Micaelamys namaquensis (A. Smith 1834)

Micaelamys namaquensis (A. Smith 1834) View in CoL

[Micaelamys] namaquensis (A. Smith 1834) View in CoL , South African Quart. J., 2: 160.

Type Locality: South Africa, S Western Cape Province, Little Namaqualand, Cape of Good Hope (restricted to Witwater by Shortridge, 1942).

Vernacular Names: Namaqua Micaelamys.

Synonyms: Micaelamys arborarius Peters 1852 ; Micaelamys auricomis De Winton 1897 ; Micaelamys avarillus Thomas and Wroughton 1908 ; Micaelamys avunculus (Thomas 1904) ; Micaelamys calarius Thomas 1926 ; Micaelamys capensis Roberts 1926 ; Micaelamys centralis Schwann 1906 ; Micaelamys drakensbergi Roberts 1926 ; Micaelamys epupae Von Lehmann 1975 ; Micaelamys grahami Roberts 1915 ; Micaelamys klaverensis Roberts 1926 ; Micaelamys lechochloides Roberts 1926 ; Micaelamys lehocla A. Smith 1836 ; Micaelamys longicaudatus Von Lehmann 1955 ; Micaelamys monticularis Jameson 1909 ; Micaelamys namibensis Roberts 1946 ; Micaelamys phippsi Hill and Carter 1937 ; Micaelamys siccatus Thomas 1926 ; Micaelamys waterbergensis Roberts 1938 .

Distribution: E Angola ( Crawford-Cabral, 1998), South Africa (except parts of Western, Northern, and Eastern Cape provinces, coastal KwaZulu-Natal Province, and Namib Desert; de Graaff, 1997 v; Taylor, 1998), Botswana, Zimbabwe, S and C Mozambique (absent from central and coastal regions), S Malawi, and SE Zambia. Range abstracted from Skinner and Smithers (1990:278) and Chimimba et al. (1999:507).

Conservation: IUCN – Lower Risk (lc) as Aethomys namaquensis .

Discussion: Originally described as a species of Gerbillus (Gerbillinae) , subsequently treated as a species of Aethomys (G. M. Allen, 1939) , Thallomys ( Ellerman, 1941) or Rattus in subgenus Praomys (Ellerman et al., 1953) . There is appreciable variation in body size and pelage coloration among geographic samples, but past systematic studies do not recognize subspecies or significant clinal patterns of variation (Chimimba, 1998; Chimimba et al., 1999). A recent intraspecific morphometric analysis across a more comprehensive geographic region in southern Africa suggested recognition of four subspecies ( Chimimba, 2001 a) in which distributional limits coincide with major phytogeographical zones. Integrity of these subspecific units, however, requires independent testing with molecular data. Non-geographic variation due to sex and age reported by Chimimba and Dippenaar (1994). Of all the species of either Micaelamys or even Aethomys , M. namaquensis has the most extensive geographic distribution and is sympatric with all the other species of Aethomys and Micaelamys occurring in the Southern African Subregion ( Chimimba et al., 1999). Reviewed by Meester et al. (1986), Skinner and Smithers (1990), Chimimba (1998), Chimimba et al.(1999), and de Graaff ( 1997 v).