Peromyscus leucopus (Rafinesque 1818) [Musculus] leucopus Rafinesque 1818, Am. Mon. Mag., 3: 446. Type Locality: USA, Kentucky, Ballard Co., near mouth of Ohio River (as restricted by Osgood, 1909:115-116). Vernacular Names: White-footed Deermouse. Synonyms: Peromyscus affinis (J. A. Allen 1891); Peromyscus ammodytes Bangs 1905; Peromyscus arboreus Gloger 1841; Peromyscus aridulus Osgood 1909; Peromyscus arizonae (J. A. Allen 1894); Peromyscus brevicaudus Davis 1939; Peromyscus campestris (Le Conte 1853); Peromyscus canus Mearns 1896; Peromyscus castaneus Osgood 1904; Peromyscus caudatus Smith 1939; Peromyscus cozulmelae Merriam 1901; Peromyscus easti Paradiso 1960; Peromyscus emmonsi (DeKay 1840); Peromyscus flaccidus J. A. Allen 1903; Peromyscus fuscus Bangs 1905; Peromyscus incensus Goldman 1942; Peromyscus lachiguiriensis Goodwin 1956; Peromyscus mearnsii (J. A. Allen 1891); Peromyscus mesomelas Osgood 1904; Peromyscus michiganensis (Audubon and Bachman 1842); Peromyscus minnesotae Mearns 1901; Peromyscus musculoides Merriam 1898; Peromyscus myoides (Gapper 1830); Peromyscus noveboracensis (Fischer 1829); Peromyscus ochraceus Osgood 1909; Peromyscus texanus (Woodhouse 1853); Peromyscus tornillo Mearns 1896. Distribution: S Alberta and to S Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia, Canada; throughout much of C and E USA, excluding Florida; southwards to N Durango and along Caribbean coast to Isthmus of Tehuantepec and NW Yucatán Peninsula, México. Conservation: IUCN – Data Deficient as P. l. ammodytes, otherwise Lower Risk (lc). Discussion: P. leucopus species group. Revised by Osgood (1909). Morphometric discrimination of P. leucopus from P. maniculatus studied in central US and New England (J. Choate, 1973; J. Choate et al., 1979); Rich et al. (1996) combined salivary amylase genotypes with discriminant function analyses to confidently separate these morphologically similar species (also see account of P. gossypinus). Distinctive eastern (leucopus) and southwestern (texanus) cytotypes reported (Baker et al., 1983), with introgression across hybrid zone in central Oklahoma intensively studied (Nelson et al., 1987; Schmidt, 1999; Simmons et al., 1992; Stangl, 1986; Stangl and Baker, 1984 a; Van Den Bussche et al., 1993 b); possible mechanisms of heterochromatic chromosomal change that would produce the different cytotypes examined by Bowers et al. (1998). Morphometric variation examined over microgeographic scale in various regions that provide insight to understanding macrogeographic patterns of size, including NC Kansas (Tolliver et al., 1987), SW Tennessee (Elrod and Kennedy, 1995), and Texas (Owen, 1989). Size and chromatic variation of series in the Llano Estacado, N Texas, and its relationship to recognized subspecies, texanus and tornillo, discussed by L. Choate (1997). See Long and Long (1993) and Kilpatrick et al. (1994) for local range expansions within Wisconsin and Maine, respectively. Genetic variation investigated at different spatial scales and habitats (Browne, 1977; Schnake-Greene et al., 1990); variation in microsatellite DNA repeats as potential markers to determine mating systems, gene flow, and demic relationships elucidated by Schmidt (1999). Whitaker and Hamilton (1998) regarded noveboracensis and the nominate subspecies as broadly intergrading and synonymized the two. See Lackey et al. (1985, Mammalian Species, 247).

Published as part of Wilson, Don E. & Reeder, DeeAnn, 2005, Order Rodentia - Family Cricetidae, pp. 955-1189 in Mammal Species of the World: a Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3 rd Edition), Volume 2, Baltimore :The Johns Hopkins University Press on page 1070, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7316535