{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026301663982823402, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0042941492216854536, 'mean_word_length': 5.151815181518152, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Taxonomic diversity of the Hipposideros larvatus species complex (Chiroptera: Hipposideridae) in mainland Asia

Hipposideros larvatus sensu lato constitutes a widespread species complex consisting of morphologically similar forms with a taxonomy that is in need of a revision. Here we present the results of a phylogenetic analysis of members of this species complex based on two mitochondrial (CytB and COI) and seven nuclear (ABHD11, ACOX2, COPS, RAG2, ROGDI2, SORBS2 and THY) genes, and a morphometric analysis. Morphological data, although showing certain diversity, does not allow an accurate delimitation of the taxonomic boundaries and occasionally contradict to genetic grouping. The molecular analyses based on mitochondrial data support the paraphyly of the H. larvatus species complex, with H. armiger recovered nested within. The nuclear data recovered all the lineages of H. larvatus sensu lato forming a monophyletic clade. Within it, apparently four different species-level clades could be revealed in Southeast Asia. One is distributed in northern Myanmar, southern China (including Hainan) and northern Vietnam, and also reaches into central Vietnam along the coast (Cham Islands). The valid name for this taxon must be H. poutensis Allen. The second clade is comprised by populations inhabiting the Malay Peninsula and the Sunda Islands, we identify this taxon as H. larvatus sensu stricto. The third taxon was identified only from southern Myanmar. The fourth taxon is distributed in southern and central Indochina. Its representatives were not related to any of the forms identified in Myanmar, and therefore, its previous identification with H. grandis sounds questionable. Since both the third and fourth taxa cannot now be unambiguously associated with a particular named form, we conventionally designate them as H. cf. grandis 1 and 2. 
 