RODENTS OF LIBYA 



253 



Figure 54. — Distribution of the subspecies of Ctenodactylus gundi. 



cally, physiographically, and climatically distinct and, to my knowl- 

 edge, there are no records of these two forms occurring together. 



I am in agreement with most recent workers in regarding C. vali as 

 a subspecies of C. gundi. The single topotype of C. vali available to 

 me is significantly different morphologically from near topo types of 

 C. gundi from northwestern Tripoli tania, but these differences, in my 

 opinion, are only of subspecific worth (for detailed comparisons of 

 C. g. gundi and C. g. vali, see following account of C. g. gundi). Cur- 

 rently, and in the past, however, too few specimens of C. vali have 

 been available and preclude any unequivocal conclusions concern- 

 ing the systematic position of this form. For the present, therefore, 

 it seems best to regard C. g. vali as a subspecies of C. gundi, rather 

 than as a distinct species. When adequate series of C. g. vali become 

 available for a more critical analysis of this form, it may prove to be 

 a separate species. 



Judging from my observations of the gundi {Ctenodactylus gundi) 

 in Libya, and those of several other collectors in the past, they are 

 confined exclusively to rocky outcroppings and boulder fields of the 

 Gebel Tigrinna, Gebel Jefren, and Gebel Nefusa of northwestern 

 Tripolitania and to the irregular rocky scarps along the larger wadis, 



