Hughes et al .: Rediscovery of the New Guinea Big-eared Bat 
231 
Figure 6. Close up of the snout region of the alcohol-preserved body of Pharotis imogene (PNGM27464) showing diagnostic convex 
dorsal margin of anterior noseleaf (arrow) and naked skin between and above nostrils. Scale: least distance between nostril margins = 
2.5 mm (photo Steve Hamilton). 
the habitat of this species (Bonaccorso et al ., 2008), was 
notably absent from the capture site of the species south of 
Oio, suggesting that rainforest might be an important habitat 
component for the New Guinea Big-eared Bat. 
The photograph of the Oio Pharotis in Broken-Brow & 
Hughes (2012) and Figs 3-5 here, are the only published 
images of a living animal. The only previously published 
illustrations of the New Guinea Big-eared Bat, to our 
knowledge, are of the Australian Museum specimen M2561. 
These include a black and white photograph of the preserved 
body (Walker, 1964), and line drawings of the head along with 
skull photographs in Flannery’s 1995 publication. Altringham 
(2011) also has a line drawing of the nose-leaves shown front 
on. The only other illustration appears to be the drawing of 
the baculum (penis bone) of an overlooked immature male 
specimen in the Natural History Museum, London (Hill & 
Harrison, 1987). The line drawings provided by Flannery 
(1995) illustrate the anterior nose-leaf which has inevitably 
been distorted during prolonged storage. Consequently, the 
anterior nose-leaf has sagged forward, giving the misleading 
impression that the dorsal margin is concave in the midline, 
as in Nyctophilus, but the margin is convex, which would be 
apparent if the nose-leaf was fully erect. 
In the most recent review of the biology and conservation 
status of the New Guinea Big-eared Bat, Bonaccorso et 
al. (2008) emphasize that the species is not known from 
any protected areas and those authors regard field surveys 
targeting the species to be one of the highest survey priorities 
for any bat species in Papua New Guinea. We concur, and 
accordingly we recommend the following steps to address 
the conservation status of this species: 
1 bat surveys using harp traps are urgently undertaken 
in the Abau district and adjoining lowland regions, to 
determine the local distribution and abundance in that 
area; 
2 priority be given to determining whether the species 
can be identified from echolocation calls, to facilitate 
acoustic surveys of the species; 
3 radio tracking studies be undertaken during different 
stages of the reproductive cycle to define habitat use, 
roosting requirements and movements. 
A further priority is to establish whether the New Guinea 
Big-eared Bat is one of a small number of mammal species 
endemic to the south-eastern peninsula region, or does it 
occur more widely as suspected by Aplin et al. (2010). 
Surveys should be undertaken in other regions of Papua 
New Guinea, drawing on insights obtained from steps 1 and 
2 above. Such surveys could focus on coastal lowland areas 
throughout Papua New Guinea, which are amongst the most 
threatened habitats in the country (Shearman & Bryan, 2011). 
