See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286595930

The first mandible of Gastornis Hébert, 1855 (Aves, Gastornithidae) from the
Thanetian (Paleocene) of Mont-de-Berru (France)

Article  in  Revue de Paleobiologie · December 2013

CITATIONS READS

11 475

2 authors:

Eric Buffetaut Delphine Angst

French National Centre for Scientific Research University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
478 PUBLICATIONS   10,061 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   252 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Mass extinctions - drivers for evolution? View project

Study on Upper Cretaceous continental vertebrates of Provence (Southern France) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Delphine Angst on 07 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1661-5468

VOL. 32, N° 2, 2013

Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève (décembre 2013) 32 (2): 423-432 ISSN 0253-6730

The first mandible of Gastornis Hébert, 1855 (Aves, Gastornithidae)

from the Thanetian (Paleocene) of Mont-de-Berru (France)

Delphine Angst1 & Eric Buffetaut2

Abstract
A new mandible of Gastornis Hébert, 1855 from the Thanetian (Paleocene) of Mont-de-Berru (France) is described. This site, near
Reims (France), is known for its rich terrestrial fauna comprising various fishes, turtles, champsosaurs, mammals, crocodilians and
birds. Previously described bird remains include several Gastornis bones, mainly from the postcranial skeleton, but no mandible had
hitherto been described from this site or other sites in France. Only one other mandible is known from Europe, from the Middle Eocene
(Lutetian) of the Geiseltal (Germany). The new mandible from Berru is well preserved and relatively complete with only the right
articular region missing, allowing comparisons with North American material referred to Diatryma Cope, 1876. This French fossil
supports the synonymy between Gastornis Hébert, 1855 and Diatryma Cope, 1876.

Keywords
Gastornis, Diatryma, mandible, Paleocene, France.

Résumé
La première mandibule de Gastornis Hébert, 1855 (Aves, Gastornithidae) du Thanétien (Paléocène) du Mont-de-Berru
(France).- Une nouvelle mandibule de Gastornis Hébert, 1855, du Thanétien (Paléocène) du Mont-de-Berru (France), est décrite.
Ce site, près de Reims (France) est connu pour sa riche faune terrestre, comprenant différents poissons, tortues, champsosaures,
mammifères, crocodiles et oiseaux. Les restes d’oiseaux comprennent plusieurs os de Gastornis, principalement postcrâniens, mais
aucune mandibule de Gastornis n’avait été décrite jusqu’à présent provenant de ce site ou d’un autre site en France. Seule une autre
mandibule est connue en Europe, provenant de l’Eocène moyen (Lutétien) du Geiseltal (Allemagne). La bonne préservation du
spécimen de Berru permet une comparaison avec le matériel nord-américain rapporté à Diatryma Cope, 1876. Ce fossile français est
un nouvel élément confirmant la synonymie entre Gastornis Hébert, 1855, et Diatryma Cope, 1876.

Mots-clés
Gastornis, Diatryma, mandibule, Paléocène, France.

I. INTRODUCTION from the Lower Eocene of New Mexico, as Diatryma.

The giant bird Gastornis Hébert, 1855 was first described
from the Early Eocene “Conglomérat de Meudon”, near
Paris, on the basis of a tibiotarsus (Lartet, 1855; Prévot,
1855) and a femur (Hébert, 1855). Later, Lemoine
described additional specimens of this giant bird from
the Late Paleocene of Cernay, near Reims (Lemoine,
1878, 1881). These were the first reports from this area,
in roughly the same geological setting as the Mouras
quarry on Mont-de-Berru, where the specimen described
in the present paper comes from (the Cernay localities
are on the western side of the Mont-de-Berru hill, while
the Mouras quarry is on the eastern side). Giant bird
remains subsequently reported from the Paleogene of
Belgium (Dollo, 1883) and England (Newton, 1885,
1886) were referred to Gastornis. In North America,
Cope (1876) described scanty remains of a similar bird,
The North American form remained poorly known until
Matthew & Granger (1917) described a nearly complete
skeleton from Wyoming. Following this description,
giant bird specimens from the Eocene of France (Schaub,
1929) and Germany (Berg, 1965; Fischer, 1962, 1978)
were referred to Diatryma rather than to the less well
known Gastornis. Gastornis and Diatryma are very
similar in size and morphology and the possibility that
they in fact belong to a single genus has already been
proposed. On the basis of post-cranial material, Buffetaut
(1997b, 2000) suggested that Gastornis and Diatryma
should be regarded as congeneric, the name Gastornis
Hébert, 1855 having priority over Diatryma Cope, 1876.
This conclusion has been accepted by various authors,
including Mlíkovský (2002) and Mayr (2009). The new
mandible from Berru provides additional evidence in
support of this generic identity.

1
Laboratoire de Géologie de Lyon: Terre, Planètes, Environnement UMR CNRS/Univ. Lyon 1/ENS-Lyon 5276, Dé-
partement des Sciences de la Terre Faculté des Sciences, Université Lyon 1, Campus de la Doua, Boulevard du 11
Novembre 1918, F-69622 Villeurbanne Cedex. E-mail: angst.delphine@gmail.com
2
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 8538, Laboratoire de Géologie de l’Ecole Normale Supérieure,
24 rue Lhomond, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France. E-mail: eric.buffetaut@sfr.fr
424 D. Angst & E. Buffetaut
II. INSTITUTIONAL ABBREVIATIONS
AMNH: Department of Vertebrate Paleontology,
American Museum of Natural History, New York, New
York; BR: Mont de Berru Collection, Muséum National
d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris; MHNT: Muséum d’Histoire
Naturelle, Toulouse; USGS: United States Geological
Survey, Paleontology and Stratigraphy Branch, Denver,
Colorado; YPM: Peabody Museum of National History,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
III. GEOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL
SETTING
The mandible described in the present paper was found
in the 1980s by Marc Duchamplecheval in the Mouras
quarry, in the Mont-de-Berru, near the village of Berru,
about 5  km NE of Reims, in eastern France (Fig.  1).
This site was discovered by Mrs. Lasseron in the 1950s,
and corresponds to a fluvial deposit. The fossil-bearing
horizon consists of yellowish sands alternating with
clays (Russell, 1964; Buffetaut, 1997b). This Thanetian
(late Paleocene, MP6 mammalian reference level) site is
known for its rich terrestrial fauna comprising various
mammals, turtles, champsosaurs, crocodilians, fishes
(Russell, 1964; Boyer et al., 2012) and birds (Martin,
1992). The previously described bird remains included
several Gastornis bones, mainly from the postcranial
skeleton (Lasseron, 1962; Martin, 1992; Buffetaut,
1997b), but no Gastornis mandible had hitherto been
described from this site or other sites in France.
Fig. 1: Geographical and geological location of Mont-de-Berru site near Reims (France).
IV. SYSTEMATIC PALAEONTOLOGY
Class Aves Linnaeus, 1758
Order Gastornithiformes Stejneger, 1885
Family Gastornithidae Fürbringer, 1888
Genus Gastornis Hébert, 1855
Gastornis parisiensis Hébert, 1855
V. DESCRIPTION OF THE MANDIBLE
General description
Osteological nomenclature follows Baumel et al. (1993).
The specimen MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1 is a very massive
avian lower jaw, entirely toothless and its surface bears
many grooves. It is well preserved (Fig. 2 and 3), with
only the tip of the processus coronoideus, the tip of the
processus retroarticularis and the posterior part of the
left ramus missing. No sutures between the bones can
be identified with certainty. With a maximum length of
309  mm, and a maximal height of 69  mm at the level
of the processus coronoideus (Table 1), this specimen
corresponds to a very large bird.
Following Stresemann (1927-1934) and Andors (1988)
we divided the jaw into two main regions: the symphyseal
and the post-symphyseal regions. The post-symphyseal
region includes the articular area, but because of the
importance of this zone we describe it separately.
Symphyseal region
The slender symphyseal region is 140 mm long, so the
ratio of the symphyseal to post symphyseal length is
45.3%. The width of the symphyseal region increases
from 27  mm at the tip to 70  mm at the level of the
 The first mandible of Gastornis from the Thanetian of Mont-de-Berru (France) 425

Fig. 2: Gastornis mandible from Mouras Quarry, Mont-de-Berru, Marne, France, n° MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1. A1: Photograph in dorsal
view. A2: interpretative drawing, in dorsal view. B: detail of articular area, dorsal view. C: detail of articular area, cranial
view. Cot. med.: Cotyla medialis, Cot. lat.: Cotyla lateralis, Cr. transv. fos.: Crista transversa fossae, For. pneu. art.: Foramen
pneumaticum articulare, Fos. art. quad.: Fossa articularis quadratis, Fos. caud.: fossa caudalis, Musc. geniog.: Musculus
genioglossus, Musc. dep. mand.: Musculus depressor mandibulae, Proc. lat. mand.: Processus lateralis mandibulae, Proc. med.
mand.: Processus medialis mandibulae, Proc. retro.: Processus retroarticularis, Ram. mand.: Ramus mandibulae, Sul. intercot.:
Sulcus intercotylaris, Symph. reg.: Symphyseal region.
426 D. Angst & E. Buffetaut

Fig. 3: Gastornis mandible from Mouras Quarry, Mont-de-Berru, Marne, France, n° MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1. A: Photograph in ventral
view. B1: Photograph in medial view. B2: Interpretative drawing, medial view C: Photograph in lateral view. Fos. ad. can.
neurovasc.: Fossa aditus canalis mandibulae, Musc. ad. mand. ext.: Musculus adductor mandibulae externus, Musc. dep.
mand.: Musculus depressor mandibulae, Musc. pteryg.: Musculus pterygoideus, Proc. coro.: Processus coronoideus, Proc. lat.
mand.: Processus lateralis mandibulae, Proc. med. mand.: Processus medialis mandibulae.
 The first mandible of Gastornis from the Thanetian of Mont-de-Berru (France) 427

separation of the rami. The depth of the rami gradually
increases from the tip of the mandible to the processus
coronoideus, from 16  mm to 69  mm (Table  1). The
anterior part is slightly dorsally projected, as seen in
lateral view (Fig. 3C). At mid-length of the dorsal face
of the symphysis, a depression is visible (Fig. 2A1 &
2A2) and may correspond to the insertion zone of the
genioglossus muscle, one of the major muscles of the
tongue. This depression is oval, twice longer than wide,
and two millimetres deep. In the posterior part of the
symphysis, the rami diverge at an angle of approximately
50 degrees (Table 1).
Post-symphyseal region
The post-symphyseal region includes the zone of the
processus coronoideus and all the posterior part of the
mandible, except the articular zone, which is described
separately. The mandible is highest at the processus
coronoideus with a maximum height of at least 69 mm
(Table  1). There is no mandibular fenestra and the
coronoid region is massive and prominent. It presents a
large and strongly marked muscular scar on its outer side,
corresponding to the insertion of the musculus adductor
mandibulae externus. The coronoid process is very large
and stout (Fig. 3C). Posterior to the coronoid region the
depth gradually decreases towards the articular region. In
medial view (Fig. 3B), very close to the tip of the coronoid
process, the fossa aditus canalis mandibulae is well
preserved and is around 17 mm in length, permitting the
passage of the canalis neurovascularis mandibulae which
conducts vessels and the intramandibular ramus of the
mandibular nerve from the region of the coronoid process
to the symphyseal region of the ramus mandibulae.
The articular region
The articular region of this mandible is very well
preserved, missing only the posterior end of the processus
retroarticularis. The different parts of this articulation are
clearly visible, which is an important point for the study
of the functional performance of the jaw of Gastornis.
This region consists of three different areas: the fossa
articularis quadratis, the processus mandibulae (medialis
and lateralis) and the processus retroarticularis, all visible
on this mandible (Fig. 2A, B). The fossa articularis
quadratis corresponds to the area of contact between the
mandible and the quadrate. It consists of the cotylae fossae
articularis, comprising the cotyla lateralis and the cotyla
medialis, which are separated by a bony crest; namely the
sulcus intercotylaris. On specimen MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1,
the cotyla lateralis, which is 15 mm deep, is smaller and
shallower than the cotyla medialis. The cotyla medialis
extends from the medial edge to the lateral edge of the
articular surface. On the posteromedial corner of the
fossa articularis quadratis, the foramen pneumaticum
articulare is well preserved, being 8 mm deep and 9 mm
in diameter (Fig. 2B). The fossa articularis quadratis is
delimited by the two processi mandibulae. The processus
lateralis mandibulae extends onto the lateral edge of the

Table 1: Measurements of several mandibles including the specimen from Berru, MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1.

MHNT. AV. G. 1968/

Collection number AMNH 6169 YPM 6352 USGS 21862
PAL.2012.1.1. Dia. 14
Wyoming - Wyoming- Wyoming-
Geiseltal
Locality of reference Berru (France) Wasatch Form. Willwood Form. Willwood Form.
(Germany)
(USA) (USA) (USA)
Total (anteroposterior) length of
309 384.7 / 385 346
mandible (mm)
Lenght of symphysis (mm) 140 169.4 / 185 156
Ratio between the total length of
mandible and the length of the 45.3 44 / 48.1 45.1
symphysis (%)
Interramal width between coronoid
70 64.9 84.6 100 /
processes (inner dimension) (mm)

Greatest height of the mandible at

69 93.7/93.2 92.1 103.5 96
the coronoid process (mm)

Internal angle (approximate)

measured between caudolateral
50° 53° 47° 55° /
tips of retroarticular processes with
vertex at posterior end of symphysis

Witmer & Rose,

Source This study Andors, 1988 Fischer, 1978
1991
428 D. Angst & E. Buffetaut
ramus to form a 10  mm wide excrescence. The dorsal
side is flat while the ventral side is much cambered.
This process is oriented approximately perpendicular to
the axis of the processus retroarticularis. The processus
medialis mandibulae extends medially with a length of
30 mm relative to the edge of the ramus, perpendicularly
to the medial side of the ramus and in the same axis as the
processus lateralis mandibulae. In medial view there is a
facet which probably was the area of the insertion of a part
of the musculus pterygoideus (Fig. 3B). In cranial view,
the fossa caudalis is well preserved and marks the position
of the insertion of the musculus depressor mandibulae
(Fig. 2B, C). The crista transversa fossae, which is an
attachment of the ligamentum occipitomandibulare,
extends from the processus medialis mandibulae to the
processus lateralis mandibulae. In the posterior part of
the mandible, the processus retroarticularis is present
although the posteriormost part is missing. It is oriented
along the same axis as the ramus of the mandible, and its
dorsal face shows a distinct triangular depression which
may represent the insertion of a portion of the musculus
depressor mandibulae (Fig. 2B). In medial view (Fig.
3B) there is a facet which probably was another insertion
area of a part of the musculus depressor mandibulae.
VI. DISCUSSION
Gastornis is very different from large modern ground
birds, as was already noted by Matthew and Granger
(1917). A comparison with modern birds is therefore
not necessary. But the very good preservation of this
new mandible, however, allows comparisons with other
mandibles from Europe and North America, originally
described either as Gastornis or as Diatryma, as well as
some functional interpretations.
Comparison with other known mandibles of
Gastornis and Diatryma
According to Martin (1992), two European species of
Gastornis are considered as valid: Gastornis parisiensis
Hébert, 1855 and Gastornis russelli Martin, 1992, and
mandible fragments are known only for G. parisiensis.
These fragments consist of a poorly preserved symphyseal
region (BR 12737) and a posterior part with the articular
region (BR 10512), which “has two large cotylae sides
by the side and a large internal articular process. There is
a large pneumatic foramen in […] the articular” (Martin,
1992). This articular region is also very poorly preserved,
and the different insertion areas of muscles are not well
visible. However proportions and organization of the
articular region are identical in all respects with those
of the specimen from Berru (MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1).
According to Martin (1992), both G. parisiensis and
G. russelli occur at Berru. G. russelli, which is smaller than
G. parisiensis, is known from a tibiotarsus and possibly
an incomplete bill (Martin, 1992). It is therefore not
easy to compare MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1 with previously
described specimens from Berru, but similarities in size
and proportions suggest that it belongs to G. parisiensis.
Among other species only a single mandible has hitherto
been described from Europe, by Fischer (1978), who
referred it to Diatryma geiselensis Fischer, 1978 (number
AV. G. 1968/Dia. 14). This specimen comes from the
upper Middle Eocene of the valley of the Geisel, near
Halle/Saale in central Germany. It is relatively complete
but strongly compressed laterally and much fractured
(Fischer, 1978). The maximal length is 346  mm,
which is comparable with that of the specimen MHNT.
PAL.2012.1.1 (309  mm), and the symphyseal region is
156  mm long, comparable too with the specimen from
Berru (140  mm). The maximal height of the Geiseltal
mandible is around 96  mm which is higher than the
69  mm of the specimen from Berru (Table  1), but this
difference can be explained because, contrary to the
German specimen, the coronoid process is broken in the
French specimen. In both fossils the symphyseal region
is narrow and tubular, although the lateral compression
in the German specimen somewhat obscures this feature.
Comparison with the Geiseltal specimen is not easy
because of its relatively poor preservation. However the
proportions and the main structures are similar to what
can be observed for the mandible from Berru. We can
however note that the mandible from the Geiseltal is
slightly larger than the French one.
From North America, several mandibles are known, all
referred to Diatryma gigantea Cope, 1876 by Andors
(1988), who has done a detailed compilation of mandible
descriptions. Unfortunately, no complete and precise
description is available for each mandible from North
America. Only two descriptions of specific specimens
have been published, the first by Matthew & Granger
(1917) for specimen AMNH 6169, and the second by
Witmer & Rose (1991) for specimen USGS 21862, but
both descriptions are very short and not sufficient for
comparison with the material from Berru. A comparison
therefore has to be based on Andors’s “synthetic”
description of the mandible of Diatryma. In practically all
respects, this tallies with what is observed on specimen
MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1. This can be illustrated by a
comparison with the well preserved mandible AMNH
6169 from Wyoming (Fig. 4).
The organization of the different parts and structures
is similar. No suture is visible, which shows that the
specimen from Berru must have been an adult, because
in young individuals the symphyseal suture is visible in
ventral view (Andors, 1988). The symphyseal region
presents the same characteristics in both the Berru and
the North American specimens, in particular regarding,
the insertion of the genioglossus muscle on the dorsal
surface, as previously noted by Andors (1988) for the two
specimens with well preserved symphyses (AMNH 6169,
YPM 6352), and the absence of the mandibular fenestra.
It is of interest that both these features are relatively rare
in birds. The symphyseal region is long and slender in
 The first mandible of Gastornis from the Thanetian of Mont-de-Berru (France) 429

Fig. 4: The mandible of Diatryma gigantea (here considered as belonging to the genus Gastornis) from the Early Eocene of Wyoming,
AMNH 6169, for comparison with the mandible of Gastornis parisiensis from Berru (Fig. 2 and 3). A: dorsal view; B: right
lateral view; C: ventral view. Scale bar: 50 mm. Modified after Matthew & Granger (1917).
430 D. Angst & E. Buffetaut
both cases, Berru and North American; and the anterior
part is slightly dorsally projected, but this is more marked
among the North American specimens. The divergence
between the two rami is 50°, measured between the
caudolateral tips of the retroarticular processes with the
vertex at the posterior end of the symphysis, exactly
as in the North American material (Table  1). As noted
by Matthew & Granger (1917) for the specimen from
Wyoming, the coronoid region is massive and prominent
with a large strongly marked muscular scar on its outer
side, and the coronoid process is very large and stout,
exactly as in the specimen from Berru, and in both cases
the fossa aditus canalis mandibulae can be seen on the
medial face. The articular region of the specimen from
Berru has the same organization and proportions as in
the American forms, with the presence of a foramen
pneumaticum articulare, indicating that the lower jaw was
pneumatic (Andors, 1988). The position of the insertion
of different muscles on the articular area, in particular
the insertion areas of the musculus pterygoideus and the
musculus depressor mandibulae, seems to be the same
in the mandibles from North America and from Berru
(Andors, 1988). The measurements of the mandible are
comparable, but it should be noted that, concerning hind
limb measurements, the North American specimens are
always slightly larger than the European specimens, as
already noted by Berg (1965), although some differences
may be explained by the state of preservation of the
fossils. Indeed, specimen MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1., despite
its very good preservation, is not entirely complete, which
may explain why certain measurements are smaller.
For example, the total length of the mandible should
be measured including the processus retroarticularis,
which alone is around 60  mm in length, so if we add
this value to the total length of the mandible from
Berru, we obtain a length of 315  mm. This is still less
than the 385  mm of the specimen from Wyoming, but
the difference is smaller. As to the greatest height of the
mandible at the coronoid process, this process being
broken in specimen MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1., this value is
necessarily smaller than for other, more complete North
American specimens, such as AMNH 6169. Finally, the
last significant difference is about the interramal width
between the coronoid processes, and this difference can
be explained by the more or less significant crushing
and flattening of the mandible. Nevertheless, overall the
proportions are closely similar, as can be seen in the ratio
between the total length of the mandible and the length
of the symphysis, which is always around 45% (Table 1).
Comparison with other fossil giant flightless birds
Comparison with two other families of Cenozoic giant
ground birds, Phorusrhacidae and Dromornithidae,
reveals many differences. In both specimen MHNT.
PAL.2012.1.1. and Dromornithidae, there is no
mandibular fenestra, but the Dromornithidae tend to
have a more massive and deeper mandible, and a much
shorter symphysis than MHNT.PAL.2012.1.1. (Murray
& Vickers-Rich, 2004), as already noted by Matthew
& Granger (1917). The mandible of Gastornis is not
reminiscent of that of members of the Phorusrhacidae,
which have a more slender mandible and a well
developed mandibular fenestra (Alvarenga & Höfling,
2003; Agnolin, 2009). Mandibular morphology thus does
not seem to support close links between Gastornis and
these groups.
Functional interpretation
The very good preservation of this mandible and more
specifically of the articular region is important for
a better understanding of jaw mobility. Indeed, the
position and the extent of the muscle insertions convey
information on the possible movements of the mandible
relative to the skull. The musculus depressor mandibulae,
which attached on the dorsal and medial surfaces of the
processus retroarticularis, presents a relatively small
insertion area (Fig. 2), contrary to the musculus adductor
mandibulae externus, which is attached to the lateral part
of the processus coronoideus with a very large and strong
insertion area (Fig. 3C). These muscles being involved
in the mobility of the jaw, it can be concluded that the
bite probably was very strong, because the insertion of
the musculus adductor mandibulae externus is very large
(Witmer & Rose, 1991). Conversely, there is no evidence
of great force being applied for the opening of the jaw,
because the musculus depressor mandibulae has left
only a weak trace on the bone. The study of the internal
osteological structures of the mandible of Gastornis
will be possible thanks to 3D studies in progress, which
may allow to confirm the mechanical properties of this
mandible, notably its resistance, as proposed by Andors
(1988), based on osteological and histological studies.
Reconstructing the feeding behaviour of Gastornis,
on the basis of its jaw structure and organization, has
already been attempted many times. One of the oldest
interpretations is by Matthew & Granger (1917),
who suggested similarities with carnivorous birds
(notably phorusrhacids) and noted that the morphology
of Gastornis is very different from that of ratites.
Subsequently, beginning with Heilmann (1926), a
carnivorous adaptation was widely accepted. Lanyon
(1963) proposed a necrophagous diet for Diatryma. Later,
Witmer & Rose (1991) studied specifically the mandible
of Diatryma using biomechanics and concluded that it
must have had a carnivorous diet and also suggested
active predation, as proposed by Kurtén (1972) before
them. However, one year later Andors (1992) closely
examined the same material and came to a completely
different conclusion, considering Diatryma a plant-eating
bird, more specifically a folivore, as already suggested by
Watson (1976). There is at present no consensus about the
diet of Gastornis and more studies, using new material
and new methods, are necessary to attempt to solve the
debate. The mandible from Berru, having undergone
little distortion, should be useful in this regard.
 The first mandible of Gastornis from the Thanetian of Mont-de-Berru (France)
VII. CONCLUSION
The description of this new mandible of Gastornis from
Mont-de-Berru (France) confirms the extremely close
similarity between Gastornis Hébert, 1855 and Diatryma
Cope, 1876, differing only in size, with the North
American specimens slightly larger than the European
ones (both from Berru and Geiseltal), which is also true
for the postcranial skeleton (Berg, 1965). Authors who
questioned this similarity, including Matthew & Granger
(1917), mainly based their conception of Gastornis on
Lemoine’s reconstuction (Lemoine, 1881) which was
extremely inaccurate, being largely based on non-avian
material (Martin, 1992; Buffetaut, 1997a). Close affinities
between Gastornis and Diatryma were suggested by
Cope as early as 1876, and generic identity was proposed
by Coues (1884). However, marked discrepancies
between Lemoine’s skeletal reconstruction of Gastornis
(Lemoine, 1881) and the nearly complete Diatryma
skeleton from Wyoming described by Matthew and
Granger (1917) suggested that Gastornis and Diatryma
were in fact different in many respects. Martin’s revision
of Lemoine’s original specimens revealed, once the non-
avian bones used by Lemoine in his reconstruction were
discarded, that Gastornis and Diatryma were in fact very
similar (Martin, 1992). The extremely close resemblance
between the mandible from Berru and its counterparts
from North America supports the idea that Gastornis and
Diatryma are congeneric, and that the name Gastornis
should be used because of priority rules, as previously
suggested by Buffetaut (1997b, 2000) – a conclusion
accepted by Mlíkovský (2002) and Mayr (2009). In this
conception, the genus Gastornis includes several species
currently known from Europe and North America (and
probably Asia, too, as the Chinese genus Zhongyuanus
appears to be a junior synonym of Gastornis: Buffetaut,
in press). However, the relationships among the various
species described from Europe and North America
remain unclear, and more material and more comparisons
will be needed to clarify them.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to François Escuillié for donating the Gastornis
mandible from Berru to the Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle
de Toulouse, and to Francis Duranthon for permission to
describe it. Vanesa De Pietri (Basle) and Nikita Zelenkov
(Moscow) provided useful comments.
REFERENCES
Agnolin, F. (2009) - Sistemática y Filogenia de las Aves Foror-
racoideas (Gruiformes, Cariamae). Buenos Aires Funda-
ción de Historia Natural Félix de Azara, Buenos Aires:
79 p.
431
Alvarenga, H.M.F. & E. Höfling (2003) - Systematic revision
of the Phorusrhacidae (Aves: Ralliformes). Papéis Avulsos
de Zoologia, São Paulo, 43(4): 55-91.
Andors, A.V. (1988) - Giant groundbirds of North America
(Aves, Diatrymidae). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Columbia
University, New York: 577 p.
Andors, A.V. (1992) - Reappraisal of the Eocene groundbird
Diatryma (Aves: Anserimorphae). In: Campbell, K.E.
Papers in Avian Paleontology honoring Pierce Brodkorb.
Los Angeles County Natural History Museum Bulletin, 36:
109-125.
Baumel, J.J., A.S. King, A.M. Lucas, J.E. Breazile & H.E.
Evans (1993) - Handbook of Avian Anatomy: Nomina
Anatomica Avium. Second Edition. Publications of the
Nuttall Ornithological Club, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
(23): 779 p.
Berg, D.E. (1965) - Nachweis des Riesenlaufenvogels Dia-
tryma im Eozän von Messel bei Darmstadt/Hessen. Notiz-
blatt des Hessischen Landesamtes für Bodenforschung zu
Wiesbaden, 93: 68-72.
Boyer, D.M., L. Costeur & Y. Lipman (2012) - First Paleocene
Record of Platychoerops (Primates, Plesiadapidae), A New
Species from Mouras Quarry, Mont de Berru, France.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, online: DOI
10.1002/ajpa.22119.
Buffetaut, E. (1997a) - L’oiseau géant Gastornis: interpréta-
tion, reconstitution et vulgarisation de fossiles inhabituels
dans la France du XIXe siècle. Bulletin de la société géolo-
gique de France, Paris, 168(6): 805-811.
Buffetaut, E. (1997b) - New remains of the giant bird Gastor-
nis from the Upper Paleocene of the eastern Paris Basin
and the relationships between Gastornis and Diatryma.
Neues Jahrbuch fuer Geologie und Paläeontologie,
Monatshefte, Stuttgart, 3: 179-190.
Buffetaut, E. (2000) - Are Gastornis and Diatryma congeneric?
Vertebrata Palasiatica, suppl. to vol. 38: 3.
Buffetaut, E. (in press) - The giant bird Gastornis in Asia: a
revision of Zhongyuanus xichuanensis Hou, 1980, from
the Early Eocene of China. Paleontological Journal.
Cope, E.D. (1876) - On a gigantic bird from the Eocene of New
Mexico. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences
of Philadelphia, 28(2): 10-12.
Coues, E. (1884) - Key to North American Birds (2nd ed.). Estes
& Lauriat, Boston: 863 p.
Dollo, L. (1883) - Note sur la présence du Gastornis edwardsii
Lemoine dans l’assise inférieure de l’étage Landénien à
Mesvin, près Mons. Bulletin du Musée royal d’Histoire
naturelle de Belgique, Bruxelles, 2: 297-305.
Fischer, K. (1962) - Der Riesenlaufvogel Diatryma aus der
eozänen Braunkohle des Geiseltales. Hallesches Jahrbuch
für mitteldeutsche Erdgeschichte, Halle, 4: 26-33.
Fischer, K. (1978) - Neue Reste des Riesenlaufvogels Diatryma
aus dem Eozän des Geisentales bei Halle (DDR). Mit-
teilungen aus dem Zoologischen Museum in Berlin,
Annalen für Ornithologie, 2: 133-144.
Fürbringer, M. (1888) - Untersuchungen zur Morphologie und
Systematik der Vögel, zugleich ein Beitrag zur Anatomie
der Stütz und Bewegungsorgane. Bijdragen tot de Dier-
kunde, Amsterdam, 15(2): 1-1751.
Hébert, E. (1855) - Note sur le tibia du Gastornis parisiensis.
Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l’Acadé-
mie des Sciences, Paris, 40: 579-582.
Heilmann, G. (1926) - The origin of birds. Witherby, London:
208 p.
 432 D. Angst & E. Buffetaut
Kurtén, B. (1972) - The age of mammals. Columbia University
Press, New York: 250 p.
Lanyon, W.E. (1963) - Biology of Birds. The Natural History
Press, New York: 175 p.
Lartet, E. (1855) - Note sur le tibia d’oiseau fossile de Meudon.
Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, Paris, 40:
582-583.
Lasseron, R. (1962) - La découverte d’un intéressant gisement
de fossiles aux portes de Reims. Bulletin de l’Association
Régionale Pour l’Etude et la Recherche Scientifique,
Reims, 3(3): 7-11.
Lemoine, V. (1878) - Recherches sur les oiseaux fossiles des
terrains tertiaires inférieurs des environs de Reims, 1. F.
Keller, Reims: 69 p.
Lemoine, V. (1881) - Recherches sur les oiseaux fossiles des
terrains tertiaires inférieurs des environs de Reims, 2.
Matot-Braine, Reims: 75-170.
Linnaeus, C. (1758) - Systema naturae per regna tria naturae,
secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characte-
ribus, differentisis, synonymis, locis. Laurentius Salvius,
Stockholm: 824 p.
Martin, L.D. (1992) - The status of the late Paleocene birds
Gastornis and Remiornis. In: Campbell, K.E. Papers in
Avian Paleontology honoring Pierce Brodkorb. Los Ange-
les County Natural History Museum Bulletin, 36: 97-108.
Matthew, W.D. & W. Granger (1917) - The skeleton of Dia-
tryma, a gigantic bird from the Lower Eocene of Wyoming.
Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, New
York, 37(11): 307-326.
Mayr, G. (2009) - Paleogene fossil birds. Springer, Berlin:
262 p.
Mlíkovský, J. (2002) - Cenozoic birds of the world. Part 1:
Europe. Ninox Press, Praha: 405 p.
Murray, P.F. & P. Vickers-Rich (2004) - Magnificent Mihirungs
- The Colossal Flightless Birds of the Australian Dream-
time. Indiana University Press, Bloomington: 416 p.
View publication stats
Newton, E.T. (1885) - On the remains of a gigantic species of
bird from the Lower Eocene beds near Croydon. Proceed-
ings of the Zoological Society of London, 53(3): 445-446.
Newton, E.T. (1886) - On the remains of a gigantic species of
bird (Gastornis klaasseni, n. sp.) from the Lower Eocene
beds near Croydon. Transactions of the Zoological Society
of London, 12(5): 143-160.
Prévot, C. (1855) - Annonce de la découverte d’un oiseau fos-
sile de taille gigantesque, trouvé à la partie inférieure de
l’argile plastique du terrain parisien. Comptes Rendus Heb-
domadaires des Séances de l’Académie des Sciences,
Paris, 40: 554-557.
Russell, D.E. (1964) - Les mammifères paléocènes d’Europe.
Mémoires du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris,
13: 1-323.
Schaub, S. (1929) - Über eocäne Ratitenreste in der osteolo-
gischen Sammlung des Basler Museums. Verhandlungen
der Naturforschenden Gesllschaft in Basel, 40: 588-598.
Stejneger, L. (1885) - Order Gastornithes. In: Kingsley, J.S.
(ed.), The Standard Natural History, 4, Birds, Cassino,
Boston: 54-55.
Stresemann, E. (1927-1934) - Sauropsida: Aves. In: Küken-
thal, W. & T. Krumbach (eds), Handbuch der Zoologie,
7/2, Gruyter, Berlin & Leipzig: 899 p.
Watson, G.E. (1976) - And birds took wing. In: Colbert, E. H.
& S.L. Fishbein (eds), Our continent, a natural history of
North America., National Geographic Society, Washington
D.C.: 98-107.
Witmer, L.M. & K.D. Rose (1991) - Biomechanics of the jaw
apparatus of the gigantic Eocene bird Diatryma: implica-
tions for diet and mode of life. Paleobiology, Boulder,
17(2): 95-120.
Accepté janvier 2013