Published December 31, 1993 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Megadontomys Merriam 1898

Description

Megadontomys Merriam, 1898. Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 12:115.

TYPE SPECIES: Peromyscus thomasi Merriam, 1898.

COMMENTS: Peromyscine. Used variably as a genus until Osgood (1909) stabilized its taxonomic ranking as a subgenus of Peromyscus, and so followed by Hooper and Musser (1964b) and Hooper (1968b). Carleton (1980, 1989) viewed the relationships and differentiation of Megadontomys at the generic level (but see Rogers, 1983). Aspects of morphology studied by Carleton (1973, 1980), Hooper and Musser (1964b), and Linzey and Layne (1969, 1974). Karyological affinities evaluated by Rogers (1983), Rogers et al. (1984), and Stangl and Baker (1984b). Werbitsky and Kilpatrick (1987) reported relatively low levels of genetic similarity between the nominal forms.

Notes

Published as part of Guy G. Musser & Michael D. Carleton, 1993, Order Rodentia - Family Muridae, pp. 501-755 in Mammal Species of the World (2 nd Edition), Washington and London :Smithsonian Institution Press on page 707, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7353098

Files

Files (1.1 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:8b688a281a27b8ca51c971fcf955835f
1.1 kB Download

System files (9.6 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:05df461a2a890354161c3127bae9ce00
9.6 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Related works

Biodiversity

Scientific name authorship
Merriam
Kingdom
Animalia
Phylum
Chordata
Order
Rodentia
Family
Muridae
Genus
Megadontomys
Taxon rank
genus
Taxonomic concept label
Megadontomys Merriam, 1898 sec. Musser & Carleton, 1993

References

  • Osgood, W. H. 1909. Revision of the mice of the American genus Peromyscus. North American Fauna, 28: 1 - 285.
  • Hooper, E. T., and G. G. Musser. 1964 b. Notes on classification of the rodent genus Peromyscus. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 635: 1 - 13.
  • Hooper, E. T. 1968 b. Classification. Pp. 27 - 74, in Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia) (J. A. King, ed.). Special Publication, American Society of Mammalogists, 2: 1 - 593.
  • Carleton, M. D. 1980. Phylogenetic relationships in neotomine-peromyscine rodents (Muroidea) and a reappraisal of the dichotomy within New World Cricetinae. Miscellaneous Publications, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 157: 1 - 146.
  • Carleton, M. D. 1973. A survey of gross stomach morphology in New World Cricetinae (Rodentia, Muroidea), with comments on functional interpretations. Miscellaneous Publications, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 146: 1 - 43.
  • Linzey, A. V., and J. N. Layne. 1969. Comparative morphology of the male reproductive tract in the rodent genus Peromyscus (Muridae). American Museum Novitates, 2355: 1 - 47.
  • Linzey, A. V., and J. N. Layne. 1974. Comparative morphology of spermatozoa of the rodent genus Peromyscus (Muridae). American Museum Novitates, 2532: 1 - 20.
  • Stangl, F. B., Jr., and R. J. Baker. 1984 b. Evolutionary relationships in Peromyscus: Congruence in chromosomal, genic, and classical data sets. Journal of Mammalogy, 65: 643 - 654.
  • Werbitsky, D., and C. W. Kilpatrick. 1987. Genetic variation and genetic differentiation among allopatric populations of Megadontomys. Journal of Mammalogy, 68: 305 - 312.