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

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

In spite of the fact that the excellent monograph of Villafranchian Cervids of Western Europe by HEINTZ (1970), who analyses all extremity bones in detail, we cannot come much nearer the solution of this problem. The morphological homogeneity of the bones is so great that, we can speak on the basis of the measurements, viz. ratio of the width and height of the proximal epiphyses of the metapodials that the group of "Cervus philisi" (as the best known representative) is present. Cervus s. 1. sp. II. (aff. Cervodama pontoborealis PIDOPLICHKO et FLEROW, 1952) (Plate II: Fig. 5) Material: basal fr. of a shed antler, four upper molar-fragments, fragment of an incisor, lunatum (Ci), two proximal and one distal fragments of metacarpals. Pidoplichko and FLEROW described from the "Pliocene" gravels of Southern Ukraine a 60 cm long, somewhat fragmentary shed, widely palmated antler under the name Cervodama pontoborealis. The antler agrees according to the description and illustrations in his whole shape and size (the greatest diameter of the burr, coronet, in both about 56 mm, the largest thickness of the beam in both about 35 mm) in such degree with the Osztramos specimen that we may suppose an identity or at most a close relation. Palmated antlers are widespread in the otherwise very homogeneous evolutionary lines in Cervids, although there are a lot of convergences in this case, too. The teeth and extremity bones are only provisionally ranged within this form on the basis of their size, being larger than the other ones from the same locality determined as "Cervus philisi"'-group. Thus, the systematical position of the larger Cervid of the Loc. 7 Osztramos remains questionable, too. Conclusions Until the late 1930s the distinction between the Villafranchian and Cromerian terrestrial stratigraphical units, was very uncertain and disputed (KORMOS 1937, SCHAUE 1932, STEHLIN 1933). The first step in the solution of this problem signified the discovery of the fact the "Cromerian" microfauna was accompanied by large mammals, fundamentally different from the classical "Villafranchian" in Gombaszög (KRETZOI 1938). The "counter-proof" of this recognition was the discovery and right interpretation of the "typical" VillafranchianCalabrian vertebrate fauna containing both micro- and macrofauna, also in the territory of the Carpathian Basin: Kisláng (KRETZOI 1954). At last the third step represented by Osztramos 7 proves the possibility of the stratification of the latter one by its rich small and well-represented large mammal fauna. A comparison presents itself primarily with Kisláng. Unfortunately, all comparisons make difficult the nature of selective fossilization viz. different facies. Thus e. g. in Osztramos 7. we find nice representatives of Mustelids, almost entirely lacking in Kisláng, the Proboscidea well represented in the latter locality, absent from the former one, etc. In any case we can establish that the microfauna differs much more in this two localities, than the large mammals. As analyzed in detail in a previous paper (JÁNOSSY 1974) the Pliocene elements predominate in the small mammal fauna of Osztramos 7. Ancestral insectivores, as Petenyiella gracilis or Blarinoides mariae, Rodents as Sminthozapus janossyi, Glirulus pusillus, Dryomimus ellomyoides, Baranomys and before all Mimomys "stehlini" and Cseria gracilis speak for this designation. All these forms are entirely absent from Kisláng. On the other hand, the larger part of macromammals lived through this period seemingly nearly unchanged. We cannot establish any ascertainable morphological differences e. g. in Ursidae, Equus or Cervidae. On the level of our present knowledge only the rhinoceros of both faunas (and levels) differs fundamentally. Instead of the large rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus megarhinusjeanvireti) in Osztramos 7. the smaller Dicerorhinus etruscus in Kisláng appears. Thus, we can establish by reason of Perissodactyles three stages in this period, being transitional between the Pliocene and Pleistocene: