dc.creatorTete, Pablo Vicente
dc.creatorD’ Elía, Guillermo
dc.creatorLanzone, Cecilia
dc.creatorOjeda, Agustina Alejandra
dc.creatorNovillo, Agustina
dc.creatorOjeda, Alejandro Alberto
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-25T12:33:20Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-31T15:58:13Z
dc.date.available2023-08-25T12:33:20Z
dc.date.available2023-08-31T15:58:13Z
dc.date.created2023-08-25T12:33:20Z
dc.date.issued2021-03-15
dc.identifierTeta, P.V., D’ Elía, G., Lanzone, C., Ojeda, A.A., Novillo, A. y Ojeda, R.A. (2021). A reappraisal of the species richness of Euneomys Coues 1874 (Rodentia, Cricetidae), with emendations of the type localities of Reithrodon fossor Thomas 1899 and Euneomys mordax Thomas 1912. Mammalia. Alemania : De Gruyter, 85 (4), 10 p.
dc.identifier0025-1461
dc.identifierN° 27041
dc.identifierA-CNyE-074
dc.identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12219/5091
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/8551387
dc.description.abstractThe genus Euneomys is mostly distributed in the open environments of the central and southern Andes, adjacent Patagonian steppes of Argentina and Chile, and in several islands of the Tierra del Fuego Archipelago. This genus includes three living species: E. chinchilloides, E. fossor, and E. mordax. Euneomys fossor is a poorly known species, with an uncertain geographic provenance and known from a single specimen, whose distinction from the other species of the genus has not been accurately assessed. Here, using qualitative and quantitative morphological evidence, plus published information about karyotypes and genetic variation, we evaluate the taxonomic status of E. fossor and E. noei, a nominal form usually considered a synonym of E. mordax. Based on multivariate analysis of cranial measurements and morphological discrete traits, we recognize two main morphotypes within Euneomys, one referable to E. chinchilloides (with dabbenei, petersoni, and ultimus as synonyms), and another including E. fossor, E. mordax, and E. noei. The recognition of two major groups within Euneomys is also supported by molecular and chromosomal data. By the principle of the priority, the names of E. chinchilloides and E. fossor applies for each one of these morphotypes. In addition, after discussing the pros and cons of replacing the name mordax by fossor, we emended the type localities of both forms.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherDe Gruyter
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/urn/https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/mammalia-2020-0157/html
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/hdl/http://hdl.handle.net/11336/160736
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2020-0157
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectAndes
dc.subjectEuneomys chinchilloides
dc.subjectSigmodontinae
dc.subjectSpecies limits taxonomy
dc.titleA reappraisal of the species richness of Euneomys Coues 1874 (Rodentia, Cricetidae), with emendations of the type localities of Reithrodon fossor Thomas 1899 and Euneomys mordax Thomas 1912
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución