Crocidura lea Miller and Hollister, 1921
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1206/0003-0090.454.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7982B923-4CDC-44ED-A598-8651009DC7CC |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5793409 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/038AB318-012D-E936-4DE8-FD24FDA8B19B |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Crocidura lea Miller and Hollister, 1921 |
status |
|
Crocidura lea Miller and Hollister, 1921 View in CoL
Crocidura lea Miller and Hollister, 1921: 102 View in CoL . Original description.
Crocidura View in CoL “pale lea” Esselstyn et al., 2019: 1715. Informal name.
HOLOTYPE: USNM 217553 About USNM , an adult male collected by H.C. Raven on 3 August 1916. Prepared as a skin and skull. External measurements from the holotype are 111 mm × 51 mm × 14 mm; ear length and weight were not recorded. TYPE LOCALITY: “Temboan, northeastern Celebes ” (Miller and Hollister, 1921: 102; fig. 25 View FIG ). Temboan is located at 0.979° N, 124.605° E, 650 m elevation in the Southeast Minahasa Regency , North Sulawesi Province, 6 km south of Kalait. See the gazetteer (appendix) for details of our interpretation of Raven’s field notes GoogleMaps .
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION: Probably endemic to the northern peninsula. We identified specimens of this species from the northwest area of endemism (Mt. Dako, Central Sulawesi Province and Mt. Buliohuto, Gorontalo Province) and the type locality is in the north-east area of endemism (Temboan, North Sulawesi Province). We did not find this species on Mt. Ambang (north-east area of endemism), where its ecological position is apparently held by another tiny, but not closely related shrew, Crocidura tenebrosa ( fig. 25 View FIG ). We recorded C. lea at both high and low elevations on both Mts. Dako (512 and 1600 m) and Buliohuto (400– 600 and 1200 m; table 3 View TABLE 3 ). We did not collect any specimens of this species at our 410 m site on Mt. Dako. The type locality (Temboan) is at roughly 650 m.
120°E 122°E 124°E 126°E
1.5°N
0° C. baletei
1.5°S
Recent sample sites
3°S Miller and Hollister (1921)
type localities
100 km
4.5°S
0–1000 m
1000–2000 m
6°S> 2000 m
EMENDED DIAGNOSIS: Crocidura lea is a very small shrew ( tables 2 View TABLE 2 , 8 View TABLE 8 ) with a brown dorsal pelage, gray-brown ventral pelage, and pale feet. The pinnae are prominent and slightly paler than the surrounding fur, especially at the lobe. The mystacial vibrissae are generally unpigmented, but a few, typically the longer ones, are brown or black proximally. Dorsally, foot color transitions from gray-brown at the wrist and ankle to pale pinkish white on the digits ( fig. 27B View FIG ). The claws are small, unpigmented, and sometimes lack the surrounding tuft of white hairs present in many other species. Ventrally, the forefeet mostly lack pigment, but the hind feet are darker. In the hind feet, color transitions from brown posteriorly from the heel, and to a lesser extent laterally, to white at the digits. However, pigment is concentrated in the pads, particularly around the base of the thenar, hypothenar, and in some cases the 4th (lateralmost) interdigital pad ( fig. 27B View FIG ). The tail is shorter than head-and-body length, sometimes dorsoventrally bicolored, and thinly covered with very small, dark brown applied hairs. A few sparse bristles are present along the proximal three-fourths of the tail ( fig. 27B View FIG ). The skull is short, narrow, and somewhat rounded in overall shape ( fig. 28B View FIG ). Relative to body size, the skull is slightly longer than expected, and relative to skull length, the braincase (BB/CIL) is especially narrow, but the interorbital region is not unusual in its relative width (IOW/CIL; fig. 10 View FIG ). The maxillary process is weak ( fig. 28B View FIG ). The I3
A B 0.5
8.5
BREADTH 8. 2 0 Species C C.. lea baletei
BRAINCASE 7.5
COMP -0.5 C C C C.... parva levicula mediocris tenebrosa
16 17 18 CONDYLOINCISIVE LENGTH
-2 -1 0 1 2 COMP. 1
(U2) is smaller than the C (U3). The parastyle of P4 is modest.
COMPARISONS: Crocidura lea is much smaller than all Sulawesi Crocidura outside of the Small- Bodied Group ( fig. 9 View FIG ). Among the Small-Bodied species, only C. baletei and C. tenebrosa are known from the northern peninsula. Crocidura levicula , C. parva , and C. mediocris are apparently restricted to the central core and eastern and southwestern peninsulas ( fig. 25 View FIG ). We therefore focus our comparisons on the cooccurring, northern peninsula species. However, first we note that the allopatric C. levicula has a broader skull ( figs. 10 View FIG , 26 View FIG ; tables 8 View TABLE 8 , 9), shorter tail, shorter hind feet, and more tail bristles than does C. lea ( figs. 27 View FIG , 29 View FIG ; table 2 View TABLE 2 ). Among the Small-Bodied shrews of the northern peninsula, C. lea has a slightly paler and more strongly dorsoventrally bicolored pelage than C. baletei or C. tenebrosa . Both of the latter species are relatively uniform in color, C. baletei being medium brown and C. tenebrosa dark brown. Crocidura lea also has paler skin wherever it is exposed than either C. baletei (somewhat darker) or C. tenebrosa (much darker). Dorsally, the feet of both C. baletei and C. tenebrosa are uniformly dark, whereas the foot color transitions posteriorly from brown at the heel to white or pink at the digits in C. lea ( fig. 27 View FIG ). Similarly, the tails of both C. baletei and C. tenebrosa are not obviously bicolored, and both are darker. Tail bristles are present on approximately three-fourths of the tail length in all three species, but they are much more abundant and longer on the tails of C. baletei and C. tenebrosa than in C. lea ( fig. 27 View FIG ). Applied hairs on the tail are also much more visible in the two new species than in C. lea . Tail length in C. lea is greater, on average, than in C. baletei , and substantially so compared to C. tenebrosa ( fig. 9 View FIG ; table 2 View TABLE 2 ). The skulls of C. lea are comparable in length, but significantly narrower at the braincase, interorbital region, maxillary process, and to a lesser extent at the rostrum than those of C. baletei and C. tenebrosa ( figs. 10 View FIG , 30 View FIG ; table 8 View TABLE 8 ). Crocidura lea occupies distinct morphometric space from the other northern peninsula endemics in bivariate plots of skull length and width and the first two principal components from an analysis of 12 cra-
nial measurements ( fig. 26 View FIG ). The C (U3) is larger than I3 (U2) in C. lea , but they are usually subequal in occlusal surface area in C. baletei and C. tenebrosa . The parastyle of P4 is more prominent in C. tenebrosa than in C. lea or C. baletei .
COMMENTS: An 1111 bp cytochrome b sequence from the holotype (USNM 217553) provides strong evidence that the tiny shrews we collected on Mts. Buliohuto and Dako (samples from Mt. Dako were referred to as “ Crocidura pale lea” by Esselstyn et al., 2019) represent this species. Interestingly, we did not find C. lea on Mt. Ambang, our sample site nearest the type locality. Rather, the tiny shrews we collected from Mt. Ambang represent an undescribed spe- cies ( C. tenebrosa ) that does not appear to be a close relative of C. lea . We suspect that C. lea is widespread at relatively low elevations on the northern peninsula, but is displaced by smallerrange, darker-colored endemics in some higherelevation areas ( fig. 13 View FIG ; table 3 View TABLE 3 ). Our only surveys on Mt. Ambang were centered on 1500 m elevation ( fig. 3 View FIG ). For BPP species delimitation results, see the C. tenebrosa account below.
Ruedi (1995) reported Crocidura lea from Mt. Rorekatimbo, but we refer those specimens to C. normalis (see below) based on a cytochrome b sequence from Ruedi et al. (1998).
None of our phylogenetic estimates found strong support for the closest relative(s) of Croc- idura lea , but some consistencies are nevertheless apparent. Our mitochondrial analyses placed C. lea as the sister to C. rhoditis and C. pseudorhoditis ( fig. 4 View FIG ) or C. elongata ( fig. 5 View FIG ), while our UCE species tree placed C. lea as sister to the clade containing C. elongata , C. rhoditis , and C. pseudorhoditis ( fig. 7 View FIG ). Other nuclear-based inferences lacked support ( fig. 8 View FIG ; supplementary data S6).
SPECIMENS EXAMINED: Mt. Buliohuto ( LSUMZ 38254–38262 , 38271–38274 ; NMV C37692 , C37715 , C37716 , C37720 , C37721 , C37735 , C37744 , C37829 ), Mt. Dako ( LSUMZ 36947– 36950 , 36952 , 36954–36956 , 36958 , 36960 , 36964 , 36968–36972 ), Temboan ( USNM 217553 ).
C. baletei | C. lea | C. levicula | C. mediocris | C. parva | C. tenebrosa | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Condyloincisive length | 17.68 ± 0.285 (17.25–18.07) 7 | 17.54 ± 0.293 (17.09–18.02) 21 | 16.58 ± 0.545 (15.56–17.58) 19 | 17.31 ± 0.643 (16.11–18.54) 25 | 16.55 ± 0.372 (15.81–17.34) 26 | 17.66 ± 0.216 (17.37–17.98) 8 |
Braincase breadth | 8.46 ± 0.152 (8.27–8.65) 7 | 7.71 ± 0.135 (7.49–7.98) 21 | 7.98 ± 0.287 (7.51–8.49) 19 | 7.85 ± 0.246 (7.45–8.34) 25 | 7.47 ± 0.145 (7.09–7.72) 26 | 8.36 ± 0.166 (8.09–8.56) 8 |
Interorbital width | 4.08 ± 0.058 (3.98–4.15) 7 | 3.89 ± 0.123 (3.69–4.14) 21 | 3.88 ± 0.136 (3.71–4.11) 19 | 3.88 ± 0.125 (3.68–4.14) 25 | 3.73 ± 0.109 (3.42–3.89) 28 | 4.12 ± 0.104 (4.04–4.26) 8 |
Rostral length | 7.05 ± 0.242 (6.78–7.49) 7 | 6.86 ± 0.208 (6.48–7.27) 22 | 6.48 ± 0.22 (6.05–6.92) 19 | 6.91 ± 0.396 (6.37–7.7) 25 | 6.48 ± 0.182 (6.08–6.86) 28 | 7.09 ± 0.136 (6.85–7.22) 8 |
Postpalatal width | 3.19 ± 0.088 (3.0–3.26) 7 | 3.13 ± 0.10 (2.95–3.33) 21 | 3.01 ± 0.101 (2.86–3.22) 19 | 3.09 ± 0.106 (2.8–3.3) 25 | 2.96 ± 0.113 (2.67–3.18) 28 | 3.2 ± 0.077 (3.12–3.33) 8 |
Rostral width | 2.41 ± 0.162 (2.17–2.61) 7 | 2.4 ± 0.146 (2.13–2.68) 21 | 2.28 ± 0.125 (2.07–2.53) 19 | 2.34 ± 0.169 (2.13–2.67) 25 | 2.32 ± 0.147 (2.09–2.63) 28 | 2.55 ± 0.117 (2.44–2.74) 8 |
Postpalatal length | 8.01 ± 0.124 (7.79–8.14) 7 | 8.08 ± 0.15 (7.81–8.42) 21 | 7.56 ± 0.265 (7.05–8.1) 19 | 7.9 ± 0.255 (7.34–8.54) 25 | 7.62 ± 0.197 (7.12–7.95) 24 | 8.06 ± 0.13 (7.89–8.26) 8 |
Condyle to glenoid fossa | 7.25 ± 0.156 (7.03–7.43) 7 | 7.21 ± 0.162 (7.01–7.56) 21 | 6.83 ± 0.211 (6.5–7.2) 19 | 7.06 ± 0.22 (6.5–7.45) 25 | 6.94 ± 0.151 (6.71–7.17) 26 | 7.24 ± 0.077 (7.11–7.35) 8 |
Upper toothrow length | 7.67 ± 0.118 (7.49–7.82) 7 | 7.52 ± 0.235 (7.13–7.98) 22 | 7.15 ± 0.222 (6.73–7.62) 19 | 7.54 ± 0.369 (6.81–8.28) 25 | 7.07 ± 0.187 (6.7–7.45) 28 | 7.62 ± 0.178 (7.34–7.84) 8 |
P4 to M3 length | 4.41 ± 0.077 (4.33–4.52) 7 | 4.23 ± 0.135 (3.98–4.56) 22 | 4.09 ± 0.132 (3.87–4.33) 19 | 4.24 ± 0.201 (3.85–4.58) 25 | 3.98 ± 0.121 (3.73–4.3) 28 | 4.36 ± 0.098 (4.23–4.52) 8 |
M2 to M2 labial width | 5.22 ± 0.063 (5.14–5.32) 6 | 5.03 ± 0.165 (4.61–5.37) 22 | 4.83 ± 0.174 (4.56–5.23) 19 | 5.0 ± 0.224 (4.58–5.48) 25 | 4.66 ± 0.137 (4.41–4.92) 28 | 5.25 ± 0.128 (5.15–5.49) 8 |
Palatal width | 2.14 ± 0.074 (2.04–2.24) 6 | 1.98 ± 0.115 (1.8–2.32) 22 | 2.02 ± 0.105 (1.78–2.24) 19 | 1.98 ± 0.068 (1.85–2.1) 25 | 1.89 ± 0.102 (1.73–2.11) 26 | 2.08 ± 0.115 (1.92–2.24) 8 |
a The sample mean ± one standard deviation, the observed range in parentheses, and the sample size.
Component 1 | Component 2 | |
---|---|---|
Variablesa | ||
Condyloincisive length | 0.6818 | 0.2724 |
Braincase breadth | 0.2456 | -0.8299 |
Interorbital width | 0.1167 | -0.2702 |
Rostral length | 0.3441 | 0.0190 |
Postpalatal width | 0.1036 | -0.0849 |
Rostral width | 0.0779 | -0.0082 |
Postpalatal length | 0.2750 | 0.2500 |
Condyle to glenoid fossa | 0.2073 | 0.1481 |
Upper toothrow length | 0.3440 | 0.0510 |
P4 to M3 length | 0.1880 | -0.0904 |
M2 to M2 labial width | 0.2256 | -0.1674 |
Palatal width | 0.0534 | -0.1820 |
Proportion of variance | 0.8056 | 0.0817 |
Cumulative proportion | 0.8056 | 0.8873 |
a Table entries for variables are component loadings.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Crocidura lea Miller and Hollister, 1921
Esselstyn, Jacob A., Achmadi, Anang S., Handika, Heru, Swanson, Mark T., Giarla, Thomas C. & Rowe, Kevin C. 2021 |
Crocidura
Esselstyn, J. A. & A. S. Achmadi & H. Handika & T. C. Giarla & K. C. Rowe 2019: 1715 |
Crocidura lea
Miller and Hollister 1921: 102 |