Marmosops (Sciophanes) bishopi ( Pine, 1981 )

Voss, Robert S., Fleck, David W. & Jansa, Sharon A., 2019, Mammalian Diversity And Matses Ethnomammalogy In Amazonian Peru Part 3: Marsupials (Didelphimorphia), Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 2019 (432), pp. 1-89 : 68-69

Marmosops (Sciophanes) bishopi ( Pine, 1981)

VOUCHER MATERIAL (TOTAL = 12): Jenaro Herrera (AMNH 276697, 276700, 276705, 276718, 276723; MUSM 23799–23803), Nuevo San Juan (MUSM 13287), San Pedro (UF 30454).

OTHER INTERFLUVIAL RECORDS: None.

IDENTIFICATION: The small species of Marmosops formerly associated with the name M. parvidens (e.g., by Pine, 1981) were referred to the subgenus Sciophanes by Díaz-Nieto et al. (2016). Specimens from the Yavarí-Ucayali interfluve were subsequently examined by Díaz-Nieto and Voss (2016), who referred them to M. bishopi , a taxon originally described as a subspecies of M. parvidens on the basis of a female holotype collected in central Brazil. As recognized by Díaz-Nieto and Voss (2016), M. bishopi is a widespread species that includes several morphologically indistinguishable mtDNA haplogroups. Unfortunately, no sequence data is available from the holotype, nor did Díaz-Nieto et al. (2016) obtain sequences from specimens collected in the Yavarí-Ucayali interfluve. The holotype (USNM 393535) has paler fur and a much shorter tail (116 mm) than the single adult female from our region (table 27), but other measurement differences between these specimens seem unremarkable. Our material agrees with the emended description of this species by Díaz-Nieto and Voss (2016: 43–49), who provided cranial photographs of one of our vouchers (MUSM 23803).

ETHNOBIOLOGY: The Matses do not distinguish this species from other pouchless, longtailed, black-masked species of small opossums (all known as chekampi; see the account for Marmosa , above) and therefore have no particular beliefs about it.

MATSES NATURAL HISTORY: The Matses have no definite knowledge of this species.

REMARKS: Our single specimen from Nuevo San Juan was caught by hand at night by a Matses hunter, but no information was recorded about the habitat in which it was taken. The remaining 10 specimens (all from Jenaro Herrera) were taken in pitfall traplines: five in welldrained secondary growth, three in swampy primary forest, and two in white-sand forest.