Translator Disclaimer
1 December 2010 The 2009/2010 Armadillo Red List Assessment
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

The conservation status of the 21 extant armadillo species was re-assessed by specialists of the IUCN/SSC Anteater, Sloth and Armadillo Specialist Group between December 2009 and May 2010. Information on their geographic range, population size and status, habitat and ecology, threats, and existing conservation measures was collected from the literature and personal communications. Four armadillo species were classified as Vulnerable, four as Near Threatened, and four were categorized as Data Deficient. Less than half of all armadillo species were listed as Least Concern. Virtually all assessed species are affected by hunting as well as habitat fragmentation and degradation. The populations of only two species are thought to be increasing, while those of at least seven species are in decline. Much work is still needed to ensure the long-term survival of all species. Most armadillo species occur in at least one protected area, but other conservation actions are scarce.

The IUCN/SSC Anteater, Sloth and Armadillo Specialist Group re-assessed the conservation status of the 21 extant armadillo species between December 2009 and May 2010. Version 3.1 of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria (IUCN, 2001) was used in all cases. Information on their geographic range, population size and status, habitat and ecology, threats, and existing conservation measures was collected from the literature and personal communications. In total, 30 researchers provided data for the 2009/2010 Armadillo Red List Assessment and checked all evaluations for consistency.

As in the 2004 assessment (Fonseca and Aguiar, 2004), four armadillo species are considered Vulnerable (VU), but the reasons for their classification as such has slightly changed (see species descriptions). The two fairy armadillos (Chlamyphorus truncatus and Calyptophractus retusus) were listed as Near Threatened (NT) in previous assessments (Table 1); their status has been changed to Data Deficient (DD) due to the lack of basic information on their ecology, range, and threats. As a consequence, four instead of six species are currently categorized as Near Threatened, and four are classified as Data Deficient.

Less than half of all armadillo species (43%) are considered Least Concern (LC; Fig. 1). This situation may worsen in the future, as virtually all assessed species are affected by hunting as well as habitat fragmentation and degradation (Fig. 2). Only four species do not seem to be affected by any threat type, while the factors affecting the long-term survival of two species (Cabassous centralis and Dasypus yepesi) could not be identified. It is possible that persecution by dogs and cats is affecting more species than Chlamyphorus truncatus and Dasypus hybridus (Fig. 2), but field data to confirm this are lacking.

The populations of only two species, Dasypus novemcinctus and Chaetophractus villosus, are thought to be increasing, while those of at least seven species are in decline (Table 1). Population trends for over half of all armadillo species remain unknown, underlining the importance of long-term field studies on these mammals. But not only data on population trends are lacking — we are in dire need of basic information on the natural history, threats, harvest levels (for hunted species), and even the taxonomy of many armadillo species (Fig. 3).

An evaluation of existing conservation measures for armadillos reveals that much work is still needed to ensure the long-term survival of all species. Four species are included in the CITES Appendices: Priodontes maximus is listed in Appendix I, Chaetophractus nationi in Appendix II, while the Costa Rican and Uruguayan populations of Cabassous centralis and Cabassous tatouay, respectively, are listed in Appendix III (CITES, 2009). Virtually all armadillo species occur in at least one protected area, but other conservation actions are scarce (Fig. 4). No action recovery, harvest management, area-based management plans, or reintroduction programs exist for any species.

Figure 1.

Percentages of species in each Red List category, according to the 2009/2010 Armadillo Red List Assessment.

f01_135.eps

Figure 2.

Main threats affecting wild armadillos.

f02_135.eps

Figure 3.

Research priorities for armadillos.

f03_135.eps

We thank all researchers, graduate students, rangers, and enthusiasts who participated in the 2009/2010 Armadillo Red List Assessment. Detailed species descriptions and updated range maps can be found in the following pages.

Figure 4.

Existing conservation actions for armadillos.

f04_135.eps

TABLE 1.

Historical overview of the Red List categories and current population trends of the 21 extant armadillo species. See glossary for definitions of the categories.

t01_135.gif

Cabassous centralis

Data Deficient (DD)

Photograph: Carlos Delgado,  www.aburranatural.org

f26_135.eps

Common Names: Northern naked-tailed armadillo (English), tatú de rabo molle (Spanish), armadillo zopilote (Spanish), armadillo de cola desnuda de Centro América (Spanish), armadillo cola de trapo (Spanish), armadillo coletrapo centroamericano (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. centralis is listed as Data Deficient due to limited knowledge on the current status of extant populations and a lack of information on the impacts of habitat loss and other threats. Habitat destruction is, however, advancing at a fast pace throughout the range of C. centralis, which may soon justify its classification as Vulnerable under criterion A4c.

Taxonomic Note: The wide range of this species might be obscuring the presence of locally distributed forms that may constitute separate species.

Geographic Range: C. centralis ranges from Chiapas state in Mexico through Central America to western Colombia, north-western Ecuador and northwestern Venezuela (Fig. 5). It occurs from sea level to around 3,000 m asl. The extent of occurrence is 780,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: C. centralis is apparently rare and patchily distributed. Individuals are not commonly seen or captured, which may be due to its secretive habits. The population trend is unknown.

Habitats and Ecology: C. centralis occurs in dry to moderately moist (mesic), deciduous and semi-deciduous forests, at forest edges in rocky terrain and in open habitats such as dry savanna (Reid, 1997). It has also been recorded in tropical moist montane forests, as well as in the subparamo of the Colombian Central Andean highlands (Díaz-N. and Sánchez-Giraldo, 2008). Deforestation rates are high in large parts of its range. This naked-tailed armadillo can be found in secondary forest habitat and also tolerates a moderate mix of forest and agricultural land. It is a solitary, insectivorous species that seems to be more fossorial than other armadillos.

Threats: The threats to this species are not known. Throughout most of its range, C. centralis is not hunted for food because of its pungent odor and local beliefs. The species is, however, indiscriminately hunted along its known Andean distribution. Some Andean populations are facing severe impacts due to urbanization of their natural habitat. C. centralis is distributed throughout the tropical dry forest, one of the most threatened habitats of northwestern South America, which in Colombia has been reduced to 1.5% of its original area (Etter, 1993). Although its sensitivity to habitat loss is not known and the species seems to tolerate some degree of habitat degradation, it is more common in primary, well-preserved forests. The severe habitat transformations are therefore likely to have a negative impact on the species.

Conservation: It has been recorded from a number of protected areas, such as Cotacachi-Cayapas Ecological Reserve, Mache-Chindul Ecological Reserve, Manglares Cayapas-Mataje Ecological Reserve and Bilsa Protected Forest in Ecuador. There is a need to determine the population status of the species throughout its range, as well as potential threats.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Tirira, D., Díaz-N., J.

Contributors: Tirira, D., Díaz-N., J. and Arteaga, M.C.

Figure 5.

Cabassous centralis. Based on Wetzel (1982); Eisenberg (1989); Albuja (1991); Emmons and Feer (1997); Reid (1997); Cadena et al. (1998); Alberico et al. (2000); Ceballos and Oliva (2005); Gardner (2005); Tirira (2007); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Díaz-N. and Sánchez-Giraldo (2008).

f05_135.eps

Cabassous chacoensis

Near Threatened (NT)

Photograph: Jakob Unger

f27_135.eps

Common Names: Chacoan naked-tailed armadillo (English), cabasú chaqueño (Spanish), cabasú chico (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. chacoensis is listed as Near Threatened given an inferred population decline of about 20–25% over the past 10 years that resulted from habitat loss and hunting. It almost qualifies as Threatened under criterion A2cd.

Taxonomic Note: This species was described by Wetzel in 1980.

Geographic Range: C. chacoensis has been recorded from the Gran Chaco of western Paraguay and central Argentina (Fig. 6). It has not been observed in Bolivia. The extent of occurrence is 438,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: The abundance of C. chacoensis is not known. In general, it is rarely sighted.

Habitats and Ecology: This largely fossorial species is restricted to chaco-seco (thorn forest) habitats (Meritt, 1985). It is not present in cultivated areas.

There is little available information on the life history and other biological characteristics of C. chacoensis. Habitat degradation and fragmentation are advancing at a fast pace in the range of this species.

Threats: This species is threatened by habitat degradation from agricultural activity, subsistence hunting for food by local people, as well as predation by dogs.

Conservation: It has been recorded in several Argentinean national and provincial parks, such as Parque Nacional Copo, Río Pilcomayo, Formosa, and Talampaya, among others.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Rogel, T., Agüero, J. and Meritt Jr., D.A.

Contributors: Rogel, T. and Meritt Jr., D.A.

Figure 6.

Cabassous chacoensis. Based on Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Agüero et al. (2005); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Nellar et al. (2008); Monguillot and Miatello (2009); Smith (2009); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); T. Rogel, pers. comm. (2009).

f06_135.eps

Cabossons tatouay

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Flávio Ubaid

f28_135.eps

Common Names: Greater naked-tailed armadillo (English), cabasú de orejas largas (Spanish), tatú de rabo molle (Spanish), tatu rabo-mole (Portuguese), tatou à queue nue (French).

Assessment Rationale: C. tatouay is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its occurrence in a number of protected areas, its tolerance of a degree of habitat modification, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: Due to the overlapping range of different Cabassous species and the description of C. chacoensis only 30 years ago (Wetzel, 1980), it is possible that many specimens (especially historical records) of this genus are erroneously classified. The exact distribution and its conservation status therefore need to be revised once these specimens are correctly identified.

Geographic Range: This species is present in eastern and southern Brazil, north-eastern Uruguay, northeastern Argentina and south-eastern Paraguay (Fig. 7). Records from Buenos Aires Province, Argentina, are erroneous (Abba and Vizcaíno, 2008). The extent of occurrence is 2,300,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: It is not uncommon and can be regularly encountered within suitable habitat.

Habitats and Ecology: C. tatouay inhabits tropical lowland and submontane forest, as well as open areas (Redford and Eisenberg, 1992). It is also found in agricultural areas and may occur in secondary forest (Mikich and Bernils, 2004; Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008). This naked-tailed armadillo is highly fossorial. Habitat degradation and fragmentation are advancing at a fast pace in the range of this species.

Threats: There is extensive habitat loss in much of its range, including in the Cerrado and Atlantic Forest. In addition, the species is hunted locally.

Conservation: C. tatouay is present in many protected areas.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Gonzalez, E. and Hernández, D.

Figure 7.

Cabassous tatouay. Based on Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Cherem et al. (2004); Mikich and Bernils (2004); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Smith (2009).

f07_135.eps

Cabossons unicinctus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Thiago Maccarini

f29_135.eps

Common Names: Southern naked-tailed armadillo (English), cabasu (English), cabasú de orejas largas (Spanish), armadillo coletrapo amazónico (Spanish), tatu-de-rabo-mole (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: C. unicinctus is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its occurrence in a number of protected areas, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: Two subspecies have been recognized (Wetzel, 1980). It is, however, possible that this taxon comprises more than one species, with the northern and southern populations representing separate species (E. Cuéllar, pers. comm., 2004).

Geographic Range: The southern naked-tailed armadillo is found east of the Andes from northern Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, through to Venezuela, Guyana, French Guiana and Suriname in the north, to the state of Mato Grosso do Sul (Brazil) in the south (Fig. 8). Its presence in northeastern Brazil is doubtful and needs to be confirmed (Anacleto and Diniz, 2006). The extent of occurrence is 9,660,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: It is a relatively common species.

Habitats and Ecology: C. unicinctus inhabits tropical lowland and submontane forest. Although it is not found in agricultural areas, it possibly occurs in secondary forest. Habitat degradation and fragmentation are advancing at a fast pace in the range of this species.

Threats: There are no major threats to this species. Populations in the south of the range are subjected to some hunting and habitat loss (e.g., Machado et al., 1998; Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008).

Conservation: It is present in some protected areas.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Anacleto, T.C.S. and Medri, I.M.

Contributors: Medri, I.M. and Moraes Tomas, W.

Figure 8.

Cabassous unicinctus. Based on Wetzel (1982); Pacheco et al. (1995); Anderson (1997); Emmons and Feer (1997); Machado et al. (1998); Alberico et al. (2000); Engstrom and Lim (2000); Gardner (2005); Anacleto and Diniz (2006); Tirira (2007); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Tomas et al. (2009); Í. M. Medri, pers. comm. (2009).

f08_135.eps

Calyptophractus retusus

Data Deficient (DD)

Photograph: Romer Miserendino

f30_135.eps

Common Names: Greater fairy armadillo (English), greater pichi ciego (English), Chacoan fairy armadillo (English), Burmeister's armadillo (English), pichiciego mayor (Spanish), culo tapado (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. retusus is classified as Data Deficient because virtually nothing is known about this species. It is known to be patchily distributed in appropriate microhabitats that are subjected to ongoing habitat loss. The species is actively persecuted throughout its range, and a population reduction in the order of 20–25% over the past 10 years is not unlikely.

Taxonomic Note: Two subspecies have been described (Yepes, 1939). Two synonyms are still commonly used for Calyptophractus retusus Fitzinger, 1871: Burmeisteria retusa Gray 1865 was preoccupied by Burmeisteria Salter, 1865, a trilobite, and is therefore incorrect. Chlamyphorus retusus Burmeister, 1863 should not be used, as recent molecular studies support the taxonomic classification of Chlamyphorus truncatus and Calyptophractus retusus into distinct genera (Delsuc, 2009).

Geographic Range: This species occurs in the Gran Chaco region of central and south-eastern Bolivia, western Paraguay, and extreme northern Argentina (Fig. 9). Two records reported from farther south by Redford and Eisenberg (1992) are not confirmed. The extent of occurrence is 258,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy. A continuing decline is inferred due to habitat conversion and degradation.

Population: The population status of this species is not known. Populations are probably severely fragmented, as the greater fairy armadillo only inhabits loose sandy soils that are not common in the Paraguayan Chaco.

Habitats and Ecology: C. retusus is restricted to loose, sandy soils. It is patchily distributed and absent from areas with clayey soils. It can be found in disturbed habitat, and may be encountered close to villages and other populated areas. Habitat degradation and fragmentation is advancing at a fast pace in the range of this species.

Threats: C. retusus is threatened by habitat loss in the Chaco region. It is persecuted because of traditional beliefs concerning the animal as an omen of disaster (Cuéllar, 2001; Noss et al., 2008).

Conservation: It has been recorded in a number of protected areas in Bolivia (Cuéllar and Noss, 2003), and Reserva Natural General Pizarro in Salta, Argentina (Regidor et al., 2005). In Paraguay, it is known from Defensores del Chaco National Park (Meritt, 2008).

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Cuéllar, E. and Meritt Jr., D.A.

Contributors: Cuéllar, E. and Meritt Jr., D.A.

Figure 9.

Calyptophractus retusus. Based on Yepes (1939); Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Gardner (2005); Agüero et al. (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Smith (2009); Tarifa and Miserendino Salazar (2009a).

f09_135.eps

Chaetophractus nationi

Vulnerable (VU A2acd)

Photograph: Gianmarco Rojas Moreno

f31_135.eps

Common Names: Bolivian hairy armadillo (English), Andean hairy armadillo (English), quirquincho andino (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. nationi is listed as Vulnerable because data from Bolivia suggest that populations there have experienced a decline exceeding 30% over the last 10 years, largely due to high rates of exploitation. This species is probably affected by hunting and habitat degradation over its entire range, but the impact of these threats in countries other than Bolivia is unknown due to a lack of field studies.

Taxonomic Note: This taxon may in fact represent a subspecies of C. vellerosus (Wetzel, 1985; Gardner, 2005), but more research is required to clarify this issue.

Geographic Range: C. nationi is found in Bolivia, Chile, Peru, and northern Argentina (Fig. 10). Its distribution is poorly known because it is often confused with C. vellerosus. In Argentina, it has been recorded in localities farther south than its current range (Carrizo et al., 2005), but these records need to be confirmed to exclude the possibility that they correspond to C. vellerosus. C. nationi is found from 2,400 to 4,000 m asl. The extent of occurrence is 383,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: No data are available on the total population size, but Peredo (1999) estimated a population of 13,000 individuals in an area of 340 km2. A population reduction of 30% in the past 10 years is probable in Bolivia; no data are available from the other range countries. The negative impact on wild populations has not ceased, and an ongoing decline in mature individuals is probable.

Habitats and Ecology: This omnivorous species inhabits high altitude grasslands, where it digs its burrows in sandy soils (Redford and Eisenberg, 1992; Pérez Zubieta, 2008). There is not much information about its life history. Assuming this species is similar to its congeners C. villosus and C. vellerosus, both genders reach sexual maturity at one year of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter of one or two young.

Threats: C. nationi is intensively harvested commercially for its meat and carapace, including for charangos (musical instruments) and also handicrafts (Reichle, 1997; Romero-Muñoz and Pérez Zubieta, 2008). Cáceres (1995) estimated yearly harvest rates of 2,000 individuals in Bolivia. Habitat degradation in the altiplano of Bolivia (where 70% of the C. nationi population occurs) is advancing at a fast pace, and habitat loss occurs due to sand excavation for concrete production (Peredo, 1999) and agricultural activities (Ríos and Rocha, 2002).

Conservation: It is present in many protected areas. Hunting of this species in Bolivia continues, even though this is prohibited (Pérez Zubieta et al., 2009).

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Pérez Zubieta, J. and Bermúdez Larrazabal, L.

Contributor: Vizcaíno, S.F.

Figure 10.

Chaetophractus nationi. Based on Wetzel (1985); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Anderson (1997); Carrizo et al. (2005); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Iriarte (2008); Pérez Zubieta et al. (2009).

f10_135.eps

Chaetophractus vellerosus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Agustín M. Abba

f32_135.eps

Common Names: Screaming hairy armadillo (English), piche llorón (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. vellerosus is listed as Least Concern because, although susceptible to hunting in parts of its range, it is widespread and rates of offtake are not believed to be at a level that would warrant listing in a category of threat. The disjunct population in Buenos Aires Province is subjected to habitat modification within its restricted range. Further studies are needed to determine the taxonomic status of this particular population.

Taxonomic Note: Two subspecies are described but require confirmation: C. v. vellerosus and C. v. pannosus (Gardner, 2007).

Geographic Range: This species is generally known from the Chaco region of Bolivia, Paraguay and Argentina. A small, isolated population inhabits an area of around 900 km2 on the coast of Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. It is separated from the core population by approximately 500 km (Fig. 11). Records from Chile are probably C. nationi. It is found from sea level to 1,000 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 1,320,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: The population status of C. vellerosus is not known, but the wild populations are thought to be stable.

Habitats and Ecology: C. vellerosus is primarily found in xeric environments, in both lowland and upland areas with loose sandy soils; it has been recorded from rangeland pasture and agricultural areas. The animal constructs burrows, and it is absent from rocky areas where burrows cannot be excavated (Greegor, 1985; Abba et al., 2007; Abba, 2008; Abba and Cassini, 2008). It can be found in some degraded habitats (arable land, pastureland and plantations). Males and females reach maturity at one year of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter of one or two young. Gestation length is 60 days.

Threats: C. vellerosus is heavily hunted for its meat and carapace (including for charangos; Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008), especially by indigenous groups in some parts of the Chaco region in Bolivia (Cuéllar and Noss, 2003; Noss et al., 2008). It is also persecuted as an agricultural pest. In addition, some animals are killed by dogs. The isolated population on the coast of Buenos Aires Province, Argentina, is negatively affected by mining activities (Abba, 2008).

Conservation: C. vellerosus is present in a number of protected areas. The highest density of this species in a protected area probably occurs in the Kaa-Iya National Park (3.4 million hectares), Bolivia.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Poljak, S. and Cuéllar, E.

Contributor: Vizcaíno, S.F.

Figure 11.

Chaetophractus vellerosus. Based on Crespo (1974); Carlini and Vizcaíno (1987); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Anderson (1997); Cuéllar and Noss (2003); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Abba et al. (2007); Abba (2008); Abba and Cassini (2008); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Noss et al. (2008); Smith (2009); Tarifa and Romero-Muñoz (2009b); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); T. Rogel, pers. comm. (2009).

f11_135.eps

Chaetophractus villosus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Kevin Schafer,  www.kevinschafer.com

f33_135.eps

Common Names: Large hairy armadillo (English), peludo (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. villosus is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its presence in a number of protected areas, its tolerance of a degree of habitat modification, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Geographic Range: It is present in the Gran Chaco of Bolivia, Paraguay, and Argentina and as far south as Santa Cruz, Argentina and Magallanes, Chile (Fig. 12). It has been introduced in Tierra del Fuego Province, Argentina (Poljak et al., 2007; Poljak et al., 2010). It ranges from sea level up to 1,500 m asl (Argentina). The extent of occurrence is approximately 2,525,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: This is one of the most common armadillo species in Argentina (Abba, 2008).

Habitats and Ecology: C. villosus is present in a wide variety of grasslands (including pampas and chaco), savanna, and forest habitats. It is also found in cultivated landscapes (Abba et al., 2005; Abba et al., 2007; Abba, 2008) and some degraded habitats (arable land, pastureland, rural gardens, and plantations). Males and females reach sexual maturity at one year of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter of one to three young. Gestation length is 68 days.

Threats: In general, there appear to be no major threats to this species. In some parts of its range it is locally used for food and charangos (Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008). It is also persecuted as a pest species in agricultural areas, and is subjected to sport hunting. Animals may also be killed on roads and by dogs (Abba et al., 2007; Abba, 2008).

Conservation: This species is present in many protected areas.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Bolkovic, M.L. and Poljak, S.

Figure 12.

Chaetophractus villosus. Based on Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Ergueta and Morales (1996); Anderson (1997); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Poljak et al. (2007); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Iriarte (2008); Smith (2009); Tarifa and Romero-Muñoz (2009b); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009).

f12_135.eps

Chlamyphorus truncatus

Data Deficient (DD)

Photograph: Mariella Superina

f34_135.eps

Common Names: Pink fairy armadillo (English), lesser pichi ciego (English), lesser fairy armadillo (English), pichiciego (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: C. truncatus is listed as Data Deficient as there is little information on its population status, and its biology and ecology are poorly known. Throughout its range there is extensive habitat degradation, especially from cattle, but the actual effect on the populations is not well understood. C. truncatus remains a priority for further survey work, as the availability of additional information may well show that the species requires listing as Near Threatened or in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: Three subspecies have been described (Yepes, 1932).

Geographic Range: C. truncatus is endemic to central Argentina, where it is found in the provinces of Buenos Aires (southern part only), Catamarca, Córdoba, La Pampa, La Rioja, Mendoza, Río Negro, San Juan, and San Luis (Fig. 13). It ranges from sea level up to 1,500 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 350,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: It may be relatively rare. Nothing is known about its population size or trend, but a reduction in sightings has been reported (Superina, 2006). The populations are fragmented; records are very isolated from each other. The species seems to have very specific habitat requirements.

Habitats and Ecology: This poorly known, nocturnal species is found in dry grassland and sandy plains with shrubby vegetation. Suitable habitat is declining.

Threats: Habitat conversion due to agriculture (plowing of fields) and cattle ranching (compaction of soil) are the predominant threats this species is facing, but predation by domestic cats and dogs is also contributing to its decline.

Conservation: It is present in a number of protected areas, including the National Parks Lihué Calel and Talampaya, and the provincial reserves Telteca and Ñacuñán in Mendoza. There is national and provincial legislation specifically in place for its protection, such as Provincial Law 6,599 in Mendoza. Further studies into the population status, demography and ecology of this species are needed.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Seitz, V. and Roig, V.G.

Contributor: Roig, V.G.

Figure 13.

Chlamyphorus truncatus. Based on Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Gardner (2005); Superina (2006); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); and point localities reported by the following persons: M. Superina, A. M. Abba, V. Seitz, J. Monguillot, E. Fra, J. Corts, C. Maldonado, P. Collavino, G. Ferraris, G. Loza, T. Rogel, E. Martinez, R. Pereyra, L. Orozco, M. Jordan, C. Aguerre, A. Dalmasso, D. Martin, D. Martí, R. Yacante, J. Pereyra.

f13_135.eps

Dasypus hybridus

Near Threatened (NT)

Photograph: Agustín M. Abba

f35_135.eps

Common Names: Southern long-nosed armadillo (English), mulita (Spanish), mulita pampeana (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: D. hybridus is listed as Near Threatened, as it is believed to have undergone a decline on the order of 20–25% over the past 10 years due to severe habitat loss and hunting throughout its range. The species was previously more widespread and locally more common (over 30 years ago). It almost qualifies as Threatened under criterion A2cd.

Taxonomic Note: For many years, D. hybridus was considered synonym of D. septemcinctus.

Geographic Range: D. hybridus is found in Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and southern Brazil. It occurs as far south as the province of Buenos Aires, Argentina (Abba, 2008; Fig. 14). The distribution is more restricted than depicted by Redford and Eisenberg (1992) and Wetzel (1985), as localities in the west near the Andes are based on incorrectly identified individuals. The exact northern limit of its range is uncertain due to its morphological similarity to D. septemcinctus. It ranges from sea level up to 2,000 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 1,420,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: It was previously common (although there are no population density estimates available), but it is sensitive to habitat loss through urbanization, and agricultural expansion has meant that populations are declining or absent over much of its former range (Abba et al., 2007). It remains a common species in parts of its range (e.g., the province of Buenos Aires; Abba, 2008).

Habitats and Ecology: D. hybridus is typically found in the grasslands and pampas of northern and central Argentina (Abba et al., 2007; Abba, 2008; Abba and Cassini, 2008). It is also present, but less common, in woodland and forest habitats. It can be found in some degraded habitats (arable land, pastureland and plantations). Agricultural activities and cattle ranching are heavily modifying the habitat of this species. Males and females reach maturity at one year of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter of six to twelve identical (monozygotic) young. Gestation length is 120 days including diapause.

Threats: D. hybridus is threatened by habitat loss through agriculture and urbanization, accidental mortality on roads, direct hunting for food, and pre dation by dogs (Abba et al., 2007; Abba, 2008).

Conservation: D. hybridus has been recorded in a few protected areas, such as the National Parks Campos del Tuyú, El Palmar and Río Pilcomayo. It is considered a conservation priority species in Uruguay (E. Gonzalez, pers. comm., 2010).

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Gonzalez, E. and Bolkovic, M.L.

Figure 14.

Dasypus hybridus. Based on Wetzel and Mondolfi (1979); Wetzel (1982); Wetzel (1985); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Cherem et al. (2004); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Abba (2008); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Smith (2009); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009).

f14_135.eps

Dasypus kappleri

Least Concern (LC)

Camera trap photograph: Daniel Munari

f36_135.eps

Common Names: Greater long-nosed armadillo (English), mulita de Kappler (Spanish), tatú-peba grande (Spanish), armadillo coligrueso (Spanish), tatu quinze quilos (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: D. kappleri is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its occurrence in a number of protected areas, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: Two subspecies are described (Gardner, 2005).

Geographic Range: This species has been recorded from Colombia (east of the Andes), Venezuela (south of the Orinoco), Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana, and south through the Amazon Basin of Brazil, Ecuador, Peru and northern Bolivia (Pando Department; Fig. 15). In Brazil, it occurs in a large part of the state of Mato Grosso, but has not been recorded from southern Para state, east of the Rio Tapajós. The easternmost locality is on the left bank of Rio das Mortes, a tributary of the upper Rio Araguaia, western Mato Grosso. There is a potentially disjunct population to the south of Marajó Island (Eisenberg and Redford, 1999). Its extent of occurrence is approximately 5,500,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: No information is available on the population status of D. kappleri.

Habitats and Ecology: This species is restricted to the tropical moist lowland forests of the Orinoco and Amazon river basins. In savanna areas, it is restricted to forest patches. D. kappleri constructs burrows in well-drained soil. The females typically give birth to two young (Eisenberg, 1989).

Threats: There are no major threats. Locally, D. kappleri is threatened by deforestation, and in Ecuador and Brazil it is subjected to hunting (Tirira, 2001; T.C.S. Anacleto, pers. comm., 2010). It is unable to survive in savannas or open areas.

Conservation: D. kappleri is present in a number of protected areas.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Anacleto, T.C.S. and Arteaga, M.C.

Contributors: Anacleto, T.C.S., Medri, I.M. and Moraes Tomas, W.

Figure 15.

Dasypus kappleri. Based on Wetzel (1982); Pacheco et al. (1995); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Tirira (1999); Alberico et al. (2000); Engstrom and Lim (2000); Gardner (2005); Tirira (2007); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Tarifa and Miserendino Salazar (2009b); Í. M. Medri, pers. comm. (2009).

f15_135.eps

Dasypus novemcinctus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Mariella Superina

f37_135.eps

Common Names: Nine-banded armadillo (English), common long-nosed armadillo (English), cachicamo (Spanish), tatú (Spanish), tatu-galinha (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: D. novemcinctus is listed as Least Concern in view of its very wide distribution, presumed large population, tolerance of habitat alteration, and because there is no evidence of a major population decline.

Taxonomic Note: Six subspecies are recognized by Gardner (2005), four of which occur in South America (Gardner, 2007).

Geographic Range: This species ranges from the southern USA through Mexico and Central America, to South America as far south as northern Argentina (Fig. 16). It is also present in the Lesser Antilles, on Grenada and Trinidad and Tobago. It ranges from sea level up to 2,000 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 19,100,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: It is a common species.

Habitats and Ecology: D. novemcinctus is very adaptable and is present in a wide variety of habitats (McBee and Baker, 1982). It can be found in some degraded habitats, such as heavily degraded subtropical and tropical forests, arable land, pastureland, rural gardens, urban areas and plantations. Males reach sexual maturity at 12 months and females at 18 months of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter after a gestation of 140 days including diapause. It has a high rate of reproduction and commonly produces monozygotic (genetically identical) quadruplets. Generation length has been estimated at five years, and longevity is around eight to twelve years.

Threats: There are no major threats to this species, although it is hunted throughout its range. In North America, it is subjected to poisoning as it is often considered a nuisance.

Conservation: D. novemcinctus occurs in many protected areas.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: McDonough, C. and Loughry, J.

Contributors: McDonough, C. and Loughry, J.

Figure 16.

Dasypus novemcinctus. Based on McBee and Baker (1982); Platt and Snyder (1995); Taulman and Robbins (1996); Freeman and Genoways (1998); Van Deelen et al. (2002); Layne (2003); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Gardner (2007); Stuart et al. (2007); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Frey and Stuart (2009); Hofmann (2009); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009).

f16_135.eps

Dasypus pilosus

Vulnerable (VU B2ab(iii))

Photograph: Andre Baertschi,  www.wildtropix.com

f38_135.eps

Common Names: Hairy long-nosed armadillo (English), tatú peludo (Spanish), quirquincho peludo (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: D. pilosus is listed as Vulnerable due to the very limited number of known locations, and because there is continuing and accelerating decline of its fragmented habitat.

Taxonomic Note: This species was originally described as Cryptophractus pilosus Fitzinger, 1856 (Gardner, 2007).

Geographic Range: D. pilosus has been recorded only from the south-western Peruvian Andes in the departments of San Martín, La Libertad, Huánuco, and Junín (Pacheco et al., 1995; Gardner, 2005). It has recently been observed in the department of Amazonas (L. Bermúdez Larrazábal, pers. comm., 2009). The known localities were incorrectly mapped by Wetzel (1982), and repeated in Eisenberg and Redford (1999). It ranges from 500 to 3,000 m asl. The exact range of this species is unknown; its extent of occurrence is estimated at 53,000 km2. Only five locations are known to date due to the lack of field studies.

Population: There is no information on the population status of D. pilosus.

Habitats and Ecology: This little-known species is endemic to the Peruvian yungas (sub-tropical montane deciduous and evergreen forests). It is found in areas with dense or shady cover and limestone formations. Deforestation is advancing at a fast pace within the range of D. pilosus, leading to a continuing decline in suitable habitat.

Threats: D. pilosus is threatened by severe deforestation of its habitat. It is likely subjected to hunting, but there is no information on the intensity and the degree to which it constitutes a major threat.

Conservation: It has been recorded from the Río Abiseo National Park.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Bermúdez Larrazabal, L. and Loughry, J.

Contributor: Bermúdez Larrazabal, L.

Figure 17.

Dasypus pilosus. Based on Pacheco et al. (1995); Gardner (2005); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); L. Bermúdez Larrazábal, pers. comm. (2009).

f17_135.eps

Dasypus sabanicola

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Diego Rodriguez

f39_135.eps

Common Names: Northern long-nosed armadillo (English), llanos long-nosed armadillo (English), tatú de sabana (Spanish), cachicamo sabanero (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: D. sabanicola is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, the availability of significant areas of suitable intact savanna habitat, and the absence of major threats to this species. There is evidence of severe hunting in some parts of the species' range.

Taxonomic Note: The taxonomic status of this species should be verified through genetic analyses.

Geographic Range: D. sabanicola is found throughout the Llanos (the flat plains) of Venezuela and Colombia (Fig. 18). It has been recorded at elevations between 25 and 200 m asl (Eisenberg, 1989). The extent of occurrence is approximately 445,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy.

Population: D. sabanicola is locally rare. It has been found to be moderately common in intact natural habitats.

Habitats and Ecology: It is generally restricted to open or shrubland habitats in lowland and mid-altitude areas. Animals have a home range of between 1.7 and 11.6 hectares (Ferguson-Laguna, 1984). The female gives birth to one yearly litter of four young.

Threats: In parts of its range it is threatened by intense hunting for subsistence purposes (Ferguson-Laguna, 1984) and by ongoing habitat loss.

Conservation: D. sabanicola has been recorded from several protected areas and is protected by national legislation in Venezuela.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Arteaga, M.C. and Lara, P.

Figure 18.

Dasypus sabanicola. Based on Wetzel (1982); Ferguson-Laguna (1984); Reid (1997); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Lord (2000); Gardner (2005); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008).

f18_135.eps

Dasypus septemcinctus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Teresa Cristina Anacleto

f40_135.eps

Common Names: Seven-banded armadillo (English), Brazilian lesser long-nosed armadillo (English), mulita chica (Spanish), tatu-mirim (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: D. septemcinctus is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its occurrence in some protected areas, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: For many years D. septemcinctus was considered synonym of D. hybridus.

Geographic Range: D. septemcinctus ranges from the lower Amazon Basin of Brazil to the Gran Chaco of Bolivia, Paraguay, and northern Argentina (presence uncertain; Fig. 19). Its southern limit is uncertain due to morphological similarities with D. hybridus, D. yepesi and juvenile D. novemcinctus (see Hamlett, 1939). The extent of occurrence is approximately 5,870,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: The population status of D. septemcinctus is not known.

Habitats and Ecology: D. septemcinctus appears to be a grassland species. However, in south-eastern Brazil it prefers to live in gallery forests. It seems to be adaptable to human disturbance and secondary habitat (Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008).

Threats: There are no major threats. Locally D. septemcinctus is threatened by habitat degradation and hunting for food.

Conservation: D. septemcinctus is present in some protected areas.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Anacleto, T.C.S. and Medri, I.M.

Contributor: Anacleto, T.C.S.

Figure 19.

Dasypus septemcinctus. Based on Wetzel and Mondolfi (1979); Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Anderson (1997); Emmons and Feer (1997); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Smith (2009).

f19_135.eps

Dasypus yepesi

Data Deficient (DD)

Camera trap photograph: Fundación ProYungas/Ledesma

f41_135.eps

Common Names: Yunga's lesser long-nosed armadillo (English), Yepes's mulita (English), mulita de Yepes (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: D. yepesi is listed as Data Deficient as there is no information on its population status and no knowledge of major threats.

Taxonomic Note: D. yepesi was named by Vizcaíno (1995) and includes specimens previously assigned to Dasypus mazzai, D. hybridus, D. septemcinctus, and D. novemcinctus. Morphological and genetic studies are needed to clarify the taxonomic status of this species.

Geographic Range: It is only known from Jujuy and Salta Provinces, Argentina (Vizcaíno, 1995; Fig. 20). Its range may extend into Bolivia and/or Paraguay. It has been recorded at elevations between 450 and 1800 m asl. The extent of occurrence is estimated at 22,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy. Due to the lack of field studies on this species, no more than nine locations are known.

Population: There is no information on the population status of D. yepesi.

Habitats and Ecology: D. yepesi appears to be tolerant of a variety of ecological conditions from xeric habitats to humid montane forest (Vizcaíno, 1995; Vizcaíno and Giallombardo, 2001; Aguiar and Fonseca, 2008). There is ongoing deforestation in the range of this species.

Threats: The threats to D. yepesi are not known, but it can be assumed that it is used as a protein source and habitat destruction is affecting it negatively.

Conservation: D. yepesi has been recorded in the National Parks Calilegua and El Rey.

Assessors: Vizcaíno, S.F. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Loughry, J. and Superina, M.

Contributor: Vizcaíno, S.F.

Figure 20.

Dasypus yepesi. Based on Vizcaíno (1995); Vizcaíno and Giallombardo (2001); Gardner (2005); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); Fundación Pro Yungas, pers. comm. (2009); S. F. Vizcaíno, pers. comm. (2009).

f20_135.eps

Euphractus sexcinctus

Least Concern (LC)

Photograph: Flávia Miranda

f42_135.eps

Common Names: Six-banded armadillo (English), yellow armadillo (English), gualacate (Spanish), tatupeba (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: E. sexcinctus is listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, its occurrence in a number of protected areas, tolerance of a degree of habitat modification, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a threatened category.

Taxonomic Note: Five subspecies are recognized (Gardner, 2007).

Geographic Range: E. sexcinctus is present in a wide area of South America, from southern Suriname and adjacent Brazil to Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, and northern Argentina (Fig. 21). It does not occur in Buenos Aires Province (Flores et al., 2009). For over 20 years, it was thought that a disjunct population of this taxon existed on the border between Brazil and Suriname (Wetzel, 1985). However, recent studies in northern Brazil confirmed the occurrence of E. sexcinctus in Maranhão, Amapá, and parts of northern, northwestern, central, and eastern Pará (see Fig. 21 for references). Most of these records are located in the cerrado. The presence of this species in Peru needs to be confirmed.

Population: It is a common species (Redford and Wetzel, 1985).

Habitats and Ecology: E. sexcinctus is found in open areas, savannas, shrubland and dry, semi-deciduous forest. It can be found in secondary forests, and may also occur in primary Amazonian forest (Redford and Wetzel, 1985). Males and females reach maturity at one year of age, and the females possibly give birth to several litters per year; litter size is one to three young.

Threats: There are no major threats. However, E. sexcinctus is hunted extensively, mostly for local use.

Conservation: E. sexcinctus is present in many protected areas.

Assessors: Medri, I.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Abba, A.M. and Lima, E.M.

Figure 21.

Euphractus sexcinctus. Based on Wetzel (1982); Redford and Wetzel (1985); Emmons and Feer (1997); Silva Júnior et al. (2001); Silva Júnior and Nunes (2001); Gardner (2005); Silva Júnior et al. (2005a, b); Andrade et al. (2006); Oliveira et al. (2006); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Flores et al. (2009); Lima et al. (2009); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); Í. M. Medri, pers. comm. (2009).

f21_135.eps

Priodontes maximus

Vulnerable (VU A2cd)

Photograph: Mariella Superina

f43_135.eps

Common Names: Giant armadillo (English), tatú guazú (Spanish), tatú carreta (Spanish), armadillo gigante (Spanish), carachupa maman (Spanish), cuspón (Spanish), tatu-canastra (Portuguese), tatou géant (French).

Assessment Rationale: P. maximus is listed as Vulnerable because, although widespread, it is rare over its entire range. Estimates for population declines based on habitat loss and hunting are at a level of at least 30% in the past three generations.

Geographic Range: P. maximus ranges from northern Venezuela (east of the Andes) and the Guianas (French Guiana, Guyana, and Suriname) south to Paraguay and northern Argentina (Fig. 22). Srbek-Araujo et al. (2009) recently confirmed its presence in Espírito Santo, Brazil, although the populations in southeastern Brazil seem to be very reduced. The species may be extinct in Uruguay, and is not listed at all for this country by Fallabrino and Castiñeira (2006). It has been recorded from sea level up to 500 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 9,750,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy. This species has disappeared from large parts of its southern range, and possibly from other portions of its range.

Population: P. maximus appears to be naturally rare where it occurs, with a very patchy distribution. Surveys in Suriname over an 18-year period recorded seven individuals in an area of 650 km2 (Walsh and Gannon, 1967). The density has been estimated to be from 5.77 to 6.28 per 100 km2 using camera trapping (Noss et al., 2004). The wild populations are decreasing.

Habitats and Ecology: This terrestrial species is found close to water within undisturbed primary rain forest habitats. It excavates burrows, usually in grasslands or open areas of the forest. Nowak (1999) suggested that the species had declined by at least 50% over the last decade. In 1954, three individuals were found in an area of 16.7 km2 in Espírito Santo, Brazil (Ruschi, 1954). Home range size has been estimated to be at least 450 ha in Brazil (Carter and Encarnação, 1983). There is ongoing deforestation in the range of this species.

Threats: P. maximus is threatened by hunting for meat (generally for subsistence) and deforestation of habitat. The illegal capture of giant armadillos for clandestine sale to wealthy animal collectors may also be a threat, but is difficult to quantify.

Conservation: P. maximus is listed on Appendix I of CITES. It is present in many protected areas. There is a need to decrease hunting pressure and maintain habitat where viable populations occur.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Porini, G. and Anacleto, T.C.S.

Contributors: Porini, G., Anacleto, T.C.S., Medri, I.M., Miranda, F. and Cuéllar, E.

Figure 22.

Priodontes maximus. Based on Ruschi (1954); Walsh and Gannon (1967); Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Chebez (1994); Emmons and Romo (1994); Pacheco et al. (1995); Mares et al. (1996); Anderson (1997); Emmons and Feer (1997); Tirira (1999); Engstrom and Lim (2000); Gardner (2005); Fallabrino and Castiñeira (2006); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Tirira (2007); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Srbek-Araujo et al. (2009); Tarifa (2009b); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); C. B. Kasper, pers. comm. (2009); Í M. Medri, pers. comm. (2009); G. Porini, pers. comm. (2009).

f22_135.eps

Tolypeutes matacus

Near Threatened (NT)

Photograph: Erika Cuéllar

f44_135.eps

Common Names: Southern three-banded armadillo (English), corechi (Spanish), tatú bolita (Spanish), mataco bola (Spanish), quirquincho bola (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: T. matacus is listed as Near Threatened because this species is probably in significant decline (albeit at a rate of less than 30% over ten years) due to widespread habitat loss through much of its range, and because of exploitation for food, thus making it close to qualifying for Vulnerable under criterion A2cd.

Geographic Range: It is found from eastern Bolivia and south-western Brazil, south through the Gran Chaco of Paraguay, to Argentina (San Luis Province; Fig. 23). The species was once present in southern Buenos Aires Province (Yepes, 1928) but recent surveys suggest that it is now extinct in this area (Abba and Vizcaíno, 2008; A.M. Abba, pers. comm., 2010). The reason for its disappearing from Buenos Ares is unknown, but may be related to climate. It ranges from sea level up to 800 m asl (Argentina). The extent of occurrence is approximately 1,200,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: It is abundant in most xeric parts of the Paraguayan Chaco (Redford and Eisenberg, 1992). It was recorded at densities of 1.9 animals per km2 in the Bolivian Chaco (Cuéllar, 2002). The wild populations are decreasing, mainly due to intense hunting and habitat loss throughout its range.

Habitats and Ecology: T. matacus is found in areas of dry vegetation within the Chaco (Bolkovic et al., 1995). It has a low reproductive rate. Both genders reach maturity at one year of age. Females give birth to one yearly litter of one young, and gestation length is between 104 and 116 days.

Threats: T. matacus is threatened by hunting for food. As it is not fossorial, it is easier to hunt than other armadillo species. It is also threatened by habitat destruction through conversion of suitable habitat to cultivated land; however, it is able to adapt to low levels of agricultural disturbance. This species is exported to zoos and for pet trade, and there is a high mortality of individuals during this export process.

Conservation: T. matacus has been recorded from a number of protected areas. There is a captive population in North America.

Assessors: Abba, A.M. and Superina, M.

Evaluators: Howell, J., Rogel, T. and Agüero, J.

Contributors: Medri, I.M., Miranda, E., Moraes Tomas, W. and Rogel, T.

Figure 23.

Tolypeutes matacus. Based on Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Gardner (2005); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); Smith (2009); Tarifa (2009a); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); Í. M. Medri, pers. comm. (2009); T. Rogel, pers. comm. (2009).

f23_135.eps

Tolypeutes tricinctus

Vulnerable (VU A2cd)

Photograph: Joares May

f45_135.eps

Common Names: Brazilian three-banded armadillo (English), tatu-bola (Portuguese).

Assessment Rationale: Tolypeutes tricinctus is listed as Vulnerable because of a population decline — estimated to be more than 30% over the last 10–12 years — inferred from ongoing exploitation and habitat loss and degradation.

Geographic Range: T. tricinctus is endemic to Brazil, where it has been recorded from the states of Bahia, Ceará, Pernambuco, Alagoas, Sergipe, Piauí, Mato Grosso (extreme central eastern portion), Goiás (extreme north), Minas Gerais (extreme northwest), Tocantins (eastern portion), Paraíba, and Rio Grande do Norte (Fig. 24). The extent of occurrence is approximately 700,000 km2 but no information is available on the area of occupancy. Continuing declines in the areas of occurrence and occupancy are probable due to habitat loss.

Population: T. tricinctus was believed to be extinct until its rediscovery in the early 1990s in a handful of scattered localities. It has probably disappeared over much of its range, but it is difficult to survey its populations (Nowak, 1999). This armadillo has a patchy distribution; population densities may be relatively high within certain patches (J. Marinho-Filho, pers. comm., 2010), except in areas where the species is exposed to human pressure.

Habitats and Ecology: T. tricinctus mainly occurs in caatinga habitat (dry thorn scrub of north-eastern Brazil), but it is also found in the eastern parts of cerrado habitat (bush savanna in central Brazil). It is not fossorial and has the habit, when threatened, of rolling into an easily portable ball. Population densities have been estimated at 0.97 individuals/km2 but are expected to be considerably lower in areas with hunting pressure. Significant habitat loss has been recorded in its range, especially in the Cerrado.

Threats: T. tricinctus is threatened by heavy hunting pressure and habitat loss. In the Caatinga, the remaining populations are practically isolated in protected areas and are subjected to subsistence hunting. In the Cerrado, the main populations live outside protected areas and are especially threatened by conversion of their natural habitat to sugar cane and soybean plantations.

Conservation: T. tricinctus has been observed in Serra da Capivara and Serra das Confusões National Parks, both in southern Piaui (Marinho-Filho and Reis, 2008). It is present in the Grande Sertão Veredas National Park, northern Minas Gerais (M. L. Reis, pers. comm., 2010). It was also recorded in the Ecological Station of Serra Geral do Tocantins and Jalapão State Park (Tocantins), as well as in the Raso da Catarina Biological Reserve and Veredas do Oeste baiano Wildlife Refuge (Bahia; Marinho-Filho and Reis, 2008; M. L. Reis, pers. comm., 2010). No protected areas exist in the area of highest population density (J. Marinho-Filho, pers. comm., 2010).

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Marinho Filho, J. and Reis, M.

Figure 24.

Tolypeutes tricinctus. Based on Sanborn (1930); Wetzel (1982); Wetzel (1985); Santos (1993); Silva and Oren (1993); Santos et al. (1994); Marinho-Filho et al. (1997); Eisenberg and Redford (1999); Reis et al. (2002); Reis et al. (2005); Gardner (2007); Marinho-Filho and Reis (2008).

f24_135.eps

Zaedyus pichiy

Near Threatened (NT)

Photograph: Mariella Superina

f46_135.eps

Common Names: Pichi (English), piche (Spanish).

Assessment Rationale: Z. pichiy is listed as Near Threatened because, although relatively widespread and present in a number of protected areas, it is hunted significantly, especially in northern and eastern portions of its range. Local extinctions have been recorded in some areas, although there is little known about the declines in the southern part of its range. Across its range, the species is thought likely to have undergone a decline on the order of 20% over the past ten years or so. It almost qualifies as Threatened under criterion A2d.

Taxonomic Note: Two subspecies are described but require confirmation: Z. p. pichiy and Z. p. caurinus (Gardner, 2007).

Geographic Range: Z. pichiy ranges from central Argentina and eastern Chile south to the Straits of Magellan (Fig. 25). It is found from sea level to 2,500 m asl. The extent of occurrence is approximately 1,300,000 km2 but no information is available on its area of occupancy.

Population: Z. pichiy is not abundant in southern Buenos Aires Province (A.M. Abba, pers. comm., 2004), and its abundance has declined in Mendoza Province within the last ten years (M. Superina, pers. comm., 2004). No data are available on the population size. However, a population reduction of 20% in the past ten years is probable. The negative impact on wild populations has not ceased, and an ongoing decline in mature individuals is probable.

Habitats and Ecology: This mostly solitary species is found in xeric grasslands and shrublands, as well as Patagonian steppe habitats, always with sandy soils (including volcanic soil; Superina, 2008). It can be found in some degraded habitats. Suitable habitat is declining. Animals have a relatively large home range within their arid habitat. Both genders reach maturity at nine months of age, and the female gives birth to one yearly litter of one or two young after a gestation length of 60 days (Superina and Jahn, 2009; Superina et al., 2009a).

Threats: Z. pichiy is threatened by hunting for food and sport, including hunting with dogs. An epidemic of an unknown disease has locally affected the species in some areas, and appears to be associated with rainy periods (Superina et al., 2009b). It is threatened to some degree by overgrazing of its habitat by cattle.

Conservation: Z. pichiy is present in many protected areas, such as the National Parks Bosques Petrificados, Los Glaciares, Laguna Blanca, Lihué Calel, and Monte León. Hunting of this species in Argentina and Chile continues, even though this is prohibited.

Assessors: Superina, M. and Abba, A.M.

Evaluators: Seitz, V. and Roig, V.G.

Contributor: Roig, V.G.

Figure 25.

Zaedyus pichiy. Based on Wetzel (1982); Redford and Eisenberg (1992); Gardner (2005); Vizcaíno et al. (2006); Iriarte (2008); Abba and Vizcaíno (2008); Aguiar and Fonseca (2008); A. M. Abba, pers. comm. (2009); M. Superina, pers. comm. (2009).

f25_135.eps

Acknowledgements:

The authors wish to thank Jim Loughry for reviewing this manuscript. This assessment was partially funded by Conservation International. Both authors are supported by CONICET.

References

  1. A. M. Abba 2008. Ecología y conservación de los armadillos (Mammalia, Dasypodidae) en el noreste de la provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina. Doctoral Thesis, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, La Plata, Argentina. Google Scholar
  2. A. M. Abba and M. H. Cassini 2008. Ecology and conservation of three species of armadillos in the Pampas region, Argentina. In: The Biology of the Xenarthra , S. F. Vizcaíno and J. W. Loughry (eds.), pp. 300–305. University Press of Florida, Florida. Google Scholar
  3. A. M. Abba and S. F. Vizcaíno 2008. Los xenartros (Mammalia: Xenarthra) del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia” y el Museo de La Plata. Contribuciones del MACN 4: 1–37. Google Scholar
  4. A. M. Abba , D. E. Udrizar Sauthier and S. F. Vizcaíno 2005. Distribution and use of burrows and tunnels of Chaetophractus villosus (Mammalia, Xenarthra) in the eastern Argentinean pampas. Acta Theriol. 50: 115–124. Google Scholar
  5. A. M. Abba , M. H. Cassini and S. F. Vizcaino 2007. Effects of land use on the distribution of three species of armadillos (Mammalia, Dasypodidae) in the pampas, Argentina. J. Mammal. 88: 502–507. Google Scholar
  6. J. M. Aguiar and G. A. B. da. Fonseca 2008. Conservation status of the Xenarthra. In: The Biology of the Xenarthra , S. F. Vizcaíno and W. J. Loughry (eds.), pp. 215–231. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Google Scholar
  7. J. A. Agüero , T. G. Rogel , A. R. Bamba , P. C. Paez , C. E. Pellegrini and E. M. Virlanga 2005. Diversidad y distribución de dasipódidos en el chaco árido de la provincia de La Rioja. In: XX Jornadas Argentinas de Mastozoología , p. 98. Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos, Mendoza, Argentina. Google Scholar
  8. M. Alberico , A. Cadena , J. Hernández-Camacho and Y. Muñoz-Saba 2000. Mamíferos (Synapsida: Theria) de Colombia. Biota Colombiana 1: 43–75. Google Scholar
  9. L. Albuja 1991. Lista de vertebrados del Ecuador. Escuela Politécnica 16: 163–203. Google Scholar
  10. T. C. S. Anacleto and J. A. F. Diniz 2006. Estimating potential geographic ranges of armadillos (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae) in Brazil under niche—based models. Mammalia 70: 202–213. Google Scholar
  11. S. Anderson 1997. Mammals of Bolivia: Taxonomy and distribution. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 231: 1–652. Google Scholar
  12. F. A. G. Andrade , M. E. B. Fernandes , M. C. Barros and H. Schneider 2006. A range extension for the yellow armadillo, Euphractus sexcinctus Linnaeus, 1758 (Xenarthra: Dasypodidae), in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. Edentata 7: 25–30. Google Scholar
  13. M. L. Bolkovic , S. M. Caziani and J. J. Protomastro 1995. Food habits of the three—banded armadillo (Xenarthra: Dasypodidae) in the dry Chaco, Argentina. J. Mammal. 76: 1199–1204. Google Scholar
  14. F. Cáceres 1995. Actual status of quirquincho Chaetopractus [sic] nationi, endangered Andean species. Unpublished report. Google Scholar
  15. A. Cadena , R. P. Anderson and P. Rivas-Pava 1998. Colombian mammals from the chocoan slopes of Nariño. Occ. Pap. Mus. Tex. Tech. Univ. 180: 1–15. Google Scholar
  16. A. A. Carlini and S. F. Vizcaíno 1987. A new record of the armadillo Chaetophractus vellerosus in the Buenos Aires Province of Argentine: possible causes for the disjunct distribution. Stud. Neotrop. Fauna Environ. 22: 53–56. Google Scholar
  17. L. V. Carrizo , M. S. Sánchez , M. I. Mollerach and R. M. Barquez 2005. Nuevo registro de Chaetophractus nationi (Thomas, 1894) para Argentina; comentarios sobre su identidad sistemática y distribución. Mastozool. Neotrop. 12: 233–236. Google Scholar
  18. T. S. Carter and C. D. Encarnação 1983. Characteristics and use of burrows by four species of armadillo in Brazil. J. Mammal. 64: 103–108. Google Scholar
  19. G. Ceballos and G. Oliva 2005. Los Mamíferos Silvestres de Mexico. Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad y Fondo de Cultura Económica, México. Google Scholar
  20. J. C. Chebez 1994. Los Que Se Van. Especies Argentinas en Peligro. Editorial Albatros, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Google Scholar
  21. J. J. Cherem , S. A. Simões-Lopes and M. E. Graipel 2004. Lista dos mamíferos do Estado de Santa Catarina, sul do Brasil. Mastozool. Neotrop. 11 : 151–184. Google Scholar
  22. CITES. 2009. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Available at < http://www.cites.org>. Google Scholar
  23. J. A. Crespo 1974. Comentarios sobre nuevas localidades para mamíferos de Argentina y Bolivia. Rev. Mus. Arg. Cienc. Nat. Bernardino Rivadavia 11 : 1–31. Google Scholar
  24. E. Cuéllar 2001. The tatujeikurajoyava (Chlamyphorus retusus) in the Isoso communities of the Bolivian Chaco. Edentata 4: 14–16. Google Scholar
  25. E. Cuéllar 2002. Census of the three-banded armadillo Tolypeutes matacus using dogs, southern Chaco, Bolivia. Mammalia 66: 448–451. Google Scholar
  26. E. Cuéllar and A. J. Noss 2003. Mamíferos del Chaco y la Chiquitanía de Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Editorial FAN, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  27. F. Delsuc 2009. The role of molecular data in xenarthran conservation. In: 10th International Mammalogical Congress , p. 49. IADIZA, Mendoza, Argentina. Google Scholar
  28. J. F. Díaz-N and C. Sánchez-Giraldo 2008. Notable altitudinal range extension of the northern naked-tailed armadillo Cabassous centralis (Cingulata: Dasypodidae) in Colombia. Brenesia 69: 75–76. Google Scholar
  29. J. F. Eisenberg 1989. Mammals of the Neotropics, Volume 1. The Northern Neotropics: Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Google Scholar
  30. J. F. Eisenberg and K. H. Redford 1999. Mammals of the Neotropics, Volume 3. The Central Neotropics: Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Google Scholar
  31. L. H. Emmons and F. Feer 1997. Neotropical Rainforest Mammals: A Field Guide. Second edition. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Google Scholar
  32. L. H. Emmons and M. R. Romo 1994. Mammals of the Upper Tambopata/Távara. RAP Working Paper # 6, The Tambopata-Candamo Reserve Zone of Southeastern Perú: A Biological Assessment: 140–143. Conservation International, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
  33. M. Engstrom and B. Lim 2000. Checklist of the Mammals of Guyana. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
  34. S. P. Ergueta and C. Morales (eds). 1996. Libro Rojo de los Vertebrados de Bolivia. Centro de Datos para la Conservación, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  35. A. Etter 1993. Diversidad ecosistémica en Colombia hoy. In: Nuestra Diversidad Biológica , S. Cardenas and H. D. Correa (eds.), pp. 43–61. Fundación Alejandro Escobar, colección María Restrepo de Angel, CEREC, Santafé de Bogotá. Google Scholar
  36. A. Fallabrino and E. Castiñeira 2006. Situación de los edentados en Uruguay. Edentata 7: 1–3. Google Scholar
  37. A. Ferguson-Laguna 1984. El Cachicamo Sabanero. Fondo Editorial, Caracas, Venezuela. Google Scholar
  38. D. A. Flores, A. M. Abba and R. M. Barquez 2009. Revisión de Libro: Mammals of South America. Volume 1. Marsupials, Xenarthrans, Shrews, and Bats. Mastozool. Neotrop. 16: 271–276. Google Scholar
  39. G. A. B. da Fonseca and J. M. Aguiar 2004. The 2004 Edentate Species Assessment Workshop. Edentata 6: 1–26. Google Scholar
  40. P. W. Freeman and H. H. Genoways 1998. Recent northern records of the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypodidae) in Nebraska. Southwest. Nat. 43: 491–504. Google Scholar
  41. J. K. Frey and J. N. Stuart 2009. Nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) records in New Mexico, USA. Edentata 8–10: 54–55. Google Scholar
  42. A. L. Gardner 2005. Order Cingulata. In: Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference , D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder (eds.), pp. 94–99. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Google Scholar
  43. A. L. Gardner 2007. Magnorder Xenarthra. In: Mammals of South America , A. L. Gardner (ed.), pp. 127–176. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Google Scholar
  44. D. H. Greegor Jr. 1985. Ecology of the little hairy armadillo Chaetophractus vellerosus. In: The Evolution and Ecology of Armadillos, Sloths, and Vermilinguas , G. G. Montgomery (ed.), pp. 397–405. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London. Google Scholar
  45. G. W. D. Hamlett 1939. Identity of Dasypus septemcinctus Linnaeus with notes on some related species. J. Mammal. 20: 328–336. Google Scholar
  46. J. E. Hofmann 2009. Records of nine—banded armadillos, Dasypus novemcinctus, in Illinois. Trans. Ill. State Acad. Sci. 102: 95–106. Google Scholar
  47. A. W. Iriarte 2008. Mamíferos de Chile. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain. Google Scholar
  48. IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Google Scholar
  49. J. N. Layne 2003. Armadillo. In: Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management and Conservation , G. A. Feldhamer , B. C. Thompson and J. A. Chapman (eds.), pp. 75–97. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Google Scholar
  50. E. M. Lima , I. C. M. Muniz , J. A. B. Ohana and J. S. Silva Júnior 2009. Ocorrência de Euphractus sexcinctus (Xenarthra: Dasypodidae) na região do Médio Rio Amazonas. Edentata 8–10: 58–60. Google Scholar
  51. R. Lord 2000. Wild Mammals of Venezuela. Armitano Editores C. A., Caracas, Venezuela.  Google Scholar
  52. A. B. M. Machado , G. A. B. da Fonseca , R. B. Machado , L. M. S. Aguiar and L. V. Lins (eds.). 1998. Livro Vermelho das Espécies Ameaçadas de Extinção da Fauna de Minas Gerais. Fundação Biodiversitas, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Google Scholar
  53. M. A. Mares , R. M. Barquez , J. K. Braun and R. A. Ojeda 1996. Observations on the mammals of Tucumán Province, Argentina. I. Systematics, distribution, and ecology of the Didelphimorphia, Xenarthra, Chiroptera, Primates, Carnivora, Perissodactyla, Artiodactyla, and Lagomorpha. Ann. Carnegie Mus. 65: 89–152. Google Scholar
  54. J. Marinho-Filho , M. Guimarães , M. L. Reis , F. Rodrigues, O. Torres and G. Almeida 1997. The discovery of the Brazilian three—banded armadillo in the Cerrado of Central Brazil. Edentata 3: 11–13. Google Scholar
  55. J. Marinho-Filho and M. L. Reis 2008. Tolypeutes tricinctus Linnaeus 1758. In: Livro Vermelho da Fauna Brasileira Ameaçada de Extinção , Ministério do Meio Ambiente (ed.), pp. 709–710. MMA, Brasília, Brazil. Google Scholar
  56. K. McBee and R. J. Baker 1982. Dasypus novemcinctus. Mamm. Species 162: 1–9. Google Scholar
  57. D. A. Meritt Jr. 1985. Naked-tailed armadillos Cabassous sp. In: The Evolution and Ecology of Armadillos, Sloths, and Vermilinguas , G.G. Montgomery (ed.), pp. 389–391. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
  58. D. A. Meritt Jr. 2008. Xenarthrans of the Paraguayan Chaco. In: The Biology of the Xenarthra , S. F. Vizcaíno and W. J. Loughry (eds.), pp. 294–299. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Google Scholar
  59. S. B. Mikich and R. S. Bernils 2004. Livro Vermelho da Fauna Ameaçada no Estado do Paraná. Instituto Ambiental do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil. Google Scholar
  60. J. C. Monguillot and R. Miatello . 2009. Presencia de Cabassous chacoensis en el Parque Nacional Talampaya, La Rioja, Argentina. Edentata 8–10: 56–57. Google Scholar
  61. M. M. Nellar , J. C. Chebez , and N. A. Nigro 2008. Hallazgo del cabasú chaqueño, Cabassous chacoensis Wetzel 1980 en la Provincia de San Luis y datos sobre su distribución. Nótulas Faunísticas, Segunda Serie 25: 1–4. Google Scholar
  62. A. Noss , R. Peña and D. I. Rumiz 2004. Camera trapping Priodontes maximus in the dry forests of Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Endangered Species Update 21: 43–52. Google Scholar
  63. A. J. Noss , R. L. Cuéllar and E. Cuéllar 2008. Exploitation of xenarthrans by the Guarani-Isoseño indigenous people of the Bolivian Chaco: comparisons with hunting by other indigenous groups in Latin America, and implications for conservation. In: The Biology of the Xenarthra , S. F. Vizcaíno and W. J. Loughry (eds.), pp. 244–254. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Google Scholar
  64. R. M. Nowak 1999. Walker's Mammals of the World. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London. Google Scholar
  65. L. C. Oliveira , S. M. Mendel , D. Loretto , J. S. Silva Júnior and G. W. Fernandes 2006. Edentates of the Saracá-Taquera National Forest, Pará, Brazil. Edentata 7: 3–7. Google Scholar
  66. V. Pacheco , H. de Macedo , E. Vivar , C. F. Ascorra , R. Arana-Cardó and S. Solari 1995. Lista anotada de los mamíferos peruanos. Occasional Papers in Conservation Biology 2: 1–35. Google Scholar
  67. B. Peredo 1999. Bolivia's trade in hairy armadillos. TRAFFIC Bulletin 18: 41–45. Google Scholar
  68. J. C. Pérez Zubieta 2008. Algunos aspectos de la historia natural del quirquincho andino en habitats aledaños a tres localidades de la provincia Sur Carangas, Oruro, Bolivia. Undergraduate thesis, Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Cochabamba, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  69. J. C. Pérez Zubieta , S. Selaya, A. P. Porcel B., Z. Torrico C., L. and N., K. Palenque 2009. Chaetophractus nationi. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O. (eds.), pp. 465–466. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  70. S. Poljak , J. Escobar , G. Deferrari and M. Lizarralde 2007. A new introduced mammal in Tierra del Fuego: the “large hairy armadillo” Chaetophractus villosus (Mammalia, Dasypodidae) in the Isla Grande island. Rev. Chil. Hist. Nat. 80: 285–294. Google Scholar
  71. S. Poljak , V. Confalonieri , M. Fasanella , M. Gabrielli and M. Lizarralde 2010. Phylogeography of the armadillo Chaetophractus villosus (Dasypodidae Xenarthra): Post-glacial range expansion from Pampas to Patagonia (Argentina). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 55: 38–46. Google Scholar
  72. K. H. Redford and R. M. Wetzel 1985. Euphractus sexcinctus. Mamm. Species 252: 1–4. Google Scholar
  73. K. H. Redford and J. F. Eisenberg 1992. Mammals of the Neotropics, Volume 2. The Southern Cone: Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Google Scholar
  74. H. A. Regidor , E. Acuña , H. Orce , A. Sosa and S. Castrillo 2005. Relevamiento de la Biodiversidad en Pizarro, Departamento de Anta, Salta, y los Efectos de los Desmontes sobre la Misma. IRNED — Instituto de Recursos Naturales y Ecodesarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Salta, Salta, Argentina. Google Scholar
  75. S. Reichle 1997. Estudio de Mercado sobre el Comercio Ilícito de la Vida Silvestre en Bolivia. DNCB, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  76. F. Reid 1997. A Field Guide to the Mammals of Central America and Southeast Mexico. Oxford University Press, New York. Google Scholar
  77. M. L. Reis , D. C. Coelho , D. F. Pereira , I. H. de Carvalho , M. L. A Nunes, M. F. Simon and V. S. Braz 2002. Relatório de Fauna. In: Jalapão, Expedição Científica e Conservacionista , M. B. Arruda and M. von Behr (eds.), pp. 29–44. IBAMA, Brasília, Brazil. Google Scholar
  78. M. L. Reis , A. Bocchiglieri , R. M. Homes , J. Bragança , M. P. Marques and C. E. C. Lobo 2005. Estudo da população de tatu-bola — Tolypeutes tricinctus da fazenda Jatobá/BA. In: III Congresso Brasileiro de Mastozoologia. Santa Cruz/ES, Brazil. Google Scholar
  79. B. Ríos and O. Rocha 2002. Uso de fauna y flora silvestre por los Uru Muratos y otros pobladores locales. In: Diagnóstico de los Recursos Naturales y Culturales de los lagos Poopó y Uru Uru, Oruro — Bolivia (para su Nominación como Sitio Ramsar) , O. Rocha (ed.), pp. 95–110. Convención RAMSAR, WCS/Bolivia, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  80. A. Romero-Muñoz and J. C. Pérez Zubieta 2008. Evaluación preliminar del comercio y uso de mamíferos silvestres en el mercado La Pampa de la ciudad de Cochabamba, Bolivia. Mastozool. Neotrop. 15: 253–259. Google Scholar
  81. A. Ruschi 1954. Algumas especies zoológicas e botá nicas em vías de extinção no Estado do Espírito Santo. Bol. Mus. Biol. Mello Leitão, Série Proteção à Natureza 16A: 1–45. Google Scholar
  82. C. C. Sanborn 1930. Distribution and habits of the three-banded armadillo (Tolypeutes). J. Mammal. 11: 61–69. Google Scholar
  83. I. B. Santos 1993. Bionomia, distribuição geográ fica e situação atual do tatu-bola Tolypeutes tricinctus (Linné, 1758) (Dasypodidae, Mammalia) no Nordeste do Brasil. Master's thesis, Instituto de Ciâncias Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Google Scholar
  84. I. B. Santos , G. A. B. da Fonseca, S. E. Rigueira and R. B. Machado 1994. The rediscovery of the Brazilian three-banded armadillo and notes on its conservation status. Edentata 1: 11–15. Google Scholar
  85. J. M. C. Silva and D. C. Oren 1993. Observations on the habitat and distribution of the Brazilian three-banded armadillo Tolypeutes tricinctus, a threatened Caatinga endemic. Mammalia 57: 149–152. Google Scholar
  86. J. S. Silva Júnior and A. P. Nunes 2001. The disjunct geographical distribution of the yellow armadillo, Euphractus sexcinctus (Xenarthra, Dasypodidae). Edentata 4: 16–18. Google Scholar
  87. J. S. Silva Júnior , S. A. Marques-Aguiar , G. F. S. Aguiar , E. M. Lima , L. N. Saldanha and A. A. Avelar 2005a. Avaliaçáo ecológica e seleção de áreas prioritárias à conservação de savanas amazônicas, Arquipélago do Marajó, Estado do Pará. Inventário de Mamíferos. Sumário Executivo. Unpublished report, Ministéério do Meio Ambiente e Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Belém, Pará, Brazil. Google Scholar
  88. J. S. Silva Júnior , S. A. Marques-Aguiar , G. F. S. Aguiar , L. N. Saldanha , A. A. Avelar and E. M. Lima 2005b. Mastofauna não voadora das savanas do Marajó. In: Livro de Resumes do III Congresso Brasileiro de Mastozoologia , p. 131. Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia, Aracruz, ES, Brasil. Google Scholar
  89. P. Smith 2009. Handbook of the Mammals of Paraguay. Vol 2: Xenarthra. Available at < http://www.faunaparaguay.com.> Google Scholar
  90. A. C. Srbek-Araujo , L. M. Scoss , A. Hirsch and A. G. Chiarello 2009. Records of the giantarmadillo Priodontes maximus (Cingulata: Dasypodidae) in the Atlantic Forest: are Minas Gerais and Espirito Santo the last strongholds of the species? Zoologia 26: 461–468. Google Scholar
  91. J. N. Stuart , J. K. Frey , Z. J. Schwenke and J. S. Sherman 2007. Status of the nine-banded armadillo in New Mexico. Prairie Nat. 39: 163–169. Google Scholar
  92. M. Superina 2006. New information on population declines in pink fairy armadillos. Edentata 7: 48–50. Google Scholar
  93. M. Superina 2008. The natural history of the pichi, Zaedyus pichiy, in western Argentina. In: The Biology of the Xenarthra , S. F. Vizcaíno and W. J. Loughry (eds.), pp. 313–318. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Google Scholar
  94. M. Superina and G. Jahn 2009. Seasonal reproduction in male pichis Zaedyus pichiy (Xenarthra: Dasypodidae) estimated by fecal androgen metabolites and testicular histology. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 112: 283–292. Google Scholar
  95. M. Superina , N. Carreño and G. Jahn 2009a. Characterization of seasonal reproduction patterns in female pichis, Zaedyus pichiy (Xenarthra: Dasypodidae) estimated by fecal sex steroid metabolites and ovarian histology. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 116: 358–369. Google Scholar
  96. M. Superina , M. M. Garner and R. F. Aguilar 2009b. Health evaluation of free-ranging and captive pichis, Zaedyus pichiy (Mammalia, Dasypodidae) in Mendoza Province, Argentina. J. Wildl. Dis. 45: 174–183. Google Scholar
  97. T. Tarifa 2009a. Tolypeutes matacus. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds.), pp. 499–502. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  98. T. Tarifa 2009b. Priodontes maximus. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds.), pp. 496–498. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  99. T. Tarifa and R. S. Miserendino Salazar 2009a. Calyptophractus (=Chlamyphorus) retusus. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds), pp. 127–130. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  100. T. Tarifa and R. S. Miserendino Salazar 2009b. Dasypus kappleri. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds), pp. 138–140. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  101. T. Tarifa and A. Romero-Muñoz 2009a. Chaetophractus vellerosus. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds.), pp. 131–134. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  102. T. Tarifa and A. Romero-Muñoz 2009b. Chaetophractus villosus. In: Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia , L. F. Aguirre , R. Aguayo , J. A. Balderrama , C. Cortez , T. Tarifa and O. Rocha O (eds.), pp. 135–137. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua, La Paz, Bolivia. Google Scholar
  103. J. F. Taulman and L. W. Robbins 1996. Recent range expansion and distributional limits of the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) in the United States. J. Biogeogr. 23: 635–648. Google Scholar
  104. D. Tirira 1999. Mamíferos del Ecuador. Publicación especial Nfi01_135.gif 2, Museo de Zoología de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador. Google Scholar
  105. D. Tirira 2001. Libro Rojo de los Mamíferos del Ecuador. Sociedad para la Investigación y Monitoreo de la Biodiversidad Ecuatoriana (SIMBIOE) / Ecociencias / Ministerio del Ambiente / UICN. Publicación Especial sobre los Mamíferos del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador. Google Scholar
  106. D. Tirira 2007. Guía de Campo de los Mamíferos del Ecuador. Publicación Especial sobre los Mamíferos del Ecuador 6. Ediciones Murciélago Blanco, Quito, Ecuador. Google Scholar
  107. W. M. Tomas , A. R. Camilo , Z. Campos , R. M. Chiaravalloti , A. C. R. Lacerda , P. A. L. Borges , I. M. Medri , A. P. Nunes , M. A. Tomas , C. S. Goulart , H. B. Morzele , V. A. Lopes and M. Aragona 2009. Occurrence of the southern naked-tailed armadillo, Cabassous unicinctus (Cingulata, Dasypodidae) in the Pantanal, Brazil. Boletim de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento 87: 1–19. Google Scholar
  108. S. F. Vizcaíno 1995. Identificación específica de las mulitas, género Dasypus L. (Mammalia, Dasypodidae), del noroeste argentino. Descripción de una nueva especie. Mastozool. Neotrop. 2: 5–13. Google Scholar
  109. S. F. Vizcaíno and A. Giallombardo 2001. Armadillos del noroeste Argentino (Provincias de Jujuy y Salta). Edentata 4: 5–9. Google Scholar
  110. S. F. Vizcaíno , A. M. Abba and C. García Esponda 2006. Magnorden Xenarthra. In: Los Mamíferos de Argentina: Sistemática y Distribución , R. M. Barquez , M. M. Díaz and R. A. Ojeda (eds.), pp. 46–56. Sociedad Argentina para el Estudio de los Mamíferos (SAREM), San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina. Google Scholar
  111. J. Walsh and R. Gannon 1967. Time is Short and the Water Rises: Operation Gwamba: the Incredible Story of How 10,000 Animals were Rescued from Certain Death in a South American Rain Forest. Tower Publications, Inc., Gainesville, FL. Google Scholar
  112. R. M. Wetzel 1980. Revision of the naked-tailed armadillos, genus Cabassous McMurtrie. Ann. Carnegie Mus. 49: 323–357. Google Scholar
  113. R. M. Wetzel 1982. Systematics, distribution, ecology, and conservation of South American edentates. In: Mammalian Biology in South America , M. A. Mares and H. H. Genoways (eds.), pp. 345–375. Special Publication Series of the Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh. Google Scholar
  114. R. M. Wetzel 1985. Taxonomy and distribution of armadillos, Dasypodidae. In: The Evolution and Ecology of Armadillos, Sloths, and Vermilinguas , G. G. Montgomery (ed.), pp. 23–48. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
  115. R. M. Wetzel and E. Mondolfi 1979. The subgenera and species of long-nosed armadillos, genus Dasypus L. In: Vertebrate Ecology in the Northern Neotropics , J. F. Eisenberg (ed.), pp. 43–47. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
  116. J. Yepes 1928. Los Edentata argentinos. Rev. Univ. Bs. As. 2a: 1–50. Google Scholar
  117. J. Yepes 1932. Las formas geográficas de pichiciego menor (Chlamyphorus truncatus Harl.). Physis (Buenos Aires) 11: 9–18. Google Scholar
  118. J. Yepes 1939. Una nueva subespecie de “pichiciego” mayor (Chlamyphorinae) y su probable distribución geográfica. Physis (Buenos Aires) 16(48): 35–39. Google Scholar
Agustín Manuel Abba and Mariella Superina "The 2009/2010 Armadillo Red List Assessment," Edentata 11(2), (1 December 2010). https://doi.org/10.5537/020.011.0203
JOURNAL ARTICLE
50 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top