462 On the Nomenclature of the Short-eared New-Zealand Bat. 
LVIII.—WNote on the Nomenclature of the Short-eared 
New-Zealand Bat. By OLDFIELD THOMAS. 
Ir has always been a subject of regret that, owing to Gray’s 
error in ascribing * to Forster’s “ Vespertilio tubercula- 
tus’? a specimen of the Long-eared Bat of New Zealand, 
which he then described and made the type of the genus 
Mystacina, the specific names of the two New-Zealand bats 
should have been identical, an identity particularly incon- 
venient to writers on the fauna of that country. It is there- 
fore with some pleasure that I am now able to point out that 
the names of the two species should after all not both be 
“ tuberculatus.”’ 
The Mystacina unquestionably should bear that name ; but 
in the case of the other species, referred in modern times to 
the genus Chalinolobus, the name tuberculatus has not the 
priority of publication, although dating in manuscript from 
the last century. It is now universally recognized that 
manuscript names do not confer priority, and before Forster’s 
description of 1772-74 was published by Lichtenstein in 18447 
a second name had been given to the bat by Dr. Gray, who 
described a specimen from South Australia as Scotophilus 
morto}, and under the latter short and convenient specific 
name the Chalinolobus should certainly stand. 
Instead, therefore, of Chalinolobus tuberculatus and Mysta- 
cina tuberculata we shall have Chalinolobus morio and 
Mystacina tuberculata as the two bats of New Zealand, both 
of them being represented by their type specimens in the 
National Collection. 
In this connexion it may be pointed out that Chalinolobus 
signifer, Dobs.§, from Queensland, is in all probability the 
same as Ch. morio, its distinguishing character—the trans- 
verse cutaneous lobule on the muzzle—being a mark of old 
age, especially developed in the male sex, and not of specific 
distinctness. A male specimen from one of the outlying 
islands round Stewart Island, New Zealand, recently pre- 
sented to the Museum by Mr. Charles Traill, has this lobule 
quite as well marked as in the type of Ch. signifer, and all 
the other fully adult specimens of Ch. morio in the Museum 
show some trace of the same lobule, while in immature indi- 
viduals no sign of it is present. 
* Voy. ‘Sulphur,’ Mamm. p. 23 (1843). 
T Forst. Descr. Anim., ed. Licht. p. 62 (1844), 
} Gray’s Austr., App. li. p. 405 (1841). 
§ Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist [4] xvii. p. 289 (1876). 
