Paratriaenops Benda & Vallo 2009
Creators: name: Rossoni, Daniela M
name: Demos, Terrence C
name: Goodman, Steven M
name: Yego, Richard K
name: Mohlman, Jessica L
name: Webala, Paul W
name: Patterson, Bruce D
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2021
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Chordata
Mammalia
Chiroptera
Rhinonycteridae
Paratriaenops

description: IMPLICATIONS FOR PARATRIAENOPS
The strong genetic differentiation of Paratriaenops and Triaenops evident in our concatenated intron and species tree analyses (Fig. 4; Supporting Information, Fig. S2) reinforces earlier distinctions of these taxa based on mitochondrial evidence (Russell et al., 2007, 2008) and on morphology (Benda & Vallo, 2009). Foley et al. (2015) dated the divergence of these taxa at 22 Mya; that analysis recovered both Rhinonycteris and Cloeotis in successive splits off the lineage leading to Triaenops. The paraphyly of Malagasy rhinonycterids clearly supports the conclusion of Russell et al. (2008) that Madagascar was colonized at least twice in the history of this group. However, this interpretation hinges on the phylogenetic positions of Rhinonycteris and Cloeotis, which were not included in our analysis. A sister relationship of Paratriaenops + Triaenops, given the well-supported position of T. menamena as sister to African plus Arabian Triaenops, could indicate that only one colonization of Madagascar was involved. In this scenario, a descendent of T. menamena could have colonized the African mainland and given rise to the clade of T. afer, T. persicus and T. parvus. Additional genetic sampling of Cloeotis, Rhinonicteris and the missing Triaenops species might help to distinguish these alternatives, but it seems likely that extinction has strongly shaped the extant diversity of the group.
Genetic and distributional data provide mixed support for the validity of P. auritus and P. furcula as separate species. Previous morphological analyses of specimens assigned to these two taxa found consistent differences (Ranivo & Goodman, 2006). The Cytb genetic distance between these species (4.5%; Table 1) and the well-supported monophyly of P. auritus and moderately supported monophyly of P. furcula (Fig. 2) could be argued to support their current taxonomic status (also see Russell et al., 2008). In stark opposition, gene tree analyses of four independent nuclear loci under both ML and BI models did not recover any genetic structure within or between the two species (Fig. 4). Instead, the relationships inferred between P. auritus and P. furcula are consistent with extensive ongoing or recent hybridization. The allopatric distributions of these species do not provide any support for their reproductive isolation. Additionally, mitochondrial isolation by distance cannot be ruled out as the mechanism responsible for the genetic distance and topological relationship between populations assigned to P. auritus and P. furcula in our genetic analyses. Before the step is taken to combine these species, for which P. auritus would be the junior synonym, further genetic sampling is needed. In the material used in the present study, the northernmost locality for P. furcula (Namoroka, FMNH 175783) is ~ 330 km south of the southernmost locality for P. auritus (Betsiaka, FMNH 179370–179373); additional data are needed from the intervening zone to determine the nature and level of genetic separation between these forms.
description: Published as part of Rossoni, Daniela M, Demos, Terrence C, Goodman, Steven M, Yego, Richard K, Mohlman, Jessica L, Webala, Paul W & Patterson, Bruce D, 2021, Genetic, morphological and acoustic differentiation of African trident bats (Rhinonycteridae: Triaenops), pp. 236 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 192 (1) on page 236, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaa098, http://zenodo.org/record/5301043