Cenera ]\Iicioiiyc(eris a/«f/ (ily|iliuiiyc(crls. o") 



2. MicTonyctcris microtis , Miller. 



18:)8. Mkroni/cterin mi<rofis, Geirit S. Miller, Proc. Ac. Nat. Sci. 

 IMiil. 1898,' \^t. ii. i)p. 328-2!), 331 ; Nov. 8, 1898.— Type: d ad., 

 skin and .-kiill ; Greytuwn, Ni(iiiMi.ni i ; U.S. Nat. Mus. The only 

 epecimeu recorded. 



The species is know n to iiic fVoiii the publislicd account 

 only. 



Tlie ])iincii);il cliaractcr.s, according to ^liller, arc tlicse : — 

 Ears considciably shorter than in megalotis ; inner surface oh' 

 ear-conch with eight sharply defined cross-ridges, crowded 

 into the space of 5 nim.^ Colour of the fur, both dorsally 

 and ventrally, wood-brown, witii nearly white bases to the 

 hairs. General size small : forearm 31 mm. 



Other external features, as well as the dentition, essentially 

 as in M. megalotis. 



3. Micronycteris minuta, Gervais. 



1856. Sc7iiz<isto7)ui viinutiDii, Paul Gervais, Exped. Casteluau Amtlrique 

 du Sud, Manun., livr.iison 15, sheet 7, p. 50, pi. vii. tig. 1 (whole 

 tigare) ; pi. x. tigs. A, A a (skull and dentition). — Type from Capella 

 Nova, Brazil; Paris Museum. 



? 1900. Micranyctcris /ii/polt-uca, J. A. Allen, Bull. Amer. Mus. N. H. 

 xiii. pp. 90-91 ; May' 12, 1900.— Type: $ ad., skin without skull; 

 Bjuda, Santa Marta region, Colombia; New York Museum; the 

 only specimen on record. — Characters, according to Dr. Allen : 

 '■ About the size of M. Diinutn, but white below instead of ashy, and 

 the basal portion of pelage above white instead of ashy white." But 

 British Museum examples (skins) of M. minuta from Brazil are, 



* Are the ears of the type specimen of M. microtis undamaged? My 

 reason for raising the question is tliis:- — In the proportinnate size of the 

 ears and in the cross-markings of the conch .17. hirsKta \> similar to M. 

 meyalotis. But in two British Museum examples of M. hirsuta the ears 

 are very short, reaching only a little beyond the eyes when laid forwards, 

 and the cross-markings on the inner surface of the conch are very strongly 

 de lined and crowded into a .«pace of 0-7 mm. ; they are, on the whole, 

 ])UzzLngly like the type of ear described by Mr. Miller in M. microtis. 

 But the ears of these two M. hirsuta have indubitably been singed (the 

 b ts may have been caught while trying to esc ipe Irom a burning tree, 

 or, perhaps more likely, been found dead in a hole of a partially burnt- 

 down tree) ; though very much shrunk they have, however, preserved 

 their oriijinal shape ; they have simply contracted into scarcelv'^ § their 

 natural size, and, as a consequence ot that, the cross-markings have 

 become very sharply defined, prominent beyond the plane of the conch, 

 and crowded into a small space, and the ear-conch thick and stiff. Is the 

 saice, perhaps, the case with the ears of the only specimen known of 

 M. microtis 'i If so, M. microtis is very closely related to .)/. mef/alotis, 

 ditiering, as it seems, only in the much lighter colour of the fur (which, 

 however, may be indicative of a light phase only) and, perhaps, a slightly 

 smaller size. 



