Molossus molossus ( Pallas, 1766 )

Loureiro, Livia Oliveira, Gregorin, Renato & Perini, Fernando Araujo, 2018, Diversity, morphological phylogeny, and distribution of bats of the genus Molossus E. Geoffroy, 1805 (Chiroptera, Molossidae) in Brazil, Zoosystema 40 (18), pp. 425-452 : 438

Molossus molossus ( Pallas, 1766)

Vespertílio molossus Pallas, 1766: 49 (type locality America). — Husson 1962: 251 (restricted to Martinique, Antilles).

Vespertilio molossus major Kerr, 1792: 97 (type locality Martinique, Antilles ). — Miller 1913: 90.

Vespertilio molossus minor Kerr, 1792: 97 (type locality Antilles).

Molossus obscurus E. Geoffroy, 1805: 279 (type locality: not specified). — Husson 1962: 258 (restricted to Martinique).

Molossus longicaudatus E. Geoffroy, 1805: 279 (type locality: not specified).

Molossus fusciventer E. Geoffroy, 1805: 279 (type locality: not specified). — Husson 1962: 257 (restricted to Martinique).

Molossus crassicaudatus E. Geoffroy, 1805: 279 (type locality: not specified).

Molossus acuticaudatus Desmarest, 1820: 116 (type locality: Brazil).

Dysopes velox Temminck, 1826: 234 (type locality: Brazil).

Molossus moxensis D’Orbigny, 1835 : pl. 11, figs 1- 4 (type locality: Moxos , Beni, Bolivia) .

Dysopes olivaceo-fuscus Wagner, 1847: 202 (type locality: Cuiaba, Mato Grosso, Brazil).

Dysopes amplexicaudatus Wagner, 1847: 203 (type locality: Caiçara, Mato Grosso, Brazil).

Molossus tropidorhynchus Gray, 1839: 6 (type locality: Cuba).

Molossus molossus obscurus – Peters 1866: 575 (name combination).

Molossus pygmaeus Miller, 1900: 162 (type locality: Curaçao, Antilles).

Molossus debilis Miller, 1913: 90 (type locality: Saint Kitts, Antilles).

Molossus fortis Miller, 1913: 89 (type locality: Luquillo, Puerto Rico).

Molossus daulensis Allen, 1916: 530 (type locality: Daule, Los RIos, Equador, Ceara, Brazil).

Molossus major crassicaudatus – Hershkovitz 1949: 454 (name combination).

Molossus molossus crassicaudatus – Koopman 1978: 21 (name combination).

Molossus molussus – Willig 1985: 671 (misspelling).

Molosus molosus – Polanco-Ochoa et al. 2000: 675 (misspelling).

EMENDED DIAGNOSIS. — Medium-sized Molossus with brown dorsal fur varying from cinnamon to cocoa brown ( Fig. 13 ). Dorsal hairs noticeably bicoloured, with pale basal band reaching 1/2 to 1/4 of total length of the hair. Forearm length averaging 40.2 mm in males (36.2-42.6) and 39.5 mm in females (36.4-42.6). Greatest length of skull averaging 17.7 mm (16.4-18.7) in males and 16.9 mm (15.6-18.6) in females ( Table 1 ). Elongated skull ( Fig. 2A ) and infraorbital foramen facing anteriorly when observed in frontal view ( Fig. 14B ). Basioccipital pits moderately deep ( Fig. 14C ) and mastoid process ventrally oriented ( Fig. 14D ). Triangular or rounded occipital with underdeveloped lambdoidal crests ( Fig. 14D ), and low sagittal crest ( Fig. 2B, E ). Elongate upper incisors with parallel tips ( Fig. 14B ). Nasal process of pre-maxilla undeveloped, not protruding over the nasal cavity ( Fig. 14E ).

VARIATION. — Dorsal pelage in M. molossus is highly variable, from cinnamon to cocoa brown. Some individuals have a very dark pelage, while others, mostly young specimens, have a grayish fur. The incisor thickness may also vary within series, going from tapered (AMNH 235285) to moderately wide and somewhat spatulated (AMNH 238351).

DISTRIBUTION. — M. molossus is one of the most widely distributed bat species in the Neotropics, occurring from southeastern United States to Argentina, and throughout the Caribbean islands ( LópezGonzález & Presley 2001). In Brazil, this species has been recorded from the state of Amazonas to Rio Grande do Sul ( Eger 2008). In the present study, we added a new record from Alagoinha, state of Alagoas (Fig. 15).

REMARKS

There is a clear morphometric difference between samples of M. molossus males from state of Rio Grande do Sul, southern Brazil, and other localities. However, no single qualitative morphological character corroborates the distinction of these samples other than the overall size. Therefore, the difference in size may be an intraspecific variation explained by latitude ( Bergmann 1847; Brown 1995; Ashton et al. 2000; Souza 2011). Future studies analyzing genetic divergence should be made to test the hypothesis that these samples are significantly different from each other.

Figures

FIG. 13. — Molossus molossus (Pallas, 1766) skull: A, dorsal view; B, frontal view; C, ventral view; D, posterior view; E, lateral view. Scale bar: 1 mm.

FIG. 2. — Variable characters in skull morphology within Molossus E. Geoffroy, 1805 (Pallas, 1766): A, B, lateral views; C, D, ventral views; E, F, posterior view; H, G, frontal view. Numbers represents characters described in the text: 1, skull robustness; 2, sagittal crest; 3, basioccipital pits; 4, projection of the canines; 5, lambdoidal crest and occipital complex; 6, mastoid process; 7, rostrum shape; 8, infraorbital foramen; 9, upper incisors; 10, nasal process. Not to scale.

FIG. 14. — Molossus molossus (Pallas, 1766). Photo courtesy of Dr Marco A. R. Mello (https://marcoarmello.wordpress.com).