﻿352 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. los 



EPTESICUS INNESI Lataste 



To date, there are two specimens of this bat known. They are the 

 pair, on which the original description was based, taken by Dr. Walter 

 Innes from a house in Cairo about 1885. Since that time no additional 

 specimens have been recorded anywhere else in Egypt, although sought 

 after. This bat may be distinguished from Pipistrellus kuhlii by the 

 nearly naked face and the lack of white edging on the wings and uro- 

 patagium. No specimens have been examined. 



PLECOTUS AURITUS Linnaeus 



This bat may be distinguished from other species of bats occurring 

 in the Nile Delta region by means of its large ears. The ears are 

 almost as long as the head and body (head and body 45 mm., ear 35 

 mm.) . It has been recorded from Mena House, Second Pyramid, and 

 Minia. No specimens have been examined. 



Family MOLOSSIDAE 



NYCTINOMUS TENIOTIS (Rafinesque) 



Cephalotes teniotis Rafinesque, Precis des d6couvertes . . . somiologiques. . , ., 

 p. 12, 1814 (Sicily). 



Specimen examined. — One. Giza Province: near Cairo (alco- 

 holic) . 



Remarks. — There was available to me only one specimen, preserved 

 in alcohol. Any color diagnosis would, therefore, be worthless. The 

 ears are large and narrowly joined across the forehead. Approxi- 

 mately half the tail is free of the uropatagium. Nyctinomus teniotis 

 is considerably larger than Nyctinomus aegyptiacus., at least as far as 

 the skull is concerned, from the specimens available. In addition, 

 N. aegyptiacus has but two lower incisors on each side of the lower jaw, 

 while N. teniotis has three. 



It appears that there has been a great deal of doubt as to the names ap- 

 plied and as to what the respective authors were describing. Geoffroy 

 St.-Hilaire (1818, p. 129) , in describing N. aegyptiacus^ says in regard 

 to the teeth, "Les dents deviennent un excellent indicateur de cette 

 organisation ; les incisives sont au nombre de deux en haut, et de quatre 

 en bas : celles-la sont fortes, coniques et contigues, quand les secondes 

 sont tres-petites et comme entassees au devant des canines." It thus 

 appears that the plate and the published description are at variance, 

 since he states in the latter that there are four incisors below and the 

 plate appears to show six. Is it possible that the artist interpreted 

 the cingulum of the canine as an incisor ? In De Winton's review of 

 Nyctinomus he states there are four incisors in N. aegyptiacus and six 

 in N. teniotis, yet he raises a question as to what N. aegyptiacus actually 

 is in the published work of Anderson on the mammals of Egypt. 



