Reply to the comment by Morales et al. on "Population genetics reveal Myotis keenii (Keen's myotis) and Myotis evotis (long-eared myotis) to be a single species"

A.E. Morales et al. (2021. Can. J. Zool. 99( 5): 415-422) provided no new evidence to alter the conclusions of C.L. Lausen et al. (2019. Can. J. Zool. 97(3): 267-279). We present background information, relevant comparisons, and clarification of analyses to further strengthen our conclusions. The genesis of the original "evotis-keenii" study in British Columbia (Canada) was to differentiate Myotis keenii (Merriam, 1895) (Keen's myotis), with one of the smallest North American bat distributions, from sympatric Myotis evotis (H. Allen, 1864) (long-eared myotis), using something other than the suggested postmortem skull size comparison, but no differentiating trait could be found, leading to the molecular genetics examination of C.L. Lausen et al. (2019). We present cumulative data that rejects the 1979 hypothesis of M. keenii as a distinct species. A.E. Morales et al. (2021) inaccurately portray C.L. Lausen et al.'s (2019) question and results; present inaccurate morphological and outdated distribution data; overstate the impact of homoplasy without supporting evidence; and misinterpret evidence of population structure.