Rhinolophus sinicus K. Andersen, 1905

Zhang, Libiao, Jones, Gareth, Zhang, Jinshuo, Zhu, Guangjian & Parsons, Stuart, 2009, Recent surveys of bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) from China. I. Rhinolophidae and Hipposideridae, Acta Chiropterologica 11 (1), pp. 71-88 : 80

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.3161/150811009X465703



persistent identifier


treatment provided by


scientific name

Rhinolophus sinicus K. Andersen, 1905


Rhinolophus sinicus K. Andersen, 1905 View in CoL

Chinese rufous horseshoe bat

The species is most easily confused with R. affinis , from which it is best distinguished by its straight-sided lancet and the relatively short second phalanx of the third digit (<66% of the length of the metacarpal — Csorba et al., 2003). Unequivocal separation can seemingly be performed by sequencing the control region of mtDNA (authors’ unpublished data). Echolocation call frequencies overlap with those emitted by R. affinis . Rhinolophus affinis is also typically a larger species, though overlap occurs with R. sinicus at forearm lengths between 50–53 mm ( Fig. 4 View FIG ). Rhinolophus sinicus is very similar to R. thomasi from Myanmar, Vietnam, Lao PDR and Thailand, to which it is closely related and possibly conspecific. Call frequency for R. thomasi in Lao PDR is reported as 76–86 kHz ( Francis and Habersetzer 1998), and so the two taxa overlap considerably in call frequency. Rhinolophus thomasi is reported to have smaller upper canines than R. sinicus (Francis 2008) .

FA — 42.6–52.6 mm, mass — 8.5–14.3 g. Seventy-four males and 43 females were captured from Fujian, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hainan, Hubei, Jiangxi, Sichuan, and Yunnan. The echolocation calls vary over the geographic range, from 73.4–88.5 kHz. The call frequencies (0 ± SD) of a sample of males (82.0 ± 2.0 kHz, n = 38) were lower than females (85.4 ± 1.9, n = 29 — Mann- Whitney W = 839, P <0.001), but the forearm lengths were not significantly different between sexes (♂♂: 46.9 ± 1.5, n = 37; ♀♀: 46.6 ± 2.0, n = 29; Mann-Whitney W = 1325, P> 0.05).

Previous records from China:, Anhui, Fujian, Gansu, Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hainan, Hubei Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Shaanxi, Sichuan, Tibet, Yunnan, Zhejiang ( Zhang, 1997; Wang, 2003).

Ecological Notes

Widespread in caves in southern China, but never abundant. Maximum count was 24 bats in one cave in Jiangxi. An abandoned brick kiln was used by a solitary male in Xinyi County.













GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF