Rhinolophus pusillus, Temminck, 1834

Csorba, G., 2002, Remarks on some types of the genus Rhinolophus (Mammalia, Chiroptera), Annales Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 94, pp. 217-226 : 218-219

Rhinolophus pusillus T E M M I N C K, 1834

The types of R. pusillus in the RMNH, Leiden caused a lot of mental labour. DOBSON (1878) investigated the types and concluded that they were "undoubtedly specimens of R. hipposide rus " which led to the statement that R. hipposideros should occur in Java . ANDERSEN (1905) later speculated that "an interchange of la­

bels has taken place in that Museum". The small specimens in the Leiden Museum were always kept in glass vials from the very beginning, with a little round label glued on the cork cover (C. SMEENK pers. comm.). Needless to say, these labels may have come off, so there was always the danger of specimens becoming mislabelled or interchanged. In fact, the type series in Leiden consists of five syntypes (RMNH 35177-35181), of which three represent R. hipposideros (RMNH 35178 [= Rh. hipposideros cat. syst, b] and 35179 [= Rh. hipposideros cat. syst, c] mounted specimens, skulls intact; RMNH 35181 [= Rh. hipposideros cat. ost. a] separate skull). One of the remaining two specimens (RMNH 35177 [= Rh. hipposideros cat. syst a, cat. ost. b]) consists of a skull of R. pusillus and a mounted skin of R. hipposideros', the another one (RMNH 35180 [= Rh. hipposideros cat. syst, d] mounted with skull intact) is with no doubt R. pusillus . These facts explain why DOBSON (1878) and JENTINK (1887) referred R. pusillus as a synonym of R. hipposideros , and make it clear that ANDERSEN (1905) was right when accepted T E M M I N C K ' S statement that the types of R. pusillus were brought back from Java . Since the cranial characters are widely used features in the group, from the syntypes representing genuine R. pusillus the RMNH 35177 specimen (a cleaned skull) is designated herein as lectotype; the skin of R. hipposideros bearing the same number is regarded as mis-labelled. The RMNH 35180 mounted specimen is the paralectotype of R. pusillus .

The shape of the rostral profile of R. pusillus was desribed by CORBET and

HILL (1992) as being nearly straight, almost horizontal (contrary to the up-

ward-curving rostral profile of R. lepidus ). Taking into consideration of the lectotype specimen of the former and the variability of both species, this character is not typical or uniform, and cannot be used for distinction of the two species. The development of the posterior median swellings (which affects the shape of the rostral

profil) is either a variable feature of both species or it has a taxonomical significance not fully understood as yet.