Examination of some cranial characteristics of Mus domesticus Linnaeus 1758 and Mus macedonicus Petrov & Ruzic 1983 (Mammalia: Rodentia) distributed in Turkey
Öz
It is known that species belonging to the subgenus Mus have common morphological characters and therefore their morphological differentiation is difficult. In this context, it was aimed to examine some skull characters as well as ZI, H+B/T values used as diagnostic criteria and the ventral edge of the parietal bone. While ZI values were found to vary between 0.24 and 0.52 in Mus domesticus, it was observed to vary between 0.49-1.33 in M. macedonicus. The H+B/T values were found to be between 0.74-1.1 in M. domesticus and between 0.81-1.77 in M. macedonicus. On the dorsal surface of the skull, it was observed that the frontal suture variations tended to be round shaped and the parietal suture variations tended to be v shaped. When the notch status of the upper incisors was examined, it was determined that the ratio of having non-notched and single-notched teeth was close to each other in both species. When the ventral edge of the parietal bone was examined, it was observed that while wavy and straight edges were found in close proportions in M. domesticus, straight edges were predominant in M. macedonicus. When the populations were evaluated according to geographical regions, no significant differences were observed between regions.
Anahtar Kelimeler
house mouse, Macedonian mouse, morphological variation
Teşekkür
This article was produced from a part of Güliz Yavuz's PhD thesis. I would like to thank my advisor Prof. Dr. Ercüment Çolak for his contributions.
Kaynakça
- Auffray J C and Britton-Davidian J (2012). The house mouse and its relatives: systematics and taxonomy. In: M Macholan, S J E Baird, P Munclinger, J Pialek (Eds.), Cambridge Series in Morphology and Molecules, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-35
- Auffray J C, Marshall J T, Thaler L, Bonhomme F (1990). Focus on the nomenclature of European species of Mus. Mouse Genome 88: 7-8
- Berry R J and Scriven P N (2005). The house mouse: a model and motor for evolutionary understanding. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 84: 335–347
- Gözcelioğlu B, Çolak R, Çolak E, Yiğit N (2005). A study on Mus domesticus Rutty, 1772 and Mus macedonicus Petrov and Ruzic, 1983 (Mammalia: Rodentia) distributed along the line of Ankara, Bolu and Zonguldak. Turkish Journal of Zoology 29: 133-140
- Guenet J L and Bonhomme F (2003). Wild mice: an ever-increasing contribution to a popular mammalian model. Trends in Genetics 19: 24–31
- Helvacı Z, Renaud S, Ledevin R, Adriaens D, Michaux J, Çolak R, Kankılıç T, Kandemir İ, Yiğit N, Çolak E (2012). Morphometric and genetic structure of the edible dormouse (Glis glis): a consequence of forest fragmentation in Turkey Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 107(3): 611-623
- Kishimoto M, Kato M, Suzuki H (2021). Morphological and molecular recharacterization of the rodent genus Mus from Nepal based on museum specimens. Mammal Study 46: 297-308
- Krystufek B and Macholan M (1998). Morphological differentiation in Mus spicilegus and the taxonomic status of mound-building mice from the Adriatic coast of Yugoslavia. Journal of Zoology 245: 185-196
- Krystufek B and Vohralik V (2009). Mammals of Turkey and Cyprus Rodentia II: Cricetinae, Muridae, Spalacidae, Calomyscidae, Capromyidae, Hystricidae, Castoridae. Knjiznica Annales Majora
- Novak R N and Paradiso J L (1983). Walker’s Mammals of The World. Baltimore and London