IANIGLA   20881
INSTITUTO ARGENTINO DE NIVOLOGIA, GLACIOLOGIA Y CIENCIAS AMBIENTALES
Unidad Ejecutora - UE
congresos y reuniones científicas
Título:
Eucholaeops (Xenarthra, Tardigrada) remains from the Santa Cruz Formation (Early Miocene), Patagonia, Argentina
Autor/es:
GERARDO, DE IULIIS; FRANÇOIS, PUJOS; MARIA SUSANA, BARGO; SERGIO F., VIZCAÍNO; NESTOR, TOLEDO
Lugar:
Mendoza, Argentina
Reunión:
Congreso; 10th International Mammalogical Congress; 2009
Resumen:
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:595.3pt 841.9pt;
margin:70.85pt 3.0cm 70.85pt 3.0cm;
mso-header-margin:35.4pt;
mso-footer-margin:35.4pt;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
Santacrucian (early Miocene) sloths
have been known at least since the 1880s, but understanding of their
systematics has not changed since the first decade of the 20th
century. The plethora of genera and species erected by earlier workers were
based in large part on fragmentary remains and, almost certainly, there are
many more taxa named that can be justified on the available material. This
situation is particularly acute for, among others, Eucholaeops Ameghino, 1887, for which 15 species have been named in
the literature. A revision of the Santacrucian sloths has not been attempted so
far, mainly because of the imposing nature of the material itself. However, new
specimens recovered between 2003 and 2009 by a team from the Museo de La Plata and
Duke University, provide a basis for beginning to unravel the chaotic taxonomy
of some of these sloths. The remains of Eucholaeops
suggest that there are two morphotypes present. The main distinction between
the two morphotypes is the size of the caniniforms. This pattern was recognized
by W.B. Scott, who suggested these differences were sex related, with males
having the larger caniniforms, but other features suggest that these
morphotypes do represent distinct species. Review of the type material
available in the Museo de La Plata (MLP) and Museo Argentino de Ciencias
Naturales Bernardino Rivadavia (MACN) suggests that most named species are
likely invalid. Which of the proposed names might apply to the two Eucholaeops morphotypes is still under
consideration.