The evolutionary history of sigmodontine rodents in Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego

The Patagonian and Fuegian regions host a rich assemblage of sigmodontine rodents. In this article, we present a synthesis of our current understanding of their late Neogene diversification. Sigmodontine diversity in this area encompasses 16 genera and about 24 species; however, most belong to the tribes Abrotrichini and Phyllotini. Several abrotrichine genera are endemic to the region, whereas phyllotines are represented mainly by species widely distributed outside Patagonia. Two main ecogeographical assemblages of sigmodontines can be recognized: a lowland northeastern group with species mostly associated with shrub formations of the Monte Desert, and a medium to highland southwestern group of typical Patagonian elements, including several abrotrichines and a diversity of Andean forms. The pattern of latitudinal decline in species' number in sigmodontine rodents is more complex than the traditionally envisioned north to south pauperization; southern mainland Patagonia is as poor in species' number as is northern Tierra del Fuego (six species), suggesting that insularity is insufficient to explain the island assemblage. Glacial cycles may have had a major role in the control of sigmodontine richness. The fossil Fuego- Patagonian sigmodontine record is restricted to late Pleistocene- Holocene times. Remarkable events include regional extinctions of several widespread southwestern species during the latest Holocene and a reworking of micromammal assemblages, probably as a result of anthropogenic environmental changes. Two main phylogeographical patterns can be broadly associated with the northeastern and southwestern groups. The northeastern assemblage basically comprises species without phylogeographical structure, whereas the southwestern group involves several lineages with deep phylogeographical breaks. The current Fuego- Patagonian sigmodontine assemblage is mainly composed of species that colonized the area from lower latitudes and by others that have differentiated in situ. (C) 2011 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2011, 103, 495- 513.