Department of Mammology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024
Reference for:
Dacnomys millardi
Expert:
Michael D. Carleton
Notes:
Department of Mammals, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC 20560
Reference for:
Dacnomys millardi
Source(s):
Publication(s):
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:
Dacnomys millardi
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Musser, Guy G., and Michael D. Carleton / Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2005-10-01 / 2005-10-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Superfamily Muroidea
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 3rd ed., vol. 2
Page(s):
894-1531
Publisher:
Johns Hopkins University Press
Publication Place:
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
0-8018-8221-4/
Notes:
Reference for:
Dacnomys millardi
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Ellerman, J. R., and T. C. S. Morrison-Scott
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
1966-07-01 / 1966-07-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Checklist of Palaearctic and Indian Mammals 1758 to 1946, 2nd edition
Page(s):
810
Publisher:
Alden Press
Publication Place:
Oxford, England
ISBN/ISSN:
0565004484/
Notes:
Available online at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/8727652
Reference for:
Dacnomys millardi
Dacnomys millardi: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Southern Asia
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Dacnomys millardi: Comments
Comment:
Status: IUCN - Lower Risk (lc)
Comment:
Comments: The few known specimens show appreciable variation in body size, but as Corbet and Hill (1992:360) noted, 'too few specimens are available to assess the overall variation.' Reviewed by Osgood (1932), Agrawal (2000), Corbet and Hill (1992), and Musser (1981b)