Large mammals of Fouvent-Saint-Andoche (Haute-Saône, France): a glimpse into a Late Pleistocene hyena den
Author
Fourvel, Jean-Baptiste
Author
Fosse, Philippe
Author
Fernandez, Philippe
Author
Antoine, Pierre-Olivier
text
Geodiversitas
2015
2015-06-26
37
2
237
266
http://dx.doi.org/10.5252/g2015n2a5
journal article
10.5252/g2015n2a5
1638-9395
4535125
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0117CBA4-4CE0-4431-B5F6-721F998C72C7
Panthera
(
Leo
)
spelaea
(Goldfüss, 1810)
MATERIAL EXAMINED. — NISP=13; MNI=7.
1989-1992 sample:
3 right C; 1 right P4; 1 left P4; 1 right mandible (including p3); 2 left p4; 2 right m1; 3 left m1.
|
N°
|
Teeth
|
Side
|
B
|
L
|
| H8.C.194 |
I2 |
Dext |
11.0 |
12.0 |
| G8.C.610 |
I3 |
Sin |
16.0 |
16.0 |
| F10.C.379 |
I3 |
Dext |
16.0 |
16.4 |
| F11.A.67 |
I3 |
Dext |
14.0 |
17.0 |
| G9.C.580 |
C |
Sin |
14.0 |
20.5 |
| 1842.66 |
M1 |
Sin |
18.0 |
25.3 |
| 1842.69 |
M1 |
Dext |
22.0 |
31.0 |
| G9.B.158 |
M2 |
Dext |
24.0 |
48.0 |
| 1842.66 |
M2 |
Sin |
21.0 |
40.5 |
| G.A.40 |
c |
Sin |
14.5 |
20.0 |
| G8.C.613 |
c |
Sin |
14.0 |
19.0 |
| 1842.70 |
m1 |
Dext |
14.0* |
30.0* |
| H8.C.258 |
m2 |
Sin |
18.7 |
29.0 |
| F10.C.263 |
m3 |
Sin |
22.0 |
29.2 |
| 1842.65 |
m3 |
Dext |
19.0 |
30.5 |
DESCRIPTION
Thirteen cranio-dental remains (upper and lower teeth, mandible) have been attributed to the cave lion. This material and its stratigraphical distribution within the locality suggest a minimum number of seven individuals.Teeth measurements reveal significant size variability (
Table 7
). Many palaeontological, phylogenetic, and biogeographical works have focused on the cave lion (e.g.,
Burger
et al.
2004
;
Hemmer 2011
;
Sabol 2011
;
Stuart & Lister 2011
). In Europe, Late Pleistocene lions are both represented by the subspecies
Panthera
(
Leo
)
spelaea
described at Gailenreuth (OIS3,
Germany
), and the smaller form,
P.
(
Leo
)
spelaea
var.
cloueti
(Filhol, 1891) (
Filhol & Filhol 1871
)
of Jaurens (
Ballesio 1980
) (OIS3,
France
).
The taxonomic status of the small morph is a matter of debate, given that such size discrepancy may either reflect ecomorphotypy or sexual dimorphism. At Fouvent, the ratio B/L of the P4 and the m1 compared with fossil and living populations leads to some comments on the size of the different clines (
Fig. 6
). Thus, on the base of the m1 of Jaurens, a clear distinction appears between large-sized lions (Jaurens
in
Ballesio 1980
) and a smaller form (Jaurens
in
Ballesio 1980
; Espèche
in
Clot
et al.
1984
). In addition, many osteometrical datasets for Late Pleistocene cave lions confirm significant variability for the m1 (specimens smaller than
P. spelaea
var.
cloueti
and also larger than the biggest form of Jaurens).Moreover, current data confirm the presence of a strongly marked sexual dimorphism, increasing the probability of significant overlap between osteometrical dimensions. In our opinion, the different sizes observed at Jaurens seem to be more related to intraspecific sexual dimorphism than to any evolutionary stage or stratigraphical age-based discrepancy. Consequently, if we consider the small form of Jaurens as characteristic of females, the m1 of Fouvent which are very close in size could belong to females. The same thing is true concerning the two P4s of Fouvent, both presenting extreme values. The larger one could be associated to a large-sized male and the smaller to a female. However, it would be necessary to undertake a thorough revision of cave lion intraspecific variability in order to validate the concerned hypothesis.