Kaszab Zoltán (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 70. (Budapest 1978)

Jánossy, D.: Larger mammals from the lowermost Pleistocene fauna, Osztramos, Loc. 7. (Hungary)

Ursus etruscus CUVIER Martes sp. Putorius stromeri KORMOS Pannonictis aff. janossyi RABEDER Mustela praenivalis KORMOS Mustela cf. plioerminea STACH Felis cf. lunensis MARTELLI Dicerorhimis cf. megarhinus CHRISTOL Equus "robustus POMEL" Cervus s.l. sp. I. (philisi group) Cervus s.l. sp. II. (cf. Cervodama pontoborealis FLEROW et PIDOPLICHKO) This extremely rich fauna allow already in spite of preliminary determinations a very detailed microstratigraphical arrangement. The description of some representatives of the larger mammals* to approximate the macro- and micromammal stratigraphy of the corresponding time span is givenRODENTIA BOWDICH, 1821 Hystrix cf. major GERVAIS, 1859 (Plate II: Fig. 9) Material: left mandible with the M

2 and M

3

, isolated right F

4

. The mandible agrees in size and chief morphological features with that of the geologically considerably younger large porcupine of the Loc. 8 Osztramos, seems to be only slightly smaller. The length and width of the M., measure 10x9 mm, that of the M

3 9x7 mm. The P

i is senile. These remains represent also the size category, which we assign conventionally with the name Hystrix major GERVAIS (see JÁNOSSY 1972). Due to the rarity and morphological homogenety of porcupine remains it is not to be hoped that we find in the near future some theoretically assumable morphological or allometrical differences between forms of the same size category and different geological age. Ferae LINNÉ, 1758 Cams aff. arnensis DEL CAMPANA, 1913 (Plate II: Fig. 8) Material: proximal half of the right humerus. The Canids of the rich material of Val d'Arno in Italy, collected during the last century, yielded an opportunity to establish many species, which seemed to be biologically an absurd resolution (FORSYTH MAJOR 1877, DEL CAMPANA 1913). The newest revision of DELLA TORRE (1967) on statistical basis reduced the number of these forms to three: Canis etruscus MAJOR the size of a small living wolf, Canis falconeri MAJOR, much larger, and Canis arnensis DEL CAMPANA, dimensions between those of a jackal and a wolf. Thus we can arrange our remains from Osztramos 7 in the size category of the last one. The fragment is not convenient for taking exact measurements, although comparing with the humerus of Canis mosbachensis (the middle-sized wolf of the Middle Pleistocene) from Gombaszög, in the collection of the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest — it seems to be weaker. The fragment is only convenient for establishing the size category and we can identify it only theoretically with the corresponding bone of Canis arnensis. Vulpes s. 1. sp. Material: broken mandible with the fragment of canine and an isolated canine fragment. The canines agree in size and measurements mostly with those of the recent Vulpes lagopus. Thus, the representative of Alopexpreglacialis KORMOS, 1934 may be present in these very fragmentary remains. Ursus minimus DEVÈZE et BOLILLET, 1827 (Plate I: Fig. 1-4, Plate II: Fig. 2-3) Material: Right maxillary fragment with the incisivi, canini, two (small) premolars and, P

4-M

2

, left fragment of the same with the canine and P

l-M

2

, nearly complete mandible with the canine and the P

4-M

2

, juvenile mandible fragment with germs of the /

a and M

3

, distal fragments of the right and left humerus, distal two-thirds of the radius, fragment of the larger part of the pelvis, dist. fragment of the tibia (diaphysis), fragment of the calcaneus, two fragments of phalanx I, fragment of phalanx II. * The term ,,larger mammals" is used here for such species, which are not conventionally ranged within the "microfauna" in the strict sense of the word.