A Review of Tube-Nosed Bats (<i>Murina</i>) from Laos with a Description of Two New Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report records for eight species of tube-nosed bats, Murina, from Laos. Murina cyclotis is the most widespread in the region, although DNA barcodes of specimens currently identified as M. cyclotis suggest high genetic diversity within southeast Asia with the possibility that the form found in Indochina is not the same as that from the type locality on the Indian subcontinent. We recognize M. peninsularis from peninsular Malaysia and Borneo as distinct from M. cyclotis. Murina huttoni is known from only one locality in Laos but has been reported from scattered localities elsewhere in southeast Asia including Vietnam and Thailand. Specimens previously reported as M. tubinaris from southeast Asia, including Laos, were recently recognized as a distinct species, M. cineracea; however, we suggest M. feae is the appropriate name for this species, based on examination of the holotype from Myanmar. Specimens formerly reported as M. aurata from Laos are now referred to the recently described M. eleryi from Vietnam. A specimen from northern Laos matches the description of M. harrisoni in morphology, while genetically it matches M. tiensa. Comparisons with additional material from Vietnam, as well as DNA from both type specimens, suggest that M. tiensa is a junior synonym of M. harrisoni. We also report M. harrisoni from Thailand and Myanmar, based on specimens originally published as M. leucogaster. The latter species is not otherwise known to occur in Thailand or Myanmar and should be removed from those countries' lists. The recently described M. walstoni is here reported for the first time from Laos. Two additional species from Laos do not match any currently described species, and are here described as new; both are also reported from Vietnam and one from Cambodia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".