Talk:Montane Guinea Pig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Peru Portal This article is supported by the Peru WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Peru To-do: edit  Assess and prioritise articles (log) Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate Create: Wildife of Peru, Fauna of Peru, Jorge Eduardo Eielson, Alberto Flores Galindo, Morococha Expand: new articles; top importance articles FAC / FLC: Mario Vargas Llosa GAC: Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes Translate Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive Wikify: articles needing attention

[edit] Taxonomic date

The modern references are off for this one. Fitzinger's publication is: "Versuch einer naturlichen Anordnung der Nagethiere (Rodentia)." It was published in Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaft zu Wien 55 (453-515) and 56 (57-168). I just checked the volume years against a university's holdings, and it checks out, 1867 was the date of publication. Chubbles 07:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Good find. MSW3 cites "Fitzinger, 1857. Sitzb. Akad. Wiss. Wien, pp. 154". I suppose it's possible that it might have something to do with the tschudi vs. tschudii spellings and Fitzinger may have had a tendency to publish there, but I think the odds of Woods (1993) getting wrong and not noticing for Woods and Kilpatrick (2005) to be vastly more likely. --Aranae 15:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)