Evidence found
254 records across 4 countries and territories, 1967–1984.
Brachyphylla nana · GBIF taxon key 5218761
Where has the Cuban Fruit-eating Bat been recorded?
Brachyphylla nana occurrence evidence comes from 254 records in 4 countries and territories, from 1967 to 1984. Most records come from Dominican Republic.
- 254 records
- 4 places
- 10 years recorded
- Mammalia class
Observation evidence passport
Source coverage
CC0 GBIF Animalia occurrence facets, including country, month and year summaries.
Refreshed 2026-09-23. Inspect the taxon on GBIF.
What this means
The species has been recorded in the listed places in the stated source universe. Peak month: September.
4 months reach at least 10% of the peak facet count.
What this does not mean
historical describes the record pattern, not a formal range, residency, abundance or conservation assessment.
A single record remains evidence of a recording, not proof that a population lives there.
Compare this animal’s observation pattern
When it is recorded
JFMAMJJASOND
Peak month: September. Records cluster in the months an animal is present and being looked for, so a summer peak can reflect observer effort as much as the animal.
Records over time
19671984
Recording effort has risen steeply almost everywhere since the 1990s, so a rising line usually shows more observers rather than more animals.
Where Cuban Fruit-eating Bat has been recorded
The countries below show where occurrence evidence exists for Cuban Fruit-eating Bat. They do not define a complete habitat range: survey effort differs by place, and historical or one-off records can appear alongside repeated presence.
| Place | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Dominican Republic | 214 | |
| Turks and Caicos Islands | 19 | |
| Cayman Islands | 16 | |
| Haiti | 5 |
Related animals
Others in the family Phyllostomidae.
Record pattern: historical
Historical records with no recent record in the covered source. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.
Historical records with no recent record in the covered source. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.