http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#wasDerivedFrom	http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/format	name_CH1_1980	name_MSW1_1982	name_CH3_1991	name_MSW2_1993	name_Koopman_1994	name_MSW3_2005	name_HMW_2019	name_BatNames_2022	name_MDD_2022	name_IUCN_2022	name_BatNames_2023	name_MDD_2023	name_MDD_2025_2.0	name_batnames_2025_1.7	name_MDD_2025_2.2	column151	taxonomic_notes_concatenated	column171	synonyms_CH1	subspecies__MSW2	synonyms__MSW1	synonyms_CH3	synonyms_MSW2	subspecies_Koopman94_interpreted	subspecies_MSW3_interpreted	synonym_MSW3_interpreted	subspecies_HMW_interpreted	synonym_HMW_interpreted	subspecies_batnames_interpreted	synonym_batnames_interpreted	synonym_MDD_interpreted	synonym_IUCN_interpreted	subspecies_batnames2023_interpreted	synonym_batnames2023_interpreted	synonym_MDD2023_interpreted	synonym_MDD2025_interpreted	subspecies_batnames2025_interpreted	synonyms_batnames2025_interpreted	nominalNames	column391	docOrigin_CH1	commonName_CH1	distribution_CH1	docOrigin_MSW1	column451	typeLocality_MSW1	authority_MSW1	year_MSW1	citation_MSW1	distribution	comment_MSW1	docOrigin_CH3	commonName_CH3	distribution_CH3	docOrigin_MSW2	authority_MSW2	year_MSW2	citation_MSW2	comments_MSW2	distribution_MSW2	typeLocality_MSW2	docOrigin_Koopman94	authority_Koopman94	year_Koopman94	description_Koopman94	distribution_Koopman94	diversity_Koopman94	subspecies_Koopman94	page	rank	name	authority	year	parent	parent_rank	corrected_name	actual_species_count	claimed_species_count	dental_formula	description	diversity	full_subspecies_text	name_line	species_index	subspecies	synonym	text	docOrigin_MSW3	order_MSW3	family_MSW3	subfamily_MSW3	tribe_MSW3	name_MSW3	genus_MSW3	subgenus_MSW3	species_MSW3	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MSW3	(parentheses (1=author & date in parentheses)_MSW3	authoritySpeciesYear_MSW3	actualDate_MSW3	citation_MSW3	volume_MSW3	issue_MSW3	pages_MSW3	type_species_MSW3	commonName_MSW3	typeLocality_MSW3	distribution_MSW3	status_MSW3	synonym_MSW3	comments_MSW3	docId_HMW	docOrigin_HMW	docISBN_HMW	docName_HMW	docMasterId_HMW	docPageNumber_HMW	derivedFrom_HMW	name_HMW	family_HMW	genus_HMW	species_HMW	authoritySpeciesAuthor_HMW	authoritySpeciesYear	commonNames_HMW	taxonomy_HMW	subspeciesAndDistribution_HMW	descriptiveNotes_HMW	habitat_HMW	foodAndFeeding_HMW	breeding_HMW	activityPatterns_HMW	movementsHomeRangeAndSocialOrganization_HMW	statusAndConservation_HMW	bibliography_HMW	distributionImageURL_HMW	verbatimText_HMW	docOrigin_batnames	family_batnames	name_batnames	genus_batnames	subgenus_batnames	species_batnames	authoritySpeciesAuthor_batnames	date_batnames	parentheses_batnames (1=author & date in parentheses)	citation_batnames	docPageNumber_batnames	common Name_batnames	synonyms_batnames	type_locality_batnames	Distribution_batnames	CITES_batnames	IUCN_batnames	comments_batnames	docOrigin_MDD	name_MDD	phylosort_MDD	mainCommonName_MDD	otherCommonNames_MDD	subclass_MDD	infraclass_MDD	magnorder_MDD	superorder_MDD	order_MDD	suborder_MDD	infraorder_MDD	parvorder_MDD	superfamily_MDD	family_MDD	subfamily_MDD	tribe_MDD	genus_MDD	subgenus_MDD	specificEpithet_MDD	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MDD	authoritySpeciesYear_MDD	authorityParentheses_MDD	originalNameCombination_MDD	authoritySpeciesCitation_MDD	authoritySpeciesLink_MDD	holotypeVoucher_MDD	holotypeVoucherURIs_MDD	typeLocality_MDD	typeLocalityLatitude_MDD	typeLocalityLongitude_MDD	nominalNames_MDD	taxonomyNotes_MDD	taxonomyNotesCitation_MDD	countryDistribution_MDD	continentDistribution_MDD	biogeographicRealm_MDD	iucnStatus_MDD	extinct_MDD	domestic_MDD	flagged_MDD	CMW_sciName_MDD	diffSinceCMW_MDD	MSW3_matchtype_MDD	MSW3_sciName_MDD	diffSinceMSW3_MDD	docOrigin_IUCN	internalTaxonId_IUCN	NAME_IUCN	kingdomName_IUCN	phylumName_IUCN	className_IUCN	orderName_IUCN	familyName_IUCN	genusName_IUCN	speciesName_IUCN	authoritySpeciesAuthorYear_IUCN	taxonomicNotes_IUCN	assessmentId_IUCN	scientificName_IUCN	redlistCategory_IUCN	redlistCriteria_IUCN	yearPublished_IUCN	assessmentDate_IUCN	criteriaVersion_IUCN	language_IUCN	rationale_IUCN	habitat_IUCN	threats_IUCN	population_IUCN	populationTrend_IUCN	range_IUCN	useTrade_IUCN	systems_IUCN	conservationActions_IUCN	realm_IUCN	yearLastSeen_IUCN	possiblyExtinct_IUCN	possiblyExtinctInTheWild_IUCN	scopes_IUCN	docOrigin_batnames2023	FAMILY_batnames2023	GENUS_batnames2023	SUBGENUS_batnames2023	SPECIES_batnames2023	authoritySpeciesAuthor_batnames2023	authoritySpeciesYearbatnames2023	PARENTHESES_batnames2023 (1=AUTHOR & DATE IN PARENTHESES)	CITATION_batnames2023	PAGES_batnames2023	COMMON NAME_batnames2023	SYNONYMS_batnames2023	TYPE LOCALITY_batnames2023	DISTRIBUTION_batnames2023	CITES_batnames2023	IUCN_batnames2023	COMMENTS_batnames2023	name MDD2023	id_MDD2023	phylosort_MDD2023	mainCommonName_MDD2023	otherCommonNames_MDD2023	subclass_MDD2023	infraclass_MDD2023	magnorder_MDD2023	superorder_MDD2023	order_MDD2023	suborder_MDD2023	infraorder_MDD2023	parvorder_MDD2023	superfamily_MDD2023	Family_mdd2023	subfamily_MDD2023	tribe_MDD2023	genus_MDD2023	subgenus_MDD2023	specificEpithet_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesAuthor_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesYear_MDD2023	authorityParentheses_MDD2023	originalNameCombination_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesCitation_MDD2023	authoritySpeciesLink_MDD2023	holotypeVoucher_MDD2023	holotypeVoucherURIs_MDD2023	typeLocality_MDD2023	typeLocalityLatitude_MDD2023	typeLocalityLongitude_MDD2023	nominalNames_MDD2023	taxonomyNotes_MDD2023	taxonomyNotesCitation_MDD2023	distributionNotes_MDD2023	distributionNotesCitation_MDD2023	subregionDistribution_MDD2023	countryDistribution_MDD2023	continentDistribution_MDD2023	biogeographicRealm_MDD2023	iucnStatus_MDD2023	extinct_MDD2023	domestic_MDD2023	flagged_MDD2023	CMW_sciName_MDD2023	diffSinceCMW_MDD2023	MSW3_matchtype_MDD2023	MSW3_sciName_MDD2023	diffSinceMSW3_MDD2023	docOrigin_MDD2025	sciName	id	phylosort	mainCommonName	otherCommonNames	subclass	infraclass	magnorder	superorder	order	suborder	infraorder	parvorder	superfamily	family	subfamily	tribe	genus	subgenus	specificEpithet	authoritySpeciesAuthor	authorityParentheses	originalNameCombination	authoritySpeciesCitation	authoritySpeciesLink	typeVoucher	typeKind	typeVoucherURIs	typeLocality	typeLocalityLatitude	typeLocalityLongitude	taxonomyNotes	taxonomyNotesCitation	distributionNotes	distributionNotesCitation	subregionDistribution	countryDistribution	continentDistribution	biogeographicRealm	iucnStatus	extinct	domestic	flagged	CMW_sciName	diffSinceCMW	MSW3_matchtype	MSW3_sciName	diffSinceMSW3	docOrigin_batnames2025	Family	Genus	Subgenus	Species	Author	Date	Parentheses (1=author & date in parentheses)	Citation	Pages	Common Name	Synonyms	Type Locality	Distribution	CITES	IUCN	Comments	column3781	column3791	subtribe	CONCAT_ALTNAMES
line:xlsx:hash://sha256/181a039844a33e66a35a457b7ece741051086608e425a040051b79581d606b97!/Sheet1!/L62	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles bulmerae		[MSW2] Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Hyndman and Menzies, 1980).; [MSW3] Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995a) and Bonaccorso (1998).; [HMW] Aproteles bulmerae Menzies, 1977 , 2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m , Chimbu Province , Papua New Guinea . Aproteles bulmerae was first discovered as fossils in 9000-12,000-year-old deposits, and it was subsequently found alive at three othersites. Monotypic.; [batnames2022] Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a ) and Bonaccorso (1998).; [batnames2023] Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a ) and Bonaccorso (1998).; [batnames2025_1.7] Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a) and Bonaccorso (1998).														bulmerae				bulmerae	bulmerae			bulmerae Menzies, 1977		Corbet, G.B. and Hill, J.E. 1980. A World List of Mammalian Species. British Museum (Natural History), London, 226 pp.		E New Guinea	Honacki, J.H., Kinman, K.E. and Koeppl, J.W. 1982. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Allen Press, Lawrence, 694 pp.	Aproteles bulmerae	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km S.E Chuave Govt. Sta., 1530 m.	Menzies	1977	Aust. J. Zool., 25:331.	Distribution: Same as for ge nus.		Corbet, G.B. and Hill, J.E. 1991. A World List of Mammalian Species. Third edition. Oxford University Press, London, 243 pp. ISBN 0-19-854017-5		E New Guinea; K	Koopman, K.F. 1993. Order Chiroptera. Pp. 137–242 in Wilson, D.E. and Reeder, D.M. (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1206 pp.	Menzies	1977	Aust. J. Zool., 25:331.	Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Hyndman and Menzies, 1980).	New Guinea.	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km SE Chuave Govt. Sta., 1,530 m.		MENZIES	1977	Total length of skull, ca. 68 mm.	Distribution: Same as for ge nus.	No subspecies.		28	species	A. bulmerae	MENZIES	1977	Aproteles	genus	Aproteles bulmerae				Total length of skull, ca. 68 mm.	No subspecies.		1. A. bulmerae MENZIES 1977.	1	NA			Don E. Wilson & DeeAnn M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed), Johns Hopkins University Press, 2,142 pp. (Available from Johns Hopkins University Press, 1-800-537-5487 or (410) 516-6900, or at http://www.press.jhu.edu).	CHIROPTERA	Pteropodidae			Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles		bulmerae	Menzies		1977		Aust. J. Zool.	25		331		Bulmer's Fruit Bat	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km SE Chuave Govt. Sta., 1,530 m.	Mainland Papua New Guinea.	U.S. ESA – Endangered. IUCN/SSC Action Plan (1992) – Endangered: Limited Distribution. IUCN 2003 – Critically Endangered.		Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995a) and Bonaccorso (1998).	03AD87FAFFF5F61889633869FD4CFE61	Handbook of the Mammals of the World – Volume 9 Bats, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions	978-84-16728-19-0	hbmw_9_Pteropodidae_16.pdf.imf	hash://md5/ff94ff82ffc4f62a891e341cffa5ff9b	107	zip:hash://sha256/ec5fd314a06aba1a7b0b72f23e54ac625ae272bd98f82f1d01f4c09627d9e8e0!/treatments-xml-main/data/03/AD/87/03AD87FAFFF5F61889633869FD4CFE61.xml	Aproteles bulmerae	Pteropodidae	Aproteles	bulmerae	Menzies	1977	Roussette de Bulmer @fr | Bulmer-Flughund @de | Aprotelo de Bulmer @es	Aproteles bulmerae Menzies, 1977 , 2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m , Chimbu Province , Papua New Guinea . Aproteles bulmerae was first discovered as fossils in 9000-12,000-year-old deposits, and it was subsequently found alive at three othersites. Monotypic.	C Papua New Guinea Mts (four localities in Western and Eastern Highlands provinces).	Head-body 248 mm ,tail 30-32 mm , ear 37 mm , hindfoot 31 mm , forearm 165; weight 600 g . Head is robust; muzzle is long and stout; nostrils are large, shortly tubular, smooth, and diverging; and lips are papillose. Eyes are moderately large; irises are brown. Ears are long and narrow and attenuated at tips. Head has no glandular areas; pelage is dark brown and short; pelage on nape and anterior dorsum is lighter brown and silky; posterior mantle is whitish, with dense brown margin right below scapular area where furry dorsum is interrupted by naked patagia, but rump is densely covered with brown hair; tail is short; uropatagium is reduced in center and more ample on sides of legs; calcar is relatively long; and hindfeet are large. Ventral side is densely covered entirely in fine brown hair. Wing membranes are thick and blackish, originate on spine where left and right wings meet giving impression of bare back, and inserted on second toes; forearm and tibia are naked; index claw is present; and all claws in hand and feet are brown (paler even whitish in young). Skull is large, with slight basicranial deflection; premaxillae are thin and arcuate, lacking any sign of alveoli; rostrum is long and relatively thin and continues on flat forehead; alveolar line is slightly arched; zygomatic root is above upper alveolar line; zygoma is relatively thick and strongly arched from its anterior root; orbit is moderately large and oriented slightly forward; and braincase is long and relatively low, with occiput directed somewhat ventrally. Dorsally, point of nasals is flared laterally; rostrum is conical; paranasal recesses are moderately inflated, barely reaching large postorbital foramen; postorbital process is strong and posteriorly directed; postorbital constriction is very obvious; temporal lines are joined anteriorly in sharp sagittal crest; and braincase is oval, ending posteriorly in obvious nuchalcrest. Ventrally, palate is flat; tooth rows diverge posteriorly; post-dental palate is relatively short, converging posteriorly; and ear bones very small. There are 14 palatal ridges; first five are arched, undivided, and smooth; and the rest are divided medially, becoming strongly denticulate caudally. Dental formulais 10/0, C 1/1, P 2/3, M 2/3 (x2) = 24—lowest tooth count of all species of Pteropodidae . Dentition is generally weak; dental pieces lack enamel and appear tinged with orange; main cusps are round; and there are no additional cusps, cingula, or ledges. Upper dentition has permanent incisors (single pair of tiny deciduous incisors present); canines are long and slender and slanted forward; P' is absent; posterior cheekteeth have single labial cusp, decreasing in height caudally, and main cusps and occlusal outline are broadly rounded; and M? is small and more triangular. Lower dentition has no incisors; small low C, is close medially; P| is simple, rounded cone; posterior cheekteeth are as tall as canines and decrease in height posteriorly, with rounded cusps and occlusal outline approaching circular; and M,is peg-like.	Montane forests in rugged limestone karst, specifically the Central Range lowland, hill, and mossy montane rainforests, at elevations of 500-2400 m . Bulmer’s Fruit Bats roost in large caves and “dolines” (sinkholes).	Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is frugivorous. Relatively weak dentition suggests consumption of soft fruit; it has been observed eating caulicarpous figs ( Ficus spp. , Moraceae ).	Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is probably seasonally monoestrous, with births recorded in April. Females carry their single young for a few weeks when they forage. Females achieve adult size by their second year and apparently start breeding during their third year oflife.	Bulmer’s Fruit Bats roost in large caves and leave roosts at 18:00 19:00 h; when disturbed, they delay emergence from roosts. They emerge and start circling the roost for 5-10 minutes, emitting a birdlike call, before leaving to unknown feeding areas; they return to roosts minutes before 06:00 h.	Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is highly gregarious, with a colony (today collapsed) of thousands of bats on record: the Luplupwintem colony is located in a large doline with a 300-m vertical shaft excavated in a limestone plateau (locally called “Fininterr”) near Hindenburg Wall that rises 400 m above the level of a rich montane forest. The large cavern at the base of shaft is the roost of Bulmer’s Fruit Bats. Some estimates indicate that they fly more than 30 km each night to find fruiting trees. Wingbeats produce a “pok-pok” sound like that of the Moluccan Naked-backed Fruit Bat ( Dobsonia moluccensis ). It is known to roost with Dobsonia bats in some localities.	Classified as Critically Endangered on The IUCN Red Lust. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is one of the rarest bats in the World. It is considered a Pleistocene holdover, and populations have been decreasing ever since. The Papua New Guinea highlands might representits last retreat. Heavy human hunting is the main cause of its decline, and it is now on the brink of extinction. Extant individuals are known from only three localities, all in almost inaccessible limestone areas surrounded by pristine montane forests. It is highly vulnerable to hunting due to its dependence on caves and its gregariousness. Introduction of shotguns probably led to the collapse of the main colony in Luplupwintem Cave that was protected by local tribesmen for generations and still numbered in the thousands in the early 1970s. The colony collapsed when shotgun hunters, equipped to be able to descend to the cave, raided the colonykilling thousands of bats in 1975-1977. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is recorded from a few, widely separate localities (one is a fossil site), some of which are in Crater Mountain Wildlife Management Area, where there is local community awareness about conservation; however, this area is not effectively protected due to local conflicts. At a wider scale, Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is not distinguished from the Moluccan Naked-backed Fruit Bat by local people, and thus there is considerable difficulty in establishing a conservation program. The single known roost with living Bulmer’s Fruit Bats might have less than 200 individuals. It is possible that new colonies are yet to be discovered in highlands of Papua New Guinea and Western New Guinea , given that extensive suitable habitat remains available with relatively low human population pressure.	Aplin et al. (2016) | Bonaccorso (1998) | Flannery (1995b) | Flannery & Seri (1993) | Hyndman & Menzies (1980) | Menzies (1977) | Wright et al. (1995)		81. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat Aproteles bulmerae French: Roussette de Bulmer / German: Bulmer-Flughund / Spanish: Aprotelo de Bulmer Taxonomy. Aproteles bulmerae Menzies, 1977 , 2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m , Chimbu Province , Papua New Guinea . Aproteles bulmerae was first discovered as fossils in 9000-12,000-year-old deposits, and it was subsequently found alive at three othersites. Monotypic. Distribution. C Papua New Guinea Mts (four localities in Western and Eastern Highlands provinces). Descriptive notes. Head-body 248 mm ,tail 30-32 mm , ear 37 mm , hindfoot 31 mm , forearm 165; weight 600 g . Head is robust; muzzle is long and stout; nostrils are large, shortly tubular, smooth, and diverging; and lips are papillose. Eyes are moderately large; irises are brown. Ears are long and narrow and attenuated at tips. Head has no glandular areas; pelage is dark brown and short; pelage on nape and anterior dorsum is lighter brown and silky; posterior mantle is whitish, with dense brown margin right below scapular area where furry dorsum is interrupted by naked patagia, but rump is densely covered with brown hair; tail is short; uropatagium is reduced in center and more ample on sides of legs; calcar is relatively long; and hindfeet are large. Ventral side is densely covered entirely in fine brown hair. Wing membranes are thick and blackish, originate on spine where left and right wings meet giving impression of bare back, and inserted on second toes; forearm and tibia are naked; index claw is present; and all claws in hand and feet are brown (paler even whitish in young). Skull is large, with slight basicranial deflection; premaxillae are thin and arcuate, lacking any sign of alveoli; rostrum is long and relatively thin and continues on flat forehead; alveolar line is slightly arched; zygomatic root is above upper alveolar line; zygoma is relatively thick and strongly arched from its anterior root; orbit is moderately large and oriented slightly forward; and braincase is long and relatively low, with occiput directed somewhat ventrally. Dorsally, point of nasals is flared laterally; rostrum is conical; paranasal recesses are moderately inflated, barely reaching large postorbital foramen; postorbital process is strong and posteriorly directed; postorbital constriction is very obvious; temporal lines are joined anteriorly in sharp sagittal crest; and braincase is oval, ending posteriorly in obvious nuchalcrest. Ventrally, palate is flat; tooth rows diverge posteriorly; post-dental palate is relatively short, converging posteriorly; and ear bones very small. There are 14 palatal ridges; first five are arched, undivided, and smooth; and the rest are divided medially, becoming strongly denticulate caudally. Dental formulais 10/0, C 1/1, P 2/3, M 2/3 (x2) = 24—lowest tooth count of all species of Pteropodidae . Dentition is generally weak; dental pieces lack enamel and appear tinged with orange; main cusps are round; and there are no additional cusps, cingula, or ledges. Upper dentition has permanent incisors (single pair of tiny deciduous incisors present); canines are long and slender and slanted forward; P' is absent; posterior cheekteeth have single labial cusp, decreasing in height caudally, and main cusps and occlusal outline are broadly rounded; and M? is small and more triangular. Lower dentition has no incisors; small low C, is close medially; P| is simple, rounded cone; posterior cheekteeth are as tall as canines and decrease in height posteriorly, with rounded cusps and occlusal outline approaching circular; and M,is peg-like. Habitat. Montane forests in rugged limestone karst, specifically the Central Range lowland, hill, and mossy montane rainforests, at elevations of 500-2400 m . Bulmer’s Fruit Bats roost in large caves and “dolines” (sinkholes). Food and Feeding. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is frugivorous. Relatively weak dentition suggests consumption of soft fruit; it has been observed eating caulicarpous figs ( Ficus spp. , Moraceae ). Breeding. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is probably seasonally monoestrous, with births recorded in April. Females carry their single young for a few weeks when they forage. Females achieve adult size by their second year and apparently start breeding during their third year oflife. Activity patterns. Bulmer’s Fruit Bats roost in large caves and leave roosts at 18:00 19:00 h; when disturbed, they delay emergence from roosts. They emerge and start circling the roost for 5-10 minutes, emitting a birdlike call, before leaving to unknown feeding areas; they return to roosts minutes before 06:00 h. Movements, Home range and Social organization. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is highly gregarious, with a colony (today collapsed) of thousands of bats on record: the Luplupwintem colony is located in a large doline with a 300-m vertical shaft excavated in a limestone plateau (locally called “Fininterr”) near Hindenburg Wall that rises 400 m above the level of a rich montane forest. The large cavern at the base of shaft is the roost of Bulmer’s Fruit Bats. Some estimates indicate that they fly more than 30 km each night to find fruiting trees. Wingbeats produce a “pok-pok” sound like that of the Moluccan Naked-backed Fruit Bat ( Dobsonia moluccensis ). It is known to roost with Dobsonia bats in some localities. Status and Conservation. Classified as Critically Endangered on The IUCN Red Lust. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is one of the rarest bats in the World. It is considered a Pleistocene holdover, and populations have been decreasing ever since. The Papua New Guinea highlands might representits last retreat. Heavy human hunting is the main cause of its decline, and it is now on the brink of extinction. Extant individuals are known from only three localities, all in almost inaccessible limestone areas surrounded by pristine montane forests. It is highly vulnerable to hunting due to its dependence on caves and its gregariousness. Introduction of shotguns probably led to the collapse of the main colony in Luplupwintem Cave that was protected by local tribesmen for generations and still numbered in the thousands in the early 1970s. The colony collapsed when shotgun hunters, equipped to be able to descend to the cave, raided the colonykilling thousands of bats in 1975-1977. Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is recorded from a few, widely separate localities (one is a fossil site), some of which are in Crater Mountain Wildlife Management Area, where there is local community awareness about conservation; however, this area is not effectively protected due to local conflicts. At a wider scale, Bulmer’s Fruit Bat is not distinguished from the Moluccan Naked-backed Fruit Bat by local people, and thus there is considerable difficulty in establishing a conservation program. The single known roost with living Bulmer’s Fruit Bats might have less than 200 individuals. It is possible that new colonies are yet to be discovered in highlands of Papua New Guinea and Western New Guinea , given that extensive suitable habitat remains available with relatively low human population pressure. Bibliography. Aplin et al. (2016), Bonaccorso (1998), Flannery (1995b), Flannery & Seri (1993), Hyndman & Menzies (1980), Menzies (1977), Wright et al. (1995).	Simmons, N.B. and A.L. Cirranello. 2022B. Bat Species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic database. Accessed on 10/11/2022.	Pteropodidae	Aproteles bulmerae	Aproteles		bulmerae	Menzies	1977	0	Aust. J. Zool.	30:31:00	Bulmer's Fruit Bat	None.	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km SE Chuave Govt. Sta., 1,530 m.	Mainland Papua New Guinea.	Not listed.	Critically Endangered	Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a ) and Bonaccorso (1998).	Mammal Diversity Database. (2023). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.11) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7830771 released 15 April 2023	Aproteles bulmerae	23	Bulmer's Fruit Bat		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	PTEROPODIFORMES	NA	NA	PTEROPODOIDEA	PTEROPODIDAE	HARPYIONYCTERINAE	DOBSONIINI	Aproteles	NA	bulmerae	Menzies	1977	0						2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m, Chimbu Province, Papua New Guinea.			bulmerae Menzies, 1977	NA	NA	Papua New Guinea	Oceania	Australasia/Oceania	CR	0	0	0	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	sciname match	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	IUCN. 2022. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on [28 September, 2022].	1933	Aproteles bulmerae	ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	MAMMALIA	CHIROPTERA	PTEROPODIDAE	Aproteles	bulmerae	Menzies, 1977		200000000	Aproteles bulmerae	Critically Endangered	B2ab(iv,v)c(ii); C2a(ii)	2021	2016-01-31 00:00:00 UTC	3.1	English	<p>Listed as Critically Endangered, because there is no current evidence for the survival of more than 250 mature individuals, the known population is centred on two or three localities, though with the best available evidence suggesting that the majority (more than 90%) of these occur at a single locality. There are observations of past hunting activity that have contributed to a decline, possibly on more than one occasion. Although there is no firm evidence of continuing decline, there is evidence for major fluctuations in the population residing at the primary known roost site. Area of occupancy (not including foraging dispersal range) is less than 10 km², the distribution is severely fragmented, and there is believed to be a continuing threat to the major known population through traditional hunting. Unless the species is confirmed to persist in additional parts of its potential range, it is considered to be at high risk of extinction in the near future.</p>	All known contemporary or recent occurrences are in areas of rugged limestone karst with largely intact forest cover. The documented elevational range of c . 500–2,400 m spans the habitat categories of Hill Forest, Lower Montane and Upper Montane Forests. The dentition and other features of the species indicate that it is frugivorous. The individual shot near Taman Village was visiting a fig tree (Ficus sp.) in an old garden area (Flannery 1995). The two confirmed cave roosts are both associated with precipitous sinkholes that afford some protection from local hunters. At Luplupwintem an adult female was collected carrying a dependent young in May 1992. In PNG the closely related Bare-backed Fruit Bat (Dobsonia moluccensis ) also favours inaccessible roost sites in areas where there is a risk of human hunting. However, in northern Australia (Churchill 1998) and in parts of PNG that are remote from human habitation (K.P. Aplin unpublished) they roost in many different situations, including large and small sinkholes, caves, fissures and rock overhangs, tree hollows, and in variable-sized groups ranging from a dozen or so individuals up to congregations of many thousands. There is some landowner testimony to suggest that large congregations are seasonal phenomena, perhaps associated with breeding activity. However, females with newborn young or in advanced stages of pregnancy have also been observed using small caves and fissures, even when larger systems are present in the same local area. Accordingly, it seems likely that Dobsonia moluccensis (and by extension, Aproteles bulmerae ) are not restricted by physiological factors to any particular type of roost but select roost sites based on various criteria that includes the risk of predation. All pteropodids including Dobsonia moluccensis (Dwyer 1975, Churchill 1998) give birth to single young. Gestation period in Australian populations of Dobsonia is c . 5 months and weaning occurs at around 5–6 months of age. Sexual maturity is attained in the second year. Similar parameters can be safely assumed for Aproteles bulmerae . Nothing is known about patterns of movement in either Aproteles bulmerae or Dobsonia moluccensis . Other similar-sized species of Pteropus are known to travel at speeds of 40 km/hr and to travel several 10s of kilometres to visit preferred food resources. However, many of the relevant studies have been carried out in highly modified landscapes where resources are fragmented and scattered, and the same pattern of dispersal may not apply in areas of continuous forest cover.	Hunting and disturbance in roost sites is the primary threat to A. bulmerae . Large cave-roosting bats are desirable targets for subsistence hunting in PNG because it is sometimes possible to kill many animals in a short period of time, especially if shotguns are available. The population at Luplupwintem was apparently decimated by groups of hunters with shotguns in the late 1970s. The closely-related Dobsonia moluccensis has been observed to abandon a cave roost after a hunting event, presumably to relocate elsewhere in one or more alternative roosts (K.P. Aplin, pers. obs.). The likelihood of hunting and roost visitation is increased with the development of new roads. Wopkaimin landowners interviewed by Ken Aplin in 2013 reported an increase in the volume of foot traffic between the Telefomin Valley to the north of the Hindenburg Range and Tabubil to the south, and they voiced concerns that this might lead to increased visitation to Luplupwintem, including visits not authorised by landowners. The same informants also mentioned a regular foot traffic across the nearby and largely unpatrolled international border with Papua Province of Indonesia, some it associated with the sale of airguns and ammunition, and potentially of other weapons. Conditions that adversely affect feeding habitat on a broad-scale have the potential to reduce the usage of local cave roosts. Forests on the Hindenburg Range in the vicinity of Luplupwintem suffered die-back during the El Nino drought of 1997–1998 and some areas were further affected by subsequent wildfires. A large wildfire had swept just north of the Luplupwintem area shortly before 2001 (T.F. Flannery pers. comm.).	In 1992 and 1993 the population at Luplupwintem was estimated to 137 and 160 individuals respectively, based on direct counts of animals leaving the sinkhole (Flannery and Seri 1993). The site has not been assessed by a biologist since that time but in February 2013 Ken Aplin was told by landowners that the population had declined again after Flannery’s last visit, only to recover again, and that the cave once more contained bats. Whether these are Bulmer’s Fruit Bat or the morphologically similar Bare-backed Fruit Bat (Dobsonia moluccensis ) is not known. The Crater Mountain population was extant in 2005/2006 but no individuals have been observed since that time. There is no estimate of population size for the Crater Mountain locality. It is not known whether or not the populations in the upper Fly River and middle Purari River catchments are extant. However, both regions are remote and receive low levels of human visitation, hence there is no reason to suggest their decline through human action.	Decreasing	This species is endemic to New Guinea and is recorded only from the eastern half of the island (Papua New Guinea). Living animals have been recorded at two sites in two widely separated localities, and recent skeletal remains have been found in two other areas. The known elevational range of the records now is from c. 500 m to 2,400 m a.s.l. and includes areas of Hill Forest and Montane Forest. All known areas of current or recent occurrence are in areas of rugged limestone karst. It was first described in 1977 from 12,000 year old fossil remains from Eastern Highlands Province of PNG. Unbeknown to the describer, living animals had been collected in 1975 by an anthropologist working in Western Province of PNG. These came from a sinkhole called Luplupwintem, close to the edge of the Hindenburg Wall and at an elevation of 2,400 m a.s.l. The first visit to Luplupwintem by biologists found only a few resident bats which had been visited shortly before by landowners armed with ropes and shotguns. Subsequent visits throughout the 1980s failed to record any bats. Tim Flannery of the Australian Museum and Lester Seri of the Papua New Guinea Wildlife Division (Flannery and Seri 1993) visited the cave in 1992 and 1993 and estimated the population to be 137 and 160 individuals in successive years. In the 1980s and 1990s the species was recorded from two sites in the Star Mountains region but the species is now no longer present. In 1984 an individual was shot at night over a native garden at Taman Village, in the Telefomin valley (Flannery 1995). This locality is c. 32 km from Luplupwintem which seems an excessive overnight foraging distance from this site. If another, closer roost site is present in the Telefomin area, its location is not yet known. ; In 1995 fresh skeletal remains were collected in Eastern Highlands Province—these were killed by a local hunter at the locality of Huavegemu Cave near the village of Herowana. Subsequently, skeletal remains of two more individuals were recorded in the same area which lies within Crater Mountain Wildlife Management Area (CMWMA) (D.D. Wright pers. comm.). In 2005-2006 University of Papua New Guinea student Kore Tau examined ten bat-occupied and four unoccupied caves and sinkholes in two distinct localities within CMWMA, twenty kilometers apart (surrounding Herowana and Supa). Among the ten roosting sites, living Aproteles bulmerae was confirmed as present (distinguished by both the lack of incisors and the presence of second digit claw; Bonaccorso 1998) in only one sinkhole near Herowana. This sinkhole is connected to the cave from which hunted remains had come (Wright et al.  1995). Tau was able to net six individual A. bulmerae at this site, which also hosted roosting Dobsonia . Because the two species co-occurred a count could not be used to estimate the size of the Aproteles colony. At a second nearby sinkhole two possible Aproteles were netted but for these only the lack of incisors was noted, without examination for the developed claw. An analysis of environmental variables to find predictors for Dobsonia /Aproteles occupation indicated that difficulty of human access to the cave/sinkhole was the only solid predictor. In 2011–2012 Kore Tau and Enock Kale of the PNG Institute of Biological Research searched and netted caves and sinkholes, and interviewed local hunters, at several sites in PNG including the Crater Supa area and sites near Mt. Karimui in Chimbu Province, Mekil-Mt. Stolle in Sandaun Province, and the Huon Peninsula in Morobe Province. They found no evidence of A. bulmerae on these trips. Between 2011 and 2015 wildlife consultant Ken Aplin found the remains of Aproteles bulmerae in two additional areas of remote limestone karst in southern Papua New Guinea. One of these areas is in Western Province in the headwaters of the Fly River, with a local elevational range of 500–1150 m a.s.l. The other is in Gulf Province in the vicinity of the middle Purari River, with local elevational range of 100–550 m a.s.l. In each of these areas Aproteles remains were found among bones and teeth accumulated in caves by roosting owls (probably the Sooty Owl Tyto tenebricosa ). In each case, the remains were judged to be recent, based on geomorphic criteria and the presence in two sites of a small number of recently regurgitated casts (these did not contain Aproteles remains). Two owl roosts were sampled in each of the areas and all roosts produced remains of Aproteles . At the two sites in Gulf Province the Aproteles remains are exclusively unerupted teeth derived from very young bats; the owls were most likely predating young bats left unattended at a nearby maternity roosts (the hunting range of the owls might extend a few kilometres from the roost). The two sites in Western Province contained the remains of subadult bats. In both areas the caves are remote from higher elevation country, hence the Aproteles were residing in areas of Hill Forest habitat. Both areas are characterised by moderately to extremely rugged karst terrain and support large tracts of undisturbed forest. Because of their remoteness it is unlikely that these populations have been subjected to any hunting activity in recent times. Unless they have declined for some natural reason, it is likely that they are extant. The known extant distribution of Aproteles , if limited to the areas immediately around the confirmed sites of Luplupwintem and the two Crater Mountain caves, is probably around 100–200 km². However, the new records in the Fly and Purari catchments suggest a potentially broader distribution in the hinterland of the Gulf of Papua. Much of this country is extremely rugged karst terrain lying at 400–600 m a.sl., and it is very thinly populated, heavily forested and biologically poorly known. Similar low to mid-elevation karst terrain extends west into the Indonesian province of Papua. The contemporary occurrence of Aproteles in this region requires confirmation.	This species has been severely hunted for meat.	Terrestrial	The Crater Mountain sites are within the Crater Mountain Wildlife Management Area and there is local community awareness of the conservation significance of this species. The Luplupwintem site is currently unprotected and the majority of regional landowners seem to be unaware of the conservation significance of this species. Among Wopkaimin people there also seems to be a lack of awareness of the distinction between Aproteles bulmerae and the morphologically similar Dobsonia moluccensis . A failure to differentiate between these species presents a challenge to the effective conservation of the rarer species. Areas of suitable habitat in adjacent areas of Papua Province, Indonesia, or to the east of Luplupwintem should be surveyed to locate any remaining colonies of this species. The status of the species in the Upper Fly River and Middle Purari River catchments needs to be reassessed and other areas of similar, low-elevation limestone karst in the hinterland of the Gulf of Papua also needs to be surveyed. Initial detection of the species through the examination of owl roost remains is an effective means of survey for the species in previously unsurveyed localities, especially where the location of potential roost caves is not known to landowners. Efforts should be made to capture and non-invasively sample a small number of individuals at each of the known sites so that genetic methods can be applied to determine the extent of contemporary and past gene flow between the Luplupwintem and Crater Mountain populations, and to derive a long-term perspective on the demographic history of the species. If the species is found to be genuinely restricted to only a few isolated populations, a captive-breeding and reintroduction programme should be considered. Research is ongoing to assess habitat requirements of this species (D.D. Wright pers. comm.).	Australasian		FALSE	FALSE	Global	Simmons, N. B., & Cirranello, A. L. (2023). Batnames.org Species List Version 1.4 (1.4). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8136157 	Pteropodidae	Aproteles		bulmerae	Menzies	1977	0	Aust. J. Zool.	30:31:00	Bulmer's Fruit Bat	None.	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km SE Chuave Govt. Sta., 1,530 m.	Mainland Papua New Guinea.	Not listed.	Critically Endangered	Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a ) and Bonaccorso (1998).	Aproteles bulmerae	1004390	23	Bulmer's Fruit Bat		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	PTEROPODIFORMES	NA	NA	PTEROPODOIDEA	Pteropodidae	HARPYIONYCTERINAE	DOBSONIINI	Aproteles	NA	bulmerae	Menzies	1977	0						2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m, Chimbu Province, Papua New Guinea.			bulmerae Menzies, 1977	NA	NA				Papua New Guinea	Oceania	Australasia/Oceania	CR	0	0	0	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	sciname match	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	Burgin, C. J., Zijlstra, J. S., Becker, M. A., Handika, H., Alston, J. M., Widness, J., Liphardt, S., Huckaby, D. G., and Upham, N. S. (2025). How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge. Journal of Mammalogy in revision: TBD. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.27.640393	Aproteles_bulmerae	1004390	23	Bulmer's Fruit Bat		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	Chiroptera	Yinpterochiroptera	NA	NA	Pteropodoidea	Pteropodidae	Harpyionycterinae	Dobsoniini	Aproteles	NA	bulmerae	Menzies	0	Aproteles bulmerae	Menzies, J.I. 1977. Fossil and subfossil fruit bats from the mountains of New Guinea. Australian Journal of Zoology 25(2):329-336.	https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO9770329	K-EE-12-31	holotype		2 km south-east of Chuave Government Station, 1530 m, Chimbu Province, Papua New Guinea.			NA	NA				Papua New Guinea	Oceania (Continent)	Australasia	CR	0	0	0	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	sciname match	Aproteles_bulmerae	0	Simmons, N. B., & Cirranello, A. L. (2025). Batnames.org Species List Version 1.7 (1.7). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14796586	Pteropodidae	Aproteles		bulmerae	Menzies	1977	0	Aust. J. Zool.	30:31:00	Bulmer's Fruit Bat	None.	Papua New Guinea, Chimbu Prov., 2 km SE Chuave Govt. Sta., 1,530 m.	Mainland Papua New Guinea.	<a href='https://cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php' target='_blank'>Not Listed</a>	<a href='https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/1933/209536462/' target='_blank'>Critically Endangered</a>	Originally described from fossil material, but since found living (Flannery and Seri, 1993; Hyndman and Menzies, 1980). See also Flannery (1995 a) and Bonaccorso (1998).		Mammal Diversity Database. (2025). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 2.2) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15007505	NA	Aproteles bulmerae; bulmerae; Roussette de Bulmer; Bulmer-Flughund; Aprotelo de Bulmer; Bulmer's Fruit Bat; Bulmer's Fruit Bat; Bulmer's Fruit Bat; Aproteles bulmerae bulmerae; A. bulmerae