Talk:Eastern chipmunk

moved here from Chipmunk

The following text:

The Eastern Chipmunk is territorial and does not tolerate others of its kind within several meters of its burrow. Fierce chases and biting to chase off encroaching individuals result when competing for food or mates. Males take no responsibility for the young beyond mating. Individual females live solitary except when nursing their young. They will drive off adolescent offspring when they become independent. Sometimes females will abandon a well stocked burrow after her young are weaned and establish a new home nearby. Young chipmunks will engage in play with one another while exploring the area immediate to their birth nest. Dominance for territory is established at this time with weaker individuals forced to move greater distances away. In areas where there are roads and traffic, young chipmunks often meet their demise under the wheels of motor vehicles. When food is abundant and predators scarce, the chipmunk can live to 5 years. They are alert, quick, and wary of danger, very industrious in food gathering, and bold once habituated to humans. Physically robust and agile, the adult chipmunk can leap vertically 10 times its body length. Chipmunks are fastidious in self grooming. They have no detectable odor and are visibly clean. A bird feeder near your window will attract chipmunks and allow hours of enjoyable observation.

was removed from Chipmunk and placed here for consideration. Some duplication, but some citations would be nice to have prior to inclusion. mdf 14:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Etymology

The main chipmunk article suggests a different etymology (from a Native American language rather than the onomotopaeic origin in this article). -Jeff Worthington 02:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Range

Can we include a map indicating geographic range? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.12.128.24 (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eastern chipmunk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ucucha 06:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll be posting some comments later today. Ucucha 06:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• I'm unenthusiastic about some recent revisions: "solitary" is a widely used word and is clearer than "a loner". "Name origin" is little better than "etymology", and the section only deals with the word "chipmunk" anyhow. I'll probably make comments and minor improvements after Ucucha does. —innotata 14:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I'm looking forward to your expertise. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• In the lead, it might be good to put it in a little more taxonomic context than just "rodent"—perhaps say it's a squirrel, and the only living member of the genus Tamias, one of three genera of chipmunks.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
• Could the Merriam 1886 citation get a title and page numbers? Also, it's presumably available online because of its age; could you add a link?
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• The subspecies are never mentioned in the body of the article.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Could you add citations for the few parts of the description that don't have them?
• The sentence about differences from Eutamias and Neotamias reads odd: "they differ by ... the penis bone". Is there some difference in the form of the baculum?
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• I don't like the "Biological statistics" table, especially in its current layout, as it is interrupting the flow of the article. There are also some problems within the table: neither a "diploid number" nor a "tooth formula" is clear to a nonspecialist. I would put it in the text and say "The eastern chipmunk has 38 chromosomes (2n = 38)." and "The tooth formula is 1.0.1.31.0.1.3 × 2 = 20 (one incisor, one premolar, and three molars on each side of both the upper and lower jaws)." Furthermore, the value for body mass under "Metabolism" is outside the range reported a few lines up.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Thanks; could you add a citation for the Indiana measurements? Ucucha 05:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• "adult dentition is attained at 3 months"—does that mean that the 3rd molars erupt then? If so, it may be clearer to say that.
  • Source doesn't say. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• You first say that the second breeding season in the year may involve young born during the first, but then that young will not breed during their first year.
  • I can't find this passage in the article. Where is it? The young would not be sexually mature during the spring and summer mating seasons of their birth year. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I misread; the first part talks about young from the previous year. Ucucha 05:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• The louse Enderleinellus tamiasis may actually have come only from Eutamias sibiricus, it appears (Durden and Musser, 1994, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 218:13).
  • My source is dated 1998. I'm wondering if it supercedes the 1994? Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Whitaker and Hamilton? They may instead have missed it. Durden and Musser are online here, if you wish to check it. I actually found another source [1], from 1999, which definitively states the chipmunk E. tamiasis was first found on was misidentified. That's also consistent with the fact that the species has been found several more times on the Siberian chipmunk, but never on the eastern [2]. Ucucha 21:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 23:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Ucucha 16:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• We still have the point about subspecies open. I'm not quite sure you'll need that to have the article meet the GA criteria ("broad in its coverage").
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, you actually deleted the paragraph about its relationships, which I do think we need. Ucucha 15:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
      • I've just restored that section: why does a lack of stuff in the text on subspecies mean info on relations should be removed? —innotata 17:10, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
        • I can't find the passage in the main body of the text about the subspecies. I'll read the article through once again. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
          • The problem is that there is no such passage at the moment. Ucucha 08:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll also wait for Innotata to leave some comments before closing the review. Ucucha 17:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• I'm not sure this complete enough even for GA grade, but I'll mostly leave that to Ucucha. Some comments for now, some beyond the GA criteria:
  • I modelled the article on those already passed to GA and thought I "covered all the bases" here (diet, habitat, predators, etc.). What have I neglected? Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
    • I don't think most current mammal featured and good articles are as complete as they should be. This article is certainly not anything like a featured article. But again, I'll leave this to Ucucha. —innotata 17:10, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
      • I don't think it's enough for an FA, but this is not an FA review and the standards for GAs are lower ("broad" instead of "comprehensive"). I think the current article is "broad". For a somewhat comparable FA, marsh rice rat, I tracked down virtually all scientific literature on the species to search for relevant material. Whether all that is necessary for an FA, I'm not sure, but it is the direction to go. Ucucha 17:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• "most formidable enemy is the weasel": besides "enemy" being a bit problematic, weasels are a group of animals like hawks or foxes, not a species.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Words such as "hypopial" (I didn't know what it meant) should be avoided, especially in the lead.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Having only one breeding season in some regions is mentioned in the lead, but not the text.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• What is the survival rate of younger chipmunks? A few more words on survival would be good; I'd think more information would be available.
  • Don't know and don't recall seeing any mention but will look again. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
    • I've not found anything on this. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

• The table in the reproduction section probably should be removed, as it disrupts the text flow and everything in it is in the text.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• I think vivipary does not need to be mentioned.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Aspects of the eastern chipmunk's relations with humans beyond conservation status are in the lead but not the text.
  • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
    • The style there may be a little unencyclopedic. Ucucha 15:12, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Done. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

—innotata 20:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Delisted

As this article has been reverted to prior to the first edit by Susanne2009NYC, a banned serial copyright infringer, it no longer meets the criteria of GA. Content added by this contributor closely paraphrased and may have outright copied inaccessible print sources. See Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/ItsLassieTime for more information on this user's patterns. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:30, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright review

This article has been blanked for copyright review. It comes under investigation as part of a contributor copyright investigation of blocked serial copyright infringer User:ItsLassieTime, editing as User:Susanne2009NYC. This contributor has shown a history of closely paraphrasing and outright copying both online and print sources. The content needs to be thoroughly evaluated. See the CCI subpage for a few problematic sections already detected. If the content cannot be cleared, it may be necessary to revert it to the last version before this user contributed to it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:35, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem

I'm very sorry to say that it has been necessary to revert this article to an earlier version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Text entered in [3] duplicated at least in part material from Mammals of the Eastern United States By John O. Whitaker, William John Hamilton. Other content added by this contributor may have been copied from other, inaccessible print sources and has been removed in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. Content added by other contributors subsequent to the introduction of this material can be restored if it does not merge with this text to create a derivative work. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. ----Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Sources

These are the worthwhile ones in the copyright violation version, for when the versions are revdeleted. —innotata 17:33, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

• "Eastern Chipmunk". State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry. 2010. Retrieved 25 November 2010.
• Merriam, , C. Hart (1886). "Description of a New Subspecies of the Common Eastern Chipmunk". The American Naturalist. 20. American Society of Naturalists: 236–242.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Musser, G. G.; Durden, L. A.; Holden, M. E.; and Light, J. E. (2010). "Systematic review of endemic Sulawesi squirrels (Rodentia, Sciuridae), with descriptions of new species of associated sucking lice (Insecta, Anoplura), and phylogenetic and zoogeographic assessments of sciurid lice". Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History (339).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Piaggio, Antoinette J.; Spicer, Greg S. (2001). "Molecular Phylogeny of the Chipmunks Inferred from Mitochondrial Cytochrome b and Cytochrome Oxidase II Gene Sequences". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 20 (3): 335–350. doi:10.1006/mpev.2001.0975. PMID 11527462.
• Ray, Clayton E. (1965). "A new chipmunk, Tamias aristus, from the Pleistocene of Georgia". Journal of Paleontology. 39 (5): 1016–1022.
• Snyder, Dana P. (May 25, 1982). "Tamias striatus" (PDF). Mammalian Species (168). The American Society of Mammologists: 1–8. Retrieved 25 November 2010.
• "Tamias striatus". Human Ageing Genomic Resources. Retrieved 25 November 2010.
• Vogel, Virgil J. (1991). Indian Names on Wisconsin's Map. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 0-299-12980-2.
• Whitaker, John O., Jr.; William, John Hamilton, Jr. (1998) [1943]. Mammals of the Eastern United States (3rd. ed.). Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-3475-0.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Wishner, Lawrence (1982). Eastern Chipmunks: Secrets of Their Solitary Lives. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. ISBN 0-87474-962-X.

File:Tamias striatus CT.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Tamias striatus CT.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 24, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-12-24. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 16:41, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Picture of the day

The eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) is a chipmunk species native to eastern North America. Like other chipmunks, they transport food in pouches in their cheeks, as seen here. They eat bulbs, seeds, fruits, nuts, green plants, mushrooms, insects, worms, and bird eggs.Photo: Simon Pierre Barrette

Tamias vs Eutamias

Let's read this again:

It is the sole living member of the chipmunk subgenus Tamias, sometimes recognised as a separate genus.

In fact the Siberian chipmunk has been described as Eutamias sibiricus but also as Tamias sibiricus. Thus, the Eastern chipmunk shouldn't be defined as the sole living member of the chipmunk subgenus Tamias, even if stating immediately after that, sometimes recognised as a separate genus. The word sometimes doesn't allow to state is the sole living member. Is there or not any scientific consensus about the Tamias genus? one or two species in Tamias? Kintaro (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Infobox image replacement?

infobox photo which was replaced

new image

The infobox image was replaced. To me, the replacement is obviously worse (doesn't show the whole animal, bad lighting, less detail...), but I don't want to revert myself because I took the replaced image. Bringing it up here instead. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:13, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins has been doing some excellent stuff around chipmunks and other :natural history articles but in this case agree the previous image was better for the :infobox. Alerting @Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins: to this discussion. Regards Orenburg1 (talk) 10:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

It's a great picture and I agree with your concerns. I made the change as it backs up the etymology of the Native American name, just to the left.

I have reverted the infobox photo. Keep taking great pictures, Rhododendrites! Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah. Makes more sense now. :) Thanks for your work on these articles! — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Chipmunk with_stuffed_cheeks_in_Prospect_Park_(05980).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 12, 2024. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2024-03-12. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 11:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

The eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) is a chipmunk species found in eastern North America. It is a small species, reaching about 30 centimetres (12 in) in length, with a weight of 66 to 150 grams (2.3 to 5.3 oz). It has reddish-brown fur on its upper body and five dark brown stripes contrasting with light brown stripes along its back, ending in a dark tail. The eastern chipmunk can climb trees well, but constructs underground nests with extensive tunnel systems, often with several entrances. Its vocal repertoire consists of five sounds: the chip, the chuck, the trills, the whistle or squeal, and chatter. Trills have been measured to occur at the rate of 130 vibrations per minute. The eastern chipmunk lives a solitary life, except during courtship and mating and for the short period that young spend with their mothers after birth. It sometimes hibernates during the winter. This eastern chipmunk with stuffed cheeks was photographed in Prospect Park in Brooklyn, New York.

Photograph credit: Rhododendrites

Recently featured:

• Cox and Box
• Picea abies
• Spotted pardalote