8 McAtee Mammals, Reptiles and Batrachians of Indiana. 



mens were seen in a cave.* A new capture is worthy of record. On No 

 vember 8, 1902, Mr. A. M. Banta took a fine specimen of this bat in the 

 Twin Caves, four miles east of Mitchell, Lawrence County (the adjoining 

 county south). These localities are farther north than this bat had been 

 previously recorded east of the Mississippi. 



23. Lasiurus borealis (Miiller). 



RED BAT. 



Rather rare. One was taken from a cedar bush April 12, 1903. It was 

 exposed to rain and with the dark streaks and spots made in its russet fur 

 by the drops, its resemblance to a withered leaf caught in the twigs was 

 nearly perfect. Two other specimens were collected. 



Stony Spring; Bloomington. 



Lasiurus cinereus (Beauvois). 



HOARY BAT. 



Mr. A. M. Banta contributes the following note on this species : " July 

 12, 1905. Bloomington, Indiana. During the afternoon a robin chased a 

 specimen of this species out of a tree (?) and after 'flying some distance, it 

 tumbled down in the driveway. It proved to be a female with two young 

 hanging on. Each young weighed certainly one-third to one-half as much 

 as the old one. In museum of Indiana University." These specimens 

 which were mislaid for a time have recently been recovered, and Mr. 

 W. L. Hahn, formerly of the Division of Mammals, U. S. National Museum, 

 has examined them and confirms the identification. 



*Myotis subulatus (Say). 



SAY'S BAT. 



This species which has been satisfactorily identified from Brookville 

 and Wheatland, Indiana, has been stated to be the most common bat, by 

 almost all writers on the fauna of the southern part of the State. The re 

 sult of investigations in Monroe County shakes our faith in this conclusion. 



Of four specimens in the University museum which were labeled subula 

 tus, two proved to be M. lurifugus and two PipixtreUus suhftuvus, which in 

 dicates how easily these forms are confused by students remote from good 

 reference collections. Furthermore, not a single bat of this species was 

 collected, though a great number of bats were secured during numerous 

 visits to the caves of the region. 



While this negative evidence is not of great value, it is sufficient to cause 

 doubt that subulatus is really the most abundant species in southern In 

 diana. In this connection it is worthy of note that when Mr. Gerrit S. 

 Miller, Jr., revised the Vespertilionidae (N. A. Fauna, 13, 1897), only fifty- 

 three specimens of this form were assembled, while Myotis lucifugus and 

 Pipistrellus subflavus, the other little brown bats of this area, were repre 

 sented by 562 and 213 examples respectively. 



*A. W. Butler, Proc. Ind. Ac. Sci. 1894, p. 86. 



