Southern Little Spotted Cat

Leopardus guttulus(Hensel, 1872)

Animal

VULR Monde (IUCN)

1 photo · Licences CC (Wikimedia Commons / iNaturalist)Click pour agrandir

Filtrer le graphe par contexte spatialPays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome

Chargement du graphe…

Indicateurs du réseau écologique

Comment lire ce graphe

Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Leopardus guttulus et d'autres espèces, à partir de la base GloBI (Global Biotic Interactions, agrégation mondiale de la littérature scientifique) — source principale, complétée par d'autres jeux de données d'interactions agrégés par Ontologia. Il faut le comprendre comme une carte du savoir documenté, pas une carte de la réalité écologique exhaustive.

Limites principales

Incomplet. La majorité des interactions écologiques en milieu naturel n'ont jamais été publiées. Une espèce sans liens visibles n'est pas isolée — elle est probablement mal étudiée.
Biais publication pharmaco-agronomique. La littérature des interactions est polarisée par les enjeux économiques et sanitaires : parasitism / pathogen sur-pondéré sur les mammifères (recherche zoonoses, vecteurs), herbivory sur-pondéré sur les insectes phytophages (entomologie agronomique). À l'inverse, mutualisms, commensalisms et interactions sol/microbiote sont sous-cités. Conseil de lecture : sur les hubs mammifères ou les insectes ravageurs de culture, lire les arêtes parasitism / herbivory dominantes relativement au contexte de littérature, pas comme une mesure d'intensité écologique brute. Détails §10.1.
Biaisé vers les espèces étudiées. Quelques espèces (oiseaux communs, abeille mellifère, espèces modèles) concentrent disproportionnellement plus d'interactions documentées. Notre score composite ajoute un malus aux hubs de littérature pour atténuer cette dominance visuelle.
Interactions documentées globalement. Toutes les espèces affichées sont observées en France métropolitaine (les observations sont filtrées sur le territoire métropolitain), mais les interactions entre elles proviennent de la littérature scientifique mondiale. Une interaction documentée à l'étranger peut ne pas se réaliser à l'identique sur votre territoire. Le filtre « restreindre à ma commune » tient compte de la co-occurrence spatiale locale mais ne garantit pas l'interaction effective.
Sans dimension temporelle. Les variations saisonnières (migration, floraison, cycle de vie) ne sont pas modélisées.
Force d'interaction approximative. L'épaisseur des liens reflète le nombre de fois où l'interaction a été rapportée dans la littérature, pas son importance écologique réelle.

Comment nous sélectionnons les espèces affichées

Le graphe affiche au plus 31 nœuds par fiche (1 centre + 15 bulles depth=1 + 15 partenaires depth=2). Le serveur sélectionne intelligemment :

Bulles famille créées si une cascade taxonomique existe ou si ≥3 espèces directement documentées partagent une même famille — les espèces sont absorbées dans la bulle (pas de doublon visuel)
Espèces individuelles uniquement quand <3 dans une famille (sans cascade) — relations directes documentées
Pas d'espèces inférées affichées en doublon — les cascades sont représentées via les bulles famille uniquement
Partenaires depth=2 sélectionnés via algo priorité : candidat partagé par ≥2 docs de la famille (food web central) → reliant entre bulles → top sum_obs en dernier recours
Sous-types GloBI traduits en français au survol de la flèche (chasse, parasite, parasitoïde, mycorhize…)

Le toggle Profondeur 1 ↔ 2 client-side cache ou affiche les partenaires depth=2 sans refetch. Filtres règne, type d'interaction, ordres/familles, patrimoniales et commune recalculent côté serveur (slow path live ~1-2 s).

Indicateurs avancés (mode expert) : Modularité Q (Newman 2006, PNAS), communautés (Louvain, Blondel et al. 2008, J. Stat. Mech.), nestedness NODF (Almeida-Neto et al. 2008, Oikos).

Source : GloBI · TAXREF v18 (INPN/MNHN) · BDC-Statuts · Wikidata

11 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires

Espèces avec interactions documentées

Types d'interactions

Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…

Connectance

0.086

Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché

Rang animalia

78 %

Percentile vs ensemble des animalia

Liste rouge IUCN

VU · Vulnérablecritères C1↘Décroissante

Évaluation complète

Évaluation: 2016 · v3.1
Altitude: 0 – 2000 m
Profondeur: – m

État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert

Leopardus guttulus population densities vary, but tend to be low throughout most of its range especially in regard to what would be expected of such a small cat species. Given its body size, expected density would be 91/100 km². Population densities of L. guttulus vary from one to 25/100 km². It is generally around 1-5/100 km² (or even lower) in most of its area of occupancy but can get to 13-25/100 km² in a few isolated high density areas (Oliveira 2011, Oliveira et al. 2013). Higher densities are attained only where Ocelots are absent or very rare. Where Ocelots are common or attain densities of 10/100 km² or higher, the Southern Tiger Cat is extremely rare and is expected to reach numbers much lower than 1-5/100 km². Thus, the Southern Tiger Cat is negatively impacted by Ocelots by interspecific killing due to potential for competition in what is known as the “Ocelot effect” (Oliveira et al. 2010, Oliveira 2011).

The state of Santa Catarina in southern Brazil has been considered the most important area for Leopardus guttulus conservation and thus to harbour the best and likely most viable population. This is due to the extent of the state’s remaining Atlantic Forest, level of connectivity and the cat’s presence in reasonable numbers in local Conservation Units due in most part to the absence of Ocelots (Oliveira et al. 2008). Nevertheless, previous high densities found in some areas there (25/100 km²) seemed to have dropped to 13/100 km² or 7/100 km² in the past few years, likely as a consequence of natural rodent reduction (Oliveira et al. 2013, M. Tortato pers. comm.). Therefore, expected higher densities of this species might be lower than previously thought. Considering all remaining area of natural habitat there and the species densities recorded, population size in Santa Catarina is expected to be around 1,500–2,800 (more likely towards the lower limit). Elsewhere, population reductions of ca. 67% have been observed due to an increase in number of Ocelots (Oliveira 2011, Marques 2013). At other areas, reductions from 20-24/100 km² to 8/100km² have also been noted (Oliveira 2011, Kasper et al. 2015), but not as a consequence of the Ocelot effect.

Likely as a consequence of the Ocelot effect, L. guttulus is found mostly outside protected areas of two of South America’s most threatened biomes, the highly fragmented Atlantic Forest, whose natural cover remaining is around 8% and the savannahs, whose remaining area is <40%. In this way, conservation efforts should focus outside protected areas.

A declining global population of about 6,047 mature individuals of L. guttulus was estimated, given its expected maximum area of occupancy (AOO) and typical lower population densities (Oliveira 2011; Oliveira et al. 2010, 2013). Given the likely overestimation of the AOO, using the lower known density estimate values is warranted to compensate and avoid an unrealistic population overestimation. A future decline of 10–30% over the next 15-18 years (= three generations) is projected due to declining AOO (habitat loss) and habitat quality. Even though the Southern Tiger Cat is found in several protected areas, no conservation units within the species’ range in Brazil or elsewhere are expected to house 500 individuals, most far below 200 (Oliveira et al. 2008).

Menaces identifiées(12 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

1_1
Housing & urban areas
Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
1_2
Commercial & industrial areas
Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
2_3_3
Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming
Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
5_1_3
Persecution/control
Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Ongoing
7_1_1
Increase in fire frequency/intensity
Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Ongoing
8_1_1
Unspecified species
Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
2_2_2
Agro-industry plantations
Very Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
4_1
Roads & railroads
Minority (<50%)Ongoing
7_3
Other ecosystem modifications
Ongoing
8_3
Introduced genetic material
UnknownOngoing

+ 2 menaces supplémentaires

Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert

The Southern Tiger Cat was heavily exploited for the fur trade decades ago, following the decline in Ocelot trade. Although international trade ceased, there is still some localized illegal hunting, usually for the domestic market. A population decline in the past few years has been detected in Santa Catarina state in Brazil, the area considered the most important for its conservation, where the density estimates dropped by more than 50%, probably as a consequence of prey reduction (Oliveira et al. 2008, 2013; M.A. Tortato pers. comm.). Additionally, the existing global population is still suffering from habitat loss and fragmentation, which in the case of the Cerrado biome is undergoing high rates of loss (Klink and Machado 2005, MMA/IBAMA 2011). Other threats include hunting due to conflicts with rural owners, competition and diseases spread by domestic dogs, indiscriminate use of rodent poisoning, and road kills (Oliveira et al. 2008, 2013; Baréa and Leite 2012; R. Leite-Pitman and T. Trigo pers. comms.). It is also very important to consider the existence of an extensive hybridization zone between L. guttulus and Leopardus geoffroyi on the geographic limits of their distribution that may be affecting the genetic uniqueness of this species, as 38.2% of the Southern Tiger Cat specimens there are introgressed from the latter (Trigo et al. 2008, Trigo et al. 2013a).

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

1_5Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry★
1_6Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland★
1_9Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane★
2_1Savanna - Dry★
1_7Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Mangrove Vegetation Above High Tide Level
1_8Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Swamp

Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert

Leopardus guttulus is not formally included on CITES Appendix I as a separate species yet (but would be automatically included as L. tigrinus). Prior to its separation from L. tigrinus, its commercial use was legally forbidden. Technically, as all Felidae not listed on Appendix I are in Appendix II, it would automatically be under Appendix II. Hunting of the species is prohibited in Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay (Nowell and Jackson 1996). This species is Vulnerable in Argentina – still under L. tigrinus (Diaz and Ojeda 2000) and Brazil (MMA 2014). Populations in protected areas are expected to be very low, probably because of the impact of the higher Ocelot densities and, as such, conservation efforts will have to focus outside protected areas (Oliveira et al. 2008, Oliveira 2011). These areas are, in turn, under intense pressure from impacts, either of fragmentation and/or area loss. Further studies are required on the species' ecology, demographics, natural history, and threats.

Actions de conservation (5)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert

1_1Site/area protection
1_2Resource & habitat protection
2_2Invasive/problematic species control
2_3Habitat & natural process restoration
5_2Policies and regulations

Stress écologiques (16)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert

1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
2_1Species mortality
2_1Species mortality
2_1Species mortality
2_1Species mortality
2_3_1Hybridisation
2_3_1Hybridisation

Priorités de recherche (7)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert

1_1Taxonomy
1_2Population size, distribution & trends
1_3Life history & ecology
1_5Threats
2_1Species Action/Recovery Plan
3_1Population trends
3_4Habitat trends

Niche IUCN globaleRealms · Systems · LMEs · Growth forms · FAOs — biogéographie IUCNExpert

Royaumes biogéographiques

Neotropical

Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)

Terrestrial

Références bibliographiques (23)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert

Kasper, C.B., Schneider, A. and Oliveira T.G. de. 2016. Home range and density of three sympatric felids in the southern Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology 76: 228-232.
IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 04 September 2016).
Ministério do Meio Ambiente - MMA. 2014. Portaria 444 - Lista Nacional Oficial de Espécies de Fauna Ameaçadas de Extinção. DOU 245.
Trigo, T.C., Tirelli, F.P., Machado, L.F., Peters, F.B., Indrusiak, C.B., Mazim, F.D., Sana, D., Eizirik, E. and Freitas, T.R.O. 2013b. Geographic distribution and food habits of Leopardus tigrinus and L. geoffroyi (Carnivora, Felidae) at their geographic contact zone in southern Brazil. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 48: 56-67.
Trigo, T.C., Schneider, A., de Oliveira,T.G., Lehugeur, L.M., Silveira, L., Freitas, T.R.O. and Eizirik, E. 2013a. Molecular data reveal complex hybridization and a cryptic species of Neotropical wild cat. Current Biology 23(24): 2528–2533.
Oliveira, T.G. de, Tortato, M.A, Almeida, L. B. de, Campos, C.B. and Beisiegel, B.M. 2013. Avaliação do risco de extinção do gato-do-mato Leopardus tigrinus no Brasil. Biodiversidade Brasileira 31: 56-65.
Marques, R.V. 2013. Riqueza de espécies, frequência relativa, padrão de atividades de mamíferos de médio e grande porte e abundância de felinos em floresta ombrófila mista. PhD dissertation, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.
Baréa, C.F.S. and Leite, M.R.P. 2012. Diagnosticando a presença do gato-do-mato (Leopardus tigrinus) em diversos ambientes do Parque Estadual Serra da Baitaca e seu entorno. Quatro Barras, PR. Report., PUC-Paraná.
Oliveira, T.G. de. 2011. Ecologia e conservação de pequenos felinos no Brasil e suas implicações para o manejo. PhD dissertation, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
Ministério do Meio Ambiente - MMA / Instituto Brasileiro de Meio Ambiente e Recursos Naturais Renováveis – IBAMA. 2011. Monitoramento do bioma Cerrado 2008-2009. MMA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Nascimento, F. O. d. 2010. Revisão taxonômica do gênero Leopardus Gray, 1842 (Carnivora, Felidae). Universidade de São Paulo.
Oliveira, T.G. de, Tortato, M.A., Silveira, L., Kasper, C.B., Mazim, F.D., Lucherini, M. Jácomo, A.T., Soares, J.B.G., Marques, R.V. and Sunquist, M. 2010. Ocelot ecology and its effect in the small-felid guild in the lowland Neotropics. In: D.W. Macdonald and A. Loveridge (eds), Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids, pp. 563-584. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Tortato, M.A. 2009. Disponibilidade e uso de presas na dieta do gato-do-mato-pequeno, Leopardus tigrinus (Schreber, 1775) em área de restinga no sul do Brasil. MSc Thesis, Universidade Federal do Paraná.
Trigo, T.C., Freitas, T.R.O., Kunzler, G., Cardoso, L., Silva, J.C.R., Johnson, W.E., O’Brien, S.J., Bonatto, S.L. and Eizirik, E. 2008. Inter-species hybridization among Neotropical cats of the genus Leopardus, and evidence for an introgressive hybrid zone between L. geoffroyi and L. tigrinus in southern Brazil. Molecular Ecology 17: 4317-4333.
Oliveira, T.G. de, Kasper, C.B., Tortato, M.A., Marques, R.V., Mazim, F.D. and Soares, J.B.G. 2008. Aspectos ecológicos de Leopardus tigrinus e outros felinos de pequeno-médio porte no Brasil. In: T.G. de Oliveira (ed.), Plano de ação para conservação de Leopardus tigrinus no Brasil, Instituto Pró-Carnívoros/Fundo Nacional do Meio Ambiente, Atibaia, SP, Brazil.
Klink, C.A. and Machado, R.B. 2005. Conservation of the Brazilian Cerrado. Conservation Biology 19(3): 707-713.
Tortato, M.A. and Oliveira, T.G. de. 2005. Ecology of the oncilla (Leopardus tigrinus) at Serra do Tabuleiro State Park, Southern Brazil. Cat News 42: 28-30.
Oliveira, T.G. de and Cassaro, K. 2005. Guia de campo dos felinos do Brasil. Instituto Pró - Carnívoros/Fundação Parque Zoológico de São Paulo/Sociedade de Zoológicos do Brasil/Pró, Vida Brasil, São Paulo.
Facure-Giaretta, K.G. 2002. Ecologia alimentar de duas espécie s de felinos do gênero Leopardus em uma floresta secundária no sudeste do Brasil. PhD dissertation, Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Diaz, G.B. and Ojeda, R.A. 2000. Libro rojo de los mamíferos de Argentina. SAREM, Buenos Aires.
Johnson, W.E., Slattery, J.P., Eizirik, E., Kim, J.H., Raymond, M.M., Bonacic, C., Cambre, R., Crawshaw, P., Nunes, A., Seuanez, H.N., Moreira, M.A.M., Seymour, K.L., Simon, F., Swanson, W. and O'Brien, S.J. 1999. Disparate phylogeographic patterns of molecular genetic variation in four closely related South American small cat species. Molecular Ecology 8: S79-S94.
Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. (compilers and editors). 1996. Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
Hensel, R. 1872. Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Säugethiere Süd-Brasiliens. Buchdrukerei der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin.

Évaluateurs & contributeurs (2)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert

assessor

de Oliveira, T., Trigo, T., Tortato, M., Paviolo, A., Bianchi, R. & Leite-Pitman, M.R.P.

evaluator

Nowell, K., Hunter, L., Schipper, J., Breitenmoser-Wursten, C., Lanz, T. and Breitenmoser, U.

de Oliveira, T., Trigo, T., Tortato, M., Paviolo, A., Bianchi, R. & Leite-Pitman, M.R.P. 2016. Leopardus guttulus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T54010476A54010576. Accessed on 05 May 2026.