156
Journal of Paleontology 90(1):154–169
MCZ, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts; PBDB, Paleobiology Database,
paleobiodb.org; SC, South Carolina State Museum, Columbia, South Carolina; USNM, United States National Museum of Natural History, The Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Order Cetacea Brisson, 1762 Pelagiceti Uhen, 2008
Neoceti Fordyce and de Muizon, 2001 Suborder Odontoceti Flower, 1867 Family Agorophiidae Abel, 1914
Type genus.—Agorophius Cope, 1895a
Included genera.—Type and only genus, Agorophius Cope, 1895a
Diagnosis.—As for the only included species, Agorophius pygmaeus, in the only included genus, Agorophius, see below.
Comments.—Fordyce (2002) stated that “the lithograph [of the holotype of Agorophius pygmaeus does not]… provide enough information to allow the Agorophiidae to be rediagnosed in a cladistic sense.” Given that Fordyce’s (1981, 2002) concept of the Family Agorophiidae includes only the genus Agorophius and the species Agorophius pygmaeus; and given that Fordyce considers the species diagnosable (see below), the family must be diag- nosableaswellusing thesesamecharacteristics as the species. Gingerich (2005) erected a superfamily Agorophioidea that inclu- ded the families Agorophiidae, Simocetidae and Patriocetidae (?) without discussion. Subsequent phylogenetic analyses (Geisler et al., 2012, 2014; Sanders and Geisler, 2015; Uhen, 2008b) have shown this assemblage of families to be polyphyletic, and thus the superfamily Agorophioidea is not recognized here. Several authors previously included the genus Xenorophus
in the Agorophiidae (Hay, 1930; Miller, 1923; Simpson, 1945), but it has been subsequently removed to its own family, the Xenorophidae (Uhen, 2008b). Likewise, the genus Archaeodelphis has also been placed in the Agorophiidae (Miller, 1923; Rothausen, 1968), but it too has been removed to the Xenorophidae (Geisler et al., 2014; Uhen, 2008b). Rothausen (Rothausen, 1968) also suggested that Microzeuglodon aff. caucasicum belonged in the Agorophiidae, but Microzeuglodon is now considered a nomen dubium (Uhen and Pyenson, 2007) and the status of the species Microzeuglodon aff. caucasicum remains
unclear.Aslanova (1977) named a newgenus and species Atropatenocetus posteocenicus based on a partial neurocranium and vertex from the Chattian of Azerbaijan, and placed it in the family Agorophiidae without justification. Neither descriptions nor photographs or illustrations of the specimen are clear enough for comparison to other Oligocene Odontoceti. Thus, Uhen (2008b) placed Atropatenocetus in Odontoceti incertae sedis. Several additional specimens have been identified
previously as members of the Agorophiidae but not yet assessed in detail, nor have they been assigned to any particular genus or species. Interestingly, all of these additional specimens are from the North Pacific, rather than the North Atlantic where all of the specimens herein attributed to Agorophius pygmaeus are found (see below). These include the following specimens.
Japan: PBDB collection 45787, Morawan, Morawan Formation, Chattian (Sawamura et al., 1996), two specimens Agorophiidae indet. n. gen. n. sp., large species and Agorophiidae n. gen. n. sp. “very aberrant” agorophiid; PBDB collection 76045, Kitakyushu, Yamaga Formation, Chattian (Okazaki, 1995), cf. Agorophiidae indet. Mexico, Baja California Sur: PBDB collec- tion 45695, San Juan de la Costa, El Cien Formation, Chattian (Cruiz-Marin and Barnes, 1996), Agorophiidae indet.; PBDB 66429, Tembabichi, Chattian (Gonzalez-Barba, 2007), Agoro- phiidae indet.U.S.A., Washington State: LACMVP 5984, PBDB collection 45807, Makah Formation, Rupelian (Goedert et al., 1995) “Agorophiidae” indet.; LACMVP5112, PBDB collection 45809, Pysht Formation, Chattian (Goedert et al., 1995), small “Agorophiidae” indet. None of these specimens has been adequately identified or described to determine if they are more closely related to Agorophius than any other Oligocene odonto- cete, and thus whether they belong in the Agorophiidae or some other clade. Until they are compared directly with the specimens described here as Agorophius pygmaeus,they should all be considered Odontoceti indet.
Agorophius Cope, 1895a Type species.—Zeuglodon pygmaeus Müller 1849.
Included species.—No other species besides the type species, Agorophius pygmaeus, are currently included in the genus Agorophius.
Diagnosis.—As for the only included species, Agorophius pygmaeus, below.
Comments.—Cope (1895) does not include any discussion of the etymology of the generic name Agorophius.
Agorophius pygmaeus (Müller, 1849)
1847 Zeuglodon Gibbes, p. 8. 1847 Basilosaurus Gibbes, plate 5. 1847 Zeuglodon Tuomey, p. 284, figured. 1847 Zeuglodon (or Basilosaurus) Tuomey, p. 16, not figured. 1849 Zeuglodon pygmaeus Müller, p. 29, not figured. 1854 Basilosaurus pygmaeus Leidy, p. 8, not figured. 1868 Doryodon pygmaeus Cope, p. 155, not figured. 1869 Squalodon pygmaeus Leidy, p. 420, plate XXIX. 1869 Phocodon holmesii Agassiz (in Leidy) 1895 Agorophius pygmaeus Cope, p. 139, not figured. 1907 Agorophius pygmaeus True, p. 3, figured. 1914 Agorophius pygmaeus Abel, p. 202, figured. 1916 Squalodon pygmaeum Dal Piaz, p. 154, not figured. 1981 Agorophius pygmaeus Fordyce, p. 1029, figures 1–3.
Holotype.—Fragmented but reassembled skull (Fig. 1) lacking ventral midline elements between orbits and basisphenoid, periotics and auditory bullae, and anterior portion of the rostrum; bearing a single right cheek tooth, figured by True from a plate prepared by Agassiz and labeled “Phocodon homesii” (True, 1907). Only the cheek tooth remains, cataloged as MCZ 8761 (Fordyce, 1981). True notes that the holotype skull and
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188
