painshill Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 In articles about mammoths, I frequently see references to: "mammoth species can be identified by counting the number of ridges on the first 4 inches of the chewing surface of the tooth". In fact everyone seems to be quoting from the same unspecified source. Does anyone know what that source is, whether the statement is actually true and if so... what the relationship might be??? Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmoceras Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 (edited) I have heard this too but have never been able to test it out not have a complete tooth. Thanks for posting this topic, a question I too am seeking the answer. Edited June 8, 2012 by Kosmoceras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitbat Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 The unspecified source is probably H.F. Osborn's famous monograph on the Proboscidea (published posthumously in 1936 and 1942). In it, he uses a count of the number of ridge plates per tooth, the number of ridge plates per 100mm, and other characteristics to separate the species of Proboscidea (including Mammuthus). While many of the species he erected have since been discarded or synonomized, and some point out that there can be considerable overlap in ridge counts, etc., Osborn's monograph(s) are still the most comprehensive attempts to date to use morphological features to classify elephants to the specific level. Joe Illigitimati non carborundum Fruitbat's PDF Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
painshill Posted June 12, 2012 Author Share Posted June 12, 2012 The unspecified source is probably H.F. Osborn's famous monograph on the Proboscidea (published posthumously in 1936 and 1942). In it, he uses a count of the number of ridge plates per tooth, the number of ridge plates per 100mm, and other characteristics to separate the species of Proboscidea (including Mammuthus). While many of the species he erected have since been discarded or synonomized, and some point out that there can be considerable overlap in ridge counts, etc., Osborn's monograph(s) are still the most comprehensive attempts to date to use morphological features to classify elephants to the specific level. Joe Joe I think the only thing more impressive than the depth of your knowledge is the unassuming modesty with which you share it. [i managed to find Osborn's monograph as a pdf here (feel free to add it to your splendid library): http://archive.org/download/proboscideamonog01osbo/proboscideamonog01osbo.pdf Anyone else who might be interested, be forewarned that it's a whopping 86.1MB download] Thanks again Roger Roger I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew);Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who [Rudyard Kipling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fruitbat Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 (edited) Roger...my distinct pleasure. I thought I had a link to the Osborn monographs in my PDF Library but I don't. I'll remedy THAT situation ASAP! -Joe Edited June 16, 2012 by Fruitbat Illigitimati non carborundum Fruitbat's PDF Library Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briman Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Roger, Joe, you are both assets to this forum. I just wonder how Joe manages to be both modest and Texan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts