Hubbry Logo
DoedicurusDoedicurusMain
Open search
Doedicurus
Community hub
Doedicurus
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Doedicurus
Doedicurus
Doedicurus
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Doedicurus
Temporal range: Pleistocene-Holocene (Uquian-Lujanian)
2–0.007 Ma
↓
Illustration of a skeleton
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Cingulata
Family: Chlamyphoridae
Subfamily: †Glyptodontinae
Genus: †Doedicurus
Burmeister, 1874
Species:
†D. clavicaudatus
Binomial name
†Doedicurus clavicaudatus
Owen, 1847
Synonyms[1]
List
    • Glyptodon clavicaudatus
      Owen, 1847
    • Hoplophorus clavicaudatus
      Nodot, 1857
    • Glyptodon giganteus
      Serres, 1866
    • Panochthus giganteus
      Burmeister, 1874
    • Doedicurus giganteus
      Burmeister, 1874
    • Doedicurus uruguayanesis
      Gervais and Ameghino, 1847
    • Doedicurus gigas
      Ameghino, 1847

Doedicurus, from Ancient Greek δοῖδυξ (doîdux), meaning "pestle" and oυρά (ourá), meaning "tail", is an extinct genus of glyptodont from South America containing one species, D. clavicaudatus. Glyptodonts are a member of the family Chlamyphoridae, which also includes some modern armadillo species, and they are classified in the superorder Xenarthra alongside sloths and anteaters. Being a glyptodont, it was a rotund animal with heavy armor and a carapace. Averaging at an approximate 1,400 kg (3,100 lb), it was one of the largest glyptodonts to have ever lived. Though glyptodonts were quadrupeds, large ones like Doedicurus may have been able to stand on two legs like other xenarthrans. It notably sported a spiked tail club, which may have weighed 40 or 65 kg (88 or 143 lb) in life, and it may have swung this in defense against predators or in fights with other Doedicurus at speeds of perhaps 11 m/s (40 km/h; 25 mph).

Doedicurus was likely a grazer, but its teeth and mouth, like those of other glyptodonts, seem unable to have chewed grass effectively, which may indicate a slow metabolism. Doedicurus existed during the Pleistocene. Before this, South America had been isolated from the rest of the world, but the formation of the Isthmus of Panama allowed North American fauna to invade South America in the Great American Interchange, including big cats, bears, proboscideans, camelids, and horses. Doedicurus seems to have inhabited the relatively cold and humid Chaco-Pampean plains of northeastern Patagonia. It may have been the latest-surviving glyptodont, with remains suggested to date to 8,000–7,000 years ago during the middle Holocene, though these dates have been questioned. It may have gone extinct due to some combination of human hunting and climate change.

Taxonomy and evolution

[edit]
Doedicurus fossil in Brazil

The animal was first described by British paleontologist Richard Owen in 1847, the fifth glyptodont species described after Glyptodon clavipes, G. reticulatus, G. tuberculatus (now Panochthus), and G. ornatus (now Neosclerocalyptus). The type specimen was a partial tail which seemed to indicate a massive club, so Owen assigned the name G. clavicaudatus (the species name deriving from Latin meaning "club-tailed"). In 1874, German zoologist Hermann Burmeister classified it into its own genus as Doedicurus clavicaudatus, the genus name deriving from Ancient Greek δοῖδυξ "pestle" and oυρά "tail".[2]

Doedicurus was a glyptodont, most closely related to modern armadillos, thus a member of the superorder Xenarthra (along with sloths and anteaters) endemic to South America. Glyptodonts were classified into the family Glyptodontidae. Through the 19th and 20th centuries, new species and genera were described on the basis of minute or debatable differences, and the total diversity had reached 65 genera with 220 species.[3][4] In 1997, Malcolm C. McKenna and Susan K. Bell in their comprehensive revision of mammal taxonomy assigned all glyptodonts to the superfamily Glyptodontoidea, which included the families Pampatheriidae, Palaeopeltidae, and Glyptodontidae. Doedicurus was classified into Glyptodontidae in the subfamily Doedicurinae, alongside Eleutherocercus, Prodaedicurus, Comaphorus, Castellanosia, Xiphuroides, Daedicuroides, and Plaxhaplous.[5]

In 2016, ancient DNA was extracted from the carapace of a 12,000 year old Doedicurus specimen, and a nearly complete mitochondrial genome was reconstructed (76x coverage). Comparisons with those of modern armadillos revealed that glyptodonts diverged from tolypeutine and chlamyphorine armadillos approximately 34 million years ago in the late Eocene.[6][7] This prompted moving them from their own family, Glyptodontidae, to the subfamily Glyptodontinae within the extant Chlamyphoridae.[7] Based on this and the fossil record, glyptodonts would have evolved their characteristic shape and large size (gigantism) quite rapidly, possibly in response to the cooling, drying climate and expansion of open savannas.[6]

Cladogram of glyptodonts after Barasoain et al. 2022:[8]

Glyptodonts

Description

[edit]
Skull of Doedicurus from the front and right

Teeth

[edit]

Glyptodonts have hypsodont dentition, and the teeth also never stopped growing in life, so they are assumed to have fed predominantly on grass. However, they have unusual teeth compared to those of other mammals, featuring three lobes (except for the first two teeth, which have the usual two lobes). The tooth core is made of osteodentine, which is surrounded by a layer of orthodentine, and capped off by cementum instead of enamel. Some of the orthodentine became exposed over time as the cementum was worn away, producing a file-like surface to better process grass, similar to the hard dentine and cementum eventually protruding through the enamel of horse and cattle teeth.[9]

Glyptodonts have eight cheek teeth, and, like bovines, completely lack canines and incisors. Nonetheless, Doedicurus and other large glyptodonts appear to have had a markedly reduced gape, and the teeth have relatively small grinding surfaces, which indicate they were incapable of thoroughly chewing food. This may have been caused by the increasing size of the muscles to support the head and neck as the armor in this region became heavier and heavier, displacing the chewing muscles to less mechanically efficient positions. This is odd as thoroughly grinding grass is very important in maximizing nutrient absorption, and such inefficiency could indicate a slow metabolism. The apparently strong tongue may have partially reworked and pushed incompletely chewed food into the stomach or possibly a cecum.[9]

Body

[edit]
1913 reconstruction of Doedicurus and Glyptodon by Robert Bruce Horsfall

Doedicurus, on average, had a height of 1.5 m (4 ft 11 in), an overall length of around 3.6 m (12 ft),[10] and a weight of about 1,400 kg (3,100 lb), but an 8,000 year old specimen was calculated to have been 1,900 to 2,370 kg (4,190 to 5,220 lb), which could indicate Doedicurus grew much larger in the Holocene just before going extinct. This makes it one of the heaviest glyptodont species known, alongside Pa. intermedius, Pa. subintermedius, G. munizi, G. elongatus, and Plaxhaplous.[11] Doedicurus had a huge domed carapace that was made of many tightly fitted scutes, somewhat similar to that of its modern-day relative, the armadillos. The carapace was firmly anchored to the pelvis but loose around the shoulder. The carapace featured a dome, which may have been a fat-filled space, similar to a camel's hump.[12]

Tail

[edit]
A museum display showing the club at the end of the tail of Doedicurus

Its tail was surrounded by a flexible sheath of bone, and features shallow depressions along the edges, which may have been spikes in life.[12] The tail club could reach up to 1 m (3 ft 3 in) in length. Assuming a maximum strain of 0.25 (typical for vertebrates), stress exertion of 3x105 N m−2 (based on what is measured in the muscles of recently dead animals), and a volume of 100 L (22 imp gal; 26 US gal) for the tail muscle, Doedicurus may have been capable of delivering a blow of about 2.5 kJ (1,800 ft⋅lbf), though this may be an underestimate. Assuming a total mass of 40 kg (88 lb) in life for the club, this would equate to a maximum velocity of 11 m/s (40 km/h; 25 mph).[a][13] The tip of the tail may have reached 15 m/s (54 km/h; 34 mph). Assuming the club was 65 kg (143 lb) in life, the center of percussion (the point of impact on the club which would have exerted maximum force and minimized damage done to itself) would have been about 77 cm (2.5 ft) from the tip.[14]

Limbs

[edit]

As with other glyptodonts and xenarthrans, the center of mass appears to have been closer to the hind limbs than the forelimbs, indicating the vast majority and in some instance nearly all of the weight was borne on the hind limbs. This might show that glyptodonts, when their weight was displaced farther tailwards, could stand on two legs, though not necessarily maintaining an erect posture.[15][16] Modern xenarthrans commonly stand up in this fashion for defense, to observe, or to feed. Strong hind limbs would also have been important while accelerating the tail club and maintaining posture after getting hit.[16]

Nonetheless, glyptodonts also had powerful forearms. Because the forelimbs did not need to bear weight, it is possible that they dug much like modern armadillos, but the carapace and spine were much more rigid than those of armadillos. Alternatively, the forelimbs may have been engaged while rotating the body to swing the tail club.[16] Because earlier, smaller glyptodonts do not share similar weight distribution, the adoption of a bipedal stance may be related to increasing body size.[15][16]

Paleobiology

[edit]
The depressions on the tail club may have supported spikes

Doedicurus is thought to have been a grazer, and the high degree of hypsodonty and the breadth of the muzzle could indicate it was a bulk feeder.[17]

Glyptodont species notably increased in size after the Great American Interchange and immigration of new mammals into the previously isolated continent, with some of the largest glyptodonts, including Doedicurus, being known from the Pleistocene following this event. This may indicate increasing gigantism was an anti-predator adaptation in response to new mammalian carnivores.[6][11] There is evidence that Smilodon preyed upon Doedicurus.[18] In the Late Pleistocene and Holocene, size dramatically increased, perhaps in response to a cooling climate (which would have reduced its metabolism, causing an increase in size) or to defend against recently immigrating human hunters.[11]

However, the increase in armor and body mass might instead have been driven primarily by intraspecific competition in fights between Doedicurus individuals. If so, males would probably have been much more heavily built than females. Evidence of carapace fractures consistent with the force calculated for a tail club impact has been noted. The eyesight of Doedicurus may have been too poor for use of the tail club in predator defense.[12] The accuracy needed to strike a target with the club may only have been attainable with a stationary adversary, further supporting use in ritualistic combat rather than predator defense.[14]

Paleoecology

[edit]
The contemporary glyptodonts Glyptodon (yellow), Doedicurus (grey), and Panochthus (brown)

Following the formation of the Isthmus of Panama about 2.8 mya, South America's long period of isolation from the rest of the world ended and it was invaded by North American species as part of the Great American Interchange. Glyptodonts would have encountered new large mammalian carnivores such as the short-faced bear, saber toothed cats such as Smilodon and Homotherium, and the jaguar.[6][11] These had replaced the former endemic top predators: sebecid crocodylomorphs, madtsoiid snakes, terror birds, and the marsupial-like sparassodonts.[19] In addition to bears and cats, other immigrants to South America include horses, camels, deer, elephants (gomphotheres), tapirs, and New World rats. Native Pleistocene South American mammals include xenarthrans, such as glyptodonts, ground sloths, anteaters, and armadillos; as well as marsupials; the large toxodonts; and native rodents such as New World porcupines.[20]

Doedicurus is among the most commonly identified glyptodont genera of the Pleistocene, alongside Glyptodon, Neosclerocalyptus, Hoplophorus, Neuryurus, and Panochthus.[21] Glyptodonts generally inhabited open grassland with temperate to cool climate.[11] It appears to have been restricted to the cold, humid Chaco-Pampean plains of northeastern Patagonia.[17] Fossils have been found in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay.[22] The Pleistocene was characterized by frequent cold/warm cycles (glacials and interglacials), and sequences in Patagonia record over 15 glacial cycles, indicated by the switch from loess (deposited during glacials) to paleosol (during interglacials).[23] Glacials may have seen an increase in savanna, whereas interglacials (including modern day) are characterized by an expansion of rainforests.[20]

Extinction

[edit]

Doedicurus may be the most recent-surviving glyptodont species, with the latest fossils suggested to date to about 8,000–7,000 years ago in the Pampas, though a G. claviceps specimen was contentiously dated to about 4,300 years ago.[11][24] A 2019 study suggested that these Holocene ages at Pampean sites are underestimates due to contamination by humic acids, more likely dating to the Late Pleistocene.[25]

Doedicurus, like many other megafauna around the world, went extinct in the Quaternary extinction event, which may have been caused by some combination of overhunting by humans and climate change. A butchered specimen dating to 7,500–7,000 years ago in this region on the edge of a swamp at the La Moderna site in Argentina shows that Doedicurus was hunted by the first human settlers of South America and coexisted with them for several thousand years. Because many other South American megafauna also seem to have persisted for some time following the close of the Pleistocene in this region—such as the armadillo Eutatus, the giant ground sloth Megatherium, and the dog Dusicyon avus—the Pampas may have been a refuge zone provided the dating is correct, providing productive grassland which was likely in decline elsewhere on the continent.[26] Their final demise may have been brought on or simply accelerated by human hunting.[27] However, a later study suggested that the late date for Doedicurus at La Moderna as well as other supposedly Holocene dated megafauna at other Pampas sites was likely due to contamination or other errors, casting doubt on their Holocene survival.[28]

See also

[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Doedicurus.

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Doedicurus

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Doedicurus clavicaudatus was an extinct species of giant , a member of the family Glyptodontidae within the order and superorder , characterized by its massive, armored body and club-shaped tail, closely related to modern . This herbivorous , reaching lengths of up to 4 meters and weights of approximately 1,500 to 2,400 kilograms, roamed the open grasslands and of during the epoch, from approximately 780,000 to roughly 10,000 years ago. Its most distinctive feature was the caudal tube of the tail, enlarged into a heavy, mace-like club armed with sharp osteoderms, likely used for intraspecific combat among males rather than solely for defense against predators. Molecular phylogenetic analyses, including from a 12,000-year-old specimen, confirm that glyptodonts like Doedicurus evolved from Eocene armadillos and represent a deeply nested lineage within the armadillo , diverging around 35 million years ago. The species became extinct at the end of the Pleistocene, potentially influenced by and human hunting, with evidence of interactions between early South American humans and glyptodonts dating to around 13,000–16,000 years ago.

Discovery and Naming

Initial Finds

The first fossils attributed to Doedicurus were collected in the early 19th century from the Argentine Pampas, particularly in Buenos Aires Province, where local gauchos and European explorers gathered surface-exposed bones amid the vast grasslands. These early discoveries often involved fragmented armored plates and limb bones unearthed during routine activities like herding cattle, reflecting the region's rich Pleistocene deposits that preserved megafaunal remains. Gauchos, familiar with the terrain, played a key role in identifying and initially excavating these specimens, which were then shared with visiting naturalists. Initial interpretations of these fossils were marked by confusion, with many viewing them as remains of oversized modern armadillos or even fantastical beasts due to their bizarre, heavily ossified structures. During the 1830s voyage of , encountered such fragments in , sketching them in detail and shipping samples to for analysis, where they contributed to broader discussions on extinct South American fauna. His reports highlighted the unexpected scale of these armored relics, initially baffling contemporaries who struggled to classify them beyond superficial resemblances to living xenarthrans. Specific sites, including Punta Alta along the coast of , yielded partial skeletons as early as 1832, when Darwin himself excavated mammal bones from coastal cliffs, including glyptodont-like armor. By the 1840s, the Luján Formation inland near the Luján River produced additional partial remains through surface collection, as erosion exposed bones in riverbanks and floodplains, drawing further attention from collectors. Early paleontologist Alcide d'Orbigny significantly advanced documentation of these finds during his 1826–1833 travels across , systematically describing surface-collected bones from the as part of the "terrains pampéens" and emphasizing their geological context in reports that influenced European scholarship. These efforts laid groundwork for later taxonomic revisions that formally identified Doedicurus among the glyptodonts.

Type Specimen and Description

The of Doedicurus clavicaudatus consists of a partial skeleton, including portions of the and , originally described by British paleontologist in 1847 as Glyptodon clavicaudatus. This type material, cataloged as BMNH M. 3615 in the Natural History Museum, London, comprises the extremity of the caudal sheath with movable rings and a club-like terminal expansion covered in coarse tubercles and radiate-sculptured disks. The specimen originates from Pleistocene deposits near , , and represents one of the earliest documented remains sent to Europe for study. In 1874, German zoologist reassigned the species to its own genus, Doedicurus, within the family Glyptodontidae, recognizing its distinct morphology from other glyptodonts like Glyptodon. The genus name derives from the δοῖδυξ (doïdix, "pestle") and οὐρά (oura, "tail"), referring to the distinctive clubbed tail structure. Detailed measurements of the indicate a approximately 1.5 meters in length, highlighting the animal's massive build despite the incomplete nature of the remains. Early descriptions faced significant challenges due to the fragmented condition of the fossils, which lacked associated skull or limb elements, leading to initial uncertainties in reconstructing the full anatomy. Complete skeletons were not available until the 20th century, when additional discoveries in Argentina provided more comprehensive material for comparison and refined the understanding of D. clavicaudatus based on the original type.

Taxonomy and Phylogeny

Classification

Doedicurus is an extinct of placental mammals within the superorder , order , and family . The is monotypic, comprising a single , D. clavicaudatus, originally described by in 1847 as Glyptodon clavicaudatus based on tail fragments from Pleistocene deposits in , . In 1874, erected the Doedicurus to accommodate the , recognizing its distinct morphology, with the generic name deriving from Greek words meaning "pestle-tailed." Historically, Doedicurus and other glyptodonts were classified in the separate family Glyptodontidae, considered a basal or stem-group lineage of distinct from s. This view persisted until 2016, when analysis of a Doedicurus fragment (dated to approximately 12,000 years ago) revealed that glyptodonts form a deeply nested within the crown-group, specifically as the extinct subfamily Glyptodontinae of . This merger resolved long-standing debates on xenarthran relationships, supported by phylogenetic reconstructions showing glyptodonts diverging from Eocene ancestors around 35 million years ago. Within Glyptodontinae, Doedicurus is diagnosed by its unique tail morphology, featuring a rigid caudal sheath formed by fused dermal and terminating in a massive, spiked club unlike the flexible, unclubbed tails of contemporaries like . This club, potentially weighing up to 65 kg, consists of enlarged, depressed osteoderms with rough surfaces indicative of horny spikes, adaptations that distinguish Doedicurus as the largest and most specialized member of the subfamily Doedicurinae.

Evolutionary Relationships

The phylogenetic position of Doedicurus within the order has been clarified through both molecular and morphological evidence, establishing it as part of a monophyletic group of specialized s known as glyptodonts. In 2016, the first complete mitochondrial genome sequencing from a Doedicurus specimen confirmed that glyptodonts represent a deeply nested within the crown group ( sensu lato), diverging from their closest living relatives approximately 35 million years ago during the . This molecular dating aligns closely with the earliest fossil records of glyptodonts, supporting their origin as a distinct evolutionary lineage within rather than a separate group. Recent cladistic analyses have refined the specific relationships of Doedicurus among glyptodonts and its embedding within extant armadillos, with Glyptodontinae (including Doedicurus) positioned as the sister taxon to the comprising the modern subfamilies Tolypeutinae and Chlamyphorinae, the latter including enigmatic species like the (Chlamyphorus truncatus). This overall placement is based on molecular phylogenetic evidence, while a comprehensive morphological phylogeny of late Doedicurinae integrates cranial, dental, and postcranial characters to resolve intra-glyptodont relationships. Key synapomorphies supporting the close affinity of glyptodonts, including Doedicurus, to Chlamyphorinae and Tolypeutinae include an extensively ossified formed by fused osteoderms and , rootless teeth adapted for abrasive herbivory—features that distinguish from other xenarthrans but show specialized elaboration in this clade. There is no phylogenetic evidence linking Doedicurus or glyptodonts closely to other Pleistocene such as (Folivora), which belong to a separate pilosan lineage within ; instead, glyptodonts remain isolated as a derived, endemic of armadillos with no shared derived traits beyond the broad xenarthran characteristics like xenarthrous vertebrae. This isolation underscores the glyptodonts' unique evolutionary trajectory, driven by adaptations to open habitats in , without convergence toward sloth-like arboreal or folivorous specializations.

Physical Description

Overall Morphology

Doedicurus clavicaudatus was one of the largest glyptodonts, reaching a total body length of approximately 4 meters and a shoulder height of about 1.5 meters. Its estimated body mass ranged from 1,900 to 2,400 kilograms, comparable in bulk to a female (Loxodonta africana) but with a much lower-slung posture due to its shorter limbs and armored build. This substantial size contributed to its overall proportions, which emphasized a compact, heavily protected form adapted for survival in predator-rich environments. The body was dominated by a domed, rigid that covered the dorsal surface from the to the , composed of numerous fused osteoderms forming a continuous bony up to 2.5 centimeters thick. This armored structure, along with a disarticulated ventral armor of similar osteoderms, enclosed much of the , giving Doedicurus a tank-like appearance optimized for defense. The head was relatively small and featured a short, deep with a compact , further accentuating the body's low profile and fortified design. Overall, these morphological traits reflect an evolutionary emphasis on over mobility, with the robust frame and extensive armor providing formidable barriers against predators like large carnivorans.

Armor and Tail Club

The of Doedicurus consisted of a rigid, dome-shaped structure formed by fused osteoderms that extended from the neck to the , providing comprehensive dorsal protection. These osteoderms were polygonal, often hexagonal in shape, and tightly interlocked to create an immovable armor, contrasting with the flexible, banded s of modern armadillos that allow for mobility. Biomechanical analyses indicate that this fused rendered the carapace highly resistant to impacts, akin to a robust defensive shield capable of withstanding significant force. The tail of Doedicurus featured a specialized rigid caudal sheath, measuring over 1 meter in length, formed by co-ossified osteoderms that stiffened the distal portion for weaponized function. This sheath culminated in an expanded club-like tip, likely adorned with keratinous spikes positioned over depressed discs, enhancing its utility as a striking tool. Biomechanical models estimate that the club could achieve tip speeds of up to 15 m/s during swings, generating substantial for defense. Fossil evidence supports a defensive role for these structures, including healed fractures observed on some Doedicurus carapaces, consistent with impacts from conspecific tail clubs or predator attacks. Such injuries, showing signs of remodeling, suggest intraspecific or against threats, with the tail club's design optimizing force delivery near its center of percussion.

Limbs and Dentition

The limbs of Doedicurus were robustly constructed to support its enormous body mass, estimated at up to 2,400 kg, with adaptations reflecting a quadrupedal supplemented by specialized behaviors. The forelimbs featured strong humeri and robust manual phalanges ending in large, curved claws, which facilitated digging into soil for or burrowing, akin to the adaptations seen in modern armadillos. These forelimb proportions, including a high humerofemoral index, indicate they were primarily involved in weight-bearing and manipulation rather than high-speed locomotion. In contrast, the hind limbs were particularly powerful, with sturdy femora exhibiting higher strength indicators than the humeri, suggesting they bore the majority of the body weight during movement. This configuration, combined with a posteriorly positioned , implies that Doedicurus could adopt an occasional bipedal stance, potentially for swinging its heavy in defense or reaching higher vegetation for . limb proportions in Doedicurus and related large glyptodonts correlate strongly with increasing body size, underscoring evolutionary reinforcement for stability and load-bearing in these posterior elements. The of Doedicurus was highly specialized for processing tough, fibrous , consisting of eight cheek teeth per side that were cylindrical, ever-growing (hypselodont), and arranged in a single row without distinct incisors or canines. These teeth lacked true enamel, instead comprising layers of cement, orthodentine, and a central osteodentine core that provided and resistance to , forming a three-lobed structure in most molars for efficient grinding. Occlusion was close along the row, with transverse crests developing from that facilitated shearing of plant material, though lateral jaw movement was limited, emphasizing a primarily vertical masticatory action. Jaw mechanics in Doedicurus featured a vertically oriented craniomandibular joint positioned high above the tooth row, enabling both up-down and slight side-to-side motion but with a relatively weak bite force suited to bulk ingestion rather than intensive mastication. The large, horizontally oriented masseter and pterygoid muscles provided the primary force for closing the jaws, while the fused mandibular symphysis and extended rostrum distributed stresses during feeding, allowing the animal to crop and swallow large quantities of low-quality forage with minimal chewing. Fossil evidence from tooth wear patterns reveals heavy abrasion on the occlusal surfaces, with prominent osteodentine crests and minimal striae, indicating a diet dominated by gritty, abrasive plants such as grasses that continuously eroded the ever-growing dentition.

Evolutionary History

Origins and Divergence

Glyptodonts, the group to which Doedicurus belongs, originated in during the late Eocene to early , approximately 36–38 million years ago (Ma), evolving from basal armadillos following the isolation of the continent after the breakup of . This isolation, completed around 34 Ma with the opening of the , allowed for the independent radiation of xenarthrans, including early glyptodonts like those in the subfamily Propalaehoplophorinae, which represent the earliest known fossils of the group. These ancestral forms were small, lightly armored herbivores adapted to forested environments with limited large-bodied predators, primarily consisting of small carnivores. The divergence of glyptodonts from the family (modern armadillos) occurred approximately 35 ± 3 Ma, near the Eocene– boundary, as supported by molecular dating and evidence. This split marked a key event in cingulate evolution, with glyptodonts developing specialized dermal armor and a fused , likely as an to the relatively low predation pressures in isolated , where mammalian carnivore diversity was sparse compared to other continents. from Doedicurus confirms this close relationship, tracing glyptodont origins to Eocene armadillos that underwent rapid morphological specialization. Following the Miocene, glyptodonts underwent a significant , with body sizes increasing to megafaunal proportions by the (around 5–2.5 Ma), driven by shifts in vegetation toward more open grasslands across . This size escalation, from early forms weighing tens of kilograms to late giants exceeding 1,000 kg, reflected adaptations to abundant low-quality forage in expanding savanna-like habitats. Throughout their history, glyptodonts remained fully endemic to , with no pre-interchange fossils documented in prior to the Great American Biotic Interchange around 3 Ma.

Temporal and Geographic Range

Doedicurus inhabited from the late Pliocene to the and possibly into the early , with the earliest fossils dating to approximately 3.6 million years ago and the youngest reliable records around 10,000 years ago, though some debated dates suggest survival until 7,000–8,000 years ago during human occupation of the region. The genus was primarily distributed across the and Chaco regions, with fossils documented in (particularly ), Uruguay, and southern . Key fossil-bearing formations include the Chapadmalal and Monte Hermoso in the late , and the Luján Formation in the Pleistocene, where remains have been recovered from fluvial and alluvial deposits near sites like Arroyo Seco Creek. Following the Great American Biotic Interchange around 3 million years ago, Doedicurus exhibited limited northward expansion within , remaining confined to southern latitudes without records in Central or , unlike some other genera. Fossils of Doedicurus are relatively abundant in riverine and open depositional environments of the , such as cutbanks along the Salado and Luján rivers, suggesting a preference for habitats where carcasses accumulated in waterlogged settings.

Paleobiology

Diet and Feeding Mechanisms

Doedicurus was a strictly herbivorous bulk feeder in open plains environments. Dental mesowear and microwear analyses of its teeth reveal patterns consistent with consumption of abrasive , including high proportions of coarse grasses, indicating a diet dominated by ground-level cropping rather than selective . Its robust, , featuring cylindrical teeth without enamel, facilitated efficient grinding of such vegetation through transverse shearing motions. Stable carbon isotope analysis (δ¹³C) from tooth enamel at sites like Arroyo del Vizcaíno in shows that Doedicurus consumed a mixed diet of C₃ and C₄ , with a predominance of C₃ vegetation (δ¹³C values around -10.5‰), reflecting open, relatively dry grasslands without significant input from tree browsing. Broader evidence from glyptodontids supports a grazer strategy focused on low-growing herbaceous . As a large xenarthran, Doedicurus exhibited a low metabolic rate, enabling slow digestion of low-quality forage through in an enlarged and colon, analogous to modern hindgut-fermenting herbivores like rhinoceroses. This physiological allowed efficient extraction of nutrients from fibrous, abrasive diets, supporting its massive body size of up to 2,400 kg while minimizing energy demands.

Locomotion and Behavior

Doedicurus, like other glyptodonts, was primarily quadrupedal in its locomotion, with limb proportions indicating that the hindlimbs bore the majority of the body weight during movement. The robust femora suggest these limbs were adapted for supporting substantial loads, potentially allowing for brief bipedal rearing to pivot the body or achieve a vigilant posture, which may have facilitated defensive maneuvers involving the tail. Forelimbs, while strong, appear to have played a secondary role in propulsion and maneuvering, consistent with a fossorial lifestyle inferred from humerus morphology in xenarthrans. Behavioral inferences for Doedicurus center on the function of its prominent , a structure formed by fused osteoderms and vertebrae that enabled powerful lateral strikes. Biomechanical analyses indicate the club's center of percussion was positioned near the distal spikes, optimizing impact force for intraspecific , such as male-male rivalry over mates or territory. Evidence from pathologies, including healed fractures on carapaces attributed to tail blows, supports this combative use, with larger individuals like Doedicurus likely engaging in ritualized confrontations that inflicted without fatal injury. The may also have served in predator deterrence by delivering high-energy impacts in static defensive scenarios, though its precision requirements would limit effectiveness against agile attackers. Defensively, Doedicurus relied on its extensive, domed of interlocking osteoderms, which provided comprehensive armor over the head, body, and much of the tail, enhancing protection beyond that seen in modern armadillos. Unlike smaller armadillos capable of into a ball, the fixed and rigid nature of the glyptodont's armor precluded full retraction, instead emphasizing passive shielding combined with active tail swings during threats. remains poorly understood, but the prevalence of combat-related injuries suggests interactions were sporadic, potentially involving solitary individuals or small aggregations during breeding.

Paleoecology

Habitats and Distribution

Doedicurus primarily inhabited open grasslands and savannas within the ecoregion of eastern , spanning parts of modern-day , , and southeastern , under a temperate to subtropical climate regime. These environments featured expansive steppes suited to large grazing herbivores, with the species showing a strong preference for low-lying plains rather than elevated or densely vegetated areas. Seasonal wetlands were integral to its , providing access to sources amid the predominantly dry landscapes. Fossil concentrations of Doedicurus are notably high in fluvial and aeolian deposits across the Pampean region, such as those in the Luján Formation (of fluvial-lacustrine origin) and the La Postrera Formation (eolian and sands), suggesting a behavioral affinity for riverine areas that offered reliable water and foraging opportunities. Sites along ancient river systems, like the Río Salado, yield abundant remains, indicating that these dynamic depositional environments preserved the species' occurrences effectively during the . The species thrived amid the glacial-interglacial cycles of the Pleistocene, particularly during arid phases that expanded open biomes like savannas and grasslands in the , favoring grazer adaptations. These cycles drove alternations between dry, steppe-dominated conditions (intensified around 16,000–12,000 years ) and more humid intervals, with Doedicurus persisting in the former. Lacking morphological features for high-altitude locomotion or arboreal navigation, its distribution was constrained by barriers such as the Andean cordillera, confining it to lowland eastern plains without evidence of montane or forested incursions.

Interactions with Fauna

Doedicurus, as a large glyptodont, faced predation pressure primarily from North American carnivores that arrived during the Great American Biotic Interchange, including the saber-toothed cat Smilodon populator and the short-faced bear Arctotherium angustidens. Isotopic analyses from Pampean region sites indicate that Smilodon consumed large herbivores in open environments, likely including glyptodonts such as Doedicurus, though direct fossil evidence like bite marks remains scarce. These predators probably targeted juveniles, which lacked fully developed armor, while adults were largely protected by their robust carapace and tail club, structures that deterred most attacks. Competition for resources occurred among Doedicurus and other grazers, such as equids ( principale and ) and camelids (Paleolama sp.), in South American open habitats. Stable carbon isotope data from the Arroyo del Vizcaíño site (~32 ka) reveal niche partitioning, with Doedicurus exhibiting a flexible diet incorporating a mix of C₃ and C₄ , while equids specialized as grazers on C₄ grasses and camelids leaned toward on C₃ . This differentiation minimized direct overlap, allowing Doedicurus to focus on bulk feeding of tougher, low-quality inaccessible to smaller competitors. Symbiotic relationships likely involved Doedicurus in ecosystem engineering through dung-mediated , benefiting by promoting the spread of large-seeded adapted to megafaunal guts. As one of 27 extinct megaherbivores (>1,000 kg) in the , Doedicurus contributed to long-distance dispersal, enhancing diversity in Pleistocene before its ~13–7 ka. No direct evidence exists for on Doedicurus, though general xenarthran fossils show rare traces potentially from arthropods. The Great American Biotic Interchange, beginning around 2.8 Ma, introduced an influx of North American carnivores that heightened predation pressure on South American natives like Doedicurus, driving evolutionary selection for enhanced armor. Accessory protective structures, such as spine-like osteoderms on the neck and abdomen, appeared in glyptodonts post-interchange, specifically countering threats from large felids and ursids. This adaptive response underscores how biotic interchange reshaped herbivore defenses across the continent.

Extinction

Timing of Disappearance

Doedicurus clavicaudatus, the iconic armored of the Pleistocene, disappeared during the , with the last reliable radiocarbon-dated fossils indicating survival until approximately 11,000 to 10,000 years ago in South American deposits. These records align with the terminal Pleistocene megafaunal assemblages in the and other regions, where Doedicurus remains are consistently absent from post-10,000 layers. Some early radiocarbon dates suggested possible persistence, with bones from the La Moderna site in yielding ages around 8,000 to 7,000 years , implying survival into the mid-. However, these dates have been contested due to methodological issues, particularly affecting preservation. A 2019 study reanalyzing megafaunal samples from the Argentine using advanced XAD-2 purification techniques demonstrated that prior dates for like the giant Megatherium americanum—and by extension, regional glyptodonts such as Doedicurus—stemmed from humate infiltration, yielding revised ages (e.g., ~10,655 ± 35 ¹⁴C years , calibrated to ~12,600 cal ). This has led to a that Doedicurus did not survive into the , with all verified records confined to the . Paleontological evidence further reveals an abrupt faunal turnover in South American ecosystems around the chronozone (~12,900–11,700 years BP), during which Doedicurus and other exhibited a sharp decline in abundance. Summed probability distributions of radiocarbon dates indicate a significant drop in Doedicurus occurrences starting at ~12.9 ka cal BP, culminating in near-total absence by ~10.9 ka cal BP, without subsequent recovery in post-glacial strata. This pattern positions Doedicurus within the widespread late megafaunal die-off, which eliminated over 80% of South America's large-bodied vertebrates by the Pleistocene-Holocene transition.

Causes and Human Role

The extinction of Doedicurus occurred as part of the broader megafaunal in , which eliminated approximately 83% of large genera around 12,000 to 10,000 years ago. This event was driven by a combination of climatic shifts, including increasing that reduced available grasslands and open habitats essential for grazing megafauna like Doedicurus, and human overhunting by early Paleoindian groups using fishtail and Clovis-like projectile points. The intensified during the transition to the , leading to habitat contraction and resource scarcity that disproportionately affected large herbivores. Compounding these pressures, Doedicurus and similar giant xenarthrans exhibited low reproductive rates, typically producing around one offspring per female per year, which limited population recovery and heightened vulnerability to perturbations. Species with such slow life histories, common among exceeding 44 kg in body mass, faced probabilities exceeding 50% under intensified and environmental stress, as non-arboreal herbivores like glyptodonts lacked refugia to buffer declines. Recent evidence underscores involvement, with a revealing anthropogenic cut marks on bones of the Neosclerocalyptus from , dated to approximately 21,000 calibrated years before present, indicating butchery by stone tools and suggesting overlap with pre-Clovis populations in the . This predates the main pulse but aligns with expanding strategies targeting . Complementing this, a 2025 study of archaeological sites in southern demonstrates that extinct giant xenarthrans, including , comprised the dominant prey in forager diets, accounting for over 70% of faunal remains before 11,600 years ago and highlighting overhunting as a key subsistence driver. No single factor dominated the extinction; instead, synergistic effects amplified vulnerability, including triggered by the cascading collapse of megafaunal communities, which altered vegetation dynamics and reduced forage quality for survivors like Doedicurus. Human predation interacted with climatic drying to shrink open habitats, creating a feedback loop where megafaunal losses further fragmented ecosystems and impeded recovery.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982216001214
  2. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2022/november/giant-glyptodont-armadillos-may-have-been-hunted-early-south-americans.html
  3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22506-4
  4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0895981121000365
  5. https://www.amnh.org/explore/news-blogs/glyptodont-armadillo-evolution
  6. https://opencurriculum.org/5403/darwin-and-the-theory-of-evolution/
  7. http://darwin-online.org.uk/
  8. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2018/april/giant-fossil-mammals-inspired-charles-darwin-theory-evolution.html
  9. https://darwin-online.org.uk/converted/Ancillary/2009_Revista_A194.html
  10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277356563_Alcide_D%27Orbigny_in_Argentina_the_Beginning_of_Stratigraphical_Studies_and_Theories_on_the_Origin_of_the_Pampean_Sediments
  11. https://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app66/app008242020.html
  12. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Catalogue_of_the_fossil_Mammalia_in_the_British_museum_%28Natural_History%29_%28IA_catalogueoffossi05britiala%29.pdf
  13. https://www.onelook.com/?loc=dmapirel&w=doedicurus
  14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/datasets/taxonomy/1811494/
  15. https://www.gbif.org/species/9361602
  16. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26906483/
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2825778/
  18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2022.2087521
  19. https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/bitstream/handle/11336/48521/CONICET_Digital_Nro.3987df39-5ee3-41b1-b9ea-8fb4f155ec4c_A.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
  20. https://sjpp.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13358-023-00280-8
  21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631068317300453
  22. https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.24093
  23. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/early-miocene-paleobiology-in-patagonia/paleobiology-of-santacrucian-glyptodonts-and-armadillos-xenarthra-cingulata/58CB0068C890DBBD5F3E7AA03E423905
  24. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1502-3931.2010.00228.x
  25. https://www.app.pan.pl/archive/published/app46/app46-219.pdf
  26. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159152857.pdf
  27. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921818114001507
  28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27158910/
  29. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2021.2521
  30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385392180_New_remains_of_Doedicurini_Cingulata_Glyptodontidae_from_the_latest_Plioceneearliest_Pleistocene_of_the_Pampean_Region_Argentina_shed_light_on_the_morphological_evolution_of_the_caudal_tube
  31. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01744.x
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379125003312
  33. https://www.mdpi.com/2571-550X/4/2/15
  34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302592275_Ancient_DNA_from_the_extinct_South_American_giant_glyptodont_Doedicurus_sp_Xenarthra_Glyptodontidae_reveals_that_glyptodonts_evolved_from_Eocene_armadillos
  35. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260850222_New_Late_Pleistocene_megafaunal_assemblage_with_well-supported_chronology_from_the_Pampas_of_southern_South_America
  36. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aau4546
  37. https://escholarship.org/content/qt05x7c9hw/qt05x7c9hw.pdf
  38. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316009519_Tooth_wear_and_diets_of_extant_and_fossil_xenarthrans_Mammalia_Xenarthra_-_Applying_a_new_mesowear_approach
  39. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373549143_A_window_into_a_late_Pleistocene_megafauna_community_Stable_isotopes_show_niche_partitioning_among_herbivorous_taxa_at_the_Arroyo_del_Vizcaino_site_Uruguay
  40. https://biocienciasims.ufba.br/sites/biocienciasims.ufba.br/files/_review_of_feeding_ecology_data_oflate_pleistocene_mammalian_herbivores_from_south_america_and_discussions_on_niche_differentiation.pdf
  41. https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/bitstream/handle/11336/56592/CONICET_Digital_Nro.621e1334-ba79-4a24-8443-bd28a0be9fb7_A.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=n
  42. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2020.00139/full
  43. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031018215000899
  44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314352147_The_Great_American_Biotic_Interchange
  45. http://escholarship.ucop.edu/content/qt05x7c9hw/qt05x7c9hw.pdf
  46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annpal.2010.01.001
  47. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4743772/
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349702886_Damaged_armour_Ichnotaxonomy_and_paleoparasitology_of_bioerosion_lesions_in_osteoderms_of_Quaternary_extinct_armadillos
  49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226952108_The_Elusive_Evidence_The_Archeological_Record_of_the_South_American_Extinct_Megafauna
  50. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-4020-8793-6_8
  51. https://www.academia.edu/7234154/Timing_of_Quaternary_megafaunal_extinction_in_South_America_in_relation_to_human_arrival_and_climate_change
  52. https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/1056/1/johnson_1.pdf
  53. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0304956
  54. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adx2615
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226053205_Did_Humans_Cause_the_Late_Pleistocene-Early_Holocene_Mammalian_Extinctions_in_South_America_in_a_Context_of_Shrinking_Open_Areas
  56. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370308950_The_timing_and_ecological_consequences_of_Pleistocene_megafaunal_decline_in_the_eastern_Andes_of_Colombia
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.