12 



NILS GYLDENSTOLPE, THE SWEDISH ZOOLOGICAL EXPEDITIONS TO SIAM. 



Rhinolophus macrotis siamensis subsp. n. 



J 1 Doi Par Sakeng, Northwestern Siarn lz /i 1914. - - $ Doi Par Sakeng 12 /t 1914. 



A member of the Rhinolophus macrotis Group. Its nearest ally is Rhinolophus 

 macrotis macrotis Hodgs. from Nepal and Masuri but it is considerably smaller and bas 

 a smaller horseshoe. 



From Sumatra another allied race bas been described by K. Andersen (Ann. 

 Museo Oivico. Genua ser. 3. Vol. III. 1907 p. 25) under the name of Rhinolophus macrotis 

 dohrni. 



Tli is lastmentioned form is also nearest allied to R. macrotis macrotis though 

 easily distinguished by its larger size. The horseshoe is also broader measuring 9 — 9,r> 

 mm. against 7,5 — 8,5 mm. in true macrotis. In the new form the horseshoe only measures 

 6,9 mm. 



The length of the forearm is also different from that one of the true macrotis being 

 only 36,i mm. against a minimum of 41 mm. in macrotis and 42,7 mm. in macrotis dohrni. 



Besides the noted differences in size the new form does not differ very much from 

 the allied forms and the noseleaf is exactly of the same character as in typical macrotis. 

 The dentition is also the same as in that species. Both p 2 and p 3 are in row and in p 2 

 the cusp is fairly well developed. 



Type: Adult male (in alcohol with the skull extracted) collected at Doi Par Sakeng 

 in Northwestern Siarn on the 12th of July 1914. 



Dimensions of type: 

 Forearm = 36, 1 ram.; tail 



13,o mm.; ear = 18,9 mm. 



Skull measurements ' 



Rhinolophus 

 m. macrotis 



Rhinolophus 

 m. dohrni 



Rhinolophus 

 m. aiamensis 



Total length to front of canine . . 

 Basilar length to front of canine . . 



Mastoid width 



Width of brain case 



Zygomatic width 



Maxillary width 



Width across nasal swellings . . . . 

 Length of mandible to front of in- 



cisors 



Length of upper toothrow, c — m 3 . 

 Longth of lower toothrow, c — m 3 . . 



17,5 mm. 



13,8 » 



8,8 » 



7,8 » 



8.2 » 

 5,8 » 



4.7 » 



11,5 » 



6.3 » 



6.8 » 



18,0—18,2 mm. 



14,2—14,4 » 



8,8 » 



7,6—7,7 » 



8,2 » 

 5,8—6,0 



4,9—5,0 » 



11,8 

 6,7 

 7,0 



c? 



15,4 mm. 



12,3 » 



7.4 » 



6.5 » 

 6,9 » 

 4,8 » 

 3,7 » 



9.5 » 

 5,3 » 



5.6 » 



9 

 15,3 mm. 



12,0 » 



7.2 » 

 6,7 » 



7.1 » 

 4,7 » 



3.6 » 



9.3 » 



5.2 » 



5.7 » 



This is apparently - - like its other relatives 

 found nowhere but at considerable elevations. 



exclusively a mountain form, benig 



1 For comparison I have recorded some measurements of Rhinolophus macrotis macrotis Hodgs. & Rltino- 

 lophus macrotis dohrni And. taken from the above-mentioned paper by Dr. Knud Andersen. 



