间型三棱齿象(Trilophodon connexus Hopwood, 1935)属于豕棱齿象类而非嵌齿象

doi:10.19615/j.cnki.2096-9899.230917

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

间型三棱齿象(Trilophodon connexus Hopwood, 1935)长期以来被认为是中国嵌齿象属(Gomphotherium)的一个代表种。然而，由于其下颌联合部与下门齿的形态未知，这一归入存疑。重新研究了来自新疆准噶尔盆地北缘乌伦古河地区哈拉玛盖组的一件此前归为陕西嵌齿象相似种(Gomphotherium cf. G. shensiensis)的下颌。该下颌联合部伸长，呈深槽状，下门齿缺失，因此确定可归入豕棱齿象科(Choerolophodontidae)。进一步将间型三棱齿象的正型标本与其相比较，两者颊齿的关键特征完全一致，包括：高度丘型化，m3伸长，具有四脊，上下颊齿第二脊“人字型”(chevron)很弱，第二脊中附锥与前中心小尖不愈合，釉质褶皱、齿谷中小锥及白垩质发育弱或缺失。因此，间型三棱齿象事实上是一种豕棱齿象类而非嵌齿象。综上所述，暂将其改定为间型“豕棱齿象” (“Choerolophodon” connexus (Hopwood, 1935))。同时，以上特征与北美的索普颌门齿象(Gnathabelodon thorpei)比较接近。此外，在颌门齿象属和间型“豕棱齿象”中，颊齿第二脊呈“人字型”, 釉质褶皱、齿谷中小锥及白垩质发育强这些典型的豕棱齿象属(Choerolophodon)的特征较弱甚至缺失，但m3齿脊数变多，这表明颌门齿象属可能起源于东亚的间型“豕棱齿象”。

关键词: 中新世, 嵌齿象, 颌门齿象, 豕棱齿象, 长鼻类

Abstract:

Trilophodon connexus Hopwood, 1935 has long been considered a typical species of Gomphotherium in China. However, due to the unknown state of the mandibular symphysis and tusks, there is no definite evidence to assign “T. connexus” to Gomphotherium. Here we describe and reevaluate a hemimandible from the Halamagai Formation, Ulungur region, northern Junggar Basin, which was previously identified as Gomphotherium cf. G. shensiensis. The mandibular symphysis is deeply troughed and lacks mandibular tusks; therefore, it undoubtedly belongs to the Choerolophodontidae. Further comparison revealed that the cheek tooth morphology is identical to that of the type specimen of Trilophodon connexus. The characteristic features include high bunodonty, elongation of the m3 with four lophids, an only weakly chevroned lophid 2, enlargement of the posterior pretrite central conule 2, unfused state of the pretrite mesoconelet 2 (if present) and anterior pretrite central conule 2, as well as the absence of ptychodonty, choerodonty, and cementodonty. Therefore, T. connexus Hopwood, 1935 is a choerolophodontid rather than a species of Gomphotherium. Based on the above features, we provisionally refer to it as “Choerolophodon” connexus. “Choerolophodon” connexus is characterized by the following features: weak or absent ptychodonty, choerodonty, and loph chevron (which were all strong in the typical species of Choerolophodon), as well as multiplication of the lophids in the m3, which were similar to that of the North American Gnathabelodon. Therefore, Gnathabelodon might represent a distinct lineage within the Choerolophodontidae, and may be derived from the East Asian “Choerolophodon” connexus.

Key words: Miocene, Gomphotherium, Gnathabelodon, Choerolophodon, proboscidean

中图分类号:

Q915.878

李春晓, 陈津, 王世骐. 间型三棱齿象(Trilophodon connexus Hopwood, 1935)属于豕棱齿象类而非嵌齿象. 古脊椎动物学报, 2024, 62(1): 33-46.

LI Chun-Xiao, CHEN Jin, WANG Shi-Qi. Reassessment of Trilophodon connexus Hopwood, 1935 and attributing it to the Choerolophodontidae. Vertebrata Palasiatica, 2024, 62(1): 33-46.

图/表 5

参考文献 36

[1]	Barbour E H, Sternberg G F, 1935. Gnathabelodon thorpei, gen. et sp. nov., a new mud-grubbing mastodon. Bull Nebr State Mus, 42: 395-403
[2]	Chen G F, 1988. Mastodont remains from the Miocene of Junggar Basin in Xinjiang. Vert PalAsiat, 26: 265-277
[3]	Chen G F, 2021. Basal synapsids and mammals:hyracoidea, proboscidea, etc. In: Qiu Z X, Li C K eds. Palaeovertebrata Sinica. Beijing: Science Press. 1-231
[4]	Chow M C, Chang Y P, 1974. Chinese Fossil Elephantoids. Beijing: Science Press. 1-74
[5]	Gaziry A W, 1987. New mammals from the Jabal Zaltan site, Libya. Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 68: 69-89
[6]	Hopwood A T, 1935. Fossil Proboscidea from China. Palaeontol Sin, Sér C, 9: 1-108
[7]	Konidaris G E, Koufos G D, Kostopoulos D S et al., 2016. Taxonomy, biostratigraphy and palaeoecology of Choerolophodon (Proboscidea, Mammalia) in the Miocene of SE Europe-SW Asia: implications for phylogeny and biogeography. J Syst Palaeont, 14: 1-27 DOI URL
[8]	Li, C X, Wang S Q, Hao C L et al., 2018. A textual research of the early localities of fossil Gomphotherium in the Xining Basin with relevant stratigraphic correlation. J Stratigr, 42: 313-324
[9]	Li C X, Wang S Q, Mothé D et al., 2019. New fossils of Early and Middle Miocene Choerolophodon from northern China reveal a Holarctic distribution of Choerolophodontidae. J Vert Paleont, 39: e1618864
[10]	Li C X, Wang S Q, Yang Q, 2022. Discovery of a primitive Gomphotherium from the Early Miocene of northern China and its biochronology and palaeobiogeography significance. Hist Biol, doi: 10.1080/08912963.2022.2077106
[11]	MacInnes D G, 1942. Miocene and post-Miocene Proboscidea from east Africa. Trans Zool Soc London, 25: 33-106 DOI URL
[12]	Maglio V J, 1974. A new proboscidean from the Late Miocene of Kenya. Palaeontology, 17: 699-705
[13]	Matthews S C, 1973. Notes on open nomenclature and on synonymy lists. Palaeontology, 16: 713-719
[14]	Osborn H F, 1936. Proboscidea: a Monograph of the Discovery, Evolution, Migration and Extinction of the Mastodonts and Elephants of the World. New York: The American Museum Press. 1-802
[15]	Pickford M, 2001. Afrochoerodon nov. gen. kisumuensis (MacInnes) (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from Cheparawa, Middle Miocene, Kenya. Ann Paléont, 87: 99-117 DOI URL
[16]	Qiu Z D, Li C K, Wang S J, 1981. Miocene mammalian fossils from Xining Basin, Qinghai. Vert PalAsiat, 19: 156-173
[17]	Sanders W J, Miller E R, 2002. New proboscideans from the Early Miocene of Wadi Moghara, Egypt. J Vert Paleont, 22: 388-404 DOI URL
[18]	Sanders W J, Gheerbrant E, Harris J M et al., 2010. Proboscidea. In: Werdelin L, Sanders W J eds.eds. Cenozoic Mammals of Africa. Berkeley: University of California Press. 161-251
[19]	Sellards E H, 1940. New Pliocene mastodon. Bull Geol Soc Am, 51: 1659-1664 DOI URL
[20]	Shoshani J, Tassy P, 2005. Advances in proboscidean taxonomy & classification, anatomy & physiology, and ecology & behavior. Quat Int, 126-128: 5-20 DOI URL
[21]	Tassy P, 1983. Les Elephantoidea Miocènes du Plateau du Potwar, Groups de Siwalik, Pakistan. Ann Paléont, 69: 99-136, 235-297
[22]	Tassy P, 1985. La place des mastodontes Miocènes de l’ancien monde dans la phylogénie des Proboscidea (Mammalia): hypothèses et conjectures. Vol I-III. Thèse Doctorat ès Sciences. Paris: Université Pierre et Marie Curie. 1-861
[23]	Tassy P, 2014. L'odontologie de Gomphotherium angustidens (Cuvier, 1817) (Proboscidea, Mammalia): données issues du gisement d'En Péjouan (Miocène moyen du Gers, France). Geodiversitas, 36(1): 35-115 DOI URL
[24]	Tobien H, 1973. On the evolution of mastodonts (Proboscidea, Mammalia), part 1: the bunodont trilophodont groups. Notizbl Hess L-Amt Bodenforsch, 101: 202-276
[25]	Tobien H, 1980. A note on the skull and mandible of a new choerolophodont mastodont (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Middle Miocene of Chios (Aegean Sea, Greece). In: Jacobs L ed. Aspects of Vertebrate History: Essays in Honor of Edwin Harris Colbert. Flagstaff: Museum of Northern Arizona Press. 299-307
[26]	Tobien H, Chen G F, Li Y Q, 1986. Mastodonts (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Late Neogene and Early Pleistocene of the People’s Republic of China, part I: historical account: the genera Gomphotherium, Choerolophodon, Synconolophus, Amebelodon, Platybelodon, Sinomastodon. Mainzer Geowiss Mitt, 15: 119-181
[27]	Wang S Q, 2014. Gomphotherium inopinatum, a basal Gomphotherium species from the Linxia Basin, China, and other Chinese members of the genus. Vert PalAsiat, 52: 183-200
[28]	Wang S Q, 2021. The anthracotheres from northern Junggar Basin and their palaeoclimatic significance in relation to the Tibetan Plateau. Palaeobio Palaeoenv, 101: 839-852 DOI
[29]	Wang S Q, Deng T, 2011. The first Choerolophodon (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae) skull from China. Sci China Earth Sci, 54: 1326-1337 DOI URL
[30]	Wang S Q, Duangkrayom J, Yang X W, 2015. Occurrence of the Gomphotherium angustidens group in China, based on a revision of Gomphotherium connexum (Hopwood, 1935) and Gomphotherium shensiensis Chang and Zhai, 1978: continental correlation of Gomphotherium species across the Palearctic. Paläont Z, 89: 1073-1086 DOI URL
[31]	Wang S Q, Li Y, Duangkrayom J et al., 2017. A new species of Gomphotherium (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from China and the evolution of Gomphotherium in Eurasia. J Vert Paleont, 37: 1-15 DOI URL
[32]	Wang S Q, Zhang X X, Li C X, 2020. Reappraisal of Serridentinus gobiensis Osborn & Granger and Miomastodon tongxinensis Chen: the validity of Miomastodon. Vert PalAsiat, 58: 134-158
[33]	Wang S Q, Ye J, Meng J et al., 2022. Sexual selection promotes giraffoid head-neck evolution and ecological adaptation. Science, 376: 6597
[34]	Wang S Q, Li C X, Li Y et al., 2023. Gomphotheres from Linxia Basin, China, and their significance in biostratigraphy, biochronology, and paleozoogeography. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimat Palaeoecol, 613: 111405 DOI URL
[35]	Wu Y, Deng T, Hu Y W et al., 2018. A grazing Gomphotherium in Middle Miocene Central Asia, 10 million years prior to the origin of the Elephantidae. Sci Rep, 8: 7640 DOI
[36]	Zhai R J, 1961. On a collection of Neogene mammals from Ching-An, eastern Kansu. Vert PalAsiat, (3): 262-268

no.	species	locality /region	locus	L	W	W1	W2	W3	W4	Hpo	W/L
*RV35D49	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. M3	120.01	62.08	62.08	60.00	57.11		41.26⁽²⁾	0.52
*V8572	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. M3	186.93	83.78	83.78	76.75	72.1	63.36	51.28⁽²⁾	0.45
*V8573	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	170.72	82.74	82.74	77.1	72.31	50.86	50.41⁽³⁾	0.48
*V8576	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	176.15	74.93	74.93	71.58	67.61	57.56	50.70⁽³⁾	0.43
*V8574	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	-	-	-	-	67.24	59.95	57.15⁽³⁾	-
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	r. M3	196.35	105.7	97.62	105.7	104.27	81.81	58.41+⁽³⁾	0.54
*V8569	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. dp4	71.83	37.82	-	-	37.82		33.12⁽²⁾	0.53
V31357	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. m2	109.59	56.62	45.59	54.96	56.62		40.8+⁽³⁾	0.52
*V8567	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m2	-	56.93	-	52.02	56.93		33.32+⁽³⁾	-
*RV35015	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. m2	103.49	45.13	38.97	45.13	50.23			0.44
V8567	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	158.44	65.19	-	63.71	65.19	53.66	45.62+⁽²⁾	0.41
*RV35015	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. m3	148.52	51.45	50.68	51.45	-	-	46.72+⁽²⁾	0.35
*V18701	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	191.09	68.1	68.1	65.22	67.31	65.05	54.14⁽²⁾	0.36
*V8571	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. m3	172.02	76.04	68.37	76.04	67.32	52.38	58.51⁽²⁾	0.44
*V8575	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	169.99	64.27	57.31	64.27	58.47	51.31	58.03⁽¹⁾	0.38
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	l. m3	209.85	91.15	80.65	89.44	91.15	78.91	66.37+⁽³⁾	0.43
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	r. m3	198.82	91.53	79.96	90.03	91.53	74.24	67.45+⁽³⁾	0.46

no.	species	locality /region	locus	L	W	W1	W2	W3	W4	Hpo	W/L
*RV35D49	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. M3	120.01	62.08	62.08	60.00	57.11		41.26⁽²⁾	0.52
*V8572	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. M3	186.93	83.78	83.78	76.75	72.1	63.36	51.28⁽²⁾	0.45
*V8573	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	170.72	82.74	82.74	77.1	72.31	50.86	50.41⁽³⁾	0.48
*V8576	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	176.15	74.93	74.93	71.58	67.61	57.56	50.70⁽³⁾	0.43
*V8574	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. M3	-	-	-	-	67.24	59.95	57.15⁽³⁾	-
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	r. M3	196.35	105.7	97.62	105.7	104.27	81.81	58.41+⁽³⁾	0.54
*V8569	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. dp4	71.83	37.82	-	-	37.82		33.12⁽²⁾	0.53
V31357	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. m2	109.59	56.62	45.59	54.96	56.62		40.8+⁽³⁾	0.52
*V8567	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m2	-	56.93	-	52.02	56.93		33.32+⁽³⁾	-
*RV35015	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. m2	103.49	45.13	38.97	45.13	50.23			0.44
V8567	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	158.44	65.19	-	63.71	65.19	53.66	45.62+⁽²⁾	0.41
*RV35015	“C.” connexus	Diaogou	l. m3	148.52	51.45	50.68	51.45	-	-	46.72+⁽²⁾	0.35
*V18701	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	191.09	68.1	68.1	65.22	67.31	65.05	54.14⁽²⁾	0.36
*V8571	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	r. m3	172.02	76.04	68.37	76.04	67.32	52.38	58.51⁽²⁾	0.44
*V8575	“C.” connexus	Ulungur	l. m3	169.99	64.27	57.31	64.27	58.47	51.31	58.03⁽¹⁾	0.38
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	l. m3	209.85	91.15	80.65	89.44	91.15	78.91	66.37+⁽³⁾	0.43
VP18	Gn. thorpei	Ogallah	r. m3	198.82	91.53	79.96	90.03	91.53	74.24	67.45+⁽³⁾	0.46

Mandibular measurements	Gnathabelodon thorpei	Gomphotherium tassyi	“Choerolophodon” connexus
Mandibular measurements	FHSU VP18	IVPP V22781	IVPP V8567	IVPP RV35015
maximal length	1490.8	1160.8	760.1	483.5+
symphyseal length	587.4+	584.0	403.5+	-
maximal width	596.1	492.7	-	-
posterior symphyseal width	258.4	185.0	158.6	161.4
anterior symphyseal width	-	114.6	-	-
maximum symphyseal width	221.9	186.3	-	-
minimum symphyseal width	176.5	108.1	83.4	-
maximum width of the rostral trough	214.8	-	-	-
minimum width of rostral trough	168.7	-	80.2	50.3
internal width between anterior alveoli (or grinding teeth if the alveoli are resorbed)	89.4	76.4	-	60.2
maximum height of horizontal ramus (measurement taken perpendicular to the ventral border of the ramus)	478.1	388.7	-	94.5
height of horizontal ramus taken at the root of the ascending branch (measurement as above)	210.5	175.7	-	76.5
rostral height taken at the symphyseal border (measurement taken perpendicular to the ventral border of the symphyseal rostrum)	207.5	120.5	98.5	61.2
rostral height taken at the tip of rostrum (measurement as above)	169.0	98.4	-	47.0
maximum depth of the ascending ramus	305.4	146.8	-	172.8
depth between gonion and the coronoid process	310.8	172.4	-	191.1
mid-alveolar length taken on the buccal side between the anterior alveolus and the root of the ascending ramus	335.8	243.0	245.4	236.0
rostral height taken at the tip of rostrum (measurement as above)	169.0	98.4	-	47.0
maximum depth of the ascending ramus	305.4	146.8	-	172.8
depth between gonion and the coronoid process	310.8	172.4	-	191.1
mid-alveolar length taken on the buccal side between the anterior alveolus and the root of the ascending ramus	335.8	243.0	245.4	236.0

Mandibular measurements	Gnathabelodon thorpei	Gomphotherium tassyi	“Choerolophodon” connexus
Mandibular measurements	FHSU VP18	IVPP V22781	IVPP V8567	IVPP RV35015
maximal length	1490.8	1160.8	760.1	483.5+
symphyseal length	587.4+	584.0	403.5+	-
maximal width	596.1	492.7	-	-
posterior symphyseal width	258.4	185.0	158.6	161.4
anterior symphyseal width	-	114.6	-	-
maximum symphyseal width	221.9	186.3	-	-
minimum symphyseal width	176.5	108.1	83.4	-
maximum width of the rostral trough	214.8	-	-	-
minimum width of rostral trough	168.7	-	80.2	50.3
internal width between anterior alveoli (or grinding teeth if the alveoli are resorbed)	89.4	76.4	-	60.2
maximum height of horizontal ramus (measurement taken perpendicular to the ventral border of the ramus)	478.1	388.7	-	94.5
height of horizontal ramus taken at the root of the ascending branch (measurement as above)	210.5	175.7	-	76.5
rostral height taken at the symphyseal border (measurement taken perpendicular to the ventral border of the symphyseal rostrum)	207.5	120.5	98.5	61.2
rostral height taken at the tip of rostrum (measurement as above)	169.0	98.4	-	47.0
maximum depth of the ascending ramus	305.4	146.8	-	172.8
depth between gonion and the coronoid process	310.8	172.4	-	191.1
mid-alveolar length taken on the buccal side between the anterior alveolus and the root of the ascending ramus	335.8	243.0	245.4	236.0
rostral height taken at the tip of rostrum (measurement as above)	169.0	98.4	-	47.0
maximum depth of the ascending ramus	305.4	146.8	-	172.8
depth between gonion and the coronoid process	310.8	172.4	-	191.1
mid-alveolar length taken on the buccal side between the anterior alveolus and the root of the ascending ramus	335.8	243.0	245.4	236.0