Matskási István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 79. (Budapest 1987)

Kordos, L.: Description and reconstruction of the skull of Rudapithecus hungaricus Kretzoi (Mammalia)

was used. The lateral view of the zygomatic bone was the only fixed starting point for the reconstruction of the contour of the face. In addition, the formerly excavated most complete find, the maxilla of RUD-12 was used for the reconstruction. As a result, a slightly prognath profile was obtained. Though no mandible was found with RUD-77, the skull was completed by using items from the RUD-2 and RUD-17 finds. Frontal and superior views of the cal varia — Since the bone fragments of lateral position were available, in case of both views the symmetrical reconstruction was achieved by reflexion. During reconstruction of the frontal bone hardly more results could obtained than may be seen on the original find (RUD-77): it offers only a better visual depiction (Fig. 4). From the superior view, the relative narrowness of the neurocranium is extremely striking (Fig. 5). Its breadth probably did not exceed the suture between the zygomatic and the superior orbital bones. The superior view of the cranium almost determines the position of the fragments of the occipital bone. From this view it can be seen that the above fragments could be moved only by 0.5-0.8 mm towards the axis, but the shape of the skull essentially would not change. The maxillary arch — Several experiments have already been carried out on the basis of the RUD-12 find to reconstruction of the maxillary arch of the Rudapithecus (ANDREWS & TEKKAYA 1976; WOLPOFF 1980; WARD & KIMBEL 1983). However all these have been carried out on the basis of the photo supplied by KRETZOI (1975). They were all erroneous however because on the basis of the poor-quality photo the midsagitlal line could not be distinguished, and thus the arches show slightly divergent toothrows. In case of RUD-12 the M

2 and M

3 are missing and this led to further ambiguities. The greatly enlarged photo of the original RUD-12 remain has now been complemented with the left toothrow of RUD-77 Since in this way a practically complete coverage could be obtained, on the basis of the symmetrically reflected mosaic picture the maxillary arch and the palatal bone of the Rudapithecus could be depicted (Fig. 6). An important fact is that it was possible to indicate for the first time a 10 myr old ape had parallel toothrow (premolars and molars) and they are joined in a regular U-shape at the incisor. Concerning the other characteristics descirbed in detail by WARD & KIMBEL (1983), no further novelties were supplied by the RUD-77 find. Fig. 6. Reconstructed maxillary arch of Rudapithecus Annls hist.-nat. Mus. natn. hung., 79, 1987