6 



In this respect, some members of tlie phyllostomid family achieved a striking diversity, 

 with the highly specialized flower bats representing an extreme (fig.l). 

 Especially the Glossophaginae succeeded in extensive specialization (prolongation of the 

 rostmm; long tongue with bristle-like papillae, weak and delicate teeth). The systematic 

 iategration of all long-nosed Phyllostomids into a single monophyletic subfamily is still 

 discussed controversially. As the main characters used to define glossophagine bats are 

 derived characters influenced by fimction, they could well have developed independently 

 within the phyllostomids. 



For more than 25 years, several approaches have been made to tliis problem (tab.l) and 

 various different systematic relationships of single genera were proposed from time to 

 tinie. 



Table 2: Studies on the system of New World nectaifeeding bats 



- morphological examinations 

 teeth, dentition 

 gastrointestinal system 

 tongue, hyoid musculature 

 female sex apparatus 

 cerebral anatomy 



(Phillips 1971) 



(Forman 1971, 1979; Rouk & Glass 1970) 



(Wille 1954; Greenbaum & Pillios 1974; Griffiths 1982) 



(Smith & Hood 1982) 



(McDaniel 1976) 



- cx'tological examinations 

 cromosomal analysis 



hematology 



(Baker et al. 1967; Patton & Gardner 1971; Stock 1975; 

 Baker & Bass 1979; Haiduk & Baker 1982) 

 (Valdivieso & Tamsit 1971) 



- immunological studies 

 serum proteins 

 serum proteins 



(Baker et al. 1981) 

 (Gerber & Leone 1971) 



Classification of BrachyphyUa as an essentially basic form witliin its own subfamily 

 Brachyphyllinae remained undisputed (Baker et al. 1979) as well as everyone aggreed to 

 sunmiarize the genera Erophylla and Phyllonycteris within the Phyllonycterinae (Flower 

 vampires), a subfamily closely related to the Brachyphyllinae (Silva Taboada & Pine 

 1969). 



Contrary conclusions primarily concern the systematic position of the genera or 

 subfamilies having been sunmiarized so far as Glossophaginae. 



Some really revolutionary improvement was achieved by the works of Griffith pubhshed 

 1982. Analyzing the tongue and hyoid morphology and their musculature, respectively, he 

 was tlie first to seperate three genera {Lionycteris, Lonchophylla and Platalina) from the 

 Glossophaginae s.str., sunmiarizing tliem witliin tlieir own subfamily Lonchophyllinae. 

 These results led to a hvely discussion between different research groups in the United 

 States (Haiduk & Baker 1982; Warner 1983; Hood & Smiüi 1982; Griffiths 1983; Smith 

 & Hood 1984). The point of this discussion is: do tlie New World nectarivorous bats 

 represent a monophyletic group, or did the glossophagine bats develop twice, 

 independently from each other? 



Even within nectar feeders, among all morphological structures, the skiül undoubtedly was 

 the main structure to undergo (possibly different) adaptarions to intake of food. Tliey are 



