Identifying a mammal canine tooth

[Kiros]

Hi everyone, some time ago I got this fossil tooth from a European collector, the only thing the seller was able to tell me is that it was a canine of a carnivore (quite evident) and that it had been found in the most recent sediments of the Linxia basin in the HeZheng area (corresponding to late Pliocene-early Pleistocene age). Intrigued by the fossil, I decided to buy it and find out what animal it was.

 

The first thing to do (in addition to hoping that the seller has given you correct information) is to search for articles regarding the fossil fauna and the ecology of the area where the fossil was found. In my case I found a very interesting article by paleontologist Deng Tao (Character, Age and Ecology of the Hezheng Biota, 2005) who gave me an overall view of the variety of carnivorous mammals that characterize the fossil association.

Then we move on to carefully observe the fossil, based on the curvature of the tooth this would seem to be a left upper canine. Another important detail is the presence of evident grooves on the crown of the tooth, this feature suggests that the tooth belongs to a feline.

 

Which felines were present in the fossil fauna of the area?

-Panthera palaeosinensis = one of the oldest known species of Panthera, but its relationship to other Pantherinae is still debated

-Felis teilhardi = an enigmatic lynx like cat

-Lynx shansius (Lynx issiodorensis) = an ancestor of the current lynxes, generally it had larger size and with a more elongated snout

-Sivapanthera linxaensis (Acinonyx pardinensis) = ancestor of today's cheetahs, it could reach much larger dimensions.

 

Then we proceed by exclusion, the tooth is too slender to be a tooth from Pantherinae and also too big (62+ mm) to be Felis teilhardi's. There are therefore two options, Lynx shansius and Sivapanthera linxaensis, here the analysis becomes more complex because it is necessary to obtain precise measurements of the tooth. Therefore, the length and width of the tooth (mediolateral breadth and anteroposterior length) are obtained. The height is not important because it can be compromised by wearing or possible fractures. Using a digital caliber, I obtained a length of 12.2 mm and a width of 10.1 mm (the measurements are probably inferior than the real dimensions because the presence of the matrix and the skull did not allow a correct estimation. Probably the tooth is larger by 1-2 mm). Comparing the measurements obtained with those reported in numerous articles, we can observed that the dimensions of the tooth are slightly greater than those of a large specimen of Lynx shansius while they fall within the size range (very close to the lower limit, see graph) of Sivapanthera linxaensis.

 

To conclude, considering the underestimation of the measures, either it is a large lynx (unlikely hypothesis due to the lack of wear on the tooth) or it is a young specimen of Sivapanthera linxaensis.

 

Thanks for making it this far, I hope this little recognition exercise of mine can serve as a little guide on how to go about trying to identify a fossil. Clearly, if someone has a different hypothesis or a different theory, they can explain it.

 

 

[Top Trilo]

Cool tooth, I did find this helpful when unsure of a species and will follow these steps in the future.

[Kiros]

18 minutes ago, Top Trilo said:

Cool tooth, I did find this helpful when unsure of a species and will follow these steps in the future.

Thank you! I find one the most funny thing of collecting is trying to identify by yourself what you have! 

[Shellseeker]

21 hours ago, Kiros said:

1) The first thing to do (in addition to hoping that the seller has given you correct information) is to search for articles regarding the fossil fauna and the ecology of the area where the fossil was found. In my case I found a very interesting article by paleontologist Deng Tao (Character, Age and Ecology of the Hezheng Biota, 2005) who gave me an overall view of the variety of carnivorous mammals that characterize the fossil association.

2) Then we move on to carefully observe the fossil, based on the curvature of the tooth this would seem to be a left upper canine. Another important detail is the presence of evident grooves on the crown of the tooth, this feature suggests that the tooth belongs to a feline.

 

Which felines were present in the fossil fauna of the area?

 

 

Excellent analysis...  Thanks for going thru it and sharing your insights. 

I am fortunate to have many papers, TFF experts, and access to a renowned Paleontologist for those canines I am most likely to find here in Florida..

It is not easy to determine left/right, upper/lower.. without knowing the characteristics of a tooth that indicate those features. Fortunately , they are similar/same for most canines (Form follows function)...

 

[Kiros]

33 minutes ago, Shellseeker said:

 

 

Excellent analysis...  Thanks for going thru it and sharing your insights. 

I am fortunate to have many papers, TFF experts, and access to a renowned Paleontologist for those canines I am most likely to find here in Florida..

It is not easy to determine left/right, upper/lower.. without knowing the characteristics of a tooth that indicate those features. Fortunately , they are similar/same for most canines (Form follows function)...

 

Yeah, papers are fundamental to even try identifying a fossil. Carnivore teeth a really hard to determine and in particular canines, need alot of comparative study! 

[RuMert]

Nice analysis, but it's based on the assumptions that the seller gives (and knows himself) the correct location and all the species present are described in international literature and recognized universally. In practice lots of species are not described at all (description process takes people, time, effort), described locally in local languages or given conflicting names and classifications (happens very often)

[Kiros]

1 minute ago, RuMert said:

Nice analysis, but it's based on the assumptions that the seller gives (and knows himself) the correct location and all the species present are described in international literature and recognized universally. In practice lots of species are not described at all (description process takes people, time, effort), described locally in local languages or given conflicting names and classifications (happens very often)

Yeah sure, I said it too that we must hope the location given was right, and sure, who knows how many species remain not derscribed and how many need to be put together. This topic was only a little identification game, hoping it can be also a little instructive. There was no scientific meaning behind it otherwise I could have wrote a paper about it ahahah