Red List of South African Species

Alternatively, Explore species
| National Red List categories | Partners |
Near Threatened (NT)
Assessors: Lientjie Cohen David Jacobs Kate MacEwan Ara Monadjem Leigh Rosanne Richards Corrie Shoeman Peter Taylor Wendy White
Contributors: Lizanne Roxburgh Domitilla Raimondo Matthew Child
Reviewers: Matthew Child Domitilla Raimondo

Rationale (Changed due to New Information)

This species occurs widely but sparsely in northeastern South Africa with an extent of occurrence of 64,798 km2 . It is often sympatric at roost sites with other Miniopterus species, yet occurs in lower densities (typically only 5% the abundance of Miniopterus natalensis). Thus, it may be overlooked and occur more widely than thought. There are no major identified threats but as it occurs predominantly outside protected areas, disturbance to cave roosts (which makes it vulnerable to local extinctions) and agricultural transformation depleting its insect prey base may be causing localised declines. Additionally, although its current known distribution does not overlap with planned wind farm developments, the discovery of new subpopulations may reveal wind farms as an emerging threat. This species would qualify as Vulnerable C2a(i) but subpopulations are not significantly fragmented as they have relatively high wing-loading. As subpopulations typically comprise c. 50 individuals and this species is known from only five localities, there is an inferred minimum population size of 250 individuals. However, this is an underestimate and field surveys are required to identify as yet undetected subpopulations. Total mature population size is unlikely to be significantly more than 1,000 individuals. Thus, we list as Near Threatened C2a(i) and D1. Additionally, since it is almost certainly a species complex and may thus be revealed to be a South African or southern African endemic, we do not know the true range of the species. As such, this species should be reassessed pending further population data and taxonomic resolution.

Regional population effects: It has a relatively high wingloading (Norberg and Rayner 1987) and thus dispersal is likely. However, it is sparsely distributed throughout its range and so significant rescue effects are uncertain.

Distribution

This species is more widespread than previously thought and is often overlooked (e.g., Friedmann and Daly 2004). Only scattered records exist for the species, occurring widely but sparsely over much of sub-Saharan Africa (Figure 1). It has been reported from Liberia and Guinea in West Africa; from Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo in Central Africa; from Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania in East Africa; and from Namibia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique in southern Africa (ACR 2015). It may have been overlooked in Angola (Monadjem et al. 2010). Within the assessment region, there are clusters of records from the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga provinces (Monadjem et al. 2010). Its overall distribution is unclear due to confusion with M. natalensis. The current estimated extent of occurrence in the assessment region is 64,798 km2. Field surveys are needed to identify previously undetected localities and subpopulations.

Population trend

Trend

This is generally considered to be a locally rare species, although it can be common in some areas (Schlitter 2008). It is poorly represented in museums with only 24 specimens examined in Monadjem et al. (2010). Where it co-occurs with M. natalensis, it does so in very low numbers (Skinner and Chimimba 2005), possibly only 5% of the total as it occurs singly or in small groups of 4–6 individuals (W. White pers. obs. 2015). For example, in Namibia, Churchill et al. (1997) recorded a cluster of 50 individuals sharing a roost with c. 500 Rhinolophus fumigatus and over 200 Nycteris thebaica.

Threats

There do not appear to be any major threats to this species, although some roosting caves may be disturbed by tourism activities (Schlitter 2008). Extensive transformation of natural habitat, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal (Jewitt et al. 2015), is likely to be causing declines where the insect prey base is depleted as a result of loss of native vegetation or the use of pesticides. Its high wing loading and aspect ratio (Norberg and Rayner 1987) suggests that this bat is a fast flyer in relatively open spaces. Additionally, similar to its close relative M. natalensis, it is also likely to be migratory. These factors are likely to result in this species flying in the rotor sweep zone of wind turbines both while foraging and commuting during migration. While its known distribution does not overlap with planned wind farm developments in the region, newly discovered subpopulations may be revealed to be threatened by wind farms, similar to M. natalensis.

Uses and trade

It is not known to be utilised or traded in any form.

Conservation

This species occurs marginally in Kruger National Park (Mpumalanga Province) and Shongweni Resources Reserves (KwaZulu-Natal Province). Regulations to limit disturbance of important roosting caves are important (Schlitter 2008). However, identifying key roosting sites is a prerequisite. No direct conservation interventions are possible without further delimitation of its distribution, population size and ecology. 

Research priorities:
  • Systematic monitoring to identify key roost sites and delimit geographical distribution more accurately. 
Encouraged citizen actions: 
  • Limit disturbance to roost sites.
  • Deposit any dead specimens to the Durban Natural Science Museum or Ditsong Museum of Natural History.

References 

[@book{275,
 address = {Cambridge},
 author = {Skinner, J.D. and Chimimba, C.T.},
 publisher = {Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom},
 title = {The Mammals of the Southern African Subregion},
 year = {2005}
}
,@book{570,
 address = {Parkview, South Africa},
 author = {Friedmann, Y. and Daly, B.},
 publisher = {Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN) and Endangered Wildlife Trust},
 title = {Red Data Book of the Mammals of South Africa: A Conservation Assessment},
 year = {2004}
}
,@book{1087,
 address = {Pretoria, South Africa},
 author = {Meester, J.A.J., Rautenbach, I.L., Dippenaar, N.J. and Baker, C.M.},
 publisher = {Transvaal Museum },
 title = {Classification of Southern African Mammals. Monograph number 5.},
 year = {1986}
}
,@techreport{5228,
 address = {Pretoria, South Africa},
 author = {Driver, A., Sink, K.J., Nel, J.N., Holness, S., Van Niekerk, L., Daniels, F., Jonas, Z., Majiedt, P.A., Harris, L. and Maze, K.},
 institution = {South African National Biodiversity Institute and Department of Environmental Affairs},
 title = {National Biodiversity Assessment 2011: An assessment of South Africa’s biodiversity and ecosystems. Synthesis Report},
 year = {2012}
}
,@article{9077,
 author = {Jewitt, D., Goodman, P.S., Erasmus, B.F.N., O’Connor, T.G. and Witkowski, E.T.F.},
 journal = {South African Journal of Science },
 pages = {1--9},
 title = {Systematic land-cover change in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: Implications for biodiversity},
 volume = {111},
 year = {2015}
}
,@book{19529,
 address = {Johannesburg},
 author = {Monadjem, A., Taylor, P.J., Cotterill, F.P.D. and Schoeman M.C.},
 publisher = {University of Witwatersrand Press},
 title = {Bats of Southern and Central Africa: a biogeographic and taxonomic synthesis},
 year = {2010}
}
,@techreport{4306,
 address = {Pretoria, South Africa},
 author = {ACR},
 title = {African Chiroptera Report 2015},
 year = {2015}
}
,@article{4317,
 author = {Norberg UM, Rayner JM},
 journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences},
 pages = {335–427},
 title = {Ecological morphology and flight in bats (Mammalia; Chiroptera): wing adaptations, flight performance, foraging strategy and echolocation},
 volume = {316},
 year = {1987}
}
,@article{13563,
 author = {Miller-Butterworth CM, Eick G, Jacobs DS, Schoeman MC, Harley EH},
 journal = {Journal of Mammalogy},
 pages = {1121–1135},
 title = {Genetic and phenotypic differences between South African long-fingered bats, with a global miniopterine phylogeny},
 volume = {86},
 year = {2005}
}
,@article{13565,
 author = {Churchill, S., Draper, R. and Marais, E.},
 journal = {South African Journal of Wildlife Research},
 pages = {44--50},
 title = {Cave utilisation by Namibian bats: population, microclimate and roost selection},
 volume = {27},
 year = {1997}
}
,@article{13565,
 author = {Sanborn, C. C.},
 journal = {Zoological Series of the Field Museum of Natural History},
 number = {14},
 pages = {107--114},
 title = {Descriptions and records of African bats},
 volume = {20},
 year = {1936}
}
,@article{13565,
 author = {Juste, J., Ferrández, A., Fa, J. E., Masefield, W. and Ibáñez, C.},
 journal = {Acta Chiropterologica},
 number = {1},
 pages = {27--37},
 title = {Taxonomy of little bent-winged bats (<i>Miniopterus</i>, Miniopteridae) from the African islands of São Tomé, Grand Comoro and Madagascar, based on based on mtDNA},
 volume = {9},
 year = {2007}
}
,@article{13565,
 author = {Jacobs DS.},
 journal = {Acta Chiropterologica },
 pages = {93–103},
 title = { Intraspecific variation in wingspan and echolocation call flexibility might explain the use of different habitats by the insectivorous bat, <i>Miniopterus schreibersii</i> (Vespertilionidae: Miniopterinae).},
 volume = {1},
 year = {1999}
}
,@techreport{13565,
 author = {Schlitter, D.},
 title = {Miniopterus inflatus},
 year = {2008}
}
,]
Send feedback about this assessment to SANBI

Lead agencies, Partners and Funders

See the partners page