94 



Lojichophylla 

 Lionycteris 



Platalina 

 Brachyphylla 



Phy lionycteris 

 Erophylla 



Glossophaga 



Monophyllus 

 Lichonycteris 

 Leptonycieris 



Anoura 



Hylonycteris 

 Choeroniscus 



Fig. 73: Cladogram of New 

 World nectar-feeding bats 

 Choeronycteris adapted from Griffiths (1982) 



Based on comparative morphology of the tongue anatomy and the hyoid region ("tunnel 

 insertion of the geniohyoideus, posterior sliift of the styloglossus insertion" in the true 

 Glossophagines; two lingual arteries in the Lonchophyhinae) Griffiths (1982) proposed 

 that the genera LonchophyUa, Lionycteris, and Platalina must have separated at a very 

 early stage from a line of the Brachyphyllinae / Glossophagmae. 



At the same time Baker and Hayduk (1982) concluded from chromosome examinations 

 (G-Bandmg patterns) that the genera separated by Griffiths represent a closely related 

 group within the Glossophaginae. Warner (1983) argued with both points of view, 

 emphasizing the difficulties: 



In addition to both hypotheses, he proposed a (deliberately artificial) even more 

 "economical" cladistic arrangement. Wliereas Griffiths' cladogram (fig.73) required at least 

 seven convergences, Hayduk & Baker (c.f. fig. 74) confined tliemselves to one convergent 

 new development, instead, however, requiring five "retrogressive developments" - all 

 witliin the group of the "Lonchophyhinae". Warner's cladogram (c.f. fig. 75) required three 

 reversions (i.e. features developing retrogressively towards the original condition - all 

 witliin tlie "Lonchophyllinae") as weh as only two convergences. Thus it would require - 

 theoretically - a minimum of auxihary hypotheses. Tliough Griffiths' convergences appear 

 to be the most expensive in numerical terms (7 events), they refer without exception to 

 modifications of the tongue musculature. Similar modifications of the tongue base are also 

 known m other manmialian groups havmg elongate, protrusible tongues - tlius convergent 

 development üi both bat groups may be quite probable. 



In contrast, the reversions required in Warner's, and especially in Hayduk' s & Baker's 

 models, refer to tliree very special adaptations to nectarivory: "brush-tip of the tongue 



