Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

Facultad de Ciencias Carrera de Biología

Estado de conocimiento de especies de pequeños carnívoros amenazados (En peligro crítico y En peligro) y Deficientes de datos a nivel mundial

Autora: María Juliana Santanilla Díaz

Dirección: José F. González-Maya Ph.D.

Codirección: Jairo Pérez-Torres Ph.D.

Mayo 2021

ESTADO DE CONOCIMIENTO DE ESPECIES DE PEQUEÑOS CARNÍVOROS AMENAZADOS (EN PELIGRO CRÍTICO Y EN PELIGRO) Y DEFICIENTES DE DATOS A NIVEL MUNDIAL

1. Justificación y planteamiento del problema

La UICN (Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza) genera la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas (Red List of Threatened Species) utilizada como mecanismo principal de clasificación del riesgo de extinción de especies y es el instrumento más utilizado como referente para la toma de decisiones de conservación específicas a nivel global (Hoffmann et al., 2008; Rodrigues et al., 2006). La lista roja ha servido no sólo para identificar las especies con mayores riesgos de extinción sino también para guiar las estrategias de conservación identificando hábitats prioritarios para las diferentes especies, sitios para ser conservados y las acciones requeridas para ello (Hoffmann et al., 2008). Las organizaciones ambientales internacionales, gubernamentales y no gubernamentales de diferentes partes del mundo consideran la categoría de peligro de extinción de las especies asignada por la UICN como parámetro para asignar recursos financieros para la conservación (Morais et al., 2013). Por esta razón, es de suma importancia la identificación de vacíos de información que puedan dilucidar los esfuerzos de investigación requeridos a futuro para la obtención de información clave del estado de amenaza, del estado de las poblaciones de las diferentes especies y, finalmente, definir prioridades y acciones de conservación. La importancia que se le da a la lista roja es cada vez más significativa ya que esta informa de prioridades de investigación y conservación, influencia la legislación y guía las inversiones para la conservación (Hoffmann et al., 2008). La lista roja contiene categorías diferenciales y ordinales de amenaza para cada especie, donde a cada una se le otorga una categoría y riesgo de extinción a partir del contraste de cierta información de la especie con criterios de evaluación que incluyen parámetros basados en tamaño poblacional, área de ocupación, entre otros (UICN, 2012). Las especies categorizadas como deficientes de datos (Data Deficient), son aquellas cuya información es poco adecuada para realizar una evaluación acerca de su riesgo de extinción. Dentro del orden , los carnívoros pequeños son un grupo de mamíferos bastante amplio y diverso pertenecientes a las familias , , Herpestidae, , , Nandiniidae, Prionodontidae, y (Willcox, 2020). Algunas de las amenazas más importantes para este grupo de mamíferos en el mundo es la pérdida de hábitat, la caza y el tráfico ilegal (Marneweck et.al., 2021). Aunque la mayoría de las especies de pequeños carnívoros pueden estar en categorías como Preocupación Menor (LC) o Casi Amenazado (NT), algunas son consideradas como prioritarias de conservación por encontrarse en regiones o países donde generar acciones de conservación puede ser complicado (Willcox, 2020). En este trabajo, se busca identificar los vacíos de información para especies de carnívoros pequeños categorizados como Datos Deficientes y amenazadas dentro de las categorías En Peligro Crítico (CR) y En Peligro (EN) a nivel mundial, y realizar una descripción de la distribución de las especies. Lo anterior, para obtener un panorama más amplio acerca de los vacíos de información existentes, las prioridades de investigación y conservación a futuro. Además, contrastará la información obtenida de las especies con Datos insuficientes con los criterios de evaluación de la lista roja para identificar vacíos de información existentes que pueden impedir la categorización de dichas especies.

1. Referentes conceptuales

1.1. Pequeños carnívoros

Los pequeños carnívoros son un amplio y diverso grupo de mamíferos del orden Carnivora, tanto así, que se ha reportado mayor riqueza de especies y diversidad ecológica de carnívoros pequeños y medianos con respecto a los grandes carnívoros (Roemer et.al, 2009). El grupo de los pequeños carnívoros está conformado por especies pertenecientes a las familias Ailuridae, Eupleridae, Herpestidae, Mephitidae, Mustelidae, Nandiniidae, Prionodontidae, Procyonidae y Viverridae (Willcox, 2020). Al ser diversas a nivel ecológico, se pueden encontrar especies solitarias o sociales, frugívoras o hipercarnívoras, especialistas o generalistas, entre otros (Roemer et.al, 2009).

La familia Ailuridae está conformada por el panda rojo (Ailurus fulgens) del género Ailurus. En muchos casos ha sido considerada como una familia monotípica, sin embargo, existe un gran debate alrededor de la taxonomía y filogenia de esta especie (Roberts & Gittleman, 1984; Glatston, 1994). Se distribuye en países del continente asiático como Bután, China, India, Myanmar y Nepal (Glatston et.al., 2017). A. fulgens es una especie herbívora y su dieta se basa principalmente en hojas y plántulas de bamboo (Wei & Zhang, 2011).

La familia Eupleridae se conforma por siete géneros de carnívoros endémicos de Madagascar, y se divide en dos subfamilias: Euplerinae (Cryptoprocta, y ) y (Galidia, , Mungotictis y ) (Veron et.al., 2017). Algunas especies de dichos géneros anteriormente fueron clasificados dentro de las familias Viverridae y Herpestidae (Veron et.al., 2017), sin embargo, a partir de la investigación realizada por Yoder et.al., (2003), se conoce que los carnívoros de Madagascar conforman un grupo monofilético.

Las mangostas, especies pertenecientes a la familia Herpestidae, se distribuyen principalmente en África y Asia (Patou et.al., 2009). La familia Herpestidae está conformada por los géneros: Atilax, , , Cynictis, Dologale, , , Ichneumia, Liberiictis, , Paracynictis, Rhynchogale y Suricata (Church et.al., 2018). Se han realizado trabajos a nivel filogenético para determinar si los grupos de mangostas eusociales, que conviven en grupos sociales estables como las especies del género Suricata, pertenecen a un clado monofilético con respecto a las especies solitarias (Veron et.al., 2004; Patou et.al., 2009).

Los mefítidos, conocidos como zorrillos o mofetas, pertenecen a la familia Mephitidae y se distribuyen principalmente en América (Schiaffini & Prevosti, 2019). La familia Mephitidae está conformada por tres géneros: Conepatus, y Spilogale, de los cuáles, el primero se distribuye principalmente en Suramérica mientras que los otros se distribuyen principalmente en Norte y Centroamérica (Schiaffini & Prevosti, 2019; Dragoo, 2009).

La familia Mustelidae está conformada por ocho subfamilias: Lutrinae, Melinae, Mellivorinae, Taxidiinae, Helictidinae, , Ictonychinae, Guloninae (Koepfli et.al., 2008; Yu et.al., 2011; Boukhdoud et.al., 2021; Valenciano et.al, 2020). Esta familia es la más diversa y grande dentro del orden Carnivora (Yu et.al., 2011) contemplando dentro de esta a animales como las nutrias, comadrejas y tejones, entre otros (Koepfli et.al., 2008). Existe una gran controversia alrededor de las relaciones filogenéticas de las subfamilias dentro de Mustelidae debido a su radiación evolutiva y los recientes eventos de especiación (Yu et.al., 2011).

La familia Nandiniidae está conformada por el género Nandinia con una sola especie representativa del género, la civeta africana de las palmeras, Nandinia binotata (Kingdon, 2015; Hassanin, 2016). Estudios filogenéticos y moleculares indican que esta familia hace parte del suborden Feliforma y es el grupo hermano del clado que contiene familias como , Eupleridae, Herpestidae, Hyaenidae, Prionodontidae y Viverridae (Gaubert & Cordeiro-Estrela, 2006; Kingdon, 2015). Son animales arbóreos y nocturnos, se distribuyen principalmente en bosque del este, centro y oeste de África (Kingdon, 2015).

La familia Prionodontidae está compuesta por un solo género, Prionodon. Este género era considerado como parte de la familia Viverridae, sin embargo, análisis filogenéticos posteriores sugieren que estos pertenecen a la familia Prionodontidae, grupo hermano a la familia Felidae (Gaubert & Veron, 2003; Zhou et.al., 2017). Se distribuyen en el continente asiático y el género se compone por dos especies: Prionodon linsang y Prionodon pardicolor (Veron, 2007).

La familia Procyonidae se distribuye a lo largo de América y alberga a especies tales como mapaches, olingos y coatíes, entre otros (Koepfli et.al. 2007). Está compuesta por seis géneros: , , , , Potos y (Church et.al. 2018, Koepfli et.al., 2007). Se caracterizan por tener denticiones características de hipocarnívoros y las especies de los géneros Nasua, Procyon y Bassariscus tienden a tener colas anilladas y manchas en el rostro que se asemejan a un antifaz, mientras que en los otros géneros estas características pueden ser nulas o reducidas (Koepfli et.al., 2007)

Por último, la familia Viverridae, que comprende especies tales como civetas y jinetas, se distribuyen principalmente en el continente asiático y africano (Gaubert & Cordeiro-Estrela, 2006). Está compuesta por tres subfamilias: , y (Gaubert & Cordeiro-Estrela, 2006). Dentro de dichas subfamilias se encuentran los géneros: Arctictis, Arctogalidia, Chrotogale, Civettictis, Cynogale, Diplogale, Genetta, Hemigalus, Macrogalidia, Paguma, , , y Viverricula (Church et.al, 2018).

1.2. Lista Roja de Especies Amenazas de la UICN La Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la naturaleza (UICN), es uno de los instrumentos más utilizados a nivel mundial para la clasificación de especies según su riesgo de extinción (Rodrigues et.al, 2006). Las especies son clasificadas utilizando información acerca de su distribución, estado poblacional, historia de vida, y así aplicar criterios determinados por la UICN para generar una valoración con respecto al riesgo de extinción (UICN, 2012; Rodrigues et.al., 2006). La Lista Roja de la UICN más allá de solo asignar una categoría a cada especie, es una herramienta utilizada por entidades gubernamentales nacionales e internacionales para asignar recursos financieros para la conservación de la biodiversidad (Rodrigues et.al., 2006; Hoffman et.al., 2008). Además, en muchos casos, algunas empresas consultan dicha lista para la óptima toma de decisiones con respecto sus actividades, para sus procesos de licenciamientos ambientales y en general como información base para minimizar el impacto de estas en la fauna silvestre y en los ecosistemas amenazados (Bennun et.al., 2008). 1.2.1. Categorías de amenaza Las categorías de amenaza son asignadas a las diferentes especies de acuerdo con la evaluación de la información contrastada con los criterios de evaluación que incluyen factores como la distribución, tamaño poblacional, entre otros (UICN, 2012). Las categorías siguen una clasificación ordinal de mayor a menor riesgo de extinción (Figura i, de acuerdo con la probabilidad de extinción de una especie de acuerdo con los criterios y en una escala de tiempo ajustada a la especie (i.e., usualmente 30 años o 3 generaciones). Dentro de las especies evaluadas frente a los criterios, existen siete categorías de riesgo de extinción (UICN, 2012): Una especie se categoriza como Extinta (EX) cuando se tiene la certeza de que el último individuo de la especie ha muerto. Luego de realizar investigaciones exhaustivas dentro del hábitat donde se encontraba, no se encuentran evidencias ni registros de individuos. Se considera como Extinta en Estado Salvaje (EW) aquella especie cuyos individuos se encuentran principalmente en cautiverio o las poblaciones naturalizadas se encuentran fuera del rango de distribución original. Luego de múltiples investigaciones, no se encuentran individuos en vida salvaje (UICN, 2012) Las especies amenazadas categorizadas como En Peligro Crítico (CR), En peligro (EN) y Vulnerable (VU) son especies cuya información disponible se contrasta con los criterios A hasta E. A partir de información disponible de la especie y datos tales como área de ocupación (km2), porcentaje de reducción de población, número de individuos maduros, entre otros, según el valor de estos se asignará a una categoría. Por ejemplo, el número de individuos maduros para una especie si es < 250, será considerado como en peligro crítico, <2.500 será categorizado como En Peligro y < 10.000 se considera como Vulnerable (UICN, 2012) Finalmente, según la UICN, 2012, las especies categorizadas como Casi Amenazada (NT) son aquellas cuya información contrastada con los criterios no califica dentro de ninguna categoría de amenaza, pero puede estar cercana a calificar en alguna de las categorías de amenaza. Especies categorizadas como Preocupación Menor (LC) no calificas dentro de ninguna categoría de amenaza y generalmente son taxones ampliamente distribuidos y abundantes. Las especies categorizadas como con Datos Insuficientes o Data Deficient (DD), son aquellas cuya información no es adecuada para realizar una evaluación directa o indirecta de su riesgo de extinción (UICN, 2012). Existen además especies No Evaluadas (NE) las cuales son aquellas que no han sido clasificadas y cuya información no ha sido contrastada con los criterios (UICN, 2012).

Figura i. Categorías de amenaza de la lista roja de la UICN. Tomada de: (UICN, 2012) 1.2.2. Criterios de evaluación IUCN La evaluación de riesgo de extinción y amenaza de las especies está determinada por cinco criterios (A-E) propuestos por la UICN. Para realizar la evaluación de pertenencia de una especie dentro de las categorías de amenaza (CR, EN y VU), se debe contrastar la información con los criterios propuestos (UICN, 2012): El criterio A consiste en la reducción del tamaño poblacional, se realiza la evaluación de acuerdo con los respectivos subcriterios. El criterio B consiste en la distribución geográfica de la especie representada como extensión de presencia (subcriterio B1) y/o área de ocupación (subcriterio B2) en 푘푚2. El criterio C consiste en el tamaño de población y disminución de esta de acuerdo con el número de individuos maduros. El criterio D consiste en identificación de poblaciones muy pequeñas o restringidas. Y finalmente, el criterio E que consiste en análisis cuantitativo de estimación de probabilidad de extinción realizados a partir de información relacionada con historia natural, amenazas, requerimientos de hábitat, entre otros (UICN, 2012). Una vez contrastada la información disponible para cada especie frente a los criterios, cada categoría de amenaza corresponde con umbrales específicos para cada criterio, de forma que permite su clasificación.

2. Pregunta de Investigación ¿Cuál es el estado de conocimiento y vacíos de información referente a especies de pequeños carnívoros categorizados como amenazados (En Peligro Crítico y En Peligro) y Datos Deficientes (DD) a nivel mundial?

3. Objetivos Objetivo general: Evaluar el estado de conocimiento de pequeños carnívoros en categorías de amenaza (En Peligro Crítico y En Peligro) y Datos Deficientes del mundo para generar estrategias de investigación al identificar posibles vacíos de información. Objetivos específicos: 1. Definir el estado de conocimiento de las diferentes especies de carnívoros pequeños categorizados como amenazados (CR y EN) y Datos Deficientes a nivel global. 2. Analizar información acerca de la distribución y registros de presencia de las diferentes especies de carnívoros pequeños categorizados como Datos Deficientes a nivel global. 3. Contrastar información obtenida para las especies categorizadas como Datos Deficientes con parámetros de la IUCN, definiendo prioridades de investigación e identificando vacíos de información.

4. Artículo Científico

STATE OF KNOWLEDGE OF THREATENED (CRITICALLY ENDANGERED AND ENDANGERED) AND DATA DEFICIENT SMALL CARNIVORE SPECIES WORLDWIDE María Juliana Santanilla Díaz1, Jairo Pérez-Torres1, José F. González-Maya2, 3 1Laboratorio de Ecología Funcional, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia. 2Proyecto de Conservación de Aguas y Tierras – ProCAT Colombia, Carrera 11 # 96-43, Of. 303, Bogotá, Colombia. 3Departamento de Ciencias Ambientales, División de Ciencias Biológicas y de la Salud, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Unidad Lerma, Lerma de Villada, C. P. 52005, Estado de México, México. Abstract Small carnivores, comprised within the order Carnivora, are a diverse group of in which 172 species had been assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened species. The state of knowledge of Data Deficient, Critically Endangered and Endangered species was evaluated based on literature research on databases and a theme-based literature classification. Data deficient species lack information primarily for ecology, conservation and threats. The main reasons for a species being classified as data deficient are, taxonomic uncertainty or sociopolitical aspects that limits scientific research in multiple countries. For the African endangered species there is not enough knowledge and research compared with endangered species from America and Asia. Some of the Asian species occur in Carnivore hotspots in south Asia. There is little information and awareness about ecology, threats, conservation, and management of some of the species around the world such as Dologale dybowskii, Nasuella meridensis, Eupleres major, Melogale everetti which shows a lack of conservation action plans in many countries. Resumen Los pequeños carnívoros pertenecientes al orden Carnivora, son un diverso grupo de mamíferos de los cuales 172 especies están evaluadas por la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN. El estado de conocimiento de especies categorizadas con Datos Insuficientes, En Peligro Crítico y En Peligro, fue evaluado basado en una búsqueda bibliográfica en bases de datos y una clasificación por temas de la literatura encontrada. Las especies con Datos Insuficientes cuentan con poca información principalmente acerca de su ecología, conservación y amenazas. Las razones principales que explican su insuficiencia de datos, en algunos casos, son incertidumbres taxonómicas o factores sociopolíticos en algunos países que limitan la realización de investigación científica. Existe poca información acerca de las especies africanas categorizadas como En Peligro en comparación con las especies americanas y asiáticas evaluadas dentro de la misma categoría. Algunas especies asiáticas se distribuyen dentro de lugares considerados como “hotspots” de carnívoros en el sur de Asia. La poca información acerca de la ecología, amenazas y conservación y manejo acerca de muchas de las especies tales como Dologale dybowskii, Nasuella meridensis, Eupleres major, Melogale everetti muestra la falta de acciones de conservación en muchos de los países donde se distribuyen. Keywords: distribution, threats, conservation, small carnivores.

Introduction Willcox (2020) defines small carnivores as mammals from the order Carnivora comprised in the families Ailuridae, Eupleridae, Herpestidae, Mephitidae, Mustelidae, Nandiniidae, Prionodontidae, Procyonidae and Viverridae. In 2015, a total of 172 small carnivore species were assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species resulting in six (6) species classified as Data Deficient (DD), 15 species categorized as Endangered (EN), and three species categorized as Critically Endangered (CR) (González-Maya, 2018). Although the majority of the small carnivore species are categorized as Least Concern (LC) or Near Threatened (NT) (Willcox, 2020), increasing the knowledge around the status of small carnivores is important due to the roles they play in the ecosystems (Roemer, et.al., 2009). Usually, large carnivores are important top predators that exert top-down effects on herbivores (Ripple & Beschta, 2012) and mesopredators like small carnivores (Ritchie & Johnson, 2009), but small carnivores might also exert top-down pressure on herbivores in some ecosystems where large apex predators were lost (Kilgo et.al, 2012). In addition, they provide ecosystem services such as seed dispersal (Jordano et.al., 2007), population control (Baudrot et.al., 2020) and control of invasive species (Twining et.al., 2021). The main threats for small carnivores around the world include overexploitation and habitat loss, mostly derived from activities such as hunting or deforestation, threats derived from agriculture and aquaculture, residential and commercial development, invasive species, introgression of genes that are not native of the populations and diseases, transportation and service corridors, among others (Marneweck et.al., 2021). These threats reduce species populations; therefore, it is important to identify species-level threats and their effects because the lack of this type of information prevents a proper development of conservation actions for small carnivore species (Marneweck et.al., 2021). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is one of the most important and reliable resources that are currently available that provides an assessment of the extinction risk and conservation status for global biodiversity (Schipper et.al., 2008; Rodrigues et.al, 2006). This Red List is highly consulted by governmental and non- governmental organizations to guide conservation investment and priorities, and influence legislation and decision-making (Hoffmann et.al., 2008). In some cases, the Red List provide information to guide conservation actions focused on species according to their threat categorization and risk of extinction (Rodrigues et.al., 2006). Species classified as Data Deficient present inadequate information to make an assessment; therefore, it must not be considered as a category of threat but as an indicator of lack of information and highlights further research is required (IUCN, 2012). These little studied species are usually not conservation priorities due to the shortage of knowledge around them. The uncertainty regarding the species populations status can be considered as a “silent extinction risk” due to little research or understanding of the species real potential extinction risk (Howard & Bickford, 2014). Therefore, it should be a priority to overcome these information gaps for better understanding of the extinction risk of Data Deficient species and include them in conservation plans. Regarding the importance of the species category of threat and the understanding of the extinction risk, is it important to identify gaps of information and state of knowledge of not only threatened species but Data Deficient species to identify research priorities. Defining the state of general knowledge for Endangered and Critically Endangered species might help to elucidate if there is an understanding on the threats and a subsequent conservation and management plans regarding key information such as the ecology of the species. For the Data Deficient species, defining the state of general knowledge might exhibit the key information missing for an adequate assessment and categorization of the species for a future inclusion in conservation and management plans. Methodology A thorough review of scientific papers and literature was conducted for all the available information on 24 species of small carnivores (Table 1) categorized by the IUCN as threatened (Critically Endangered and Endangered) and Data Deficient, around the world. Databases such as ScienceDirect, Scopus, SpringerLink, Web of Science and JSTOR were used as well as search engines, and libraries. The keywords searched were the scientific and common names of the species in addition to the synonyms provided by the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS).

Table 1. Small carnivore species covered by literature review in this work. CR: Critically Endangered. EN: Endangered. DD: Data Deficient.

IUCN Family Species Category Ailuridae Ailurus fulgens EN Eupleres major EN Galidictis grandidieri EN Eupleridae Mungotictis EN decemlineata Herpestidae Dologale dybowskii DD Enhydra lutris EN felina EN Lontra provocax EN sumatrana EN Melogale DD cucphuongensis Mustelidae Melogale everetti EN Mustela lutreola CR Mustela nigripes EN Mustela russelliana DD Mustela tonkinensis DD Pteronura EN brasiliensis Nasuella meridensis EN Procyonidae Procyon pygmaeus CR Chrotogale owstoni EN Cynogale bennettii EN Genetta abyssinica DD Viverridae Genetta poensis DD Viverra civettina CR Viverra megaspila EN For species with taxonomic uncertainty such as Mustela tonkinensis, considered in many papers as a subspecies of Mustela nivalis (Smith et.al, 2008; Abramov & Baryshnikov, 2000), bibliographic records and geographic occurrences for Mustela nivalis in distribution areas for M. tonkinensis in Tonkin, Vietnam were considered as records for this species. Mustela russelliana, as well as M. tonkinensis, is considered in many papers as a subspecies of Mustela nivalis (Smith et.al, 2008; Abramov & Baryshnikov, 2000). Therefore, bibliographic records and geographic occurrences for Mustela nivalis in distribution areas for M. russelliana, in Sichuan Province, China were considered as records for this species. Likewise, records and occurrences for Nasuella olivacea in the Venezuelan are here regarded as Nasuella meridensis. The Malagasy species Eupleres major was considered as a subspecies for Eupleres goudotti but Goodman & Helgen (2010) determined they should be considered as different species due to morphological evidence. Records and occurrences for E. goudotti in distribution areas for E. major in the west of Madagascar, were considered as records for this species. According to the IUCN assessment, these formerly considered as subspecies should be regarded as species and so it was done in this work. Subsequently, a modified theme-based classification proposed by Andrade-Ponce et al., (2016) was made for each piece of literature. The classification consists of seven general subjects: 1. Threats and relation with humans. 2. Anatomy, Morphology and Physiology. 3. Distribution and Occurrences. 4. Ecology 5. Generalities 6. and Systematics. 7. Genetics. For some of these themes there are sub-topics identified (Table 2) Table 2. Theme-based literature organization for assessing the state of knowledge of small carnivores globally.

A. Threats and Threats relation with Conservation and Management humans Medicine, Parasites and Pathologies B. Anatomy, Anatomy, Morphology and Physiology morphology and physiology C. Distribution and Distribution and Occurrences occurrences D. Ecology Use of habitat Diet and trophic relations Behavior Populations and Abundance Others E. Generalities Generalities F. Taxonomy and Taxonomy and Systematics systematics G. Genetics Genetics

Based on the classification of each piece of literature found for each species, a visual and graphic representation was made to identify the quantity of information and literature found for each theme and subtopic. Henceforth, a state of knowledge and information gaps description was made for each species to elucidate the investigation priorities for each of them. For the six Data Deficient species, a compilation of occurrences was made with geographic records provided by GBIF and literature consulted, for a subsequent detailed description of the distribution of each species. Finally, using the geographic records and the information provided by the literature found, an evaluation and contrast with IUCN assessment criteria was made for each of the Data Deficient species for the identification of information gaps that prevent a proper assessment process. Results We obtained a total of 1370 open access documents distributed in 5 databases, Web of Science, SpringerLink, Scopus, ScienceDirect and JSTOR. The species with the largest number of documents was Enhydra lutris with 294 documents found, followed by Mustela lutreola, while for species such as Mustela tonkinensis, Nasuella meridensis and Melogale everetti only between 8 and 9 documents were found. In terms of records, we found a total of 8989 records, distributed globally (Figure 1), where 8640 were obtained from GBIF and 273 from literature. The family with the largest number of records was Mustelidae while the lowest number was found for the Herpestidae family; in terms of species, Enhydra lutris concentrated the largest number of records (6949) while only one record was found for Nasuella meridensis, and two records for Genetta poensis and Mustela tonkinensis (Table 3).

Table 3. Geographic records and number of open access articles found for each species.

IUCN Category Species Geographic Number of records articles Data Deficient Dologale dybowskii 14 30 Genetta abyssinica 19 36 Genetta poensis 2 31 Melogale cucphuongensis 2 13 Mustela russelliana 3 11 Mustela tonkinensis 2 8 Critically Endangered Mustela lutreola 671 164 Procyon pygmaeus 15 45 Viverra civettina 0 17 Endangered Enhydra lutris 6949 294 Lontra felina 174 61 Lontra provocax 144 40 Mustela nigripes 159 117 Nasuella meridensis 1 9 Pteronura brasiliensis 471 107 Ailurus fulgens 71 162 Lutra sumatrana 7 32 Melogale everetti 8 9 Chrotogale owstoni 7 41 Cynogale bennettii 18 29 Viverra megaspila 96 52 Eupleres major 20 12 Galidictis grandidieri 47 15 Mungotictis decemlineata 16 35

Figure 1. Distribution of records for 24 species of small carnivore records included in this study. Data Deficient species

Figure 2. Graphic representation of the state of knowledge on the six small carnivore Data Deficient species according to the theme-based classification of the literature found. A. Dologale dybowskii. B. Genetta abyssinica. C. Genetta poensis. D. Melogale cucphuongensis. E. Mustela russelliana. F. Mustela tonkinensis

Dologale dybowskii The Pousargue’s is the only species in the genus Dologale (Woolgar, 2014) and it is one of the least studied small carnivores in Africa, due to the few records of the species in the last decades (San et.al., 2013). Based on the literature reviewed, Dologale dybowskii presents greater knowledge regarding information of distribution and occurrences (n=10), followed by taxonomy and systematics and generalities (Figure 2a). There are information gaps for the ecology of the species in general, as well as little knowledge concerning Conservation and Threats. Dologale dybowskii is distributed in Central Africa (Figure 3) along the Central African Republic (CAR), reported in the northeastern part of the DRC towards the border with South Sudan in the Garamba National Park (Verschuren, 1958). It has also been reported in the northwest and central Uganda (Kingdon, 2015), on the eastern border of the Semliki Wildlife Reserve in Uganda near Lake Albert (Woolgar, 2014). The lack of information about the current population status and size, estimated number of mature individuals and threats, prevents a proper evaluation with the IUCN assessment criterions A-D. The species few sightings might be related to the confusion with the Common Dwarf Moongose (Helogale parvula) (Aebischer et.al., 2015). The species range is considered as relatively stable (Aebischer et.al., 2015), but further research is necessary on the aspects previously mentioned. A total of 14 records were obtained for the species (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Distribution records for Dologale dybowskii. Genetta abyssinica The Abyssinian or Ethiopian genet (Genetta abyssinica) is an African species distributed in countries such as Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan (Figure 4), in the horn of Africa (Gaubert at.al, 2016). According to the characterization of the literature found, this species presents a major knowledge on Distribution and Occurrences (n=18), followed by Taxonomy and Systematics (n=9) (Figure 2b). There are information gaps regarding the ecology of the species because it is poorly studied (Ferguson et.al., 2019) and there is no information regarding the genetics of the species and populations. There are ecological niche predictions of this species provided by Papeş & Gaubert (2007), that presume that the most suitable range for G. abyssinica are the Eritrean grasslands and the deciduous-shrubland and montane forest in western Ethiopia. Furthermore, little is known about the threats and relation with humans even though they might occur near villages where they predate on village chickens (Markos et.al., 2014) or crop areas (Papeş & Gaubert, 2007). The species is known for only 18 museum specimens (Ferguson et.al., 2019) and is assessed as Data Deficient due to the little information on population status and size, estimated number of mature individuals, range, exact distribution and threats (Gaubert et.al., 2016) which prevents a proper evaluation with IUCN assessment criterions A-D. The species has been reported within a large distribution over various habitats such as the Ethiopian highlands, forested areas of the plateaus, lowlands of Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti and Eritrea (Diaz Behrens & Van Rompaey, 2002) but the species is considered as rare (Gaubert et.al., 2016) and in some cases it has been confused or misidentified as the Common Genet, Genetta genetta (Gaubert et.al., 2009). A total of 19 records were obtained for the species (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Distribution records for Genetta abyssinica. Genetta poensis The King genet (Genetta poensis) is distributed in the African countries of Congo, Côte D’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Ghana and Liberia (Gaubert & Do Lihn San, 2015) in the west part of Africa (Figure 5). According to the classification of the literature and articles available and the graphic representation, there is a greater knowledge of Distribution and Occurrences (n=10) in comparison with other themes, but in this case, there are certainly more records of threats (n=6) of G. poensis in comparison to the other Data Deficient species (Figure 2c). There is a possible threat recorded for G. poensis regarding hunting for local markets such as the Omagwa Bushmeat Market in Nigeria where there have been registered an important number of carcasses for the species over the years (Anadu et.al., 1988; Okiwelu et.al., 2009; Okiwelu et.al., 2010; Noutcha et.al., 2020). However, there are not confirmed sightings of the species since 1946 (Gaubert & Do Linh San, 2015). Nonetheless, there are no conservation and management records available for the species showing that it is certainly not clear the real impact of the hunting pressure exerted on the species populations. The species is known for only 10 museum specimens with no recent confirmed records since 1946. Although there are some articles in which they claim the species have been hunted in the past decades for the bushmeat markets (Anadu et.al., 1988; Okiwelu et.al., 2009; Okiwelu et.al., 2010; Noutcha et.al., 2020), this is not confirmed. As there are not recent records, the population status and size, number of mature individuals, range and possible threats are unknown which prevents a proper evaluation with criterions A-D. A total of 2 records were obtained for the species (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Distribution records for Genetta poensis. Melogale cucphuongensis The Vietnam -bagder (Melogale cucphuongensis) is distributed in Ninh Binh Province, Vietnam (Figure 6), in the Cuc Phuong National Park which is the only known place where the species might occur (Nadler et.al., 2011). This species was recently described by Nadler et.al., (2011), therefore it is a poorly known species. It appears to be the sister lineage to the clade containing M. personata and M. moschata (Nadler et.al, 2011; Rozhnov et.al, 2019). According to the classification of the literature available, there is a greater knowledge around the taxonomy and systematics (Figure 2d) due to the investigations around the phylogeny of the newly described species. There is no information concerning threats and conservation and management. However, the area M. cucphuongensis inhabits presents a high habitat loss and degradation along with hunting activities but the species resilience is still unknown (Helgen & Long, 2016). The fact that this species has been recently described, might explain the lack of information found. The species is known from its type locality in the Cuc Phuong Park in Viet Nam and there is no information on its current status and threats and according to the IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee (2019), in this case, the species must be considered as Data Deficient. Population status and size, number of mature individuals, range and possible threats are unknown which prevents a proper evaluation with IUCN assessment criterions A-D. A total of 1 record was obtained for the species (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Distribution records for Melogale cucphuongensis. Mustela russelliana and Mustela tonkinensis The Sichuan (Mustela russelliana) is distributed in the Province of Sichuan, in China (Lin et.al., 2010) (Figure 7). Although there are few records and literature around this species, the greatest knowledge is about the distribution and occurrences followed by taxonomy and systematics (Figure 2e) The Tonkin weasel (Mustela tonkinensis) is distributed in Tonkin, Viet Nam (Lin et.al., 2010) (Figure 7). It is a poorly known species, and the majority of studies are focused on taxonomy and systematics (Figure 2f). These species are still considered by some as subspecies of the Least weasel (Mustela nivalis) (Smith et.al, 2008; Abramov & Baryshnikov, 2000) and probably, the taxonomic uncertainty can partially explain the little knowledge around the ecology, genetics, threats and conservation of the two species. According to Lin et.al. (2010), the specimens from M. russelliana and M. tonkinensis are evidently distinct to M. nivalis due to the morphological differences in the shape of skulls and ratios of body length. In addition, they occur in northern Viet Nam (M. tonkinensis) and southern China (M. russelliana), isolated from the main continuous distribution range of M. nivalis (Lin et.al., 2010). The taxonomic uncertainty and current debate in addition to the little knowledge on the ecology of both species, prevents a proper threat identification and, subsequently, limits conservation and management actions. Mustela russelliana inhabits areas that present habitat degradation and fragmentation but the effects on the species populations are unknown (Abramov & Duckworth, 2016). In the case of Mustela tonkinensis, the species lives in areas that present hunting activities and habitat degradation and fragmentation but the effects of these factors on the species populations are also unknown (Timmins et.al., 2016). Mustela russelliana is known from a few records in the Province of Sichuan, in China and there is no information on its current status and threats. Population status and size, number of mature individuals, range and possible threats are unknown which prevents a proper evaluation with IUCN assessment criterions A-D. Although there are some threats identified in the area, the effects and impacts of these on the populations are unknown (Abramov & Duckworth, 2016). A total of 3 records were obtained for the species (Figure 7). Mustela tonkinensis is known from records in Tonkin, Vietnam and there is no information on its status and threats and according to the IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee (2019), in this case, the species must be considered as Data Deficient. Population status and size, number of mature individuals, range and possible threats are unknown which prevents a proper evaluation with IUCN assessment criterions A-D. A total of 2 records were obtained for the species (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Distribution records for Mustela tonkinensis and Mustela russelliana.

Critically Endangered species

Figure 8. Graphic representation of the state of knowledge on the small carnivore Critically Endangered (CR) species according to the theme-based classification of the literature found.

For the Critically Endangered species there is a great knowledge around themes such as conservation and management and distribution and occurrences. Most of the information gathered on the Critically Endangered species corresponds to Mustela lutreola. M. lutreola occurs in Europe in multiple countries such as France, Romania, Russia, Spain and Ukraine (Maran et.al., 2016); in total, 671 geographic records were obtained for the species (Figure 9). The graphic representation (Figure 8) reflects the lack of information on Viverra civettina and Procyon pygmaeus in comparison with M. lutreola. Viverra civettina is an understudied species due to the few records obtained of the species in the wild in the last decades (Nandini & Mudappa, 2010) and it is possible that it might be extinct; in total, 13 possible records from presumed distribution were obtained for the species according to Schreiber (1989) (Figure 10). The species is thought to occur in the Western Ghats in India (Nandini & Mudappa, 2010). This can explain the information gaps on the species ecology. Procyon pygmaeus has a restricted distribution, it occurs in Cozumel Island in Mexico (McFadden et.al., 2010); in total, 75 records were obtained for the species (Figure 11). The greatest knowledge on this species corresponds to threats, conservation and management.

Figure 9. Distribution records for Mustela lutreola.

Figure 10. Distribution records for Viverra civettina.

Figure 11. Distribution records for Procyon pygmaeus.

Endangered species For the Endangered small carnivore species, we might see a great difference between the state of knowledge of the species distributed in Europe, Asia and America in comparison with the lack of information on the African species (Figure 12). The three African species (Eupleres major, Galidictis grandidieri, Mungotictis decemlineata) occur only in Madagascar (Figures 22, 23, 26) and little is known about their ecology, threats and conservation and management (Figure 12c).

Figure 12. Graphic representation of the state of knowledge of the endangered (EN) small carnivore species according to continental distribution and the theme-based classification of the literature found. A. American species B. European/Asian species C. African species In general, the graphics show a greater knowledge for some of the American species in most themes. However, the most studied species is Enhydra lutris and most of the information gathered on the American species corresponds to this species (Figure 12a); in total, 6949 geographic records were obtained, corresponding to the species with the largest number globally (Figure 13). E. lutris also occurs in the Asian pacific in Japan and Russia and all over the Aleutian Archipelago between Alaska and Russia. (Figure 13), consequently, the literature found for this species was separated by continents and it appears in both American and Asian species graphics.

The least studied species is Nasuella meridensis which was previously considered as Nasuella olivacea but recent investigations showed they are different species due to their morphological and molecular differences (Helgen et.al., 2009); only one records was obtained for the species (Figure 14). The recent taxonomic assessment might explain the lack of information around the species. Mustela nigripes occur only in North America, in total 159 geographic records for the species (Figure 15), and has been subject to multiple conservation efforts, including reintroduction and repopulation (Jachowski et.al. 2011). Pteronura brasiliensis, Lontra provocax and Lontra felina are restricted to South America; in total, 471, 144 and 174 records were found for each species, respectively (Figure 16, 17, 18).

Figure 13. Distribution records for Enhydra lutris.

Figure 14. Distribution records for Nasuella meridensis.

Figure 15. Distribution records for Mustela nigripes.

Figure 16. Distribution records for Pteronura brasiliensis.

Figure 17. Distribution records for Lontra provocax.

Figure 18. Distribution records for Lontra felina. For the European and Asian species, there is a greater knowledge on the distribution of the species but there is a lack of information of many aspects regarding their ecology as well es the threats for each species. The Asian species are distributed principally in the southernmost part of Asia (Figure 1). Some of the species occur in the Peninsular Malaysia, known as a carnivore hotspot in Asia (Ratnayeke et.al., 2018). Ailurus fulgens is distributed in the central part of Asia, in countries such as Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar and Nepal (Glatston et.al., 2015); in total 71 records were obtained for the species (Figure 19). The most studied species is the , Ailurus fulgens, and most of the information gathered on most of the subjects of the articles, correspond to this species (Figure 12b). There is a greater investigation on American populations of Enhydra lutris than Asian populations as represented in the graphics.

Figure 19. Distribution records for Ailurus fulgens. In total, we found 7 records for Chrotogale ownstoni (Figure 20), 18 for Cynogale bennettii (Figure 21), 20 for Eupleres major (Figure 22), 47 for Galidictis grandidieri (Figure 23), 7 for Lontra sumatrana (Figure 24), 8 for Melogale everetti (Figure 25), 16 for Mungoctictis decemlineata (Figure 26) and 96 for Viverra megaspila (Figure 27).

Figure 20. Distribution records for Chrotogale ownstoni.

Figure 21. Distribution records for Cynogale bennettii.

Figure 22. Distribution records for Eupleres major.

Figure 23. Distribution records for Galidictis grandidieri.

Figure 24. Distribution records for Lontra sumatrana.

Figure 25. Distribution records for Melogale everetti.

Figure 26. Distribution records for Mungoctictis decemlineata.

Figure 27. Distribution records for Viverra megaspila

Discussion Small carnivores in general are considered among the most unknown species, receiving very little attention compared to many other carnivore species globally (Marneweck et.al., 2021). In fact, most information for many species is derived as by-catch from camera-trapping and other survey efforts for large carnivores, which receive most general research attention (Marneweck et.al., 2021). Overall, most information for most species is restricted to distribution records, natural history observations, and opportunistic data but with very few systematic studies about ecology or conservation status. Although considerable advances have occurred regarding taxonomy and systematics of many groups, still many issues remain to be solved for most species and even families. The general lack of information for many species respond not only to potential neglection of the group, but some specific reason might explain these gaps. Dologale dybowskii, has been reported on the east part of the Central African Republic which is considered one of the least scientifically investigated areas in the world due to sociopolitical factors and low accessibility (Aebischer et.al., 2013). This social and political situation might partially explain the lack of information around the species. Genetta abyssinica is considered as extremely rare or highly localized in determined habitats and its distribution is not well determined (Gaubert et. al., 2016), which might explain the few information regarding its ecology, threats and conservation. This species occurs in countries such as Eritrea, Somalia, Djibouti and Ethiopia that possess political conflicts between them (Dersso, 2009) where political instability and limited access to some areas (Diaz Behrens & Van Rompaey, 2002) might prevent proper opportunities and access for further scientific research on the species. In Somalia, the higher education system collapsed during the conflict, but some efforts are made to restore it and according to HIPS (2013), from the universities surveyed, none of them are involved in research or publishing activities (Pellini et.al., 2020). In Ethiopia, the higher education system is also growing (Akalu, 2014) but the government depends on international funding and the resources are insufficient to address the needs (Reisberg & Rumbley, 2010). Genetta poensis, in comparison with the other Data Deficient species, have documented an important threat to the species over the years that is the hunting of individuals for the bushmeat markets in Nigeria. There is a great uncertainty of the real impact caused on the species populations and their status (Anadu et.al., 1988; Okiwelu et.al., 2009; Okiwelu et.al., 2010; Noutcha et.al., 2020). Little is known about their ecology and researchers suggest that it is a rare and localized species (Gaubert & Do Linh San, 2015). In addition, it is considered in some cases as synonym with other large-spotted genets such as Genetta pardina (Gaubert & Do Linh San, 2015) and this confusion, along with the other problematics mentioned, might partially explain the data deficiency of the species. Melogale cucphuongensis, as a recently described species in 2011, has little information about its ecology, threats and conservation, in addition, it might have a localized distribution because the only records belong to the Cuc Phuong National Park in Vietnam (Nadler et.al., 2011). In some studies, such as Morais et.al. (2013), the description date of the species along with the extent of occurrence (EOO) are considered as important factors to consider regarding the reasons that might explain Data Deficiency. In this case, the few distribution records of M. cucphuongensis and its recent description explain its assessment. Taxonomic uncertainties around species such as Mustela russelliana and Mustela tonkinensis that are considered by many researchers as subspecies of Mustela nivalis (Smith et.al, 2008; Abramov & Baryshnikov, 2000) might contribute to the lack of information around these species’ ecology, conservation and threats. There was few information found on M. nivalis in Tonkin, Vietnam and Sichuan, China and there were not geographical records found of the species in those countries. There are various types of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology proposed by Regan et.al. (2002), and linguistic uncertainties such as indeterminacy of theoretical terms such as the concept of species is one of the cases that can be reflected here. The application of the species concept and taxonomic revisions around Mustela nivalis lead to an ambiguity of the name and now, many researchers consider M. russelliana and M. tonkinensis should be decoupled from the species M. nivalis. According to Regan et.al. (2002), the way to resolve this is to decide about future usage of the species definition. This would lead the future investigations around these species solving the taxonomic uncertainties and focusing on proper research on the species ecology and conservation. In addition, cases such as Nasuella meridensis (EN) in America, where until recently it was considered as part of Nasuella olivacea, but morphological differences and their distribution helped to clarify they should be considered as two different species (Helgen et.al., 2009). N. olivacea occurs in Colombia and Ecuador while N. meridensis only occurs in Venezuela (Helgen et.al., 2009). Certainly, there was little information gathered on Nasuella in Venezuela. Likewise, Eupleres major (EN) in Madagascar was considered as Eupleres goudottii but their morphology and distribution helped to elucidate they are different species (Goodman & Helgen, 2010). Eupleres major is commonly known as the Western Falanouc due to its distribution within the eastern part of Madagascar (Goodman & Helgen, 2010). These taxonomic uncertainties can explain the lack of information and literature gathered due to a possible confusion with other species. The scarcity of knowledge around African Endangered and Data Deficient species is evidenced in the geographic representations. In Africa there is a general shortage of science, social science and humanities research represented in number of publications in databases like Elsevier’s Scopus (Irikefe et.al., 2011). Scientific leaders in countries such as Nigeria experience problems regarding poor science education, poorly equipped labs, little funding, among others and in Uganda, few universities offer science related programs and there is a low density of researchers per million inhabitants (Irikefe et.al., 2011). These problems occur in many African countries limiting the opportunities for the development of science research and this might be related to the little knowledge around species distributed in many African countries. Critically Endangered small carnivore species such as Mustela lutreola in Europe and Procyon pygmaeus in Cozumel Island in México, show a great knowledge around threats and conservation and management in comparison to the Asian species, Viverra civettina. In addition, most of the information gathered for these species correspond to M. lutreola, which has well documented threats including the impact of an invasive species, the (Neovison vison), in M. lutreola populations around Europe (García et.al., 2020; Santulli et.al., 2014); habitat loss (Maran et.al., 2016) and trapping or shooting (Palazón et.al. 2012). Probably, the distribution of the species in multiple countries in Europe might explain the amount of literature found around the species in comparison with the other species. For Procyon Pygmaeus, the documented threats are related to invasive predators (Cuarón et.al., 2004), natural threats such as hurricanes (Cruz-Copa, 2007; Ameca et.al., 2019) and habitat fragmentation (Cuarón et.al., 2004). In the case of Viverra civettina, little is known about the species due to the lack of records in the wild for the past decades (Nandini & Mudappa, 2010). Research around the species have taken place but, unfortunately, there have been no sightings or records in recent years which explains the lack of information in literature found. It is presumed that the species might be extinct or near extinction (Nandini & Mudappa, 2010). In the cases of Endangered species in America, the greatest part of the literature gathered corresponds to Enhydra lutris which shows there is a huge research effort around this species, but this effort should be increased for the others (Lontra provocax, Nasuella meridensis, Pteronura brasiliensis, Lontra Felina, Mustela nigripes). Despite this, for the endangered category, the American species are the most known in most topics in comparison to African and Eurasian species. Threats and conservation and management information is well documented for these species. North American species such as Mustela nigripes has been reintroduced in many parts of the United States because there was a massive decline of populations due to the diet specificity and dependence on Cynomys spp. (Biggins & Godbey, 2003), and the persecution of Cynomys generated a decline of M. nigripes (Biggins & Godbey, 2003). There are multiple ongoing reintroduction programs and research on the conservation of the species (Jachowski et.al., 2011). The main threats for Enhydra lutris are anthropogenic activities that caused oils spills and multiple diseases related to them (Harwell & Gentile, 2013; Bodkin et.al., 2012), deaths related to parasites such as Toxoplasma gondii (Burgess et.al., 2018; Miller et.al., 2002) and Sarcocystis neurona (Miller et.al., 2010). For Lontra provocax some of the main threats are loss of suitable habitat and dam constructions (Sepúlveda et.al., 2009). Pteronura brasiliensis threats are potential conflicts with fisherman and aquiculture (Recharte et.al., 2008), mercury pollution (Soresini et.al., 2020; Fonseca et.al., 2005), among others. Threats identified for Lontra felina are invasive species and attacks from (Cursach et.al., 2012), isolation of rocky shore patches (Medina-Vogel et.al., 2008) and human disturbance (Medina-Vogel et.al., 2008; Valqui & Rheingantz, 2015). Likewise, Eurasian Endangered species possess the same problem due to the great research effort around the red panda (Ailurus fulgens) leaving aside the other species. In this case, most of the literature and information found on the other species (Enhydra lutris, Lutra sumatrana, Melogale everetti, Chrotogale owstoni, Cynogale bennettii, Viverra megaspila) belong to distribution and occurrences and there is a huge gap of information regarding their ecology, threats and conservation and management. Distribution records for Lutra sumatrana and Viverra megaspila coincides with the geographical carnivore hotspots of the Peninsular Malaysia, which contain a high number of native species comprised in Carnivora within the region of Sundaland (Ratnayeke et.al., 2018). Several threatened carnivores can be found in hotspots in this region due to large extents of natural land cover and lower elevations in Sundaland (Ratnayeke et.al., 2018). Some of the most important threats for the species in the region are urbanization, habitat fragmentation, agricultural development, hunting and illegal trade, among others (Ratnayeke et.al., 2018; Aadrean et.al., 2015; Timmins et.al., 2016). Conclusions The main information gaps on Data Deficient species are related to their ecology, population status, threats and conservation and management, which explains their data deficiency and their assessment. Taxonomic uncertainties are also harmful for gathering information around determined species and should be clarified. Research and investigation efforts should be increased around certain species, especially African species who are distributed in countries with low science funding and inadequate research tools. Unfortunately, sociopolitical factors might affect scientific research and access to certain areas where species are distributed. Some research efforts have focused on certain species, therefore, research around the less studied species should increase mainly towards Data Deficient species, Endangered African species and some Asian species such as Viverra civettina. There is little information and awareness around ecology, threats and conservation and management of some of the species in this study which shows a lack of conservation action plans in many countries. For Data Deficient species, the lack of this information may create a silent extinction risk while the species remain understudied. Small carnivores are less studied than larger carnivores and most of the conservation attention has focused on them leaving aside small carnivores. It is necessary to increase research and conservation actions around small carnivores due to their important role in ecosystems. Bibliography Aadrean, A., Kanchanasaka, B., Heng, S., Reza Lubis, I., de Silva, P. & Olsson, A. 2015. Lutra sumatrana. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T12421A21936999. Abramov, A. V., & Baryshnikov, G. F. (2000). Geographic variation and intraspecific taxonomy of weasel Mustela nivalis (Carnivora, Mustelidae). Zoosystematica Rossica, 8(2), 365-402. Abramov, A.V. & Duckworth, J.W. 2016. Mustela russelliana. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T70207817A70207828. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T70207817A70207828.en. Aebischer, T., Hickisch, R., Klimek, M., & Parkison, A. (2013). Probable records of Pousargues’s Mongoose Dologale dybowskii in the Chinko/Mbari Drainage Basin, Central African Republic. Small Carnivore Conservation, 48, 101-103. Akalu, G. A. (2014). Higher Education in E thiopia: Expansion, Quality Assurance and Institutional Autonomy. Higher Education Quarterly, 68(4), 394-415. Ameca, E. I., Mace, G. M., Cowlishaw, G., & Pettorelli, N. (2019). Relative vulnerability to hurricane disturbance for endangered mammals in Mexico: a call for adaptation strategies under uncertainty. Animal Conservation, 22(3), 262-273. Anadu, P. A., Elamah, P. O., & Oates, J. F. (1988). The bushmeat trade in southwestern Nigeria: A case study. Human Ecology, 16(2), 199–208. Andrade-Ponce, G. P.., Montaño-Salazar, S. M., Riveros-Loaiza, L. M., Ramírez- Cháves, H. E., & Suárez-Castro, A. F. (2016). Estado del conocimiento y prioridades de investigación sobre las familias , Mephitidae y Procyonidae (Mammalia: Carnivora) en Colombia. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 40(156), 500-513. Baudrot, V., Fernandez‐de‐Simon, J., Coeurdassier, M., Couval, G., Giraudoux, P., & Lambin, X. (2020). Trophic transfer of pesticides: The fine line between predator– prey regulation and pesticide–pest regulation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57(4), 806-818. Bennun, L., Regan, E. C., Bird, J., van Bochove, J. W., Katariya, V., Livingstone, S., ... & Pilgrim, J. D. (2018). The value of the IUCN Red List for business decision‐ making. Conservation Letters, 11(1), e12353. Biggins, D. E., & Godbey, J. L. (2003). Challenges to reestablishment of free-ranging populations of black-footed . Comptes Rendus Biologies, 326, 104-111. Bodkin, J. L., Ballachey, B. E., Coletti, H. A., Esslinger, G. G., Kloecker, K. A., Rice, S. D., Reed, J. A., & Monson, D. H. (2012). Long-term effects of the “Exxon Valdez” oil spill: Sea foraging in the intertidal as a pathway of exposure to lingering oil. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 447, 273–287. Boukhdoud, L., Parker, L. D., Mcinerney, N. R., Saliba, C., Kahale, R., Cross, H., ... & Bou Dagher Kharrat, M. (2021). First mitochondrial genome of the Vormela peregusna (Carnivora, Mustelidae). Mitochondrial DNA Part B, 6(3), 1009- 1011. Burgess, T. L., Tim Tinker, M., Miller, M. A., Bodkin, J. L., Murray, M. J., Saarinen, J. A., ... & Johnson, C. K. (2018). Defining the risk landscape in the context of pathogen pollution: Toxoplasma gondii in sea along the Pacific Rim. Royal Society open science, 5(7), 171178. Church, M. E., Terio, K. A., & Keel, M. K. (2018). Procyonidae, viverridae, hyenidae, herpestidae, eupleridae, and prionodontidae. In Pathology of Wildlife and Zoo (pp. 305-321). Academic Press. Cruz-Copa, M.A.(2007) Efectos de los huracanes Emily y Wilma en los mamíferos medianos de Cozumel. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Cursach, J. A., Rau, J. R., Ther, F., Vilugrón, J., & Tobar, C. N. (2012). Sinantropía y conservación marina: el caso del chungungo Lontra felina en el sur de Chile. Revista de biología marina y oceanografía, 47(3), 593-597. Diaz Behrens, G. and Van Rompaey, H. 2002. The Ethiopian Genet, Genetta abyssinica (Rüpell [sic] 1836) (Carnivora, Viverridae): Ecology and phenotypic aspects. Small Carnivore Conservation 27: 23-28. Dersso, S. A. (2009). The Somalia Conflict implications for peacemaking and peacekeeping efforts. Institute for Security Studies Papers, 2009(198), 24. Dragoo, J. W. (2009). Family Mephitidae (). In: Wilson, D.E., Mittermeier, R.A. (Eds.) Handbook of the mammals of the world, 1. Carnivores. Published by Edicions in association with Conservation International and IUCN, Barcelona, pp. 532-563. Ferguson, A. W., Roble, H. R., & McDonough, M. M. (2019). Noteworthy record of the Ethiopian genet, Genetta abyssinica, (Carnivora, Viverridae) from Djibouti informs its phylogenetic position within Genetta. Mammalia, 83(2), 180-189. Fonseca, F. R. D., Malm, O., & Waldemarin, H. F. (2005). Mercury levels in tissues of Giant otters (Pteronura brasiliensis) from the Rio Negro, Pantanal, Brazil. Environmental research, 98(3), 368-371. García, K., Sanpera, C., Jover, L., Palazón, S., Gosálbez, J., Górski, K., & Melero, Y. (2020). High Trophic Niche Overlap between a Native and Invasive Mink Does Not Drive Trophic Displacement of the Native Mink during an Invasion Process. Animals, 10(8), 1387. Gaubert, P., Balakrishnan, M., & Bekele, A. (2009). Corrigendum “A road kill of the Ethiopian Genet Genetta abyssinica along the Addis Ababa–Dira Dewa Highway, Ethiopia” by Mundanthra BALAKRISHNAN and AFEWORK Bekele (2008, Small Carnivore Conservation 39: 37–38). Gaubert, P., & Cordeiro-Estrela, P. (2006). Phylogenetic systematics and tempo of evolution of the Viverrinae (Mammalia, Carnivora, Viverridae) within feliformians: Implications for faunal exchanges between Asia and Africa. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 41, 266-278. Gaubert, P. & Do Linh San, E. 2015. Genetta poensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T136435A45221269. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T136435A45221269.en. Gaubert, P., Duckworth, J.W. & Do Linh San, E. 2016. Genetta abyssinica. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T8994A45198149. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T8994A45198149.en. Gaubert, P., & Veron, G. (2003). Exhaustive sample set among Viverridae reveals the sister-group of felids: the linsangs as a case of extreme morphological convergence within . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 270(1532), 2523-2530. Glatston, A. R. (1994). The Red Panda, Olingos, , Raccoons, and their Relatives. IUCN status survey and conservation action plan for procyonids and ailurids. Glatston, A., Wei, F., Than Zaw & Sherpa, A. 2015. Ailurus fulgens (errata version published in 2017). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T714A110023718. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015- 4.RLTS.T714A45195924.en. González-Maya, J.F. (2018): Changes to the conservation status and the distribution of the world’s small carnivores. Small Carnivore Conservation 56: 1–5. Goodman, S. M., & Helgen, K. M. (2010). Species limits and distribution of the Malagasy carnivoran genus Eupleres (Family Eupleridae). Mammalia, 74(2), 177- 185. Hassanin, A. (2016). The complete mitochondrial genome of the , Nandinia binotata, the only representative of the family Nandiniidae (Mammalia, Carnivora). Mitochondrial DNA Part A, 27(2), 904-905. Harwell, M. A., & Gentile, J. H. (2013). Quantifying long-term risks to sea otters from the 1989 “Exxon Valdez” oil spill: Comment on Bodkin et al. (2012). Marine Ecology Progress Series, 488, 291–296. Helgen, K. M., Kays, R. W., Helgen, L. E., Tsuchiya-Jerep, M. T., Pinto, C. M., Koepfli, K. P., ... & Maldonado, J. E. (2009). Taxonomic boundaries and geographic distributions revealed by an integrative systematic overview of the mountain coatis, Nasuella (Carnivora: Procyonidae). Small Carnivore Conservation. Hoffmann, M., Brooks, T. M., Da Fonseca, G. A. B., Gascon, C., Hawkins, A. F. A., James, R. E., ... & Silva, J. M. C. (2008). Conservation planning and the IUCN Red List. Endangered Species Research, 6(2), 113-125. Howard, S. D., & Bickford, D. P. (2014). Amphibians over the edge: silent extinction risk of Data Deficient species. Diversity and Distributions, 20(7), 837-846. Irikefe, V., Vaidyanathan, G., Nordling, L., Twahirwa, A., Nakkazi, E., & Monastersky, R. (2011). Science in Africa: the view from the front line. Nature News, 474(7353), 556-559. IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee. 2019. Guidelines for Using the IUCNRed List Categories and Criteria. Version 14. Prepared by the Standards and PetitionsCommittee. Jachowski, D. S., Gitzen, R. A., Grenier, M. B., Holmes, B., & Millspaugh, J. J. (2011). The importance of thinking big: large-scale prey conservation drives black- footed ferret reintroduction success. Biological Conservation, 144(5), 1560-1566. Jordano, P., García, C., Godoy, J. A., & García-Castaño, J. L. (2007). Differential contribution of frugivores to complex seed dispersal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(9), 3278-3282. Kilgo, J. C., Ray, H. S., Vukovich, M., Goode, M. J., & Ruth, C. (2012). Predation by coyotes on white-tailed deer neonates in South Carolina. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 76(7), 1420–1430. doi:10.1002/jwmg.393 Kingdon, J. (2015). The Kingdon field guide to African mammals. Bloomsbury Publishing. Koepfli, K. P., Deere, K. A., Slater, G. J., Begg, C., Begg, K., Grassman, L., ... & Wayne, R. K. (2008). Multigene phylogeny of the Mustelidae: resolving relationships, tempo and biogeographic history of a mammalian adaptive radiation. BMC biology, 6(1), 1-22. Koepfli, K. P., Gompper, M. E., Eizirik, E., Ho, C. C., Linden, L., Maldonado, J. E., & Wayne, R. K. (2007). Phylogeny of the Procyonidae (Mammalia: Carnivora): Molecules, morphology and the Great American Interchange. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. Lin, L. K., Motokawa, M., & Harada, M. (2010). A new subspecies of the least weasel Mustela nivalis (Mammalia, Carnivora) from Taiwan. study, 35(3), 191-200. Maran, T., Skumatov, D., Gomez, A., Põdra, M., Abramov, A.V. & Dinets, V. 2016. Mustela lutreola. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T14018A45199861. Markos, S., Belay, B., & Dessie, T. (2014). Village chicken production constraints and opportunities in Western Zone of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Journal of Biology and Agricultural Health, 4(27), 2224-3208. Marneweck, C., Butler, A. R., Gigliotti, L. C., Harris, S. N., Jensen, A. J., Muthersbaugh, M., Newman, A., Saldo, E.A., Shute, K., Titus, K.L., & Jachowski, D. S. (2021). Shining the spotlight on small mammalian carnivores: Global status and threats. Biological Conservation, 255, 109005. McFadden, K. W., García-Vasco, D., Cuarón, A. D., Valenzuela-Galván, D., Medellín, R. A., & Gompper, M. E. (2010). Vulnerable island carnivores: the endangered endemic dwarf procyonids from Cozumel Island. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19(2), 491-502. Medina‐Vogel, G., Merino, L. O., Alarcón, R. M., & Vianna, J. D. A. (2008). Coastal– marine discontinuities, critical patch size and isolation: implications for marine otter conservation. Animal Conservation, 11(1), 57-64. Miller, M. A., Conrad, P. A., Harris, M., Hatfield, B., Langlois, G., Jessup, D. A., ... & Grigg, M. E. (2010). A protozoal-associated epizootic impacting marine wildlife: Mass-mortality of southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis) due to Sarcocystis neurona infection. Veterinary Parasitology, 172, 183-194. Miller, M. A., Gardner, I. A., Kreuder, C., Paradies, D. M., Worcester, K. R., Jessup, D. A., ... & Conrad, P. A. (2002). Coastal freshwater runoff is a risk factor for Toxoplasma gondii infection of southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis). International journal for parasitology, 32(8), 997-1006. Morais, A. R., Siqueira, M. N., Lemes, P., Maciel, N. M., De Marco Jr, P., & Brito, D. (2013). Unraveling the conservation status of Data Deficient species. Biological conservation, 166, 98-102. Nandini, R., & Mudappa, D. (2010). Mystery or myth: a review of history and conservation status of the Malabar Civet Viverra civettina Blyth, 1862. Small Carnivore Conservation, 43, 47-59. Noutcha A.E., Amadi, U., & Okiwelu, S. (2020). Wildlife harvesting and bushmeat trade in Rivers State, Nigeria: The resilience of the , Civettictis civetta (Carnivora: Viverridae) and records of rare species. Journal of Ecology and The Natural Environment, 12(3), 117-119. Okiwelu, S. N., Akpan-Nnah, P. M., Noutcha, M. A. E., & Njoku, C. C. (2010). Wildlife harvesting and bushmeat trade in Rivers State, Nigeria II: Resilience of the greater cane rat, Thryonomys swinderianus (Rodentia: Thryonomidae). Scientia Africana, 9(2), 18-23. Okiwelu, S. N., Ewurum, N., & Noutcha, M. A. E. (2009). Wildlife harvesting and bushmeat trade in Rivers State, Nigeria: I species composition, seasonal abundance and cost. Scientia Africana, 8(2), 1-8. Palazón, S., Melero, Y., Gómez, A., de Luzuriaga, J. L., Podra, M., & Gosàlbez, J. (2012). Causes and patterns of human-induced mortality in the Critically Endangered European mink Mustela lutreola in Spain. Oryx, 46(4), 614-616. Patou, M. L., Mclenachan, P. A., Morley, C. G., Couloux, A., Jennings, A. P., & Veron, G. (2009). Molecular phylogeny of the Herpestidae (Mammalia, Carnivora) with a special emphasis on the Asian Herpestes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 53, 69-80. Papeş, M., & Gaubert, P. (2007). Modelling ecological niches from low numbers of occurrences: assessment of the conservation status of poorly known viverrids (Mammalia, Carnivora) across two continents. Diversity and distributions, 13(6), 890-902. Pellini, A., Abdi, D. I., Salah, G., Ali, H. Y., Quintin, K. L., Hassan, M. A., ... & Laws, E. (2020). Research in Somalia: opportunities for cooperation. ODI Report. Ratnayeke, S., Van Manen, F. T., Clements, G. R., Kulaimi, N. A. M., & Sharp, S. P. (2018). Carnivore hotspots in Peninsular Malaysia and their landscape attributes. PloS one, 13(4), e0194217. Recharte, M., Bowler, M., & Bodmer, R. (2008). Potential conflict between fishermen and giant otters (Pteronura brasiliensis) in response to declining stocks of arowana fish (Osteoglossum bicirrhosum) in northeastern . IUCN Otter Specialist Group Bulletin, 25(2). Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. (2010). Ethiopia: The dilemmas of expansion. International Higher Education, (58). Regan, H. M., Colyvan, M., & Burgman, M. A. (2002). A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecological applications, 12(2), 618-628. Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2012). Large predators limit herbivore densities in northern forest ecosystems. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 58(4), 733-742. Roberts, M. S., & Gittleman, J. L. (1984). Ailurus fulgens. Mammalian species. Rodrigues, A. S., Pilgrim, J. D., Lamoreux, J. F., Hoffmann, M., & Brooks, T. M. (2006). The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends in ecology & evolution, 21(2), 71-76. Roemer, G.W., Gompper, M.E., Van Valkengurgh, B. (2009). The ecological roles of the mammalian mesocarnivore. BioScience 59, 165-173 San, E. D. L., Ferguson, A. W., Belant, J. L., Schipper, J., Hoffmann, M., Gaubert, P., ... & Somers, M. J. (2013). Conservation status, distribution and species richness of small carnivores in Africa. Small Carniv. Conserv, 48, 4-18. Santulli, G., Palazón, S., Melero, Y., Gosálbez, J., & Lambin, X. (2014). Multi-season occupancy analysis reveals large scale competitive exclusion of the critically endangered European mink by the invasive non-native American mink in Spain. Biological Conservation, 176, 21-29. Schiaffini, M. I., & Prevosti, F. J. (2019). Taxonomy and systematic of fossil hog- nosed skunks, genus Conepatus (Carnivora: Mephitidae) from Argentina. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 89, 140-157. Schreiber, A. (1989). , civets, , and their relatives: an action plan for the conservation of mustelids and viverrids. IUCN. Schipper, J., Hoffmann, M., Duckworth, J. W., & Conroy, J. (2008). The 2008 IUCN red listings of the world’s small carnivores. Small Carnivore Conservation, 39, 29- 34. Smith, A. T., Xie, Y., Hoffmann, R. S., Lunde, D., MacKinnon, J., Wilson, D. E., Wozencraft, W. C., & Hoffmann, R. S. S. (Eds.). (2008). A guide to the mammals of china. ProQuest Ebook Central Soresini, G., da Silva, F. A., Leuchtenberger, C., & Mourão, G. (2020). Total mercury concentration in the of free-ranging giant otters in a large Neotropical floodplain. Environmental Research, 110483. The Heritage Institute for Policy Studies. (2013). The State of Higher Education in Somalia: Privatization, rapid growth, and the need for regulation. Mogadishu, Somalia Timmins, R., Duckworth, J.W., Tordoff, A.W., Abramov, A.V., Long, B., Mahood, S., Lunde, D.P., Roberton, S. & Willcox, D.H.A. 2016. Mustela tonkinensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T70207949A70207972. Timmins, R., Duckworth, J.W., WWF-Malaysia, Roberton, S., Gray, T.N.E., Willcox, D.H.A., Chutipong, W. & Long, B. 2016. Viverra megaspila. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T41707A45220097. Twining, J. P., Montgomery, W. I., & Tosh, D. G. (2021). Declining invasive grey squirrel populations may persist in refugia as native predator recovery reverses squirrel species replacement. Journal of Applied Ecology, 58(2), 248-260. UICN. (2012). Categorías y Criterios de la Lista Roja de la UICN: Versión 3.1. Segunda edición. Gland, Suiza y Cambridge, Reino Unido: UICN. Originalmente publicado como IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. (Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN, 2012). Valenciano, A., Abella, J., Alba, D. M., Robles, J. M., Álvarez-Sierra, M. A., & Morales, J. (2020). New early Miocene material of Iberictis, the oldest member of the lineage (Carnivora, Mustelidae, Guloninae). Journal of Mammalian Evolution, 27(1), 73-93. Valqui, J. & Rheingantz, M.L. 2015. Lontra felina (errata version published in 2017). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T12303A117058682. Veron, G. (2007). Phylogenie des petits carnivores feliformes (Mammalia, Carnivora). Bulletin de la Société zoologique de France, 132(4), 261-268. Veron, G., Colyn, M., Dunham, A. E., Taylor, P., & Gaubert, P. (2004). Molecular systematics and origin of sociality in mongooses (Herpestidae, Carnivora). Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 30(3), 582-598. Veron, G., Dupré, D., Jennings, A. P., Gardner, C. J., Hassanin, A., & Goodman, S. M. (2017). New insights into the systematics of Malagasy mongoose‐like carnivorans (Carnivora, Eupleridae, Galidiinae) based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 55(3), 250-264. Verschuren, J. (1958). Ecologie et biologie des grands mammifères Exploration du Parc National de la Garamba, Mission H. de Saeger. Wei, F., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Red panda ecology. In Red panda (pp. 193-212). William Andrew Publishing. Willcox, D. (2020). Conservation status, ex situ priorities and emerging threats to small carnivores. International Zoo Yearbook. Woolgar, J. (2014). A confirmed sighting of Pousargues’s Mongoose Dologale dybowskii. Small Carnivore Conservation, 51, 1-3. Yoder, A. D., Burns, M. M., Zehr, S., Delefosse, T., Veron, G., Goodman, S. M., & Flynn, J. J. (2003). Single origin of Malagasy Carnivora from an African ancestor. Nature, 421(6924), 734-737. Yu, L., Peng, D., Liu, J., Luan, P., Liang, L., Lee, H., ... & Zhang, Y. (2011). On the phylogeny of Mustelidae subfamilies: analysis of seventeen nuclear non-coding loci and mitochondrial complete genomes. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 11(1), 1-16. Zhou. Y., Wang, S-R., Ma J-Z. (2017). Comprehensive species set revealing the phylogeny and biogeography of Feliformia (Mammalia, Carnivora) based on mitochondrial DNA. PLoS ONE 12(3): e0174902. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174902