First report of Sus strozzii (Suidae, Mammalia) from the Early Pleistocene of Hungary (Dunaalmás) and species distinction based on deciduous teeth

Iannucci, Alessio; Gasparik, Mihály; Sardella, Raffaele

doi:10.1007/s00114-019-1661-6

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, it has long been hypothesized that the wild boar underwent a dimensional change from large-to small-sized forms during the Pleistocene, eventually reaching the size of extant populations [64][65][66][67]. Testing this observation necessitates geographically constrained settings, because the extant populations vary markedly in size, encompassing the entire fossil record of the taxon [68,69]. When this has been properly taken into account, resulting analyses have revealed more complex evolutionary scenarios than the simple dimensional trend suggested by previous research conducted at a coarser geographic scale [7,70].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Authorship, Availability, and Improper Use of Sus scrofa ferus for Referring to Wild Pigs

Iannucci

2022

Taxonomy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wild boar, Sus scrofa, is one of the most successful large mammals in terms of geographic distribution. Along with its domestic descendant, the pig, they are extremely important animals for conservation, economy, human sustenance, and well-being. Naming wild and domestic pigs in a way that allows them to be distinguished effectively and unambiguously is crucial for a number of studies in archaeozoology, biomedicine, genetics, epidemiology, paleontology, and wildlife management. Sus scrofa ferus, or less commonly, Sus ferus, is often used to refer to wild populations, frequently in opposition to S. scrofa domesticus, or S. domesticus in reference to domestic pigs. Here, it is argued that S. scrofa ferus is available for nomenclatural purposes but should not be regarded as valid from a taxonomic perspective. Authors should refer wild populations to valid subspecies, e.g., S. scrofa scrofa, or to S. scrofa ssp., when information on the subspecific status is not available or relevant for the research questions under consideration. This remark is not a mere nomenclatural clarification, because the potential identification of differences between wild boar taxa is often hidden behind a simplistic dichotomy between wild and domestic forms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Authorship, Availability, and Improper Use of Sus scrofa ferus for Referring to Wild Pigs

Iannucci

2022

Taxonomy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The presence of suids at 'Ubeidiya is undeniable [107]; although, pending a revision of the sample, they should be referred to as Sus sp. [17]. The fauna contains several European elements, but, on the other hand, the site is not in Europe, hence offering arguments in favor or against the "suid gap" hypothesis.…”

Section: Fossil Localities and The "Suid Gap"mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sus strozzii is traditionally considered a species adapted to humid and forested environments [16], especially after the considerations of comparative anatomy pointed out by Azzaroli [70]. Iannucci et al [17] suggested a link between the ecological requirements of S. strozzii and its decrease in abundance from the late Villafranchian to the Epivillafranchian. Subsequently, Cherin et al [25] pointed out the need to evaluate the ecology of S. strozzii with methods independent of morphology.…”

Section: Implications For Late Villafranchian Biochronology and Fauna...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The perceived biochronological and paleoecological significance of the Early Pleistocene suids of Europe in the context of Quaternary faunal turnovers and in relation to hominins has long been quite low, being mainly limited to the inclusion of the appearance of S. strozzii in the bioevents denoting the late Villafranchian faunal turnover, the "Wolf event" [10][11][12]-although the species is now documented in several middle Villafranchian localities [13]-and to the emphasis placed on the replacement between S. strozzii Forsyth Major, 1881 [14] and S. scrofa Linnaeus, 1758 [15] in terms of the different ecological requirements of the two species [16,17]. In this framework, an important impetus was given by the work of Martínez-Navarro et al [18], in which it is argued that suids were absent from Europe during the 1.8-1.2 Ma time span and that a species phylogenetically related to the extant wild boar (Sus gr.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Occurrence of Suids in the Post-Olduvai to Pre-Jaramillo Pleistocene of Europe and Implications for Late Villafranchian Biochronology and Faunal Dynamics

Iannucci

2024

Quaternary

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been proposed that suids were absent from Europe during the post-Olduvai to pre-Jaramillo Early Pleistocene (from less than 1.8 to more than 1.2 Ma) and that their “re-appearance” in the late Early Pleistocene would mark the end of the late Villafranchian and the beginning of the Epivillafranchian. Arguments enumerated in favor of this “suid gap” are the lack of suid remains from extensively sampled fossil localities of this age and the high reproductive potential (r-strategy) of suids, which would translate in a high commonness of their remains in the fossil record. However, here it shown that while suids’ reproductive potential is certainly exceptional within artiodactyls, there is no direct relationship between the reproductive strategy and preservation rate of a taxon in the fossil record. In Early Pleistocene localities of Europe and adjoining areas, where suids are present in a fossil assemblage, they are always rare. In terms of number of occurrences (frequency), suids range from being moderately common (~2.0–1.8 Ma) to moderately rare (~1.1–1.0 Ma). Suid material is also described herein from Peyrolles (Issoire, France; reference locality for MNQ 19), a site dated at 1.47 Ma, providing direct evidence for the presence of suids within the purported “suid gap”. The case of suids underlines an important source of caveat in inferring faunal dynamics of the late Early Pleistocene of western Europe—including the dispersal of hominins—i.e., the unequal geographical distribution of the paleontological sites of post-Olduvai to pre-Jaramillo age. Indeed, Peyrolles is the only large mammal site in western Europe located outside the Iberian and Italian Peninsulas reliably dated around 1.5 Ma. In the post-Olduvai to pre-Jaramillo period, there is a paucity of radiometric estimates (or they have too coarse a resolution) and of paleomagnetic excursions detectable in continental deposits. Basically, for this time span, there is a high dependence on biochronological correlations, although, at the same time, these correlations are less reliable—because these are based on a few sites not covering the entire spectrum of environments present in Europe and the sites are not independently dated with methods that outperform biochronology—than those for other periods.

show abstract

“…In particular, some remains previously assigned to P . p r ov i nc i a l i s a c t u al l y b e l o n g t o Su s s tr o zz i i Forsyth Major, 1881, a large-sized early Pleistocene (Middle Villafranchian to Epivillafranchian) suid (Azzaroli 1952;Cherin et al 2018Cherin et al , 2020Iannucci et al 2020a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suidae Transition at the Miocene-Pliocene Boundary: a Reassessment of the Taxonomy and Chronology of Propotamochoerus provincialis

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Miocene-Pliocene (Turolian-Ruscinian) transition represents a fundamental interval in the evolution of Euro-Mediterranean paleocommunities. In fact, the paleoenvironmental changes connected with the end of the Messinian salinity crisis are reflected by a major renewal in mammal faunal assemblages. An important bioevent among terrestrial large mammals is the dispersal of the genus Sus, which replaced all other suid species during the Pliocene. Despite its possible paleoecological and biochronological relevance, correlations based on this bioevent are undermined by the supposed persistence of the late surviving late Miocene Propotamochoerus provincialis. However, a recent revision of the type material of this species revealed an admixture with remains of Sus strozzii, an early Pleistocene (Middle Villafranchian to Epivillafranchian) suid, questioning both the diagnosis and chronological range of P. provincialis. Here we review the late Miocene Suidae sample recovered from the Casino Basin (Tuscany, central Italy), whose taxonomic attribution has been controversial over the nearly 150 years since its discovery. Following a comparison with other Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene Eurasian species, the Casino Suidae are assigned to P. provincialis and the species diagnosis is emended. Moreover, it is recognized that all the late Miocene (Turolian) European Propotamochoerus material belongs to P. provincialis and that there is no compelling evidence of the occurrence of this species beyond the Turolian-Ruscinian transition (MN13-MN14).

show abstract

First report of Sus strozzii (Suidae, Mammalia) from the Early Pleistocene of Hungary (Dunaalmás) and species distinction based on deciduous teeth

Cited by 16 publications

References 42 publications

On the Authorship, Availability, and Improper Use of Sus scrofa ferus for Referring to Wild Pigs

On the Authorship, Availability, and Improper Use of Sus scrofa ferus for Referring to Wild Pigs

The Occurrence of Suids in the Post-Olduvai to Pre-Jaramillo Pleistocene of Europe and Implications for Late Villafranchian Biochronology and Faunal Dynamics

Suidae Transition at the Miocene-Pliocene Boundary: a Reassessment of the Taxonomy and Chronology of Propotamochoerus provincialis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About