Parahypsugo happoldorum Hutterer & Decher & Monadjem & Astrin 2019, sp. nov.

Parahypsugo happoldorum sp. nov.

Happolds’ pipistrelle

Neoromicia sp. 1: Monadjem et al., 2013: 194, 196, 199, 200, 205.

Hypsugo sp.: Decher et al., 2016: 266; Monadjem et al., 2016: 369.

Holotype

ZFMK-MAM-2009.0029, field number JD 700, collected by Jan Decher, Blaise Kadjo and Juliane Schaer on 12 December 2008. Adult male preserved in 70% ethanol, skull extracted. Frozen tissue and DNA preserved (ZFMK-TIS-4547, -4548, and -25937; ZFMK-DNA-0100417629); COI and Cyt-b sequences deposited in GenBank (accessions KT598198 and MK188525).

Type locality

Guinea, Préfécture Macenta, Simandou Mountains, Western Spur Valley, 08°33‘26.44”N, 08°55‘ 16.50”W, ca. 737 m a.s.l., in net placed across a fastflowing creek in a ravine in submontane forest.

Paratype

ZFMK-MAM-2008.0295, ♀, with two embryos preserved (Guinea, Préfécture Macenta, Foko Confluence, 8 March 2008) (ZFMK-TIS-25935; ZFMK-DNA-0100417627).

Referred specimens

ZFMK-MAM-2008.0296 (ZFMK-TIS-4549, -25936; ZFMK-DNA-0100417628), ♀ (Guinea, 2.3 km E Tourela, 14 March 2008); ZFMK-MAM- 2009.0032 (ZFMK-TIS-4550, -4551, -5938; ZFMK- DNA-0100417630), ♀ (Guinea, gallery forest on the Canga-Moribadou Road, 18 December 2008); DM 13225 (Liberia, Mount Nimba, submontane forest, 26 December 2011); reported as Neoromicia sp. 1 by Monadjem et al. (2013) who suggested that it may refer to an undescribed new species; COI sequence GenBank accession: JX508832. All preserved in alcohol and skulls extracted.

Diagnosis

Largest species of Parahypsugo (Tables 4 and 5), as defined above. Total length 92–97 mm, tail length 28–37 mm, forearm 34.6–36.5 mm, ear length 9–12 mm, body mass 7.3–9.5 g (Table 4). Free tail tip 1.2 to 1.9 mm long (Table 1; longer in Hypsugo, shorter in Pipistrellus). Thumb long (Fig. 8). Length of penis 6.4 mm, baculum 4.4 mm, thumb 7.2 mm, tragus 4.0 mm (Table 2). Greatest length of skull 14.96 mm, length of C–M 3 15.20 mm (Table 5).

Etymology

We are pleased to dedicate this new bat to Meredith and David Happold (Canberra, Australia) (Fig. 9) in recognition of their studies on African bats, and particularly of their monumental work for the Mammals of Africa volume IV on hedgehogs, shrews, and bats (Happold and Happold, 2013). As a vernacular name we propose ‘Happolds’ Pipistrelle’.

Description and comparison

Parahypsugo happoldorum gen. nov., sp. nov. is the largest species currently recognized in the genus, with a total length of 90–97 mm. The tail length (28–37 mm), however, is longer in P. eisentrauti (36–40 mm), while forearm (34.6–36.5 mm) and body mass (7.3–9.5 g) are larger in P. happoldorum than in the other three species (Table 4). The short free tail tip measures 1.2–1.9 mm, and is shorter than in most Hypsugo species (1.5–5.5 mm — Table 1).

Specimens from Guinea and the Nimba specimen are unicolored and medium brown on the dorsal and ventral surfaces. Dorsal hairs are 5 mm long on back and 3 mm at venter. Thumb, pad and lip are paler (Figs. 8 and 10).

Parahypsugo happoldorum has a broad and simply built rhinarium (Fig. 2), and the face bears two round glandular areas surrounded by longer hairs which are missing in P. bellieri (Fig. 10). Ear length is 10 mm in the holotype (9–12 mm, n = 4), and its tip is rounded; the inner ear conch bears 3 folds. The tragus (Fig. 8) of the holotype is 4.0 mm long (Table 2) and represents 40% of the ear length. The thumb of the holotype is 7.2 mm long (Table 2 and Fig. 8), the longest in the genus. The forearm of the holotype is 35.8 mm long in P. happoldorum, slightly smaller but overlapping in P. eisentrauti, but significantly shorter in P. bellieri and P. crassulus (Table 4). The penis of the holotype specimen is 6.4 mm long and covered by short whitish hairs (Fig. 3 left); the proximal part is bent and not visible from the outside. A digital x-ray of its baculum measures 4.0 mm which is straight with a larger structure on its basal part and a slightly curved cross-section (Fig. 3 middle). The bacula of P. eisentrauti and P. bellieri are much shorter (Table 2), while the baculum of P. crassulus (Heller et al., 1994; Bates et al., 2013) is only slightly shorter.

The cranium of P. happoldorum is illustrated in Figs. 4 and 11. The species is distinguished from other species (Fig. 12) by larger cranial and dental measurements, particularly in the greatest skull

the eye. Photographs by J. Decher

length and the upper and lower molar rows (Table 5). The dorsal profile is relatively flat (slightly more rounded in P. eisentrauti and P. bellieri). The large skull in P. happoldorum is mainly due to a different anterior design of the skull (Fig. 12). The rostrum is smooth and shows no traces of pits (as in Hypsugo sensu stricto — Table 6). The zygomatic arches are wide and extend posteriorly (Figs. 4 and 11).

The I 1 has a second cusp, which is shorter than the first (P. happoldorum) or almost equal in length (P. eisentrauti, P. bellieri). The second upper incisor is small, about half the length of the first, and bears traces of a second cusp (Fig. 6). In Hypsugo, Neoromicia and Pipistrellus, the I 2 almost never bears traces of a second cusp (Fig. 6). Furthermore, P 1 is absent in the few P. happoldorum specimens that have been examined to date, but is present in all other species of the genus (Fig. 7). The upper molars are widest in P. happoldorum, and this is also true for P 2.

Discussion

Based on our molecular analyses, Parahypsugo happoldorum is split into two clusters (Fig. 1; p -distances of up to 6.7% in COI and up to 5.6% in Cyt-b) but we are unable to recognize reliable morphological characters, and we therefore refrain from describing a further new species. However, cryptic species may occur within this new species which is a topic for future studies.

Specimen ZFMK-MAM-2009.0032, the only specimen caught in gallery forest on the more arid eastern side of the Simandou Ridge, is lighter on the belly, but the other specimens are brown. Cranially, the four species are quite similar. Differences are mainly due to the length of the rostrum (Fig. 9).

Other species in the genus

Currently we recognize three further species in the new genus, based on genetics (Fig. 1) and morphology (Figs. 7 and 9). However, we expect that further new species will be described in the future, particularly from the central and eastern parts of its range (see below).