• 中文核心期刊要目总览
  • 中国科技核心期刊
  • 中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)
  • 中国科技论文与引文数据库(CSTPCD)
  • 中国学术期刊文摘数据库(CSAD)
  • 中国学术期刊(网络版)(CNKI)
  • 中文科技期刊数据库
  • 万方数据知识服务平台
  • 中国超星期刊域出版平台
  • 国家科技学术期刊开放平台
  • 荷兰文摘与引文数据库(SCOPUS)
  • 日本科学技术振兴机构数据库(JST)
吴攀文, 周材权, 王艳妮, 胡锦矗, 张承德. 2004: 长尾姬鼠、中华姬鼠毛髓质指数比较及长尾姬鼠分类地位的探讨(英文). 动物学研究, 25(6): 534-537.
引用本文: 吴攀文, 周材权, 王艳妮, 胡锦矗, 张承德. 2004: 长尾姬鼠、中华姬鼠毛髓质指数比较及长尾姬鼠分类地位的探讨(英文). 动物学研究, 25(6): 534-537.
WU Pan-wen, ZHOU Cai-quan, WANG Yan-ni, HU Jin-chu, ZHANG Cheng-de. 2004. Comparison between the Medullary Indexes of Hairs from Apodemus orestes and A.draco,with Discussion about the Taxonomic Status of A.orestes. Zoological Research, 25(6): 534-537.
Citation: WU Pan-wen, ZHOU Cai-quan, WANG Yan-ni, HU Jin-chu, ZHANG Cheng-de. 2004. Comparison between the Medullary Indexes of Hairs from Apodemus orestes and A.draco,with Discussion about the Taxonomic Status of A.orestes. Zoological Research, 25(6): 534-537.

长尾姬鼠、中华姬鼠毛髓质指数比较及长尾姬鼠分类地位的探讨(英文)

Comparison between the Medullary Indexes of Hairs from Apodemus orestes and A.draco,with Discussion about the Taxonomic Status of A.orestes

  • 摘要: 关于长尾姬鼠(Apodemus orestes)的分类地位,一直没有确定。有的认为它是中华姬鼠(A.draco)的一个亚种,而有的认为是一个独立的种。分别从成体长尾姬鼠、中华姬鼠和高山姬鼠(A.chevrieri)(对照)各5只的胡须、头部、背部、腹部、前肢取毛样,清洗和处理后,在倒置显微镜下观察,用目镜测微尺分别测量和计算出其5个部位毛发的毛髓质指数。结果表明:长尾姬鼠与中华姬鼠5个部位及混合毛发的毛髓质指数无显著差异;二者5个部位及混合毛发的毛髓质指数与高山姬鼠均有显著差异。不支持长尾姬鼠作为一个独立种的观点。

     

    Abstract: The taxonomic status of longtailed field mouse (Apodemus orestes) is still uncertain up to now.Some scholars regarded it as a subspecies or a synonym of dragon field mouse (A.draco),while other scholars considered it a valid species.In the study,five specimens of adult long-tailed field mouse,dragon field mouse and Chevriers field mouse (A.chevrieri) (as a contrast) were chosen respectively.After treated,with the eyepiece micrometer in the inverted microscope,we made measurements of the widths of hairs and medullas and then calculated the medullary indexes of straight guard hairs from around the mouth,head,back,abdomen and forelimb of each species.The results indicate that,viewing at each of the five parts and the mixture of the five parts,there are no significant differences between A.orestes and A.draco,Significant differences can be found between A.orestes & A.chevrieri and A.draco & A.chevrieri though.The standpoint that A.orestes was listed as a valid species is not supported by this study.

     

/

返回文章
返回