1. Another Thomasomys described: T. antoniobracki from N Peru (4.89429S 79.36761W). The link for downloading the PDF.
2. Bullimus carletoni described from S Luzon.
3. Three new species of Neacomys described from Amazonia: N. aletheia (split from N. minutus) lives between Ucayali and Jurua; N. elieceri (sister to N. vossi) between Madeira and Tapajos, and N. jau (sister to N. guyanae) between Japura & Rio Negro (which means it’s the one around Manaus).
4. Microcavia sorojchi described from NW Argentina (I have the PDF if anybody has trouble viewing it).
5. Jird Meriones dahli lumped into M. meridianus. Sad for me as I seriously risked getting shot while looking for it on Armenian-Turkish border 30 years ago.
6. Llanos population of Eptesicus diminutus split as E. orinocensis. If I am not mistaken, this is the species that roosts inside the walls at Hato Masaguaral in Venezuela (a great mammalwatching place, BTW).
7. Turns out there was a 2019 paper that lumped Rhinolophus kahuzi into R. ruwenzori, R. gorongosae and R. rhodesiae into R. simulator, R. cohenae, R. smithersi and R. mabuensis – into R. hildebrandti.
Taxonomy news
Related Articles
-
Sex Pest Seal
This is amusing …unless you are a penguin) … http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7379554.stm Jon
-
Oregon Mammal Information
I am taking a short trip to Oregon in early March, to Portland and the North Umpqua River. The...
-
New Trip Report: Labahe (China), 2016
Thank you, once again, to Richard Webb for harvesting this – very helpfully detailed – report off of Cloud...
-
Which animal is this?
Good day, In November 2015 we went to Namibia and we could take a picture of this small animal...
-
Scout thermal imagers
Has anybody used Scout thermal imagers? Are they as good as Pulsar Quantum? I have to buy one in...
-
Introducing Mammalwatching.com 2.0
Hello, After a lot of work – mainly from other people – the new mammalwatching.com is now live and...
-
Shrew sp in the Andamans.
I recently visited the Andamans ( South island, the one with Port Blair on it) and was fortunate to...
-
Happy Christmas
I hope everyone out there is having a good Christmas and taking some quiet time to think of the...
There is a new paper studying pelage patterns in Plecturocebus parecis and Plecturocebus cinerascens. Even though it doesn’t explicitly lumps these two species, the evidence seems to point into that direction. Aditionally, it seems Plecturocebus bernhardi could also be lump together with them. DOI:10.1007/s10764-021-00249-9
I never recognized any of those taxa 🙂 As far as I am concerned, there are only five species of titis.
Hi Jon. Thanks for posting. I started at the end of your list. For “R. gorongosae and R. rhodesiae into R. simulator” it seems the actual recipe is as follows: Throw simulator and denti into the pot. Add gorongosae and rhodesiae. 4 species. Remove some of simulator and some of denti as species cf denti/sumulator; the rest of denti stays as species denti; then remove some simulator and add gorongosae + rhodesiae as simulator 2; leftovers are simulator 1; after all the mixing it is not clear which of sim 1 and sim 2 is the real sim shady. If sim 1 is the real sim then it is not true that gor and rho are lumped with sim and in that case the sim 2 might take name rho or gor? If sim 2 is the real sim then the original statement lumping gor + rho into sim is correct. It is all denti’s fault; because otherwise you might have just had a simple/complex species complex. So 4 species into the pot and 4 or more out of the pot, none how they started; names are shown in the tree in Fig 5 … otherwise one could temporarily just leave all 3, I mean 4, as is until the real names are sorted out … or to paraphrase Eminem’s real slim shady until the real sim stands up “we’re gonna have a problem here” and “I probably got a couple of screws up in my head loose” from all of this.
Jon is not responsible for this post at all 🙂
Hi Vladimir. When I read the original post I knew the style was yours and assumed so; but in the email version the header is “Taxonomy News by Jon Hall” and Jon’s name was at the bottom of the post so I over-rode my instinct and gave him the credit/thanks; even though in message trail above I now see your name; but in my defense as you see above I did claim to have screws loose. No damage done as I think there are only 3 to 5 people who jump into these taxonomy threads 🙂 🙂
BTW Vladimir when I wrote “No damage done as I think there are only 3 to 5 people who jump into these taxonomy threads ” I didn’t mean that in any disparaging way against your thread; I just meant that as the readership count on my reply and confusing the authorship. Keep your posts coming; they are great. Cheers, Paul