Perfil taxonómico: Ctenomys perrensi (Thomas 1896)

Ctenomys perrensi: Taxonomía y Nomenclatura
Reino:
Animalia
Rango taxonómico:
Species
Sinónimas:
Ctenomys perrensis
Thomas 1896
Nombres comunes:
Goya Tuco-tuco []
Estado taxonómico:
Situación actual:
valid
Indicadores de calidad de datos:
Récord de calificación de credibilidad:
TWG standards met
Ctenomys perrensi: Taxonomic Hierarchy
Reino : Animalia
animals |
Animal |
animaux |
subreino : Bilateria
Infrareino : Deuterostomia
Filo : Chordata
chordates |
cordado |
cordés |
subfilo : Vertebrata
vertebrates |
vertebrado |
vertébrés |
Infradivisión : Gnathostomata
superclase : Tetrapoda
Clase : Mammalia
mammals |
mamífero |
mammifères |
subclase : Theria
Infraclase : Eutheria
Ordenar : Rodentia
rodents |
esquilo |
preá |
rato |
roedor |
rongeurs |
Suborden : Hystricomorpha
Infraorden : Hystricognathi
hystricognath rodents |
Familia : Ctenomyidae
Género : Ctenomys
Especies : Ctenomys perrensi
Goya Tuco-tuco |
Ctenomys perrensi Niños directos:
Ctenomys perrensi: References
Expert(s):
Source(s):
Publication(s):
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Woods, Charles A., and C. William Kilpatrick / Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2005-10-01 / 2005-10-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Infraorder Hystricognathi Brandt, 1855
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 3rd ed., vol. 2
Page(s):
1538-1600
Publisher:
Johns Hopkins University Press
Publication Place:
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
0-8018-8221-4/
Notes:
Reference for:
Ctenomys perrensi
Ctenomys perrensi: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
South America
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Ctenomys perrensi: Comments
Comment:
Status: IUCN - Lower Risk (lc)
Comment:
Comments: See Contreras et al. (1985) for distribution. Specimens from the type locality have karyotypes of 2n=50, FN=84 (Ortells et al., 1990). Specimens taken north of the type locality with FN=84 and 2n=53-56 or 58 were tentatively assigned to this taxon (Ortells et al., 1990; Reig et al., 1992) but specimens from two other localities with FN=84 and 2n=62 were not included. Little or no genetic differentiation and no fixed differences of isozymes were observed among any of the populations with FN=...