the generic status of Baiyankamys and description of a new species of Hydromys
Author
Helgen, Kristofer M.
text
Zootaxa
2005
913
1
20
journal article
51057
10.5281/zenodo.171028
d3f1ce59-f24d-4abf-9ebd-28af273be687
11755326
171028
Hydromys ziegleri
new species
Figures 3
,
4
;
Tables 3
,
4
Holotype
: BBMNG
101683
, adult female, skin (
Fig. 3
) and skull (
Fig. 4
), from Bainyik (
03°40'S
,
143°05'E
),
circa
5 km
south of Maprik,
700 ft
(=
213 m
), East Sepik Province,
Papua New Guinea
, collected
29 October 1972
by A.B. Mirza. According to its label the holotype—the only known specimen of this species—was livetrapped in a local garden (see
Ziegler 1984
: 101).
Diagnosis
:
Hydromys ziegleri
is the smallest species of
Hydromys
. It most closely resembles
H. hussoni
, endemic to the upland Wissel Lakes of westcentral New
Guinea
(
Figs. 3–4
;
Table 3–4
), but differs from that species in its smaller size, broadened rostrum, shorter incisive foramina, shorter toothrow, broader first molars, lowerdomed braincase, and much less denselyfurred tail.
Distribution
:
Hydromys ziegleri
is known only from the
type
locality, situated in the foothills of the southern slopes of the Prince Alexander Range, one of the North Coast Ranges of
Papua New Guinea
. The
type
locality lies in the vicinity of the Screw and Amuk Rivers, which drain from the highlands of the Prince Alexander Range and the Torricelli Range, respectively. I suspect that future collecting efforts may show it to occur more widely (and at higher altitudes) in the North Coast Ranges (see Discussion below). Two other amphibious murines (
Hydromys chrysogaster
and
Parahydromys asper
) are known from other localities in the North Coast Ranges and are thus likely to occur sympatrically with
H. ziegleri
, though only
H. chrysogaster
has been collected in the same general area to date (e.g. CSIRO 8346, adult male from Maprik).
Etymology
: For the late Dr. Alan C. Ziegler (
19292003
), former head of the Vertebrate Zoology Division at the Bishop Museum in Honolulu and authority on New
Guinea
mammals.
Description
: The
holotype
of
ziegleri
is smaller than most specimens of
hussoni
(
Figs. 3–4
;
Table 3
). The dorsal pelage of
ziegleri
is dark brown (somewhat darker than the rich brown of
hussoni
) tipped with paler, orangebuff hairs. The fur is considerably shorter (
6– 7 mm
on the anterior dorsum), less dense, and conspicuously more glossy than in
hussoni
. The fur of the venter is greybased with ochraceousbuff tipping, similar to
hussoni
(
Musser and Piik 1982
;
Ziegler 1984
), but in the
holotype
of
ziegleri
the lower cheeks and the underside of the throat and chin are dingy white, contrasting with the rest of the venter.
The inguinal region and ventral base of the tail are dark brown (
Figure 3
).
As
in other
Hydromys
,
the hindfeet are long and broad and bear conspicuous webbing between the middle digits (II–IV). The dorsal surface of the pes is pigmented dark but covered with small pale hairs, and the claws are equal in size to those of
hussoni
,
and unpigmented. The skin label gives the hindfoot length as 29, probably measured with the claw, as on the dry skin this length is closer to 27
sans unguis
(
Ziegler 1984
).
FIGURE 3.
Dorsal and ventral views of the skins of
Hydromys ziegleri
(a, c; BBMNG 101683, adult female holotype) and
Hydromys hussoni
(b, d; AM M18627; adult female paratype). Scale bar = 20 mm.
The tail of the
holotype
is black, and lacks a white tailtip, which is present in 19 of 24 known specimens of
hussoni
,
and always present in
Hydromys chrysogaster
,
Baiyankamys
,
and
Parahydromys
(absent in
Crossomys
). There are 13–15 tail rings per centimetre in the midsection of the tail. Probably the most conspicuous external difference between
ziegleri
and
hussoni
is the relative hairiness of the tail. In other
Hydromys
, including
hussoni
, the tail is extensively haired, obscuring the tail rings, and the tail hairs are long, extending for the length of many tail scales. In
ziegleri
the tail is considerably less heavily furred, lending it a much more “naked” appearance, such that the tail rings are immediately evident to the naked eye. The tail hairs measure only about 2–3 tail rings in length and lie close to the body of the tail.
FIGURE 4.
Crania and mandibles of
Hydromys ziegleri
(below, adult female holotype) and
Hydromys hussoni
(above, AM M18627, adult female paratype).
In many ways the cranial resemblance between
hussoni
and
ziegleri
is close (
Ziegler 1984
). However, judging from direct comparisons between the
holotype
of
ziegleri
and a
paratype
of
hussoni
(AM M18627, formerly RMNH 29162, also adult female), my notes on the
type
series of
hussoni
at RMNH, comparisons with the verbal and mensural descriptions of
hussoni
by
Musser and Piik (1982)
and Voss (1988), and illustrations of the
holotype
of
hussoni
figured by
Musser and Piik (1982)
, many qualitative cranial differences between the two species are immediately apparent. The skull of
ziegleri
is noticeably shorter and stouter than that of
hussoni
(
Fig. 4
). The rostrum is short and broad in both species, but the nasolacrimal capsules are laterally expanded to a much greater degree in
ziegleri
, as reflected in its relatively greater rostral breadth, and the nasals are correspondingly broader (
Table 3
) and also more strongly retracted. The incisive foramina are more truncate in
ziegleri
, only 31% of the length of the diastema, versus 37% (in
hussoni
) or greater in all other species of
Hydromys
and
Baiyankamys
(
Musser and Piik 1982: 164
)
. The zygomatic plate is more excavated in
ziegleri
than
hussoni
, and the braincase is markedly less expanded dorsoventrally (
Table 3
; braincase height is 64% of braincase breadth in
ziegleri
, versus 69% or greater in all other
Hydromys
and
Baiyankamys
;
Musser and Piik 1982
:164).
TABLE 3.
Craniodental metrics for the adult female holotype of
Hydromys ziegleri
and for series of adult female and mixed adult
Hydromys hussoni
.
Measurements
H. ziegleri
H. hussoni
ΨΨ
1
H. hussoni
ΨΨ, ♂♂
2
n = 69 n = 20
Length of head and body
132 150.1 ± 9.4 (138164) 147.9 ± 15.4 (122171)
Length of tail
118 125.5 ± 14.3 (103144) 126.4 ± 13.8 (103152)
Length of hindfoot
29 27.4 ± 1.1 (2629) 29.8 ± 2.0 (2733)
Length of ear
13 12.4 ± 0.8 (1214) 12.1 ± 0.8 (1114)
Greatest length of skull
29.01 31.54 ± 0.87 (30.132.8) —
Condyloincisive length
28.50 — 30.5 ± 1.41 (27.932.9)
Zygomatic breadth
14.98 15.60 ± 0.50 (14.816.3) 15.5 ± 0.87 (14.017.3)
Breadth of rostrum
6.23 5.82 ± 0.21 (5.6 6.1) —
Length of nasals
8.73 10.17 ± 0.43 (9.410.6) 9.8 ± 0.68 (8.611.2)
Breadth of nasals
3.39 — 3.10 ± 0.18 (2.83.4)
Length incisive foramina
2.48 3.08 ± 0.13 (2.93.3) 3.0 ± 0.33 (2.03.3)
Maxillary toothrow
4.13 4.71 ± 0.15 (4.55.0) 4.6 ± 0.12 (4.44.8)
Breadth of braincase
13.09 13.44 ± 0.28 (13.113.8) 13.7 ± 0.36 (13.014.4)
Height of braincase
8.39 9.21 ± 0.19 (8.99.5) —
Postorbital constriction
|
5.09 |
5.28 ± 0.14 (5.15.5) |
5.3 ± 0.14 (5.05.6) |
Breadth of incisor tips
|
1.62 |
1.67 ± 0.13 (1.51.9) |
1.6 ± 0.15 (1.41.9) |
Length of diastema
|
7.99 |
8.39 ± 0.36 (7.99.0) |
8.5 ± 0.54 (7.69.3) |
1 From
Musser and Piik (1982: 159)
.
2 From Voss (1988: 467): 12ΨΨ and 8♂♂.
The faces of the upper and lower incisors are pigmented yellowishorange in
ziegleri
(with pigmentation more obvious in the upper incisors), while those of
hussoni
are very weakly pigmented or almost unpigmented. In
ziegleri
the first upper molars are broader relative to their length compared to
hussoni
, and the second upper and lower molars are more reduced (e.g.
Table 4
). The posterior palatine foramina are lengthened into a more extensive narrow groove in the
hussoni
paratype
than in the
holotype
of
ziegleri
, in which these foramina are essentially small ovate holes. The posterior palatal spine is extremely welldeveloped. Relative to
hussoni
the auditory bullae are less flattened and less elongate. The foramen ovale is distinctly larger in
ziegleri
than
hussoni
. In both species the stapedial foramen is welldeveloped and the foramen ovale bears a conspicuous groove for the passage of the infraorbital branch of the stapedial artery, suggesting that both possess the primitive murine cephalic arterial configuration typical of other New Guinean waterrats of the genera
Baiyankamys
,
Hydromys
,
Parahydromys
,
and
Crossomys
(and the less closelyrelated lowland false waterrat,
Xeromys myoides
, as stated by Musser and Carleton [2005] and confirmed by my examination of specimens in the Australian Museum; cf.
Musser and Heaney 1992
:87).
Additional measurements of the
holotype
(other than those presented in
Table 3
) include: palatal length 13.08; breadth of mesopterygoid fossa 2.13; greatest breadth of incisive foramina 1.67; breadth of the palatal bridge between M2–M2 2.60; breadth of the zygomatic plate 1.54; height of upper incisor 4.58; depth of upper incisor 1.55; breadth across occipital condyles 8.37; coronoid height of mandible 7.99; alveolar length of M1–2 4.35; and mandible length minus incisor 14.85 (with incisor, 18.38).
TABLE 4.
Comparative molar dimensions in specimens of
Hydromys ziegleri
(adult female holotype) and
Hydromys hussoni
(AM M18627, adult female paratype).
ziegleri
|
hussoni
|
M
1
length x width
|
2.98 x 1.54 |
3.24 x 1.49 |
M
2
length x width
|
1.22 x 1.07 |
1.52 x 1.34 |
M
2
length / M
1
length
|
0.41 |
0.47 |
M
1
width / M
1
length
|
0.52 |
0.46 |
M
1
length x width
|
2.59 x 1.28 |
2.84 x 1.59 |
M
2
length x width
|
1.67 x 1.18 |
1.81 x 1.34 |
Zoogeography |
Several isolated mountain ranges are situated along the northern coast of New
Guinea
, including the Adelbert, Prince Alexander, Torricelli, Bewani, Cyclops, Foya (= Gauttier), and Van Rees Mountains, collectively referred to hereafter as the North Coast Ranges. These mountain ranges are wellseparated from the Central Dividing Ranges of New
Guinea
by large expanses of lowland forest, have distinctive geological histories (
Flannery 1995
), and support highly distinctive faunas.
TABLE 5.
North Coast endemic mammal species recorded from the various North Coast Ranges of northern New Guinea. PA = Prince Alexander Range; T = Torricelli Range; B = Bewani Range (including Mt. Menawa); C = Cyclops Range; F = Foya Range.
PA T B C F Recorded elevation
Monotremes
Zaglossus attenboroughi
Flannery & Groves, 1998
x
1600 m
Bats
Marsupials
|
Dendrolagus pulcherrimus
Flannery, 1993
|
? x |
? |
680 to 1120 m |
Dendrolagus scottae
Flannery & Seri, 1990
|
x x |
900 to 2000 m |
Petaurus
abidi
Ziegler, 1981
|
x |
800 to 1220 m |
Rodents
|
Hydromys ziegleri
n. sp.
|
x |
213 m |
‘Microhydromys’ musseri
Flannery, 1989
|
x |
1350 m |
Paraleptomys rufilatus
Osgood, 1945
|
x x x |
1200 to 1700 m |
Hipposideros edwardshilli
Flannery & Colgan, 1993
x
240 m
Many endemic mammals occur in these mountain ranges (
Table 5
). A recentlydescribed monotreme, the dwarf longbeaked echidna (
Zaglossus attenboroughi
), is known only by a single specimen collected in
1961 in
upper montane forest (
1600 m
) on Mt. Rara in the Cyclops Range, behind Jayapura (
Flannery and Groves, 1998
). The treekangaroo
Dendrolagus scottae
(the “tenkile”) is known from the western Torricelli Range and Mt. Menawa in the Bewanis, where it is primarily restricted to narrow bands of montane forest situated at about
1200–1500 m
in the Torricellis and about
1500–2000 m
on Mt. Menawa (
Flannery and Seri 1990b
;
Flannery
et al.
1996
). Another tree kangaroo,
Dendrolagus pulcherrimus
, is recorded as a living animal from the eastern Torricellis and (on the basis of a sight record) from the Foya Range (Flannery 1993;
Flannery
et al.
1996
), and is rumoured to occur in the Prince Alexander Range. The latter species (originally described as a subspecies of
D. goodfellowi
by Flannery 1993) has disappeared from much of its former range in the Torricellis in recent decades, probably as a result of unsustainable hunting practices (
Flannery
et al.
1996
). In the past,
D. pulcherrimus
probably had a much more extensive distribution, as it or a very closelyrelated taxon is also represented in Quaternary subfossil deposits from the Vogelkop Peninsula of northwest New
Guinea
(
Aplin
et al.
1999
). A third marsupial found only in the North Coast Ranges is the Northern glider (
Petaurus abidi
), recorded only from mid and upper montane forest in the vicinity of Mts. Somoro and Sapau in the Torricelli Range (
Ziegler 1981
;
Flannery 1995
).
Among murine rodents, three endemic hydromyins are known from the North Coast Ranges. These are
Paraleptomys rufilatus
,
a mediumsized terrestrial rat which occurs in mountaintop forests in the Cyclops, Bewani, and Torricelli Ranges (
Osgood 1945
;
Flannery 1995
; Musser and Carleton 2005); ‘
Microhydromys’ musseri
, a small mossmouse of uncertain phylogenetic affinity, known by a single specimen collected in
1972 in
upper montane forest (
1350 m
) on Mt. Somoro in the Torricellis (Flannery 1989; Musser and Carleton, 2005); and now
Hydromys ziegleri
, known by a single specimen collected on the southern margin of the Prince Alexander Range. Finally, one species and one distinctive subspecies of leafnosed bat (
Hipposideros edwardshilli
and
Hipposideros wollastoni fasensis
) are known only from the northern and southern foothills of the Bewani range, respectively (
Flannery and Colgan 1993
).
During cooler climatic periods during the Late Pleistocene, montane forests extended to much lower elevations in New
Guinea
than they do today, and the montaneadapted species of the North Coast Ranges likely had considerably more expansive or even contiguous distributions across certain of these mountain ranges. I suspect that the seemingly haphazard distribution of endemic species recorded from the various North Coast ranges today (
Table 5
) reflects a combination of two factors: artefacts of geographically uneven sampling effort and, at least for some of the largerbodied species (
Zaglossus
,
Dendrolagus
), historical extinctions (see
Flannery
et al.
1996
;
Flannery and Groves 1998
).
Some of the larger endemic mammals of the North Coast Ranges, especially
Zaglossus attenboroughi
,
Dendrolagus scottae
,
and
Dendrolagus pulcherrimus
, have minuscule global geographic ranges and are actively hunted for food (
Flannery
et al.
1996
;
Flannery and Groves 1998
), and are probably among the most endangered of all Australasian mammals (indeed,
Z. attenboroughi
may already be extinct;
Flannery and Groves 1998
). All North Coast Range endemic mammals, even the smallest (such as ‘
Microhydromys’ musseri
and
Hydromys ziegleri
), should be considered conservation priorities on account of their extremely limited geographic and altitudinal ranges, which in most cases are centred on small tracts of upper montane forest, highly susceptible to threatening processes including logging and climate change. In addition to supporting a markedly unique mammal fauna, the North Coast Ranges are also an area of considerable geographicallyrestricted endemism for frogs, birds, and other biotic groups (
Stattersfield
et al.
1998
; Kraus and Allison 2000; Allison and Kraus 2000, 2003), ranking these mountain ranges among the most critical priorities for conservation efforts in the Melanesian region (
Wikramanayake
et al.
2002
).
Of the eight endemic mammal species currently known from the North Coast Ranges, seven were described as new to science only within the last 15 years, and all eight were both discovered and described within the last 60 years (
Table 5
). Further, three of these remain known by a single museum specimen (
Zaglossus attenboroughi
, ‘Microhydromys’ musseri,
and
Hydromys ziegleri
). These cursory but remarkable statistics for North Coast Range mammals aptly demonstrate how incompletely catalogued the biota of these mountains remains. While the mammal faunas of some areas in the North Coast Ranges (including the western Torricellis, Cyclops, and Bewanis) have become much better understood through recent survey efforts (e.g. Flannery 1993, 1995), others, such as the Foya and Van Rees Ranges of western New
Guinea
, remain almost wholly unknown mammalogically. For example, until recently the ornithologist Jared Diamond was the only westerner known to have visited the relatively expansive Foya Range, which is mostly uninhabited and largely unexplored (see
Diamond 1985
). Given the startling rate of new discoveries in North Coast mountain ranges in recent decades, there is no doubt that future survey efforts in this region will continue to encounter vertebrate species new to science.
The mammal fauna of the Prince Alexander Mountains is moderately wellknown. Apart from
Hydromys ziegleri
,
at least 23 other species are recorded from these mountains (specimens at AM, AMNH, and BBM). These include the cuscuses
Phalanger orientalis
,
P. gymnotis
,
and
Spilocuscus maculatus
,
the treekangaroo
Dendrolagus inustus
,
the wallabies
Thylogale browni
and
Dorcopsis hageni
,
the bandicoots
Echymipera clara
,
E. kalubu
,
and
E. rufescens
,
the rodents
Hydromys chrysogaster
,
Melomys rufescens
,
Rattus praetor
,
and
R. exulans
,
the fruitbats
Pteropus neohibernicus, Dobsonia
minor,
Nyctimene aello
,
N. albiventer
,
N. cyclotis, Paranyctimene
tenax, Syconycteris australis,
and
Macroglossus minimus
,
the vespertilionid bat
Pipistrellus papuanus
,
and the molossid bat
Mormopterus beccarii
. However, essentially all of these species (excepting
Nyctimene cyclotis
,
a widespread inhabitant of New Guinean montane forests) are characteristic inhabitants of lowland habitats and are widespread in northern New
Guinea
. Future surveys in the Prince Alexanders should thus focus on the very highest peaks in the range, which rise to
1240 m
and are likely to support unique animal assemblages unknown at lower altitudes.
As
discussed above, rodentcollecting efforts in the Melanesian region have so far yielded five species of
Hydromys—
the widespread
H. chrysogaster
, the insular endemic
H. neobrittanicus
,
the midmontane Wissel Lakes endemic
H. hussoni
,
the newlydescribed
H. ziegleri
,
and an unnamed species from the Moluccan island of Obi. The three larger species (
H. chrysogaster
,
H. neobrittanicus
,
and the Obi taxon) have all been collected in lowland rainforest, including in forest at sea level, while one of the smaller species (
H. hussoni
) is known only from forest at much higher elevations. The similarly smallbodied
Hydromys ziegleri
is thus far known only by a single specimen taken in relatively low elevation forest (
213 m
); given that extensive collecting efforts in other areas of lowland northern New
Guinea
have failed to record it elsewhere, I strongly suspect that it is a legitimate endemic of the North Coast Ranges. That the other smallbodied
Hydromys
(
H. hussoni
) and most other North Coast Range endemic mammals are restricted to higherelevation forests suggests to me that
H. ziegleri
may be an inhabitant of montane forests, and that thus far it may be known only from the very lowest altitudinal bound of its range. Future trapping regimes targeted at streams along elevational gradients in the Prince Alexander and eastern Torricelli Mountains should serve to illuminate its real geographic and altitudinal distribution.
The ongoing discovery and description of new mammal species from throughout mainland New
Guinea
(e.g.
Flannery and Groves 1998
;
Helgen and Flannery 2004
;
Helgen 2005
), highlights how poorlystudied the biota of many areas of the island remains. Amphibious murines, which can be difficult to trap, are often especially overlooked in rapid faunal inventories. I strongly suspect that future survey efforts will identify additional smallbodied amphibious murines in outlying areas of montane New Guinea—perhaps, for example, in the mountain ranges of the Vogelkop Peninsula (the Arfaks and Tamraus), in the expansive Foya Range, or on other large mountainous islands adjacent to New
Guinea
, such as New
Britain
or Seram.