Smithsonian Institution, MRC 108 Washington DC 20560-0108
Reference for:
Anomalurus beecrofti
Source(s):
Publication(s):
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Wilson, Don E., and F. Russell Cole
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2000-01-01 / 2000-01-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Common Names of Mammals of the World
Page(s):
xiv + 204
Publisher:
Smithsonian Institution Press
Publication Place:
Washington, DC, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
1-56098-383-3/
Notes:
With contributions by Bernadette N. Graham, Adam P. Potter, and Mariana M. Upmeyer
Reference for:
Anomalurus beecrofti
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
1992-01-01 / 1993-01-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 2nd ed., 3rd printing
Page(s):
xviii + 1207
Publisher:
Smithsonian Institution Press
Publication Place:
Washington, DC, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
1-56098-217-9/
Notes:
Corrections were made to text at 3rd printing
Reference for:
Anomalurus beecrofti
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Dieterlen, Fritz / Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2005-10-01 / 2005-10-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Family Anomaluridae
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 3rd ed., vol. 2
Page(s):
1532-1534
Publisher:
Johns Hopkins University Press
Publication Place:
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
0-8018-8221-4/
Notes:
Reference for:
Anomalurus beecrofti
Anomalurus beecrofti: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Africa
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Anomalurus beecrofti: Comments
Comment:
Status: CITES - Appendix III (Ghana); IUCN - Lower Risk (lc). Not mentioned in Schlitter (1989)
Comment:
Comments: Belongs to the distinct genus Anomalurops according to Ansell (1978:73), Grubb et al. (1998:185), Rosevear (1969:159), and Verheyen (1968:404). Taxa argenteus and hervoi were considered 'valid as a race' by Rosevear (1969); chapini and citrinus were considered 'well defined subspecies' by Verheyen (1968); schoutedeni was considered a distinct species by Verheyen (1968) and by Cabral (1971). There is no proof of the validity of subspecies (A. C. Schunke, in litt.)