Advertisement

International Journal of Primatology

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 163–178 | Cite as

The generic classification of Fayum anthropoidea

  • Elwyn L. Simons
  • D. Tab Rasmussen
Article

Abstract

The early anthropoid species initially described asAegyptopithecus zeuxis Simons, 1965, from the Oligocene of Egypt, although retained by many authors in the monotypic genusAegyptopithecus, has been lumped by others into the genusPropliopithecus. Similarly, the species originally described asParapithecus grangeri Simons, 1974, has been ranked by some authors in a monotypic genusSimonsius, while others retain it inParapithecus. Criteria to be considered in resolving these taxonomic debates are (1) the adequacy and consistency of proposed morphological differences between species; (2) analogy with the degree of morphological variation tolerated within extant genera; and (3) nomenclatural conservatism. A philosophy that would require strict monophyletic classification is of insufficient practical value for assessing the validity of Fayum genera. Characters cited as distinguishing vetweenAegyptopithecus andPropliopithecus, and betweenSimonsius andParapithecus, are reviewed and evaluated. The results indicate thatA. zeuxis is generically distinct from species ofPropliopithecus, based on differences in the crown structure and proportions of the molars.Pa. grangeri cannot be shown to differ at the generic level from the type and only known specimen ofPa. fraasi, thus establishing Simonsius as a junior synonym ofParapithecus.

Key Words

Aegyptopithecus Apidium Parapithecus Propliopithecus Simonsius primate systematics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, P. (1985). Family group systematics and evolution among catarrhine primates. In Delson, E. (ed.),Ancestors: The Hard Evidence. Alan R. Liss, New York, pp. 14–22.Google Scholar
  2. Delson, E. (1979).Prohylobates (Primates) from the early Miocene of Libya: A new species and its implication for cercopithecid origin.Geobios 12: 725–733.Google Scholar
  3. Fleagle, J. G., and Kay, R. F. (1985) The paleobiology of catarrhines. In Delson, E. (ed.),Ancestors: The Hard Evidence. Alan R. Liss, New York, pp. 23–36.Google Scholar
  4. Fleagle, J. G., and Simons, E. L. (1982a). The humerus ofAegyptopithecus zeuxis, a primitive anthropoid.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 59: 175–193.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fleagle, J. G., and Simons, E. L. (1982b). Skeletal remains ofPropliopithecus chirobates from the Egyptian Oligocene.Folia Primatol. 39: 161–177.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gingerich, P. D. (1978). The Stuttgart collection of Oligocene primates from the Fayum Province of Egypt.Palaont. Z. 52: 82–92.Google Scholar
  7. Ginsburg, L., and Mein, P. (1980).Crouzelia rhodanica, nouvelle espèce de Primate catarhinien, et essai sur la position systèmatique des Pliopithecidae.Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. Paris 4e sé Sect. C 2: 57–80.Google Scholar
  8. Harrison, T. (1987). The phyletic relationships of the carly catarrhine primates: A revicw of the current evidence.J. Hum. Evol. 16: 41–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kälin, J. (1961). Sur les primates de l'Oligocène infèrieur d'Égypte.Ann. Paleont. 47: 1–48.Google Scholar
  10. Kay, R. F., and Simons, E. L. (1980). The ecology of Oligocene African Anthropoidea.Int. J. Primatol. 1: 21–37.Google Scholar
  11. Kay, R. F., and Simons, E. L. (1983). Dental formulae and dental eruption patterns in Parapithecidae.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 63: 353–375.Google Scholar
  12. Kay, R. F., Fleagle, J. G., and Simons, E. L. (1981). A revision of the Oligocene apes from the Fayum Province, Egypt.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 55: 293–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leakey, R. E., and Leakey, M. G. (1987). A new Miocene small-bodied ape from Kenya.J. Hum. Evol. 16: 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mayr, E. (1981). Biological classification: Toward a synthesis of opposing methodologies.Science 214: 510–516.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Schlosser, M. (1910). Uber einige fossile Saugetiere aus dem oligocan von Agypten.Zoo. Anz. 34: 500–508.Google Scholar
  16. Schlosser, M. (1911). Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Oligozanen Lansaugetiere aus dem Fayum, Aegypten.Beitr. Palaeontol. Oesterreich-Ungarns Orients 6: 1–227.Google Scholar
  17. Simons, E. L. (1965). New fossil apes from Egypt and the initial differentiation of Hominoidea.Nature 205: 135–139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Simons, E. L. (1967). The earliest apes.Sci. Am. 217: 28–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Simons, E. L. (1974).Parapithecus grangeri (Parapithecidae, Old World Higher Primates): New species from the Oligocene of Egypt and the initial differentiation of Cercopithecoidea.Postilla 166: 1–12.Google Scholar
  20. Simons, E. L. (1986).Parapithecus grangeri of the African Oligocene: An archaic catarrhine without lower incisors,J. Hum. Evol. 15: 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Simons, E. L., Rasmussen, D. T., and Gebo, D. L. (1987). A, new species ofPropliopithecus from the Fayum, Egypt.Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 73: 139–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Swindler, D. R., and Olshan, A. F. (1982). Molar size sequence in Old World Monkeys.Folia Primatol. 39: 201–212.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Szalay, F. S., and Delson, E. (1979).Evolutionary History of the Primates, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elwyn L. Simons
    • 1
  • D. Tab Rasmussen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological Anthropology & AnatomyDuke UniversityDurham
  2. 2.Duke Primate CenterDuke UniversityDurham

Personalised recommendations