Occasional Papers

Museum of Texas Tech University

Number 218 18 December 2002

The Mammals of Mexico: Composition,
Distribution, and Conservation Status

Gemkdo Cemiiqs, JoA^m AmoYO-QAEMiEE, Am RodriqoA. UEmiim

It is well known that Mexico is among the most
diverse countries in the world. In about 1,6% of the
emerged land surface of earth, it holds about 10% of
the living species (Ceballos and Navarro, 1991; Ceballos
and Brown, 1995; Mittermeier and Goettsch de M,,
1992; Mittemieier et al., 1997). Although in recent
years several authors have compiled lists of terrestrial
and marine Mexican mammals (Arita and Ceballos,
1997; Auricles, 1993; Cervantes et al, 1994; Ramirez-
Pulidoetak, 1983,1986, 1996; Salinas and Ladron de
Guevara, 1993; Torres et al., 1995), there have been
many taxonomic changes, descriptions of new spe¬
cies, and new^ records of species that have signifi¬

cantly increased Mexico’s mammalian inventory. In
this paper we present an updated checklist that in¬
cludes the complete mammal fauna of Mexico as cur¬
rently understood, identify its main affinities and spe¬
cies sources such as endemicity and insularity, as well
as the conservation status for all species. We also in¬
clude a section where we discuss the introduced spe¬
cies that have become established in Mexico. By up¬
dating the list of Mexican mammal species, w e hope
to provide a platform that stimulates additional w ork
on the mammals of our country, and further entices
research by Mexican and foreign researchers.

Methods

To compile the list, we used as a base line the
works by Ramirez-Pulido et al. (1996) and Arita and
Ceballos (1997). We complemented the initial list with
additional references detailed below. We excluded in¬
troduced murid rodents {Mus mmculuSy Rattus

norvegiem^ and Rattm rattus) and domesticated spe¬
cies with feral populations, such as dogs, cats, goats,
and donkeys. Our nomenclature follows Wilson and
Reeder (1993). Additions and modifications are justi¬
fied as follows:

2

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

1) We follow Hershkovitz (1992) in recognizing
several families in the Order Didelphimorphia,

2) We follow Woodman and Timm (1999, 2000)
for the rearrangement of specific names of Cryptotis.

3) We recognize three species of Notiosorex fol¬
lowing Carraway and Timm (2000).

4) We follow Yates and Salazar (in press) in rec¬
ognizing Scapanus anthony as a valid species, endemic
to the Sieo’a de Juarez, Baja California.

5) Bats of the genus Centronycteris in the north¬
ern part of the range were determined to be a separate
species by Simmons and Handley (1998)

6) rhe subfamily arrangement within
Phyllostomidae is still in discussion. Wetterer et al.
(2000) presented a purportedly strong analysis based
on “total evidence”, proposing the existence of seven
subfamilies, but Baker et al. (2000) analyzed a differ¬
ent character set (DNA sequence from the recombi¬
nation-activating gene-2) and their data do not support
some of the proposals by Wetterer et al. (2000). There
are agreements on some groups being monophyletic
as Desmodontinae, Glossophaginae, and
Stenodermatinae (except Caroliia). Monophyly of
those genera traditionally included within
Phyllostominae remains controversial, as does the in¬
clusion of Caroliia within Stenodennatinae. Here, we
follow the classification of McKenna and Bell (1997),
recognizing the subfamily Phyllostominae with no tribe
designations, and retaining Caroliia within the
Stenodennatinae.

7) We consider more than one genus in the pre¬
viously recognized Micronycteris following Simmons
and Voss (1998) and Wetterer et al. (2000). We con¬
cur with Simmons (1996) in that the valid name for
the species of Micronycteris with a shallow notch on
the ear band, occunmg in Mexico and northern Cen¬
tral America, is M. microtis instead of M. megalotis.

8) Trinycteris nicefori was recently collected in
Mexico by L. Leon and J. Arroyo Cabrales,

9) Wc follow Simmons and Voss (1998) and
Wetterer et al. (2000) in recognizing Phylloderma as
different from PhyUostomus.

10) We follow Baker ct al. (2002) in recognizing
Caroliia sowelli as distinct from C brevicauda.

11) Another controversy that has not been re¬
solved, even with recent data analysis (Baker et al.,
2000; Van Den Bussche et ah, 1998; Wetterer et al.,
2000) is w'hether Dermanura is a subgenus ofZl

or a sister genus. We think that until further data fal¬
sify the sister-relationships of those taxa, they should
be recognized as separate genera.

12) The use of the subfamily Myotinae and the
family Antrozoidae follows Sintmons (1998).

13) Based on a large set of phylogenetic data for
the species within the Order Primates, Groves (2001)
proposed the splitting of the Family Cebidae, with the
genera Alouatta and Ateles, the only two currently
occurring in Mexico, allocated within the Family
Atelidae. Also, the name for the subfamily where
Alouatta is allocated is changed from Aiouattinae to
Mycetinae.

14) Mustela nigripes was successfully reintro¬
duced m the Janos - Casas Grandes region in north¬
western Chihuahua recently (Pacheco et ah, 2001).
In the summer of 2002 we recorded the first black¬
footed ferrets bom in the wild in Mexico,

15) We follow Dragoo and Honeycutt (1997) in
recognizing the Family Mephitidae as different from
Mustehdae.

F6) Records oiMesoplodon peruvianas near La
Paz, Baja California Sur are based on Urban-R. and
Aurioles-G (1992). An additional unidentified species
of Mesoplodon has been recorded in Mexico (Salinas
and Ladron de Guevara, 1993).

17) The Galapagos fur seal (Arctocephalits
galapagoensis) was recently recorded in the coast of
Chiapas (E. Espinosa and G. Ceballos, pers. obs.).

18) Mazama pandora from the Yucatan penin¬
sula was given specific staius, and was separated from
M americana by Medellin ct al. (1998).

Ceballos et al— The Mammals of Mexico

19) We did not follow Gmbb (1993) and Ramfrez-
Piilido et al. (1996) in using Pecari tajacu for the col¬
lared peccary, and retain Tayassu tajacu because of
the arguments provided by Wright (1989).

20) We follow Hall (1981) in considering
Chaetodipus anthonyi and Ch. dalquesti as distinct
species. Williams et al. (1993) considered them con-
specific with Ch. fadax and Ch. arenarius, respec¬
tively but an analysis of their proposals was not pro¬
vided.

21) We include Chaetodipus eremicus as differ¬
ent from C. penicillatusy as proposed by extensive
analyses by Lee et al. (1996).

22) The populations of Chaetodipus baileyi west
of the Colorado river, from southern California to the
Baja California Peninsula, were recently recognized as
a distinct species {Ch. rudinoris) on the basis of mito¬
chondrial DNA by Riddle et al. (2000a).

23) Similarly, the populations of Peromyscus
eremicus west of the Colorado river, from southern
California to the Baja California Peninsula, were re¬
cently recognized as a distinct species {Peromyscus
fraterculus) by Riddle et al. (2000b).

24) We recognize Peromyscus sagax as a valid
taxon, endemic to Central Michoacan, following Bra¬
dley el al. (1996), which used molecular, caryological,
and morphometric data.

25) Hafner et al. (2001) used genetic and mo¬
lecular data to evaluate the status of insular species of
Peromyseus of Baja California. We did not follow them
in considering P. stephani, P. interparietalis, P.
caniceps.^ and P. dickeyi as subspecies of P. hoyiii, P.
eremicus, P. fraterculus, andP! merriami, respectively.
Additional morphometric, karyotypic, and allozymic
data should be used to determine level of difference of
the island’s populations.

26) We follow Edwards et al. (2001) in recog¬
nizing the Neotoma albigula populations east of the
Conchos river as a different species {Neotoma
leucodon).

3

27) Recently, Matocq (2002) analyzed morpho¬
logical, mitochondrial sequence, and nuclear
microsatellite data, and based on qualitative cranial,
gland penes, and molecular characters data, proposed
that the dusky-footed woo drat, Neotoma fuscipes, is
countituted by two isolated taxonomic units, corre¬
sponding to those southern populations the specific
name Neotoma macrotis, with no subspecies recog¬
nized at this time.

28) A new species of Habromys (//, delicatulus)
has been recently described from Central Mexico
(Carleton et al., 2002).

29) We follow the Intemational Commission on
Zoological Nomenclature (ISCN, 1998) in recogniz¬
ing the Family Cuniculidae and the genus Cuniculus as
the valid name for C paca.

30) We followed Ruedas (1998) in considering
the populartions Syivilagus floridanus of southern
Texas and northern Coahuila as a different species (S.
robustus).

We gatlrered infonnation on distribution and zoo-
geogiaphic affinities from several sources. Distribu¬
tional patterns were determined using the maps of Hall
(1981) and new information published since then, such
as Ceballos et al. (in press), and Medellin et al. (1997).
We classified Mexican mammals according to their
recent geographical distribution (DIST) as follows: 1)
Mexican species shared with other North American
countries (NA), 2) Mexican species shared with other
South American countries (SA), 3) species with wide
distributional ranges that include both North and South
America (AM), 4) species that are endemic to Middle
America, that is, Mexico and Central America (MA),
and 5) Mexican endemics (MX).

The list of insular species (fNS) was compiled
from Ceballos and Rodriguez (1993), Engstrom et al.
(1989), Jones and Lawlor (1965), Lawlor (1983),
Ramlrez-Pulido and Miidespachcr (1987), Sanchez-
H. (1986), and Wilson (1991). Species are described
as fully insular; i.e. not present in the mainland (1),
continental (C), and insular-continental (IC), species
that combine the two patterns.

4

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

Conservation status was compiled from
the Mexican list of species at risk (SEMARNAT, 2000),
lUCN (Hilton-Taylor, 2000; see also
httm//www,redli5t.org/search/search-expert.php) and

CITES (2001). CITES classifies species subject to
international trade in three appendices. Appendix I
includes “all species tlireatened with extinction which
are or may be affected by trade. Trade in specimens
of these species must be subject to particularly strict
regulation in order not to endanger further their sur¬
vival and must only be authorized in exceptional cir¬
cumstances.” Appendix II includes “all species which
although not necessarily now threatened with extinc¬
tion may become so unless trade in specimens of such

species is subject to strict regulation in order to avoid
utilization incompatible with their survival, and other
species must be subject to regulation specimens of
such species is subject to strict regulation in order to
avoid utilization incompatible with their survival, and
other species which must be subject to regulation in
order that trade in specimens of certain species re¬
ferred to in the previous paragraph may be brought
under effective control.” Finally, Appendix III includes
“species which any Party identifies as being subject to
regulation, within its jurisdiction for the purpose of pre¬
venting or restricting exploitation, and as needing the
co-operation of other Parties in the control of trade”
(see also http://www.cites.org h

Species Composition, Diversity, and Distribution

The mammal fauna of Mexico includes 525 na¬
tive species in 292 genera, 47 families, and 12 orders
(Table 1, Fig. 1). Mexico ranks the second in the
world in teniis of numbers of mammals, tied with In¬
donesia, and behind Brazil (Ceballos and Brown, 1995;
Mittermeier et aL, 1997). Rodents and bats are the
most species-rich orders contributing over 77 % of all
species (Table 1). Other orders contributing large
numbers are carnivores, cetaceans, insectivores,
and lagomorphs. On average, each genus is repre¬
sented by less than two species; however, there
are speciose genera like Peromyscus (46 spp), Myolis
(19 spp), Chaetodipus (18 spp), Neotoma (17 spp),
Reilhrodontomys (13 spp), and Cryptotis (13 spp).

Thirty percent (159 spp) of all the species
and four percent of the genera {Megasorex.
Musonycteris, Pappogeomys, Zygogeomys,
Osgoodomys, Megadontomys, Nehonia, Neotomodon,
XenojYiys, Hodomys, Romerolagus) are endemic to
the country (see also Ceballos and Rodriguez, 1993;
Ceballos et a),, 1998; Ramirez-Pulido and
Miidespacher, 1987). Endemic species belong to 7

orders and 12 families, but the majority (112 spp; 71%)
are rodents.

The remaining fauna is a combination of Neo¬
tropical, Nearctic, or shared species that contribute
two-thirds of the Mexican species (see also Alvarez
and de LaChica, 1974; Anta, 1993; Ortega and Arita,
1998). Similar patterns have been found in many other
groups of plants and animals (Ramammoithy et al.,
1993), No other continental country in the world, how¬
ever, contains the complete limit between any two bio¬
geographic regions.

The proportion of terrestrial mammal species
among orders also shows that the Mexican fauna re¬
sults from the combination of Nearctic and Neotropi¬
cal elements. In all orders but one, the proportion of
species for Mexico is intermediate between that for
the Nearctic and the Neotropical realms. The excep¬
tion is for species of the order Chiroptera, which ac¬
count for more than 30% of the whole Mexican fauna
of terrestrial mammals, and is mainly composed of
Neotropical species.

NUMBER OF SPECIES

Ceballos et al^— The Mammals of Mexico

5

Table I. Species diversity and composition of the mammals from Mexico.

Order

Family

Genera

Species

Endemic

Species

DIDELPHIMORPHIA

3

6

8

1

XENARTHRA

2

4

4

0

INSECTIVORA

2

6

32

19

CHIROPTERA

9

64

QO

15

PRIMATES

1

2

3

0

CARNIVORA

8

27

40

3

CETACEA

7

25

39

1

SIRENIA

1

1

1

0

PERISSODACTYLA

1

I

1

0

ARCTIODACTYLA

4

7

10

{)

RODEN'l'IA

8

46

234

113

LAGOMORPHA

1

3

15

7

iotal

47

192

525

159

\r "y

MAMMAL ORDERS

Figure 1. Number of species in the 12 orders of mammals represented in Mexico. The closed bars
represent all species; the open bars represent endemic species.

6

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

ORDER DIDELPHIMORPHIA
FAMILY MARMOSIDAE

SUBFAMILY MARMOSINAE

Marmosa canescens (J. A. Alien, 1893)
Marm05a mexicana Merriam, 1897

FAMILY CALUROMYIDAE

SUBFAMILY CALUROMYINAE

Caluromys derbianus (Waterhouse, 1841}

FAMILY DIDELPHIDAE

SUBFAMILY DIDELPHINAE

Chironecles minimus (Zimmermann, 1780)
Diileiphis marsupialis Linnaeus, 1757
Didelphis virginiana Kerr, 1792
Metachirus nudicaudatus (Desmarest, 1817)
Philander opossum (Linnaeus, 1758)

ORDER XENARTHRA

FAMILY DASYPODIDAE

SUBFAMILIA DASYPODINAE

Cabassous centralis (Miller, 1899)

Dasypus novemcinctus Linnaeus, 1758

FAMILY MYRMECOPHAGIDAE

Cyclopes didaciylus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Tamandua mexicana (SaussLire, 1860)

ORDER INSECTIVORA

FAMILY SORICIDAE

SUBFAMILY SORICINAE

Cryptotis alticola (Merriam, 1895)

Cryplotis goldmani (Merriam, 1895)
Cryptofis goodwini Jackson, 1933

lUCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

I C MX

C MA

C SA Pr VU

C SA P

1 C SA

1C AM

C SA

C SA

C SA P III

1 C AM

C SA P

C SA P

C MX

C MX

C MA

Ceballos et al— The Mammals of Mexico

7

Ctypioiis griseoveniris Jackson, 193!^
Crypiotis magna (Meiriam, 1895)

Crypiotis mciyensis (Merrianri, 1901)

Crypiods nierriami Choate, 1 970
CrypU)(i.v mexicann (Coues, 1877)

Crypt Otis fteisoni (Merriam, 1895)

Crypiotis obscura (Merriani, 1895)

Crypto!is parva (Say, 1823)

Crypt Otis peregrina (Merriam, 1895)

Cryptotis philUpsi! (Schal dacIt, 1966)

Meg os or ex gigtts (Merriam, 1897)

Notiosorex crowfordi (Cones, 1877)
Notiosorex, evotis (Coues, 1877)

Notiosorex viliai Carr a way & Timm, 2000
Sorex orizonae Diersing & Hoffmeisier, 1977
So rex emorginotus Jackson, 1925
So rex mac rod on Merriam, 1895
Sorex milleri Jackson, 1947
Sorex monticoliis Merriam, 1890
oreopolus Merriam, 1892
Sorex ornatus Mcmam, 1895
Sorex saussurei Merriam, 1892
Sorex sdateri Merriam, 1897
Sorej: stizodoii Merriam, 1895
Sorex ventralis Merriam, 1895
Sorex veroepocis Alston, 1877

FAMILY TALPIDAE

SUBFAMILY TALPINAE

Scciiopns oquaticus (Linnaeus, 1758)
Scapeuits laiittionus (Bachman, 1842)
Scapanus anthony (Allen, 1893)

ORDER CHJROPTERA

FAMILY EMBALLONURIDAE

SUBFAMILY EMBALLONURINAE

Balontiopteryx io Thomas, 1904
Balontiopteryx plicota Peters, 1867
Ceruronyctens centralis Thomas, 1912
Dididuriis a I bus Wied-Neuwied, 1820
Feropteryx kappleri Peters, 1867
Peropteiyx mocrotis (Wagner, 1843)
Rynchofiycteris no so (Wied- Neuwied, 1820)
Saccopteryx biiineoto (Temmiiick, 1 838)
Sticcopteryx lepturo (Schreber, 1774)

INS

DIST

SEMARNAT

lUCN/

CITES

C

MA

c

MX

Pr

c

MA

Pr

c

MA

c

MX

c

MX

c

MX

c

AM

c

MX

c

MX

c

MX

A

I c

NA

A

c

MX

c

MX

c

NA

P

vu

c

MX

c

MX

Pr

c

MX

Pr

vu

c

NA

c

MX

c

NA

*

c

MA

*

c

MX

Pr

LN

c

MX

Pr

LN

c

MX

c

MA

Pr

C

NA,

A

c

NA

A

c

MX

A

C

MA

1 c

SA

c

SA

Pr

c

SA

c

SA

Pr

c

SA

c

SA

Pr

c

SA

c

SA

Pr

8

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

INS

DIST

SEMARNAT

FAMILY NOCTILIONIDAE

Noctilio {slbiventns Desmarest, 1818

C

SA

Pr

Noctilio leporinus (Linnaeus, 1758)

C

SA

FAMILY MORMOOPIDAE

Mormoops megnlophylla (Peters, 1864)

I c

AM

Fieronotus davyi Gray, 1838

I c

SA

Pteronotus gymnonoius Natterer, 1843

c

SA

Pr

Pleronotus parneilii (Gray, 1843)

I c

SA

Pieronotus personatus (Wagner, 1843)

1 c

SA

FAMILY PHYLLOSTOMIDAE

SUBFAMILY MACROTINAE

Macrolus californicus Baird, 1858

C

NA

Macrotus waterhousii Gray, 1843

I C

MA

SUBFAMILY MICRONYCTERINAE

Glyphonycteris sylvestris Thomas, 1896

c

SA

Micronycteris brachyotis (Dobson, 1879)

c

SA

A

Micronycteris microtis Miller, 1898

I c

SA

Microtiycteris schmidtorurn Sanborn, 1935

c

SA

A

Trinycteris nicefori Sanborn 1949

c

SA

SUBFAMILY DESMODONTINAE

Desmodus rotundus (E. Geoffrey, 1810)

c

SA

Diaemus young: (Jentink, 1893)

c

SA

Pr

Diphylia ecaudata Spix, 1823

c

AM

SUBFAMILY VAMPYRINAE

Chrotopterus auritus (Peters, 1856)

c

SA

A

Trachops cirrhosus (Spix, 1823)

c

SA

A

Varnpyrum spectrum (Linnaeus, 1758)

c

SA

P

SUBFAMILY PHYLLOSTOMINAE

TRIBE PHYLLOSTOMINI

Lonchorhina aurita Tomes, 1863

C

SA

A

Macrophylium macrophyUum (Schinz, 1821)

C

SA

A

Mimon cozumeiae Goldman, 1914

C

SA

A

Mimon crenuiatum (E, Geoffroy, 1810)

C

SA

A

Phyllodenna sienops Peters, 1865

c

SA

A

lUCN/

CITES

Ceimllos et al— The Mammals of M^:xico

INS

DIST

SEMARNAT

FhyUostomus discoior Wagner, 1843

C

SA

Tonatia brasiliense (Fclers, 1866)

c

SA

A

Tonatia evoiis Davis & Carter, 1978

c

MA

A

Tonaiia Haurophiia Koopman & Williams, 1951

i c

SA

A

TRIBE GLOSSOPHAGINl

Anoum ^eoffyoyi Gray, 1S38

c

SA

Choeroniscus godmani (Thomas, 1903)

c

SA

Choetotiyctens mexicann Tschudi, 1844

c

NA

A

Glossophaga commissarisi Gardner, 1962

c

SA

Cilossopbiign leachis (Gray, 1844)

c

MA

Glossophaga morenoi Martinez & Villa, 1938

c

MX

Glossophaga soriciaa (Pallas, 1766)

c

SA

Hylonycteris underwoodi Thomas, 190J

c

MA

Leptonycteris curasoae Miller, 1900

1 c

AM

A

Leptonyctens tuvalis (Saussure, 1860)

c

NA

A

Lichanycreyis obscitra Thomas, 1895

c

SA

s¥iiso>iycteris harrisoni Sclialdach & McLaughlin, 1960

c

MX

P

TRIBE STENODERMATINl

Artibous hifsutus Andcrscn, 1906

c

MX

Artibeus intermedtus J. A. Allen, 1897

1 c

SA

Artibeus Jtiawicensis Leach, 1821

[ c

SA

Artibeus lifuratus (Olfcrs, 1818)

I c

SA

Carollia sowelli Baker el al., 2002

c

MA

Carollia perspicillaia (Linnaeus, 1758)

c

SA

Carollia subrufa (Hahn, 1905)

c

MA

Centurio senex Gray, 1842

c

SA

Chirodeniia salvini Dobson, 1878

c

SA

Chirodoraia villosiim Peicrs, 1860

c

SA

Dermanura azteoas Andersen, 1906

c

MA

Dermaititra phaeolis (Miller, 1902)

1 c

SA

Dermanura wliecas (Saussure. I860)

c

MA

Deniianura watsoni Thomas, 1901

c

SA

Pr

Ench isshenes hartii ( TItonras, 1892)

c

SA

Pr

Platyrrhiniis helleri (Peters, 1866)

c

SA

Sturnira iilium (E. GcolTroy, 1810)

c

SA

Sturnira iudovici Anthony, 1924

c

SA

Uroderma bslobalum Peters, 1866

c

SA

Uroderma magnirostrum Davis, 1968

c

SA

Vampyressa pusilla (Wagner, 1843)

c

SA

Vampyrodes caracciali (Thomas. 1889)

c

SA

FAMILY NATALiDAE

Natahts stramineus Gray, 1838

I c

SA

9

lUCN/

CITES

vu

EN

VU

VLJ

10

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

lUCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

FAMILY THYROPTERIDAE

Thyroplera tricolor Spix, 1823

C SA Pr

FAMILY VESPERTILIONIDAE

SUBFAMILY MYOTINAE

Myods albescens {F. Geoffrey, 1806)

C

SA

Pr

Myofis auriculus Baker & Stains, 1955

C

AM

Myotis cadfornicus (Audubon & Bacbman, 1842)

C

AM

Myotis carieri La Val, 1973

C

MX

Myotis cUiohibrum Merriam, 1886

c

NA

Myotis elegans Ilall, 1962

c

MA

Myotis evotis (II- Allen, 1864)

c

NA

Myotis fmdleyi Bogan, 1978

1

MX

VU

Myotis fortidens M iller & Allen, 1928

c

M A

Myotis keaysi J, A, Allen, 1914

c

SA

Myotis lucifugus (Lc Conte, 1831)

c

NA

Myotis nigricans (Schinz, 1821)

c

SA

Myotis peninsularis Miller, 1898

c

MX

vu

Myotis planiceps Baker, 1955

c

MX

P

CR

Myotis thy son odes Miller, 1897

c

NA

Myotis velifer (J, A, Allen, 1890)

c

AM

Myotis vivesi Mcnegaux, 1901

c

MX

P

VU

Myotis voinns (FL Allen, 1866)

c

NA

Myotis yurnonensis (H. Allen, 1864)

c

NA

SUBFAMILY VESPERTILIONINAE

Corynorhinus nie?cicnnus G M. Allen, 1916

c

MX

Corynorkinus towsendii (Cooper, 1837)

I c

NA

VU

Eptesicus brasiliensis (Desmaresl, 1819)

c

SA

Eptesicus furinalis (d’Orbigny, 1847)

c

SA

Eptesicus fa sc us (Bcauvois, 1796)

c

AM

Euderma macuiatum (J. A. Allen, 1891)

c

NA

Pr

Id io nycteri s phyl lot is G, M, A11 c n, 1916

c

NA

Lasionycteris noctivagans (Lc Conte, 1831)

C'

NA

Pr

Lasiurus blossevillii (Lesson & Garnot, 1826)

1 C

AM

Losiurus borealis (Muller, 1776)

c

NA

Lasiurus cinereus (Bcauvois, 1796}

c

AM

Lasiurus ega (Gervais, 1856)

c

AM

Lasiurus intermedius H. Allen, 1862

c

NA

Lasiurus xantlsinus (Thomas, 1897)

c

NA

iWycticelus humeralis (Rafinesque, 1818)

c

NA

Pipistrellus kesperus (H, Allen, 1864)

1C

NA

Pipistrelhis subfJavus (F. Cuvier, 1832)

c

NA

Rhogeessa aeneus Goodwin, 1958

c

MX

Rhogeessa aileni Thomas, 1892

c

MX

LN

Rhogeessa ge noways I Baker, 1984

c

MX

Pr

VU

Ckballos et ai,—The Mammals of Mexico

11

Rfiogeessa gracilix MiUer» 1897
Rhogeessa mira La VaJ, 1973
Rhogeessa parvula H, Allen, 1866
Rhogeessa tumicia H, Allen, 1866

FAMILY ANTROZOIDAE

Afurozous palUdiis (Le Conte, 1850)

Bauenis dubiaqitercus (Van Geider, 1959)

FAMILY MOLOSSIDAE

SUBFAMILY MOLOSSINAE

Eimtops auripe/ululiis (Shaw. 1800)

Enmops bonariensis (Peters, 1874)

Eumops glaucinus (Wagner, 1843)

Eumops fwnsae Sanborn, 1932
Eumops perotis (Schinz, 1821)

Eumops underwoodi Goodwin, 1940
Molossops greenfialii (Goodwin, 1958)
Molossus aztecus Satissiire, 1860
Molossus bondae J, A. Allen, 1904
Moiossus coibensis J. A. Allen, 1904
Molossus motossus (Pallas. 1766)
i\Mossus rufus E. Geoffroy, 1805
Molossus sinaloae J. A, Allen, 1906
Nyclinomops uurispiitosus (Pcale, 1848)
IVyctinoniops femorosaccus (Meiriam, 1889)
iWyctinotuops laticaudatus (E. Geoffroy, 1805}
\ycliiJOrtiOps macrotis (Gray, 1840)

Promops centroHs Thomas, 1915

SUBFAMILY TADARiNAE

Todaridn brasihensis (I, Geoffrey, 1824)

ORDER PRIMATES

FAMILY ATELIDAE

SUBFAMILY MYCETINAE

Alouafta palliaia (Gray, !849)

Alouaila pi'gra Lawrence, 1933

SUBFAMILY ATE LIN A E

Aides geoffroyi Kuhl, 1820

INS DtST

C MX

C MX

1C MX

C SA

I C NA

I C MA

C SA

I C SA

C AM

C SA

C AM

C AM

C SA

C MA

C SA

C SA

C SA

C SA

C SA

C SA

C NA

C SA

C AM

C SA

C AM

C SA

C M A

C MA

SEMARNAT

Pr

Pr

Pr

P

lUCN/

CITES

EN

VI1

VU'

vu=

12

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

[UCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

ORDER CARNIVORA
FAMILY CANIDAE

Can is latrans Say, 1823

I C

NA

Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758

C

NA

E

FAV’

Urocyon cinereoargenteus (Schrcbcr, 1775)

IC

AM

ysilpes macron's (Merriam, 1888)

C

NA

A

FAMILY FELIDAE

SUBFAMILY FELJNAE

/lerpaHunis yaguarondi (Lacepede, 1809)

C

AM

A

LN^./

Leopardus pardah's (Litinaeus, 1758)

C’

AM

P

EN-'/

Leopardus wiedii (Sehin?:, 1821)

c

AM

P

[

Lynx rafus {Schrcber, 1777)

c

NA

11

Puiju! coiicolor (Linnaeus, 1771)

c

AM

SUBFAMILY RANTHERINAE

Pandiera onca (Linnaeus, 1758)

c

AM

P

FAMILY MUSTELIDAE

SUBFAMILY LUTRINAE

Enhydra lutris (Linnaeus, 1758)

C

NA

P

EN/1

Lonirn cnnadeiisis (Schreber, 1777)

C

NA

[|

Lontra iongicciudix (Oilers, 1818)

c

SA

A

[V

SUBFAMILY MUSTELINAE

Eira barbara (Linnaeus, 1758)

c

SA

P

VUh'I!

Galiais vinaia (Schreber, 1776)

c

SA

A

Ill

Miislela frenata Lichtenstein, 1831

c

AY1

Mustela nigripes (Audubon and Bachman, 1851)

c

NA

I

SUBFAMILY TAXIDIINAE

Taxidea laxits (Schreber, 1777)

c

NA

A

FAMILY MEPHITIDAE

Conepafus ieuconotus (I.ichienstein, 1 832)

c

NA

Conepaiits mesoleucus (Lichtenstein, 1832)

c

AM

1

Conepntus seinisiriaius (Boddaerl, 1784)

c

SA

*

Mephilis inacroura Idchtenstein, 1832

c

AM

Mephitis mephilis (Schreber, 1776)

c

NA

Ceballos et al— The Mammals of Mexico

13

Spilogale puiorius (Linnaeus, 1758)
Spilogale pygmaea Thomas, 1898

FAMILY OTARIIDAE

Arctocephaius galapngeoensis Helier, 1904
Arctocephalus townsendi Merriam, 1897
Zalophus californinnus: (Lesson, 1828)

FAMILY PHOCIDAE

Mirounga angusdrosiris (Gill, 1866)
Monachui' iropicalis (Gray, 1850)

Plioca vilulina Linnaeus, 1758

lUCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

C AM

C MX A

I SA

A NA

A AM

VU/1

P VU/J

Pr

A

NA

A

A

MA

E

EX

A

NA

Pr

FAMILY PROCYONIDAE

SUBFAMILY POTOSINAE

Polos /lavus (Schreber, 1774)

SUBFAMILY PROCYONINAE

Bassariscus astulus (Lichtenstein, 1830)
B as sari sens su m i ch rasii (S a uss ii re, ] 8 60)
iWasua narica (Linnaeus, 1776)

Procyofi insuliin's Merriam, 1898
Procyoft lotor (Linnaeus, 1758)

Procyon pygmaeus Merriam, 190!

FAMILY URSIDAE

SUBFAMILY URSINAE

Ursus americanus Pallas, 1780
Vrsus circles Linnaeus, 1758

ORDER CETACEA

FAMILY BALAENIDAE

Euhcilaenn glacialis (Muller, 1776)

FAMILY BALAENOPTERIDAE

C

SA

111

I c

NA

+

c

MA

Pi

ill

c

AM

*

ENVIll

I

MX

P

EN

c

AM

1

MX

P

EN

C NA

C NA £ EX'

A NA P £N

Baiaenoptera acutoroslrota Lacepede, 1 804

A

AM

Pr

1

Bcilaciwpiera borealis Lesson, 1828

A

AM

Pr

EN/

Balaeuopiera edeni Anderson, 1878

A

AM

Pr

1

14

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tfxh University

lUCN/

INS

DIST

SEMARNAT

CITES

Balaenopiera musculus (Linnaeus, 1758)

A

AM

Pr

EN/I

Bcilaenoptera physnlus {Linnaeus, 1758)

A

AM

Pr

EN/1

Megaptera novneungHae (Borowski, 1781)

A

AM

Pr

VU/1

FAMILY ESCHRICHTIDAE

Eschnchtius robusius (Lilljcborg, 1861)

A

NA

Pr

I

FAMILY DELPHINIDAE

Delphinus delphis Linnaeus, 1758

A

AM

Pr

11

Feres{s attenu^iia Gray, 1875

A

AM

Pr

11

Globicephala macrorhynchns Gray, 1846

A

AM

Pr

11

Grampus griseus G. Cuvier, 1812

A

AM

Pr

11

Lagenodelphis hosei Fraser, 1956

A

AM

Pr

[]

Liigenorhynchus obliquidens Gill, 1865

A

NA

Pr

Lissodelphis borealis {Pcalc, 1848)

A

NA

P1

[]

Orct/uiS orca (Linnaeus, 1758)

A

AM

Pi

11

Pepoiiocephala electra (Gray, 1846)

A

AM

Pi

II

Fseudorca crassidens (Owen, 1846}

A

AM

Pr

II

Stenella atte/iuaia (Gray, 1846)

A

AM

IN-

n

Sfeuella clymene (Gray, 1846)

A

AM

Pr

11

Stenella coeruleoalba (Meyen, 1833)

A

AM

Pr

n

Stenella frontalis (G. Cuvier, 1829)

A

AM

Pr

II

Stenella longirostris (Gray, 1828)

A

AM

Pi

!I

Steno bredanensis (Lesson, 1 828)

A

AM

Pr

II

Tursiops truneatus (Montagu, 1821)

A

AM

Pr

fl

FAMILY PHOCOENIDAE

Phocoena sinus Norris & McFarland, 1958

A

MX

Pr

CRd,

Phocoenoldes dalli (True, 1885)

A

NA

Pi

|]

FAMILY PHYSETERIDAE

Kogia breviceps (De Blainville, 1838)

A

AM

Pr

11

Kogia simus (Owen, 1866)

A

AM

Pr

n

Physeter macrocephalus Linnaeus, 1758

A

AM

Pr

VU/I

FAMILY ZIPHIIDAE

Berardius bairdii Stejneger, 1883

A

NA

Pr

I

Hyperoodon planifrons Flower, 1882

A

AM

Pr

1

Mesoplodon carlhubbsi (Moore, 1963)

A

NA

Pr

Mesoplodon densirostris (De Blainville, 1817)

A

AM

Pi

II

Mesoplodon europaeus (Gervais, 1855)

A

NA

Pr

11

Mesoplodon glnkgodens Nishiwaki & ICamiya, 1958

A

NA

Pr

11

Mesoplodon peruvianus Reyes, Mead & Van Waerebeek, 1991 •

A

AM

Pr

II

Mesoplodon sp

A

NA

Pr

Ziphius cavirostris G Cuvier, 1823

A

AM

Pr

I!

Ceballos et al—The Mammals of Mexico

15

INS DIST SEMARNAT

ORDER SIREN IA

FAMILY TRICHECHIDAE

Trichechus mann(us Linnaeus, 1738 A AM P

ORDER PERISSODACTYLA
FAMILY TAPIRIDAE

Tapirus bairdli {QW\, 1865) C SA P

ORDER ARTIODACTYLA

FAMILY ANTILOCAPRIDAE

Arnilocapra atnericann (Ord, 1815)

FAMILY BOV I DAE

SUBFAMILY BOVINAE

Bison bison (Linnaeus, 1 758)

SUBFAMILY CAPRINAE

Ovis canadensis Shaw, 1804

FAMILY CERVIDAE

SUBFAMILY CERVINAE

Cervus elaphus Linnaeus, 1758

SUBFAMILY ODOCOILEINAE

Maioma americana (Erxlcbcn, 1777)
Maziuna pandora Merriain, 1901
Odocoileus hendonus (Rafinesque, 1817)
Odocoileiis virginianus (Zirnmermann, 1780)

FAMILY TAYASSUIDAE

Tayassu tajacu (Linnaeus, 1758)

Tayassu pecari (Link, 1795)

C NA P

C NA P

C NA Pr

C NA

C SA

C MA

1C NA

IC AM

IC AM

C SA

lUCN/

CITES

VU/1

vu

CR"

vyi^'

n

[1

16

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

iNS DIST SEMARNAT

ORDER RODENTIA
FAMILY SCIURIDAE

SUBFAMILY PETAURISTINAE

GUmcomys (Linnaeus, 1758) C NA A

SUBFAMILY SCIURINAE

Ami}io.':pcn}iophi!!Ji harrisii (Audubon & Baehmiin, 1854)

C

NA

Ammospermophilus im'ulnris Nelson & Goldman, 1909

I

MX

A

AmmospermophUus inlerpres (Mcrriam, 1890)

c

NA

Ammospermophiliis {eucurus (Mcrriam, 1889)

c

NA

Cynoniys ludovicianus (Ord, 1815)

c

NA

A

Cynotttys niexicanus Merriam, 1892

c

MX

P

Sciurus aberti Woodhouse, 1853

c

NA

Ft

Sciurus allenl Nelson, 1898

c

MX

Sciurua anzot^ensis Coues, 1867

c

NA

A

Sciurus uuteogaster F. Cuvier, 1829

c

MA

Sciurus colliuei Richardson, 1839

c

MX

Sciurus deppei Peters, 1863

c

MA

Sciurus griseus Ord, 1818

c

NA

A

Sciurus nayoriteusis J. A, Allen, 1890

c

NA

Sciurus niger Linnaeus, 1758

c

NA

Sciurus oculaius Peters, 1863

c

MX

Pr

Sciurus variegowidcs Ogilby, 1839

c

MA

Pr

Sciurus yuemanensis }. Allen, 1877

c

MA

SpermophihiS adoceius (Merriam, 1903)

c

MX

Spermophiius amtulatus Audubon & Bachman, 1842

c

MX

SpennophihiS atriccpillus W. E. Bryant, 1889

c

MX

Spermophiius beecheyi (Richardson, 1829)

c

NA

Sperinophiius madrensis (Merriam, 1901)

c

MX

Pr

Spermophiius mexicanus (Erxlcben, 1777)

c

NA

Spermophiius peroiensis Merriam, 1893

c

MX

A

Spermophiius spllosotna Bennett, 1833

c

NA

Spermophiius tereticaudus Baird, 1858

1 c

NA

Spermophiius variegatus (Erxieben, 1777)

I c

NA

Tamias buHeri J, A. Allen, 1889

c

MX

Tamias dorsalis Baird, 1855

c

NA

Tamias durangae (L A, Allen, 1903)

c

MX

Tamias merriami J. A, Allen, 1889

c

NA

Pr

Tamias obscurtis J. A. Allen, 1890

c

NA

Tamiasciurus mearusi (Townsend, 1897)

c

MX

A

FAMILY CASTORIDAE

Castor canadensis Kuhl, 1820

c

NA

P

lUCN/

CITES

EK

Ceballos et al— The Mammals of Mexico

17

lUCN/

_________ INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

FAMILY GEOMYIDAE

Craiogeomys cosfa/iopv (Baird, 1 B52)
Cratogeo/nys fumosus (Merriain, 1892)
Cratogeomys goldniani Merriam, 1895
Craiogeomys gymnurus (Merriarn, 1892)
Cratogeomys merriarni (Thomas, 1893)
Crntogeornys neglectus (Merriam, 1902)
Cratogeomys lylorhinus (Mcrnam, 1895)
C}‘a!ogeof}iyx ziuseri (Goldman, 1939)

Geornys arefiarius Merriam, 1895
Geomys person a I us True, 1889
Geo lays (rop i calls Goldman, 1915
Orihogeomys cu/u'ciihis Elliot, 1905
On/iogeoinys grandis (Thomas, 1893)

Orf li ogeon iys h isp id us (L e Conic, 1 852)
Orilsogeomys lanius (Blliol, 1905)

Pappogeomys alcorni Russeil, 1957
Pappogeotnys huiieri ('rhomas, 1892)

Thotnoniys bonae (Lydoux & Gervais, 1836)
Thomomys luitbrinus (Richardson, 1829)
Zygogeomys trichopus Merriam, 1895

FAMILY HETEROMYIDAE

SUBFAMILY DIPODOMYJNAE

Dlpodoniys compnetus True, 1889
Dipodomys deserd Stephens, 1887
Dipodo/nys gravipcs Muey, 1925
Dipodomys insidaris Merriam, 1907
Dipodomys merriami Mearns, 1890
Dipodomys nelsoni Merriam, 1907
Dipodomys ordii WoodhoLise, 1853
Dipodomys phillipsii Gray, 1 841
Dipodomys simidans Merriam, 1904
Dipodomys speciabilis Merriam, 1890

SUBFAMILY HETEROMYINAE

Heteromys desmaresiianus Gray, 1868
Heteromys gaumeri J. A. Allen & Chapman, 1897
Heieromys goldmani Merriam, 1902
Ileieromys nelsoui Merriam, 1902
Liomys irrorafus (Gray, 1868)

Liomys picius (Thomas, 1893)

Liomys snlvini (Thomas, 1893)

Liomys spec! a bills Gen o ways, 1971

c

NA

c

MX

A

c

MX

c

MX

c

MX

c

MX

A

CR

c

MX

c

MX

c

NA

c

NA

A

c

MX

A

vu

c

MX

A

CR

C'

MA

c

MA

c

MX

A

c

MX

Pi

VU

c

MX

1C

NA

c

NA

c

MX

P

c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

P

LN

[

MX

A

CR

[ c

NA

*

CR'-

c

MX

c

NA

c

MX

c

NA

c

NA

C

SA

C

MA

c

MX

c

MX

Pr

c

NA

c

MA

c

MA

c

MX

Pr

18

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

SUBFAMILY PEROGNATHINAE

Choetodipus anthonyi (Osgood, 1900)

ChaetodipiiS arenarius Merriam, 1894
ChaetodipuK artu^ Osgood, 1900
Chnetodipus hnileyi Merriam, 1894
Chaetodipus cnUforniciss Merriam, 1889
Chaetodipus dalquesti (Roth, 1976)

C-haeiodspus ei-emicus (Mearns, 1898)

Chaetodipus fallax Merriam, 1889
C h n eiod ip u $ formas us Merriam, 1889
Chaetodipus goldmnni Osgood, 1900
Chaetodipus hispidus Baird, 1858
Chaetodipus intennedius Merriam, 1889
Chaetodipus lineatus Dalquest, 1951
Chaetodipus aeJsoni Merriam, 1894
Chaetodipus peniciflatus Wood ho use, 1852
Chaetodipus pernix J. A. Allen, 1898
Chaetodipus rudinoris (FJliol, 1903)

Chaetodipus spiitatus Merriam, 1889
Perognathus ampius Osgood, 1900
Perognathus flavesceas Merriam, 1889
Perogn a th u s fJa vu s B a i rd, 1855
Perognathus loiigimenibris (Cones, 1875)
Perognathus meniaini J, A. Allen, 1892

FAMILY MURIDAE

SUBFAMILY ARVICOLINAE

Microtus califorFucus (Peale, 1884)

Microtus guatemalensis Merriam, 1898
Microtus FFiexicatius (Saussure, 1861)

Microtus oaxaceusis Goodwin, 1966
Mic!‘Otus peunsylvaFiicus (Ord, 1815)

Microtus quasiater {Coues, 1874)

Microtus utn b ros us Merriam, 1898
Ondatra zibethicus {Linnaeus, 1766)

SUBFAMILY SIGMODONTINAE

Baiomys FFJUSCutus (Merriam, 1892)

Baioiitys tayiori (Thomas, 1887)

iiabrotnys chiFsanteco (Robertson & Musser, 1976)

HabroFFiys delicatulus

HabroFuys iepturus (Merriam, 1898)

HabF-omys tophurus (Osgood, 1904)

Ilabiotnys simuiatus (Osgood, 1904)

HodoFFtys alieni (Merriam, 1892)

MegadoFttoFFiys cryophilus (Musser, 1964)
MegadontOFFiys neisoni (Merriam, 1898)

INS

DJST

SEMARNAT

lUCN/

CITES

1

MX

A

c

MX

t

c

MX

I c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

Pr

c

NA

c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

c

NA

1 c

NA

Me

c

MX

c

NA

1 c

NA

*

c

MX

I c

NA

I c

NA

*

c

NA

*

c:

NA

c

NA

c

NA

c

NA

C

NA

(’

VU

c

MA

A

c

NA

c

MX

A

c

NA

P

c

MX

Pr

c

MX

Pr

c

NA

A

C

MA

C

NA

C

MX

c

MX

c

MX

c

MA

c

MX

EN

c

MX

c

MX

c

MX

Ceballos et al—The Mammals of Mexico

19

Megadontomys tkomasi (Merriam, 1898)

Nelsonia goldmnni Merriam, 1903
Nehonia neotomodon Mcrriam, 1897
Neoioma albigula Hartley, 1894
Neotoma angusiOpnlatn Baker, 1951
Neoioma anlhonyi J. A. Allen, 1898
Neolomn hryanli Mcrrlam, 1887
Neoioma bunkeri Burt, 1932
Neoioma devia Goldman, 1927
Neoioma fusctpes Baird, 1858
Neoioma goldmani Mend am, 1903
Neoioma lepida Thomas, 1893
Neoioma leueodon Merrian, 1894
Neoioma mar linen sis Goldman, 1905
Neoioma mexicana Baird, 1855
Neoioma micropus Baird, 1855
Neoioma nelsoni Goldman, 1905
Neoioma palatina Goldman, 1905
Neoioma phenax Merriam, 1903
Neoioma varia Burt, 1932
Neotomodon alsioni Merriam, 1898
Nyclomys sumichrasti (Saussure, I860)
Oligoryzomys fidvescens (Saussure, 1860)
Onychomys arenicola Mearns, 1896
Onychomys leucogasier (Wied- Netiwied, 1841)
Onychomys iorridus (Coues, 1874)

Oryzomys alfnroi (J.. A. Allen, 1891)

Oryzon fjw c h a pm ajii Th o m a s, 1898
Oryi 0 n lys co uesi (Alston, 1 877)

Oryzomys meianolis Thomas, 1893
Oryzomys neisoni Merriam, 1898
Oryzomys palustris (Harlan, 1837)

Oryzomys rhabdops Merriam, 1901
Oryzomys ro sir a Ills Merriam, 1901
Oryzomys saiuratior McrriaTn, 1901
Osgoodomys banderanus (J. A. Allen, 1897)
Olonyciomys hatii Anthony, 1932
Otoiyiomys phyilolis Me I’lia m , 1901
Peromyscus aziecus (Saussure, I860)

Peromyscus bealae Thomas, 1903
Peromyscus boylii (Baird, 1855)

Peromyseiis biiUaliis Osgood, 1904
Peromyscus califoniicus {Gambei, 1848)
Peromyscus caniceps Burt, 1932
Peromyscus criniius {Merriam, 1891)

Peromyscus dickeys Burt, 1932

Perosayscus difficilis {L A. Allen, 1891)

Peromyscus eremicus {Baird, 1858)

Peromyscus eva 'rhomas, 1898
Peromyscus fralercuius (Miller, 1892)
Peromyscus furvus i. A. Allen & Chapman, 1897

INS

DIST

SEMARNAT

lUCN/

CITES

C

MX

V 1

c

MX

Pr

c

MX

P r

1 c

NA

*

c

MX

1

MX

E

EN

I

MX

A

EN

1

MX

E

EN

c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

r c

NA

*

c

NA

1

MX

P

EN

c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

EN

c

MX

c

MX

Pr

I

MX

A

EN

c

MX

c

MA

c

SA

c

NA

c

NA

c

NA

c

SA

c

MX

I c

AM

c

MX

1

MX

E

EX

c

NA

+

c

MA

c

MA

c

MA

c

MX

c

MA

A

c

MA

c

MA

c

MX

I c

NA

*

c

MX

Pr

EN

c

NA

I

MX

I c

NA

+

1

MX

c

MX

J c

NA

*

c

MX

A

c

NA

c

MX

20

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

lUCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

Perom],L^cus gratus Mcrriam, 1898
Peromyscii^'S gunniid Townsend, 1912
Peromyscus guatemalensis Merriam, 1898
Peromyscus gymnolis Thomas, 1894
Peromyscus hyiocetes Mcrriam, 1898
Peromyxc'us hoaperi Lee & Schmidly, 1977
Peromyxeux interpnriedilis Burl, 1932
Peroniyscux leucopux Ra I’inesq ue, 1818
Peromyscus levipes Merriam, 1898
Peromyscus nindrensis Merriam, 1898
Peroiuysciis luniiicuintus (Wagner, 1845)

Peromyscus megaiops Merriam, 1 898
Pero fuys cu s in e k isi urus M c rr i a m, 1898
Peromyscus melanocarpus Osgood, 1904
Peromyscus melanophrys (Cones, 1874)

Peromyscus me!anolis J- A. Allen Sc Chapman, 1897
Peromyscus meianurus Osgood, 1909
Peromyscus merriami M eaI’ns , 1896
Peromyscus mexicanus (Saussure, 1860)

Peromyscus nnsutus (J. A, Allen, 1891)

Peromyscus ochraventer Baker, 1951
Peromyscus pectoralis Osgood, 1904
Peromyscus pembertoni Burl, 1932
Peromyscus perfulvus Osgood, 1945
Peromyscus polius Osgood, 1904
Peromyscus pseudocrinilus Burt, 1932
Peromyscus sagax Elliot, 1903
Peromyscus sejugis Burl, 1932
Peromyscus simsdus Osgood, 1904
Peromyscus slevirsi Mailliard, 1924
Peromyscus spicilegus J. A. Allen, 1897
Peromyscus siephani Towmsend, 1912
Peromyscus (niei (Shufeldt, 1885)

Peromyscus wiukelmanni Carle ton, 1977
Peromyscus yucatanicus J. A. Allen & Chapman, 1897
Peromyscus zarhynchus Merriam, 1898
Reiihrodoniomys burti Benson, 1939
Reiihrodontomys chrysopsis Merriam, 1900
Reithrodontomys fulvescens J. A, Allen, 1894
Reithrodontomys graesHs J, A. Allen & Chapman, 1897
Reithrodoniomys hirsutus Merriam, 1901
Reithrodontomys megalotis (Baird, 1858)
Reithrodontomys mexicantts (Saussure, 1860)
Reithrodontomys microdon Merriam, 1901
Reithrodontomys montanus (Bairli, 1855)
Reithrodontomys spectabiUs Jones & Lawlor, 1965
Reithrodontomys sumichrasti (Saussure, 1861)
Reithrodontomys tenuirostris Merriam, 1901
Reithrodontomys zacatecae Merriam, 1901
Rheo n m ex icon us Goodwin, 1959

c

NA

1

MX

P

c:

MA

c

MA

c

MX

c

MX

I

MX

+

I c

NA

+

c

MX

1

MX

vu

1 c

NA

if

C‘

MX

c

MX

A

vu

c

MX

c

MX

c

NA

c

MX

vu

c

NA

c

MA

c

NA

c

MX

c

NA

I

MX

E

EX

c

MX

c

MX

VU

I

MX

A

CR

c

MX

I

MX

A

c

MX

P 1

1

MX

A

CR

c

MX

1

MX

c

NA

c

MX

Pr

c

MX

c

MX

Pi

VU

c

MX

c

MX

c

NA

IC

MA

*

c

MX

c

NA

c

SA

c

MA

A

c

NA

1

MX

A

HN

c

MA

c

MA

c

MX

c

MX

P1

Ceballos et al—The Mammals of Mexico

21

Rheomys ihomnsi Dickey, 1928
Scotinomys leguina (Alston, 1877)
Sigmodon aHeni Bailey, 1902
Sigmodon arizonae M earns, 1890
Sigmodon fidviventer J. A, Allen, 1889
Sigmodon hispidus Say & Ord, 1825
Sigmodon ie-ucotis Bailey, 1902
Sigmodon mascotensis J. A. Allen, 1897
Sigmodon ochrognathus Bailey, 1902
Tylomys bullaris Mcrriam, 1901
Tylomys nudicaudus (Peters, 1866)
Tylomys tumbalensis Merriam, 1901
Xenomys nedsoni Merriam, 1892

FAMILY ERETHIZONTIDAE

Coendu mexicanus (Kerr, 1792)
Erethizon dorsatum (Linnaeus, 1758)

FAMILY CUNICULIDAE

Coniculus paca (Linnaeus, 1776)

FAMILY DASYPROCTIDAE

Dasyprocta mexicana Saussure, 1860
Dasyproctc! punctata Gray, 1842

ORDER LAGOMORPHA

lUCN/

INS DIST SEMARNAT CITES

c

MA

Pr

c

MA

Pr

c

MX

c

NA

c

NA

c

AM

c

MX

c

MX

c

NA

c

MX

A

CR

c

MA

c

MX

Pr

c

MX

A

c:r

c

MA

A

III

c

NA

P

I c

SA

III

c

MX

I c

SA

Ill

FAMILY LEPORIDAE

SUBFAMILY LEPORINAE

Lepus nlleni Mearns, 1890
Lepus califomicus Gray, 1837
Lepus callotis Waglcr, i 830
Lepus fiavigutaris Wagner, 1844
Lepus insuloris W. Bryant, 1891
Romerolagus diazi (Ferrari- Perez, 1893)
Sylviiagus audubonii (Baird, 1858)
Sylvilagus bachmani (Waterhouse, 1839)
Sylvilagus brasiiiensis (Linnaeus, 1758)
Sylvilagus cunicularius (Waterhouse, 1848)
Sylvilagus Jloridcinus (J. A. Alien, 1890)
Sylvilagus graysoni (J, Allen, 1877)
Sylvilagus insonus Nelson, 1904
Sylvilagus mansuetus Nelson, 1907
Sylvilagus robustus (Y Bailey, 1905)

I c

NA

I c

NA

c

NA

c

MX

P

EN

1

MX

Pr

c

MX

P

LN/I

c

NA

I c

NA

#

c

SA

c

MX

c

AM

1

MX

A

EN

c

MX

P

CR

I

MX

Pr

c

NA

22

Occasional Papers, Museum ofTekvs Tech University

Indicates some subspecies arc listed under some risk category in the Mexican legislation. Categories are endangered (P), threatened
(A)j and special protection (PR).

Undcr the lUCN column only those species listed under one of the categories at risk (l.c.. Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EK),
Critically Endangered (CR), Extinct in the Wild (EW), and Extinct (E)) are included.

' Only the subspecies Aiouatta paUiata mexicana,

* Only the subspecies /I geojfroylyucatancnsi:;.

Only the Mexican wolf, Cauis lupus baiieyi.

Only the HerpaUurus yaguarondi caconutii.

'Only the subspecies Leopardus pardalis albescens.

*(Dnly the subspecies Eira barbara senex.

Only the subspecies Nasua narica nelsoni.

® Only the subspecies IJrsits arctos nehont.

^The subspecies/f. a.peninsulans is considered critically endangered and A.a. sonoriensis endangered.

'^Thc subspecies O. c. cremnobates is considered endangered, O.c. mexicana vulnerable, and O. c. wecmsi critically
endangered.

" Only the subspecies O. h. cerrosensis.

'^Only the subspecies D. ni. margarilae.

Conservation Status

The mammals from Mexico face severe envi¬
ronmental problems that affect their long-tenri sur¬
vival. At least eight species have either been eradicated
or become extinct, and 229 (44%) are classified as
facing conserv'ation problems (Ceballos, 1993; Ceballos
et ah, in press). The numbers and proportions of ex¬
tinct and endangered taxa indicate that Mexico is also
among the top countries in the world in these catego¬
ries (Baillie and Groombridge, 1996; Ceballos and
Brown, 1995; Hilton-Taylor, 2000).

Documented extinct or eradicated species in¬
clude four insular species of rodents, a pinniped
and two carnivores. All the rodents, including
Peroniyscus pemberloni from San Pedro Nolasco is¬
land, Neolonia anlhonyi from Todos Santos island,
Neoloina bunkeri from the Coronados islands, and
Oryzotnys nelsoni from the Tres Marias islands, dis¬
appeared as a consequence of the introduction of do¬
mestic rats (Rallus spp), mice {Mus musculus), and
cats (FeUs calus) (Ceballos and Navarro, 1991; Lawlor,
1983 ;Mellink, 1992; Smith et ah, 1993; Wilson, 1991).
We have data that suggest that two additional species;
Feromyscus guardia from Angel de la Gtiarda, Mejia,
Granito, and Estaiique islands (Mellink et ah, 2002),
and Dipodoniys gravipes from the San Quintin Valley

in Baja California may be extinct (Ceballos and
Rodriguez, 1993; E. Mellink, pers. conn). TheCaribean
monk seal (Monachus Iropicalis), which inhabited in
the waters of Cuba, Jamaica and the Yucatan Penin¬
sula, became extinct around 1952 (Cole et ah, 1994;
Villa-R. et ah, 1986). The last Mexican Grizzly bear
(Ursus arctos hornbills) was killed in the 1960's in the
Sierra del Nido, Chihuahua (Brown, 1985). The Mexi¬
can wolf (Canis lupus bailey 1) is extinct in the wild,
but a few' survive in captivity (Ceballos and Navaixo,
1991). Additionally, Myotis planiceps and M. millen
are considered extinct by the lUCN (Hilton-Taylor,
2000). However, there are no recent studies to evalu¬
ate the conservation status of M planiceps, and AT
millerl is considered a subespecies ofM evotis (Man¬
ning, 1993).

.Although six species were considered extirpated
from Mexico by Ceballos and NavaiTo (1991), one of
them w^as re-encountered, one has been successfully
reintroduced, and another has spontaneously recolo¬
nized Mexico. Until recently, the bison {Bison bison)
w^as believed to be extirpated from Mexico (Ander¬
son, 1972; Ceballos and Navarro, 1991; Leopold,
1965); how'ever, a wild remnant population along the

Ceballos £T al— The Mamm als of Mexico

Chihuahua-New Mexico border was rediscovered in
the early 1990’s (G Ceballos, pers. obs,). However,
the species should be considered critically endangered.
The elk {Cervus elaphus) was probably extirpated near
the beginning of the last century (Leopold, 1959); how¬
ever, it has been successfully reintroduced in Coahuila
(Robles Gil et al,, 1993), The sea otter {Enhydra lutris)
disappeared from Mexican waters at the beginning of
this century (Ceballos and Navan'o, 1991); interest¬
ingly, a few dispersing individuals have been found off
Cedros Island and Maria Magdalena Bay off Baja Cali¬
fornia Peninsula (Gallo, 1997; Rodriguez-JaramiHo and
Gendron, 1996), By 1950 the northern river otter
{Lontra canadensid) had disappeared from the Colo¬
rado and Bravo (Grande) rivers (Ceballos andNavano,
1991); but there are recent records in Tamaulipas (G.
Ceballos, pers, obs.; Gallo, 1997).

Mexican mammals are underrepresented in
the international lists of species of concern. Two hun¬
dred and twenty-nine species are considered by new

23

Mexican legislation as endangered, threatened, or un¬
der special protection (SEMARNAT, 2002), whereas
only 58 Mexican mammals are included
in CITES, and 83 in the lists of lUCN. The most
obvious differences are in those cases regarding small
mammals. For example, 38 bats and 17 insectivores
are considered by SEMARNAT, whereas none is
included in CITES and 19(15 bats and 4 insectivores)
in lUCN. Similarly, CITES considers four Mexican
rodents, lUCN includes 35, and SEMARNAT lists
88 species of concern. Conversely, most Mexican
cetaceans are included in CITES, while they
are underrepresented in the lUCN list. Bias in CITES
listing is undoubtedly related to the objective of
CITES to protect only those species that are subjected
to international trade, overwhelmingly large species.
International regulations protect some key species
of Mexican mammals, but they are clearly inadequate
if protection of the diversity of the country is the
conservation goal.

Introduced Species

In Mexico there are established populations of
domestic mammals including dogs, cats, donkeys, pigs,
goats, sheep, and rabbits. Additionally, there are feral
populations of three introduced species, including the
African Barbary sheep {Ammolragm lef'via), the Eu¬
ropean boar {Sus scrofa), and the South American
coypii {Myocastor coypus; Arita and Ceballos, 1997).
The Barbary sheep was introduced tliree decades ago,
and it is presently distributed in the states of Nuevo
Leon, Coahuila, and San Luis Potosi; its geographic
range is still increasing (Gray and Simpson, 1980; E.

Mellink, pers, com.). Established populations of Euro¬
pean boar are known in the Sierra del Nido, Chihuahua
(G. Ceballos, pers. obs.), the Mapimi Biosphere Re¬
serve, Durango (Weber, 1995), and northwestern
Durango (R. Muniz M., pers. com.). The coypu is
native to South America; populations were acciden¬
tally introduced to Louisiana in USA, and dispersed to
Texas. They have recently colonized the Rio Bravo
from the delta up to the Big Bend National Park (Texas)
- Maderas del Carmen (Coahuila) and the Laguna Madre
in Tamaulipas (J. Camera; R. Soto, pers. com.).

Conclusion

Mexico has 525 mammal species, which account
for the inclusion of the country into the World
megadiverse realm (more than 10% World-wide bio¬
logical species account). Although knowledge of mam¬
mals in Mexico has a long tradition and has grown
rapidly in recent years, more studies are required to
understand the biology of those species and their con¬
servation status. Because of the degree of knowledge
of mammals as a whole, it is expected that at the very

least 247 new species of manunals will be described
in the World by the year 2032 (Medellin and Soberon
1999). Other researchers have shown that we are still
far from aUaimng a realistic estimate of the numbers
of living species of mammals (Patterson, 2001). This
issue, coupled with the relatively limited, biased level
of faunal knowledge at the local scale in Mexico
(Bojorquez-Tapia et al. 1994), is a virtual guarantee
that the number of mammal species recorded from

24

OccASioiNAL Papers, Musp:iim of Texas Tech University

Mexico (and the entire world) will continue to increase
in coming years- The advent of specialized techniques
in molecular genetics studies has allowed a much more
comprehensive and realistic approach to understand¬
ing phylogenetic affinities and evolutionary relation¬
ships of the different groups. These techniques have
allowed the determination of sister species otherwise
indistinguishable by earlier methods. As new techniques
continue to evolve and be refined, it is likely that the
number of species will also climb.

The number of native species of Mexican mam¬
mals IS 525 as of tins publication. Other countries with

similar numbers include Indonesia, Brazil, and China,
This puts the Mexican mammal fauna among the top
countries in the world in terms of species numbers.
These numbers are likely to chairge m the near future
because of the reasons described above, althougli it is
clear that Mexico will remain as a me gad i verse coun¬
try containing about 12% of the mammal species in
about 1.6% of the world’s emerged land surface. The
next 30 years will likely prove dynamic for numbers
of species recognized in vertebrates and higher plants;
the real number of species of mammals is, however,
almost within our grasp.

LrTERA'ruRE Cited

Albo, C. J. R., M, L. Reis, and P. Seixas, 2d02. Mamiferos de
Brasil. Pp, 1 15-150, i /1 Diversidad y conservacion del
los mamlfcros Neoiropicalcs. (G Ceballos and J. A,
Simoneiti, eds). CONABIO - UNAM, Mexico D. F,

Alvarez, T. and F. de Lachica. 1974. Zoogeografia de los
vertebrados de Mexico. Pp. 219-302, in El escenario
geografico. Rccursos natural es. Secreiaria de Educacidn
Piiblica e Institute Nacioiial de Antropologia e Historia,
Mexico, 335 pp.

Anderson, S. 1972. Mammals of Chihuahua. Taxonomy and
Distribution, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natu¬
ral Histoiy, 148:149-410.

Arita, H. T- 1993. Riqueza de espccics de la mastofauna de Mexico.

Pp 109-125, in Avances cn el esludio dc los inamiferos
de Mexico (R. A. Medellin, and G Ceballos, edilors).
Asociacion Mexicanade Mastozoologla, A. C., Mexico,
464 pp.

Arita, H, T, and G. Ceballos, 1997. Los mamiferos dc Mexico;

distribucion y conservacion. The mammals of Mexico:
distribution and conservation. Revista Mexicana de
Mastozoologla, 2:33-71.

Aurioles-G, D. 1993. Biodiversidadyestado actual delos mamiferos
marinos de Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Historia Natu¬
ral, Volumen especial, 44:397-412,

Baker, R. J., C. A. Porter, J. C, Patton, and R. A. Van Den Bussche.

2000. Systematics of bats of the family Phyllostomidae
based on RAG2 DNA sequences. Occasional Papers,
Museum of Texas Tech University, 202;i + 1-16.

Baker, R. J., S Solari, and F. G Hoffmann, 2002. A New Central
American Species from the Carollia brevicctttda Com¬
plex. Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech Uni¬
versity, 217;i + 1-11.

Bojdiquez-Tapia, L A., P. Balvanera, and A-D.Cuar6n.1994. Bio¬
logical inventories and computer data bases: their role in
environmental assessments. Environmental Manage¬
ment 18:775-785,

Bradley, R. D-, D, J. Schmidly, and C, W. Kirpatrick, 1996. The
relationships of Feromyscus sagax to the F boylii and
F. truei species groups in Mexico based on morphomet¬
ric, karyotipic, and allozymic data, Pp. 95-106, Con¬
tributions in Mammalogy: A memorial volume honoring
Dr. J. K, Jones, Jr. (H.H. Genoways and R.J. Baker, edi¬
tors). Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock,
Texas.

Brown, D. E. 1985. The grizzly in the Southwest. University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma. 274 pp,

Carleton, M. D., O. Sanchez, and G Urbano Vidales. 2002, Anew
species of Habromys (Muroidea; Neotominac) from
Mexico, with generic review' of species definitions and
remarks on diversity patterns among Mesoamerican
small manimals restricted to humid montane forests.
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,

1 l5(3):4a8-533,

Carraway, L. N., and R. M. Timm. 2000. Revision of the extant
taxa of the genus Noiiosorex (Mammalia: Jnscctivora:
Soricidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, 113:302-318.

Ceballos, G 1993, Especics en peligro dc cxtincion. Revista Ciencias,
Numcro especial 7:5-10.

Ceballos, G, and J.H. Brown. 1995. Global patterns of mammalian
diversity, endemicity, and endangerment. Conservation
Biology, 9:559-568.

Ceballos G, and D. Navarro. 1991. Diversity and conservation of
Mexican mammals. Pp. 167-198, i7j_Topics m Latin
American mammalogy; history, biodiversity, and educa¬
tion (M. A. Marcs and D. J. Schmidly, editors). Univer¬
sity of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma,

Ceballos, G, and P. Rodriguez- 1993, Diversidad y conservacion de
los mamiferos de Mexico: 11. Patrones de endcnucidad,
Pp. 8 7-108, j'n Avances cn el estudio de los mami feros de
Mexico(R, A- MedellinyG Ceballos, eds,), Asociacion
Mexicana de Mastozoologla, .A. C., Mexico, D, F,

Ceballos et al— The Mammals of Mexico

Ceballos, G, P. Rodriguez, and R, A, MedcllJn. 1998, Assessing
conservation priorities in mcgadiverse Mexico: matn-
malian diversity, endemicity, and endangermcnt. EcO'
logical Applications, 8:8-17,

Ceballos, G-, G Oliva, and H.T, Arita (editors). In press. Los
maniiferos silvestres de Mexico. CONABIO-UNAM,
Mexico D-F.

Cervantes, F. A., A Castro-C,, and J. Ramirez-P. 1994 Mamiferos
terrestres nativos de Mexico. Anales del Instituto dc
Biologia, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico,
Serie Zoologia, 65:177-190.

CITES- 2001. Annotated CITES Appendices and Reservations,
UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Geneve,
Switzerland, 170 pp.

Colc, K R., D, M, Reeder, and D, E, Wilson. 1994. A synopsis of
distribution patterns and the conservation of mammal
species. Journal of Mammalogy, 75:266-276.

Dragoo, J, W., and R. L, Honeycutt. 1997. Systematics of inustelid-
like carnivores. Journal of Mammalogy, 78:426-443,

Edwards, C.W,, C.F. Fulhorst, and R. D. Bradley, 2001. Molecular
phylogenetics of the Neoioma albigula. species group:
further evidence of a paraphyletic assemblage. Journal
of Mammalogy, 82:267-279,

Engstrom, M, D., C. A. Schmidt, J, C, Morales, and R. C. Dowler,
1989. Records of mammals from Isla Cozumel, Quintana
Roo, Mexico. The Southwestern Naturalist, 34:413-415,

Gallo R,, J. P. 1997, Situacidn y distribucion de las nutrias en
Mexico, con enfasis cn iontra hngicaudis unfieciens
Major, 1897. Revista Mexicana de Mastozoologia, 2:10-
32.

Gray, GG and C D. Simpson. 1980, Ammotragus lervia. Mam¬
malian Species, 144:1-7.

Groves, C, 2001. Primate Taxonomy. Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, D.C. 350 pp.

Grubb, P. 1993- Order Artiodactyla. Pp. 377-414, I/i Mammal
species of the world, A taxonomic and geographic
reference, 2nd ed. (D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder,
editors). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D
C-, 1206 pp.

Hafncr, D. J , B R. Riddle, and S.'f Alvarez-Castafieda, 2001. Evo-
lutionary relationships of white-footed mice
(Peromyscus) on islands in the Sea of Cortez, Mexico,
Journal of Mammalogy 82:775-790,

Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. Second
edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1:1-600 + 90,
2:601-1181 + 90,

Hershkovitz, R 1992. The South America genus Gracilinanus
Gardner and Creighton, l989(Marmosidac, Marsupialia):
a taxonomic review with notes on general morphology
and relationships. Fieldiana Zoology (new series) 70:1-
56.

Hilton-Taylor, C. 2000. 2000 lUCN red list of threatened specie,
lUCN, Glanz, Switzcrland.

25

Huey, L. M. 1964. The mammals of Baja California, Transactions
of the San Diego Society of Natural History, 13:85-168.

ICZN, 1998. Opinion 1894, Regnum Animale..,, Ed. 2 (M. J.

BHsson, 1762): rejected for nomenclatural purposes,
with the conservation of the mammalian generic names
for Fhiiander (Marsupialia), Fleropus (Chiroptcra), GVA,
Cuniculus and Hydrochoents (Rodentia), Me!es, Luira
and Hyaena (Carnivora), Tapirus (Perissodactyla),
Traguius and Giraffa (Artiodactyla), Bulletin Zoologi¬
cal Nomenclature 55:64-71.

Jones, J. K., Jr., and T. E. Lawlor. 1965, Mammals from Isla
Cozumel, Mexico, with description of a new species of
ha rves t mous e. U ni versi ty o f K ansas Pu bt t c ati ons, M u -
seum of Natural History, 16:409-419.

Lawlor, T. E, 1983. The mammals. Pp, 265-289, in Island
Biogcography in the Sea of Cortez (T, J. Case and M, L,
Cody, editors). University of California Press, Berke¬
ley, 508 pp,

Lee, T. E., Jr,, B. Riddle, and P. L. Lee. 1996. Speciatioii in the
desert pocket mouse (Chaeiodipus penicHlaius
Woodhouse), Journal of Mammalogy, 77:58-68,

Leopold,A, S. 1959, Wildlife of Mexico. University of California
Press, Berkeley, xiii + 568 pp.

Leopold, A. S. 1965. Fauna silvestrede Mexico: aves y mamiferos
de caza. Instituto Mexicano dc Recursos Naturales
Renovables, Mexico, D, F, xvii + 655 pp.

Manning, R, W, 1993. Systematics and evolutionary'relationships
of the long-eared myotis, Myods evods (Chiroptera;
Vespcitilionidac). Special Publications, Museum of Texas
Tech University, 37:1-58.

Matocq, M, D. 2002. Morphological and molecular analysis of a
contact zone in the Neotoma fuscipes species complex.
Journal of Mammalogy, 83:866-883.

McKenna, M, C., and S. K, Bell. 1997, Classification of mammals
above the species level, Columbia University Press,
New York, xii + 631 pp.

Medellin, R. A. and J, Soberon. 1999. Predictions of mammal
diversity on four land masses. Conservation Biology,
13:143-149-

Medellin, R..A.., H. T; Arita, and 0 Sanchez H, 1997, Identificacion
dc los murcielagos de Mexico. Claves dc campo.
Publicacion Especial, Asociacion Mexicana de
Mastozoologia, 2:1-83.

Medellin, R. A., A L, Gardner, and J. M, Aranda. 1998. The
taxonomic status of the Yucatan brown brocket, Maiama
pandora (Mammalia; Cervidae). Proceedings of the
Biological Society of Washington, 111:1-14,

Mellink, E. 1992. The status of Neotoma anthonyi (Rodentia,
Muridae, Cricetidae) of Todos Santos Island, Baja Cali¬
fornia, Mexico. Bulletin of the Southern California Acad¬
emy of Sciences, 91:137-140.

Mellink, E., G Ceballos and J. Luevano, 2002. Conservation status
of Peromyscus guardia. Biological Conservation,
108:107-1 11.

26

Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University

MiUermeier, R. A,, and C. Gocttsch dc M. 1992, La importancia
dc la diversidad biologica de Mexico. Pp 63-73, in
Mexico ame los reios de la biodiversidad (J, Sarukhan
and R- Dirzo, editors). Comisidn Nacional para el
Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad, Mexico, D. F,,
370 pp,

MiUermeier, R. A., P, Robles G, and C. Goettsch de M. 1997.

Mcgadivcrsidad. Los paJses biologicamcntc mas ricos
del mundo- Agrupacibn Sierra Madre, S. C. y CEMEX,
Mexico, D. F., 501 pp,

Ortega, i., and H. T. Ariia. 1998. Nearctic limits in middle America
as determined by distributions of bats. Journal of Mam¬
malogy, 79:772-781.

Pacheco, J., G Ceballos and R. List. 2002. Reimroduccion del
hurbn de patas iiegras en las praderas de Janos, Chihua¬
hua, Biodiversitas, 42\l-5:

Patterson, B. D. 2001, Fathoming tropical biodiversity: the con¬
tinuing discovery of Neotropical mammals. Diversity
and Distribution, 7:191-196.

Ramamoorthy, T, R, R, Bye, A, Lot, and J. Fa (editors), 1993.

Biological Diversity of Mexico. Origins and Distribu¬
tion. Oxford University Press, New York, xxxix + 812

pp.

Rannrez-Pulido, J., and C. Mudcspachcr, 1987. Estado actual y
perspectivas del conocimiento dc los mamiferos de
Mexico. Ciencia, 38:49-67.

Ramirez-Pulido, J., R. Lopez-W., C. Mudespacber, and L Lira,
1983, Calalogo de los mamiferos terrestres natives de
Mexico. Editorial Trillas, Mexico, D. F. 126 pp.

Ramirez- Pulido, J., M. C. Britton, A. Perdomo and A, Castro.

1986. Guia de los mamiferos de Mexico, rcfcrencias
hasla 1983. Universidad Autonoma Mctropolitana,
Unidad Iztapalapa, Mexico, D, F. 720 pp.

Ramirez- Pulido, J,, A, Castro-Campillo, J. Arroyo-Cabrales, and F.

A. Cervantes, 1996, Lista laxonomica de los mamiferos
dc Mexico. Occasional Papers, The Museum, Texas Tech
University, 158:1-62-

Riddle, B.R., D,J- Hafner, and L.F. Alexander. 2000a. Comparative
phylogeography of Baileys’ pocket mouse (Chaeiodipus
baileyi) and the Ferontyscus eremicus species group:
historical vicariance of the Baja California Peninsular
desert. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 17:161-
172.

Riddle, B.R., D.J. Hafner, and L.F, Alexander. 2000b.

Pbylogcograpliy and systematics of Peromyscus erenikus
species group and historical biogeography of North
American warm regional deserts. Molecular
Phylogenetics and Evolution, 17:145-160.

Rohles Gil, R, G Ceballos, and F. Eccardi, 1993. Diversidad de
fauna mcxicana, CEMEX, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon,
Mexico.

Rodriguez-Jaramitio’, M, del C,, and D. Gendron, 1996. Report of
a sea otter, Enhydra lulris, off the coast of Isla
Magdalena, Baja California Sur, Mexico, Marine Mam¬
mal Science, 12:153-156.

Ruedas, L. A. 1998. Systematics of Syfvilagus Gray, 1867
(Lagomorpha:Lcporidac) from southwestern
NorthAmerica, Journal of Mammalogy, 79:1355- 1378,

Salinas, M,, and P. Ladron de Guevara. 1993. Riquezay diversidad
de los mamiferos marinos. Pp. 85 -93, in BiologSa y
problematica delos veriebrados cn Mexico (O. Florcs-V,
and A. Navarro-S., editores). Ciencias, numcro espe¬
cial, 7:1-110,

Sanchez-H., C. 1986. Notew'orthy records of bats from islands in
the Gulf of California. Journal of Mammalogy, 67:212-
213.

SEMARNAT 2002. Norma Oficial Mexicana PROy-NOM-059-
ECOL-2001, Proteccion ambiental - especies nativas
de Mexico de flora y fauna sil vestres-categorias de riesgo
y espccificaciones para su inclusion, exclusion o cambio-
lista dc especies en riesgo. Diario Oficial dc la Fcderacion,
Miercoles 6 dc Marzo 2002:1-80-

Simmons, N. B., 1996, Anew''species ofMc/wjye/cm (Chiroptera:

Phyllostomidae) from northeastern Brazil, with com¬
ments on phylogenetic relationships. American Mu¬
seum Novitates, 3158:1-34.

Simmons, N. B.’ 1998. A reappraisal of intcrfamilial relationships
of bats. Pp. 3-26, in. Bat Biology and Conservation (T.
H, Kunz and P. A, Racey, editors). Smithsonian Institu¬
tion Press, Washington, DC, xiv + 365 pp.

Simmons, N. B-, and C. O. Handley, Jr. 1998. A revision of
Cenironycterk Gray (Chiroptera: .Emballonuridae) wuth
notes on natural history. American Museum Novitates,
3239:1-28.

Simmons, N, B., and R. S. Voss. 1998, The mammals of Paracou,
French Guiana: A Neotropical lowland rainforets fauna.
Part 1, Bats, Bulletin of the American Museum of.Natu¬
ral History, 237:1-219.

Smith, F. A., B. T. Bestelmcycr, J, Biardi, and M. Strong. 1993,
Anthropogenic extinction of the endemic woodrat,
Neotoma bunkeri Burt. Biodiversity Letters, 1:149-
155.

Tiemann-Boegc, 1., C.W, Kilpatrick, D J. Schmidly, and R.D. Bra¬
dley, 2000- Molecular phylogenetics of Ferotnyscus boylii
species group (Rodentia: Muridae) based on mitochon¬
drial cytochrome b sequences. Molecular phylogenetics
and evolution, 16:366 -378.

Torres, A., C. Esquivel, and G. Ceballos. 1995. Diversidad y
conscrvacion de los mamiferos marinos de Mexico.
Revisia Mexicana dc Maslozoologia, 1; 22-43,

Urban-R., J., and D. AurioSes-G 1992. First record of the pygmy
beaked whale Mesophdon peruvianus in the North Pa¬
cific. Marine Mammal Science, 8:420-425.

Ceballos et al—The Mammals of Mexico

27

Van Den Bussche, R, A., J. L. Hudgeons, and R. J, Baker, H. A,
Wichman, 1998. Phylogenetic accuracy, stability, and
congruence: relationships within and among the New
World hat genera ArUbeus, Dermanura, and Koopmania.
Pp, 59-71, Bat Biology and Conservation (T H. Kunz
and P. A. Racey, editors). Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, DC. xiv + 365 pp.

Villa-R., B., J. P, Gallo, and B, Le Bocuf 1986, La foca monje
Monachtis Iropicafis (Mammalia: Pinnipedia)
definitivamente extinguida en Mexico. Anales del
Instituto de Biologia, Universidad Nacional AutOnoma
dc Mexico, Seric Zoologia, 56:573-588.

Weber, M. 1995. La introduce ion del Jabali curopco a la Reserva de
la Biosfera La Michilia, Durango: implicaciones
ecologicas y cpidemiologicas. Revisia Mexicana de
Mastozoologia, 1:69-73.

Wettcrer, A, L,, M. V. Rockinan, and N. B, Simmons. 2000.

Phylogeny of phylloslomid bats (Mammalia:
Chiroptera): data from diverse moiphological systems,
sex chromosomes, and resinction sites. Bulletin of the
American Museum ofNatura! History, 248:1-200.

Williams, D. F., H. H. Genoways, and J. K. Braun, 1993. Tax¬
onomy. Pp, 38-196, in Biology of the Heteromyidae
(H. H. Genoways and J. H. Brown, editors) The Ameri¬
can Society of Mammalogists, Special Publication, 10:xii
+ 1-719.

Addresses of authors:

Gerardo Ceballos

Instituto de Ecologia,

UNAM

Chid ad Universitaria
Apatardo Postal 70-275
Mexico, D. F, 04510
MEXICO

W'hlson, D. E. 1991. Mammals of the Tres Marias Islands. Bulle¬
tin of the American Museum of Natural 11istor>', 206:214-
250.

Wilson. D, E, and D. M, Reeder (editors), 1993. Mammal species
of the w'orld, a taxonomic and geographic reference,
2nd cd. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.
C, 1206 pp,

W'^oodman, N. and R. M. Timm. 1999. Geographic variation and
evolutionary relationships among broad-claw'cd shrews
of the Cryptotis gogroup (Mammalia:
Insectivora: Soricidac). Fieldiana, Zoology, New Series,
91:1-35.

Woodman, N, and R. M, 'I’imm. 2000. Taxonomy and evolution¬
ary relationships of Phillips' small-eared shrew, Csypiotis
phiiUpsii (Schaldach, 1966), from Oaxaca, Mexico (Mam¬
malia; Insectivora: Soricidae), Proceedings of the Bio¬
logical Society of Washington, 113:339-355,

Wh'ight, D. B. 1989. Phylogenetic relationships of Caiagonus
wagnerh sister taxa from the Tertiary ofNorth America,
Pp. 281-308, Advances in Neotropical Mammalogy
(K, H, Redfordand J. F.Eisenberg, eds,). Sandhill Crane
Press, Gainesville, Florida, 554 pp,

Yates, T. and J, Salazar. In Press. A revision ofLVctT/jfrnn.? ktiimanus,.

with the revalidation of a Mexican species. In: Homcnaje
al Dr. Bernardo Villa (R, Medellin and V, Sanchez Cordero,
eds). UNAM, Mexico D. F.

J O AQ1) fN AR RO Y 0"C AB ilAL LS

Labor a tor io de Arqueozoologia
“M. en C. Ticul Alvarez Solorzano”
INAH, Moneda 16
CoL Centro 06060
Mexico, D. F

Rodrigo A. Medellin

Instituto de Ecologia,

UNAM

Ciudad Univeisitaha
Apatardo Postal 70-275
Mexico, D. F, 04510
MEXICO

Publications of the Museum of Texas Tech University

It was through the efforts of Horn Professor J Knox Jones, as director of Academic Publications, that
Texas Tech University initiated several publications series including the Occasional Papers of the Museum.
This and future editions in the series are a memorial to his dedication to excellence in academic publications.
Professor Jones enjoyed editing scientific publications and served the scientific community as an editor for
the Journal of Mammalogy, Evolution, The Texas Journal of Science, Occasional Papers of the Museum, and
Special Publications of the Museum. It is with special fondness that we remember Dn J Knox Jones.

Institutional subscriptions are available through the Museum of Texas Tech University, attn: NSRL
Publications Secretary, Box 43191, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191. Individuals may also purchase separate num¬
bers of the Occasional Papers directly from the Museum of Texas Tech University.

ISSN 0149-175X

Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191