摘要
绒属Ｃａｒｙｏｍｙｓ原为Ｔｈｏｍａｓ（１９１１）命名的Ｍｉｃｒｏｔｕｓ属中的一个新亚属，Ｈｉｎｔｏｎ（１９２３）将它升格为独立属，但很快又于１９２６年否定了此属的存在，从此各国学者或认为它是属Ｃｌｅｔｈｒｌｏｎｏｍｙｓ的同物异名，或认为它是绒鼠属Ｅｏｔｈｅｎｏｍｙｓ的亚属，近７０年间再无人承认此属名。本文通过对Ｃａｍｐｍｙｓ所包含的ｉｎｅｚ和ｅｖａ两种的形态学及染色体核型进行研究，并与绒鼠属Ｅｏｔｈｅｎｏｍｙｓ和属Ｃｌｅｔｈｒｉｏｎｏｍｙｓ代表种类的相关特征进行了比较分析，结果表明，ｉｎｅｚ和ｅｖａ除在形态上与绒鼠属及属种类有一些明显差异外，在染色体核型上也有显著不同，主要表现在：ｉｎｅｚ及ｅｖａ的染色体数目２ｎ＝５４，且在常染色体中，其最大的一对染色体均为亚端部着丝粒染色体；而绒鼠属和属的染色体数目则为２ｎ＝５６，且在常染色体中无此对端部着丝粒染色体。为此，作者认为应恢复Ｃａｒｙｏｍｘｓ属的分类地位。
Caryomys was originally named as a new subgenus of MI'crotus by Thomas in 19if.Hinton (1923) regarded it as an independent genus, but he soon disavowed the exist of thegenus in 1926. Since then,taxonomists either thought of it as the synonym of Clethrboomys(Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951 ), or as a subgenus of Eothenomys (Allen, 1940; Corbet,1978; Corbet & Hill, 1986; Kaneko, 1991; Wang, T. Z. et al., 1992; Wilson & Reeder,1993). Genus Caryomys has been acknowledged by no one for nearly seventy years.The authors have sutdies the morphological and karyotype characteristics of the two..spedes, Inez and eva from Caryomys, compared the characteristics of the two species withthose of the species of EOthenomys and Clethrionomys. inez and eva have some distinct morphological differences from the latter two,besides which,inez and eva also clearly differ fromthe latter two on karyotype. The diploid number of chromosome of both inez and eva wasfound to be 54 (2n= 54),and the largest pair of autosome was one subtelocentric(ST) pair,whereas the diploid chromosome number of the species of Eothenonmys and Clethrionomysamount to 56 (2n= 56),and there was not one subtelocentric pair among the autosome. Sowe considered that the status of the genus Caryomys should be reinstated.
出处
《动物分类学报》
CSCD
1996年第4期493-497,共5页
Acta Zootaxonomica Sinica
关键词
啮齿目
仓鼠科
田鼠亚科
绒Ping属
Microtinae, Caryomys, Clethrionomys, Eothenomys, karyotype.
