Conservation setback may doom Christmas Island pipistrelle bat to extinction

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


When last we wrote about the Christmas Island pipistrelle bat (Pipistrellus murrayi), things didn't look good for this rare species that is both tiny in size and in population. Just 20 or so of the microbats remain in the world, and conservationists hoped to capture the remaining wild population and start a captive-breeding program, a last-gasp chance to save the species for extinction.

Since then, things haven't gone well.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


An attempt to capture and breed bats from a similar species have, so far, failed. The bats proven to be almost impossible to catch, and even harder to keep alive. Just two bats were captured, but one has since died.

The remaining bat needs to be hand-fed to survive, according to Peter Cochrane, Australia's Director of National Parks. Since this was a test-case to see if captive-breeding Christmas Island bats was even possible, it suggests that the future of the critically endangered pipistrelles may be brief.

Meanwhile, wildlife activists have told The Daily Telegraph that the pipistrelle bat population may have become even smaller, and there may now be just four bats left, according to the un-named sources.

Australia still hasn't ruled out funding a captive-breeding program for the increasingly rare bats, and could make a decision in the next month, but the question remains, will any action be in time?

Image: Common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus), a relative of the Christmas Island pipistrelle, via Wikipedia

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe