This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Primates Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mammals: Bats Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Bats Task Force (assessed as Low-importance).

Do any scientists in 2008 still believe that bats are diphyletic? A letter published in Nature states that “recent studies unambiguously support bat monophyly” [1]. It also seems that mitochondrial analyses published seven years ago proved the monophyly of bats [2]. -- Mathew5000 ( talk) 08:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply

See also the responses to my inquiry at the Science RefDesk. -- Mathew5000 ( talk) 06:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• This article shoudl be merged into megabat. FunkMonk ( talk) 03:24, 21 December 2017 (UTC) reply