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!/L620	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet	N/A	Micronycteris megalotis [synonym of]	N/A	Micronycteris megalotis [synonym of]	Micronycteris megalotis microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris microtis		[MSW3] Formerly included in megalotis, but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998). Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis, but noted that it may be a distinct species.; [HMW] Micronycteris microtis G. S. Miller, 1898 , “Greytown [= San Juan del Norte],” Rio San Juan , Nicaragua . G. S. Miller in 1898 described the subspecies M. megalotis mexicanus with type locality from Platinar, Jalisco , Mexico , based on its similarity to M. megalotis but with longer wings. Taxonomic revision by K. Andersen in 1906 questioned the species status of M. mucrotis due to vague diagnostic characteristics of the holotype. C. C. Sanborn in 1949 regarded M. microtis as a subspecies of M. megalotis , but C. O. Handley, Jr. in 1976 listed it as a valid species. A. Brosset and P. Charles-Dominique in 1991 corroborated this distinction based on ear length, craniodental differences, and ventral fur variations compared with M. megalotis . Finally, N. B. Simmons in 1996 agreed that these are distinct species based on examination of a larger sample size and also considered that mexicana is actually a subspecies of M. microtis . C. A. Porter and collaborators in 2007 found no support to separate them (again) based on their phylogenetic analysis of genetic sequences, concluding that morphological characteristics used to characterize them might represent intraspecific polymorphism of M. megalotis . Later studies (see previous account) agreed with that suggestion but refrained from making any definitive changes to the taxonomy. Here M. microtis is considered as valid. Two subspecies recognized.; [batnames2022] Subgenus Micronycteris . Formerly included in megalotis , but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis , but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).; [IUCN]  Micronycteris megalotis subsp., recognized as species by Simmons 1996. Synonymous with M. megalotis (unpublished molecular data).; [batnames2023] Subgenus Micronycteris . Formerly included in megalotis , but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis , but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).; [batnames2025_1.7] Subgenus Micronycteris. Formerly included in megalotis, but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis, but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).								microtis, mexicana	mexicana - pygmaeus	microtis, mexicana		microtis, mexicana, pygmaeus		microtis, pygmaeus	 Micronycteris megalotis subsp., recognized as species by Simmons 1996. Synonymous with M. megalotis (unpublished molecular data).	microtis, mexicana	mexicana - pygmaeus	microtis, pygmaeus	mexicana, microtis, pygmaea, microti	mexicana, microtis 	mexicana - pygmaeus	mexicana G. S. Miller, 1898|microtis G. S. Miller, 1898|pygmaea (Rehn, 1904)|microti Simmons, Voss, & Peckham, 2000 [incorrect subsequent spelling]						N/A																																								_M. m. mexicana_ Miller, 1898 (synonyms: _pygmaea_ (Rehn, 1904)); _M. m. microtis_ Miller, 1898			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	Phyllostomidae	Phyllostominae		Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris		microtis	Miller		1898		Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.	50		328		Common Big-eared Bat	Nicaragua, San Juan del Norte, Graytown.	Tamaulipas and Jalisco (Mexico) to northern Colombia, Venezuela, the Guianas, northern Brazil, and Bolivia.	IUCN 2003 – Not evaluated; not considered in IUCN/SSC Action Plan (2001).	mexicana Miller, 1898; pygmaeus Rehn, 1904.	Formerly included in megalotis, but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998). Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis, but noted that it may be a distinct species.	03A687BCFFBBFFBA138DF33DFB38FF43	Handbook of the Mammals of the World – Volume 9 Bats, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions	978-84-16728-19-0	hbmw_9_Phyllostomidae_444.pdf.imf	hash://md5/ff9fffc4ffb1ffb1133cffbaffe0f244	494	zip:hash://sha256/ec5fd314a06aba1a7b0b72f23e54ac625ae272bd98f82f1d01f4c09627d9e8e0!/treatments-xml-main/data/03/A6/87/03A687BCFFBBFFBA138DF33DFB38FF43.xml	Micronycteris microtis	Phyllostomidae	Micronycteris	microtis	G. S. Miller	1898	Micronyctére modeste @fr | Gewohnliche Gro Rohrblattnase @de | Micronicteriocomun de Miller @es	Micronycteris microtis G. S. Miller, 1898 , “Greytown [= San Juan del Norte],” Rio San Juan , Nicaragua . G. S. Miller in 1898 described the subspecies M. megalotis mexicanus with type locality from Platinar, Jalisco , Mexico , based on its similarity to M. megalotis but with longer wings. Taxonomic revision by K. Andersen in 1906 questioned the species status of M. mucrotis due to vague diagnostic characteristics of the holotype. C. C. Sanborn in 1949 regarded M. microtis as a subspecies of M. megalotis , but C. O. Handley, Jr. in 1976 listed it as a valid species. A. Brosset and P. Charles-Dominique in 1991 corroborated this distinction based on ear length, craniodental differences, and ventral fur variations compared with M. megalotis . Finally, N. B. Simmons in 1996 agreed that these are distinct species based on examination of a larger sample size and also considered that mexicana is actually a subspecies of M. microtis . C. A. Porter and collaborators in 2007 found no support to separate them (again) based on their phylogenetic analysis of genetic sequences, concluding that morphological characteristics used to characterize them might represent intraspecific polymorphism of M. megalotis . Later studies (see previous account) agreed with that suggestion but refrained from making any definitive changes to the taxonomy. Here M. microtis is considered as valid. Two subspecies recognized.	M.m.microtisG.S.Miller,1898—AtlanticcoastofNicaraguaStoColombia,Venezuela,theGuianas,Brazil,andEBolivia(SantaCruzDepartment);alsoanisolatedrecordfromNWArgentina(SaltaProvince). M. m. mexicana G. S. Miller, 1898 — WC & NE Mexico from Jalisco and Tamaulipas S to the Pacific coast of Costa Rica .	Head-body 44-48 mm, tail 8:4-17 mm, ear 13-23 mm, hindfoot 8-11 mm, forearm 30-3-37-4 mm; weight 5-5-10 g. All studies before 1990 about the Little Big-eared Bat ( M. megalotis ) in Central America actually refer to what is now considered the Common Big-eared Bat. Greatest lengths of skulls are 16-4-19-4 mm. Pelage is wood-brown dorsally and a bit paler ventrally. Hairs on anterior part of back have white bases that comprise one-quarter to one-half of their lengths; fur color on posterior part of body can be variable. Pelage pattern of the Common Big-eared Bat is similar to that of the Little Big-eared Bat, exceptthat it differs consistently in length of fur on outside of medial one-third of ear pinna that is shorter (less than or equal to 3 mm ) and denser on external basal one-half. The Common Big-eared Bat has large rounded ears, connected by transverse band that extends overhead with shallow notch at middle of upper margin of band. Uropatagium and base oftail are naked. Calcar 1s longer than hindfoot. Skull is small and slender, rostrum is narrow, and braincase is large, swollen, and elevated immediately behind orbits. Mastoid breadth is less than zygomatic breadth. P, is often slightly larger than P, and P,, although there is some intraspecific variation resulting in all three lower premolars being subequal in some individuals. Lower incisors are mostly bifid, although they are trifid in some South American specimens. Chromosomal complement has 2n = 40 and FN = 68.	Mostly well-drained primary forests, swampy primary forests, semideciduous lowland forests, edges of small forest fragments, pastures, and areas near human settlements. In Argentina , the Common Big-eared Bat was recorded in montane Yungas forests. In Brazil , it is mostly found in Amazonian rainforests in the north and transitional areas between the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forests ecoregions. In general,it has persisted in rather small habitat patches.	The Common Big-eared Batis a gleaning insectivore (mostly), with an unusually broad diet. Most studies related to the feeding habits have shown that Lepidoptera and Coleoptera are consistently the most frequent orders of arthropods consumed. A detailed study in Panama concluded that the most frequent diet item was Lepidoptera , mostly caterpillars and then nocturnal moths and diurnal butterflies. Coleoptera (predominantly small soft-body beetles from Scarabaeidae ) and Orthoptera ( Tettigoniidae , Gryllidae , and Acrididae ) followed in frequency of occurrence in diets. Cockroaches ( Blattidae ) and dragonflies (Odonata: Anisoptera) are also common food items. Less than 5% of prey is composed of cicadas (Homoptera, mostly Cicadidae ), flies ( Diptera , mostly Asilidae ), spiders ( Arachnida ), ants and wasps ( Hymenoptera, Apoidea and Formicidae ), and stick insects ( Phasmidae ). Prey items varied in size by at least an order of magnitude. Common Big-eared Bats eat arthropods by repeatedly biting and crushing their heads or cephalothorax before consuming them;then,biting and discarding wings, antennae, and occasionally legs; and finally, consuming thorax and abdomen by repeatedly chewing them with their molars and premolars and rotating prey from one side ofthejaw to the other. In the case of phytophagous and detritivorous insects (caterpillars, beetles, crickets, katydids, phasmids, and cockroaches), abdominal regions are separated and discarded. This behavior probably avoids consumption of the insect’s intestine that contains plant material that is relatively less nutritious, difficult to digest, and might be toxic. Findings revealed that almost 70% of insects consumed are herbivores, which could be higher in wet seasons when herbivorous bugs thrive in response to new leaf production. Feeding habits of most insectivorous bats, such as the Common Big-eared Bat, are probably opportunist, varying with local conditions and abundance of preferred prey. A study on Barro Colorado Island, Panama , recorded for the first ime consumption of small anole lizards by Common Big-eared Bats. Observations revealed that they eat lizards in a similar fashion as they eat arthropods, but legs are also eaten. Analyses of bite forces and cranial morphology of the Common Big-eared Bat showed that it predominantly usesits molars and premolars to process food items and also has an increased ability to modify its bite performance behaviorally. The Common Big-eared Bat has the strongest bite force of any phyllostomids, including frugivores, omnivores, and other insectivores. Behavioral experiments have also demonstrated that it has a unique sensory strategy to locate prey with echolocation alone. It is slow flying, highly maneuverable, and capable of hovering, so it searches for prey up and down understory vegetation to detect silent and motionless insects that are usually found resting on vegetation rather than in flight. Several groups of insects consumed are noisy, especially when calling, so Common Big-eared Bats might be attracted by sounds produced by prey. Itis thought that such plasticity in foraging behavior of the Common Big-eared Bat has allowed its niche to expand, providing access to prey with wider ranges ofsizes and texture, including vertebrates, unique among coexisting phyllostomids.	The Common Big-eared Bat has a unimodal breeding phenology in its northern distribution, with a single peak in pregnancy in the middle to late dry season, followed by a peak in lactation during early wet season. Males are reproductively active for several months before peak pregnancy, showing descended testes at end of dry and wet seasons. In contrast, bimodal reproduction occurs more commonly in Mesoamerica and South America, with peak pregnancy in late dry season and another during most of wet season, coinciding with explosion of food resources (arthropods). Pregnant females have been found in February—April, June-August, and November throughout their distribution. Lactation records are from May-June, August, and November. In its southernmost distribution, pregnant females were found in September ( Argentina ) and a pregnant female and a lactating female in November ( Bolivia ). Males with descended testes have been recorded in June-August in Nicaragua and November, March, and April in Guyana . A behavioral study in Barro Colorado, Panama , found that mothers feed their young solid food for at least five months after weaning. Amount of prey fed by the mother declined over time as young mature and became capable of finding prey alone. This behavior might train young in prey-handling skills. Young recognize their mothers when they return to night roosts and display behaviors such as lifting their heads and orienting their ears toward their returning mothers significantly more often than toward other returning conspecifics.	During hovering flights, Common Big-eared Bats continuously emit broadband 83-4 kHz FM, multiharmonic echolocation calls of 68:6-143-3 kHz. Based on video recording and radio-tracking at a feeding roost in Barro Colorado, Common Big-eared Bats are active throughout the entire night and have no distinctive activity peaks. Nightly activity of individuals from first arrival (mean 16 minutes after sunset) at the feeding roost until last departure (mean 6 minutes before sunrise) encompassed 10-5 hours. Foraging flights lasted 15 seconds to 51 minutes; ¢.50% offlights was shorter than five minutes, 23% was 5—10 minutes, 17-5% was 10-20 minutes, and 10-5% exceeded 20 minutes. Individuals spent an average of 14-1 minutes/hour searching for prey, and six of ten times, they returned to the roost with something to eat. In Bolivia , emergence of Common Big-eared Bats from shelters occurred around local sunset, at 18:10 h on average. On repeated occasions, exits of individuals out of roosts could be observed for 10-15 seconds, in what appeared to be reconnaissance flights. Individuals returned to the roost between 03:40 h and 05:50 h,just before local sunrise.	Flight of the Common Big-eared Bat is not rapid, butit is highly maneuverable. Individuals forage in forest understories searching for prey on vegetation, briefly hovering in front of leaves. When prey is detected, stereotypic flight behavior is characterized by flight covering three-dimensional space in a radius of less than 15 cm in front and around the prey, and then hovering and going downward, moving quickly and repeatedly up and down in front of the target, in what seems to be scanning behavior. The individual then abruptly approaches the insect from a slightly higher position, lands on it, and grabs it. These hunting behaviors show that Common Big-eared Bats can detect, localize, precisely identify, and classify silent and motionless prey in vegetation. A radio-tracking study in Panama revealed average home ranges of c.1-2 ha. Another radio-tracking study in Panama in dry season found an average home range of 3-8 ha, and marked individuals did not cross open areas like lakes. These same studies found foraging areas averaging 2-1 ha; males used only one foraging area, and females used two foraging areas that were ¢. 200 m apart. Mean core area of use only encompassed 0-2 ha. Small area requirements of the Common Big-eared Bat might be explained by its particular foraging behaviors. It has been suggested that it might be less affected by habitat fragmentation because it appears to be less mobile, does not require extensive movement to find prey, and shows high fidelity to roosts. Unlike most other gleaning insectivorous bats, it shows high site fidelity to night roosts where prey is eaten. The Common Big-eared Bat commonly roosts in hollow trees and logs, small caves, crevices of rocky outcrops, buildings, ruins, and houses and under bridges and tunnels. It also uses metal culverts under roads through forested areas, underground drains, and cisterns. In caves, it prefers small, well-lit areas or near entrances of larger and deeper caves. In trees,it prefers to roost low down near the opening. It lives in social groups of 3-10 individuals, rarely exceeding twelve individuals and very rarely 25 individuals. Groups include adults and juveniles of both sexes. Common Big-eared Bats have been found roosting in association with Seba’s Short-tailed Bats ( Carolia perspicillata ), Tailed Tailless Bats ( Anoura caudifer ), Pallas’s Long-tongued Bats ( Glossophaga soricina ), and Common Vampire Bats ( Desmodus rotundus ).	Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN Red List.	Acosta et al. (2011) | Albrecht et al. (2007) | Alonso-Mejia & Medellin (1991) | Andersen (1906a) | Bloedel (1955) | Brosset & Charles-Dominique (1991) | Dias (2007) | Diaz & Barquez (2009) | Durant et al. (2013) | Geipel, Jung & Kalko (2013) | Geipel, Kalko et al. (2013) | Goodwin (1946) | Handley (1976) | Humphrey et al. (1983) | Jones, Smith & Turner (1971) | Kalka & Kalko (2006) | Larsen et al. (2011) | Lim, B.K. et al. (1999) | Louzada et al. (2015) | Miller (1898a) | Morales-Martinez (2017) | Moras et al. (2015) | Porter et al. (2007) | Sanborn (1949a) | Santana, Geipel et al. (2011) | Simmons (1996) | Simmons & Voss (1998) | Williams & Genoways (2008)	https://zenodo.org/record/6458628/files/figure.png	13. Common Big-eared Bat Micronycteris microtis French: Micronyctére modeste / German: Gewohnliche GroRohrblattnase / Spanish: Micronicterio comun de Miller Taxonomy. Micronycteris microtis G. S. Miller, 1898 , “Greytown [= San Juan del Norte],” Rio San Juan , Nicaragua . G. S. Miller in 1898 described the subspecies M. megalotis mexicanus with type locality from Platinar, Jalisco , Mexico , based on its similarity to M. megalotis but with longer wings. Taxonomic revision by K. Andersen in 1906 questioned the species status of M. mucrotis due to vague diagnostic characteristics of the holotype. C. C. Sanborn in 1949 regarded M. microtis as a subspecies of M. megalotis , but C. O. Handley, Jr. in 1976 listed it as a valid species. A. Brosset and P. Charles-Dominique in 1991 corroborated this distinction based on ear length, craniodental differences, and ventral fur variations compared with M. megalotis . Finally, N. B. Simmons in 1996 agreed that these are distinct species based on examination of a larger sample size and also considered that mexicana is actually a subspecies of M. microtis . C. A. Porter and collaborators in 2007 found no support to separate them (again) based on their phylogenetic analysis of genetic sequences, concluding that morphological characteristics used to characterize them might represent intraspecific polymorphism of M. megalotis . Later studies (see previous account) agreed with that suggestion but refrained from making any definitive changes to the taxonomy. Here M. microtis is considered as valid. Two subspecies recognized. Subspecies and Distribution. M.m.microtisG.S.Miller,1898—AtlanticcoastofNicaraguaStoColombia,Venezuela,theGuianas,Brazil,andEBolivia(SantaCruzDepartment);alsoanisolatedrecordfromNWArgentina(SaltaProvince). M. m. mexicana G. S. Miller, 1898 — WC & NE Mexico from Jalisco and Tamaulipas S to the Pacific coast of Costa Rica . Descriptive notes. Head-body 44-48 mm, tail 8:4-17 mm, ear 13-23 mm, hindfoot 8-11 mm, forearm 30-3-37-4 mm; weight 5-5-10 g. All studies before 1990 about the Little Big-eared Bat ( M. megalotis ) in Central America actually refer to what is now considered the Common Big-eared Bat. Greatest lengths of skulls are 16-4-19-4 mm. Pelage is wood-brown dorsally and a bit paler ventrally. Hairs on anterior part of back have white bases that comprise one-quarter to one-half of their lengths; fur color on posterior part of body can be variable. Pelage pattern of the Common Big-eared Bat is similar to that of the Little Big-eared Bat, exceptthat it differs consistently in length of fur on outside of medial one-third of ear pinna that is shorter (less than or equal to 3 mm ) and denser on external basal one-half. The Common Big-eared Bat has large rounded ears, connected by transverse band that extends overhead with shallow notch at middle of upper margin of band. Uropatagium and base oftail are naked. Calcar 1s longer than hindfoot. Skull is small and slender, rostrum is narrow, and braincase is large, swollen, and elevated immediately behind orbits. Mastoid breadth is less than zygomatic breadth. P, is often slightly larger than P, and P,, although there is some intraspecific variation resulting in all three lower premolars being subequal in some individuals. Lower incisors are mostly bifid, although they are trifid in some South American specimens. Chromosomal complement has 2n = 40 and FN = 68. Habitat. Mostly well-drained primary forests, swampy primary forests, semideciduous lowland forests, edges of small forest fragments, pastures, and areas near human settlements. In Argentina , the Common Big-eared Bat was recorded in montane Yungas forests. In Brazil , it is mostly found in Amazonian rainforests in the north and transitional areas between the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forests ecoregions. In general,it has persisted in rather small habitat patches. Food and Feeding. The Common Big-eared Batis a gleaning insectivore (mostly), with an unusually broad diet. Most studies related to the feeding habits have shown that Lepidoptera and Coleoptera are consistently the most frequent orders of arthropods consumed. A detailed study in Panama concluded that the most frequent diet item was Lepidoptera , mostly caterpillars and then nocturnal moths and diurnal butterflies. Coleoptera (predominantly small soft-body beetles from Scarabaeidae ) and Orthoptera ( Tettigoniidae , Gryllidae , and Acrididae ) followed in frequency of occurrence in diets. Cockroaches ( Blattidae ) and dragonflies (Odonata: Anisoptera) are also common food items. Less than 5% of prey is composed of cicadas (Homoptera, mostly Cicadidae ), flies ( Diptera , mostly Asilidae ), spiders ( Arachnida ), ants and wasps ( Hymenoptera, Apoidea and Formicidae ), and stick insects ( Phasmidae ). Prey items varied in size by at least an order of magnitude. Common Big-eared Bats eat arthropods by repeatedly biting and crushing their heads or cephalothorax before consuming them;then,biting and discarding wings, antennae, and occasionally legs; and finally, consuming thorax and abdomen by repeatedly chewing them with their molars and premolars and rotating prey from one side ofthejaw to the other. In the case of phytophagous and detritivorous insects (caterpillars, beetles, crickets, katydids, phasmids, and cockroaches), abdominal regions are separated and discarded. This behavior probably avoids consumption of the insect’s intestine that contains plant material that is relatively less nutritious, difficult to digest, and might be toxic. Findings revealed that almost 70% of insects consumed are herbivores, which could be higher in wet seasons when herbivorous bugs thrive in response to new leaf production. Feeding habits of most insectivorous bats, such as the Common Big-eared Bat, are probably opportunist, varying with local conditions and abundance of preferred prey. A study on Barro Colorado Island, Panama , recorded for the first ime consumption of small anole lizards by Common Big-eared Bats. Observations revealed that they eat lizards in a similar fashion as they eat arthropods, but legs are also eaten. Analyses of bite forces and cranial morphology of the Common Big-eared Bat showed that it predominantly usesits molars and premolars to process food items and also has an increased ability to modify its bite performance behaviorally. The Common Big-eared Bat has the strongest bite force of any phyllostomids, including frugivores, omnivores, and other insectivores. Behavioral experiments have also demonstrated that it has a unique sensory strategy to locate prey with echolocation alone. It is slow flying, highly maneuverable, and capable of hovering, so it searches for prey up and down understory vegetation to detect silent and motionless insects that are usually found resting on vegetation rather than in flight. Several groups of insects consumed are noisy, especially when calling, so Common Big-eared Bats might be attracted by sounds produced by prey. Itis thought that such plasticity in foraging behavior of the Common Big-eared Bat has allowed its niche to expand, providing access to prey with wider ranges ofsizes and texture, including vertebrates, unique among coexisting phyllostomids. Breeding. The Common Big-eared Bat has a unimodal breeding phenology in its northern distribution, with a single peak in pregnancy in the middle to late dry season, followed by a peak in lactation during early wet season. Males are reproductively active for several months before peak pregnancy, showing descended testes at end of dry and wet seasons. In contrast, bimodal reproduction occurs more commonly in Mesoamerica and South America, with peak pregnancy in late dry season and another during most of wet season, coinciding with explosion of food resources (arthropods). Pregnant females have been found in February—April, June-August, and November throughout their distribution. Lactation records are from May-June, August, and November. In its southernmost distribution, pregnant females were found in September ( Argentina ) and a pregnant female and a lactating female in November ( Bolivia ). Males with descended testes have been recorded in June-August in Nicaragua and November, March, and April in Guyana . A behavioral study in Barro Colorado, Panama , found that mothers feed their young solid food for at least five months after weaning. Amount of prey fed by the mother declined over time as young mature and became capable of finding prey alone. This behavior might train young in prey-handling skills. Young recognize their mothers when they return to night roosts and display behaviors such as lifting their heads and orienting their ears toward their returning mothers significantly more often than toward other returning conspecifics. Activity patterns. During hovering flights, Common Big-eared Bats continuously emit broadband 83-4 kHz FM, multiharmonic echolocation calls of 68:6-143-3 kHz. Based on video recording and radio-tracking at a feeding roost in Barro Colorado, Common Big-eared Bats are active throughout the entire night and have no distinctive activity peaks. Nightly activity of individuals from first arrival (mean 16 minutes after sunset) at the feeding roost until last departure (mean 6 minutes before sunrise) encompassed 10-5 hours. Foraging flights lasted 15 seconds to 51 minutes; ¢.50% offlights was shorter than five minutes, 23% was 5—10 minutes, 17-5% was 10-20 minutes, and 10-5% exceeded 20 minutes. Individuals spent an average of 14-1 minutes/hour searching for prey, and six of ten times, they returned to the roost with something to eat. In Bolivia , emergence of Common Big-eared Bats from shelters occurred around local sunset, at 18:10 h on average. On repeated occasions, exits of individuals out of roosts could be observed for 10-15 seconds, in what appeared to be reconnaissance flights. Individuals returned to the roost between 03:40 h and 05:50 h,just before local sunrise. Movements, Home range and Social organization. Flight of the Common Big-eared Bat is not rapid, butit is highly maneuverable. Individuals forage in forest understories searching for prey on vegetation, briefly hovering in front of leaves. When prey is detected, stereotypic flight behavior is characterized by flight covering three-dimensional space in a radius of less than 15 cm in front and around the prey, and then hovering and going downward, moving quickly and repeatedly up and down in front of the target, in what seems to be scanning behavior. The individual then abruptly approaches the insect from a slightly higher position, lands on it, and grabs it. These hunting behaviors show that Common Big-eared Bats can detect, localize, precisely identify, and classify silent and motionless prey in vegetation. A radio-tracking study in Panama revealed average home ranges of c.1-2 ha. Another radio-tracking study in Panama in dry season found an average home range of 3-8 ha, and marked individuals did not cross open areas like lakes. These same studies found foraging areas averaging 2-1 ha; males used only one foraging area, and females used two foraging areas that were ¢. 200 m apart. Mean core area of use only encompassed 0-2 ha. Small area requirements of the Common Big-eared Bat might be explained by its particular foraging behaviors. It has been suggested that it might be less affected by habitat fragmentation because it appears to be less mobile, does not require extensive movement to find prey, and shows high fidelity to roosts. Unlike most other gleaning insectivorous bats, it shows high site fidelity to night roosts where prey is eaten. The Common Big-eared Bat commonly roosts in hollow trees and logs, small caves, crevices of rocky outcrops, buildings, ruins, and houses and under bridges and tunnels. It also uses metal culverts under roads through forested areas, underground drains, and cisterns. In caves, it prefers small, well-lit areas or near entrances of larger and deeper caves. In trees,it prefers to roost low down near the opening. It lives in social groups of 3-10 individuals, rarely exceeding twelve individuals and very rarely 25 individuals. Groups include adults and juveniles of both sexes. Common Big-eared Bats have been found roosting in association with Seba’s Short-tailed Bats ( Carolia perspicillata ), Tailed Tailless Bats ( Anoura caudifer ), Pallas’s Long-tongued Bats ( Glossophaga soricina ), and Common Vampire Bats ( Desmodus rotundus ). Status and Conservation. Classified as Least Concern on The IUCN Red List. Bibliography. Acosta et al. (2011), Albrecht et al. (2007), Alonso-Mejia & Medellin (1991), Andersen (1906a), Bloedel (1955), Brosset & Charles-Dominique (1991), Dias (2007), Diaz & Barquez (2009), Durant et al. (2013), Geipel, Jung & Kalko (2013), Geipel, Kalko et al. (2013), Goodwin (1946), Handley (1976), Humphrey et al. (1983), Jones, Smith & Turner (1971), Kalka & Kalko (2006), Larsen et al. (2011), Lim, B.K. et al. (1999), Louzada et al. (2015), Miller (1898a), Morales-Martinez (2017), Moras et al. (2015), Porter et al. (2007), Sanborn (1949a), Santana, Geipel et al. (2011), Simmons (1996), Simmons & Voss (1998), Williams & Genoways (2008).	Simmons, N.B. and A.L. Cirranello. 2022B. Bat Species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic database. Accessed on 10/11/2022.	Phyllostomidae	Micronycteris microtis	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	Miller	1898	0	Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.	55:28:00	Common Big-eared Bat	<b> mexicana </b> Miller, 1898;<b></b> pygmaeus Rehn, 1904.	Nicaragua, San Juan del Norte, Graytown	Tamaulipas and Jalisco (Mexico) to Colombia, Venezuela, the Guianas, northern Brazil, and Bolivia	Not listed.	Least Concern	Subgenus Micronycteris . Formerly included in megalotis , but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis , but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).	Mammal Diversity Database. (2023). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.11) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7830771 released 15 April 2023	Micronycteris microtis	23	Common Big-eared Bat	Little Big-eared Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	VESPERTILIONIFORMES	NA	NA	NOCTILIONOIDEA	PHYLLOSTOMIDAE	MICRONYCTERINAE	NA	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	G. S. Miller	1898	0	Micronycteris_microtis	Miller, G. S., Jr. (1898). Descriptions of Five New Phyllostome Bats. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 50, 328.	https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1647820#page/330/mode/1up	USNM 16366/23364		"Greytown [= San Juan del Norte]," Rio San Juan, Nicaragua.			microtis G. S. Miller, 1898|pygmaeus (Rehn, 1904)	NA	NA	Mexico|Guatemala|Belize|El Salvador|Honduras|Nicaragua|Costa Rica|Panama|Colombia|Venezuela|Guyana|Suriname|French Guiana|Brazil|Bolivia|Argentina	North America|South America	Nearctic|Neotropic	LC	0	0	0	Micronycteris_microtis	0	sciname match	Micronycteris_microtis	0	IUCN. 2022. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on [28 September, 2022].	136424	Micronycteris microtis	ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	MAMMALIA	CHIROPTERA	PHYLLOSTOMIDAE	Micronycteris	microtis	Miller, 1898	 Micronycteris megalotis subsp., recognized as species by Simmons 1996. Synonymous with M. megalotis (unpublished molecular data).	20000000	Micronycteris microtis	Least Concern		2019	2019-02-11 00:00:00 UTC	3.1	English	This species is listed as Least Concern in because of its wide distribution, presumed large population, occurrence in a number of protected areas, tolerance to some degree of habitat modification, and because it is unlikely to be declining at nearly the rate required to qualify for listing in a threatened category.	This small bat ;occurs mostly in  well-drained primary forest, swampy primary forest, semi-deciduous lowland forests, edges of small forest fragments, pastures, and areas near human settlements. Also found in montane forests (Yungas) and ;transitional areas between the Cerrado and the Atlantic forests. It roosts in hollow trees, logs, caves, mines, buildings, culverts, and large mammal burrows in areas with some natural light, they are alert and easily induced to take flight. Shallow earthen depressions along banks and among tree roots are also occupied (Alonso and Medellin 1991, Handley 1976, Williams and Genoways 2008). Clusters of 4 to 6 bats hang together from the ceiling of the roost. Their diet includes fruit and insects; insects may be gleaned from the vegetation or captured in flight. Food is usually consumed at a night roost, which may be the same as the day roost or may only be used at night (Reid 2009). A collection of wings and legs dropped at night roosts in Costa Rica consisted of insects of 13 different orders, with small scarab beetles, grasshoppers, cockroaches, crickets, and katydids predominating. Seasonal changes in diet, probably reflecting insect abundances, were noted (Kalka and Kalko 2006, LaVal and LaVal 1980). A roost in Mexico contained wings of Lepidoptera. In Panama flies and beetles were taken (Humphrey et al. 1983). Single young are born annually, usually at the onset of the rainy season.	There are no major threats throughout the wide geographic range of the species.	Rather common and widespread. This species is the most commonly encountered Micronycteris in southeastern Mexico and Central America (Reid 2009). Because of its overall similitude to M. megalotis , no precise account of its abundance (or rarity) can be stated for South America.	Stable	This species occurs from Jalisco and Tamaulipas, southern Mexico, throughout Central America to Colombia, Venezuela, French Guiana, and Amazonian Brazil, as well as Bolivia, northeastern Argentina and southeastern Brazil. Lowlands to 2,600 m (Acosta et al . 2011, Moras et al . 2015, Reid 2009).		Terrestrial	Given its wide distribution, it is expected to be found in several protected areas. As the proper identification of this species in South America improves, it would be easier to understand some potential habitat requirements at specific areas.	Neotropical		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 	Phyllostomidae	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	Miller	1898	0	Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.	55:28:00	Common Big-eared Bat	<b> mexicana </b> Miller, 1898;<b></b> pygmaeus Rehn, 1904.	Nicaragua, San Juan del Norte, Graytown	Tamaulipas and Jalisco (Mexico) to Colombia, Venezuela, the Guianas, northern Brazil, and Bolivia	Not listed.	Least Concern	Subgenus Micronycteris . Formerly included in megalotis , but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis , but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).	Micronycteris microtis	1004959	23	Common Big-eared Bat	Little Big-eared Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	VESPERTILIONIFORMES	NA	NA	NOCTILIONOIDEA	Phyllostomidae	MICRONYCTERINAE	NA	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	G. S. Miller	1898	0	Micronycteris_microtis	Miller, G. S., Jr. (1898). Descriptions of Five New Phyllostome Bats. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 50, 328.	https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1647820#page/330/mode/1up	USNM 16366/23364		"Greytown [= San Juan del Norte]," Rio San Juan, Nicaragua.			microtis G. S. Miller, 1898|pygmaeus (Rehn, 1904)	NA	NA				Mexico|Guatemala|Belize|El Salvador|Honduras|Nicaragua|Costa Rica|Panama|Colombia|Venezuela|Guyana|Suriname|French Guiana|Brazil|Bolivia|Argentina	North America|South America	Nearctic|Neotropic	LC	0	0	0	Micronycteris_microtis	0	sciname match	Micronycteris_microtis	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	Micronycteris_microtis	1004959	23	Common Big-eared Bat	Little Big-eared Bat	Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	Chiroptera	Yangochiroptera	NA	NA	Noctilionoidea	Phyllostomidae	Micronycterinae	NA	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	G. S. Miller	0	Micronycteris microtis	Miller, G.S., Jr. 1898-08-02. Descriptions of five new phyllostome bats. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 50:326-337.	https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/1647822	USNM:MAMM:16366 (= USNM:MAMM:A23364)	holotype	http://n2t.net/ark:/65665/341d4894f-15f0-444a-9e72-b9e7e4283033	"Greytown [= San Juan del Norte]," Rio San Juan, Nicaragua.			NA	NA				Mexico|Guatemala|Belize|El Salvador|Honduras|Nicaragua|Costa Rica|Panama|Colombia|Venezuela|Guyana|Suriname|French Guiana|Brazil|Bolivia|Argentina	North America|South America	Nearctic|Neotropic	LC	0	0	0	Micronycteris_microtis	0	sciname match	Micronycteris_microtis	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	Phyllostomidae	Micronycteris	Micronycteris	microtis	Miller	1898	0	Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.	55:28:00	Common Big-eared Bat	mexicana  Miller, 1898; pygmaeus Rehn, 1904.	Nicaragua, San Juan del Norte, Graytown	Tamaulipas and Jalisco (Mexico) to Colombia, Venezuela, the Guianas, northern Brazil, and Bolivia	<a href='https://cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php' target='_blank'>Not Listed</a>	<a href='https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/136424/21985267/' target='_blank'>Least Concern</a>	Subgenus Micronycteris. Formerly included in megalotis, but see Brosset and Charles-Dominique (1990), Simmons (1996), and Simmons and Voss (1998), who treated it as distinct, but see Martins et al. (2014), Porter et al. (2007), and Morales-Martínez et al. (2021) for a different view. Larsen et al. (2011) showed that microtis nests within a large clade of megalotis-like bats that apparently represents a species complex in need of revision. Simmons (1996) included mexicana as a subspecies of microtis, but noted that it may be a distinct species, a view consistent with Larsen et al. (2011) and Siles et al. (2013). Records from S Brazil and Bolivia appear likely to be megalotis or another taxon in that complex (Williams and Genoways, 2008).		Mammal Diversity Database. (2025). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 2.2) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15007505	NA	Micronycteris microtis; Micronycteris microtis; Micronycteris microtis; Micronycteris microtis; Micronycteris microtis; Micronycteris microtis; microtis; mexicana; mexicana - pygmaeus; microtis; mexicana; mexicana; pygmaeus; microtis; pygmaeus; Micronyctére modeste; Gewohnliche Gro Rohrblattnase; Micronicteriocomun de Miller; Common Big-eared Bat; Little Big-eared Bat; Common Big-eared Bat; Common Big-eared Bat; M. microtis