Jump to content

User:PrimalMustelid/sandbox: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
 
(94 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User sandbox}}
{{User sandbox}}
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->

{{Short description|Extinct genus of proboscideans}}
{{About|the genus|the social networking platform|Mastodon (social network)|the band|Mastodon (band)|other uses|Mastodon (disambiguation)|other uses|Mammut (disambiguation)}}
{{Automatic taxobox
{{Automatic taxobox
| name = Mastodon
| fossil_range = {{Fossil range|Middle Eocene|Early Oligocene}}
| taxon = Mammut
| image = Plagiolophus 1.JPG
| fossil_range = Late [[Miocene]] – early [[Holocene]] {{fossilrange|8|0.011|earliest=10}} (Possible earliest record of up to ~10&nbsp;[[megaannum|Ma]])
| image_caption = ''Plagiolophus'' skeleton
| image = AMNH Mastodon.jpg
| taxon = Plagiolophus
| image_caption = Mounted ''M. americanum'' skeleton ("Warren mastodon"), [[American Museum of Natural History]]
| authority = [[Auguste Pomel|Pomel]], 1847
| authority = [[Johann Friedrich Blumenbach|Blumenbach]], 1799
| type_species = {{extinct}}''[[Palaeotherium]] minus'' <br>(= †'''''Plagiolophus minor''''')
| type_species = {{extinct}}''Elephas americanus'' <br>(= †'''''Mammut americanum''''')
| type_species_authority = [[Georges Cuvier|Cuvier]], 1804
| type_species_authority = [[Robert Kerr (writer)|Kerr]], 1792
| subdivision_ranks = Other species
| subdivision_ranks = Other species
| subdivision = {{species list
| subdivision = {{species list
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;ovinus'''''|[[Auguste Aymard|Aymard]], 1846
| {{extinct}}'''''M. matthewi'''''|[[Henry Fairfield Osborn|Osborn]], 1921
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;annectens'''''|[[Richard Owen|Owen]], 1848
| {{extinct}}'''''M. vexillarius'''''|[[William Diller Matthew|Matthew]], 1930
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;fraasi'''''|[[Christian Erich Hermann von Meyer|von Meyer]], 1852
| {{extinct}}'''''M. raki'''''|[[Childs Frick|Frick]], 1933
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;javali'''''|[[Henri Filhol|Filhol]], 1877
| {{extinct}}'''''M. nevadanum'''''|[[Chester Stock|Stock]], 1936
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;lugdunensis'''''|[[Charles Depéret|Depéret]] & Carrière, 1901
| {{extinct}}'''''M. cosoensis'''''|Schultz, 1937
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;cartailhaci'''''|[[Hans Georg Stehlin|Stehlin]], 1904
| {{extinct}}'''''M? furlongi'''''|Shotwell & Russell, 1963
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;cartieri'''''|Stehlin, 1904
| {{extinct}}'''''M. pacificum'''''|Dooley ''et al''., 2019
}}
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;oweni'''''|Depéret, 1917
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;curtisi'''''|Hooker, 1986
|title=<small>Species pending reassessment</small>
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;major'''''|Brunet & Jehenne, 1989
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;ministri'''''|Brunet & Jehenne, 1989
| {{extinct}}'''''[["Mammut" borsoni|M. borsoni]]''''' <small>[[Isaac Hays|Hays]], 1834</small>
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;casasecaensis'''''|Cuesta, 1994
| {{extinct}}'''''M. obliquelophus''''' <small>Mucha, 1980</small>
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;mazateronensis'''''|Cuesta, 1994
| {{extinct}}'''''M. lufugense''''' <small>Zhang, 1982</small>
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;huerzeleri'''''|Remy, 2000
| {{extinct}}'''''M. zhupengensis''''' <small>Zhang et. al., 1991</small>
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;ringeadei'''''|Remy, 2004
|{{extinct}}'''''P.&nbsp;mamertensis'''''|Remy, 2004
}}
}}
| synonyms = {{collapsible list |bullets = true |title=<small>Genus synonymy</small>
''For subspecies suggested, see [[#List of lineages|below]].''
| ''Harpagmotherium'' {{small|[[Gotthelf Fischer von Waldheim|Fischer von Waldheim]], 1808}}
| synonyms = {{collapsible list|bullets = true|title=<small>Genus synonymy</small>
|''Paloplotherium'' {{small|Owen, 1848}}
| ''Mastotherium'' {{small|Fischer von Waldheim, 1814}}
| ''Mastodon'' {{small|[[Georges Cuvier|Cuvier]], 1817}}
| ''Tetracaulodon'' {{small|[[John Davidson Godman|Godman]], 1830}}
| ''Missourium'' {{small|[[Albert C. Koch|Koch]], 1840}}
| ''Leviathan'' {{small|Koch, 1841}}
| ''Pliomastodon'' {{small|Osborn, 1926}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;minor''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. americanum''</small>
|''Plagiolophus tenuirostris'' {{small|Pomel, 1853}}
| ''Elephas americanus'' {{small|Kerr, 1792}}
| ''Mammut ohioticum'' {{small|Blumenbach, 1799}}
| ''Elephas macrocephalus'' {{small|Camper, 1802}}
| ''Harpagmotherium canadense'' {{small|Fischer de Waldheim, 1808}}
| ''Elephas mastodontus'' {{small|[[Benjamin Smith Barton|Barton]], 1810}}
| ''Mastotherium megalodon'' {{small|Fischer de Waldheim, 1814}}
| ''Tapirus mastodontoides'' {{small|[[Richard Harlan|Harlan]], 1825}}
| ''Tetracaulodon mastodontoideum'' {{small|Godman, 1830}}
| ''Mastodon ohioticum'' {{small|[[Karl Eichwald|Eichwald]], 1832}}
| ''Mastodon cuvieri'' {{small|Hays, 1834}}
| ''Mastodon jeffersoni'' {{small|Hays, 1834}}
| ''Tetracaulodon collinsii'' {{small|Hays, 1834}}
| ''Tetracaulodon godmani'' {{small|Hays, 1834}}
| ''Tetracaulodon tapyroides'' {{small|Hays, 1834}}
| ''Elephas ohioticus'' {{small|[[Henri Marie Ducrotay de Blainville|de Blainville]], 1839–1864}}
| ''Missourium kochii'' {{small|Koch, 1840}}
| ''Leviathan missourii'' {{small|Koch, 1840}}
| ''Tetracaulodon osagii'' {{small|Koch, 1841}}
| ''Tetracaulodon kochii'' {{small|Koch, 1841}}
| ''Tetracaulodon bucklandii'' {{small|Grant, 1842}}
| ''Missourium theristocaulodon'' {{small|Koch, 1843}}
| ''Mastodon rugatum'' {{small|Koch, 1845}}
| ''Elephas rupertianus'' {{small|[[John Richardson (naturalist)|Richardson]], 1854}}
| ''Trilophodon ohioticus'' {{small|[[Hugh Falconer|Falconer]], 1868}}
| ''Mammut progenium'' {{small|[[Oliver P. Hay|Hay]], 1914}}
| ''Mastodon americanus plicatus'' {{small|Osborn, 1926}}
| ''Mammut oregonense'' {{small|Hay, 1926}}
| ''Mastodon moodiei'' {{small|[[Erwin Hinckley Barbour|Barbour]], 1931}}
| ''Mastodon americanus alaskensis'' {{small|Frick, 1933}}
| ''Mastodon acutidens'' {{small|Osborn, 1936}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;ovinus''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. matthewi''</small>
|''Palaeotherium ovinum'' {{small|Aymard, 1846}}
| ''Mastodon matthewi'' {{small|Osborn, 1921}}
| ''Pliomastodon sellardsi'' {{small|[[George Gaylord Simpson|Simpson]], 1930}}
| ''Pliomastodon adamsi'' {{small|[[Claude W. Hibbard|Hibbard]], 1944}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;annectens''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. vexillarius''</small>
|''Paloplotherium annectens'' {{small|Owen, 1848}}
| ''Pliomastodon vexillarius'' {{small|Matthew, 1930}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;javali''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. raki''</small>
|''Paloplotherium javalii'' {{small|Filhol, 1877}}
| ''Mastodon raki'' {{small|Frick, 1933}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;lugdunensis''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. nevadanum''</small>
|''Paloplotherium lugdunense'' {{small|Depéret & Carrière, 1901}}
| ''Pliomastodon nevadanus'' {{small|Stock, 1936}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''P.&nbsp;major''</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of ''M. cosoensis''</small>
|''Paloplotherium majus'' {{small|Brunet & Jehenne, 1989}}
| ''Pliomastodon cosoensis'' {{small|Schultz, 1937}}
}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Dubious species</small>
|title=<small>Synonyms of "''M.''" ''borsoni''</small>
|''Plagiolophus minutus'' {{small|[[Ludwig Ruetimeyer|Ruetimeyer]], 1862}}
| ''Mastodon vellavus'' {{small|[[Auguste Aymard|Aymard]], 1847}}
| ''Mastodon vialleti'' {{small|Aymard, 1847}}
| ''Mastodon buffonis'' {{small|[[Auguste Pomel|Pomel]], 1848}}
| ''Mastodon affinis'' {{small|Pomel, 1859}}
| ''Zygolophodon borsoni'' {{small|Osborn, 1926}}
| ''Mastodon pavlowi'' {{small|Osborn, 1936}}
| ''Mammut shansiense'' {{small|Chow & Chang, 1961}}
}}
{{collapsible list|bullets = true
|title=<small>Synonyms of "''M.''" ''obliquelophus''</small>
| ''M. praetypicum?'' {{small|Schlesinger, 1917}}
}}
}}
}}
}}


A '''mastodon''' ({{wikt-lang|grc-Latn|μαστός|mastós}} 'breast' + {{wikt-lang|grc-Latn|ὀδούς|odoús}} 'tooth') is a member of the genus '''''Mammut''''' (German for 'mammoth'), which was endemic to North America and lived from the late [[Miocene]] to the early [[Holocene]]. Mastodons belong to the order [[Proboscidea]], the same order as [[elephant]]s and [[mammoth]]s (which belong to the family [[Elephantidae]]). ''Mammut'' is the [[type genus]] of the extinct family [[Mammutidae]], which diverged from the ancestors of modern elephants at least 27–25&nbsp;million years ago, during the [[Oligocene]].


Like other members of the Mammutidae, mastodon [[molar (tooth)|molar]]s have a zygodont morphology (where parallel pairs of [[cusp (anatomy)|cusps]] are merged into sharp ridges) that is strongly different from those of elephantids. Compared to its likely ancestor ''[[Zygolophodon]]'', ''Mammut'' is characterized by particularly long and upwardly curved upper tusks, reduced or absent tusks on the lower jaw, and shortening of the [[mandibular symphysis]] (the frontmost part of the lower jaw), the latter two traits having also [[Parallel evolution|evolved in parallel]] separately in elephantids. Mastodons had an overall stockier skeleton, a lower domed skull, and a longer tail than elephantids. Fully grown male ''M. americanum'' are thought to have been have been {{cvt|275|cm|ft}} to {{cvt|305|cm|ft}} at shoulder height and from {{cvt|6.8|tonnes}} to {{cvt|9.2|tonnes}} in body mass on average. Size estimates suggest that American mastodon males were heavier on average than any living elephant species; they were typically larger than [[Asian elephant]]s and [[African forest elephant]]s of both sexes but shorter than male [[African bush elephant]]s.


''M. americanum'', known as the "American mastodon" or simply "mastodon," has a long and complex paleontological history dating back to 1705 when the first fossils were discovered in [[Claverack, New York|Claverack]], [[New York (state)|New York]] in the American colonies. Because of its uniquely shaped molars with no modern analogues in terms of large animals, the species attracted attention from European researchers and influential Americans before and after the [[American Revolution]] to the point that, according to American historians Paul Semonin and [[Keith Stewart Thomson]], it bolstered [[American nationalism]] and contributed to a greater understanding of extinction. Taxonomically, it was first recognized as a distinct species by [[Robert Kerr (writer)|Robert Kerr]] in 1792 then placed in its own genus ''Mammut'' by [[Johann Friedrich Blumenbach]] in 1799, thus making it one of first fossil mammal genera to be established with undisputed taxonomic authority. The genus served as a [[wastebasket taxon]] for proboscidean species with superficially similar molar tooth morphologies but today includes 7&nbsp;definite species, 1 of questionable affinities, and 4&nbsp;other species from Eurasia that are awaiting reclassifications to other genera.


Mastodons are thought to have had a predominantly [[browsing (herbivory)|browsing]] diet of leaves, fruits, and woody parts of plants. This allowed mastodons to [[niche partition]] with other members of Proboscidea in North America such as [[gomphothere]]s and the [[Columbian mammoth]], which had shifted to mixed feeding or [[grazing]] by the late [[Neogene]]-[[Quaternary]]. It is thought that mastodon behavior was not much different from that of elephants and mammoths, with females and young living in herds and adult males living largely solitary lives plus entering periods of aggression similar to the [[musth]] exhibited by modern elephants. ''Mammut'' achieved maximum species diversity in the [[Pliocene]], although the genus is known from abundant fossil evidence in the [[Late Pleistocene]].


Mastodons coexisted with [[Paleoindians]], the first humans to inhabit North America, for at least a few thousand years prior to their extinction. Evidence has been found that Paleoindians (including those of the [[Clovis culture]]) hunted mastodons, based on findings of mastodon remains with cut marks and/or lithic artifacts.


Mastodons disappeared along with many other North American animals, including most of the largest animals ([[megafauna]]), as part of the [[Late Pleistocene extinctions|end-Pleistocene extinction event]], the causes of which are typically attributed to human hunting, severe climatic periods such as the [[Younger Dryas]], or some combination of the two. The American mastodon had its last recorded occurrence in the earliest Holocene about 11,000 years ago, which is considerably later than other North American megafauna species. Today, the American mastodon is one of the best-known fossil species in both academic research and public perception, as a result of its inclusion in American popular culture.


== Taxonomy ==
=== Research history ===
{{Main|Research history of Mammut|l1=Research history of ''Mammut''}}


==== Earliest finds ====
[[File:Em - Mammut americanum - 9.jpg|thumb|left|''Mammut americanum'' [[molar (tooth)|molar]] tooth, [[Rotunda Museum]]]]
In a letter dated 1713, [[Edward Hyde, 3rd Earl of Clarendon]] (also known as Lord Cornbury) from [[New York (state)|New York]] reported to the [[Royal Society]] [[learned society]] of [[Great Britain]] that in 1705, a large tooth had been found near the bank of the [[Hudson River]] by a [[Dutch people|Dutch]] countryman and was sold to Van Bruggen, a member of the [[New York General Assembly]], for a [[gill (unit)|gill]] of rum; Bruggen eventually gave the tooth to Cornbury. He then stated that he sent Johannis Abeel, a recorder of [[Albany, New York|Albany]], New York to dig near the original site of the tooth to find more bones.<ref name="stanford"/><ref name="cornbury">{{cite book |last=Weld |first=Charles Richard |year=1848 |title=A History of the Royal Society: With memoirs of the Presidents |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;XV: 1710–1725 |pages=398–433 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5CUEAAAAQAAJ }}</ref>


Abeel reported in a letter that he went to the town of [[Claverack, New York|Claverack]], New York where the original bones were found. American historian Paul Semonin said that the accounts written by Cornbury and Abeel agree with that written by in the July 30, 1705 entry in the ''[[The Boston News-Letter]]''.<ref name="monster">{{cite book|last=Semonin|first=Paul|year=2000|title=American Monster: How the Nation's First Prehistoric Creature Became a Symbol of National Identity|chapter=Chapter 1: The Giant of Claverack in Puritan America|publisher=NYU Press|pages=15–40}}</ref> The account reported skeletal evidence of an [[antediluvian]] (or biblical) "[[giant]]" unearthed in Claverack. However, the [[femur]] and one of the teeth both disintegrated before they could be further observed.<ref name="warren">{{cite book|last=Warren|first=John Collin|year=1852|title=The Mastodon giganteus of North America|section=Historical sketch|publisher=John Wilson and Son|pages=1–3|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/126175#page/20/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="stanford">{{cite journal|last=Stanford|first=Donald E.|year=1959|title=The Giant Bones of Claverack, New York, 1705|journal=New York History|volume=40|number=1|pages=47–61|jstor=23153528 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23153528}}</ref>


==== Big Bone Lick ====
[[File:Proboscidean femurs 1764.png|thumb|Engravings of the femurs of an unspecified extant elephant species (top), ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' (middle), and a "Siberian" mammoth (bottom), 1764]]
In 1739, a French military expedition under the command of [[Charles III Le Moyne]] (also known as "Longueil") explored the site of "[[Big Bone Lick State Park|Big Bone Lick]]" (in present-day [[Kentucky]]), collecting fossil bones and teeth there.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Storrs |first=Glenn W. |year=2019 |title=Big Bone Lick |journal=Ohio Valley History |volume=19 |number=3 |pages=82–90 |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/734797}}</ref> The French naturalist [[Louis Jean-Marie Daubenton]] examined the fossil collection brought by Longueuil and compared it with specimens of extant [[elephant]]s and Siberian [[mammoth]]s in 1762. Daubenton said that the bones had been discovered by Native Americans (probably [[Abenaki]] hunter-warriors). He concluded that the femur and tusk belonged to an elephant while the [[molar (tooth)|molars]] (or cheek teeth) came from a separate giant [[hippopotamus]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Daubenton|first=Louis Jean-Marie|year=1764|title=Mémoire sur des os et des dents remarquables par leur gradeur|journal=Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, Année MDCCLXII, avec les Mémoires de Mathématiques & de Physique, pour la même année, 1762|pages=206–229|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rT1RAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA1-PA206}}</ref><ref name="hedeen">{{cite book|last=Hedeen|first=Stanley|year=2008|title=Big Bone Lick: The Cradle of American Paleontology |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;4: Gathering the bones |publisher=University Press of Kentucky|pages=31–44}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Barnett|first=Lydia|year=2019|title=Showing and hiding: The flickering visibility of earth workers in the archives of earth science|journal=History of Science|volume=58|issue=3|pages=245–274 |doi=10.1177/0073275319874982|pmid=31640428 }}</ref>


In [[Shawnee]] tradition, proboscideans roamed in herds and were hunted by giants, both of which eventually became extinct. The stories. The accounts told by the Shawnee individuals in 1762 are the oldest known documented interpretations of the "[[Ohio]]" fossils, although the traditions may have had been told for generations.<ref name="monster3">{{cite book |last=Semonin |first=Paul |year=2000 |title=American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;4: Big Bone Lick |publisher=NYU Press |pages=84–110 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Mayor |first=Adrienne |year=2005 |title=Fossil Legends of the First Americans |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;1: The northeast: Giants, great bears, and grandfather of the buffalo |publisher=Princeton University Press |pages=32–72}}</ref>


In 1767, [[Peter Collinson (botanist)|Peter Collinson]] credited Irish trader [[George Croghan]] with sending him and [[Benjamin Franklin]] proboscidean fossils for his studies. He concluded that the peculiar grinding teeth (the molars) were built for herbivorous diets of branches of trees and shrubs as well as other vegetation, a view later shared by Franklin.<ref>{{cite thesis |last=Daiutolo |first=Robert, Jr. |date=October 2015 |title=George Croghan: The life of a conqueror |degree=Ph.D. |series=Graduate Program in History |publisher=[[Rutgers University]] |place=New Brunswick–Piscataway, NJ |url=https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/48442/PDF/1/play/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Collinson |first=Peter |year=1767 |title=XLVII.&nbsp;Sequel to the foregoing account of the large fossil teeth |journal=[[Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London]] |volume=57 |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/208064#page/534/mode/1up}}</ref>


In 1768, Scottish anatomist [[William Hunter (anatomist)|William Hunter]] recorded that he and his brother [[John Hunter (surgeon)|John Hunter]] observed that the molars did not resemble those of modern elephants. He determined that the "grinders" were from a carnivorous animal but believed that the tusks belonged to the same animal. After examining the fossils from Franklin and Lord Shelburne, Hunter was convinced that the "''pseudo-elephant''", or "''animal incognitum''" (or "''incognitum''"), was a non-elephant animal species that was probably the same as the proboscideans found in Siberia. He concluded that humanity should be thankful to heaven that the animal, if truly carnivorous, was extinct despite what philosophers may think.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hunter |first=William |year=1768 |title=V.&nbsp;Observations on the bones, commonly supposed to be elephants bones, which have been found near the river Ohio in America |journal=[[Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London]] |volume=58 |pages=34–45 |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/207945#page/60/mode/1up }}</ref>


==== Early American observations ====
[[File:C W Peale - The Exhumation of the Mastadon.jpeg|thumb|The 1806–1808 painting ''The Exhumation of the Mastodon'' by [[Charles Willson Peale]]]]
In 1785, the reverend Robert Annan wrote an account in which workers discovered bones on his farm near the Hudson River in New York in the fall of 1780. The workers found fossil bones including vertebrae that broke shortly thereafter and molars. Annan expressed his confusion as to what the animal could be but speculated based on its "grinders" that it was carnivorous in diet and probably went extinct due to some global catastrophe.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Annan |first=Robert |year=1793 |title=Account of a skeleton of a large animal, found near Hudson's River |journal=Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences |volume=2 |number=1 |pages=160–164 |doi=10.2307/27670792 |jstor=27670792 |bibcode=1793MAAAS...2..160A }}</ref>


American statesman [[Thomas Jefferson]] stated his thoughts on ''[[Notes on the State of Virginia]]'' (published by 1785) that the fossil proboscideans may have been carnivorous, still exist in northern North America, and are related to mammoths whose remains had been found in Siberia. Jefferson referred to the theory of American [[social degeneracy]] by [[Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon]] and countered with measurements of extant and extinct animals, including those of "mammoths," as evidence that American faunas were not "degenerative" in size.<ref>{{cite book|last=Jefferson|first=Thomas|year=1785|title=Notes on the State of Virginia|publisher=Philippe Denis Pierres|pages=42–80|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DTWttRSMtbYC}}</ref> Semonin argued that the American proboscidean fossils were used as political tools to inspire [[American nationalism]] and counter against the theory of the offensive American degeneracy.<ref name="monster5">{{cite book|last=Semonin|first=Paul|year=2000|title=American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;5: The American ''incognitum'' in Paris |publisher=NYU Press |pages=111–135 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Semonin |first=Paul |year=2000 |title=American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;11: “Monarch of the wilderness” |publisher=NYU Press |pages=263–287 }}</ref>


[[File:Skeleton Missouri Leviathan Drawing.jpg|thumb|left|Colored [[lithograph]] of the "''Missourium''" (= ''Mammut'') skeleton, {{circa|1845}}]]
In 1799, workers digging a [[marl]] pit at John Masten's farm in [[Newburgh (town), New York|Newburgh]], New York uncovered a femur and subsequent excavations were watched by a large crowd.<ref name="monster7">{{cite book |last=Semonin |first=Paul |year=2000 |title=American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;13: Exhumation of the monster |publisher=NYU Press |pages=315–340 }}</ref> American painter and exhibitionist [[Charles Willson Peale]] visited the site in 1801, where he first sketched the fossils then purchased excavation privileges and full ownership of the fossils from Masten and borrowed a monetary loan from the [[American Philosophical Society]] (APS) in [[Philadelphia]], [[Pennsylvania]]. In addition to the first skeleton, the second was excavated using a mill-like device to drain a {{cvt|12|ft}} deep marl pit. Peale assembled a complete skeleton in his [[Peale's Philadelphia Museum|Philadelphia Museum]] in 1804, and its exhibit was open first to invited members of the American Philosophical Society on December&nbsp;24 then to the general public on December&nbsp;25 for an exhibition fee plus the general admission fee.<ref name="peale">{{cite journal|last=Zygmont|first=Brian J.|year=2015|title=Charles Willson Peale's ''The Exhumation of the Mastodon'' and the great chain of being: The interaction of religion, science, and art in early-federal America |journal=Text Matters |volume=5 |number=5 |pages=95–111 |doi=10.1515/texmat-2015-0008 |hdl=11089/15025 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>


The special exhibition attracted thousands of visitors, and the skeleton became a US national symbol.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hoffman |first=Sheila K. |year=2018 |title=The origins of Puritan politics in U.S. museums: Nation building and "the arts" from 1776 to 1806 |journal=ICOFOM Study Series |volume=46 |issue=46 |pages=131–145 |doi=10.4000/iss.1025 }}</ref> Charles Peale's son, [[Rembrandt Peale]], took the skeleton to Europe, showing if off and allowing usage of it for Jefferson's final rebuttals against Buffon's arguments for the supposed inferiority of American faunas. Author Keith Stewart Thomson argued that the promotion of the "mastodon" skeleton made it a symbol of the strength of American nationalism and that "mammoth" as a term became associated with gigantism. Decades later, the museum bankrupted, and the first skeleton's specimens were sold to some German spectators in around 1848, who eventually sold it to [[Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt]] in Germany, where it is now displayed. The second skeleton's specimens eventually ended up at the [[American Museum of Natural History]].<ref name="peale2">{{cite book|last=Thomson|first=Keith Stewart|year=2008|title=The Legacy of the Mastodon|chapter=Chapter&nbsp;6: Fossils and show business: Mr.&nbsp;Peale’s mastodon |publisher=Yale University Press |pages=46–54 }}</ref>


{{multiple image
| align = right
| image1= Burning Tree Mastodon excavation (mid-December 1989), Burning Tree Golf Course, Heath, east-central Ohio.jpg
| image2= Mammut americanum - Burning Tree Mastodon (Upper Pleistocene, 11.39 ka; Burning Tree Golf Course, south of Heath, southern Licking County, central Ohio, USA) 1 (15276264887).jpg
| total_width = 400
| total_height= 400
| footer = Excavation of a specimen in a [[golf course]] in [[Heath, Ohio]], 1989 (left) and a replica of the "[[Burning Tree mastodon]]" complete skeleton (right)
}}
Other skeletons of ''Mammut americanum'' were excavated within the United States in the first half of the 19th century. One of them was collected by American showman [[Albert C. Koch]] in what is today the [[Mastodon State Historic Site]] at [[Missouri]] in 1839. He hypothesized in 1840 that the proboscidean, which he classified as ''Missourium'', was much larger than an elephant, had horizontal tusks plus trunks, and occupied aquatic habitats.<ref name="koch">{{cite journal|last=McMillan|first=R. Bruce|year=2022|title=Albert C. Koch's Missourium and the debate over the contemporaneity of humans and the Pleistocene megafauna of North America|journal=Earth Sciences History|volume=41|issue=2|pages=410–439|doi=10.17704/1944-6187-41.2.410|bibcode=2022ESHis..41..410M }}</ref> He acquired additional fossils from a spring on the [[Pomme de Terre River (Missouri)|Pomme de&nbsp;Terre River]] to assemble a mounted skeleton of the "''Missouri Leviathan''" and briefly exhibited it at {{nobr|[[St. Louis]].}} After exhibiting the skeleton throughout Europe, he sold the skeleton to the [[British Museum of Natural History]]. [[Richard Owen]] then properly reassembled the skeleton, and it today is on display there.<ref name="koch2">{{cite journal|last=McMillan|first=R. Bruce|year=2010|title=The Discovery of Fossil Vertebrates on Missouri's Western Frontier|journal=Earth Sciences History|volume=29|issue=1|pages=26–51|doi=10.17704/eshi.29.1.j034662534721751|bibcode=2010ESHis..29...26M }}</ref><ref name="osborn"/>


In 1845, another skeleton was excavated from Newburgh by laborers hired by Nathaniel Brewster initially to remove [[lacustrine deposits]] to fertilize the neighboring fields. They were observed by a large amount of spectators and uncovered relatively complete fossil evidence of ''M.&nbsp;americanum''.<ref name="warren3">{{cite book|last=Warren|first=John Collin|year=1852|title=The Mastodon giganteus of North America|section=Discovery of the skeleton|publisher=John Wilson and Son|pages=4–7|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/126175#page/24/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="AMNH">{{cite journal|last=Horenstein|first=Sidney|year=2008|title=New York City Mastodons: Big Apple Tusks|journal=Evolution: Education and Outreach|volume=1|issue=2 |pages=204–209|doi=10.1007/s12052-008-0042-y|doi-access=free}}</ref> The skeleton was exhibited in [[New York City]] and other New England towns then was acquired by [[John Collins Warren (surgeon, born 1778)|John Collins Warren]] for study.<ref name="warren2">{{cite book|last=Warren|first=John Collin|year=1852|title=The Mastodon giganteus of North America|section=Geological situation and causes of preservation|publisher=John Wilson and Son|pages=154–167|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/126175#page/174/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="newyork">{{cite book|last1=Hartnagel|first1=Chris Andrew|last2=Bishop|first2=Sherman Chauncey|year=1922|title=The Mastodons, Mammoths and Other Pleistocene Mammals of New York State: Being a Descriptive Record of All Known Occurrences|publisher=University of the State of New York|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9rxRAQAAIAAJ}}</ref> After Warren's death in 1856, the skeleton was sent to Warren's family but was traded to [[Harvard Medical School]] for John Warren's skeleton. The "Warren mastodon", under the request of American paleontologist [[Henry Fairfield Osborn]], was purchased by the American financier [[J. P. Morgan]] for $30,000 in 1906 and donated to the American Museum of Natural History where it is exhibited today.<ref name="monsterafter">{{cite book|last=Semonin|first=Paul|year=2000|title=American Monster: How the Nation's First Prehistoric Creature Became a Symbol of National Identity|chapter=Afterword: The Myth of Wild Nature|publisher=NYU Press|pages=392–411}}</ref><ref name="AMNH"/>


==== Early taxonomic history ====
[[File:Mastodon HLMD.jpg|thumb|left|''Mammut'' skeleton previously displayed by Charles Peale at his museum, now on display at [[Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt]]]]
In the 1790s, the "''American incognitum''" was subject to research by multiple taxonomists. Scottish writer [[Robert Kerr (writer)|Robert Kerr]] erected the species name ''Elephas americanus'' in 1792 based on fossil tusks and "grinders" from the Big Bone Lick locality. He stated that the tusks were similar to elephants while the molars were completely different because they were covered with enamel and had a double row of high conical [[cusp (anatomy)|cusp]] processes. Kerr was unsure about the taxonomic affinities of the molars and referenced that [[Thomas Pennant]] supposed that they belong to an unknown species within the genus ''[[Elephas]]'', giving the common name "American elephant."<ref>{{cite book|last=Kerr|first=Robert|year=1792|title=The animal kingdom, or zoological system, of the celebrated Sir Charles Linnæus. containing a complete systematic description, arrangement, and nomenclature, of all the known species and varieties of the mammalia, or animals which give suck to their young Class&nbsp;I Mammalia|publisher=Edinburgh|pages=115–117|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/119041#page/169/mode/1up}}</ref>


German naturalist [[Johann Friedrich Blumenbach]] also followed up with more taxonomic descriptions of fossil proboscideans in 1799. After first naming ''Elephas primigenius''? (now known as ''[[Mammuthus primigenius]]''), he followed with describing what he considered a "mammoth" and "colossal land monster of the prehistoric world." He created the genus ''Mammut'' and erected the species ''Mammut ohioticum'' based on fossil bones dug up from Ohio in North America. He said that the species was distinguished from other animals of the prehistoric world based on the unusual shapes of the large molars. The genus name "Mammut" refers to the German translation for "mammoth."<ref>{{cite book|last=Blumenbach|first=Johann Friedrich|year=1799|title=Handbuch der Naturgeschichte [6. ed.]|publisher=Göttingen|pages=695–698|url=https://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/view/blumenbach_naturgeschichte_1799?p=719}}</ref> The naming of the genus ''Mammut'' in 1799 makes it the second or third genus to be recognized with taxonomic authority given that ''[[Megalonyx]]'' had been named the same year.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hooker|first=Jerry J.|year=2007|title=Bipedal browsing adaptations of the unusual Late Eocene–earliest Oligocene tylopod Anoplotherium (Artiodactyla, Mammalia)|journal=Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society|volume=151|issue=3|pages=609–659|doi=10.1111/j.1096-3642.2007.00352.x|doi-access=free}}</ref>


French naturalist [[Georges Cuvier]] also described known fossil proboscidean species back in 1796, although his account was later published in 1799. He considered that the remains uncovered from Siberia were true "mammoths" that had similar dentitions to extant elephants but had some morphological differences. He mentioned the fossil remains that were brought back by Longueil from Ohio back in 1739 and several researchers from previous decades who noted the unusual molars and thought that they belonged to different animals like hippopotamuses. He followed recognition in the previously established species "''Elephas americanus''" and argued that the species was different from elephants and mammoths and cannot be found amongst living animals due to extinction from [[catastrophism]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1799|title=Mémoire sur les espèces d'éléphans vivantes et fossiles|journal=Mémoires de l'Institut des Sciences et Arts|pages=1–22|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/16303001#page/175/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="arctic">{{cite journal|last=Froese|first=Duane|year=2014|title=The curious case of the Arctic mastodons|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=111|number=52|pages=18405–18406|doi=10.1073/pnas.1422018112|doi-access=free |pmid=25535342 |pmc=4284541}}</ref>


The proboscidean species was subject to several other species names given by other taxonomists within the earliest 18th century as well as the genus name ''Harpagmotherium'' by the Russian naturalist [[Gotthelf Fischer von Waldheim]] in 1808.<ref name="osborn">{{cite book|last=Osborn|first=Harry Fairfield|year=1936|title=Proboscidea: a monograph of the discovery, evolution, migration and extinction of the mastodonts and elephants of the world|volume=1|publisher=J. Pierpont Morgan Fund by the trustees of the American Museum of Natural History|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/44913#page/1/mode/1up}}</ref>


==== Cuvier's taxonomy ====
[[File:Mammut Mastodonte Skeleton Cuvier 1806.png|thumb|Sketch of the skeleton of ''Mammut'', labeled as "Mastodonte"]]
In 1806, Cuvier wrote multiple extended research articles on fossil proboscideans of Eurasia and the Americas. He stated that the bones that Buffon previously described from North America were not of elephants but another animal that he referred to as the "''mastodonte''," or the "''animal of Ohio''."<ref>{{cite journal|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1806|title=Sur les éléphans vivans et fossiles|journal=Annales du Muséum d'histoire naturelle|volume=8|pages=1–68|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/93165#page/4/mode/1up}}</ref> He reinforced the idea that the extinct "mastodon" was an animal close in relationship to elephants that differed by jaws with large tubercles. He suggested that "mammoth" and "carnivorous elephant" be discontinued as names for the species and that it receive a new genus name instead. Cuvier said that for "''mastodonte''," he derived the name's etymology (compound {{lang|grc|μαστός}} ({{transliteration|grc|mastós}}, "breast") + {{lang|grc|ὀδούς}} ({{transliteration|grc|odoús}}, "tooth") from [[Ancient Greek]] to mean "nipple tooth," since he thought that it expressed the characteristic form of the teeth.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1806|title=Sur le grand mastodonte|journal=Annales du Muséum d'histoire naturelle|volume=2|pages=270–312|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/51185#page/312/mode/1up}}</ref>


In 1817, the French naturalist officially established the genus name ''Mastodon'', reaffirming that it is extinct and has left no living descendants. He established that it had an overall body form similar to elephants but had molars more similar to hippopotamuses and pigs that did not grind meat. The first species he erected within ''Mastodon'' was ''Mastodon giganteum'', giving it the informal name "great mastodon" and writing that that it is designated to the Ohio proboscidean with abundant fossil evidence, equal size but greater proportions to modern elephants, and diamond-shaped points of the molars. The naturalist also created the second species name ''Mastodon angustidens'' and gave it the informal name "narrow-toothed mastodon," diagnosing it as having narrower molars, smaller sizes compared to ''M. giganteum'', and range distributions in Europe and South America.<ref name="cuvier1">{{cite book|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1817|title=Le règne animal distribué d'après son organisation : pour servir de base à l'histoire naturelle des animaux et d'introduction à l'anatomie comparée|chapter=Sixié ordre des mammiféres. Les pachydermes|publisher=Chez Déterville|pages=227–245|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/18030#page/269/mode/1up}}</ref> Cuvier also erected several other species of ''Mastodon'' originating from other continents in 1824.<ref name="cuvier2">{{cite book|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1824|title=Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles, où l'on rétablit les caractères de plusieurs animaux dont les révolutions du globe ont détruit les espèces|section=Résumé général: Des Animaux dont les caractères ont été indiqués ou rectifiés, ou dont l'Ostéologie a été décrite dans cet ouvrage|volume=5|publisher=G. Dufour and E. d'Ocagne|pages=527–536|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/214698#page/535/mode/1up}}</ref> Despite Cuvier's genus name being younger than multiple other genus names, ''Mastodon'' became the most commonly used genus name for the 19th century.<ref name="mammut">{{cite book|last=Perry Hay|first=Oliver|year=1902|title=Bibliography and catalogue of the fossil vertebrata of North America|publisher=Washington Government Printing Office|pages=707–712|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/59973#page/713/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="osborn"/>


==== Taxonomic problems ====
[[File:Em - Mammut americanum - 3.jpg|thumb|''M. americanum'' skeleton, [[Natural History Museum, London]]. The skeleton was initially assembled by [[Albert C. Koch]] as "''Missourium''" or "''Leviathan''", both now synonymous with ''Mammut''.]]
"''Mastodon''" was riddled with major taxonomic problems since species now determined as belonging to other proboscidean genera were classified to ''Mastodon'' on the basis of similar dentitions to that of "''Mastodon giganteum''" (= ''Mammut americanum''), effectively making it a [[wastebasket taxon]].<ref name="cuvier1"/><ref name="cuvier2"/><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mazo|first1=A.V.|last2=van der Made|first2=Jan|year=2012|title=Iberian mastodonts: Geographic and stratigraphic distribution|journal=Quaternary International|volume=255|pages=239–256|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2011.07.047|bibcode=2012QuInt.255..239M }}</ref> Various fossil proboscidean species were classified into ''Mastodon'' in the 19th century before eventually being reclassified into distinct genera.<ref name="osborn"/> In addition to still-valid species names, several synonymous or dubious species names ultimately belonging to different genera were erected within the Americas as well throughout the 19th century.<ref name="notiomastodon">{{cite journal|last1=Mothé|first1=Dimila|last2=Avilla|first2=Leonardo S.|last3=Cozzuol|first3=Mário|last4=Winck|first4=Gisele R.|year=2012|title=Taxonomic revision of the Quaternary gomphotheres (Mammalia: Proboscidea: Gomphotheriidae) from the South American lowlands|journal=Quaternary International|volume=276–277|pages=2–7|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2011.05.018|bibcode=2012QuInt.276....2M }}</ref><ref name="rhynchotherium">{{cite journal|last1=Lucas|first1=Spencer G.|last2=Morgan|first2=Gary S.|year=2008|title=Taxonomy of Rhynchotherium (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Miocene-Pliocene of North America|journal=New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin|volume=44|pages=71–87|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281863115}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Dalquest|first=Walter W.|year=1975|title=Vertebrate fossils from the Blanco local fauna of Texas|journal=Occasional Papers of the Museum, Texas Tech University|number=30|pages=1–52|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/241967#page/1/mode/1up}}</ref> Also, many species names erected based on ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' remains were erected. As a result, ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' has many synonymous names. The issue of synonymous species names were especially apparent in the first half of the 19th century.<ref name="osborn"/>


Today, the genera that include species formerly classified into ''Mastodon'' include ''[[Gomphotherium]]'' (''G. angustidens'', ''G. pyrenaicum'', ''G. productum'', ''G. libycum'', ''G. subtapiroideum'', ''G. steinheimense''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Wang|first1=Shi-Qi|last2=Duangkrayom|first2=Jaroon|last3=Yang|first3=Xiang-Wen|year=2015|title=Occurrence of the Gomphotherium angustidens group in China, based on a revision of Gomphotherium connexum (Hopwood, 1935) and Gomphotherium shensiensis Chang and Zhai, 1978: continental correlation of Gomphotherium species across the Palearctic|journal=Paläontologische Zeitschrift|volume=89|issue=4 |pages=1073–1086|doi=10.1007/s12542-015-0270-8|bibcode=2015PalZ...89.1073W }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Göhlich|first=Ursula B.|year=2010|title=The Proboscidea (Mammalia) from the Miocene of Sandelzhausen (southern Germany)|journal=Paläontologische Zeitschrift|volume=84|number=1|pages=163–204|doi=10.1007/s12542-010-0053-1|bibcode=2010PalZ...84..163G }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Sanders|first=William J.|year=2023|title=Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea|publisher=CRC Press}}</ref> ''[[Zygolophodon]]'' (''Z. turicensis'', ''Z. proavus''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Duangkrayom|first1=Jaroon|last2=Wang|first2=Shi-Qi|last3=Deng|first3=Tao|last4=Jintasakul|first4=Pratueng|year=2016|title=The first Neogene record of Zygolophodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea) in Thailand: implications for the mammutid evolution and dispersal in Southeast Asia|journal=Journal of Paleontology|volume=91|number=1|pages=179–193|doi=10.1017/jpa.2016.143}}</ref><ref name="neogene">{{cite journal|last1=von Koenigswald|first1=Wighart|last2=Wigda|first2=Chris|last3=Göhlich|first3=Ursula B.|year=2023|title=New mammutids (Proboscidea) from the Clarendonian and Hemphillian of Oregon – a survey of Mio-Pliocene mammutids from North America|journal=The Bulletin of the Museum of Natural History of the University of Oregon|volume=30 |number=30|url=https://journals.oregondigital.org/nat_history/article/view/6004}}</ref> ''[[Cuvieronius]]'' (''C. hyodon''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mead|first1=Jim I.|last2=Arroyo-Cabrales|first2=Joaquin|last3=Swift|first3=Sandra L.|year=2019|title=Late Pleistocene Mammuthus and Cuvieronius (proboscidea) from Térapa, Sonora, Mexico|journal=Quaternary Science Reviews|volume=223|doi=10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.105949|bibcode=2019QSRv..22305949M }}</ref> ''[[Stegodon]]'' (''S. elephantoides''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Nanda|first1=A.C.|last2=Sehgal|first2=Ramesh Kumar|last3=Chauhan|first3=Parth R.|year=2018|title=Siwalik-age faunas from the Himalayan Foreland Basin of South Asia|journal=Journal of Asian Earth Sciences|volume=162|pages=54–68|doi=10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.10.035|bibcode=2018JAESc.162...54N }}</ref> ''[[Stegolophodon]]'' (''S. latidens'', ''S. cautleyi''),<ref>{{cite journal|last=Rai|first=R.C.|year=2004|title=Fossil elephants from the Indian sub-continent and their tusks: A review|journal=Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India|volume=49|pages=169–188|url=https://palaeontologicalsociety.in/vol49/v8.pdf}}</ref> ''[[Anancus]]'' (''A. avernensis'', ''A. sivalensis'', ''A. perimensis''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hautier|first1=Lionel|last2=Mackaye|first2=Hassane Taisso|last3=Lihoreau|first3=Fabrice|last4=Tassy|first4=Pascal|last5=Vignaud|first5=Patrick|last6=Brunet|first6=Michel|year=2009|title=New material of Anancus kenyensis (proboscidea, mammalia) from Toros-Menalla (Late Miocene, Chad): Contribution to the systematics of African anancines|journal=Journal of African Earth Sciences|volume=53|issue=4–5|pages=171–176|doi=10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2009.01.003|bibcode=2009JAfES..53..171H }}</ref> ''[[Tetralophodon]]'' (''T. longirostris''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Wang|first1=Shi-Qi|last2=Saegusa|first2=Haruo|last3=Duangkrayom|first3=Jaroon|last4=He|first4=Wen|last5=Chen|first5=Shan-Qin|year=2017|title=A new species of Tetralophodon from the Linxia Basin and the biostratigraphic significance of tetralophodont gomphotheres from the Upper Miocene of northern China|journal=Palaeoworld|volume=26|issue=4|pages=703–717|doi=10.1016/j.palwor.2017.03.005}}</ref> ''[[Choerolophodon]]'' (''C. pentelici''),<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Konidaris|first1=George|last2=Koufos|first2=George D.|last3=Kostopoulos|first3=Dimitris S.|last4=Merceron|first4=Gildas|year=2016|title=Taxonomy, biostratigraphy and palaeoecology of Choerolophodon (Proboscidea, Mammalia) in the Miocene of SE Europe-SW Asia: Implications for phylogeny and biogeography|journal=Journal of Systematic Palaeontology|volume=14|issue=1|pages=1–27|doi=10.1080/14772019.2014.985339|bibcode=2016JSPal..14....1K }}</ref> ''[[Stegomastodon]]'' (''S. mirificus''),<ref name="stegomastodon">{{cite book|editor-last1=Sullivan|editor-first1=Robert M.|editor-last2=Lucas|editor-first2=Spencer G.|editor-last3=Spielmann|editor-first3=Justin A.|last1=Morgan|first1=Gary S.|last2=Lucas|first2=Spencer G.|year=2011|title=Fossil Record 3|section=Stegomastodon (Mammalia: Proboscidea: Gomphotheriidae) from the Blancan and Irvingtonian (Pliocene and early Pleistocene) of New Mexico|publisher=Bulletin of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science|pages=570–582|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283079006}}</ref> ''[[Rhynchotherium]]'' ("''R.''" ''euhypodon''),<ref name="rhynchotherium"/> ''[[Stenobelodon]]'' (''S. floridanus''),<ref name="stenobelodon">{{cite journal|last=Lambert|first=W. David|year=2023|title=Implications of discoveries of the shovel-tusked gomphothere Konobelodon (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae) in Eurasia for the status of Amebelodon with a new genus of shovel-tusked gomphothere, Stenobelodon|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=43|issue=1|doi=10.1080/02724634.2023.2252021}}</ref> and ''[[Notiomastodon]]'' (''N. platensis'').<ref name="notiomastodon"/>


In 1830, American naturalist [[John Davidson Godman]] created the genus ''Tetracaulodon'' plus its species ''T. Mastodontoideum'' based on what he determined to be differences between it and ''Mastodon'' based on the skull and dentition.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Godman|first=John Davidson|year=1830|title=Description of a New Genus and New Species of Extinct Mammiferous Quadruped|journal=Transactions of the American Philosophical Society|volume=3|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24785763#page/532/mode/1up}}</ref> Both [[Richard Harlan]] and [[William Cooper (conchologist)|William Cooper]] pointed out that except for the tusks, all other characteristics of the specimens were consistent with ''M. giganteum''. They therefore argued that there was no reason to assume that the tusks were not just individual variations, a view followed also by [[George William Featherstonhaugh]]. Isaac Hays comparatively defended Godman's taxon, which led to a bitter debate regarding the validity of the genus amongst American naturalists.<ref name="tetracaulodon">{{cite journal|last=Gerstner|first=Patsy A.|year=1970|title=Vertebrate Paleontology, an Early Nineteenth-Century Transatlantic Science|journal=Journal of the History of Biology|volume=3|number=1|pages=137–148|doi=10.1007/BF00569310 |jstor=4330534 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4330534}}</ref>


The validities of both ''Tetracaulodon'' and ''Missourium'' were rejected by Owen in 1842, although he retained the former name informally.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Owen|first=Richard|year=1842|title=Report on the Missourium now exhibiting at the Egyptian Hall|journal=Proceedings of the Geological Society of London|volume=3|number=2|pages=689–695|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/96958#page/717/mode/1up}}</ref> By 1869, American paleontologist [[Joseph Leidy]] determined that ''Mastodon americanus'' is the senior species synonym and listed ''M. giganteum'' as a junior synonym. He also listed ''Mammut'', ''Harpagmotherium'', ''Mastotherium'', ''Missourium'', and ''Leviathan'' as synonyms of ''Mastodon''. He also noted that ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' as a species was highly variable in morphology.<ref>{{cite book|last=Leidy|first=Joseph|year=1869|title=The extinct mammalian fauna of Dakota and Nebraska : Including an account of some allied forms from other localities, together with a synopsis of the mammalian remains of North America|publisher=J.B. Lippincott|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/60918#page/398/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="utah">{{cite journal|last=Miller|first=Wade E.|year=1987|title=Mammut americanum, Utah's First Record of the American Mastodon|journal=Journal of Paleontology|volume=61|number=1|pages=168–183|doi=10.1017/S0022336000028316 |jstor=1305142 |bibcode=1987JPal...61..168M |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1305142}}</ref>


In 1902, American paleontologist [[Oliver Perry Hay]] listed ''Mammut'' as the prioritized genus name given its status as the oldest genus name, making ''Mastodon'', ''Tetracaulodon'', and ''Missourium'' classified as junior synonyms. He also established ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' as the type species.<ref name="mammut"/> The genus name ''Mastodon'' was subsequently abandoned by many American paleontologists in favor of ''Mammut'' within the early 20th century.<ref name="etymology">{{cite journal|last=Palmer|first=Theodore Sherman|year=1904|title=A List of the Genera and Families of Mammals|journal=North American Fauna|issue=23|doi=10.3996/nafa.23.0001 |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83341#page/405/mode/1up|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Lull|first=Richard Swann|year=1908|title=The Evolution of the Elephant|journal=American Journal of Science|series=4|volume=25|issue=147 |pages=169–212|doi=10.2475/ajs.s4-25.147.169 |bibcode=1908AmJS...25..169L |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40227522#page/193/mode/1up}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Hay|first=Oliver P.|year=1923|title=The Pleistocene of North America and its vertebrated animals from the states east of the Mississippi River and from the Canadian provinces east of longitude 95°|publisher=Carnegie Institution of Washington|number=322|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/66297#page/4/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="osborn"/> In 1942, American paleontologist [[George Gaylord Simpson]] said that for his study, he prioritized the historic plus taxonomically correct name ''Mammut'' over ''Mastodon''.<ref name="beginnings">{{cite journal|last=Simpson|first=George Gaylord|year=1942|title=The Beginnings of Vertebrate Paleontology in North America|journal=Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society|volume=86|number=1|pages=130–188|jstor=985085 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/985085}}</ref> He continued prioritizing ''Mammut'' in 1945, stating that people were generally aware of its taxonomic priorities over ''Mastodon'' and that people had refused to use it. He stated that he did not want to either but reluctantly set aside his personal preferences to follow taxonomic rules.<ref>{{cite book|last=Simpson|first=George Gaylord|year=1945|title=The Principles of Classification and a Classification of Mammals|publisher=Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History|volume=85|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=28TPAAAAMAAJ}}</ref>


==== Additional species ====
[[File:Pliomastodon Mammut vexillarius skull drawing.png|thumb|left|Sketch of the reconstructed skull of "''Pliomastodon vexillarius''" (= ''Mammut vexillarius''), 1930]]
In 1921, Osborn created the species name ''Mastodon matthewi'' based on distinct molars from the [[Snake Creek Formation]] of western [[Nebraska]], naming it in honor of [[William Diller Matthew]]. He also erected another species ''M. merriami'' from the [[Thousand Creek Formation]] in [[Nevada]], which was eventually synonymized with ''Zygolophodon proavus''.<ref name="matthewi">{{cite journal|last=Osborn|first=Henry Fairfield|year=1921|title=First appearance of the true mastodon in America|journal=American Museum Novitates|number=10|pages=1–6|doi=10.1126/science.54.1388.108 |pmid=17734372 |bibcode=1921Sci....54..108F |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/26890426#page/135/mode/1up}}</ref><ref name="neogene"/> Osborn in 1926 followed up for ''Mastodon matthewi'' by establishing the genus ''Pliomastodon'' for the species based on cranial differences from "''Miomastodon''" (= ''Zygolophodon'').<ref>{{cite journal|last=Osborn|first=Henry Fairfield|year=1926|title=Additional new genera and species of the mastodontoid proboscidea|journal=American Museum Novitates|number=238|pages=1–16|url=https://digitallibrary.amnh.org/items/94c50ee5-2dc1-4788-a440-cd135a90bffe}}</ref>


In 1930, Matthew erected a second species for ''Pliomastodon'' named ''P. vexillarius'' based on fossil material from the locality of [[Elephant Hill (California)|Elephant Hill]] in [[California]], determining that it differs from ''Mammut'' by differences in the skull and that the etymology of the species name was made in honor of paleontological contributions by the [[Standard Oil Company]] of California.<ref name="vexillarius">{{cite journal|last=Matthew|first=William Diller|year=1930|title=A Pliocene mastodon skull from California: Pliomastodon vexillarius n. sp|journal=University of California Publications in Geological Sciences|volume=19|issue=16|pages=336–348}}</ref><ref name="neogene"/>


In 1933, [[Childs Frick]] named the species ''Mastodon raki'' from the locality of [[Truth or Consequences, New Mexico|Truth or Consequences]], [[New Mexico]] based on differences on the [[heel]] and M<sub>3</sub> tooth from ''M.&nbsp;americanus'', otherwise having proportions similar to it.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Frick|first=Childs|year=1933|title=New remains of trilophodont-tetrabelodont mastodonts|journal=Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History|volume=59|pages=505–652}}</ref><ref name="neogene"/> In 1936, [[Chester Stock]] published the species name ''Pliomastodon nevadanus'' based on fossils from the Thousand Creek Beds of northwestern Nevada.<ref name="nevadanum">{{cite journal|last=Stock|first=Chester|year=1936|title=A Pliomastodon skull from the Thousand Creek beds, northwestern Nevada|journal=Contributions to Palaeontology|volume=3|number=473|pages=35–39|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/322843#page/57/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1937, John R. Schultz created the species name ''Pliomastodon? cosoensis'', naming it after the [[Coso Range|Coso Mountains]] in [[Inyo County]], California where skull fossils were recovered.<ref name="cosoensis">{{cite journal|last=Schultz|first=John R.|year=1937|title=A late Cenozoic vertebrate fauna from the Coso Mountains, Inyo County, California|journal=Carnegie Institution of Washington Publications|pages=77–109|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/322907#page/95/mode/1up}}</ref>


In 1963, J. Arnold Shotwell and Donald E. Russell created another species ''Mammut (Pliomastodon) furlongi'', assigning it to fossils collected from the [[Juntura Formation]] of Oregon. The species name was created in honor of [[Eustace L. Furlong]], who made early fossil collections from the western side of the Juntura Basin.<ref name="furlongi">{{cite journal|last1=Shotwell|first1=J. Arnold|last2=Russell|first2=Donald E.|year=1963|title=Mammalian fauna of the upper Juntura Formation, the Black Butte local fauna|journal=Transactions of the American Philosophical Society|volume=53|pages=42–69}}</ref>


The genus ''Pliomastodon'' was synonymized with ''Mammut'' while ''Miomastodon'' was synonymized with ''Zygolophodon'' by [[Jeheskel Shoshani]] and [[Pascal Tassy]] in a 1996 appendix,<ref>{{cite book|editor-last1=Shoshani|editor-first1=Jeheskel|editor-last2=Tassy|editor-first2=Pascal|year=1996|title=The Proboscidea: Evolution and Palaeoecology of Elephants and Their Relatives|section=Appendix B|publisher=Oxford University Press|pages=352–353|isbn=978-0-19-854652-8}}</ref> a view that was followed by other authors in later years.<ref name="tertiary">{{cite book|editor-last1=Janis|editor-first1=Christine M.|editor-last2=Scott|editor-first2=Kathleen M.|editor-last3=Jacobs|editor-first3=Louis L.|last1=Lambert|first1=W. David|last2=Shoshani|first2=Jeheskel|year=1998|title=Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America: Volume 1, Terrestrial Carnivores, Ungulates, and Ungulate like Mammals|section=Proboscidea|publisher=Cambridge University Press, New York|pages=606–621}}</ref><ref name="pacificum">{{cite journal|last1=Dooley Jr.|first1=Alton C.|last2=Scott|first2=Eric|last3=Green|first3=Jeremy|last4=Springer|first4=Kathleen B.|last5=Dooley|first5=Brett S.|last6=Smith|first6=Gregory James|year=2019|title=Mammut pacificus sp. nov., a newly recognized species of mastodon from the Pleistocene of western North America|journal=PeerJ|volume=7|pages=e6614 |doi=10.7717/peerj.6614|doi-access=free|pmid=30944777 |pmc=6441323 }}</ref><ref name="neogene"/>


In 2019, Alton C. Dooley Jr. et al. established ''Mammut pacificus'' based on fossils collected from the [[Diamond Valley Lake]] in [[Hemet, California|Hemet]], California. They also stated that ''M. oregonense'' is a ''[[nomen dubium]]'' and that further analysis needs to be done to confirm whether or not ''M. furlongi'' belongs to ''Zygolophodon'' instead.<ref name="pacificum"/>


In 2023, Wighart von Koenigswald et al. reviewed the North American species of ''Zygolophodon'' and ''Mammut''. They synonymized ''P. adamsi'' and ''P. sellardsi'' with ''Mammut matthewi'' and emended ''M. nevadanus'' and ''M. pacificus'' to ''M. nevadanum'' and ''M. pacificum'', respectively. They also said that they were uncertain of the taxonomic status of ''M. furlongi'', specifically whether or not it was a variant of [[sexual dimorphism]] of ''Z. proavus''. Some authors have considered ''M. nevadanum'' to be synonymous with ''M. matthewi'' while others had retained validity of the species name.<ref name="neogene"/><ref name="pacificum"/>


Several mammutid species outside of North America are classified to ''Mammut'' (or "''Pliomastodon''"), namely ''M. borsoni'', ''M. obliquelophus'', ''M. zhupengensis'', and ''M. lufugense'' (possibly synonymous with ''M. obliquelophus'').<ref name="borsoni">{{cite journal|last1=von Koenigswald|first1=Wighart|last2=Březina|first2=Jakub|last3=Werneburg|first3=Ralf|last4=Göhlich|first4=Ursula B.|year=2022|title=A partial skeleton of "Mammut" borsoni (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Pliocene of Kaltensundheim (Germany)|journal=Palaeontologia Electronica|number=25.1.a10|doi=10.26879/1188|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="obliquelophus">{{cite journal|last1=Yaghoubi|first1=Sadaf|last2=Ashouri|first2=Ali Reza|last3=Ataabadi|first3=Majid Mirzaie|last4=Ghaderi|first4=Abbas|year=2023|title=First true mastodon from the Late Miocene of Western Asia|journal=Research Square|doi=10.21203/rs.3.rs-3046011/v1}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Shiqi|first1=Wang|last2=Chun-Xiao|first2=Li|last3=Xiao-Xiao|first3=Zhang|year=2021|title=On the scientific names of mastodont taxa: nomenclature, Chinese translation, and taxonomic problems|journal=Vertebrata PalAsiatica|volume=59|issue=4|pages=295–332|doi=10.19615/j.cnki.2096-9899.210728}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Wang|first=Shiqi|year=2023|title=中国新近纪大型植食性哺乳动物演化和生物地层|journal=Quaternary Studies|volume=43|number=3|pages=637–672|doi=10.11928/j.issn.1001-7410.2023.03.01}}</ref> Recent research such as that of von Koenigswald et al. in 2023 warned that the genus ''Mammut'' should be carefully used for non-North American species.<ref name="neogene"/>


=== Classification and evolution ===
[[File:Johann Friedrich Blumenbach.jpg|thumb|left|Portrait of [[Johann Friedrich Blumenbach]], who erected the genus ''Mammut'' in 1799]]
''Mammut'' is the [[type genus]] of the [[Mammutidae]], the sole family of the [[elephantimorph]] clade [[Mammutida]] (the other elephantimorph clade is [[Elephantida]]). The Mammutidae is characterized by molars with zygodont-form crests, which have remained morphologically conservative throughout the evolutionary history of the family. ''Mammut'' is considered to be a derived genus of the family because of strong zygodont development.<ref name="greece">{{cite book|editor-last=Vlachos|editor-first=Evangelos|last1=Konidaris|first1=George E.|last2=Tsoukala|first2=Evangelia|year=2021|title=Fossil Vertebrates of Greece Vol. 1: Basal vertebrates, Amphibians, Reptiles, Afrotherians, Glires, and Primates|chapter=The Fossil Record of the Neogene Proboscidea (Mammalia) in Greece|publisher=Springer Cham|volume=1|pages=299–344|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-68398-6_12|isbn=978-3-030-68397-9 }}</ref> As a family of the Elephantimorpha clade, it is only distantly related to the [[Deinotheriidae]] due to major differences in dentition and emergence of adult teeth.<ref name="sanders"/> The Mammutidae is identified as a [[monophyletic]] clade, meaning that it did not leave any derived descendant groups in its evolutionary history.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Shi-Qi|first1=Wang|last2=Yu|first2=Li|last3=Duangkrayom|first3=Jaroon|last4=Shao-Kun|first4=Chen|last5=Wen|first5=He|last6=Shan-Qui|first6=Shen|year=2017|title=Early Mammut from the Upper Miocene of northern China, and its implications for the evolution and differentiation of Mammutidae|journal=Vertebrata PalAsiatica|volume=55|issue=3|pages=233–256|url=https://chinaxiv.org/user/view.htm?uuid=ea7f7df31b0a4d62a991311874964ed9&filetype=pdf}}</ref> The monophyly of the Mammutidae makes it differ from the Elephantida, where the [[Gomphotheriidae]] is [[paraphyletic]] (or ancestral to more derived descendant groups in the cladistic sense) in relation to the derived [[elephantoid]] families [[Stegodontidae]] and [[Elephantidae]] (elephants, mammoths, and relatives).<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mothé|first1=Dimila|last2=Avilla|first2=Leonardo S.|last3=Cozzuol|first3=Mario A.|year=2012|title=The South American Gomphotheres (Mammalia, Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae): Taxonomy, Phylogeny, and Biogeography|journal=Journal of Mammalian Evolution|volume=20|pages=23–32|doi=10.1007/s10914-012-9192-3}}</ref>


Although the separation of the Mammutida and Elephantida is strongly supported based on morphological differences, their origins within the late [[Paleogene]] remain uncertain. One hypothesis asserts that the Elephantimorpha is monophyletic if the primitive [[Elephantiformes]] genus ''[[Phiomia]]'' was truly ancestral to both the Elephantida and Mammutida. An alternate hypothesis suggests that the Elephantimorpha is diphyletic because ''Phiomia'' is ancestral to gomphotheres while ''[[Palaeomastodon]]'' is ancestral to mammutids.<ref name="sanders">{{cite book|last=Sanders|first=William J.|year=2023|title=Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea|chapter=Chapter 1: Context of African Proboscidean Evolution|publisher=CRC Press|pages=1–17|doi=10.1201/b20016-1}}</ref> The earliest undisputed mammutid genus ''[[Losodokodon]]'' is recorded in [[Kenya]], Africa and firmly establishes the earliest presence of mammutids in the late [[Oligocene]] (~27-24 Ma). The Mammutidae, like other Paleogene proboscideans, was therefore an endemic radiation within the continent akin to other endemic mammals like [[arsinoithere]]s, [[hyracoid]]s, and [[catarrhine]] [[primates]] plus non-endemics such as [[anthracothere]]s and [[hyaenodont]]s.<ref>{{cite book|last=Sanders|first=William J.|year=2023|title=Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea|chapter=Chapter 3:Late Paleogene: First Major Diversification and Adaptive Radiation of Proboscideans|publisher=CRC Press|pages=45–99|doi=10.1201/b20016-3}}</ref>


In the early [[Neogene]] phase of evolution, ''[[Eozygodon]]'' made an appearance in the earliest [[Miocene]] (~23-20 Ma) of Africa after ''Losodokodon''. ''Eozygodon'' was subsequently succeeded by ''Zygolophodon'' by the early Miocene, and the latter dispersed into Eurasia by around 19-18 million years ago, and into North America by the middle Miocene. The dispersal of mammutids between Africa and Eurasia may have occurred multiple times. The Mammutidae eventually went extinct in Africa prior to the late Miocene.<ref>{{cite book|last=Sanders|first=William J.|year=2023|title=Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea|chapter=Chapter 3: Early and Middle Miocene Diversification of Proboscideans and Dominance of Elephantimorphs|publisher=CRC Press|pages=101–148|doi=10.1201/b20016-4}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Jiangzuo|first1=Qigao|last2=Wang|first2=Shi-Qi|year=2023|title=Northeastern Asia humidification at the end of the Miocene drives the boost of mammalian dispersals from the Old to New World|journal=Journal of Palaeogeography|volume=12|issue=1|pages=50–68|doi=10.1016/j.jop.2022.09.002|doi-access=free|bibcode=2023JPalG..12...50J }}</ref><ref name="borsoni" />


''Mammut'' as currently defined ''sensu lato'' (in a broad sense) is most likely [[polyphyletic]] (comprising several unrelated groups). This is because the inclusion of Eurasian mammutid species into ''Mammut'' implies that they share a common origin with North American ''Mammut'', but this relationship has been doubted. As a result, these Eurasian species may belong to either other existing mammutid genera or entirely new genera. ''[["Mammut" borsoni]],'' the last Eurasian mammutid, became extinct during the earliest [[Pleistocene]], around 2.5-2&nbsp;million years ago.<ref name="borsoni" />


[[File:Mastodon mother & child.jpg|thumb|Skeletons of an adult and calf ''M.&nbsp;americanum'', [[La Brea Tar Pits|George C. Page Museum]]]]
The oldest evidence of mammutids in North America is of a fragmentary molar of ''Zygolophodon'' sp. from [[Massacre Lake]], Nevada, dating to 16.5-16.4&nbsp;Ma (during the [[Hemingfordian]] stage of the [[North American land mammal age]]s (NALMA)). The only definitively defined species of ''Zygolophodon'' from North America is ''Z.&nbsp;proavus'', which occurs in the [[Barstovian]] and [[Clarendonian]] stages. ''M? furlongi'' from the Black Butte in Oregon also dates back to the Clarendonian stage, but the affinities of the species remains unclear. If it truly is a species of ''Mammut'', then its earliest temporal range is recorded at about 10&nbsp;Ma. The earliest undisputed appearance of ''Mammut'' is of ''M.&nbsp;nevadanum'' from Thousand Creek Beds, dating back to the early [[Hemphillian]], or 8.0-7.1&nbsp;Ma. Historically, North American paleontologists considered that North American ''Zygolophodon'' evolved into ''Mammut'' in an endemic fashion while European workers generally thought that ''Mammut'' was a Eurasian immigrant that replaced North American ''Zygolophodon'' during the Miocene or [[Pliocene]]. Current evidence supports an endemic origin of North American ''Mammut'' from ''Zygolophodon'' without later migration because of the gradual appearance of ''Mammut'' morphologies and a lack of solid evidence that ''Mammut'' ''sensu stricto'' (in a strict sense) ever dispersed outside of North America.<ref name="neogene"/>


''M. matthewi'' is recorded from the late Hemphillian to early [[Blancan]] stages. Mammutid specimens of the Hemphillian and Blancan had typically previously been assigned to ''M.&nbsp;matthewi'', but this is seemingly the result of overreliance on stratigraphic positions to define taxa. ''M.&nbsp;vexillarius'', ''M.&nbsp;raki'', and ''M.&nbsp;cosoensis'' are definitively recorded from the Blancan, and ''M.&nbsp;raki'' specifically is thought to not be synonymous with ''M.&nbsp;pacificum''.<ref name="neogene"/> ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' (known popularly as an "American mastodon" or simply "mastodon") is also stratigraphically recorded first from the early Blancan of the [[Ringold Formation]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]]. The age of the formation where the mammutid specimen was found dates to about 3.75&nbsp;Ma. It is also known from multiple other Blancan sites such as Fish Springs Flat in Nevada.<ref name="neogene"/><ref>{{cite journal|last=Pasenko|first=Michael|year=2011|title=A Specimen of Mammut americanum (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from Yavapai County, West-Central Arizona|journal=Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science|volume=42|issue=2|pages=61–64|doi=10.2181/036.042.0201}}</ref><ref>{{cite thesis |last=Ruez |first=Dennis Russell, Jr. |year=2007 |title=Effects of climate change on mammalian fauna composition and structure during the advent of North American continental glaciation in the Pliocene |publisher=[[University of Texas at Austin|University of Texas]] |place=Austin, TX |url=https://www.proquest.com/docview/304831808|id={{ProQuest|304831808}} }}</ref> From the [[Irvingtonian]] to the [[Rancholabrean]] (from around 1.6&nbsp;million to 11,000&nbsp;years ago), only ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' and the newly appearing ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' are recorded, the former having an exceptional level of diversity based on abundant skeletal evidences from the late Pleistocene that is unusual for the typical mammutid fossil record.<ref name="pacificum"/><ref name="neogene"/>


The following cladogram defines the phylogeny of certain proboscideans, a majority known from [[endocasts]], including ''M.&nbsp;americanum'':<ref name="endocast">{{cite book |editor1-last=Dozo |editor1-first=María Teresa |editor2-last=Paulina-Carabajal |editor2-first=Ariana|editor3-last=Macrini|editor3-first=Thomas E. |editor4-last=Walsh |editor4-first=Stig |last1=Benoit|first1=Julien|last2=Lyras |first2=George A. |last3=Schmitt |first3=Arnaud |last4=Nxumalo |first4=Mpilo |last5=Tabuce|first5=Rodolphe|last6=Obada |first6=Teodor |last7=Mararsecul |first7=Vladislav |last8=Manger |first8=Paul |display-authors=6 |year=2022 |title=Paleoneurology of Amniotes: New directions in the study of fossil endocasts |chapter=Paleoneurology of the Proboscidea (Mammalia, Afrotheria): Insights from their brain endocast and labyrinth |publisher=Springer Cham |pages=579–644 |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-13983-3_15 |isbn=978-3-031-13982-6 |chapter-url=https://hal.umontpellier.fr/hal-04295685/file/Benoit-et-al-TEM.pdf }}</ref>


{{clade

|grouplabel1={{clade labels |label1="plesielephantiforms" |top1=9%

|label2="mastodonts" |top2=46%

}}

|label1=[[Proboscidea]]

|1={{clade

|1=''[[Phosphatherium esculliei]]'' [[File:Phosphatherium - head restoration.tif|50px]] |bar1=green

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Numidotherium koholense]]'' [[File:Numidotherium koholense skull.png|50px]] |bar1=green

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Moeritherium lyonsi]]'' [[File:Moeritherium NT crop.jpg|50px]] |bar1=green

|2={{clade

|1=[[Deinotheriidae]] [[File:Deinotherium12.jpg|40px]] |bar1=green

|label2=[[Elephantiformes]]

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Palaeomastodon beadnelli]]'' [[File:Palaeomastodon NT small.jpg|50px]]

|label2=[[Elephantimorpha]]

|2={{clade

|1={{clade

|label1=[[Mammutidae]]&nbsp;

|1={{clade

|1='''''Mammut americanum''''' [[File:Mammut americanum.png|50px]]

|2=''[["Mammut" borsoni]]'' [[File:Mammut borsoni from Milia.jpg|50px]]

}}

}}

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Choerolophodon pentelici]]'' |bar1=purple

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Gomphotherium augustidens]]'' [[File:Gomphotherium NT small (flipped).jpg|50px]] |bar1=purple

|2={{clade

|1=''[[Cuvieronius andium]]'' [[File:Cuvieronius hyodon2.jpg|50px]] |bar1=purple

|2=''[[Stegomastodon humboldti]]'' [[File:Stegomastodon sp.png|50px]] |bar2=purple
== Research history ==
|label3=[[Elephantoidea]]
=== Early history ===
|3={{clade
{{multiple image
|1=''[[Stegodon insignis]]'' [[File:Stegodon ganesaDB.jpg|50px]]
| align = left
|label2=[[Elephantidae]]
| image1= Annales du Muséum d'histoire naturelle (1804) (18410876301).jpg
|2={{clade
| image2= Palaeotherium minus Plagiolophus minor skeleton reconstruction.jpg
|1={{clade
| total_width = 425
|1={{clade
| total_height= 425
|1=''[[Mammuthus meridionalis]]'' [[File:Mammuthus meridionalis reconstruction 2.jpg|50px]]
| footer = 1804 sketch of a skeleton of ''Plagiolophus minor'' from the commune of [[Pantin]] (left) and an 1812 drawn skeletal reconstruction based on the Pantin skeleton and additional fossil material by [[Georges Cuvier]] (right)
|2=''[[Mammuthus primigenius]]'' [[File:202003 Woolly mammoth.png|50px]]
|3=''[[Mammuthus columbi]]'' [[File:Archidiskodon imperator121.jpg|50px]]
}}
|2=''[[Elephas maximus]]'' [[File:Indian elephant (PSF).png|50px]]
}}
|2=''[[Loxodonta africana]]'' [[File:African elephant (PSF).png|50px]]
|label3=''[[Palaeoloxodon]]''
|3={{clade
|1=''[[Palaeoloxodon antiquus]]'' [[File:Palaeoloxodon_antiquus_size_comparison.png|50px]]
|2=''[[Palaeoloxodon falconeri]]'' [[File:Palaeoloxodon_falconeri_Size_Comparison.svg|40px]]
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
In 1804, the French naturalist [[Georges Cuvier]], having established the genus ''[[Palaeotherium]]'' and some of its species (''P. medium'' and ''P. magnum''), recognized a third species ''Palaeotherium minus'' based on some postcranial fossils from the gypsum quarries of the outskirts of Paris (known as the [[Paris Basin]]), although he did not elaborate further on them.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1804|title=Suite des Recherches: Suite de recherches sur les os fossiles de la pierre à plâtre des environs de Paris. Troisième mémoire. Restitution des pieds. Première section. Restitution des différens pieds de derrière.|journal=Annales du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris|language=french|volume=3|pages=442–472|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/51193#page/1/mode/1up|archive-date=2023-07-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230727022652/https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/51193#page/1/mode/1up|url-status=live}}</ref> In a later journal of the same year, he described a nearly completely skeleton from the quarries of the [[communes of France|French commune]] of [[Pantin]], originally found by the French naturalist [[Auguste Nicholas de Saint-Genis]]. According to Cuvier, the quarry workers previously thought the skeleton to be of a ram, and it was presented as such in public newspapers. The French prefect [[Nicolas Frochot]] later acquired it and brought it to the [[National Museum of Natural History, France]], where Cuvier was then able to observe that it must have been a skeleton of a ''Palaeotherium'' species. He noted that the majority of the fossil bones were detached from others and/or damaged but that postcranial fossils such as [[scapula]]e, [[humeri]], [[femur|femora]], [[vertebrae]], and [[rib]]s were found. The naturalist also provided a figure of the skeleton within the journal.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Cuvier|first=Georges|year=1804|title=Suite de recherches sur les os fossiles de la pierre à plâtre des environs de Paris. Cinquiéme Mémoire. Sur les os du Tronc. Premiére Section. Description d'un squelette presque entier trouvé dans les carriéres de Pantin|journal=Annales du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris|language=french|volume=4|pages=66–81|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/51194#page/76/mode/1up}}</ref>

In 1812, Cuvier published published his drawing of a skeletal reconstruction of ''P. minus'' based on known fossil remains of the species including the mostly complete skeleton. He also suggested theoretical lifestyles of several ''Palaeotherium'' species. In particular, he suggested that ''P. minus'' resembled a [[tapir]], was smaller than a sheep, and was cursorial based on the slender morphologies of its leg bones. Such a behaviour and small size would have differed from other species of ''Palaeotherium'', several of which according to Cuvier had stockier limb bone builds. He also identified that ''P. medium'', ''P. magnum'', ''P. minus'', ''P. crassum'', and ''P. curtum'' were all tridactyl, or three-toed.<ref name="research">{{cite book|last=Cuvier|first=Geoges|year=1812|title=Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles de quadrupèdes: où l'on rétablit les caractères de plusieurs espèces d'animaux que les révolutions du globe paroissent avoir détruites|chapter=Résumé général et rétablissement des Squelettes des diverses espèces|volume=3|language=french|publisher=Chez Deterville|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/123872#page/1/mode/1up|archive-date=2023-07-31|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230731200748/https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/123872#page/1/mode/1up|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Rudwick|first=Martin J. S.|year=1997|title=Georges Cuvier, Fossil Bones, and Geological Catastrophes: New Translations and Interpretations of the Primary Texts|chapter=Chapter 6: The Animals from the Gypsum Beds around Paris|publisher=University of Chicago Press}}</ref>

[[File:Crystal Palace Palaeotherium.jpg|thumb|left|Sculptures of ''Plagiolophus minor'' (left) and ''[[Palaeotherium]] medium'' (right) as they appeared as part of the [[Crystal Palace Dinosaurs]] sculptures of the [[Crystal Palace Park]], 2009]]
"''P. minus''" (= ''Plagiolophus minor'') was amongst the fossil mammal species represented as sculptures in the [[Crystal Palace Dinosaurs]] attraction in the [[Crystal Palace Park]] in the United Kingdom, open to the public since 1854 and constructed by English sculptor [[Benjamin Waterhouse Hawkins]]. The ''Plagiolophus'' sculpture is smaller than the ''P. magnum'' and ''P. medium'' sculptures and is in a sitting position unlike the other two. The models' resemblances to tapirs reflected early perceptions that the palaeothere species resembled them in body plan appearances. Despite this, the sculptures differ from living tapirs in several ways, such as shorter plus taller faces, higher eye positions, slender legs, longer tails, and the presence of three toes on the forelimbs unlike the four toes of the forelimbs of tapirs.<ref name="crystal">{{cite book|last1=Witton|first1=Mark P.|last2=Michel|first2=Ellinor|year=2022|title=The Art and Science of the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs|chapter=Chapter 4: The sculptures: mammals|publisher=The Crowood Press|pages=68–91}}</ref>

Hawkins and other workers seemingly used Cuvier's research for reference to the anatomy of ''P. minor'' and reproduced its size and proportions accordingly. The ''P. minor'' sculpture, sheep-sized, originally had a short head that probably measured about {{cvt|1.3|m}} in length and had pointed ears, large eyes, long lips, a stocky proboscis, a muscular neck, and a short plus slender tail. It looks similar to the ''P. medium'' sculpture overall but lacks skin details. Although the original head's form is poorly known, it appeared to have been longer and more robust than that of ''P. medium''. Within the later half of the 20th century, the original head was lost and replaced with a head cast of ''P. medium''. Because the size and form of the head made it difficult to attach to the ''P. minor'' body normally, the back portion of the cranium was removed and the neck lengthened. This resulted in the sculpture appearing to look forward instead of upwards like before. The ''P. minor'' sculpture lost its head twice more, once recently in 2014 when its head was tossed into a lake of the Crystal Palace by an unknown criminal and had to be recovered.<ref name="crystal"/>

=== Later 19th century research history ===
[[File:Paloplotherium (Plagiolophus) Anoplotherium Palaeotherium fossils illustration 1848.jpg|thumb|upright=0.7|Cranial fossils of ''Plagiolophus annectens'' (fig. 1-4), ''[[Anoplotherium]]'' (fig. 5), and ''Palaeotherium'' (fig. 6)]]
In 1846, French palaeontologist [[Auguste Aymard]] recorded a [[mandible]] with teeth from the [[departments of France|French department]] of [[Haute-Loire]], noting that it was the approximate size of that of ''Palaeotherium curtum'' but had different [[molar (tooth)|molar]] morphologies from it and the small-sized "''P. minus''", establishing the name ''P. ovinum''.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Aymard|first=Auguste|year=1846|title=Essai monographie sur un nouveau genre de mammifère fossile trouvé dans la Haute-Loire, et nommé Entélodon|journal=Annales de la Société d'Agriculture, Sciences, Arts et Commerce du Puy|volume=12|pages=227–267|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6zU2AAAAMAAJ}}</ref> The year after in 1847, the French palaeontologist [[Auguste Pomel]] erected the ''Palaeotherium'' [[subgenus]] ''Plagiolophus'', which he reclassified ''P. minus'' to.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Pomel|first=Auguste|year=1847|title=Note critique sur le genre Paléothérium|journal=
Bulletin de la Société géologique de France|series=2|volume=4|pages=584–587|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/235518#page/598/mode/1up}}</ref> The genus name derives in [[Ancient Greek]] from πλαγιοϛ ("oblique") and λοφος ("crest") meaning "oblique crest".<ref name="etymology">{{cite journal|last=Palmer|first=Theodore Sherman|year=1904|title=A List of the Genera and Families of Mammals|journal=North American Fauna|issue=23|doi=10.3996/nafa.23.0001 |url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/83341#page/549/mode/1up|doi-access=free}}</ref>

British palaeontologist [[Richard Owen]] in 1848 wrote about a nearly complete lower jaw with both deciduous and permanent dental sets that was uncovered from the Eocene beds of [[Hordle]], England by Alexander Pytts Falconer, observing that it had one less [[premolar]] for a total of 3 of them than in other species of ''Palaeotherium'' and erecting the genus ''Paloplotherium'' based on the mandible. He then described a [[cranium]] belonging to ''Paloplotherium'' that similarly had nearly complete dentition but evolutionarily lost a premolar. After comparing the dentition to those of both ''Palaeotherium'' and ''[[Anoplotherium]]'', he determined that the dentition of ''Paloplotherium'' was similarly to that of the former but differed mainly by the absence of the first premolar. He wrote that the permanent [[dental formula]] of ''Paloplotherium'' is {{DentalFormula|upper=3.1.3.3|lower=3.1.3.3}} for a total of 40 teeth and erected the species ''Paloplotherium annectens''.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Owen|first=Richard|year=1848|title=On the Fossil remains of Mammalia referable to the genus Palæotherium, and to two genera, Paloplotherium and Dichodon, hitherto undefined: from the Eocene Sand at Hordle, Hampshire|journal=The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London|volume=4|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/114011#page/173/mode/1up}}</ref> ''Paloplotherium'' derives from the Ancient Greek words παλαιός ("ancient"), ὅπλον ("arms"), and θήρ ("wild beast") meaning "ancient armed beast".<ref name="etymology"/>

[[File:Paloplotherium Plagiolophus javali mandible.jpg|thumb|left|upright=0.8|Mandible of ''P. javali'']]
In 1852, German palaeontologist [[Christian Erich Hermann von Meyer]], recognizing ''Plagiolophus'' as a distinct genus and emending ''Plagiolophus minus'' to ''Plagiolophus minor'', erected the species ''P. fraasi'' based on fossils from the German locality of [[Frohnstetten]] originally found by [[Oscar Fraas]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=von Meyer|first=Christian Erich Hermann|year=1852|title=Mitteilungen an Professor Bronn gerichtet|journal=Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie, Paläontologie, Stuttgart|pages=831–833|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112176#page/855/mode/1up}}</ref> Fraas had studied fossils of [[Palaeotheriidae|palaeotheres]] from Frohnstetten since 1851, assembling a complete skeleton of ''P. minor'' using fossils from there in 1853.<ref name="skeleton">{{cite journal|last=Fraas|first=Oscar|year=1852|title=Beitrage zu der Palaeotheriumformation|journal=Jahreshefte des Vereins für vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemberg|pages=218–251|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/33511#page/236/mode/1up}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Fraas|first=Oscar|year=1869|title=Die Geognostische Sammlung Wurttembergs: Im Erdgeschoss Des Koniglichen Naturalien-Cabinets Zu Stuttgart Ein Fuhrer Fur Die Besucher Derselben|publisher=Self-published|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uoNi5Ht_c2kC}}</ref> In 1853, Pomel listed in the genus ''Plagiolophus'' multiple previously recognized species, namely ''P. ovinus'' (reclassified from ''Palaeotherium'' and emended from ''P. ovinum''), ''P. minor'', and ''P. annectens'' (by extent synonymizing ''Paloplotherium'' with ''Plagiolophus''). He also erected another species ''P. tenuirostris''.<ref>{{cite book|last=Pomel|first=Auguste|year=1853|title=Catalogue méthodique et descriptif des Vertébrés fossiles découverts dans le bassin hydrographique supérieur de la Loir|publisher=J.B. Bailliere|url=https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k97953010/f83}}</ref> In 1862, Swiss palaeontologist [[Ludwig Ruetimeyer]] established ''P. minutus'' based on dental remains from the Swiss locality of [[Egerkingen]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Ruetimeyer|first=Ludwig|year=1862|title=Eocaene Säugethiere Gebiet des Schweizerischen Jura|journal=Neue Denkschriften der Allg. Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für die Gesammten Naturwissenschaften|volume=19|pages=1–98|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/47574#page/485/mode/1up}}</ref>

Not all taxonomists agreed on ''Paloplotherium'' as a synonymous genus. In 1865 for example, French palaeontologist [[Jean Albert Gaudry]] recognized ''Paloplotherium'' as valid genus instead of ''Plagiolophus'', grouping ''P. minor'', ''P. ovinus'', and ''P. annectens'' into it and erecting another species ''P. codiciense''.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Gaudry|first=Jean A.|year=1865|title=Remarques sur les Paloplotherium|journal=Nouvelles archives du Muséum d'histoire naturelle|volume=1|pages=15–24|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/49413#page/23/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1869, Swiss palaeontologists [[François Jules Pictet de la Rive]] and [[Aloïs Humbert]] wrote that ''Palaeotherium'', ''Paloplotherium'', and ''Plagiolophus'' were all valid genera and erected two species for the latter: ''P. siderolithicus'' using fossil molars from a museum collection and ''P. valdensis'' based on a mandible that was smaller in proportion that that of ''P. minor''.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Pictet|first1=François Jules|last2=Humbert|first2=Aloïs Humbert|year=1869|title=Mémoire sur les animaux vertébrés: trouvés dans le terrain sidérolitique du Canton de Vaud et appartenant a la faune éocène: supplément|publisher=H. Georg|volume=2|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112849#page/9/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1877, French naturalist [[Henri Filhol]] erected ''Paloplotherium Javalii'' based on fossil jaws including that from the fossil collection of the French official [[Ernest Javal]], who he named the species after.<ref name="filhol">{{cite journal|last=Filhol|first=Henri|year=1877|title=Recherches sur les phosphorites du Quercy: etude des fossiles qu'on y rencontre et spécialement des mammifères|journal=Annales des sciences géologiques|volume=8|pages=160–167|url=https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k432584w/f164}}</ref> Ruetimeyer in 1891 erected another species ''Paloplotherium magnum'', stating that its size based on fossil material would have been that of ''Palaeotherium magnum''.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Rütimeyer|first=Ludwig|year=1891|title=Die eocaene Säugethiere-Welt von Egerkingen. Gesammtdarstellung und dritter Nachtrag zu den "Eocänen Säugethieren aus dem Gebiet des schweizerischen Jura" (1862)|journal=Abhandlungen der Schweizerischen paläontologischen Gesellschaft|volume=18|pages=61–62|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/265968#page/65/mode/1up}}</ref>

=== 20th-21st century taxonomy ===
[[File:Paloplotherium Plagiolophus minor dentition.jpg|thumb|Upper dentition (top) and mandible (bottom) of ''P. minor'']]
In 1901, researchers [[Charles Depéret]] and G. Carrière designated the species name ''Paloplotherium lugdunense'' to fossil material originally from the fossil deposits from the French commune of [[Lissieu]]. They said that the species was barely larger than ''P. codiciense'' and that it was also known from the locality of Robiac.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Depéret|first=Charles|last2=Carrière|first2=G.|year=1901|title=Sur un nouveau gisement de mammifères de l’Eocène moyen à Robiac, près Saint-Mamert (Gard)|journal=Comptes Rendus des séances de l'Académie des Sciences|volume=133|pages=616–618|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/28067#page/694/mode/1up}}</ref> The year after in 1902, Swiss palaeontologist [[Hans Georg Stehlin]] erected ''Paloplotherium Rütimeyeri'', but he only wrote that it was known from Egerkingen and did not elaborate further on it.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Dietrich|first=Wilhelm Otto|year=1922|title=Beitrag zur Kenntnis der säugetierführenden Bohnerzformation in Schwaben. 1. Ein vergessenes, neu erschlossenes Höhlenvorkommen terrestrischen Eozäns auf der Ulmer Alb.|journal=Zentralblatt für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie|volume=19|pages=209–224}}</ref> In 1904, Swiss palaeontologist [[Hans Georg Stehlin]] synonymized ''Paloplotherium magnum'' with ''Palaeotherium castrense'' and erected two species of ''Plagiolophus'': ''P. Nouleti'' from a fossil mandible from the French commune of [[Viviers-lès-Montagnes]] and ''P. Cartailhaci'' using fossils from the commune of [[Peyregoux]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Stehlin|first=Hans Georg|year=1904|title=Sur les mammifères des Sables bartoniens du Castrais|journal=Bulletin de la Société géologique de France|series=4|volume=4|pages=445–475|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/96943#page/527/mode/1up}}</ref> In one of his monographies, written the same year, Stehlin erected ''Palaeotherium Rütimeyeri'' with official fossil descriptions to replace the previous species name and synonymized ''Paloplotherium javali'' with ''Plagiolophus fraasi''. He also erected the species ''P. cartieri'' based on Egerkingen fossils, arguing that its size was between ''P. annectens'' and ''P. minor'' plus that its fossils resembled those of ''P. codidiciensis''.<ref name="catalogue">{{cite journal|last=Stehlin|first=Hans Georg|year=1904|title= Die Säugetiere des schweizerischen Eocaens. Critisher Catalog der Materialen. Zweiter Teil: Palaeotherium. — Plagiolophus. — Propalaeotherium|journal=Abhandlungen der schweizerischen paläontologischen Gesellschaf|volume=31|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/262221#page/1/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1917, French palaeontologist [[Charles Depéret]] erected the species ''P. Oweni'' (also recognizing it by the name ''P. annectens'' mut. ''Oweni'' from fossils in the commune of [[Gargas, Vaucluse|Gargas]], arguing that it was a more advanced species of ''Plagiolophus'' based on the size and morphology of its premolars. He also reclassified "''Paloplotherium''" ''codiciense'' into its own genus ''[[Paraplagiolophus]]''.<ref name="gard">{{cite book|last=Depéret|first=Charles|year=1917|title=Monographie de la faune de mammifères fossiles du Ludien inférieur d'Euzet-les-Bains (Gard)|publisher=Lyon A. Rey|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112216#page/74/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1965, French palaeontologist Jean Albert Remy erected the genus ''[[Leptolophus]]'', reclassifying ''P. nouleti'' into the taxon.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean Albert|year=1965|title=Un nouveau genre de Paléothéridé (Perissodactyla) de l'Eocène supérieur du Midi de la France|journal=Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, Paris|volume=260|pages=4362–4364|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273446412_Un_nouveau_genre_de_Paleotheride_Perissodactyla_de_l'Eocene_superieur_du_Midi_de_la_France}}</ref>


== Description ==
=== Skull ===
{{multiple image
{{multiple image
| align = left
| align = right
| image1= Palaeotherium foot bones.jpg
| image1= Mastodon skull 3-26-14 116.jpg
| image2= Plagiolophus annectens limb bones Deperet.jpg
| image2= Mammut pacificus holotype skull Dooley et al 2019.png
| total_width = 300
| total_width = 400
| total_height= 300
| total_height= 400
| footer = Sketches of limb bones of ''Palaeotherium'' and ''Plagiolophus minor'' (left) and an image of the limb bones of ''Plagiolophus annectens'' (right)
| footer = Articulated ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' skull at the [[Porter County Museum]] (left) and an unarticulated [[cranium]] plus tusks of ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' (right)
}}
}}
''Mammut'' is diagnosed and differentiated in terms of the skull from ''Zygolophodon'' as having a shortened bottom skull base (basicranium) and a high-domed [[cranium]]. It is also diagnosed as having an "elephantoid" [[mandible]] with a shortened [[mandibular symphysis]] (or "brevirostrine") and a protruding angular process in the mandible. The diagnosis accounts for both true ''Mammut'' species and ''Mammut'' species pending reassessments.<ref name="tobien">{{cite book|editor-last1=Shoshani|editor-first1=Jeheskel|editor-last2=Tassy|editor-first2=Pascal|last=Tobien|first=Heinz|year=1996|title=The Proboscidea: Evolution and Palaeoecology of Elephants and Their Relatives|chapter=Chapter 9: Evolution of zygodons with emphasis on dentition|publisher=Oxford University Press|pages=76–85|doi=10.1093/oso/9780198546528.003.0009|isbn=978-0-19-854652-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Konidaris|first1=George E.|last2=Aytek|first2=Ahmet I.|last3=Yavuz|first3=Alper Y.|last4=Tarhan|first4=Erhan|last5=Alçiçek|first5=M. Cihat|year=2023|title=First Report of "Mammut" (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Upper Miocene of Turkey|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=42|issue=6|doi=10.1080/02724634.2023.2222784}}</ref> The shortening of the symphysis is one of the major evolutionary trends observed in Neogene mammutids, making it critical in understanding the evolutionary transition from ''Zygolophodon'' to ''Mammut''. However, mandibular remains with characteristics of ''Mammut'' are not known from any anywhere within the Hemphillian, thus making the transition poorly understood.<ref name="neogene"/> It differs from ''[[Sinomammut]]'' by the shortened mandibular symphysis, although ''Mammut'' sometimes retained lower tusks unlike the other genus.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mothé|first1=Dimila|last2=Avilla|first2=Leonardo dos Santos|last3=Zhao|first3=Desi|last4=Xie|first4=Guangpu|last5=Sun|first5=Boyang|year=2016|title=A new Mammutidae (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Late Miocene of Gansu Province, China|journal=Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências|volume=88|issue=1 |pages=65–74|doi=10.1590/0001-3765201520150261|pmid=26839998 }}</ref>
In 1986, British palaeontologist Jerry J. Hooker listed ''Paloplotherium'' as a synonym of ''Palaeotherium'' and listed ''P. minor'', ''P. cartieri'', ''P. lugdunensis'' (emended name), ''P. cartailhaci'', ''P. annectens'', ''P. fraasi'', and ''P. javalii'' as valid species, although he doubted that ''P. javalii'' was distinct from ''P. fraasi''. He also erected ''P. curtisi'' using fossils from fragmentary cranial remains from the [[Barton Beds]] of the United Kingdom and recognized two subspecies: ''P. curtisi curtisi'' and ''P. curtisi creechensis''. The species was named after an individual named R.J. Curtis, who found the specimens for the former subspecies.<ref name="bartonian">{{cite journal|last=Hooker|first=Jerry J.|year=1986|title=Mammals from the Bartonian (middle late Eocene) of the Hampshire Basin, southern England|journal=Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Geology|volume=39|issue=4|pages=191–478|url=https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112470#page/373/mode/1up}}</ref> In 1989, palaeontologists [[Michel Brunet (paleontologist)|Michel Brunet]] and Yves Jehenne considered ''Paloplotherium'' to be distinct from ''Palaeotherium'' and erected for the former genus two additional species: ''P. majus'' from the fossil collections of the [[Quercy Phosphorites Formation]] and ''P. ministri'' from the French commune of [[Villebramar]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Brunet|first1=Michel|last2=Jehenne|first2=Yves|year=1989|title=Révision des genres Plagiolophus Pomel, 1847 et Paloplotherium Owen, 1848, Mammalia, Palaotheriidae du Paléogène d'Europe; intérêt biochronologique|journal=Annales de Paléontologie|volume=75|number=1|pages=23–52}}</ref> Remy in 1994, however, rejected the claim by Brunet and Jehenne that ''Paloplotherium'' was a distinct genus from ''Plagiolophus'', instead suggesting to convert the former into a ''Plagiolophus'' subgenus.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean A.|year=1994|title=Une faunule de vertébrés sous la base des Grès de Célas (Eocène supérieur) à St-Dézéry (Gard)|journal=Palaeovertebrata|volume=23|number=1–4|pages=211–216|url=https://www.palaeovertebrata.com/Articles/view/269}}</ref>


''M. americanum'' is diagnosed as having a long plus low skull and a shortened mandible.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bravo-Cuevas|first1=Victor M.|last2=Morales-García|first2=Nuria M.|last3=Cabral-Perdomo|first3=Miguel A.|year=2015|title=Description of mastodons (Mammut americanum) from the late Pleistocene of southeastern Hidalgo, central Mexico|journal=Boletín de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana|volume=67|number=2|pages=337–347 |doi=10.18268/BSGM2015v67n2a14|doi-access=free}}</ref> The [[frontal bone]] (or forehead) gives off a flattened appearance compared to extant elephants.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Knox|first1=S. Cragin|last2=Pitts|first2=Sue|year=1984|title=Excavation of a Mastodon at Vicksburg, Mississippi|journal=Mississippi Geology|volume=4|number=4|pages=1–12|url=https://geology.deq.ms.gov/Publications/Mississippi_Geology/Vol_4_4.pdf}}</ref> The skull of ''M. americanum'' has many [[plesiomorphies]] (or ancestral traits) that can be observed, namely the low and flat brain case, a slightly vertical basicranium, a narrow nasal aperture inlet of the nose with no step-like perinasal fossa, and a backside [[infraorbital foramen]]. At least some of these features are thought to have been acquired from ''Phiomia''. The nasal aperture of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' is oval, whereas that of the skull of "''M.''" cf. ''obliquelophus'' is more trapezoidal. ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' is also more derived based on the lack of a strong proximal constriction of the incisive fossa of the [[incisive foramen]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Shi-Qi|first1=Wang|last2=Yu|first2=Li|last3=Duangkrayom|first3=Jaroon|last4=Shao-Kun|first4=Chen|last5=Wen|first5=He|last6=Shan-Qin|first6=Chen|year=2017|title=Early Mammut from the Upper Miocene of northern China, and its implications for the evolution and differentiation of Mammutidae|journal=Vertebrata PalAsiatica|volume=55|issue=3|pages=233–256|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318588129}}</ref> ''M. americanum'' also has a high and narrow [[orbit (anatomy)|orbit]] with a somewhat rectangular outline, but it is less rectangular than that of ''Eozygodon''. The North American mammutid retains a primitive trait in the form of the orbit containing a [[lacrimal bone]] with a hole known as the lacrimal foramen. Unlike elephantidans, it has another primitive trait of a short and high-positioned [[temporal fossa]], a trait shared with ''Eozygodon''.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Tassy|first=Pascal|year=2018|title=Remarks on the cranium of Eozygodon morotoensis (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the early Miocene of Africa, and the question of the monophyly of Elephantimorpha|journal=Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève|volume=37|issue=2|pages=593–607|url=http://institutions.ville-geneve.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/mhn/documents/Museum/Revue_de_Paleo/593-607_Tassy.pdf}}</ref>
In 1994, Spanish palaeontologist Miguel Ángel Cuesta Ruiz-Colmenares erected two ''Plagiolophus'' species, the first being ''P. casasecaensis'', named after the Spanish municipality of [[Casaseca de Campeán]] within the [[Duero Basin]]. The second species he recognized was ''P. mazateronensis'', also from the Duero Basin; it was named after the Mazaterón province in the municipality of [[Soria]].<ref name="plagiolophinae">{{cite journal|last=Ruiz-Colmenares|first=Miguel Ángel Cuesta|year=1994|title=Los Plagiolophinae (Remy, 1976) nuevo rango (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) del Eoceno de la Cuenca del Duero (Castilla y Leon, España)|journal=Estudios Geológicos|volume=50|number=3–4|pages=253–279|doi=10.3989/egeol.94503-4323}}</ref> In 1997, another Spanish palaeontologist Lluís Checa Soler analyzed a dental specimen, stating his belief that it belonged to ''Plagiolophus'' and that the species would be defined by its smaller size and primitive characteristics compared to other species. He proposed the name ''P. plesiomorphicus'' but sought to not formally define it until more complete material assigned to the species was found.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Soler|first=Lluís Checa|year=1997|title=Los perisodàctilos (Mammalia, Ungulata) del eoceno catalàn|journal=Paleontologia i Evolucio, Sabadell|volume=30–31|pages=149–234}}</ref>


=== Endocast anatomy ===
In 2000, Remy described a skull of a male ''Plagiolophus'' individual that was within a sandstone block originally from the French department of [[Vaucluse]], assigning it the new species name ''P. huerzeleri''. The species was named after Johannes Hürzeler, Swiss palaeontologist and former director of the oteology department of the [[Natural History Museum of Basel]]. Remy had also emended ''P. majus'' to ''P. major'' and suggested both ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Paloplotherium'' as valid subgenera for ''Plagiolophus''<ref>{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean A.|year=2000|title=''Plagiolophus huerzeleri'', une nouvelle espèce de Palaeotheriidae (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) de l'Oligocène inférieur (Rupélien, MP 23), à Murs (Vaucluse, France)|journal=Géobios|volume=33|issue=4|pages=489–503|doi=10.1016/S0016-6995(00)80082-0}}</ref> Remy, in 2004, followed up by erecting ''P. ringeadei'', named after Ruch fossil deposit discoverer Michel Ringead and known by a skull of an adult female with cheek teeth, and ''P. mamertensis'', which was assigned a left [[maxilla]] with partial dentition from Robiac for a [[holotype]] specimen. He also listed ''P. minutus'' and ''P. plesiomorphicus'' both as ''[[nomen dubium|nomen dubia]]'' (doubtful taxon names). Remy reiterated both ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Paloplotherium'' as defined subgenera for ''Plagiolophus'' and created a third subgenus ''Fraasiolophus''.<ref name="plagiolophus">{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean-Albert|year=2004|title=Le genre Plagiolophus (Palaeotheriidae, Perissodactyla, Mammalia): révision systématique, morphologie et histologie dentaires, anatomie crânienne, essai d'interprétation fonctionnelle|journal=Palaeovertebrata|volume=33|number=1–4|url=https://palaeovertebrata.com/articles/view/38}}</ref>
[[File:Mastodon Mammut americanum brain endocast.png|upright=0.85|thumb|left|Illustration of the [[endocast]] of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' without any visible [[olfactory bulb]]s, 1906]]
''M.&nbsp;americanum'' is known by several brain endocasts stored in American museums, although they are seldom subjected to studies. In 1973, neuroscientist Harry J. Jerison studied an endocast of ''Mammut'', recording that it was elephantlike in both size and shape.<ref>{{cite book|last=Jerison|first=Harry J.|year=1973|title=Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;15: Special topics |publisher=Elsevier|pages=340–362|isbn=978-0-323-14108-6 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=20tlZXXWX-MC}}</ref> According to Shoshani et al. in 2006, the endocast of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' features the [[olfactory bulb]]s protruding in front of the [[frontal lobe]]. They also drew several proboscidean brains to scale, in which the brain of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' was much larger than that of ''[[Moeritherium]] lyonsi'' but smaller than that of the [[Asian elephant]] (''Elephas maximus'').<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shoshani |first1=Jeheskel |last2=Kupsky |first2=William J. |last3=Marchant|first3=Gary H. |year=2006 |title=Elephant brain: Part&nbsp;I: Gross morphology, functions, comparative anatomy, and evolution |journal=Brain Research Bulletin|volume=70|issue=2|pages=124–157|doi=10.1016/j.brainresbull.2006.03.016|pmid=16782503 }}</ref>


Julien Benoit et al. in 2022 explained that while the front tips of the olfactory bulbs of "''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'' are partially visible in the brain's back (or dorsal) area, its visibility in ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' is debated. Some authors had argued that the olfactory bulbs are visible in the brain's back area while some other authors did not portray them as being visible. The researchers confirmed based on one specimen that the olfactory bulbs are only partially visible in the brain's back area. They also observed that "''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'', despite weighing twice as much as ''M.&nbsp;americanum'', had a 30% lower [[encephalization quotient]] (EQ) compared to the other mammutid species, supporting the idea that the evolution of proboscidean encephalization is tied with phylogeny.<ref name="endocast"/> The Mammutida, as the most basal clade of the Elephantimorpha, has an EQ twice that of ''Moeritherium'' and ''Palaeomastodon''. The endocast volume and brain size of the brain ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' are larger than those of ''Stegodon'' but smaller than those of derived elephantids. It has an EQ that is higher than those of Paleogene proboscideans and "''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'' but lower than those of elephantids (extant and extinct) and stegodonts.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Benoit|first1=Julien|last2=Legendre|first2=Lucas J.|last3=Tabuce|first3=Rodolphe|last4=Obada|first4=Theodor|last5=Mararescul|first5=Vladislav|last6=Manger|first6=Paul|year=2019|title=Brain evolution in Proboscidea (Mammalia, Afrotheria) across the Cenozoic|journal=Scientific Reports|volume=9|number=9323|page=9323 |doi=10.1038/s41598-019-45888-4|pmid=31249366 |pmc=6597534|bibcode=2019NatSR...9.9323B }}</ref>
=== Classification ===
[[File:Huizingen Belgian draft horse 056.jpg|thumb|Horses and other [[Equidae|equids]] are commonly defined as the closest relatives of [[Palaeotheriidae|palaeotheres]] and are typically grouped within the superfamily [[Equoidea]]]]
''Plagiolophus'' belongs to the Palaeotheriidae, largely considered to be one of two major [[hippomorph]] families in the superfamily [[Equoidea]], the other being the [[Equidae]]. Alternatively, some authors have proposed that equids are more closely related to the [[Tapiromorpha]] than to the Palaeotheriidae. It is also usually thought to consist of two families, the [[Palaeotheriinae]] and [[Pachynolophinae]]; not all authors agree on the latter as a palaeotheriid subfamily, however.<ref name="yunnan">{{cite journal|last=Bai|first=Bin|year=2017|title=Eocene Pachynolophinae (Perissodactyla, Palaeotheriidae) from China, and their palaeobiogeographical implications|journal=Palaeontology|volume=60|issue=6|pages=837–852|doi=10.1111/pala.12319}}</ref> Some authors have also considered the Plagiolophinae to be a separate subfamily, while others group its genera into the Palaeotheriinae.<ref name="thrace">{{cite journal|last1=Métais|first1=Grégoire|last2=Sen|first2=Sevket|year=2017|title=First occurrence of Palaeotheriidae (Perissodactyla) from the late–middle Eocene of eastern Thrace (Greece)|journal=Comptes Rendus Palevol|volume=16|issue=4|pages=382–396|doi=10.1016/j.crpv.2017.01.001|bibcode=2017CRPal..16..382M |doi-access=free}}</ref> ''Plagiolophus'' has also been suggested to belong to the tribe [[Plagiolophini]], one of three proposed tribes within the Palaeotheriinae along with the [[Leptolophini]] and [[Palaeotheriini]].<ref name="plagiolophus"/> The geographic range of the palaeotheres were in contrast to equids, which are generally thought to have been an endemic radiation in North America. Some of the most basal equoids of the European landmass are of uncertain affinities, with some genera being thought to potentially belong to the Equidae.<ref name="hippomorph">{{cite journal|last1=Bronnert|first1=Constance|last2=Métais|first2=Grégoire|year=2023|title=Early Eocene hippomorph perissodactyls (Mammalia) from the Paris Basin|journal=Geodiversitas|volume=45|number=9|pages=277–326|doi=10.5252/geodiversitas2023v45a9|url=https://sciencepress.mnhn.fr/en/periodiques/geodiversitas/45/9}}</ref> Palaeotheriids are well-known for having lived in western Europe during much of the Palaeogene but were also present in eastern Europe, possibly the Middle East, and, in the case of pachynolophines (or pachynolophs), Asia.<ref name="yunnan"/><ref name="thrace"/>


The type species is also known from endocasts of [[Petrous part of the temporal bone|ear petrosals]].<ref name="endocast"/> According to Eric G. Ekdale, the ear petrosals of ''Mammut'' cannot automatically be distinguished from ''Mammuthus'' alone. The [[subarcuate fossa]] is absent from the cerebellar surface of the inner ear. The ear petrosals of ''Mammut'' are relatively incomplete, leaving several traits to be unable to be observed.<ref>{{cite thesis|last=Ekdale|first=Eric Gregory|year=2009|title=Variation within the bony labyrinth of mammals|publisher=University of Texas at Austin|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44794693}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Ekdale|first=Eric Gregory|year=2011|title=Morphological variation in the ear region of pleistocene elephantimorpha (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from central Texas|journal=Journal of Morphology|volume=272|issue=4|pages=452–464|doi=10.1002/jmor.10924|pmid=21284018 }}</ref>
The Perissodactyla makes its earliest known appearance in the European landmass in the MP7 faunal unit of the [[Mammal Paleogene zones|Mammal Palaeogene zones]]. During the temporal unit, many genera of basal equoids such as ''[[Hyracotherium]]'', ''[[Pliolophus]]'', ''[[Cymbalophus]]'', and ''[[Hallensia]]'' made their first appearances there. A majority of the genera persisted to the MP8-MP10 units, and "pachynolophines" (probably true palaeotheres) such as ''[[Propalaeotherium]]'' and ''[[Orolophus]]'' arose by MP10.<ref name="hippomorph"/><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bronnert|first1=Constance|last2=Gheerbrant|first2=Emmanuel|last3=Godinot|first3=Marc|last4=Métais|first4=Grégoire|year=2017|title=A primitive perissodactyl (Mammalia) from the early Eocene of Le Quesnoy (MP7, France)|journal=Historical Biology|volume=30|issue=1–2|pages=237–250|doi=10.1080/08912963.2017.1341502|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318400964}}</ref> The MP13 unit saw the appearances of later pachynolophines such as ''[[Pachynolophus]]'' and ''[[Anchilophus]]'' along with definite records of the first palaeotheriines such as ''Palaeotherium'' and ''Paraplagiolophus''.<ref name="iberian">{{cite journal|last1=Badiola|first1=Ainara|last2=Perales-Gogenola|first2=Leire|last3=Astibia|first3=Humberto|last4=Suberbiola|first4=Xabier Pereda|year=2022|title=A synthesis of Eocene equoids (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) from the Iberian Peninsula: new signs of endemism|journal=Historical Biology|volume=34|issue=8|pages=1623–1631|doi=10.1080/08912963.2022.2060098|bibcode=2022HBio...34.1623B |s2cid=248164842 }}</ref> The palaeotheriine ''Plagiolophus'' has been suggested to have potentially made an appearance by MP12. It was by MP14 that the subfamily proceeded to diversify,<ref name="aumelas">{{cite journal|last1=Remy|first1=Jean A.|last2=Krasovec|first2=Gabriel|last3=Lopez|first3=Éric|last4=Marandat|first4=Bernard|last5=Lihoreau|first5=Fabrice|year=2019|title=The Palaeotheriidae (Equoidea, Perissodactyla, Mammalia) from the Eocene fauna of Aumelas (Hérault department, France)|journal=Geodiversitas|volume=41|number=1|pages=525–585|doi=10.5252/geodiversitas2019v41a13}}</ref> and the plagiolophines were generally replaced but still reached the late Eocene. In addition to more widespread palaeothere genera such as ''Plagiolophus'', ''Palaeotherium'', and ''Leptolophus'', some of their species reaching medium to large sizes, various other palaeothere genera that were endemic to the Iberian Peninsula, such as ''[[Cantabrotherium]]'', ''[[Franzenium]]'' and ''[[Iberolophus]]'', appeared by the middle Eocene.<ref name="iberian"/>


=== Dentition ===
The phylogenetic tree for several members of the family Palaeotheriidae within the order Perissodactyla (including three outgroups) as created by Remy in 2017 and followed by Remy et al. in 2019 is defined below:<ref name="propachynolophus">{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean A.|year=2017|title=Critical comments on the genus Propachynolophus Lemoine, 1891 (Mammalia, Perissodactyla, Equoidea)|journal=Palaeovertebrata|volume=41|pages=1–18|doi=10.18563/pv.41.1.e3}}</ref><ref name="aumelas"/>
[[File:Aurora Mastodon Lower Jaw and Tooth.jpg|thumb|''M.&nbsp;americanum'' lower jaw and molars, [[Phillips Park (Aurora, Illinois)]]]]
[[File:Mastodon AMNH.jpg|thumb|249x249px|Front view of the "Warren mastodon" (''M.&nbsp;americanum''). Note the presence of a single vestigial mandibular tusk.]]
The family Mammutidae is defined by zygolophodont molars with compressed and sharp transverse ridges plus lack of accessory conules (smaller cusps). The intermediate molars, or the first two molars, are consistently trilophodont, or three-cusped. The dental morphologies of the clade Mammutida contrast strongly with most members of both the Elephantida ([[bunodont]] molars that evolutionarily convert to being thin and platelike) and the Deinotheriidae ([[tapir]]-like [[lophodont]] to bilophodont molars).<ref name="greece"/> The zygodont morphologies of the molars of mammutids were conservative, meaning that they hardly changed in the evolutionary history of the family.<ref name="neogene"/> Mammutids also exhibited evidences of horizontal tooth displacement where milk teeth were gradually replaced by permanent molars, mirroring elephantidans in an instance of [[parallel evolution]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Sanders|first=William J.|year=2017|title=Horizontal tooth displacement and premolar occurrence in elephants and other elephantiform proboscideans|journal=Historical Biology|volume=30 |issue=1–2|pages=137–156|doi=10.1080/08912963.2017.1297436|bibcode=2018HBio...30..137S }}</ref> The Mammutidae was not the only proboscidean family to have acquired zygodont crested molars, as Neogene species of the gomphothere ''[[Sinomastodon]]'' display moderate to weak zygodont crests. Pleistocene species of ''Sinomastodon'' do not display zygodont crests, however.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Parray|first1=Khursheed A.|last2=Jukar|first2=Advait M.|last3=Paul|first3=Abdul Qayoom|last4=Ahmad|first4=Ishfaq|last5=Patnaik|first5=Rajeev|year=2022|title=A gomphothere (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Quaternary of the Kashmir valley, India|journal=Papers in Palaeontology|volume=8|issue=2|doi=10.1002/spp2.1427|bibcode=2022PPal....8E1427P }}</ref>


The dentition of ''Mammut'' is diagnosed as being strongly zygodont and having no conules. The lophs extend to the long axis of the molars. The first two molars in the dental row have no more than three lophs while the third molars have four lophs plus a [[cingulum (tooth)|cingulum]]. The upper tusks (or upper [[incisor]]s) of ''Mammut'' differ from those of ''Zygolophodon'' by the generally larger sizes, tendency to either straighten or curve up, and the typical lack of any enamel band, although ''M.&nbsp;vexillarius'' retains a very narrow strip of enamel in the upper tusks. The lower (or mandibular) tusks tend to be reduced in comparison. ''M. nevadanum'' represents the earliest case of a North American mammutid species without any enamel band, although the possibility of it being worn off by wear cannot automatically be eliminated.<ref name="tobien"/><ref name="neogene"/> It differs from ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' and ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' by the nearly straight but downward-facing upper tusk, whereas males of the latter two species have large and upward-facing upper tusks while females had upward or straight but frontward-directed upper tusks.<ref name="pacificum"/> The reduction to loss of the lower tusks plus reduction of the mandibular symphysis of the derived Mammutidae and Elephantida is an instance of [[convergent evolution]], correlating potentially with the need to reduce heat loss due to the decrease of global temperature and humidity during the late Miocene and Pliocene.<ref name="endocast"/> Despite the reductions of the lower tusks, they were still present in Neogene species of ''Mammut''. Pleistocene ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' comparatively often lacks mandibular tusks, and ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' is always devoid of them.<ref name="neogene"/> The presence of lower tusks in ''M.&nbsp;raki'' separates it as a species from ''M.&nbsp;pacificum''. ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' differs from ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' in part by the narrower molars. Both species have broader molars compared to the "narrow-toothed" ''M.&nbsp;nevadanum'', ''M.&nbsp;raki'', and ''M.&nbsp;cosoensis''.<ref name="pacificum"/>
{{clade
|1={{clade
|1={{clade
|1=''[[Cardiolophus|Cardiolophus radinskyi]]''
|2=''[[Hallensia|Hallensia matthesi]]''
}}
|2=''[[Pliolophus|Pliolophus vulpiceps]]''
|label3=[[Palaeotheriidae]]
|3={{clade
|1=''[[Hyracotherium|Hyracotherium leporinum]]''
|2={{clade
|1=''"Hyracotherium" levei''
|2={{clade
|1=''"Hyracotherium" remyi''
|2={{clade
|1=''[[Orolophus|Orolophus maldani]]''
|2={{clade
|label1=''[[Pachynolophus]]''
|1={{clade
|1={{clade
|1=''P. sp.'' AUM
|2=''P. duvali''
}}
|2={{clade sequential
|1=''P. ruscassierensis''
|2=''P. eulaliensis''
|3=''P. livinierensis''
|4=''P. cesserasicus''
}}
}}
|2={{clade
|1={{clade
|2=''[[Propalaeotherium|Propalaeotherium hassiacum]]''
|1={{clade
|2=''[[Eurohippus|Eurohippus parvulus]]''
|label1=''[[Lophiotherium]]''
|1={{clade
|1=''L. sp.'' AUM
|2=''L. pygmaeum''
|3=''L. cervulum''
}}
}}
}}
|2={{clade sequential
|1=''[[Propalaeotherium|Propalaeotherium cf. gaudryi]]'' AUM
|2=''[[Propalaeotherium|Propalaeotherium gaudryi]]''
|3=''[[Propalaeotherium|Propalaeotherium sudrei]]''
|4={{clade
|1=''[[Propalaeotherium|Propalaeotherium isselanum]]''
|label2=[[Palaeotheriinae]]
|2={{clade sequential
|1=''[[Leptolophus|Leptolophus nouleti]]''
|2=''[[Plagiolophus (mammal)|Plagiolophus minor]]''
|3='''''Palaeotherium magnum'''''
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}
}}


Like its relative "''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'', ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' had very large tusks, with some records suggesting lengths of {{cvt|3|m}} and diameters exceeding {{cvt|200|mm}} were not unusual.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Larramendi|first=Asier|year=2023|title=Estimating tusk masses in proboscideans: a comprehensive analysis and predictive model|journal=Historical Biology|pages=1–14|doi=10.1080/08912963.2023.2286272}}</ref> In the skull of the earlier-appearing ''M.&nbsp;matthewi'', its [[dental alveolus]] of the right tusk from the locality of [[Hermiston]], Oregon suggests a tusk diameter of approximately {{cvt|200|mm}}.<ref name="neogene"/> Similar to modern elephants, ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' also has degrees of sexual dimorphism indicated by the sizes of the upper tusks. Adult males have tusks 1.15–1.25&nbsp;times as large as those of adult females, also reflecting general body size differences between the two sexes. The sizes of the tusk also depend on the ages of the individuals, as older individuals have larger tusk circumferences than younger ones. Adult individuals of comparable ages have similar tusk sizes, but older individuals do not necessarily have larger tusk sizes. Tusk sizes may have depended on external factors like nutritional stress, geographic location, and reproductive status.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Smith|first1=Kathlyn M.|last2=Fisher|first2=Daniel C.|year=2011|title=Sexual dimorphism of structures showing indeterminate growth: tusks of American mastodons (Mammut americanum)|journal=Paleobiology|volume=37|issue=2|pages=175–194|doi=10.1666/09033.1|bibcode=2011Pbio...37..175S }}</ref> The tusks of ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' are thought to have been smaller in length and circumstance than that of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' and may have similarly exhibited degrees of sexual dimorphism.<ref>{{cite conference|last1=Smith|first1=Kathlyn M.|last2=Stoneburg|first2=Brittney E.|last3=Dooley|first3=Alton C.|year=2023|title=Tusk morphology and sexual dimorphism in the Pacific mastodon (''Mammut pacificus'')|conference=Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 83rd Annual Meeting|pages=402|url=https://vertpaleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023_SVP_Program-Final-10032023.pdf}}</ref>
As shown in the above phylogeny, the Palaeotheriidae is defined as a [[monophyletic]] clade, meaning that it did not leave any derived descendant groups in its evolutionary history. ''Hyracotherium'' ''sensu stricto'' (in a strict sense) is defined as amongst the first offshoots of the family and a member of the Pachynolophinae. "''H.''" ''remyi'', formerly part of the now-invalid genus ''Propachynolophus'', is defined as a sister taxon to more derived palaeotheriids. Both ''Pachynolophus'' and ''[[Lophiotherium]]'', defined as pachynolophines, are defined as monophyletic genera. The other pachynolophines ''[[Eurohippus]]'' and ''Propalaeotherium'' consistute a paraphyletic clade in relation to members of the derived and monophyletic subfamily Palaeotheriinae (''Leptolophus'', ''Plagiolophus'', and ''Palaeotherium''), thus making Pachynolophinae a paraphyletic subfamily clade.<ref name="propachynolophus"/>


=== List of lineages ===
=== Postcranial skeleton ===
[[File:Cohoes Mastodon, New York State Museum.jpg|thumb|left|"Cohoes Mastodon" skeleton, [[New York State Museum]]]]
Unlike ''Palaeotherium'' where many species have subspecies, ''Plagiolophus'' only has one species with defined subspecies, ''P. curtisi''. All species of ''Plagiolophus'' are classified in one of three subgenera. The following table defines the species and subspecies of ''Plagiolophus'' and additional information about them:
As a result of proboscidean diagnoses focusing mostly on dentition, the postcranial anatomies of fossil proboscideans like ''Mammut'' are underrepresented in academic literature. Jennifer A. Hodgson ''et al''. compared the anatomies of ''Mammut'' and ''Mammuthus'', mentioning that their postcranial anatomies were studied previously by Stanley John Olsen in 1972 and recognizing that the two genera were only distantly related to each other.<ref name="osteology">{{cite book|editor-last1=Allmon|editor-first1=Warren D.|editor-last2=Nester|editor-first2=Peter L.|last1=Hodgson|first1=Jennifer A.|last2=Allmon|first2=Warren D.|last3=Nester|first3=Peter L.|last4=Sherpa|first4=James M.|last5=Chiment|first5=John J.|year=2008|title=Mastodon Paleobiology, Taphonomy, and Paleoenvironment in the Late Pleistocene of New York State: Studies on the Hyde Park, Chemung, and North Java Sites|chapter=Comparative osteology of late Pleistocene mammoth and mastodon remains from the Watkins Glen site, Chemung County, New York|publisher=Palaeontographica Americana|number=61|pages=301–367|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269094378}}</ref><ref name="olsen">{{cite journal|last=Olsen|first=Stanley J.|year=1972|title=Osteology for the archaeologist: the American mastodon and the woolly mammoth|journal=Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge|volume=56|number=3|pages=1–47|isbn=978-0-87365-197-4 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PoP_SFdFgQUC}}</ref> ''M. americanum'' is typically depicted as stocky based on postcranial evidence.<ref name="paleoart">{{cite journal|last1=Davis|first1=Matt|last2=Nye|first2=Benjamin D.|last3=Sinatra|first3=Gale M.|last4=Swartout|first4=William|last5=Sjӧberg|first5=Molly|last6=Porter|first6=Molly|last7=Nelson|first7=David|last8=Kennedy|first8=Alana A.U.|last9=Herrick|first9=Imogen|last10=Weeks|first10=Danaan DeNeve|last11=Lindsey|first11=Emily|display-authors=6|year=2022|title=Designing scientifically-grounded paleoart for augmented reality at La Brea Tar Pits|journal=Palaeontologia Electronica|number=25.1.a9|doi=10.26879/1191|doi-access=free}}</ref>


The [[vertebral column]] (also known as the backbone or spine) of ''Mammut'' is documented as having a highest point located in the shoulder's front like ''Mammuthus'', but the spines gradually decrease in length then increase slightly in the rear area. The number of ribs and vertebrae of ''Mammut'' is not well-documented in paleontological literature and may vary by individual. ''Mammut'' usually has 20&nbsp;[[thoracic vertebrae]] whereas ''Mammuthus'' usually has 19, but both have documented individuals with 18 of them. The reduction of thoracic vertebrae in ''Mammuthus'' is considered a derived trait also present in modern elephants. The "Watkins Glen mastodon," for example, has 7&nbsp;[[cervical vertebrae]], 20&nbsp;thoracic vertebrae, 3&nbsp;[[lumbar vertebrae]], and 5&nbsp;[[sacral vertebrae]]. They believed that ''Mammut'' could have had as many as 20&nbsp;[[rib]]s and that the back ribs were shorter and broader than that of ''Mammuthus''.<ref name="osteology"/> The tail of ''Mammut'' may have been made up of as many as up to 27&nbsp;[[caudal vertebrae]], suggesting that it had a long tail compared to gomphotheres and elephantids.<ref name="weight">{{cite journal |last=Larramendi |first=Asier |year=2015 |title=Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans |journal=Acta Palaeontologica Polonica |volume=61 |issue=3 |pages=537–574 |doi=10.4202/app.00136.2014|doi-access=free}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Comparative table of ''Plagiolophus'' lineages<ref name="robiac">{{cite journal|last=Remy|first=Jean-Albert|year=2015|title=Les Périssodactyles (Mammalia) du gisement Bartonien supérieur de Robiac (Éocène moyen du Gard, Sud de la France)|journal=Palaeovertebrata|volume=39|number=1|pages=1–98|doi=10.18563/pv.39.1.e3}}</ref><ref name="plagiolophus"/><ref name="evolutionary">{{cite journal|last1=Perales-Gogenola|first1=Leire|last2=Merceron|first2=Gildas|last3=Badiola|first3=Ainara|last4=Gómez-Olivencia|first4=Asier|last5=Suberbiola|first5=Xabier Pereda|year=2022|title=The evolutionary ecology of the endemic European Eocene Plagiolophus (Mammalia: Perissodactyla)|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=594|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2022.110962}}</ref>
|-
! Lineage
! Proposed subgenus
! MP unit(s)
! Author(s) of taxon
! Taxon publication year
|-
| ''P. annectens''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16, 17
| [[Richard Owen|Owen]]
| 1848
|-
| ''P. cartailhaci''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16
| [[Hans Georg Stehlin|Stehlin]]
| 1904
|-
| ''P. cartieri''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 12?, 13, 14
| Stehlin
| 1904
|-
| ''P. casasecaensis''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 13
| Cuesta
| 1994
|-
| ''P. curtisi curtisi''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16
| Hooker
| 1986
|-
| ''P. curtisi creechensis''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16
| Hooker
| 1986
|-
| ''P. fraasi''
| ''Fraasiolophus''
| 20
| [[Christian Erich Hermann von Meyer|von Meyer]]
| 1852
|-
| ''P. huerzeleri''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 23
| Remy
| 2000
|-
| ''P. javali''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 25
| [[Henri Filhol|Filhol]]
| 1877
|-
| ''P. lugdunensis''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 14
| [[Charles Depéret|Depéret]] & Carrière
| 1901
|-
| ''P. major''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 20
| Brunet & Jehenne
| 1989
|-
| ''P. mamertensis''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16
| Remy
| 2004
|-
| ''P. mazateronensis''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 16, 17
| Cuesta
| 1994
|-
| ''P. ministri''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 22
| Brunet & Jehenne
| 1989
|-
| ''P. minor''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 18, 19, 20, 21, 22
| [[Georges Cuvier|Cuvier]]
| 1804
|-
| ''P. ovinus''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 21
| [[Auguste Aymard|Aymard]]
| 1846
|-
| ''P. oweni''
| ''Paloplotherium''
| 18
| Depéret
| 1917
|-
| ''P. ringeadei''
| ''Plagiolophus''
| 21
| Remy
| 2004
|}


[[File:Age of the mastodon - side looking at cases - 27 FEB 0222 copy.jpg|thumb|''M.&nbsp;americanum'' skeleton, [[Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History]]]]
== Description ==
The [[scapula]] (or shoulder blade) of ''Mammut'' has a straight vertebral border, contrasting with a more concave vertebral border of ''Mammuthus''. Hodgson ''et al''. disagreed with the claim by Olsen in 1972 that the neck of the scapula is more constricted in ''Mammuthus primigenius'' than ''Mammut americanum'', since neither of the two ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' scapulae observed by the researchers have any high constriction there. The [[pelvis]] allows for identification of the sex of the species, as male ''Mammut'' individuals have a smaller [[pelvic outlet]] and wider [[ilium (bone)|ilium]] than female individuals.<ref name="osteology"/>
=== Skull ===
[[File:Plagiolophus annectens skull euzet.png|thumb|1935 photograph of ''P. annectens'' skull from [[Euzet|Euzet-les-Bains]]]]
The Palaeotheriidae is diagnosed in part as generally having [[orbit (anatomy)|orbits]] that are wide open in the back area and are located in the middle of the skull or in a slight frontal area of it. The [[nasal bone]]s are slightly extensive to very extensive in depth.<ref name="revisions">{{cite thesis|type=Inaugural Dissertation|last=Franzen|first=Jens L.|year=1968|title=Revision der Gattung Palaeotherium Cuvier, 1804 (Palaeotheriidae, Perissodactyla, Mammalia). Band 1|publisher=University of Freiburg}}</ref> ''Plagiolophus'' is diagnosed in part as having skull lengths that vary by species and range from {{cvt|170|mm}} to {{cvt|400|m}}. It is also defined by many other unique cranial traits, among them being the the skull's elongated facial region, especially in later species, that is more well-developed compared to that of ''Palaeotherium''. The maxilla, at the area with the canine, is wide; the muzzle in comparison is thin. The [[nasal notch]], found on the front lower edge of the maxilla, is generally deep, ranges from P<sup>1</sup> to M</sup>1</sup>, and has its lower edges formed from those of the [[premaxilla]] and maxilla. The [[zygomatic arch]] is narrow and elevates up to the back of the [[orbit (anatomy)|orbit]]. The [[mandibular symphysis]], the middle of the mandible, is elongated and contains projecting incisors. The horizontal ramus (or body) of the mandible is wide from front to back and has a prominent [[coronoid process of the mandible|coronoid process]].<ref name="plagiolophus"/><ref name="mazateron">{{cite journal|last1=Perales-Gogenola|first1=Leire|last2=Badiola|first2=Ainara|last3=Pereda-Suberbiola|first3=Xabier|last4=Astibia|first4=Humberto|year=2022|title=New Eocene fossil remains of Palaeotheriidae (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) from Mazaterón (Soria, Castile and Leon, Spain)|journal=Historical Biology|volume=34|issue=8|pages=1388–1398 |doi=10.1080/08912963.2021.2025363}}</ref> The subgenus ''Plagiolophus'' is defined by a a shallow nasal notch that is always located in front of P<sup>2</sup>, the lack of any [[preorbital fossa]] and a thinner body of the mandible compared to that of ''Paloplotherium''. ''Paloplotherium'' contrasts from ''Plagiolophus'' in having a deep nasal notch is always behind P<sup>2</sup> and a larger skull size, but the former also shares the lack of any preorbital fossae. ''Plagiolophus'' also differs from ''Paloplotherium'' in having a thinner horizontal ramus of the mandible. ''Fraasiolophus'' differs from the other two subgenera solely by the presence of a deep preorbital fossa.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


''Mammut'' has shorter and more robust limb bones compared to those of derived elephantids, probably the result of it retaining primitive anatomical traits. Both the [[humerus]] and [[radius (bone)|radius]] of the mammutid genus are robust for instance. The [[ulna]] has a slightly more developed [[olecranon process]] and a deeper [[trochlear notch]]. The [[femur]] is somewhat thick, short, and appears to have more expanded [[condyle]]s. Possibly, sexual dimorphism could be a factor behind the size of the femur itself. The [[tibia]] does not appear much different in both ''Mammut'' and ''Mammuthus'', whereas the [[fibula]] may have only had subtle and complex differences within the two genera. The bones within both the front feet and back feet have their own subtle and complex differences by genus, but both have smaller and more narrow hind feet than fore feet so that the latter bears more weight of the proboscideans.<ref name="osteology"/> In terms of postcranial anatomy, ''M.&nbsp;pacificum'' differs from ''M. americanum'' by the presence of six as opposed to five sacral vertebrae and the femur having a larger diameter of the middle shaft (or main cylindrical area).<ref name="pacificum"/>
{{multiple image
| align = left
| image1= Plagiolophus annectens cranium.jpg
| image2= Plagiolophus annectens mandible.jpg
| total_width = 450
| total_height= 450
| footer = ''P. annectens'' skull remains, held at the fossil collections of the [[Natural History Museum, London]]
}}
The skull of ''Plagiolophus'' appears slightly triangular in shape, has a maximum width either above or in front of where the mandible articulates with other skull bones, and has a wider front area compared to that of ''Leptolophus''. The skull length of ''Plagiolophus'' generally increases over time as part of an evolutionary trend of species. For instance, the skull of ''P. huerzeleri'', one of the latest species to have existed, has a more elongated and skull (making it more equinelike) than that of ''P. annectens'', an earlier-appearing species; the former species also has a longer anterior orbital region, a higher orbit position, implying different arrangements of facial muscles compared to the latter. The orbit of ''Plagiolophus'' is slightly behind the midlength of the skull, making its position more similar to that of the Palaeogene equid ''[[Mesohippus]]'' than the more forward orbit of ''Palaeotherium''. The nasal opening in ''Plagiolophus'' is positioned than that of ''Propalaeotherium'' and varies in form by species, generally becoming less hollow in later species contrary to the evolutionary trends observed in ''Palaeotherium''.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


=== External features ===
[[File:Plagiolophus minor-Montmatre-Paris-France.tif|thumb|''P. minor'' mandible, [[National Museum of Natural History, France]]]]
[[File:Mammut americanum Sergiodlarosa.jpg|thumb|left|Restoration of a mastodon with fur. The hypothesis that ''Mammut'' had thick coats of fur has been questioned.]]
The body of the premaxilla is elongated but low height and hosts all the incisors. The [[palatine bone]] stretches up to the [[lacrimal bone]]. The [[optic foramen]], located in the [[sphenoid bone]], is larger than that of ''Palaeotherium''; it is separated from other foramen like in other palaeotheres and stretches more forwards compared to equines. Those of ''P. annectens'' and ''P. minor'' pierce through the skull and connect with each other as part of a single optic canal path; those of ''P. cartieri'' and species originating from the [[Oligocene]] have thick [[septum|septa]], or anatomical walls that separate them and therefore lead to two different optic canals for each foramen. The [[sagittal crest]] (midline of skull's top) and [[nuchal lines]] are both well-developed, the latter displaying stronger [[sexual dimorphism]] in males. The [[post-orbital constriction]] occurs behind the [[postorbital process]] like in most other palaeotheres but unlike in ''Palaeotherium''.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>
The American mastodon (''M.&nbsp;americanum'') has typically been depicted as having shaggy and brown-colored fur in reconstructions, especially in over a century of [[paleoart]]. Despite this, there is little direct evidence supporting the idea that ''Mammut'' was actually covered in hair. Supposedly, only one find of fur belonging to the mastodon is of a skull with two small hairy patches of skin from the state of [[Wisconsin]] near the city of [[Milwaukee]]. These have only been described briefly in the original literature and have never been figured beyond one hair from a [[scanning electron microscope]] (SEM). K.F.&nbsp;Hallin and D.&nbsp;Gabriel in 1981 speculated that mastodons were indeed hairy but were more suited for semiaquatic lifestyles than tolerance of colder climates. Matt Davis ''et al''. in 2022 were tentative in accepting the source as evidence for hairiness, as they questioned whether ''Mammut'' needed thick coats for body warmth for their upper ranges at the [[Arctic]] and [[Subarctic]] and mentioned that it would not have needed them in subtropical climates like in [[Florida]].<ref name="paleoart"/><ref>{{cite conference|last1=Hallin|first1=K.F.|last2=Gabriel|first2=D.|year=1981|title=The first specimen of mastodon hair|conference=Geological Society of America 34th Annual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section, Abstracts with Program|volume=13|number=4|pages=199}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Hallin|first=K.F.|year=1983|title=Hair of the American mastodon indicates an adaptation to a semiaquatic habitat|journal=American Zoologist|volume=23|pages=949}}</ref>


Davis ''et al''. referenced that because [[Columbian mammoth]]s (''Mammuthus columbi'') were not thought to be hairy, it is unclear why mastodons would need thick coats in comparison. The former was typically depicted as hairless and the latter as hairy in paleoart, but the mastodon's preferences for closed or mixed habitats puts the speculations into question. They felt the need to portray the latter as hairy so that the average person could differentiate between the two species.<ref name="paleoart"/>
The postglenoid process, located in the [[squamous part of temporal bone|squamous part of the temporal bone]], is large in both ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Palaeotherium'' and has parallel front and back walls. The process is where the hollowing of the [[ear canal]]'s roof is located, taking different shapes in different species. The underside of the ear canal does not take a canalized form except in ''P. huerzeleri''. The [[petrous part of the temporal bone]] largely contacts the [[basilar part of occipital bone|basilar part of the occipital bone]] and is slightly hollowed.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


The concept of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' having thick coats of fur was also subjected to study by Asier Larramendi in 2015. He acknowledged that hair is important for thermoregulation in extant elephants but that there is a negative correlation between body size and hair density in mammals. Some mammals have broken this trend before, however, as woolly mammoths (''Mammuthus primigenius'') evolved to have thick coats of hair and a very short tail in response to cold climates. The idea that the American mastodon had hair is possible because of the seasonal climates, but there are few preserved soft tissues to support this idea, referencing the hairs found in Wisconsin. The supposed evidence of hair reported in the 19th&nbsp;century were actually just [[green algae]] filaments. He concluded that the long tail and large body mass both contradict the hypothesis that ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' was covered with thick coats of fur, considering it to be probably exaggerated.<ref name="weight"/>
The horizontal ramus of the manible is robust but varies in such based on factors pertaining to species morphology and sexual dimorphism, its underside being mostly convex but also straight at the front area. The vertical ramus is extensive like in ''Palaeotherium'' but is wider at the area of articulation. The [[condyloid process]] of the mandible, which articulates with the [[temporal bone]], is narrow, elongated, and sloped. The coronoid process of the mandible is wide like in ''Palaeotherium'' but may sometimes be wider; it is able to support [[temporalis muscle]]s well for chewing.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


=== Dentition ===
=== Size and weight ===
[[File:Plagiolophus annectens.JPG|thumb|left|''P. annectens'' mandible, [[Milan Natural History Museum]]]]
[[File:Mammut UMMNH.jpg|thumb|''M. americanum'' male ("Beusching mastodon," left) and female ("Owosso mastodon," right), [[University of Michigan Museum of Natural History]]]]
According to Larramendi, the mammutids of the genus ''Mammut'' were among the largest known proboscideans. This was especially the case with [["Mammut" borsoni|"''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'']], males of which are suggested to have had an average body mass of {{cvt|16|tonnes}} making it the largest known proboscidean alongside the extinct Indian elephant species ''[[Palaeoloxodon namadicus]],'' and one of the largest land mammals to have ever lived. ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' in comparison to "''M.''"&nbsp;''borsoni'' was much smaller, but it was still large in its own right compared to extant elephants. The American mastodon did not grow taller than living elephants but it was much more robust in body build than them, in part due to its very broad pelvis. The Warren mastodon produces a body mass of nearby {{cvt|7.8|tonnes}} and had a shoulder height measuring {{cvt|289|cm}}. This robustness is so pronounced that ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' individuals could have been up to 80% heavier than an elephant with the same shoulder height. Larger than average individuals may have possibly had a shoulder height of {{cvt|325|cm}} and weighed up to {{cvt|11|tonnes}}. 90% of fully grown male ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' individuals are suggested to have had shoulder heights ranging from {{cvt|275|cm}} to {{cvt|305|cm}} and body masses ranging from {{cvt|6.8|tonnes}} to {{cvt|9.2|tonnes}} in body mass, with an average fully grown ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' male estimated at {{cvt|2.9|m}} in shoulder height and {{cvt|8|tonnes}} in body mass. These estimates place males as larger on average in weight and shoulder height than those of both the living [[Asian elephant]] and [[African forest elephant]], and heavier but somewhat shorter than average males of [[African bush elephant]]s.<ref name="weight"/>
Derived palaeotheres are generally diagnosed as having selenolophodont upper molars and selenodont lower molars that are mesodont, or medium-crowned, in height. The canines strongly protrude and are separated from the premolars by medium to long [[diastema]]ta and from the incisors by short ones in both the upper and lower dentition. The other teeth are paired closely with each other in both the upper and lower rows.<ref name="revisions"/> ''Plagiolophus'' is defined by hypsodont (low-crowned) to semi-hypsodont dentition, the premolars being semi-molarized and the molars increasing in size from the front end to the back end of the dental row. The dental formula of ''Plagiolophus'' is {{DentalFormula|upper=3.1.3-4.3|lower=3.1.3-4.3}}, totaling at 42 to 44 teeth present.<ref name="plagiolophinae"/><ref name="plagiolophus"/> It differs from ''Leptolophus'' is appearing less lophodont and lesser degree of heterodonty in its cheek teeth. ''Plagiolophus'' also differs from ''Paraplagiolophus'' in having cheek teeth that appear narrower and more lophodont. The postcanine diastemata of ''Plagiolophus'' are longer than those of ''Palaeotherium'' but display varying degrees of such based on sex and species. The subgenus ''Plagiolophus'' differs from ''Paloplotherium'' by its longer postcanine diastemata and greater degree of hypsodonty, and the former has proportionally narrow and oblique lingual lophs in its upper cheek teeth compared to that of the latter. The latter also has a stronger degree of heterodonty from its premolars and smaller internal cusps compared to the former.<ref name="plagiolophinae"/>
[[File:Warren mastodon size comparison.jpg|thumb|Skeletal diagram of the "Warren mastodon" specimen, an adult bull of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' compared to a human]]
The size of the "Overmyer Mastodon," an individual skeleton recovered from the farm of Robert Overmyer northwest of [[Rochester, Indiana|Rochester]], [[Indiana]] in 1976, was estimated by Neal Woodman and Jon W. Branstrator in 2008. They estimated based on the length of the humerus ({{cvt|829|mm}}) that the shoulder height of the individual was {{cvt|230.2|cm}}, which they said was close to the average shoulder height of the species and comparable to a large female or small male. Similar to extant elephants, male American mastodon individuals tended to be larger than female individuals and tend to have larger and more strongly curved tusks, although the degree to which the body size is a factor in molar size is unclear.<ref name="overmyer">{{cite journal|last1=Woodman|first1=Neal|last2=Branstrator|first2=Jon W.|year=2008|title=The Overmyer Mastodon (Mammut Americanum) from Fulton County, Indiana|journal=The American Midland Naturalist|volume=159|issue=1|pages=125–146|doi=10.1674/0003-0031(2008)159[125:TOMMAF]2.0.CO;2}}</ref>


A relatively complete skeleton of ''Mammut'' sp. from the [[Gray Fossil Site]] in [[Tennessee]], which was first uncovered in 2015, dates to the latest Hemphillian, and has an elongated mandibular symphysis and large mandibular tusks, is thought to have been several tonnes larger than ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' and even several species of ''Mammuthus''. The specimens are still being prepared for further studies.<ref name="neogene"/><ref>{{cite conference|last=Hart|first=Brenna|year=2020|title=Manus biomechanics of a giant mastodon from the Gray Fossil Site suggests the ability to transverse uneven terrain in a karstic and mountainous refugium|conference=Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 80th Annual Meeting|pages=166|url=https://vertpaleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SVP_2020_Program-Abstracts-Volume-FINAL-for-Publishing-1.27.2021.pdf}}</ref>
While not all species of ''Plagiolophus'' are currently known by fossil incisors, the incisors of known species reveal a common trait of chisel-like shapes typical of the equoids. The outermost edges of the incisors are of identical lengths but take different forms from each other. The edges of the incisors are sharp and thin, giving them flat appearances. The frontmost incisors, the first incisors, have elongated labial (or front in relation to the mouth) faces that are equal in size to that of ''Palaeotherium'' but smaller than that of ''Leptolophus''. The lingual (back) face is shorter than the labial face, takes a concave shape, and is surrounded by a cingulum that ascends up to the outermost edge of the incisor. I<sub>1</sub> is inclined and appears to project forward. The second and third incisors have less symmetrical crown shapes compared to the first. Both I<sup>2</sup> and I<sub>2</sub> have somewhat oblique outermost edges. The third incisors appear to be the most differentiated incisor variants and are the smallest ones. The canines have labial surfaces that are convex compared to their lingual counterparts. The widths of the canines vary because of sexual dimorphism. While the upper canines appear to be inclined forward and outwards due to the positions of their roots, the lower canines and their crowns have straighter positions, although the crowns diverge as well.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


== Paleobiology ==
[[File:Plagiolophus minor.JPG|thumb|''P. minor'' dentition, Natural History Museum, London]]
=== Diet ===
The oldest species of ''Plagiolophus'' had four upper and lower premolars whereas later species have evolutionarily lost them. However, ''P. annectens'' has well-documented deciduous premolars, totaling at four in each of each first permanent molar before they are replaced by the three permanent premolars.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> Remy argued that the first deciduous premolar was replaced by the first permanent premolar based on juvenille dentition of ''P. annectens'', but Kenneth D. Rose et al. in 2017 argued that the demonstrated evidence did not prove Remy's hypothesis, meaning that it requires further research for proof. Most adult ''P. annectens'' individuals have no reported deciduous or permanent first premolars in either jaw, probably due to displacement by the second premolars.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rose|first1=Kenneth D.|last2=Holbrook|first2=Luke T.|last3=Luckett|first3=Patrick|year=2018|title=Deciduous premolars of Eocene Equidae and their phylogenetic significance|journal=Historical Biology|volume=30|issue=1–2|pages=89–118|doi=10.1080/08912963.2017.1291637}}</ref> The first premolar, when present, appears to be small, elongated, and narrow. The metacone cusp of P<sup>3</sup> evolutionarily shrunk over time, and P<sup>4</sup> at least sometimes lost its mesostyle cusp and often lost hypocone cusp. P<sub>4</sub> has a high talonid cusp but lacks any entoconid cusp; the entoconid of P<sub>3</sub> in comparison is short and a crescentlike shape. Within the molars, the ectoloph crest tends to stick out over the large cusps. The coronal [[cementum]] on the cheek teeth tend to thicken from the front end to the back end of the dental arch, and it tended to grow evolutionarily thicker over time. ''Paloplotherium'' sometimes lacks any coronal cementum. Within the upper molars, each ectoloph lobe has a middle rib developed on them. The paraconule cusp is separated from the protocone cusp, and the metaloph ridge only touches the ectoloph at advanced stages of dental wear. The crescents of the lower molars are separate from each other. Except for those in deciduous molars, the metastylid and metaconid cusps are nearly identical to each other. The internal [[cingulid]]s of the lower molars are reduced or gone.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>
[[File:Mastodon color.jpg|thumb|left|Restoration of an American mastodon without fur by [[Heinrich Harder]]]]
The zygodont molar morphologies of mammutids suggest that they consistently occupied adaptations to [[folivore|folivorous]] diets throughout their evolutionary history. This means that mammutids such as ''Mammut'', because they retained zygodont molars, were built to browse on higher vegetation and did not shift towards grazing specializations or consistent mixed feeding. The stomach contents of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' indicate that the species consumed [[spruce needle]]s, [[pine cone]]s, grass, and occasionally [[gourds]] plus [[vine leaves]]. Of note is that whereas mammutids of Eurasia went extinct by the early Pleistocene in association with more seasonal climates, ''Mammut'' survived in North America and became abundant, although the reason for the latter faunal trend does not have any offered explanation.<ref>{{cite book|editor-last1=Höhne|editor-first1=D.|editor-last2=Schwarz|editor-first2=W.|last=van der Made|first=Jean|year=2010|title=Elefantenreich: Eine Fossilwelt in Europa|chapter=The evolution of the elephants and their relatives in the context of a changing climate and geography|publisher=Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archälogie Sachsen-Anhalt & Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte, Halle|pages=341–360|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260869040}}</ref> The browsing specialization of ''Mammut'' is supported further by the [[coprolite]]s (or fossil dung) of ''M.&nbsp;americanum'', which are large-sized similar to extant elephants and predominantly consist of consumed woody contents but no grass.<ref>{{cite book|editor-last=Webb|editor-first=S. David|last1=Newsom|first1=Lee A.|last2=Mihlbachler|first2=Matthew C. |year=2006 |title=First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson site in the Aucilla river |chapter=Chapter&nbsp;10: Mastodons (Mammut americanum) Diet Foraging Patterns Based on Analysis of Dung Deposits|publisher=Springer|pages=263–331|doi=10.1007/978-1-4020-4694-0_10}}</ref> Of the Pleistocene New World proboscideans, the American mastodon appears to have been the most consistent in browsing rather than grazing, consuming [[C3 carbon fixation|C<sub>3</sub>]] as opposed to [[C4 carbon fixation|C<sub>4</sub>]] plants, and occupying closed forests versus more open habitats. This dietary inflexibility may have prevented them from invading South America during the [[Great American Interchange]], due to the need to cross areas of grassland to do so.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Pérez-Crespo|first1=Victor A.|last2=Prado|first2=José L.|last3=Alberdi|first3=Maria T.|last4=Arroyo-Cabrales|first4=Joaquín|last5=Johnson|first5=Eileen|year=2016|title=Diet and Habitat for Six American Pleistocene Proboscidean Species Using Carbon and Oxygen Stable Isotopes|journal=Ameghiniana |volume=53|issue=1|pages=39–51|doi=10.5710/AMGH.02.06.2015.2842|s2cid=87012003}}</ref>


The mastodon commonly browsed on woody plants (i.e. twigs) and fruits, occupying dense [[coniferous forest]]s made up of spruces (''[[Picea]]'') and pines (''[[Pinus]]'') within most of eastern North America. In Florida, it consumed twigs of the genus ''[[Taxodium]]'' as well as other woody plants and fruits. Based on [[isotopes of carbon|carbon isotopic analyses]] of mastodons in Florida, they had low δ13C values which indicate C<sub>3</sub> browsing specialization.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Green|first1=Jeremy L.|last2=Semprebon|first2=Gina M.|last3=Solounias|first3=Nikos|year=2005|title=Reconstructing the palaeodiet of Florida ''Mammut americanum'' via low-magnification stereomicroscopy|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=223|issue=1–2|pages=34–48|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2005.03.026
=== Postcranial skeleton ===
|bibcode=2005PPP...223...34G }}</ref> The dietary preferences of North American ''Mammut'' are thought to have mirrored those of the older ''Zygolophodon'', which may have preferred living in closed forests and consuming conifers to avoid active competition with the bunodont gomphotheres and lophodont deinotheres in the Miocene of Europe.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Březina|first1=Jakub|last2=Alba|first2=David M.|last3=Ivanov|first3=Martin|last4=Hanáček|first4=Martin|last5=Luján|first5=Àngel H.|year=2021|title=A middle Miocene vertebrate assemblage from the Czech part of the Vienna Basin: Implications for the paleoenvironments of the Central Paratethys|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=575|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2021.110473|bibcode=2021PPP...57510473B |url=https://ddd.uab.cat/record/241122 }}</ref> Most accounts of gut contents have identified coniferous twigs as the dominant element in their diet.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lepper|first1=Bradley T.|last2=Frolking|first2=Tod A.|last3=Fisher|first3=Daniel C.|last4=Goldstein|first4=Gerald|last5=Sanger|first5=Jon E.|last6=Wymer|first6=Dee Anne |last7=Ogden|first7=J. Gordon, III |last8=Hooge |first8=Paul E. |display-authors=6 |year=1991 |title=Intestinal contents of a late Pleistocene Mastodont from mid-continental North America |journal=Quaternary Research |volume=36 |issue=1|pages=120–125|bibcode=1991QuRes..36..120L|doi=10.1016/0033-5894(91)90020-6|hdl=2027.42/29243|s2cid=56160892 |url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/29243/1/0000299.pdf|hdl-access=free}}</ref> In addition to twigs and leaves, as indicated by the "Heisler mastodon" of [[Michigan]] and the "[[Burning Tree mastodon]]" of Ohio, mastodons may have also consumed swamp grasses (''[[Glyceria]]'' and ''[[Zizania]]'') as well as semiaquatic and aquatic plants such as sedge marshes (''[[Carex]]'') that surrounded lakes. They may have additionally ingested other aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates while consuming more than {{cvt|100|L}} of water from lakes a day.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Birks|first1=Hilary H.|last2=van Geel|first2=Bas|last3=Fisher|first3=Daniel C.|last4=Grimm|first4=Eric C.|last5=Kuijper|first5=Wim J.|last6=van Arkel|first6=Jan|last7=van Reenen|first7=Guido B.A.|year=2019|title=Evidence for the diet and habitat of two late Pleistocene mastodons from the Midwest, USA|journal=Quaternary Research|volume=91|issue=2|pages=792–812|doi=10.1017/qua.2018.100|bibcode=2019QuRes..91..792B }}</ref> The temporal shifts in molar and limb bone sizes in mastodon populations from Missouri and Florida as well as apparent differences in body size between western and eastern populations suggest that ''M.&nbsp;americanum'' was an adaptable species for local environmental shifts. Regardless, it depended heavily on forested environments similar to tapirs, so significant closed vegetation losses of any sort could have impacted them.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Green|first1=Jeremy L.|last2=DeSantis|first2=Larisa R.G.|last3=Smith|first3=Gregory James|year=2017|title=Regional variation in the browsing diet of Pleistocene Mammut americanum (Mammalia, Proboscidea) as recorded by dental microwear textures|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=487|pages=59–70|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.08.019|doi-access=free|bibcode=2017PPP...487...59G }}</ref>
[[File:Plagiolophus 2.JPG|thumb|upright=0.75|''Plagiolophus'' sp. limb, [[State Museum of Natural History, Stuttgart]]]]
''P. minor'' is known by a few incomplete skeletons, the first of which was studied originally by Georges Cuvier in 1804. According to Remy, the gypsum skeleton has been lost; he stated that the individual was a pregnant female. It was figured by Cuvier and later Blainville in 1839–1864, and the latter naturalist also figured skeletal elements from the French commune of [[Monthyon]] surrounding the skeleton whose whereabouts are also unclear.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> ''P. minor'' is also known from another assembled skeleton that was originally documented by Fraas in the later 19th century,<ref name="skeleton"/> although Stehlin referenced that Fraas paid little attention to studying the limb bones.<ref name="foot">{{cite journal|last=Stehlin|first=Hans Georg|year=1938|title=Zur Charakteristik einiger Palaeotheriumarten des oberen Ludien|journal=Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae|volume=31|number=2|pages=263–292}}</ref> Remy in 2004 noted that the postcranial bones of palaeotheriids are not as well-studied, meaning that future studies would require studying traits of postcranial fossils of palaeotheres at the genus level.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


As a result of the consistent browsing specializations of the genus, ''Mammut'' occupied an ecological niche that allowed it to actively [[niche partition]] (or occupy similar but niche ecological spaces) with other proboscideans of North America in the Neogene-[[Quaternary]]. In the Blancan, ''M.&nbsp;raki'' showed few morphological changes. In stark contrast, the contemporary gomphothere ''Stegomastodon'' showed progressive developments in response to increasingly arid and extensive grasslands from the Blancan up to the early Irvingtonian, with molar complexities resembling those of ''Mammuthus''.<ref name="stegomastodon"/> The morphology of ''Stegomastodon'' suggests thus that it was grazing-specialized.<ref name="stegomastodon2">{{cite journal|last1=Lucas|first1=Spencer G.|last2=Morgan|first2=Gary S.|last3=Spielmann|first3=Justin A.|last4=Pasenko|first4=Michael R.|last5=Aguilar|first5=Ricardo Hernán|year=2011 |title=Taxonomy and evolution of the Plio-Pleistocene proboscidean Stegomastodon in North America |journal=Current Research in the Pleistocene|volume=28|pages=173–175|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362887774}}</ref> A more well-known example of niche partitioning occurred between mastodons and mammoths within the later Pleistocene (Irvingtonian-Rancholabrean). Mammoths had a broader range of diets that allow them to occupy mixed feeding to specialized grazing habits whereas mastodons were specialized browsers that nonetheless still could have consumed a variety of plants. Mammoth diets varied by region whereas those of mastodons remain unclear still. Both at times overlapped in C<sub>3</sub> resource usages, although whether this represents browsing or grazing in the case of mammoths remains unclear.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Pardi|first1=Melissa I.|last2=DeSantis|first2=Larisa R.G.|year=2022|title=Interpreting spatially explicit variation in dietary proxies through species distribution modeling reveals foraging preferences of mammoth (''Mammuthus'') and American mastodon (''Mammut americanum'')|journal=Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution|volume=10|doi=10.3389/fevo.2022.1064299|doi-access=free}}</ref>
According to Remy, if the skeletal images as drawn by Cuvier and Blainville are accurate, then the back of ''P. minor'' appears convex, its peak being on par with the last [[thoracic vertebrae]] and its spinous processes of its [[lumbar vertebrae]] facing forward. Its arched back appears to be more similar to modern reconstructions of ''Propalaeotherium'' than to those of ''Palaeotherium''. The cervical vertebrae of both ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Palaeotherium'' are elongated. It tail, composed of [[caudal vertebrae]], has high spinous processes and appears pointed at its end. The tail is short in length and slender in spite of being made up of many vertebrae.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


=== Social behaviors ===
''Plagiolophus'' has several limb bone fossils attributed to it,<ref name="plagiolophus"/> although it is unclear as to whether the [[tarsus (skeleton)|tarsal]] and [[metatarsal bones|metatarsal]] bones from the Spanish locality of [[Roc de Santa]] are attributable to ''P. annectens'' or ''Anchilophus dumasi''.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Casanovas-Cladellas|first1=María Lourdes|last2=Santafé Llopis|first2=José Vicente|year=1981|title=Descripcion de elementos tarsales y metatarsales de Plagiolophus annectens y Anchilophus dumasi (Palaeotheriidae, Perissodactyla) del yacimiento de Roc de Santa (Area del Noguera Pallaresa)|journal=Paleontologia i Evolució|volume=16|pages=29–37}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Casanovas-Cladellas|first1=María Lourdes|last2=Checa-Soler|first2=Lluis|last3=Santafé Llopis|first3=José Vicente|year=1993|title=Esqueleto postcraneal de los Equoidea de talla media del yacimiento Ludiense de Roc de Santa (área del Noguera Pallaresa, Lleida, España)|journal=Revista Española de Paleontología|volume=8|number=1|pages=37–55|url=https://turia.uv.es/index.php/sjpalaeontology/article/view/24458}}</ref> It is tridactyl, or three-toed, like most species of the fellow palaeotheriine ''Palaeotherium'' and unlike the earlier pachynolophine ''Propalaeotherium''.<ref name="forelimb">{{cite journal|last1=MacLaren|first1=Jamie A.|last2=Nauwelaerts|first2=Sandra|year=2020|title=Modern tapirs as morphofunctional analogues for locomotion in endemic Eocene European perissodactyls|journal=Journal of Mammalian Evolution|volume=27|issue=2 |pages=245–263|doi=10.1007/s10914-019-09460-1|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331178250}}</ref> The [[scapula]] is forward-facing with a slightly narrow neck (its back being wider than its front) and a shortened upper edge. The [[iliac crest]] of the [[hip bone]] in ''Plagiolophus'' is concave in shape, contrasting with that of ''Palaeotherium'' which is convex. The foot bones of ''Plagiolophus'' are distinguished from those ''Palaeotherium'' based on its foot bones being more slender and its side toes being lesser-developed (or smaller and thinner) compared to its middle toe, suggesting that the digits are not well-supported anatomically. ''P. minor'' has particularly slender foot bones; the morphologies of the limb bones suggest that it was better-adapted to cursoriality than any species of ''Palaeotherium'' and other palaeothere genera.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> The cursoriality adaptation in multiple ''Plagiolophus'' spp. along with ''Palaeotherium medium'' is supported by the elongated and gracile [[metacarpal bones]] which are of equal proportional lengths.<ref name="forelimb"/> ''P. ministri'' has similarly tall and narrow [[talus bone|astragali]], suggesting that its limb bone morphologies could have been similar to those of ''P. minor''. The astragali of ''P. huerzeleri'' are slightly shorter and wider compared to those of ''P. ministri''. ''P. fraasi'' differs from the aforementioned ''Plagiolophus'' species by the side [[metapodial]] bones being visible from the foot's front and the neck of the astragalus being visible. The astragali of ''P. javali'' and ''P. annectens'' are both short and stocky. The limb bone morphologies of ''P. annectens'', ''P. fraasi'', and ''P. javali'' point towards short and robust legs that were less adapted towards cursoriality.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>
[[File:Mastdon Wheaton College.jpg|thumb|American mastodon ("Perry mastodon") skeleton with silhouette in back including the trunk, [[Wheaton College (Illinois)]]]]
American mastodons may have lived in herds, and it is possible that they were smaller than mammoth herds on average.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bonhof|first1=Wouter J.|last2=Pryor|first2=Alexander J.E.|year=2022|title=Proboscideans on Parade: A review of the migratory behaviour of elephants, mammoths, and mastodons|journal=Quaternary Science Reviews|volume=277|number=107304|doi=10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107304|bibcode=2022QSRv..27707304B |hdl=10871/128047|hdl-access=free}}</ref> Based on the characteristics of mastodon bone sites and strontium and oxygen isotopes from tusks, it can be inferred that, as in modern proboscideans, the mastodon social group consisted of adult females and young, living in bonded groups called mixed herds. The males abandoned the mixed herds once reaching sexual maturity and lived either alone or in male bond groupings.<ref name="buesching">{{Cite journal |last1=Miller |first1=Joshua H.|last2=Fisher|first2=Daniel C.|last3=Crowley|first3=Brooke E.|last4=Secord|first4=Ross|last5=Konomi|first5=Bledar A.|year=2022|title=Male mastodon landscape use changed with maturation (late Pleistocene, North America)|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|language=en|volume=119|issue=25|pages=e2118329119|doi=10.1073/pnas.2118329119|doi-access=free|pmid=35696566|pmc=9231495 |bibcode=2022PNAS..11918329M |issn=0027-8424}}</ref><ref name="Haynes">{{cite journal|last1=Haynes|first1=G.|last2=Klimowicz|first2=J.|year=2003|title=Mammoth (''Mammuthus'' spp.) and American mastodont (''Mammut americanum'') bonesites: what do the differences mean?|journal=Advances in Mammoth Research|volume=9|pages=185–204|url=http://natuurtijdschriften.nl/record/538680}}</ref> As in modern elephants,<ref>{{cite book|author= Sukumar, R.|title= The Living Elephants: Evolutionary Ecology, Behaviour, and Conservation|url=https://archive.org/details/livingelephantse00suku_0|url-access=registration|pages=[https://archive.org/details/livingelephantse00suku_0/page/262 262]|date= September 11, 2003|publisher= Oxford University Press, USA|isbn= 978-0-19-510778-4 |oclc= 935260783}}</ref> there probably was no seasonal synchrony of mating activity, with both males and females seeking out each other for mating when sexually active.<ref name="Haynes"/> Mastodons and other Pleistocene proboscideans may have used landscapes seasonally then migrated to suitable areas to mate or give birth. It is estimated that it may have taken 9 to 12 years for American mastodon females to become mature enough for reproduction, and they may have slowly reproduced single calves at a time.<ref name="buesching"/>


The social behaviors of male mastodon were inferred from one individual skeleton known as the "Buesching mastodon" (known informally as "Fred"),<ref>{{cite news|last=McNamee|first=Kai|date=7 July 2022|title=The story of Fred the mastodon, who died looking for love|work=National Public Radio|url=https://www.npr.org/2022/07/07/1109839726/research-news-science-nature-mastodon|access-date=2 February 2024}}</ref> which was recovered from a peat farm near [[Fort Wayne]], Indiana in 1998. The mastodon individual lived during the later part of the [[Bølling–Allerød warming]] period when human populations were present. The Buesching mastodon's tusks grew for about 30 years, and he lived for 34 years total, an approximate lifespan comparable to other males. He may have had engaged in aggressive behavior from [[musth]], although it may have been season-specific compared to living elephants given climatic conditions in North America. He likely engaged in [[intraspecific competition]] late in his life with other males during the spring or early summer, and he had tusk fractures and may have been severely wounded from a {{cvt|4|cm}} to {{cvt|5|cm}} puncture to the right-sided temporal fossa. Multiple other males are recorded to have had severe wounds resulting from male-male musth fighting.<ref name="buesching"/> The Buesching mastodon likely considered central Indiana his main home but went on seasonal migrations in his lifetime. He could have traveled hundreds of kilometers in the process and engaged with mates outside of the herd he was born from. Around his last moments, he probably wandered around in vagabondlike behaviors and spent little time in the area where his skeleton was found. His inferred behavior is quite similar to extant elephants.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Price|first=Gilbert J.|year=2022|title=Wandering mastodons reveal the complexity of Ice Age extinctions|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=119|issue=25|pages=e2118329119 |doi=10.1073/pnas.2118329119|doi-access=free |pmid=35696566 |pmc=9231495 |bibcode=2022PNAS..11918329M }}</ref>
=== Footprints ===
Palaeotheriids are known from footprint tracks assigned to [[ichnotaxa]], among them being the ichnogenus ''[[Plagiolophustipus]]'', named in 1989–1990 by R. Santamaria et al. and suggested to have belonged to ''Plagiolophus''. The ichonogenus is dated to the early Oligocene of Spain and may originated from the locality of [[Montfalco d'Agramunt]], which the sole species name ''Plagiolophustipus montfalcoensis'' derives from. As a tridactyl footprint, it is diagnosed as having a middle digit that is much longer and wider than its two somewhat assymetrical side digits. The ichonospecies measures between {{cvt|5|cm}} and {{cvt|6|cm}} total. The assignment of the ichnogenus to ''Plagiolophus'' is based on its middle digit being longer and wider than the other digits unlike that of ''Palaeotherium'' which has roughly equal sizes in all three of its toes.<ref name="plagiolophustipus">{{cite journal|last1=Santamaria|first1=R.|last2=Gregorio|first2=López|last3=Casanovas-Cladellas|first3=María Lourdes|year=1989–1990|title=Nuevos yacimientos con icnitas de mamíferos del Oligoceno de los alrededores de Agramunt (Lleida, España)|journal=Paleontologia i Evolució|number=23|pages=141–152}}</ref>


== Paleoecology ==
By extent, the ichnogenus ''[[Palaeotheriipus]]'', assigned to ''Palaeotherium'', differs from ''Plagiolophustipus'' by its smaller and wider digits. ''[[Lophiopus]]'', likely produced by ''[[Lophiodon]]'', has more divergent outer digit imprints, while ''[[Rhinoceripeda]]'', attributed to the [[Rhinocerotidae]], differs by its oval shape and varying from three to five digits.<ref name="iran">{{cite journal|last1=Abbassi|first1=Nasrollah|last2=Lucas|first2=Spencer G.|last3=Gholam|first3=Reza Zaare|year=2015|title=First report of Oligocene vertebrate footprints from Iran|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=440|pages=78–89|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2015.08.039}}</ref> ''Palaeotheriipus'' is known from both France and Iran whereas ''Plagiolophustipus'' is currently known from Spain.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Belvedere|first1=Matteo|last2=Fabre|first2=Emmanuel|last3=Pandolfi|first3=Luca|last4=Legal|first4=Stephane|last5=Coster|first5=Pauline|year=2023|title=Stepping into Oligocene. A reassessment of the early Oligocene mammal tracks from Saignon (SE France)|journal=Historical Biology|pages=1–17|doi=10.1080/08912963.2023.2286275}}</ref> It is possible that the ichnospecies is correlated with ''P. huerzeleri'' or another medium to large species based on their temporal ranges.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Montes|first1=Martín Linares|last2=Luzón|first2=Aránzazu|last3=Cuenca-Bescós|first3=Gloria|last4=Canudo|first4=José Ignacio|last5=Castanera|first5=Diego|year=2022|title=New mammal and bird tracks from the Lower Oligocene of the Ebro Basin (NE Spain): implications for the Palaeogene ichnological record|journal=Historical Biology|volume=35|issue=9|pages=1616–1636|doi=10.1080/08912963.2022.2104644}}</ref>
=== Distribution ===
[[File:Mammut pacificus Mammut americanum fossil distribution.jpg|thumb|North American map of the distributions of ''M. americanum'' (blue) and ''M. pacificum'' (red) fossil localities of the [[Irvingtonian]]-[[Rancholabrean]]]]
The range of most species of ''Mammut'' is unknown as their occurrences are restricted to few localities, the exception being the American mastodon (''M.&nbsp;americanum''), which is one of the most widely distributed Pleistocene proboscideans in North America. ''M. americanum'' fossil sites range in time from the [[Blancan]] to [[Rancholabrean]] faunal stages and in locations from as far north as Alaska, as far east as Florida, and as far south as the state of Puebla in central Mexico.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lucas|first1=Spencer G.|last2=Guillermo|first2=Alvarado Induni|year=2010|title=Fossil Proboscidea from the upper Cenozoic of Central America: taxonomy, evolutionary and paleobiogeographic significance|journal=Revista Geológica de América Central|volume=42|issue=42 |pages=9–42|doi=10.15517/rgac.v0i42.4169}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Polaco|first1=O. J.|last2=Arroyo-Cabrales|first2=J.|last3=Corona-M.|first3=E.|last4=López-Oliva|first4=J. G.|editor1-last=Cavarretta|editor1-first=G. |editor2-last=Gioia |editor2-first=P. |editor3-last=Mussi |editor3-first=M.|editor4-last=Palombo|editor4-first=M. R.|date=2001|title=The World of Elephants – Proceedings of the 1st International Congress, Rome October 16–20, 2001|chapter=The American Mastodon ''Mammut americanum'' in Mexico|publisher=Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche|pages=237–242|jstor=30055281 |isbn=88-8080-025-6|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/30055281}}</ref><ref name="neogene"/> ''M. americanum'' was most common in the eastern United States but rarer in the western US in comparison. ''M. pacificum'' is known across California and present as far north as southern [[Idaho]], but it was apparently absent from both the [[Sonoran Desert]] and [[Mojave Desert]] regions. The elevated-controlled distributions of coniferous forests within the [[Rocky Mountain]] region may have limited populations of ''Mammut'' compared to the other Plio-Pleistocene proboscideans.<ref name="pacificum"/> The easternmost range of the species was in what is now [[Montana]] in the Irvingtonian but may have been extirpated from the area as a result of [[Illinoian (stage)|Illinoian glaciation]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=McDonald|first1=Andrew T.|last2=Atwater|first2=Amy L.|last3=Dooley Jr.|first3=Alton C.|last4=Hohman|first4=Charlotte J.H.|year=2020|title=The easternmost occurrence of Mammut pacificus (Proboscidea: Mammutidae), based on a partial skull from eastern Montana, USA|journal=PeerJ|volume=8|pages=e10030 |doi=10.7717/peerj.10030|doi-access=free|pmid=33240588 |pmc=7676352}}</ref> An isolated record of ''M. americanum'' is known from [[Honduras]], where the genus is not recorded to have extended beyond.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Arroyo-Cabrales|first1=Joaquín|last2=Polaco|first2=Oscar J.|last3=Laurito|first3=César|last4=Johnson|first4=Eileen|last5=Alberdi|first5=María Teresa|last6=Zamora|first6=Ana Lucía Valerio|year=2007|title=The proboscideans (Mammalia) from Mesoamerica|journal=Quaternary International|volume=169–170|pages=17–23|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2006.12.017|bibcode=2007QuInt.169...17A }}</ref>


''M. matthewi'' is known by a wide distribution range, its westernmost range being in California from the [[Horned Toad Formation]] in the late Hemphillian.<ref name="neogene"/> It has also apparently been identified from the latest Hemphillian based on skull material from the [[Pascagoula Formation]] in [[Tunica Hills]], [[Louisiana]]. This suggests that ''Mammut'' already had an eastern range in the United States by the latest Miocene or earliest Pliocene.<ref>{{cite conference |last=White |first=Connor D. |year=2023 |title=Partial cranium and associated tusks of Mio-Pliocene ''Mammut'' (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from Pascagoula Formation in Tunica Hills, Louisiana |url=https://vertpaleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023_SVP_Program-Final-10032023.pdf |conference=Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 83rd Annual Meeting |pages=443–444}}</ref> Similarly, the same species is recorded from the Palmetto Fauna locality ([[Bone Valley Formation]]) in [[Brewster, Florida|Brewster]], Florida in the latest Hemphillian while ''Mammut'' sp. is recorded from the Gray Fossil Site in Tennessee.<ref name="neogene"/>
''Plagiolophustipus'' is also known by ''Plagiolophustipus'' ichsp. from the Spanish municipality of [[Mues]] in the province of [[Navarre]], dating to the Oligocene. It is similar to ''Plagiolophustipus montfalcoensis'' because of the presence of three digits, the middle one of which is longer and wider than the other two side digits. The undefined ichnospecies could potentially have belonged a small to medium-sized palaeothere such as ''Plagiolophus''.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Murelaga|first1=Xabier|last2=Baceta|first2=Juan Ignacio|last3=Astibia|first3=Humberto|last4=Badiola|first4=Ainara|year=1999|title=Icnitas de perisodáctilos en el Oligoceno de Navarra: posición estratigráfica y sistemática|journal=Geogaceta|volume=27|page=15–18|url=https://rabida.uhu.es/dspace/handle/10272/9955}}</ref>


The American mastodon was only present in the far north of North America during [[interglacial]] periods, with mitochondrial genome analysis suggesting that separate populations repeatedly colonised the region before becoming [[extirpated]] during glacial periods.<ref name="genomes">{{cite journal|last1=Karpinski|first1=Emil|last2=Hackenberger|first2=Dirk|last3=Zazula|first3=Grant|last4=Widga|first4=Chris|last5=Duggan|first5=Ana T.|last6=Golding|first6=G. Brian|last7=Kuch|first7=Melanie|last8=Klunk|first8=Jennifer|last9=Jass|first9=Christopher N.|last10=Groves|first10=Pam|last11=Druckenmiller|first11=Patrick|last12=Schubert|first12=Blaine W.|last13=Arroyo-Cabrales|first13=Joaquin|last14=Simpson|first14=William F.|last15=Hoganson|first15=John W.|last16=Fisher|first16=Daniel C.|last17=Ho|first17=Simon Y.W.|last18=MacPhee|first18=Ross D.E.|last19=Poinar|first19=Hendrick N.|year=2020|title=American mastodon mitochondrial genomes suggest multiple dispersal events in response to Pleistocene climate oscillations|journal=Nature Communications|volume=11|issue=1|page=4048|bibcode=2020NatCo..11.4048K|doi=10.1038/s41467-020-17893-z|pmc=7463256|pmid=32873779|doi-access=free}}</ref> A 2022 study of ancient [[environmental DNA]] from the [[Kap Kobenhavn Formation]] of northern [[Greenland]], dating the [[Early Pleistocene]], 2 million years ago, identified preserved DNA fragments of mastodons. This suggests that the mammutids ranged as far north as Greenland during optimal conditions. Around this time, northern Greenland was 11–19 °C warmer than the [[Holocene]], with a [[Taiga|boreal forest]] hosting a species assemblage with no modern analogue. These are among the oldest DNA fragments ever sequenced.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kjær|first1=Kurt H.|last2=Winther Pedersen|first2=Mikkel|last3=De Sanctis|first3=Bianca|last4=De Cahsan|first4=Binia|last5=Korneliussen|first5=Thorfinn S.|last6=Michelsen|first6=Christian S.|last7=Sand|first7=Karina K.|last8=Jelavić|first8=Stanislav|last9=Ruter|first9=Anthony H.|last10=Schmidt|first10=Astrid M. A.|last11=Kjeldsen|first11=Kristian K.|last12=Tesakov|first12=Alexey S.|last13=Snowball|first13=Ian|last14=Gosse|first14=John C.|last15=Alsos|first15=Inger G.|date=December 2022|title=A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA|journal=Nature|language=en|volume=612|issue=7939|pages=283–291|doi=10.1038/s41586-022-05453-y|pmid=36477129|pmc=9729109|bibcode=2022Natur.612..283K|issn=1476-4687}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Pappas|first=Stephanie|title=World's Oldest DNA Discovered, Revealing Ancient Arctic Forest Full of Mastodons|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/worlds-oldest-dna-discovered-revealing-ancient-arctic-forest-full-of-mastodons/|access-date=2022-12-08|website=Scientific American|language=en}}</ref>
=== Size ===
''Plagiolophus'' is characterized by the inclusion of small to medium-sized species, the skull base length ranging from {{cvt|140|mm}} to {{cvt|400|mm}} depending on the species. The length of the P<sup>2</sup> to M<sup>3</sup> dental row ranges from {{cvt|60|mm}} to {{cvt|121|mm}}. According to Remy, the basicranial (lower part of the skull) length of the Ma-PhQ-349 skull specimen of ''P. minor'' could have measured {{cvt|176|mm}} to {{cvt|179|mm}} long. Despite being a high, wide, and robust skull, ''P. minor'' is the smallest species of its genus, with the basal skull length being less than or equal to {{cvt|200|mm}} and the P<sup>2</sup> to M<sup>3</sup> dental row measuring {{cvt|69|mm}}. ''P. huerzeleri'' is mentioned to have been 20-25% larger than ''P. ministri'' with a basicranial length of {{cvt|350|mm}} and a P<sup>2</sup> to M<sup>3</sup> dental row length of {{cvt|100|mm}} to {{cvt|118|mm}}. The mandibular dental row of ''P. fraasi'' could measure {{cvt|90|mm}} to {{cvt|98|mm}} long whereas that of ''P. major'' could reach {{cvt|99|mm}} to {{cvt|109|mm}} long. The former species has an estimated skull length of {{cvt|300|mm}} while the latter's skull length could have measured {{cvt|350|mm}}. ''P. javali'' is known only from a male juvenile mandible with a dental row measuring {{cvt|121.2|mm}} long. With a potential adult skull length of about {{cvt|400|mm}}, ''P. javali'' is the largest species of ''Plagiolophus''.<ref name="plagiolophus"/>


=== Late Neogene-Quaternary North America ===
Remy in 2004 calculated that the smallest species ''P. minor'' could have weighed less than {{cvt|10|kg}}. He also calculated ''P. huerzeleri'' to have a body weight range of {{cvt|90|kg}} to {{cvt|110|kg}}. ''P. major'' has an estimated weight range of {{cvt|90|kg}} to {{cvt|110|kg}} while ''P. fraasi'' has an estimated weight range of {{cvt|50|kg}} to {{cvt|70|kg}}. ''P. javali'', as the largest species of ''Plagiolophus'', could have had a body weight of over {{cvt|150|kg}}. <ref name="plagiolophus"/> Later in 2015, he placed a body weight estimate of ''P. annectens'' at about {{cvt|50|kg}}, ''P. cartailhaci'' at {{cvt|99|kg}}, and ''P. mamertensis'' at {{cvt|77|kg}}.<ref name="robiac"/> Jamie A. MacLaren and Sandra Nauwelaerts in 2020 estimated the weight of ''P. minor'' at {{cvt|19.3|kg}}, ''P. annectens'' at {{cvt|34.8|kg}}, and ''P. major'' at {{cvt|78.9|kg}}.<ref name="forelimb"/> In 2022, Leire Perales-Gogenola et al. made five weight estimates of different populations of ''Plagiolophus''. They stated that ''P. mazateronensis'' from Mazaterón has a body weight of {{cvt|118.71|kg}}. According to the authors, ''P. minor'' from St. Capraise d'Eymet potentially weighed {{cvt|26.56|kg}}, and ''P. ministri'' from Villebramar weighed {{cvt|53.61|kg}}. They also said that ''P. annectens'' from Euzet weighed {{cvt|34.8|kg}} while the same species from Roc de Santa I measured {{cvt|40.6|kg}}.<ref name="evolutionary"/> The same year, Perales-Gogenola et al. estimated that ''P. mazateronensis'' has a weight estimate range of {{cvt|95|kg}} to {{cvt|130|kg}}.<ref name="mazateron"/>
[[File:Natural History Museum of LA Teleoceras.jpg|thumb|''[[Teleoceras]] fossiger'' skeleton, [[Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County]]. ''Mammut'' coexisted with [[rhinocerotid]]s up to the Pliocene.]]
The overall paleontological record of the Neogene of North America is relatively incomplete compared to other areas of the world. This is the result of a greater fossil record bias of western North America compared to eastern North America, meaning that the western half is better understood in terms of evolutionary and climatic trends while the eastern half is poorly understood. During the late Neogene (8-5 Ma), C<sub>4</sub> grasslands spread throughout the North American continent and replaced woodland habitats. In eastern North America were relict woodlands in an increasingly drier climate followed by a large faunal turnover.<ref>{{cite thesis|type=MS|last=Baumgartner|first=Kyrie A.|year=2014|title=Neogene Climate Change in Eastern North America: A Quantitative Reconstruction|publisher=East Tennessee State University|url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214070254.pdf}}</ref> There was a long-term decline of genus-level faunal diversity, with many large-sized herbivores going extinct. Many of the surviving herbivorous faunas were thus adapted for drier and more open habitats resulting from cooling and increase in seasonality.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Fox|first=David L.|year=2000|title=Growth increments in Gomphotherium tusks and implications for late Miocene climate change in North America|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=156|issue=3–4|pages=327–348|doi=10.1016/S0031-0182(99)00148-0|bibcode=2000PPP...156..327F }}</ref>


[[File:Megalonyx_jeffersonii_(1).jpg|thumb|left|''[[Megalonyx]] jeffersonii'' skeleton. ''Megalonyx'' mostly likely descended from ''[[Pliometanastes]]'' and was present in North America since the late Hemphillian.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=McDonald|first1=H. Gregory|last2=Carranza-Castañeda|first2=Oscar|year=2017|title=Increased xenarthran diversity of the Great American Biotic Interchange: a new genus and species of ground sloth (Mammalia, Xenarthra, Megalonychidae) from the Hemphillian (late Miocene) of Jalisco, Mexico|journal=Journal of Paleontology|volume=91|issue=5|pages=1069–1082|doi=10.1017/jpa.2017.45|bibcode=2017JPal...91.1069M }}</ref>]]
== Palaeobiology ==
The earliest undisputed record of ''Mammut'' ''sensu stricto'' was of ''M. nevadanum'' in the Thousand Creek Formation in Nevada.<ref name="neogene"/> Coexistent with the mammutid species were a large variety of other mammals, namely those of the [[Artiodactyla]] ([[antilocaprid]]s, [[camelid]]s, [[tayassuid]]s), [[Carnivora]] ([[canid]]s, [[felid]]s, [[mustelid]]s, [[Ursidae|ursid]]s), [[Eulipotyphla]] ([[talpid]]s), [[Lagomorpha]] ([[leporid]]s), [[Perissodactyla]] ([[equid]]s, [[rhinocerotid]]s), and [[Rodentia]] ([[aplodontiid]]s, [[castorid]]s, [[geomyid]]s, [[heteromyid]]s, [[cricetid]]s, [[mylagaulid]]s, and [[sciurid]]s).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Prothero|first1=Donald R.|last2=Davis|first2=Edward Byrd|year=2008|title=Neogene Mammals: Bulletin 44|chapter=Magnetic stratigraphy of the Upper Miocene (Early Hemphillian) Thousand Creek Formation, Northwestern Nevada|volume=44|pages=233–238|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vW_aBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA233}}</ref> The latest Hemphillian of Florida based on the Palmetto Fauna of the Bone Valley Formation records the coexistence of ''M. matthewi'' with similar types of faunas, namely [[Pilosa]] ([[megalonychid]]s), Eulipotyphla (talpids), Lagomorpha (leporids), Carnivora ([[borophagine]] canids, [[Caninae|canine]] canids, ursids, [[procyonid]]s, mustelids including [[lutrine]]s, [[Felinae|feline]] felids, [[machairodontine]] felids), Proboscidea (gomphotheres), Perissodactyla (tapirs, rhinocerotids, [[hipparionine]] equids), and Artiodactyla (tayassuids, [[protoceratid]]s, camelids, "[[pseudoceratine]]s," [[cervid]]s, antilocaprids).<ref>{{cite book|editor-last1=Wang|editor-first1=Xiaoming|editor-last2=Barnes|editor-first2=Lawrence G.|last1=Webb|first1=S. David|last2=Hulbert Jr.|first2=Richard C.|last3=Morgan|first3=Gary S.|last4=Evans|first4=Helen F.|year=2008|title=Geology and Vertebrate Paleontology of Western and Southern North America|chapter=Terrestrial mammals of the Palmetto Fauna (early Pliocene, latest Hemphillian) from the Central Florida Phosphate District|publisher=Natural History Museum Los Angeles County Science|volume=41|pages=293–312|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257618973}}</ref> North America in the late Neogene is understood to have undergone a long-term decline in large mammal diversity (i.e. the [[Dromomerycidae]], "[[Blastomerycinae]]," Rhinocerotidae) as a result of C<sub>4</sub> grassland expansion, cooler climates, and increased seasonality.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Figueirido|first1=Borja|last2=Janis|first2=Christine M.|last3=Pérez-Claros|first3=Juan A.|last4=De Renzi|first4=Miquel|last5=Palmqvist|first5=Paul|year=2012|title=Cenozoic climate change influences mammalian evolutionary dynamics|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=109|issue=3|pages=722–727|doi=10.1073/pnas.1110246108|doi-access=free |pmid=22203974 |pmc=3271923|bibcode=2012PNAS..109..722F }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Wang|first1=Bian|last2=Secord|first2=Ross|year=2020|title=Paleoecology of Aphelops and Teleoceras (Rhinocerotidae) through an interval of changing climate and vegetation in the Neogene of the Great Plains, central United States|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=542|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109411|doi-access=free|bibcode=2020PPP...54209411W }}</ref>
''Plagiolophus'' contains several species of a wide range of sizes that are known from postcranial fossils that suggest different paces of locomotion, with some having bulky builds and some others being more cursorial.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> Similar trends in limb morphological diversity and size diversity are also observed in a contemporary palaeothere ''Palaeotherium''.<ref name="forelimb"/> The evolutionary history of the palaeotheres might have had emphasized macrosmatic (derived smell) traits rather than sight or hearing, evident by the smaller orbits and a seeming lack of a derived auditory system. The macrosmatic trait could have allowed palaeotheres to keep track of their herds, implying gregarious behaviours. This is evident in ''Plagiolophus'' based on an implied development of the [[rhinencephalon]], a portion of the brain concerning smell, in ''P. minor'' based on skull evidence.<ref name="central">{{cite journal|last=Santi|first=Guiseppe|year=2000|title=Palaeotheriidae (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) Del Paleogene Dell'Europa Centrale: Note E Considerazioni Preliminari|journal=Natura Bresciana|volume=32|pages=15–22|url=https://www.comune.brescia.it/aree-tematiche/cultura-e-turismo/luoghi-della-cultura/museo-civico-di-scienze-naturali/natura-bresciana-la-rivista-di-scienze-naturali/20003215-22santi}}</ref>


The Blancan fossil record suggests a maximum known diversity of four species of ''Mammut'' (''M. americanum'', ''M. vexillarius'', ''M. raki'', and ''M. cosoensis'').<ref name="neogene"/> However, the Blancan record of ''Mammut'' is relatively rare.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lucas|first1=Spencer G.|last2=Morgan|first2=Gary S.|year=1999|title=The oldest Mammut (Mammalia: proboscidea) from New Mexico|journal=New Mexico Geology|volume=21|number=1|pages=10–12|doi=10.58799/NMG-v21n1.10}}</ref> ''M. raki'' from the [[Palomas Formation]] of Truth or Consequences in New Mexico is recorded with a few other mammalian faunas, namely the megalonychid [[ground sloth]] ''Megalonyx'', the pocket gopher ''[[Geomys]]'', the cricetid ''[[Sigmodon]]'', the equin ''[[Equus (genus)|Equus]]'', the hipparionine ''[[Nannippus]]'', and the camelid ''[[Camelops]]''.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Morgan|first1=Gary S.|last2=Harris|first2=Arthur H.|year=2015|title=Pliocene and Pleistocene vertebrates of New Mexico|journal=New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin|volume=68|pages=233–427|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S--oDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA233}}</ref> A late Blancan locality known as the Fish Springs Flat Fauna in Nevada reveals that fossils of ''M. americanum'' were found with those of the leporid ''[[Hypolagus]]'', lutrine ''[[Satherium]]'', equid ''Equus'', camelid ''[[Gigantocamelus]]'', gopher ''[[Thomomys]]'', and the ground squirrel ''[[Spermophilus]]''.<ref name="stratigraphy">{{cite book|editor-last=Woodburne|editor-first=Michael|last1=Bell|first1=Christopher J.|last2=Lundelius Jr.|first2=Ernest L.|last3=Barnosky|first3=Anthony D.|last4=Graham|first4=Russell W.|last5=Lindsay|first5=Everett H.|last6=Ruez|first6=Dennis R.|last7=Semken|first7=Holmes A.|last8=Webb|first8=S. David|last9=Zakrzewski|first9=Richard J.|year=2004|title=Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic Mammals of North America|chapter=Chapter 7: The Blancan, Irvingtonian, and Rancholabrean Mammal Ages|publisher=Columbia University Press|pages=232–314|doi=10.7312/wood13040-009}}</ref>
Both ''Palaeotherium'' and ''Plagiolophus'' have dentitions that are both capable of chewing through harder items such as fruits without wearing their teeth down quickly compared to their pachynolophine predecessors (i.e. ''Hyracotherium'' and ''Propalaeotherium''). The shifts in dietary capabilities were the result of changes in the efficiencies of the mastication processes.<ref>{{cite conference|last=Engels|first=Sandra|year=2010|title=Functional and morphological changes in the molar morphology of early Hippomorpha|conference=Jahrestagung der Paläontologischen Gesellschaft 2010|pages=33–34|url=https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/12021/1/zitteliana_2010_b29.pdf}}</ref> The two derived genera have brachyodont (high-crowned) dentition, the hypsodonty index suggesting that both genera were mostly folivorous (leaf-eating) and did not have especially frugivorous (fruit-eating) tendencies because of the reduced proportions of rounded cusps. While both genera may have incorporated some fruit into their diets, the higher lingual [[tooth wear]] in ''Plagiolophus'' indicates it ate more fruit than ''Palaeotherium''. Because of their likely tendencies to browse on higher plants, evident by their long necks and the woodland environments that they inhabited, it is unlikely that ground minerals, usually consumed from grazing on ground plants, significantly affected the tooth wear of either of the genera. The tooth wear in both genera could have been the result of scratches from chewing on fruit seeds. It is likely that ''Palaeotherium'' ate softer food such as younger leaves and fleshy fruit that may have had hard seeds while ''Plagiolophus'' leaned towards consuming tough food such as older leaves and harder fruit.<ref name="diet">{{cite journal|last1=Joomun|first1=Sarah C.|last2=Hooker|first2=Jerry J.|last3=Collinson|first3=Margaret E.|year=2008|title=Dental wear variation and implications for diet: An example from Eocene perissodactyls (Mammalia)|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=263|issue=3–4|pages=92–106|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2008.03.001}}</ref>


In the Irvingtonian, only ''M. americanum'' is recorded to have crossed past the Blancan while ''M. pacificum'' replaced the other Blancan species.<ref name="pacificum"/> By this time, ''Mammut'' would have coexisted with the elephantid ''Mammuthus'' and the gomphotheres ''Cuvieronius'' and ''Stegomastodon'', although the latter failed to survive past the early Irvingtonian.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lucas|first1=Spencer G.|last2=Morgan|first2=Gary S.|last3=Estep|first3=John W.|last4=Mack|first4=Greg H.|last5=Hawley|first5=John W.|year=1999|title=Co-Occurrence of the Proboscideans Cuvieronius, Stegomastodon, and Mammuthus in the Lower Pleistocene of Southern New Mexico|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=19|number=3|pages=595–597|doi=10.1080/02724634.1999.10011169|jstor=4524020 |bibcode=1999JVPal..19..595L |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4524020}}</ref><ref name="stegomastodon2"/> The Middle Pleistocene sites are scarce in North America compared to the Late Pleistocene sites,<ref>{{cite journal|last=Schultz|first=Gerald E.|year=2010|title=Pleistocene (Irvingtonian, Cudahyan) vertebrates from the Texas Panhandle, and their geographic and paleoecologic significance|journal=Quaternary International|volume=217|issue=1–2|pages=195–224|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2009.12.012|bibcode=2010QuInt.217..195S }}</ref> but from the Irvingtonian to the Rancholabrean, repeated glacial events occurred that led to repeated formations of major ice sheets in northern North America.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hughes|first1=Philip D.|last2=Gibbard|first2=Philip L.|last3=Ehlers|first3=Jürgen|year=2020|title=The "missing glaciations" of the Middle Pleistocene|journal=Quaternary Research|volume=96|pages=161–183|doi=10.1017/qua.2019.76|bibcode=2020QuRes..96..161H |url=https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/files/144687057/Hughesetal_MissingGlaciations_FINAL_withFigs.pdf }}</ref> The [[Port Kennedy Bone Cave]] of Pennsylvania is of Irvingtonian age (Middle Pleistocene) and reveals that during this time, ''M. americanum'' was present with the megalonychid ''Megalonyx wheatleyi'', the [[Tremarctinae|tremarctine]] bear ''[[Arctodus|Arctodus pristinus]]'', the [[jaguar]] (''Panthera onca''), the felid ''[[Miracinonyx|Miracinonyx inexpectatus]]'', and the machairodontine ''[[Smilodon|Smilodon gracilis]]''.<ref name="stratigraphy"/> The Big Bone Lick locality in Kentucky, which dates to the latest Pleistocene (Rancholabrean), indicates the coexistence of the American mastodon with the extant [[reindeer]] (''Rangifer tarandus'') along with various other extinct [[megafauna]] like ancient [[bison]] (''[[Bison antiquus]]''), the [[Caprinae|caprine]] [[bovid]] ''[[Bootherium|Bootherium bombifrons]]'', [[mylodontid]] ground sloth ''[[Paramylodon|Paramylodon harlani]]'', megalonychid ''Megalonyx jeffersoni'', true deer ''[[Cervalces|Cervalces scotti]]'', equid ''[[Equus complicatus]]'', and the Columbian mammoth.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Storrs|first1=Glenn W.|last2=McDonald|first2=H. Gregory|last3=Scott|first3=Eric|last4=Genheimer|first4=Robert A.|last5=Hedeen|first5=Stanley E.|last6=Schwalbach|first6=Cameron E.|year=2023|title=Field Guide to Big Bone Lick, Kentucky: Birthplace of American Vertebrate Paleontology|journal=Kentucky Geological Survey|series=13|issue=2 |pages=1–54|doi=10.13023/kgs13sp22023|url=https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kgs_sp/1/}}</ref>
Similarly, Perales-Gogenola et al. observed that the ''Plagiolophus'' species that they studied all have brachyodont dentitions, but they also noted a general trend in hypsodonty within the genus over time. More specifically, they pointed out that early species tended to be very brachyodont but that later species tended to have more hypsodont dentition, potentially reaching a hypsodonty level similar to that in the Miocene North American endemic grazing equid ''[[Merychippus]]''.<ref name="evolutionary"/> The hypsodonty trend in ''Plagiolophus'' was previously documented by Remy in 2004, who said that it is not known in ''Palaeotherium'' but that it was neither as rapid nor as dramatic a trend as in the hypsodonty observed in ''Leptolophus stehlini''.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> ''Leptolophus'' having a hypsodonty level similar to later Neogene equids suggests a distinct [[niche partitioning]] dietary strategy from contemporary palaeotheres, with ''Plagiolophus'' not showing a stricter preference towards abrasive plants based on dental evidence. ''Plagiolophus'' may have adopted dietary strategies similar to mixed-feeding deer such as the [[red deer]] (''[[Cervus]] elephus'') and [[roe deer]] (''[[Capreolus]] capreolus'') as well as the browsing-specialized [[moose]] (''Alces alces''), often avoiding hard foods (fruits, nuts, seeds, bark) and preferring tough leaves and related plant material. The changes in dietary behaviours in ''Plagiolophus'' were likely the result of environmental changes in western Europe during the late Eocene to early Oligocene.<ref name="evolutionary"/>


== Relationship with humans ==
Both ''Plagiolophus'' and the [[Anoplotheriidae|anoplotheriid]] ''[[Diplobune]]'' consumed increasingly abrasive plant material during the Eocene-Oligocene transition, but ''Diplobune'' was purely a folivorous browser and therefore never consumed fruits unlike ''Plagiolophus''.<ref name="dietary">{{cite conference|last1=Joomun|first1=Sarah C.|last2=Hooker|first2=Jerry J.|last3=Collinson|first3=Margaret E.|year=2009|title=Differences in the Dietary Responses of the Perissodactyl ''Plagiolophus'' and the Artiodactyl ''Diplobune'' to the Eocene/Oligocene Transition Events in Europe|conference=69th Annual Meeting Society of Vertebrate Paleontology and the 57th Symposium of Vertebrate Palaeontology and Comparative Anatomy (SVPCA)|volume=29|url=https://vertpaleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/SVP09AbstractsFULL_WEB.pdf}}</ref> The change in dieting in ''P. minor'' is evident from dental morphology and scratches in several localities of different time ranges. In the Late Eocene French locality of La Débruge (MP18), the cheek dentition of ''P. minor'' has a high amount of scratches resulting from wear created from the infrequent consumption of fruits and seeds, although its main diet consisted mainly of tough leaves. Its larger consumption of fruit is evident by the lower amount of round cusps and the few pits recorded in the teeth (the presence of more pits than scratches indicates more folivorous diets). In a later Late Eocene German locality of Frohnstetten (MP20) in comparison, the cheek teeth of ''P. minor'' have similar amount of pits but has more rounded cusps and slightly less scratches, suggesting that it consumed less fruit and more abrasive leaves. In Soumailles and Ronzon, both French localities dating after the Grande Coupure extinction event (MP21), the cheek teeth of ''P. minor'' has more rounded cusps, smaller pits, and more pits than scratches. The dental evidence likely implies that ''P. minor'' became a specialized browser to the extent that fruit is nearly absent from its diet. ''P. minor'' was also probably a less selective browser in the more easily available old and tough leaves that took more effort to consume, but it probably avoided younger leaves and shoots. The less specialized browsing diet could have been due to seasonal climates as well, in which the availability of certain plants by season varied. There are no significant changes in dental wear in ''P. minor'' from the older Soumailles locality to the younger Ronzon locality.<ref name="wear">{{cite journal|last1=Joomun|first1=Sarah C.|last2=Hooker|first2=Jerry J.|last3=Collins on|first3=Margaret E.|year=2010|title=Changes in Dental Wear of Plagiolophus minor (Mammalia: Perissodactyla) Across the Eocene—Oligocene Transition|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=30|issue=2|pages=563–576|doi=10.1080/02724631003618124}}</ref>
[[File:Clovis spearpoints - Cleveland Museum of Natural History.jpg|thumb|left|[[Clovis culture|Clovis]] spearpoints, [[Cleveland Museum of Natural History]]]]
The exact timing of [[human]] (''Homo sapiens'') arrival to temperate North America is unclear, but they likely arrived to North America ∼19,000–14,000 [[radiocarbon calibration|calibrated]] years [[Before Present]]. They are known within the archeological record as [[Paleoindian]]s and eventually gave rise to modern-day Native Americans.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=White|first1=John T.|last2=Henry|first2=Auréade|last3=Kuehn|first3=Stephen|last4=Loso|first4=Michael G.|last5=Rasic|first5=Jeffrey T.|year=2022|title=Terminal Pleistocene human occupation of the upper Copper River basin, southern Alaska: Results of test excavations at Nataeł Na'|journal=Quaternary International|volume=640|pages=23–43|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2022.08.012|bibcode=2022QuInt.640...23W |url=https://hal.science/hal-03780826/file/1-s2.0-S1040618222002749-main.pdf }}</ref> Of interest is that in the [[Clovis culture]] phase, there is evidence that Clovis hunters targeted contemporary proboscideans based on archeological "kill sites." Clovis projectile points and other artifacts have been found in association with both mammoths and mastodons. The former has more frequent evidence of having been hunted by Clovis hunters while mastodons have much fewer in comparison. Todd A. Surovell and Nicole M. Waguespack in 2008 hypothesized that Clovis hunters in North America hunted proboscideans more often than those in any other continent. They addressed that preservation biases of larger mammals in archeological sites may have caused higher representations of proboscidean kill sites but suggested that regardless, Clovis hunters were likely specialized in hunting large game.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Surovell|first1=Todd A.|last2=Waguespack|first2=Nicole M.|year=2008|title=How many elephant kills are 14?: Clovis mammoth and mastodon kills in context|journal=Quaternary International|volume=191|issue=1|pages=82–97|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2007.12.001|bibcode=2008QuInt.191...82S }}</ref>


As of present, 2 definite ''Mammut'' kill sites compatible with Clovis [[lithic technology]] have been recorded compared to 15 of ''Mammuthus'' and 1 of ''Cuvieronius''. These two kill sites are thought to be from [[Kimmswick]], Missouri and Pleasant Lake in [[Washtenaw County]], Michigan.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Grayson|first1=Donald K.|last2=Meltzer|first2=David J.|year=2015|title=Revisiting Paleoindian exploitation of extinct North American mammals|journal=Journal of Archaeological Science|volume=56|pages=177–193|doi=10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.009|bibcode=2015JArSc..56..177G }}</ref><ref name="site">{{cite journal|last=Haynes|first=Gary|year=2022|title=Sites in the Americas with Possible or Probable Evidence for the Butchering of Proboscideans|journal=PaleoAmerica|volume=8|issue=3|pages=187–214|doi=10.1080/20555563.2022.2057834}}</ref><ref name="storage">{{cite book|editor-last1=Konidaris|editor-first1=George Dimitri|editor-last2=Barkai|editor-first2=Ran|editor-last3=Tourloukis|editor-first3=Vangelis|editor-last4=Harvati|editor-first4=Katerina|last=Fisher|first=Daniel C.|year=2021|title=Human-Elephant Interactions: From Past to Present|chapter=Chapter 16: Underwater carcass storage and processing of marrow, brains, and dental pulp: Evidence for the role of proboscideans in human subsistence|publisher=Tübingen University Press|pages=407–435|doi=10.15496/publikation-55583}}</ref> Whether various other sites can be confirmed as proboscidean butchery sites appear subjective, largely depending on the views of different authors.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mackie|first1=Madeline E.|last2=Haas|first2=Randall|year=2021|title=Estimating the frequency of coincidental spatial associations between Clovis artifacts and proboscidean remains in North America|journal=Quaternary Research|volume=103|pages= 182–192|doi=10.1017/qua.2021.1|bibcode=2021QuRes.103..182M }}</ref> It is uncertain if Clovis people had hunting strategies of proboscideans similar to tribal Africans, but the Clovis points likely indicate usage as spears for thrusting or throwing at proboscideans (there are disagreements to whether they indicate multiple other usages, however).<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kilby|first1=J. David|last2=Surovell|first2=Todd A.|last3=Huckell|first3=Bruce B.|last4=Ringstaff|first4=Christopher W.|last5=Hamilton|first5=Marcus J.|last6=Haynes Jr.|first6=C. Vance|year=2022|title=Evidence supports the efficacy of Clovis points for hunting proboscideans|journal=Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports|volume=45|doi=10.1016/j.jasrep.2022.103600|bibcode=2022JArSR..45j3600K }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Eren|first1=Metin I.|last2=Meltzer|first2=David J.|last3=Story|first3=Brett|last4=Buchanan|first4=Briggs|last5=Yeager|first5=Don|last6=Bebber|first6=Michelle R.|year=2022|title=Not just for proboscidean hunting: On the efficacy and functions of Clovis fluted points|journal=Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports|volume=45|doi=10.1016/j.jasrep.2022.103601|doi-access=free|bibcode=2022JArSR..45j3601E }}</ref>
== Palaeoecology ==
{{further|Mammal Palaeogene zones}}


According to the American paleontologist [[Daniel Fisher (paleontologist)|Daniel C. Fisher]], the "Heisler mastodon" site in [[Calhoun County, Michigan|Calhoun County]], Michigan, which recovered about 50% of the skeleton, was proof of meat caching in a pond by Paleoindians in the late Pleistocene. This hypothesis opposes the notion that proboscideans ended up unable to disentangle themselves in marsh wetlands, which he said there is no evidence of. His hypothesis was based on his experiment with partial carcasses of a horse that was preserved in a shallow lake then extracted as well as a [[Moravian Church|Moravian]] missionary's testimony of [[Inuit]] retrieving caribou carcasses from lakes that they probably placed as storage in the cases of excess meat or future limited hunting successes. Fisher said that if his theory is true, then Paleoindian interactions with megafauna (hunting and scavenging) are far more complex than initially thought.<ref name="storage"/><ref name="site"/>
=== Middle Eocene ===
[[File:Middle Eocene Paleogeography Tethys Dispersals.jpg|thumb|left|[[Palaeogeography]] of Europe and Asia during the middle [[Eocene]] with possible [[artiodactyl]] and [[perissodactyl]] dispersal routes.]]
For much of the Eocene, a hothouse climate with humid, tropical environments with consistently high precipitations prevailed. Modern mammalian orders including the Perissodactyla, Artiodactyla, and [[Primates]] (or the suborder Euprimates) appeared already by the early Eocene, diversifying rapidly and developing dentitions specialized for folivory. The [[omnivorous]] forms mostly either switched to folivorous diets or went extinct by the middle Eocene (47–37 Ma) along with the archaic "[[condylarths]]". By the late Eocene (approx. 37–33 Ma), most of the ungulate form dentitions shifted from bunodont cusps to cutting ridges (i.e. lophs) for folivorous diets.<ref name="evolution">{{cite journal|last1=Eronen|first1=Jussi T.|last2=Janis|first2=Christine M.|last3=Chamberlain|first3=Charles Page|last4=Mulch|first4=Andreas|year=2015|title=Mountain uplift explains differences in Palaeogene patterns of mammalian evolution and extinction between North America and Europe|journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences |volume=282|number=1809|page=20150136 |doi=10.1098/rspb.2015.0136|pmid=26041349 |pmc=4590438 }}</ref><ref name="chiroptera">{{cite journal|last=Maitre|first=Elodie|year=2014|title=Western European middle Eocene to early Oligocene Chiroptera: systematics, phylogeny and palaeoecology based on new material from the Quercy (France)|journal=Swiss Journal of Palaeontology|volume=133|issue=2 |pages=141–242|doi=10.1007/s13358-014-0069-3|s2cid=84066785 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2014SwJP..133..141M }}</ref>


[[File:Manis-Mastodon-rib-embedded-object-Sequim-Museum-and-Arts-Center.jpg|thumb|Cast of a right rib of the "Manis mastodon" with an embedded object and healed wound, [[Sequim Museum & Arts]]. The wound has been hypothesized to be the result of pre-Clovis hunting from several sources.]]
Land-based connections to the north of the developing Atlantic Ocean were interrupted around 53 Ma, meaning that North America and Greenland were no longer well-connected to western Europe. From the early Eocene up until the [[Grande Coupure]] extinction event (56 Ma - 33.9 Ma), the western Eurasian continent was separated into three landmasses, the former two of which were isolated by seaways: western Europe (an archipelago), [[Balkanatolia]], and eastern Eurasia (Balkanatolia was in between the [[Paratethys Sea]] of the north and the [[Neotethys Ocean]] of the south).<ref name="balkanatolia">{{cite journal|last1=Licht|first1=Alexis|last2=Métais|first2=Grégoire|last3=Coster|first3=Pauline|last4=İbilioğlu|first4=Deniz|last5=Ocakoğlu|first5=Faruk|last6=Westerweel|first6=Jan|last7=Mueller|first7=Megan|last8=Campbell|first8=Clay|last9=Mattingly|first9=Spencer|last10=Wood|first10=Melissa C.|last11=Beard|first11=K. Christopher|year=2022|title=Balkanatolia: The insular mammalian biogeographic province that partly paved the way to the Grande Coupure|journal=Earth-Science Reviews|volume=226|page=103929 |doi=10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.103929|bibcode=2022ESRv..22603929L |doi-access=free}}</ref> The [[Holarctic]] mammalian faunas of western Europe were therefore mostly isolated from other continents including Greenland, Africa, and eastern Eurasia, allowing for endemism to occur within western Europe.<ref name="chiroptera"/> The European mammals of the late Eocene (MP17 - MP20 of the Mammal Palaeogene zones) were mostly descendants of endemic middle Eocene groups as a result.<ref name="iberian"/>
In 2023, [[Michael R. Waters]] et al. suggested that the [[Manis Mastodon site]] in [[Washington (state)|Washington]] state supported evidence of a mastodon hunt ~13,900 cal. years BP, some 900 years before Clovis culture. Their study was a continuation of a 2011 anatomical study that proposed that osseous (bone) pieces found in a right rib of a mastodon represented fragmented tips of a projectile point, but it had been repeatedly challenged by other authors. Based on anatomical reevaluations, they determined that the bone fragments were embedded in the Manis mastodon rib while it was alive, as evident by the visible healing around the wounded area. Waters and his colleagues stated that the bone pieces were from an external source, explainable by human-made projectile points. They rejected alternate explanations for why bone fragments ended up in the Manis mastodon rib. Based on this, they envisioned that the mastodon individual was wounded by pre-Clovis hunters and got away, giving it time to heal. Afterwards, it died either by natural causes and was scavenged by humans, or it was killed by them on another attack then butchered. This site proves the existence of pre-Clovis hunting technology that the earliest people brought with them when dispersing to North America and made localized adaptations of.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Waters|first1=Michael R.|last2=Newell|first2=Zachary A.|last3=Fisher|first3=Daniel C.|last4=McDonald|first4=H. Gregory|last5=Han|first5=Jiwan|last6=Moreno|first6=Michael|last7=Robbins|first7=Andrew|year=2023|title=Late Pleistocene osseous projectile point from the Manis site, Washington—Mastodon hunting in the Pacific Northwest 13,900 years ago|journal=Science Advances|volume=9|issue=5|pages=eade9068 |doi=10.1126/sciadv.ade9068|pmid=36724281 |pmc=9891687|bibcode=2023SciA....9E9068W }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Waters|first1=Michael R.|last2=Stafford Jr.|first2=Thomas W.|last3=McDonald|first3=H. Gregory|last4=Gustafson|first4=Carl|last5=Rasmussen|first5=Morten|last6=Cappelini|first6=Enrico|last7=Olsen|first7=Jesper V.|last8=Szklarczyk|first8=Damian|last9=Jensen|first9=Lars Juhl|last10=Gilbert|first10=M. Thomas P.|last11=Willerslev|first11=Eske|year=2011|title=Pre-Clovis Mastodon Hunting 13,800 Years Ago at the Manis Site, Washington|journal=Science|volume=334|issue=6054|pages=351–353|doi=10.1126/science.1207663|pmid=22021854 |bibcode=2011Sci...334..351W }}</ref>


In 2017, Steven R. Holen et al. published an article arguing that the [[Cerutti Mastodon site]], located in [[San Diego County]] in California, is an archeological site involving ''M. americanum'' that dates to approximately 130,000 years ago. If true, they stated, the site would imply evidence of now-extinct species of ''[[Homo]]'' in North America during the [[Marine Isotope Stage 5]] (MIS 5e) temporal range of the early late Pleistocene.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Holen|first1=Steven R.|last2=Deméré|first2=Thomas A.|last3=Fisher|first3=Daniel C.|last4=Fullagar|first4=Richard|last5=Paces|first5=James B.|last6=Jefferson|first6=George T.|last7=Beeton|first7=Jared M.|last8=Cerutti|first8=Richard A.|last9=Rountrey|first9=Adam N.|last10=Vescera|first10=Lawrence|last11=Holen|first11=Kathleen A.|year=2017|title=A 130,000-year-old archaeological site in southern California, USA|journal=Nature|volume=544|issue=7651 |pages=479–483|doi=10.5066/F7HD7SW7|pmid=28447646 }}</ref> The proposal was highly controversial, as many archeologists were skeptical about the claim that the bones of ''M. americanum'' were broken by hominins, and alternate explanations have been offered.<ref name="site"/> For instance, in the same year the article was published, Gary Haynes expressed concern of it being published in the journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' due to how highly prolific it is. Reporters from print presses and digital media published reactions of the article from various North American archeologists, with [[Donald K. Grayson]] stating that it was astonishingly bad, [[Jon M. Erlandson]] arguing that the site was non-credible, and various other archeologists arguing that the claim is insufficiently supported. Haynes pointed out that the article's claim was "extraordinary" and must therefore be met with rigorous skepticism. He wrote that there were no traces of archeological structures typically built by archaic species of ''Homo'' (i.e. ''[[H. erectus]]'', [[Neanderthal]]s, or [[Denisovan]]s) in the Cerutti site. Additionally, he brought up the possibilities of the fossil bones being affected by sediment pressures or damage done by earth-moving construction equipments despite the original authors denying the latter possibility.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Haynes|first=Gary|year=2017|title=The Cerutti Mastodon|journal=PaleoAmerica|volume=3|issue=3|pages=196–199|doi=10.1080/20555563.2017.1330103}}</ref>
In the fossil record, ''Plagiolophus'' is thought to have made its earliest appearance in MP12 based on dental fossils from the [[Geiseltal|Geiseltal uMK]] locality in Germany that are classified as belonging to ''P. cartieri''. The classification is typically only tentatively accepted by paleontologists due to the poor differentiation between ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Propalaeotherium'' in terms of the lower molars.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hellmund|first=Meinolf|year=2000|title=Erstnachweis von Plagiolophus cartieri Stehlin (Palaeotheriidae, Perissodactyla) in der unteren Mittelkohle (uMK, MP 12) des Geiseltales bei Halle (Sachsen-Anhalt, Deutschland)|journal=Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie Geologie Paläontologie|volume=4|pages=205–216|doi=10.1127/njgpm/2000/2000/205}}</ref><ref name="plagiolophus"/><ref name="aumelas"/> The earliest undisputed records of ''Plagiolophus'' are from the appearances of ''P. cartieri'' and ''P. casasecaensis'' in MP13 (the latter species of which is endemic to the Iberian peninsula and is restricted to the faunal unit).<ref name="evolutionary"/><ref name="plagiolophus"/> By then, it would have coexisted with perissodactyls (Palaeotheriidae, [[Lophiodontidae]], and [[Hyrachyidae]]), non-endemic artiodactyls ([[Dichobunidae]] and [[Tapirulidae]]), endemic European artiodactyls ([[Choeropotamidae]] (possibly polyphyletic, however), [[Cebochoeridae]], and Anoplotheriidae), and primates ([[Adapidae]]). Both the [[Amphimerycidae]] and [[Xiphodontidae]] made their first appearances by the level MP14.<ref name="ungulates">{{cite journal|last=Blondel|first=Cécile|year=2001|title=The Eocene-Oligocene ungulates from Western Europe and their environment|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=168|issue=1–2 |pages=125–139|doi=10.1016/S0031-0182(00)00252-2|bibcode=2001PPP...168..125B |url=http://doc.rero.ch/record/20314/files/PAL_E4294.pdf }}</ref><ref name="turnover">{{cite journal|last=Franzen|first=Jens Lorenz|year=2003|title=Mammalian faunal turnover in the Eocene of central Europe|journal=Geological Society of America Special Papers|volume=369|pages=455–461|doi=10.1130/0-8137-2369-8.455|isbn=9780813723693 }}</ref> The stratigraphic ranges of the early species of ''Palaeotherium'' also overlapped with [[metatheria]]ns ([[Herpetotheriidae]]), [[cimolesta]]ns ([[Pantolestidae]], [[Paroxyclaenidae]]), rodents ([[Ischyromyidae]], [[Theridomyoidea]], [[Gliridae]]), [[eulipotyphla]]ns, bats, [[apatotheria]]ns, [[carnivoraformes]] ([[Miacidae]]), and [[hyaenodont]]s ([[Hyainailourinae]], [[Proviverrinae]]).<ref name="MP">{{cite book|last1=Aguilar|first1=Jean-Pierre|last2=Legendre|first2=Serge|last3=Michaux|first3=Jacques|year=1997|title=Actes du Congrès Bio-chroM'97. Mémoires et Travaux de l'EPHE Institut de Montpellier 21|chapter=Synthèses et tableaux de corrélations|publisher=École Pratique des Hautes Études-Sciences de la Vie et de la Terre, Montpellier|language=french|pages=769–850|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286785439}}</ref> Other MP13-MP14 sites have also yielded fossils of turtles and [[Crocodylomorpha|crocodylomorphs]],<ref name="sebecid">{{cite journal|last1=Martin|first1=Jeremy E.|last2=Pochat-Cottilloux|first2=Yohan |last3=Laurent|first3=Yves|last4=Perrier|first4=Vincent|last5=Robert|first5=Emmanuel|last6=Antoine|first6=Pierre-Olivier|year=2022|title=Anatomy and phylogeny of an exceptionally large sebecid (Crocodylomorpha) from the middle Eocene of southern France|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=42|issue=4|doi=10.1080/02724634.2023.2193828|bibcode=2022JVPal..42E3828M |s2cid=258361595 }}</ref> and MP13 sites are stratigraphically the latest to have yielded remains of the bird clades [[Gastornithidae]] and [[Palaeognathae]].<ref>{{cite conference|last1=Buffetaut|first1=Eric|last2=Angst|first2=Delphine|year=2014|title=Stratigraphic Distribution of Large Flightless Birds in the Palaeogene of Europe|conference=STRATI 2013: First International Congress on Stratigraphy At the Cutting Edge of Stratigraphy|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-04364-7_190}}</ref>


Multiple [[petroglyph]]s suggested to have depicted prehistoric proboscideans in North America like mastodons are known within the United States, but they are either fraudulent or depict entities other than mastodons. As a result, suggested rock art of mammoths and mastodons within North America are not sufficiently credible.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bednarik|first=Robert G.|year=2014|title=Pleistocene Palaeoart of the Americas|journal=Arts|volume=3|number=2|pages=190–206|doi=10.3390/arts3020190|doi-access=free}}</ref>
[[File:Lophiodon lautricenseDB24.jpg|thumb|Restoration of ''[[Lophiodon]]'', which coexisted with ''Plagiolophus'' in the middle to late [[Eocene]]]]
The Geiseltal Obere Mittelkhole locality, dating to MP13, records fossils of ''P. cartieri'' along with the herpetotheriid ''[[Amphiperatherium]]'', carnivoraforme ''[[Quercygale]]'', hyaenodont ''[[Proviverra]]'', [[Amphilemuridae|amphilemurid]] ''[[Amphilemur]]'', [[Archaeonycteridae|archaeonycterid]] ''[[Matthesia]]'', [[Paroxyclaenidae|paroxyclaenid]] ''[[Pugiodens]]'', adapid ''[[Europolemur]]'', [[Omomyidae|omomyid]] ''[[Nannopithex]]'', dichobunid ''[[Messelobunodon]]'', choeropotamids ''[[Rhagatherium]]'' and ''[[Amphirhagatherium]]'', lophiodonts ''Lophiodon'' and ''[[Paralophiodon]]'', and the other palaeotheres ''Propalaeotherium'' and ''Lophiotherium''.<ref name="MP"/>


== Extinction ==
The MP14 faunal unit marks the only known period in which ''P. lugdunensis'' appears and also records the final temporal appearance of ''P. cartieri''. MP16 marks the first appearances of the species ''P. cartailhaci'', ''P. curtisi'', ''P. mamertensis'', ''P. annectens'', and ''P. mazateronensis'', the former three of which were exclusive to the faunal unit. ''P. curtisi'' is known only from the United Kingdom, and ''P. mazateronensis'' was one of several palaeothere species endemic to the Iberian Peninsula. By the middle Eocene, ''Plagiolophus'' lived across western Europe in what is now Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Switzerland.<ref name="plagiolophus"/><ref name="iberian"/> <ref name="evolutionary"/> Despite being almost entirely recorded from western Europe, ''Plagiolophus'' sp. is recorded from an eastern European locality in [[Cherno More (village)|Cherno More]] in Bulgaria, dating to the middle to late Eocene. The sporadic occurrences of ''Palaeotherium'' and ''Plagiolophus'' suggest some periodic connectivity between Balkanatolia and other Eurasian regions, allowing faunas to disperse between land.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Métais|first1=Grégoire|last2=Coster|first2=Pauline|last3=Kaya|first3=Mustafa|last4=Licht|first4=Alexis|last5=Miller|first5=Kristen|last6=Ocakoğlu|first6=Faruk|last7=Rust|first7=Kathleen|last8=Beard|first8=K. Christopher|year=2024|title=Rapid colonization and diversification of a large-bodied mammalian herbivore clade in an insular context: New embrithopods from the Eocene of Balkanatolia|journal=Journal of Mammalian Evolution|volume=31|number=15|doi=10.1007/s10914-024-09711-w|url=https://hal.science/hal-04562110}}</ref>
[[File:United States megafauna human SPDs.webp|thumb|left|Summed probability distributions (SPDs) of ''[[Mammuthus]]'', ''Mammut'', ''[[Nothrotheriops]]'', ''[[Equus (genus)|Equus]]'', ''[[Smilodon]]'', and humans in the latest Pleistocene of the United States]]
''Mammut'', or more specifically the American mastodon, experienced an initial decline in geographical range when it was extirpated from the northernmost ranges of North America ~75,000 years ago. ''Mammut'' initially occupied the region during the [[Last Interglacial]] (~125,000-75,000 years ago) back when suitable forested habitats were present there but was subsequently extirpated in correlation with environmental changes from the [[Wisconsin glaciation]] (MIS 4). The local extirpation, occurring long before human arrival, caused the mastodon range to be limited to areas south of North American ice sheets. The steppe-tundra faunas thrived there during the event whereas boreal forest-adapted faunas underwent declines.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Zazula|first1=Grant D.|last2=MacPhee|first2=Ross|last3=Metcalfe|first3=Jessica|last4=Reyes|first4=Alberto V.|last5=Brock|first5=Fiona|last6=Druckenmiller|first6=Patrick S.|last7=Groves|first7=Pamela|last8=Harington|first8=C. Richard|last9=Hodgins|first9=Gregory|last10=Kunz|first10=Michael L.|last11=Longstaffe|first11=Fred John|last12=Mann|first12=Dan|last13=McDonald|first13=H. Gregory|year=2014|title=American mastodon extirpation in the Arctic and Subarctic predates human colonization and terminal Pleistocene climate change|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=111|issue=52|pages=18460–18465 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1416072111|doi-access=free |pmid=25453065 |pmc=4284604|bibcode=2014PNAS..11118460Z }}</ref><ref name="arctic"/> The trend of recolonization and extirpation appears to have had been a recurring trend in the Pleistocene correlated with repeated returns of forests and wetlands, but what is unclear is why faunas that were able to repeatedly recolonize northern North America during previous interglacial periods were unable to do so again after the [[Last Glacial Maximum]].<ref name="genomes"/>


The latest Pleistocene of North America records a [[Late Pleistocene extinctions|large extinction phase]] that resulted in the disappearances of over 30 genera of mammals, the majority of which are considered "megafauna" (~{{cvt|45|kg}} or larger). ''Mammut'' was one of the many genera recorded within North America whose extinction causes are currently unresolved.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Meltzer|first=David J.|year=2020|title=Overkill, glacial history, and the extinction of North America's Ice Age megafauna|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=117|issue=46|pages=28555–28563|doi=10.1073/pnas.2015032117|doi-access=free |pmid=33168739 |pmc=7682371|bibcode=2020PNAS..11728555M }}</ref> During the latest Pleistocene of North America, two major events occurred: the development of Clovis culture from 13,200 to 12,800 years ago and the onset of the [[Younger Dryas]] cold phase from 12,900 to 11,700 years ago.<ref name="stuart">{{cite book|last=Stuart|first=Anthony J.|title=Vanished Giants: The Lost World of the Ice Age|chapter=Chapter 6. North America: mastodon, ground sloths, and sabertooth cats|date=August 20, 2022 |publisher=University of Chicago Press|pages=67–112 |isbn=978-0-226-82403-1}}</ref> The extinctions of mammalian megafauna in North America are particularly high akin to those of South America and Australia rather than Eurasia and Africa.<ref name="debate">{{cite journal|last1=Koch|first1=Paul L.|last2=Barnosky|first2=Anthony D.|year=2006|title=Late Quaternary Extinctions: State of the Debate|journal=Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics|volume=37|pages=215–250|doi=10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132415}}</ref> As a result, the extinctions that occurred in the latest Pleistocene of North America have been mainly attributed to human hunting, climate change, or some combination of the two (there are alternate but lesser-supported hypotheses). Many researchers have struggled to explained the North American extinctions, with both human hunting and climate change explanations alone being challenged.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Scott|first=Eric|year=2010|title=Extinctions, scenarios, and assumptions: Changes in latest Pleistocene large herbivore abundance and distribution in western North America|journal=Quaternary International|volume=217|issue=1–2|pages=225–239|doi=10.1016/j.quaint.2009.11.003|bibcode=2010QuInt.217..225S }}</ref> In recent years, research has shifted towards studying the extinctions of North American faunas by individual taxon and/or region rather as a homogenous group. The results vary in regions such as the northeast, with some authors suggesting that there was minimal evidence for Clovis hunting being the major factor behind proboscidean population drops and some others arguing that environmental shifts prior to human arrival were not detrimental enough to the proboscideans.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Boulanger|first1=Matthew T.|last2=Lyman|first2=R. Lee|year=2014|title=Northeastern North American Pleistocene megafauna chronologically overlapped minimally with Paleoindians|journal=Quaternary Science Reviews|volume=85|pages=35–46|doi=10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.11.024|bibcode=2014QSRv...85...35B }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Feranec|first1=Robert S.|last2=Kozlowski|first2=Andrew|year=2016|title=Implications of a Bayesian radiocarbon calibration of colonization ages for mammalian megafauna in glaciated New York State after the Last Glacial Maximum|journal=Quaternary Research|volume=85|issue=2|pages=262–270|doi=10.1016/j.yqres.2016.01.003|bibcode=2016QuRes..85..262F }}</ref>
''P. annectens'', ''P. cartailhaci'', and ''P. mamertensis'' are located in the MP16 French locality of Robiac along with the herpetotheriids ''Amphiperatherium'' and ''[[Peratherium]]'', apatemyid ''[[Heterohyus]]'', nyctithere ''[[Saturninia]]'', omomyids (''Necrolemur'', ''[[Pseudoloris]]'', and ''[[Microchoerus]]''), adapid ''[[Adapis]]'', ischyromyid ''Ailuravus'', glirid ''[[Glamys]]'', pseudosciurid ''[[Sciuroides]]'', [[theridomyid]]s ''[[Elfomys]]'' and ''[[Pseudoltinomys]]'', hyaenodonts (''[[Paracynohyaenodon]]'', ''[[Paroxyaena]]'', and ''[[Cynohyaenodon]]''), carnivoraformes (''[[Simamphicyon]]'', ''Quercygale'', and ''[[Paramiacis]]''), cebochoerids ''Cebochoerus'' and ''[[Acotherulum]]'', choeropotamids ''[[Choeropotamus]]'' and ''[[Haplobunodon]]'', tapirulid ''Tapirulus'', anoplotheriids (''[[Dacrytherium]]'', ''[[Catodontherium]]'', and ''[[Robiatherium]]'', dichobunid ''Mouillacitherium'', [[robiacinid]] ''[[Robiacina]]'', xiphodonts (''[[Xiphodon]]'', ''[[Dichodon (mammal)|Dichodon]]'', ''[[Haplomeryx]]''), amphimerycid ''[[Pseudamphimeryx]]'', lophiodont ''Lophiodon'', hyrachyid ''[[Chasmotherium]]'', and other palaeotheres (''Plagiolophus'', ''Leptolophus'', ''Anchilophus'', ''[[Metanchilophus]]'', ''Lophiotherium'', ''Pachynolophus'', ''Eurohippus'').<ref name="robiac"/>


Paul L. Koch and Anthony D. Barnosky in 2006 suggested that ''Mammuthus'' was well-associated with archeological sites of North America. In comparison, ''Mammut'' and the peccary ''[[Platygonus]]'' were far less frequently associated with human sites, potentially suggesting that Paleoindians hunted them less than mammoths. They stated that the current understanding of ''Mammut'' associations with humans could shift if the supposed butchery sites were better understood while that of ''Platygonus'' is stable and therefore unlikely to change.<ref name="debate"/> In 2018, Jack M. Broughton and Elic M. Weitzel calculated populated dynamics of some of the North American late Pleistocene megafauna based on summed probability distributions (SPDs) using calibrated [[radiocarbon date]]s. They determined based on the data that the declines of ''Mammuthus'', ''Equus'', and ''Smilodon'' were correlated with Clovis culture hunting while ''Mammut'' and the [[nothrotheriid]] ground sloth ''[[Nothrotheriops]]'' did not exhibit any significant population bust until after Clovis culture and during the Younger Dryas at ~12,650 years ago. They concluded that the declines of megafauna are of mixed causes and that the extinction processes and causes therefore vary by individual taxon and region.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Broughton|first1=Jack M.|last2=Weitzel|first2=Elic M.|year=2018|title=Population reconstructions for humans and megafauna suggest mixed causes for North American Pleistocene extinctions|journal=Nature Communications|volume=9|number=5441|page=5441 |doi=10.1038/s41467-018-07897-1|pmid=30575758 |pmc=6303330|bibcode=2018NatCo...9.5441B }}</ref>
After MP16, a [[faunal turnover]] occurred, marking the disappearances of the lophiodonts and European hyrachyids as well as the extinctions of all European crocodylomorphs except for the alligatoroid ''Diplocynodon''.<ref name="turnover"/><ref name="sebecid"/><ref>{{cite journal|last=Martin|first=Jeremy E.|year=2015|title=A sebecosuchian in a middle Eocene karst with comments on the dorsal shield in Crocodylomorpha|journal=Acta Palaeontologica Polonica|volume=60|issue=3|pages=673–680|doi=10.4202/app.00072.2014|s2cid=54002673 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Antunes|first=Miguel Telles|year=2003|title=Lower Paleogene Crocodilians from Silveirinha, Portugal|journal=Palaeovertebrata|pages=1–26|volume=32|url=https://palaeovertebrata.com/articles/keyword/476}}</ref> The causes of the faunal turnover have been attributed to a shift from humid and highly tropical environments to drier and more temperate forests with open areas and more abrasive vegetation. The surviving herbivorous faunas shifted their dentitions and dietary strategies accordingly to adapt to abrasive and seasonal vegetation.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Robinet|first1=Céline|last2=Remy|first2=Jean Albert|last3=Laurent|first3=Yves|last4=Danilo|first4=Laure|last5=Lihoreau|first5=Fabrice|year=2015|title=A new genus of Lophiodontidae (Perissodactyla, Mammalia) from the early Eocene of La Borie (Southern France) and the origin of the genus ''Lophiodon'' Cuvier, 1822|journal=Geobios|volume=48|issue=1|pages=25–38|doi=10.1016/j.geobios.2014.11.003|bibcode=2015Geobi..48...25R }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Perales-Gogenola|first1=Leire|last2=Badiola|first2=Ainara|last3=Gómez-Olivencia|first3=Asier|last4=Pereda-Suberbiola|first4=Xabier|year=2022|title=A remarkable new paleotheriid (Mammalia) in the endemic Iberian Eocene perissodactyl fauna|journal=Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology|volume=42|issue=4|doi=10.1080/02724634.2023.2189447|bibcode=2022JVPal..42E9447P |s2cid=258663753 }}</ref> The environments were still subhumid and full of subtropical evergreen forests, however. The Palaeotheriidae was the sole remaining European perissodactyl group, and frugivorous-folivorous or purely folivorous artiodactyls became the dominant group in western Europe.<ref name="Evolution of European carnivorous mammal assemblages">{{cite journal|last1=Solé|first1=Floréal|last2=Fischer|first2=Valentin|last3=Le Verger|first3=Kévin|last4=Mennecart|first4=Bastien|last5=Speijer|first5=Robert P.|last6=Peigné|first6=Stéphane|last7=Smith|first7=Thierry|year=2022|title=Evolution of European carnivorous mammal assemblages through the Paleogene|journal=Biological Journal of the Linnean Society|volume=135|issue=4|pages=734–753|doi=10.1093/biolinnean/blac002}}</ref><ref name="ungulates"/>


Of note is that there is a recorded latest survival of the American mastodon in the early [[Holocene]]. The Overmyer Mastodon individual, recovered from northern Indiana with 41-48% complete remains recovered, exhibits no evidence of weathering or gnawing by other animals. The individual dates from 11,795 to 11,345 years Before Present for a median of 11,576 calibrated years BP, therefore having a secure calibrated radiocarbon date dating to the early Holocene unlike most other extinct North American genera of the terminal Pleistocene. Neal Woodman and Nancy Beavan Athfield stressed that although the early Holocene survival of the species does not eliminate the possibilities that Clovis hunters and/or Younger Dryas impacted their populations in the long term, its survival meant that the genus was not immediately brought to extinction by either factor.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Woodman|first1=Neal Woodman|last2=Athfield|first2=Nancy Beavan|year=2009|title=Post-Clovis survival of American Mastodon in the southern Great Lakes Region of North America|journal=Quaternary Research|volume=72|issue=3|pages=359–363|doi=10.1016/j.yqres.2009.06.009|bibcode=2009QuRes..72..359W }}</ref><ref name="stuart"/>
=== Late Eocene ===
[[File:Life reconstruction of Diplobune secundaria.png|thumb|Reconstruction of ''[[Diplobune]]'', a contemporary mammal that was endemic to western Europe]]
The Late Eocene marks the latest appearances of ''P. annectens'' and ''P. mazateronensis'' at MP17 followed by the first appearances of ''P. oweni'' and ''P. minor'' at MP18 (the former of which is restricted to the unit). MP20 records both the continuous occurrence of ''P. minor'' and the restricted appearances of ''P. fraasi'' and ''P. major''.<ref name="plagiolophus"/> Within the late Eocene, the [[Cainotheriidae]] and derived members of the [[Anoplotheriinae]] both made their first fossil record appearances by MP18.<ref name="endemic">{{cite book|editor-last1=Prothero|editor-first1=Donald R.|editor-last2=Foss|editor-first2=Scott E.|last1=Erfurt|first1=Jörg|last2=Métais|first2=Grégoire|year=2007|title=The Evolution of Artiodactyls|publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press|chapter=Endemic European Paleogene Artiodactyls|pages=59–84}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Weppe|first1=Romain|last2=Blondel|first2=Cécile|last3=Vianey-Liaud|first3=Monique|last4=Escarguel|first4=Gilles|last5=Pelissie|first5=Thierry|last6=Antoine|first6=Pierre-Olivier|last7=Orliac|first7=Maeva J.|year=2020|title=Cainotheriidae (Mammalia, Artiodactyla) from Dams (Quercy, SW France): phylogenetic relationships and evolution around the Eocene–Oligocene transition (MP19–MP21)|journal=Journal of Systematic Palaeontology|volume=18|issue=7|pages=541–572|doi=10.1080/14772019.2019.1645754|bibcode=2020JSPal..18..541W |s2cid=202026238 |url=https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02349546/file/caino_manuscrit_Review2.pdf }}</ref> Also, several migrant mammal groups had reached western Europe by MP17a-MP18, namely the [[Anthracotheriidae]], [[Hyaenodontinae]], and [[Amphicyonidae]].<ref name="MP"/> In addition to snakes, frogs, and [[Salamandridae|salamandrids]], rich assemblage of lizards are known in western Europe as well from MP16-MP20, representing the [[Iguanidae]], [[Lacertidae]], [[Gekkonidae]], [[Agamidae]], [[Scincidae]], [[Helodermatidae]], and [[Varanoidea]], most of which were able to thrive in the warm temperatures of western Europe.<ref name="reptiles">{{cite journal|last=Rage|first=Jean-Claude|year=2012|title=Amphibians and squamates in the Eocene of Europe: what do they tell us?|journal=Palaeobiodiversity and Palaeoenvironments|volume=92|issue=4 |pages=445–457|doi=10.1007/s12549-012-0087-3|bibcode=2012PdPe...92..445R |s2cid=128651937 }}</ref>


== Cultural significance ==
The MP18 locality of La Débruge in France holds fossil records of both ''P. oweni'' and ''P. minor'' along with the herpetotheriid ''Peratherium'', theridomyids ''[[Blainvillimys]]'' and ''[[Theridomys]]'', ischyromyid ''Plesiarctomys'', glirid ''Glamys'', hyaenodonts ''[[Hyaenodon]]'' and ''[[Pterodon (mammal)|Pterodon]]'', amphicyonid ''[[Cynodictis]]'', palaeotheres ''Plagiolophus'' and ''Anchilophus'', dichobunid ''Dichobune'', choeropotamid ''Choeropotamus'', cebochoerids ''Cebochoerus'' and ''Acotherulum'', anoplotheriids (''[[Anoplotherium]]'', ''Diplobune'', and ''Dacrytherium''), tapirulid ''Tapirulus'', xiphodonts ''Xiphodon'' and ''Dichodon'', cainothere ''[[Oxacron]]'', amphimerycid ''[[Amphimeryx]]'', and the anthracothere ''[[Elomeryx]]''.<ref name="MP"/>
[[File:Winsor McCay 1922-03-19 Oblivion's Cave.jpg|thumb|Political cartoon "Oblivion's Cave—Step Right In, Please" by [[Winsor McCay]], 1922]]
Late Pleistocene proboscideans of the Americas such as the American mastodon could have been recognized in Native American oral histories, but they are unlikely to have referenced any specific species. Typically, they may have been depicted in Native American oral history as aggressive and antagonistic beasts.<ref>{{cite thesis|type=MA|last=Landol|first=Nicholas|year=2022|title=The Role of the Pleistocene in Native American Oral Traditions|chapter=Chapter 4: Analysis|publisher=Binghamton University|pages=21–53|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/368392074}}</ref> Mastodons may have played ancient roles in [[Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast|Native American cultures of the Pacific Northwest]]. In 1987, Carl E. Gustafson recovered fossil evidence of a late Pleistocene mastodon far away from where the species would typically roam, the radiocarbon dating confirming a date of about 13,800 years ago. The local tribal members identified the remains as being of game pieces for [[slahal]], a gambling game for dispute settlements and entertainment.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Nose|first1=Renee Roman|year=2012|title=An Oral History of the Ancient Game of Sla-Hal: Man Versus Animals|work=ICT News|url=https://ictnews.org/archive/an-oral-history-of-the-ancient-game-of-sla-hal-man-versus-animals|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230425025130/https://ictnews.org/archive/an-oral-history-of-the-ancient-game-of-sla-hal-man-versus-animals|archive-date=25 April 2023|access-date=20 February 2024}}</ref> The bone sticks, carved from mastodon bones, are not easily interpretable archeologically, but tribal members saw the recovery of the items as evidence of the endurance of ancient cultural practices like slahal.<ref>{{cite news|last=Mapes|first=Lynda V.|year=2012|title=Tribal gathering celebrates unifying culture of an ancient game|work=The Seattle Times|url=https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/tribal-gathering-celebrates-unifying-culture-of-an-ancient-game/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210922002712/https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/tribal-gathering-celebrates-unifying-culture-of-an-ancient-game/|archive-date=22 September 2021|access-date=20 February 2024}}</ref>


The American mastodon had long been a stand-in within the United States for American nationalism since early American history,<ref name="peale2"/> and Thomas Jefferson was famously known for having hoped that the [[Lewis and Clark Expedition]] would eventually yield evidence of living mastodons in the western frontier of the United States.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Thomson|first=Keith|year=2011|title=Jefferson's old bones: did the so-called father of American vertebrate paleontology believe in fossils?|journal=American Scientist|volume=99|issue=3|doi=10.1511/2011.90.200 |url=https://www.americanscientist.org/article/jeffersons-old-bones}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Currie|first=Philip J.|year=2023|title=Celebrating dinosaurs: their behaviour, evolution, growth, and physiology|journal=Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences|volume=60|number=3|pages=263–293 |doi=10.1139/cjes-2022-0131|bibcode=2023CaJES..60..263C }}</ref> It was a defining symbol of museums according to Brett Barney as evident by a mention of it by [[Walt Whitman]] in a passage of the 1855 poem "[[Song of Myself]]."<ref>{{cite book|editor-last=Kummings|editor-first=Donald D.|last=Barney|first=Brett|year=2006|title=A Companion to Walt Whitman|chapter=Chapter 15: Nineteenth-century Popular Culture|publisher=Blackwell Publishing|pages=233–256|url=https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience/111/}}</ref>
=== Grande Coupure ===
[[File:Anthracotherium magnum.jpg|thumb|Restoration of ''[[Anthracotherium]] magnum'', an anthracothere genus that arrived in western by the Grande Coupure]]
The [[Grande Coupure]] event of western Europe is well-recognized in the palaeontological record as one of the largest extinction and faunal turnover events in the Cenozoic era.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Sun|first1=Jimin|last2=Ni|first2=Xijun|last3=Bi|first3=Shundong|last4=Wu|first4=Wenyu|last5=Ye|first5=Jie|last6=Meng|first6=Jin|last7=Windley|first7=Brian F.|year=2014|title=Synchronous turnover of flora, fauna, and climate at the Eocene-Oligocene Boundary in Asia|journal=Scientific Reports|volume=4|number=7463|page=7463 |doi=10.1038/srep07463|pmid=25501388 |pmc=4264005 |bibcode=2014NatSR...4E7463S }}</ref> The event is coincident with [[climate forcing]] events of cooler and more seasonal climates, the result being a 60% extinction rate of western European mammalian lineages while Asian faunal immigrants replaced them.<ref name="hampshire">{{cite journal|last1=Hooker|first1=Jerry J.|last2=Collinson|first2=Margaret E.|last3=Sille|first3=Nicholas P.|year=2004|title=Eocene–Oligocene mammalian faunal turnover in the Hampshire Basin, UK: calibration to the global time scale and the major cooling event|journal=Journal of the Geological Society|volume=161|issue=2|pages=161–172|doi=10.1144/0016-764903-091|bibcode=2004JGSoc.161..161H |s2cid=140576090 |url=http://doc.rero.ch/record/13418/files/PAL_E228.pdf }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Legendre|first1=Serge|last2=Mourer-Chauviré|first2=Cécile|last3=Hugueney|first3=Marguerite|last4=Maitre|first4=Elodie|last5=Sigé|first5=Bernard|last6=Escarguel|first6=Gilles|year=2006|title=Dynamique de la diversité des mammifères et des oiseaux paléogènes du Massif Central (Quercy et Limagnes, France)|journal=STRATA|language=french|series=1|volume=13|pages=275–282|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232607296}}</ref><ref name="unearth">{{cite journal|last1=Escarguel|first1=Gilles|last2=Legendre|first2=Serge|last3=Sigé|first3=Bernard|year=2008|title=Unearthing deep-time biodiversity changes: The Palaeogene mammalian metacommunity of the Quercy and Limagne area (Massif Central, France)|journal=Comptes Rendus Geoscience|volume=340|issue=9–10|pages=602–614|doi=10.1016/j.crte.2007.11.005|bibcode=2008CRGeo.340..602E |url=https://comptes-rendus.academie-sciences.fr/geoscience/articles/10.1016/j.crte.2007.11.005/ }}</ref> The Grande Coupure is often marked by palaeontologists as part of the Eocene-Oligocene boundary as a result at 33.9 Ma, although some estimate that the event began 33.6-33.4 Ma.<ref name="age">{{cite journal|last1=Costa|first1=Elisenda|last2=Garcés|first2=Miguel|last3=Sáez|first3=Alberto|last4=Cabrera|first4=Lluís|last5=López-Blanco|first5=Miguel|year=2011|title=The age of the "Grande Coupure" mammal turnover: New constraints from the Eocene–Oligocene record of the Eastern Ebro Basin (NE Spain)|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=301|issue=1–4|pages=97–107|doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2011.01.005|bibcode=2011PPP...301...97C |hdl=2445/34510 |hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hutchinson|first1=David K.|last2=Coxall|first2=Helen K.|last3=Lunt|first3=Daniel J.|last4=Steinthorsdottir|first4=Margret|last5=De Boer|first5=Agatha M.|last6=Baatsen|first6=Michiel L.J.|last7=Von der Heydt|first7=Anna S.|last8=Huber|first8=Matthew|last9=Kennedy-Asser|first9=Alan T.|last10=Kunzmann|first10=Lutz|last11=Ladant|first11=Jean-Baptiste|last12=Lear|first12=Caroline|last13=Moraweck|first13=Karolin|last14=Pearson|first14=Paul|last15=Piga|first15=Emanuela|last16=Pound|first16=Matthew J.|last17=Salzmann|first17=Ulrich|last18=Scher|first18=Howie D.|last19=Sijp|first19=Willem P.|last20=Śliwińska|first20=Kasia K|last21=Wilson|first21=Paul A.|last22=Zhang|first22=Zhongshi|year=2021|title=The Eocene-Oligocene transition: A review of marine and terrestrial proxy data, models and model-data comparisons|journal=Climate of the Past|volume=17|issue=1|pages=269–315|doi=10.5194/cp-17-269-2021|bibcode=2021CliPa..17..269H |s2cid=234099337 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The event correlates directly with or after the [[Eocene-Oligocene extinction event|Eocene-Oligocene transition]], an abrupt shift from a greenhouse world characterizing much of the Paleogene to a coolhouse/icehouse world of the early Oligocene onwards. The massive drop in temperatures stems from the first major expansion of the Antarctic [[ice sheets]] that caused drastic [[pCO2|pCO<sub>2</sub>]] decreases and an estimated drop of ~{{cvt|70|m}} in sea level.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Toumoulin|first1=Agathe|last2=Tardif|first2=Delphine|last3=Donnadieu|first3=Yannick|last4=Licht|first4=Alexis|last5=Ladant|first5=Jean-Baptiste|last6=Kunzmann|first6=Lutz|last7=Dupont-Nivet|first7=Guillaume|year=2022|title=Evolution of continental temperature seasonality from the Eocene greenhouse to the Oligocene icehouse –a model–data comparison|journal=Climate of the Past|volume=18|issue=2|pages=341–362|doi=10.5194/cp-18-341-2022|bibcode=2022CliPa..18..341T |doi-access=free }}</ref>


[[File:Nova Scotia DSC07369 - Mastodon Ridge (35913143965).jpg|thumb|left|Mastodon replica at the [[Mastodon Ridge]] park in [[Stewiacke]], [[Nova Scotia]], Canada]]
The seaway dynamics separating western Europe from other landmasses to strong extents but allowing for some levels of dispersals prior to the Grande Coupure are complicated and contentious, but many palaeontologists agreed that glaciation and the resulting drops in sea level played major roles in the drying of the seaways previously acting as major barriers to eastern migrants from Balkanatolia and western Europe. The [[Turgai Strait]] is often proposed as the main European seaway barrier prior to the Grande Coupure, but some researchers challenged this perception recently, arguing that it completely receded already 37 Ma, long before the Eocene-Oligocene transition. Alexis Licht et al. suggested that the Grande Coupure could have possibly been synchronous with the Oi-1 glaciation (33.5 Ma), which records a decline in atmospheric [[carbon dioxide|CO<sub>2</sub>]], boosting the Antarctic glaciation that already started by the Eocene-Oligocene transition. The Oi-1 glaciation, similar to the first glaciation event, caused large drops in sea level and pushed the global climate towards a coolhouse/icehouse environment.<ref name="balkanatolia"/><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Boulila|first1=Slah|last2=Dupont-Nivet|first2=Guillaume|last3=Galbrun|first3=Bruno|last4=Bauer|first4=Hugues|last5=Châteauneuf|first5=Jean-Jacques|year=2021|title=Age and driving mechanisms of the Eocene–Oligocene transition from astronomical tuning of a lacustrine record (Rennes Basin, France)|journal=Climate of the Past|volume=17|issue=6|pages=2343–2360|doi=10.5194/cp-17-2343-2021|bibcode=2021CliPa..17.2343B |s2cid=244097729 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The extinctions of a majority of endemic artiodactyls have been attributed to competition with immigrant faunas, environmental changes from cooling climates, or some combination of the two.<ref name="age"/>
The mastodon became the subject of a Michigan political campaign in 2000 when [[Washtenaw Community College]] geology instructor David P. Thomas Sr. aimed to make it the state fossil of Michigan. He, assisted by the [[Slauson Middle School (Ann Arbor, Michigan)|Slauson Middle School]] science teacher Jeffrey Bradley, was sponsored by the state senator [[Thaddeus McCotter]], arranged petition drives that collected thousands of signatures, and attended state hearings. Bradley's students participated in the "Mastodon for Michigan" campaign, which built a life-sized replica out of paper and raised $1,000 for the [[University of Michigan Museum of Natural History]] to built a mastodon exhibit. In 2002, the mastodon became the state fossil, making it the fourteenth [[Lists of United States state symbols|state symbol]].<ref>{{cite web|year=2002|title=STATE FOSSIL: MASTODON|work=Michigan Legislature|url=https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2001-2002/billanalysis/House/htm/2001-HLA-0397-a.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240129001956/https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2001-2002/billanalysis/House/htm/2001-HLA-0397-a.htm|archive-date=29 January 2024|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Mastodon|work=State Symbols USA|date=10 October 2014 |url=https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-official-item/michigan/state-dinosaur-fossil/mastodon|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231001081701/https://statesymbolsusa.org/symbol-official-item/michigan/state-dinosaur-fossil/mastodon|archive-date=1 October 2023|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref> Similarly, the mastodon became the state fossil of Indiana as recently as 2022 due to House Bill 1013, authored by the representative [[Randy Frye]], passing unanimously.<ref>{{cite news|title=Indiana lawmakers name mastodon as first state fossil|work=WFYI|url=https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/indiana-lawmakers-name-mastodon-as-first-state-fossil|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230922112045/https://www.wfyi.org/news/articles/indiana-lawmakers-name-mastodon-as-first-state-fossil|archive-date=22 September 2023|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref>


In January 2024, Indiana senator [[Mike Braun]] and Michigan senator [[Gary Peters]] introduced a bipartisan bill to make the mastodon the US national fossil is what is called the "National Fossil Act." Section 1 aims to define the bill's name, Section 2 would investigate the roles of the mastodon in American public life, and Section 3 would designate it as the national fossil under [[Title 36 of the United States Code]]. Peters justified that the mastodon represents a unique aspect of Michigan's history and American history, stating that he hoped that its establishment as the national fossil would preserve the histories and encourage new generations of scientists and other researchers to pursue their goals.<ref>{{cite news|title=Senators Braun and Peters Introduce Bill to Name Mastodon America's National Fossil|work=Mike Braun: U.S. Senator Indiana|url=https://www.braun.senate.gov/news/press-releases/25802-2/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240220235406/https://www.braun.senate.gov/news/press-releases/25802-2/|archive-date=20 February 2024|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Davidson|first=Kyle|year=2024|title=Peters introduces bipartisan proposal to designate the first national fossil|work=Michigan Advance|url=https://michiganadvance.com/briefs/peters-introduces-bipartisan-proposal-to-designate-the-first-national-fossil/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240127193610/https://michiganadvance.com/briefs/peters-introduces-bipartisan-proposal-to-designate-the-first-national-fossil/|archive-date=27 January 2024|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref>
The earliest Oligocene marked the arrivals of later anthracotheres, [[entelodont]]s, ruminants ([[Gelocidae]], [[Lophiomerycidae]]), [[Rhinocerotoidea|rhinocerotoids]] ([[Rhinocerotidae]], [[Amynodontidae]], [[Eggysodontidae]]), carnivorans (later Amphicyonidae, [[Amphicynodontidae]], [[Nimravidae]], and [[Ursidae]]), eastern Eurasian rodents ([[Eomyidae]], [[Cricetidae]], and [[Castoridae]]), and eulipotyphlans ([[Erinaceidae]]).<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rivals|first1=Florent|last2=Belyaev|first2=Ruslan I.|last3=Basova|first3=Vera B.|last4=Prilepskaya|first4=Natalya E.|year=2023|title=Hogs, hippos or bears? Paleodiet of European Oligocene anthracotheres and entelodonts|journal=Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology|volume=611|page=111363 |doi=10.1016/j.palaeo.2022.111363|bibcode=2023PPP...61111363R |s2cid=254801829 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Becker|first=Damien|year=2009|title=Earliest record of rhinocerotoids (Mammalia: Perissodactyla) from Switzerland: systematics and biostratigraphy|journal=Swiss Journal of Geosciences|volume=102|issue=3 |pages=489–504|doi=10.1007/s00015-009-1330-4|s2cid=67817430 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="hampshire"/><ref name="pterodon">{{cite journal|last1=Solé|first1=Floréal|last2=Fischer|first2=Fischer|last3=Denayer|first3=Julien|last4=Speijer|first4=Robert P.|last5=Fournier|first5=Morgane|last6=Le Verger|first6=Kévin|last7=Ladevèze|first7=Sandrine|last8=Folie|first8=Annelise|last9=Smith|first9=Thierry|year=2020|title=The upper Eocene-Oligocene carnivorous mammals from the Quercy Phosphorites (France) housed in Belgian collections|journal=Geologica Belgica|volume=24|issue=1–2|pages=1–16|doi=10.20341/gb.2020.006|s2cid=224860287 |doi-access=free}}</ref>


Located in the [[Mastodon Ridge]] park in the Canadian town of [[Stewiacke]], [[Nova Scotia]] is a large-sized replica of a mastodon based on a skeleton recovered from Nova Scotia. It was sculpted as a clay model, has a weight of ~{{cvt|1400|kg}}, is {{cvt|3.5|m}} in shoulder height, and measures {{cvt|7.5|m}} long. The sculpture took about 8 weeks to be constructed and was sent to the Mastodon Ridge in January 1995.<ref>{{cite web|title=Replica|work=Mastodon Ridge|url=https://mastodonridge.ca/mastodon/replica/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240116153106/https://mastodonridge.ca/mastodon/replica/|archive-date=16 January 2024|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref>
In regard to palaeotheres, ''P. major'' and ''P. fraasi'' are recorded to have gone extinct by MP20 while ''P. minor'' survived past the Grande Coupure.<ref name="evolutionary"/> Research by Sarah C. Joomun et al. in 2010 suggests that ''P. minor'' changed its dietary habits most likely in response to increasingly abrasive plants, the result of environmental changes following the Oi-1 glaciation. Afterward, the climate in MP21 was stable enough that ''P. minor'' did not need to respond with further dietary changes.<ref name="wear"/> The climatic trends from the Grande Coupure event favored palaeothere species that had light body builds and were built for cursoriality such as ''P. minor'', allowing them to transverse across more open lands and escape from newly arrived predators where shelter otherwise was scarce.<ref name="forelimb"/><ref name="central"/> ''P. fraasi'' in comparison had a stockier build,<ref name="plagiolophus"/> a body build type that was likely unfavorable for early Oligocene environmental trends in relation to palaeotheres.<ref name="forelimb"/><ref name="central"/>


The name "mastodon" was adopted in different contexts within the United States. For instance, [[4-8-0]] [[locomotive]]s of the late 19th century were originally named "''[[Mastodon (steam locomotive)|Mastodons]]''" before the name was eventually replaced with "12-wheeler." The name was a reference to the American mastodon. The [[4-10-0]] locomotive later became known also as "''Mastodon''."<ref>{{cite book|last=Morrison|first=Tom|year=2018|title=The American Steam Locomotive in the Twentieth Century|chapter=Chapter 4: Locomotive Construction, 1895–1905|publisher=McFarland|pages=133–182}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Gaskell|first=G.H.|year=1952|title=The Origin of Locomotive Class Names|journal=The Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin|number=87|pages=83–95|jstor=43517676 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/43517676}}</ref> In the 1993-1995 show ''[[Mighty Morphin Power Rangers]]'', the Black Ranger [[Zack Taylor]] had the mastodon ability and controlled the Mastodon Dinozord machine.<ref>{{cite thesis|type=MA|last=Wilhelmi|first=Cynthia J.|year=1996|title=The content of the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers as the source of antisocial and prosocial learning|publisher=University of Nebraska at Omaha|url=https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork/3018/}}</ref> The name "Mastodon" was also adopted by a [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]] band when guitarist [[Bill Kelliher]] was asked by the guitarist-singer [[Brent Hinds]] asked him about the name of the "fossil elephant" after seeing his tattoo of a [[Bantha]] skull from the [[Star Wars]] franchise, in which the members then agreed to it being the [[Mastodon (band)|band's name]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Marchese|first=David|year=2010|title=How They Became... Mastodon|work=Spin|url=https://www.spin.com/2010/04/how-they-became-mastodon/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220629191437/https://www.spin.com/2010/04/how-they-became-mastodon/|archive-date=29 June 2022|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref> "Mastodon" is also the name of a blogging [[social network]] site that also acquired its name from the extinct proboscidean species.<ref>{{cite magazine|last=Perrigo|first=Billy|year=2020|title=Thousands Have Joined Mastodon Since Twitter Changed Hands. Its Founder Has a Vision for Democratizing Social Media|magazine=Time|url=https://time.com/6229230/mastodon-eugen-rochko-interview/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240121220657/https://time.com/6229230/mastodon-eugen-rochko-interview/|archive-date=21 January 2024|access-date=21 February 2024}}</ref>
=== Early Oligocene ===


== References ==
== References ==

Latest revision as of 00:32, 23 November 2024

Mastodon
Temporal range: Late Miocene – early Holocene 8–0.011 Ma (Possible earliest record of up to ~10 Ma)
Mounted M. americanum skeleton ("Warren mastodon"), American Museum of Natural History
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Proboscidea
Family: Mammutidae
Genus: Mammut
Blumenbach, 1799
Type species
Elephas americanus
(= †Mammut americanum)
Kerr, 1792
Other species
  • M. matthewi Osborn, 1921
  • M. vexillarius Matthew, 1930
  • M. raki Frick, 1933
  • M. nevadanum Stock, 1936
  • M. cosoensis Schultz, 1937
  • M? furlongi Shotwell & Russell, 1963
  • M. pacificum Dooley et al., 2019
Species pending reassessment
  • M. borsoni Hays, 1834
  • M. obliquelophus Mucha, 1980
  • M. lufugense Zhang, 1982
  • M. zhupengensis Zhang et. al., 1991
Synonyms
Genus synonymy
  • Harpagmotherium Fischer von Waldheim, 1808
  • Mastotherium Fischer von Waldheim, 1814
  • Mastodon Cuvier, 1817
  • Tetracaulodon Godman, 1830
  • Missourium Koch, 1840
  • Leviathan Koch, 1841
  • Pliomastodon Osborn, 1926
Synonyms of M. americanum
  • Elephas americanus Kerr, 1792
  • Mammut ohioticum Blumenbach, 1799
  • Elephas macrocephalus Camper, 1802
  • Harpagmotherium canadense Fischer de Waldheim, 1808
  • Elephas mastodontus Barton, 1810
  • Mastotherium megalodon Fischer de Waldheim, 1814
  • Tapirus mastodontoides Harlan, 1825
  • Tetracaulodon mastodontoideum Godman, 1830
  • Mastodon ohioticum Eichwald, 1832
  • Mastodon cuvieri Hays, 1834
  • Mastodon jeffersoni Hays, 1834
  • Tetracaulodon collinsii Hays, 1834
  • Tetracaulodon godmani Hays, 1834
  • Tetracaulodon tapyroides Hays, 1834
  • Elephas ohioticus de Blainville, 1839–1864
  • Missourium kochii Koch, 1840
  • Leviathan missourii Koch, 1840
  • Tetracaulodon osagii Koch, 1841
  • Tetracaulodon kochii Koch, 1841
  • Tetracaulodon bucklandii Grant, 1842
  • Missourium theristocaulodon Koch, 1843
  • Mastodon rugatum Koch, 1845
  • Elephas rupertianus Richardson, 1854
  • Trilophodon ohioticus Falconer, 1868
  • Mammut progenium Hay, 1914
  • Mastodon americanus plicatus Osborn, 1926
  • Mammut oregonense Hay, 1926
  • Mastodon moodiei Barbour, 1931
  • Mastodon americanus alaskensis Frick, 1933
  • Mastodon acutidens Osborn, 1936
Synonyms of M. matthewi
  • Mastodon matthewi Osborn, 1921
  • Pliomastodon sellardsi Simpson, 1930
  • Pliomastodon adamsi Hibbard, 1944
Synonyms of M. vexillarius
  • Pliomastodon vexillarius Matthew, 1930
Synonyms of M. raki
  • Mastodon raki Frick, 1933
Synonyms of M. nevadanum
  • Pliomastodon nevadanus Stock, 1936
Synonyms of M. cosoensis
  • Pliomastodon cosoensis Schultz, 1937
Synonyms of "M." borsoni
  • Mastodon vellavus Aymard, 1847
  • Mastodon vialleti Aymard, 1847
  • Mastodon buffonis Pomel, 1848
  • Mastodon affinis Pomel, 1859
  • Zygolophodon borsoni Osborn, 1926
  • Mastodon pavlowi Osborn, 1936
  • Mammut shansiense Chow & Chang, 1961
Synonyms of "M." obliquelophus
  • M. praetypicum? Schlesinger, 1917

A mastodon (mastós 'breast' + odoús 'tooth') is a member of the genus Mammut (German for 'mammoth'), which was endemic to North America and lived from the late Miocene to the early Holocene. Mastodons belong to the order Proboscidea, the same order as elephants and mammoths (which belong to the family Elephantidae). Mammut is the type genus of the extinct family Mammutidae, which diverged from the ancestors of modern elephants at least 27–25 million years ago, during the Oligocene.

Like other members of the Mammutidae, mastodon molars have a zygodont morphology (where parallel pairs of cusps are merged into sharp ridges) that is strongly different from those of elephantids. Compared to its likely ancestor Zygolophodon, Mammut is characterized by particularly long and upwardly curved upper tusks, reduced or absent tusks on the lower jaw, and shortening of the mandibular symphysis (the frontmost part of the lower jaw), the latter two traits having also evolved in parallel separately in elephantids. Mastodons had an overall stockier skeleton, a lower domed skull, and a longer tail than elephantids. Fully grown male M. americanum are thought to have been have been 275 cm (9.02 ft) to 305 cm (10.01 ft) at shoulder height and from 6.8 t (6.7 long tons; 7.5 short tons) to 9.2 t (9.1 long tons; 10.1 short tons) in body mass on average. Size estimates suggest that American mastodon males were heavier on average than any living elephant species; they were typically larger than Asian elephants and African forest elephants of both sexes but shorter than male African bush elephants.

M. americanum, known as the "American mastodon" or simply "mastodon," has a long and complex paleontological history dating back to 1705 when the first fossils were discovered in Claverack, New York in the American colonies. Because of its uniquely shaped molars with no modern analogues in terms of large animals, the species attracted attention from European researchers and influential Americans before and after the American Revolution to the point that, according to American historians Paul Semonin and Keith Stewart Thomson, it bolstered American nationalism and contributed to a greater understanding of extinction. Taxonomically, it was first recognized as a distinct species by Robert Kerr in 1792 then placed in its own genus Mammut by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach in 1799, thus making it one of first fossil mammal genera to be established with undisputed taxonomic authority. The genus served as a wastebasket taxon for proboscidean species with superficially similar molar tooth morphologies but today includes 7 definite species, 1 of questionable affinities, and 4 other species from Eurasia that are awaiting reclassifications to other genera.

Mastodons are thought to have had a predominantly browsing diet of leaves, fruits, and woody parts of plants. This allowed mastodons to niche partition with other members of Proboscidea in North America such as gomphotheres and the Columbian mammoth, which had shifted to mixed feeding or grazing by the late Neogene-Quaternary. It is thought that mastodon behavior was not much different from that of elephants and mammoths, with females and young living in herds and adult males living largely solitary lives plus entering periods of aggression similar to the musth exhibited by modern elephants. Mammut achieved maximum species diversity in the Pliocene, although the genus is known from abundant fossil evidence in the Late Pleistocene.

Mastodons coexisted with Paleoindians, the first humans to inhabit North America, for at least a few thousand years prior to their extinction. Evidence has been found that Paleoindians (including those of the Clovis culture) hunted mastodons, based on findings of mastodon remains with cut marks and/or lithic artifacts.

Mastodons disappeared along with many other North American animals, including most of the largest animals (megafauna), as part of the end-Pleistocene extinction event, the causes of which are typically attributed to human hunting, severe climatic periods such as the Younger Dryas, or some combination of the two. The American mastodon had its last recorded occurrence in the earliest Holocene about 11,000 years ago, which is considerably later than other North American megafauna species. Today, the American mastodon is one of the best-known fossil species in both academic research and public perception, as a result of its inclusion in American popular culture.

Taxonomy

[edit]

Research history

[edit]

Earliest finds

[edit]
Mammut americanum molar tooth, Rotunda Museum

In a letter dated 1713, Edward Hyde, 3rd Earl of Clarendon (also known as Lord Cornbury) from New York reported to the Royal Society learned society of Great Britain that in 1705, a large tooth had been found near the bank of the Hudson River by a Dutch countryman and was sold to Van Bruggen, a member of the New York General Assembly, for a gill of rum; Bruggen eventually gave the tooth to Cornbury. He then stated that he sent Johannis Abeel, a recorder of Albany, New York to dig near the original site of the tooth to find more bones.[1][2]

Abeel reported in a letter that he went to the town of Claverack, New York where the original bones were found. American historian Paul Semonin said that the accounts written by Cornbury and Abeel agree with that written by in the July 30, 1705 entry in the The Boston News-Letter.[3] The account reported skeletal evidence of an antediluvian (or biblical) "giant" unearthed in Claverack. However, the femur and one of the teeth both disintegrated before they could be further observed.[4][1]

Big Bone Lick

[edit]
Engravings of the femurs of an unspecified extant elephant species (top), M. americanum (middle), and a "Siberian" mammoth (bottom), 1764

In 1739, a French military expedition under the command of Charles III Le Moyne (also known as "Longueil") explored the site of "Big Bone Lick" (in present-day Kentucky), collecting fossil bones and teeth there.[5] The French naturalist Louis Jean-Marie Daubenton examined the fossil collection brought by Longueuil and compared it with specimens of extant elephants and Siberian mammoths in 1762. Daubenton said that the bones had been discovered by Native Americans (probably Abenaki hunter-warriors). He concluded that the femur and tusk belonged to an elephant while the molars (or cheek teeth) came from a separate giant hippopotamus.[6][7][8]

In Shawnee tradition, proboscideans roamed in herds and were hunted by giants, both of which eventually became extinct. The stories. The accounts told by the Shawnee individuals in 1762 are the oldest known documented interpretations of the "Ohio" fossils, although the traditions may have had been told for generations.[9][10]

In 1767, Peter Collinson credited Irish trader George Croghan with sending him and Benjamin Franklin proboscidean fossils for his studies. He concluded that the peculiar grinding teeth (the molars) were built for herbivorous diets of branches of trees and shrubs as well as other vegetation, a view later shared by Franklin.[11][12]

In 1768, Scottish anatomist William Hunter recorded that he and his brother John Hunter observed that the molars did not resemble those of modern elephants. He determined that the "grinders" were from a carnivorous animal but believed that the tusks belonged to the same animal. After examining the fossils from Franklin and Lord Shelburne, Hunter was convinced that the "pseudo-elephant", or "animal incognitum" (or "incognitum"), was a non-elephant animal species that was probably the same as the proboscideans found in Siberia. He concluded that humanity should be thankful to heaven that the animal, if truly carnivorous, was extinct despite what philosophers may think.[13]

Early American observations

[edit]
The 1806–1808 painting The Exhumation of the Mastodon by Charles Willson Peale

In 1785, the reverend Robert Annan wrote an account in which workers discovered bones on his farm near the Hudson River in New York in the fall of 1780. The workers found fossil bones including vertebrae that broke shortly thereafter and molars. Annan expressed his confusion as to what the animal could be but speculated based on its "grinders" that it was carnivorous in diet and probably went extinct due to some global catastrophe.[14]

American statesman Thomas Jefferson stated his thoughts on Notes on the State of Virginia (published by 1785) that the fossil proboscideans may have been carnivorous, still exist in northern North America, and are related to mammoths whose remains had been found in Siberia. Jefferson referred to the theory of American social degeneracy by Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon and countered with measurements of extant and extinct animals, including those of "mammoths," as evidence that American faunas were not "degenerative" in size.[15] Semonin argued that the American proboscidean fossils were used as political tools to inspire American nationalism and counter against the theory of the offensive American degeneracy.[16][17]

Colored lithograph of the "Missourium" (= Mammut) skeleton, c. 1845

In 1799, workers digging a marl pit at John Masten's farm in Newburgh, New York uncovered a femur and subsequent excavations were watched by a large crowd.[18] American painter and exhibitionist Charles Willson Peale visited the site in 1801, where he first sketched the fossils then purchased excavation privileges and full ownership of the fossils from Masten and borrowed a monetary loan from the American Philosophical Society (APS) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In addition to the first skeleton, the second was excavated using a mill-like device to drain a 12 ft (3.7 m) deep marl pit. Peale assembled a complete skeleton in his Philadelphia Museum in 1804, and its exhibit was open first to invited members of the American Philosophical Society on December 24 then to the general public on December 25 for an exhibition fee plus the general admission fee.[19]

The special exhibition attracted thousands of visitors, and the skeleton became a US national symbol.[20] Charles Peale's son, Rembrandt Peale, took the skeleton to Europe, showing if off and allowing usage of it for Jefferson's final rebuttals against Buffon's arguments for the supposed inferiority of American faunas. Author Keith Stewart Thomson argued that the promotion of the "mastodon" skeleton made it a symbol of the strength of American nationalism and that "mammoth" as a term became associated with gigantism. Decades later, the museum bankrupted, and the first skeleton's specimens were sold to some German spectators in around 1848, who eventually sold it to Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt in Germany, where it is now displayed. The second skeleton's specimens eventually ended up at the American Museum of Natural History.[21]

Excavation of a specimen in a golf course in Heath, Ohio, 1989 (left) and a replica of the "Burning Tree mastodon" complete skeleton (right)

Other skeletons of Mammut americanum were excavated within the United States in the first half of the 19th century. One of them was collected by American showman Albert C. Koch in what is today the Mastodon State Historic Site at Missouri in 1839. He hypothesized in 1840 that the proboscidean, which he classified as Missourium, was much larger than an elephant, had horizontal tusks plus trunks, and occupied aquatic habitats.[22] He acquired additional fossils from a spring on the Pomme de Terre River to assemble a mounted skeleton of the "Missouri Leviathan" and briefly exhibited it at St. Louis. After exhibiting the skeleton throughout Europe, he sold the skeleton to the British Museum of Natural History. Richard Owen then properly reassembled the skeleton, and it today is on display there.[23][24]

In 1845, another skeleton was excavated from Newburgh by laborers hired by Nathaniel Brewster initially to remove lacustrine deposits to fertilize the neighboring fields. They were observed by a large amount of spectators and uncovered relatively complete fossil evidence of M. americanum.[25][26] The skeleton was exhibited in New York City and other New England towns then was acquired by John Collins Warren for study.[27][28] After Warren's death in 1856, the skeleton was sent to Warren's family but was traded to Harvard Medical School for John Warren's skeleton. The "Warren mastodon", under the request of American paleontologist Henry Fairfield Osborn, was purchased by the American financier J. P. Morgan for $30,000 in 1906 and donated to the American Museum of Natural History where it is exhibited today.[29][26]

Early taxonomic history

[edit]
Mammut skeleton previously displayed by Charles Peale at his museum, now on display at Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt

In the 1790s, the "American incognitum" was subject to research by multiple taxonomists. Scottish writer Robert Kerr erected the species name Elephas americanus in 1792 based on fossil tusks and "grinders" from the Big Bone Lick locality. He stated that the tusks were similar to elephants while the molars were completely different because they were covered with enamel and had a double row of high conical cusp processes. Kerr was unsure about the taxonomic affinities of the molars and referenced that Thomas Pennant supposed that they belong to an unknown species within the genus Elephas, giving the common name "American elephant."[30]

German naturalist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach also followed up with more taxonomic descriptions of fossil proboscideans in 1799. After first naming Elephas primigenius? (now known as Mammuthus primigenius), he followed with describing what he considered a "mammoth" and "colossal land monster of the prehistoric world." He created the genus Mammut and erected the species Mammut ohioticum based on fossil bones dug up from Ohio in North America. He said that the species was distinguished from other animals of the prehistoric world based on the unusual shapes of the large molars. The genus name "Mammut" refers to the German translation for "mammoth."[31] The naming of the genus Mammut in 1799 makes it the second or third genus to be recognized with taxonomic authority given that Megalonyx had been named the same year.[32]

French naturalist Georges Cuvier also described known fossil proboscidean species back in 1796, although his account was later published in 1799. He considered that the remains uncovered from Siberia were true "mammoths" that had similar dentitions to extant elephants but had some morphological differences. He mentioned the fossil remains that were brought back by Longueil from Ohio back in 1739 and several researchers from previous decades who noted the unusual molars and thought that they belonged to different animals like hippopotamuses. He followed recognition in the previously established species "Elephas americanus" and argued that the species was different from elephants and mammoths and cannot be found amongst living animals due to extinction from catastrophism.[33][34]

The proboscidean species was subject to several other species names given by other taxonomists within the earliest 18th century as well as the genus name Harpagmotherium by the Russian naturalist Gotthelf Fischer von Waldheim in 1808.[24]

Cuvier's taxonomy

[edit]
Sketch of the skeleton of Mammut, labeled as "Mastodonte"

In 1806, Cuvier wrote multiple extended research articles on fossil proboscideans of Eurasia and the Americas. He stated that the bones that Buffon previously described from North America were not of elephants but another animal that he referred to as the "mastodonte," or the "animal of Ohio."[35] He reinforced the idea that the extinct "mastodon" was an animal close in relationship to elephants that differed by jaws with large tubercles. He suggested that "mammoth" and "carnivorous elephant" be discontinued as names for the species and that it receive a new genus name instead. Cuvier said that for "mastodonte," he derived the name's etymology (compound μαστός (mastós, "breast") + ὀδούς (odoús, "tooth") from Ancient Greek to mean "nipple tooth," since he thought that it expressed the characteristic form of the teeth.[36]

In 1817, the French naturalist officially established the genus name Mastodon, reaffirming that it is extinct and has left no living descendants. He established that it had an overall body form similar to elephants but had molars more similar to hippopotamuses and pigs that did not grind meat. The first species he erected within Mastodon was Mastodon giganteum, giving it the informal name "great mastodon" and writing that that it is designated to the Ohio proboscidean with abundant fossil evidence, equal size but greater proportions to modern elephants, and diamond-shaped points of the molars. The naturalist also created the second species name Mastodon angustidens and gave it the informal name "narrow-toothed mastodon," diagnosing it as having narrower molars, smaller sizes compared to M. giganteum, and range distributions in Europe and South America.[37] Cuvier also erected several other species of Mastodon originating from other continents in 1824.[38] Despite Cuvier's genus name being younger than multiple other genus names, Mastodon became the most commonly used genus name for the 19th century.[39][24]

Taxonomic problems

[edit]
M. americanum skeleton, Natural History Museum, London. The skeleton was initially assembled by Albert C. Koch as "Missourium" or "Leviathan", both now synonymous with Mammut.

"Mastodon" was riddled with major taxonomic problems since species now determined as belonging to other proboscidean genera were classified to Mastodon on the basis of similar dentitions to that of "Mastodon giganteum" (= Mammut americanum), effectively making it a wastebasket taxon.[37][38][40] Various fossil proboscidean species were classified into Mastodon in the 19th century before eventually being reclassified into distinct genera.[24] In addition to still-valid species names, several synonymous or dubious species names ultimately belonging to different genera were erected within the Americas as well throughout the 19th century.[41][42][43] Also, many species names erected based on M. americanum remains were erected. As a result, M. americanum has many synonymous names. The issue of synonymous species names were especially apparent in the first half of the 19th century.[24]

Today, the genera that include species formerly classified into Mastodon include Gomphotherium (G. angustidens, G. pyrenaicum, G. productum, G. libycum, G. subtapiroideum, G. steinheimense),[44][45][46] Zygolophodon (Z. turicensis, Z. proavus),[47][48] Cuvieronius (C. hyodon),[49] Stegodon (S. elephantoides),[50] Stegolophodon (S. latidens, S. cautleyi),[51] Anancus (A. avernensis, A. sivalensis, A. perimensis),[52] Tetralophodon (T. longirostris),[53] Choerolophodon (C. pentelici),[54] Stegomastodon (S. mirificus),[55] Rhynchotherium ("R." euhypodon),[42] Stenobelodon (S. floridanus),[56] and Notiomastodon (N. platensis).[41]

In 1830, American naturalist John Davidson Godman created the genus Tetracaulodon plus its species T. Mastodontoideum based on what he determined to be differences between it and Mastodon based on the skull and dentition.[57] Both Richard Harlan and William Cooper pointed out that except for the tusks, all other characteristics of the specimens were consistent with M. giganteum. They therefore argued that there was no reason to assume that the tusks were not just individual variations, a view followed also by George William Featherstonhaugh. Isaac Hays comparatively defended Godman's taxon, which led to a bitter debate regarding the validity of the genus amongst American naturalists.[58]

The validities of both Tetracaulodon and Missourium were rejected by Owen in 1842, although he retained the former name informally.[59] By 1869, American paleontologist Joseph Leidy determined that Mastodon americanus is the senior species synonym and listed M. giganteum as a junior synonym. He also listed Mammut, Harpagmotherium, Mastotherium, Missourium, and Leviathan as synonyms of Mastodon. He also noted that M. americanum as a species was highly variable in morphology.[60][61]

In 1902, American paleontologist Oliver Perry Hay listed Mammut as the prioritized genus name given its status as the oldest genus name, making Mastodon, Tetracaulodon, and Missourium classified as junior synonyms. He also established M. americanum as the type species.[39] The genus name Mastodon was subsequently abandoned by many American paleontologists in favor of Mammut within the early 20th century.[62][63][64][24] In 1942, American paleontologist George Gaylord Simpson said that for his study, he prioritized the historic plus taxonomically correct name Mammut over Mastodon.[65] He continued prioritizing Mammut in 1945, stating that people were generally aware of its taxonomic priorities over Mastodon and that people had refused to use it. He stated that he did not want to either but reluctantly set aside his personal preferences to follow taxonomic rules.[66]

Additional species

[edit]
Sketch of the reconstructed skull of "Pliomastodon vexillarius" (= Mammut vexillarius), 1930

In 1921, Osborn created the species name Mastodon matthewi based on distinct molars from the Snake Creek Formation of western Nebraska, naming it in honor of William Diller Matthew. He also erected another species M. merriami from the Thousand Creek Formation in Nevada, which was eventually synonymized with Zygolophodon proavus.[67][48] Osborn in 1926 followed up for Mastodon matthewi by establishing the genus Pliomastodon for the species based on cranial differences from "Miomastodon" (= Zygolophodon).[68]

In 1930, Matthew erected a second species for Pliomastodon named P. vexillarius based on fossil material from the locality of Elephant Hill in California, determining that it differs from Mammut by differences in the skull and that the etymology of the species name was made in honor of paleontological contributions by the Standard Oil Company of California.[69][48]

In 1933, Childs Frick named the species Mastodon raki from the locality of Truth or Consequences, New Mexico based on differences on the heel and M3 tooth from M. americanus, otherwise having proportions similar to it.[70][48] In 1936, Chester Stock published the species name Pliomastodon nevadanus based on fossils from the Thousand Creek Beds of northwestern Nevada.[71] In 1937, John R. Schultz created the species name Pliomastodon? cosoensis, naming it after the Coso Mountains in Inyo County, California where skull fossils were recovered.[72]

In 1963, J. Arnold Shotwell and Donald E. Russell created another species Mammut (Pliomastodon) furlongi, assigning it to fossils collected from the Juntura Formation of Oregon. The species name was created in honor of Eustace L. Furlong, who made early fossil collections from the western side of the Juntura Basin.[73]

The genus Pliomastodon was synonymized with Mammut while Miomastodon was synonymized with Zygolophodon by Jeheskel Shoshani and Pascal Tassy in a 1996 appendix,[74] a view that was followed by other authors in later years.[75][76][48]

In 2019, Alton C. Dooley Jr. et al. established Mammut pacificus based on fossils collected from the Diamond Valley Lake in Hemet, California. They also stated that M. oregonense is a nomen dubium and that further analysis needs to be done to confirm whether or not M. furlongi belongs to Zygolophodon instead.[76]

In 2023, Wighart von Koenigswald et al. reviewed the North American species of Zygolophodon and Mammut. They synonymized P. adamsi and P. sellardsi with Mammut matthewi and emended M. nevadanus and M. pacificus to M. nevadanum and M. pacificum, respectively. They also said that they were uncertain of the taxonomic status of M. furlongi, specifically whether or not it was a variant of sexual dimorphism of Z. proavus. Some authors have considered M. nevadanum to be synonymous with M. matthewi while others had retained validity of the species name.[48][76]

Several mammutid species outside of North America are classified to Mammut (or "Pliomastodon"), namely M. borsoni, M. obliquelophus, M. zhupengensis, and M. lufugense (possibly synonymous with M. obliquelophus).[77][78][79][80] Recent research such as that of von Koenigswald et al. in 2023 warned that the genus Mammut should be carefully used for non-North American species.[48]

Classification and evolution

[edit]
Portrait of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, who erected the genus Mammut in 1799

Mammut is the type genus of the Mammutidae, the sole family of the elephantimorph clade Mammutida (the other elephantimorph clade is Elephantida). The Mammutidae is characterized by molars with zygodont-form crests, which have remained morphologically conservative throughout the evolutionary history of the family. Mammut is considered to be a derived genus of the family because of strong zygodont development.[81] As a family of the Elephantimorpha clade, it is only distantly related to the Deinotheriidae due to major differences in dentition and emergence of adult teeth.[82] The Mammutidae is identified as a monophyletic clade, meaning that it did not leave any derived descendant groups in its evolutionary history.[83] The monophyly of the Mammutidae makes it differ from the Elephantida, where the Gomphotheriidae is paraphyletic (or ancestral to more derived descendant groups in the cladistic sense) in relation to the derived elephantoid families Stegodontidae and Elephantidae (elephants, mammoths, and relatives).[84]

Although the separation of the Mammutida and Elephantida is strongly supported based on morphological differences, their origins within the late Paleogene remain uncertain. One hypothesis asserts that the Elephantimorpha is monophyletic if the primitive Elephantiformes genus Phiomia was truly ancestral to both the Elephantida and Mammutida. An alternate hypothesis suggests that the Elephantimorpha is diphyletic because Phiomia is ancestral to gomphotheres while Palaeomastodon is ancestral to mammutids.[82] The earliest undisputed mammutid genus Losodokodon is recorded in Kenya, Africa and firmly establishes the earliest presence of mammutids in the late Oligocene (~27-24 Ma). The Mammutidae, like other Paleogene proboscideans, was therefore an endemic radiation within the continent akin to other endemic mammals like arsinoitheres, hyracoids, and catarrhine primates plus non-endemics such as anthracotheres and hyaenodonts.[85]

In the early Neogene phase of evolution, Eozygodon made an appearance in the earliest Miocene (~23-20 Ma) of Africa after Losodokodon. Eozygodon was subsequently succeeded by Zygolophodon by the early Miocene, and the latter dispersed into Eurasia by around 19-18 million years ago, and into North America by the middle Miocene. The dispersal of mammutids between Africa and Eurasia may have occurred multiple times. The Mammutidae eventually went extinct in Africa prior to the late Miocene.[86][87][77]

Mammut as currently defined sensu lato (in a broad sense) is most likely polyphyletic (comprising several unrelated groups). This is because the inclusion of Eurasian mammutid species into Mammut implies that they share a common origin with North American Mammut, but this relationship has been doubted. As a result, these Eurasian species may belong to either other existing mammutid genera or entirely new genera. "Mammut" borsoni, the last Eurasian mammutid, became extinct during the earliest Pleistocene, around 2.5-2 million years ago.[77]

Skeletons of an adult and calf M. americanum, George C. Page Museum

The oldest evidence of mammutids in North America is of a fragmentary molar of Zygolophodon sp. from Massacre Lake, Nevada, dating to 16.5-16.4 Ma (during the Hemingfordian stage of the North American land mammal ages (NALMA)). The only definitively defined species of Zygolophodon from North America is Z. proavus, which occurs in the Barstovian and Clarendonian stages. M? furlongi from the Black Butte in Oregon also dates back to the Clarendonian stage, but the affinities of the species remains unclear. If it truly is a species of Mammut, then its earliest temporal range is recorded at about 10 Ma. The earliest undisputed appearance of Mammut is of M. nevadanum from Thousand Creek Beds, dating back to the early Hemphillian, or 8.0-7.1 Ma. Historically, North American paleontologists considered that North American Zygolophodon evolved into Mammut in an endemic fashion while European workers generally thought that Mammut was a Eurasian immigrant that replaced North American Zygolophodon during the Miocene or Pliocene. Current evidence supports an endemic origin of North American Mammut from Zygolophodon without later migration because of the gradual appearance of Mammut morphologies and a lack of solid evidence that Mammut sensu stricto (in a strict sense) ever dispersed outside of North America.[48]

M. matthewi is recorded from the late Hemphillian to early Blancan stages. Mammutid specimens of the Hemphillian and Blancan had typically previously been assigned to M. matthewi, but this is seemingly the result of overreliance on stratigraphic positions to define taxa. M. vexillarius, M. raki, and M. cosoensis are definitively recorded from the Blancan, and M. raki specifically is thought to not be synonymous with M. pacificum.[48] M. americanum (known popularly as an "American mastodon" or simply "mastodon") is also stratigraphically recorded first from the early Blancan of the Ringold Formation, Washington. The age of the formation where the mammutid specimen was found dates to about 3.75 Ma. It is also known from multiple other Blancan sites such as Fish Springs Flat in Nevada.[48][88][89] From the Irvingtonian to the Rancholabrean (from around 1.6 million to 11,000 years ago), only M. americanum and the newly appearing M. pacificum are recorded, the former having an exceptional level of diversity based on abundant skeletal evidences from the late Pleistocene that is unusual for the typical mammutid fossil record.[76][48]

The following cladogram defines the phylogeny of certain proboscideans, a majority known from endocasts, including M. americanum:[90]

Proboscidea
"plesielephantiforms"
"mastodonts"

Description

[edit]

Skull

[edit]
Articulated M. americanum skull at the Porter County Museum (left) and an unarticulated cranium plus tusks of M. pacificum (right)

Mammut is diagnosed and differentiated in terms of the skull from Zygolophodon as having a shortened bottom skull base (basicranium) and a high-domed cranium. It is also diagnosed as having an "elephantoid" mandible with a shortened mandibular symphysis (or "brevirostrine") and a protruding angular process in the mandible. The diagnosis accounts for both true Mammut species and Mammut species pending reassessments.[91][92] The shortening of the symphysis is one of the major evolutionary trends observed in Neogene mammutids, making it critical in understanding the evolutionary transition from Zygolophodon to Mammut. However, mandibular remains with characteristics of Mammut are not known from any anywhere within the Hemphillian, thus making the transition poorly understood.[48] It differs from Sinomammut by the shortened mandibular symphysis, although Mammut sometimes retained lower tusks unlike the other genus.[93]

M. americanum is diagnosed as having a long plus low skull and a shortened mandible.[94] The frontal bone (or forehead) gives off a flattened appearance compared to extant elephants.[95] The skull of M. americanum has many plesiomorphies (or ancestral traits) that can be observed, namely the low and flat brain case, a slightly vertical basicranium, a narrow nasal aperture inlet of the nose with no step-like perinasal fossa, and a backside infraorbital foramen. At least some of these features are thought to have been acquired from Phiomia. The nasal aperture of M. americanum is oval, whereas that of the skull of "M." cf. obliquelophus is more trapezoidal. M. americanum is also more derived based on the lack of a strong proximal constriction of the incisive fossa of the incisive foramen.[96] M. americanum also has a high and narrow orbit with a somewhat rectangular outline, but it is less rectangular than that of Eozygodon. The North American mammutid retains a primitive trait in the form of the orbit containing a lacrimal bone with a hole known as the lacrimal foramen. Unlike elephantidans, it has another primitive trait of a short and high-positioned temporal fossa, a trait shared with Eozygodon.[97]

Endocast anatomy

[edit]
Illustration of the endocast of M. americanum without any visible olfactory bulbs, 1906

M. americanum is known by several brain endocasts stored in American museums, although they are seldom subjected to studies. In 1973, neuroscientist Harry J. Jerison studied an endocast of Mammut, recording that it was elephantlike in both size and shape.[98] According to Shoshani et al. in 2006, the endocast of M. americanum features the olfactory bulbs protruding in front of the frontal lobe. They also drew several proboscidean brains to scale, in which the brain of M. americanum was much larger than that of Moeritherium lyonsi but smaller than that of the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus).[99]

Julien Benoit et al. in 2022 explained that while the front tips of the olfactory bulbs of "M.borsoni are partially visible in the brain's back (or dorsal) area, its visibility in M. americanum is debated. Some authors had argued that the olfactory bulbs are visible in the brain's back area while some other authors did not portray them as being visible. The researchers confirmed based on one specimen that the olfactory bulbs are only partially visible in the brain's back area. They also observed that "M.borsoni, despite weighing twice as much as M. americanum, had a 30% lower encephalization quotient (EQ) compared to the other mammutid species, supporting the idea that the evolution of proboscidean encephalization is tied with phylogeny.[90] The Mammutida, as the most basal clade of the Elephantimorpha, has an EQ twice that of Moeritherium and Palaeomastodon. The endocast volume and brain size of the brain M. americanum are larger than those of Stegodon but smaller than those of derived elephantids. It has an EQ that is higher than those of Paleogene proboscideans and "M.borsoni but lower than those of elephantids (extant and extinct) and stegodonts.[100]

The type species is also known from endocasts of ear petrosals.[90] According to Eric G. Ekdale, the ear petrosals of Mammut cannot automatically be distinguished from Mammuthus alone. The subarcuate fossa is absent from the cerebellar surface of the inner ear. The ear petrosals of Mammut are relatively incomplete, leaving several traits to be unable to be observed.[101][102]

Dentition

[edit]
M. americanum lower jaw and molars, Phillips Park (Aurora, Illinois)
Front view of the "Warren mastodon" (M. americanum). Note the presence of a single vestigial mandibular tusk.

The family Mammutidae is defined by zygolophodont molars with compressed and sharp transverse ridges plus lack of accessory conules (smaller cusps). The intermediate molars, or the first two molars, are consistently trilophodont, or three-cusped. The dental morphologies of the clade Mammutida contrast strongly with most members of both the Elephantida (bunodont molars that evolutionarily convert to being thin and platelike) and the Deinotheriidae (tapir-like lophodont to bilophodont molars).[81] The zygodont morphologies of the molars of mammutids were conservative, meaning that they hardly changed in the evolutionary history of the family.[48] Mammutids also exhibited evidences of horizontal tooth displacement where milk teeth were gradually replaced by permanent molars, mirroring elephantidans in an instance of parallel evolution.[103] The Mammutidae was not the only proboscidean family to have acquired zygodont crested molars, as Neogene species of the gomphothere Sinomastodon display moderate to weak zygodont crests. Pleistocene species of Sinomastodon do not display zygodont crests, however.[104]

The dentition of Mammut is diagnosed as being strongly zygodont and having no conules. The lophs extend to the long axis of the molars. The first two molars in the dental row have no more than three lophs while the third molars have four lophs plus a cingulum. The upper tusks (or upper incisors) of Mammut differ from those of Zygolophodon by the generally larger sizes, tendency to either straighten or curve up, and the typical lack of any enamel band, although M. vexillarius retains a very narrow strip of enamel in the upper tusks. The lower (or mandibular) tusks tend to be reduced in comparison. M. nevadanum represents the earliest case of a North American mammutid species without any enamel band, although the possibility of it being worn off by wear cannot automatically be eliminated.[91][48] It differs from M. americanum and M. pacificum by the nearly straight but downward-facing upper tusk, whereas males of the latter two species have large and upward-facing upper tusks while females had upward or straight but frontward-directed upper tusks.[76] The reduction to loss of the lower tusks plus reduction of the mandibular symphysis of the derived Mammutidae and Elephantida is an instance of convergent evolution, correlating potentially with the need to reduce heat loss due to the decrease of global temperature and humidity during the late Miocene and Pliocene.[90] Despite the reductions of the lower tusks, they were still present in Neogene species of Mammut. Pleistocene M. americanum comparatively often lacks mandibular tusks, and M. pacificum is always devoid of them.[48] The presence of lower tusks in M. raki separates it as a species from M. pacificum. M. pacificum differs from M. americanum in part by the narrower molars. Both species have broader molars compared to the "narrow-toothed" M. nevadanum, M. raki, and M. cosoensis.[76]

Like its relative "M.borsoni, M. americanum had very large tusks, with some records suggesting lengths of 3 m (9.8 ft) and diameters exceeding 200 mm (7.9 in) were not unusual.[105] In the skull of the earlier-appearing M. matthewi, its dental alveolus of the right tusk from the locality of Hermiston, Oregon suggests a tusk diameter of approximately 200 mm (7.9 in).[48] Similar to modern elephants, M. americanum also has degrees of sexual dimorphism indicated by the sizes of the upper tusks. Adult males have tusks 1.15–1.25 times as large as those of adult females, also reflecting general body size differences between the two sexes. The sizes of the tusk also depend on the ages of the individuals, as older individuals have larger tusk circumferences than younger ones. Adult individuals of comparable ages have similar tusk sizes, but older individuals do not necessarily have larger tusk sizes. Tusk sizes may have depended on external factors like nutritional stress, geographic location, and reproductive status.[106] The tusks of M. pacificum are thought to have been smaller in length and circumstance than that of M. americanum and may have similarly exhibited degrees of sexual dimorphism.[107]

Postcranial skeleton

[edit]
"Cohoes Mastodon" skeleton, New York State Museum

As a result of proboscidean diagnoses focusing mostly on dentition, the postcranial anatomies of fossil proboscideans like Mammut are underrepresented in academic literature. Jennifer A. Hodgson et al. compared the anatomies of Mammut and Mammuthus, mentioning that their postcranial anatomies were studied previously by Stanley John Olsen in 1972 and recognizing that the two genera were only distantly related to each other.[108][109] M. americanum is typically depicted as stocky based on postcranial evidence.[110]

The vertebral column (also known as the backbone or spine) of Mammut is documented as having a highest point located in the shoulder's front like Mammuthus, but the spines gradually decrease in length then increase slightly in the rear area. The number of ribs and vertebrae of Mammut is not well-documented in paleontological literature and may vary by individual. Mammut usually has 20 thoracic vertebrae whereas Mammuthus usually has 19, but both have documented individuals with 18 of them. The reduction of thoracic vertebrae in Mammuthus is considered a derived trait also present in modern elephants. The "Watkins Glen mastodon," for example, has 7 cervical vertebrae, 20 thoracic vertebrae, 3 lumbar vertebrae, and 5 sacral vertebrae. They believed that Mammut could have had as many as 20 ribs and that the back ribs were shorter and broader than that of Mammuthus.[108] The tail of Mammut may have been made up of as many as up to 27 caudal vertebrae, suggesting that it had a long tail compared to gomphotheres and elephantids.[111]

M. americanum skeleton, Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History

The scapula (or shoulder blade) of Mammut has a straight vertebral border, contrasting with a more concave vertebral border of Mammuthus. Hodgson et al. disagreed with the claim by Olsen in 1972 that the neck of the scapula is more constricted in Mammuthus primigenius than Mammut americanum, since neither of the two M. americanum scapulae observed by the researchers have any high constriction there. The pelvis allows for identification of the sex of the species, as male Mammut individuals have a smaller pelvic outlet and wider ilium than female individuals.[108]

Mammut has shorter and more robust limb bones compared to those of derived elephantids, probably the result of it retaining primitive anatomical traits. Both the humerus and radius of the mammutid genus are robust for instance. The ulna has a slightly more developed olecranon process and a deeper trochlear notch. The femur is somewhat thick, short, and appears to have more expanded condyles. Possibly, sexual dimorphism could be a factor behind the size of the femur itself. The tibia does not appear much different in both Mammut and Mammuthus, whereas the fibula may have only had subtle and complex differences within the two genera. The bones within both the front feet and back feet have their own subtle and complex differences by genus, but both have smaller and more narrow hind feet than fore feet so that the latter bears more weight of the proboscideans.[108] In terms of postcranial anatomy, M. pacificum differs from M. americanum by the presence of six as opposed to five sacral vertebrae and the femur having a larger diameter of the middle shaft (or main cylindrical area).[76]

External features

[edit]
Restoration of a mastodon with fur. The hypothesis that Mammut had thick coats of fur has been questioned.

The American mastodon (M. americanum) has typically been depicted as having shaggy and brown-colored fur in reconstructions, especially in over a century of paleoart. Despite this, there is little direct evidence supporting the idea that Mammut was actually covered in hair. Supposedly, only one find of fur belonging to the mastodon is of a skull with two small hairy patches of skin from the state of Wisconsin near the city of Milwaukee. These have only been described briefly in the original literature and have never been figured beyond one hair from a scanning electron microscope (SEM). K.F. Hallin and D. Gabriel in 1981 speculated that mastodons were indeed hairy but were more suited for semiaquatic lifestyles than tolerance of colder climates. Matt Davis et al. in 2022 were tentative in accepting the source as evidence for hairiness, as they questioned whether Mammut needed thick coats for body warmth for their upper ranges at the Arctic and Subarctic and mentioned that it would not have needed them in subtropical climates like in Florida.[110][112][113]

Davis et al. referenced that because Columbian mammoths (Mammuthus columbi) were not thought to be hairy, it is unclear why mastodons would need thick coats in comparison. The former was typically depicted as hairless and the latter as hairy in paleoart, but the mastodon's preferences for closed or mixed habitats puts the speculations into question. They felt the need to portray the latter as hairy so that the average person could differentiate between the two species.[110]

The concept of M. americanum having thick coats of fur was also subjected to study by Asier Larramendi in 2015. He acknowledged that hair is important for thermoregulation in extant elephants but that there is a negative correlation between body size and hair density in mammals. Some mammals have broken this trend before, however, as woolly mammoths (Mammuthus primigenius) evolved to have thick coats of hair and a very short tail in response to cold climates. The idea that the American mastodon had hair is possible because of the seasonal climates, but there are few preserved soft tissues to support this idea, referencing the hairs found in Wisconsin. The supposed evidence of hair reported in the 19th century were actually just green algae filaments. He concluded that the long tail and large body mass both contradict the hypothesis that M. americanum was covered with thick coats of fur, considering it to be probably exaggerated.[111]

Size and weight

[edit]
M. americanum male ("Beusching mastodon," left) and female ("Owosso mastodon," right), University of Michigan Museum of Natural History

According to Larramendi, the mammutids of the genus Mammut were among the largest known proboscideans. This was especially the case with "M.borsoni, males of which are suggested to have had an average body mass of 16 t (16 long tons; 18 short tons) making it the largest known proboscidean alongside the extinct Indian elephant species Palaeoloxodon namadicus, and one of the largest land mammals to have ever lived. M. americanum in comparison to "M.borsoni was much smaller, but it was still large in its own right compared to extant elephants. The American mastodon did not grow taller than living elephants but it was much more robust in body build than them, in part due to its very broad pelvis. The Warren mastodon produces a body mass of nearby 7.8 t (7.7 long tons; 8.6 short tons) and had a shoulder height measuring 289 cm (114 in). This robustness is so pronounced that M. americanum individuals could have been up to 80% heavier than an elephant with the same shoulder height. Larger than average individuals may have possibly had a shoulder height of 325 cm (128 in) and weighed up to 11 t (11 long tons; 12 short tons). 90% of fully grown male M. americanum individuals are suggested to have had shoulder heights ranging from 275 cm (108 in) to 305 cm (120 in) and body masses ranging from 6.8 t (6.7 long tons; 7.5 short tons) to 9.2 t (9.1 long tons; 10.1 short tons) in body mass, with an average fully grown M. americanum male estimated at 2.9 m (9 ft 6 in) in shoulder height and 8 t (7.9 long tons; 8.8 short tons) in body mass. These estimates place males as larger on average in weight and shoulder height than those of both the living Asian elephant and African forest elephant, and heavier but somewhat shorter than average males of African bush elephants.[111]

Skeletal diagram of the "Warren mastodon" specimen, an adult bull of M. americanum compared to a human

The size of the "Overmyer Mastodon," an individual skeleton recovered from the farm of Robert Overmyer northwest of Rochester, Indiana in 1976, was estimated by Neal Woodman and Jon W. Branstrator in 2008. They estimated based on the length of the humerus (829 mm (32.6 in)) that the shoulder height of the individual was 230.2 cm (90.6 in), which they said was close to the average shoulder height of the species and comparable to a large female or small male. Similar to extant elephants, male American mastodon individuals tended to be larger than female individuals and tend to have larger and more strongly curved tusks, although the degree to which the body size is a factor in molar size is unclear.[114]

A relatively complete skeleton of Mammut sp. from the Gray Fossil Site in Tennessee, which was first uncovered in 2015, dates to the latest Hemphillian, and has an elongated mandibular symphysis and large mandibular tusks, is thought to have been several tonnes larger than M. americanum and even several species of Mammuthus. The specimens are still being prepared for further studies.[48][115]

Paleobiology

[edit]

Diet

[edit]
Restoration of an American mastodon without fur by Heinrich Harder

The zygodont molar morphologies of mammutids suggest that they consistently occupied adaptations to folivorous diets throughout their evolutionary history. This means that mammutids such as Mammut, because they retained zygodont molars, were built to browse on higher vegetation and did not shift towards grazing specializations or consistent mixed feeding. The stomach contents of M. americanum indicate that the species consumed spruce needles, pine cones, grass, and occasionally gourds plus vine leaves. Of note is that whereas mammutids of Eurasia went extinct by the early Pleistocene in association with more seasonal climates, Mammut survived in North America and became abundant, although the reason for the latter faunal trend does not have any offered explanation.[116] The browsing specialization of Mammut is supported further by the coprolites (or fossil dung) of M. americanum, which are large-sized similar to extant elephants and predominantly consist of consumed woody contents but no grass.[117] Of the Pleistocene New World proboscideans, the American mastodon appears to have been the most consistent in browsing rather than grazing, consuming C3 as opposed to C4 plants, and occupying closed forests versus more open habitats. This dietary inflexibility may have prevented them from invading South America during the Great American Interchange, due to the need to cross areas of grassland to do so.[118]

The mastodon commonly browsed on woody plants (i.e. twigs) and fruits, occupying dense coniferous forests made up of spruces (Picea) and pines (Pinus) within most of eastern North America. In Florida, it consumed twigs of the genus Taxodium as well as other woody plants and fruits. Based on carbon isotopic analyses of mastodons in Florida, they had low δ13C values which indicate C3 browsing specialization.[119] The dietary preferences of North American Mammut are thought to have mirrored those of the older Zygolophodon, which may have preferred living in closed forests and consuming conifers to avoid active competition with the bunodont gomphotheres and lophodont deinotheres in the Miocene of Europe.[120] Most accounts of gut contents have identified coniferous twigs as the dominant element in their diet.[121] In addition to twigs and leaves, as indicated by the "Heisler mastodon" of Michigan and the "Burning Tree mastodon" of Ohio, mastodons may have also consumed swamp grasses (Glyceria and Zizania) as well as semiaquatic and aquatic plants such as sedge marshes (Carex) that surrounded lakes. They may have additionally ingested other aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates while consuming more than 100 L (22 imp gal; 26 US gal) of water from lakes a day.[122] The temporal shifts in molar and limb bone sizes in mastodon populations from Missouri and Florida as well as apparent differences in body size between western and eastern populations suggest that M. americanum was an adaptable species for local environmental shifts. Regardless, it depended heavily on forested environments similar to tapirs, so significant closed vegetation losses of any sort could have impacted them.[123]

As a result of the consistent browsing specializations of the genus, Mammut occupied an ecological niche that allowed it to actively niche partition (or occupy similar but niche ecological spaces) with other proboscideans of North America in the Neogene-Quaternary. In the Blancan, M. raki showed few morphological changes. In stark contrast, the contemporary gomphothere Stegomastodon showed progressive developments in response to increasingly arid and extensive grasslands from the Blancan up to the early Irvingtonian, with molar complexities resembling those of Mammuthus.[55] The morphology of Stegomastodon suggests thus that it was grazing-specialized.[124] A more well-known example of niche partitioning occurred between mastodons and mammoths within the later Pleistocene (Irvingtonian-Rancholabrean). Mammoths had a broader range of diets that allow them to occupy mixed feeding to specialized grazing habits whereas mastodons were specialized browsers that nonetheless still could have consumed a variety of plants. Mammoth diets varied by region whereas those of mastodons remain unclear still. Both at times overlapped in C3 resource usages, although whether this represents browsing or grazing in the case of mammoths remains unclear.[125]

Social behaviors

[edit]
American mastodon ("Perry mastodon") skeleton with silhouette in back including the trunk, Wheaton College (Illinois)

American mastodons may have lived in herds, and it is possible that they were smaller than mammoth herds on average.[126] Based on the characteristics of mastodon bone sites and strontium and oxygen isotopes from tusks, it can be inferred that, as in modern proboscideans, the mastodon social group consisted of adult females and young, living in bonded groups called mixed herds. The males abandoned the mixed herds once reaching sexual maturity and lived either alone or in male bond groupings.[127][128] As in modern elephants,[129] there probably was no seasonal synchrony of mating activity, with both males and females seeking out each other for mating when sexually active.[128] Mastodons and other Pleistocene proboscideans may have used landscapes seasonally then migrated to suitable areas to mate or give birth. It is estimated that it may have taken 9 to 12 years for American mastodon females to become mature enough for reproduction, and they may have slowly reproduced single calves at a time.[127]

The social behaviors of male mastodon were inferred from one individual skeleton known as the "Buesching mastodon" (known informally as "Fred"),[130] which was recovered from a peat farm near Fort Wayne, Indiana in 1998. The mastodon individual lived during the later part of the Bølling–Allerød warming period when human populations were present. The Buesching mastodon's tusks grew for about 30 years, and he lived for 34 years total, an approximate lifespan comparable to other males. He may have had engaged in aggressive behavior from musth, although it may have been season-specific compared to living elephants given climatic conditions in North America. He likely engaged in intraspecific competition late in his life with other males during the spring or early summer, and he had tusk fractures and may have been severely wounded from a 4 cm (1.6 in) to 5 cm (2.0 in) puncture to the right-sided temporal fossa. Multiple other males are recorded to have had severe wounds resulting from male-male musth fighting.[127] The Buesching mastodon likely considered central Indiana his main home but went on seasonal migrations in his lifetime. He could have traveled hundreds of kilometers in the process and engaged with mates outside of the herd he was born from. Around his last moments, he probably wandered around in vagabondlike behaviors and spent little time in the area where his skeleton was found. His inferred behavior is quite similar to extant elephants.[131]

Paleoecology

[edit]

Distribution

[edit]
North American map of the distributions of M. americanum (blue) and M. pacificum (red) fossil localities of the Irvingtonian-Rancholabrean

The range of most species of Mammut is unknown as their occurrences are restricted to few localities, the exception being the American mastodon (M. americanum), which is one of the most widely distributed Pleistocene proboscideans in North America. M. americanum fossil sites range in time from the Blancan to Rancholabrean faunal stages and in locations from as far north as Alaska, as far east as Florida, and as far south as the state of Puebla in central Mexico.[132][133][48] M. americanum was most common in the eastern United States but rarer in the western US in comparison. M. pacificum is known across California and present as far north as southern Idaho, but it was apparently absent from both the Sonoran Desert and Mojave Desert regions. The elevated-controlled distributions of coniferous forests within the Rocky Mountain region may have limited populations of Mammut compared to the other Plio-Pleistocene proboscideans.[76] The easternmost range of the species was in what is now Montana in the Irvingtonian but may have been extirpated from the area as a result of Illinoian glaciation.[134] An isolated record of M. americanum is known from Honduras, where the genus is not recorded to have extended beyond.[135]

M. matthewi is known by a wide distribution range, its westernmost range being in California from the Horned Toad Formation in the late Hemphillian.[48] It has also apparently been identified from the latest Hemphillian based on skull material from the Pascagoula Formation in Tunica Hills, Louisiana. This suggests that Mammut already had an eastern range in the United States by the latest Miocene or earliest Pliocene.[136] Similarly, the same species is recorded from the Palmetto Fauna locality (Bone Valley Formation) in Brewster, Florida in the latest Hemphillian while Mammut sp. is recorded from the Gray Fossil Site in Tennessee.[48]

The American mastodon was only present in the far north of North America during interglacial periods, with mitochondrial genome analysis suggesting that separate populations repeatedly colonised the region before becoming extirpated during glacial periods.[137] A 2022 study of ancient environmental DNA from the Kap Kobenhavn Formation of northern Greenland, dating the Early Pleistocene, 2 million years ago, identified preserved DNA fragments of mastodons. This suggests that the mammutids ranged as far north as Greenland during optimal conditions. Around this time, northern Greenland was 11–19 °C warmer than the Holocene, with a boreal forest hosting a species assemblage with no modern analogue. These are among the oldest DNA fragments ever sequenced.[138][139]

Late Neogene-Quaternary North America

[edit]
Teleoceras fossiger skeleton, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. Mammut coexisted with rhinocerotids up to the Pliocene.

The overall paleontological record of the Neogene of North America is relatively incomplete compared to other areas of the world. This is the result of a greater fossil record bias of western North America compared to eastern North America, meaning that the western half is better understood in terms of evolutionary and climatic trends while the eastern half is poorly understood. During the late Neogene (8-5 Ma), C4 grasslands spread throughout the North American continent and replaced woodland habitats. In eastern North America were relict woodlands in an increasingly drier climate followed by a large faunal turnover.[140] There was a long-term decline of genus-level faunal diversity, with many large-sized herbivores going extinct. Many of the surviving herbivorous faunas were thus adapted for drier and more open habitats resulting from cooling and increase in seasonality.[141]

Megalonyx jeffersonii skeleton. Megalonyx mostly likely descended from Pliometanastes and was present in North America since the late Hemphillian.[142]

The earliest undisputed record of Mammut sensu stricto was of M. nevadanum in the Thousand Creek Formation in Nevada.[48] Coexistent with the mammutid species were a large variety of other mammals, namely those of the Artiodactyla (antilocaprids, camelids, tayassuids), Carnivora (canids, felids, mustelids, ursids), Eulipotyphla (talpids), Lagomorpha (leporids), Perissodactyla (equids, rhinocerotids), and Rodentia (aplodontiids, castorids, geomyids, heteromyids, cricetids, mylagaulids, and sciurids).[143] The latest Hemphillian of Florida based on the Palmetto Fauna of the Bone Valley Formation records the coexistence of M. matthewi with similar types of faunas, namely Pilosa (megalonychids), Eulipotyphla (talpids), Lagomorpha (leporids), Carnivora (borophagine canids, canine canids, ursids, procyonids, mustelids including lutrines, feline felids, machairodontine felids), Proboscidea (gomphotheres), Perissodactyla (tapirs, rhinocerotids, hipparionine equids), and Artiodactyla (tayassuids, protoceratids, camelids, "pseudoceratines," cervids, antilocaprids).[144] North America in the late Neogene is understood to have undergone a long-term decline in large mammal diversity (i.e. the Dromomerycidae, "Blastomerycinae," Rhinocerotidae) as a result of C4 grassland expansion, cooler climates, and increased seasonality.[145][146]

The Blancan fossil record suggests a maximum known diversity of four species of Mammut (M. americanum, M. vexillarius, M. raki, and M. cosoensis).[48] However, the Blancan record of Mammut is relatively rare.[147] M. raki from the Palomas Formation of Truth or Consequences in New Mexico is recorded with a few other mammalian faunas, namely the megalonychid ground sloth Megalonyx, the pocket gopher Geomys, the cricetid Sigmodon, the equin Equus, the hipparionine Nannippus, and the camelid Camelops.[148] A late Blancan locality known as the Fish Springs Flat Fauna in Nevada reveals that fossils of M. americanum were found with those of the leporid Hypolagus, lutrine Satherium, equid Equus, camelid Gigantocamelus, gopher Thomomys, and the ground squirrel Spermophilus.[149]

In the Irvingtonian, only M. americanum is recorded to have crossed past the Blancan while M. pacificum replaced the other Blancan species.[76] By this time, Mammut would have coexisted with the elephantid Mammuthus and the gomphotheres Cuvieronius and Stegomastodon, although the latter failed to survive past the early Irvingtonian.[150][124] The Middle Pleistocene sites are scarce in North America compared to the Late Pleistocene sites,[151] but from the Irvingtonian to the Rancholabrean, repeated glacial events occurred that led to repeated formations of major ice sheets in northern North America.[152] The Port Kennedy Bone Cave of Pennsylvania is of Irvingtonian age (Middle Pleistocene) and reveals that during this time, M. americanum was present with the megalonychid Megalonyx wheatleyi, the tremarctine bear Arctodus pristinus, the jaguar (Panthera onca), the felid Miracinonyx inexpectatus, and the machairodontine Smilodon gracilis.[149] The Big Bone Lick locality in Kentucky, which dates to the latest Pleistocene (Rancholabrean), indicates the coexistence of the American mastodon with the extant reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) along with various other extinct megafauna like ancient bison (Bison antiquus), the caprine bovid Bootherium bombifrons, mylodontid ground sloth Paramylodon harlani, megalonychid Megalonyx jeffersoni, true deer Cervalces scotti, equid Equus complicatus, and the Columbian mammoth.[153]

Relationship with humans

[edit]
Clovis spearpoints, Cleveland Museum of Natural History

The exact timing of human (Homo sapiens) arrival to temperate North America is unclear, but they likely arrived to North America ∼19,000–14,000 calibrated years Before Present. They are known within the archeological record as Paleoindians and eventually gave rise to modern-day Native Americans.[154] Of interest is that in the Clovis culture phase, there is evidence that Clovis hunters targeted contemporary proboscideans based on archeological "kill sites." Clovis projectile points and other artifacts have been found in association with both mammoths and mastodons. The former has more frequent evidence of having been hunted by Clovis hunters while mastodons have much fewer in comparison. Todd A. Surovell and Nicole M. Waguespack in 2008 hypothesized that Clovis hunters in North America hunted proboscideans more often than those in any other continent. They addressed that preservation biases of larger mammals in archeological sites may have caused higher representations of proboscidean kill sites but suggested that regardless, Clovis hunters were likely specialized in hunting large game.[155]

As of present, 2 definite Mammut kill sites compatible with Clovis lithic technology have been recorded compared to 15 of Mammuthus and 1 of Cuvieronius. These two kill sites are thought to be from Kimmswick, Missouri and Pleasant Lake in Washtenaw County, Michigan.[156][157][158] Whether various other sites can be confirmed as proboscidean butchery sites appear subjective, largely depending on the views of different authors.[159] It is uncertain if Clovis people had hunting strategies of proboscideans similar to tribal Africans, but the Clovis points likely indicate usage as spears for thrusting or throwing at proboscideans (there are disagreements to whether they indicate multiple other usages, however).[160][161]

According to the American paleontologist Daniel C. Fisher, the "Heisler mastodon" site in Calhoun County, Michigan, which recovered about 50% of the skeleton, was proof of meat caching in a pond by Paleoindians in the late Pleistocene. This hypothesis opposes the notion that proboscideans ended up unable to disentangle themselves in marsh wetlands, which he said there is no evidence of. His hypothesis was based on his experiment with partial carcasses of a horse that was preserved in a shallow lake then extracted as well as a Moravian missionary's testimony of Inuit retrieving caribou carcasses from lakes that they probably placed as storage in the cases of excess meat or future limited hunting successes. Fisher said that if his theory is true, then Paleoindian interactions with megafauna (hunting and scavenging) are far more complex than initially thought.[158][157]

Cast of a right rib of the "Manis mastodon" with an embedded object and healed wound, Sequim Museum & Arts. The wound has been hypothesized to be the result of pre-Clovis hunting from several sources.

In 2023, Michael R. Waters et al. suggested that the Manis Mastodon site in Washington state supported evidence of a mastodon hunt ~13,900 cal. years BP, some 900 years before Clovis culture. Their study was a continuation of a 2011 anatomical study that proposed that osseous (bone) pieces found in a right rib of a mastodon represented fragmented tips of a projectile point, but it had been repeatedly challenged by other authors. Based on anatomical reevaluations, they determined that the bone fragments were embedded in the Manis mastodon rib while it was alive, as evident by the visible healing around the wounded area. Waters and his colleagues stated that the bone pieces were from an external source, explainable by human-made projectile points. They rejected alternate explanations for why bone fragments ended up in the Manis mastodon rib. Based on this, they envisioned that the mastodon individual was wounded by pre-Clovis hunters and got away, giving it time to heal. Afterwards, it died either by natural causes and was scavenged by humans, or it was killed by them on another attack then butchered. This site proves the existence of pre-Clovis hunting technology that the earliest people brought with them when dispersing to North America and made localized adaptations of.[162][163]

In 2017, Steven R. Holen et al. published an article arguing that the Cerutti Mastodon site, located in San Diego County in California, is an archeological site involving M. americanum that dates to approximately 130,000 years ago. If true, they stated, the site would imply evidence of now-extinct species of Homo in North America during the Marine Isotope Stage 5 (MIS 5e) temporal range of the early late Pleistocene.[164] The proposal was highly controversial, as many archeologists were skeptical about the claim that the bones of M. americanum were broken by hominins, and alternate explanations have been offered.[157] For instance, in the same year the article was published, Gary Haynes expressed concern of it being published in the journal Nature due to how highly prolific it is. Reporters from print presses and digital media published reactions of the article from various North American archeologists, with Donald K. Grayson stating that it was astonishingly bad, Jon M. Erlandson arguing that the site was non-credible, and various other archeologists arguing that the claim is insufficiently supported. Haynes pointed out that the article's claim was "extraordinary" and must therefore be met with rigorous skepticism. He wrote that there were no traces of archeological structures typically built by archaic species of Homo (i.e. H. erectus, Neanderthals, or Denisovans) in the Cerutti site. Additionally, he brought up the possibilities of the fossil bones being affected by sediment pressures or damage done by earth-moving construction equipments despite the original authors denying the latter possibility.[165]

Multiple petroglyphs suggested to have depicted prehistoric proboscideans in North America like mastodons are known within the United States, but they are either fraudulent or depict entities other than mastodons. As a result, suggested rock art of mammoths and mastodons within North America are not sufficiently credible.[166]

Extinction

[edit]
Summed probability distributions (SPDs) of Mammuthus, Mammut, Nothrotheriops, Equus, Smilodon, and humans in the latest Pleistocene of the United States

Mammut, or more specifically the American mastodon, experienced an initial decline in geographical range when it was extirpated from the northernmost ranges of North America ~75,000 years ago. Mammut initially occupied the region during the Last Interglacial (~125,000-75,000 years ago) back when suitable forested habitats were present there but was subsequently extirpated in correlation with environmental changes from the Wisconsin glaciation (MIS 4). The local extirpation, occurring long before human arrival, caused the mastodon range to be limited to areas south of North American ice sheets. The steppe-tundra faunas thrived there during the event whereas boreal forest-adapted faunas underwent declines.[167][34] The trend of recolonization and extirpation appears to have had been a recurring trend in the Pleistocene correlated with repeated returns of forests and wetlands, but what is unclear is why faunas that were able to repeatedly recolonize northern North America during previous interglacial periods were unable to do so again after the Last Glacial Maximum.[137]

The latest Pleistocene of North America records a large extinction phase that resulted in the disappearances of over 30 genera of mammals, the majority of which are considered "megafauna" (~45 kg (99 lb) or larger). Mammut was one of the many genera recorded within North America whose extinction causes are currently unresolved.[168] During the latest Pleistocene of North America, two major events occurred: the development of Clovis culture from 13,200 to 12,800 years ago and the onset of the Younger Dryas cold phase from 12,900 to 11,700 years ago.[169] The extinctions of mammalian megafauna in North America are particularly high akin to those of South America and Australia rather than Eurasia and Africa.[170] As a result, the extinctions that occurred in the latest Pleistocene of North America have been mainly attributed to human hunting, climate change, or some combination of the two (there are alternate but lesser-supported hypotheses). Many researchers have struggled to explained the North American extinctions, with both human hunting and climate change explanations alone being challenged.[171] In recent years, research has shifted towards studying the extinctions of North American faunas by individual taxon and/or region rather as a homogenous group. The results vary in regions such as the northeast, with some authors suggesting that there was minimal evidence for Clovis hunting being the major factor behind proboscidean population drops and some others arguing that environmental shifts prior to human arrival were not detrimental enough to the proboscideans.[172][173]

Paul L. Koch and Anthony D. Barnosky in 2006 suggested that Mammuthus was well-associated with archeological sites of North America. In comparison, Mammut and the peccary Platygonus were far less frequently associated with human sites, potentially suggesting that Paleoindians hunted them less than mammoths. They stated that the current understanding of Mammut associations with humans could shift if the supposed butchery sites were better understood while that of Platygonus is stable and therefore unlikely to change.[170] In 2018, Jack M. Broughton and Elic M. Weitzel calculated populated dynamics of some of the North American late Pleistocene megafauna based on summed probability distributions (SPDs) using calibrated radiocarbon dates. They determined based on the data that the declines of Mammuthus, Equus, and Smilodon were correlated with Clovis culture hunting while Mammut and the nothrotheriid ground sloth Nothrotheriops did not exhibit any significant population bust until after Clovis culture and during the Younger Dryas at ~12,650 years ago. They concluded that the declines of megafauna are of mixed causes and that the extinction processes and causes therefore vary by individual taxon and region.[174]

Of note is that there is a recorded latest survival of the American mastodon in the early Holocene. The Overmyer Mastodon individual, recovered from northern Indiana with 41-48% complete remains recovered, exhibits no evidence of weathering or gnawing by other animals. The individual dates from 11,795 to 11,345 years Before Present for a median of 11,576 calibrated years BP, therefore having a secure calibrated radiocarbon date dating to the early Holocene unlike most other extinct North American genera of the terminal Pleistocene. Neal Woodman and Nancy Beavan Athfield stressed that although the early Holocene survival of the species does not eliminate the possibilities that Clovis hunters and/or Younger Dryas impacted their populations in the long term, its survival meant that the genus was not immediately brought to extinction by either factor.[175][169]

Cultural significance

[edit]
Political cartoon "Oblivion's Cave—Step Right In, Please" by Winsor McCay, 1922

Late Pleistocene proboscideans of the Americas such as the American mastodon could have been recognized in Native American oral histories, but they are unlikely to have referenced any specific species. Typically, they may have been depicted in Native American oral history as aggressive and antagonistic beasts.[176] Mastodons may have played ancient roles in Native American cultures of the Pacific Northwest. In 1987, Carl E. Gustafson recovered fossil evidence of a late Pleistocene mastodon far away from where the species would typically roam, the radiocarbon dating confirming a date of about 13,800 years ago. The local tribal members identified the remains as being of game pieces for slahal, a gambling game for dispute settlements and entertainment.[177] The bone sticks, carved from mastodon bones, are not easily interpretable archeologically, but tribal members saw the recovery of the items as evidence of the endurance of ancient cultural practices like slahal.[178]

The American mastodon had long been a stand-in within the United States for American nationalism since early American history,[21] and Thomas Jefferson was famously known for having hoped that the Lewis and Clark Expedition would eventually yield evidence of living mastodons in the western frontier of the United States.[179][180] It was a defining symbol of museums according to Brett Barney as evident by a mention of it by Walt Whitman in a passage of the 1855 poem "Song of Myself."[181]

Mastodon replica at the Mastodon Ridge park in Stewiacke, Nova Scotia, Canada

The mastodon became the subject of a Michigan political campaign in 2000 when Washtenaw Community College geology instructor David P. Thomas Sr. aimed to make it the state fossil of Michigan. He, assisted by the Slauson Middle School science teacher Jeffrey Bradley, was sponsored by the state senator Thaddeus McCotter, arranged petition drives that collected thousands of signatures, and attended state hearings. Bradley's students participated in the "Mastodon for Michigan" campaign, which built a life-sized replica out of paper and raised $1,000 for the University of Michigan Museum of Natural History to built a mastodon exhibit. In 2002, the mastodon became the state fossil, making it the fourteenth state symbol.[182][183] Similarly, the mastodon became the state fossil of Indiana as recently as 2022 due to House Bill 1013, authored by the representative Randy Frye, passing unanimously.[184]

In January 2024, Indiana senator Mike Braun and Michigan senator Gary Peters introduced a bipartisan bill to make the mastodon the US national fossil is what is called the "National Fossil Act." Section 1 aims to define the bill's name, Section 2 would investigate the roles of the mastodon in American public life, and Section 3 would designate it as the national fossil under Title 36 of the United States Code. Peters justified that the mastodon represents a unique aspect of Michigan's history and American history, stating that he hoped that its establishment as the national fossil would preserve the histories and encourage new generations of scientists and other researchers to pursue their goals.[185][186]

Located in the Mastodon Ridge park in the Canadian town of Stewiacke, Nova Scotia is a large-sized replica of a mastodon based on a skeleton recovered from Nova Scotia. It was sculpted as a clay model, has a weight of ~1,400 kg (3,100 lb), is 3.5 m (11 ft) in shoulder height, and measures 7.5 m (25 ft) long. The sculpture took about 8 weeks to be constructed and was sent to the Mastodon Ridge in January 1995.[187]

The name "mastodon" was adopted in different contexts within the United States. For instance, 4-8-0 locomotives of the late 19th century were originally named "Mastodons" before the name was eventually replaced with "12-wheeler." The name was a reference to the American mastodon. The 4-10-0 locomotive later became known also as "Mastodon."[188][189] In the 1993-1995 show Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, the Black Ranger Zack Taylor had the mastodon ability and controlled the Mastodon Dinozord machine.[190] The name "Mastodon" was also adopted by a heavy metal band when guitarist Bill Kelliher was asked by the guitarist-singer Brent Hinds asked him about the name of the "fossil elephant" after seeing his tattoo of a Bantha skull from the Star Wars franchise, in which the members then agreed to it being the band's name.[191] "Mastodon" is also the name of a blogging social network site that also acquired its name from the extinct proboscidean species.[192]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Stanford, Donald E. (1959). "The Giant Bones of Claverack, New York, 1705". New York History. 40 (1): 47–61. JSTOR 23153528.
  2. ^ Weld, Charles Richard (1848). "Chapter XV: 1710–1725". A History of the Royal Society: With memoirs of the Presidents. pp. 398–433.
  3. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Chapter 1: The Giant of Claverack in Puritan America". American Monster: How the Nation's First Prehistoric Creature Became a Symbol of National Identity. NYU Press. pp. 15–40.
  4. ^ Warren, John Collin (1852). "Historical sketch". The Mastodon giganteus of North America. John Wilson and Son. pp. 1–3.
  5. ^ Storrs, Glenn W. (2019). "Big Bone Lick". Ohio Valley History. 19 (3): 82–90.
  6. ^ Daubenton, Louis Jean-Marie (1764). "Mémoire sur des os et des dents remarquables par leur gradeur". Histoire de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, Année MDCCLXII, avec les Mémoires de Mathématiques & de Physique, pour la même année, 1762: 206–229.
  7. ^ Hedeen, Stanley (2008). "Chapter 4: Gathering the bones". Big Bone Lick: The Cradle of American Paleontology. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 31–44.
  8. ^ Barnett, Lydia (2019). "Showing and hiding: The flickering visibility of earth workers in the archives of earth science". History of Science. 58 (3): 245–274. doi:10.1177/0073275319874982. PMID 31640428.
  9. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Chapter 4: Big Bone Lick". American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity. NYU Press. pp. 84–110.
  10. ^ Mayor, Adrienne (2005). "Chapter 1: The northeast: Giants, great bears, and grandfather of the buffalo". Fossil Legends of the First Americans. Princeton University Press. pp. 32–72.
  11. ^ Daiutolo, Robert, Jr. (October 2015). George Croghan: The life of a conqueror (Ph.D. thesis). Graduate Program in History. New Brunswick–Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University.{{cite thesis}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  12. ^ Collinson, Peter (1767). "XLVII. Sequel to the foregoing account of the large fossil teeth". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. 57.
  13. ^ Hunter, William (1768). "V. Observations on the bones, commonly supposed to be elephants bones, which have been found near the river Ohio in America". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. 58: 34–45.
  14. ^ Annan, Robert (1793). "Account of a skeleton of a large animal, found near Hudson's River". Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 2 (1): 160–164. Bibcode:1793MAAAS...2..160A. doi:10.2307/27670792. JSTOR 27670792.
  15. ^ Jefferson, Thomas (1785). Notes on the State of Virginia. Philippe Denis Pierres. pp. 42–80.
  16. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Chapter 5: The American incognitum in Paris". American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity. NYU Press. pp. 111–135.
  17. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Chapter 11: "Monarch of the wilderness"". American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity. NYU Press. pp. 263–287.
  18. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Chapter 13: Exhumation of the monster". American Monster: How the nation's first prehistoric creature became a symbol of national identity. NYU Press. pp. 315–340.
  19. ^ Zygmont, Brian J. (2015). "Charles Willson Peale's The Exhumation of the Mastodon and the great chain of being: The interaction of religion, science, and art in early-federal America". Text Matters. 5 (5): 95–111. doi:10.1515/texmat-2015-0008. hdl:11089/15025.
  20. ^ Hoffman, Sheila K. (2018). "The origins of Puritan politics in U.S. museums: Nation building and "the arts" from 1776 to 1806". ICOFOM Study Series. 46 (46): 131–145. doi:10.4000/iss.1025.
  21. ^ a b Thomson, Keith Stewart (2008). "Chapter 6: Fossils and show business: Mr. Peale's mastodon". The Legacy of the Mastodon. Yale University Press. pp. 46–54.
  22. ^ McMillan, R. Bruce (2022). "Albert C. Koch's Missourium and the debate over the contemporaneity of humans and the Pleistocene megafauna of North America". Earth Sciences History. 41 (2): 410–439. Bibcode:2022ESHis..41..410M. doi:10.17704/1944-6187-41.2.410.
  23. ^ McMillan, R. Bruce (2010). "The Discovery of Fossil Vertebrates on Missouri's Western Frontier". Earth Sciences History. 29 (1): 26–51. Bibcode:2010ESHis..29...26M. doi:10.17704/eshi.29.1.j034662534721751.
  24. ^ a b c d e f Osborn, Harry Fairfield (1936). Proboscidea: a monograph of the discovery, evolution, migration and extinction of the mastodonts and elephants of the world. Vol. 1. J. Pierpont Morgan Fund by the trustees of the American Museum of Natural History.
  25. ^ Warren, John Collin (1852). "Discovery of the skeleton". The Mastodon giganteus of North America. John Wilson and Son. pp. 4–7.
  26. ^ a b Horenstein, Sidney (2008). "New York City Mastodons: Big Apple Tusks". Evolution: Education and Outreach. 1 (2): 204–209. doi:10.1007/s12052-008-0042-y.
  27. ^ Warren, John Collin (1852). "Geological situation and causes of preservation". The Mastodon giganteus of North America. John Wilson and Son. pp. 154–167.
  28. ^ Hartnagel, Chris Andrew; Bishop, Sherman Chauncey (1922). The Mastodons, Mammoths and Other Pleistocene Mammals of New York State: Being a Descriptive Record of All Known Occurrences. University of the State of New York.
  29. ^ Semonin, Paul (2000). "Afterword: The Myth of Wild Nature". American Monster: How the Nation's First Prehistoric Creature Became a Symbol of National Identity. NYU Press. pp. 392–411.
  30. ^ Kerr, Robert (1792). The animal kingdom, or zoological system, of the celebrated Sir Charles Linnæus. containing a complete systematic description, arrangement, and nomenclature, of all the known species and varieties of the mammalia, or animals which give suck to their young Class I Mammalia. Edinburgh. pp. 115–117.
  31. ^ Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich (1799). Handbuch der Naturgeschichte [6. ed.]. Göttingen. pp. 695–698.
  32. ^ Hooker, Jerry J. (2007). "Bipedal browsing adaptations of the unusual Late Eocene–earliest Oligocene tylopod Anoplotherium (Artiodactyla, Mammalia)". Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 151 (3): 609–659. doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.2007.00352.x.
  33. ^ Cuvier, Georges (1799). "Mémoire sur les espèces d'éléphans vivantes et fossiles". Mémoires de l'Institut des Sciences et Arts: 1–22.
  34. ^ a b Froese, Duane (2014). "The curious case of the Arctic mastodons". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111 (52): 18405–18406. doi:10.1073/pnas.1422018112. PMC 4284541. PMID 25535342.
  35. ^ Cuvier, Georges (1806). "Sur les éléphans vivans et fossiles". Annales du Muséum d'histoire naturelle. 8: 1–68.
  36. ^ Cuvier, Georges (1806). "Sur le grand mastodonte". Annales du Muséum d'histoire naturelle. 2: 270–312.
  37. ^ a b Cuvier, Georges (1817). "Sixié ordre des mammiféres. Les pachydermes". Le règne animal distribué d'après son organisation : pour servir de base à l'histoire naturelle des animaux et d'introduction à l'anatomie comparée. Chez Déterville. pp. 227–245.
  38. ^ a b Cuvier, Georges (1824). "Résumé général: Des Animaux dont les caractères ont été indiqués ou rectifiés, ou dont l'Ostéologie a été décrite dans cet ouvrage". Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles, où l'on rétablit les caractères de plusieurs animaux dont les révolutions du globe ont détruit les espèces. Vol. 5. G. Dufour and E. d'Ocagne. pp. 527–536.
  39. ^ a b Perry Hay, Oliver (1902). Bibliography and catalogue of the fossil vertebrata of North America. Washington Government Printing Office. pp. 707–712.
  40. ^ Mazo, A.V.; van der Made, Jan (2012). "Iberian mastodonts: Geographic and stratigraphic distribution". Quaternary International. 255: 239–256. Bibcode:2012QuInt.255..239M. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.07.047.
  41. ^ a b Mothé, Dimila; Avilla, Leonardo S.; Cozzuol, Mário; Winck, Gisele R. (2012). "Taxonomic revision of the Quaternary gomphotheres (Mammalia: Proboscidea: Gomphotheriidae) from the South American lowlands". Quaternary International. 276–277: 2–7. Bibcode:2012QuInt.276....2M. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.05.018.
  42. ^ a b Lucas, Spencer G.; Morgan, Gary S. (2008). "Taxonomy of Rhynchotherium (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Miocene-Pliocene of North America". New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin. 44: 71–87.
  43. ^ Dalquest, Walter W. (1975). "Vertebrate fossils from the Blanco local fauna of Texas". Occasional Papers of the Museum, Texas Tech University (30): 1–52.
  44. ^ Wang, Shi-Qi; Duangkrayom, Jaroon; Yang, Xiang-Wen (2015). "Occurrence of the Gomphotherium angustidens group in China, based on a revision of Gomphotherium connexum (Hopwood, 1935) and Gomphotherium shensiensis Chang and Zhai, 1978: continental correlation of Gomphotherium species across the Palearctic". Paläontologische Zeitschrift. 89 (4): 1073–1086. Bibcode:2015PalZ...89.1073W. doi:10.1007/s12542-015-0270-8.
  45. ^ Göhlich, Ursula B. (2010). "The Proboscidea (Mammalia) from the Miocene of Sandelzhausen (southern Germany)". Paläontologische Zeitschrift. 84 (1): 163–204. Bibcode:2010PalZ...84..163G. doi:10.1007/s12542-010-0053-1.
  46. ^ Sanders, William J. (2023). Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea. CRC Press.
  47. ^ Duangkrayom, Jaroon; Wang, Shi-Qi; Deng, Tao; Jintasakul, Pratueng (2016). "The first Neogene record of Zygolophodon (Mammalia, Proboscidea) in Thailand: implications for the mammutid evolution and dispersal in Southeast Asia". Journal of Paleontology. 91 (1): 179–193. doi:10.1017/jpa.2016.143.
  48. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v von Koenigswald, Wighart; Wigda, Chris; Göhlich, Ursula B. (2023). "New mammutids (Proboscidea) from the Clarendonian and Hemphillian of Oregon – a survey of Mio-Pliocene mammutids from North America". The Bulletin of the Museum of Natural History of the University of Oregon. 30 (30).
  49. ^ Mead, Jim I.; Arroyo-Cabrales, Joaquin; Swift, Sandra L. (2019). "Late Pleistocene Mammuthus and Cuvieronius (proboscidea) from Térapa, Sonora, Mexico". Quaternary Science Reviews. 223. Bibcode:2019QSRv..22305949M. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.105949.
  50. ^ Nanda, A.C.; Sehgal, Ramesh Kumar; Chauhan, Parth R. (2018). "Siwalik-age faunas from the Himalayan Foreland Basin of South Asia". Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. 162: 54–68. Bibcode:2018JAESc.162...54N. doi:10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.10.035.
  51. ^ Rai, R.C. (2004). "Fossil elephants from the Indian sub-continent and their tusks: A review" (PDF). Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India. 49: 169–188.
  52. ^ Hautier, Lionel; Mackaye, Hassane Taisso; Lihoreau, Fabrice; Tassy, Pascal; Vignaud, Patrick; Brunet, Michel (2009). "New material of Anancus kenyensis (proboscidea, mammalia) from Toros-Menalla (Late Miocene, Chad): Contribution to the systematics of African anancines". Journal of African Earth Sciences. 53 (4–5): 171–176. Bibcode:2009JAfES..53..171H. doi:10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2009.01.003.
  53. ^ Wang, Shi-Qi; Saegusa, Haruo; Duangkrayom, Jaroon; He, Wen; Chen, Shan-Qin (2017). "A new species of Tetralophodon from the Linxia Basin and the biostratigraphic significance of tetralophodont gomphotheres from the Upper Miocene of northern China". Palaeoworld. 26 (4): 703–717. doi:10.1016/j.palwor.2017.03.005.
  54. ^ Konidaris, George; Koufos, George D.; Kostopoulos, Dimitris S.; Merceron, Gildas (2016). "Taxonomy, biostratigraphy and palaeoecology of Choerolophodon (Proboscidea, Mammalia) in the Miocene of SE Europe-SW Asia: Implications for phylogeny and biogeography". Journal of Systematic Palaeontology. 14 (1): 1–27. Bibcode:2016JSPal..14....1K. doi:10.1080/14772019.2014.985339.
  55. ^ a b Morgan, Gary S.; Lucas, Spencer G. (2011). "Stegomastodon (Mammalia: Proboscidea: Gomphotheriidae) from the Blancan and Irvingtonian (Pliocene and early Pleistocene) of New Mexico". In Sullivan, Robert M.; Lucas, Spencer G.; Spielmann, Justin A. (eds.). Fossil Record 3. Bulletin of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science. pp. 570–582.
  56. ^ Lambert, W. David (2023). "Implications of discoveries of the shovel-tusked gomphothere Konobelodon (Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae) in Eurasia for the status of Amebelodon with a new genus of shovel-tusked gomphothere, Stenobelodon". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 43 (1). doi:10.1080/02724634.2023.2252021.
  57. ^ Godman, John Davidson (1830). "Description of a New Genus and New Species of Extinct Mammiferous Quadruped". Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 3.
  58. ^ Gerstner, Patsy A. (1970). "Vertebrate Paleontology, an Early Nineteenth-Century Transatlantic Science". Journal of the History of Biology. 3 (1): 137–148. doi:10.1007/BF00569310. JSTOR 4330534.
  59. ^ Owen, Richard (1842). "Report on the Missourium now exhibiting at the Egyptian Hall". Proceedings of the Geological Society of London. 3 (2): 689–695.
  60. ^ Leidy, Joseph (1869). The extinct mammalian fauna of Dakota and Nebraska : Including an account of some allied forms from other localities, together with a synopsis of the mammalian remains of North America. J.B. Lippincott.
  61. ^ Miller, Wade E. (1987). "Mammut americanum, Utah's First Record of the American Mastodon". Journal of Paleontology. 61 (1): 168–183. Bibcode:1987JPal...61..168M. doi:10.1017/S0022336000028316. JSTOR 1305142.
  62. ^ Palmer, Theodore Sherman (1904). "A List of the Genera and Families of Mammals". North American Fauna (23). doi:10.3996/nafa.23.0001.
  63. ^ Lull, Richard Swann (1908). "The Evolution of the Elephant". American Journal of Science. 4. 25 (147): 169–212. Bibcode:1908AmJS...25..169L. doi:10.2475/ajs.s4-25.147.169.
  64. ^ Hay, Oliver P. (1923). The Pleistocene of North America and its vertebrated animals from the states east of the Mississippi River and from the Canadian provinces east of longitude 95°. Carnegie Institution of Washington.
  65. ^ Simpson, George Gaylord (1942). "The Beginnings of Vertebrate Paleontology in North America". Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 86 (1): 130–188. JSTOR 985085.
  66. ^ Simpson, George Gaylord (1945). The Principles of Classification and a Classification of Mammals. Vol. 85. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History.
  67. ^ Osborn, Henry Fairfield (1921). "First appearance of the true mastodon in America". American Museum Novitates (10): 1–6. Bibcode:1921Sci....54..108F. doi:10.1126/science.54.1388.108. PMID 17734372.
  68. ^ Osborn, Henry Fairfield (1926). "Additional new genera and species of the mastodontoid proboscidea". American Museum Novitates (238): 1–16.
  69. ^ Matthew, William Diller (1930). "A Pliocene mastodon skull from California: Pliomastodon vexillarius n. sp". University of California Publications in Geological Sciences. 19 (16): 336–348.
  70. ^ Frick, Childs (1933). "New remains of trilophodont-tetrabelodont mastodonts". Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 59: 505–652.
  71. ^ Stock, Chester (1936). "A Pliomastodon skull from the Thousand Creek beds, northwestern Nevada". Contributions to Palaeontology. 3 (473): 35–39.
  72. ^ Schultz, John R. (1937). "A late Cenozoic vertebrate fauna from the Coso Mountains, Inyo County, California". Carnegie Institution of Washington Publications: 77–109.
  73. ^ Shotwell, J. Arnold; Russell, Donald E. (1963). "Mammalian fauna of the upper Juntura Formation, the Black Butte local fauna". Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 53: 42–69.
  74. ^ Shoshani, Jeheskel; Tassy, Pascal, eds. (1996). "Appendix B". The Proboscidea: Evolution and Palaeoecology of Elephants and Their Relatives. Oxford University Press. pp. 352–353. ISBN 978-0-19-854652-8.
  75. ^ Lambert, W. David; Shoshani, Jeheskel (1998). "Proboscidea". In Janis, Christine M.; Scott, Kathleen M.; Jacobs, Louis L. (eds.). Evolution of Tertiary Mammals of North America: Volume 1, Terrestrial Carnivores, Ungulates, and Ungulate like Mammals. Cambridge University Press, New York. pp. 606–621.
  76. ^ a b c d e f g h i Dooley Jr., Alton C.; Scott, Eric; Green, Jeremy; Springer, Kathleen B.; Dooley, Brett S.; Smith, Gregory James (2019). "Mammut pacificus sp. nov., a newly recognized species of mastodon from the Pleistocene of western North America". PeerJ. 7: e6614. doi:10.7717/peerj.6614. PMC 6441323. PMID 30944777.
  77. ^ a b c von Koenigswald, Wighart; Březina, Jakub; Werneburg, Ralf; Göhlich, Ursula B. (2022). "A partial skeleton of "Mammut" borsoni (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Pliocene of Kaltensundheim (Germany)". Palaeontologia Electronica (25.1.a10). doi:10.26879/1188.
  78. ^ Yaghoubi, Sadaf; Ashouri, Ali Reza; Ataabadi, Majid Mirzaie; Ghaderi, Abbas (2023). "First true mastodon from the Late Miocene of Western Asia". Research Square. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3046011/v1.
  79. ^ Shiqi, Wang; Chun-Xiao, Li; Xiao-Xiao, Zhang (2021). "On the scientific names of mastodont taxa: nomenclature, Chinese translation, and taxonomic problems". Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 59 (4): 295–332. doi:10.19615/j.cnki.2096-9899.210728.
  80. ^ Wang, Shiqi (2023). "中国新近纪大型植食性哺乳动物演化和生物地层". Quaternary Studies. 43 (3): 637–672. doi:10.11928/j.issn.1001-7410.2023.03.01.
  81. ^ a b Konidaris, George E.; Tsoukala, Evangelia (2021). "The Fossil Record of the Neogene Proboscidea (Mammalia) in Greece". In Vlachos, Evangelos (ed.). Fossil Vertebrates of Greece Vol. 1: Basal vertebrates, Amphibians, Reptiles, Afrotherians, Glires, and Primates. Vol. 1. Springer Cham. pp. 299–344. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-68398-6_12. ISBN 978-3-030-68397-9.
  82. ^ a b Sanders, William J. (2023). "Chapter 1: Context of African Proboscidean Evolution". Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea. CRC Press. pp. 1–17. doi:10.1201/b20016-1.
  83. ^ Shi-Qi, Wang; Yu, Li; Duangkrayom, Jaroon; Shao-Kun, Chen; Wen, He; Shan-Qui, Shen (2017). "Early Mammut from the Upper Miocene of northern China, and its implications for the evolution and differentiation of Mammutidae". Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 55 (3): 233–256.
  84. ^ Mothé, Dimila; Avilla, Leonardo S.; Cozzuol, Mario A. (2012). "The South American Gomphotheres (Mammalia, Proboscidea, Gomphotheriidae): Taxonomy, Phylogeny, and Biogeography". Journal of Mammalian Evolution. 20: 23–32. doi:10.1007/s10914-012-9192-3.
  85. ^ Sanders, William J. (2023). "Chapter 3:Late Paleogene: First Major Diversification and Adaptive Radiation of Proboscideans". Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea. CRC Press. pp. 45–99. doi:10.1201/b20016-3.
  86. ^ Sanders, William J. (2023). "Chapter 3: Early and Middle Miocene Diversification of Proboscideans and Dominance of Elephantimorphs". Evolution and Fossil Record of African Proboscidea. CRC Press. pp. 101–148. doi:10.1201/b20016-4.
  87. ^ Jiangzuo, Qigao; Wang, Shi-Qi (2023). "Northeastern Asia humidification at the end of the Miocene drives the boost of mammalian dispersals from the Old to New World". Journal of Palaeogeography. 12 (1): 50–68. Bibcode:2023JPalG..12...50J. doi:10.1016/j.jop.2022.09.002.
  88. ^ Pasenko, Michael (2011). "A Specimen of Mammut americanum (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from Yavapai County, West-Central Arizona". Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science. 42 (2): 61–64. doi:10.2181/036.042.0201.
  89. ^ Ruez, Dennis Russell, Jr. (2007). Effects of climate change on mammalian fauna composition and structure during the advent of North American continental glaciation in the Pliocene (Thesis). Austin, TX: University of Texas. ProQuest 304831808.{{cite thesis}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  90. ^ a b c d Benoit, Julien; Lyras, George A.; Schmitt, Arnaud; Nxumalo, Mpilo; Tabuce, Rodolphe; Obada, Teodor; et al. (2022). "Paleoneurology of the Proboscidea (Mammalia, Afrotheria): Insights from their brain endocast and labyrinth" (PDF). In Dozo, María Teresa; Paulina-Carabajal, Ariana; Macrini, Thomas E.; Walsh, Stig (eds.). Paleoneurology of Amniotes: New directions in the study of fossil endocasts. Springer Cham. pp. 579–644. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-13983-3_15. ISBN 978-3-031-13982-6.
  91. ^ a b Tobien, Heinz (1996). "Chapter 9: Evolution of zygodons with emphasis on dentition". In Shoshani, Jeheskel; Tassy, Pascal (eds.). The Proboscidea: Evolution and Palaeoecology of Elephants and Their Relatives. Oxford University Press. pp. 76–85. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198546528.003.0009. ISBN 978-0-19-854652-8.
  92. ^ Konidaris, George E.; Aytek, Ahmet I.; Yavuz, Alper Y.; Tarhan, Erhan; Alçiçek, M. Cihat (2023). "First Report of "Mammut" (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Upper Miocene of Turkey". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 42 (6). doi:10.1080/02724634.2023.2222784.
  93. ^ Mothé, Dimila; Avilla, Leonardo dos Santos; Zhao, Desi; Xie, Guangpu; Sun, Boyang (2016). "A new Mammutidae (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the Late Miocene of Gansu Province, China". Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências. 88 (1): 65–74. doi:10.1590/0001-3765201520150261. PMID 26839998.
  94. ^ Bravo-Cuevas, Victor M.; Morales-García, Nuria M.; Cabral-Perdomo, Miguel A. (2015). "Description of mastodons (Mammut americanum) from the late Pleistocene of southeastern Hidalgo, central Mexico". Boletín de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana. 67 (2): 337–347. doi:10.18268/BSGM2015v67n2a14.
  95. ^ Knox, S. Cragin; Pitts, Sue (1984). "Excavation of a Mastodon at Vicksburg, Mississippi" (PDF). Mississippi Geology. 4 (4): 1–12.
  96. ^ Shi-Qi, Wang; Yu, Li; Duangkrayom, Jaroon; Shao-Kun, Chen; Wen, He; Shan-Qin, Chen (2017). "Early Mammut from the Upper Miocene of northern China, and its implications for the evolution and differentiation of Mammutidae". Vertebrata PalAsiatica. 55 (3): 233–256.
  97. ^ Tassy, Pascal (2018). "Remarks on the cranium of Eozygodon morotoensis (Proboscidea, Mammalia) from the early Miocene of Africa, and the question of the monophyly of Elephantimorpha" (PDF). Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève. 37 (2): 593–607.
  98. ^ Jerison, Harry J. (1973). "Chapter 15: Special topics". Evolution of the Brain and Intelligence. Elsevier. pp. 340–362. ISBN 978-0-323-14108-6.
  99. ^ Shoshani, Jeheskel; Kupsky, William J.; Marchant, Gary H. (2006). "Elephant brain: Part I: Gross morphology, functions, comparative anatomy, and evolution". Brain Research Bulletin. 70 (2): 124–157. doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2006.03.016. PMID 16782503.
  100. ^ Benoit, Julien; Legendre, Lucas J.; Tabuce, Rodolphe; Obada, Theodor; Mararescul, Vladislav; Manger, Paul (2019). "Brain evolution in Proboscidea (Mammalia, Afrotheria) across the Cenozoic". Scientific Reports. 9 (9323): 9323. Bibcode:2019NatSR...9.9323B. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-45888-4. PMC 6597534. PMID 31249366.
  101. ^ Ekdale, Eric Gregory (2009). Variation within the bony labyrinth of mammals (Thesis). University of Texas at Austin.
  102. ^ Ekdale, Eric Gregory (2011). "Morphological variation in the ear region of pleistocene elephantimorpha (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from central Texas". Journal of Morphology. 272 (4): 452–464. doi:10.1002/jmor.10924. PMID 21284018.
  103. ^ Sanders, William J. (2017). "Horizontal tooth displacement and premolar occurrence in elephants and other elephantiform proboscideans". Historical Biology. 30 (1–2): 137–156. Bibcode:2018HBio...30..137S. doi:10.1080/08912963.2017.1297436.
  104. ^ Parray, Khursheed A.; Jukar, Advait M.; Paul, Abdul Qayoom; Ahmad, Ishfaq; Patnaik, Rajeev (2022). "A gomphothere (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from the Quaternary of the Kashmir valley, India". Papers in Palaeontology. 8 (2). Bibcode:2022PPal....8E1427P. doi:10.1002/spp2.1427.
  105. ^ Larramendi, Asier (2023). "Estimating tusk masses in proboscideans: a comprehensive analysis and predictive model". Historical Biology: 1–14. doi:10.1080/08912963.2023.2286272.
  106. ^ Smith, Kathlyn M.; Fisher, Daniel C. (2011). "Sexual dimorphism of structures showing indeterminate growth: tusks of American mastodons (Mammut americanum)". Paleobiology. 37 (2): 175–194. Bibcode:2011Pbio...37..175S. doi:10.1666/09033.1.
  107. ^ Smith, Kathlyn M.; Stoneburg, Brittney E.; Dooley, Alton C. (2023). Tusk morphology and sexual dimorphism in the Pacific mastodon (Mammut pacificus) (PDF). Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 83rd Annual Meeting. p. 402.
  108. ^ a b c d Hodgson, Jennifer A.; Allmon, Warren D.; Nester, Peter L.; Sherpa, James M.; Chiment, John J. (2008). "Comparative osteology of late Pleistocene mammoth and mastodon remains from the Watkins Glen site, Chemung County, New York". In Allmon, Warren D.; Nester, Peter L. (eds.). Mastodon Paleobiology, Taphonomy, and Paleoenvironment in the Late Pleistocene of New York State: Studies on the Hyde Park, Chemung, and North Java Sites. Palaeontographica Americana. pp. 301–367.
  109. ^ Olsen, Stanley J. (1972). "Osteology for the archaeologist: the American mastodon and the woolly mammoth". Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Cambridge. 56 (3): 1–47. ISBN 978-0-87365-197-4.
  110. ^ a b c Davis, Matt; Nye, Benjamin D.; Sinatra, Gale M.; Swartout, William; Sjӧberg, Molly; Porter, Molly; et al. (2022). "Designing scientifically-grounded paleoart for augmented reality at La Brea Tar Pits". Palaeontologia Electronica (25.1.a9). doi:10.26879/1191.
  111. ^ a b c Larramendi, Asier (2015). "Shoulder height, body mass, and shape of proboscideans". Acta Palaeontologica Polonica. 61 (3): 537–574. doi:10.4202/app.00136.2014.
  112. ^ Hallin, K.F.; Gabriel, D. (1981). The first specimen of mastodon hair. Geological Society of America 34th Annual Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Section, Abstracts with Program. Vol. 13. p. 199.
  113. ^ Hallin, K.F. (1983). "Hair of the American mastodon indicates an adaptation to a semiaquatic habitat". American Zoologist. 23: 949.
  114. ^ Woodman, Neal; Branstrator, Jon W. (2008). "The Overmyer Mastodon (Mammut Americanum) from Fulton County, Indiana". The American Midland Naturalist. 159 (1): 125–146. doi:10.1674/0003-0031(2008)159[125:TOMMAF]2.0.CO;2.
  115. ^ Hart, Brenna (2020). Manus biomechanics of a giant mastodon from the Gray Fossil Site suggests the ability to transverse uneven terrain in a karstic and mountainous refugium (PDF). Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 80th Annual Meeting. p. 166.
  116. ^ van der Made, Jean (2010). "The evolution of the elephants and their relatives in the context of a changing climate and geography". In Höhne, D.; Schwarz, W. (eds.). Elefantenreich: Eine Fossilwelt in Europa. Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archälogie Sachsen-Anhalt & Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte, Halle. pp. 341–360.
  117. ^ Newsom, Lee A.; Mihlbachler, Matthew C. (2006). "Chapter 10: Mastodons (Mammut americanum) Diet Foraging Patterns Based on Analysis of Dung Deposits". In Webb, S. David (ed.). First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson site in the Aucilla river. Springer. pp. 263–331. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-4694-0_10.
  118. ^ Pérez-Crespo, Victor A.; Prado, José L.; Alberdi, Maria T.; Arroyo-Cabrales, Joaquín; Johnson, Eileen (2016). "Diet and Habitat for Six American Pleistocene Proboscidean Species Using Carbon and Oxygen Stable Isotopes". Ameghiniana. 53 (1): 39–51. doi:10.5710/AMGH.02.06.2015.2842. S2CID 87012003.
  119. ^ Green, Jeremy L.; Semprebon, Gina M.; Solounias, Nikos (2005). "Reconstructing the palaeodiet of Florida Mammut americanum via low-magnification stereomicroscopy". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 223 (1–2): 34–48. Bibcode:2005PPP...223...34G. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2005.03.026.
  120. ^ Březina, Jakub; Alba, David M.; Ivanov, Martin; Hanáček, Martin; Luján, Àngel H. (2021). "A middle Miocene vertebrate assemblage from the Czech part of the Vienna Basin: Implications for the paleoenvironments of the Central Paratethys". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 575. Bibcode:2021PPP...57510473B. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2021.110473.
  121. ^ Lepper, Bradley T.; Frolking, Tod A.; Fisher, Daniel C.; Goldstein, Gerald; Sanger, Jon E.; Wymer, Dee Anne; et al. (1991). "Intestinal contents of a late Pleistocene Mastodont from mid-continental North America" (PDF). Quaternary Research. 36 (1): 120–125. Bibcode:1991QuRes..36..120L. doi:10.1016/0033-5894(91)90020-6. hdl:2027.42/29243. S2CID 56160892.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  122. ^ Birks, Hilary H.; van Geel, Bas; Fisher, Daniel C.; Grimm, Eric C.; Kuijper, Wim J.; van Arkel, Jan; van Reenen, Guido B.A. (2019). "Evidence for the diet and habitat of two late Pleistocene mastodons from the Midwest, USA". Quaternary Research. 91 (2): 792–812. Bibcode:2019QuRes..91..792B. doi:10.1017/qua.2018.100.
  123. ^ Green, Jeremy L.; DeSantis, Larisa R.G.; Smith, Gregory James (2017). "Regional variation in the browsing diet of Pleistocene Mammut americanum (Mammalia, Proboscidea) as recorded by dental microwear textures". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 487: 59–70. Bibcode:2017PPP...487...59G. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.08.019.
  124. ^ a b Lucas, Spencer G.; Morgan, Gary S.; Spielmann, Justin A.; Pasenko, Michael R.; Aguilar, Ricardo Hernán (2011). "Taxonomy and evolution of the Plio-Pleistocene proboscidean Stegomastodon in North America". Current Research in the Pleistocene. 28: 173–175.
  125. ^ Pardi, Melissa I.; DeSantis, Larisa R.G. (2022). "Interpreting spatially explicit variation in dietary proxies through species distribution modeling reveals foraging preferences of mammoth (Mammuthus) and American mastodon (Mammut americanum)". Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. 10. doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.1064299.
  126. ^ Bonhof, Wouter J.; Pryor, Alexander J.E. (2022). "Proboscideans on Parade: A review of the migratory behaviour of elephants, mammoths, and mastodons". Quaternary Science Reviews. 277 (107304). Bibcode:2022QSRv..27707304B. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107304. hdl:10871/128047.
  127. ^ a b c Miller, Joshua H.; Fisher, Daniel C.; Crowley, Brooke E.; Secord, Ross; Konomi, Bledar A. (2022). "Male mastodon landscape use changed with maturation (late Pleistocene, North America)". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (25): e2118329119. Bibcode:2022PNAS..11918329M. doi:10.1073/pnas.2118329119. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 9231495. PMID 35696566.
  128. ^ a b Haynes, G.; Klimowicz, J. (2003). "Mammoth (Mammuthus spp.) and American mastodont (Mammut americanum) bonesites: what do the differences mean?". Advances in Mammoth Research. 9: 185–204.
  129. ^ Sukumar, R. (September 11, 2003). The Living Elephants: Evolutionary Ecology, Behaviour, and Conservation. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 262. ISBN 978-0-19-510778-4. OCLC 935260783.
  130. ^ McNamee, Kai (7 July 2022). "The story of Fred the mastodon, who died looking for love". National Public Radio. Retrieved 2 February 2024.
  131. ^ Price, Gilbert J. (2022). "Wandering mastodons reveal the complexity of Ice Age extinctions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (25): e2118329119. Bibcode:2022PNAS..11918329M. doi:10.1073/pnas.2118329119. PMC 9231495. PMID 35696566.
  132. ^ Lucas, Spencer G.; Guillermo, Alvarado Induni (2010). "Fossil Proboscidea from the upper Cenozoic of Central America: taxonomy, evolutionary and paleobiogeographic significance". Revista Geológica de América Central. 42 (42): 9–42. doi:10.15517/rgac.v0i42.4169.
  133. ^ Polaco, O. J.; Arroyo-Cabrales, J.; Corona-M., E.; López-Oliva, J. G. (2001). "The American Mastodon Mammut americanum in Mexico". In Cavarretta, G.; Gioia, P.; Mussi, M.; Palombo, M. R. (eds.). The World of Elephants – Proceedings of the 1st International Congress, Rome October 16–20, 2001. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche. pp. 237–242. ISBN 88-8080-025-6. JSTOR 30055281.
  134. ^ McDonald, Andrew T.; Atwater, Amy L.; Dooley Jr., Alton C.; Hohman, Charlotte J.H. (2020). "The easternmost occurrence of Mammut pacificus (Proboscidea: Mammutidae), based on a partial skull from eastern Montana, USA". PeerJ. 8: e10030. doi:10.7717/peerj.10030. PMC 7676352. PMID 33240588.
  135. ^ Arroyo-Cabrales, Joaquín; Polaco, Oscar J.; Laurito, César; Johnson, Eileen; Alberdi, María Teresa; Zamora, Ana Lucía Valerio (2007). "The proboscideans (Mammalia) from Mesoamerica". Quaternary International. 169–170: 17–23. Bibcode:2007QuInt.169...17A. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2006.12.017.
  136. ^ White, Connor D. (2023). Partial cranium and associated tusks of Mio-Pliocene Mammut (Mammalia, Proboscidea) from Pascagoula Formation in Tunica Hills, Louisiana (PDF). Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 83rd Annual Meeting. pp. 443–444.
  137. ^ a b Karpinski, Emil; Hackenberger, Dirk; Zazula, Grant; Widga, Chris; Duggan, Ana T.; Golding, G. Brian; Kuch, Melanie; Klunk, Jennifer; Jass, Christopher N.; Groves, Pam; Druckenmiller, Patrick; Schubert, Blaine W.; Arroyo-Cabrales, Joaquin; Simpson, William F.; Hoganson, John W.; Fisher, Daniel C.; Ho, Simon Y.W.; MacPhee, Ross D.E.; Poinar, Hendrick N. (2020). "American mastodon mitochondrial genomes suggest multiple dispersal events in response to Pleistocene climate oscillations". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 4048. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.4048K. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17893-z. PMC 7463256. PMID 32873779.
  138. ^ Kjær, Kurt H.; Winther Pedersen, Mikkel; De Sanctis, Bianca; De Cahsan, Binia; Korneliussen, Thorfinn S.; Michelsen, Christian S.; Sand, Karina K.; Jelavić, Stanislav; Ruter, Anthony H.; Schmidt, Astrid M. A.; Kjeldsen, Kristian K.; Tesakov, Alexey S.; Snowball, Ian; Gosse, John C.; Alsos, Inger G. (December 2022). "A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA". Nature. 612 (7939): 283–291. Bibcode:2022Natur.612..283K. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05453-y. ISSN 1476-4687. PMC 9729109. PMID 36477129.
  139. ^ Pappas, Stephanie. "World's Oldest DNA Discovered, Revealing Ancient Arctic Forest Full of Mastodons". Scientific American. Retrieved 2022-12-08.
  140. ^ Baumgartner, Kyrie A. (2014). Neogene Climate Change in Eastern North America: A Quantitative Reconstruction (PDF) (MS). East Tennessee State University.
  141. ^ Fox, David L. (2000). "Growth increments in Gomphotherium tusks and implications for late Miocene climate change in North America". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 156 (3–4): 327–348. Bibcode:2000PPP...156..327F. doi:10.1016/S0031-0182(99)00148-0.
  142. ^ McDonald, H. Gregory; Carranza-Castañeda, Oscar (2017). "Increased xenarthran diversity of the Great American Biotic Interchange: a new genus and species of ground sloth (Mammalia, Xenarthra, Megalonychidae) from the Hemphillian (late Miocene) of Jalisco, Mexico". Journal of Paleontology. 91 (5): 1069–1082. Bibcode:2017JPal...91.1069M. doi:10.1017/jpa.2017.45.
  143. ^ Prothero, Donald R.; Davis, Edward Byrd (2008). "Magnetic stratigraphy of the Upper Miocene (Early Hemphillian) Thousand Creek Formation, Northwestern Nevada". Neogene Mammals: Bulletin 44. Vol. 44. pp. 233–238.
  144. ^ Webb, S. David; Hulbert Jr., Richard C.; Morgan, Gary S.; Evans, Helen F. (2008). "Terrestrial mammals of the Palmetto Fauna (early Pliocene, latest Hemphillian) from the Central Florida Phosphate District". In Wang, Xiaoming; Barnes, Lawrence G. (eds.). Geology and Vertebrate Paleontology of Western and Southern North America. Vol. 41. Natural History Museum Los Angeles County Science. pp. 293–312.
  145. ^ Figueirido, Borja; Janis, Christine M.; Pérez-Claros, Juan A.; De Renzi, Miquel; Palmqvist, Paul (2012). "Cenozoic climate change influences mammalian evolutionary dynamics". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109 (3): 722–727. Bibcode:2012PNAS..109..722F. doi:10.1073/pnas.1110246108. PMC 3271923. PMID 22203974.
  146. ^ Wang, Bian; Secord, Ross (2020). "Paleoecology of Aphelops and Teleoceras (Rhinocerotidae) through an interval of changing climate and vegetation in the Neogene of the Great Plains, central United States". Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology. 542. Bibcode:2020PPP...54209411W. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109411.
  147. ^ Lucas, Spencer G.; Morgan, Gary S. (1999). "The oldest Mammut (Mammalia: proboscidea) from New Mexico". New Mexico Geology. 21 (1): 10–12. doi:10.58799/NMG-v21n1.10.
  148. ^ Morgan, Gary S.; Harris, Arthur H. (2015). "Pliocene and Pleistocene vertebrates of New Mexico". New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin. 68: 233–427.
  149. ^ a b Bell, Christopher J.; Lundelius Jr., Ernest L.; Barnosky, Anthony D.; Graham, Russell W.; Lindsay, Everett H.; Ruez, Dennis R.; Semken, Holmes A.; Webb, S. David; Zakrzewski, Richard J. (2004). "Chapter 7: The Blancan, Irvingtonian, and Rancholabrean Mammal Ages". In Woodburne, Michael (ed.). Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic Mammals of North America. Columbia University Press. pp. 232–314. doi:10.7312/wood13040-009.
  150. ^ Lucas, Spencer G.; Morgan, Gary S.; Estep, John W.; Mack, Greg H.; Hawley, John W. (1999). "Co-Occurrence of the Proboscideans Cuvieronius, Stegomastodon, and Mammuthus in the Lower Pleistocene of Southern New Mexico". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology. 19 (3): 595–597. Bibcode:1999JVPal..19..595L. doi:10.1080/02724634.1999.10011169. JSTOR 4524020.
  151. ^ Schultz, Gerald E. (2010). "Pleistocene (Irvingtonian, Cudahyan) vertebrates from the Texas Panhandle, and their geographic and paleoecologic significance". Quaternary International. 217 (1–2): 195–224. Bibcode:2010QuInt.217..195S. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2009.12.012.
  152. ^ Hughes, Philip D.; Gibbard, Philip L.; Ehlers, Jürgen (2020). "The "missing glaciations" of the Middle Pleistocene" (PDF). Quaternary Research. 96: 161–183. Bibcode:2020QuRes..96..161H. doi:10.1017/qua.2019.76.
  153. ^ Storrs, Glenn W.; McDonald, H. Gregory; Scott, Eric; Genheimer, Robert A.; Hedeen, Stanley E.; Schwalbach, Cameron E. (2023). "Field Guide to Big Bone Lick, Kentucky: Birthplace of American Vertebrate Paleontology". Kentucky Geological Survey. 13 (2): 1–54. doi:10.13023/kgs13sp22023.
  154. ^ White, John T.; Henry, Auréade; Kuehn, Stephen; Loso, Michael G.; Rasic, Jeffrey T. (2022). "Terminal Pleistocene human occupation of the upper Copper River basin, southern Alaska: Results of test excavations at Nataeł Na'" (PDF). Quaternary International. 640: 23–43. Bibcode:2022QuInt.640...23W. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2022.08.012.
  155. ^ Surovell, Todd A.; Waguespack, Nicole M. (2008). "How many elephant kills are 14?: Clovis mammoth and mastodon kills in context". Quaternary International. 191 (1): 82–97. Bibcode:2008QuInt.191...82S. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2007.12.001.
  156. ^ Grayson, Donald K.; Meltzer, David J. (2015). "Revisiting Paleoindian exploitation of extinct North American mammals". Journal of Archaeological Science. 56: 177–193. Bibcode:2015JArSc..56..177G. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.009.
  157. ^ a b c Haynes, Gary (2022). "Sites in the Americas with Possible or Probable Evidence for the Butchering of Proboscideans". PaleoAmerica. 8 (3): 187–214. doi:10.1080/20555563.2022.2057834.
  158. ^ a b Fisher, Daniel C. (2021). "Chapter 16: Underwater carcass storage and processing of marrow, brains, and dental pulp: Evidence for the role of proboscideans in human subsistence". In Konidaris, George Dimitri; Barkai, Ran; Tourloukis, Vangelis; Harvati, Katerina (eds.). Human-Elephant Interactions: From Past to Present. Tübingen University Press. pp. 407–435. doi:10.15496/publikation-55583.
  159. ^ Mackie, Madeline E.; Haas, Randall (2021). "Estimating the frequency of coincidental spatial associations between Clovis artifacts and proboscidean remains in North America". Quaternary Research. 103: 182–192. Bibcode:2021QuRes.103..182M. doi:10.1017/qua.2021.1.
  160. ^ Kilby, J. David; Surovell, Todd A.; Huckell, Bruce B.; Ringstaff, Christopher W.; Hamilton, Marcus J.; Haynes Jr., C. Vance (2022). "Evidence supports the efficacy of Clovis points for hunting proboscideans". Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports. 45. Bibcode:2022JArSR..45j3600K. doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2022.103600.
  161. ^ Eren, Metin I.; Meltzer, David J.; Story, Brett; Buchanan, Briggs; Yeager, Don; Bebber, Michelle R. (2022). "Not just for proboscidean hunting: On the efficacy and functions of Clovis fluted points". Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports. 45. Bibcode:2022JArSR..45j3601E. doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2022.103601.
  162. ^ Waters, Michael R.; Newell, Zachary A.; Fisher, Daniel C.; McDonald, H. Gregory; Han, Jiwan; Moreno, Michael; Robbins, Andrew (2023). "Late Pleistocene osseous projectile point from the Manis site, Washington—Mastodon hunting in the Pacific Northwest 13,900 years ago". Science Advances. 9 (5): eade9068. Bibcode:2023SciA....9E9068W. doi:10.1126/sciadv.ade9068. PMC 9891687. PMID 36724281.
  163. ^ Waters, Michael R.; Stafford Jr., Thomas W.; McDonald, H. Gregory; Gustafson, Carl; Rasmussen, Morten; Cappelini, Enrico; Olsen, Jesper V.; Szklarczyk, Damian; Jensen, Lars Juhl; Gilbert, M. Thomas P.; Willerslev, Eske (2011). "Pre-Clovis Mastodon Hunting 13,800 Years Ago at the Manis Site, Washington". Science. 334 (6054): 351–353. Bibcode:2011Sci...334..351W. doi:10.1126/science.1207663. PMID 22021854.
  164. ^ Holen, Steven R.; Deméré, Thomas A.; Fisher, Daniel C.; Fullagar, Richard; Paces, James B.; Jefferson, George T.; Beeton, Jared M.; Cerutti, Richard A.; Rountrey, Adam N.; Vescera, Lawrence; Holen, Kathleen A. (2017). "A 130,000-year-old archaeological site in southern California, USA". Nature. 544 (7651): 479–483. doi:10.5066/F7HD7SW7. PMID 28447646.
  165. ^ Haynes, Gary (2017). "The Cerutti Mastodon". PaleoAmerica. 3 (3): 196–199. doi:10.1080/20555563.2017.1330103.
  166. ^ Bednarik, Robert G. (2014). "Pleistocene Palaeoart of the Americas". Arts. 3 (2): 190–206. doi:10.3390/arts3020190.
  167. ^ Zazula, Grant D.; MacPhee, Ross; Metcalfe, Jessica; Reyes, Alberto V.; Brock, Fiona; Druckenmiller, Patrick S.; Groves, Pamela; Harington, C. Richard; Hodgins, Gregory; Kunz, Michael L.; Longstaffe, Fred John; Mann, Dan; McDonald, H. Gregory (2014). "American mastodon extirpation in the Arctic and Subarctic predates human colonization and terminal Pleistocene climate change". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111 (52): 18460–18465. Bibcode:2014PNAS..11118460Z. doi:10.1073/pnas.1416072111. PMC 4284604. PMID 25453065.
  168. ^ Meltzer, David J. (2020). "Overkill, glacial history, and the extinction of North America's Ice Age megafauna". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (46): 28555–28563. Bibcode:2020PNAS..11728555M. doi:10.1073/pnas.2015032117. PMC 7682371. PMID 33168739.
  169. ^ a b Stuart, Anthony J. (August 20, 2022). "Chapter 6. North America: mastodon, ground sloths, and sabertooth cats". Vanished Giants: The Lost World of the Ice Age. University of Chicago Press. pp. 67–112. ISBN 978-0-226-82403-1.
  170. ^ a b Koch, Paul L.; Barnosky, Anthony D. (2006). "Late Quaternary Extinctions: State of the Debate". Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 37: 215–250. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132415.
  171. ^ Scott, Eric (2010). "Extinctions, scenarios, and assumptions: Changes in latest Pleistocene large herbivore abundance and distribution in western North America". Quaternary International. 217 (1–2): 225–239. Bibcode:2010QuInt.217..225S. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2009.11.003.
  172. ^ Boulanger, Matthew T.; Lyman, R. Lee (2014). "Northeastern North American Pleistocene megafauna chronologically overlapped minimally with Paleoindians". Quaternary Science Reviews. 85: 35–46. Bibcode:2014QSRv...85...35B. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2013.11.024.
  173. ^ Feranec, Robert S.; Kozlowski, Andrew (2016). "Implications of a Bayesian radiocarbon calibration of colonization ages for mammalian megafauna in glaciated New York State after the Last Glacial Maximum". Quaternary Research. 85 (2): 262–270. Bibcode:2016QuRes..85..262F. doi:10.1016/j.yqres.2016.01.003.
  174. ^ Broughton, Jack M.; Weitzel, Elic M. (2018). "Population reconstructions for humans and megafauna suggest mixed causes for North American Pleistocene extinctions". Nature Communications. 9 (5441): 5441. Bibcode:2018NatCo...9.5441B. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07897-1. PMC 6303330. PMID 30575758.
  175. ^ Woodman, Neal Woodman; Athfield, Nancy Beavan (2009). "Post-Clovis survival of American Mastodon in the southern Great Lakes Region of North America". Quaternary Research. 72 (3): 359–363. Bibcode:2009QuRes..72..359W. doi:10.1016/j.yqres.2009.06.009.
  176. ^ Landol, Nicholas (2022). "Chapter 4: Analysis". The Role of the Pleistocene in Native American Oral Traditions (MA). Binghamton University. pp. 21–53.
  177. ^ Nose, Renee Roman (2012). "An Oral History of the Ancient Game of Sla-Hal: Man Versus Animals". ICT News. Archived from the original on 25 April 2023. Retrieved 20 February 2024.
  178. ^ Mapes, Lynda V. (2012). "Tribal gathering celebrates unifying culture of an ancient game". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on 22 September 2021. Retrieved 20 February 2024.
  179. ^ Thomson, Keith (2011). "Jefferson's old bones: did the so-called father of American vertebrate paleontology believe in fossils?". American Scientist. 99 (3). doi:10.1511/2011.90.200.
  180. ^ Currie, Philip J. (2023). "Celebrating dinosaurs: their behaviour, evolution, growth, and physiology". Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences. 60 (3): 263–293. Bibcode:2023CaJES..60..263C. doi:10.1139/cjes-2022-0131.
  181. ^ Barney, Brett (2006). "Chapter 15: Nineteenth-century Popular Culture". In Kummings, Donald D. (ed.). A Companion to Walt Whitman. Blackwell Publishing. pp. 233–256.
  182. ^ "STATE FOSSIL: MASTODON". Michigan Legislature. 2002. Archived from the original on 29 January 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  183. ^ "Mastodon". State Symbols USA. 10 October 2014. Archived from the original on 1 October 2023. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  184. ^ "Indiana lawmakers name mastodon as first state fossil". WFYI. Archived from the original on 22 September 2023. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  185. ^ "Senators Braun and Peters Introduce Bill to Name Mastodon America's National Fossil". Mike Braun: U.S. Senator Indiana. Archived from the original on 20 February 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  186. ^ Davidson, Kyle (2024). "Peters introduces bipartisan proposal to designate the first national fossil". Michigan Advance. Archived from the original on 27 January 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  187. ^ "Replica". Mastodon Ridge. Archived from the original on 16 January 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  188. ^ Morrison, Tom (2018). "Chapter 4: Locomotive Construction, 1895–1905". The American Steam Locomotive in the Twentieth Century. McFarland. pp. 133–182.
  189. ^ Gaskell, G.H. (1952). "The Origin of Locomotive Class Names". The Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin (87): 83–95. JSTOR 43517676.
  190. ^ Wilhelmi, Cynthia J. (1996). The content of the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers as the source of antisocial and prosocial learning (MA). University of Nebraska at Omaha.
  191. ^ Marchese, David (2010). "How They Became... Mastodon". Spin. Archived from the original on 29 June 2022. Retrieved 21 February 2024.
  192. ^ Perrigo, Billy (2020). "Thousands Have Joined Mastodon Since Twitter Changed Hands. Its Founder Has a Vision for Democratizing Social Media". Time. Archived from the original on 21 January 2024. Retrieved 21 February 2024.