Rhinolophidae (Gray, 1825)

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 : 319

Rhinolophidae

The Rhinolophidae form a fully supported monophyletic group but intrafamilial relationships are less well resolved than for the Hipposideridae (see supplementary table S2, Supplementary Material online). Generally, the analyses produced a topology that provided either no structure at the base of the crown group Rhinolophidae or a strict division between the African/European clade, comprising R. hipposideros , R. ferrumequinum , and R. euryale versus the Asian clade, comprising all other Rhinolophus spp. However, the African/ European clade, when recovered, grouped together with relatively low support approximately 60 BSS/0.6 PP. For all analyses using the CAT model in PhyloBayes, a topology with no structure at the base of the crown group Rhinolophidae was supported. Uniquely, the intron data set with outliers included under a BEAST analysis provided an alternative topology in which R. hipposideros was the basal clade; however, this was poorly supported, 0.38 PP. The association of Asian taxa was supported across all BA 0.88–1.0 PP, whereas ML analyses provided variable support depending on the data set. The exon and exon+introns data sets strongly support the association of the Asian taxa, 98–100 BSS; however, less support for this association is found in the introns analyses 63–65 BSS.