DOCSLIB.ORG

Thiel, C. 2011. Ecology and Population Status of the Serval Leptailurus Serval in Zambia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Thiel, C. 2011. Ecology and population status of the serval Leptailurus serval in Zambia. Thesis: 1-294. Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn. 2011. Keywords: 1ET/1KE/1TZ/1UG/1ZA/1ZM/diet/disease/distribution/ecology/habitat/habitat preference/Leptailurus serval/parasites/population status/prey/prey availability/serval/status Abstract: Little is known about the Serval's ecology, its needs and population status. This thesis is providing a new and detailed groundwork on this elusive felid species. The study was conducted between 2006 and 2008 in Zambia, with the focus area being Luambe National Park (LNP) in the Luangwa Valley. Using transect line walking, signs of Serval presence (faeces, spoor and sightings) were recorded. Analyses of these records revealed new information on the diet, habitat preferences, the distribution within LNP, and parasite composition in faecal samples. The most studied fact on Servals found in literature is their diet, through scats analyses, observations and stomach analyses. Faeces analyses of this thesis supported the previous studies' findings that the Leptailurus serval is a rodent hunter. But besides that, they also prey extensively on birds, on reptiles, and on arthropods. A diet breadth of 0.5 also indicates a more opportunistic lifestyle. People associate Servals with grasslands and wetlands, but this study proved the Servals to use also thickets and riverine woodland. This felid needs water resources nearby and a certain degree of cover, whether it is grass or thickets/bushes. Closed forests with little ground cover are less preferred or even avoided habitats. parasites of Servals were never analysed up to now. This analysis revealed Rhipicephalus sanguineus and Haemaphysalis leachi, both so-called 'Dog Ticks', to be the most common tick of Leptailurus serval. Additionally, camera traps were set up to calculate the minimum population size of Leptailurus serval in LNP. In an area of 134 km² composed of 30% potentially preferred habitat, this study found a density of 9.9 Servals per 100 km2. This study has been the first density estimation proved by the capture-recapture method with the usage of camera traps. Zambia-wide collections of scat samples, observations and spoors completed the data to produce an overview of Zambian Serval populations. Zambian-wide distribution proclaimed by ANSELL (1978) was reviewed and most of the areas were confirmed. Distribution patterns of the different pelage morphs of Servals occurring in Zambia, following ANSELL (1978), were reviewed. His statement on the south-eastern boundary of the distribution of a small spotted morph could neither be proven nor rejected. Also the first African-wide species distribution model for the Serval was created with the software MAXENT. The MAXENT model revealed good results and showed possible distribution areas mostly south of the Sahara, with hotspots in the highlands of Ethiopia, in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, the eastern highlands of Zimbabwe, and at the South African coast line. On the basis of the newly gained knowledge on preferred and less preferred habitats the output map was overlaid and modified with land cover data, eco-region maps, areas of wilderness and areas of critical or endangered conservation status. If all these factors are taken into consideration, the potential Serval distribution area decreases, especially the areas of high probability are endangered and unsuitably influenced to provide good and stable Serval habitats. Ecology and population status of the Serval Leptailurus serval (SCHREBER, 1776) in Zambia By Christine Thiel Academic dissertation for the Degree of Doctor of Science (Dr. rer. Nat.) in Zoology at Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Bonn. (February 2011) Declaration I declare that the research described within this thesis is my work and this thesis is my own composition. I certify that this thesis has never been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification. Christine Thiel Bonn, February 2011 This dissertation was supported by: Ecology and population status of the Serval Leptailurus serval (SCHREBER, 1776) in Zambia Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades (Dr. rer. nat.) der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn vorgelegt von Christine Thiel aus Bonn Bonn, Februar 2011 Angefertigt mit Genehmigung der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn 1. Gutachter Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Boehme 2. Gutachter Prof. Dr. Steven Perry Tag der Promotion: 27.06.2011 Erscheinungsjahr: 2011 Table of Content page Abstract .................................................................................................................................. I Zusammenfassung ................................................................................................................III Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... V List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... VII List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... VIII List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... VIII The Story of the Serval and how it got its spots .................................................................... XI The Story of the Serval and how it got its spots .................................................................... XI 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Carnivore and Serval conservation ............................................................................ 1 1.2. Project Background and motivation ............................................................................ 3 1.3. Objectives .................................................................................................................. 4 1.4. Leptailurus serval (SCHREBER, 1776) ...................................................................... 6 1.5. Study area ................................................................................................................10 2. Diet ...............................................................................................................................21 2.1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................21 2.2. Methods ....................................................................................................................25 2.2.1. Determination of prey components in the Serval diet ............................................25 2.2.2. Guard hair analysis ...............................................................................................28 2.2.3. Data analyses .......................................................................................................30 2.2.4. Prey availability .....................................................................................................32 2.2.5. Activity patterns of Servals in Luambe National Park ............................................33 2.3. Results .....................................................................................................................34 2.3.1. Diet in Luambe National Park ................................................................................34 2.3.1.1. Prey spectrum in Luambe National Park ...........................................................34 2.3.1.2. Annual changes in diet ......................................................................................53 2.3.2. Diet in different locations in Zambia ......................................................................62 2.3.3. Prey availability .....................................................................................................72 2.3.3.1. Prey availability in Luambe National Park .........................................................72 2.3.3.2. Prey availability in Zambia .................................................................................76 2.3.4. Activity patterns of Servals in Luambe National Park ............................................80 2.4. Discussion ................................................................................................................81 2.4.1. The Serval’s diet ...................................................................................................83 2.4.1.1. Diet in Luambe National Park ............................................................................92 2.4.1.2. Diet in Zambia ...................................................................................................99 2.5. Summary Chapter 2 ................................................................................................ 104 3. Parasites .................................................................................................................... 107 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 107 3.2. Methods .................................................................................................................. 108 3.3. Results ..................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • South Central Africa: Zambia and Malawi

    South Central Africa: Zambia and Malawi

    SOUTH CENTRAL AFRICA: ZAMBIA AND MALAWI 14 AUGUST – 9 SEPTEMBER 2022/2023 Black-backed Barbet is one of the many barbet targets on this trip. www.birdingecotours.com [email protected] 2 | ITINERARY South-central Africa: Zambia and Malawi It is surprising that Zambia and Malawi are not bombarded by birders! Probably they are just not particularly well-marketed, charismatic, and popular countries for birding tours. But this is certainly not because they’re not exactly as amazing as any of their more popular neighbors in East and South Africa. Their avifauna is incredible for advanced and novice birders alike; both countries are teaming with huge numbers of amazing birds that will delight beginners as well as experienced birders, including loads of regional (if not country) endemics, and even a number of “Congolese-Zambian” specials on the northern border of Zambia. In addition, these countries are not only teaming with birds, but also with loads of big animals, amazing sights, and everything else that makes Africa such a brilliant continent to travel in. On this tour we will visit a large number of areas in both countries proclaimed by BirdLife International as Important Bird Areas (IBAs), as well as several wonderful national parks – a route that hopefully will allow us to watch the majority of these exciting avian riches. Itinerary (27 days/26 nights) Day 1. Livingstone Arrival day at Harry Mwanga Nkumbula International Airport in Livingstone, Zambia. Depending on the time of arrival we will head out straight away in search of some of our target birds near to our lodge.
  • 2020/21 Catalogue

    2020/21 Catalogue

    2020/21 catalogue Birds | Reptiles | Trees | Geology | Mammals Popular science | General wildlife and more www.struiknatureclub.co.za BIRDS BIRDS A wide range of bird books, from field guides to collections of Birds bird calls and bird narratives. Covers the spectrum of bird ID, NEWMAN’S CLASSIC ID GUIDES behaviour, how to find birds, attract them and identify their calls. See also our series guides on pages 18–21. SASOL BIRDS OF SOUTHERN AFRICA 5TH EDITION Updated, revised, with extensive new artwork, and access to bird calls using innovative barcode technology, Sasol 978 1 77007 876 5 978 1 77007 877 2 978 1 77007 942 7 TOP Birds of Southern SELLER 978 1 77007 878 9 (PVC) 978 1 77007 879 6 (PVC) Africa 5th edition maintains its place as one of Africa’s most trusted and sought- after field guides Comprehensively 978 1 77584 668 0 (Softcover) 978 1 77584 671 0 (Softcover) TOP illustrated, 978 1 77584 670 3 (PVC) 978 1 77584 673 4 (PVC) and trusted by SELLER leading bird guides ALSO AVAILABLE THE LARGER ILLUSTRATED 978 1 77007 388 3 978 1 77007 589 4 978 1 77584 449 5 978 1 77007 623 5 GUIDE TO BIRDS OF 978 1 77007 884 0 (PVC) SOUTHERN AFRICA 978 1 77584 730 4 GUIDE TO SEABIRDS OF CHECKLISTS SOUTHERN AFRICA Focusing exclusively on the 132 bird species that occur around the southern African Scan barcodes using coastline and adjacent Sasol eBirds NEW! your smart phone Southern Ocean. A must-have Southern and play bird calls for birding along the region’s Africa App 978 1 43170 085 1 SCAN using the free extensive coastline.
  • Diet and Microhabitat Use of the Woodland Dormouse Graphiurus Murinus at the Great Fish River Reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa

    Diet and Microhabitat Use of the Woodland Dormouse Graphiurus Murinus at the Great Fish River Reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa

    Diet and microhabitat use of the woodland dormouse Graphiurus murinus at the Great Fish River Reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa by Siviwe Lamani A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE (ZOOLOGY) in the Faculty of Science and Agriculture at the University of Fort Hare 2014 Supervisor: Ms Zimkitha Madikiza Co-supervisor: Prof. Emmanuel Do Linh San DECLARATION I Siviwe Lamani , student number 200604535 hereby declare that this dissertation titled “Diet and microhabitat use of the woodland dormouse Graphiurus murinus at the Great Fish River Reserve , Eastern Cape, South Africa” submitted for the award of the Master of Science degree in Zoology at the University of Fort Hare, is my own work that has never been submitted for any other degree at this university or any other university. Signature: I Siviwe Lamani , student number 200604535 hereby declare that I am fully aware of the University of Fort Hare policy on plagiarism and I have taken every precaution on complying with the regulations. Signature: I Siviwe Lamani , student number 200604535 hereby declare that I am fully aware of the University of Fort Hare policy on research ethics and have taken every precaution to comply with the regulations. The data presented in this dissertation were obtained in the framework of another project that was approved by the University Ethics committee on 31 May 2013 and is covered by the ethical clearance certificate # SAN05 1SGB02. Signature: ii SUPERVISOR’S FOREWORD The format of this Master’s dissertation (abstract, general introduction and two independent papers) has been chosen with two purposes in mind: first, to train the MSc candidate to the writing of scientific papers, and second, to secure and allow for a quicker dissemination of the scientific knowledge.
  • No Evidence for Proteolytic Venom Resistance in Southern African Ground Squirrels

    No Evidence for Proteolytic Venom Resistance in Southern African Ground Squirrels

    1 No evidence for proteolytic venom resistance in southern African ground squirrels Molly A. Phillips, Jane M. Waterman, Pg Du Plessis, Martin Smit, and Nigel C. Bennett Abstract Many species that interact with venomous snakes show resistances to their venoms. The family Sciuridae has several North American members that harass venomous snakes and show proteolytic resistances in their sera. We examined sera collected from an African ground squirrel (Xerus inauris) against two sympatric venomous snakes (Bitis arietans and Naja annulifera) and found no support for proteolytic resistance. Our results add to our understanding of the risks in predator defense within the family Sciuridae. Keywords: Xerus inauris; Bitis arietans; Naja annulifera; Venom; Venom resistance; Predator-prey Animal venoms are a complex mixture of proteins and peptides that induce many destructive physiological effects for a variety of purposes, including prey capture (Fry et al., 2008; Jansa and Voss, 2011), digestion (Thomas and Pough, 1979), and defense (Kardong, 1982). The evolution of venom in snakes is thought to be a major factor leading to the radiation of over 2500 advanced snake species (Vidal, 2002). Some animals that interact with venomous snakes have physiological resistance to venom. As a predator, the Indian grey mongoose (Herpestes edwardsii) is resistant to the haemorrhagic effects caused by the venom of many snake species (Tomihara et al., 1990). California ground squirrels (Spermophilus (Otospermophilus) beecheyi) defend against snake predation by mobbing and have resistance against the proteolytic activity of the venom from northern Pacific rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus) (Biardi, 2000). The Cape ground squirrel (Xerus inauris) is a ground-dwelling sciurid that inhabits the arid regions of southern Africa (Skurski and Waterman, 2005).
  • Felis Silvestris, Wild Cat

    Felis Silvestris, Wild Cat

    The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ ISSN 2307-8235 (online) IUCN 2008: T60354712A50652361 Felis silvestris, Wild Cat Assessment by: Yamaguchi, N., Kitchener, A., Driscoll, C. & Nussberger, B. View on www.iucnredlist.org Citation: Yamaguchi, N., Kitchener, A., Driscoll, C. & Nussberger, B. 2015. Felis silvestris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T60354712A50652361. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T60354712A50652361.en Copyright: © 2015 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; Microsoft; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; Wildscreen; and Zoological Society of London. If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information
  • 29 Figure8. the Limited Rank Hydrophilic Sedge and Grass Patches Within the Central Valley Bottom Wetland Provide Suitable Roost

    29 Figure8. the Limited Rank Hydrophilic Sedge and Grass Patches Within the Central Valley Bottom Wetland Provide Suitable Roost

    Figure8. The limited rank hydrophilic sedge and grass patches within the central valley bottom wetland provide suitable roosting and foraging habitat for African Grass Owls. The high levels of human disturbances on the site including hunting with dogs; severely restricts the likelihood of any nests and limits potential roosting suitability. The annual burning of the site restricts the vegetative cover along the valley bottom wetland. Off-road bikes, quads and vehicle tracks transverse the entire site as well as helicopter training and landing on the site and open areas to the south of the site adjacent to the Waterval cemetery. African Grass Owls are found exclusively in rank grass, typically, although not only, at fair altitudes. Grass Owls are secretive and nomadic breeding in permanent and seasonal vleis, which it vacates while hunting or post-breeding, although it will breed in any area of long grass and it is not necessarily associated with wetlands. It marshlands it is usually outnumbered by the more common Marsh Owl (Asio capensis) 10:1 (Tarboton et al. 1987). Grass Owls nest on the ground within a system of tunnels constructed in mostly tall grass; peak-breeding activity (February- April) tends to coincide with maximum grass cover (Steyn 1982). Grass Owls specialise in large rodent prey, particularly Otomys vlei rats, although a wide range of rodent prey species, including Rhabdomys, Praomys, Mus, and Suncus, are taken (Earle 1978). Some local and nomadic movements in response to fluctuating food supplies, fire and the availability of suitable habitat can be expected (Steyn 1982). The ecological requirements of this species make it susceptible to many land-use changes impacting contemporary South Africa.
  • CHAPTER 1: Introduction 1

    CHAPTER 1: Introduction 1

    University of Pretoria etd, Wilson K A (2006) Status and distribution of cheetah outside formal conservation areas in the Thabazimbi district, Limpopo province by Kelly-Anne Wilson Submitted in partial fulfilment for the requirements for the degree Magister Scientiae in Wildlife Management Centre for Wildlife Management Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences University of Pretoria Pretoria Supervisor: Prof. J. du P. Bothma Co-supervisor: Prof. G. H. Verdoorn February 2006 University of Pretoria etd, Wilson K A (2006) STATUS AND DISTRIBUTION OF CHEETAH OUTSIDE FORMAL CONSERVATION AREAS IN THE THABAZIMBI DISTRICT, LIMPOPO PROVINCE by Kelly-Anne Wilson Supervisor: Prof. Dr. J. du P. Bothma Co-supervisor: Prof. Dr. G. H. Verdoorn Centre for Wildlife Management Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences University of Pretoria Magister Scientiae (Wildlife Management) ABSTRACT The current status of the cheetah Acinonyx jubatus outside formal conservation areas in South Africa is undetermined. The largest part of the cheetah population in South Africa occurs on cattle and wildlife ranches. Conflict between cheetahs and landowners is common and cheetahs are often persecuted. Cheetah management and conservation efforts are hampered as little data are available on the free-roaming cheetah population. A questionnaire survey was done in the Thabazimbi district of the Limpopo province to collect data on the status and distribution of cheetahs in the district and on the ranching practices and attitudes of landowners. By using this method, a population estimate of 42 – 63 cheetahs was obtained. Camera trapping was done at a scent-marking post to investigate the marking behaviour of cheetahs. Seven different cheetahs were identified marking at one specific tree.
  • African Wildcat 1 African Wildcat

    African Wildcat 1 African Wildcat

    African Wildcat 1 African Wildcat African Wildcat[1] Scientific classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Carnivora Family: Felidae Genus: Felis Species: F. silvestris Subspecies: F. s. lybica Trinomial name Felis silvestris lybica Forster, 1770 The African wildcat (Felis silvestris lybica), also known as the desert cat, and Vaalboskat (Vaal-forest-cat) in Afrikaans, is a subspecies of the wildcat (F. silvestris). They appear to have diverged from the other subspecies about 131,000 years ago.[2] Some individual F. s. lybica were first domesticated about 10,000 years ago in the Middle East, and are among the ancestors of the domestic cat. Remains of domesticated cats have been included in human burials as far back as 9,500 years ago in Cyprus.[3] [4] Physical characteristics The African wildcat is sandy brown to yellow-grey in color, with black stripes on the tail. The fur is shorter than that of the European subspecies. It is also considerably smaller: the head-body length is 45 to 75 cm (17.7 to 29.5 inches), the tail 20 to 38 cm (7.87 to 15 inches), and the weight ranges from 3 to 6.5 kg (6.61 to 14.3 lbs). Distribution and habitat The African wildcat is found in Africa and in the Middle East, in a wide range of habitats: steppes, savannas and bushland. The sand cat (Felis margarita) is the species found in even more arid areas. Skull African Wildcat 2 Behaviour The African wildcat eats primarily mice, rats and other small mammals. When the opportunity arises, it also eats birds, reptiles, amphibians, and insects.
  • Civettictis Civetta (Schreber, 1776)

    Civettictis Civetta (Schreber, 1776)

    Civettictis civetta (Schreber, 1776) The African civet, Civettictis civetta is native to and widely distributed in Africa. It was probably introduced to Sao Tome & Principe with the weasel Mustela nivalis to control rodents. African civets occupy a range of habitats including secondary forest, woodland, bush habitats as well as aquatic habitats. They are not common in interior forest habitats but thrive in degraded and deforested areas. They have been recorded at altitudes up to 5000 m asl on Mt Kilimanjaro The Guinea Lidless Skink (Afroablepharus africana) is classified as ‘Vulnerable (VU)’ in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. It is restricted to three locations on the islands of Sâo Tomé, Principé, and Rolas in the Gulf of Guinea. The main threats to this species are suspected to be loss of habitat through deforestation and predation Photo credit: Brianna Hackler by introduced mammals. Introduced mammals on these islands include the African civet, Norway rat (Rattus bocagei); the Sao Tome Canary (Neospiza concolor) and the norvegicus) ship rat (Rattus rattus), House mouse (Mus Sao Tome Fiscal (Lanius newtoni) are under threat of loss musculus), Mona monkey (Cercopithecus mona) and of habitat and potential predation by introduced mammals weasel. that include the African civet, ship rat, house mouse, Mona Declining populations of three endemic and ‘Critically monkey and weasel. Feral pigs (Sus scrofa) are also present Endangered (CR)’ birds the Sao Tome Ibis (Bostrychia and could be a threat. References: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2 ISSG 2012. Global Invasive Species Database Click here to view archives of previous weeks’ species.
  • Quaternary Murid Rodents of Timor Part I: New Material of Coryphomys Buehleri Schaub, 1937, and Description of a Second Species of the Genus

    Quaternary Murid Rodents of Timor Part I: New Material of Coryphomys Buehleri Schaub, 1937, and Description of a Second Species of the Genus

    QUATERNARY MURID RODENTS OF TIMOR PART I: NEW MATERIAL OF CORYPHOMYS BUEHLERI SCHAUB, 1937, AND DESCRIPTION OF A SECOND SPECIES OF THE GENUS K. P. APLIN Australian National Wildlife Collection, CSIRO Division of Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra and Division of Vertebrate Zoology (Mammalogy) American Museum of Natural History ([email protected]) K. M. HELGEN Department of Vertebrate Zoology National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington and Division of Vertebrate Zoology (Mammalogy) American Museum of Natural History ([email protected]) BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY Number 341, 80 pp., 21 figures, 4 tables Issued July 21, 2010 Copyright E American Museum of Natural History 2010 ISSN 0003-0090 CONTENTS Abstract.......................................................... 3 Introduction . ...................................................... 3 The environmental context ........................................... 5 Materialsandmethods.............................................. 7 Systematics....................................................... 11 Coryphomys Schaub, 1937 ........................................... 11 Coryphomys buehleri Schaub, 1937 . ................................... 12 Extended description of Coryphomys buehleri............................ 12 Coryphomys musseri, sp.nov.......................................... 25 Description.................................................... 26 Coryphomys, sp.indet.............................................. 34 Discussion . ....................................................
  • Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forests in Indonesia

    Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forests in Indonesia

    Report on Biodiversity and Tropical Forests in Indonesia Submitted in accordance with Foreign Assistance Act Sections 118/119 February 20, 2004 Prepared for USAID/Indonesia Jl. Medan Merdeka Selatan No. 3-5 Jakarta 10110 Indonesia Prepared by Steve Rhee, M.E.Sc. Darrell Kitchener, Ph.D. Tim Brown, Ph.D. Reed Merrill, M.Sc. Russ Dilts, Ph.D. Stacey Tighe, Ph.D. Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. v List of Figures............................................................................................................................... vii Acronyms....................................................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... xvii 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................1- 1 2. Legislative and Institutional Structure Affecting Biological Resources...............................2 - 1 2.1 Government of Indonesia................................................................................................2 - 2 2.1.1 Legislative Basis for Protection and Management of Biodiversity and
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2018-2019)

    Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2018-2019)

    IUCN Red List version 2019-3: Table 7 Last Updated: 10 December 2019 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2018-2019) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2018 (IUCN Red List version 2018-2) and 2019 (IUCN Red List version 2019-3) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered [CR(PE) - Critically Endangered (Possibly Extinct), CR(PEW) - Critically Endangered (Possibly Extinct in the Wild)], EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2018) List (2019) change version Category