Gazelle : The Palestinian Biological Bulletin (ISSN 0178 – 6288) . Number 134, February 2016, pp. 1-44. | Page 20

20

felt obliged to assign to Zeuglodon together with his original material. Gibbes
concluded that Dorudon were juvenile Zeuglodon and consequently withdrew his
new genus. He did however allow Louis Agassiz at Harvard to examine his
specimens, and the Swiss professor replied that these were neither teeth of a
juvenile nor those of Zeuglodon, but of a separate genus just as Gibbes had first
proposed (Wikipedia).

Studying a Dorudon atrox Whale Fossil at Wadi El-Hitan (Whales Valley), Al-Fayyum,
Al-Sahraa Al-Gharbiah (Western Desert), Egypt. Photo: Ola Mostafa Khalaf.
11.07.2012. https://www.flickr.com/photos/50022881@N00/15292228860/
Andrews (1906) described Prozeuglodon atrox (="Proto-Basilosaurus") based on a
nearly complete skull, a dentary, and three associated vertebrae presented to him
by the Geological Museum of Cairo. Kellogg (1936), however, realized that
Andrews' specimen was a juvenile, and, he assumed, the same species as
Zeuglodon isis, described by Andrews (1906). Kellogg also realized that the
generic name Zeuglodon was invalid and therefore recombined it Prozeuglodon
isis. Since then many specimens have been referred to Prozeuglodon atrox,
including virtually every part of the skeleton, and it has become obvious that it is
a separate genus, not a juvenile "Proto-Zeuglodon". Kellogg placed several of the
species of Zeuglodon described from Egypt in the early 20th century (including Z.
Gazelle : The Palestinian Biological Bulletin – Number 134 – February 2016