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

Merychippus californicus

Mammalia - Perissodactyla - Equidae

Taxonomy
Merychippus californicus was named by Merriam (1915). Its type specimen is UCMP 21247, a tooth (First superior molar of the left side, M1), and it is a 3D body fossil. Its type locality is North Coalinga, which is in a Barstovian terrestrial horizon in the Temblor Formation of California.

It was recombined as Merychippus (Merychippus) californicus by Stirton (1940); it was recombined as Stylonus californicus by Kelly and Lander (1988); it was considered a nomen dubium by Macdonald (1992).

Synonymy list
YearName and author
1915Merychippus californicus Merriam
1918Merychippus californicus Osborn p. 121 figs. Text Fig. 96
1940Merychippus (Merychippus) californicus Stirton p. 181
1956Merychippus californicus Downs p. 283
1988Stylonus californicus Kelly and Lander
1995Merychippus californicus Kelly
1998Merychippus californicus MacFadden p. 547

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()
RankNameAuthor
infraorderCynodontia()
Epicynodontia
infraorderEucynodontia
Probainognathia
Mammaliamorpha
Mammaliaformes
classMammalia
subclassTribosphenida()
infraclassEutheria()
Placentalia
orderPerissodactyla()
suborderLophodontomorpha
infraorderEuperissodactyla
Hippomorpha
superfamilyEquoidea
familyEquidae
subfamilyEquinaeSteinmann and Döderlein 1890
genusMerychippus
speciescalifornicus

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
H. F. Osborn 1918(Merriam, 1915) (1) Molars of more slender form than in M. isonesus, otherwise in some respects
similar; (2) protocone separate from protoconule almost to base of crown, connected only in very old, much worn teeth; (3) protocone round [oval] with a slightlateral compression [suboval]; (4) a spur extending toward protoconule; (5) enamel folding moderately complex, approximating that of M. isonesus; (6) superior molars somewhatnarrow in cross section and somewhat more hypsodont than in M. isonesus; (7) type of upper molar leading toward Hipparion; (8) lower cheek teeth closely resembling those of M . isonesus in form and dimensions.