Glyphonycteris Thomas 1896

Glyphonycteris

With few exceptions, Glyphonycteris has been regarded as a subgenus of Micronycter­ is since Sanborn’s (1949) influential revision of the latter taxon. However, Peffley et al. (MS) have recently shown that Micronycteris (sensu Sanborn) is not monophyletic, and suggested that Glyphonycteris and several other erstwhile subgenera (Lampronycteris, Neonycteris, and Trinycteris) be restored to generic rank.

The type species of Glyphonycteris, as originally described and designated by Thomas (1896), is G. sylvestris. Hill (1964) subsequently described another new genus, Barticonycteris, to contain the single species B. daviesi. Many workers have recognized a close relationship between G. sylvestris and B. daviesi (e.g., Hill, 1964; Koopman, 1978, 1994; Arnold et al., 1983; Genoways and Williams, 1986), and a recent phylogenetic analysis (Simmons, 1996b) confirmed that these species are sister taxa. We therefore follow Handley (1976), Genoways and Williams (1986), and Simmons (1996b) in referring daviesi to the genus Glyphonycteris. Because previous authors have not explicitly diagnosed Glyphonycteris as so defined (Barticonycteris a synonym), we provide an emended diagnosis below.

EMENDED DIAGNOSIS OF GLYPHONYCTERIS: Dorsal fur unicolored or tricolored, not bicolored; ventral fur dark brown or gray; fur on external surface of leading edge of pinna short (≤ 4 mm); pinna pointed, with concavity on posterior border near tip; interauricular band absent; ventral margin of narial horseshoe grades gradually into upper lip (without any thick ridge or free flap of skin marking boundary); chin with pair of dermal pads arranged in a ‘‘V’’ with no central papilla; fourth metacarpal shortest, fifth longest; second phalanges of wing digits III and IV longer than first phalanges; calcar markedly shorter than hindfoot; rostrum and anterior orbital region of skull inflated, dorsum of rostrum flat or convex; basisphenoid pits deep; mastoid breadth less than zygomatic breadth; P3 and P4 subequal in crown height; P3 molariform with well­developed lingual cingulum and cusp; P4 with lingual cingulum convex in outline, edge not raised, lingual cusp well developed; upper canine much less than twice the height of the inner upper incisor; outer upper incisor either absent or moved dorsally and excluded from occlusion by close apposition of inner incisor and canine; lower incisors trifid; lower premolars aligned in row on mandible, none excluded from toothrow; coronoid process low, with little slope along dorsal margin.