A history of land mammals in the western hemisphereScott, William Berryman
History
A history of land mammals in the western hemisphere
Scott, William Berryman
Mammals; Mammals, Fossil
The evolution of the Proboscidea was, in a certain sense, very similar
to that of the †oreodont family (p. 381) among the Artiodactyla, in
that the developmental changes affected chiefly the dentition and the
skull, the skeleton of the body and limbs having very early acquired a
character which was afterward but little modified. Were the skull and
teeth of the lower Miocene _†Gomphotherium_ not known, we should hardly
hesitate to refer the skeleton to the genus _Elephas_, and even in the
Oligocene _†Palæomastodon_ all the bones of the skeleton, other than the
skull, were characteristically and unmistakably proboscidean. On the
other hand, the transformations of the teeth and skull were very profound
and far-reaching, very much more so than those which took place in the
†oreodonts.
[Illustration: FIG. 229.—Evolution of the Proboscidea: on the right, a
series of skulls; on the left, last lower molar. (After Lull, modified by
Sinclair.) N.B. _†Tetrabelodon_ should read _†Gomphotherium_.]
In the dentition we may consider separately the development of the
tusks and of the grinding teeth. The first step in the known series, as
exemplified by _†Mœritherium_, was the enlargement of the second incisor
in each jaw to form a tusk which, though actually quite long, was very
small when judged by the proboscidean standard. The upper tusk was
directed vertically downward and the lower one was procumbent, pointing
almost directly forward; the third incisor and the canine were small and
in the lower jaw already lost. In the next known stage, _†Palæomastodon_,
all of the anterior teeth, except the tusks, had been suppressed; the
upper tusks were longer and more curved and of an oval cross-section;
they extended less directly downward and more forward, while the enamel
was restricted to the outer side of the tusk; the lower tusks were more
fully procumbent than in the preceding genus. The third stage, that
of the lower Miocene _†Gomphotherium_, showed the upper tusks greatly
elongated and directed more forward than downward, while the lower
tusks were but little larger than before. From the middle Miocene two
phyla may be distinguished by the tusks alone; in one, which was not
destined to long life, the lower pair increased greatly both in length
and in diameter, while in the other series they rapidly diminished and
eventually disappeared. Even in the Pleistocene, however, the American
†Mastodon had remnants of these tusks in the males. In the later
†mastodons, the †stegodonts, and true elephants, the upper tusks, which
alone remained, lost the enamel bands and attained enormous proportions,
differing in the various genera and species in the extent and direction
of curvature. An aberrant mode of tusk development was to be seen in the
†dinotheres, in which the upper pair was suppressed and the lower pair
enlarged and so curved that the points were directed backward.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account