Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 August 2022 | 14(8): 21501–21507
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7995.14.8.21501-21507
#7995 | Received 29 April 2022 | Final
received 02 August 2022 | Finally accepted 11 August 2022
Natural history notes on three bat species
Dharmendra Khandal
1, Ishan Dhar 2, Dau Lal Bohra 3 & Shyamkant S.
Talmale 4
1,2 Tiger Watch, Maa
Farm, Ranthambhore Road, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan 322001, India.
3 Head, P. G.
Department of Zoology, Seth Gyaniram Bansidhar Podar College, Nawalgarh,
Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan 333042, India.
4 Western Regional
Centre, Zoological Survey of India, Vidyanagar, Sector-29, Ravet Road, Akurdi,
Pune, Maharashtra 411044, India.
1
dharmkhandal@gmail.com, 2 dhar.ishan@gmail.com
(corresponding author), 3 daulalbohara@yahoo.com, 4 s_talmale@yahoo.co.in
Editor: Paul Racey,
University of Exeter, Cornwall, UK. Date
of publication: 26 August 2022 (online & print)
Citation: Khandal, D., I.
Dhar, D.L. Bohra & S.S. Talmale (2022). Natural history notes on
three bat species. Journal of Threatened Taxa 14(8): 21501–21507. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7995.14.8.21501-21507
Copyright: © Khandal et al. 2022. Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License.
JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this
article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the
source of publication.
Funding: None.
Competing interests: The authors declare no
competing interests.
Author details: Dr. Dharmendra Khandal Phd, has served
as conservation biologist with Tiger Watch since 2003. His work with Tiger
Watch has involved pioneering ground breaking initiatives in proactive anti-poaching,
the monitoring of wildlife & scientific research. He has also forged new
frontiers in the world of community based conservation through the Village
Wildlife Volunteer program in the Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve. He is also the
co-author of Unexplored Ranthambhore, a first of its kind book on the
canids and striped hyena in Ranthambhore. Ishan
Dhar became associated with Tiger Watch since 2015 and has been an
active participant in Tiger Watch conservation interventions ever since. He has
also served on Tiger Watch’s Board of Directors since 2017. The youngest
individual to do so. He has co-authored a book on the Village Wildlife
Volunteer program titled Wildlife Warriors, along with multiple research
articles in journals, the electronic and print media. Dr. Dau Lal Bohra PhD, is
currently head of the Department of Zoology at the Seth Gyaniram
Bansidhar Podar College in Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. He has numerous research
papers to his credit and is recognised for his significant contributions to
vulture conservation in Rajasthan. Dr. S.
Talmale PhD, is a taxonomist working on Indian small mammals and
(Insecta) Odonata with several research papers and books to his
credit. He is currently affiliated with the Zoological Survey of India.
Author contributions:
All authors have contributed equally to this
chronological literature review.
Acknowledgements: The authors are
grateful to Mr. Dieter Gutmann & Mrs. Liz Gutmann, and Tiger Watch for
their unstinting support.
Abstract: Three bat species
have long been considered to occur within the state of Rajasthan—the Lesser
Mouse-Eared bat Myotis blythii Tomes, 1857, the Large
Barbastelle Barbastella darjelingensis Hodgson, in Horsfield,
1855 and the Serotine Bat Eptesicus serotinus pachyomus Tomes,
1857. Rajasthan is considered the type locality for two of these species—Myotis
blythii and Eptesicus serotinus pachyomus. Despite
targeted surveys, these bats have not been observed in Rajasthan for more than
a century and a half. A chronological review of published literature reveals
that the bats were never originally claimed to occur in Rajasthan and
their inclusion among bats occurring in Rajasthan was a consequence of
assumptions perpetuated as facts.
Keywords: Chiroptera, Large
Barbastelle, Serotine Bat, Lesser Mouse-eared Bat, Rajasthan, India, British
Museum, Captain Boys, Himalaya.
Introduction
Bats (Chiroptera) are
among the most widely distributed and diverse mammals in the world, second only
to rodents in both regards (Sinha 1996). India is home to 127 species of bats
(Talmale & Saikia 2018) and the state of Rajasthan has a long history of
chiropteran study. There have been contributions by Blanford (1888–91), Ryley
(1914), Wroughton (1918), Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951), Prakash
(1963a,b, 1973), Agrawal (1967), Biswas & Ghosh (1968), and Sinha (1973,
1975, 1976, 1977) to chiropteran study in Rajasthan. Prakash’s (1963a) study in
Rajasthan was limited to nine bat species in the Thar Desert. Sinha (1980)
carried out the first systematic study of bats covering all of Rajasthan,
discussing in great detail, both the taxonomy and zoogeography of 21 species
based on a field survey and published literature. Some of these 21 species were
recorded for the first time in the state of Rajasthan (Sinha 1980). Sinha
(1981), Sharma (1986), Bhupathy (1987) and Senacha & Dookia (2013) recorded
a new species each for the state of Rajasthan. Srinivasulu et al. (2013)
provided an ’intensive account’ of 25 bat species recorded in Rajasthan.
However, despite
targeted surveys and the consistent addition of new species to the list of bats
occurring in Rajasthan, it is believed that three bat species have not been
observed in the state for more than a century and a half: the Lesser
Mouse-eared Bat Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857), the Large Barbastelle Barbastella
darjelingensis (Hodgson, in Horsfield, 1855) and the Serotine Bat Eptesicus
serotinus pachyomus (Tomes, 1857). Rajasthan is in fact considered the type
locality for two of these species—Myotis blythii and Eptesicus
serotinus pachyomus (Thomas 1915; Wroughton 1918; Sinha 1980; Bates &
Harrison 1997; Srinivasulu & Srinivasulu 2012; Srinivasulu et al. 2013).
Information on these bats is fragmented, and the presence of these bats has
only been questioned sporadically before in Rajasthan (Blanford 1888–91; Topal
1971). In addition to not being observed for more than a century, targeted
field surveys such as by Sinha (1980) did not yield any results. The authors
thus propose a thorough chronological review of published literature on these
species to ascertain just why there has been absolutely no evidence of
occurrence for such a long period of time.
Observations
Lesser Mouse-eared
Bat Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857)
The description for
this species of bat (then Vespertilio blythii) was provided by R.F.
Tomes (1857). Robert Fisher Tomes (1823–1904) was an English farmer and
zoologist with an avid interest in Chiroptera. His description was based on a
specimen preserved in the British Museum and thus he did not collect the
specimen himself. Tomes (1857) wrote that the type specimen in the British
Museum was labelled, “Hab. India,
Nassenabad, from Mr. Warwick, 1848” and he added, “I believe collected
by Captain Boys”.
Tomes (1857) provides
two pieces of information, a location in India, the fact that the specimen was
sent to the British Museum by a Mr. Warwick in 1848. Now considering there
already was a name attached to the specimen, why did Tomes (1857) speculate
that the collector was Captain Boys? Where precisely “Nassenabad” is in India
is also unknown, but Tomes (1857) created confusion by speculating that the
collector might be Captain Boys. There is absolutely no mention of Rajasthan or
as it was then known, Rajputana.
So what could be the
reason behind this speculation? The “Mr. Warwick” referred to here was John
Edington Warwick, a ‘naturalist’ employed by the Royal Surrey Zoological
Gardens in Walworth, London at the time (not to be confused with the Zoological
Gardens managed by the Zoological Society of London in Regent’s Park) (Grigson
2016). The gardens sourced animals for their displays from at least three
continents during Warwick’s time (Editor 1835; Jardine 1858; Sclater 1870;
Grigson 2016). Warwick appears to have occasionally sourced and procured
animals back from overseas personally, such as giraffes from Egypt in 1836
(also brought back were five ostriches, 18 Numidian cranes, one camel and five
jerboas) which became the subject of a book authored by him (Warwick 1836;
Grigson 2016). The animals displayed at the gardens often became specimens for
museums upon expiry. The gardens were clearly the final destination of many
kinds of fauna from overseas, and it appears that Warwick’s specimens were even
sold to museums, such as the Cuban nightjar to the Derby Museum in 1849
(Sclater 1866), a year after the British Museum received the type specimen for Myotis
blythii. It is therefore clear that
although Warwick was certainly the source of the specimen, he was not
necessarily the collector, prompting Tomes (1857) to speculate that perhaps it
was Captain Boys who collected it from the field in India.
Which brings us to
why Tomes (1857) speculated that the collector might be Captain Boys. It is
possible that Tomes (1857) connected Captain Boys to the locality “Nasirabad”,
and assumed that was what was meant by “Nassenabad” on the specimen label.
However, there were multiple towns named “Nasirabad” in British India. A background on Capt. Boys might shed some
light on such an assumption. Captain W.J.E Boys was an officer in the 6th
Regt. Light Cavalry of the British East India Company and a known collector of
specimens. Nasirabad in the district of Ajmer in Rajasthan has a very long
history as a cantonment town. It is also quite possible that the label
“Nassenabad” was a typological error since error by curators was not unheard of
in the British Museum during that period (Benda & Mlíkovský 2008).
It should also be
noted that Boys died three years before Tomes (1857) authored his description
and thus could not be consulted to confirm nor refute the contents of the
description or any work by subsequent authors. Nevertheless, the purported
association of Captain Boys with Nasirabad, Rajasthan led to the perpetuation
of certain assumptions regarding the type locality of this species, even though
Tomes (1857) clearly never made any such claims.
It was Jerdon (1867)
who first made the claim that the type specimen was procured from Rajasthan,
and wrote that “The bat was found by Captain Boys in Nusserabad, Rajputana”.
Jerdon (1867) made three assumptions in this claim. The first is that the “Nassenabad”
mentioned by Tomes (1857) is “Nusserabad”. The second is that “Nusserabad” is
in Rajputana (Rajasthan), thereby becoming the first author to connect
an otherwise ambiguous locality to the state of Rajasthan. This is despite the
fact there were multiple towns with the same name, which still exist to this
day in independent India and Pakistan, including in the Indian states of Uttar
Pradesh and Uttarakhand, where Boys was also known to be active. The third is
that the collector of the specimen was Captain Boys. Therefore, Jerdon (1876)
stated what was clearly a speculation by Tomes (1857) as fact.
Dobson (1878) in his
‘Catalogue of the Chiroptera in the Collection of the British Museum’,
wrote that the type specimen was from “India” and from the “Warwick Coll.”
(Coll. =Collection). Dobson (1878) was thus most appropriate in his treatment
of the specimen, for he did not include any speculative information in his
account and mentioned the undisputed facts alone, which were that the type
specimen was from India and that the origin was the collection of J.E. Warwick.
Blanford (1888–91) was the first to question whether the locality of this
report was correct, and wrote “This type of V. blythii was said to be
from Nusserabad, in Rajputana, but this locality I think requires
confirmation”. However, Blanford (1888–91) did not stress this point any
further and did not elaborate why he thought so.
Following Jerdon
(1867), the aforementioned assumptions regarding the locality and collector are
further perpetuated as facts by Thomas (1915) in the Bombay Natural History
Society’s Indian Mammal Survey, “Of this group of large grey species, the
Indian representative in M. blythii, Tomes of which the Museum contains
the type (skin and skull) from Nusserabad (Boys)”. Which was in turn, further
perpetuated by Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951), who claimed that the type
locality of “1857, Vespertilio blythii Tomes” was “Nasirabad, Rajputana”
and on distribution, commented, “Ranges to Simla, northern India”. It should be noted that the text by Ellerman
& Morrison-Scott (1951) did not exclusively focus on Chiroptera, but their text was a checklist on ‘Palearctic
and Indian Mammals- 1758 to 1946’, and brought ‘Rajputana’ back into the
discourse concerning this bat.
Nearly a century
after Blanford (1888–91) questioned the locality of the report, Topal (1971)
commented on the improbability of Nasirabad, Rajasthan being the origin of the
type specimen discussed by Tomes (1857) on ecological grounds, and also
suggested that the locality “Nassenabad” was in all likelihood, somewhere in
the Himalayas. Topal (1971) wrote, “this site lies, on the one hand, at least
600 km. to the SW of the nearest locality of occurrence of M. blythi, and,
on the other, in a climatically and zoogeographically utterly different region,
separated by an extensive plain of hot and mostly dry climate from the
Himalayas. It is therefore improbable that Nasirabad, Rajputana, could be the
type-locality of M. blythi. Since Mussoorie, Chamba, Simla (Dodsworth
1914), Kashmir, and probably the locality Nassenabad all belong to the
climatically and zoogeographically essentially uniform area of the western
Himalaya, it is in all likelihood inhabited by a single form, the nominate one,
of Myotis blythi.”
Nevertheless, Sinha
(1980) also gave “Nasirabad, Rajasthan” as the type locality for “Vespertilio
blythii Tomes, 1857, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond., 1857. p. 53” and citing Ellerman & Morrison-Scott
(1951), described the distribution of the species in India to range from “Nasirabad
(Rajasthan) to Simla, northern India”. Sinha (1980) thus ignored Dobson (1878),
Blanford (1888-91) and Topal (1971). Sinha (1980) only examined a female
specimen sourced from Chamba (Himachal Pradesh) during this survey and not the
type specimen in the British Museum.
Bates & Harrison
(1997) in their book on Bats of the Indian Subcontinent, acknowledged
Blanford (1888–91) and Topal (1971), by marking the locality in Rajasthan with
a “?”, on their distributional map for Myotis blythii. In the section on
distribution, Bates & Harrison (1997), state the following, “Rajasthan:
Nasirabad (type loc. of blythii, but Topal, 1971 suggests the correct
locality is Nassenabad, possibly in the Himalayas)”.
Srinivasulu &
Srinivasulu (2012) in their book on: “Checklist of South Asian mammals”
mentioned the type locality Nasirabad, Rajasthan without any further comment.
Even more recently, Srinivasulu et al. (2013) (includes Y.P. Sinha as
co-author) wrote that, “Myotis blythi blythi (Tomes, 1857) has been
reported from Nasirabad (Ajmer District) which is also its type locality, but
Topal suggests that the correct locality is Naseerabad, possibly in the
Himalayas”. While acknowledging the arguments made by Topal (1971), Srinivasulu
et al. (2013) nevertheless perpetuated assumptions first made by Jerdon (1867)
by including this species in their account of bats recorded in Rajasthan.
The Serotine Bat Eptesicus
serotinus pachyomus (Tomes, 1857)
In the same
publication, Tomes (1857) also provided a description for the Serotine Bat
(then Scotophilus pachyomus), which was based on a specimen preserved in
the British Museum. According to Tomes (1857), the collector was “Capt. Boys”
and the specimen was from “Hab. India”. There is no mention of Rajasthan (then
known as Rajputana), but a non-specific type locality in the form of “India”.
Dobson (1878) wrote
in his catalogue that the type specimen for “Scotophilus pachyomus,
Tomes” was from “India” and collected by “Capt. Boys [C]”. This is completely
consistent with Tomes (1857). As far as distribution in India is concerned,
Dobson (1878) did not name Rajputana nor any contiguous region in the
distribution of the species, but “India, where it inhabits the valleys of the
Himalayas”.
The first account of
this species purportedly occurring in Rajputana or Rajasthan is by
Wroughton (1918) in a manner similar to the last species by Jerdon (1867). In
the Bombay Natural History Society’s Indian Mammal Survey, in which Wroughton
(1918) wrote, “Type Locality: Rajputana: Boys”. It appears that this is an
assumption presented as fact, quite possibly made on account of the collector
of the type specimen being Captain Boys. Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951)
further perpetuated this assumption, when they included “Rajputana” in the
distribution area of this species. Therefore, once again, the purported
association between Captain Boys and Rajputana or Nasirabad, caused the
perpetuation of assumptions as facts regarding the type locality of the
specimen.
Sinha (1980) also
wrote that E. serotinus pachyomus “is found in Rajasthan” and that the
type locality for “Scotophilus pachyomus Tomes, 1857, Proc. zool.
Soc. Lond., 1857. p. 50” as “Rajputana”. Sinha (1980) then further
added, “As informed by J.E. Hill (Brit. Mus.): It seems that Boy’s collected
the specimen in Rajputana, probably near Nasirabad, but labelled “India”; I
failed to collect it in Nasirabad”. J.E. Hill (now deceased) is consistent with
Tomes (1857) and Dobson (1878) on the facts that Captain Boys collected the
type specimen and that it was indeed labelled “India”, however it is evident
that the origin of the specimen being Nasirabad or anywhere else in Rajputana
is guess work at best. Boys being the collector of the type specimen might
well have informed Hill’s speculation regarding the locality. Despite a clear
lack of confirmation, Sinha (1980) included this species in his survey for
Rajasthan. The three Indian specimens Sinha (1980) examined for this survey
originated in “Kashmir”.
Bates & Harrison
(1997) included Rajasthan in the distributional area of the species but with
the following caveat, “Rajasthan: no fixed locality (type loc. of pachyomus)”.
Rather pertinently, Bates & Harrison (1997) also did not mark any locality
in Rajasthan on their distributional map for the subspecies. Srinivasulu &
Srinivasulu (2012) in their book on: “Checklist of South Asian mammals”
included Rajasthan in the distribution area for the subspecies pachyomus without
providing any further details.
Srinivasulu et al.
(2013) wrote that “The type locality of Eptesicus serotinus pachyomus (Tomes
1857) is “Rajputana” (present-day Rajasthan), India”. Then, citing Sinha
(1980), Srinivasulu et al. (2013) added “The type probably has been collected
from Nasirabad (Ajmer District)”. Despite a lack of confirmation regarding the
origin of the type specimen and the absence of any other evidence of this bat’s
occurrence in Rajasthan, Srinivasulu et al. (2013) included this species in
their account of bats recorded in Rajasthan.
In addition,
Srinivasulu et al. (2013) also categorically stated, “The first account of bats
from Rajputana (British name for Rajasthan and its surrounding states)
dates back to 1857 in the work of R.F. Tomes who provided descriptions of Scotophilus
pachyomus (presently Eptesicus serotinus pachyomus) and Vespertilio
blythi (presently Myotis blythi blythi) collected from Nasirabad,
130 km south of Jaipur in the present-day Ajmer district”.
However, it should be
abundantly clear that Tomes (1857) never mentioned “Nasirabad” nor Rajputana
in his accounts of the two species.
Large Barbastelle Barbastella
darjelingensis (Hodgson, in Horsfield, 1855)
The first account of
this species of bat purportedly occurring in Rajasthan is provided by Wroughton
(1918). Wroughton (1918) includes “Rajputana” in the distribution of this
species on account of a specimen in the British Museum, but does not mention a
collector nor a specific locality within Rajputana for this specimen in
the survey.
A close examination
of the catalogue by Dobson (1878), reveals that in addition to the type
specimen collected by B.H. Hodgson from the district of Darjeeling (“Darjiling”
in the text) in northern West Bengal, there was one more specimen labelled from
“India” with “Capt. Boys” named as the collector. There is no mention of Rajputana
nor any specific locality in India for this specimen. Dobson (1878) also did
not mention Rajputana in the distribution of this species in the
accompanying account, “India (Darjiling, Khasia hills, Sikhim, Masuri, Simla);
Yarkand”.
This raises the
obvious question, how then did Wroughton (1918) include Rajputana in the
distribution of this species? Here too, it appears that the purported
association between Captain Boys and Nasirabad or Rajputana (Rajasthan)
led to the perpetuation of certain assumptions, similar to what transpired with
the two species described by Tomes (1857).
Ellerman &
Morrison-Scott (1951) also included Rajputana in the distribution area
of this species. Sinha (1980) however, while pointing out that Wroughton (1918)
and Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) included “Rajputana” to the range of
distribution of this species, mentions that he was unable to find any specimens
in Rajasthan for his survey. However, here too, Sinha (1980) consulted J.E.
Hill from the British Museum and wrote the following: “as informed by J.E. Hill
(B.M.) the specimen from the British Museum is probably from Nasirabad but
labelled as “India”. J.E. Hill is consistent with Dobson (1878) on the fact
that the specimen is labelled from just “India”. However, it is quite clear
that the origin of the specimen being “Nasirabad” is guess work. This is also
the first instance of the specimen being alleged to have originated in
Nasirabad, and not just Rajputana. It is quite possible that in addition
to following Wroughton (1918) and Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) as far
as Rajputana is concerned, Hill speculated that the type locality is
Nasirabad on account of the collector being Captain Boys (as Wroughton (1918)
might have done for this species earlier for Rajputana), although Sinha
(1980) does not mention Boys in this particular account.
In addition, the
specimens that Sinha (1980) examined for this survey originated from locations
in the Himalayas. Despite a clear lack of confirmation of the origin of the
relevant specimen, Sinha (1980) included this species in his survey for
Rajasthan. Bates & Harrison (1997) did not mention Rajasthan in the distributional
area of this species in their text, nor did they mark any locality in Rajasthan
on their distributional map for this species.
Srinivasulu &
Srinivasulu (2012) in their book on: “Checklist of South Asian mammals” did not
include Rajasthan in the distributional area for this species. Citing Wroughton
(1918), Ellerman & Morrison-Scott (1951) and Sinha (1980), Srinivasulu et
al. (2013) asserted, “Barbastella darjelingensis (Hodgson, 1855 in
Horsfield 1855) has been reported from Nasirabad (Ajmer District)”. Thus
Srinivasulu et al. (2013) further perpetuated their assumptions by including
this species to their account of bats recorded in Rajasthan.
Discussion and Conclusion
Our chronological
review of literature reveals that many authors believed Captain Boys to be the
collector of the relevant specimens for all three species. However, the
original descriptions and account reveal that Boys was the collector of just
two specimens (Tomes, 1857; Dobson, 1878). Tomes (1857) only traced the type
specimen for Myotis blythii with certainty to J.E. Warwick of the Surrey
Zoological Gardens in Walworth, London and merely speculated that Boys was the
collector in India. Among the three species, only one specific locality was
ever provided and this was the ambiguous “India, Nassenabad” for Myotis
blythii (Tomes 1857). The relevant specimens for Eptesicus serotinus
pachyomus and Barbastella darjelingensis were only described to have
originated in “India” (Tomes 1857; Dobson 1878).
The erroneous belief
regarding Boys evidently gained currency because authors either associated
Captain Boys with Rajputana first and then Nasirabad (for Eptesicus
serotinus pachyomus & Barbastella darjilengensis), or in the
reverse order (for Myotis blythii) (Jerdon 1867; Thomas 1915; Wroughton
1918; Sinha 1980). The connection
between Captain Boys and Rajputana or Nasirabad is unclear. It could
possibly be on account of Boys having been a cavalry officer and that Nasirabad
was a cantonment town.
On examination of
Boys’s life, it is evident that he was rather mobile through northern India. In
1843, he served as assistant to the Commissioner of Kumaon (Uttarakhand)
(Piddington 1843) and was also a combatant in the second Anglo-Sikh war (Grant
1849). Boys eventually expired in Almora (Uttarakhand) on 21 March
1854 (Editor 1854).
Authors such as
Wroughton (1918) categorically associated Captain Boys with the collection of
mammal specimens in “Rajputana” during the early period of Indian Mammalogy
(second quarter of the 19th century), however an examination of his
work reveals that Boys was by no means limited to just Rajputana nor
mammals.
Such was Boys’s
prowess in collecting specimens, that he was unanimously elected a member of
the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1842 (Prinsep 1842). Specimen contributions by
Boys range from a snail from Agra (Uttar Pradesh) (Benson 1864), a wasp from
Almora (Uttarakhand) (Turner 1912), a bird from a location in between Sindh
(now Pakistan) and Ferozepur (Indian Punjab) (Blyth 1846), to even a caracal
from Jaipur in Rajasthan (Blyth, 1845). Strickland & Strickland, in Jardine
(1852), wrote of the auction of Boys’s ornithological collection in London
which included, “the result of many years residence in the upper Gangetic
provinces of India, ….an extensive series of birds, amounting to between 500
and 600 species. Some of them very rare”. Piddington (1843) even wrote of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal providing Boys with financial assistance for
geological expeditions to the “Thibet passes” (India-Tibet border areas).
Thus it is evident
that Boys was not limited to just Rajputana in his endeavours and spent
a considerable amount of time in the Himalayas (Piddington 1843; Strickland
& Strickland, in Jardine 1852; Turner 1912). Incidentally, the Himalayas
are where Topal (1971) believed the type specimen of Myotis blythii to
originate from based on its ecology, and where there are at least two
localities by the name Nasirabad (one in Haridwar district in the state of
Uttarakhand, and the other in the Hunza district of Pakistan Occupied Ladakh).
It should also be
noted that errors in the provenance of specimens were not only common, but
often translated to taxonomic errors of great magnitudes. In a notable example,
the eminent curator and zoologist John Edward Gray made just such an error with
a small cat specimen in the British Museum. Gray (1867) declared a new species
based on the aforementioned specimen, Pardalina warwickii or Warwick’s
Cat, which was apparently from the Himalayas. The specimen, when alive was
exhibited as a “Himalayan Cat” in the Surrey Zoological Gardens (hence named
after J.E. Warwick). It was not until 1870,
that zoologist Philip Sclater
proved that the cat was a Geoffroy’s Cat (L. geoffroyi) from South
America, a species which had been described much earlier in 1844 (Sclater
1870). Thus not only was the specimen not from the Himalayas, it was not even
Asian. Gray (1874), in his recantation, commented that, “there was an
inclination of the dealers to give Himalaya as the habitat of animals of which
they did not know whence they came, as animals of that country were interesting
and fetched a good price”.
Thus the authors
propose that until there is tangible evidence of occurrence of these three
species in Rajasthan—Myotis blythii Tomes, 1857, Eptesicus serotinus
pachyomus Tomes, 1857, and Barbastella darjeligensis, Hodgson, in
Horsfield, 1855—they should be omitted from lists and accounts of Chiroptera
occurring in Rajasthan. The bats were never originally claimed to occur in
Rajasthan (Tomes 1857; Dobson 1878) and their inclusion among bats occurring in
Rajasthan was a consequence of assumptions perpetuated as facts.
References
Agrawal, V.C. (1967). New mammal records
from Rajasthan. Labdev (Journal of Science & Technology) 5(4):
342–344.
Bates, P.J.J. & D.L. Harrison (1997). Bats of the Indian
Subcontinent. Harrison Zoological Museum Publication, Seven oaks,
Kent 258 pp.
Benda, P. & J. Mlíkovský (2008). Nomenclatural notes
on the Asian forms of Barbastella bats (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae). Lynx
39(1): 31–46.
Benson, W.H. (1864). Characters of new
land-shells from the Mahabaleshwar hills in western India, and from Agra in the
North-west provinces. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 13(75):
209–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222936408681599
Bhupathy, S. (1987). Occurrence of the
bicoloured leaf-nosed bat (Hipposideros fulvus) in Rajasthan. Journal
of the Bombay Natural History Society 84(1): 199–200.
Biswas, B. & R.K. Ghosh (1968). New records of
mammals from Rajasthan, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society
65: 481–482.
Blanford, W.T. (1888–91). Vespertilio
murinus: p. 334. In: Mammalia. Taylor & Francis, London, 617 pp.
https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.40278
Blyth, E. (1845). Rough Notes on the
Zoology of Cundahar and the Neighbouring Districts by Capt. Thos. Hutton. Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 14(157–162): 340–354.
Blyth, E. (1846). Notices and
Descriptions of various New or Little Known Species of Birds. Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal 15(169): 2–54.
Dobson, G.E. (1878). Catalogue of the
Chiroptera in the Collection of the British Museum. Taylor &
Francis, London, 550 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.55341
Editor (1835). The Orang-outang: At
the Surrey Zoological Gardens. The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and
Instruction 25(725): 401–403.
Editor (1854). Summary of Public
News. The Indian News and Chronicle of Eastern Affairs 281: 193–194.
Ellerman, J.R. & T.C.S. Morrison-Scott (1951). Checklist of
Palaearctic and Indian Mammals 1758 to 1946. British Museum (Natural
History), London, 810 pp.
Gray, J.E. (1867). 2. Notes on certain
species of cats in the Collection of the British Museum. Proceedings of the
Zoological Society of London 1867: 394–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1867.tb00434.x
Gray, J.E. (1874). IX- Notes on
Pardalina Warwickii, Gray, Felis guigna, Molina, and Felis
Geoffroyi, D’Orbigny. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History
13 (73) : 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222937408562429
Grant, P. (1849). Nominal Roll of
European Officers Killed, Wounded, or Missing. Adjutant General’s Office, Head
Quarters, Camp, Chillianwallah. The London Gazette 1 (20952): 748.
Grigson, C. (2016). Menagerie: The
History of Exotic Animals in England, 1100–1837. Oxford University
Press, London, 349pp.
Horsfield, T. (1855). Brief notices of
several new or little-known species of Mammalia, lately discovered and
collected in Nepal, by Brian Houghton Hodgson. The Annals and Magazine of
Natural History 2(16): 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/037454809495489
Jardine, W. (1858). The Naturalists
Library Vol. XVI. Mammalia. Lions, Tigers & C., & C.W.H. Lizars,
London, 490 pp.
Jerdon, T.C. (1867). 59. Vespertilio
Blythi: p. 45. In: The Mammals of India: A Natural History of all the
Animals Known to Inhabit Continental India. Thomason College Press,
Roorkee, 320 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.54173
Piddington, H. (1843). Report of the
Curator Museum of Economic Geology, for the Month of May. Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal 12(128):520–521.
Prakash, I. (1963a). Taxonomic and
biological observations on the bats of the Rajasthan desert. Records of
the Indian Museum 59(1961): 149–170.
Prakash, I. (1963b). Zoogeography and
evolution of the mammalian fauna of Rajasthan desert. Mammalia 27:
342–351.
Prakash, I. (1973). The ecology of
vertebrates of the Indian desert, pp. 369–420. In: Mani, M.S. (ed.). Ecology
and Biogeography in India. The Hague (W. Junk), 725 pp.
Prinsep, H.T. (1842).Proceedings of the
Meeting held on August 12th, 1842. Journal of the Asiatic Society
of Bengal 11(129): 863.
Ryley, K.V. (1914). Bombay Natural
History Society’s Mammal Survey of India. No. 12. Palanpur and Mt. Abu. Journal
of the Bombay Natural History Society 22(4):
684–699.
Sclater, P.L. (1866). Additional Notes on
the Caprimulglidae. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London
1866: 581–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1866.tb00427.x
Sclater, P.L. (1870). The Secretary on
Additions to the Menagerie. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London
1870: 796–797. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1870.tb00469.x
Senacha K.R. & S. Dookia (2013). Geoffroy’s Trident
Leaf-nosed bat, Asellia tridens (Geoffroy, E., 1813) from India. Current
Science 105(1): 21–22
Sharma, S.K. (1986).Painted bats and
nests of Baya Weaver Bird. Journal of the Bombay Natural History
Society 83 (Supp.): 196.
Sinha, Y.P. (1969). Taxonomic status of Rousettus
seminudus (Mammalia: Chiroptera: Pteropidae). Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society 65(1968): 764–767.
Sinha, Y.P. (1970). Taxonomic notes on
some Indian bats. Mammalia 34: 81–92.
Sinha, Y.P. (1973). Taxonomic studies on
the Indian Horseshoe Bats of the genus Rhinolophus Lacepede. Mammalia
37(4): 603–630.
Sinha, Y.P. (1975). New records of Bats
(Chiroptera) from Rajasthan. Science & Culture 41: 608–610.
Sinha, Y.P. (1976). New record of the
Indian Sheath-tailed bat, Taphozous longimanus, from Rajasthan with
remarks on winter fat deposition in T. kachhensis. Science &
Culture 42: 168–170.
Sinha, Y.P. (1977). A new and a rare
record of fruit bat (Pteropidae) from Rajasthan (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Science
& Culture 43: 264–265.
Sinha Y.P. (1980). The bats of
Rajasthan: taxonomy and zoogeography. Records of the Zoological Survey of
India 76 (1–4): 7–63.
Sinha Y.P. (1981). New record of
Black-bearded tomb bat, Taphozous melanopogon melanopogon
Temminck from Rajasthan. Geobios 8(5): 225–226.
Sinha, Y.P. (1996). Bats in Indian Thar
Desert, pp. 349–352. In: Ghosh, A.K., Q.H. Baqri & I. Prakash (eds.). Faunal
Diversity in the Thar Desert: Gaps in research. Scientific Publishers,
Jodhpur, 410 pp.
Srinivasulu, C. & B. Srinivasulu (2012). South Asian
Mammals, Their diversity, Distribution, and Status. Springer, New York, 468
pp. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3449-8_2
Srinivasulu, C., B. Srinivasulu & Y.P. Sinha
(2013). Chapter 21. Chiropteran Fauna of Rajasthan: Taxonomy,
Distribution and Status, pp. 505–548. In: Sharma, B.K., S. Kulshreshtha &
A.R. Rahmani (eds.). Faunal Heritage of Rajasthan, India: General Background
and Ecology of Vertebrates. Springer Science+Business Media, New York, 661
pp. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0800-0_21
Strickland, H.E. & C. Strickland (1852). Illustrations of
Ornithology: Pericrocotus Erythropogius, JERDON. In: Jardine, W. Contributions
to Ornithology 1848–1852 Vol 1. Samuel Higley, London, 162 pp.
Talmale, S.S. & U. Saikia (2018). A Checklist of
Indian Bat Species (Mammalia: Chiroptera), Version 2.0. Zoological Survey
of India, 17 pp.
Thomas, O. (1915). Scientific results
from the mammal survey No. 10: The Indian bats assigned to the genus Myotis.
Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 23: 607–612.
Tomes R.F. (1857). Description of four
undescribed species of Bats. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London
25: 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.1857.tb01197.x
Topal, G. (1971). The taxonomic
position of Myotis dobsoni (Trouessart, 1879) and some statistical data
to the sub-specific examination of Myotis blythi (Tomes, 1857). Annales
Historico- Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici 63: 383–400.
Turner, R.E. (1912). A monograph of the
wasps of the genus Cerceris inhabiting British India, Part II. Journal
of the Bombay Natural History Society 21(2–3): 794–819.
Warwick, J.E. (1836). Description and
History, with Anecdotes, of the Giraffes (Camelopardis
giraffa Gmel.) now Exhibiting at the
Surrey Zoological Gardens, 2nd edition. J. King, London, 16 pp.
Wroughton, R.C. (1918). Summary of the
Results from the Indian Mammal Survey of the Bombay Natural History Society. Journal
of the Bombay Natural History Society 5(4): 547–596.