85 



6 .340 



-+++ 



4.235 — 



2 .829 



1 .889 



225 . 184 



402 .365 



718 .955 



1284 .646 



2295 .43 



Fig.61: Relation SIZE to width over caiiini: comparison hew teen (i/ossop/iaga (-) and Brachyphxlla (+) 



specific way, e.g. the rostra are narrower at their tip tlian üi the oiitgroiip (fig. 60). Tliis 

 also applies to Brachyphylla, although in many other respects this genus approaches the 

 outgroup much closer than otlier nectar feedmg bats. This is partly due to their 

 considerably differring skull geometry; in basal view, the palate appears rounded in a 

 trapezoid way (the width of the palate over the second molar tootli ist much larger than 

 over tlie canines, fig.61). 



9.220 — 



6.139 — 



2.722 — 



1 .812 



372.464 668.622 1200.265 2154.633 3867 . E 



Fig.62: Relation SIZE to width over canini: comparison between Glossopliaga (□) and Lonchophylla (+) 



