Rhinolophus sinicus
Creators: name: Thomas, Nikky M.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2000
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Chordata
Mammalia
Chiroptera
Rhinolophidae
Rhinolophus
Rhinolophus sinicus

description: <i>Rhinolophus sinicus</i> (Andersen, 1905 a) Chinese horseshoe bat <i> Rhinolophus <i>rouxii</i> sinicus Andersen 1905 a: 98</i> ; Chinteh, Anhwei, China. External characters (measurements included in Table 4): A medium-sized Rhinolophid, with an average forearm length of 47.4 mm (range 45.5-50.0 mm). The ears average 17.8 mm in length (l15.8 5 8 —-20.0 20.0 mm), being smaller than those of <i>R</i>. <i>rouxii</i>. The noseleaf is shorter and narrower than in <i>R</i>. <i>rouxii</i>, averaging 12.5 mm in maximum height and 7.7 mm in maximum width. The lancet is broad and short with a well-de&amp;filig;ned ti tip? (F ig 6a). The base of the sella is broad. In side view, the superior connecting process of the sella is bluntly rounded off, with the base of the sella projecting slightly forwards and downwards. The wing morphology differs signi&amp;filig;cantly to that of <i>R</i>. <i>rouxii</i>. The forearms and metacarpals of <i>R</i>. <i>sinicus</i> average 4.7 % shorter than in <i>R</i>. <i>rouxii</i>. However the phalanges, with the exception of the second phalanx of the &amp;filig;fth &amp;filig;nger, average 4.5 % longer. This wing structure is similar to that of <i>R</i>. <i>q&amp;filig;ìnís</i>, although when these two species are found sympatrically, as at Nala Pani Cave in Mussoorie (30.27' N 78.06 'E), <i>R</i>. <i>af&amp;filig;nis</i> is absolutely larger in all respects. The pelage is soft and silky, and is generally rich russet brown on the back and paler on the belly. Cranial and dental characters: <i>R</i>. <i>siníc&amp;imath;&amp;imath;s</i> has characteristically small cranial measurements, with condylocanine length ranging from 16.7—18.4 mm (Table 4). The skull is narrow, having an average zygomatic breadth of 10.3 mm, and a mastoid breadth of 9.4 mm. The palate is short, its anterior border lies adjacent to the metacone of the &amp;filig;rst upper molar ml; it averages 1.9 mm in length (Fig. 7 a). This is in contrast to the longer palate ofR. <i>rouxii</i> which averages 2.4 mm in length. The dentition is not as robust as <i>rouxii</i>, having short upper and lower toothrows, averaging 7.5 mm and 8.1 mm respectively. The upper canine is not in contact with the second upper premolar (pm4) and the &amp;filig;rst upper premolar (pmz) is usually situated in the toothrow. The second lower premolar (pmz) is often displaced from the toothrow, with the &amp;filig;rst (pmz) and third (pm 4) premolars in contact. Bacular morphology“ The shaft of the baculum is long, parallel-sided and generally straight, thickening towards the base. The base is slightly expanded, and the tip is simple and unexpanded (Fig. 8 a). The average length is 2.1 mm, and the average width 0.5 mm. Distribution. <i>R</i>. <i>sinicus</i> ranges from southern China, through Nepal and into northern India (Fig. 9). Localities include: India: Himachal Pradesh: Solan (Das 1986); Uttar Pradesh: Mussoorie (Blandford 1888 -91, HZM); Dhakuri (Wroughton 1914); West Bengal: Darjeeling (BMNH); Pashok (Sinha 1973); Sikkim: Tashiding (Bhat 1974). Nepal: Sipuri (Fry 1925); Thankot; Parchung (BMNH); Godavari; Pulchowki (HZM); Num (FMNH). China: Sichuan Province: Wanhsien; Fujian Province: Yungan; Nanping; Hebei Province: Ichang; Zheijiang Province; Tunglin; Yunnan: Likiang (Allen 1938). Hong Kong: Lam Tao Island (BMNH). Variation. At present, all specimens are referred to the nominate race <i>R</i>. <i>s</i>. <i>sinicus</i>. However, those from northern India and Nepal average slightly larger in body and skull size than individuals from China, particularly in condylocanine length, the length of the upper and lower toothrows and the length of the mandible. In addition, the noseleaf in individuals from China is slightly shorter and narrower. Specimens examined. (S) denotes inclusion in discriminant analysis, (D) denotes inclusion in molecular analysis. India: Darjeeling, BM. 21.1.17.2 (S), BM. 79.11.21.57; Mussoorie, HZM. 22.28154 (S, D), HZM. 23.28155, MM. 85 (S), MM 86 (S), HZM. 21.28153 (S, D), BM. 79.11.21.146 (S), BM. 79.11.21.149. Nepal: Godavari, HZM. 1.16291 (S), HZM.2.16292, HZM. 3.16293 (S), HZM.4.16294 (S); HZM. 5.162895 (S), HZM. 6.16296 (S), HZM. 7.16297 (S), HZM.8.16298, HZM.9.16296; Parchung, BM. 21.5.1.3 (S); Thankot, BM. 22.5.16.6. China: Ichang, AM. 60217; Nanping, AM. 47997, AM. 48006, AM. 48012 (S), AM. 48015 (S), AM. 48018 (S), AM. 48019, AM. 48020 (S), AM. 56944, AM. 56946; Wanhsien, AM. 59607 (S); Yungan, AM. 60225 (S), AM. 84857 (S), AM. 84859 (S). Hong Kong: Lam Tao Island, BM. 66.24 (S). Habits: In China, <i>R</i>. <i>sínicus</i> is common over the southem half of the country. In the southeast it is found at relatively low altitudes of up to 200 metres (656 feet), being recorded from Hebei Province, F ujian Province, Zheijiang Province and Sichuan Province. In the south-west, it is found at higher altitudes of up to 2000 metres (6562 feet), such as a series of specimens collected from southern Yunnan (Allen 1938). In northern India and Nepal, it is restricted to higher elevations. It has been collected at an altitude of 500 metres (1625 feet) in Arunachal Pradesh (Lal 1982); 550 metres (1788 feet) in West Bengal (Bhat, 1974); 862 metres (2800 feet) in Nepal (FMN H) and at 2769 metres (9000 feet) in Uttar Pradesh (Wroughton 1914). In Mussoorie, Uttar Pradesh (1910 metres / 6208 feet), individuals were found by the author roosting in a cave with <i>R</i>. <i>ferrumeq&amp;imath;&amp;imath;ínum</i> and <i>R</i>. <i>a&amp;filig;inis</i>. In cold regions, <i>R</i>. <i>sinicus</i> hibernates during winter (Blanford 1888-91). It is a largely social species, but segregation of males and females occurs when the females are having their young (Allen 1938).
description: Published as part of <i>Thomas, Nikky M., 2000, Morphological and mitochondrial-DNA variation in Rhinolophus rouxii (Chiroptera), pp. 1-18 in Bonner zoologische Beiträge 49 (1)</i> on pages 8-10, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3759227
description: {"references": ["Andersen, K. (1905 a): On some bats ofthe genus Rhinolophus, with remarks on their mutual affinities, and descriptions of twenty-six new forms. B Proc. Z 001. Soc. London 2 (10): 75 - 145.", "Das, P. K. (1986): Studies on the taxonomy and geographical distribution of the species of bat obtained by the Silent Valley (Kerela, India) expedition, 1980. Records Zool. Surv. India 84: 259 - 276.", "Blandford a, W. T. (1 1888 888 - - I 1891 89 l)): 1 The fauna of British India, Mammalia. - Taylor and Francis, London.", "Wroughton, R. C. (1914) Report No. 16: Kumaon. Bombay Natural History Societj mammal survey of India, Burma and Ceylon. B J. Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. 22 (4): 282 - 3 (", "Sinha, Y. P. (1973): Taxonomic studies on the Indian horseshoe bats of the genus Rhino]: phiis. Mammalia 37 (4): 603 - 630.", "Bhat, H. R. (1974): Records and observations on bats of Himalayan region of Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, India. J. Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. (1): 51 - 57.", "Fry, T. B. (1925): Report No. 37 a: Nepal. Bombay Natural History Society's Mammal Survey of India, Bunna and Ceylon. J. Bombay nat. Hist Soc. 30: 525 - 530.", "Allen, G. M. (1938): The mammals of China and Mongolia. - American Museum ofNatural History, New York.", "Lal, J. P. (1982): Andersen's rufous horseshoe bat, Rhinolophus rouxii sinicus Andersen (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) from Arunachal Pradesh, India. - J. Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. 79: 402."]}