Basic info Taxonomic history Classification Relationships
Morphology Ecology and taphonomy External Literature Search Age range and collections

Xenocyon lycaonoides

Mammalia - Carnivora - Canidae

Taxonomy
Xenocyon lycaonoides was named by Kretzoi (1938). Its type specimen is MNM FA 20 (PV4), a tooth, and it is a 3D body fossil.

It was recombined as Lycaon lycaonoides by Kurten (1968) and Medin et al. (2017).

Sister species lacking formal opinion data

View classification of included taxa

Synonymy list
YearName and author
1938Xenocyon lycaonoides Kretzoi p. 128
1968Lycaon lycaonoides Kurten p. 114
2009Xenocyon lycaonoides Tedford et al. p. 154 figs. 58A–C; appendix 3
2017Lycaon lycaonoides Medin et al. p. 29

Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data

RankNameAuthor
kingdomAnimalia()
Triploblastica
Nephrozoa
Deuterostomia
phylumChordataHaeckel 1847
subphylumVertebrata
superclassGnathostomata
Osteichthyes()
Sarcopterygii
subclassDipnotetrapodomorpha(Nelson 2006)
subclassTetrapodomorpha()
Tetrapoda()
Reptiliomorpha
Anthracosauria
Batrachosauria()
Cotylosauria()
Amniota
Synapsida()
Therapsida()
infraorderCynodontia()
Epicynodontia
infraorderEucynodontia
RankNameAuthor
Probainognathia
Mammaliamorpha
Mammaliaformes
classMammalia
subclassTribosphenida()
infraclassEutheria()
Placentalia
Laurasiatheria
Scrotifera
Ferae()
CarnivoramorphaWyss and Flynn 1993
CarnivoraformesFlynn et al.
orderCarnivoraBowditch 1821
suborderCaniformiaKretzoi 1943
superfamilyCanoideaSimpson 1931
familyCanidaeFischer 1817
subfamilyCaninaeGill 1872
tribeCaniniFischer de Waldheim 1817
subtribeCanina()
genusXenocyonKretzoi 1938
specieslycaonoidesKretzoi 1938

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.

Diagnosis
ReferenceDiagnosis
R. H. Tedford et al. 2009Rami distinguished from those of X. dubius Teilhard de Chardin, 1940, by larger average size; premolars not as elongate, wider, and higher crowned; p2 lacks posterior cusp; second posterior cusp on p4 smaller, often closely appressed to cingulum; m2 with metaconid smaller relative to proto- conid and narrower talonid.