Cryptotis parva - (Say, 1823)
North American Least Shrew
Other English Common Names: Least Shrew, North American least shrew
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Cryptotis parva (Say, 1823) (TSN 179971)
French Common Names: petite musaraigne
Spanish Common Names: Una Musaraņa
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.791224
Element Code: AMABA04010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Other Mammals
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Soricomorpha Soricidae Cryptotis
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. Available online at: https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/
Concept Reference Code: B05WIL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Cryptotis parva
Taxonomic Comments: Cryptotis parva formerly included, as subspecies, Central American Cryptotis orophila and C. tropicalis, which were listed as distinct species by Hutterer (in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Some of the other C. parva subspecies may be distinct species (Hutterer, in Wilson and Reeder 2005).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 04Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 04Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Sep1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: NH (22Jan2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (S5), Arkansas (S5), Colorado (S5), Connecticut (S1), Delaware (SNR), District of Columbia (S4), Florida (SNR), Georgia (S5), Illinois (S5), Indiana (S4), Iowa (S2), Kansas (S5), Kentucky (S5), Louisiana (S4), Maryland (S3S5), Michigan (S1S2), Minnesota (S3), Mississippi (SNR), Missouri (S4), Nebraska (S4), New Jersey (SU), New Mexico (S2), New York (SH), North Carolina (S5), Ohio (SNR), Oklahoma (S5), Pennsylvania (S1), South Carolina (SNR), South Dakota (S3), Tennessee (S5), Texas (S4), Virginia (S5), West Virginia (S2), Wisconsin (SX)
Canada Ontario (SH)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Throughout much of eastern U.S. north (at least formerly) to extreme southeastern Canada (Hutterer, in Wilson and Reeder 1993), southern New York and southern Connecticut, southern Michigan (Evers 1992), and South Dakota; also south through Mexico (south to Chiapas, west to Nayarit) (Hutterer, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Northern limit in eastern part of range may have contracted somewhat. Distribution expanded westward in the western Great Plains over the past few decades in response to the creation of relatively stable mesic habitat associated with increased irrigation and a simultaneous trend toward more mesic climate (Hafner and Shuster 1996). However, some western populations apparently represent relicts of late Wisconsinan and altithermal periods (Hafner and Shuster 1996).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Throughout much of eastern U.S. north (at least formerly) to extreme southeastern Canada (Hutterer, in Wilson and Reeder 1993), southern New York and southern Connecticut, southern Michigan (Evers 1992), and South Dakota; also south through Mexico (south to Chiapas, west to Nayarit) (Hutterer, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Northern limit in eastern part of range may have contracted somewhat. Distribution expanded westward in the western Great Plains over the past few decades in response to the creation of relatively stable mesic habitat associated with increased irrigation and a simultaneous trend toward more mesic climate (Hafner and Shuster 1996). However, some western populations apparently represent relicts of late Wisconsinan and altithermal periods (Hafner and Shuster 1996).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NE, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WIextirpated, WV
Canada ON

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
CT Middlesex (09007)*, New Haven (09009)
IA Appanoose (19007), Louisa (19115), Monona (19133), Muscatine (19139), Pottawattamie (19155)
MI Allegan (26005)*, Clinton (26037)*, Ingham (26065)*, Jackson (26075)*, Kalamazoo (26077)*, Livingston (26093)*, Oakland (26125)*, Washtenaw (26161)*
MN Winona (27169)*
NM Chaves (35005), Eddy (35015), Guadalupe (35019), Quay (35037), Roosevelt (35041), San Miguel (35047)
PA Adams (42001), Beaver (42007)*, Berks (42011)*, Chester (42029)*, Columbia (42037)*, Crawford (42039)*, Franklin (42055)*, Greene (42059)*, Indiana (42063)*, Mercer (42085)*, Schuylkill (42107)*, Westmoreland (42129)*, York (42133)
SD Custer (46033), Dewey (46041), Fall River (46047), Hughes (46065)*, Jackson (46071)*, Jones (46075)*, Mellette (46095)*, Minnehaha (46099), Pennington (46103)*, Stanley (46117), Todd (46121)*, Ziebach (46137)
WV Berkeley (54003), Cabell (54011)*, Mercer (54055)*, Nicholas (54067)*, Summers (54089)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Quinnipiac (01100004)+
02 Long Island Sound (02030203)+*, Schuylkill (02040203)+*, Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna (02050107)+*, Lower Susquehanna-Swatara (02050305)+*, Lower Susquehanna (02050306)+, Conococheague-Opequon (02070004)+, Monocacy (02070009)+
04 St. Joseph (04050001)+*, Kalamazoo (04050003)+*, Upper Grand (04050004)+*, Detroit (04090004)+*, Huron (04090005)+*, Ottawa-Stony (04100001)+*, Raisin (04100002)+*
05 Conemaugh (05010007)+*, Kiskiminetas (05010008)+*, Lower Monongahela (05020005)+*, Upper Ohio (05030101)+*, Shenango (05030102)+*, Middle New (05050002)+, Gauley (05050005)+*, Lower Guyandotte (05070102)+*, Raccoon-Symmes (05090101)+*
07 Buffalo-Whitewater (07040003)+*, Copperas-Duck (07080101)+
10 Angostura Reservoir (10120106)+, Middle Cheyenne-Spring (10120109)+, Middle Cheyenne-Elk (10120111)+*, Lower Lake Oahe (10130105)+, Lower Moreau (10130306)+, Fort Randall Reservoir (10140101)+*, Bad (10140102)+*, Lower White (10140204)+*, Keya Paha (10150006)+*, Lower Big Sioux (10170203)+, Little Sioux (10230003)+, Monona-Harrison Ditch (10230004)+*, Maple (10230005)+, Big Papillion-Mosquito (10230006)+, Upper Chariton (10280201)+
11 Upper Canadian-Ute Reservoir (11080006)+, Revuelto (11080008)+
12 Yellow House Draw (12050001)+
13 Pecos headwaters (13060001)+, Upper Pecos-Long Arroyo (13060007)+, Upper Pecos-Black (13060011)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Diagnostic Characteristics: See Carraway (1995) for a key to western North American soricids based primarily on dentaries.
Reproduction Comments: Breeds March-November in north, all year in south (mainly spring-summer). Gestation lasts about 2 weeks. Litter size is 2-7, average 4-5. young are weaned in 3 weeks. Two to three litters per year. Sexually mature after 5 weeks.
Ecology Comments: Populations may occur in small colonies. Nest is center of activity. Home range may be 3 acres (Choate and Fleharty 1973). Usually more abundant than snaptrap surveys show. Density may be 10-15 per acre (Hoffmeister and Mohr 1957, Kale 1972). Appears in owl pellets much more frequently than in traps of collectors.
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Estuarine Habitat(s): Herbaceous wetland
Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND, HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian, SCRUB-SHRUB WETLAND
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Grassland/herbaceous, Old field, Savanna, Shrubland/chaparral, Suburban/orchard, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Burrowing in or using soil, Fallen log/debris, Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: Generally occurs in open country with dense herbaceous vegetation. Also brushy areas, forest edges, and sometimes salt and freshwater marshes. Sometimes in scrubby live oak, pine-oak, dense humid tropical forest, and cloud forest, and near water in Mexico and Central America. Nest site may be underground or under log, stump, rock, board.
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Primarily feeds on insects and other invertebrates (e.g., earthworms, spiders), some vegetable matter.
Adult Phenology: Circadian
Immature Phenology: Circadian
Phenology Comments: Active day and night, probably more at night than during day.
Length: 10 centimeters
Weight: 8 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Shrews

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area of suitable habitat where there is evidence of presence (or historical presence), with potential for continued presence; evidence minimally including a specimen or, in the case of certain species, a determination by a reliable observer of a live specimen in the hand.
Separation Barriers: Arbitrarily set at rivers wider than 50 meters at low water. Some shrews are relatively strong, active swimmers (notably SOREX PALUSTRIS, S. BENDIRII, SOREX ALASKANUS). No data on dispersal or other movement across water barriers.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 1 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Dispersal distances of shrews are poorly known, but these mammals are mobile enough to cover fairly large distances. Mature males especially may wander widely (Hawes 1977). Separation distance for suitable habitat attempts to reflect the small home range size of shrews, their secretive habits and consequent apparent absence in areas where they do in fact occur, and the seemingly low probability that two occupied locations separated by a gap of less than several kilometers of suitable habitat would represent independent populations.

Home ranges small: for breeding SOREX VAGRANS in British Columbia, 338 - 5261 square meters (Hawes 1977); in California, mean of about 372 square meters (Ingles 1961); for breeding S. MONTICOLUS (=OBSCURUS) in British Columbia, mean of 4020 square meters (Hawes 1977); for S. ARANEUS in England, a fall and winter home range of about 2800 square meters, with females occupying exclusive ranges (Buckner 1969).

Date: 21Sep2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 23Sep1994
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): HAMMERSON, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • Arbetan, P. 1988. Rediscovery of the Least Shrew in Minnesota. The Prairie Naturalist 20:58.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of Mammals in Colorado. Monograph of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas. University of Kansas Printing Service, Lawrence. 415 pp.

  • BAKER, ROLLIN H. 1991. MAMMALIAN PREY OF THE COMMON BARN-OWL (TYTO ALBA) ALONG THE TEXAS COAST. SOUTHWEST. NAT. 36(3):343-347.

  • BEE, J.W., G.E. GLASS, R.S. HOFFMANN, AND R.R. PATTERSON. 1981. MAMMALS IN KANSAS. UNIV.KANS.MUS.NAT.HIST., PUB.ED. SERIES NO.7.

  • BRIMLEY, C. S. 1923. BREEDING DATES OF SMALL MAMMALS AT RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA. J. MAMMAL. 4:263-264

  • BURT, W.H., AND R.P. GROSSENHEIDER. 1976. A FIELD GUIDE TO THE MAMMALS, THIRD EDITION. HOUGHTON MIFFLIN, MASSACHUSETTS. 289 P.

  • Baker, R. H. 1983. Michigan mammals. Michigan State University Press. 642 pp.

  • Baker, R. J., L. C. Bradley, R. D. Bradley, J. W. Dragoo, M. D. Engstrom, R. S. Hoffman, C. A. Jones, F. Reid, D. W. Rice, and C. Jones. 2003. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2003. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers 229:1-23. [Available online at http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/publications/opapers/ops/op229.pdf ]

  • Balkwill, D. 1999. Letter (e-mail) from Darlene Balkwill to Don Sutherland regarding a specimen of Cryptotis parva in the Canadian Museum of Nature. .

  • Banfield, A.W.F. 1948. The second record of the Little Short-tailed Shrew in southern Ontario. Canadian Field- Naturalist, 62:163-164.

  • Birney, E. C. 1983. Status of small mammal species reaching distributional limits in southern and western Minnesota. Final report submitted to the Nongame Wildlife Program, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Unpaged.

  • Bowles, J. B. 1975. Cryptotis parva parva (Say); Least shrew. Unknown pages in Bowles, J. B. Distribution and biogeography of mammals of Iowa. Special Publications Museum Texas Tech University, No. 9.

  • Bradley, R.D., L.K. Ammerman, R.J. Baker, L.C. Bradley, J.A. Cook. R.C. Dowler, C. Jones, D.J. Schmidly, F.B. Stangl Jr., R.A. Van den Bussche and B. Würsig. 2014. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2014. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers 327:1-28. Available at: http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/publications/opapers/ops/OP327.pdf

  • CRAIN, J.L. AND J.W. CLIBURN. 1965. A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF THE MAMMALS OF SOUTHEASTERN MISSISSIPPI. J. MISS. ACAD. SCI. 2:271-280.

  • Cahn, A.R. 1936. The Mammals of the Quetico Provincial Park of Ontario. Journal of Mammalogy 18: 19-30.

  • Carraway, L. N. 1995. A key to Recent Soricidae of the western United States and Canada based primarily on dentaries. Occasional Papers of the Natural History Museum, University of Kansas (175):1-49.

  • Chambers, R.E. 1983. Integrating timber and wildlife management. State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

  • Choate, J. R. 1970. Systematics and zoogeography of Middle American shrews of the genus Cryptotis. Univ. Kansas Pub. Mus. Nat. Hist. 19:195-317.

  • Choate, J.R. and E.D. Fleharty. 1973. Habitat preference and spatial relations of shrews in a mixed grassland in Kansas. Southwestern Nat. 18(1): 110-112.

  • Dobbyn, J.S. 1994. Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Don Mills, Ontario. 120 pp.

  • ESHER, ROBERT J. AND DWITHT K. BRADSHAW, 1988. AN ECOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE SSC AREA POTENTIALLY IMPACTED BY AN ADVANCED SOLID ROCKET MOTOR MANUFACTORY AND TEST FACILITY. MS. STATE RES. CENTER. 20 MAY. 45 PP.

  • Evers, D. C. 1992. A guide to Michigan's endangered wildlife. Univ. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. viii + 103 pp.

  • GEHLBACH, FREDERICK R. 1991. THE EAST-WEST TRANSITION ZONE OF TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATES IN CENTRAL TEXAS: A BIOGEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS. TEXAS J. SCI. 43(4):415-427.

  • GOETZE, JIM R., J. KNOX JONES, JR., AND RICHARD W. MANNING. 1991. MAMMAL REMAINS FROM OWL PELLETS FROM TWO LOCALITIES IN SWISHER COUNTY, TEXAS. TEXAS J. SCI. 43(2):221-222.

  • GOLLEY, F.B. 1966. SOUTH CAROLINA MAMMALS. THE CHARLESTONMUSEUM, CHARLESTON, SC. 181PP.

  • GOLLEY, FRANK B. 1962. MAMMALS OF GEORGIA: A STUDY OF THEIR DISTRIBUTION AND FUNCTIONAL ROLE IN THE ECOSYSTEM. UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA PRESS, ATHENS, GA 30602.

  • Garland, D. and G. A. Heidt. 1989. Distribution and Status of Shrews in Arkansas. Proc. Ark. Acad. Sci., 43:35-38.

  • Genoways, H.H. & BRENNER, F.J., EDITORS. 1985. SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN IN PENNSYLVANIA. CARNEGIE MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, PITTSBURGH. SPECIAL PUBLICATION NO. 11. 430 PP. B85GEN01PAUS.

  • Godin, A. J. 1977. Wild mammals of New England. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 304 pp.

  • HALL,E. 1955. HANDBOOK OF MAMMALS IN KANSAS. UNIV KS MUS NAT HIST AND KBS.

  • HALL,E. AND K.KELSON. 1959. THE MAMMALS OF NORTH AMERICA, VOL 1 & 2.

  • HAMILTON, W. J. JR. 1944. THE BIOLOGY OF THE LITTLE SHORT-TAILED SHREW, CRYPTOTIS PARVA. J. MAMMAL. 25:1-7

  • HAMILTON, W.J. JR., AND J.O. WHITAKER, JR. 1979. MAMMALS OF THE EASTERN UNITED STATES, SECOND EDITION. CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRESS, ITHACA, NEW YORK. 346 P.

  • HAYDEN, D.C. AND W.F. MACCALLUM. 1976. EFFECTS OF PROLONGED FLOODING ON SMALL MAMMAL POPULATIONS IN AN AREA OF THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER VALLEY. J. MISS. ACAD. SCI. 21:84-88.

  • Hafner, D. J., and C. J. Shuster. 1996. Historical biogeography of western peripheral isolates of the least shrew, CRYPTOTIS PARVA. Journal of Mammalogy 77:536-545.

  • Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I & II. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.

  • Hall, E. Raymond and Keith R. Kelson. 1959. The Mammals of North America. The Ronald Press Company, New York. 1083 pp.

  • Hamilton, W. J., Jr., and J. O. Whitaker, Jr. 1979. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York. 346 pp.

  • Hamilton, W.J., Jr. 1944. The biology of the little short-tailed shrew (Cryptotis parva). J. Mamm. 25(1):1-7.

  • Hamilton, W.J., Jr. and J.O. Whitaker, Jr. 1979. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York. 346 pp.

  • Hamilton, W.J.Jr. 1944. The biology of the Little Short-tailed Shrew, Cryptotis parva.. Journal of Mammalogy 25(1):1-7.

  • Heagy, A.E. (ed.) 1995. Hamilton-Wentworth Natural Areas Inventory. Volume I: Part 1 - Summary Report; Part 2 - Regional Context; Part 3 - Watershed Summaries. Hamilton Naturalists' Club, Hamilton.

  • Hoffmeister, D.F., and C.O. Mohr. 1957. Fieldbook of Illinois mammals. Illionis Nat. Hist. Surv. Div., Manual 4. 233 pp.

  • JONES, C. AND C. CARTER. 1989. ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE RECENT MAMMALS OF MISSISSIPPI. OCCAS. PAPERS MUS., TEXAS TECH UNIV. 128:1-9.

  • JONES, C. AND J.R. GOETZE. 1991. VERTEBRATE REMAINS FOUND IN BARN OWL PELLETS FROM WILBARGER COUNTY, TEXAS. TEXAS J. SCI. 43(3):326-328.

  • JONES, J. KNOX, JR., RICHARD W. MANNING, FRANKLIN D. YANCEY, II, AND CLYDE JONES. 1993. RECORDS OF FIVE SPECIES OF SMALL MAMMALS FROM WESTERN TEXAS. TEXAS J. SCI. 45(1):104-105.

  • Jackson, Hartley T. 1961. Mammals of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI 53701. 504pp.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr. and C. Jones. 1992. Revised checklist of recent land mammals of Texas, with annotations. The Texas Journal of Science 44(1):53-74.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., C. Jones, and D. J. Schmidly. 1988. Annotated checklist of recent land mammals of Texas. Occasional Papers The Museum Texas Tech University 119:1-26.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., R. S. Hoffman, D. W. Rice, C. Jones, R. J. Baker, and M. D. Engstrom. 1992a. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991. Occasional Papers, The Museum, Texas Tech University, 146:1-23.

  • Jones, J. K., S. Demarais, and C. T. McAllister. 1995. Contribution to a bibliography of recent Texas mammals 1981-1990. Special Publications, The Museum Texas Tech University 38:1-64.

  • KALE, H. W. 1972. A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF CRYPTOTIS PARVA IN A FOREST IN FLORIDA. J. MAMM. 53:216-218.

  • KENNEDY, M.L. 1968. A SURVEY OF THE MAMMALS OF DE SOTO COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. M.S. THESIS, MEMPHIS STATE UNIVERSITY.

  • KENNEDY, M.L., ET. AL. 1974. A REVIEW OF MISSISSIPPI MAMMALS. STUDIES IN NATURAL SCIENCES. 2(1):1-36.

  • Kale, H.W. 1972. A high concentration of Cryptotis parva in a forest in Florida. Jour. Mamm. 53(1):216-218.

  • LAERM, J., L.E. LOGAN, M.E. MCGHEE, AND H.N. NEUHAUSER. 1981. ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE MAMMALS OF GEORGIA. BRIMLEYANA 7:121-135.

  • LOWERY, G.H., JR. 1974. THE MAMMALS OF LOUISIANA AND ITS ADJACENT WATERS. LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 565 P.

  • Linzey, D.W. 2016. Mammals of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: 2016 revision. Southeastern Naturalist 15(Monograph 8):1?93.

  • Lowery, George H. 1974. The mammals of Louisiana and its adjacent waters. Kingsport Press, Inc. Kingsport, Tennessee. 565 pp.

  • MCKEEVER, S. & FRUM, W., A SURVEY OF WV MAMMALS, 1951

  • MISSISSIPPI MUSEUM OF NATURAL SCIENCE. 1989. COUNTY INFORMATION FOR MAMMALS OF MISSISSIPPI.

  • MITCHELL, W.A. AND C.O. MARTIN. 1985. SOUTHWEST MISSISSIPPI TRIVUTARIES STUDY AREA ENVIROMENTAL INVENTORY - WILDLIFE RESOURES. MISCELLANEOUS PAPER EL-85-3, U.S. ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION, VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI. 90P.

  • Mammalian Species, nos. 1-604. Published by the American Society of Mammalogists.

  • Merritt, J.F. 1987. Guide to the Mammals of Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 408 pp. B87MER01PAUS.

  • Mock, O.B. 1970. Reproduction of the least shrew (Cryptotis parva) in captivity. Univ. Missouri, unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, 132 pp.

  • Mumford, R. E., and J. O. Whitaker, Jr. 1982. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 537 pp.

  • Mumford, R. E., and J. O. Whittaker, Jr. 1982. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana. 537 pp.

  • Mumford, Russell E. 1969. Distribution of the Mammals of Indiana. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis, Indiana. 114 pp.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Checklist of the amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals of New York State, including their protective status. Nongame Unit, Wildlife Resources Center, Delmar, NY.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF MAMMALIAN DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS IN TEXAS. ECOLOGY 71(5):1823-1832.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. PATTERNS OF MAMMALIAN SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO TEMPERATURE, PRODUCTIVITY, AND VARIANCE IN ELEVATION. J. MAMM. 71(1):1-13.

  • PEPPERS L.L., D.M. BELL, J.C. CATHEY, T.W. JOLLEY, R. MARTINEZ, C.W. MASON, A.Y. NEKRUTENKO, AND R.D. BRADLEY. 1998. DISTRIBUTIONAL RECORDS OF MAMMALS IN TEXAS. OCCASIONAL PAPERS. MUSEUM OF TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY. NUMBER 183, 5 PP.

  • Peterson, R.L. 1966. The Mammals of Eastern Canada. Oxford University Press, Toronto, Ontario. 465 pp.

  • Reid, F. A. 1997. A field guide to the mammals of Central America and southeast Mexico. Oxford University Press, Incorporated New York, New York. 334 pp.

  • Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri. University of Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp.

  • Sealander, J.A. and G.A. Heidt. 1990. Arkansas Mammals: Their Natural History, Classification and Distribution. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville. 308 pp.

  • See SERO listing

  • Snyder, L.L. 1929. Cryptotis parva, a new shrew for the Canadian list. J. Mammalogy, 10:79-80.

  • Snyder, L.L. and E.B.S. Logier (eds.). 1931. A faunal investigation of Long Point and vicinity, Norfolk County, Ontario. Transactions of the Royal Canadian Institute 18(1): 117-236..

  • WARD, R.P. 1965. THE MAMMALS OF MISSISSIPPI. J. MISS. ACAD. SCI. 11:309-330.

  • WHITAKER, J. O. JR. 1974. CRYPTOTIS PARVA. MAMMALIAN SPECIES 43:1-8

  • WHITAKER, J.O., JR. 1974. MAMMALIAN SPECIES NO. 43, CRYPTOTIS PARVA. THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MAMMALOGISTS, 8 P.

  • WOLFE, J.L., AND R.R. LOHOEFENER. 1982. SMALL MAMMALS ON FIVE HABITATS, DESOTO NATIONAL FOREST, MISSISSIPPI, P.O. #40-2-22246. U.S. FOREST SERVICE. 28P.

  • Whitaker, J. O., Jr. 1974. Cryptotis parva. American Society of Mammalogists, Mammalian Species 43. 8 pp.

  • Whitaker, J. O., Jr. 1974. CRYPTOTIS PARVA. Am. Soc. Mamm., Mammalian Species No. 43:1-8.

  • Whitaker, J. O., and W. J. Hamilton. 1998. Mammals of the eastern United States. Comstock Publishing, Ithaca, New York.

  • Whitaker, John O., Jr., and Russell E. Mumford. 2009. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. Available online at: https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/

  • Wolde, J.L. and R. Lohoefener. 1983. The small mammal fauna of a longleaf - slash pine forest in southern Mississippi. J. Miss. Acad. Sci. 28:37-47.

  • Wolfe, J.L. 1971. Mississippi land mammals. Mississippi Museum of Natural Science, Jackson, Mississippi 44 pp.

  • Woodward, S. 1999. Letter (e-mail) from Susan Woodward to Don Sutherland regarding a specimen of Cryptotis parva in the ROM. .

  • van Zyll de Jong, C.G. 1983. Handbook of Canadian mammals. 1. Marsupials and insectivores. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 210 pp.

  • van Zyll de Yong, C.G. 1983. Handbook of Canadian Mammals. Volume 1: Marsupials and Insectivores. National Museums of Canada, National Museum of Natural Science, Ottawa. 212 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.