Zapodinae Coues, 1875
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.7353072 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7281817 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039187BE-FFD6-FFC2-A6EF-510F3854F995 |
treatment provided by |
GgServerImporter |
scientific name |
Zapodinae Coues, 1875 |
status |
|
Subfamily Zapodinae Coues, 1875 View in CoL . Bull. U.S. Geol. Geog. Surv. Terr., ser. 2,5(3):253.
COMMENTS: The recognition of three distinct genera of zapodines has been challenged ( Corbet, 1978c). Higher level relationships among zapodines have been addressed by Preble (1899), who described Eozapus and Napaeozapus as new subgenera of Zapus , and by Krutzsch (1954), who supported generic separation based on differences in tooth number and occlusal pattern, bacula, and ear ossicles. Klingener (1964:75) found no consistant differences in the myology of Zapus versus Napaeozapus ( Eozapus was not included in his study), but favored generic separation of the two based on dental morphology. The dental differences documented in Preble (1899) and Krutzsch (1954) are substantial and phylogenetically significant; following Ellerman (1940) and Krutzsch (1954), three genera are retained here.
A critical study documenting other morphological characters, and /or molecular differentiation among zapodines, as well as the level of differentiation of zapodines relative to other dipodids, is needed.
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.