A stereological comparison of villous and microvillous surfaces in small intestines of frugivorous and entomophagous bats: species, inter-individual and craniocaudal differences

The extents of functional surfaces (villi, microvilli) have been estimated at different longitudinal sites, and in the entire small intestine, for three species of bats belonging to two feeding groups: insect- and fruit-eaters. In all species, surface areas and other structural quantities tended to be greatest at more cranial sites and to decline caudally. The entomophagous bat (Miniopterus inflatus) had a mean body mass (coefficient of variation) of 8.9 g (5%) and a mean intestinal length of 20 cm (6%). The surface area of the basic intestinal tube (primary mucosa) was 9.1 cm2 (10%) but this was amplified to 48 cm2 (13%) by villi and to 0.13 m2 (20%) by microvilli. The total number of microvilli per intestine was 4 x 10(11) (20%). The average microvillus had a diameter of 8 nm (10%), a length of 1.1 microns (22%) and a membrane surface area of 0.32 micron 2 (31%). In two species of fruit bats (Epomophorus wahlbergi and Lisonycteris angolensis), body masses were greater and intestines longer, the values being 76.0 g (18%) and 76.9 g (4%), and 73 cm (16%) and 72 cm (7%), respectively. Surface areas were also greater, amounting to 76 cm2 (26%) and 45 cm2 (8%) for the primary mucosa, 547 cm2 (29%) and 314 cm2 (16%) for villi and 2.7 m2 (23%) and 1.5 m2 (18%) for microvilli. An increase in the number of microvilli, 33 x 10(11) (19%) and 15 x 10(11) (24%) per intestine, contributed to the more extensive surface area but there were concomitant changes in the dimensions of microvilli. Mean diameters were 94 nm (8%) and 111 nm (4%), and mean lengths were 2.8 microns (12%) and 2.9 microns (10%), respectively. Thus, an increase in the surface area of the average microvillus to 0.83 micron 2 (12%) and 1.02 microns 2 (11%) also contributed to the greater total surface area of microvilli. The lifestyle-related differences in total microvillous surface areas persisted when structural quantities were normalised for the differences in body masses. The values for total microvillous surface area were 148 cm2g-1 (20%) in the entomophagous bat, 355 cm2g-1 (20%) in E. wahlbergi and 192 cm2g-1 (17%) in L. angolensis. This was true despite the fact that the insecteater possessed a greater length of intestine per unit of body mass: 22 mm g-1 (8%) versus 9-10 mm g-1 (9-10%) for the fruit-eaters.

The tail plays a major role in the differing manoeuvrability of two sibling species of mouse-eared bats (Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii)

Two sympatrically occurring bat species, the greater mouse-eared bat (Myotis myotis (Borkhausen, 1797)) and the lesser mouse-eared bat (Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857)) (Chiroptera, Vespertillionidae), share numerous similarities in morphology, roosting behaviour, and echolocation and are often difficult to distinguish. However, despite these similarities, their foraging behaviour is noticeably different. Our aim was to examine the extent to which these different foraging strategies reflect morphological adaptation. We assessed whether the morphology of the wing, body, and tail differed between M. myotis and M. blythii. In addition, in a laboratory experiment involving an obstacle course, we compared differences in manoeuvrability by relating them to our morphological measurements. The two species differed in their overall size, wing-tip shape, and tail-to-body length ratio. The generally smaller sized M. blythii performed better in the obstacle course and was therefore considered to be more manoeuvrable. Although differences in wing-tip shape were observed, we found the most important characteristic affecting manoeuvrability in both species to be the tail-to-body length ratio. Additionally, when we compared two bats with injured wing membranes with unharmed bats of the same species, we found no difference in manoeuvrability, even when the wing shape was asymmetric. We therefore postulate that morphometric differences between the two species in their overall size and, more importantly, in their tail-to-body length ratio are the main physical characteristics providing proof of adaptation to different foraging and feeding strategies.