Eremitalpa granti Roberts 1924
Creators: name: Russell A. Mittermeier
name: Don E. Wilson
Publisher: name: Lynx Edicions
Year: 2018
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Chordata
Mammalia
Afrosoricida
Chrysochloridae
Eremitalpa

description: 21.
Grant's Golden Mole
Eremitalpa grant
French: Taupe-dorée de Grant / German: \Wistengoldmull / Spanish: Topo dorado de Grant
Other common names: Namib Golden Mole (namibensis)
Taxonomy. Chrysochloris granti Broom, 1907,
Garies, Little Namaqualand, North- ern Cape Province, South Africa. Two subspecies are recognized.
Subspecies and Distribution.
E.g.grantiBroom,1907—StrandveldSucculentKaroo,WcoastofSouthAfrica.
E. g. namibensis Bauer & Niethammer, 1960 — Sossusvlei, Namib Desert, W Namibia.
Descriptive notes. Head-body 76-86 mm, hindfoot 9-12 mm; weight 15-30 g for nominotypical granti; head—body 65-81 mm (males) and 60-74 mm (females), hindfoot 6-10 mm (males) and 6-8 mm (females); weight 17-30 g (males) and 15-23 g (females) for subspecies namibensis, the “Namib Golden Mole.” Grant’s Golden Mole is the smallest species in the family, and males are larger than females. Dorsum is pale grayish yellow, with iridescent silvery sheen. Flank and venter are paler than dorsum, with more intense yellow; forehead and cheeks are pale yellow. Grant's Golden Mole differs from other species of golden moles by having a well-developed claw on fourth toe. Subspecies namibensis has shorter greater skull length and shorter fur than grant.
Habitat. Confined to Strandveld Succulent Karoo biomes in South Africa (nominotypical granti) and Namib Desert (subspecies namibensis). Both subspecies have similar microhabitat requirements, preferring soft sands of coastal dune crests but also occurring in interdune valleys with vegetation clumps where sand is not compacted.
Food and Feeding. Grant’s Golden Mole has been recorded eating sand-burrowing skinks, legless lizards, web-footed geckos, and insects, including crickets and beetle larvae. When feeding on dunes, the Namib Golden Mole eats similar types of food but specializes in eating sand termites (Psammotermes allocerus), which make up 95% of the diet by mass. Root material is also ingested along with sand. It is thought that termite colonies are detected around dune grass with seismic cues. Both subspecies forage on the surface at night, which provides a much more energy efficient form of locomotion than burrowing through the sand, given that prey species are patchily distributed.
Breeding. Pregnant Grant’s Golden Moles have been recorded in October-November. Litters have 1-2 young.
Activity patterns. Grant's Golden Moles are mostly nocturnal, but some afternoon activity occurs in winter; captive individuals were active at midday. In winter, Grant’s Golden Mole is most active between sunset and midnight; summer activity continues all night.
Movements, Home range and Social organization. Both subspecies of Grant’s Golden Moles burrow just below the surface of the sand but occasionally use deeper tunnels in more solid sand; they do not throw up mounds. When inactive, they use temporary rest sites, with no evidence of permanent burrows, tunnels, chambers, or nest material; they rarely reuse the same rest site. Most restsites are situated below hummocks of vegetation, and they never share these sites with conspecifics. Adults are solitary and occupy a consistent home range. Mean home range size of the Namib Golden Mole
was estimated as 4-6 ha (n = 8), with males having larger home ranges (3-1-12-3 ha) than females (1-8—4-6 ha). Home ranges of several individuals can overlap, with multiple intersecting tracks observed over the same time-period, but individuals appear to use discrete centers of activity. Direct encounters between neighboring individuals are uncommon. When housed together in captivity, individuals are not aggressive toward conspecifics.
Status and Conservation. Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN Red List. Grant’s Golden Mole has a wide distribution and occurs in protected areas and mostly away from human activity. Nevertheless, little is known about population trends and threats. Conservation status will need to be reassessed if subspecies are elevated to distinct species.
Bibliography. Bronner (2013b), Fielden (1991), Fielden et al. (1990), Maree (2015g), Maree & Bronner (2016b), Mason & Narins (2001, 2002), Perrin & Fielden (1999), Seymour & Seely (1996).
description: Published as part of Russell A. Mittermeier & Don E. Wilson, 2018, Chrysochloridae, pp. 180-203 in Handbook of the Mammals of the World – Volume 8 Insectivores, Sloths and Colugos, Barcelona :Lynx Edicions on pages 202-203, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6624497