Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus Temminck 1840

• Main Authors: Wilson, Don E., Reeder, DeeAnn
• Format: Other/Unknown Material
• Language: unknown
• Published: The Johns Hopkins University Press 2005
• Subjects: Biodiversity; Taxonomy; Animalia; Chordata; Mammalia; Chiroptera; Vespertilionidae; Pipistrellus; Pipistrellus hesperidus; Pipistrellus pipistrellus
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11327560; http://treatment.plazi.org/id/1065E2758B5BA4EAB7E8AD4B3AEF1E75

Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus Temminck 1840 Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus Temminck 1840, Monograph. Mammal. Musees de l'Europe, Vol. 2: 211. Type Locality: Not definitely identifiable, although known to be from the Red Sea coast of Africa; probably Ethiopia, probably Shewa Province [= Shoa] (see discussion in Kock, 2001 b ). Vernacular Names: Dusky Pipistrelle. Synonyms: Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) platycephlus Temminck 1832. Subspecies:: Subspecies Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus subsp. hesperidus Temminck 1840 Subspecies Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus subsp. fuscatus Thomas 1901 Subspecies Pipistrellus (Pipistrellus) hesperidus subsp. subtilis Sundevall 1846 Distribution: Cape Verde Isls, Canary Isls, Liberia, Chad, Bioko (Equatorial Guinea), Nigeria, Cameroon, Dem. Rep. Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana, South Africa, Madagascar. Conservation: IUCN 2003 – Not evaluated; not considered in IUCN / SSC Action Plan (2001). Discussion: Subgenus Pipistrellus . Distinct from kuhlii , see Kock (2001 b ). Lectotype designated by Kock (2001 b ). Chromosomal differences between populations in South Africa / Madagascar and those in N Africa strongly suggest that the southern populations (for which subtilis is apparently the oldest name) represent a distinct species (Volleth et al., 2001). Similarly, differences in ectoparasites suggest that North African and Afrotropical forms may represent different species (Kock, 2001 b ). It thus seems clear that more than one species is present in this complex. However, allocation of many populations is uncertain, taxonomic limits have not yet been adequately described, and holotypes of several important forms (e.g., subtilis ) have not been reexamined (Kock et al., 2001 b Volleth et al., 2001). I therefore treat this complex as a single taxon, recognizing the following subspecies (which may be shown to be distinct species): hesperidus (Northeastern Africa), fuscatus ...