Journals / Turkish Journal of Zoology / 2006 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 3

Morphological and Biometrical Comparisons of Mesocricetus Nehring, 1898 (Mammalia: Rodentia) species distributed in the Palaearctic Region

Pages
291–299
Publication Date
2006-03-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

M. newtoni proved to be an intermediary between M. auratus and M. brandti.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Currently, 4 species, Mesocricetus auratus, Mesocricetus raddei, Mesocricetus newtoni, and Mesocricetus brandti of the genus Mesocricetus are accepted as the valid taxa based on karyotype and morphologic features.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A potential fifth species, Mesocricetus nigriculus, is under dispute and is currently listed as a subspecies of M. raddei, along with Mesocricetus raddei raddei and Mesocricetus raddei avaricus.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:M. newtoni proved to be an intermediary between M. auratus and M. brandti.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mesocricetus spp · morphology · UPGM cluster

Abstract

Currently, 4 species, Mesocricetus auratus, Mesocricetus raddei, Mesocricetus newtoni, and Mesocricetus brandti of the genus Mesocricetus are accepted as the valid taxa based on karyotype and morphologic features. A potential fifth species, Mesocricetus nigriculus, is under dispute and is currently listed as a subspecies of M. raddei, along with Mesocricetus raddei raddei and Mesocricetus raddei avaricus. UPGMA cluster analyses performed with biometrical measures confirm, only partially, the common separation of Mesocricetus hamsters into a Transcaucasian group with Mesocricetus newtoni, Mesocricetus brandti, and Mesocricetus auratus, and a Ciscaucasian group including the M. raddei subspecies. The status of M. nigriculus could not be resolved by these analyses. Biometric measurements group M. nigriculus and M. auratus together. M. raddei were found to be the most divergent species according to its biometrical characteristics. In addition to this, there are no morphologic or biometric differences in the subspecies level between M. r. raddei and M. r. avaricus; however, the differences among taxa might be explained by the fact that the species inhabits mountainous areas and that body measures and coloration reflect ecological adaptation more than true phylogenetic position. Morphometric data revealed an increasing similarity in M. brandti from the eastern to the western part of its range. M. newtoni proved to be an intermediary between M. auratus and M. brandti.

Özet

Currently, 4 species, Mesocricetus auratus, Mesocricetus raddei, Mesocricetus newtoni, and Mesocricetus brandti of the genus Mesocricetus are accepted as the valid taxa based on karyotype and morphologic features. A potential fifth species, Mesocricetus nigriculus, is under dispute and is currently listed as a subspecies of M. raddei, along with Mesocricetus raddei raddei and Mesocricetus raddei avaricus. UPGMA cluster analyses performed with biometrical measures confirm, only partially, the common separation of Mesocricetus hamsters into a Transcaucasian group with Mesocricetus newtoni, Mesocricetus brandti, and Mesocricetus auratus, and a Ciscaucasian group including the M. raddei subspecies. The status of M. nigriculus could not be resolved by these analyses. Biometric measurements group M. nigriculus and M. auratus together. M. raddei were found to be the most divergent species according to its biometrical characteristics. In addition to this, there are no morphologic or biometric differences in the subspecies level between M. r. raddei and M. r. avaricus; however, the differences among taxa might be explained by the fact that the species inhabits mountainous areas and that body measures and coloration reflect ecological adaptation more than true phylogenetic position. Morphometric data revealed an increasing similarity in M. brandti from the eastern to the western part of its range. M. newtoni proved to be an intermediary between M. auratus and M. brandti.

🔖

Cite This Article

YIĞIT, N., ÇOLAK, E., GATTERMANN, R., NEUMANN, K., ÖZKURT, Ş., GHARKHELOO, M. M., FRITZSCHE, P., ÇOLAK, R. (2006). Morphological and Biometrical Comparisons of Mesocricetus Nehring, 1898 (Mammalia: Rodentia) species distributed in the Palaearctic Region. Turkish Journal of Zoology, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 3, 291–299. https://ajindex.com/articles/177440

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Argyropola, A. I. 1933. Die Gattungen und Arten der Hamster (Cricetinae Murray, 1866) der Paläarktik. Z. Säugetierkunde, 8: 9-149.
  2. Corbet, G. B. 1978. The mammals of the Palaearctic region; a taxonomic review. British Museum (Natural History), Cornell University Press,
  3. London. Doğramacı, S. Kefelioğlu, H., and Gündüz, I., 1994. Karyological analysis of Anatolian Mesocricetus (Mammalia: Rodentia) species. Tr. J. of Zoology, 18: 41-46 (In Turkish with English summary). Ellerman, J. R. and Morrison-Scott, T. C. S. 1951. Checklist of Palaearctic and Indian Mammals 1758 to 1946.
  4. British Museum Natural History, London. Felten, H., Spitzenberger, F. and Storch, G. 1971. Zur Kleinsäugerfauna West - Anatoliens. Senkerbergiana Biology Teil I, 52, 393 - 424. Gattermann, R., Fritzsche, P., Neumann, K., Al – Husseyin, I., Kayser, K., Abiad, M. and Yakti, R. 2001. Notes on the current distribution and the ecology of wild golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus). Journal of Zoology London 254, 359 – 365. Gromov, I. M. and Erbajeva, M. A. 1995. The Mammals of Russia and Adjacent Territories; Lagomorphs and Rodents, Russian Academy of Science, Zoological Institute, St. Petersburg (In Russian). Hamar, M. and Schutowa, M. 1966. Neue Daten über die geographische Veränderlichkeit und die Entwicklung der Gattung Mesocricetus Nehring, 1898 (Glires, Mammalia). Z. Säugetierkunde, 31, 237 - 251. Harrison, D. L. and Bates, P. J. J. 1991. The mammals of Arabia. Harrison Museum Publication, Kent / England. Hosey, G. R. 1982. The Bosporus Land – Bridge and Mammals Distributions in Asia Minor and the Balkans. Säugetierkundliche Mitteillungen, 30, 53 – 62. Lehman, L. M. and Macpherson, I., 1967. The karyotype of the Kurdistan Hamster. Journal of Heredity, 58, 29 - 31. Lehmann, E. 1969. Eine neue Säugetieraufsammlung aus der Türkei im Museum Koenig. Bonner Zoologischer Beiträge, 15, 299 - 327. Lukjanenko, A. A. 1954. Über die Veränderung der nördlichen Grenze des Verbreitungsareals von Mesocricetus raddei nigriculus, Nehr. 1898. Zool. Journal, 33, 218 – 220 (In Russian). Lyman, C. and O’Brien, R. A. 1977. Laboratory study of the Turkish Hamster Mesocricetus brandti. Breviora (Cambridge, Mass), 442, 1 - 27. Nehring, A. 1898 a. Über Cricetus, Cricetulus und Mesocricetus n. Subg. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 21, 493 - 495. Nehring, A. 1898 b. Die Gruppe der Mesocricetus-Arten. Archiv für Naturgeschichte, 1, 373-392. Neuhäuser, G. 1936. Die Muriden von Kleinasien. Z. Säugetierkunde, 11, 161 - 236. Ni