Hipposideridae, Lydekker, in Flower and Lydekker, 1891

Foley, Nicole M., Thong, Vu Dinh, Soisook, Pipat, Goodman, Steven M., Armstrong, Kyle N., Jacobs, David S., Puechmaille, Sebastien J. & Teeling, Emma C., 2014, How and Why Overcome the Impediments to Resolution: Lessons from rhinolophid and hipposiderid Bats, Molecular Biology and Evolution 32 (2), pp. 313-333 : 324

Hipposideridae

The familial delimitation of Rhinonycteridae and Hipposideridae results in Asellia being basal to all other Hipposideridae . This clade received strong bootstrap and PP support across all analyses (see supplementary table S2, Supplementary Material online). This is contrary to a previous study, which, based on morphological data, places Aselliscus basal ( Hand and Kirsch 1998), despite the inclusion of Asellia in their data set. The genus Aselliscus contains two species, and its placement in the Hipposideridae phylogeny has been controversial. Pierson (1986) concluded that Aselliscus was not a member of Hipposideridae and was more closely aligned with the Rhinolophidae , based on immunological transferrin distance data. Morphological data place this genus among other Hipposideros spp. ( Bogdanowicz and Owen 1998; Hand and Kirsch 1998). These morphological results are in agreement with molecular data, which found strong support for a sister taxa relationship between Aselliscus and Coelops ( Li et al. 2007) . Previously, Coelops has been grouped in a separate tribe Coelopini Tate (1941:11) (sensu; McKenna and Bell [1997] = Coelopinae Tate [1941:11]), which comprised Coelops and Paracoelops , the latter no longer recognized as a valid genus (Thong, Dietz, et al. 2012). Our findings provide strong support for the sister taxa relationship between Aselliscus and Coelops recovered by Li et al. (2007).