10 SJOSTEDTS KILIMANDJARO-MERU EXPEDITION. 2. 



In the folded wing the first joint of the third and fifth fingers reach plainly beyond 

 the elbow. Plagiopatagium inserted 5 6 mm. above the tarsal joint. Only 6 muscular 

 bands across the longitudinal, one extending from the elbow to tip of fifth finger. Tail 

 much longer than in the foregoing. 



General colour above rather pale brown, below very pale brownish grey. 



Length of nose-leaf from anterior margin of horseshoe to poste- 

 rior point of lancet 15 mm. 



Greatest width of horseshoe (in spirit) 8 



Length of ear from base of inner margin to tip . . . . 21,6 



forearm 55 



metacarpal of 3d finger 36,6 



1st joint 19,6 



2nd 30 



metacarpal 4th 42 



1st joint 11,6 



2nd 19 



metacarpal 5th 41,5 



1st joint 14 



2nd 17 



tail 33,5 



tibia 22 



Greatest length of skull 23,6 



The outer appearance of this specimen as well as the measurements of this bat are 

 very similar to those of the foregoing. The principal differences consist in the presence 

 of a small upper premolar, the greater length of the second joint of the fifth finger and of 

 the tail, and in the different insertion of the plagiopatagium in this latter. These 

 two latter characteristics combined produce naturally a quite different shape of the pla- 

 giopatagium of the two specimens. In the former its posterior margin is almost straight, 

 and in the latter it extends on either side of the tail as a triangular flap with deep emar- 

 ginations on either side. The first described female is considerably more robust than 

 the male, it is also certainly older and its teeth are more worn. It is very difficult in 

 a case such as this with only two specimens of different sex and age at hand to form 

 any definite opinion whether the differences are due to sex and age or to racial dif- 

 ference. The absence of the small upper premolar in the female specimen may be due 

 only to age. The greater length of the forearm and some of the finger joints in the 

 male may be secondary sexual features, but the different numbers of muscular bands 

 and the differences in the insertion of plagiopatagium is less easily explained in this 

 way. As the material is so scanty I think it is best to leave the question open for the 

 present (conf. note). 



The male specimen differs from Eh. deckenii PETERS with regard to the size of the 

 nose-leaf and the ears, the insertion of the plagiopatagium, and the length of the tail etc. 



