Armstrong, K.N., Reardon, T.B. and Jackson, S.M. (2020). A current taxonomic list of Australian Chiroptera. Australasian Bat Society. Version 2020-06-09. https://www.ausbats.org.au/species-list.html
Reference for:
Nyctophilus bifax
Publication(s):
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Simmons, Nancy B. / Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2005-10-01 / 2005-10-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Order Chiroptera
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 3rd ed., vols. 1 & 2
Page(s):
312-529
Publisher:
Johns Hopkins University Press
Publication Place:
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
0-8018-8221-4/
Notes:
Corrections were made to text at 3rd printing
Reference for:
Nyctophilus bifax
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Thomas, Oldfield
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
1915-05-01 / 1915-05-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Notes on the genus Nyctophilus
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
The Annals and Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany, and Geology, 8th ser., no. 89
Page(s):
493-498
Publisher:
Publication Place:
ISBN/ISSN:
/
Notes:
Available online at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/24256063
Reference for:
Nyctophilus bifax
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Wilson, D. E., and R. A. Mittermeier, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2019-01-01 / 2019-01-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Handbook of the Mammals of the World. 9. Bats
Page(s):
1008
Publisher:
Lynx Edicions
Publication Place:
Barcelona, Spain
ISBN/ISSN:
978-84-16728190/
Notes:
Reference for:
Nyctophilus bifax
Nyctophilus bifax: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Australia
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Nyctophilus bifax: Comments
Comment:
Status: IUCN 2003 and IUCN/SSC Action Plan (2001) - Lower Risk (lc) as N. bifax; IUCN/SSC Action Plan (2001) - Lower Risk (nt) as N. daedalus; but N. daedalus not listed in IUCN 2003 (lapsus)
Comment:
Comments: Included in gouldi by Koopman (1984c, 1993, 1994), but see Parnaby (1987, 2002a). Also see Flannery (1995a). The status of daedalus is uncertain; data presented by Parnaby (1987) suggested that it may represent a distinct species, but Bonaccoroso (1998) indicated that it may not be distinct from bifax even at the subspecies level