An inventory
of the chiropteran fauna of Himachal Pradesh, northwestern India with some
ecological observations
Uttam Saikia 1, M.L. Thakur 2,
Mayur Bawri 3 & P.C. Bhattacherjee 4
1 High Altitude Regional Centre,
Zoological Survey of India, Saproon, Solan, Himachal Pradesh 173211, India
2 Department of Biosciences, Himachal Pradesh
University, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh 171005, India
3,4 Department of Zoology, Gauhati
University, Guwahati, Assam 781014, India
Email: 1 uttamzsi@gmail.com, 2 mlthakur75@gmail.com, 3 mayurbawri@yahoo.co,4 bhattapc@wti.org.in
Date of publication (online): 26 April 2011
Date of publication (print): 26 April 2011
ISSN 0974-7907 (online) | 0974-7893 (print)
Editor: Malcolm Pearch
Manuscript details:
Ms
# o2409
Received
22 February 2010
Final
received 15 March 2011
Finally
accepted 29 March 2011
Citation: Saikia, U., M.L. Thakur, M. Bawri & P.C. Bhattacherjee
(2011). An inventory of the chiropteran fauna of Himachal
Pradesh, northwestern India with some ecological observations. Journal
of Threatened Taxa3(4): 1637–1655.
Copyright: © Uttam Saikia, M.L. Thakur, Mayur Bawri
& P.C. Bhattacherjee 2011. Creative Commons Attribution
3.0 Unported License. JoTT allows unrestricted use of this article in
any medium for non-profit purposes, reproduction and distribution by providing
adequate credit to the authors and the source of publication.
Authors details: Uttam Saikia is currently working at High Altitude Regional Centre, Zoological
Survey of India, Solan, Himachal Pradesh. His primary research interest is
small mammalian taxonomy and also interested in reptilian taxonomy. He is also
a keen birdwatcher.
M.L.Tkakur is working as a young scientist fellow in the department of
biosciences, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla. His research interest is
avifaunal diversity of Himachal Pradesh and is currently working onpopulation status
and habitat use pattern of vultures in Himachal Pradesh, under Fast Track Scheme
sponsored by Department of Science and Technology,NewDelhi.
Mayur Bawri is a research fellow in the department of Zoology, Gauhati
University. His research interest is in large mammalian ecology especially that
of Asiatic Buffalo.
P.C. Bhattacharjee is a retired professor in zoology from Gauhati University and a well known conservationist in northeastern India. He is
currently associated with Wildlife Trust of India.
Author Contribution: US conducted the field survey,
identification of specimens and wrote the paper. MLT helped writing the paper and also accompanied in some field
trips. MB helped in getting certain literature and helped in analyzing the
results. PCB provided guidance in
planning the field survey and also helped writing the mss.
Acknowledgements: The present work is an extension of a study on the small mammalian
fauna of the Shiwaliks of Himachal Pradesh during the first author’s stint as
junior research fellow at ZSI, Solan. He is grateful to Dr. J.R.B. Alfred and Dr. Ramakrishna, former
Directors, ZSI Kolkata; Dr. K. Venkataraman, Director, ZSI, Kolkata; Dr. A.K.
Sanyal, Additional Director, ZSI, Kolkata; C. Radhakrishnan, Additional
Director, ZSI, Calicut; Dr. K. Chandra, Additional Director, ZSI, Jabalpur; Dr.
R.M. Sharma, former Officer-in-Charge, ZSI, Solan; Dr. A.K. Sidhu, Officer-in
Charge, ZSI, Solan for institutional support and encouragement. US also expresseshis gratitude to Dr. M.S. Pradhan, Retd. Scientist, ZSI, Pune and Dr. S.S.
Talmale, ZSI, Jabalpur for imparting the basic knowledge of small mammalian
taxonomy and literature support. Abhijit Das of Utkal University, Orissa and Narayan Sharma of NIAS,
Bangalore provided suggestions for improvement on the earlier versions of the
manuscript and literature support. Narayan Sharma also prepared the locality record map. Himachal Pradesh
Forest Department is also thanked for permission to visit certain areas and
manifold courtesies.
Abstract: A chiropteran inventory of Himachal Pradesh, northwestern India
is presented. Based on field
observation and the study of museum collections and published literature, the
occurrence of 28 species within 14 genera and five families is affirmed. The study also provides observations on
ecology and biology of selected species, and ecological, zoogeographical and
conservation aspects of the chiropteran fauna of Himachal Pradesh are also
discussed. Considering the lack of
studies on the bat fauna of Himachal Pradesh, it is expected that systematic
and intensive field surveys will refine significantly our knowledge of diversity
and distribution of Chiroptera in the state.
Keywords: Chiroptera, distribution, Himachal Pradesh, inventory, locality
records.
Abbreviations: AMNH - American Museum of Natural
History, New York; BB - Breadth of braincase; C1-C1 - Width across
upper canines; CBL - Condylo-basal length; CCL - Condylo-canine length; CM3- Length of the maxillary tooth-row; CM3 - Length of
mandibular tooth-row; E - Ear length; FA - Forearm length; FMNH - Field Museum
of Natural History, Chicago; GTL - Greatest length of skull; HARC - High
Altitude Regional Centre; HB - Head body length; HF - Feet length; M - Mandible
length; M3-M3 - Width across upper molars; NZC - National
Zoological Collection; TB - Length of tibia; TL - Tail length; Tr - Length of
tragus; ZSIK - Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata; ZSIS - Zoological Survey of
India, Solan; ZW - Zygomatic width.
For figures, images, tables -- click here
Introduction
The state of Himachal
Pradesh lies in the northwestern Himalaya between 30022’44”–33012’40”N
and 75040’55”–79004’20”E and encompasses an area of
55,673km2. The state
has been divided into four distinct parallel physiographic zones, namely
Shiwalik Himalaya, Lesser Himalaya, Greater Himalaya and Trans-Himalaya
covering around 10.54% of the Himalayan land mass. The Shiwalik Himalaya (up to an elevation of 1500m)
represent the southernmost zone, extending from northwest to south, 40–60
km wide and covering the districts of Sirmour, Solan, Bilaspur, Hamirpur, Una
and parts of Chamba and Kangra. The Lesser Himalaya (about 80km wide) run from north of the Shiwalik and
parallel to the great Himalayan range. This zone encompasses the districts of Shimla, Mandi and parts of the
districts of Chamba, Kullu, Kangra and Sirmour. The Great Himalayan ranges lie just north of the
Chandrabhaga River in Lahaul-Spiti and contain peaks with an elevation in
excess of 6000m. This zone covers
the Pangi region of Chamba District and certain portions of Kullu and Kinnaur
districts. The Trans-Himalayan
region, comprising Lahaul and Spiti valleys and parts of the district of
Kinnaur, is characterised by extreme cold, low precipitation and lack of
vegetation and is often referred to as cold desert (Rodger & Panwar 1988).
Himachal Pradesh has an
elevation range of 350–6,975 m. At lower elevations, four seasons: winter (December–February),
summer (March–June), monsoon (July–September) and post monsoon
(October–November) are recognised, with seasonal individuality decreasing
with elevation. In higher alpine
zones temperatures remain low throughout the year with subzero temperatures
during the winter months. The
state has an estimated forest cover of 17.15% of the total geographical area
(Joshi et al. 2001). Along the foothills, vegetation is dominated by tropical forest of Acacia and Zizyphus or
deciduous Sal (Shorea
robusta) forest. Within an elevation range of 500–1800 m, subtropical forest
of Terminalia, Albizzia or pure chir-pine (Pinus roxburghii) is found. Forest type
between 1500–3000 m can be divided into moist temperate and dry
temperate. Moist temperate forest
is dominated by various species of oak (Quercus spp.), Deodar (Cedrus deodaria), Blue Pine (Pinus wallichiana) and Rhododendron sp. The dry temperate forest is characterised
by species including Quercus sp. and Pinus gerardiana. Sub-alpine forest
in the state is composed of birch (Betula utilis) and fir (Abies spectabilis) or scrub of Rhododendron
campanulatum and Juniperus communis. Between the tree
line and the snow line, dry alpine pastures of Caragana sp., Lonicera sp., Festuca sp., and Artemisia sp. are present.
The small mammalian fauna
of Himachal Pradesh, and Chiroptera in particular, have received relatively
little recent study compared to other vertebrate groups. The first report pertaining to the
Chiroptera of Himachal Pradesh was that of Dobson (1873) who described Vespertilio
murinoides (later synonymised with Myotis blythii) from the Chamba area of
the state (erstwhile Punjab). Some
information on diversity and distribution of bat fauna of the area is available
from the past accounts of Blanford (1888–1891), Allen (1908), Dodsworth
(1913), Thomas (1915) and Lindsay (1927). Blanford (1888–1891), in his “Fauna of British India”, reported a
few species of bats from the political boundary of present Himachal Pradesh,
including Myotis muricola from Dalhousie and Shimla and Barbastella leucomelas from Shimla. Allen (1908) reported Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum, Scotophilus kuhlii and Scotoecus pallidus from Koolloo valley (Kullu valley). Dodsworth (1913) recorded seven species of bats, namely Pteropus giganteus,
Rhinolophus ferrumequinum tragatus, Nyctalus montanus, N. labiatus, Myotis
muricola, M. blythii and Pipistrellus coromandra from Shimla and the adjoining hill region. Thomas (1915) reported Myotis formosus from Dharamsala and M. blythii from Shimla. Lindsay (1927) reported the collections
made during the Mammal Survey of India organised by The Bombay Natural History
Society and recorded seven species of bats from Himachal Pradesh, namely Pteropus giganteus from Kotla (Kullu
District, erstwhile Kangra District) and Gopalpur (Kangra District), Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum tragatus from Manali (Kullu District), Pipistrellus javanicus (babu in Lindsay) from Gopalpur
(Kangra District), Nyctalus noctula (labiatus in Lindsay 1927) from Kangra (Kangra District) and Sissu (Lahaul
and Spiti District), Nyctalus leisleri from Chamba (Chamba District), Myotis mystacinus (muricola in Lindsay, 1927) from
Chirot, Pattan Valley (Lahaul and Spiti District) and Myotis muricola (caliginosus in Lindsay, 1927) from
Chatri (Chamba District) and Samayala from Kangra valley (Kangra
District). Besides these, a few
occasional species records from the state also exist and these include Plecotus auritus (Bhat et al. 1983) and Murina tubinaris (Das 2003). Of late, a few more species have been
added to the Chiropteran fauna of Himachal Pradesh (Saikia et al. 2004). However, there remains no consolidated
account of the Chiroptera of Himachal Pradesh. A perusal of published information on the mammalian fauna of
Himachal Pradesh reveals a varying number of bat species occurring in the state
from five (Mahajan & Mukherjee 1974), eight (Mehta & Julka 2002) to 23
(Chakraborty et al. 2005). A
review of the comprehensive work of Bates & Harrison (1997) reveals that 19
species of bats exist in the state. The latest account of the mammalian fauna of Himachal Pradesh by
Chakraborty et al. (2005) includes some bat species (e.g. Rhinopoma hardwickii,
Hipposideros fulvus, Kerivoula picta, Eptesicus serotinus, Hesperotenus
tickelli etc.) that need confirmation as the authors do not mention the
source of authentication of the same (voucher specimens etc.). Das (1986, 2003) includes Himachal
Pradesh within the distributional range of Rhinolophus rouxii, a taxon which, in the northern part of its range (which includes
Himachal Pradesh), is now referable to R. sinicus (see Thomas 2000). Bates & Harrison (1997), referring
to Chakraborty (1983), report Otonycteris hemprichii from the Nagrota area of Himachal Pradesh but
this locality is in Jammu and Kashmir (between Jammu and Udhampur on NH
1A). Accordingly, the above
species are excluded from the present inventory. In view of the scattered nature of published information and
the ambiguity regarding diversity and distribution of the bat fauna of Himachal
Pradesh, this paper seeks, inter alia, to collate available information and to
present an up to date account of the same.
Methods
The present account is
based largely on the first author’s collections and field observations mostly
in the Shiwalik area of Himachal Pradesh during 2004–2006. Earlier collections of Chiroptera held
at the High Altitude Regional Centre, Zoological Survey of India, Solan were examined and published literature on the bat
fauna of Himachal Pradesh was reviewed. The locality records and elevations mentioned in the Gazetteer are based
on the first author’s field observations, collection localities of specimens at
the Zoological Survey of India at Solan and Kolkata (vide Ghosh 2008), and
published records. The geographic
locations and elevations of collection or observation localities during field
surveys were recorded using a Garmin™ 12 GPS unit. For museum specimens and published records where geographic
co-ordinates were not available, approximate co-ordinates and elevations were
determined from toposheets and from Google Earth (www.googleearth.com). For comparison of diversity along
elevation gradients, intervals were established as follows: 500–1000 m,
1001–1500 m, 1501–2000 m, 2001–2500 m, 2501–3000
m. Elevations below 500m and above
3000m were not taken into account since there are no bat records beyond these
ranges in Himachal Pradesh. Species were assumed to occur in all elevation intervals in between
their distributional extremes as established from their maximum and minimum
elevation records.
Those species marked with
an asterisk are represented in the collections of HARC, ZSI Solan and have been
examined. Species identifications
follow Bates & Harrison (1997) and detailed taxonomic measurements of
studied specimens are provided. Common names follow Bates & Harrison (1997). Conservation status in South Asia is
pursuant to Molur et al. (2002).
Species account
Sub-order: Megachiroptera
Family: Pteropodidae
1. Rousettus leschenaulti (Desmarest, 1820)*
Fulvous Fruit Bat
New material: Female, 29.v.2004, 3km upstream of Gambhar Bridge, Solan District, M24, (HARC, ZSIS)
Locality records: ?Ballu, Bilaspur District (c. 700m)
(Bhat et al. 1983); Bandrol, Kullu District (Bhat et al. 1983);
Dadh, Kangra District (1080m) (Bhat et al. 1983); Gambhar, Solan
District (780m) (present study); Gutkar, Mandi District (710m) (Bhat et
al. 1983); Mandi, Mandi District (1050m) (Bhat et al. 1983); Sooma , Kullu
District (1400m) (Bhat et al. 1983).
Ecological notes: A colony of this bat was located in a natural cave approximately
8m. in length on the bank of a stream (Gambhar) in
Solan District. At the end of May,
around 250 individuals were seen roosting inside the cave. On entering the cave, a strong smell of
fermenting fruit was detected. Probably this smell emanated from undigested or partly digested fruit
pulps regurgitated by the bats and scattered over the cave floor. A similar strong
smell in Rousettusroosts has been reported by Roberts (1977) in Pakistan. The bats were observed to be very noisy
and some individuals kept flying from one place to another in the cave at all
times. A few
individuals were caught by setting a mist net in front of the cave mouth and
then disturbing the colony but most of them were able to avoid the net
by deft manoeuvring. Along with
Microchiroptera, the megachiropteran genus Rousettus has developed vocal
echolocation (Eonyteris echolocates by wing clapping (Gould 1988)) producing signals by
clicks of the tongue (Jones & Holderied 2007; Raghuram et al. 2007)
enabling them to orient, forage and roost in low light situations. Despite the rudimentary nature of this
echolocating mechanism, spatial resolution of the system is apparently
comparable to Microchiroptera in some respects (Holland et al. 2007). A study by researchers in southern
India has revealed that the obstacle avoidance efficiency of the echolocatory
mechanism in R. leschenaulti is as good as microchiropteran bats (Raghuram et al. 2007). However, it was not clear whether
echolocation had any role in avoidance of the mist nets set in front of the
cave. It was noted that all the
captured adult individuals were females while one was a juvenile male (FA-68mm
and incomplete dentition). Whether this indicates the existence of a maternal
colony is not clear because the juvenile did not appear to be a dependent
young. However, sexual segregation
in this species had been reported in Madhya Pradesh during March, June and July
(Khajuria 1979).
Local
people reported that the bats do not use the cave site during winter but
reappear in spring. This probably
indicates seasonal movement in search of food since no significant fruiting
occurs during the winter season in the area where the cave is located. Brosset (1962) noted that in the area
of Bombay, these bats periodically abandon their roosts for a few months and he
believed non availability of food to be the reason.
Conservation status: Least Concern
2. Pteropus
giganteus Brunnich, 1782*
Indian
Flying Fox
Locality records: Bilaspur, Bilaspur District (530m) (present study); Dharampur,
Mandi District, (630m) (present
study); Dodour near Nehr Chawk, Mandi District (c.760m) (present study);
Gopalpur, Kangra District (Lindsay 1927); Kotla, Kullu District (940m) (Lindsay
1927); Kulu, Kullu District (Ferrar 1934; Paul et al. 2009); Kunihar, Solan
District (960m)(present study); Nalagarh, Solan District (c.600m) (present
study); Nurpur, Kangra District (c.590m)(present study).
Ecological notes: Three big and three small colonies of this species were observed
during the study period. One
colony was located at Kunihar in a few Siris (Albizia lebbeck) trees near a check dam.
About 200 individuals were observed in the month of July,2005 but on a visit in January, 2006, the number was estimated to be
approximately 120 individuals, suggesting seasonal variations of colony size
and local migration. Another
colony was located at Bilaspur Town on the bank of Sutlej River. The colony size estimated in the month
of November was about 500 individuals and they were roosting in five Orix siris trees. The third colony was observed near
Dharampur, Mandi District roosting in a large, unidentified tree: the number of
bats was estimated to be around 150 during May,2006. A few pups attached to the
mother were also observed. The
population trend of P. giganteus in Himachal Pradesh is not known. In 2005, under the auspices of the Chiroptera Conseravtion
and Information Network of South Asia (CCINSA), project “PteroCount” was
initiated to count and monitor P. giganteus roosts throughout South Asia on a voluntary basis. Under this project, so far 16 roosts of
this species have been reported from various parts of Himachal Pradesh (Molur
2009).
Local
migration of flying foxes has been reported in Himachal Pradesh (Paul et al.
2009). In Kullu, a colony of fruit
bats has been regularly observed to roost in poplar trees from the last week of
April to October before migrating to an unknown place (Paul et al. 2009). Flying foxes cause considerable damage
to the fruit orchards of Himachal Pradesh. Fortunately, local people are not antagonistic towards them
and, despite some damage to their fruit crops, live in harmony with them.
Conservation status: Least Concern
Sub-order: Microchiroptera
Family: Megadermatidae
3. Megaderma lyra E. Geoffroy, 1810
Greater False Vampire
Locality record: Damtal, Kangra District (c. 850m) (Ghosh 2008)
(NZC, ZSIK 17123); Kangra, Kangra District (Sinha 1980).
Conservation status: Least Concern
Family: Rhinolophidae
4. Rhinolophus ferrumequinum (Schreber, 1774)*
Greater
Horseshoe Bat
New material: Male, 02.v.2004, Barog Tunnel, Solan District, M21 (HARC, ZSIS); male,
30.v.2004, Lutru Cave, Arki, Solan District, M32 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Barog Tunnel, Solan District (1560m) (present study); Chakmoh,
Hamirpur District (c.760m) (Ghosh 2008); Chamba, Chamba District (c.1000m)
(Chakraborty 1977); Ghannati, Shimla District (c.1640m) (Ghosh 2008); Koolloo
Valley (Kullu Valley), Kullu District (Allen 1908); Lutru Cave near Arki, Solan
District (1550m) (present study); Mandi, Mandi District (c.1050m) (Ghosh 2008);
Manali, Kullu District (1950m) (Lindsay 1927); Shimla, Shimla District (2100m)
(Dodsworth, 1913; Bates & Harrison 1997); Solan Town, Solan District
(1500m) (present study); Tottu, Shimla District (c.1900m) (Ghosh 2008).
Ecological notes: This species has been observed to roost in Barog tunnel, a
railway tunnel on the historic Kalka-Shimla track, which is1140m long. In the month of May,
four specimens were collected throughout the length of the tunnel. They were seen hanging from the wall of
the tunnel in small numbers and their total number was estimated to be
90–100 individuals. The species
was not recorded during two subsequent visits to the tunnel within the
following four months although small groups of Rhinolophus affinis (collected earlier at the
site) and possibly another rhinolophoid (darker than R. affinis) were observed. Whether R. ferrumequinum use the tunnel as a
seasonal roost or whether the bats simply evaded notice because of smaller
numbers was not determined. Although the bats seemed to be indifferent to railway traffic, they
became active and flew away when approached by humans. This species has also
been observed roosting in small numbers (c. 15 individuals) in a subterranean
cave on a hillock at Arki in Solan District in the last week of May with some
individuals carrying pups. One
male pup collected had forearm length of 44mm and weighed 11g. The pelage of the collected specimen
was long and soft and light brownish throughout.
Conservation status: Vulnerable
5. Rhinolophus sinicus (Anderson, 1905)*
Chinese
Horseshoe Bat
New material: Female, 14.v.2004, Happy Valley, Solan District, M27 (HARC, ZSIS)
Locality records: Happy Valley, Solan District (1550m) (present
study).
Ecological notes: A single specimen was caught in a butterfly net on 14.v.2004
while hanging from the roof of a natural cave near Solan Town (1550m). It was carrying a suckling, the age of
which was estimated to be approximately 15–20 days (8g in weight) on the
basis that no bats were observed carrying young on a visit that took place 21
days before the collection date. Accordingly, the parturition period of the species in this area would
appear to be in the last week of April or the first week of May. Seven or eight other individuals were
also observed carrying pups and this may indicate sexual segregation of
lactating females as reported by Allen (1938). Pelage of the collected specimen was soft, silky and
chocolate brown dorsally with a paler belly.
Taxonomic remarks: Bates & Harrison (1997) recognised two
subspecies of R. rouxii in India namely R. r. rouxii and R. r. sinicus and referred Himalayan populations to R. r. sinicus. Based on mitochondrial DNA analysis, Thomas (2000) elevated sinicus to specific status. The
external and cranial measurements of the single specimen studied fall within
the measurement ranges for both R. rouxii and R. sinicus provided by Thomas (2000). However, the noseleaf and sella
structure correspond to those of R. sinicus described by Thomas
(2000).
Conservation status: Near Threatened
6. Rhinolophus affinis Horsefield, 1823*
Intermediate
Horseshoe Bat
New material: Male, 09.iv.2004, Kot Beja, Solan District, M28 (HARC, ZSIS);
female, 15.ix.2004, Happy Valley, Solan District, M31 (HARC, ZSIS); female,
31.iv.2004, Barog Tunnel, Solan District, CW1 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Barog Tunnel, Solan
District (1560m) (present study); Happy Valley, Solan District (1550m) (present
study) and Kot Beja, near Kasauli, Solan District (1100m) (present study).
Ecological notes: A roost of approximately 10 individuals was observed in a cave
near Solan. The cave was dark and
humid: water was observed dripping from the roof and the cave mouth was
surrounded by vegetation. The sitewas found to be inhabited by two other species, namelyR.
ferrumequinum and M. mystacinus, at different times. Another individual was caught while entering a house adjacent to a
cattleshed. The collected
specimens had silky fur and were dull brown throughout.
Conservation status: Least Concern
7. Rhinolophus luctus Temminck, 1835*
Wooly
Horseshoe Bat
New material: Female, 27.v.2004, Arki, Solan
District, M20 (HARC, ZSIS); male, 27.v.2004, Shalaghat, Solan District, M48
(HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Arki, Solan District (900m) (present study); Shalaghat, Solan
District (1200m) (present study).
Ecological notes: A lone individual of this species was captured on 27.v.2004 from
a dark corner of a dilapidated temple, which was surrounded by thick lantana
bushes. The specimen was in an
advanced stage of pregnancy with a foetus weighing 10g. The parturition period of this species
in this area appears to occur during the month of June (Saikia et al.
2004). Another individual of the
same species was observed hanging from the wall of a narrow cave at Shalaghat
in Solan District. Bates &
Harrison (1997) reported that this species normally roosts in pairs but our observations
suggest that it also roosts solitarily. Pelage of the collected specimens was distinctively long, woolly and
dark brown throughout.
Conservation status: Near Threatened
8. Rhinolophus lepidus (Blyth, 1854)
Blyth’s
Horseshoe Bat
Locality records: Drang, Mandi District (c.780m) (Ghosh 2008) (NZC, ZSIK 24881);
Kullu, Kullu District (c.1200m) (Ghosh 2008) (NZC, ZSIK 24882).
Conservation status: Least Concern
Family: Hipposideridae
9. Hipposideros armiger Hodgson, 1835*
Great
Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat
New material: Male, 18.ix.2004, Karool hill, Solan District, M33 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality record: Karool hill near Solan Town, Solan District (2200m) (present
study).
Ecological notes: A single specimen was collected from a cavesite on the top of a
hill surrounded by Quercus forest near Solan Town. The cave had about ten individuals of this species and was shared by
another two species viz. Myotis mystacinus and M. blythii. The emergence time of this
species recorded in mid September was 1840 hr and the whole colony came out
within 10 minutes; this was earlier than the other two species sharing the
cave. The lone specimen collected
had long, smooth and overall dark brown fur on the back with a comparatively
paler belly.
Conservation status: Least Concern
Family: Vespertilionidae
10. Miniopterus
schreibesrsii (Kuhl, 1819)*
Schreiber’s
Long Fingered Bat
New material: Female, 02.v.2004, Barog Tunnel, Solan District, M22 (HARC,
ZSIS); female, 16.iv.2004, Brewery Tunnel, Solan District, M30 (HARC, ZSIS); female,
15.iv.2004, Chambaghat, Solan District, CW3 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Barog Tunnel, Solan District (1560m) (present
study); Brewery Tunnel, Solan District (1480m) (present study); Chambaghat,
Solan District (1450m) (present study).
Ecological notes: This species was observed roosting in Barog tunnel in large
numbers (about 2000). Individuals
were in close proximity to each other and were pressed together in several
layers. All those specimens
collected in the month of May were female. Accordingly, the formation of female colonies cannot be
ruled out although this is not corroborated by the observations of Brosset
(1962) at Mahabaleshwar. This
species was also observed roosting in another railway tunnel about 10km away
from Barog, where they were seen inside holes in the walls in groups of
4–5. In this case, both male
and female specimens were collected from the same hole. Of the six individuals examined, five
had a dark brown dorsal pelage with a lighter venter. One individual had a much darker, almost black, dorsum,
which would indicate the occurrence of colour variations within the same
population.
Conservation status: Least Concern
11. Myotis
mystacinus (Kuhl, 1819)*
Whiskered
Bat
New material: 2 females, 14.v.2004, Happy Valley, Solan District, M25, M35
(HARC, ZSIS); 2 males, 18.ix.2004, Karool hill, Solan, CW36, CW37 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Chirot in Pattan Valley (possibly Thirot), Lahaul & Spiti
(2910m) (muricola in Lindsay, 1927); Happy Valley, Solan District (1550m) (present
study); Karool Hill near Solan Town, Solan District (2200m) (present study).
Ecological notes: On 14 May 2005, individuals of this species were seen
hanging from the ceiling of a cave in a tight group of over 100
individuals. From this
group, about 20 specimens were captured using a butterfly net. Five individuals were taken as voucher
specimens and the rest were released after morphological measurements were
taken and the sex of the individual determined. All individuals were found to be female. Among the five
specimens, three were carrying foetuses at various stages of development
(weighing 0.23–0.83 g). In
previous visits to the site and afterwards, we were unable to observe any such
congregations of this species. This may indicate the formation of an exclusive maternal colony during
the breeding season. Considering
the stages of foetal development, the parturition period of this species in
this area is presumed to be June to July. In India, formation of maternal
colonies by this species has not been reported but Roberts (1977) did report
maternal colonies from Dunga Gali and Shogran area of northeast Pakistan. However, Bates & Harrison (1997)
opined that all records of M. mystacinus from Pakistan are misidentified specimens of M. muricola. Another population of about 50 individuals of this bat
was observed in a cave atop a hill at an elevation of 2200m near Solan Town.
Taxonomic remarks: This species is externally similar to M. muricola. However, the dark brown dorsum and silvery grey hair tips on
the ventral areas of the collected material (discernable in fresh and alcohol
preserved specimens) is distinctive of mystacinus (Bates & Harrison
1997).
Conservation status: Vulnerable
12. Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857)*
Lesser
Mouse-eared Bat
New material: Male, 18.ix.2004, Karool Hill, Solan District, M34 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Chamba, Chamba District (900m) (Dobson 1873); Dalhousie, Chamba
District (c. 2000m) (Bates & Harrison 1997); Karool hill near Solan Town,
Solan District (2200m) (present study); Shimla and neighbourhood, Shimla
District (1820m) (Dodsworth 1913; Thomas 1915).
Ecological notes: a colony of approximately 100 individuals of this species was
observed in a short and narrow cave in a hilltop (2200m), which it shared with H. armiger and M. mystacinus. It was seen hanging from the roof of the cave, mixing
frequently with M. myatacinus. Interestingly, it
maintained quite a distance from individuals of H. armiger. M. blythii was observed crawling on the roof of the cave using its feet and
first digit to change position. Amongst the three species inhabiting the cave, this species emerges from
the cave the latest and only after darkness has fallen fully. Pelage of the collected specimens was somewhat woolly in
texture and beige brown dorsally.
Conservation status: Vulnerable
13. Myotis
siligorensis (Horsefield, 1855)*
Himalayan
Whiskered Bat
New material: Female, 05.iii.1973, Solan Town, Solan District, M38 (HARC,
ZSIS).
Locality records: Solan Town, Solan District (1500m) (present study).
Remarks: The specimen at ZSIS was collected in the month of October, 1974 in Solan Town. The specimen lacks other details (e.g. habitat, method of
collection). This species was not
encountered during the present survey and appears to be rare in the study
area. The alcohol
preserved specimen is creamy white, which is probably the result of its
long period of preservation. However, dark hair roots are still discernable. The species’
identification was confirmed by the late Dr. P.K. Das.
Conservation status: Near Threatened
14. Myotis formosus (Hodgson, 1835)
Hodgson’s
Bat
Locality records: Dharamsala, Kangra
District (c.1250m) (Thomas 1915); Drang, 17km north of Mandi, Mandi District (c.780m) (Ghosh 2008).
Conservation status: Least Concern
15. Myotis muricola (Gray, 1846)*
Nepalese
Whiskered Bat
New material: Female, 18.ix.2010, Kalatop, near Dalhousie, Chamba District, M50
(HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Chatri, Chamba District (1800m) (M. caliginosus in Lindsay 1927);
Dalhousie, Chamba District (c. 2042m) (Blanford 1888–1891; Khajuria
1953); Kalatop, Chamba District (2400m) (present study); Samayala, Kangra
District (1500m) (M. caliginosus in Lindsay 1927); Shimla, Shimla District (c. 2000m) (Dodsworth 1913).
Ecological notes: A single specimen was collected from the verandah of the forest
rest house at Kalatop in mid September. Two individuals were observed in the space between the wooden ceiling
and some tin sheets. Local people
report that during summer months, they can be seen roosting in large numbers
there but that the species is not observed during winter months, the same
indicating seasonal migration or hibernation. Dodsworth (1913) collected this bat from the porch of his
bungalow in Shimla. He reported
that the bat is very active during summer months and probably hibernates for a
long period. The breeding period
was reported to range between May and June in Shimla. The ventral fur of the Kalatop specimen has slightly
paler hair tips and dark roots (not discernable in the wet preserved specimen)
in contrast to the silvery hair tips of the congeneric mystacinus.
Conservation status: Least Concern
16. Pipistrellus
tenuis Temminck, 1840*
Indian
Pygmy Bat
New material: Female, 08.iv.2005,
Majutho, near Barotiwala Solan District, M37 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Bhunter, Kullu District (c. 1080m) (Ghosh 2008); Kullu Valley,
Kullu District (FMNH 34147); Manikaran, Kullu District (c.1740m) (Ghosh 2008);
Majothu near Barotiwala, Solan District (520m) (present study); Simbalbara Wildlife
Sanctuary, Sirmour District (590m) (Sharma & Saikia 2009).
Ecological notes: Specimens of this bat were collected in a mist net set on the
bank of a check dam and in the vicinity of human habitation at Majthu near
Barotiwala in Solan District. This
species is known to roost near human habitation. In Kerala, it has been collected beneath road bridges, from
hollows of coconut trees and under the tiled roofs of houses (Madhavan 2000). Prakash (1962) comments that it is one
of the first bats to make an appearance and reports the collection of three
specimens between 1815 and 1830 hr in April (darkness was still to fall). Activity appeared to decrease as night
set in. These bats were caught
barely a metre above the embankment of the check dam, confirming the
observations of Bhattacharyya (1985) that it hunts frequently close to the
ground. This species was also
observed and collected along the bank of a dry stream amidst mixed Shorea robusta forest in Simbalbara WLS in Sirmour district. The collected specimens had a dark
brown dorsum and a distinctly lighter venter.
A
prolific breeder, these bats have been reported to undergo parturition in four
distinct cycles in southern India including one in March–April (Isaac et
al. 1994). However, the female
specimens collected in April in Himachal did not exhibit any breeding activity
or show any sign of lactation (as evinced by diminutive mammary glands).
Taxonomic remarks: Bates & Harrison (1997) mention that it is not possible to
distinguish P. tenuis and smaller individuals of P. coromandra by external characters
alone in sympatric situations. The
cranial measurements of the above specimens are significantly smaller than
specimens of P. coromandra examined presently and fit well into the character matrix for P. tenuis given by Bates &
Harrison (1997).
Conservation status: Least Concern
17. Pipistrellus
coromandra (Gray, 1838)*
Coromandel
Pipistrelle
New material: 2 females, 18.vii.2009, Shaur, Pangi Valley, Chamba District,
M46, M48 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Bakloh, Chamba District (c.1330m) (Ghosh 2008); Narkanda, Shimla District
(2470m) (Ghosh 2008); Shaur, Pangi Valley, Chamba District (2400m) (present
study).
Ecological notes: Two individuals were caught with a butterfly net while foraging
around a lamppost at Shaur in Pangi Valley, Chamba District. An active flyer, it can avoid a mist
net very efficiently and no individuals could be caught in three sessions of
netting in an area frequented by the species. This wariness of mist nets was noted by Chakraborty(1983). Feeding activity starts
before darkness sets in fully and it continues for about 50–60 minutes,
after which the bats disappear for some time before foraging is resumed. This pattern of feeding behaviour was
observed until 2230 hr, after which time it became sporadic. Bhattacharyya (1985) reports that
foraging continues throughout the night in this fashion. Dodsworth (1913) noted that this bat
was very common in Shimla but disappeared during winter months, such absence
being consistent with a period of hibernation. Gut content of a preserved specimen contained mostly
undigested parts of moths and Dipterans.
Conservation status: Least Concern
18. Pipistrellus
javanicus (Gray,1838)*
Javan
Pipisterlle
New
material: 2 females, 27.v.2004, Arki, Solan District, M23, M49(HARC, ZSIS).
Locality records: Arki, Solan District (900m) (present study); Gopalpur, Kangra
District (2700m) (Pipistrellus babu in Lindsay 1927) and Shimla, Shimla District (c. 2100m) (Siddiqi
1961; Bates & Harrison 1997).
Ecological notes: A few individuals were caught in a mist net set on the verandah
of a house while foraging around a striplight. They were seen hunting actively in the early evening hours
but could not be observed afterwards. These bats have also been observed often flying quite low around human
settlements. The specimens had a
dark brown dorsal pelage and a fawn coloured venter.
Taxonomic remarks: Among the closely similar species of Pipistrellus, namely P. tenuis, P.
coromandra and P. javanicus, there is significant overlapping of external measurements, making
species assignment awkward. However, in the ascending order of P. tenuis, P. coromandra and P. javanicus, there is an increase in
cranial measurements. The series
of specimens assigned to P. javanicus have the greatest cranial measurements among the Pipistrellus specimens examined
presently and conform well to the character matrix for the species by Bates
& Harrison (1997).
Conservation status: Least
Concern
19. Pipistrellus dormeri (Dobson, 1785)*
Dormer’s Bat
New material: 2 females, 08.iv.2005, Majothu near Barotiwala, Solan District,
M36, M47 (HARC, ZSIS); female, 17.ix.07, Solan Town, Solan District, CW 43 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality record: Majothu, near Barotiwala, Solan District (520m) (present study);
Solan Town, Solan District (1500m) (present study).
Ecological notes: These bats were caught in a mist net set on the bank of the same
check dam where P. tenuis was collected. This
species is known to drink water from ponds and lakes (Bates & Harrison
1997) and this drinking behaviour was also observed on that day. They were seen hovering over the water
surface before making a swift descent to drink. Until 2100 hr, the bats were observed to forage over the
water surface; similar foraging behaviour has been reported in some species of Myotis and Pipistrellus (Taylor 2006). In live specimens, the dorsal surface
was clove brownish with streaks of silver whilst the ventral surface was
significantly paler.
Conservation Status: Least Concern (LC)
20. Pipistrellus
ceylonicus indicus (Dobson, 1878)
Kellart’s
Pipistrelle
Locality record: Ghanatti, Shimla District (c. 1640m) (Ghosh 2008) (NZC, ZSIK
24879).
Conservation status: Least Concern
21. Scotophilus kuhlii Leach, 1821*
Asiatic
Lesser Yellow House Bat
New material: Male, 12.ix.1980, Solan Town, Solan District, M45 (HARC, ZSIS);
female (1973), Solan Town, Solan District, M51 (HARC, ZSIS).
Locality record: Koolloo Valley (Kullu Valley), Kullu District (Pachyotus temminckii in Allen 1908); Solan
Town, Solan District (1500m) (present study).
Ecological notes: The specimens at HARC were collected beneath a tin shed amidst
human settlements on the periphery of Solan Town in 1973, indicating a
perihuman dwelling habit of the species.
Dorsal
areas of specimen M45 are chocolate brown although other parts of the specimen
have faded owing to its long retention in alcohol. A few other alcohol preserved specimens are reddish brown
dorsally and a little paler ventrally.
Conservation status: Least Concern
22. Plecotus
homochrous Hodgson, 1847
Brown
Long-eared Bat
Locality record: Ratandi, near Bagi, Shimla District (2700m) (Bhat et al. 1983).
Conservation status: Near Threatened
23. Barbastella
leucomelas (Cretzschmar, 1826)
Eastern
Barbastelle
Locality record: Shimla, Shimla District (c.2200m) (Blanford 1888-1891; Ghosh 2008 - NZC,
ZSIK Reg.No.19324).
Conservation status: Near Threatened
24. Scotoecus
pallidus Dobson, 1876
Desert
Yellow Bat
Locality record: Koolloo Valley (Kullu Valley), Kullu District (Scoteinus pallidus in Allen 1908) (FMNH 34173,
34174; AMNH 54419, 54420).
Conservation status: Near Threatened
25. Nyctalus noctula (Schreber, 1774)
Noctule
Locality records: Kangra, Kangra District (c. 760m) (N. labiatus in Lindsay 1927; Bates
& Harrison 1997); Mandi District (Chakraborty 1983); Sissu, (Lahaul and
Spiti District) (3000m) (N. labiatus in Lindsay 1927); Shimla, Shimla District (2100m) (N. labiata in Dodsworth 1913).
Ecological notes: Dodsworth (1913) noted that this bat is a forest dwelling species
that is found solitarily in natural crevices and holes of trees.
Conservation status: Least Concern
26. Nyctalus leisleri (Kuhl, 1890)
Leisler’s
Bat
Locality records: Chamba, Chamba District (1000m) (Lindsay 1927); Kothi, Kullu
District (c. 2575m) (Bhat et al. 1983); Shimla, Shimla District (c. 2000m)
(Bates & Harrison 1997).
Conservation status: Endangered
27. Nyctalus
montanus (Barret-Hamilton, 1906)
Mountain
Noctule
Locality record: Chamba, Chamba District (c. 1000m) (Bates & Harrison 1997);
Shimla, Shimla District (2100m) (Dodsworth 1913).
Ecological note: Dodsworth (1913) collected this species from the roof of a
bungalow in Shimla.
Conservation status: Near Threatened
28. Murina tubinaris (Scully, 1881)
Scully’s
Tube Nosed Bat
Locality record: Kalung (Keylong), Lahaul & Spiti District (c. 3000m) (AMNH
150088).
Remarks: Included after Das (2003), who reported the species on the basis
of a specimen in the American Museum of Natural History. The female specimen was collected from
Kalung in Lahul (Punjab) which obviously refers to
Keylong in Lahaul and Spiti District of Himachal Pradesh (erstwhile Punjab
State).
Conservation status: Near Threatened
Discussion
The
present checklist of bats recorded form Himachal Pradesh comprises 28 species
of 14 genera from five families. Despite its small geographic area (1.76% of the total area of India), 25% of the chiropteran species
known from India are represented in the state. The families Megadermatidae and Hipposideridae are
represented by single species and the ubiquitous family Vespertilionidae
includes 19 species. Whilst some
of the species, such as those of the genus Pipistrellus, are common in many parts
of the state, others, such as Megaderma lyra, Scotecus pallidus, Murina
tubinaris, and Myotis siligorensis, are known only from a single museum specimen
collected many years ago. However,
considering the lack of studies on bat fauna in this part of the western
Himalaya, the apparent rarity of some species is more likely to be the result
of undersampling than low incidence. For instance, the Greater False Vampire Bat Megaderma lyra, is a widespread and common species in many parts of its range
and is found in a variety of biotypes (Bates & Harrison 1997; Molur et al.
2002). Intriguingly, it is known
from Himachal Pradesh only by a single record and it has not been reported from
neighbouring states of Punjab and Haryana. Brosset (1962) mentioned that this species appears to avoid
hilly country and it is probable that the bat is absent in many parts of the
state. It is possible, however,
that the species is distributed in the Shiwalik foothills, which are contiguous
with the plains of Punjab and Haryana, and that it has gone unnoticed because
of poor sampling efforts. Only
systematic and intensive surveys in prospective areas can establish whether
this is the case.
By virtue
of its location in the transitional zone between the Palaearctic and the
Oriental realms, the chiropteran fauna of Himachal Pradesh shows an admixture
of species from both regions. Of
the 28 species of bat known from the state, 19 have an Oriental affinity, eight
are Palaearctic, and one species, Miniopterus schreibersii, finds representation in
both realms. Nyctalus spp.
Pipistrellus javanicus, Barbastella leucomelanos, Plecotus auritus, Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum, and Myotis mystacinus are some of the Palaearctic species (Roberts 1977; Corbet &
Hill 1992; Horáček et al. 2000) occurring in Himachal Pradesh. These elements probably entered this
region from Iran through Pakistan or down through the Himalayas from the Hindu
Kush and Uzbekistan (Roberts 1977) during the late Tertiary. Species with Oriental affinities
include Pteropus giganteus, Megaderma lyra, Hipposideros armiger,
Rhinolophus sinicus, Rhinolophus luctus, and Myotis siligorensis. The possible route of invasion of oriental elements is along
the Himalayas through northeastern India (Kurup 1966, 1974). No endemic species of bats have been
reported from the state.
While
most of the bats occurring in the state have a reasonably settled taxonomic
status, the taxonomy of some species encountered in the area is uncertain or
controversial. Many of them belong
to species complexes where many morphologically indistinguishable forms are
recognised as a single species but actually represent different species. For example, the Miniopterus
schreibersii complex is found throughout the Palaearctic, Oriental, Afrotropic and
Australian regions (Koopman 1994). There is extensive overlap of morphological variations within this
complex and traditionally the complex is treated as a single species with
several subspecies (Corbet 1978; Wilson & Reeder 1993). Applications of recent molecular
techniques have revealed that the complex is a paraphyletic assemblage with
several species (Appleton et al. 2004; Lanxiang et al. 2004). Thus, although this complex has a wide
geographical distribution, member species can have smaller range bearing
implications on their zoogeography. The same holds true for the widely distributed Palearctic Myotis mystacinus group, the taxonomy of which is
one of the most complicated tasks of chiropteran systematics. The true nature of cryptic variations
and whether they are single or a number of species is yet to be determined and
the resolution of these matters lies far beyond the scope of traditional
morphometric taxonomy (Horáček et al. 2000).
Shiwalik
(c.19 spp.) and the Lesser Himalaya (c.18 spp.) are the most diverse zones as
far as Chiroptera is concerned (Fig. 2). This species richness is apparently a
function of abundance of roosting sites along with other factors such as
availability of food. Roosts are a critical
resource for bats; their availability may limit the number and distribution of
certain species (Humphrey 1975). By virtue of geology, mountainous terrain harbours large numbers of
caves and caverns that provide ideal refugia for a significant number of
bats. Bats adapt also to a variety
of man-made structures, which may have a similar microclimate characteristic
and may fulfil the same function as natural roosting places (Presetnik
2004). For this reason, several
railway tunnels, especially on the century-old Kalka-Shimla track, have become favourite refugiafor a large number of bats. Moreover, forest cover is an important factor for bats, providing
resources for roosting, foraging, and drinking to a large number of
species. For example, almost all
North American bats rely on forest for survival (Taylor 2006). Forest cover is relatively intact in
some parts of the Shiwaliks and the Lesser Himalayan zone and this may be a
crucial factor in the survival of many forest-dependent bat species.
The
trans-Himalayan areas of Himachal Pradesh comprising most parts of the
districts Lahaul & Spiti and Kinnaur are characterised by scant rainfall
and extremely low winter temperatures and, consequently, sparse
vegetation. However, a few species
of bats have adapted to such conditions. As homiothermic animals, bats are more cold tolerant than cold adapted.
Species recorded from these parts of the state are Myotis mystacinus and Murina tubinaris. Myotis mystacinus has been recorded from warm tropical areas such as Hasimara in
West Bengal to the trans-Himalayan cold desert of Ladakh (Bates & Harrison
1997), indicating wide ecological adaptability. Similar is the case of M. tubinaris, which is known from an
elevation range of 615–2615 m (Bates & Harrison 1997). However, in these higher areas, food
may be the limiting factor for distribution and abundance of bats since the
growing season is too short to provide time for the gestation and rearing of
young (Humphrey 1975). In
addition, areas of high elevation present physiological challenges for mammals
such as the difficulties of effective respiration in a rarified atmosphere and
efficient thermoregulation in lower temperatures (Graham, 1990). Lower highland temperatures and oxygen
concentration in the air may impede the upslope movement of lowland species,
effectively putting a cap on species diversity. Nevertheless, it should be clear that present understanding
of the geographical and ecological distribution of Chiroptera in Himachal
Pradesh is inadequate and any generalisation must necessarily be crude.
For three
species, Himachal Pradesh constitutes the westernmost point of their
distribution. These species are R. affinis, Hipposideros armiger, and Myotis
siligorensis. All these are Oriental
species distributed in the Indian, Indochinese and Sundaic subregions of the
Oriental realm (Corbet & Hill 1992) and the recorded westernmost point of
their distribution is Solan in Himachal Pradesh (Saikia et al. 2004). As suggested by Kurup (1966, 1974),
these elements invaded from the Indo-Chinese subregion through northeastern
India and headed towards the northwestern parts of the narrow, wooded
sub-Himalayan belt. Their failure
to progress further west and south may have been caused by the prevailing drier
conditions in those directions (the Thar Desert formed at that time).
The
distribution of the chiropteran fauna of Himachal Pradesh exhibits a distinct
elevation pattern; species diversity increases with elevation and reaches a
maximum (21 spp.) in the 1001–1500 m zone and decreases thereafter. This is in accordance with a
distribution trend having a mid-elevation peak (Rahbek 1995). Cumulative species richness increases
sharply with elevation up to 1500m and thereafter increases moderately. Species richness is also a function of
the transitional assemblages located between highland and lowland areas, which
results in a complex pattern of species turnover. Interestingly, the percentages of unique species in all the
zones excepting the highest zone are relatively low and are fairly comparable. This, in general, implies a broad
distribution of fauna throughout the elevation ranges. No significant species boundary, where
lowland species are replaced by highland forms and vice versa, can be drawn
along the elevation gradients.
Occurrence
of some bats at certain elevations can be the result of the ecological
adaptations of particular species. For example, Plecotus homochrous (as P. auritus) has been recorded from an
elevation of 2700m and, according to Bhat (1974), has never been encountered at
lower elevations. Likewise, P. dormeri has been recorded at
elevations around 500m and this species normally occupies the plains near human
habitations. However, species such
as Myotis mystacinus, Nyctalus noctula, and Pipistrellus javanicus have been recorded from
lower areas to elevations nearing 3000m, indicating a broad ecological
tolerance. In other parts of their
ranges, these species are known also to occur throughout a broad range of
elevation (Bates & Harrison 1997; Kaňuch & Krištín 2006).
Inter-specific
associations
Many
species of bats are known to share roosting sites with other species, often in
close proximity. These
associations may result from a limited number of roost sites or a convergence
of roosting requirements (Kunz 1982). Although many of these associations are casual, there is evidence to
suggest that, in some species, they may be essential (Dwyer 1968). Tuttle (1975) suggested that the
reproductive success of some species may be augmented
in situations where species are closely associated in roosts. Post natalgrowth and post flight survival of some species of bats increases with
increased cave temperature. If
colony sizes are too small to augment the cave temperature sufficiently,
reproductive success may be affected severely (Tuttle 1976). Therefore, associations of small
colonies of different species can help to maintain a warm cave
environment. Lower predation risk
from improved predator surveillance is another potential benefit of such
associations. However, such benefits
may be offset by disadvantages such as misdirected social behaviour (Bradburry
1977), competition for space, increased incidence of parasites and disease and
greater risk of environmental stochastic events. During the field study, the following mixed species
associations were observed.
(i) Rhinolophus affinis,
Rhinolophus sp. and Miniopterus schreibersii: This association was observed in Barog railway
tunnel. In this case, the
unidentified Rhinolophid (which bore a resemblance to R. sinicus) and R. affinis were observed in close
proximity but M. schreibersii was found to roost at some distance from both of these. However, this association appears to be
casual and to result from the convergence of roosting requirements rather than
obligatory, as a long, dark and humid tunnel could offer a suitable roosting
microclimate for a large number of species.
(ii) Rhinolophus sinicus and Myotis mystacinus: This association was seen
in May in a shallow, natural cave with an internal chamber of approx 10x6
ft. Both species were observed
hanging from the ceiling of the internal chamber in small numbers (fewer than
30 individuals in total). One R. sinicus caught was carrying a
suckling but it cannot be inferred that such physical associations increase the
survival chances of the pups.
(iii) Hipposideros
armiger, Myotis mystacinus and M. blythii: This association was observed within a 6–7 m long natural
cave at an elevation of 2200m during September. Myotis blythii dominated the association with approx 100 individuals followed by
≥ 50 individuals of M. mystacinus and about 10 individuals of H. armiger. Both M. myatacinus and M. blythii were observed hanging from the roof of the cave and intermixing
frequently. M. blythii maintained a considerable distance (c.1.5m) from H. armiger, which was seen to move
away when the former approached. It is possible that these
associations, especially that of M. blythii and M. mystacinus, may have mutual
benefits. According to a villager,
these bats remain in the cave in winter, when the temperature is quite
low. This association, therefore,
might be of thermic benefit to the bats although further observations are
required to substantiate this.
Species likely to occur in Himachal Pradesh
Although
not reported so far, certain species of bats are likely to occur in the
state. For example, many of the Rhinolophus species are more or less
evenly distributed along the Himalayas from East to West. Rhinolophus
pearsonii, R. macrotis and R. pusillus all occur along the Himalayan chain and the westernmost recorded
locality in India of each is Mussoorie in Uttarakhand (Bates & Harrison
1997). Similarly, the widespread
Short-nosed Fruit Bat Cynopterus sphinx has been recorded as far north as Jammu and Kashmir (Chakraborty
1983) with an apparent disjunction in Himachal Pradesh. Similarly, the Fulvous Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros fulvus Gray, 1838 is distributed
widely across the Indian subcontinent with records in the adjacent states of
Haryana (Siddiqi 1961) and Jammu & Kashmir (Saikia et al. 2006). Systematic and intensive surveys
covering all physiographic zones of the state will add significantly to our
understanding of bat diversity in Himachal Pradesh.
Conservation status
Of the 28
species of bat occurring in Himachal Pradesh, one is Endangered (Nyctalus leisleri), three are Vulnerable (Rhinolophus
ferrumequinum, Myotis blythii and M. mystacinus), eight species are Near Threatened (Rhinolophus sinicus, R. luctus, Myotis siligorensis, Plecotus homochrous, Barbastella
leucomelas, Scotoecus pallidus, Nyctalus montanus and Murina tubinaris) and 16 are Least Concern (Molur et al. 2002). The majority of taxa in the Least
Concern category comprise several well-distributed Pipistrellus species together with a
number of Vespertilionid and Rhinolophoid taxa. However, these categories apply largely to South Asia and
the local population status of bat species in the state appears to vary to some
extent. For example, both Myotis blythii and M. mystacinus have been recognised as
Vulnerable on the basis of very small population sizes. However, our field observations suggest
that the population sizes of these two taxa might not be very small in Himachal
Pradesh, where colonies of approximately 100 individuals of both species were
observed. Likewise, R. ferrumequinum has been categorised as
Vulnerable on the basis of a restricted area of occupancy and a change in the
quality of habitat. In Himachal
Pradesh, though, this bat has been collected at many localities, albeit in
small numbers.
Bats in
India face a catastrophic loss of habitat, which decreases foraging areas,
reduces prey populations, and often forces species to live in and around human
habitations, making them more vulnerable (Mistry 2003). The quality of habitat for most of the
bat species in this area is also deteriorating gradually. Stone-quarrying,
for example, which is carried out in the state, is known to be detrimental to
the existence of cave-dwelling bats (Murphy 1987). Caves in limestone areas may harbour healthy populations of many
bat species. Large-scale mining of
limestone is prevalent in Himachal Pradesh and poses a threat to the survival
of many cave-dwelling bats. Although human population growth in Himachal Pradesh is not high, the
rapid pace of urbanisation and industrialisation, especially in areas of lower
elevation, is likely to have a severely detrimental impact on the region’s bat
fauna. As the urban landscape
continues to encroach on rural areas, diversity and abundance of bat species in
this region is likely to undergo a steady decline.
It is
fortunate that other factors that are detrimental to bats, such as hunting for
food, traditional medicine, and persecution, are almost non-existent in the
state. Although fruit bats,
notably Pteropus giganteus, cause considerable damage to fruit orchards, farmers are not normally hostile to their existence. It is to be hoped that this peaceful
coexistence will continue for the time to come.
References
Allen, G.M. (1908). Notes on
Chiroptera. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 52: 25–61
Allen, G.M. (1938). The
Mammals of China and Mongolia. American Museum of Natural History, New
York, 620pp.
Appleton B.R., J.A. Mckenzie & L. Chirstidis (2004). Molecular
systematics and biogeography of the Bentwing Bat complex Miniopterus schreibersii (Kuhl,
1817) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31: 431–439
Bates, P.J.J. & D.L. Harrison (1997). Bats of the Indian
Subcontinent. Harrison Zoological Museum, Kent, 268pp
Bhat, H.R. (1974). Records
and observations on bats of Himalayan region of Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal,
India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 71(1): 51–57.
Bhat, H.R., S.M. Kulkarni & A.C. Mishra (1983). Records
of Mesostigmata, Ereynetidae and Pterygosomidae (Acarina) in Western Himalayas,
Sikkim and hill districts of West Bengal. Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 80(1): 91–110.
Bhattacharrya, T.P. (1985). Observations on the
roosting and feeding habits of Pipistrelle bats around Calcutta airport. Bulletin of
Zoological Survey of India 7(1): 113–116.
Blanford, W.T. (1888-1891). Fauna of British
India - Mammalia. Taylor and Francis, London, xx+617pp.
Bradburry, J.W. (1977). Social organization and communication, pp.
1–72. In: Wimsat, W.A. (ed.). Biology of
Bats—Vol. 3. Academic Press, New york.
Brosset, A. (1962). The bats of central and western India—part II. Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 59(2): 583-624.
Chakraborty, S. (1977). Taxonomic
studies on the greater horseshoe bat, Rhinolophus ferrumequinum (Schreber) [Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae]. Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 74(2): 341–343.
Chakraborty, S. (1983). Contribution to knowledge of the mammalian
fauna of Jammu and Kashmir, India. Records of Zoological Survey of India Occasional Paper 38: 129pp
Chakraborty, S., H.S. Mehta & S. Pratihar (2005). Mammals, pp. 341-359. In: Fauna of western
Himalaya—(Part 2)- Himachal Pradesh, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.
Corbet, G.B. (1978). The Mammals of the Palaearctic Region: A Taxonomic Review. British
Museum (NH), London, 314pp.
Corbet, G.B. & J.E. Hill (1992). The Mammals of the
Indomalayn Region. Natural History Museum/Oxford University Press, 488pp
Das, P.K. (1986). Studies on the taxonomy and geographical
distribution of the species of bats obtained by Silent Valley (Kerala, India)
expedition, 1980. Records of Zoological Survey of India 84: 259–276.
Das, P.K. (2003). Studies on some Indian Chiroptera from West
Bengal. Records of Zoological Survey of India Occasional Paper 217: 1–164.
Dobson, G.E. (1873). Description of a new
species of Vespertilio from northwestern Himalaya. Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 42(2): 205–206.
Dodsworth, P.T.L.
(1913) Notes on some mammals found in Simla districts,theSimla hill states, and Kalka and adjacent country. Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 22(3): 726–748.
Dwyer, P.D. (1968). The little bent winged bat- Evolution in progress. Australian Natural History 1968: 55–58.
Ferrar, M. L. (1934): Daily flighting of flying foxes (Pteropus giganteus Brunn) Journal of the
Bombay Natural History Society 37: 214–215.
Ghosh, M.K. (2008). Catalogue of Chiroptera in the collection of Zoological Survey of
India—Part II: Microchiroptera, Records of Zoological Survey of India Occasional Paper - 281. Zoological
Survey of India, Kolkata, 399pp.
Gould, E. (1988). Wing-clapping sounds of Eonycteris spelaea (Pteropodidae) in Malaysia. Journal of Mammalogy 69: 378–379.
Graham, G.L. (1990). Bats versus birds – comparison among
Peruvian volant vertebrate faunas along an elevational gradient. Journal of Biogoegraphy 17: 657–668.
Holland, R.A., D.A.
Waters & J.M.V. Rayner (2007).Echolocation signal structure in the
Megachiropteran bat Rousettus aegyptiacus Geoffroy 1810. Journal of Experimental Biology 207: 4361–4369.
Horáček, I., V. Hanak & J. Gaisler (2000). Bats of the Palearctic
region: A taxonomic and biogeographic review. Proceedings of the VIIIth European Bat Research Society 1: 11–157
Humphrey, S.R. (1975). Nursery roosts and community diversity of
Nearctic bats. Journal of Mammalogy 56: 321–346.
Isaac, S., G. Marimuthu & M.K. Chandrashekaran (1994). Fecundity
in Indian pygmy bat Pipistrellus mimus. Journal of Zoology (London) 234: 665–668
Jones, G. & M.W. Holderied (2007). Bat echolocation calls:
adaptation and convergent adaptation. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biology (supplement) 274: 905–912 doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.0200
Joshi, P.K., S. Singh, S. Agrawal & P.S. Roy (2001). Forest coverassessment in western Himalayas, Himachal Pradesh using IRS 1C/1D WiFS data. Current Science 80(8): 941–947.
Kaňuch, P. &
A. Krištín (2006) Altitudinal distribution of bats in the Poľana Mts area
(Central Slovakia). Biologia Bratislava 61(5): 605–610.
Khajuria, H. (1953) Taxonomic studies on some Indian Chiroptera. Records
of the Indian Museum 50: 113–128.
Khajuria, H. (1979). Studies on the Bats
(Chiroptera: Mammalia) of M.P., India. Pt
I (Families Pteropodidae, Rhinolophidae and Embalonuridae). Records
of Zoological Survey of India Occasional Paper 13, 59pp+vii pls.
Koopman K. (1994). Chiroptera: Systematics. Handb. der Zoologie, VIII, Mammalia Part 60. W. de Gruyter, Berlin, New
York, 217pp.
Kunz, T.H. (1982). Roosting ecology, pp.
1–55. In: Kunz, T.H. (ed.). Ecology of Bats. Plenum Press, New York.
Kurup, G.U. (1966). Mammals of Assam and
adjoining areas 1. An analytical study. Proceedings of the
Zoological Society of Calcutta 19: 1–21
Kurup, G.U. (1974). Mammals of Assam and the
mammal-geography of Assam, pp. 585–613. In: Mani, M.S. (ed.). Ecology and Biogeography of India. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague.
Lanxiang T., B. Liang, K. Maeda, W. Metzner & S. Zhang (2004).Molecular
studies on the classification of Miniopterus schreibersii (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) inferred from mitochondrial
cytochrome b sequences. Folia Zool. 53(3): 303–311.
Lindsay, H.M. (1927). Report No 44: Kangra and Chamba, Bombay Natural History Society’s
Mammal Survey of India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 31: 597–607
Madhavan, A. (2000). A catalogue of bats
recorded in Thrissur district, Kerala. Zoos’ Print Journal 15(11): 355–358
Mahajan, K.K. & R.N. Mukherjee (1974). Checklist
of mammals of Himachal Pradesh. Hippocampus 5: 40–47
Mehta, H.S. & J.M. Julka (2002). Mountains: North-West Humalaya, pp. 51–72. In: Alfred, J.R.B., Das & Sanyal (eds.). Ecosystems of India. ENVIS Center, Zoological
Survey of India, Kolkata
Mistry, S. (2003). Protecting the bats of India. Bats 21(2): 8-11.
Molur, S. (2009). Progress on ongoing project Ptero Count. Small Mammal Mail 1(1): 29
Molur, S., G. Marimuthu, C.
Srinivasulu, S. Mistry, A.M. Hutson, P.J.J. Bates, S. Walker, K.P. Priya &
A.R.B. Priya (eds.) (2002). Status of South Asian Chiroptera: Conservation Assessment and Management Plan
(C.A.M.P.) Workshop Report, 2002. Zoo Outreach Organisation, CBSG South Asia and WILD, Coimbatore,
India, 322pp
Murphy, M. (1987). India’s Samanar Hill caves saved. Bats 5(3): 6
Paul, S.K., R. Paul, H. Mitter, L. Singh & G.S. Chandel
(2009). Bats and people: Harmony and conflict. Small Mammal Mail 1(1): 10
Prakash, I. (1962). Times of emergence of
pipistrelle. Mammalia 26: 133–135.
Presetnik P. (2004). Bat species and
conservation issues in the castle Grad naGoričkem (NE Slovenia). Mammalia 68(4): 427–435.
Rahbek, C. (1995). The elevational gradient of
species richness: a uniform pattern? Ecography 18: 200–205.
Raghuram, H., N.
Gopukumar & K. Sripathi (2007). Presence of single as well as double clicks in the echolocation
signals of a fruit bat, Rousettus leschenaulti (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae). Folia Zoologica 56(1): 33–38
Roberts, T.J. (1977) The Mammals of Pakistan. Ernest Benn Limited, London & Tonbridge, 361pp
Rodger, W.A. & H.S.E. Panwar (1988). Planning A Wildlife Protected Area Network in India—Vols I & II. Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun, 341pp.
Saikia, U., R.M. Sharma & V.K. Mattu (2004). New
records of bats from Himachal Pradesh with some ecological notes The Indian Forester 130(10): 1204–1208.
Saikia, U., R.M. Sharma & D.K.
Sharma (2006). Record of Fulvous Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros fulvus Gray, 1838 from Jammu & Kashmir, India. Zoos’ Print Journal 21(3): 2197.
Siddiqui, M.S.U.
(1961). Checklist of mammals of Pakistan with particular reference to the
mammalian collection in the British Museum (Natural History), London. Biologia 7: 93–225.
Sinha, Y.P. (1980). The bats of Rajasthan:
taxonomy and zoogeography. Records of the Zoological Survey of India 76(1–4): 7–63.
Sharma, D.K. & U. Saikia (2009). Mammalia, pp. 103-118. In:Faunal
Diversity of Simbalbara Wildlife Sanctuary. Conservation Area Series,
41, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.
Taylor, D.A.R. (2006). Forest Management and Bats. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, 16pp
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.
Thomas, N.M. (2000). Morphological
and mitochondrial-DNA variation in Rhinolophus
rouxii (Chiroptera) Bonn. Zool. Beitr. 49(1–4):
1–18.
Tuttle, M.D. (1975). Population ecology of gray bat (Myotis griescens): factors influencing early growth and development. Occasional Paper of the Museum of Natural History, University of
Kansas 36: 1–24.
Tuttle, M.D. (1976). Population ecology of gray bat (Myotis griescens): factors influencing growth and survival of newly volant young. Ecology 57: 587-595.
Wilson D.E. & D.M. Reeder (1993). Mammal Species of The World. A Taxonomic and
Geographic Reference—Second Edition. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington and
London, 1206pp.
Websites:
http://mapsofindia.com/maps/himachalpradesh/himachalpradesh-forest-map.html (Accessed on 19 February
2010).
http://emuweb.fieldmuseum.org/mammals/Query.php (Accessed on 12
October 2010).
http://entheros.amnh.org/db/emuwebamnh/pages/amnh/mammalogy/ResultsList.php (Accessed on 27 October
2010).