CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 55Evolution and Paleontology StudiesWildlife Ecology and ConservationResearch Data Management Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 278 of the 278 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 25 of the 130 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

How many mammal species are there now? Updates and trends in taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic knowledge

Open access
Burgin, Connor J, Zijlstra, Jelle S, Becker, Madeleine A, Handika, Heru, Alston, Jesse M, Widness, Jane, Liphardt, Schuyler, Huckaby, David G, Upham, Nathan S·2025·Journal of Mammalogy
DOI 10.1093/jmammal/gyaf047PMC PMC12526941
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) is an open-access resource providing up-to-date taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic data for global mammal species. Since its launch in 2018, the MDD has transformed the traditionally static process of updating mammalian taxonomy into regular online releases reflecting the latest published research. To build on this foundation, we here present version 2.0 of the MDD (MDD2), which catalogs 6,759 living and recently extinct mammal species, representing net increases of 4.1% and 24.8% over MDD version 1.0 and Mammal Species of the World, 3rd edition (MSW3), respectively. Additionally, we identify a net increase of 68.8% (+2,754; 3,149 splits + de novo, 395 lumps) species since 1980 at a rate of ∼65 species/yr based on past totals from 14 mammalian compendia, leading to projections of ∼7,079 species by 2030 and ∼8,376 by 2050 if these trends continue. Key updates in MDD2 include: (i) codings of US state, country, continent, and biogeographic realm geographic categories for each species; (ii) a comprehensive nomenclatural dataset for 50,230 valid and synonymous species-rank names, curated with type locality and specimen information for the first time; and (iii) integration between the MDD and the databases Hesperomys and Batnames for greater data accuracy and completeness. These updates bridge critical gaps in the taxonomic and nomenclatural information needed for ongoing revisions and assessments of mammalian species diversity. Using these data, we evaluate temporal and geographic trends over the past 267 yr, identifying 4 major time periods of change in mammalian taxonomy and nomenclature: (i) the initial monographic description of traditionally charismatic species (1758 to 1880); (ii) the peak of descriptive taxonomy, describing subspecies, and publishing in journals (1881 to 1939); (iii) the shift toward revisionary taxonomy and recognizing polytypic species (1940 to 1999); and (iv) the current technology-driven period of integrative revisionary taxonomy (2000 to present). Geographically, new species recognition since MSW3 has been concentrated in equatorial, mountainous, and island regions—highlighting areas of high mammal endemism (e.g., Madagascar, Philippines, Andes, East Africa, Himalayas, Atlantic Forest). However, gaps in 21st-century taxonomic activity are identified in West and Central Africa, India, and some parts of Indonesia. Additionally, lagging conservation assessments are alarming, with 25% of the MDD2-recognized mammal species allocated to the “understudied” conservation threat categories of Data Deficient (11%) or Not Evaluated (14%), underscoring the need for greater taxonomic integration with conservation organizations. Governance advancements in MDD2 include the establishment of external taxonomic subcommittees to guide data collection and curation, a rewritten website that improves access and scalability, a cross-platform mobile application that provides offline access, and new partnerships to continue linking MDD data to global biodiversity infrastructure. By providing up-to-date mammalian taxonomic and nomenclatural data—including links to the text of original name descriptions, type localities, and type specimen collections—the MDD provides an integrative resource for mammalogists and conservationists to more easily track the status of their study organisms.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

MDD2 catalogs 6,759 living and recently extinct mammal species, a net increase of 4.1% over MDD1 and 24.8% over MSW3, alongside 50,230 species-rank names and new geographic/nomenclatural metadata. It documents 267 years of taxonomic change and projects ~7,079 mammal species by 2030 and ~8,376 by 2050 if recent trends continue.

Key findings

  • MDD2 recognizes 6,759 valid mammal species (6,629 wild extant; 113 recently extinct; 17 domestic), which is 267 more (+4.1%) than MDD1 and 1,343 more (+24.8%) than MSW3; the 2024-1 IUCN Red List lists 5,983 species, 776 fewer (−11.5%) than MDD2.
  • Since 1980, MDD2 identifies a net increase of 2,754 species (+68.8%; 3,149 splits + de novo, 395 lumps) at ~65 species/yr; linear regression across 14 compendia gave y = 64.86x − 124587.19, R² = 0.98, projecting ~7,079 species by 2030, ~7,727 by 2040, ~8,376 by 2050, and ~11,619 by 2100.
  • MDD2 includes 50,230 species-rank names: 28,382 available names, 2,127 unavailable names, 3,445 spelling variants, 16,182 name combinations, and 435 other subsequent uses; type localities are recorded for 99.6% of originally available names and all valid species, and type specimen locations for 73.3% of originally available names (87.9% of valid species).
  • Of 6,742 wild mammal species, 25.5% (1,716) are “understudied” on the IUCN Red List—11.5% (773) Data Deficient and 14.0% (943) Not Evaluated—while 19.2% (1,295) are threatened (VU, EN, CR, EW); new species recognition since MSW3 is concentrated in equatorial, mountainous, and island regions, with gaps in West and Central Africa, India, and parts of Indonesia.

Methods

  • MDD2 used a taxonomic, nomenclatural, and geographic cutoff of 15 August 2024; it compared MDD2 taxonomy to 14 major compendia since 1980 and all 18 MDD versions, then used linear regression of species totals to project future recognized richness.
  • Curation tracked peer-reviewed mammal taxonomy, mostly following the most recent published evidence, with documented subjective decisions; nomenclatural data were integrated with Hesperomys and Batnames, and geographic distributions were coded for countries/offshore territories, country subregions (US states only), continents, and 8 terrestrial biogeographic realms.
  • Analyses summarized name descriptions since 1758, type localities, species richness, endemism, conservation status, and website/database usage; R code and supplementary data are available via GitHub and Zenodo.

Limitations

  • The paper states that future richness projections are based on compendia totals rather than year-by-year split, lump, and de novo data; it notes the 2100 estimate “seems more far-fetched” because trends likely level off, and that MDD has refrained from tracking subspecies due to inconsistent use.
  • The paper states that type specimen coverage is nearly complete for North America but incomplete for many names likely housed in European collections, and that some taxonomic decisions are subjective or can be “ricochetal” amid conflicting literature.
  • Evident from the text: country subregions are implemented only for the United States; type-locality coordinates are available for just 9.8% of available names and 27.4% of valid species; and MDD recognizes 17 domestic forms as species despite acknowledging this contradicts much evolutionary and taxonomic research.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jmammal/gyaf047

Cites

278 of 278 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Fig. 1. A graphical history of mammalian species-group name descriptions since the start of zoological nomenclature on 1 January 1758, incorporating all 28,382 available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) and 6,759 names currently recognized as valid species in MDD2. The histogram summarizes the number of available names (light gray) and valid species names (dark gray) described each year from 1 January 1758 to 15 August 2024 (a ∼267 yr period). The lines in the bottom panel summarize the 10-yr running means (starting 1768) for the proportion of names initially described at the ranks of species (blue) and subspecies (orange), as well as the proportions of names initially described as species and then lumped into another species (pink) or initially described as subspecies, forms, or varieties and then split into their own species (turquoise). Since all 4 lines were smoothed by taking 10-yr running means, each point on these lines represents a mean generated from the previous 10 yrs of data. See Supplementary Data SD9 for the raw data and running means used to create the line graph in this figure. Total recognized mammal species estimates are included from major compendia since Corbet and Hill (1980; red points), including all taxonomic compendia listed in Table 1 other than IUCN totals (which do not represent the actually recognized mammals at the time of versioning). A linear regression line, equation, and R2 value of these data are included on the graph. Six additional pre-1980s species estimates are also included for comparison (blue points), which are from resources that do not include full species lists (4,400 species in Storer (1951); 4,748, 4,732, and 4722 species in Walker et al. (1964, 1968, 1975); 4,237 species in Morris (1965); and 4,060 species in Anderson and Jones (1967)).
Fig. 1. A graphical history of mammalian species-group name descriptions since the start of zoological nomenclature on 1 January 1758, incorporating all 28,382 available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) and 6,759 names currently recognized as valid species in MDD2. The histogram summarizes the number of available names (light gray) and valid species names (dark gray) described each year from 1 January 1758 to 15 August 2024 (a ∼267 yr period). The lines in the bottom panel summarize the 10-yr running means (starting 1768) for the proportion of names initially described at the ranks of species (blue) and subspecies (orange), as well as the proportions of names initially described as species and then lumped into another species (pink) or initially described as subspecies, forms, or varieties and then split into their own species (turquoise). Since all 4 lines were smoothed by taking 10-yr running means, each point on these lines represents a mean generated from the previous 10 yrs of data. See Supplementary Data SD9 for the raw data and running means used to create the line graph in this figure. Total recognized mammal species estimates are included from major compendia since Corbet and Hill (1980; red points), including all taxonomic compendia listed in Table 1 other than IUCN totals (which do not represent the actually recognized mammals at the time of versioning). A linear regression line, equation, and R2 value of these data are included on the graph. Six additional pre-1980s species estimates are also included for comparison (blue points), which are from resources that do not include full species lists (4,400 species in Storer (1951); 4,748, 4,732, and 4722 species in Walker et al. (1964, 1968, 1975); 4,237 species in Morris (1965); and 4,060 species in Anderson and Jones (1967)).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 2. Summary of mammal species-rank taxonomy and nomenclature by terrestrial biogeographic realm and continent, including: A) total native, wild species (including recently extinct species) distributed within each region (excluding fully marine distributed species) with totals listed above each bar (broken into total species and species split or newly described since MSW3 was published), with total species density per region marked with red dots in species per million km2; B) total native, wild species distributed within and in the waters surrounding each continent with symbols given analogously to graph A; C) available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) with type localities within each terrestrial biogeographic realm with totals listed above each bar; and D) available names with type localities within each continent with totals listed above each bar. It should be noted that species are often distributed across multiple regions, while available name type localities only appear in a single region. See Table 3 for numeric summaries of species richness and available name type localities relative to regional land areas.
Fig. 2. Summary of mammal species-rank taxonomy and nomenclature by terrestrial biogeographic realm and continent, including: A) total native, wild species (including recently extinct species) distributed within each region (excluding fully marine distributed species) with totals listed above each bar (broken into total species and species split or newly described since MSW3 was published), with total species density per region marked with red dots in species per million km2; B) total native, wild species distributed within and in the waters surrounding each continent with symbols given analogously to graph A; C) available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) with type localities within each terrestrial biogeographic realm with totals listed above each bar; and D) available names with type localities within each continent with totals listed above each bar. It should be noted that species are often distributed across multiple regions, while available name type localities only appear in a single region. See Table 3 for numeric summaries of species richness and available name type localities relative to regional land areas.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 3. Type locality locations for species-rank mammal taxa described from 1 January 2000 to 15 August 2024. Map gray-scale country coloration represents the total number of currently valid species type localities found per country that were described within this time period. Colored dots represent the exact georeferenced type locality of all currently valid species (red circles) and names currently considered synonyms and subspecies (blue diamonds) in MDD2. Most coordinates were generated from the original description of each name when included directly in the publication, while others were georeferenced using GeoLocate or WikiMedia GeoHack place coordinates when not included in the original description publication. The georeferenced localities were mapped and both programmatically and visually vetted for accuracy. Latitude and longitude in decimal degrees is included for each of the names mapped here in the MDD2 synonym list, Supplementary Data SD2.
Fig. 3. Type locality locations for species-rank mammal taxa described from 1 January 2000 to 15 August 2024. Map gray-scale country coloration represents the total number of currently valid species type localities found per country that were described within this time period. Colored dots represent the exact georeferenced type locality of all currently valid species (red circles) and names currently considered synonyms and subspecies (blue diamonds) in MDD2. Most coordinates were generated from the original description of each name when included directly in the publication, while others were georeferenced using GeoLocate or WikiMedia GeoHack place coordinates when not included in the original description publication. The georeferenced localities were mapped and both programmatically and visually vetted for accuracy. Latitude and longitude in decimal degrees is included for each of the names mapped here in the MDD2 synonym list, Supplementary Data SD2.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 4. A) Total number of wild extant and recently extinct mammal species distributed within and in the waters surrounding each country and offshore territory. B) Total number of newly recognized species (both de novo and split) distributed within each country and offshore territory. C) Total number of available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) with type localities within each country and offshore territory. D) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are categorized as threatened (VU, EN, CR, EW) on the IUCN Red List (version 2024-1). E) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are either categorized as Data Deficient (DD) or Not Evaluated (NE) on the IUCN Red List, considered “understudied” here. F) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are endemic to each region (only found in one of the countries or offshore territories).
Fig. 4. A) Total number of wild extant and recently extinct mammal species distributed within and in the waters surrounding each country and offshore territory. B) Total number of newly recognized species (both de novo and split) distributed within each country and offshore territory. C) Total number of available names (including preoccupied, replacement, and suppressed names) with type localities within each country and offshore territory. D) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are categorized as threatened (VU, EN, CR, EW) on the IUCN Red List (version 2024-1). E) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are either categorized as Data Deficient (DD) or Not Evaluated (NE) on the IUCN Red List, considered “understudied” here. F) Percentage of species distributed in each country and offshore territory that are endemic to each region (only found in one of the countries or offshore territories).CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 5. Mammal species richness across the 50 states of the United States, including both terrestrial mammals and marine mammals found along the coast of coastal states. State-level species totals are included in Supplementary Data SD7.
Fig. 5. Mammal species richness across the 50 states of the United States, including both terrestrial mammals and marine mammals found along the coast of coastal states. State-level species totals are included in Supplementary Data SD7.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 6. Proportion of the 6,742 wild mammal species (not including domestic species) recognized in MDD2 categorized by IUCN Red List category (version 2024-1): 54.2% (3651 species) are considered “Low Risk” (Least Concern [LE] or Near Threatened [NT]); 25.5% (1716 species) are considered “Understudied” (Data Deficient [DD] and Not Evaluated [NE]); 19.2% (1295 species) are considered “Threatened” (Vulnerable [VU], Endangered [EN], Critically Endangered [CR], or Extinct in the Wild [EW—not visible]); and 1.2% (80 species; note that some MDD2 extinct species are NE on the IUCN) are considered globally Extinct (EX) on the IUCN. Total species per category are listed next to the category abbreviation in the figure legend while percent of total MDD2 species per column appears above each column.
Fig. 6. Proportion of the 6,742 wild mammal species (not including domestic species) recognized in MDD2 categorized by IUCN Red List category (version 2024-1): 54.2% (3651 species) are considered “Low Risk” (Least Concern [LE] or Near Threatened [NT]); 25.5% (1716 species) are considered “Understudied” (Data Deficient [DD] and Not Evaluated [NE]); 19.2% (1295 species) are considered “Threatened” (Vulnerable [VU], Endangered [EN], Critically Endangered [CR], or Extinct in the Wild [EW—not visible]); and 1.2% (80 species; note that some MDD2 extinct species are NE on the IUCN) are considered globally Extinct (EX) on the IUCN. Total species per category are listed next to the category abbreviation in the figure legend while percent of total MDD2 species per column appears above each column.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Fig. 7. Overview of the MDD’s structure and governance for future versions. Taxonomic knowledge will continue being extracted from research articles, each of which presents peer-reviewed evidence in support of a perspective on the limits of species- and higher-rank taxa. Nomenclatural information in those taxonomic treatments will also be curated, including the status of available names for a given taxon and the associated physical evidence for those names in the form of one or more type specimens. The MDD editorial team, consisting of both volunteers and paid student assistants, will be advised by new sets of taxonomic subcommittees that will help gather and curate data while providing expert guidance in cases where subjective decisions need to be issued. Linking of the resulting MDD data with external databases will remain a top priority, both to provide up-to-date information to those sources and to inform the taxonomic curation process itself.
Fig. 7. Overview of the MDD’s structure and governance for future versions. Taxonomic knowledge will continue being extracted from research articles, each of which presents peer-reviewed evidence in support of a perspective on the limits of species- and higher-rank taxa. Nomenclatural information in those taxonomic treatments will also be curated, including the status of available names for a given taxon and the associated physical evidence for those names in the form of one or more type specimens. The MDD editorial team, consisting of both volunteers and paid student assistants, will be advised by new sets of taxonomic subcommittees that will help gather and curate data while providing expert guidance in cases where subjective decisions need to be issued. Linking of the resulting MDD data with external databases will remain a top priority, both to provide up-to-date information to those sources and to inform the taxonomic curation process itself.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

76 Own result · 60 No basis given · 37 Own interpretation · 32 No full text of the sources · 18 Sources not found · 17 Partly supported · 12 Own method · 10 Not checked yet · 4 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 118 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 70
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 93
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
150 of 150

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The past rate of mammal species recognition/description since 1980 will continue into the future.

    “leading to projections of ∼7,079 species by 2030 and ∼8,376 by 2050 if these trends continue”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The species totals from the 14 mammalian compendia are comparable and accurate enough to estimate a global rate of species recognition.

    “at a rate of ∼65 species/yr based on past totals from 14 mammalian compendia”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The total species counts from the compared compendia (other than IUCN) are representative of the number of recognized mammal species at their time.

    “total species counts were extracted from each source (other than IUCN version totals, which are not representative of all recognized mammals at their time of versioning) and used to estimate the rate of new mammal species recognition from 1980 to 2024 using linear regression.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The observed trend in mammal species recognition from 1980 to 2024 will continue into the future.

    “The equation generated for the linear regression line was then used to estimate total recognized mammal species by 2030, 2040, 2050, and 2100 if the observed trends were to continue.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Much of the information used to update the MDD is in rare archives, offline sources, or behind paywalls.

    “Because much of the information used to update the MDD is in rare archives, offline sources, or behind paywalls, manual data curation by a dedicated team of students and volunteers has been crucial in collating these data and linking their contained biodiversity knowledge.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Google Analytics data accurately reflects the number of unique users and their locations.

    “Over a recent 17-mo period, it was visited by 1,200 to 2,900 users/mo for a total of 25,991 unique users that were located in 170 different countries (Google Analytics: 19 May 2023 to 19 October 2024).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The historical estimates of mammal species richness from different sources are comparable enough to track trends.

    “Estimates of total mammal species richness continued to decrease before reaching a low in 1980 when Corbet and Hill listed 4,005 recent mammal species (C&H1), being the first known publication since the peak of mammalian descriptive taxonomy to include a complete list of every then-recognized valid mammal species.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Observed trends in historical species descriptions or species recognition will continue into the future.

    “if observed trends in historical species descriptions were to continue”
    “If this trend continues”
8 of 8

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Items 201–278 of 278

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Borisenko, 2001, Types of vertebrates in the zoological museum of moscow university
  2. Cabrera, 1961, Catálogo de los mamíferos de America del Sur, Revista Del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia” e Institutio Nacional de Investigación de Las Ciencias Naturales, 4, 309
  3. Corbet, 1986, A world list of mammalian species
  4. Cracraft, 1983, Current Ornithology, 159
  5. Cuvier, 1797, Tableau élémentaire de l’histoire naturelle des animaux
  6. Dalapicolla, 2020, Species concepts and taxonomic practice in the integrative taxonomy era: an example using South American rodents, Boletim Da Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologia, 88, 36
  7. de Blainville, 1816, Prodrome d’une nouvelle distribution systématique du règne animal, 113
  8. de Blainville, 1864, Ostéographie ou description iconographique comparée du squelette et du système dentaire des mammifères recents et fossiles pour servir de la base à la zoologie et à la géologie
  9. Di Cecco, 2021, Observing the observers: how participants contribute data to iNaturalist and implications for biodiversity science, BioScience, 71, 1179
  10. Erxleben, 1777, Systema regni animalis per classes, ordines, genera, species, varietates cum synonymia et historia animalium. Classis I. Mammalia
  11. Fitzinger, 1867, Versuch einer natürlichen Anordnung der Nagethiere (Rodentia). (Schluss.), Sitzungsberichte Der Kaiserlichen Akademie Der Wissenschaften, 56, 57
  12. AL, 2008, Mammals of South america, volume 1: Marsupials, xenarthrans, shrews, and bats
  13. Gippoliti, 2012, “Taxonomic inflation” in the historical context of mammalogy and conservation, Hystrix, 23, 8
  14. Gippoliti, 2018, Impacts of taxonomic inertia for the conservation of African ungulate diversity: an overview, Biological Reviews, 93, 115
  15. Gmelin, 1788, Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima tertia, aucta, reformata
  16. Gray, 1821, On the natural arrangement of vertebrose animals, London Medical Repository, 15, 296
  17. Groves, 2001, Primate taxonomy
  18. Gutiérrez, 2018, Species delimitation based on diagnosis and monophyly, and its importance for advancing mammalian taxonomy, Zoological Research, 39, 301
  19. Hillis, 2020, The detection and naming of geographic variation within species, Herpe, 51, 52
  20. Huxley, 1881, On the application of the laws of evolution to the arrangement of the Vertebrata, and more particularly of the Mammalia, Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1880, 649
  21. Kerr, 1792, The animal kingdom, or zoological system of the celebrated sir charles linnaeus. Class I. Mammalia
  22. Lawrence, 1993, Catalog of recent mammal types in the American Museum of Natural History, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 217, 1
  23. Lesson, 1842, Nouveau tableau du règne animal
  24. Linnaeus, 1758, Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata
  25. RA, 2013, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  26. Nowak, 1991, Walker’s mammals of the world
  27. Nowak, 1983, Walker’s mammals of the world
  28. Owen, 1868, On the anatomy of vertebrates
  29. Pallas, 1766, Miscellanea zoologica quibus novæ imprimis atque obscuræ animalium species describuntur et observationibus iconibusque illustrantur
  30. Pallas, 1767, Spicilegia zoologica. Fasciculus 1-12
  31. JL, 2015, Mammals of South america
  32. Siegismund, 2013, The mammals of Africa. VI. Pigs, hippopotamuses, chevrotain, giraffes, deer, and bovids, 373
  33. Smith, 2022, Species problems and beyond, 145
  34. Storer, 1943, General zoology
  35. Storer, 1951, General zoology. Second edition
  36. Trouessart, 1897, Catalogus mammalium tam viventium quam fossilium. Tomus I
  37. Trouessart, 1899, Catalogus mammalium tam viventium quam fossilium. Tomus II
  38. Uetz, 2016, The Reptile Database turns 20, Herpetological Review, 47, 330
  39. Uetz, 2021, A quarter century of reptile and amphibian databases, Herpetological Review, 52, 246
  40. Walker, 1964, Mammals of the world
  41. Walker, 1968, Mammals of the world
  42. Walker, 1975, Mammals of the world
  43. DE, 2016, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  44. DE, 2017, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  45. DE, 2009, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  46. DE, 2011, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  47. DE, 2014, Handbook of the mammals of the world
  48. DE, 2018, Handbook of the mammals of the world

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 55

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Burgin, C. J., Zijlstra, J. S., Becker, M. A., Handika, H., Alston, J. M., Widness, J., Liphardt, S., Huckaby, D. G., & Upham, N. S.
Affiliations
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • Hesperomys Project , Orinda, CA 94563,
  • Smithsonian Institution (US)
  • Louisiana State University (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Montana (US)
  • California State University, Long Beach (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Burgin, Connor J
  • Upham, Nathan S
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Mammalogy
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2025-09-14
Volume
106
Issue
5
Pages
1082-1117
ISSN
  • 0022-2372 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1542
DOI
10.1093/jmammal/gyaf047
PMC
PMC12526941
OpenAlex
W4414346270
Cited by
54
References
237
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 7
FWCI
29.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Mammalogy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Funders
  • American Society of Mammalogists
  • National Science Foundation
  • VertLife Terrestrial (DEB 1441737)
  • National Institutes of Health (1R21AI164268, 1R35GM156919)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
Keywords
mammal diversity, mammal taxonomy, zoological nomenclature, geographic distribution, biogeographic realms, type specimens, species delimitation, Hesperomys, synonymy, mammals, bats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review