|Basic info||Taxonomic history||Classification||Relationships|
|Morphology||Ecology and taphonomy||External Literature Search||Age range and collections|
Mammalia - Artiodactyla - Merycoidodontidae
It was recombined as Metoreodon major by Matthew (1924) and Thorpe (1937); it was recombined as Ustatochoerus major by Schultz and Falkenbach (1941), Schultz and Falkenbach (1947), Stevens and Stevens (1989), Voorhies (1990) and Stevens and Stevens (2007).
|Year||Name and author|
|1858||Merychyus major Leidy p. 26|
|1884||Merychyus major Cope p. 545|
|1924||Metoreodon major Matthew|
|1937||Metoreodon major Thorpe|
|1941||Ustatochoerus major Schultz and Falkenbach p. 16|
|1947||Ustatochoerus major Schultz and Falkenbach|
|1988||Merychyus major Kelly and Lander|
|1989||Ustatochoerus major Stevens and Stevens|
|1990||Ustatochoerus major Voorhies|
|1998||Merychyus major Lander|
|2007||Ustatochoerus major Stevens and Stevens p. 166|
|2009||Merychyus major Morgan et al.|
Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data
|C. B. Schultz and C. H. Falkenbach 1941||SKULL.-Larger than that of U. profectus; elongated posterior to orbits; malar moderately deep; nasals short and retracted considerably more than those of U. profectus; anterior tip of nasals retracted to region above P 3 ; postglenoid process very large in comparison with that of U. profectus.
MANDIBLE.-Typical of genus; larger and more robust than in U. profectus; smaller and lighter than in U. californicus espanolensis.
DENTITION.-Well-developed cusps in superior and inferior premolars, more so than in U. medius; 'tendency for presence of cingula on superior molars; m- ferior premolars crowded and grooved on internal side.
LIMBS.-Longer and heavier than in examples of U. profectus.