CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Peruvian Oldfield mouse

species of mammal

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 2, 2025
Entity authorityQ535361 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Peruvian Oldfield mouse (Thomasomys eleusis) is a species of rodent in the family Cricetidae. It is found only in Peru.

References

Musser, G. G. and M. D. Carleton. 2005. Superfamily Muroidea. pp. 894–1531 in Mammal Species of the World a Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder eds. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Editorial summary

“Peruvian Oldfield mouse” enters the record as species of mammal. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Peruvian, Oldfield and mouse can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2005, 1531—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Peruvian, Oldfield and mouse.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Peruvian Oldfield mouse” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Peruvian, Oldfield and mouse provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 2, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q535361. The first chronological checks are 2005 and 1531.

Critical limits

Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Peruvian Oldfield mouse”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Peruvian Oldfield mouse primary sources, Peruvian Oldfield mouse archive and Peruvian research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Peruvian Oldfield mouse”?
  2. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
  3. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Peruvian Oldfield mouse” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.