|
Biodiversity Data Journal :
Research Article
|
|
Corresponding author: Son T Nguyen (truongsoniebr@gmail.com)
Academic editor: Krizler Tanalgo
Received: 17 Jul 2025 | Accepted: 24 Oct 2025 | Published: 04 Nov 2025
© 2025 Yen Vu, Hai Bui, Toan Giang, Luong Vu, Luong Nguyen, Masaharu Motokawa, Son Nguyen
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Vu Y, Bui H, Giang T, Vu L, Nguyen L, Motokawa M, Nguyen S (2025) Study of bat diversity (Mammalia, Chiroptera) in Xuan Nha Nature Reserve, Son La Province, north-western Vietnam, based on integrative insights from morphology, genetics and echolocation data. Biodiversity Data Journal 13: e165516. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.13.e165516
|
|
This study presents the results of bat diversity surveys in Xuan Nha Nature Reserve, north-western Vietnam. A total of 114 individuals, representing 19 species belonging to four families, were recorded. The Rhinolophidae family was the most species-rich, contributing eight species to the total diversity, followed by Hipposideridae, with four species. Eight species, including Rhinolophus episcopus, R. siamensis, R. cf. episcopus, R. perniger, Hipposideros griffini, Megaerops niphanae, Tylonycteris tonkinensis and Myotis muricola, were newly recorded for Xuan Nha NR. Species richness was high, but evenness was low, with Hipposideros poutensis and Rhinolophus pearsonii dominating captures. Eleven species were observed, represented by only one individual. The morphological examinations, with support from echolocation calls and preliminary genetic analysis, revealed the presence of morphologically conserved and potentially cryptic taxa. Reproductive data indicated early wet-season breeding for several species. Compared to previous surveys in the region, our study substantially expands the knowledge of chiropteran fauna in Xuan Nha. Given the high proportion of habitat-specialist and montane-associated species and the documented presence of a conservation-priority taxon, Hipposideros griffin, in Xuan Nha NR, continued biodiversity surveys incorporating molecular and acoustic methods are essential to refine species inventories and to provide information for conservation strategies for this biologically important landscape.
biodiversity, Chiroptera, cytochrome b, species richness
Vietnam, located in Indochina, is recognised as a hotspot country and amongst the world's richest regions for mammal diversity. Such biodiversity is attributed to the country's complex topography, diverse climatic conditions and distinct ecosystems (
In August 2024, within the framework of the Nagao NEF Project, we conducted an 11-day field survey in Xuan Nha NR. The results significantly expand current knowledge of bat diversity in the region by increasing the number of recorded species and providing understandings of undocumented taxa. This paper aims to update the chiropteran fauna of Xuan Nha NR by providing information related to morphological characteristics, echolocation calls and genetic information; and then we discuss species composition and diversity in north-western Vietnam to support future ecological and taxonomic research in the region.
Xuan Nha NR (20°36'–20°48'N, 104°29'–104°50'E) is positioned in the south-western area of Son La Province, north-western Vietnam, bordering Laos to the west (Fig.
Map of Vietnam showing the location of Xuan Nha NR within Son La Province. Red dots indicate bat sampling sites. The map was organised using QGIS 3.38.3 (https://www.qgis.org).
Along the mid-elevation transects (500–800 m a.s.l.), the surveyed routes crossed areas heavily altered by anthropogenic activity. Remnant patches of primary forest were fragmented and embedded in a matrix of cultivated lands and secondary vegetation (Fig.
The main field survey was conducted from 4-15 August 2024, with additional data from a two-day survey on 25-26 March 2010. Bats were surveyed using mist nets and harp traps (
Echolocation calls were recorded using an Echo Meter Touch 2 ultrasonic detector (Wildlife Acoustics, Inc., Maynard, Massachusetts, USA) connected to the smartphone device. Recordings were obtained under two conditions: (1) handheld recordings made immediately at the mist net site of captured individuals; (2) controlled recordings inside a temporary flight tent (4 × 4 × 2 m). All recordings were analysed visually using spectrograms to characterise call structure and frequency parameters. Echolocation calls were compared with references from previous studies in Vietnam (
Most specimens (109 individuals) were collected during the main survey in 2024, while only five individuals were captured on March 2010, with detailed information for each specimen presented in Suppl. material
Specimens were preserved in 95% ethanol during both the 11-days survey in 2024 and 2-days in 2010. Upon transfer to the laboratory, ethanol concentration was reduced to 70% for long-term storage. Skulls were extracted and cleaned and one to two individuals per species were selected for genetic analyses. Craniodental characters were measured under a stereoscopic microscope (SMZ 745, Nikon) using an electronic digital caliper (Mitutoyo NTD12-15PMX, 0.01 mm precision). A total of 20 metrics were measured following
DNA was isolated from tissue samples preserved in 99% ethanol using the DNeasy® Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). The mitochondrial cytochrome b (Cyt b) gene was targeted for species-level identification. PCR amplification employed primer pair SoriF/SoriR (
Chromatograms were edited and assembled in Chromas Pro (Technelysium Pty Ltd., Australia) and MEGA 11 (
Data package title: Occurrence dataset of bats (Mammalia, Chiroptera) from Xuan Nha Nature Reserve, Son La Province, north-western Vietnam.
Resource link: https://doi.org/10.15468/7d54s5
Number of datasets: 1
Data set name: Occurrence dataset of bats (Mammalia, Chiroptera) from Xuan Nha Nature Reserve, Son La Province, north-western Vietnam.
Data format: Darwin Core Event
Description: This dataset presents species occurrence of bats collected from Xuan Nha NR, Son La Province, north-western Vietnam. Field surveys were conducted in August 2024 as part of the biodiversity research programme with the support of the Nagao Natural Environment Foundation (NEF). For every occurrence record, the dataset provides information on location (GPS coordinates), date, sex, reproductive condition and trap type.
A total of 114 bat individuals were collected during two field surveys in Xuan Nha NR, representing 19 species from nine genera and four families: Hipposideridae, Pteropodidae, Rhinolophidae and Vespertilionidae. The Rhinolophidae was the most species-rich family, with eight species of one genus (R. pearsonii, R. perniger, R. affinis, R. pusillus, R. episcopus, R. siamensis, R. thomasi and R. cf. episcopus). This was followed by Hipposideridae, with four species of two genera (A. stoliczkanus, H. armiger, H. griffini and H. poutensis) and Vespertilionidae, with five species of four genera (K. cf. dongduongana, M. alticraniatus, M. muricola, P. tenuis and T. tonkinensis). The Pteropodidae family was represented by two species of two genera (C. sphinx and M. niphanae) (Table
List of bat species recorded from Xuan Nha NR. n (♂, ♀) = sample size (♂ = male, ♀ = female); Elevation: n (m) = number of individuals with elevation in metres. Recorded habitat: 1 = evergreen forest, 2 = disturbed secondary forest, 3 = cave areas, 4 = stream valley. Species records: ✓ = recorded, ✓* = newly recorded in the 2024, — = Not recorded.
| No. | Specific name | n (M♂, F♀) | Reproductive information | Elevation (m) | Habitat nature | Species recorded in this study | Previous Record (Nguyen et al. 2012) | IUCN Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hipposideridae Lydekker, 1891 | ||||||||
| 1 |
Hipposideros armiger (Hodgson, 1835) |
3 (2♂, 1♀) | 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 2 (650 m), 1 (750 m) | 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 2 |
Hipposideros griffini Vu, Puechmaille, Denzinger, Dietz, Csorba, Bates, Teeling & Schnitzler, 2012 |
1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (650 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | NT |
| 3 | Hipposideros poutensis Allen, 1906 | 39 (21♂, 18♀) | 3♀ (3 Lactating), 15♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (600 m), 4 (650 m), 8 (700 m), 15 (750 m), 7 (800 m), 2 (850 m), 2 (910 m) | 1, 2, 3, 4 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 4 | Hipposideros gentilis Andersen, 1918 | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 5 | Aselliscus stoliczkanus (Dobson, 1871) | 3 (0♂, 3♀) | 3♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (750 m), 2 (800 m) | 1, 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| Pteropodidae Brisson, 1762 | ||||||||
| 6 |
Cynopterus sphinx (Vahl, 1797) |
8 (2♂, 6♀) | 3♀ (2 Lactating, 1 Pregnant, 1 with newborn), 3♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (600 m), 5 (700 m), 2 (750 m) | 2, 4 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 7 | Megaerops niphanae Yenbutra & Felten, 1983 | 7 (3♂, 4♀) | 2♀ (2 Lactating), 2♀ (Not reproductive) | 3 (600 m), 2 (700 m), 2 (750 m) | 2, 4 | ✓* | — | LC |
| 8 | Sphaerias blanfordi (Thomas, 1891) | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| Rhinolophidae Gray, 1825 | ||||||||
| 9 | Rhinolophus affinis Horsfield, 1823 | 1 (0♂, 1♀) | 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (750 m) | 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 10 | Rhinolophus episcopus Allen, 1923 | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (600 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | LC |
| 11 | Rhinolophus siamensis Gyldenstolpe, 1917 | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (750 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | LC |
| 12 | Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851 | 32 (5♂, 27♀) | 6♀ (5 Lactating, 1 Pregnant), 21♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (500 m), 4 (600 m), 1 (650 m), 1 (700 m), 20 (750 m), 5 (800-850 m) | 2, 4 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 13 | Rhinolophus pusillus Temminck, 1834 | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (650 m) | 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 14 | Rhinolophus cf. episcopus Allen, 1923 | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (750 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | LC |
| 15 |
Rhinolophus thomasi K. Andersen, 1905 |
7 (5♂, 2♀) | 1♀ (1 Lactating), 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 2 (600 m), 5 (800 m) | 2, 4 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 16 | Rhinolophus rouxii Temminck, 1835 | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 17 | Rhinolophus perniger Hodgson, 1843 | 1 (0♂, 1♀) | 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (600 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | LC |
| Vespertilionidae Gray, 1821 | ||||||||
| 18 | Kerivoula cf. dongduongana Vuong et al. 2018 | 4 (0♂, 4♀) | 4♀ (Not reproductive) | 4 (900 m) | 1 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 19 | Murina cyclotis Dobson, 1872 | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 20 | Myotis alticraniatus Osgood, 1932 | 1 (0♂, 1♀) | 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (800 m) | 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 21 | Myotis muricola (Gray, 1864) | 1 (0♂, 1♀) | 1♀ (Not reproductive) | 1 (950 m) | 2 | ✓* | — | LC |
| 22 | Pipistrellus tenuis (Temminck, 1840) | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (800 m) | 2 | ✓ | ✓ | LC |
| 23 | Pipistrellus abramus (Temminck, 1840) | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 24 | Pipistrellus coromandra Gray, 1838 | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 25 | Pipistrellus javanicus Gray, 1838 | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 26 | Ia io Thomas, 1902 | — | ✓ | NT | ||||
| 27 | Tylonycteris pachypus (Temminck, 1840) | — | ✓ | LC | ||||
| 28 | Tylonycteris tonkinensis Tu, Csorba, Ruedi & Hassanin, 2017 | 1 (1♂, 0♀) | — | 1 (600 m) | 4 | ✓* | — | LC |
Capture success varied by trap type: harp traps accounted for 88 individuals (77.2%), proving effective for Rhinolophus and Hipposideros species, while mist nets (26 individuals, 22.8%) exclusively captured frugivorous taxa, such as C. sphinx and M. niphanae. Species evenness was low, with captures dominated by a few abundant taxa. Signs of reproductive activity, including pregnancy, lactation or the presence of newborns, were observed in 15 females across five species, while 54 females showed no evidence of breeding.
Four species of Hipposideridae were recorded (H. armiger, H. griffini, H. poutensis, A. stoliczkanus). H. griffini is the first record from Xuan Nha NR. H. larvatus in the previous report from this area (
Hipposideros armiger (Hodgson, 1835)
H. armiger is amongst the largest members of Hipposideridae and widely distributed across Southeast Asia (
The echolocation call of a male H. armiger was recorded at the capture site (mist net, 650 m a.s.l.). This individual emitted a narrowband CF-FM structure (Fig.
Hipposideros griffini Vu, Puechmaille, Denzinger, Dietz, Csorba, Bates, Teeling & Schnitzler, 2012
H. griffini was first described from Cat Ba Island and subsequently recorded in Chu Mom Ray NP (Central Highlands) and Cat Tien NP (southern part of Vietnam) (
External measurements of bat specimens. Values are presented as min–max (upper row) and mean ± SD (lower row, if n ≥ 3). All measurements are in millimetres, except Wt (grams).
|
Character |
HB |
T |
HF |
E |
FA |
Wt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
H. armiger |
87.7–95.7 92.16±3.07 |
62.6–68.2 64.71±3.84 |
17.7–17.8 17.73±0.06 |
30.7–32.7 31.73±1 |
92.6–98.9 94.73±5.42 |
47–66 57.67±6.28 |
|
H. griffini |
88.8 |
60.3 |
16.3 |
28.3 |
87.6 |
54 |
|
H. poutensis |
59.5–71.1 65.20±2.93 |
30.5–47.7 37.24±3.05 |
8.4–14 10.72±1.12 |
11.6–29.3 21.53±2.9 |
54.7–61 58.44±1.56 |
10.25–19.5 14.52±1.88 |
|
A. stoliczkanus |
40.7–45.4 43.07±2.35 |
35.6–39.4 37.53±1.9 |
6.3–6.9 6.63±0.31 |
7.7–10.2 9.20±1.32 |
41.3–42.5 42.07±0.67 |
4.5–6.3 5.12±1.03 |
|
C. sphinx |
79.2–97.8 89.94±6.68 |
11–14.4 12.21±1.33 |
11.6–16.4 14.43±1.55 |
18.9–23.3 21.00±1.46 |
68.2–73.5 71.15±1.89 |
37–61 45.63±8.81 |
|
M. niphanae |
70–87.6 80.64±5.87 |
— |
9.8–12.6 11.20±0.88 |
15.6–17.1 16.56±0.48 |
54.8–58.6 56.57±1.56 |
26.15–32 28.41±2.02 |
|
R. affinis |
50.2 |
22.3 |
7.8 |
18.2 |
46.2 |
8.1 |
|
R. episcopus |
41.8 |
21.9 |
8.5 |
23.4 |
42.1 |
6 |
|
R. siamensis |
40.7 |
18.4 |
7.3 |
19.3 |
37.3 |
3.07 |
|
R. pearsonii |
50.4–64.3 60.31±2.55 |
10.1–27.2 20.23±2.92 |
8.8–13.1 11.28±0.94 |
15.8–25.3 22.62±2.41 |
48.1–54.8 52.23±1.53 |
8.85–13 10.24±1.03 |
|
R. pusillus |
39.8 |
23.9 |
7.2 |
15.6 |
35.4 |
4.2 |
|
R. cf. episcopus |
44.7 |
18.1 |
8.2 |
23.1 |
43.2 |
4.51 |
|
R. thomasi |
45.1–53.2 48.79±2.51 |
20.8–27.6 23.09±2.41 |
7.1–8.5 7.89±0.43 |
14.7–17.8 16.74±1.21 |
38–43.9 42.38±2.43 |
6.3–8.5 7.12±0.8 |
|
R. perniger |
83.2 |
59.5 |
18.4 |
37.5 |
73.4 |
48 |
|
K. cf. dongduongana |
34.3–40.4 37.90±2.64 |
39.8–41.6 40.88±0.76 |
6.5–7.5 6.95±0.42 |
12.9–14.5 13.33±0.78 |
33.5–35.4 34.55±0.79 |
4.6–5 4.83±0.21 |
|
M. alticraniatus |
41.6 |
36.72 |
5.3 |
10.17 |
31.8 |
2.7 |
|
M. muricola |
45.3 |
45.8 |
62 |
12.1 |
36.5 |
3.4 |
|
P. tenuis |
41.1 |
31.5 |
5.6 |
10.9 |
28.1 |
2.6 |
|
T. tonkinensis |
45.2 |
28.2 |
5.7 |
10.2 |
25.7 |
5.1 |
The skull is robust, with a smooth dorsal cranial profile. The braincase is flattened and less globular, with a short, flattened rostrum lacking the steep slope seen in H. armiger. The rostrum–frontal transition forms a gentle incline, the sagittal crest is well developed and the lambda point is prominent. Zygomatic arches are strong and evenly curved, without the inward bend typical of H. armiger (Fig.
Craniodental measurements with abbreviations shown in Suppl. material
|
Character |
Species (n) |
||||||
|
H. armiger (3) |
H. griffini (1) |
H. poutensis (39) |
A. stoliczkanus (3) |
C. sphinx (8) |
M. niphanae (7) |
||
|
GTL |
31.15–32.79 32.10±0.85 |
30.11 |
22.34–23.26 22.86±0.24 |
14.81–15.19 15.04±0.2 |
30.47–33.09 31.47±0.84 |
26.93–27.75 27.31±0.27 |
|
|
CCL |
28.87–31.26 30.07±1.27 |
26.78 |
17.21–18.21 17.77±0.21 |
10.81–11.21 10.97±0.21 |
25.08–27.11 25.91±0.71 |
21.77–23.68 22.66±0.61 |
|
|
CM3L |
12.45–13.05 12.78±0.31 |
11.42 |
8.45–9.03 8.71±0.13 |
4.96–5.19 5.09±0.12 |
10.32–11.17 10.58±0.28 |
7.98–8.62 8.36±0.26 |
|
|
CP4L |
5.48–5.61 5.55±0.11 |
5.31 |
3.63–4.17 3.90±0.15 |
2.03–2.17 2.11±0.07 |
7.77–8.67 8.07±0.28 |
6.05–6.4 36.28±0.14 |
|
|
P4M3L |
9.38–9.45 9.42±0.04 |
8.98 |
5.96–6.57 6.32±0.13 |
3.63–3.88 3.74±0.13 |
4.34–4.78 4.59±0.15 |
3.56–4.17 3.84±0.23 |
|
|
M1M3L |
7.54–7.81 7.71±0.15 |
7.39 |
4.71–5.35 5.07±0.14 |
2.98–3.09 3.05±0.06 |
2.11–2.47 2.22±0.11 |
1.65–2.11 1.80±0.16 |
|
|
MAW |
15.24–15.94 15.58±0.35 |
15.45 |
10.71–11.69 11.27±0.21 |
7.03–7.33 7.16±0.16 |
— |
— |
|
|
BCH |
11.65–12.13 11.85±0.25 |
11.45 |
6.86–7.53 7.18±0.16 |
5.05–5.13 5.08±0.04 |
9.96–11.99 10.74±0.64 |
9.85–10.61 10.16±0.24 |
|
|
BB |
13.63–14.26 13.88±0.34 |
13.67 |
9.56–10.31 10.01±0.22 |
6.11–6.55 6.26±0.25 |
14.13–15.21 14.62±0.36 |
12.58–13.53 13.11±0.31 |
|
|
RW |
9.45–9.75 9.58±0.15 |
9.14 |
6.44–7.0 96.76±0.15 |
4.03–4.47 4.25±0.22 |
— |
— |
|
|
IOW |
4.32–4.83 4.55±0.26 |
3.78 |
3.18–3.57 3.35±0.12 |
1.69–1.83 1.77±0.07 |
6.36–7.27 6.63±0.28 |
5.78–6.85 6.25±0.38 |
|
|
ZYW |
18.02–18.21 18.13±0.1 |
17.62 |
12.32–13.11 12.74±0.19 |
7.31–7.61 7.43±0.16 |
18.88–21.11 19.74±0.67 |
17.37–18.31 17.91±0.34 |
|
|
C1C1W |
8.53–8.72 8.63±0.1 |
8.11 |
5.01–5.78 5.51±0.17 |
3.19–3.27 3.22±0.04 |
6.32–7.65 6.76±0.44 |
5.17–5.84 5.44±0.25 |
|
|
M3M3W |
12.84–12.95 12.88±0.06 |
11.65 |
8.28–9.04 8.63±0.16 |
5.01–5.18 5.10±0.09 |
8.98–10.05 9.59±0.38 |
7.91–8.52 8.19±0.22 |
|
|
ML |
21.71–23.22 22.54±0.77 |
20.23 |
14.79–15.81 15.34±0.21 |
9.21–9.33 9.27±0.06 |
23.39–24.57 23.79±0.42 |
19.24–20.25 19.78±0.34 |
|
|
CPH |
6.51–7.71 7.09±0.6 |
6.31 |
4.01–4.78 4.34±0.14 |
2.02–2.08 2.05±0.03 |
11.27–13.17 12.31±0.71 |
10.08–11.12 10.60±0.37 |
|
|
cm3L |
13.48–14.21 13.94±0.4 |
12.69 |
8.98–9.61 9.32±0.15 |
5.31–5.38 5.34±0.04 |
11.37–12.35 11.67±0.33 |
8.91–9.58 9.30±0.25 |
|
|
cp4L |
4.94–5.17 5.08±0.12 |
4.71 |
3.12–3.59 3.35±0.11 |
1.71–1.72 1.71±0.01 |
7.35–8.24 7.69±0.31 |
5.72–6.2 55.98±0.2 |
|
|
p4m3L |
10.55–10.84 10.67±0.15 |
10.12 |
6.75–7.31 7.04±0.13 |
4.05–4.16 4.10±0.06 |
6.05–6.43 6.25±0.12 |
5.01–5.53 5.23±0.17 |
|
|
m1m3L |
8.72–8.95 8.87±0.13 |
8.36 |
5.53–6.07 5.82±0.14 |
3.45–3.54 3.49±0.05 |
3.64–3.98 3.82±0.12 |
2.95–3.47 3.20±0.17 |
|
|
Character |
Species (n) |
||||||
|
R . affinis (1) |
R . episcopus (1) |
R . siamensis (1) |
R . pearsonii (32) |
R . pusillus (1) |
R . cf. episcopus (1) |
||
|
GTL |
18.96 |
17.69 |
15.66 |
22.78–23.85 23.29±0.3 |
15.01 |
17.76 |
|
|
CCL |
14.95 |
13.79 |
12.29 |
18.14–19.19 18.66±0.27 |
11.54 |
14.16 |
|
|
CM3L |
7.29 |
6.38 |
5.76 |
8.97–9.78 9.32±0.21 |
5.34 |
6.71 |
|
|
CP4L |
3.25 |
2.85 |
2.46 |
4.07–4.69 4.27±0.16 |
1.84 |
3.05 |
|
|
P4M3L |
5.31 |
4.57 |
4.21 |
6.32–7.08 6.68±0.16 |
3.95 |
4.88 |
|
|
M1M3L |
4.45 |
3.77 |
3.44 |
5.01–5.73 5.38±0.16 |
3.18 |
3.87 |
|
|
MAW |
9.18 |
8.97 |
7.83 |
10.48–11.12 10.80±0.19 |
7.33 |
8.91 |
|
|
BCH |
6.94 |
6.73 |
5.83 |
7.31–7.93 7.61±0.14 |
5.89 |
6.95 |
|
|
BB |
8.82 |
7.93 |
7.09 |
9.94–10.84 10.24±0.22 |
6.76 |
7.96 |
|
|
RW |
5.42 |
4.83 |
3.96 |
5.69–6.21 5.99±0.13 |
3.99 |
5.09 |
|
|
IOW |
2.79 |
2.51 |
2.07 |
2.11–2.84 2.43±0.16 |
2.17 |
2.41 |
|
|
ZYW |
9.97 |
7.97 |
7.29 |
11.08–12.09 11.61±0.25 |
7.27 |
8.17 |
|
|
C1C1W |
4.98 |
3.88 |
3.39 |
5.72–6.49 6.09±0.17 |
3.42 |
3.62 |
|
|
M3M3W |
7.34 |
5.83 |
5.01 |
8.33–9.18 8.71±0.23 |
5.33 |
5.71 |
|
|
ML |
12.77 |
11.29 |
9.05 |
15.89–16.89 16.27±0.28 |
9.73 |
10.12 |
|
|
CPH |
2.75 |
2.35 |
1.99 |
3.11–3.65 3.39±0.12 |
1.82 |
1.98 |
|
|
cm3L |
7.61 |
6.64 |
5.37 |
9.57–10.42 9.98±0.21 |
5.68 |
5.94 |
|
|
cp4L |
2.79 |
2.22 |
1.67 |
3.58–4.13 3.84±0.15 |
1.93 |
2.21 |
|
|
p4m3L |
5.66 |
4.85 |
4.13 |
7.01–7.74 7.37±0.18 |
4.28 |
4.43 |
|
|
m1m3L |
4.98 |
4.02 |
3.46 |
5.73–6.38 6.03±0.15 |
3.64 |
3.81 |
|
|
Character |
Species (n) |
||||||
|
R. thomasi (7) |
R. perniger (1) |
K. cf. dongduongana (4) |
M. alticraniatus (1) |
M. muricola (1) |
P. tenuis (1) |
T. tonkinensis (1) |
|
|
GTL |
18.58–19.01 18.83±0.16 |
33.54 |
14.03–14.14 14.09±0.06 |
12.35 |
14.21 |
12.34 |
12.65 |
|
CCL |
14.61–14.91 14.76±0.15 |
26.23 |
12.42–12.58 12.52±0.07 |
9.34 |
12.21 |
9.74 |
10.13 |
|
CM3L |
7.02–7.35 7.15±0.13 |
12.59 |
5.05–5.19 5.14±0.06 |
4.38 |
5.35 |
4.14 |
3.92 |
|
CP4L |
3.21–3.31 3.24±0.03 |
5.72 |
2.55–2.58 2.56±0.01 |
2.15 |
2.45 |
1.88 |
1.56 |
|
P4M3L |
5.29–5.49 5.35±0.07 |
8.98 |
3.37–3.54 3.45±0.08 |
3.08 |
4.03 |
3.22 |
3.06 |
|
M1M3L |
4.21–4.55 4.38±0.13 |
7.32 |
— |
2.61 |
3.22 |
2.71 |
2.53 |
|
MAW |
9.06–9.24 9.17±0.07 |
— |
7.38–7.58 7.45±0.09 |
6.27 |
7.13 |
6.53 |
7.03 |
|
BCH |
6.88–7.29 7.04±0.17 |
10.24 |
4.42–4.54 4.50±0.05 |
4.71 |
4.86 |
4.35 |
3.17 |
|
BB |
8.62–8.94 8.78±0.12 |
13.05 |
6.65–6.75 6.69±0.05 |
5.95 |
6.75 |
6.13 |
4.45 |
|
RW |
5.16–5.49 5.32±0.13 |
8.43 |
— |
— |
— |
4.07 |
— |
|
IOW |
2.39–2.79 2.61±0.17 |
3.14 |
3.24–3.52 3.36±0.12 |
3.01 |
3.22 |
3.24 |
3.85 |
|
ZYW |
9.58–9.97 9.73±0.14 |
15.66 |
7.93–8.31 8.16±0.16 |
6.97 |
8.83 |
7.52 |
8.96 |
|
C1C1W |
4.59–4.98 4.78±0.15 |
8.69 |
3.19–3.32 3.27±0.06 |
2.98 |
3.52 |
3.71 |
3.91 |
|
M3M3W |
7.14–7.34 7.25±0.07 |
11.18 |
5.06–5.2 5.14±0.06 |
4.55 |
5.79 |
5.02 |
5.38 |
|
ML |
12.57–12.79 12.68±0.08 |
22.98 |
9.13–9.49 9.31±0.16 |
8.68 |
10.43 |
8.54 |
8.81 |
|
CPH |
2.61–2.73 2.66±0.05 |
5.72 |
2.83–3.05 2.95±0.1 |
2.06 |
3.11 |
2.24 |
2.42 |
|
cm3L |
7.33–7.69 7.54±0.13 |
13.48 |
5.42–5.51 5.47±0.04 |
4.66 |
5.65 |
4.45 |
4.23 |
|
cp4L |
2.32–2.79 2.55±0.17 |
5.38 |
2.33–2.39 2.36±0.03 |
1.87 |
2.07 |
1.43 |
1.21 |
|
p4m3L |
5.67–6.07 5.86±0.16 |
10.03 |
— |
3.27 |
4.02 |
3.41 |
3.12 |
|
m1m3L |
4.93–5.18 5.05±0.1 |
8.16 |
— |
2.95 |
3.37 |
2.85 |
2.81 |
(Left) Cranium of H. poutensis (A–C) and A. stoliczkanus (a–c) in dorsal (A, a), lateral (B, b) and ventral (C, c) views; mandible in dorsal (D, d) and lateral (E, e) views; (Right) Phylogeny based on Cyt b sequences of Hipposideridae bats. Bootstrap support values (BS) are shown at nodes.
The echolocation call of an adult male consisted of narrowband CF-FM signals (Fig.
Hipposideros poutensis Allen, 1906
In the study, 39 individuals of H. poutensis (21♂, 18♀) were recorded (Table
The specimen clustered within the H. poutensis lineage on the phylogenetic tree, with strong support and showed the closest genetic relationship with specimens collected from Bai Tu Long Island (OP142137), followed by population from Cat Ba Island (OP142143–OP142145) (Fig.
Aselliscus stoliczkanus (Dobson, 1871)
A. stoliczkanus is widely distributed across north-western and central Vietnam (
Two species of fruit bats were recorded during this survey (Table
Cynopterus sphinx (Vahl, 1797)
C. sphinx is common, occurring across lowland and edge habitats. Adults show short orange-brown dorsal pelage, a greyish ventral side and a darker mantle region, more pronounced in males. Juveniles are paler with an overall greyish tone. The ears are brown with a distinctive whitish margin and the interfemoral membrane is narrow, but evident, with a short tail extending slightly beyond it. Compared with Megaerops, C. sphinx is larger-bodied, more robust, with a more developed interfemoral membrane and a diagnostic white ear margin (absent in Megaerops). Cranially, the skull is elongate, narrowing anteriorly (Fig.
Megaerops niphanae Yenbutra & Felten, 1983
This is a small pteropodid bat. The species is easily recognised by its soft, light brownish-grey pelage and absence of a tail. The flight membranes are pale grey with weak pigmentation, while the ears, muzzle and limbs are pale brownish, giving a subtly translucent appearance. Cranially, the skull is short (Fig.
Eight species of Rhinolophidae were documented. Four species (R. episcopus, R. siamensis, R. cf. episcopus and R. perniger) are newly recorded, while R. affinis, R. thomasi, R. pearsonii and R. pusillus had previously been reported by
Rhinolophus affinis Horsfield, 1823
Only a female R. affinis was recorded showing no signs of reproductive activity. This species is a medium-sized horseshoe bat. Externally, it has a broad horseshoe with a deep median emargination, rounded connecting process and a moderately convex sella lacking basal lappets; the lancet is subtriangular with an unreduced tip. The pelage is soft, dark greyish-brown. The skull is small, with well-developed lateral nasal compartments and narrow interorbital constriction. The dentition shows a slightly reduced P2 within the tooth row. In comparison with R. thomasi (Fig.
Rhinolophus thomasi K. Andersen, 1905
One lactating female of R. thomasi was observed. Compared to R. affinis, R. thomasi has slightly smaller zygomatic, braincase breadths and its mandible is thinner and shorter. Externally, it shows a narrow, rectangular horseshoe and a broad, bluntly pointed lancet. The pelage is uniformly light grey with a metallic sheen, dense and velvety, with pale bases and darker tips (Fig.
Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851
A total of 32 individuals of R. pearsonii were captured and were the most common species of Rhinolophus in the survey. Six females were reproductively active (five lactating, one pregnant). This species has a broad rostrum and a well-developed braincase. Cranial dimensions include GTL 22.78–23.85 mm, CM3L 8.97–9.78 mm and ML 16.27 ± 0.28 mm. The molars are marked by high, sharp cusps (Fig.
Rhinolophus perniger Hodgson, 1843
Previously, R. perniger was considered a subspecies within the R. luctus complex; however, studies of
Rhinolophus pusillus Temminck, 1834
This species is amongst the smallest horseshoe bats (Wt 4.2 g, FA 35.4 mm, CCL 11.54 mm), with proportionally small ears and nose-leaf and weakly developed supplementary leaflets (Fig.
Rhinolophus episcopus Allen, 1923
The male R. episcopus has morphometric measurements: HB 41.8 mm, TL 21.9 mm, HF 8.5 mm, EL 23.4 mm, FA 42.1 mm and Wt 6 g. The bat has light brown pelage, large ears and a well-developed nose-leaf. The horseshoe is broad, covering the muzzle, with small lateral leaflets and a visible median notch. The lancet is elongated with convex margins and a rounded tip (Fig.
In the R. macrotis complex, craniodental differences can be detected even amongst sympatric taxa. Comparative measurements between R. episcopus and R. cf. episcopus specimens collected from the same locality revealed that R. episcopus exhibits smaller CCL (13.79 mm vs. 14.16 mm) and BCH (6.73 mm vs. 6.95 mm) relative to R. cf. episcopus. Dental measurements such as CM3L (6.38 mm vs. 6.71 mm) and CP4L (2.85 mm vs. 3.05 mm) are smaller in R. episcopus. Conversely, R. episcopus displays a broader interorbital width (IOW). In this study, Cyt b sequencing was attempted for the specimen, but the obtained fragment (~ 500 bp) was insufficient in length and quality to be included in phylogenetic analyses. However, based on external morphology and craniodental traits, the identification of the specimen as R. episcopus is considered reliable. The echolocation call of this male was a broadband FM-CF-FM structure (Fig.
Rhinolophus siamensis Gyldenstolpe, 1917
R. siamensis initially described as a subspecies of R. macrotis, has since been elevated to species level, with a wide distribution in Southeast Asia (
Rhinolophus cf. episcopus Allen, 1923
In this study, R. cf. episcopus was represented by a single adult male. External measurements included FA of 43.2 mm, E of 23.1 mm and Wt of 4.51 g. The ears were large, approximately half the length of the forearm and the pelage was soft, woolly and brown dorsally with a slightly paler ventral surface. The cranial profile is broad, with MAW of 8.91 mm and ZYW of 8.17 mm. The mandible is well-developed, with a ML of 10.12 mm. The skull morphology shows a more heavily built cranial structure compared to other members of the macrotis group (Fig.
Several species reported by
Kerivoula cf. dongduongana Vuong, Hassanin, Furey, Nguyen & Csorba, 2018
According to
Myotis alticraniatus Osgood, 1932
M. alticraniatus was once considered a subspecies of M. siligorensis in Vietnam, but more recent taxonomic studies by
Myotis muricola (Gray, 1864)
A female was collected at 950 m a.s.l. The pelage is soft and dense, pale brownish-grey dorsally and dirty white ventrally with dark hair roots (Fig.
Pipistrellus tenuis (Temminck, 1840)
Externally, P. tenuis has dark brown dorsal pelage with a slightly paler ventral side and a short broad tragus (Fig.
Tylonycteris tonkinensis Tu, Csorba, Ruedi & Hassanin, 2017
Previously, Vietnamese populations were identified as T. robustula. However, integrative analyses combining genetic and morphological data by
Acoustic recordings revealed FM calls with peak energy at 58.2 ± 1.3 kHz, starting at 88.5 kHz and ending at 38.6 kHz (Fig.
Our survey revealed a diverse bat assemblage, documented 19 bat species, expanding the known bat diversity in this ecosystem. The observed bat community structure is characterised by high species richness, but low evenness. This was due to the dominance of a few species, especially H. poutensis and R. pearsonii, which accounted for a disproportionate share of the captures. This skewed abundance distribution aligns with previous research on tropical bat populations, in which factors, such as habitat specialisation, roosting ecology and behavioural traits, strongly influence local species dominance (
Although our findings indicate higher species richness compared to the previous survey by
Bat assemblages in Xuan Nha NR reflect complex interactions between ecological specialisation and landscape dynamics. High-elevation habitats with cooler microclimates support montane-adapted species (
This study also provides the first distributional record of H. griffini in north-western Vietnam. Due to the common elevational range, it is likely that other individuals of this species may occur in adjacent regions, such as Xuan Lien and Ta Xua NR. Our survey also suggests that H. griffini and H. armiger are sympatric species due to our observations that they inhabit the same open forest and understorey habitat. However, H. armiger consistently dominates population size within the shared distribution range, which may indicate competitive advantages in roost selection.
Our study employed the integrative approaches, combining external morphology, craniodental characters, preliminary genetic data and echolocation analysis to improve species identification. In this study, analyses, based on external morphology and craniodental characters, resulted in the classification of four morphological groups represented by four families. In particular, dentition characteristics, coronoid process structure and braincase height have been extensively demonstrated to be species-specific and can be considered as diagnostic characters, not only in bats (
Our findings strongly advocate the need for expanded multi-seasonal bat surveys at Xuan Nha NR to better study dynamics in species composition, reproductive phenology and habitat use. Given the moderate to high species richness observed and the potential for cryptic species, the ecosystems of Xuan Nha NR warrant further conservation priority. Our survey recorded Hipposideros griffini, a species listed as Near Threatened (NT) on the IUCN Red List due to ongoing habitat loss and its narrow distribution range. The presence of this species indicates the ecological significance of Xuan Nha NR and highlights the need for targeted management strategies to protect more taxa. Continued protection of mature forest patches and cave systems is critical to preserving the ecological integrity of this chiropteran community. Finally, our study contributes baseline data for the bat populations of north-western Vietnam and demonstrates the importance of integrating morphological, genetic and echolocation data in biodiversity assessments and conservation planning. We believe that continued research will significantly increase the known species richness of the region.
We are grateful to the authorities of Son La Province for their permissions and logistical support throughout the fieldwork. We sincerely thank Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thien Tao, Dr. Hoang Van Chung, Dr. Ngo Ngoc Hai, Dr. Ninh Thi Hoa, M.Sc. Le Tu Hoang Linh and Ms. Nguyen Phuong Linh for their invaluable support during the implementation. This research was funded by VAST for NTS and BTH under the project entitled “Research on the diversity of small mammals in the high mountain, cave and limestone ecosystems of Northern and Central Vietnam” and grant number ĐL0000.04/24–26. VHY and VKL were supported by the Nagao NEF to under the project entitled “Species diversity of terrestrial vertebrates in the mountains of Indochina”. VHY was funded by the Master's and PhD Scholarship Programme of the Vingroup Innovation Foundation (VINIF), under grant code VINIF.2024.ThS.54.
This research is funded by the VAST under grant number ĐL0000.04/24–26.
Institute of Biology (IB), Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology (VAST), Hanoi, Vietnam.
The study followed national and institutional ethical guidelines for biodiversity research and specimen handling. No ethical or security issues are associated with the data presented.
STN–Specimens management; Morphological identifications; Funding acquisition; Final manuscript approval; Supervision.
YHV–Formal analysis and interpretation; Visualisation; Dataset curation and analyses; Manuscript writing.
HTB–Conceptualisation; Software assistant; Manuscript revision; Funding acquisition; Final manuscript approval; Supervision.
MM–Final manuscript approval; Funding acquisition.
LKV–Fieldwork assistant.
TTG–Fieldwork assistant.
LTN–Echolocation analyses.
Bat dataset table from the field survey in Xuan Nha NR, Son La, Vietnam (March 2010 & August 2024). Dash (–): Not determined. Habitat nature: 1 = Evergreen forest, 2 = Disturbed secondary forest, 3 = Cave areas, 4 = Stream valley.