| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
Taxonomy
Muscardinus was named by Kaup (1829). It is extant.
It was assigned to Gliridae by McKenna and Bell (1997); and to Glirinae by Daams and de Bruijn (1995) and Kowalski (1997).
It was assigned to Gliridae by McKenna and Bell (1997); and to Glirinae by Daams and de Bruijn (1995) and Kowalski (1997).
Synonyms
|
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 1829 | Muscardinus Kaup |
| 1943 | Pentaglis Kretzoi |
| 1966 | Eomuscardinus Hartenberger |
| 1995 | Muscardinus Daams and de Bruijn p. 9 |
| 1997 | Muscardinus Kowalski |
| 1997 | Eomuscardinus McKenna and Bell |
| 1997 | Muscardinus McKenna and Bell |
| 1997 | Pentaglis McKenna and Bell |
Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data
|
|
If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.
G. Muscardinus Kaup 1829
show all | hide all
†Muscardinus austriacus Bachmayer and Wilson 1970
Muscardinus avellanarius Linnaeus 1758 [hazel dormouse]
†Muscardinus crusafonti Hartenberger 1966
†Muscardinus cyclopeus Agusti et al. 1982
†Muscardinus dacicus Kormos 1930
†Muscardinus davidi Hugueney and Mein 1965
†Muscardinus heintzi Aguilar 1981
†Muscardinus helleri Fejfar and Storch 1990
†Muscardinus hispanicus de Bruijn 1966
†Muscardinus pliocaenicus Kowalski 1963
†Muscardinus pliocaenicus pliocaenicus Kowalski 1963
†Muscardinus sansaniensis Lartet 1856
†Muscardinus thaleri De Bruijn 1966
†Muscardinus vallesiensis Hartenberger 1966
†Muscardinus vireti Hugueney and Mein 1965
Invalid names: Eomuscardinus Hartenberger 1966 [synonym], Pentaglis Kretzoi 1943 [synonym]
Diagnosis
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| R. Daams and H. de Bruijn 1995 | P4 very small indeed. M1 conspicuously larger than M2, with five well-developcd ridges, the depressions between them very broad; the ridges oblique, the tooth lengthened: M2 with seven transverse ridges, the depressions between them narrow; M3 like M2 but smaller, with ridges less developed. P4 usually with two ridges.
In the lower cheekteeth thcrc are six ridges extending across each tooth cxcept the much reduced premolar; the lower first molar is less enlarged than the upper first molar, and its ridges less oblique. (from Ellerman (1941) dental characteristics only) |