp C is small to absent and stylar cusp D is well developed but smaller than B. On the labial edge of M2 is a small ectoflexus (rather a notch) between stylar cusps B and C. On M3, the ectoflexus is deeper and located between stylar cusps C and D. From M1 to M3, at the distolabial corner of the tooth, the angle between the labial edge and the postmetacrista increases and, as a consequence, the postmetacrista is more transverse posteriorly. M2-M3 of Incadelphys strongly resemble those of Aenigmadelphys, from which they differ however in the latter being transversely wider and mesiodistally shorter (see comparison below p. 000). Furthermore, the M2-M3 of Aenigmadelphys have a slightly wider stylar shelf. On M4, the protocone is shorter mesiodistally than on the anterior molars and the metacone is greatly reduced compared to that of the anterior molars, being significantly smaller than the paracone. The anterior stylar shelf is wider and the preparacrista is longer than on M2-M3. The posterior stylar shelf is very narrow but still present labial to the metacone. The M4 of Incadelphys differs from that of Aenigmadelphys in the latter being mesiodistally shorter, transversely wider with a longer preparacrista, and in the posterior stylar shelf being virtually absent. Lower dentition Lower incisors (Figs 6; 7). The four incisors are preserved on the left dentary, but i1 is missing part of its crown. In the description below, we follow the interpretation of Hershkovitz (1982, 1995), that the four lower incisors of metatherians are serially homologous to i2-i5. On the right dentary i2-i4 are preserved but i5 is missing its crown. In size, the crown of i2 is smaller than that of i3 but larger than i4; i5 is the smallest of the four incisors. The crowns are peg-like but slightly spatulate, being wider than high. The apex of the crown of i2 is roughly semicircular in labial or lingual view; that of i3 is lanceolate with a carina on its lingual aspect; that of i4 is similar to i1 but smaller and that of i5 is also somewhat lanceolate. The i3 is distinctly staggered as indicated by the buttress visible on the anterolabial edge of the dentary just ventral to the labial aspect of the tooth and by the posterior shift of its root observable lingually on MHNC 13906. Lower canine (Figs 6; 7). The lower canine is a large tooth, although consistently smaller than the upper canine. It is pointed at its apex and curved (from the alveolar border) dorsally but not posteriorly. In other words, the apex of the tooth does not overhang the, Published as part of Muizon, Christian de & Ladevèze, Sandrine, 2022, New material of Incadelphys antiquus (Pucadelphyda, Metatheria, Mammalia) from the early Palaeocene of Bolivia reveals phylogenetic affinities with enigmatic North and South American metatherians, pp. 609-643 in Geodiversitas 44 (22) on pages 613-630, DOI: 10.5252/geodiversitas2022v44a22, http://zenodo.org/record/6795405, {"references":["MARSHALL L. G. & MUIZON C. DE 1988. - The dawn of the age of mammals in South America. National Geographic Research 4 (1): 23 - 55.","GAYET M., MARSHALL L. G. & SEMPERE T. 1992. - The Mesozoic and Palaeocene vertebrates of Bolivia and their stratigraphic context: a review. Revista Tecnica de YPFB 12 (3 - 4): 393 - 433.","MARSHALL L. G. & MUIZON C. DE 1995. - Part II: The skull, in MUIZON C. DE (ed.), Pucadelphys andinus (Marsupialia, Mammalia) from the early Paleocene of Bolivia. Museum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris: 21 - 90 (Memoires du Museum national d'Histoire naturelle; 165).","GELFO J., GOIN F., WOODBURNE M. O. & MUIZON C. DE 2009. - Biochronological relationships of South American Paleogene mammalian faunas. Palaeontology 52: 251 - 269. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1475 - 4983.2008.00835. x","MUIZON C. DE, BILLET G., ARGOT C., LADEVEZE S. & GOUSSARD F. 2015. - Alcidedorbignya inopinata, a basal pantodont (Eutheria, Mammalia) from the early Palaeocene of Bolivia: anatomy, phylogeny, and palaeobiology. Geodiversitas 37 (4): 397 - 634. https: // doi. org / 10.5252 / g 2015 n 4 a 1","MUIZON C. DE, LADEVEZE S., SELVA C., VIGNAUD R. & GOUSSARD F. 2018. - Allqokirus australis (Sparassodonta, Metatheria) from the early Palaeocene of Tiupampa (Bolivia) and the rise of the metatherian carnivorous radiation in South America. Geodiversitas 40 (16): 363 - 459. https: // doi. org / 10.5252 / geodiversitas 2018 v 40 a 16. http: // geodiversitas. com / 40 / 16","LADEVEZE S., SELVA C. & MUIZON C. DE 2020. - What are \" opossum-like \" fossils? The phylogeny of herpetotheriid and peradectids metatherians, based on new features from the petrosal anatomy. Journal of Systematic Palaeontology 18: 17, 1463 - 1479. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 14772019.2020.1772387","ZIMICZ A. N., FERNANDEZ M., BOND M., CHORNOGUBSKY L., ARNAL M., CARDENAS M., & FERNICOLA J. C. 2020. - Archaeogaia macachaae gen. et sp. nov., one of the oldest Notoungulata Roth, 1903 from the early-middle Paleocene Mealla Formation (Central Andes, Argentina) with insights into the Paleocene- Eocene south American biochronology. Journal of South American Earth Sciences 103: 102772. https: // doi. org / 10.1016 / j. jsames. 2020.102772","LADEVEZE S., MUIZON C. DE, BECK R., GERMAIN D. & CESPEDES- PAZ R. 2011. - Earliest evidence of mammalian social behaviour in the basal Tertiary of Bolivia. Nature. 474: 83 - 86. https: // doi. org / 10.1038 / nature 09987","HERSHKOVITZ P. 1982. - The staggered marsupial lower third incisor (i 3). Geobios, Memoire special 6: 191 - 200.","HERSHKOVITZ P. 1995. - The staggered marsupial third lower incisor: hallmark of Cohort Didelphimorphia, and description of a new genus and species with staggered i 3 from the Albian (Lower Cretaceous) of Texas. Bonner Zoologische Beitrage 45: 153 - 169.","MUIZON C. DE & LADEVEZE S. 2020. - The cranial anatomy of Andinodelphys cochabambensis, a stem metatherian from the early Palaeocene of the Santa Lucia Formation at Tiupampa (Bolivia). Geodiversitas 42 (30): 597 - 739. https: // doi. org / 10.5252 / geodiversitas 2020 v 42 a 30. http: // geodiversitas. com / 42 / 30","TURNBULL W. D. 1970. - Mammalian masticatory musculature. Fieldiana: Geology 18 (2): 149 - 356. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 5442","THEWISSEN J. G. M. 1989. - Mammalian frontal diploic vein and the human foramen caecum. The Anatomical Record 223: 242 - 244. https: // doi. org / 10.1002 / ar. 1092230217","EVANS H. E. & DE LAHUNTA A. 2013. - Miller's Anatomy of the Dog. Saunders, St Louis, 850 p.","WIBLE J. R., NOVACEK M. J. & ROUGIER G. W. 2004. - New data on the skull and dentition in the Mongolian Cretaceous eutherian mammal Zalambdalestes. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 281: 1 - 144. https: // doi. org / c 4 wpk 4","NOVACEK M. J. 1986. - The skull of leptictid insectivorans and the higher-level classification of eutherian mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 183 (1): 1 - 112. http: // hdl. handle. net / 2246 / 1628","WIBLE J. R. & ROUGIER G. W. 2000. - Cranial anatomy of Kryptobaatar dashzevegi (Mammalia, Multituberculata), and its bearing on the evolution of mammalian characters. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 247: 1 - 124. https: // doi. org / dkpqq 3","WIBLE J. R. 2003. - On the cranial osteology of the short-tailed opossum Monodelphis brevicaudata (Marsupialia, Didelphidae). Annals of the Carnegie Museum 72 (3): 1 - 66. https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 52469617","WIBLE J. R., ROUGIER G. W., NOVACEK M. J. & ASHER R. J. 2009. - The eutherian mammal Maelestes gobiensis from the Late Cretaceous of Mongolia and the phylogeny of Cretaceous Eutheria. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 327: 1 - 123. https: // doi. org / 10.1206 / 623.1","WIBLE J. R. 2011. - On the treeshrew skull (Mammalia, Placentalia, Scandentia). Annals of the Carnegie Museum 79 (3): 149 - 230. https: // doi. org / 10.2992 / 007.079.0301","HIIEMAE K. & JENKINS F. A. 1969. - The anatomy and internal architecture of the muscles of mastication in Didelphis marsupialis. Postilla 140: 1 - 49. https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 10598728"]}
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF