Comment on “Population genetics reveal Myotis keenii (Keen’s myotis) and Myotis evotis (long-eared myotis) to be a single species”
Open accessAbstract
Genetic exchange and hybridization appear common among the western long-eared bats from North America. Multiple sources of evidence indicate that lineages within this group are evolving independently, despite genetic exchange. However, evidence of gene flow raises questions about the species-level status of some lineages. C.L. Lausen et al. (2019. Can. J. Zool. 97(3): 267–279) proposed that Myotis evotis (H. Allen, 1864) (long-eared myotis) and Myotis keenii (Merriam, 1895) (Keen’s myotis) are one species, not two. This conclusion is based on analyses of cytochrome b and microsatellite data suggesting gene flow between these taxa. Microsatellites are not reliable markers for identifying species because homoplasy can be a major confounding factor, which appears to be true in this case. We reanalyzed the dataset of C.L. Lausen et al. (2019) and show that it is not reliable to distinguish between gene flow or homoplasy, and that these data do not support the conclusion that M. evotis and M. keenii represent a single species. Previous morphological and genomic studies indicate that these are separate species despite previous genetic exchange between them. Failing to recognize that gene flow can occur between independently evolving lineages is counterproductive for conservation because it can lead to neglect of important independent lineages, and likewise failing to use proper tools to delimit species is counterproductive to efforts to quantify biodiversity and design conservation strategies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many mammal taxa lack sufficient geographic and taxonomic sampling to identify and interpret such hybridization histories (e.g., in the case of M. keenii and M. evotis).
“Many mammal taxa lack sufficient geographic and taxonomic sampling to identify and interpret such hybridization histories (e.g., in the case of M. keenii and M. evotis; Lausen et al. 2019, 2021; Morales et al. 2021; Upham et al. 2022b).”
From How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge (2025) · cites this paper as Morales et al. 2021
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Burgin, C. J., Zijlstra, J. S., Becker, M. A., Handika, H., Alston, J. M., Widness, J., Liphardt, S., Huckaby, D. G., & Upham, N. S. (2025) · Journal of Mammalogy · doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyaf047 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
- Authors
- Morales, A. E., Fenton, M. B., Carstens, B. C., & Simmons, N. B.
- Affiliations
- American Museum of Natural History (US)
- Western University (CA)
- The Ohio State University (US)
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Zoology
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2021-05
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 415-422
- ISSN
- 0008-4301 (ISSN-L)
- 1480-3283
- OpenAlex
- W3160730304
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 0.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Zoology (publishedVersion)
- TSpace (University of Toronto) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Gerstner Family Foundation
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Bat Biology and Ecology Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Diptera species taxonomy and behavior
- Keywords
- Myotis keenii, Myotis evotis, long-eared myotis, species delimitation, gene flow, hybridization, homoplasy, microsatellite markers, cytochrome b, bat conservation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review