|Basic info||Taxonomic history||Classification||Relationships|
|Morphology||Ecology and taphonomy||External Literature Search||Age range and collections|
Mammalia - Artiodactyla - Merycoidodontidae
It was recombined as Ticholeptus harrisonensis by Loomis (1923); it was recombined as Merycoides harrisonensis by Lander (1998); it was recombined as Paramerychyus harrisonensis by Schultz and Falkenbach (1947) and Stevens and Stevens (2007).
|Year||Name and author|
|1907||Merychyus harrisonensis Peterson|
|1923||Ticholeptus harrisonensis Loomis|
|1935||Merychyus harrisonensis Schlaikjer|
|1947||Paramerychyus harrisonensis Schultz and Falkenbach p. 248 figs. 1, 9|
|1950||Hypsiops luskensis Schultz and Falkenbach p. 122 figs. 4-6, 11, 13-15|
|1980||Phenacocoelus luskensis MacFadden p. 93|
|1998||Merycoides harrisonensis Lander|
|2007||Paramerychyus harrisonensis Stevens and Stevens p. 164|
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.
|C. B. Schultz and C. H. Falkenbach 1947||SKULL:Larger than any known examples of Merychyus; smaller than known specimens of Ticholeptus; approximate size of P. relictus; lacrimal fossa moderately large and deep; prelacrimal vacuity present (in the holotype the very large prelacrimal vacuity may be due to damage of the area; in the referred skull the vacuity is much smaller); malar moderately robust, with a slight but gradual upward trend posteriorly; zygomatic arch of medium construction with shallow rise posteriorly; orbits round, looking forward and upward; postorbital pillar quite heavy; bulla covering large area (Peterson described the bulla as "flask-like in form with a conical swelling on the posterior-external surface"); palatal surface vaulted.
DENTITION:C/ heavy but not long; pre- molars not crowded; external styles of molars prominent.
|C. B. Schultz and C. H. Falkenbach 1950 (Hypsiops luskensis)||SKULL: Approximately same length but narrower than H. breviceps, smaller than other species of genus; nasals retracted to area above P 1 ; anterior nasal-maxilla contact above anterior portion of P2 ; zygomatic arch elongated posteriorly and not extending upward as high as in other species of this genus, but similar to those of Phenacocoelus kayi and P. stouti (see discussion, p. 104); infraorbital foramen above anterior portion of P4; small, round, facial vacuity; other characters similar to those of H. brachymelis and H. brachymelis petersoni.
MANDIBLE: Characters and outline typical of genus; postsymphysis below Pa.
DENTITION:Shorter and lighter than in H. breviceps; smaller than examples of other known species of genus; p1-p 3 each with anterior intermediate crest; PrPa each with posterior intermediate crest.
LIMBS:Similar to those of H. brachymelis; considerable individual variation in length but within the expected variation of a species.