Geomys lutescens, also known as the Sand Hills pocket gopher, is a species of pocket gopher native to the western United States (Wyoming, Colorado, South Dakota, and Nebraska).[1] It is a fossorial rodent that inhabits the Mississippi basin. The common name is derived from the type locality of Sand Hills.[2]

Sand Hills pocket gopher
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Rodentia
Family: Geomyidae
Genus: Geomys
Species:
G. lutescens
Binomial name
Geomys lutescens
Merriam, 1890
Synonyms
  • Geomys bursarius lutescens Merriam, 1890

Taxonomy

edit

Authors have debated for decades whether this is a distinct species or a subspecies of the plains pocket gopher.[3] Recent genetic evidence and the lack of gene flow from other gopher populations has supported this being a distinct species and a sister species to Hall's pocket gopher.[4]

The subspecies G. l. jugossicularis was recently split from the Sand Hills pocket gopher as its own distinct species. The other subspecies, G. l. halli, was later found to be a subspecies of Hall's pocket gopher, leaving this species with no subspecies.[1]

References

edit
  1. ^ a b Chambers, Ryan R.; Sudman, Philip D.; Bradley, Robert D. (2 June 2009). "A Phylogenetic Assessment of Pocket Gophers (Geomys): Evidence from Nuclear and Mitochondrial Genes". Journal of Mammalogy. 90 (3): 537–547. doi:10.1644/08-MAMM-A-180R1.1.
  2. ^ Merriam, C. Hart (8 October 1890). "Description of a new pocket gopher of the genus Geomys, from western Nebraska" (PDF). North American Fauna. 4: 51. doi:10.3996/nafa.4.0010. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  3. ^ Wilson; Reeder. "Mammal Species of The World Third Edition". Wilson & Reeder's Mammal Species of the World Third Edition. Retrieved 11 December 2023.
  4. ^ Sudman, Jerry R.; Wickliffe, Jeffrey K.; Horner, Peggy; Smolen, Michael J.; Bickham, John W.; Bradley, Robert D. (24 August 2006). "Molecular Systematics of Pocket Gophers of the Genus Geomys". Journal of Mammalogy. 87 (4): 668–676. doi:10.1644/05-MAMM-A-349R2.1.