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!/L902	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet	Myotis leibi	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii	Myotis leibii		[MSW2] Subgenus Selysius. Called subulatus in Hall (1981:187); but see Glass and Baker (1968:259) who showed that subulatus was probalby an older name for yumanensis. Includes ciliolabrum, and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984).; [MSW3] Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall (1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis.; [HMW] Vespertilio leibu Audubon & Bachman, 1842 , “Erie county, Michigan ,” USA . Subgenus Pyzonix; lucifugus species group. Monotypic.; [batnames2022] Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus , but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis .; [IUCN] Formerly, M. ciliolabrum was included as a subspecies of M. leibii (or M. subulatus ). Based chiefly on cranial measurements, van Zyll de Jong (1985) recognized western populations of what had been known as M. subulatus as a species ( M. ciliolabrum ) distinct from eastern populations, for which the appropriate name is M. leibii . Electrophoretic data support the conclusion that the two taxa are specifically distinct (Herd 1987). Wilson and Ruff (1999) regarded M. ciliolabrum and M. leibii as separate species. Koopman (1993) did not recognize M. ciliolabrum as a species distinct from M. leibii , but Simmons (2005) did. Monotypic (Best and Jennings 1997).<br><br>In a phylogenetic study based on mtDNA data, M. leibii was included within clades containing both M. californicus and M. ciliolabrum (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Further data from M. leibii are necessary to validate its phylogenetic relationship to M. ciliolabrum and M. californicus (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Comparisons among outgroups ( M. yumanensis , M. lucifugus , and M. evotis ) found sufficient support for specific status of M. leibii , but sequence divergence between M. evotis and the leibii group was small (2.9%) and within the intraspecific range. Further sampling of M. evotis is necessary to establish the level of divergence between M. evotis , as well as other long-eared Myotis , and the leibii group (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004).; [batnames2023] Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus , but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis .; [batnames2025_1.7] Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis.		(subulatus)		subulatus		ciliolabrum, melanorhinus.	leibii, ciliolabrum, melanorhinus		henshawii, orinomus, winnemana			leibii	leibii - henshawii, orinomus, winnemana	leibii, winnemana	Formerly, M. ciliolabrum was included as a subspecies of M. leibii (or M. subulatus ). Based chiefly on cranial measurements, van Zyll de Jong (1985) recognized western populations of what had been known as M. subulatus as a species ( M. ciliolabrum ) distinct from eastern populations, for which the appropriate name is M. leibii . Electrophoretic data support the conclusion that the two taxa are specifically distinct (Herd 1987). Wilson and Ruff (1999) regarded M. ciliolabrum and M. leibii as separate species. Koopman (1993) did not recognize M. ciliolabrum as a species distinct from M. leibii , but Simmons (2005) did. Monotypic (Best and Jennings 1997).<br><br>In a phylogenetic study based on mtDNA data, M. leibii was included within clades containing both M. californicus and M. ciliolabrum (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Further data from M. leibii are necessary to validate its phylogenetic relationship to M. ciliolabrum and M. californicus (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Comparisons among outgroups ( M. yumanensis , M. lucifugus , and M. evotis ) found sufficient support for specific status of M. leibii , but sequence divergence between M. evotis and the leibii group was small (2.9%) and within the intraspecific range. Further sampling of M. evotis is necessary to establish the level of divergence between M. evotis , as well as other long-eared Myotis , and the leibii group (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004).	leibii	leibii - henshawii, orinomus, winnemana	leibii, winnemana 	leibii, winnemanus, leibi	leibii	leibii - henshawii, orinomus, winnemana	leibii (Audubon & Bachman, 1842)|winnemanus E. W. Nelson, 1913|leibi Corbet & J. Edwards Hill, 1980 [incorrect subsequent spelling]		Corbet, G.B. and Hill, J.E. 1980. A World List of Mammalian Species. British Museum (Natural History), London, 226 pp.	Least brown bat (Small-footed myotis)	SW Canada, USA (except SE), N Mexico	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.	Myotis leibii	U.S.A., Pennsylvania, Erie Co.	Audubon and Bachman	1842	J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., ser. 1, 8:284.	Distribution: Ranging from southern Canada to Central Mexico.		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	Least brown bat (Small-footed myotis)	SE Canada – Oklahoma, Georgia; ref. 4.107	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.	Audubon and Bachman	1842	J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, ser. 1, 8:284.	Subgenus Selysius. Called subulatus in Hall (1981:187); but see Glass and Baker (1968:259) who showed that subulatus was probalby an older name for yumanensis. Includes ciliolabrum, and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984).	N Baja California, Michoacan, and Nuevo Leon (Mexico) to S British Columbia (Canada), east to Maine (USA) and S Quebec (Canada).	USA, Pennsylvania, Erie Co.		AUDUBON & BACHMAN	1842	Size fairly small (forearm length, 29-36 mm; condylobasal length, 12-14 mm). Braincase fairly low but rostrum of medium width. Middle upper premolar more or less displaced medially from toothrow. Fur glossy.	Distribution: Ranging from southern Canada to Central Mexico.	Three subspecies are recognized:	M. I. leibii (southeastern Canada to Oklahoma in the southcentral United States), M. I. ciliolabrum (southcentral Canada to central United States), M. I. melanorhinus (southwestern Canada to central Mexico). It is possible that ciliolabrum and melanorhinus are specifically distinct from leibii.	104	species	M. leibii	AUDUBON & BACHMAN	1842	Selysius	subgenus	Myotis leibii				Size fairly small (forearm length, 29-36 mm; condylobasal length, 12-14 mm). Braincase fairly low but rostrum of medium width. Middle upper premolar more or less displaced medially from toothrow. Fur glossy.	Three subspecies are recognized:		36. M. leibii (AUDUBON & BACHMAN 1842) [leibii group].	36	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	Vespertilionidae	Myotinae		Myotis leibii	Myotis		leibii	Audubon and Bachman	y	1842		J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., ser. 1	8		284		Eastern Small-footed Myotis	USA, Pennsylvania, Erie Co.	E North America from S Ontario, S Quebec (Canada), and S Maine (USA) south to Georgia and west to E Oklahoma (USA).	IUCN 2003 and IUCN/SSC Action Plan (2001) – Lower Risk (lc).	henshawii H. Allen, 1894; orinomus Elliot, 1903; winnemana Nelson, 1913.	Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall (1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis.	4C3D87E8FF5F6AE1FA4D910E1A39BEB1	Handbook of the Mammals of the World – Volume 9 Bats, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions	978-84-16728-19-0	hbmw_9_Vespertilionidae_716.pdf.imf	hash://md5/b004ff90fffb6a44fffc96591e00bb32	926	zip:hash://sha256/ec5fd314a06aba1a7b0b72f23e54ac625ae272bd98f82f1d01f4c09627d9e8e0!/treatments-xml-main/data/4C/3D/87/4C3D87E8FF5F6AE1FA4D910E1A39BEB1.xml	Myotis leibii	Vespertilionidae	Myotis	leibii		1842	Murin de Leib @fr | Ostliches Kleinfu R-Mausohr @de | Ratonero de Leib @es	Vespertilio leibu Audubon & Bachman, 1842 , “Erie county, Michigan ,” USA . Subgenus Pyzonix; lucifugus species group. Monotypic.	SE Canada in SE Ontario and SW Quebec , and W USA from SE Oklahoma E to New England , W Virginia, and NW South Carolina; distribution 1s irregular, and most occurrences and largest populations are in New York , Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and W Virginia.	Head-body c. 40-44 mm , tail 33-38 mm , ear c. 13 mm , hindfoot 5-7 mm , forearm 30-1-35- 3 mm ; weight 3-6 g . Fur of the Eastern Small-footed Myotis is long and silky. Dorsal hairs are bicolored, with blackish bases and dark yellowish brown to golden tips; ventral hairs are paler, with dark brown bases and yellowish tan or cinereous tips. Ears are medium-sized and extend slightly beyond nose when laid forward; tragus is long and slender, tapering slightly at tip. Membranes, ears, and skin are blackish. Plagiopatagium is attached to feet by a broad band of membrane; feet are small; and calcar is keeled. Baculum is small and deeply sculptured; slender distal part terminates in slight knob; dorsal and lateral extensions are separated proximally by prominent notch; and bone is somewhat saddle-shaped and concave ventrally and has dorsal prominence. Skull is small and delicate (greatest skull lengths 12-5-13- 9 mm ); braincase is flattened; forehead slopes gradually upward from rostrum; occipital region is rounded posteriorly; and sagittal and lambdoidal crests are absent. Chromosomal complement has 2n = 44 and FN = 50, with four pairs of metacentric and 17 pairs of acrocentric autosomes. X- and Y-chromosomes are submetacentric.	Mostly hilly or mountainous areas, in or near deciduous or coniferous evergreen forests, sometimes in open agricultural landscapes, mostly at elevations of 700-800 m (but some up to 1125 m .	The Eastern Small-footed Myotis forages over water and land, being specialized to catch flying insects 1-3 m aboveground. When foraging,it flies slowly and catchesits prey in flight. It also forages in dense forests by gleaning insects from plants, rocks, or other surfaces. Diets contain lepidopterans, dipterans, coleopterans, hymenopterans, trichopterans, hemipterans, orthopterans, homopterans, psocopterans, neuropterans, and other arthropods (e.g. spiders Araneae ).	Eastern Small-footed Myotis swarm in hibernacula, and mate selection occurs from late summer through early autumn. It is polygynandrous, and males and females have many mates. Copulation occurs in late autumn, just before individuals hibernate. Females store sperm while hibernation from mid-November to March. Mating during winter was reported when a male and a female arouse from hibernation at the same time. Female have one young each year in May-July.	The Eastern Small-footed Myotis emerges around dusk in summer. Activity peak occurs immediately after sunset. It roosts during spring and summer in buildings, expansion joints of bridges overrivers, caves, coal mines, hollow trees, spaces beneath loose bark of trees, tunnels, rock crevices, and rocky outcrops and under rocks. In winter,it hibernates in caves and mines and prefers cold and dry locations near entrances.	Eastern Small-footed Myotis travel a maximum of 1- 1 km within their home range. There is no evidence of migration. They have remarkable homing behavior, returning to the same cave to hibernate even if placed in a different location. Individuals typically switch roosts daily, which requires an abundance of adequate roosting locations within a home range. Males and females select roosts differently, and their preferences change during the reproductive season. In winter, they hibernate alone or occasionally in small clusters, but many can be packed into a crevice, with up to 142 individuals recorded in a cave in Ontario . The Eastern Smallfooted Myotis hibernates horizontally rather than vertically and sometimes hibernate on cave floors.	Classified as Endangered on The IUCN Red List. The Eastern Small-footed Myotis has been substantial impacted by White-nose Syndrome. It has likely declined by more than 70% over its distribution in eastern North America over three generations (18 years). It has always been considered to be relatively rare, and some populations experienced declines before the onset of White-nose Syndrome.	Barbour & Davis (1969) | Best & Jennings (1997) | Chapman (2007b) | Johnson & Gates (2007, 2008) | Moosman et al. (2007) | O'Keefe & LaVoie (2011) | Simmons (2005) | Solari (2018q)	https://zenodo.org/record/6398652/files/figure.png	374. Eastern Small-footed Myotis Myotis leibii French: Murin de Leib / German: Ostliches KleinfuR-Mausohr / Spanish: Ratonero de Leib Taxonomy. Vespertilio leibu Audubon & Bachman, 1842 , “Erie county, Michigan ,” USA . Subgenus Pyzonix; lucifugus species group. Monotypic. Distribution. SE Canada in SE Ontario and SW Quebec , and W USA from SE Oklahoma E to New England , W Virginia, and NW South Carolina; distribution 1s irregular, and most occurrences and largest populations are in New York , Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and W Virginia. Descriptive notes. Head-body c. 40-44 mm , tail 33-38 mm , ear c. 13 mm , hindfoot 5-7 mm , forearm 30-1-35- 3 mm ; weight 3-6 g . Fur of the Eastern Small-footed Myotis is long and silky. Dorsal hairs are bicolored, with blackish bases and dark yellowish brown to golden tips; ventral hairs are paler, with dark brown bases and yellowish tan or cinereous tips. Ears are medium-sized and extend slightly beyond nose when laid forward; tragus is long and slender, tapering slightly at tip. Membranes, ears, and skin are blackish. Plagiopatagium is attached to feet by a broad band of membrane; feet are small; and calcar is keeled. Baculum is small and deeply sculptured; slender distal part terminates in slight knob; dorsal and lateral extensions are separated proximally by prominent notch; and bone is somewhat saddle-shaped and concave ventrally and has dorsal prominence. Skull is small and delicate (greatest skull lengths 12-5-13- 9 mm ); braincase is flattened; forehead slopes gradually upward from rostrum; occipital region is rounded posteriorly; and sagittal and lambdoidal crests are absent. Chromosomal complement has 2n = 44 and FN = 50, with four pairs of metacentric and 17 pairs of acrocentric autosomes. X- and Y-chromosomes are submetacentric. Habitat. Mostly hilly or mountainous areas, in or near deciduous or coniferous evergreen forests, sometimes in open agricultural landscapes, mostly at elevations of 700-800 m (but some up to 1125 m . Food and Feeding. The Eastern Small-footed Myotis forages over water and land, being specialized to catch flying insects 1-3 m aboveground. When foraging,it flies slowly and catchesits prey in flight. It also forages in dense forests by gleaning insects from plants, rocks, or other surfaces. Diets contain lepidopterans, dipterans, coleopterans, hymenopterans, trichopterans, hemipterans, orthopterans, homopterans, psocopterans, neuropterans, and other arthropods (e.g. spiders Araneae ). Breeding. Eastern Small-footed Myotis swarm in hibernacula, and mate selection occurs from late summer through early autumn. It is polygynandrous, and males and females have many mates. Copulation occurs in late autumn, just before individuals hibernate. Females store sperm while hibernation from mid-November to March. Mating during winter was reported when a male and a female arouse from hibernation at the same time. Female have one young each year in May-July. Activity patterns. The Eastern Small-footed Myotis emerges around dusk in summer. Activity peak occurs immediately after sunset. It roosts during spring and summer in buildings, expansion joints of bridges overrivers, caves, coal mines, hollow trees, spaces beneath loose bark of trees, tunnels, rock crevices, and rocky outcrops and under rocks. In winter,it hibernates in caves and mines and prefers cold and dry locations near entrances. Movements, Home range and Social organization. Eastern Small-footed Myotis travel a maximum of 1- 1 km within their home range. There is no evidence of migration. They have remarkable homing behavior, returning to the same cave to hibernate even if placed in a different location. Individuals typically switch roosts daily, which requires an abundance of adequate roosting locations within a home range. Males and females select roosts differently, and their preferences change during the reproductive season. In winter, they hibernate alone or occasionally in small clusters, but many can be packed into a crevice, with up to 142 individuals recorded in a cave in Ontario . The Eastern Smallfooted Myotis hibernates horizontally rather than vertically and sometimes hibernate on cave floors. Status and Conservation. Classified as Endangered on The IUCN Red List. The Eastern Small-footed Myotis has been substantial impacted by White-nose Syndrome. It has likely declined by more than 70% over its distribution in eastern North America over three generations (18 years). It has always been considered to be relatively rare, and some populations experienced declines before the onset of White-nose Syndrome. Bibliography. Barbour & Davis (1969), Best & Jennings (1997), Chapman (2007b), Johnson & Gates (2007, 2008), Moosman et al. (2007), O'Keefe & LaVoie (2011), Simmons (2005), Solari (2018q).	Simmons, N.B. and A.L. Cirranello. 2022B. Bat Species of the World: A taxonomic and geographic database. Accessed on 10/11/2022.	Vespertilionidae	Myotis leibii	Myotis	Unassigned-Myotis	leibii	Audubon and Bachman	1842	1	J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., ser. 1	0.5306	Eastern Small-footed Myotis	 henshawii H. Allen, 1894; orinomus Elliot, 1903; winnemana Nelson, 1913.	USA, Pennsylvania, Erie Co.	E North America from S Ontario, S Quebec (Canada), and S Maine (USA) south to Georgia and west to E Oklahoma (USA).	Not listed.	Endangered	Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus , but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis .	Mammal Diversity Database. (2023). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.11) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7830771 released 15 April 2023	Myotis leibii	23	Eastern Small-footed Myotis		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	VESPERTILIONIFORMES	NA	NA	VESPERTILIONOIDEA	VESPERTILIONIDAE	MYOTINAE	NA	Myotis	Pizonyx	leibii	Audubon & Bachman	1842	1						"Erie county, Michigan," USA.			leibii (Audubon & Bachman, 1842)|winnemana E. W. Nelson, 1913	NA	NA	Canada|United States	North America	Nearctic	EN	0	0	0	Myotis_leibii	0	sciname match	Myotis_leibii	0	IUCN. 2022. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on [28 September, 2022].	14172	Myotis leibii	ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	MAMMALIA	CHIROPTERA	VESPERTILIONIDAE	Myotis	leibii	(Audubon &; Bachman, 1842)	Formerly, M. ciliolabrum was included as a subspecies of M. leibii (or M. subulatus ). Based chiefly on cranial measurements, van Zyll de Jong (1985) recognized western populations of what had been known as M. subulatus as a species ( M. ciliolabrum ) distinct from eastern populations, for which the appropriate name is M. leibii . Electrophoretic data support the conclusion that the two taxa are specifically distinct (Herd 1987). Wilson and Ruff (1999) regarded M. ciliolabrum and M. leibii as separate species. Koopman (1993) did not recognize M. ciliolabrum as a species distinct from M. leibii , but Simmons (2005) did. Monotypic (Best and Jennings 1997).<br><br>In a phylogenetic study based on mtDNA data, M. leibii was included within clades containing both M. californicus and M. ciliolabrum (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Further data from M. leibii are necessary to validate its phylogenetic relationship to M. ciliolabrum and M. californicus (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004). Comparisons among outgroups ( M. yumanensis , M. lucifugus , and M. evotis ) found sufficient support for specific status of M. leibii , but sequence divergence between M. evotis and the leibii group was small (2.9%) and within the intraspecific range. Further sampling of M. evotis is necessary to establish the level of divergence between M. evotis , as well as other long-eared Myotis , and the leibii group (Rodriguez and Ammerman 2004).	20000000	Myotis leibii	Endangered	A4bce	2018	2018-02-12 00:00:00 UTC	3.1	English	This species is listed as Endangered (EN) in view of the potential impact of white-nose syndrome (WNS), considering a time period of three generations (18 years), including both past (12 years) and future (6 years), this species is likely to have declined by more than 70% over its geographic range in eastern North America, which is enough to be classified in this category. Some populations have been suffering reductions even before the onset of WNS, and the species was already considered uncommon over most of its distribution.	This species is most often detected during hibernation. In recent years, it has been counted at approximately 125 hibernacula. Recent surveys have greatly increased the number of localities above those known historically; the number of hibernacula may be significantly larger than currently known. Intensive cave and mine surveys have been undertaken in most states where the species occurs, but some sites probably remain unsearched in most states. The total count for all hibernacula is approximately 3,000 individuals, with roughly 60% of the total number from just two sites in New York. Some of the occurrences probably have not been surveyed completely, and some individuals are undoubtedly missed within some sites because they are hibernating in portions of mines or caves that cannot be reached or easily observed. This bat always has been considered to be relatively rare (Barbour and Davis 1969). Numbers are reduced in a few sites where older counts are available, and a few historical sites are apparently no longer occupied, but whether these observation reflect declines or changes in distribution is unknown. In Vermont, Myotis leibii has been consistently found in very small numbers and often not detected at all during periodic surveys of various hibernacula dating back to 1934 (Trombulak et al. 2001). Habitat is mostly hilly or mountainous areas, in or near deciduous or evergreen forest, sometimes in mostly open farmland. In Pennsylvania, Mohr (1976) found this species mostly in heavy hemlock forests in the foothills of mountains that rise to 2,000 feet (600 meters). Unpublished data from the Kentucky Heritage Program indicate that summer roosts include caves, coal mines, buildings, and bridges over rivers (in expansion joints). Warm-season roosts include buildings, towers, hollow trees, spaces beneath the loose bark of trees, cliff crevices, and bridges. Tuttle (1964) reported two individuals found in April in Tennessee under a large flat rock at the edge of a quarry surrounded by woods and cow pastures. In Ontario, about 12 of these bats were found in July behind the door of a shed that was kept open (i.e., positioned against the wall) (Hitchcock 1955). They have been seen resting in limestone caves in West Virginia in spring and summer (Krutzsch 1966).  By far most records come from observations of bats hibernating in winter in caves and mine tunnels. Hibernation occurs in solution and fissure caves and mine tunnels (including coal, iron, copper, and talc mines). Situations near the entrance where the air is relatively cold and dry seem to be preferred (Barbour and Davis 1969), though sometimes deeper locations are used (Schwartz and Schwartz 1981). Roost sites often are deep in crevices, or under rocks on the cave floor, where the bats can be very difficult to find (Davis 1955, Krutzsch 1966, Martin et al . 1966). These bats are usually found singly or occasionally in small clusters, but many may be packed in a crevice; often they hang among other species (Marin et al . 1966). In tight places the body may be horizontal, even belly down. On cave walls, the forearms are somewhat extended rather than parallel to the body axis. Dunn and Hall (1989) noted that 52% of Pennsylvania hibernacula were small caves of less than 150 m (500 feet) in length. Like many other bat species, this one typically forages over ponds and streams.	Some mines may be threatened by closure or collapse. Ceiling collapse may kill bats outright or, more significantly, alter cave microhabitat enough to make it unsuitable. A few cave occurrences are threatened or have been reduced in quality due to commercialization for tourism. Threats to summer sites are unknown, but are likely to be moderate due to alteration of riparian habitats. Conversion of forested habitats to agricultural and residential uses has decreased the amount of preferred habitat in some areas, but the bats do make use of bridges and various other non-natural roost sites. Perhaps the most serious threat to cave-dwelling bats is human disturbance during hibernation. Very low levels of noise, light, and heat from lanterns are sufficient to awaken hibernating bats, which then expend energy moving about and deplete critical reserves of body fat. ; Improper gating of caves to protect bats may result in site abandonment. For example, the large colony of M. leibii at Fourth Chute Cave, Quebec, was driven out by blocking the flow of cold air (Mohr 1976). In contrast, gating of cave entrances in other locations (e.g., Aitkin Cave, Pennsylvania) has led to increases in M. leibii populations. With its small numbers and spotty distribution, isolated colonies of M. leibii are particularly vulnerable to extirpation by chance events, especially when concentrated during winter months. On the other hand, in contrast to certain other bats that assemble in vast numbers in relatively few sites, the population of M. leibii as a whole is not vulnerable to localized events. This bat tends to hibernate near cave entrances; hence it may be vulnerable to freezing in abnormally severe winters. Recently, the white-nose syndrome (WNS) is becoming the major threat to hibernating bats ; in caves (hibernacula) and a number of studies have called the attention that the spread of this disease can extirpate whole caves from the distribution range for some species, including M. leibii (Alves et al . 2014).	It seems to be uncommon in most localities and some authorities consider M. leibii to be one of the rarest bats in the eastern United States. Approximately 80% of the known occurrences are of poor estimated viability; just 7% are believed to have good or excellent viability. In most instances, surveys yield very few individuals of this species in any particular location. Most occurrences have been counted only within the past decade or two and are not revisited regularly, making the assessment of population trend difficult. Many biologists believe that this species is basically stable, having declined little in recent times, but that it is vulnerable, especially in its cave hibernacula. The population at one site in Arkansas has increased in recent years, probably due to reduced winter disturbance following the installation of a cave gate. A study of the potential impact of white-nose syndrome (WNS) on bat populations (Alves et al . 2014) indicates a pessimistic scenario for M. leibii , which will probably be the most affected species, with more than 96% of population decline, and could be considered as Critically Endangered (CR). Even an intermediate scenario suggests a loss over 70% of its populations. The current distribution of this species is very congruent with the potential spread of WNS, encompassing all the Appalachian Mountains until the Arkansas River. The populations of M. leibii were considered stable before the onset of WNS, but some populations are already experiencing negative population trends.	Decreasing	The range extends from New England, southeastern Ontario, and southwestern Quebec south and west to southeastern Oklahoma, Arkansas, northern Alabama, northern Georgia, and northwestern South Carolina (Menzel et al. 2003). Within this range, the distribution is very spotty, and the bulk of the occurrences and largest populations are in New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and western Virginia. Hall's (1981) map should be taken as potential range; there are no records of this species ever occurring in some parts of the indicated distribution (e.g., Illinois; Jim Herkert pers. comm). This species is apparently extirpated in Connecticut and Ohio (where it is known from only one specimen). Elevational range extends to at least 700-800 meters in several states and to at least 1,125 meters in Kentucky (Best and Jennings 1997).		Terrestrial	There is a strong conservation easement held by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) on the second largest occurrence. TNC has a management agreement giving limited protection to the largest occurrence and one occurrence with apparently good viability is on National Park Service land in Arkansas. Several occurrences with fair to poor estimated viability in various states are either owned by TNC or are on Federal land. Summer surveys throughout the species known range should be a high priority for inventory work. Winter hibernacula surveys should continue with emphasis on searching sites which have not been surveyed, improving counts in sites which have not been completely or thoroughly surveyed, and monitoring some portion of the known sites on a regular basis (perhaps every other year as recommended for Myotis sodalis sites) to establish baseline population trend data.	Nearctic		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 	Vespertilionidae	Myotis	Unassigned - Myotis	leibii	Audubon and Bachman	1842	1	J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., ser. 1	0.530556	Eastern Small-footed Myotis	 henshawii H. Allen, 1894; orinomus Elliot, 1903; winnemana Nelson, 1913.	USA, Pennsylvania, Erie Co.	E North America from S Ontario, S Quebec (Canada), and S Maine (USA) south to Georgia and west to E Oklahoma (USA).	Not listed.	Endangered	Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus , but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis .	Myotis leibii	1005428	23	Eastern Small-footed Myotis		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	CHIROPTERA	VESPERTILIONIFORMES	NA	NA	VESPERTILIONOIDEA	Vespertilionidae	MYOTINAE	NA	Myotis	Pizonyx	leibii	Audubon & Bachman	1842	1						"Erie county, Michigan," USA.			leibii (Audubon & Bachman, 1842)|winnemana E. W. Nelson, 1913	NA	NA			USA(OK,AR,MO,IL,MS,AL,TN,KY,IN,OH,GA,SC,NC,VA,MD,DE,PA,WV,NJ,NY,RI,CT,MA,VT,NH,ME)	Canada|United States	North America	Nearctic	EN	0	0	0	Myotis_leibii	0	sciname match	Myotis_leibii	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	Myotis_leibii	1005428	23	Eastern Small-footed Myotis		Theria	Placentalia	Boreoeutheria	Laurasiatheria	Chiroptera	Yangochiroptera	NA	NA	Vespertilionoidea	Vespertilionidae	Myotinae	NA	Myotis	Pizonyx	leibii	Audubon & Bachman	1	Vespertilio Leibii	Audubon, J.J. and Bachman, J. 1842. Descriptions of new species of quadrupeds inhabiting North America. Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 8(2):280-323.	https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24623282	lost (number not known)	holotype		"Erie county, Michigan," USA.			NA	NA			USA(OK,AR,MO,IL,MS,AL,TN,KY,IN,OH,GA,SC,NC,VA,MD,DE,PA,WV,NJ,NY,RI,CT,MA,VT,NH,ME)	Canada|United States	North America	Nearctic	EN	0	0	0	Myotis_leibii	0	sciname match	Myotis_leibii	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	Vespertilionidae	Myotis	Pizonyx	leibii	Audubon & Bachman	1842	1	J. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., ser. 1	0.530556	Eastern Small-footed Myotis	henshawii H. Allen, 1894; orinomus Elliot, 1903; winnemana Nelson, 1913.	USA, Pennsylvania, Erie Co.	E North America from S Ontario, S Quebec (Canada), and S Maine (USA) south to Georgia and west to E Oklahoma (USA).	<a href='https://cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php' target='_blank'>Not Listed</a>	<a href='https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/14172/22055716/' target='_blank'>Endangered</a>	Formerly included ciliolabrum and melanorhinus, but see van Zyll de Jong (1984). An older name for this species may be subulatus Say, 1823; see Glass and Baker (1968). These authors recommended that subulatus should be supressed, but see Hall(1981), who used subulatus instead of leibii for this species. Koopman (1993) disagreed, and suggested that subulatus is probably an older name for yumanensis.		Mammal Diversity Database. (2025). Mammal Diversity Database (Version 2.2) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15007505	NA	Myotis leibii; Myotis leibii; Myotis leibii; Myotis leibii; Myotis leibii; Myotis leibii; henshawii; orinomus; winnemana; henshawii; orinomus; winnemana; leibii; winnemana; Murin de Leib; Ostliches Kleinfu R-Mausohr; Ratonero de Leib; Eastern Small-footed Myotis; Eastern Small-footed Myotis; Eastern Small-footed Myotis; M. leibii