IV.—Hamster Remains from the Norfolk Forest Bed

Abstract

Mr. A. Savin, of Cromer, has been kind enough to send me for examination a large number of small vertebrate remains which he has recently collected from the Upper Freshwater Bed of the Norfolk Forest Bed Series at West Runton. Among these there is one little specimen which deserves to be recorded, as it represents a genus not hitherto recognized in the ‘Forest Bed’. The specimen is a right maxilla with three grinders in place, indubitably belonging to the genus Cricetus; in size it is distinctly larger than the common Hamster Cricetus vulgaris (= C. frumentarius), which is the largest species of the genus living at the present day. Only once before has Cricetus been recognized in Britain, W. A. Sanford having identified from the Hutton Cave, Mendip Hills, remains of a small mouse-like species which he referred to Cricetus songarus.

Micromammals from the 1995 Mammoth Excavation at West Runton, Norfolk, UK: Morphometric data, biostratigraphy and taxonomic reappraisal

“…Cricetus Leske, 1779 Cricetus runtonensis Newton, 1909 A c c e p t e d m a n u s c r i p t A c c e p t e d m a n u s c r i p t -10 -25.10.2008 (= Cricetus cricetus (Linnaeus, 1758) auctt.) Material: 1 right m1 (Fig.…”

“…However, there is currently no consensus over how many species are represented by this material, which is morphologically indistinguishable from the living Cricetus cricetus. An upper tooth row of Cricetus from West Runton was first described by Newton (1909) as C. runtonensis, but Stuart (1975) subsequently attributed this specimen to C. cricetus. Another large Pleistocene hamster maxilla was named C. major by Woldrich 1880, based on a specimen from the Late Pleistocene site of Vypustek, Moravia.…”

Cricetinae in the Quaternary fossil record of the Czech Republic and Slovakia (Rodentia: Cricetidae)

“…Another form with analogous size differences to the Recent species is described 29 years later as Cricetus vulgaris Runtonensis Newton, 1909 from the classic site of the Cromerian fauna "Upper Freshwater Bed of the Norfolk Forest Bed series at West Runton", based on the maxilla (length of M 1 -M 3 9.3 mm). Newton (1909) points to differences in the mesial part of M 1 (constricted at the major), but the main argument for the distinctiveness of the two forms is the different stratigraphic ages: "If the 'Forest Bed' specimens were of the same age as those described by Dr. Woldrich, one would have little hesitation in referring them provisionally to the same subspecies; but the evidence in favor of these Norfolk deposits being of Pliocene age is becoming stronger." (Newton 1909).…”

“…Newton (1909) points to differences in the mesial part of M 1 (constricted at the major), but the main argument for the distinctiveness of the two forms is the different stratigraphic ages: "If the 'Forest Bed' specimens were of the same age as those described by Dr. Woldrich, one would have little hesitation in referring them provisionally to the same subspecies; but the evidence in favor of these Norfolk deposits being of Pliocene age is becoming stronger." (Newton 1909).…”

“…Schaub (1930) paid special attention to the earliest Pleistocene records from the classical locality Q1 Somlyómberg bei Püspekfördö (= Betfia 2), where he demonstrated the simultaneous presence of two forms -a small one, falling under the variation range of Recent populations (= nanus) and a form roughly corresponding to the size of the Recent species but differing in the more complicated structure of the molars with the regular presence of a mesolophid on the M 3 , etc. Thus according to Schaub (1930), the fossil record of the genus Cricetus includes the following taxa: Cricetus cricetus nanus Schaub, 1930, T: Q1 Betfia 2, Cricetus cricetus praeglacialis Schaub, 1930, T: Q1 Betfia 2, Cricetus cricetus runtonensis Newton, 1909, T: Q2 UFB West Runton, and Cricetus cricetus major Woldřich, 1880, T: Q4 Výpustek.…”