欢迎访问《古脊椎动物学报》官方网站，今天是

古脊椎动物学报

• •    

斑鬣狗(Crocuta)和硕鬣狗(Pachycrocuta)的生态功能之分化——对淮南标本的重新评估

刘金毅1   曾志杰2,3,4    金昌柱1    郑龙亭5   孙成凯6   同号文1,7   

  1. (1 中国科学院古脊椎动物与古人类研究所  北京  100044)
    (2 美国加州大学伯克利分校综合生物学系  伯克利  94720)
    (3 美国加州大学伯克利分校古生物博物馆  伯克利  94720)
    (4 美国自然历史博物馆古生物学部  纽约  10024)
    (5 中国安徽博物馆  合肥  230061)
    (6 中国山东博物馆  济南  250014)
    (7 中国科学院大学  北京  100049)

Eco-functional divergence of Crocuta and Pachycrocuta: a Huainan specimen reappraisal

LIU Jin-Yi1  Zhijie Jack TSENG2,3,4   JIN Chang-Zhu1  ZHENG Long-Ting5  SUN Cheng-Kai6  TONG Hao-Wen1,7   

  1. (1 Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences  Beijing, 100044, China
    liujinyi@ivpp.ac.cn)
    (2 Department of Integrative Biology, University of California  Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)
    (3 Museum of Paleontology, University of California  Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)
    (4 Division of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History  New York, NY 10024, USA)
    (5 Anhui Museum  Hefei 230061, China)
    (6 Shandong Museum  Jinan 250014, China)
    (7 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences  Beijing 100049, China)

PDF

补充材料

1

摘要：

斑鬣狗(Crocuta)和硕鬣狗(Pachycrocuta)是第四纪期间欧亚大陆最常见、最具代表性的鬣狗，仅由裂齿的形态便可以加以区分。然而，二者非裂齿的形态差异却不甚明显，过往的研究也没有予以足够的重视。在面对破碎的标本时，尤其是在裂齿破损或缺失的情况下，时常会导致分类鉴定错误，并进一步导致对有关类群在古动物地理分布和生物年代学上的错误认识和推断。通过一系列的形态学比较和数据统计分析(单元，双元和多元分析等), 对曾志杰等(2008)研究发表的安徽淮南碎骨型鬣狗进行了重新研究和评估，结果表明西裂隙的标本并非斑鬣狗，而是属于佩里硕鬣狗(Pachycrocuta perrieri); 大顶山的标本才是斑鬣狗的真正代表，它可能是迄今中国境内最后斑鬣狗(Crocuta ultima)的最早化石记录。此外，系统总结并分析了斑鬣狗与硕鬣狗在齿颌形态上的差异，并阐述了相应的生态功能意义。研究认为硕鬣狗仍保留了一定的主动捕杀能力，其强壮的犬齿和下颌联合部等充分展示了这一点，在觅食行为上表现出与斑鬣狗类似的灵活弹性：既能机会腐食也能主动捕猎。最后，大致恢复和重现了自更新世以来，华东地区鬣狗的动态演化历史。

关键词: 安徽淮南, 更新世, 重新研究, 佩里硕鬣狗, 河南斑鬣狗, 最后斑鬣狗, 形态学比较, 统计分析, 

Abstract:

Crocuta and Pachycrocuta are widely regarded as the most prevalent and emblematic hyenas across Eurasia during Quaternary. They are easily distinguished by their distinctive carnassial teeth. However, the disparities in non-carnassial elements are less pronounced and have received minimal attention in previous studies. This has resulted in erroneous identifications when dealing with fragmented specimens, particularly in cases where carnassial teeth are poorly preserved or absent. Such misidentifications have the potential to give rise to erroneous inferences regarding the paleozoogeography and biochronology of the animals in question. The bone-cracking hyena specimens from Huainan, Anhui (Tseng et al., 2008) are re-examined and re-evaluated here through a series of morphological comparisons and data analyses (univariate, bivariate, and multivariate analyses etc.). The results provide unequivocal confirmation that the specimens from Xiliexi are not spotted hyenas, but belong to Pachycrocuta perrieri instead. Conversely, the specimen from Dadingshan is the only genuine representative of the spotted hyena, which is supposed to be a possible earliest fossil record for Crocuta ultima thus far in China. Furthermore, the disparities in dentognathic morphology between Crocuta and Pachycrocuta are systematically summarized and analyzed, with an explanation of their eco-functional significance. The present study hypothesizes that Pachycrocuta retains a certain degree of active predatory capability, attributable to the robustness of the canine and the symphysis of the jaw, among other factors. This finding indicates that Pachycrocuta exhibits a form of flexible foraging behavior, combining opportunistic scavenging and active hunting in a manner analogous to Crocuta. Finally, the dynamic evolutionary history of hyenas in East China since Pleistocene has also been broadly reconstructed.

Key words: Huainan, Anhui, Pleistocene, re-examination, Pachycrocuta perrieri, Crocuta honanensis, Crocuta ultima, morphological comparison, statistical analysis

　 网站版权 © 《古脊椎动物学报》编辑部
地址：北京643信箱，《古脊椎动物学报》编辑部　邮编：100044　
电话：(010)88369180　 Email：bjs@ivpp.ac.cn
技术支持：北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司