CHIROPTERA

Pearch, Malcolm J., 2011, A review of the biological diversity and distribution of small mammal taxa in the terrestrial ecoregions and protected areas of Nepal 3072, Zootaxa 3072 (1), pp. 1-286 : 20-68

ORDER CHIROPTERA

FAMILY PTEROPODIDAE

* Cynopterus brachyotis ( Müller, 1838)

Lesser Dog-faced Fruit bat

Lesser Short-nosed Fruit bat

Pachysoma brachyotis Müller, 1838: 146 . Dewei R., Borneo.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Simmons (2005): Nepal.— Sinha (1986): Nepal (see note).

Note.— Sinha (1986) records brachyotis from Nepal based upon his examination of one male and one female specimen collected by J. Scully in 1877. In his monograph on Nepalese Chiroptera , however, Scully (1887) mentions that he collected only two Cynopterus , both specimens of which (a male and a female) he refers to C. marginatus Geoffroy, 1810a , the latter being a current synonym of C. sphinx (see Bates & Harrison, 1997; Simmons, 2005).

Andersen, 1912 considered Cynopterus angulatus to be a synonym of C. brachyotis but the removal of angulatus from brachyotis to C. sphinx (see Hill & Thonglongya, 1972) would suggest that, based on material in collections, brachyotis occurs no further north than Sirsi (14º37'N.) in the Indian State of Karnataka ( Bates & Harrison, 1997: 23). The subspecies angulatus is ascribed to specimens of C. sphinx from Bhutan ( Bates & Harrison, 1997: 19), the latter country sharing many similarities in elevation and topography with Nepal. Until substantive information arises to place brachyotis firmly in Nepal, the species is excluded here from the country's faunal list.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Cynopterus sphinx Vahl, 1797 MAP No. 1 (Greater) Short-nosed Fruit bat

Indian Fruit bat

Vespertilio sphinx Vahl, 1797: 123 . Tranquebar, Madras, India.

Pteropus marginatus Geoffroy, 1810a: 97 , pl. 5. Bengal.

Cynopterus angulatus Miller, 1898: 316 . Trong, southern Thailand.

Cynopterus sphinx gangeticus Andersen, 1910: 623 . Lucknow, United Provinces, India.

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Salthar.—F.M.N.H.(see note 1): Bharabise (Sankhuwasabha District) (FMNH 114496— FMNH 114500); Shebu (Sankhuwasabha District) (FMNH 114495); Tumlingtar (FMNH 114346, FMNH 114347: both as C. s. sphinx ); Wana (Sankhuwasabha District) (FMNH 114494).— Fry (1925): Satthar.— Johnson et al. (1980): Chisapani (USNM 290057—USNM 290060) (all as C. s. gangeticus Anderson, 1910) (see notes 2,3).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 4): Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172230—UMMZ 172241); Nandon Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172229); Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172227, UMMZ 172228)

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as C. s. sphinx ).— Mitchell (1978a) (as C. s. sphinx ): Nepal.— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Sankhuwasabha [District].— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley; "Nowakot district about 16 miles north-west of Kathmandu" (as Cynopterus marginatus Dobson, 1876 ) (see note 5).— Worth & Shah (1969): Nepal.

Note.— 1 The localities of Bharabise, Shebu, and Wana cannot be identified precisely as they do not appear on standard maps of Nepal (1:750,000 and 1:500,000) and co-ordinates are not given in the F.M.N.H. collections catalogue. Bharabise is not the more sizeable locality of the same name in Sindhupalchok District. Examples of C. sphinx from the three localities mentioned were collected by E. W. Cronin Jr. between 3 rd and 8 th February, 1973. Cronin was associated with the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition (1970–1973), whose members collected at points along the course of the Arun River in Sankhuwasabha District, and it is likely that it is in this area that the localities lie.

2 The species authority of gangeticus is (K.) Andersen, 1910 and not, as Johnson et al. (1980) state, "Anderson, 1910" (see Simmons, 2005: 317).

3 Measurements of USNM specimens are given in Appendix II.

4 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of 19 specimens (seven males and 12 females), which were collected variously “near banana plants adjacent to houses, in dense riparian vegetation, over trails through forest, and over a stream”. The authors comment that “late arrivers appeared to be attracted by the distress calls of other Cynopterus as we removed them from the net”.

5 Scully (1887) bases his records on two specimens collected personally, the measurements of which he lists. Hinton & Fry (1923) include the species in Nepal's faunal list as Cynopterus brachyotis angulatus Mill [er, 1898]; angulatus is now an accepted synonym of C. sphinx ( Simmons, 2005: 317) . See the note to Cynopterus brachyotis , above (p. 20).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Eonycteris spelaea (Dobson, 1871) MAP No. 2 (Lesser) Dawn bat

Cave Fruit bat

Dobson's Long-tongued Fruit bat

Macroglossus spelaeus Dobson, 1871a: 105 , 106. Farm Caves, Moulmein, Tenasserim, Burma [Myamnar].

Records.— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 1): Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172224).

Non-specific records.— Simmons (2005): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of two male E. spelaea , one of which was collected “among banana plants near houses” the other in a net set adjacent to a stream in a ravine. Myers records spelaea from Nepal for the first time.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Pteropus giganteus Brünnich, 1782 MAP No. 3 Indian Flying fox

Vespertilio gigantea Brünnich, 1782: 45 . Bengal, India.

Pteropus medius Temminck, 1825 [1824–1841]: 176. Calcutta, Pondicherry, India.

Pteropus leucocephalus Hodgson, 1835: 700 . "Central region of Nipal". [Kathmandu Valley]. See note 1.

Records.—F.M.N.H.: 5 miles N. of Jhapa (FMNH 94115); Kathmandu (FMNH 57660—FMNH 57669, FMNH 104133—FMNH 104162).—P.S.M.: Kathmandu (PSM 14743, PSM 14744, PSM 15533—PSM 15535, PSM 15537—PSM 15540).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as P. g. leucocephalus Hodgson, 1835 ).— Hinton & Fry (1923) (as P. g. leucocephalus ): "The valley of Nepal near Katmandu" (see note 2).— Kock (1996) (as P. g. leucocephalus —see note 3): Nepal (SMF 12424).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Kathmandu [District].— Mitchell (1978a) (as P. g. leucocephalus ): Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (as Pteropus medius Temminck, 1827 [1824–1841]).— Worth & Shah (1969): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Hodgson (1841b) refers to Pteropus leneocephalus but this is considered simply to be a misprint of Pteropus leucocephalus .

2 Hinton & Fry (1923) refer to B. H. Hodgson's manuscript, in which the latter author writes of the species: "Very rare in hills, very common in plains or Tarai". Scully (1887) indicates that Hodgson observed the species (and P. pyrivorus (= Rousettus leschenaulti ) ( Hodgson, 1835: 700)) [in the Kathmandu Valley] only in autumn, when "it comes in large bodies to plunder the ripe fruit in gardens". Ogilby (1840) was the first commentator to appreciate the lack of any perceptible difference between P. medius and P. leucocephalus , writing: " P. leucocephalus ... does not appear to differ from the P. medius ... of the Plains; and the probability of its identity with that species is increased by the fact, which Mr. Hodgson mentions, of its only visiting the temperate regions of Nepal during the autumn, returning of course to the more sultry plains of India on the approach of the cold season". Presumably with reference to Ogilby's comments, Hodgson (1842) writes that leucocephalus "is alleged to be identical with Medius".

3 The single specimen to which Kock (1996) refers, was collected by B. H. Hodgson.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rousettus leschenaulti ( Desmarest, 1820) MAP No. 4 Fulvous Fruit bat

Leschenault's Rousette

Pteropus leschenaulti Desmarest, 1820: 110 . Pondicherry, India.

Pteropus pyrivorus Hodgson, 1835: 700 . "Central region of Nipal". See note 1.

Pteropus pirivarus Hodgson, 1842: 908 . Nepal.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999): 25 km. S. of Jomson (ZMMU 166329—see note 2).—F.M.N.H.: Tumlingtar (FMNH 114493).— Fry (1925): Boitari.— Le Patourel (1971) (as R. l. leschenaulti ) (see note 3): Harpan River Cave, S. Pokhara.— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 4): Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172225).—R.O.M.: Chobar Gorge (ROM 74734 and ROM 74735).— Worth & Shah (1969): Pokhara.

Non-specific records.— Hinton & Fry (1923): "Valley of Nepal " (see note 5).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Kathmandu [District].— Mitchell (1978a) (as R. l. leschenaulti ): Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (as Cynonycteris amplexicaudata Dobson, 1876 —see note 6).

Note.— 1 Hodgson (1844b) refers to the taxon " privorus " but this is likely to be a simple misspelling of " pyrivorus ".

2 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a single female and remark that the specimen was collected in a mist net set in montane primary mixed forest. Nepalese specimens are referred to the nominate subspecies R. l. leschenaulti .

3 Le Patourel (1971) collected specimens from "a very large colony" of R. leschenaulti within Harpan River Cave, approximately 3 km. south-west of Pokhara. The author gives the forearm and the head & body measurements of "a typical bat" as 75 mm. and 95 mm., respectively. These measurements do not compare favourably with measurements given in Bates & Harrison (1997) of R. leschenaulti from India and Pakistan (FA: 75.0—86.0, mean = 80.6; HB: 111.0—147.0, mean = 125.9; n = 37) and are more representative of measurements of Eonycteris spelaea from India and Myanmar (FA: 66.0—78.0, mean = 71.2 [n = 12]; HB: 92.0—130.0, mean = 115.0 [n = 11]).

4 Myers et al. (2000) give external measurements of a single female specimen, which “entered a mist net set over a small stream in a forested ravine at about 9.30 p.m.”

5 Hinton & Fry (1923) base their record on Hodgson's collection of Pteropus pyrivorus in "the great valley of Nepal at 4,000' [1,219 m.]".

6 Scully (1887) follows Dobson (1878) in synonymising Cynonycteris amplexicaudata (now Rousettus amplexicaudatus (see Simmons, 2005: 346)) with Hodgson's Pteropus pyrivorus . Despite Scully's assertive defence of this synonymy, the range of R. amplexicaudatus does not extend to Nepal ( Corbet & Hill, 1992: Map 29; Simmons, 2005: 347).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Sphaerias blanfordi ( Thomas, 1891)

Blanford's Fruit bat

Mountain Fruit bat

Cynopterus blanfordi Thomas, 1891: 884 , 921-922; pl. XI; figs. 1-2. Leito, Cheba, Karin Hills, 1,000 m., Burma [ Myanmar].

Records.—None.

Non-specific records (see note 1).—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as S. b. blanfordi ).— Lekagul & McNeely (1977): "Eastern Nepal " (see note 2).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) include S. blanfordi in a list of bat species recorded from Nepal but without elucidation. Lekagul & McNeely (1977) state: " Sphaerias has now been found in ... eastern Nepal by the junior author" but provide no further comment. Nepal is included in the species' distribution by I.U.C.N. (the year of assessment being 2008) but with no greater detail than that provided by Leekagul & McNeely (1977), upon which publication I.U.C.N.'s assessment of the species' presence in Nepal is likely to be based. Nepal is not included in the species' distribution by Simmons (2005). Pending the description of substantive material from Nepal, it is not considered safe to include Sphaerias blanfordi in that country's faunal list.

2 Lekagul & McNeely (1977) make no reference to actual material but it is likely that any specimens of S. blanfordi collected in Nepal would have been secured during the course of the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition, which collected mammal specimens in eastern Nepal between 1970 and 1973 and of which J. A. McNeely (see note 1, above), was co-leader. In a checklist of Nepalese bats, Mitchell (1978a) makes no reference to the presence of S. blanfordi , despite his being supplied with material from the Expedition ( Mitchell, 1978a).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY RHINOLOPHIDAE

Rhinolophus affinis Horsfield, 1823 MAP No. 5 Intermediate Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus affinis Horsfield, 1823 [1821-1824]: (6), pl.; figs. a, b. Java.

Rhinolophus affinis himalayanus Andersen, 1905: 103 . Masuri [Mussoorie], Kumaon, north-western India.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (see notes 2a,2b) (HNHM 95.56.9— HNHM 95.56.13); 14 km. E. of Syangja (see notes 2a,2b); Balaju Forest Reserve (see notes 2a,4); Bimalnager (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 95.57.17; HNHM 95.58.1: see note 3); Chobar (see note 4) (HNHM 98.5.25); Chun Pahad (see note 4) (HNHM 95.57.12—HNHM 95.57.15); Tawa (HNHM 98.5.4).—F.M.N.H. (all as R. a. himalayanus Andersen, 1905 ) (see note 5): Bharabise (Sankhuwasabha District) (FMNH 114242, FMNH 114461— FMNH 114470); Shebu (Sankhuwasabha District) (FMNH 114243, FMNH 114471, FMNH 114472).— Fry (1925): Bouzini (as R. a. himalayanus ).— Kock (1996) (as R. a. himalayanus ): Dike Pako Höhle [Dike Pako Cave] in Balaju, Kathmandu-Tal [Kathmandu Valley] (SMF 58415—SMF 58417).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Sinha (1973): Nepal (as R. a. himalayanus — see note 6)

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of 16 specimens and cranial and dental measurements of two specimens. The authors remark that nearly all of the bats were collected within, or in the vicinity of, caves and that the specimen from Chobar "belongs to the red color phase". Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the subspecies R. a. himalayanus Andersen, 1905 .

2a The H.N.H.M. accession nos. HNHM 95.57.4—HNHM 95.57.7 should refer, if one follows Csorba et al. (1999), to specimens of R. affinis collected from the Syangja and Balaju Forest localities mentioned above. The collection locality of those specimens, however, is listed in the H.N.H.M. collections catalogue as " 3 km. S.E. of Syabru". The Syangja and Balaju Forest localities are retained here as it is considered that the 1999 publication preponderates.

2b When plotted on a 1:500,000 map, the co-ordinates given in Csorba et al. (1999) for the localities " 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave)" (28º08'N, 83º44'E) and " 14 km. E. of Syangja" (28º07'N, 83º51'E) place the positions approximately 14 km. W.N.W. of Syangja and 4 km. N.W. of Syangja, respectively. In the course of the survey that gave rise to the Syangja specimens, Dr. Csorba's field team used only very basic Nepalese-made tourist maps and did not have access to Global Positioning System (G.P.S.) equipment. In the field, the team's native guides estimated the distance and the direction of the collecting sites from larger settlements and it was from the guides' projections that the latitudinal and longitudinal co-ordinates were plotted subsequently. This system lent itself inevitably to inaccuracies with the result that neither the co-ordinates given nor the written description of the collecting localites can be accepted as precise. It is, however, the written descriptions that are likely to provide the more accurate information (G. Csorba, pers. comm.) and it is those that are followed here. The co-ordinates given in the Gazetteer for the localities " 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave)" and " 14 km. E. of Syangja" have, accordingly, been changed from those given in Csorba et al. (1999) to reflect the actual geographical position of these localities (28º05'N, 83º54'E and 28º05'N, 84º01E, respectively). A position 4 km. E. of Syangja would be approximately 17 km. S.W. of Pokhara rather than "about 30 km. S. of Pokhara" as indicated in Topál (1997: 377).

3 Specimen no. HNHM 95.58 .1 was collected by Gy. Lásló and G. Ronkay.

4 Bates & Harrison (1997: 60) refer to (a) the Balaju Forest Reserve and Chobar localities and (b) the Chun Pahad locality mentioned above as (a) "Kathmandu" and (b) "Dulegounda".

5 The localities of Bharabise and Shebu in Sankhuwasabha District cannot be identified precisely as they do not appear on standard maps of Nepal (1:750,000 and 1:500,000) and co-ordinates are not given in the F.M.N.H. collections catalogue.

6 The single male specimen, to which Sinha (1973) refers, is contained within the collections of the Zoological Survey of India.

7 Hinton & Fry (1923) record R. affinis himalayanus from Parchung and Thankot but these records are referred by Bates & Harrison (1997: 60) to Rhinolophus rouxii , which, in the northern part of its range, is, itself, referable to Rhinolophus sinicus ( Thomas, 2000) . It is under sinicus , therefore, that Hinton & Fry's records are now included.

8 Thomas (1997) records specimen no. BM.21.5.1.3 (from Parchung) both as R. affinis (op. cit., p. 193) and R. rouxii (now R. sinicus ) (op. cit., p. 191). It is likely that the specimen is the same as that mentioned in Hinton & Fry (1923: 405) and it is for the reasons given in note 7, above, that the Parchung locality is applied to R. sinicus (q.v.) and not R. affinis . See note 4 to R. sinicus , below (p. 29).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ( Schreber, 1774) MAP No. 6 Greater Horseshoe bat

Vespertilio ferrum-equinum Schreber, 1774 : pl. 62, upper figs. (text, p. 174). France.

Rhinolophus tragatus Hodgson, 1835: 699 . "Central region of Nipal".

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Annigera; Najarkot (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 57).—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 2 km. E. of Ghorepani (HNHM 95.57.10); 3 km. S.E. of Syabru (see note 2) (HNHM 95.57.1—HNHM 95.57.3); Chobar (HNHM 98.5.26).—F.M.N.H.: Num (near) (4) (FMNH 114238—as R. f. tragatus Hodgson, 1835 ).— Kock (1996) (as R. f. tragatus ): Mt. Chordung bei [near] Jiri (2) (see note 3) (SMF 58419).— Thomas (1997): Kathmandu (BM.45.1.8.279); Najarkot (BM.1937.3.14.1).—R.O.M.: Sundarijal (ROM 74722 and ROM 74725).

Non-specific records.—B.M.(N.H.): Kathmandu Valley (BM.43.1.12.135); Nepal (BM.43.1.12.136).— Chiroptera Specialist Group (2000): Nepal.— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Kathmandu [District].— Mitchell (1978a): Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (see note 4).— Sinha (1973): Nepal.— Thomas (1997): Sankhuwasabha [District] (CN.114238—see notes 5,6).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external, cranial, and dental measurements of five specimens. The authors remark that one of the bats obtained 3 km. S.E. of Syabru was collected in a net set amongst dense Berberis bushes, suggesting a "foliage-gleaning feeding behaviour", and that the Chobar specimen was pregnant with a single embryo on 16 th April. Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the subspecies R. f. tragatus Hodgson, 1835 .

2 Bates & Harrison (1997: 57) refer to "Langtang" rather than " 3 km. S.E. of Syabru", as the locality lies in Langtang National Park.

3 Bates & Harrison (1997: 57) refer to the Mt. Chordung locality mentioned above as "Ramechhap" (the district in which Mt. Chordung is located).

4 Scully (1887) bases his record on Hodgson's original description of Rhinolophus tragatus .

5 The locality "Sankhuwasabha [District]" is not plotted on map 6 owing to the absence of an exact location. 6 Thomas (1997) does not name the institution represented by the letters "CN".

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus lepidus Blyth, 1844 MAP No. 7 Blyth's Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus lepidus Blyth, 1844: 486 .?Calcutta. (See note 1).

Rhinolophus monticola Andersen, 1905: 124 . Masuri [Mussoorie], Kumaon, north-western India.

Records.— Mitchell (1980): Jamuna (Ilam District) (ROM 74765—see note 2); Melumchi (near the village of) (Sindu District) (ROM 74655 and ROM 74716) (see note 3).—R.O.M.: Melumche (1) (ROM 74715) (see note 4)

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as R. l. monticola [K.] Andersen, 1905).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Sindu [District].— Mitchell (1978a): Nepal.

Note.— 1 "?Calcutta" is used commonly to denote the type locality of lepidus ( Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951; Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997) but an argument is put forward by Das (1986) that the type locality should be revised to read "Vicinity of Calcutta". Blyth (1844) does not possess detailed information about the exact locality, writing only that the specimen was "probably obtained in the vicinity of Calcutta". The adverb "probably" indicates Blyth's uncertainty and it is suggested, therefore, that a better citation of the type locality might be "?Vicinity of Calcutta".

2 ROM 74765 is identified in the collections of the Royal Ontario Museum as Rhinolophus rouxii (now R. sinicus in the northern part of its range—see Thomas, 2000). It is included here as R. lepidus as the measurements of the specimen given in Mitchell (1980), notably the length of the forearm, are consistent with lepidus rather than R. sinicus . "Jamuna" is the collection locality attributed to the specimen in the R.O.M. catalogue; Mitchell states only that "The Ilam District specimen was taken at an elevation of 2,240 m. near the eastern border of Nepal which lies adjacent to the Darjeeling District of India ". Mitchell describes the vegetation of the area in which it was collected.

3 Mitchell (1980) gives measurements of one male and three female specimens and provides details of the dominant vegetation of the collection site.

4 R. M. Mitchell collected one male and three female lepidus from Melumchi, presenting one of each gender to the Royal Ontario Museum . ROM 74715 was also collected from Melumchi by Mitchell but this specimen is not discussed by the author in his 1980 publication .

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1834 MAP No. 8 Woolly Horseshoe bat

Great Eastern Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1834: 23 ; pl. 1 (and 1835 [1824-1841]: 24; pl. 30). Java.

Rhinolophus perniger Hodgson, 1843: 414 . Nepal: the central region of the Sub-Himalayas (see note 1).

Records.—F.M.N.H. (as R. l. perniger ): Suki Patyl Forest (see note 2) (FMNH 114253).— Fry (1925) (as R. l. perniger ): Banss Bahari; Bouzini.— Hinton & Fry (1923) (as R. perniger ): Bouzini; Chalna-Khel.

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as R. l. perniger ).— Scully (1887): Nepal (see note 3).— Sinha (1973): Nepal (as R. l. perniger —see note 4).

Note.— 1 Hinton & Fry (1923: 405) state that "Hodgson's type was obtained from 'the Forest of Hatiban' in the great valley of Nepal ".

2 Bates & Harrison (1997: 74) refer to the Suki Patyl Forest locality mentioned above as "Num".

3 Scully (1887) reproduces Hodgson's measurements of the type of R. perniger , which he treats as a synonym of R. luctus .

4 Sinha (1973) refers to a single male spirit specimen contained in the collections of the Zoological Survey of India.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus macrotis Blyth, 1844 MAP No. 9 Large-eared Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus macrotis Blyth, 1844: 485 . Nepal.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (HNHM 95.56.2—HNHM 95.56.8) (see note 2); Batule Chour (2) (HNHM 95.56.14); Chun Pahad (see note 3) (HNHM 95.57.11).—F.M.N.H. (as R. m. macrotis ): Kerabari (Sankhuwasabha District) (see note 4) (FMNH 114252).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal (see note 5).— Sinha (1973): Nepal (as R. m. macrotis Blyth, 1844 —see note 6).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of eight specimens and cranial and dental measurements of three specimens. The authors remark that "two of the three females caught in July were lactating" and that "the male specimen captured in October had expanded testes indicating the sexually active period". Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the nominate subspecies R. m. macrotis .

2 The co-ordinates accompanying the locality " 4 km. E. of Syangja" given in Csorba et al., 1999 (28º08'N, 83º44'E) have been altered in the Gazetteer to read " 28º05'N, 83º54'E ". The reason for the amendment is explained in note 2b to Rhinolophus affinis , above (p. 24).

3 Bates & Harrison (1997: 72) refer to the Chun Pahad locality mentioned above as "Dulegounda".

4 The locality "Kerabari" cannot be located within Sankhuwasabha District and no co-ordinates are given in the F.M.N.H. collections catalogue. FMNH 114252 was collected by the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition in May, 1973. The nearest locality to the Arun R. that bears the name "Kerabari" is 30 km. S.E. of that river's confluence with the Sun Kosi and Tamar rivers but the locality is in Morang District, which lies much further south than Sankhuwasabha District.

5 Scully (1887) bases his record on two specimens collected by B. H. Hodgson. One specimen, Scully states, was presented by Hodgson to the B.M.(N.H.) and one "to the Asiatic Society which is now in the collection of the Indian Museum". Citing Dobson (1876), Scully comments that the type [specimen] of R. macrotis forms part of the collection of the Indian Museum (in Calcutta) and that that specimen is the " Nepal specimen". Scully reproduces the measurements of two specimens from Nepal collected by B. H. Hodgson.

6 Sinha (1973: 627) indicates that the single female spirit specimen in the collections of the Zoological Survey of India is the holotype of Rhinolophus macrotis macrotis Blyth, 1844 .

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851 MAP No. 10 Pearson's Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851: 33 . Darjeeling, north-eastern India.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Bimalnager (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 95.57.8, HNHM 95.57.9); Mamankhe (HNHM 98.5.9, HNHM 98.5.10).—F.M.N.H. (all as R. pearsoni pearsoni ): Num (near) (2) (FMNH 114239, FMNH 114240, FMNH 114459, FMNH 114460); Suki Patyl Forest (FMNH 114241); Sundarijal (FMNH 94120).— Hinton & Fry (1923): Parchung.

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Kock (1996) (as R. p. pearsoni ): "Katmandu- Tal im Westen" ["In the western part of the Kathmandu Valley"] (SMF 58414).— Sinha (1973): Nepal (as R. p. pearsoni —see note 2).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of four specimens and cranial and dental measurements of one specimen. The authors comment that two R. pearsoni were observed hibernating in a cave system in October whilst two other Rhinolophus species were seen to be active, a feature of the behaviour of R. pearsoni that the authors had also witnessed in [North] Vietnam. Nepalese specimens are referred to the nominate subspecies R. p. pearsoni .

2 Sinha (1973) refers to five female spirit specimens in the collections of the Zoological Survey of India.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus pusillus Temminck, 1834 MAP No. 11 Least Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus minor Horsfield, 1823 [1821-1824]: (6), pl. Java. [Preoccupied by Vespertilio ferrumequinum minor Kerr, 1792 ]. Rhinolophus pusillus Temminck, 1834: 29 ; pl. 1. Java.

Rhinolophus blythi Andersen, 1918: 376 . Almora, 5,500 feet, Kumaon, northern India.

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Nagerjunban (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 66).—Csorba et al. (1999) (all as Rhinolophus cf. pusillus — see note 1): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (HNHM 95.56.1) (see note 2); Banthanti (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164498); Bimalnagar (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 95.57.16, HNHM 95.58.2); Chobar (HNHM 98.5.1); Tawa (HNHM 98.5.5).—H.Z.M.: Godavari (HZM 1.16287—see note 3).— Kock (1996) (as R. p. blythi ): Mahendra Höhle [= Mahendra Cave] (SMF 58418); Sinha (1973): Soondarijal (as Rhinolophus cornutus blythi Andersen, 1918 ) (see note 4).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Rhinolophus minor ) (see note 5).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) draw attention to the taxonomic similarities within the pusillus group of R. cornutus , R. lepidus , R. pusillus , and R. subbadius . The authors give a range of, and mean, external, cranial, and dental measurements of Nepalese specimens and state that the single adult female from the vicinity of Banthanti was gravid and was captured on 8 th May in a mist net set over the Bhurungdi River. The male specimen from Bimalnager, which was collected on 12 th October, was noted to have enlarged testes. Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the subspecies R. p. blythi [K.] Andersen, 1918, although they add the qualification that northern Indian and Nepalese specimens are "generally listed as subspecies blythi by tradition only".

2 The co-ordinates accompanying the locality " 4 km. E. of Syangja" given in Csorba et al. (1999) (28º08'N, 83º44'E) have been altered in the Gazetteer to read " 28º05'N, 83º54'E ". The reason for the amendment is explained in note 2b to Rhinolophus affinis , above (p. 24).

3 Measurements of HZM 1.16287 are given in Appendix III.

4 Sinha (1973) refers to two unsexed spirit specimens in the collections of the Zoological Survey of India. The author gives external measurements of one male and one female specimen of blythi from Nepal and cranial measurements of one male. It is not clear whether these specimens bear a relationship to the two unsexed specimens mentioned. The distribution of the taxon cornutus is limited to Japan ( Simmons, 2005).

5 Bates & Harrison (1997) treat Scully's single specimen of R. minor as representing R. subbadius . See note 2 to Rhinolophus subbadius , below (p. 30).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Rhinolophus sinicus K. Andersen, 1905 (See note 1) MAP No. 12 Chinese Rufous Horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus rouxii sinicus Andersen, 1905: 98 . Chinteh, Anhwei, southern China.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 2): Banthanti (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164509); Mamankhe (HNHM 98.5.8); Yamphudin (above) (HNHM 98.5.6, HNHM 98.5.7).—F.M.N.H. (as R. rouxi rouxi Temminck, 1835 [1824- 1841]): Num Bridge (FMNH 114244).— Fry (1925) (as R. rouxi ): Sipuri (see note 3).— Hinton & Fry (1923) (as R. affinis himalayanus —see note 4): Parchung; Thankot.—H.Z.M.: Godavari (HZM 1.16291, HZM 2.16292, HZM 3.16293, HZM 4.16294, HZM 5.16295, HZM 6.16296, HZM 7.16297, HZM 8.16298, and HZM 9.16299) (all as R. rouxi sinicus ) (see note 5).—R.O.M. (as R. rouxi ): Melumche (1) (ROM 74652); Sundarijal (ROM 74726).— Thomas (1997) (see note 4): Parchung (BM.21.5.1.3), Thankot (BM.22.5.16.6) (all as R. rouxii ).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (2000): Nepal.

Note.— 1 sinicus was regarded formerly as a subspecies of R. rouxii but was elevated to specific level by Thomas (2000), based on morphological analyses. Thomas restricts rouxii to Sri Lanka, peninsular India, and southern Myanmar and refers populations from China, the Himalayan region of northern India, and Nepal to sinicus . The Chiroptera Specialist Group includes both species from Nepal in the I.U.C.N. Red List (2006) but the Group's assessment of rouxii was four years prior to Thomas's paper. I.U.C.N. (2008) record both rouxii and sinicus from “Central and Eastern Nepal ” but without comment.

2 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external, cranial, and dental measurements of four specimens. They remark that many R. sinicus were collected in cultivated areas and suggest that the bats, on account of their propensity to settle in niches under rocks, may be solitary perch-hunters. The authors state that the "echolocation calls are of high intensity with the CF component around 90 kHz".

3 The locality "Sipuri" cannot be located. It may be the same as the locality "Sipari", which is "Probably near [Chalna-Khel] and [Thankot]" ( Hinton & Fry, 1923). It is more likely, however, to be a variation in the spelling of (Mount) Sheopuri and this would be adopted here were it not for the fact that Fry (1925) states that the collections, of which his published record of R. rouxi forms part, were secured "in the districts lying to the west of Kathmandu". Mt. Sheopuri is within 30 km. both of Chalna-Khal and of Thankot but lies to the north-east of Kathmandu. The problems of identifying antique place-names in Nepal and elsewhere were acknowledged by Ellerman (1947a), who wrote: "I suspect that some of these obscure places are native villages or perhaps gardens or plantations which would not normally appear in atlases".

4 Bates & Harrison (1997: 60) refer Hinton's & Fry's records of R. affinis himalayanus from Parchung and Thankot to Rhinolophus rouxii , the latter being referable, in the northern part of its range, to R. sinicus (see note 1, above). Specimen nos. BM.21.5.1.3 and BM.22.5.16.6 mentioned by Thomas (1997) are most probably the same specimens recorded by Hinton & Fry (1923). Thomas also lists BM.21.5.1.3 as Rhinolophus affinis but the Parchung locality is applied to R. sinicus for the reasons given in notes 7&8 to R. affinis , above (p. 25).

5 HZM 3.16293, HZM 6.16296, and HZM 7.16297 were collected at "Godavari Bridge, 15 minutes up the track to Pulchowki", their provenance being listed above as "Godavari" and not as "Pulchowki" as stated in Bates & Harrison (1997) and Thomas (2000). HZM 4.16294 was collected at "Godavari Temple". Measurements of HZM specimens are given in Appendix III.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Rhinolophus subbadius Blyth, 1844 MAP No. 13 Little Nepalese Horseshoe bat

Vespertilio subbadia Hodgson, 1842: 908 . (The central hilly region of) Nepal. [ Nomen nudum ] (See notes 1,2).

Rhinolophus subbadius Blyth, 1844: 486 . Nepal. (See note 2).

Rhinolophus garoensis Dobson, 1872a: 337 . Garo Hills, Assam. [ India].

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal.— Simmons (2005): Nepal.

Note.— 1 The correct citation is that given and not " subbadius Hodgson, 1841 " as stated in Simmons (2005).

2 Hodgson first mentioned subbadia in his 1842 catalogue but included the taxon alongside four other species of Vespertilio , writing simply of them all that they were " 5 Sp. new". Hodgson did, however, remit a specimen of subbadia to the Asiatic Society of Bengal and this was described by Blyth (1844) as Rhinolophus subbadius . The holotype, itself, cannot be traced ( Scully, 1887; Csorba et al., 2003), although Scully (1887) suggests that the type is the specimen presented to the Asiatic Society by Hodgson and recorded by Blyth as "No. 69A", which number, Scully adds, "seems to have been accidentally removed from the specimen", rendering it indistinguishable. Scully collected a single specimen of a bat he thought was representative both of subbadius and of Rhinolopus minor (= R. pusillus ) and synonymised the two species. There is no apparent record of any further capture of subbadius in Nepal. Bates & Harrison (1997) list external, cranial, and dental measurements of six small rhinolophid bats collected in northern Myanmar that were referred by Hill (1962) to R. subbadius and note (of one of the key diagnostic characters) that the "average forearm length is considerably shorter than that of R. pusillus ". The authors question, however, whether Hill was correct in referring the series of bats before him to subbadius and emphasize that further studies are needed "to determine whether subbadius is a discrete taxon or a synonym of pusillus ". Scully (1887) lists a series of measurements of subbadius (from Nepal) taken by Hodgson, Blyth, and himself and these, together with measurements taken by Bates & Harrison both of Hill's subbadius from Myanmar and of a series of R. pusillus from India are given in Table 1. Also given in that table are measurements of a single specimen of R. pusillus from Nepal (HZM 1.16287), which was identified originally as R. subbadius . Measurements taken by Hodgson, Blyth, and Scully have been converted from their original imperial units (inches and fractions thereof) to metric equivalents (mm.).

Ignoring the head and body length of the H.Z.M. specimen (54.0 mm.), which is notably in excess of the top of the range of the specimens of pusillus from India (30.0—40.0 mm.), and the tail length of Hodgon's specimen(s) (31.8 mm.), which is more than double that of Hodgson's single specimen measured by Blyth (15.8 mm.), the data appear inconclusive. The measurements of Scully's specimen do not distinguish it from Indian pusillus . However, the range of forearm length of subbadius from Myanmar (33.4—35.9 mm.), although overlapping the lower range of forearm length of pusillus from India (34.9—37.8 mm.), would seem to indicate that it is in general a smaller bat. This would appear also to be the case with the specimens examined by Hodgson and Blyth, as the forearm lengths given (31.8 mm. [Hodgson] and 34.8 mm. [Blyth]) fall below the range of Indian pusillus (34.9—37.8 mm.), Hodgson's notably so. Hodgson provided the British Museum with many examples of species collected by him in Nepal and it is unfortunate, therefore, that he did not make a specimen of subbadius available to that institution ( Scully, 1887). Had he done so, the determination of the taxonomic status of subbadius in Nepal (and elsewhere) may have been assisted greatly.

It is considered that the presence of subbadius in Nepal cannot be supported for the following reasons:

1. Scully (1887) synonymises subbadius with R. minor (= R. pusillus ) and states that the specimen he collected in the Nepal Valley is an example of both species [sic].

2. A specimen in B.M.(N.H.) of Rhinolophus garoensis Dobson, 1872a , a taxon that is deemed to be a synonym of R. subbadius (see Corbet & Hill, 1991; Bates & Harrison, 1997; Simmons, 2005), is referable actually to R. pusillus ( Bates & Harrison, 1997) .

3. The holotype of subbadius remitted by Hodgson to the Asiatic Society of Bengal and described by Blyth (1844) cannot be traced and cannot, therefore, yield any confirmatory data.

4. Measurements of Nepalese specimens considered to be subbadius are scarce and do not provide sufficient evidence to differentiate the species from others, particularly R. pusillus .

5. Andersen (1905) states that "Hodgson's ' Vespertilio subbadia '", which Scully (1887) equates with Rhinolophus subbadius Blyth, 1844 "is not a Rhinolophus , but a Hipposideros , probably H. bicolor or an allied form".

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY HIPPOSIDERIDAE

Hipposideros armiger ( Hodgson, 1835) MAP No. 14 Himalayan Leaf-nosed bat

Great Leaf-nosed bat

Great Himalayan Leaf-nosed bat

Rhinolophus armiger Hodgson, 1835: 699 . "Central region of Nipal". [Kathmandu Valley].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (HNHM 98.9.4) (see note 2); Balaju Forest Reserve (see note 3) (HNHM 98.8.8—HNHM 98.8.10, HNHM 98.9.1); Batule Chour (2) (see note 3) (HNHM 98.9.9—HNHM 98.9.13); Bimalnager (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 98.8.29); Chobar (HNHM 98.5.3. HNHM 98.5.27—HNHM 98.5.34); Saldanda (HNHM 98.9.6—HNHM 98.9.8).—F.M.N.H. (all as H. a. armiger , except where stated): " 15 miles above Baglung, on Kali Gandak R." (FMNH 67303—see note 4); Bouzini (FMNH 82655* and FMNH 82656*—see note 5); Chobar (FMNH 162223, FMNH 162224—both as H. armiger — see note 6); Gari (FMNH 114348); Hathiban (FMNH 82657* and FMNH 82658*—see note 4); Suki Patyl Forest (see note 7) (FMNH 114254, FMNH 114482);— Fry (1925): Bachek; Bouzini; Dano Kharka; Hathiban.— Hinton & Fry (1923): Bouzini; Pattibhagan.—H.Z.M.: Godavari (HZM 1.16286—see note 8).— Le Patourel (1971) (as H. a. armiger ): Harpan River Cave, S. Pokhara.— Kock (1996) (as H. armiger armiger ): Mahendra Höhle [= Mahendra Cave], nördl. [northern] Pokhara (SMF 58410).—P.S.M.: 4 miles S.E. of Trisuli (PSM 14773, PSM 14774).— R.O.M.: Sundarijal (ROM 74723).—Y.P.M.: Pokharia (see note 9).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Mitchell (1978a) (as H. a. armiger ): Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (as Phyllorhina armigera ).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of nine specimens and cranial and dental measurements of ten specimens. The authors comment on the "fleshy elevation behind the posterior leaf" in male specimens and state that females caught in March and July were found to be lactating, indicating a prolongued period for parturition. The species was found to be common in caves. Nepalese specimens are referred to the nominate subspecies H. a. armiger .

2 The co-ordinates accompanying the locality " 4 km. E. of Syangja" given in Csorba et al. (1999) (28º08'N, 83º44'E) have been altered in the Gazeteer to read " 28º05'N, 83º54'E ". The reason for the amendment is explained in note 2b to Rhinolophus affinis , above (p. 24).

3 Bates & Harrison (1997: 98) refer to the Balaju Forest Reserve and Batule Chour localities mentioned above as "Kathmandu Valley" and "near Pokhara", respectively.

4 The co-ordinates given in the Gazetteer are of a point 15 miles (24 km.) north of Baglung on the Kali Gandaki R. The co-ordinates listed in the records of the F.M.N.H. are of Baglung, itself.

5 The specimens marked with an asterisk were collected between January, 1921 and May, 1923 by Mr. N. A. Baptista as part of the Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Burma, and Ceylon. Mr. Baptista's collections, together with those of Lt.-Colonel R. L. Kennion, a former British Envoy in Kathmandu, were documented in Hinton & Fry (1923) and Fry (1925), the latter author dealing with collections made by Baptista in districts west of Kathmandu. The asterisked specimens may, therefore, represent replicas of the records published by Hinton and Fry, but they are included here for completeness.

6 FMNH162223 and FMNH 162224 were collected in March/April, 1996 during the course of Hungarian and Russian field surveys in Nepal. The remainder of the H. armiger specimens so collected are recorded and discussed in Csorba et al. (1999).

7 Bates & Harrison (1997: 98) refer to the Suki Patyl Forest locality mentioned above as "Num".

8 Measurements of HZM 1.16286 are given in Appendix III.

9 The Y.P.M. collections catalogue lists three specimens from Pokharia but accession numbers are not given.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Hipposideros cineraceus Blyth, 1853 MAP No. 15 Least Leaf-nosed bat

Ashy Leaf-nosed bat

Hipposideros cineraceus Blyth, 1853: 410 . Near Pind Dadan Khan, Salt Range, Punjab.

Phyllorhina micropus Peters, 1872: 256 . Dehra Dun, near Simla, north-western India. See note 1.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.—B.M.(N.H.): Kathmandu Valley (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 85 and note 2).— Corbet & Hill (1992): Central and southern areas of western and central Nepal (map only) (see note 3).—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as H. c. cineraceus ).— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Phyllorhina amboinensis Peters, 1871 —see note 4).

Note.— 1 The taxon is ascribed sometimes to Hutton ( Hutton, 1872: 703).

2 The specimen(s) in the British Museum (Natural History) may well be that (those) described by Scully (1887).

3 Corbet & Hill (1992) do not include Nepal within the range of cineraceus in their text. They do, however, map the species' presence in central and southern areas of western and central Nepal but provide no explanation.

4 The synonymy given in Scully (1887) comprises Phyllorhina amboinensis Peters, 1871 (to which Scully assigns his specimens) and Phyllorhina micropus Hutton, 1872 [ Peters, 1872 in Bates & Harrison, 1997]. The former species is now regarded as a synonym of Hipposideros ater Templeton, 1848 (see Simmons, 2005) whilst the latter is an accepted synonym of Hipposderos cineraceus (see Bates & Harrison, 1997). The range of ater does not extend as far as Nepal ( Simmons, 2005; Bates & Harrison, 1997) but that country does fall within the range of cineraceus (see the two aforementioned commentators). Hinton & Fry (1923) assign Scully's specimens to cineraceus , based on forearm measurements, although the range Scully gives (1.37—1.4 in. [34.80—35.56 mm.]) falls within those of both ater (34.9—38.0 mm.) and cineraceus (33.0— 36.3 mm.) (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 81, 84).

5 The Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996) does not recognise the presence of cineraceus in Nepal although this view is reversed by I.U.C.N. (2008).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Hipposideros fulvus Gray, 1838 MAP No. 16 Fulvous Leaf-nosed bat

Hipposideros fulvus Gray, 1838: 492 . " India, (Madras.)" but possibly Dharwar [Dharwad], Karnataka State, India. See note 1. Hipposideros fulvus pallidus [K.] Andersen, 1918: 381. Junagadh, Kathiawar, India.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as H. f. pallidus).— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Phyllorhina fulva —see note 2).

Note.— 1 In his initial description of the species, Gray (1838) states: "Inhabits India, (Madras.)" [in the south-eastern state of Tamil Nadu]. Corbet & Hill (1992) write of the type locality: "'Madras', actually apparently Dharwar, India " [in the south-western state of Karnataka]. Simmons (2005) gives the type locality as: " India, Karnatika, Dharwar".

2 Scully (1887) gives measurements of three specimens.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Hipposideros pomona Andersen, 1918 MAP No. 17 Andersen’s Leaf-nosed bat

Pomona Leaf-nosed bat

Hipposideros pomona [K.] Andersen, 1918: 380, 381. Haleri, North Coorg, southern India (see note 1).

Hipposideros gentilis [K.] Andersen, 1918: 380, 381. Thayetmyo, Burma [ Myanmar].

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Mehendra Gupha [= Mehendra (Mahendra) Cave] (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 90).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as H. p. gentilis [K.] Andersen, 1918).— Chiroptera Specialist Group (2000): Nepal; I.U.C.N. (2008): Western Nepal.

Note.— 1 Corbet & Hill (1992) add that the type locality is “a few miles N. of Mercara, Coorg District, Karnataka ”.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

I.U.C.N./S.S.C. Chiroptera Specialist Group status.—DD (2001) (see Hutson et al., 2001).

FAMILY MEGADERMATIDAE

Megaderma lyra E. Geoffroy, 1810 MAP No. 18 Greater False Vampire bat

Indian False Vampire bat

Megaderma lyra E. Geoffroy, 1810b: 190 . India. See note 1.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 2): Balaju Forest Reserve (see note 3) (HNHM 95.48.1, HNHM 95.48.2); Chobar (HNHM 98.5.2).—F.M.N.H. (all as M. l. lyra ): Bharabise (FMNH 114483).— Hinton & Fry (1923): Hazaria (4) (as Lyroderma lyra ).— Kock (1987): Mahendra Cave (see note 4).

Non-specific records.— Mitchell (1978a) (as M. l. lyra ): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) suggest that the type locality may be defined more precisely as “Madras”.

2 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of three specimens and cranial and dental measurements of two specimens. The authors remark that all bats were captured in nets near cave entrances and comment on aspects of carnivory associated with the species. Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the nominate subspecies M. l. lyra .

3 The Balaju Forest Reserve locality is the same as the "Kathmandu" locality mentioned in Bates & Harrison (1997) (p. 52).

4 Kock (1987) reports M. lyra from Twan Reng Cave, Kathmandu Valley, citing Durrant et al. (1979) but the locality is not recognised here owing to taxonomic irregularities in the latter paper concerning other species. [Durrant records Hipposideros bicolor from Mahendra Cave, Chobar Gorge Cave, and Twan Reng Cave but the range of bicolor does not include Nepal ( Simmons, 2005). The author refers also to Hipposideros cinerascens , a species of Hipposideros that does not exist].

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY RHINOPOMATIDAE

* Rhinopoma hardwickii Gray, 1831

Lesser Mouse-tailed bat

Lesser Rat-tailed bat

Rhinopoma hardwickii Gray, 1831: 37 . India. See note 1.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.— Benda (2004): Nepal (see note 2).

Note.— 1 Simmons (2005) indicates that the type locality is restricted to “Bengal” by Qumsiyeh et al. (1992).

2 As part of his assessment of the species for the I.U.C.N. Red List in 2004, Benda records R. hardwickii from Nepal but without comment. The species is not included in the country's faunal list by other authorities (e.g. Qumsiyeh & Knox Jones, 1986; Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997; Csorba et al., 1999). In the absence of a substantive record of the species from Nepal, it is considered that Rhinopoma hardwickii should not be included in that country's faunal list.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY EMBALLONURIDAE

Taphozous longimanus Hardwicke, 1825 MAP No. 19 Long-winged Tomb bat

Taphozous longimanus Hardwicke, 1825: 525 . Calcutta, India.

Records.— Mitchell (1978a): Jhapa.

Non-specific records (see note 1).—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as T. l. longimanus ).— Worth & Shah (1969): Nepal (see note 2).

Note.— 1 Nepal is not included in the species' distribution by Simmons (2005).

2 This is the first published record of the species from Nepal. The record is based on six specimens collected by R. M. Mitchell in January, 1966 from Jhapa in the eastern Terai and is the same record to which Mitchell (1978a) refers (see "Records", above).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY MOLOSSIDAE

* Chaerephon plicatus ( Buchannan, 1800)

Wrinkle-lipped Free-tailed bat

Vespertilio plicatus Buchannan, 1800: 261 , pl. 13. Bengal, India.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal. (See note).

Note.—The Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996) provides no Nepalese locality details in their assessment of the species, which remains excluded from Nepal's faunal list in other reputable source material (see, for example, Corbet & Hill, 1992 (as Tadarida plicata ); Bates & Harrison, 1997 (as Tadarida (Chaerephon) plicata ); and Simmons, 2005). In the absence of a substantive record of the species from Nepal, it is considered that Chaerephon plicatus should not be included in the country's faunal catalogue.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001) (as Tadarida plicata )

Year of assessment: 2008.

FAMILY VESPERTILIONIDAE

Arielulus circumdatus (Temminck, 1840) MAP No. 20 Black gilded pipistrelle

Large Black pipistrelle

Bronze sprite

Vespertilio circumdatus Temminck, 1840 [1824–1841]: 214. Tapos, Java.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Banthanti (vicinity of) (see note 2); Lam Pokhari (HNHM 98.5.23); Sudame (vicinity of) (see note 2).—F.M.N.H. (as Pipistrellus circumdatus ): Suki Patyl Forest (see note 3) (FMNH 114248).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Arielulus was classified as a subgenus of Pipistrellus by Hill & Harrison (1987) but Csorba et al. (1999) give examples of cranial and dental characteristics that "give a possibility to consider [ Arielulus ] as a separate genus", a revision cemented by Csorba & Lee (1999) and followed subsequently (see Simmons, 2005: 451-452). Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of Nepalese specimens and comment that all bats were captured in mountainous terrain over water either in a partly forested area (nr. Sudame) or in primary forest (nr. Banthanti). Each of the females captured on 4 th May (n. 1) and 8 th & 9 th May (n. 4) was gravid. The authors refer Nepalese specimens to the nominate subspecies A. c. circumdatus .

2 Specimens obtained from the vicinities of Banthanti and Sudame are retained in the collections of the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University under accession nos. ZMMU 164469 — ZMMU 164474 .

3 Bates & Harrison (1997) (p. 185) refer to the Suki Patyl Forest locality mentioned above as "Num".

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Eptesicus dimissus Thomas, 1916 MAP No. 21 Surat serotine

Eptesicus dimissus Thomas, 1916b: 1 . Kao Nawng, Bandon, Malay Peninsula [southern Thailand], 3,500 ft. Records.— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 1): Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172218, UMMZ 172220—UMMZ 172223); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172219).

Non-specific records.— Simmons (2005): Nepal (based on Myers et al., 2000).

Note.— 1 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of seven specimens (males and females), which represent the first collection of this little-known species since its description by Oldfield Thomas in 1916. In order to augment the scant information available on E. dimissus , which, prior to Myers’s publication, had been known only by the type specimen from Thailand ( Myers et al., 2000), the authors provide careful drawings of the cranial and dental morphology and of the baculum of the species; give useful descriptions of pelage coloration and ear, wing, and dental morphology; and compare the taxon with its generic siblings, E. fuscus ( Beauvois, 1796) and E. pachyotis ( Dobson, 1871b) .

I.U.C.N. status.—Data deficient (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Eptesicus gobiensis Bobrinskii, 1926

Bobrinskii’s serotine

Gobi Big Brown bat

Eptesicus nilssonii gobiensis Bobrinskii, 1926: 96 . Burchasteitala, Gobi Altai Mountains, Mongolia.

Eptesicus nilssonii centrasiaticus Bobrinskii, 1926: 96 . Ushchele Khatu, near Russk, Orin-Nor, Tibet.

Eptesicus nilssonii kashgaricus Bobrinskii, 1926: 97 . Khotun-Tagh, mountains of Russki, near Kashgar, Chinese Turkestan.

Records.—see notes 1,2

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as E. g. centralasiaticus Bobrinskii, 1926) (see notes 3,4).— Honacki et al. (1982): Nepal (as Eptesicus nilssoni ( Keyserling and Blasius, 1839)) .— Koopman (1993): Nepal (as Eptesicus nilssoni ).— Mitchell (1978a) (as Eptesicus nilssoni ): Nepal.— Simmons (2005): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Distribution. Honacki et al. (1982) include Nepal (but without specifying a locality) in the geographical distribution of Eptesicus nilssonii . Corbet & Hill (1992) incorporate Nepal within the range of Eptesicus gobiensis but base this purely on Honacki et al.'s distribution of E. nilssonii . Based on the distribution given in Honacki et al. (1982), E. gobiensis is also placed in Nepal by Koopman (1993) and Simmons (2005) (both of whom repeat Honacki et al.) and Bates & Harrison (1997) (who refer to Koopman, 1993). Csorba et al. (1999) include gobiensis in a list of Nepal's bat fauna but without explanation. Somewhat more concrete, although inconclusive, information is contained in Rydell (1993), who states "Specimens, that may be either nilssonii or gobiensis , have been obtained from Iraq, Kashmir, and Nepal ". Rydell bases this statement on Hanák & Horáček (1986), who refer to "die ungenauen Angaben von Mitchell (1978) aus Nepal " ["the inexact records of Mitchell (1978) from Nepal "]. In his checklist of Nepalese bats, Mitchell (1978a) includes Eptesicus nilssoni in a list of 19 bat species that, he states, were "collected by the author or ... [were] provided to him by the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition", the latter having collected mammals in eastern Nepal between 1970 and 1973. In his 1978(a) paper, Mitchell provides the only firm evidence to date of E. nilssoni in Nepal but, unfortunately, fails to give any locality details of the specimen(s) collected. Strelkov (1986) provides a somewhat less than straightforward distribution map, which does, however, indicate the geographical ranges of nilssoni , gobiensis , " centralasiaticus ", and kashgaricus (and E. bobrinskii ). Unfortunately, the distribution map does not extend as far south as Nepal. Inexplicably, Horáček et al. (2000) base their distribution of gobiensis on DeBlase (1980) (who does not mention Nepal in the species' range) and on Bates & Harrison (1997) (who refer, via Koopman, 1993, to the unqualified record of Honacki et al., 1982). The Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996) does not include Nepal in the distribution of E. gobiensis . I.U.C.N. (2008), however, does place the species in Nepal, although this view is based on the same two authorities cited by Horáček et al. (2000).

2 Shrestha (1997) and Majupuria & Kumar (1998) both state that Eptesicus nilssonii is "reported from Makulu Barun National Park". Such a record would be compatible geographically with the study area of the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition (see note 1, above) as the Arun Valley forms the easternmost border of the National Park. The record is not formally recognised here, however, owing to the very general nature of the two publications and to the absence of any corroborating data.

3 The correct spelling of the subspecific name is " centrasiaticus " ( Bobrinskii, 1926: 95, 96) and not " centralasiaticus ", the latter having been employed by Csorba et al. (1999) and other commentators ( Strelkov, 1986; Corbet & Hill, 1992).

4 Taxonomy. Bobrinskii (1926) describes three subspecies of Eptesicus nilssonii : c entrasiaticus, gobiensis , and kashgaricus. Horáček et al. (2000) list seven authorities ( Kuzyakin, 1950, 1965; Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951, 1966; Corbet, 1978; and Koopman, 1993, 1994), who follow Bobrinskii in treating gobiensis as a subspecies of nilssoni . In the first edition of "Mammal Species of the World", Honacki et al. (1982) do not acknowledge gobiensis but refer to nilssonii alone. They do refer, however (but in relation to E. n. japonensis Imaizumi, 1953), to Corbet (1978), who lists gobiensis as a subspecies of nilssonii . Hanák & Horáček (1986) refer the record from Nepal (which they query on the grounds of inexactness—see note 1) to E. n. gobiensis and specimens from western central China to E. n. " centralasiaticus ". Strelkov (1986) raises gobiensis to specific level based on the species' baculum structure and morphology. The three records nearest to Nepal (Strelkov's distribution map does not cover that country) are considered by the author to represent E. gobiensis but he appears to base these records on " Eptesicus nilssoni centralasiaticus ". Corbet & Hill (1992) treat gobiensis as specifically distinct but regard specimens of gobiensis from Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan as E. g. kashgaricus and suggest that "elsewhere ... in the region" (which would include Nepal), specimens may be referable to E. g. " centralasiaticu s", a view that seems to support the inference of Strelkov (1986). Bates & Harrison (1997) adhere closely to Corbet & Hill but expand usefully on the species' morphology and cranial and dental characters. Csorba et al. (1999) follow Corbet & Hill without comment in regarding " centralasiaticus " as a subspecies of gobiensis whilst Horáček et al. (2000) state that E. gobiensis is a "Centralasiatic vicariant [taken to mean a local variety or morphological variant] of E. nilssonii ". Simmons (2005) treats gobiensis and nilssonii as separate species and regards centrasiaticus and kashgarensis as synonyms of gobiensis .

The apparent lack of consistency in published material would indicate that there are unresolved difficulities in the taxonomic identfication of subspecies of gobiensis and, indeed, in the relationship between gobiensis and nilssonii . The paucity of central Asiatic specimens (of gobiensis ) in scientific collections, and certainly the lack of material from Nepal, may hinder a straightforward resolution of these difficulties.

Eptesicus gobiensis is included in Nepal's faunal list for the following two reasons:

1. One specimen or more of E. nilssoni was collected in Nepal between 1965 and 1973 either by R. M. Mitchell or by the Arun Valley Wildlife Expedition.

2. Strelkov (1986) and Corbet & Hill (1992) refer specimens from the region of Nepal, which were formerly regarded as examples of E. nilssoni , to E. gobiensis .

R. M. Mitchell deposited much of his material in the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto and in the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, but there is no record of E. nilssoni in the collection of either institution. To trace the specimen(s) would enable evidence to be gained not only of its precise taxonomic status, which, in the light of Strelkov (1986), may be brought about by an examination of the specimen's baculum, but also of its exact provenance in Nepal.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Eptesicus serotinus ( Schreber, 1774) MAP No. 22 Serotine

Common serotine

Vespertilio serotinus Schreber, 1774: 167 , pl. 53. France.

Scotophilus pachyomus Tomes, 1857: 50 . Rajputana, India.

Records.—F.M.N.H. (as Eptesicus serotinus pachyomos —see note 1): Tumlingtar (FMNH 114246).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as E. s. pachyomus ).

Note.— 1 The correct citation of the taxon is “ pachyomus ” (see Tomes, 1857: 50, 51).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Hesperoptenus tickelli (Blyth, 1851) MAP No. 23 Tickell’s bat

Nycticejus tickelli Blyth, 1851a: 157 . “Central India, Ceylon and the intervening hilly country”. See note 1.

Records.— Mitchell (1980): Darakhuti, Dang Valley (Dang-Deokhuri District) (ROM 74638) (see note 2).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): Dudora Nala/Park Rd.(Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172253); Nandon Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172252); Tamar Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172254); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172255, UMMZ 172256).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as H. t. tickelli ).— Mitchell (1978a): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Corbet & Hill (1992) state that Anderson (1881) and Wroughton (1918) restrict the type locality to “Chaibassa, Bihar ” ( India).

2 Mitchell (1980) gives measurements of a single female specimen, which was collected from the same habitat as that author's specimen of Nyctalus montanus (q. v., p. 42).

3 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of five specimens (both male and female) and state that individuals were collected in mist nets that had been established "over a ravine, a stream, a pond, and extending from forest edge into grassland".

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Scotomanes ornatus (Blyth, 1851) MAP No. 24 Harlequin bat

Nycticejus ornatus Blyth, 1851b: 517 . Cherra Punji, Khasia Hills, Assam, India.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Sudame (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164499).—F.M.N.H. (as S. o. ornatus ): Arun R. (see note 2) (FMNH 114245).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal. Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a single adult male specimen. The authors state that "echolocation calls are distinctive with very high intensity steep to shallow FM sweep from ca. 80 to 25 kHz with maximum energy around 30 kHz.". Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the nominate subspecies S. o. ornatus .

2 Bates & Harrison (1997: 145) refer to the Arun R. locality mentioned above as "Sankhuwasabha", which is the name of the district in which the locality is found.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Scotophilus heathii Horsfield, 1831 MAP No. 25 Asiatic Greater Yellow House bat

Greater Yellow bat

Scotophilus heathii Horsfield, 1831: 113 . Madras, India.

Vespertilio belangeri Geoffroy, 1834 [1831–34]: 87. Towns near Pondicherry, Coromandel coast, India.

Records.— Agrawal & Chakraborty (1971): Bhojbhawanpur [= Bahwanipur [Village]) (as S. heathi heathi ) (see note 1).— Johnson et al. (1980) (as S. heathii heathii ): Raxaul-Birganj (USNM 290061, skin only; USNM 290062).— Mitchell (1980) (see note 2): Bahwanipur Village (Banke District) (FMNH 142277; ROM 74633, ROM 74634); Darakhuti, Dang Valley (Dang-Deokhuri District) (FMNH 142278).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): Bardhana Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.); Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172259); Nandon Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172258); Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172257); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172260—UMMZ 172262).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as S. h. heathi ).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Banke [District].— Mitchell (1978a) (as S. h. belangeri ): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Agrawal & Chakraborty (1971) give measurements of a single male specimen together with brief remarks on coloration. The specimen was secured by R. M. Mitchell during the same period of collection in April, 1968 that gave rise to the specimens deposited in F.M.N.H. and R.O.M., to which Mitchell (1980) refers (see "Records", above).

2 Mitchell (1980) gives measurements of two male and two female specimens from Bahwanipur, which were collected from the same habitat as the author's specimen of Pipistrellus tenuis (q.v., p. 48), and one female specimen from Dang-Deokhuri District, which was collected from the same habitat as the author's specimen of Nyctalus montanus (q.v., p. 42). The two separate localities "Darakhuti" and "Dang-Deokhuri District" listed under the distribution of the species in Bates & Harrison (1997) and based on the F.M.N.H. specimen list and Mitchell's 1980 paper, respectively, are, in fact, referable to the single locality "Darakhuti", Mitchell having placed the solitary specimen giving rise to the record in the F.M.N.H. collection.

3 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of 11 S. heathii (five males and six females), a majority of the bats having being collected over water. The authors state that Scotophilus was one of the first genera to be secured in the evening with females appearing to be notably larger than males.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Scotophilus kuhlii Leach, 1821

Asiatic Lesser Yellow House bat

Scotophilus kuhlii Leach, 1821: 72 . " India ".

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.—None (see note).

Note.— Corbet & Hill (1992: 128, Map 60) indicate that the range of S. kuhlii includes the Terai of southern Nepal but the authors make no textual reference either to collection records or to any other information that would confirm the species' presence there. No other authority places kuhlii firmly in Nepal and in the absence of substantive material from that country, it is considered that Scotophilus kuhlii should be excluded from Nepal's faunal list.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Nyctalus leisleri ( Kuhl, 1819)

Leisler's bat

Lesser noctule

Hairy-armed bat

Vespertilio leisleri Kuhl, 1819: 46 . Hanau, Hessen-Nassau, Germany. See note 1.

Records.—None.

Non-specific records.— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Dang-Deokhuri [District]. See note 2.

Note.— 1 Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) and Simmons (2005) cite the date of Kuhl's authorship of the species as 1818 and 1817, respectively, rather than the commonly accepted year 1819 given in the Bibliography.

2 This is seemingly the only reference to the presence of N. leisleri in Nepal. The species is not included in Nepal's fauna by other authorities ( Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951; Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997; Simmons, 2005; I.U.C.N., 2008). The nearest locality outside Nepal at which the species has been collected is Katarmal in Uttar Pradesh, India ( Bates & Harrison, 1997), approximately 60 km. from Nepal's western border and some 280 km. from the westernmost point of Dang Deokhuri District. The specimen from Katarmal, however, may be referable to Nyctalus montanus (see Bates & Harrison, 1997), a single specimen of which (ROM 74637) was collected by R. M. Mitchell also from Dang-Deokhuri District. Pending further collection of the species from Nepal or confirmation of the taxonomic identity of the single specimen examined by Mitchell & Punzo (1977), it is considered unsafe to include N. leisleri in Nepal's faunal list.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Nyctalus montanus ( Barrett-Hamilton, 1906) MAP No. 26 Mountain noctule

Pterygistes montanus Barrett-Hamilton, 1906: 99 . Mussoorie, Kumaon, northern India.

Records.— Mitchell (1980): Darakhuti, Dang Valley (Dang-Deokhuri District) (ROM 74637) (see note 1). Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal.— Mitchell (1978a): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Mitchell (1980) gives measurements of a single male specimen and provides details of the geographical features and dominant vegetation of the collection site.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Nyctalus noctula ( Schreber, 1774) MAP No. 27 Noctule

Vespertilio noctula Schreber, 1774: 166 , pl. 52. France.

Vespertilio labiata Hodgson, 1835: 700 . "Central region of Nipal". [Kathmandu Valley].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Sudame (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164497).—F.M.N.H.(all as N. n. labiatus : see note 2): 4 miles S.E. of Trisuli (see note 3) (FMNH 104132); Gari (FMNH 114349, FMNH 114350).— H.Z.M.: Godavari (HZM 40.16245, HZM 41.16246, and HZM 42.16247—see note 4).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 5): Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.); Nandon Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172251); Tamar Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.).

Non-specific records.— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Vesperugo noctula Dobson, 1876 ) (see notes 6,7).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) comment that the single adult female specimen collected near Sudame "is quite different from European and Central Asian N. noctula in size, fur coloration, and skull shape" and remark that there are similarities between their specimen and examples of Nyctalus plancei Gerbe, 1880 ( Simmons, 2005 corrects the spelling of the species to plancyi) in the Z.M.M.U. collections. The authors follow Bates & Harrison (1997) in referring specimens from the Indian Subcontinent to N. n. labiata Hodgson, 1835 but query the incontrovertibility of such referral in light of comments on the taxonomic status of labiata in Yoshiyuki (1989). Bates & Harrison (1997) do refer specimens from the Indian Subcontinent to N. noctula labiata but they except from such referral specimens from Nagaland and northern Myanmar, which "are notably darker and appear most similar to N. n. plancyi from China ". Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of the single specimen mentioned, which was lactating and "had probably just given birth to twins (the uterine horns were enlarged, each with a placental scar)".

2 The F.M.N.H. catalogue refers to N. n. labiatus , rather than the correct subspecific spelling labiata .

3 Bates & Harrison (1997: 190) refer to the locality " 4 miles S.E. of Trisuli" as "Nuwakot" [District].

4 HZM 41.16246 was collected at St. Xavier's School in Godavari, where a large roost was located within the rafters of a house. Measurements of HZM specimens are given in Appendix III.

5 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of two male specimens and note that “both individuals were captured several hours after dark in nets set over small ponds”.

6 Scully (1887) refers to, and repeats the measurements of, Hodgson's type specimen of Vespertilio labiata , which Scully synonymises with Vesperugo noctula . Hinton & Fry (1923) comment also on Hodgson's type specimen but refer it to Nyctalus labiatus . Scully (1887) lists the measurements, and furnishes a brief description, of a single specimen (of V. noctula ) collected by himself.

7 Scully (1887) attributes the authorship of Vesperugo noctula to Dobson, 1876, although Dobson refers the specific form noctula to Schreber ( Schreber, 1774 (1775 in Dobson, 1876)).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Pipistrellus coromandra ( Gray, 1838) MAP No. 28 Indian pipistrelle

Coromandel pipistrelle

Little Indian bat

Scotophilus coromandra Gray, 1838: 498 . Pondicherry, Coromandel Coast, India.

Records.—F.M.N.H. (as P. c. coromandra ): Bharabise (FMNH 114251).— Hinton & Fry (1923) (see note 1): Bairia; Hazaria.— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 2): Bardhaha Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172287); Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172275); Simal Ghol Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172282, UMMZ 172283, UMMZ 172285, UMMZ 172286, UMMZ 172475); Tamar Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172276—UMMZ 172278); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172279— UMMZ 172281).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as P. c. coromandra ).— Mitchell (1978a) (as P. c. coromandra ): Nepal.— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Vesperugo abramus Dobson, 1876 —see note 3).

Note.— 1 Hinton & Fry (1923) record P. coromandra also from Bairaglia (as part of their report on Nepal), although the locality is in India.

2 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of 24 specimens (13 males and 11 females). The authors state that the species was “not seen near houses” and that “most individuals were captured over streams”. Cranial, palatal, and bacular comparisons are made with Nepalese specimens of P. javanicus . See Caveat to Pipistrellus javanicus (p. 44).

3 Pipistrellus abramus ( Vesperugo abramus in Dobson, 1876) is not known to occur in Nepal. The V. abramus to which Scully (1887) refers was synonymised by Dobson with, inter alia: Scotophilus javanicus Gray, 1838 (now Pipistrellus javanicus ); Vespertilio imbricatus Horsfield, 1824 [Temminck [1826] in Dobson, 1876] (now Hypsugo imbricatus ); and Scotophilus coromandra Gray, 1838 . It is in the last-named taxon (now Pipistrellus coromandra ) that Hinton & Fry (1923) place the species to which Scully refers as Vesperugo abramus and that treatment is followed here.

Two specimens from Sauraba [= Sauraha] in Nepal listed as P. abramus in the collections of the Hungarian Natural History Museum (HNHM 97.7.1 and HNHM 97.7.2) have been reidentified as Pipistrellus tenuis (G. Csorba, pers. comm.).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Pipistrellus javanicus ( Gray, 1838) MAP No. 29 Javan pipistrelle

Scotophilus javanicus Gray, 1838: 498 . Java.

Pipistrellus babu Thomas, 1915c: 30 . Murree , Punjab, Pakistan, 8,000 ft.

Records– B.M.(N.H.): Bouzini, Kathmandu, Najarkot, Sipuri (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 172).—Csorba et al. (1999) (see notes 1,2) (all as Pipistrellus cf. javanicus ): Banthanti (vicinity of); Sudame (vicinity of).— Fry (1925) (as P. babu ) (see note 3): Bouzini; Sipuri.— Hinton & Fry (1923) (as P. babu ): Kakani (2).—H.Z.M. (as P. babu ): Godavari (HZM 1.16285—see note 4).— Kock (1996) (as P. j. babu ): Dhunche (SMF 58412).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 5 and Caveat): Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (AMNH 269841—AMNH 269843: as P. j.

babu ; UMMZ 172291—UMMZ 17203); Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172288—UMMZ 172290); Simal Ghol Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172306, UMMZ 172307); Tamar Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172304, UMMZ 172305).—R.O.M. (as P. babu ) (see note 6): Melumche (1) (ROM 74651).

Non-specific records.— Mitchell (1978a) (as P. babu ): Nepal (see note 6).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977) (as P. babu ): Sindu [District].

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) draw attention to the taxonomic differences between examples of javanicus from Vietnam and Nepalese specimens, the latter being referred, together with all specimens from the mainland of the Indian Subcontinent ( Bates & Harrison, 1997), to the subspecies babu Thomas, 1915c . Csorba et al. (1999) suggest that babu could be raised to specific status based on size, karyology, and external & cranial morpholgy. The authors give selected external, cranial, and dental measurements of their Nepalese specimens, which were caught over the Bhurungdi River either in a partly deforested area (nr. Sudame) or in primary forest (nr. Banthanti). It is stated that "typical echolocation calls are of relatively high intensity, with a steep then shallow FM sweep from ca. 60 to 40 kHz., with maximum energy around 45-50 kHz."

2 The two adult males collected in the vicinity of Banthanti and the single adult male captured near Sudame are retained in the collections of the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University under the accession nos. ZMMU 164506 — ZMMU 164508 .

3 The specimens from Bouzini and Sipuri are likely to be those that give rise to the records from the same localities in the B.M.(N.H.) (see "Records", above).

4 Measurements of HZM specimens are given in Appendix III.

5 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of 33 specimens (eight males and 25 females). The authors state that the species was “common around houses [at Sauraha], where it tended to be captured earlier than other pipistrelles” and was “sometimes abundant over water”.

6 The specimen from Melumche (ROM 74651) was collected by R. M. Mitchell and accounts probably for that author's inclusion of the taxon in his checklist of Nepal's chiropteran fauna ( Mitchell 1978a).

Caveat: Myers et al. (2000) propound the reasoning (based on cranial and dental data and palatal and bacular morphology) that leads them to identify specimens as javanicus but the authors caution that “the identification of [ Pipistrellus javanicus ] and … other pipistrelles [in their 2000 paper] … is controversial”. See Pipistrellus coromandra (p. 43) and P. tenuis (p. 48), to which species this caveat is equally applicable. See also note 1 to P. paterculus (p. 45).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Pipistrellus paterculus Thomas 1915

Mount Popa pipistrelle

Pipistrellus paterculus Thomas 1915c: 32 . Mount Popa, Upper Burma [ Myanmar].

Records.—A.M.N.H.: Sauraha (AMNH 269835—AMNH 269837) (see note 1).

Non-specific records.—None. Note.— 1 The collections catalogue of the American Museum of Natural History lists three specimens of P. paterculus , which were collected from Sauraha in Royal Chitwan N. P. by P. Myers and D. Smith on 5 th & 11 th March, 1990. The specimens mentioned formed part of a much larger collection secured by P. Myers in and near Royal Chitwan N. P. That collection is discussed in some detail in Myers et al. (2000) but no reference is made therein to the identifications of any of the specimens as P. paterculus . The authors do state, however, that the identification of pipistrelles mentioned in the paper "is controversial" (see caveat to Pipistrellus javanicus , p. 44). In order to confirm the specific identification of the material, which, were it paterculus , would represent the first record of the species from Nepal, a single male specimen (AMNH 269836) was received on loan from A.M.N.H. and its baculum, the morphology of which is useful in distinguishing between closely related sympatric species that it may otherwise be troublesome to identify using conventional morphological characters ( Hill & Harrison, 1987), was prepared as described in the Material and Methods section, above (Section 2) (p. 16).

Initial observations indicated that the morphology and length (3.65 mm.) of the baculum were consistent not with P. paterculus , which has a much greater bacular length (c. 9.2 mm. (see Hill & Harrison, 1987: 286, Fig. 3 )), but with either P. tenuis or P. coromandra (both of which species Myers and Smith had collected from Royal Chitwan N. P.—with tenuis being collected at Sauraha, itself—in the course of the same field exercise that gave rise to the collection of the specimens identified as paterculus (see Myers et al., 2000)). Accordingly, ventral and lateral aspects of pre-prepared bacula of P. coromandra from northern India (HZM 2.7318) and P. tenuis from western Myanmar (HZM 10.35443) were drawn also and were compared with those of the " paterculus " specimen (see Fig. 3 ). In addition, external measurements of AMNH 269836 were taken and were compared with the same measurements from specimens of P. coromandra and P. tenuis from India, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka and of P. paterculus from India and Myanmar given in Bates & Harrison (1997) (see Table 2). The skull of AMNH 269836 was not able to be located in the collections of A.M.N.H. and thus could not be used to provide additional data to aid specific identification.

Results.

The baculum of AMNH 269836 has a long, reasonably straight shaft with a notable bifid tip. The lateral view shows that the paired basal lobes are inclined ventrally. These characteristics are consistent with the genus Pipistrellus and, specifically, with the abramus , pipistrellus, coromandra , and tenuis group ( Hill & Harrison, 1987: 233). The bacula of HZM 2.7318 ( coromandra ) and HZM 10.35443 ( tenuis ) share the above morphology, although the shaft of tenuis is, to a certain extent, slenderer than those of coromandra and AMNH 269836, whilst the basal lobes of coromandra are somewhat fuller in lateral view than those of the other two specimens.

The baculum of AMNH 269836 is longer (3.4 mm.) than that of tenuis (2.9 mm.) but is similar in length to that of coromandra (3.3 mm.). The basal width (taken across the widest point of the basal forks) and the shaft width (taken at its narrowest point) of AMNH 269836 (0.7 & 0.23 mm.) agree more readily with the same measurements of coromandra (0.6 & 0.2 mm.) than with those of tenuis (0.5 & 0.18 mm). A favourable comparison may be drawn between the baculum of AMNH 269836 and the dorsal and lateral views of the baculum of P. coromandra as depicted by Hill & Harrison (1987: 233, Fig. 7 b (lateral) and Fig. 7 c (dorsal)). The bacular morphology of AMNH 269836 would indicate that the specimen is allied more closely with P. coromandra than with P. tenuis but, owing to the overall similarity between the bacula of coromandra and tenuis, AMNH 269836 cannot be identified as coromandra with certainty.

The baculum of P. paterculus has a long, straight shaft with a less distinctly bifid tip than the two other species mentioned above. The base does not possess the marked lobes of coromandra or tenuis and exhibits a much smaller inclination ventrally. The length (8.8 mm.) and shaft width (0.36 mm.) of the baculum are, respectively, 158% and 56% greater than in AMNH 269836 and these measurements alone are sufficient to determine that AMNH 269836 is not representative of Pipistrellus paterculus .

The head and body (38.4 mm.), forearm (26.8 mm.), and hind foot (4.9 mm.) measurements of AMNH 269836 fall into the range of both P. coromandra (34.0—49.0 mm.; 25.5—34.3 mm.; 3.4—8.0 mm.) and P. tenuis (33.0— 45.0 mm.; 25.0— 30.2 mm.; 3.0—7.0 mm.), although each measurement of the AMNH specimen is closer to the mean measurements of tenuis (39.1; 27.7; 5.3 mm.) than to coromandra (42.3; 30.0; 5.6 mm.). The tail (21.9 mm.) and ear (6.8 mm.) measurements of AMNH 269836 are below the range of coromandra (22.0—39.0; 7.1—14.0 mm.) but within the range of tenuis (20.0—35.0; 5.0—11.0 mm.), although each is significantly lower than the mean measurement of the tail and ear of the two latter species: 32.0 mm.; 10.3 mm. ( coromandra ) and 28.9 mm.; 9.7 mm. ( tenuis ). None of the measurements of AMNH 269836 falls within the range of those of P. paterculus , with measurements of the latter species being notably in excess of those of the AMNH specimen. External morphological data would indicate that AMNH 269836 is allied somewhat more closely with P. tenuis than with P. coromandra but the data are not conclusive owing largely to the great difficulty in separating tenuis from smaller individuals of coromandra using external measurements alone ( Bates & Harrison, 1997).

Comparative material.

Pipistrellus coromandra (HZM 2.7318)

Collection locality: Dalpatpur, nr. Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Collection date: 14.10.1973

Collector: D. L. Harrison

Pipistrellus tenuis (HZM 10.35443)

Collection locality: Balukan, Mrauk-U, Rakhine State, Myanmar.

Collection date: 13.03.2003

Collector: M. J. Pearch

(The specimen was one of eleven individuals collected by the author in a four-ply, nylon mesh mist net erected amongst toddy palms ( Borassus flabellifer ) in the village of Balukan. Within the immediate area were betel nut trees ( Areca catechu ), coconut trees ( Cocos nucifera ), cashew nut trees ( Anachardium occidentalis ), mango trees ( Mangifera indica ), kapok trees ( Ceiba pentranda ), and fig trees ( Ficus mysorensis ). The bats were observed roosting in the crown of one of the toddy palms).

Pipistrellus paterculus (HZM 7.36082)

Collections locality: Hintha Gu (Hintha Cave), Mandalay, Myanmar.

Collection date: 03.12.2003

Collector: I. J. Mackie.

The nearest locality outside Nepal from which Pipistrellus paterculus has been collected is Buhnar in Bihar State, India ( Sinha, 1983), approximately 210 km. distant from Sauraha to the south-east and about 45 km. from the nearest point on the Nepalese border.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Pipistrellus tenuis (Temminck, 1840) MAP No. 30 Least pipistrelle

Indian Pygmy bat

Vespertilio tenuis Temminck, 1840 [1824–1841]: 229. Sumatra ( Tate, 1942).

Pipistrellus mimus Wroughton, 1899: 722 . Mheskatri, Dangs, Surat District, W. India.

Pipistrellus principulus Thomas, 1915b: 231 . Gauhati, Assam ( India).

Records.— Hinton & Fry (1923): Bairia; Hazaria (both as Pipistrellus mimus Wroughton, 1899 ).—H.N.H.M.: Sauraba [= Sauraha] (HNHM 97.7.1, HNHM 97.7.2—see note 1).— Mitchell (1980): Bahwanipur Village (Banke District) (as P. mimus —see note 2).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): Dudora Nala/Park Rd. (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (AMNH 269838—as P. t. principulus ; UMMZ 172268—UMMZ 172271); Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172263—UMMZ 172267); Simal Ghol Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172274); Tamar Tal (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (AMNH 269839—as P. t. principulus ; UMMZ 172272); Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (AMNH 269840—as P. t. principulus ; UMMZ 172273).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as P. t. tenuis ).— Mitchell (1978a) (as P. m. mimus ): Nepal.

Note.— 1 HNHM 97.7.1 and HNHM 97.7.2 were listed initially in the collection of the H.N.H.M. as Pipistrellus abramus , a species not known to occur in Nepal.

2 Mitchell (1980) gives measurements of a single female specimen and provides details of the geographical features and dominant vegetation of the collection site.

3 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a series of 21 specimens (11 males and ten females). The authors state that the species was commonly to be found under galvanised metal roofing sheets on the buildings at Sauraha and that “several specimens were also captured over streams, ponds, and forest trails”. Cranial, palatal, and bacular comparisons are made with Nepalese specimens of P. coromandra and P. javanicus . See Caveat to Pipistrellus javanicus (p. 44).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Barbastella leucomelas ( Cretzschmar, 1826) MAP No. 31 Eastern barbastelle

Vespertilio leucomelas Cretzschmar, 1826 [ 1826 –1831]: 73, pl. 28b. Arabia Petraea [Sinai, Egypt]. See note 1.

Plecotus darjelingensis Hodgson [in Horsfield], 1855: 103. Darjeeling [ India]. [Not Nepal].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see notes 2,3): Banthanti (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164496).—R.O.M.: Melumche (1) (ROM 74650).

Non-specific records.— Corbet & Hill (1992): Nepal (see note 4).— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Sindu [District].— Mitchell (1978a) (as B. l. darjeelingensis (Hodgson, 1855)): Nepal (see notes 3,5).

Note.— 1 The date of the species authority is given often as 1830 or 1831 ( Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997). Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951), I.U.C.N. ( Chiroptera Specialist Group, 1996 ), and Simmons (2005) prefer the date 1826. It was decided at 11 th Meeting of the Eurobats Advisory Committee (see Hutson, 2006) that "the date should be changed from 1830 to 1826 in line with other publications" and that ruling is followed here. The work in which Cretzschmar published the species spans the years 1826 to 1831.

2 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a single adult male, which was collected "in montane primary broad-leafed forest in a mist-net set across the Bhurungdi river".

3 Csorba et al. (1999) and Mitchell (1978a) refer Nepalese specimens to the subspecies B. l. darjelingensis Hodgson, 1855 [= Hodgson (in Horsfield), 1855], although darjelingensis was never collected by Hodgson in Nepal, its correct provenance being Darjiling [Darjeeling] ( Hinton & Fry, 1923: 428).

4 Corbet & Hill (1992: 127, 128) include Nepal within the the range of B. leucomelas and indicate five localities in Nepal on a distribution map of the species. The authors do not, however, provide details of specimens or refer to any supporting references by way of verification.

5 The correct spelling of the subspecific name is darjelingensis (see Horsfield, 1855: 103).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Plecotus auritus ( Linnaeus, 1758) MAP No. 32 Brown Long-eared bat

Vespertilio auritus Linnaeus, 1758: 32 . Sweden.

Plecotus homochrous Hodgson, 1847b: 895 .?Darjeeling. (See notes 1,2).

Records.— Sanborn (1950) (as Plecotus homochrous — see note 3 and Caveat): Jomson (FMNH 67304).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999) (as P. a. homochrous ): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Horsfield (1855) states that Hodgson discovered homochrous "in the central regions of Sub-Himalaya" and it is included in a list of species that Horsfield indicates were collected by Hodgson in Nepal. Hinton & Fry (1923: 428) suggest that Plecotus homochrous was not collected by Hodgson in Nepal but probably in Sikkim whilst Scully (1887) and Sanborn (1950) both regard the specimen as originating in Darjeeling. In his catalogue of Hodgson's specimens from Nepal and Tibet, Gray (1863) writes (of the specimen he numbers 20 in that catalogue): " Plecotus homochrous, Hodgson. Hab. Darjiling, July 6 ...". Hodgson, himself ( Hodgson, 1847b: 894), states only that the specimen in his possession, and which he proceeds to describe, "was taken in the central region of the mountains, in a dwelling house ...". As Hodgson left Nepal in the autumn of 1843 and did not return, it can be stated with certainty that his specimen of Plecotus was not secured in that country but in the Indian states either of [West] Bengal or of Sikkim, in which latter areas (as well as the neighbouring parts of Tibet) he obtained material from 1845 to 1858.

Hodgson's description of homochrous was published in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal ( Hodgson, 1847b: 894–896). Immediately preceding that paper in the Journal is another paper by Hodgson ( Hodgson, 1847a: 889–894), in which the author wrote (of the collection locality of Megaderma schistacea ): "Arriving recently at the staging Bungalow of Siligori [in West Bengal] ...". There is no evidence that Hodgson wrote the two papers mentioned in the order in which he secured the specimens of P. homochrous and M. schistacea or that the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal published the works in chronological sequence but it is possible that homochrous may have been collected at Siligori rather than at Darjeeling or in Sikkim. The likelihood, however, is that the specimen did originate in Darjeeling on the basis of Gray's description of Hodgson's material from that locality ( Gray, 1863: 2). It is suggested, therefore, that the type locality of homochrous should read "?Darjeeling" and this has been employed in the synonymy above.

2 Spitzenberger et al. (2006) consider homochrous to be a distinct species based on genetic and morphological analysis. The authors restict P. auritus to "Europe including Ural and Caucasus mountains".

3 The co-ordinates given in the F.M.N.H. catalogue of the collection locality are for Baglung and not Jomson, although Sanborn (1950) makes it clear that the specimen was collected at Jomson, where it was found frozen to a rock on the banks of the Kali Gandaki River.

Caveat: Sanborn (1950) provides a forearm length of the single female specimen collected at Jomson of 44.5 mm., which is within the range of Indian examples of Plecotus austriacus (41.9—45.1 mm.; n. 10) but notably beyond the range of forearm measurements of P. auritus (36.5—40.3 mm.; n. 4) ( Bates & Harrison, 1997). It is clear that Sanborn was not able to examine the skull of the specimen as he states that this has not been removed and the author produces little other taxonomic evidence to confirm the specimen as P. auritus .

The specimen is retained in the collections of the F.M.N.H., where its identity is listed currently as Plecotus auritus homochrous .

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Plecotus austriacus ( Fischer, 1829) MAP No. 33 Grey Long-eared bat

Vespertilio auritus austriacus Fischer, 1829: 117 . Vienna, Austria.

Plecotus wardi Thomas, 1911d: 209 . Leh, Ladak, Kashmir, north-western India.

Records.— Kock (1996) (as Plecotus austriacus wardi (Thomas, 1911)) : Ringmo [Dolpa District] (SMF 58407— SMF 58409) (see notes 1,2).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as P. a. wardi ).

Note.— 1 Based on cranial measurements of the three specimens from Nepal discussed by Kock (1996), Spitzenberger et al. (2006) consider the material to represent Plecotus wardi , which they regard as a distinct species based on genetic and morphological analysis.

2 The specimens of P. austriacus to which Kock (1996) refers were collected by Jochen Martens.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Falsistrellus affinis (Dobson, 1871) MAP No. 34 Chocolate bat

Chocolate pipistrelle

Vesperugo (Pipistrellus) affinis Dobson, 1871b: 213 . Bhamo, north-eastern Burma [ Myanmar].

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Najarkot (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 184 (as Pipistrellus affinis )).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as Pipistrellus affinis ).— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Ia io Thomas, 1902 MAP No. 35 Great Evening bat

Great pipistrelle

Ia io Thomas, 1902: 164. Chungyang, southern Hupeh, China.

Records.— Csorba (1998) (see note 1): Bimalnager (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 98.8.27, HNHM 98.8.28, HNHM 98.10.1—HNHM 98.10.3, HZM 1.28130).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Csorba (1998) gives selected external, cranial, and dental measurements of each of the six specimens listed above (which represent the first record of the species from Nepal); other data, including mean measurements, are included in Csorba et al. (1999). Three male specimens were secured in a mist net set in the entrance of Sidda Gupha (Monk Cave) at Bimalnager on 12 th October. One adult male and two adult females were collected from the same locality six months later (12 th April), when the majority of the bats netted were gravid females. Csorba (1998) comments that the locality is in one of the few limestone areas in Nepal and is the westermnost record of the species. Ia io was noted to leave its diurnal roost in the cave before dusk ( Csorba, 1998).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Philetor brachypterus (Temminck, 1840) MAP No. 36 Rohu's bat

Vespertilio brachypterus Temminck, 1840 [1824–1841]: 215, pl.53. Padang District, Sumatra.

Records.— Koopman (1983): Barabisse (FMNH 114249); Num Bridge (FMNH 114481).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis blythii ( Tomes, 1857) MAP No. 37 Lesser Mouse-eared bat

Lesser Mouse-eared Myotis

Vespertilio blythii Tomes, 1857: 53 . Nasirabad, Rajputana, India. See note 1.

Records.—F.M.N.H.: Tumlingtar (FMNH 114473).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as M. b. blythi ).

Note.— 1 Blanford (1888 –91) suggests that the type locality requires confirmation but does not explain further.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis csorbai Topál, 1997 MAP No. 38

Csorba’s Mouse-eared bat

Csorba's Mouse-eared Myotis

Myotis csorbai Topál, 1997 [1998]: 377. " Nepal, Syangja District, 4 k.m. E. of Syangja, about 30 k.m. S. of Pokhara town, 1,300 m."

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (HNHM 97.2.1—HNHM 97.2.5) (see note 2); Banthanti (vicinity of) (see note 3); Sudame (vicinity of) (see note 3); Tirkhedunga (vicinity of) (see note 3).—R.O.M.: Sundarijal (ROM 74724—see note 4).

Non-specific records.— CBSG CAMP Workshop (2004): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a series of specimens, some of which were collected in a net "in front of a cave surrounded by subtropical secondary forest". These bats were noted to leave the cave "before total darkness". Specimens were also captured over rivers, where they were seen to fly "in slow circles ca. 10–30 cm. above the water" and in riparian areas, which they traversed at a height of approximately 1– 3 m. The pattern of flight of M. csorbai over water is likened to that of Myotis daubentonii ( Kuhl, 1819 —see note 5) and the genera Selysius Bonaparte, 1841[1836–41] and Leuconoë Boie, 1830 . Wing movements were noted to be comparable to those of Myotis brandtii ( Eversmann, 1845) . The riverine bats were seen to appear "immediately after sunset" with echolocation calls being detected at 40 kHz. The authors record that the majority of females captured between 2 nd and 16 th May were gravid.

2 The co-ordinates accompanying the locality " 4 km. E. of Syangja" given in Csorba et al. (1999) (28º08'N, 83º44'E) have been altered in the Gazetteer to read " 28º05'N, 83º54'E ". The reason for the amendment is explained in note 2b to Rhinolophus affinis (p. 24).

3 Specimens obtained from the vicinities of Banthanti, Tirkhedunga, and Sudame are retained in the collections of the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University under accession nos. ZMMU 164475 — ZMMU 164490 .

4 ROM 74724 was collected on 7 th September, 1969 by R. M. Mitchell but it is not known to which taxon the specimen was assigned originally. Five specimens of M. longipes in the collections of H.N.H.M. were reidentified subsequently as M. csorbai by Topál, 1997 [1998] (see note 2 to Myotis longipes , p. 53).

5 Simmons (2005) cites the authority as "(Kuhl, 1817). Die Deutschen Fledermäuse. Hanau, p. 14", rather than the commonly accepted 1819 reference given in the Bibliography.

6 Myotis csorbai is endemic to Nepal.

I.U.C.N. status.—Data deficient (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis formosus ( Hodgson, 1835) MAP No. 39 Hodgson's bat

Hodgson's Myotis

Vespertilio formosa Hodgson, 1835: 700 . "Central region of Nipal". [Kathmandu Valley].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): 2 km. E. of Ghorepani (HNHM 98.8.22).

Non-specific records.— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Vespertilio formosus —see note 2).

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a single adult specimen, which was collected in a mist net "in a mature Rhododendron forest half an hour after sunset". Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the nominate subspecies M. f. formosus .

2 Scully (1887) refers to the original description of the type specimen of V. formosa by Hodgson (1835) and repeats some of the latter's measurements and observations. The holotype, Scully states, is retained in the collections of B.M.(N.H.).

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Myotis longipes ( Dobson, 1873)

Kashmir Cave bat

Kashmir Cave Myotis

? Myotis theobaldi Blyth, 1856: 363 . Caves near Matar Nag, north of Islamabad, Kashmir. See note 1.

Vespertilio macropus Dobson, 1872b: 209 . Caves of Bhima Devi, 6,000 ft., Kashmir. [Pre-occupied by V. macropus Gould, 1854 ].

Vespertilio longipes Dobson, 1873: 110 . [Renaming of macropus ].

Records.—see note 2

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (2000): Nepal (see note 3).— Simmons (2005): Nepal (see note 3).

Note.— 1 Blanford (1891) [1888–91] and Thomas (1915a) consider the form unidentifiable (Ellerman & Morrison- Scott, 1951).

2 Bates & Harrison (1997: 131) record M. longipes from Syangja in Nepal based on records in the collections of the Hungarian Natural History Museum, dated February, 1996. At that time, the five specimens listed, which had been collected at Kailash Cave, 4 km. E. of Syangja on 23 rd July, 1995, were referred to the taxon longipes . Topál (1997) [1998] re-identified the five specimens and described them as a new species ( M. csorbai ). It is under csorbai , therefore, that the Syangja records are now included.

3 The Chiroptera Specialist Group (2000), Simmons (2005), and I.U.C.N. (2008) include M. longipes in Nepal's faunal list without comment. It is likely that the reason for such inclusion is based either on the collection records of the Hungarian Natural History Museum or on the content of Bates & Harrison (1997) (see note 2, above), there being no other published records that are evident. In the absence of a tangible record, M. longipes is excluded here from Nepal's known bat fauna.

I.U.C.N. status.—Data deficient (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis muricola ( Gray, 1846 [1847]) (See note 1) MAP No. 40

Nepalese Whiskered bat

Nepalese Whiskered Myotis

Vespertilio tralatitius Temminck, 1840 [1824–41]: 228, pl. 57. Java. [Preoccupied by V. tralatitius Horsfield, 1824 [1821– 24]].

Kerivoula trilatitoides Gray, 1843: 27 . Java. [ Nomen nudum ].

Vespertilio muricola Gray, 1846 [= Gray & Gray, 1846] [= Gray, 1847a]: 4. "Central hilly region, Nepal ". [= Kathmandu Valley in Bates & Harrison, 1997]. See note 2.

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Kontoum (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 126).—Csorba et al. (1999) (see notes 3,4): Banthanti (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164491, ZMMU 164492); Tinjure Phedi (HNHM 98.5.24).—H.N.H.M.: Dhunche (near) (see note 5) (HNHM 98.8.7).— Kock (1996) (as Myotis (Selysius) muricola ( Gray, 1846)) : Thodung bei [near] Those [= Thodung (2)] (SMF 58413).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Francis & Hill (1998): Nepal.— Mitchell (1978a) (as Myotis mystacinus muricola ( Gray, 1846) —see note 6): Nepal.— Scully (1887) (as Vespertilio muricola Gray, 1846 —see note 7): Nepal Valley.

Note.— 1 Gray describes the taxon muricola first in his "Catalogue of the specimens and drawings of mammals, birds, reptiles and fishes of Nepal and Thibet presented by B. H. Hodgson to the British Museum". Although dated

1846, the Catalogue was published in January, 1847 and it is, accordingly, the latter date to which reference is made in the species citation above.

2 Gray (1847a) refers Vespertilio muricola to Hodgson, who had listed the taxon (but without description) in three of his catalogues of Nepalese mammalia ( Hodgson, 1841b: 212; 1842: 908; and 1844b: 286). Gray makes reference only to the 1842 catalogue. Simmons (2005) regards muricola Hodgson, 1841 as a nomen nudum .

3 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of specimens, which were collected "across a path just after sunset"; "in montane primary broadleafed forest"; and "in a partly deforested area". The authors state that the ZMMU specimens differ from the description of the species given in Francis & Hill (1998) "by the nearly absent calcar keel and somewhat darker coloration" [Francis & Hill state that "the calcar has a distinct heel"]. Calls were detected between 40 and 45 kHz. Nepalese specimens are referred to the nominate subspecies M. m. muricola .

4 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a specimen of Myotis from near Dhunche (HNHM 98.8.7), which they identify provisionally as muricola . The authors comment, however, that the specimen's pelage coloration and skull morphology do not agree precisely with those of muricola .

5 Bates & Harrison (1997: 60) refer to the Dhunche locality mentioned above as "Langtang".

6 muricola was regarded as a subspecies of Myotis mystacinus (see Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951) until considered specifically distinct by Corbet (1978).

7 Scully (1887) states that three specimens of the species were collected in the Nepal Valley and presented to the British Museum by B. H. Hodgson. Scully draws a comparison between V. muricola and V. mystacinus based on the morphology of the tragus.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis mystacinus ( Kuhl, 1819) MAP No. 41 Whiskered bat

Whiskered Myotis

Vespertilio mystacinus Kuhl, 1819: 202 . Germany. See note 1.

Records (see note 2).—F.M.N.H.: Num Bridge (FMNH 114250).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.— Mitchell & Punzo (1977): Kathmandu [District].— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (as Vespertilio mystacinus — see note 3).

Note.— 1 Simmons (2005) cites the authority as "(Kuhl, 1817). Die Deutschen Fledermäuse. Hanau, p. 15", rather than the commonly accepted 1819 reference given in the Bibliography.

2 A taxonomic reanalysis of the specimens giving rise to the F.M.N.H. record and that of Mitchell & Punzo (1977) should be undertaken to confirm that they are not examples of Myotis nipalensis , a taxon that was regarded as a synonym of mystacinus (excepting Hinton & Fry, 1923, who considered it to be "a perfectly distinct species") until it was raised to specific status by Benda & Tsytsulina (2000). The latter authors suggest that nipalensis occurs "in a large part of the Asian area ... believed to be inhabited by M. mystacinus ". The southern border of the area is deemed to be the southern Himalayan slopes, which would encompass the records from Num and Kathmandu (the latter more marginally). In the absence of evidence that the specimens are not nipalensis , M. mystacinus is included in Nepal's fauna with a degree of caution. Were it not for the differentiation between nipalensis and mystacinus made by Scully (1887) (see note 3 to Myotis nipalensis , p. 55), it is likely that Nepalese specimens regarded hitherto as mystacinus would, in fact, be referable solely to nipalensis based on the diagnosis of Benda & Tsytsulina (2000).

The record of M. mystacinus from Kathmandu contained in Bates & Harrison (1997) is based on Vespertilio nipalensis Dobson, 1871b and is, accordingly, referred to the latter species ( Myotis nipalensis ) and not hereunder to mystacinus .

3 Scully (1887) gives the measurements of five male and three female specimens secured in the Nepal Valley between June and November together with a brief description of the species. Hinton & Fry (1923) refer to Scully's records from the Nepal Valley but assign Scully's V. mystacinus to Myotis siligorensis , the latter founded on Vespertilio siligorensis Tomes [in: Horsfield, 1855]. See the note to M. siligorensis , p. 56

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis nipalensis Dobson, 1871 MAP No. 42 Nepalese Myotis

Vespertilio pallidiventris Hodgson, 1844b: 286 . "Central hilly region" (of Nepal). [ Nomen nudum ].

Vespertilio nipalensis Dobson, 1871b: 214 . Katmandu, Nipal.

Records.— Dobson (1876): "Katmandu, Nipal" (as Vespertilio nipalensis Dobson, 1871b —see note 1).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (as M. mystacinus nipalensis ): Nepal (see note 2).— Hinton & Fry (1923): valley of Nepal.— Mitchell (1978a) (as M. mystacinus nipalensis ): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Dobson (1876) describes, and gives external measurements of, the type of V. nipalensis from the collection of the Indian Museum, Calcutta. His description is replicated in his 1878 "Catalogue of the Chiroptera in the Collection of the British Museum" (= Dobson, 1878) and is a fuller description than that given in his 1871 work. Hinton & Fry (1923) indicate that the type specimen in the Indian Museum has the accession code "172 a ".

2 Csorba et al. (1999) include the taxon in a general list of bat species recorded from Nepal but do not refer to examined specimens.

3 M. nipalensis is often included in the synonymy of M. mystacinus (see, for example, Bates & Harrison, 1997). Corbet & Hill (1992) suggest that, in "N. India ", nipalensis may be a subspecies of mystacinus based on its darker form. Benda & Tsytsulina (2000) regard nipalensis as a distinct species (as did Hinton & Fry, 1923), describing it as "a highly diversified form", of which there may be several different subspecies. Benda & Tsytsulina (2000) provide a good description of the species together with detailed notes on dentition, taxonomy, and distribution. Simmons (2005) follows Benda & Tsytsulina (2000). Scully (1887) distinguishes between Vespertilio nipalensis Dobson, 1871b and Vespertilio mystacinus Kuhl, 1819 (1817 in Simmons, 2005). See also note 2 to Myotis mystacinus (p. 55).

4 Benda & Tsytsulina (2000) indicate that eastern montane forms of nipalensis (which would include Nepalese specimens) differ from the western desert forms and consider assigning the latter to the subspecies M. n. transcaspicus Ogneff & Heptner, 1928.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Myotis sicarius Thomas, 1915 . MAP No. 43 Mandelli's Mouse-eared bat

Mandelli's Mouse-eared Myotis

Myotis sicarius Thomas, 1915a: 608 . Northern Sikkim, India.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Sudame (vicinity of) (ZMMU 164493—ZMMU 164495).— Fry (1925): Banss Bahari.—H.Z.M.: Godavari (HZM 1.16284—see note 2).

Non-specific records.— CBSG Camp Workshop (2004): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of three specimens and cranial and dental measurements of two specimens. The authors comment that the specimens were collected in "flap-traps" about 3 m. over the Bhurungdi R. in a partially deforested area. Two female specimens were heavily gravid on 6 th May.

2 Measurements of HZM 1.16284 are given in Appendix III.

I.U.C.N. status.—VU B2ab(iii) (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

I.U.C.N./S.S.C. Chiroptera Specialist Group status.—VU A2c, D2 (2001) (see Hutson et al., 2001).

* Myotis siligorensis ( Horsfield, 1855) MAP No. 44

Himalayan Whiskered bat

Himalayan Whiskered Myotis

Siliguri bat

Vespertilio siligorensis Horsfield, 1855: 102 . Seligori [= Siliguri] Tarai, Darjeeling, India. [The type locality "(Siligori,) Nepal ", which is used commonly, is incorrect—see note].

Vespertilio darjelingensis Horsfield, 1855: 102 . Type locality unknown but possibly Darjeeling, India. [The type locality " Nepal ", implied by Horsfield (1855), is incorrect—see note].

Records.—None.

Non-specific records (see note).— Bates & Harrison (1997): Kathmandu Valley.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal.— Dobson (1878): "Nipal" (as Vespertilio mystacinus ).— Hinton & Fry (1923): Nepal valley.—M.C.Z. (as M. mystacinus siligorensis ): Nepal (MCZ 32977).

Note.— Dobson (1878) catalogues 17 specimens of Vespertilio mystacinus in the collections of the British Museum. The collection locality of two of these, an immature male and an adult female, is given as "Nipal", the specimens having been secured, Dobson indicates, by B. H. Hodgson. Dobson refers the two specimens mentioned to Vespertilio siligorensis Hodgson [ Horsfield, 1853] (1855 in later works, e.g. Corbet & Hill, 1992 and Bates & Harrison, 1997), which species he places in the synonymy of Vespertilio mystacinus Leisler [ Kuhl, 1819]. At this point, the only record of mystacinus from Nepal is based on Hodgson's siligorensis . In his monograph on Nepalese Chiroptera, Scully (1887: 234–235) writes as follows:

"Mr. Hodgson left Nepal in 1844 [1843]. He never returned to that country, but, after a visit to England, he settled for some years at Darjiling, in the Sikkim Himalayas east of Nepal, and collected zoological specimens there largely. These spoils he also gave to the British Museum and to the Museum of the East India Company in London. Mr. Hodgson's name had, however, become so firmly connected with Nepal in the minds of English zoologists, that some portion of his collections in Sikkim were wrongly assigned by them to Nepal. So that, mainly by Dr. Horsfield, Hodgson's additions of Chiroptera from Darjiling were published as coming from the former country. Owing to this confusion, at least half a dozen species of bats from Sikkim, never obtained by Hodgson in Nepal, were credited to the latter country on the strength of that naturalist having collected them".

In examining specimens remitted to the British Museum (Natural History) by Hodgson, Gray (1863) lists the taxon " Vespertilio seligorensis " and adds " Hab. Seligori Tarai".

Scully continues:

"In 1876 and 1878, Dr. Dobson's two admirable works on the Chiroptera appeared. The task this author had on hand was too extensive to permit his paying particular attention to a relatively small question like the station of certain species in Nepal; he had, moreover, to be guided by previous writers, and to rely on museum labels, which are not always accurate. He has in consequence given in his works some species as from Nepal which were not obtained there by Hodgson or any one else ..."

Scully (1887) records Vespertilio mystacinus from the Nepal Valley, basing the species authority on V. mystacinus Kuhl, 1819 and referring in his synonymy to Dobson (1876 [incorrectly printed in Scully's 1887 paper as 1816] and 1878), whose accuracy with regard to the "station of certain species in Nepal " he had already questioned. Scully, himself, secured ten specimens of V. mystacinus from June to September [one of which is contained in the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University under the accession no. MCZ 32977, where it is classified as Myotis mystacinus siligorensis —see "Non-specific records", above] and remarked that the species was "one of the commonest bats in the Nepal Valley".

Scully concludes his commentary on V. mystacinus thus:

"Considering how common this bat is in Nepal, it is very singular that Mr. Hodgson never seems to have obtained a specimen of it there. His first acquaintance with the species was made years after he left Nepal, when he procured it at Siligori, in the Sikkim Terai [in India], and named it Vespertilio siligorensis ".

Blanford (1888 –91) follows Scully by incorporating siligorensis in the synonymy of Vespertilio mystacinus . Hinton & Fry (1923) acknowledge Blanford but include Scully's record of mystacinus conversely in the synonymy of Myotis siligorensis Tomes [in: Horsfield, 1855: 102] [Note: In his analysis of Hodgson's specimens, Horsfield (1855) states: "This [ Vespertilio darjelingensis ] and the preceding [ Vespertilio siligorensis ] were examined and described at my request by R. F. Tomes, Esq." The only other reference that can be found to Tomes is in Dobson (1871b: 214), where Tomes is cited as the authority for the "Subgenus, Vespertilio "]. As Hinton & Fry (1923) refer to Scully's 1887 work alone, there seems to be no evidence in support of their placing mystacinus within the synonymy of siligorensis , especially as they do not record the collection of siligorensis by The Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Burma, and Ceylon, upon whose collections their 1923 report is based. Hinton & Fry's record of Myotis siligorensis is reversed here and referred accordingly to Myotis mystacinus . Bates & Harrison (1997) separate mystacinus and siligorensis but record siligorensis from the Kathmandu [ Nepal] Valley based on Hinton & Fry's report, a record that, for the above reasons, appears insupportable. Corbet & Hill (1992) map Nepal within the distribution of siligorensis and Csorba et al. (1999) include Myotis siligorensis in a list of bat species recorded from Nepal but neither authority offers details in support. The Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996) includes Nepal in its distribution list for the species but without comment. The only two localities given in the literature for siligorensis (and founded on actual material) that are relevant hereto are "Nipal", which is based on a specimen that was collected by Hodgson in India, and the Nepal Valley (Kathmandu Valley in Bates & Harrison, 1997), which is founded on Scully's record from that locality of mystacinus . It is concluded that no definite record of Myotis siligorensis has been obtained from Nepal and that the species cannot, despite references to its presence in Nepal by authors subsequent to Scully (1887), be included in the country's faunal list. Scully (1887) believed evidently that the species named as Vespertilio siligorensis by Hodgson, when the latter "procured it at Siligori, in the Sikkim Tarai" ( Scully, 1887: 255), was Myotis (Vespertilio) mystacinus . It would seem clear, however, that Hodgson recognised it not as mystacinus but as a new species, and named it accordingly. It is unfortunate that the type locality associated with Hodgson's specimen of siligorensis is " Siligori, Nepal ", as this has become embedded in the literature (see, for example, Corbet & Hill, 1992, who attribute the type locality to " Horsfield, 1855: 102 ", and Simmons, 2005). Although Horsfield, 1855 makes no mention of any precise locality relating to V. siligorensis , he does indicate clearly (and mistakenly) that Hodgson collected siligorensis in Nepal. Horsfield refers to the species as " Vespertilio siligorensis, Hodgson ".

In an effort to determine the true taxonomic identity of the specimen registered as Myotis mystacinus siligorensis in the collections of the Museum of Comparative Zoology (MCZ 32977), an examination of the specimen was undertaken by curatorial staff. Owing to the age of the material (a label attached to the specimen indicates a collection date of 5 th August, 1876), the skull was deemed too friable to be removed. In order for the skull characters to be examined, however, X-ray images of the bat were taken ( Fig. 4 ). In addition, photographic images were taken of the specimen's dorsal and ventral aspects ( Fig. 5 ) and selected external, cranial, and dental measurements were collected ( Table 3). External measurements were taken from the specimen itself whilst cranial and dental measurements were taken from the X-ray images. External, cranial, and dental measurements of MCZ 32977 were compared with the same measurements of specimens of Myotis mystacinus from India; M. siligorensis from India, Myanmar, and Vietnam; M. csorbai from Nepal; and M. muricola from India, Nepal, and Pakistan. Lateral outlines of the skulls of MCZ 32977 and the four abovementioned taxa were drawn and compared ( Fig. 6 ). M. csorbai and M. muricola were included in the comparative analysis on account of the taxonomic similarities between the four taxa mentioned.

collections of the Hungarian Natural History Museum.

[Images in Figs. 4 and 5 © Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University]. Results.

Hairs on the dorsal surface of MCZ 32977 have dark brown to black roots with pale brown tips ( Fig. 5 ). This coloration is consistent with both M. muricola and M. mystacinus (see Bates & Harrison, 1997). The pelage of the ventral surface ( Fig. 5 ) is almost perfectly representative of M. mystacinus (see Bates & Harrison, 1997) with individual hairs having brownish grey roots and characteristic silvery white tips.

Seven of the external, dental, and cranial measurements of MCZ 32977 listed in Table 3 fall into the range of M. mystacinus (HB, FA, HF, GTL, CCL, C-M3, and C-m3), four fall into the range of M. siligorensis (HB, FA, T, and E), one into the range of M. csorbai (FA) , and seven into the range of M. muricola (HB, FA, T, E, GTL, CCL, and C-M3). Six of the measurements (HB, FA, HF, GTL, C-M3, and C-m3) are nearest to the mean measurements of M. mystacinus . Of the remaining measurements, FA is nearest to the mean of M. csorbai , E is nearest to the mean of M. siligorensis , and C-M3 is closest to M. muricola .

By tracing the outline of the skull of MCZ 32977 ( Fig. 6 ) and superimposing this on the skull outlines of the other four taxa shown in Fig. 6 , it would seem that, in general outline, MCZ 32977 matches M. muricola more closely than the other species. It can be seen also from Fig. 6 that both MCZ 32977 and HZM 18.31749 ( M.

muricola) have a more flattened braincase and rostrum compared to the specimens of M. mystacinus , M. siligorensis , and M. csorbai .

Discussion

It is apparent from the partial overlap of external, cranial, and dental measurements given in Table 3 that MCZ 32977 cannot be stated incontrovertibly to be representative of any one of the four taxa listed. The coloration of the pelage of MCZ 32977 would suggest strongly that it is representative of M. mystacinus and this identification is supported by the HB, FA, HF, GTL, C-M3, and C-m3 measurements being closest to the mean of the latter species.

In M. siligorensis , the braincase is conspicuously domed and elevated distinctly above the rostrum ( Bates & Harrison, 1997). This is not the case with MCZ 32977 and, both for this reason and for the fact that none of the cranial or dental measurements falls within the range of those of siligorensis given in Table 3, it can be stated with reasonable certainty that MCZ 32977 does not represent siligorensis .

The relatively flattened braincase of MCZ 32977 is consistent with that of M. muricola ( Fig. 6 ) rather than with the braincases of M. mystacinus , M. siligorensis , or M. csorbai , each of which is elevated more notably above the rostrum, particularly that of siligorensis . Of the measurements of MCZ 32977 given in Table 3, four of the external measurements (HB, FA, T, and E), both cranial measurements (GTL and CCL), and one dental measurement (C-M3) fall within the range of the same measurements of M. muricola . It is possible that MCZ 32977 represents muricola but this identification is not supported by the colour of the ventral pelage of MCZ 32977, where the tips of individual hairs are silvery white (which, as stated above, is consistent with M. mystacinus ) rather than the ochraceous brown of muricola (see Bates & Harrison, 1997).

Of the nine measurements given in Table 3, the only measurement of MCZ 32977 that falls within the range of any one measurement of M. csorbai is that of the forearm. The pelage colour of MCZ 32977 is also lighter than that of genuine M. csorbai (G. Csorba, pers. comm.), although this may be the result of fading during the considerable time that has elapsed since the collection of the specimen.

Conclusion

The available data would seem to indicate that MCZ 32977 represents mystacinus based on the general compatibility of the specimen's measurements and of its external appearance with that species. However, the fact that there are some inconsistencies in these measurements and that there are certain affiliations of MCZ 32977 with the other species discussed, precludes an absolute taxonomic identification of MCZ 32977 from being made at present. It can be said, however, that Hinton & Fry (1923) are not justified in assigning Scully’s specimens to siligorensis .

-●-

Majapuria & Kumar (1998) and Shrestha (1997) state that M. siligorensis occurs in, or is reported from, Annapurna Conservation Area and Makulu Barun National Park in Nepal. M. siligorensis also appears in a checklist of the mammals of Nepal extracted from a forthcoming publication by P. B. Yonzon. None of the three works mentioned provides supporting information (although it is possible that Yonzon's work, should it proceed to publication, may do so) and, consequently, they are not regarded as scientifically admissible for the purposes of determining the presence of siligorensis in Nepal.

The only recorded specimens of Vespertilio darjelingensis Hodgson [ Horsfield, 1855], which is tentatively synonymised with Myotis (Vespertilio) siligorensis by some authors (e.g. Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997) and incontrovertibly by others (e.g. Simmons, 2005), were collected by Hodgson in the Siligori Terai ( Gray, 1863) in Darjeeling, India and not in Nepal. [Note: Horsfield (1855) refers to V. darjelingensis rather than V. darjilingensis , the latter spelling having been adopted by more recent authorities (e.g. Corbet & Hill, 1992; Bates & Harrison, 1997; Simmons, 2005).]

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Miniopterus pusillus Dobson, 1876 MAP No. 45 Nicobar Long-fingered bat

Small Long-fingered bat

Miniopterus pusillus Dobson, 1876: 162 . Nicobar Islands [ India]. See note 1.

Records.— Maeda (1982): Pokhara (see note 2).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172242, UMMZ 172243).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal.— Simmons (2005): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Dobson (1876) does not furnish details of the type locality of pusillus . Tate (1941) assumes it to be "Madras, India " but Hill (1983) shows this to be based simply on the provenance of the first specimen listed in Dobson's 1878 "Catalogue of the Chiroptera in the collection of the British Museum". Hill (1983) follows Wroughton (1918) in determining the type locality as " Nicobar Islands " and gives a succinct explanation of his deduction in this respect (pp. 175 & 176).

2 Maeda (1982) bases the record from Pokhara on one examined male specimen, which was collected by Hisashi Abe on 18 th May, 1968, and of which the author lists measurements of the skull characters. Corbet & Hill (1992) question the record, however, but offer no explanation of their reasoning.

3 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of one male and one female specimen and record that the species was collected in mist nets set over a ravine.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Miniopterus schreibersii ( Kuhl, 1819) MAP No. 46

Schreibers’s Long-fingered bat

Long-winged bat

Vespertilio schreibersii Kuhl, 1819: 185 . Columbäzar Höhle [Kulmbazer/Kolumbacs Cave], near Coronini, mountains of southern Bannat, Romania. See note 1.

Vespertilio fuliginosa Hodgson, 1835: 700 . "Central region of Nipal". [Kathmandu Valley].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 2): 4 km. E. of Syangja (Kailash Cave) (HNHM 98.9.5) (see note 3); Banthanti (vicinity of) (see note 4); Bimalnager (Sidda Gupha [Monk Cave]) (HNHM 98.8.30—HNHM 98.8.32, HNHM 98.10.4); Hattisar (HNHM 98.9.2); Sudame (vicinity of) (see note 4).—H.Z.M. (see note 5): Kakani (1) (HZM 249.24438, HZM 250.24439, HZM 251.24440, HZM 252.24659, HZM 253.24659, HZM 255.25010, HZM 256.25011, and HZM 257.25012—see note 6); Pharping (HZM 227.15748 and HZM 228.15749).— Kock (1996) (as M. s. fuliginosus ): "Tindara Paksala, Stadtrand von Kathmandu City" (see "Kathmandu" in Gazetteer and note 7) (SMF 58389—SMF 58406).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 8): Kathmandu (UMMZ 172245—UMMZ 172250).

Non-specific records.—H.Z.M.: Bagmati [Zone] (HZM 229.15750); Schlitter (2004): Nepal.— Mitchell (1978a) (as M. schreibersi fuliginosus ( Hodgson, 1835)) : Nepal.— Scully (1887): Nepal Valley (see note 9).

Note.— 1 Simmons (2005) cites the authority as "(Kuhl, 1817). Die Deutschen Fledermäuse. Hanau, p. 14", rather than the commonly accepted 1819 reference given in the Bibliography. Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) place Kulmbazer Cave in Hungary.

2 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of eight specimens and cranial and dental measurements of three specimens. The authors comment that M. schreibersii was a common species in caves at Bimalnager and in the vicinity of Syangja and that three specimens were taken above the Bhurungdi R., one in primary forest near Banthanti and two "in a partly deforested area near Sudame". Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the subspecies M. s. fuliginosus (= fuliginosa ) Hodgson, 1835.

3 The co-ordinates accompanying the locality " 4 km. E. of Syangja" given in Csorba et al. (1999) (28º08'N, 83º44'E) have been altered in the Gazetteer to read " 28º05'N, 83º54'E ". The reason for the amendment is explained in note 2b to Rhinolophus affinis (p. 24).

4 Specimens obtained from the vicinities of Banthanti and Sudame are retained in the collections of the Zoological Museum of Moscow State University under accession nos. ZMMU 164503 — ZMMU 164505 .

5 Measurements of HZM specimens are given in Appendix III.

6 The specimens from Kakani in the collections of H.Z.M. were caught in a butterfly net as they approached a lepidopterist's mercury vapour light.

7 The specimens described by Kock (1996) seem to have been collected in a building or area known as Tindara [Teen Dhara] Paksala on the urban fringe ["Stadtrand"] of Kathmandu.

8 Myers et al. (2000) give mean external, cranial, and palatal measurements of eleven specimens (six males and five females), all of which were captured in a suspended net "as they exited a large sewer tunnel".

9 Scully (1887) gives the measurements of a single specimen obtained in the Nepal Valley together with the briefest description of the specimen's pelage coloration. Scully repeats Hodgson's morphological and cranial observations of Vespertilio fuliginosa , together with that species' dental formulae, which data, he states, accord with M. schreibersii . Hinton & Fry (1923) refer to Hodgson's manuscript and Scully's record but assign the name Miniopterus fuliginosus Hodgson [1835] to the taxon. Bates & Harrison (1997) refer to Scully's " Nepal Valley" as "Kathmandu Valley".

I.U.C.N. status.—Near threatened (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

I.U.C.N./S.S.C. Chiroptera Specialist Group status.—LR/nt (2001) (see Hutson et al., 2001).

Murina aurata Milne-Edwards, 1872 MAP No. 47 Little Tube-nosed bat

Tibetan Tube-nosed bat

Murina aurata Milne-Edwards [in David, 1872: 91]. Moupin [ China]. See note 1.

Records.—B.M.(N.H.): Makut (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 205) (see note 2).— Maeda (1980) (see note 3): Mt. Sheopuri; N. of Dhaulagiri (BM.75.301).

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as M. a. aurata .).— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.

Note.— 1 The first reference to Murina aurata Milne-Edwards (which is attended by a brief description of the species) appears on p. 91 of Armand David's 1872 "Rapport adressé à MM. les professeurs-administrateurs du Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle". This is the authority cited here rather than the more commonly accepted " Murina aurata Milne-Edwards, 1872 [b]: 250, pl. 37b, fig. 1; pl. 37c, fig. 2." (see Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951: 184; Corbet & Hill, 1992: 149; Simmons, 2005: 523). See note 1 to Murina leucogaster (p. 67) for a fuller explanation of the citations and their dates.

2 It is likely that the specimen from Makut is the same as the specimen collected north of [Mount] Dhaulagiri, to which Maeda (1980) refers. Makut is located approximately 16 km. N.N.W. of the summit of Mount Dhaulagiri. See note 3, below.

3 Maeda (1980) states that the record from Mt. Sheopuri is based on his examination of two specimens (skins and skulls) collected by H. Abe at that location and that the record from N. of Dhaulagiri is based on a single specimen (skull only) collected by G. B. Corbet, the latter specimen being contained within the collections of the Natural History Museum, London.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Murina cyclotis Dobson, 1872 MAP No. 48 Round-eared Tube-nosed bat

Murina cyclotis Dobson, 1872b: 210 . Darjeeling, north-eastern India.

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Island Jungle Resort (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (HNHM 98.7.3) (see note 2).— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): 3.8 km. S.W. of Sauraha (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172226).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give external, cranial, and dental measurements of a single adult male, which was “caught by hand in a hut well after … sunset”. The authors record M. cyclotis from Nepal for the first time and refer their Nepalese specimen to the nominate subspecies M. c. cyclotis .

2 The approximate co-ordinates of the Island Jungle Resort are 27º35'N, 84º10'E and not 27º40'N, 84º07'E as stated in Csorba et al. (1999).

3 Myers et al. (2000) give external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a single female specimen, which "was caught in a net set across a road through dense riverine forest ... around 7.30 p.m." The authors comment on the specimen's size, colour, and dental morphology.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Murina huttonii ( Peters, 1872) MAP No. 49 Hutton’s Tube-nosed bat

White-bellied Tube-nosed bat

Harpyiocephalus huttonii Peters, 1872: 257 . Dehra Dun, Kumaon, north-western India.

Records.—see note. Non-specific records (see note).— Bates & Harrison (1997): Kathmandu Valley.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as M. h. huttoni ).— Hinton & Fry (1923): Nepal Valley.— Scully (1887): " Nepal Valley" (as Harpyiocephalus leucogaster ).

Note.— Dobson (1876) records Harpiocephalus leucogaster (although not from Nepal) in his monograph on bats in the collection of the Indian Museum, placing Murina leucogaster Alph. Milne-Edwards, 1871 (the correct date is 1872—see note 1 to Murina leucogaster , p. 67) and Harpyiocephalus huttonii Peters, 1872 in his synonymy. Dobson made measurements of a single specimen preserved in alcohol, recording the forearm measurement of that specimen as 1.3 ins. (33.02 mm.). Scully (1887) describes a single specimen of Harpyiocephalus leucogaster , which he collected in the Nepal Valley. In his synonymy, Scully includes only Murina leucogaster Alph. Milne- Edwards, 1871 [1872] and Harpiocephalus leucogaster Dobson, 1876 . He gives the forearm measurement of his specimen as 1.25 ins. (31.75 mm.). Blanford (1888 –91) offers a description of the species ( Harpyiocephalus leucogaster ) with measurements, the length of the forearm being given as 1.3 ins. (33.02 mm.). Blanford follows the synonymy of Dobson (1876) but adds Harpiocephalus leucogaster Dobson 1876 (& 1878) and Harpiocephalus leucogaster Scully, 1887 thereto. Hinton & Fry (1923) mention only Scully's specimen from the Nepal Valley but refer the record to Murina huttoni, Peters , citing Wroughton's Report No. 15 ( Wroughton, 1914) in support. Wroughton (1914) rejects Dobson's placement of huttonii in the synonymy of leucogaster , stating: "that animal [ leucogaster ] is much larger, having a forearm of 41 mm. ... as compared with 37 mm. in the present species [ huttonii ]". Wroughton also introduces Blanford's leucogaster into the synonymy of huttonii , implying tacitly that the species Blanford described was not leucogaster , as Blanford thought, but huttonii [Blanford's description ( Blanford, 1888 –91: 327) portrays characteristics of both leucogaster and huttonii but it is considered here to be more representative of huttonii on the basis of the specimen's external measurements]. Corbet & Hill (1992: 149, 151) distinguish between Murina leucogaster Alph. Milne-Edwards, 1872b , giving the type locality of the species as "Moupin district, Sichuan, China ", and Murina huttonii Peters, 1872 , the type locality of which they state as "Dehra Dun, Kumaon, N.W. India ". Bates & Harrison (1997) give detailed accounts of both species but rely for their distribution record of M. leucogaster on Scully (1887) and for the record of M. huttonii on Hinton & Fry (1923). As Hinton & Fry's record of huttonii is based solely on Scully's record of leucogaster , only one of the records given in Bates & Harrison (1997) can be valid. Bates & Harrison give a forearm measurement range taken from four specimens of huttonii from India and Tibet as 32.8—35.4 mm. and a forearm measurement of a single specimen of leucogaster from India as 40.9 mm. Measurements taken from Vietnamese specimens in the collection of the Harrison Institute (HZM 1. 31758, HZM 2.32351, and HZM 3.32352) show a forearm range in huttonii (n. 2) of 33.2—33.3 mm. and a forearm length in leucogaster (n. 1) of 41.8 mm. The forearm measurement given by Scully (1887) would not seem to indicate that the specimen before him at that time was leucogaster . Rather, it would point to the specimen's being huttonii , although, even for the latter species, the measurement is low. It may be the case that Scully was dealing with a juvenile specimen or that he mismeasured his material; however, as Scully's profession was that of surgeon, it is unlikely, in the case of the former, that he would not be able to identify the specimen as immature. With such conflicting information, it is difficult to be precise about the identity of the specimens described by Dobson, Scully, and Blanford and it is worth noting not only that methods of measuring were less precise at the time those naturalists were working but that measurements were taken in imperial units (inches and fractions thereof).

The Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996) and Csorba et al. (1999) record huttoni from Nepal but provide no details of specimens nor any information that would represent a concrete record of the species from that country.

It is unclear whether Scully's single specimen collected in the Nepal [Kathmandu] Valley, which is the only apparent material from Nepal, is an example of M. leucogaster or M. huttonii . It is considered to represent M. huttonii , however, on the basis that its external measurements, notably that of the forearm, compare more favourably with those of the latter taxon. The forearm measurement Scully gives of his specimen (= 31.75 mm.) is so far removed from the same typical measurement (> 40 mm.) (see Bates & Harrison, 1997: 202, 203) in leucogaster as to preclude the referral of the specimen to this last taxon.

The collection locality of Scully's material (the Nepal [Kathmandu] Valley) is shown on map 49, where it is indicated by a white dot to demonstrate the uncertainty surrounding the specimen's identity.

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

* Murina leucogaster Milne-Edwards, 1872 MAP No. 50 Great(er) Tube-nosed bat

Rufous Tube-nosed bat

Murina leucogaster Milne-Edwards [in David, 1872: 91]. Moupin [ China]. See note 1.

Records.—see note 2.

Non-specific records.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as M. l. leucogaster ).

Note.— 1 The first reference to Murina leucogaster Milne-Edwards (which is attended by a brief description of the species) appears on p. 91 of Armand David's 1872 (dated 15 th December, 1871) "Rapport adressé à MM. les professeurs-administrateurs du Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle" (which forms part of the Bulletin of Volume 7 of the Nouvelles Archives du Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris). This is the reference employed here and also by Dobson (1876) and Scully (1887). The authority that has become embedded in the literature, however (see Ellerman & Morrison-Scott, 1951: 185; Corbet & Hill, 1992: 149; Simmons, 2005: 524), is based on a subsequent, fuller description and on a representation of M. leucogaster given on p. 252 (and pl. 37b, fig. 1 & pl. 37c, fig. 3) of Milne-Edwards's "Recherches pour servir l'histoire des mammifères" (= Milne-Edwards & Milne-Edwards, 1868 – 74). A helpful elucidation of the publication dates of the two works mentioned is provided by a note attached to the copy of David's "Rapport" in the Natural History Museum in London. The note, which bears the signature "T. C. S. Morrison-Scott" and the date " 8.iv.1952 ", reads as follows:

"Extended descriptions of these mammals" (which include M. leucogaster ) "are given in Milne Edwards RECHERCHES HIST. NAT. MAMM. pp.231-379. Of this pages 231-304 were published in 1872 and the rest in 1874.

"Pages 91-93 of the Bulletin vol.7 (for 1871) were published in 1872 almost certainly prior to pages 231-304 of the Rech.H.N.Mamm."

Somewhat inconsistently, Morrison-Scott employs the later authority (it is felt erroneously by this author) in his joint publication with J. R. Ellerman in 1951.

See note 1 to Murina aurata (p. 65), to which the body of this note also applies.

2 Scully (1887) records M. leucogaster (as Harpyiocephalus leucogaster ) from the Nepal [Kathmandu] Valley based on a single specimen collected by himself. Scully's material, however, is considered to represent Murina huttonii for the reasons given in the note to that species (p. 66) and it is to the latter taxon that the record accordingly is referred. As the identity of the specimen is attended by considerable uncertainty (the material may yet be shown to represent leucogaster ), the collection locality is included on map 50 ( Murina leucogaster ), where it is indicated by a white dot.

I.U.C.N. status.—Data deficient (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Kerivoula hardwickii (Horsfield, 1824) MAP No. 51 Hardwicke’s bat

Hardwicke’s Forest bat

Hardwicke’s Woolly bat

Obscure bat

Vespertilio hardwickii Horsfield, 1824 [1821–1824]: Part 8. Java.

Kerivoula depressa Miller, 1906: 64 . Biapo, Carin Hills, N.E. of Tounghoo, S. Burma [ Myanmar].

Records.—Csorba et al. (1999) (see note 1): Mamankhe (HNHM 98.5.11—HNHM 98.5.21, HNHM 98.5.35).

Non-specific records.—None.

Note.— 1 Csorba et al. (1999) give a range of, and mean, external measurements of 11 specimens and cranial and dental measurements of two specimens. The authors record K. hardwickii from Nepal for the first time and comment that all specimens were captured in houses. Six of the female bats collected were noted to be gravid. Nepalese specimens are referred by the authors to the subspecies K. h. depressa .

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Kerivoula picta ( Pallas, 1767) MAP No. 52 Painted bat

Painted Woolly bat

Vespertilio pictus Pallas, 1767: 7 .? Ternate Island, northern Molucca Islands, Indonesia. See notes 1,2.

Records.— Myers et al. (2000) (see note 3): Tiger Tops, Dhangari Khola (Royal Chitwan N.P.) (UMMZ 172244).

Non-specific records.— Chiroptera Specialist Group (1996): Nepal.—Csorba et al. (1999): Nepal (as K. p. picta ).

Note.— 1 Corbet & Hill (1992) indicate that Pallas’s introduction of the taxon is based on Seba (1734: 91, pl. 56, figs. 2,3).

2 Corbet & Hill (1992) follow, inter alia, Tate (1941), who, according to Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951), considered the type locality to be “ Ternate [ Island], Moluccas (near Halmahera)”.

3 Myers et al. (2000) give external, cranial, and palatal measurements of a single female specimen, which "was captured at around 9 p. m. in a net set over a stream running through a steep-sided ravine".

I.U.C.N. status.—Least concern (ver. 3.1, 2001)

Year of assessment: 2008.

Figures

FIGURE 3. Dorsal (d) and lateral (l) views of the bacula of Pipistrellus paterculus (HZM 7.36082) from Myanmar, P. coromandra (HZM 2.7318) from India, P. tenuis (HZM 10.35443) from Myanmar, and Pipistrellus sp. (AMNH 269836) from Nepal.

FIGURE 4. Lateral (l) and ventral (v) X-ray images of the skull and mandible of MCZ 32977 (Myotis sp.).

FIGURE 5. Dorsal (d) and ventral (v) views of the skin of MCZ 32977 (Myotis sp.).

FIGURE 6. Lateral outlines of the skulls (from top to bottom) of Myotis sp. (MCZ 32977) from Nepal; M. mystacinus (HZM 25.35972) from Shan State, Myanmar; M. siligorensis (HZM 11.36227) from Meghalaya, India; M. csorbai (HNHM 97.2.4) from 4 km. E. of Syangja, Nepal; and M. muricola (HZM 18.31749) from Pu Mat Reserve, Vietnam.

FIGURE 7. Dorsal (a) and ventral (b) views of the skull and lateral views of the skull (c) and mandible (d) of FMNH 114259.