RHINOLOPHUS 



159 



aiititragus, together witli its rather smaller size and iisnall\- 

 darker colour. With the material at hand I am unable to 

 recognize the local forms of this species described by Andersen 

 and Matschie, as the alleged differences appear tf) be within the 

 range of normal indi^'idual variation. 



2 9. Cintra, 500m. Portugal. (). Thomas (c & p). US. 2. 2. 2-8. 



2 i, 2 9 al. Cintra, 500 m. 0. Thomas (c & r). >JS. 2. 2. 53-5G. 



9 al. Villalba, Lugo, N.W. Dr. V. L. Seoane (p). 'J4. 1. 1. 1. 

 Spain. 



5, 9 al. Madrid. A. Cabrera (p). 5. 2. 3. 1-2. 



1 al. St. Paterne, Indre-et- Roj^al Army Medical "J. 1. 4. 9. 



Loire, France. College (p). 



9 al. St. Paterne, Indre-et- (t. E. Dobson (p). 80. 12. 14. 3. 



Loire. 



'J al. Cxapeau River, Var. Dr. K. Jordan (C & p). 8. 3. 15. 2-10; 



3 i, 9 al. Finalborgo, L i g u r i a , Marquis G. Doria (p). 6. 12. 1. 14-17. 



Italy. (A. Gagi'iu.) 



2 al. Monte Pisanino,Lignria. Lord Lilford (p). 73. 1. 8. (i. 



•2 6. Rome. {C. CoIi.) G. Barrett-Hamilton 11. 1. 2. 40-41. 



W- 



c$ al. Nicotera, Calabria. Florence Museum (b). 85.7.6.1. 



2 d. :\Iarsala, Sicily. {A. O. Thomas (p). G. 8. 4. 10-11. 

 Robert.) 



6, 9 al. Ofeuer Mts., Budapest. Budapest Museum (e). 94. 7. IS. 2-3. 

 9. Orsova, Hungary. Hon. W. Rothschild 7. 9. 16. 7. 



9. Zara, Dalmatia, 50 ni. Lord Lilford (p). 11. 1. 1. 128. 



{Kolombafocic.) 

 1 al. S. Europe. Purchased (Parreys). 47. 5. 27. 44. 



RHINOLOPHUS MEHELYI Matschie. 



1901. RhinolopliHS mehehji ^Matschie, Sitz.-Ber. Gesellsch. Naturforscli. 



Freunde, Berlin, p. 225 (Bucharest, Roumauiat. 

 1904. Rhinolophufi carpetcuiua Cabrera, ]\Iem. Soc. Espafi. Hist. Nat., ii, 



p. 254 (Madrid, Spain). 

 1910. Rhinolopliua euryalc vwlieliji and R. cavpctanus Trouessart, Fauue 



5Iamm. d'Europc, pp. 7-8. 



Type locaHty. — Bucharest, Uoumauia. 



(Teix/rapJucal flistribidioii. — Roumania, southern France 

 (Uard), Sardinia, central Spain. Details of distribution not 

 known. 



Diagnosis. — Like Hhiiiolophns luryaJr but larger (forearm, 

 48 'G to 51 "4; upper tooth-row about 7 mm.); noseleaf with 

 lancet abruptly narrowed to a linear tip ; ear with antitragal 

 lobe relativel)^ broad and low ; fourth linger with iirst phalan.\ 

 decidedly more than one-third as long as second (ratio about 44) : 

 colour usually paler than in tlie related animal. 



J E.rirrtial characters. —i>\ight\y larger and more robu.st than 

 Rhinoloplnis ciiryalc, a difference especially noticeable in freshlv 

 killed individuals. Noseleaf as in I{. ciiryale, except tluit the 

 lancet is very abruptly narrowed above middle to a distinctlv 

 linear tip. Ear as in B. enryulr but bioader. the antitragal lobe 



