| Basic info | Taxonomic history | Classification | Included Taxa |
| Morphology | Ecology and taphonomy | External Literature Search | Age range and collections |
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. Its type locality is Gombasek, which is in a Pleistocene terrestrial horizon in Slovakia.
It was recombined as Canis lycaonoides by Sotnikova (2001); it was recombined as Lycaon lycaonoides by Kurten (1968), Medin et al. (2017) and Koufos (2022).
It was recombined as Canis lycaonoides by Sotnikova (2001); it was recombined as Lycaon lycaonoides by Kurten (1968), Medin et al. (2017) and Koufos (2022).
Synonyms
|
Synonymy list
| Year | Name and author |
|---|---|
| 1938 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Kretzoi p. 128 |
| 1954 | Cuon stehlini Thenius |
| 1968 | Lycaon lycaonoides Kurten p. 114 |
| 1978 | Cuon rosi Pons-Moyá and Moyá-Solá |
| 2001 | Canis lycaonoides Sotnikova |
| 2006 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Moullé et al. |
| 2008 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Wang et al. |
| 2009 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Tedford et al. p. 154 figs. 58A–C; appendix 3 |
| 2017 | Lycaon lycaonoides Medin et al. p. 29 |
| 2022 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Bartolini-Lucenti and Spassov |
| 2022 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Jiangzuo et al. |
| 2022 | Lycaon lycaonoides Koufos |
| 2022 | Xenocyon lycaonoides Madurell-Malapeira et al. |
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.
†Xenocyon lycaonoides Kretzoi 1938
show all | hide all
Invalid names: Cuon rosi Pons-Moyá and Moyá-Solá 1978 [synonym], Cuon stehlini Thenius 1954 [synonym]
Diagnosis
| Reference | Diagnosis | |
|---|---|---|
| R. H. Tedford et al. 2009 | Rami 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. |