Fossils: A Story of the Rocks and Their Record of Prehistoric Life

by Harvey C. Markman

This type of tooth is constructed for long continued use and will withstand the wear of more abrasive foods. The position of the white enamel plates is seen in this view of the grinding surface. These plates extend all the way to the base of the tooth, which is of the long-crowned variety and not to be destroyed by the wearing away of a single outside layer of enamel.

Other specimens in the Museum collection are the long-jawed mastodonts, so named because of the elongated jaws and protruding chin which is often mistaken for a tusk. Early members of this group had more cheek teeth than later types of mastodons, and longer jaws were required for their accommodation. Some of them had flattened lower tusks which evidently were used for digging purposes. These are popularly known as “shovel tuskers.” The more modern American mastodon had shorter jaws and, like the mammoths and elephants, only one pair of tusks. Both the long-jawed and short-jawed types are represented by complete skeletons, and also by tusks, jaws, and teeth of many individuals. The American mastodons and mastodonts were of about the same size as the smaller mammoths.

The difference between mastodons and mammoths is most readily recognized in the structure of the grinding teeth, the molars and pre-molars. In the mastodon these teeth are of the short-crowned type, while in the mammoths, as in the modern elephants, they are long-crowned. The difference between these two types of molars has been described with reference to horses, and the change from the older to the modern form may be regarded as coming about in the same general way, through a series of gradual modifications. In both horse and mammoth the final development shows internal enamel extending from the grinding surface nearly to the roots. Otherwise, however, there is almost no resemblance, for the mammoth tooth is made up of flattened enamel plates, the number of which is variable for different species. In the jaws of a very young individual these plates may be seen as separate parts. As the tooth continues to grow, the plates become cemented together, and when the ends of the plate are worn down it may be observed that each consists of a layer of enamel surrounding a flat central core of dentine. The type of construction is rather more obvious in the mammoth tooth than in that of a horse, partly because of the larger size, and partly because of the relative simplicity of construction.

The earlier history of the Proboscidea is not recorded in the rocks of North America, for the group was of African origin and its migrations did not extend as far as the New World until middle Cenozoic times. The mastodons and mammoths were the largest of land animals since the Age of Reptiles, but their Old World ancestors were not conspicuous because of their bulk. Many of these ancient forms, even in the earliest stages, reveal some of the prominent characters that dominate the entire group. None of them, however, should be regarded as a miniature mammoth or mastodon, for these highly specialized types were perfected only at a comparatively recent date, and by a process that works very slowly. Among the earlier forms there were also some oddities which failed to survive or to produce a successful branch of the stock such as the elephants.

Nebraska Mammoth
(Archidiskodon meridionalis nebrascensis)

The earliest known member of the order was Moeritherium, an animal of the size of a tapir, living in Egypt during the late Eocene and early Oligocene time. At this stage the characteristic specializations leading to the mastodons and mammoths were apparent but not far advanced. The proboscis was probably much like the flexible snout of modern tapirs, for the need of a long trunk had not yet arrived. In upper and lower jaws the second pair of incisor teeth were becoming large and prominent. The enormous tusks of the mammoths later developed from the enlargement of the same pair of upper incisors, and in some of the long-jawed mastodonts the lower pair also produced large tusks, though frequently the lower tusks were not prominent.

Dinotherium had downward-growing tusks in the lower jaws, none in the upper. This genus was fairly common in the Miocene of Europe, Asia, and Africa. In the tropics it survived throughout the Pliocene and possibly into the Pleistocene. Some of the species acquired the size of elephants, but it is apparent that they were not ancestral to any of the more progressive types. They are to be regarded rather as an offshoot from the main line of descent.

In 1859 only ten species of the elephant-like mammals were known, and all were referred to a single genus. At the present time eleven genera appear to be well founded, and the number of recognized species has reached a hundred, if it has not already passed that figure. New discoveries are expected to add to the existing total. With this mass of material before us we note certain definite trends among the more progressive types. The increasing weight was accompanied by the development of strong, upright limbs in which the bones have a columnar position instead of the angular assembly which prevails among most of the mammals. As the tusks increased in size there was a shortening of both skull and neck to bring the weight closer to the point of support. The front teeth disappeared except the second pair of upper incisors which remain as tusks in the modern elephant. The cheek teeth present in the shortened jaws of the mammoth were reduced to one pair at a time in the upper set and another pair below. From a simple, low-crowned origin these grinding teeth developed into the more successful high-crowned pattern with numerous plates of enamel inside. A prehensile upper lip acquired the length and usefulness of the elephants trunk.