266 W. T. Blauford— Notes on Indian CHiroptera. [No. 3, 



scription and most of the measurements correspond closely ; but the 

 outer upper incisors are described as having two or three cusps, and the 

 length of the tibia is given as 07 inch," instead of 0*55. The type too 

 had been lost. 



Now in V. indicus, as in F. noctula, " the outer incisor is hollowed 

 out to receive the extremity of the lower canine when the jaw is closed," so 

 that this incisor may very well be described as having two or three 

 cusps. But Kelaart's expression is more characteristic. He says, " Upper 

 incisors 2 pairs both indistinctly bilobed ? or certainly the lateral ones 

 are trifid." Now the inner upper incisor is bifid and in all probability the 

 precise form of the outer upper incisor varies, according as it is worn 

 away by the point of the lower canine. Certainly, in some skulls of 

 V. noctula, * trifid' would correctly express the form of the tooth. I think, 

 therefore, that there should be no hesitation in recognizing Kelaart's 

 name for the species. 



Vesperugo abramus. 



Blyth in 1852 (J. A. S. B. XXI, p. 360) received several bats from 

 Masuri, sent by Captain T. Hutton. Amongst the species supposed to 

 be identified was the pipistrelle, which Blyth, then and subsequently, 

 called Myotis pipistrellus (though the genus Myotis of Gray, I believe, 

 was confined to species of Vespertilio*). In 1853 (J. A. S. B. XXII, 

 p. 581), Blyth pointed out that the supposed pipistrelle . from Masuri 

 differed from the true pipistrelle of Europe in colour and in the small 

 size of the foot, which, with its claws, scarcely exceeded -^-^ in. ; and he 

 proposed for this form the name M. parvipes, a name that is retained by 

 Jerdon in his work on the Mammals of India, p. 48, but which is not, so 

 far as I am aware, mentioned by Dobson. The type was lost. 



Years afterwards Captain Hutton, in his paper on Himalayan bats, 

 described a Vesperugo micropus (P. Z. S. 1872, p. 708). This was sub- 

 sequently identified by Dobson, I believe from examination of the type, 

 with V. ahramus. I cannot but suspect that Blyth's Myotis parvipes 

 was the same. 



At the same time, the dimensions of the foot, as given by Blyth, 

 agree more nearly with those of the true pipistrelle, md the only reason 

 iov not identiiying M. par oipes with. V. pipistrellas is that this species 

 has not been recognized amongst Hutton's collections, nor is it known 

 to occur in the Himalayas east of Kashmir, where it was obtained by 

 Stoliczka (Yarkand Mission Mamm. p. 11). It is also possible that 



* The genus was proposed in 1842 (A, M. N. H. X, p. 258). The examples quoted 

 were V. murinus, V. hech.steini, and V. nattereri, all belonging to tbe second section of 

 the genus in Dobson's Catalogue. 



