508:
Carleton and Olson 1999) show that length and width of the molars do not vary with age (as expected - rooted molars don't grow when erupted), that height of the molars is negatively correlated with age (as expected again - with wear it becomes lower), that two measures of the incisor and two of the depth of the mandible are positively correlated with age, and that the length of another part of the mandible, the condyle, is also unrelated to age. They discuss it in the text on p. 27, but don't go into too much detail. I changed the phrasing again to something close to what you suggested to be a little more precise.
908:, leaning toward support. Overall it is good, and accessible enough if you can get past all the technical body part names. I do have a concern about overlinking, especially the red links. Are most of these really likely to become articles, or should they redirect to larger articles? Additionally, some of them are linked multiple times, creating the quite visually distracting sea of red links. I'd like to see some strategy in place for remedying this, even if it's putting together a small task force to create stubs for those articles. --
1043:
original biological information we have about the living animal is that
Vespucci saw it (with the associated uncertainties of that account); otherwise, we have to use the subfossils Carleton and Olson used to describe the species. In some cases, the subfossil records may be so good that they can be helpful in determining the cause of extinction (for example, one may see a gradual replacement of indigenous rodents by introduced mice and rats over time), but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
1028:: The "extinction" section is awfully short (one paragraph), and to me that's the most interesting thing about the subject, so I'm wondering if there's more that could be written. Since there was no human habitation at the time, I'm sure information is scarce, but I'd imagine we could have some more detail on scientific speculation.
717:
I can see how that might be a problem, but we have to go with the sources and the information we have, which in this case is largely limited to the technical description in
Carleton and Olson and the even more technical account of the incisor enamel microstructure in Weise and Malabarba. I have tried
622:
The mass of scientific names (of body parts) astound me... I do not know what precisely they are, but have an inkling. It seems overly technical to me, but I guess this would be expected of a biological article. It does seem a bit worrisome that most technical names are red-linked. Perhaps this is
240:
The last citation in "Literature cited" looks inconsistent (even ugly) with that angle-bracketed link. We already link to the direct source and describe the publisher; just remove that second link. "In IUCN. IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species. Version 2009.2." also looks awkward to me—maybe remove
648:
Anterolophids and mesolophids are part of a phrase which starts "The molars lack many accessory ridges, including ...", which should make clear that these are all accessory ridges. Going into more detail on them is possible, but would be difficult to do without a full explanation of the nomenclature
573:
The body mass helps. What I meant was did anyone (notable scientist) make an estimation of the entire size of the rodent, (since the article does go into detail of the measurements of individual parts)? If that is the case, a chart like that for dinosaurs (which are sometimes based on estimations)
569:
No. The animal hasn't been featured in the popular literature or anything similar, and of course, we can't have pictures of the actual animal (unless someone actually drew one in 1503). However, the article already states that it was larger than a black rat and I now also added a body mass estimate.
507:
Sorry for that. "Old adults" and "adults" are often used as distinct age categories in studies on rodents. In this case, they sorted the mandibles in three age categories (young adults, full adults, and old adults) on the basis of tooth wear and eruption and measured them. Their results (table 5 in
1219:
There are a few thousand people there. The fauna perhaps isn't terribly well-studied (I think they had Ridley around 1890, who studied pretty much everything, and at least some people studying lizards etc. thereafter), but neither
Carleton and Olson nor the IUCN include any speculation that it is
1042:
Carleton and Olson discuss this on pp. 48-49 (link to full text is in the article - you can read it for yourself if you wish). They go into a bit more detail than the article does, but nothing really relevant to this article, I think. Not much has been written on this animal. The only piece of
673:
As I implied below, articles like this have to balance between being not comprehensive enough in failing to address salient morphological points and too detailed in including too much technical description. I have tried to limit it to taxonomically significant characters (like the absence of
1084:
of the Lesser
Antilles are thought to have been driven to extinction by mongoose predation. The article currently contains a summary of Carleton and Olson's speculations on that, as it should, and although I just added one minor point, there doesn't seem to be anything else to add.
934:, the second occurrence of which I delinked). Writing articles on those terms is somewhere on my list of things to do, but it may take some time. I do think they deserve their own articles, perhaps with the exception of some of the molar features (such as the entoflexid).
658:
On re-reading the sentence alone, you are correct. However, I think my confusion (when reading the article as a whole) was influenced by the mass of technical terms used. Like I said earlier, perhaps this also cannot be helped for such an article (biology).
400:
An account of his voyage, the authenticity of which is controversial, recorded that on August 10, 1503, he visited an island just south of the equator, identified as
Fernando de Noronha, where he saw "very big rats and lizards with two tails, and some
1215:
I'd like to have a better idea of how well-known the fauna of this island is. What are the chances that this rat is not actually extinct, and just hides in the bushes whenever a scientist comes on the island? Do people live on the island?
1310:
What is an alisphenoid strut? I can figure out that the masticatory ... and foramen are two parts of the skull, I guess? In cases like this, the absence of a stub makes the article hard to digest. Sample only. Another sample:
409:(On both comments.) There's several levels of controversy here (whether the voyage actually took place and whether the account we have of it is authentic). I want to avoid going into too much detail, as it is not directly about
633:
Not quite, "anterolophids", "mesolophids" and several other terms are used in explaining previous terms. I am not so hard up over this, as like I said, I do get a certain idea of what is said (just not clear comprehension).
796:
The first two paragraphs of taxonomy are more a history of the species and humans than taxonomy, perhaps breaking into related subsections might be good, or modifying the section heading to "Description and
746:
Clarifying that I am supporting this article, but it is a bit uncertain due to what I perceive as a mass of technical terms (possibly a subjective concern, hence it tempers, but not obstructs, my support).
588:
No, no one did. Total length is probably very difficult because we don't know how long its tail was. Head and body length may perhaps be estimated from available measurements, but no one has tried so far.
422:
which took him to Brazil. The
Lettera di Amerigo Vespucci delle Isole Nuovamente in Quattro Suoi Viaggi recorded that during his fourth voyage he visited an island just south of the equator on August 10,
649:
for molar features (for example, the anterolophid is a ridge in the protoflexid, in between the anterolingual cuspulid and the protoconid). Are there any others that you think require more information?
1183:
It's the tooth enamel. Incisor enamel microstructure is so arcane a subject that even technical papers which report on it generally include an introduction explaining important terms and concepts.
1259:
I also checked 1(b) and 1(c); the coverage looks thorough, and the article uses all available scholarly resources. Props for finding enough relevant pics to make it visually interesting as well.
802:
Otherwise this really isn't far off to my mind. It is technical, but that is all this kind of article can be, either that or really short. Oh, If you can, get someone to make you a diagram like
815:
879:
856:
824:
Thanks for your comments. This one was in fact fairly easy on the information, because it was recently and comprehensively described and no substantive other information is known about it.
86:
1046:
In that case, the only thing left is speculating informed by what's happened in other island rodents. There's an awful lot of such rodents that got extinct over the last centuries (see
1374:
the first two samples you mentioned. I think it should be clear from the existing wording that the MBF and the FOA are openings in the skull. I'll create a stub on the HSB tomorrow.
630:
I believe all technical terms are explained or bluelinked. "Opisthodont" is explained in the following part of the sentence. I rephrased a few sentences to improve on this.
718:
to keep the information readable by explaining more arcane points of morphology and their evolutionary significance (such as the absence of the entepicondylar foramen, a
961:
Sorry, thought you were referring to red links only there. Thanks for catching these links; I found one more. I just created an article on one of the anatomical terms (
303:
Wow, that looks impressive. Yes, commons has some maps of the archipelago itself; I will add both after I am finished expanding the article on the local amphisbaenian.
267:
articles. The main work is titled "IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species" and the author is "IUCN", so that's how we should cite it, whether or not that looks awkward.
1510:
1493:
1377:
MOSBOLD only says "olume numbers of journal articles in some bibliographic formats"; in the bibliographic format (reference style) I chose, they are not bolded.
943:
I went through and delinked a few more items. It's not just the redlinks—you had some other terms linked multiple times, sometimes even in the same paragraph. --
557:
Are there reliable records of measurements/estimations of the whole creature so that a size comparison chart (like what is seen on dinosaur articles) such as
888:
865:
842:
791:
The entepicondylar foramen is absent, as in all members of the
Sigmodontinae; if present, it perforates the distal (far) end of the humerus (upper arm bone).
284:
263:
Thanks for the checks. I changed the map alt. As for the IUCN citation, it is mostly as recommended by the IUCN itself and is consistent with usage in other
287:. Also, is there any chance of a map where the islands of the archipelago are visible that can go in the text (in addition to the one in the taxobox)? --
40:
785:. I'm impressed by the depth on such an obscure subject - extinct species on remote islands can be very difficult to get info on. A few minor quibbles.
682:
group) and some more easily understood ones (like the proportions of the molars). I hope I've struck the right balance, but am open to improvements.
1327:
Even after reading that it "perforates the far end of the upper arm bone", I still don't know what the entepicondylar foramen is. Another sample:
1196:"Remains of Noronhomys were found in association with various reptiles, birds, and snails" do you mean the fossilized remains of these creatures?
1148:"The material is now in the United States National Museum of Natural History" shouldn't that be States' (i.e. a possessive, not an adjective)?
1115:"N. vespuccii was a fairly large rodent," I've been told you shouldn't start sentences, let alone paragraphs, with the abbreviated genus name.
1282:
article leave sentences incomprehensible to the layperson, so unless the redlinks are stubbed, definitions would be needed here. One example:
30:
17:
469:... that growth continued in adults, with old adults having larger mandibular dimensions than adults, and does not provide evidence ...
838:
Such an image would be original research, I believe. There are no body size estimates, only a rather crude estimate of the body mass.
1318:
is absent, as in all members of the
Sigmodontinae; if present, as in some other rodents, it perforates the distal (far) end of the
138:, but also "very large rats". It took nearly five centuries before anyone found the large rats back, but here they are now at FAC.
1123:
I'd like to know in the lead if the fossil remains were complete or partial, and if complete, if there was more than one fossil.
480:... that growth continued in adults—the older the animal, the larger its mandibular dimensions—and does not provide evidence ...
930:
Thanks for commenting. Which terms are linked multiple times? They should not be, and I think I avoided doing that (except for
254:
194:
1459:
1455:
and is intentional. That page shouldn't be a dab, but rather an article on foramina in general; I changed it accordingly.
1446:
1419:
1410:
1393:
1381:
1365:
1268:
1251:
1224:
1110:
1089:
1037:
1020:
998:
969:
956:
938:
921:
765:
756:
737:
711:
686:
668:
653:
643:
607:
593:
583:
512:
502:
451:
442:
363:
342:
316:
307:
296:
271:
257:
197:
176:
167:
142:
77:
1006:
I read this ages ago, but got sidetracked by real world events. My few niggling concerns seem to have been addressed
962:
874:
851:
810:
561:
can be made? Saying "large rats" is not as impressive as getting a visual hint on how big it can actually be... like
1294:
493:" is not what I suggested; for one thing, the concept of "old adults ... than adults" seems strange on the tongue.
107:
102:
558:
1298:
1047:
1339:
So, I know these bands are uniserial, and that is defined, but I still don't know what they are. Also, per
803:
1164:
the convert templates are set to Brit spelling output, contrary to the spelling of the rest of the article
1406:
1361:
1315:
1235:
871:
848:
807:
162:
1347:
1331:
1302:
1080:
993:
951:
916:
131:
1386:
1305:, an opening at the back of the skull determined by the shape of the squamosal, is present but small.
403:" is a very fragmented sentence... (count the commas). Can it be broken down into shorter sentences?
219:
1033:
1015:
752:
707:
702:
Interesting article but mayhaps a bit too technical for the average reader interested in animals?
664:
639:
603:
579:
498:
438:
359:
335:
250:
190:
152:
135:
127:
1050:
for one regional overview), and some have better information. For example, the Canary Islands rat
1442:
1205:
1068:
1389:
is beautifully blue now. I believe all other redlinked terms are in fact adequately explained.
1172:"Analysis of metrical data" is this the same as morphometrical, mentioned in the last section?
623:
a bit too technical? I feel overwhelmed at times and some terms seem sudden and abrupt, e.g. "
1399:
1354:
1340:
1290:
413:. I expanded a little on it now, however, and will try to write complementary articles on the
156:
562:
1456:
1416:
1390:
1378:
1343:, volume numbers in Literature cited should be bold; that can be done manually, or by using
1264:
1248:
1221:
1106:
1086:
1074:
1057:
986:
966:
944:
935:
909:
885:
862:
839:
762:
734:
683:
650:
590:
509:
448:
313:
304:
292:
268:
173:
139:
123:
74:
1278:; redlinks are not a problem, and stubbing them is not required. However, the redlinks in
1131:
caption: "…the island group to which Noronhomys is endemic." shouldn't this be past tense?
1062:
1140:
use non-breaking spaces for names with initials (or the equivalent {{nowrap}} template)
727:
1029:
1008:
748:
703:
660:
635:
599:
575:
494:
434:
355:
246:
186:
1438:
1275:
723:
230:
226:
215:
53:
719:
675:
1234:
Looks like you're right. The Zoological Record does list Weiss, and I think it is
1260:
1231:
My database gives the spelling of one of the source authors as Weiss, not Weise
1102:
1052:
431:
recorded that he visited an island just south of the equator on August 10, 1503.
288:
283:
What about a habitat. If nothing else a from the ground shot is present here:
264:
64:
931:
828:
429:
Lettera di Amerigo Vespucci delle Isole Nuovamente in Quattro Suoi Viaggi
847:
Fine and fine. Still think the taxonomy sections needs a rename though.
827:
As for the foramen, it's present in rodents that are not sigmodontines (
1452:
1319:
835:, for example, I believe). I added a clarification to account for that.
832:
312:
Done. Made a new map indicating the fossil site where they dug it up.
1180:"which are uniserial (consisting of a single prism)" what's a prism?
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
1437:; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox.
1072:
apparently succumbed to disease brought by introduced rodents, and
1334:, which are uniserial (consisting of a single enamel prism), ...
530:... in 39 specimens in which the entire molar row is preserved.
491:—with old adults have larger mandibular dimensions than adults—
793:- If it is absent how can it be present? Is it usually absent?
726:). Not including this information would make the article fail
627:": what is "opisthodont", which was never introduced earlier.
1415:
Good. Is there anything else you feel needs to be addressed?
861:
Sorry for missing that. What about "Discovery and taxonomy"?
1220:
still extant, so I don't think we should, even implicitly.
354:
are verifiably sourced and licensed, or in public domain.
112:
1371:
1244:
351:
57:
1293:
is present, separating two openings in the skull, the
389:
Why is it controversial? Elaborate for the readers.
380:... the authenticity of which is controversial ...
1469:The above discussion is preserved as an archive.
1151:No, "United States" is used as an adjective here.
806:, it would help the reader picture the creature.
985:now—concerns have been addressed. Good work! --
87:Featured article candidates/Noronhomys/archive1
43:. No further edits should be made to this page.
598:It cannot be helped then; quite unfortunate.
1475:No further edits should be made to this page.
29:The following is an archived discussion of a
8:
285:File:Fernando de Noronha Conceicao Beach.jpg
541:... in 39 specimens with intact molar rows.
91:
41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
1126:"Numerous but fragmentary fossil remains"
229:looks good, but the alt text for the map
1509:was invoked but never defined (see the
1492:was invoked but never defined (see the
1481:
625:The upper incisors are opisthodont, ...
237:, not describe its detailed appearance.
94:
84:
1175:Yes, changed this into morphometrical.
18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates
7:
1101:Looks good, just a few suggestions:
185:yet covered in this big ol' wiki. --
1504:
1487:
1204:"The introduced black rat..." link
24:
1505:Cite error: The named reference
1488:Cite error: The named reference
231:should describe what the map is
1353:. The jargon here needs work.
965:), and will continue to do so.
674:accessory ridges, an important
172:Hey, you stole my article! ;-)
1295:masticatory–buccinator foramen
761:Thanks for the clarification.
427:which took him to Brazil; the
1:
922:17:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
816:20:14, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
738:13:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
712:11:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
644:22:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
584:22:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
503:22:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
443:22:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
364:11:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
343:20:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
317:03:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
308:00:39, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
297:00:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
272:00:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
258:23:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
198:23:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
181:Always amazes me how much is
177:22:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
168:22:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
143:23:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
78:23:08, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
1460:07:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
1447:03:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
1420:22:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
1411:18:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
1394:10:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
1382:22:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1366:22:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1269:08:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1252:08:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1225:08:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1111:05:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
1090:13:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
1038:23:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
1021:17:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
999:13:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
766:08:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
757:00:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
687:08:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
151:- Now look what you made me
970:19:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
963:posterolateral palatal pits
957:19:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
939:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
889:10:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
880:09:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
866:08:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
857:22:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
843:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
669:23:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
654:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
608:23:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
594:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
513:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
452:21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
235:(or refer to adjacent text)
31:featured article nomination
1530:
1139:Michael D. Carleton -: -->
733:Thanks for your comments!
350:all images and maps as of
1299:foramen ovale accessorius
1134:Yes, that's better. Done.
559:File:Largesttheropods.svg
130:in 1503, he saw not only
1472:Please do not modify it.
1199:Of course. I changed it.
1048:Rodents of the Caribbean
36:Please do not modify it.
56:22:23, 20 January 2010
1316:entepicondylar foramen
132:lizards with two tails
1332:Hunter-Schreger bands
1303:subsquamosal fenestra
1081:Megalomys desmarestii
1398:Better: thank you!
1387:Hunter-Schreger band
730:(comprehensiveness).
539:Suggest change to: "
478:Suggest change to: "
1330:The PI consists of
1156:link specific name
369:Comments Leaning to
220:dead external links
128:Fernando de Noronha
1069:Rattus nativitatis
420:Suggest changing "
208:Technical comments
1322:(upper arm bone).
1291:alisphenoid strut
1118:Quite true. Done.
780:- leaning towards
341:
327:Everything fine.
120:
119:
81:
1521:
1514:
1508:
1503:
1497:
1491:
1486:
1474:
1403:
1358:
1352:
1346:
1075:Megalomys luciae
1058:Christmas Island
1018:
1011:
996:
991:
954:
949:
919:
914:
877:
872:Sabine's Sunbird
854:
849:Sabine's Sunbird
813:
808:Sabine's Sunbird
417:and his voyage.
333:
332:
124:Amerigo Vespucci
92:
71:
48:The article was
38:
1529:
1528:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1506:
1500:
1489:
1483:
1479:
1470:
1451:The link is to
1401:
1356:
1350:
1344:
1188:link vulcanism
1063:Rattus macleari
1016:
1009:
994:
987:
952:
945:
917:
910:
875:
852:
811:
728:FA criterion 1b
328:
325:Source comments
68:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1527:
1525:
1516:
1515:
1498:
1480:
1478:
1477:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1431:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1375:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1284:
1283:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1113:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1044:
1023:
1001:
979:
978:
977:
976:
975:
974:
973:
972:
925:
924:
902:
901:
900:
899:
898:
897:
896:
895:
894:
893:
892:
891:
870:Sounds right.
836:
825:
819:
818:
799:
798:
794:
787:
786:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
741:
740:
731:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
619:
618:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
610:
574:can be made.
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
398:Furthermore, "
394:
393:
392:
391:
322:
321:
320:
319:
300:
299:
275:
274:
243:
242:
238:
233:trying to show
224:
205:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
118:
117:
116:
115:
113:External links
110:
105:
97:
96:
90:
89:
83:
82:
73:Nominator(s):
67:
62:
61:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1526:
1512:
1502:
1499:
1495:
1485:
1482:
1476:
1473:
1467:
1466:
1461:
1458:
1454:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1433:
1432:
1421:
1418:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1392:
1388:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1380:
1376:
1373:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1349:
1342:
1338:
1333:
1329:
1328:
1326:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1312:
1309:
1304:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1258:
1254:
1253:
1250:
1246:
1237:
1233:
1232:
1230:
1226:
1223:
1218:
1217:
1214:
1209:
1208:
1207:
1203:
1198:
1197:
1195:
1190:
1189:
1187:
1182:
1181:
1179:
1174:
1173:
1171:
1166:
1165:
1163:
1158:
1157:
1155:
1150:
1149:
1147:
1142:
1141:
1138:
1133:
1132:
1130:
1125:
1124:
1122:
1117:
1116:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1097:
1096:
1091:
1088:
1083:
1082:
1077:
1076:
1071:
1070:
1065:
1064:
1059:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1024:
1022:
1019:
1014:
1012:
1005:
1002:
1000:
997:
992:
990:
984:
981:
980:
971:
968:
964:
960:
959:
958:
955:
950:
948:
942:
941:
940:
937:
933:
929:
928:
927:
926:
923:
920:
915:
913:
907:
904:
903:
890:
887:
883:
882:
881:
878:
873:
869:
868:
867:
864:
860:
859:
858:
855:
850:
846:
845:
844:
841:
837:
834:
830:
826:
823:
822:
821:
820:
817:
814:
809:
805:
801:
800:
795:
792:
789:
788:
784:
781:
779:
775:
774:
767:
764:
760:
759:
758:
754:
750:
745:
744:
743:
742:
739:
736:
732:
729:
725:
724:Sigmodontinae
721:
716:
715:
714:
713:
709:
705:
688:
685:
681:
677:
672:
671:
670:
666:
662:
657:
656:
655:
652:
647:
646:
645:
641:
637:
632:
631:
629:
628:
626:
621:
620:
609:
605:
601:
597:
596:
595:
592:
587:
586:
585:
581:
577:
572:
571:
568:
567:
566:
564:
560:
555:
554:
546:
545:
544:
542:
537:
536:
534:
533:
531:
526:
525:
514:
511:
506:
505:
504:
500:
496:
492:
488:
487:
485:
484:
483:
481:
476:
475:
473:
472:
470:
465:
464:
453:
450:
446:
445:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
419:
418:
416:
412:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
402:
396:
395:
390:
387:
386:
384:
383:
381:
376:
375:
374:
373:
372:Weak support:
370:
366:
365:
361:
357:
353:
352:this revision
349:
348:Image review:
345:
344:
339:
338:
331:
326:
318:
315:
311:
310:
309:
306:
302:
301:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
281:
280:
279:
273:
270:
266:
262:
261:
260:
259:
256:
253:
252:
248:
239:
236:
234:
228:
225:
222:
221:
217:
212:
211:
210:
209:
199:
196:
193:
192:
188:
184:
180:
179:
178:
175:
171:
170:
169:
166:
165:
160:
159:
154:
150:
147:
146:
145:
144:
141:
137:
133:
129:
125:
114:
111:
109:
106:
104:
101:
100:
99:
98:
93:
88:
85:
80:
79:
76:
70:
69:
66:
63:
60:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
37:
32:
27:
26:
19:
1501:
1484:
1471:
1468:
1434:
1348:cite journal
1279:
1256:
1255:
1243:
1236:this student
1167:Killed them.
1098:
1079:
1073:
1067:
1061:
1051:
1025:
1007:
1003:
988:
982:
946:
911:
905:
790:
782:
777:
776:
720:synapomorphy
701:
679:
676:synapomorphy
624:
556:
540:
538:
535:
529:
527:
490:
479:
477:
474:
468:
466:
430:
426:
421:
414:
410:
399:
397:
388:
385:
379:
377:
371:
368:
367:
347:
346:
336:
329:
324:
323:
277:
276:
249:
244:
232:
213:
207:
206:
189:
182:
163:
157:
148:
121:
108:Citation bot
72:
49:
47:
35:
28:
1053:Malpaisomys
1017:talk to me?
241:"In IUCN."?
136:some snakes
1341:WP:MOSBOLD
1206:introduced
989:Andy Walsh
947:Andy Walsh
912:Andy Walsh
797:taxonomy"?
680:Holochilus
411:Noronhomys
265:Oryzomyini
164:Μολὼν λαβÎ
65:Noronhomys
1511:help page
1494:help page
1372:clarified
1030:Everyking
1010:Jimfbleak
749:Jappalang
704:Jappalang
661:Jappalang
636:Jappalang
600:Jappalang
576:Jappalang
495:Jappalang
435:Jappalang
356:Jappalang
216:dab links
1439:Dabomb87
1297:and the
1099:Comments
1056:and the
932:mesoloph
906:Comments
833:hamsters
829:deermice
804:this one
401:snakes".
227:Alt text
126:visited
103:Analysis
54:Karanacs
50:promoted
1453:foramen
1402:Georgia
1357:Georgia
1320:humerus
1257:Support
1026:Comment
1004:Support
983:Support
783:support
778:Comment
722:of the
678:of the
489:Eh... "
415:Lettera
223:—sweet.
149:Comment
95:Toolbox
1457:Ucucha
1417:Ucucha
1391:Ucucha
1379:Ucucha
1301:. The
1276:WP:RED
1261:Sasata
1249:Ucucha
1222:Ucucha
1103:Sasata
1087:Ucucha
995:(talk)
967:Ucucha
953:(talk)
936:Ucucha
918:(talk)
886:Ucucha
884:Done.
863:Ucucha
840:Ucucha
763:Ucucha
735:Ucucha
684:Ucucha
651:Ucucha
591:Ucucha
510:Ucucha
486:Done.
449:Ucucha
447:Done.
425:" to "
314:Ucucha
305:Ucucha
289:Aranae
278:Images
269:Ucucha
174:Ucucha
140:Ucucha
75:Ucucha
1400:Sandy
1355:Sandy
1210:Done.
1191:Done.
1159:Done.
1143:Done.
1060:rats
547:Done.
423:1503.
122:When
16:<
1507:CO16
1490:CO13
1443:talk
1435:Dabs
1407:Talk
1362:Talk
1314:The
1280:this
1274:See
1265:talk
1245:Diff
1107:talk
1078:and
1066:and
1034:talk
876:talk
853:talk
831:and
812:talk
753:talk
708:talk
665:talk
640:talk
604:talk
580:talk
563:this
499:talk
439:talk
360:talk
330:RB88
293:talk
255:name
195:name
158:Mike
134:and
1289:An
433:"
251:odd
218:or
214:No
191:odd
183:not
155:!--
52:by
1513:).
1496:).
1445:)
1409:)
1370:I
1364:)
1351:}}
1345:{{
1267:)
1247:.
1109:)
1036:)
1013:-
755:)
710:)
667:)
642:)
606:)
582:)
532:"
501:)
471:"
441:)
382:"
362:)
295:)
247:an
245:--
187:an
161:-
153:do
59:.
33:.
1441:(
1405:(
1360:(
1263:(
1238:.
1105:(
1032:(
751:(
706:(
663:(
638:(
602:(
578:(
565:.
543:"
528:"
497:(
482:"
467:"
437:(
378:"
358:(
340:)
337:T
334:(
291:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.