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

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

present knowledge is concerned, due to the roles of nomenclature Ursus minimus DEVÈZE et BOUILLET, independent from the fact what this name really covers (Ursus arvernensis CROIZET et JOBERT, 1828 and Ursus ruscinensis DÉPERET, 1891 are subsequent designations). Ursus etruscus CUVIER, 1823 Material: right upper canine. — This determination is based on the larger dimensions : the length of the whole tooth is about 75 mm (worn tooth), the length of the crown is about 35 mm, the larger diameter at the boundary of the root and the crown is 22 mm. KORMOS (1937) mentioned in his list of "preglacial" mammals Ursus etruscus from Loc. Villány-Kalkberg. The remains from this locality to be found in the collection of the Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, are the following: fragment of a right mandible with the canine, M

s and a broken M

2 (length of P

4-M

3 about 86 mm, length and width of M

3

: 20X 15 mm). Besides them, isolated M

1 and M- are also found deriving the same locality (M

1 20X 16, M- 30X 17 mm). These scanty fragmentary remains together with the ones from Kisláng (KRETZOI 1954) prove the uninterrupted successions of the evolutionary line of the "etruscus"-bears too. Putorius stromeri KORMOS, 1934 (Plate II: Fig. 7) Material: Palatal fragment with the canine, P^-P'

1 and M

1

, two mandibles with full dentition and one of them with the ascending ramus. The more complete mandible is most convenient for comparitive purposes with the type-material of KORMOS (1934). The entire shape of the lower carnassial (Mj), chiefly with its broader talonid against recent forms and lesser dimensions (length about 6.5 mm), agree in all details with the typespecimen. The morphology of the upper dentition is also in all particulars Putorius-like; chiefly the shape of the upper M

l

, with its characteristical outlines and cusps. The specific identity with Putorius stromeri, or at least the presence of close evolutionary form is highly probable. Mustela praenivalis KORMOS, 1934 Material: Viscerocranium with the P

3 and P

1 of both sides and the fragments of the canine, P'

z and M

1

; isolated P* and a diaphysis of a humerus. Due to their dimensions the three pieces are relegated in the above given taxonomical unit. The length of the upper carnassials (P

1

) measures 3.8 and 3.9 mm. The recent revision of Mustelids by RABEDER (1976) clearly shows the systematical independence of this form. Mustela aff. plioerminea STACH, 1959 Material: Mandible fragment with the carnassial (M

4

), another fragment with the F

4

, fragments of isolated Pm inferior, M

x and canine, proximal fragment of the femur and dist. fragment of the tibia. It is a strange form: the dimensions and the morphology of all pieces place it near the recent stoat (Mustela erminea). The length of the M

x is 6.1 mm, the width 2.4 mm. Thus, the size and proportions agree more with those of recent plus-variants of stoat, than with the Lower Pleistocene fossil from (see RABEDER 1976, diagram 3). The hinder part of the tooth constitute a more talonidlike form, than in the hitherto known recent or fossil species. In this feature this tooth agrees in some aspects with that of Lutreola, although being considerably slender. The proximal width of the femur is about 7 mm, the distal width of the tibia about 5 mm. More complete remains of this interesting form will most certainly clarify its exact systematical position. A relation with Mustela plioerminea STACH, 1959, may be supposed, although an immediate comparison is not possible, since other anatomical units are present (there a cranium only). cf. Pannonictis? jánossy

i RABEDER, 1976 (Plate II: Fig. 6) Material: Fragment of viscerocranium with the P^-P^-M

1

. A comparison of the remain with the hitherto described Mustelid remains of the similar sizecategory and age, we find the most common features with the Lower Pleistocene Grisonines and among them with Pannonictis ? janossyi. However, the teeth in the Osztramos-specimen are some-