quaternary Article The Fox from Bajiazui (Qingyang, Central China) and an Update on Early Pleistocene Foxes from China Saverio Bartolini-Lucenti 1,2, * , Qigao Jiangzuo 3,4 , Hao Jiang 3,5 , Zhaoyu Li 6 , Kun Xie 6 and Joan Madurell-Malapeira 1,7 1 Earth Science Department, University of Florence, 50121 Florence, Italy; joan.madurell@uab.cat 2 Institut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont, Campus de la UAB, Autonomous University of Barcelona, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain 3 Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044, China; jiangzuo@ivpp.ac.cn (Q.J.); jianghao@ivpp.ac.cn (H.J.) 4 Key Laboratory of Orogenic Belts and Crustal Evolution, School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China 5 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100040, China 6 State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Institute of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China 7 Department of Geology, Faculty of Sciences, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain * Correspondence: saverio.bartolinilucenti@unifi.it Abstract: (1) Background: despite the fact that nowadays the genus Vulpes Frisch, 1775, is the most diverse among extant Canidae, its fossil record is utterly scarce, especially in the Asian Pliocene. The sparse nature of this record further complicates the reconstruction of the evolutionary scenario to fit these taxa with extant species. The situation seems to change slightly in the Early Pleistocene when two species are recorded: Vulpes alopecoides (Del Campana, 1913) in Europe and Vulpes chikushanensis, Young, 1930, in Asian localities. Unlike the former, which has an extensive record, the remains of the Chinese V. chikushanensis are sporadic and the validity of the taxon has also been questioned. (2) Meth- Citation: Bartolini-Lucenti, S.; ods: the study of the specimens from the Early Pleistocene site of Bajiazui (1.8–1.2 Ma, Qingyang, Jiangzuo, Q.; Jiang, H.; Li, Z.; Xie, K.; Gansu) in comparison to an extensive sample of Vulpes spp. The Pliocene–Early Pleistocene is relevant Madurell-Malapeira, J. The Fox from for the delimitation of fossil foxes variability; (3) Results: morphologically and morphometrically, Bajiazui (Qingyang, Central China) the specimens of Bajiazui fit with the specimens of V. chikushanensis from other Chinese localities of and an Update on Early Pleistocene the Early Pleistocene, e.g., Longdan (Gansu) and Huiyu (Fangshang), highlighting some difference Foxes from China. Quaternary 2023, 6, with the latest Early Pleistocene forms of Jigushan fox; (4) Conclusions: the revision of the Asian 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/ quat6040057 fossil record of Vulpes is crucial in our attempt to understand and reconstruct the evolution of car- nivoran guild during the late Early Pleistocene (1.8–0.8 Ma). The fox remains from Bajiazui, although Academic Editor: Juan Manuel fragmentary, add a valuable piece to our knowledge of V. chikushanensis, a species possibly strongly López García related to the extant Vulpes corsac (Linnaeus, 1768). Received: 2 July 2023 Revised: 22 September 2023 Keywords: Vulpes; carnivora; eastern Asia; Pleistocene Accepted: 7 November 2023 Published: 20 November 2023 1. Introduction Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. Foxes of the genus Vulpes Frisch, 1775, are today the most diverse monophyletic group Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. of extant Canidae [1,2], with twelve recognized species that inhabit almost the entire planet This article is an open access article with the exception of Antarctica and South America [2,3]. Despite the present diversity, distributed under the terms and their fossil record is one of the most fragmentary within the subfamily Caninae. conditions of the Creative Commons The oldest documented fossil evidence of foxes dates back to the Late Miocene period Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// of North America and the Old World. This coincided with the spread of dry and open creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ environments, which followed the global cooling trend that began precisely in the latest 4.0/). Miocene [4]. However, fossil fox occurrences are sporadic and scattered across the North Quaternary 2023, 6, 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/quat6040057 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/quaternary Quaternary 2023, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 14 Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 2 of 14 Miocene [4]. However, fossil fox occurrences are sporadic and scattered across the North American, Eurasian, and African continents [5,6]. The earliest species are the Late Miocene (~9 Ma) North American, American Eurasian, Vulpescontinents and African stenognathus Savage, [5,6]. 1941, and The earliest speciesVulpes kernensis are the Tedford et Late Miocene al., 2009 [5]. Vulpes reached Eurasia and Africa pretty early (~9 Ma) North American Vulpes stenognathus Savage, 1941, and Vulpes kernensis Tedford in its record, as Vulpes riffautae de Bonis et al., 2007, was already present in Chad around 7 Ma et al., 2009 [5]. Vulpes reached Eurasia and Africa pretty early in its record, as Vulpes riffautae [7]. The earliest Eurasian records de Bonis ofet the genuswas al., 2007, are already the Pliocenepresentones in of Vulpes Chad qiuzhudingi around 7 Ma [7]. WantThe et al., 2014, earliest from the Eurasian Zanda basin records of the[8], genusVulpes arebeihaiensis the Pliocene Qiuones and of Tedford, Vulpes 1990, from the qiuzhudingi Want Yushe Basin et al., and 2014, Çalta- from 1 [9,10], the ZandaVulpes basin rooki Bartolini [8], Vulpes Lucenti, beihaiensis Qiu2021, andfrom the Yushe Tedford, 1990, fromBasinthe [11], as well Yushe BasinasandVulpes ‘praecorsac’ Çalta-1 from [9,10], VulpesOdessa rookiCatacombs [12] and2021, Bartolini Lucenti, Vulpes sp.the from from Musselievo Yushe Basin [11],[13].as well as VulpesThese ‘praecorsac’ from Odessa early records Catacombs are, despite [12] and apparent Vulpes rather diversity, sp. from Musselievo scattered [13]. and fragmentary. These Indeed, ofearly theserecords taxa, onlyare,V. despite apparent beihaiensis, diversity, rather V. qiuzhudingi and V. scattered rooki areand wellfragmentary. characterized Indeed, taxa, and of there these is taxa, general V. beihaiensis, only consensus onV. qiuzhudingi their taxonomy, V. rooki and, andecology are well characterized plausibly, systemat- taxa, and there is general consensus on their taxonomy, ecology ics. The Tibetan V. qiuzhudingi and the Chinese V. rooki stand out as peculiar, with their and, plausibly, systematics. The Tibetan V. qiuzhudingi hypercarnivorous dentition andand Chinese V. rooki the adaptations, stand out especially as qiuzhudingi in V. peculiar, with theirThe [8,11]. hyper-small- carnivorous dentition and adaptations, especially in V. qiuzhudingi sized V. beihaiensis is interesting for its plausible affinity with the extant Vulpes corsac (Lin- [8,11]. The small-sized V.naeus, beihaiensis 1768), is as interesting proposedfor byits plausible [9], but alsoaffinity with the with Early extant Vulpes the Pleistocene corsacchikushanensis, Vulpes (Linnaeus, 1768), as proposed by [9], but also with the Early Pleistocene Vulpes chikushanensis, Young, Young, 1930 [14,15], and the contemporaneous Vulpes alopecoides (Del Campana, 1913) 1930 [14,15], and the contemporaneous Vulpes alopecoides (Del Campana, 1913) [10]. Indeed, [10]. Indeed, V. beihaiensis might have originated V. chikushanensis in the Late Pliocene of V. beihaiensis might have originated V. chikushanensis in the Late Pliocene of eastern Asia eastern Asia and then, in turn, the extant V. corsac, while in western Asia, it gave origin to and then, in turn, the extant V. corsac, while in western Asia, it gave origin to the lineage of the lineage of Vulpes vulpes (Linnaeus, 1758) (through V. alopecoides) [10,16]. Vulpes vulpes (Linnaeus, 1758) (through V. alopecoides) [10,16]. Duringthe During theLate Late Pliocene Pliocene and and thethe Early Early Pleistocene, Pleistocene, the the situation situation changed. changed. ThereThere was awas a reduction in diversity, probably prompted by an increase reduction in diversity, probably prompted by an increase in carnivoran intraguild competi- in carnivoran intraguild com- petition, tion, as onlyas the only two the two distinct distinct forms V.forms V. alopecoides alopecoides and V. chikushanensis and V. chikushanensis are recordedare recorded [6,15,17]. [6,15,17]. The first record of the former is in the Georgian The first record of the former is in the Georgian site of Kvabebi, recently redated site of Kvabebi, recently redated to 2.85 Ma [18], whereas the latter appeared in the Gansu site of Longdan (2.4–2.2 Ma) [15].Ma) to 2.85 Ma [18], whereas the latter appeared in the Gansu site of Longdan (2.4–2.2 [15].these Both Both taxa theseapparently taxa apparently remained remained confinedconfined to the two to sides the two sides ofwith of Eurasia Eurasia with nu- numerous merous occurrences occurrences (see an in-depth (see andiscussion in-depth of discussion [6]). By the ofbeginning [6]). By the beginning of the of the Middle Middle Pleistocene, Pleistocene, the the extant extant V. corsac, V. corsac, Vulpes lagopusVulpes lagopus (Linnaeus, (Linnaeus, 1758), and V. 1758), vulpes and V. vulpes appeared in theappeared Asian in the Asian fossil record:fossiltherecord: corsac the andcorsac the red andfoxthearered fox are recorded recorded in the earliestin theMiddle earliestPleistocene Middle Pleis- layers toceneoflayers Zhoukoudian Loc. 1 [19,20], of Zhoukoudian Loc.whereas 1 [19,20], thewhereas arctic foxthe is present arctic fox in the depositsinofthe is present the de- Middle posits of Pleistocene the Middle of Pleistocene Oloyr faunaof (Russian Oloyr faunaFederation) (Russian [21].Federation) [21]. Here, Here,we wedescribe describe forfor thethe firstfirst timetime the remains the remains of a foxof afrom fox the from Early the Pleistocene site Early Pleistocene of Bajiazui (Qingyang, Gansu Province, China) site of Bajiazui (Qingyang, Gansu Province, China) (Figure 1). (Figure 1). Figure1.1.Localization Figure Localizationofofthe thelate late Early Early Pleistocene Pleistocene (1.8–1.2 (1.8–1.2 Ma) Ma) sitesite of Bajiazui of Bajiazui (Qingyang, (Qingyang, Gansu), Gansu), redstar, red star,compared comparedtoto other other sites sites cited cited in in thethe text, text, yellow yellow stars. stars. Abbreviations: Abbreviations: ZKD,ZKD, Zhoukoudian. Zhoukoudian. Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 3 of 14 2. Geological and Geographical Background Bajiazui fauna was found at the bottom of the Wucheng loess in Qingyang, Gansu province. The site has yielded a rich amount of fossils that belong to a diverse mammal community, including the Talpinae gen. et sp. indet., Eospalax sp., Allosiphneus arvicolinus, Ochotona sp.1, Ochotona sp.2, Hystrix sp., Canis chihliensis, Vulpes chikushanensis (here de- scribed), Meles teilhardi, Pachycrocuta brevirostris, Megantereon inexpectatus, Homotherium cf. crenatidens, Coelodonta nihowanensis, Proboscidipparion sinensis, Equus qingyangensis, Equus wangi, Equus teilhardi, Sus lydekkeri, Eucladoceros sp., Gazella sinensis, Bison palaeosinensis, and Leptobos cf. amplifrontalis [22,23]. The age of the fauna is still not fully resolved. Wang [23] believed that the age of the fauna is similar to that of Xiashagou of Nihewan, as the ratio of the extinct species is similar, while Xue et al. [24] believed that the age of the fauna could be younger, ranging from 1.8–1.2 Ma, therefore being slightly younger than Classic Nihewan fauna. We follow Xue et al. [24] that Bajiazui fauna is somewhat between 1.8–1.2 Ma based on the evolutionary level of Carnivora, including hypercarnivorous dentition of Canis chihliensis, reduced P4 protocone of Megantereon and Homotherium, and reduced m1 talonid cusp of Pachycrocuta, all derived within their lineages (Jiangzuo in prep.). 3. Material and Methods This study is based on comparative morphological and morphometric analyses of Vulpes from Bajiazui compared to other Pliocene to Early Pleistocene Vulpes species of Eurasia. The fossils studied come from the collections of the Department of Geology, Institute of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, Northwest University. As comparative fossil material, we studied the collections of several European and Chinese localities (AMNH, AUTh, DST-UNIFI, HMV, HNHM, ICP, IGF, IVPP, MAFI, MdC, MG-GNM, MHNL, MNHN, UCBL-1; see abbreviations below) and inspected all the relevant literature on Eurasian fossil Vulpes [8–10,12,15,18,25–28]. Fossil species considered for comparison include V. alopecoides (sensu [6]) from numer- ous sites throughout Europe (see the sample [6]); V. beihaiensis from Baihaicun, Zhaozhuang, Zhangwagou (Yushe Basin, China) [9], and Alta-1 [10]; V. chikushanensis from Huiyu– Zhoukoudian Loc. 18 [13] and Longdan [15]; V. qiuzhudingi from the Himalayan–Tibetan Plateau (Zanda and Kunlun Pass Basins, China) [8]; V. ‘praecorsac’ from the Odessa Cata- combs (Ukraine) [12]; and Vulpes sp. from Musselievo (Bulgaria) [13]. Extant samples of V. corsac, V. lagopus, and V. vulpes from AMNH, HNHM, IVPP, IOZ, and MZUF were used for morphological and morphometric comparisons. 3.1. Abbreviations 3.1.1. Site and Institutional Abbreviations AMNH, the American Museum of Natural History, New York (USA); AUTh, Aristotle University Thessaloniki (Greece); DST-UNIFI, Earth Science Department of the Univer- sity of Florence (Italy); HMV, Hezheng Palaeozoological Museum, Linxia, Gansu (China); HNHM, Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest (Hungary); ICP, Institut Català de Paleontologia Miquel Crusafont, Barcelona (Spain); IGF, Geological and Paleontological Section of the Natural History Museum of the University of Florence (Italy); IOZ, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing (China); IVPP, Institute of Vertebrate Pa- leontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing (China); LGPUT, reference for the specimens in the Museum of Geology-Palaeontology-Palaeoanthropology of Aristotle University Thessaloniki (Greece); MAFI, Hungarian Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Budapest (Hungary); MdC, Musée des Confluences, Lyon (France); MG-GNM, S. Janashia Museum of Georgia, Georgian National Museum (Tbilisi, Georgia); MGPT-PU, Geology and Paleontology Museum of the University of Turin (Italy); MZUF, La Specola, Zoological Section of the Natural History Museum of the University of Florence (Italy); NWU, Northwest University, Xi’an, China, UCBL-1, Université Claude-Bernard Lyon-1, Lyon (France). Quaternary 2023, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 14 Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 4 of 14 3.1.2. Measurement Abbreviations Dentition: C–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the canine to the distal 3.1.2. of side the M2; ECW, Measurement external canine width of the muzzle measured at the level of the Abbreviations canines; GPW, greatest palatal width; L, mesiodistal length; LMR, upper molars row Dentition: C–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the canine to the distal length; P4–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the P4 to the distal side of the side of the M2; ECW, external canine width of the muzzle measured at the level of the M2; td, talonid; trd, trigonid; W, buccolingual width. canines; GPW, greatest palatal width; L, mesiodistal length; LMR, upper molars row length; Teeth nomenclature follows Bartolini-Lucenti and Spassov [29]. P4–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the P4 to the distal side of the M2; td, talonid; trd, trigonid; W, buccolingual width. 4. Systematic Paleontology Teeth nomenclature follows Bartolini-Lucenti and Spassov [29]. Order Carnivora Bowdich, 1821 4. Systematic Paleontology Suborder Caniformia Kretzoi, 1943 Order Carnivora Bowdich, 1821 Family Canidae Fischer, 1817 Suborder Caniformia Kretzoi, 1943 Subfamily Caninae Family Canidae Fisher,1817 Fischer, 1817 Subfamily Tribe Vulpini Caninae HemprichFisher, and1817 Ehrenberg, 1832 Tribe Vulpini Hemprich Genus Vulpes Frisch, 1775 and Ehrenberg, 1832 Genus Vulpes Frisch, 1775 Vulpes Vulpeschikushanensis, chikushanensis,Young, Young,1930 1930 (Figure (Figure2 2and andTable Table1)1) Figure2.2.Early Figure Early Pleistocene Pleistocene fossil fossil fox remains fox remains from Bajiazui from Bajiazui (Qingyang, (Qingyang, Gansu), Gansu), China. China. (a–c) (a–c) MLS028, MLS028, cranial fragment in dorsal (a), ventral (b), and left lateral (c) views. (d–h) M63022, left and cranial fragment in dorsal (a), ventral (b), and left lateral (c) views. (d–h) M63022, left and right right mandibular fragments with teeth; left hemimandible fragment with m1–m2 in buccal (d), lin- mandibular fragments with teeth; left hemimandible fragment with m1–m2 in buccal (d), lingual (e), gual (e), and occlusal (f) views; right hemimandible fragment with p3 and isolated c, p2, and p4 (g) and occlusal in buccal (f) views; view; right m2right (h)hemimandible in occlusal view.fragment with p3 and isolated c, p2, and p4 (g) in buccal view; right m2 (h) in occlusal view. Table 1. Measurement table for upper and lower teeth expressed in millimeters. Abbreviations: C– M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the canine to the distal side of the M2; ECW, exter- Table 1. Measurement table for upper and lower teeth expressed in millimeters. Abbreviations: nal canine width of the muzzle measured at the level of the canines; GPW, greatest palatal width; C–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial side of the canine to the distal side of the M2; ECW, L, mesiodistal length; LMR, upper molars row length; P4–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial external canine side of the P4 towidth of theside the distal muzzle of themeasured at the level M2; td, talonid; trd,oftrigonid; the canines; GPW, greatestwidth. W, buccolingual palatal width; L, mesiodistal length; LMR, upper molars row length; P4–M2 L, mesiodistal length from the mesial CL C W P1 L P1 W side P2 Lof P2 theWP4 P3 to LtheP3 W P4 distal L of side P4the W M2;M1 td, L talonid; M1 W trd,M2 L M2 W W, trigonid; LMR C-M2 L P4-M2 buccolingual L GPW ECW width. MLS028 5.10 3.40 3.80 2.30 6.80 2.60 7.7 3.2 12.2 6.3 8.2 10.9 5.7 8.5 13.65 55.90 23.40 37.70 19.00 C Lc L C Wc W P1 Lp2 LP1 W p2 WP2 Lp3 LP2 W p3 WP3 Lp4 L P3p4 W W P4m1 L L P4m1 W W M1 m1td L L M1 m1td W W M2 m1trd L L M2m2W L m2 LMRW C-M2 L P4-M2 L GPW ECW M63022 MLS028 5.105.6 3.40 3.4 3.80 6.8 2.30 2.6 6.80 7.3 2.60 2.8 7.7 8.2 3.2 3.4 12.2 14 6.35.2 8.24.2 10.9 5 5.7 9.8 8.56.5 5.3 13.65 55.90 23.40 37.70 19.00 cL cW p2 L p2 W p3 L p3 W p4 L p4 W m1 L m1 W m1td L m1td W m1trd L m2 L m2 W M63022 5.6 3.4 6.8 2.6 7.3 2.8 8.2 3.4 14 5.2 4.2 5 9.8 6.5 5.3 Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 5 of 14 4.1. Referred Specimens Cranial fragment–MLS028, rostral portion of the cranium with complete dentition (I1-M2 from both sides). Mandible–M63022, fragments of left and right hemimandibles with left m1–m2 and right c, p2–p4, and m2. 4.2. Description Cranial specimen—The specimen MLS028 (Figure 2a–c) consists of part of the cranium, particularly the muzzle, with complete dentition. The specimen is partially deformed, with right to left compression. As a result, the nasals sank into the nasal cavity. Despite the plastic deformation, some features can still be identified. The muzzle is not particularly elongated rostrocaudally. In lateral view, the caudal margin of the infraorbital foramen is located at the level of the distal margin of the P3. In ventral view, the palate is not enlarged neither rostrally, at the level of the canines, nor caudally at the level of the molars. The palatine foramina are well developed, and two marked furrows extend rostrally from them. The incisors are very similar to each other, as the I3 is not particularly enlarged, showing only a low cingulum on its lingual side. There is no space between I2 and I3. The canines have a high and mesiodistally thin crown. There are diastemata between C1–P1 and P1–P2, and a small one between P2 and P3. The premolars are compressed buccolingually and fairly elongated distally, marked by a fairly low crown. The single-rooted P1 has a single, rather low, cusp. The P2 and the P3 do not show differentiation among each other, apart from the larger size and a mesiolingual enlargement visible in the occlusal view of the P3. In occlusal view, the P4 have a mesially projected protocone, markedly placed forward compared to the mesial margin of the paracone, and rather individualized. In the same view, the paracone and the metastylar blade have comparable length. No prominent cingula or accessory crests are visible. The molars have a rectangular and elongated buccolingual occlusal shape, marked by the lingually projecting talons and hypocones. The M1 paracone is only slightly enlarged compared to the metacone. The lingual cusps are fairly worn down, but the presence of protocone and developed metaconule seem plausible. Lingually, there is a cingular hypocone. The buccal cingulum is prominent. Even in the M2, the paracone is slightly larger than the metacone. The protocone appears to have developed but is not connected to the distal side, as there is a furrow extending buccally from the talon. Mandibular specimens—The mandibular remains of Bajiazui are rare and fairly poorly preserved (Figure 2d–h). The lower canine is high-crowned and slender, characterized by a crescent-like lateral shape. The premolars are compressed buccolingually and have a moderately high crown. Only the p4 is slightly rounded, in the occlusal view. The p2 and p3 have very similar morphologies, despite the larger size of the latter. In addition, the p3 displays a shallow distal accessory cuspulid, distally to the protoconid, and a shallow but pointy distal cingulid. The p4 is larger compared to the other premolars and has a prominent distal accessory cuspulid and a high, pointy distal cingulid. The m1 of M63022 has a developed trigonid compared to the talonid, as evident in the buccal and occlusal views (Figure 2d,f). In the occlusal view, it is slender and compressed buccolingually. The paraconid is mesiodistally short compared to the prominent protoconid. The metaconid is enlarged in the occlusal view, projected lingually and distally (it is even visible in the buccal view). On the talonid, the principal cuspulid is the hypocone, which is enlarged, and placed buccally. The entoconid is reduced in height and width and is placed at the distolingual corner of the talonid. There is no transverse cristid between the entoconid and hypoconid. From the mesial to the entoconid, there is a shallow cuspulid, which does not close the talon lingually. A hypoconulid shelf bounds the distal margin of the tooth with a central hypoconulid. The m2 has three principal cuspids: protoconid, metaconid, and hypoconid. Mesially, a cristid departs from the protoconid and reaches the mesial margin of the m2, but no paraconid seems to be present. The protoconid and the metaconid are of similar size. On the distolingual side of the tooth, a shallow entoconid is evident. The cingulid is prominent mesiobuccally. Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 6 of 14 4.3. Morphological Comparisons The fox from Bajiazui is a medium-sized fox, comparable in size to the extant V. corsac, V. lagopus, and close to the extinct V. chikushanensis and V. alopecoides of the Early Pleistocene of China and Europe, respectively [6,15]. MLS028, due to its fragmentary nature, has few cranial characteristics valuable for comparison with other taxa. Possibly, only the slenderness of the muzzle can be used as a comparative feature. In this sense, the specimen from Bajiazui differs from V. alopecoides from Europe (e.g., Kastritsi, and Villány 3) [5,28] and the existing V. vulpes or V. lagopus, in which the muzzle is generally wider rostrally (cf. to the cranium of Bajiazui, Figure 2). The slenderness is more consistent with the shape of V. chikushanensis (e.g., from Longdan or Huiyu) and the extant V. corsac. Dental morphologies allow more considerations (Figures 3 and 4). The P4 of MLS028 is fairly slender, especially for the reduction in a distolingual cingulum, similar to the morphologies of V. chikushanensis from Jigushan [21] and the existing V. corsac. In fact, it contrasts with the morphology of Vulpes sp. from Odessa [12] as P4 is enlarged and stout, with a poorly individualized protocone. Likewise, the morphologies of V. rooki, as well as its size, do not fit the morphology of Vulpes from Bajiazui. Apparently, the specimens from Bajiazui has a more slender P4 compared to the published specimens of V. chikushanensis from Longdan [15], although some specimens, for example, X1805 and X1806, are definitely similar to MLS028 (Figure 3). In fact, the slenderness of P4 appears to be a variable feature in V. alopecoides and V. vulpes [6]. However, the development of the P4 protocone is comparable to that of V. chikushanensis from Longdan [15], Huiyu (Zhoukoudian Loc. 18) [13], Jigushan [25], and the existing V. corsac, unlike the generally large and individualized one of V. alopecoides from Europe and the existing V. vulpes (Figure 3). On the contrary, the Pliocene V. beihaiensis from the Yushe Basin has a smaller protoconid [8]. The arctic fox, V. lagopus, generally possesses a larger P4 compared to the specimen of Bajiazui. In the upper molars, the European V. alopecoides and Holarctic V. vulpes tend to display a moderately mesiodistally enlarged M1 compared to that of Bajiazui Vulpes, while M2 shares the slender, buccolingually elongated morphology (Figure 3 and [6]). However, the buccal M2 cusps of V. alopecoides generally differ in size, with the paracone being slightly larger compared to the metacone (Figure 3) [6]. The upper molar morphology of the specimen from Odessa [12] and of V. rooki differ greatly from the Vulpes from Bajiazui. In the Odessa specimens, there is a notable enlargement of the paracone relative to the metacone in the M1–M2, along with an enlargement of the M1 hypocone, as observed through parameters such as the mesiodistal width of the M1. In V. rooki, the enlargement of the cingula and that of the buccal cusps as well as of the protocone mark the distinction with the fox from Bajiazui. The Vulpes beihaiensis type AMNH F:AM 97062 has a larger M1 compared to MLS028 and is less lingually elongated (Figure 3). The buccal side of the M2 of V. beihaiensis is enlarged compared to the shortened shape of Vulpes from Bajiazui (Figure 3). Moreover, V. beihaiensis shows an evident metaconule, possibly linked to the protocone by postprotocrista. This contrasts with the morphology of Vulpes of Bajiazui and V. chikushanensis of Longdan, in which the metaconule is reduced or absent and there is no postprotocrista connecting the protocone to the distal side (Figure 3). The similarity between M2 paracone and metacone resembles that of V. chikushanensis from Longdan. In this regard, Vulpes from Bajiazui differs from V. corsac. The mesiodistal slenderness of the molars suggests a close similarity with V. chikushanensis from Chinese localities such as Longdan or Huiyu (Zhoukoudian Loc. 18) [14,15]. Regarding the lower dentition (Figure 4), the premolars are higher crowned compared to those of V. alopecoides from Eurasia and V. vulpes (despite the low degree of variability). Their morphology is consistent with that of V. chikushanensis from Longdan [15] and Ji- gushan [21] or extant V. corsac. The morphology of V. qiuzhudingi’s lower carnassial and m2, with strongly derived hypercarnivorous features (Figure 4), allow immediate distinction between this Pliocene taxon and the fox from Bajiazui. Similarly, V. rooki cannot be regarded as comparable to Vulpes from Bajiazui given the enlargement of buccal cuspids and the Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 7 of 14 parallel reduction in lingual ones. The m1 in buccal view, differs from V. alopecoides from Eurasia (e.g., Dafnero 1; La Puebla de Valverde; Apollonia-1) due to the more mesiodistally reduced paraconid and the stouter protoconid compared to other Eurasian species (Figure 4). Furthermore, m1 of V. alopecoides tends to possess buccolingually wider talonids compared to Asian forms, such as V. beihaiensis, V. chikushanensis, V. corsac, and M63022 (Figure 4). Compared to V. beihaiensis, the fox from Bajiazui possesses a proportion- ally larger hypoconid and a more reduced entoconid. These cusps are more similar in V. beihaiensis, where the entoconid is enlarged in the talonid. The morphologies of Vulpes from Bajiazui are close to those of V. chikushanensis from Longdan and Jigushan and to those of extant V. corsac, although they are stouter, especially mesially on the trigonid compared to the latter two. The m2 of V. beihaiensis is more squared, unlike the oval morphology of M63022, which has a more oval, occlusal shape (Figure 4). This morphology resembles that of V. chikushanensis from Longdan, although the latter have a more developed entoconid. On the contrary, this cuspid is very reduced. The morphology also bears some similarity to that of V. corsac, although the corsac fox generally possesses a definitely prominent mesial Quaternary 2023, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14 cingulid. In comparison, V. alopecoides has a wider talonid and a generally more prominent buccal cingulid (Figure 4). Figure 3. Comparison Figure Comparisonofofupper upperteethteethmorphologies morphologies (occlusal (occlusal view viewof P4–M2) of P4–M2) of various Vulpes of various spp. Vulpes from Eurasia. (a) Vulpes from Bajiazui (China), MLS028, left P4–M2 spp. from Eurasia. (a) Vulpes from Bajiazui (China), MLS028, left P4–M2 (mirrored). (b–d) Vulpes (mirrored). (b–d) Vulpes chikushanensisfrom chikushanensis fromLongdan Longdan(Gansu, (Gansu,China): China):(b)(b)X1805, X1805, left left P4–M2 P4–M2 (mirrored); (mirrored); (c,d) (c,d) V.13533, V.13533, right right (c) (c) and left mirrored (d) P4–M2. (e) Vulpes sp. from Musselievo (Bulgaria) [13], right P4 with cata- and left mirrored (d) P4–M2. (e) Vulpes sp. from Musselievo (Bulgaria) [13], right P4 with catalogue logue number. (f) Vulpes sp. from Odessa Catacombs (Ukraine) [12], O-7764, right P4–M2. (g) Vulpes number. (f) Vulpes sp. from Odessa Catacombs (Ukraine) [12], O-7764, right P4–M2. (g) Vulpes rooki from Xiakou (Yushe basin, China), AMNH F:AM 97027, right P4–M2. (h,i) Vulpes beihaiensis rooki fromfrom Asia Xiakou (Turkey(Yushe basin,(h) and China): China), AMNH F:AM 97027, MNHN.F.ACA-357, right P4–M2. left P4 (mirrored) from(h,i) Vulpes Ç alta-1 beihaiensis (Turkey); (i) from AMNH Asia (Turkey F:AM 97062,and China): right P4–M2 (h)right MNHN.F.ACA-357, from Baihai, Yushe left Basin P4 (mirrored) from Çalta-1 (China). (j–b’) (Turkey); Vulpes alopecoides (i) AMNH from F:AMlocalities: European 97062, right P4–M2 (j) IGF right 12110, from right Baihai,(type M1-M2 Yushe Basin (China). specimen (j–b0 ) Vulpes of the species) from alopecoides Il Tasso (Il Tasso); from (k) MHNL European 20.161684, localities: (j) IGFright P4-M2 12110, from right St. Vallier M1–M2 (type(France); specimen(l)ofPP the789, left P4–M2 species) from Il(mirrored) Tasso (Il from Pirro Tasso); Nord 20.161684, (k) MHNL (Italy); (m) MGPT-PU104618, right right P4 P4-M2 from St. Vallier from (l) (France); Pirro Nord PP 789, left(Italy); P4–M2(n) MGPT- (mirrored) PU104805, from left P4 Pirro Nord (mirrored) (Italy); from Pirro Nord (m) MGPT-PU104618, right(Italy); P4 from (o)Pirro KSR-PO221, P4–M2 Nord (Italy); (mirrored) from (n) MGPT-PU104805, Kastritsi left (Greece);from P4 (mirrored) (p) V.61.1401, Pirro Nordleft P4–M2 (Italy); (o)(reversed) KSR-PO221, from Villany P4–M2 3 (Hungary); (mirrored) (q) APL-20, from Kastritsi right (Greece); P4 from Apollonia-1 (Greece); (r) V.13.04696.3, left P4 (mirrored) from Nagyharsanyhegy 4 (Hun- (p) V.61.1401, left P4–M2 (reversed) from Villany 3 (Hungary); (q) APL-20, right P4 from Apollonia-1 gary); (s) VER.2018.2676, left P4 (mirrored) from Somssich Hill 2 (Hungary); (t) VER.2018.2682, right (Greece); (r) V.13.04696.3, left P4 (mirrored) from Nagyharsanyhegy 4 (Hungary); (s) VER.2018.2676, M1 from Somssich Hill 2 4 (Hungary); (u) V.61.2164_1, left P4–M1 (mirrored) from Villany 8 (Hun- left P4 (v) gary); (mirrored) fromright V.61.2164_2, Somssich P4 from Hill 2 (Hungary); Villany 8 (Hungary);(t) VER.2018.2682, (w) unnumbered right M1 from specimen, leftSomssich M2 (mir- Hill 2 4from rored) (Hungary); Villany(u) V.61.2164_1,(x)left 3 (Hungary); P4–M1 (mirrored) unnumbered specimen, from Villany right 8 (Hungary); M1 from Villany 3(v) V.61.2164_2, (Hungary); (y) unnumbered specimen, left P4 from Villany 3 (Hungary); (z) IPS 45634 (cast), right M1 from Venta Micena (Spain); (a′) UWPI 2275/13/10, left P4-M2 (mirrored) from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria); (b′) UWPI 2275/13/11, right P4–M2 from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria). Regarding the lower dentition (Figure 4), the premolars are higher crowned com- Quaternary 2023, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14 Vulpes from Bajiazui are close to those of V. chikushanensis from Longdan and Jigushan Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 and to those of extant V. corsac, although they are stouter, especially mesially on the trigo- 8 of 14 nid compared to the latter two. The m2 of V. beihaiensis is more squared, unlike the oval morphology of M63022, which has a more oval, occlusal shape (Figure 4). This morphol- ogy rightresembles that of P4 from Villany V. chikushanensis 8 (Hungary); from Longdan, (w) unnumbered specimen,although the latter from left M2 (mirrored) haveVillany a more3 developed entoconid. On the contrary, this cuspid is very reduced. The morphology (Hungary); (x) unnumbered specimen, right M1 from Villany 3 (Hungary); (y) unnumbered specimen, also bears left P4 some similarity from Villany to that (z) 3 (Hungary); of IPS V. corsac, although 45634 (cast), thefrom right M1 corsac foxMicena Venta generally 0 possesses (Spain); (a ) UWPI a definitely 2275/13/10, prominent left P4-M2mesial cingulid. (mirrored) from In comparison, Deutsch Altenburg V. alopecoides 2C (Austria);has(ba0 )wider UWPItalonid and 2275/13/11, aright generally P4–M2 more prominent from Deutsch buccal2C Altenburg cingulid (Figure 4). (Austria). Figure Figure 4.4. Comparison Comparison of of lower lower teeth teeth morphologies morphologies(occlusal (occlusalviewviewof ofp4–m3) p4–m3)of ofvarious variousVulpes Vulpesspp. spp. from from Eurasia. (a) Vulpes from Bajiazui (China), M63022, left m1–m2. (b,c) Vulpes chikushanensis from Eurasia. (a) Vulpes from Bajiazui (China), M63022, left m1–m2. (b,c) Vulpes chikushanensis from Longdan (Gansu, China): (b,c) V.13533, left p4–m2 (b) and right mirrored p4–m3 (c). (d,e) Vulpes Longdan (Gansu, China): (b,c) V.13533, left p4–m2 (b) and right mirrored p4–m3 (c). (d,e) Vulpes qiuzhudingi from Himalayan–Tibetan Plateau (China): (d) IVPP V19060, left m2 from IVPP locality qiuzhudingi from Himalayan–Tibetan Plateau (China): (d) IVPP V19060, left m2 from IVPP locality KL0605, Kunlun Pass Basin (China); (e) IVPP V18923, left m1 from Zanda Basin (China). (f,g) Vulpes KL0605, sp. KunlunCatacombs from Odessa Pass Basin (Ukraine) (China); (e) IVPP [12]: V18923,left (f) O-1519, leftm1-m2; m1 from (g)Zanda O-1520,Basin right(China). (f,g) Vulpes p4–m1 (mirrored). sp. Vulpes (h) from Odessa Catacombs rooki from (Ukraine) Xiakou (Yushe [12]:China), basin, (f) O-1519, AMNH left F:AM m1-m2; (g) O-1520, 97058, right p4–m1 right p4–m3 (mirrored). (mirrored). (i–m) (h) Vulpes Vulpes rooki from Asia beihaiensis Xiakou (Yushe (Turkey andbasin, China): China), AMNH F:AM 97058, (i) MNHN.F.ACA-293b, right p4–m3 left m1-m2 (mirrored). from Ç alta-1 (Tur- key); (i–m)(j)Vulpes MNHN.F.ACA-293a, beihaiensis from right Asia p4–m3 (Turkey (mirrored) from(i) and China): Ç alta-1 (Turkey); (k) AMNH MNHN.F.ACA-293b, F:AM 97068, left m1-m2 from right Çalta-1m1–m3 (mirrored) (Turkey); from Zhuangwagou, (j) MNHN.F.ACA-293a, rightYushe p4–m3 Basin (China); (mirrored) (l) AMNH from F:AM 97071, Çalta-1 (Turkey); left m1 (k) AMNH from F:AMZhaozhuang, 97068, rightYushe m1–m3 Basin (China);from (mirrored) (m) AMNH F:AM 97070, Zhuangwagou, left Basin Yushe p4–m1(China); from Zhaozhuang, (l) AMNHYushe F:AM Basin (China). (n–u′) Vulpes alopecoides from European localities: 97071, left m1 from Zhaozhuang, Yushe Basin (China); (m) AMNH F:AM 97070, left (n) LGPUT DFN-22, left p4–m1 p4–m3 fromfrom Dafnero-1 (Greece); (o) LGPUT DFN-172, 0right p4–m2 (mirrored) from Dafnero-1 (Greece); (p) MG- Zhaozhuang, Yushe Basin (China). (n–u ) Vulpes alopecoides from European localities: (n) LGPUT 29-2013/461, right m1–m2 (mirrored) from Kvabebi (Georgia); (q) IPS 27246, left m1–m2 from La Pue- DFN-22, left p4–m3 from Dafnero-1 (Greece); (o) LGPUT DFN-172, right p4–m2 (mirrored) from bla de Valverde (Spain); (r) IPS 27248, right m1 (mirrored) from La Puebla de Valverde (Spain); (s) IPS Dafnero-1 27259, right(Greece); p4–m3 from (p) MG-29-2013/461, La Puebla de Valverde right(Spain); m1–m2(t) (mirrored) PN 28, leftfrom p4–m1Kvabebi (Georgia); from Pirro Nord (q) IPS (Italy); 27246, left m1–m2 from La Puebla de Valverde (Spain); (r) IPS 27248, right m1 (mirrored) from La Puebla de Valverde (Spain); (s) IPS 27259, right p4–m3 from La Puebla de Valverde (Spain); (t) PN 28, left p4–m1 from Pirro Nord (Italy); (u) MGPT-PU104721, right m1 (reversed) from Pirro Nord (Italy); (u) MGPT-PU104721, right m1 (reversed) from Pirro Nord (Italy); (v) MGPT-PU106227, right m1 versed) from Pirro Nord (Italy); (w) V.61.1401, right m1–m2 (mirrored) from Villany 3 (Hungary) LGPUT APL-11, right p4–m2 (mirrored) from Apollonia-1 (Greece); (y,z) V.13.04696.0, right m2 (m rored) and left m1 from Nagyharsanyhegy 4 (Hungary); (a′) V.61.1372, left p4–m1 from Villany 8 (H gary); (b′) V.13.04785.0, right m1 talonid (mirrored) from Püspökfurdȍ/Betfia 2 (Romania); Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 VER.2018.2630, Quaternary 2023, left m16, xfrom FOR PEER SomssichREVIEW Hill 2 (Hungary); (d′) VER.2018.2638, right m1 9 of(mirrored) 14 fr Somssich Hill 2 (Hungary); (e′) VER.2018.2641, left m1 from Somssich Hill 2 (Hungary); VER.2018.2676, left m1 from Somssich Hill 2; (g′) V.2014.2.5.1, right m1–m2 (mirrored) from Villan (Hungary); (h′) VER.2018.2678, left p4 and m2 from Somssich Hill 2 (Hungary); (i′) V.2014.5.1.2, r (v) MGPT-PU106227, right m1 (reversed) from Pirro Nord (Italy); (w) V.61.1401, right m1–m2 (mir- m1(mirrored) from Villany 3 (Hungary); (u)(j′) MGPT-PU104721, unnumbered specimen, right m1right (reversed) m1–m2from Pirro Nord (mirrored) from rored) from Villany 3 (Hungary); (x) LGPUT APL-11, Quaternary 2023, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW right p4–m2 (mirrored) (Italy);from 9 of Apollonia-1 14 V. 2014.2.5.4, lany 3 (Hungary); (k′) V.2014.2.5.2, leftversed) p4–m1from fromPirroVillanyNord 3 (Hungary); (w) V.61.1401, (l′) right m1–m2 right (Greece); (y,z) V.13.04696.0, (mirrored) fromright Villany m23(mirrored) (Hungary);and LGPUT (m′) left m1 from Nagyharsanyhegy APL-11, V.13.3632_c, right m1 right p4–m2 (mirrored) (mirrored) 4from (Hungary); from VillanyApollonia-1 3 (Hunga (a0 ) V.61.1372,(n′) left p4–m1 from V.13.3632_d, leftVillany m1 from 8 (Hungary); Villany 3rored) (b0 )and (Hungary); V.13.04785.0, left (o′)m1 fromright V.13.10754.1, m1right talonid Nagyharsanyhegy (mirrored) m1 (mirrored)4 (Hungary); from Püsp(a′) 0 gary); (b′) V.13.04785.0, right m1 from Püspökfurd (u) MGPT-PU104721, /Betfia furdȍ/Betfia right m1 22(Romania); (Romania); (reversed) from (c LGPUT (p′) )Pirro VER.2018.2630, PET-1600, Nord (Italy); left left (v) m1 m1-m2 fromfrom MGPT-PU106227, SomssichPetralona right m1talonid Hill 2(re- (Hungary); (Greece); (mirrored) (q′) LGPUTfro P (d 0 ) VER.2018.2638, versed) from Pirro 1602,Nord right right (Italy); m1-m3 (w) V.61.1401, (mirrored) m1 (mirrored) from right from m1–m2VER.2018.2630, Petralona Somssich (mirrored) (Greece); Hill left from 2 (Hungary); m1(e (r′)Villany IPS 0 )3VER.2018.2641, from 14748, Somssich (Hungary); right m1-m2 Hill left (x) 2(mirrored) (Hungary); m1 (d′ from LGPUT APL-11, right p4–m2 (mirrored) from Somssich Guardiola Hill (Spain); 2 (Hungary); (s’) ) from (f0UWPI Apollonia-1 2275/13/17, VER.2018.2676, (Greece); Somssich left m1 left p4–m2(y,z) from V.13.04696.0, Hillfrom2Somssich (Hungary); Deutsch right m2 0VER.2018.2641, (e′)(g (mir- Altenburg Hill 2; 2C (Austria);left ) V.2014.2.5.1, (t′) m1 UP rored) and left2275/13/1, m1 from Nagyharsanyhegy right p4–m3 4 (Hungary); (mirrored) from(a′) V.61.1372,Altenburg VER.2018.2676, Deutsch 0 left p4–m1 left m1 from 2C from Villany Somssich (Austria); 8 (Hun- (u′) Hill UPWI 2; (g′) V.2014.2.5 2275/13/26, r right gary);m1–m2 (mirrored) right (b′) V.13.04785.0, from m1Villany talonid3 (Hungary); (mirrored) (h from ) VER.2018.2678, Püspökfurdȍ/Betfia left p4 and m2 from 2 (Romania); Somssich m1–m3 0 (mirrored) from Deutsch (Hungary); Altenburg 2C (h′) VER.2018.2678, (Austria). left0 p4(c′)and m2 from Somssi Hill 2 (Hungary); VER.2018.2630, (i )from left m1 V.2014.5.1.2, Somssich Hillright m1(mirrored) 2 (Hungary); from Villany right (d′) VER.2018.2638, 3 (Hungary); m1 (mirrored) (j ) from unnumbered m1(mirrored) from Villany 3 (Hungary); (j′) unnumbered sp Somssich Hill specimen, right 2 m1–m2 (Hungary); (e′) VER.2018.2641, (mirrored) from Villany left 3m1(Hungary); from Somssich (k0 ) V.2014.2.5.2, Hill 2 (Hungary); (f′) left p4–m1 from 4.4. Morphometric Comparisons lany 3 (Hungary); (k′) V.2014.2.5.2, left p4–m1 from Villan VER.2018.2676, left m1 from 0 Somssich Hill Villany 3 (Hungary); (l ) V. 2014.2.5.4, right m1 (mirrored)2; (g′) V.2014.2.5.1, right m1–m2 fromfromVillany (mirrored) 3 (Hungary); from Villany 0 (m ) (m′) 3 V.13.3632_c, (Hungary); (h′) VER.2018.2678, left p4of and m2upper (mirrored) from Somssich Hill 2 teeth Villany (Hungary); 3 (Hungary); (i′) V.2014.5.1.2, V.13.3632_c, righ right m1 (mirrored) Comparisons from Villany 3 the (Hungary); and (n (n′) lower 0 ) V.13.3632_d, V.13.3632_d, measurements left m1 left m1 from from Villany Villany ofright 3Vulpes 3 (Hungary); (Hungary); of Bajiazui (o′) V.13. w m1(mirrored) from Villany 3 (Hungary); (j′) unnumbered specimen, right m1–m2 (mirrored) from Vil- (o 0 lany the ) V.13.10754.1, Plio–Pleistocene 3 (Hungary); right m1 (mirrored) (k′) V.2014.2.5.2, and extant from from left p4–m1 species Püspökfurd Villany of Eurasia 3 /Betfia furdȍ/Betfia (Hungary);22(Romania);are (Romania); visible 0 (p LGPUT (p′) (l′) V. 2014.2.5.4, in ) LGPUT Figures right m1 PET-1600, PET-1600, 5 and 6 (and left m1-m2 (mirrored) left m1-m2from plots from in 3the Villany Petralona Supplementary (Hungary); (Greece); 0 ) LGPUT (m′)(qV.13.3632_c,Material). 1602, right PET-1602, Figure m1right (mirrored) right 5m1-m3 m1-m3 reports (mirrored) from the 3principal Villany (mirrored) from Petralona (Hungary); from component Petralona (Greece);analy(r′) IP (Greece); (r0 ) on (n′) V.13.3632_d, the IPSleft m1 14748, upper fromrightteeth Villany m1-m2 3(length (Hungary); (mirrored) and(o′)width V.13.10754.1, fromGuardiola CalP3–M2).right m1 (mirrored) (Spain); Guardiola (s’) UWPI (Spain); from (s’) UWPIPüspök- 2275/13/17, left p4–m2 from D 2275/13/17, furdȍ/Betfia 2 (Romania); (p′) LGPUT PET-1600, left m1-m2 from Petralona (Greece);(mirrored) (q′) LGPUTfrom PET-Deutsch Altenburg left p4–m2 from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria); (t02275/13/1, right p4–m3 ) UPWI 2275/13/1, right p4–m3 (mirrored) from 1602, right m1-m3 (mirrored) from Petralona (Greece); (r′)m1–m3 IPS 14748, right m1-m2 (mirrored) from Cal Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria); (u0 ) UPWI 2275/13/26,(mirrored) right m1–m3 Guardiola (Spain); (s’) UWPI 2275/13/17, left p4–m2 from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria); (t′) UPWI from(mirrored) Deutsch Altenburg from Deutsch 2C (Austria). Altenburg 2C (Austria). 2275/13/1, right p4–m3 (mirrored) from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria); (u′) UPWI 2275/13/26, right m1–m3 (mirrored) from Deutsch Altenburg 2C (Austria).4.4. Morphometric Comparisons 4.4. Morphometric Comparisons Comparisons of the upper and lower teeth mea 4.4. Morphometric Comparisons the Plio–Pleistocene and extant species of Eurasia a Comparisons of the upper and lower teeth measurements of Vulpes of Bajiazui with the Comparisons of the upper and lower teeth measurements of Vulpes of Bajiazui plots in the Supplementary with Material). Figure 5 repo Plio–Pleistocene and the Plio–Pleistocene extant and extantspecies speciesof ofEurasia Eurasiaonare visibleininFigures arethe visible Figures5 5and and 6 (and 6and (and 3D3DP3–M2). plots upper teeth (length width in thein plots Supplementary Material). the Supplementary Figure Material). 5 reports Figure 5 reportsthe theprincipal principal component analysis on the component analysis upper on the teeth upper(length and width teeth (length P3–M2). and width P3–M2). Figure 5. Principal component analysis on upper teeth variables (P3–M2 length and width) on ex and fossil Vulpes species. Symbols are explained in the legend. The red diamond is MLS028. Vu chikushanensis specimens from Jigushan (China) [25] are reported in light cerulean whereas tha Longdan (China) [15] in dark cerulean. Figure 5. Figure 5. Principal Principalcomponent component analysis on upper analysis teethteeth on upper variables (P3–M2 variables length and (P3–M2 width) length andonwidth) extant on extant and fossil Vulpes species. Symbols are explained in the legend. The red diamond is MLS028. Vulpes and fossil Vulpes species. Symbols are explained inFigure the legend. The red 5. Principal is MLS028. Vulpes diamond analysis component chikushanensis specimens from Jigushan (China) [25] are reported in light cerulean whereas that ofon upper teeth vari chikushanensis Longdan (China) specimens from [15] in dark Jigushan (China) [25] cerulean. andare reported fossil Vulpesinspecies. light cerulean Symbols whereas that of in the leg are explained Longdan (China) [15] in dark cerulean. chikushanensis specimens from Jigushan (China) [25] are r Longdan (China) [15] in dark cerulean. The fox of Bajiazui lies close to these specimens. Taking into account also PC3, which ac- counts for 4.12% of the variance and is positively influenced by the width of M2 and P3 (see Table S1), in a 3D plot (see Figure S1 and Supplementary Material), it is possible to confirm the pattern visible in Figure 5, with all taxa separated from one another and Vulpes Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 from Bajiazui placed close to V. chikushanensis from Longdan. 10 of 14 Figure 6 shows the analysis of the principal components in the measures of the lower teeth (length and width p3–m2). Figure6. Figure 6. Principal Principal component componentanalysis analysison onlower lowerteeth variables teeth (p3–m2 variables (p3–m2length andand length width) on extant width) on extant andfossil and fossil Vulpes Vulpes species. species. Symbols Symbolsare areexplained explainedininthe thelegend. The legend. redred The diamond diamondis M63022. Vulpes is M63022. Vulpes chikushanensis specimens from Jigushan (China) [25] are reported in light cerulean whereas that of chikushanensis specimens from Jigushan (China) [25] are reported in light cerulean whereas that of Longdan (China) [15] are in dark cerulean. Longdan (China) [15] are in dark cerulean. The PC1 represents 75.23% of the total variance and is positively influenced, in order, by the length of P4 and P3 and of the width of the P4 (see Table S1). Along this axis, the species are fairly well separated according to size, with V. vulpes occupying the positive end of the axis, whereas V. bengalensis and V. rueppelli have negative values. In between these extremes are medium-sized foxes, e.g., V. corsac and V. lagopus. The fossil species are in this latter group, with very low (positive and negative) values. The PC2 accounts for 12.11% of the variance and it is mainly influenced by the size of the upper molars, especially the width and length of the M2 and the width of the M1 (see Table S1). Along this axis, the extant species are clustered together: only V. lagopus is partially separated from the other species by its negative values. Fossil species range from very low negative values to positive values of V. chikushanensis and Vulpes from Bajiazui. In the analysis, V. alopecoides, V. beihaiensis, and V. chikushanensis from Jigushan are within the variability of the upper teeth of V. corsac. Vulpes chikushanensis has a wide variability, with the cranium from Jigushan having negative values of PC1 and low values of PC2, lying close to V. beihaiensis and V. corsac. In contrast, Longdan specimens have positive values for both PC1 and PC2. The fox of Bajiazui lies close to these specimens. Taking into account also PC3, which accounts for 4.12% of the variance and is positively influenced by the width of M2 and P3 (see Table S1), in a 3D plot (see Figure S1 and Supplementary Material), it is possible to confirm the pattern visible in Figure 5, with all taxa separated from one another and Vulpes from Bajiazui placed close to V. chikushanensis from Longdan. Figure 6 shows the analysis of the principal components in the measures of the lower teeth (length and width p3–m2). Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 11 of 14 The PC1 here accounts for 79.61% of the variability and is mainly influenced by the length of m1, p4, and p3, respectively (see Table S2); the PC2 accounts for 6.19% of the total variance and is positively influenced by the length and width of m2 and by the width of the talonid m1 talonid (see Table S2). The distribution of the taxa is consistent with the PCA in the upper teeth (Figure 5) described above. Here, V. alopecoides is distinct from V. corsac. Again, Vulpes from Bajiazui lies close to the specimen from Longdan (V.13533). The 3D plot considering PC3 (accounting for 5.25% of the variability) confirms the distinction of the different species in the lower teeth (see Figure S1 and Supplementary Material). 5. Discussion Taxonomical Attribution of the Bajiazui Specimens and the Status of V. chikushanensis The fox specimens from the Early Pleistocene of Bajiazui described in this paper dis- play several characteristics formerly attributed as characteristic of Vulpes chikushanensis, namely [9,15]: slender muzzle; slender P4 with reduced distolingual cingulum and re- duced protocone; M1 not enlarged mesiodistally; M2 with reduced or absent metaconule; lower premolars with crowned lower premolars; m1 with larger hypoconid and reduced entoconid; and m2 with oval occlusal outline, narrow talonid and faintly buccal cingulid. On the contrary, the studied specimens differ in some respects from other previously described species, specifically from the European V. alopecoides, which shows a larger muzzle; larger and individualized P4 protocone; mesiodistally enlarged M1; M2 slightly larger compared to the metacone; and m1 with a mesiodistally reduced paraconid and a stouter protoconid [6]. Finally, the Bajiazui specimens differ from Vulpes corsac, for example, in the deeper and wider outline of the zygomaticomaxillary suture, in lateral view; the stouter upper molars, especially in mesiodistal length at the mid level of the tooth; the similarity between M1 and M2 paracone and metacone; the m1 is more robust in occlusal view but with a proportionally shorter trigonid. In summary, the reported evidence enables us to include the Bajiazui specimens in the Early Pleistocene Asian species, Vulpes chikushanensis, similar to that of Longdan (Gansu). The Jigushan fox was described by Young in 1930 in his revision of the mammalian fauna from a fossiliferous level near Zhoukoudian. This locality, known as Jigushan, ‘Chicken Bones Hill’ for its fossil accumulations, had already been investigated in the late 1910s by other paleontologists e.g., Zdansky, Andersson [30] and fossils unearthed. However, the study of the taxa recovered here was delayed by the discovery of the first tooth of the ‘Pekin man’ (Homo erectus pekinensis) by Zdansky [30]. Samples of Vulpes were fairly common in Jigushan [25] and were numerous. In his revision, Young [25] acknowledged the similarity envisioned by other scholars (e.g., Zdansky) of the fox from Jigushan to V. corsac reporting ‘the clearest affinities of the Vulpes of Chi ku shan seem to be with the complex group of V. corsac’ See Young [25] (p. 12). According to Young [25], the number of different forms of this ’group of V. corsac‘ justified the erection of a new species. After Young’s description, all subsequent authors accepted this specific name and it was rooted in the literature as V. chikushanensis is reported from Huiyu (Zhoukoudian Loc. 18) [14], Longdan [15], Classic Nihewan fauna [31], Yuanmou [32,33]. Qiu and Tedford [9] pointed out the possibility that V. chikushanensis from the type locality might actually be conspecific of extant V. corsac, as at the time corsac fox was poorly known [9], or rather, it was its variability. The age of the site also might offer support to this interpretation, as Jigushan is early Middle Pleistocene. Nevertheless, subsequent authors have abandoned this hypothesis and put forward other ones, e.g., the possible conspecificity of V. chikushanensis and Vulpes sp. from Odessa Catacombs [15]. We agree that the specimens from Longdan, Huiyu (Zhoukoudian Loc. 18), and also Bajiazui show some differences from those described by Young [25], both morphologically and morphometrically (see Sections 4.3 and 4.4). Regarding the similarity between V. chikushanensis and Vulpes sp. of the Odessa Catacombs, the morphologies of the upper teeth of the cranium described by Odintzov [12] contrast strongly with those of Jigushan fox, but the lower teeth and the lateral shape of the mandible (see [12,15]) are indeed similar to Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 12 of 14 each other. Such a dichotomic condition and the revision needed for the taxon from Odessa Catacombs (currently undergoing, Ivanoff pers. comm.) favor caution in considering the two taxa as related or conspecific. Taking into account the rarity of the Asian record and the current inaccessibility of the original specimens used by Young [25] in the collection from Zhoukoudian sites, it is difficult to adequately assess the degree of variability of V. chikushanensis. Modern species, for example V. corsac, V. lagopus, and V. vulpes, show high intraspecific variability [6,34,35], which could justify synonymizing historic taxa. However, discriminating between interspecific or intraspecific variability of Asian fossil foxes currently represents a challenge, unlike European ones [6]. Thus, we prefer to keep the specific name of V. chikushanensis, at least for the moment. 6. Concluding Remarks We described for the first time the medium-sized fox remains coming from the Early Pleistocene of Bajiazui (Gansu, China). The dentognathic features of the studied material allowed us to include it in the species V. chikushanensis, a mesocarnivorous fox widely recorded in the earliest Pleistocene of China. Dental characteristics suggest a closer affinity of the latest from the Pliocene V. beihaiensis and possibly with the extant V. corsac. The available records of V. chikushanensis do not allow a precise comparison with the other widely recorded Eurasian form, e.g., V. alopecoides, either regarding dental variability or an eventual relationship between them. Despite these issues and the possible problematic status of the specific name, the discovery of a medium-sized fox-like V. chikushanensis in the late Early Pleistocene site of Bajiazui is relevant because it adds morphological and morphometric variance on this poorly known species. The general cooling trend of the Northern Hemisphere started at the Latest Miocene intensified in the Latest Pliocene around 3 Ma. The former progressive aridification and the shift from subtropical environments to more open ones significantly affected the large mammal assemblages of Europe [36,37]. At the beginning of the Pleistocene the last tropical adapted species such as Tapirus, Anancus, or Alephis disappeared from Eurasian ecosystems being replaced by Mammuthus, Leptobos, or Eucladoceros [38]. Regarding carnivorans, at this time the first pursuit predators such as Homotherium, Xenocyon, or Chasmaporthetes were recorded in Eurasia [29,39,40]. More precisely, focusing on the small-to-medium-sized carnivores particularly influenced by climatic shifts, the initial appearances of the genera Meles, Nyctereutes, Canis, Gulo, and Vulpes were documented in Eurasia at the onset of the Early Pleistocene [38,39]. Certainly, the available records of Pliocene carnivorans are scanty, fragmented, and geographically distant and results easily compare the Late Pliocene to the Early Pleistocene ecosystems. Nevertheless, the loss of diversity of the fox group at the beginning of the Pleistocene seems significant, associated with the increase in diversity in the recorded small-to-medium-sized carnivorans and the change from hypercarnivorous forms such as V. qiuzhudingi and V. rooki to mesocarnivorous forms such as V. alopecoides and V. chikushanensis. In fact, the loss of diversity of the carnivoran guild in the latest Early Pleistocene [17] appears to be coeval with the second increase in diversity in the Vulpes group during the Early-Middle Pleistocene transition, when the first records of the arctic corsac and red foxes. Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https: //www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/quat6040057/s1, Figure S1: 2D views of the 3D plot of PCA on upper teeth described in the main text; Figure S2: 2D views of the 3D plot of PCA on lower teeth described in the main text. Table S1: Loadings of the principal component analysis on upper teeth; Table S2: Loadings of the principal component analysis on lower teeth. SHtml file #1: PCA Upper teeth_3D PLOT; SHtml file #2: PCA Lower teeth_3D PLOT. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.B.-L., J.M.-M. and Q.J.; writing—original draft prepara- tion, S.B.-L.; writing—review and editing, S.B.-L., J.M.-M., Q.J., H.J., Z.L. and K.X.; photo making, Q.J.; analyses, figure preparation, S.B.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 13 of 14 Funding: S.B.-L. is supported by the Tuscany Region funds for young researchers “Giovanisì” (www. giovanisi.it (accessed on 1 May 2023)): ‘POR FSC 2014–2020’ funds for ‘Progetti di alta formazione attraverso l’attivazione di Assegni di Ricerca’. Data Availability Statement: Data are available upon request to the corresponding author. Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to the kindness and availability of following curators of universities and institutions: E. Cioppi and P. Agnelli, curators of the IGF and of the MZUF, respectively; M. Pavia of the Paleontology collection of the MGPT-PU; M. Bukhsianidze and D. Lordkipanidze of the MG-GNM; C. Argot, curator of the Paleovertebrate collection of the MNHN; J. Galkin and J. Meng, curator of the fossil mammals collection of AMNH; M. Gasparik, curator of the Paleovertebrate collection of the HNHM. G. Koufos and D. Kostopoulos from the Earth Science Dept. of the AUTh; The MNHN gives access to the collections in the framework of the RECOLNAT national Research Infrastructure. We also thank X. Wang for kindly providing us the pictures of V. qiuzhudingi. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. References 1. Lindblad-Toh, K.; Wade, C.M.; Mikkelsen, T.S.; Karlsson, E.K.; Jaffe, D.B.; Kamal, M.; Clamp, M.; Chang, J.L.; Kulbokas, E.J.; Zody, M.C.; et al. Genome Sequence, Comparative Analysis and Haplotype Structure of the Domestic Dog. Nature 2005, 438, 803–819. [CrossRef] 2. Castelló, J.R. Canids of the World; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2018; ISBN 978-0-691-17685-7. 3. Nowak, R.M. Walker’s Carnivores of the World; JHU Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2005; ISBN 0-8018-8032-7. 4. Kaya, F.; Bibi, F.; Žliobaitė, I.; Eronen, J.T.; Hui, T.; Fortelius, M. The Rise and Fall of the Old World Savannah Fauna and the Origins of the African Savannah Biome. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 2, 241–246. [CrossRef] 5. Tedford, R.H.; Wang, X.; Taylor, B.E. Phylogenetic Systematics of the North American Fossil Caninae (Carnivora: Canidae). Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 2009, 325, 1–218. [CrossRef] 6. Bartolini Lucenti, S.; Madurell-Malapeira, J. Unraveling the Fossil Record of Foxes: An Updated Review on the Plio-Pleistocene Vulpes spp. from Europe. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2020, 236, 106296. [CrossRef] 7. De Bonis, L.; Peigné, S.; Likius, A.; Mackaye, H.T.; Vignaud, P.; Brunet, M. The Oldest African Fox (Vulpes riffautae n. sp., Canidae, Carnivora) Recovered in Late Miocene Deposits of the Djurab Desert, Chad. Naturwissenschaften 2007, 94, 575–580. [CrossRef] 8. Wang, X.; Tseng, Z.J.; Li, Q.; Takeuchi, G.T.; Xie, G. From “third Pole” to North Pole: A Himalayan Origin for the Arctic Fox. Proc. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. 2014, 281, 20140893. [CrossRef] 9. Qiu, Z.; Tedford, R.H. A Pliocene Species of Vulpes from Yushe, Shanxi. Vertebr. Palasiat. 1990, 28, 245–258. 10. Bartolini-Lucenti, S.; Madurell-Malapeira, J. Ancestral Foxes at the Gates of Europe: The Pliocene Fox from Çalta-1 (Turkey) and their Relationships with Asian and European Plio-Pleistocene Foxes. Comptes Rendus Palevol 2021, 20, 619–626. [CrossRef] 11. Bartolini-Lucenti, S. A New Large-Sized Pliocene Fox (Carnivora, Canidae) from Yushe Basin (Shanxi, China). Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Stratigr. 2021, 127, 133–147. [CrossRef] 12. Odintzov, I.A. Vulpes praecorsac Kormos from Pliocene Deposits of Odessa. Paleontol. Sb. L’vov Univ. 1965, 2, 57–64. 13. Spassov, N. Biochronology and Zoogeographic Affinities of the Villafranchian Faunas of Bulgaria and South Europe. Hist. Nat. Bulg. 2000, 12, 89–128. 14. Teilhard de Chardin, P. The Fossils from Locality 18 near Peking. Palaeontol. Sin. New Ser. C 1940, 9, 1–95. 15. Qiu, Z.; Deng, T.; Wang, B. Early Pleistocene Mammalian Fauna from Longdan, Dongxiang, Gansu, China. Palaeontol. Sin. New Ser. C 2004, 191, 1–245. 16. Ginsburg, L. Le Gisement de Vertébrés Pliocenes de Çalta, Ankara, Turquie. 5. Carnivores. Geodiversitas 1998, 20, 379–396. 17. Rodríguez, J.; Rodríguez-Gómez, G.; Martín-González, J.A.; Goikoetxea, I.; Mateos, A. Predator–Prey Relationships and the Role of Homo in Early Pleistocene Food Webs in Southern Europe. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2012, 365–366, 99–114. [CrossRef] 18. Lazarev, S.; Kuiper, K.F.; Oms, O.; Bukhsianidze, M.; Vasilyan, D.; Jorissen, E.L.; Bouwmeester, M.J.; Aghayeva, V.; van Amerongen, A.J.; Agustí, J.; et al. Five-Fold Expansion of the Caspian Sea in the Late Pliocene: New and Revised Magnetostratigraphic and 40Ar/39Ar Age Constraints on the Akchagylian Stage. Glob. Planet. Chang. 2021, 206, 103624. [CrossRef] 19. Pei, W.-C. On the Carnivora from Locality 1 of Choukoutien. Palaeontol. Sin. Ser. C 1934, 8, 1–216. 20. Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, X.; Ao, H.; Li, L.; An, Z. Mammalian Evolution in Asia Linked to Climate Changes. In Late Cenozoic Climate Change in Asia; Developments in Paleoenvironmental Research; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; Volume 16, pp. 435–490, ISBN 978-94-007-7816-0. 21. Sher, A.V. Olyorian Land Mammal Age of Northeastern Siberia. Palaeontogr. Ital. 1986, 74, 97–112. 22. Deng, T.; Xue, X.-X. Equus qingyangensis sp. nov. (Perissodactyla, Equidae) from the Early Pleistocene of Qingyang, Gansu, China. Vertebr. Palasiat. 1999, 37, 62–74. 23. Wang, J. Early Pleistocene Mammalian Fauna from Bajiazui, Qingyang, Gansu, China and Their Environment; Northwest University: Xi’an, China, 2006; pp. 1–88. Quaternary 2023, 6, 57 14 of 14 24. Xue, X.-X.; Zhang, Y.-X.; Yue, L.-P. Paleoenvironments indicated by the fossil mammalian assemblages from red clay-loess sequence in the Chinese Loess Plateau since 8.0 Ma B.P. Sci. China Ser. D 2006, 49, 518–530. [CrossRef] 25. Young, C.C. On the Mammalian Remains from Chi Ku Shan. Palaeontol. Sin. 1930, 8, 5–19. 26. Rabeder, G. Die Carnivoren (Mammalia) Aus Dem Altpleistozän Mit Beiträgen Zur Systematik Einiger Musteliden Und Caniden. Beitr. Paläontol. Osterr. 1976, 1, 5–119. 27. Garrido, G. El registro de Vulpes alopecoides (Forsyth-Major, 1877), Canis etruscus Forsyth-Major, 1877 y Canis cf. falconeri Forsyth- Major, 1877 (Canidae, Carnivora, Mammalia) en Fonelas P-1 (Cuenca de Guadix, Granada). Vertebr. Plioceno Super. Termin. El Suroeste Eur. Fonelas P-1 El Proy. Fonelas 2008, 10, 159–186. 28. Koufos, G.D. The Villafranchian Carnivoran Guild of Greece: Implications for the Fauna, Biochronology and Paleoecology. Integr. Zool. 2014, 9, 444–460. [CrossRef] 29. Bartolini-Lucenti, S.; Spassov, N. Cave Canem! The Earliest Canis (Xenocyon) (Canidae, Mammalia) of Europe: Taxonomic Affinities and Paleoecology of the Fossil Wild Dogs. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2022, 276, 107315. [CrossRef] 30. Ebbestad, J.O.R.; Romgard, J. Otto Zdansky the Scientist Who Discovered Peking Man and Explored China’s Fossil Past; Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis: Uppsala, Sweden, 2021; ISBN 978-91-554-7182-8. 31. Teilhard de Chardin, P.; Piveteau, J. Les Mammifères Fossiles de Nihowan (Chine). Ann. Paleontol. 1930, 19, 1–134. 32. You, Y.; Qi, G. New Materials of Pleistocene Mammal Fossils in Yuanmou, Yunnan. Vertebr. Palasiat. 1973, 11, 66–85. 33. Wang, X.; Flynn, L.J.; Fortelius, M. Fossil Mammals of Asia; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 1–732. 34. Gimranov, D.O.; Kosintsev, P.A.; Gasilin, V.V. Species Diagnostics of Corsac (Vulpes Corsac), Fox (Vulpes Vulpes), and Arctic Fox (Vulpes Lagopus) According to Ontological Characteristics of Mandible Teeth. Zool. Zhurnal 2015, 94, 1338–1350. [CrossRef] 35. Gimranov, D.O. Species Diagnostics of the Corsac (Vulpes Corsac), Fox (Vulpes Vulpes) and Arctic Fox (Vulpes Lagopus, Carnivora, Canidae) Using the Upper Teeth. Zool. Journal 2017, 96, 684–697. [CrossRef] 36. Kahlke, R.D.; García, N.; Kostopoulos, D.S.; Lacombat, F.; Lister, A.M.; Mazza, P.P.A.; Spassov, N.; Titov, V.V. Western Palaearctic Palaeoenvironmental Conditions during the Early and Early Middle Pleistocene Inferred from Large Mammal Communities, and Implications for Hominin Dispersal in Europe. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2011, 30, 1368–1395. [CrossRef] 37. Head, M.J.; Gibbard, P.L. Early-Middle Pleistocene Transitions: Linking Terrestrial and Marine Realms. Quat. Int. 2015, 389, 7–46. [CrossRef] 38. Madurell-Malapeira, J.; Ros-Montoya, S.; Espigares, M.P.; Alba, D.M.; Aurell-Garrido, J. Villafranchian Large Mammals from the Iberian Peninsula: Paleobiogeography, Paleoecology and Dispersal Events. J. Iber. Geol. 2014, 40, 167–178. [CrossRef] 39. Rook, L.; Martínez-Navarro, B. Villafranchian: The Long Story of a Plio-Pleistocene European Large Mammal Biochronologic Unit. Quat. Int. 2010, 219, 134–144. [CrossRef] 40. Antón, M.; Turner, A.; Salesa, M.J.; Morales, J. A Complete Skull of Chasmaporthetes Lunensis (Carnivora, Hyaenidae) from the Spanish Pliocene Site of La Puebla de Valverde (Teruel). Estud. Geol. 2006, 62, 375–388. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.