Bukovina blind mole rat Spalax graecus revisited: phylogenetics, morphology, taxonomy, habitat associations and conservation

Abstract

The Bukovina blind mole rat Spalax graecus is the westernmost representative of the genus and one of the least known European mammals. As currently understood, the species contains three isolates on both sides of the south‐eastern Carpathian Mountains. Our focus was on Bukovina blind mole rats from north‐eastern Romania and adjacent Ukraine, i.e. on the nominal subspecies Spalax graecus graecus Topachevskii 1976. Phylogenetic reconstruction based on 1140‐bp‐long cytochrome b sequence revealed a sister position of Spalax graecus against the genus Nannospalax. Pairwise Kimura two‐parameter genetic divergences were evidently higher between Spalax graecus and the three species of Nannospalax (mean distances ± standard errors between 0.177 ± 0.014 and 0.197 ± 0.016) than between the three species of Nannospalax (up to 0.128 ± 0.010). The two genera were separated by 178 mutational steps. The Bukovina blind mole rat is so far known from 13 localities in north‐eastern Romania and adjacent Ukraine. The most influential environmental factors in the Spalax graecus habitat model were seasonality in precipitation, type of soil and altitude. The elevational range of suitable habitats is 39–848 m. The area occupied is estimated at 15581 km2, but patches with high habitat suitability cover only 1604 km2. The main habitat for the Bukovina blind mole rat is likely to degrade and the conservation needs of the species will soon have to be taken into account. We recommend the inclusion of the species on Annex II or IV of the European Union's Habitats Directive on grounds of its (i) narrow endemism, (ii) small range of occupancy, (iii) small overall population size and (iv) vulnerability to changes in agricultural land use.

Old views and new insights: taxonomic revision of the Bukovina blind mole rat,Spalax graecus(Rodentia: Spalacinae)

“…Distribution areas are based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature ( IUCN ) Red List maps, C hişamera et al . (), and our own data. A, S palax uralensis ; B, S palax giganteus ; C, S palax microphthalmus ; D, S palax arenarius ; E, S palax zemni ; F, S palax graecus s.s .…”

“…Resetnik, ; Gromov et al ., ; Pavlinov & Rossolimo, ). Nevertheless, as cytogenetic (Lyapunova, Vorontsov & Martynova, ) and molecular genetic (Hadid et al ., ) works provided further support of deep taxonomic divergences within the subfamily, and support of the presence of two genera ( Spalax and Nannospalax ), this old‐established classification scheme has finally been accepted in the most recent publications (Németh et al ., ; Arslan, Akan & Zima, , Kryštufek et al ., , Chişamera et al ., ).…”

“…These isolated populations can be assigned to described taxa, the nomenclatural history of which is summarized by Chişamera et al . (). Accordingly, the nominotypical form graecus graecus Nehring, occurs in Ukranian and Romanian Bukovina, istricus Méhely, is known from Oltenia and Muntenia, Romania, and two forms, antiquus Méhely, and mezosegiensis Szunyoghy, , were described from Transylvania, Romania.…”

Heterochromatin distribution and localization of nucleolar organizing regions in the 2n = 52 cytotypes of Nannospalax xanthodon and N. ehrenbergi from Turkey

“…The species composition of Spalacinae, however, has not been yet definitively settled. Chişamera et al (2014) demonstrated that the division of the extant species into two distinct genera, Spalax and Nannospalax, is justified and congruent with the pattern of phylogenetic divergence. The exceptional karyotype diversification is apparently confined to the genus Nannospalax which includes, in a traditional view, three nearly parapatric species, Nannospalax leucodon, Nannospalax xanthodon, and Nannospalax ehrenbergi (Kryštufek and Vohralík 2009).…”

A new cytotype (2n=46) ofNannospalax xanthodonfrom Turkey

“…These data enable the distribution of C-heterochromatin and nucleolar organizer regions to be revealed in the karyotype, and such findings bring new insights to the reconstruction of karyotype evolution. In this study, we follow the treatment recognizing two genera, Spalax and Nannospalax (Chişamera et al, 2014), and three traditional species within the genus Nannospalax (Kryštufek & Vohralík, 2009). …”