A new cryptic species of Rhinolophus macrotis (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) from Jiangxi Province, China

Integrative taxonomy of theRhinolophus macrotiscomplex (Chiroptera, Rhinolophidae) in Vietnam and nearby regions

“…Of the three phenetic forms of R. macrotis recognized by Sun et al. () in China, the morphological measurements of the small and intermediate forms of Chinese R. macrotis match those of our R. cf . siamensis and R .…”

“…macrotis Phia Oac bats and those of the large form of R. macrotis s.l. in Jiangxi (Sun et al., ) overlapped in body size (FA: >45 mm), while their FmaxE ranged from 43.2 kHz (former taxon) to >47.9 kHz (latter taxon). Bats of Vietnamese R. cf .…”

“…The localities of bats of the R. macrotis complex collected by previous studies are presented in large map, and those collected by the authors in Vietnam are detailed in small map: NP —Pokhara, Nepal; MY —Myanmar; C—China: C1—Jinning County, Yunnan (originally R. macrotis s.l. intermediate form (Sun et al., )); C2—Vicinity Of Nian Wei, Guangxi; C3—imprecise locality, Guizhou; C4—Shuipu Village, Libo, Guizhou; C5—Nanning city, Guangxi; C6—Jinggangshan Nature Reserve ( NR ), Jiangxi; C7—, Jingmen; L—Laos: L1—Ban En, Luang Namtha; L2—NamEt NBCA , Louangphrabang; L3—Lak Sao, Khammouan; V—Vietnam: V1—Hoang Lien National Park ( NP ), Lao Cai; V2—Copia NR , Son La; V3—Xuan Son NP , Phu Tho; V4—Khau Ca NR , Ha Giang; V5—Phia Oac–Phia Den NR , Cao Bang; V6—Na Hang NR , Tuyen Quang; V7—Ba Be NP , Bac Kan; V8—Cuc Phuong NP , Ninh Binh; V9—Xuan Lien NR , Thanh Hoa; V10—Phong Nha‐Ke Bang NP , Quang Binh; V11—Bac Huong Hoa NR , Quang Tri; and V12—Dakrong NR , Quang Tri…”

“…However, Sun et al. () concluded that bats of R. macrotis s.l. at different localities in southern China can be divided into three different phenetic and phonic forms: (i) a large form in Jiangxi Province (C6 in Figure ) characterized by an average FA of >45 mm and a mean FmaxE of 48.8 kHz; (ii) a small form in Jiangxi (C6 in Figure ) and Guangxi provinces (C5 in Figure ) with a mean FA of <40 mm and mean FmaxE of 64.7–66.7 kHz; and (iii) an intermediate form in Yunnan Province (C1 in Figure ) with a mean FA of 42.3–43.5 mm and a mean FmaxE of 57.3 kHz.…”

“…Sun et al. () consequently suggested that the large form may represent a cryptic species of R. macrotis , whereas the slight differences in morphology and echolocation calls between the two other forms were attributed to geographic variation rather than speciation. Wu, Motokawa, and Harada () considered records of R. siamensis in China erroneous and hence described southern Chinese specimens formerly identified as R. siamensis as a new species, R. huananus Wu et al., ;.…”