Civette a trois bandes

Arctogalidia trivirgata(Gray, 1832)

Animal

LCLR Monde (IUCN)

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

Description

espèce de mammifères

Source : Wikidata

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 Arctogalidia trivirgata 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

8 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires

Espèces avec interactions documentées

Types d'interactions

Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…

Connectance

0.115

Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché

Rang animalia

74 %

Percentile vs ensemble des animalia

Liste rouge IUCN

LC · Préoccupation mineure↘Décroissante

Évaluation complète

Évaluation: 2024 · v3.1
Altitude: 0 – 2100 m
Profondeur: – m

État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert

Few mammal surveys within the range of Small-toothed Palm Civet use methodology likely to find the species reliably, let alone assess population levels and trends (e.g., Willcox et al. 2012). Some past statements that this as a rare species stem from the typical paucity of records (compared with other palm civets) reflecting the arboreal, nocturnal habits of this species (Pocock 1939, van Bemmel 1952, Duckworth 1997a, Duckworth and Nettelbeck 2008). The species is not found reliably by any conventional survey method other than spotlighting, which latter is rarely carried out in most regions, especially since the advent of widespread camera-trapping. In extensive spotlighting in Lao PDR, the species was found, often commonly, in most semi-evergreen and evergreen forests surveyed in the country in the 1990s (Duckworth 1997b). There are recent records from many sites in Viet Nam, mostly found by incidental spotlighting outside formal survey and including records in several heavily encroached, highly hunted areas (Willcox et al. 2012). Although conventionally considered rare in India, a rash of very recent spotlighting records (and one by camera-trap) suggest it is simply much overlooked: notably only one of these recent records comes from formal mammal survey, the others coming from activities such as recreational bird-watching and research into flying squirrels (Naniwadekar et al. 2013, Kakati and Srikant 2014, Murali et al. 2014, Raman and Zakhuma 2014). The great paucity of camera-trap photographs reflects the rarity of the species coming to ground. Hence, many well camera-trapped areas have failed to record the species (Willcox et al. 2012 and references therein); yet when even quite modest levels of spotlighting have taken place in these areas, the species has been found, sometimes even exceptionally commonly. As examples: ten animals were found in the first three hours at Sarawak Planted Forests Concession (Belden et al. 2007); intensive camera-trapping in Thung Yai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary – West, Thailand, using camera-traps placed conventionally on ground with a few on leaning logs crossing small streams failed to detect this species in more than 10,000 trap-nights spread across three years; yet in only 43 hours of spotlighting, Small-toothed Palm Civet was encountered 14 times (sometimes as duos) (Chutipong et al. 2014b); and in one survey area in East Kalimantan, Borneo, extensive ground-level camera-trapping never found the species, but when the units were deployed arboreally, it was photographed commonly (Wahyudi and Stuebing 2014). It is a reasonable inference, therefore, that the species is not just locally common, but widely numerous. By contrast, in Java, however, there do seem to be only few records (excluding those from a couple of sites with regular sightings) for the level of spotlighting deployed (Rode-Margono et al. 2014) and in Singapore the species is certainly rare, reflecting the very small remaining area of mature native forest (Chua et al. 2012).

Menaces identifiées(10 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

1_1
Housing & urban areas
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
1_2
Commercial & industrial areas
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
2_1_2
Small-holder farming
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
2_1_3
Agro-industry farming
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
2_2_1
Small-holder plantations
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
2_2_2
Agro-industry plantations
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
5_1_1
Intentional use (species is the target)
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
5_3_3
Unintentional effects: (subsistence/small scale) [harvest]
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
5_3_4
Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
7_2_10
Large dams
Negligible declinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing

Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert

Forest loss, degradation and fragmentation are all potential threats to Small-toothed Palm Civet. There is no evidence that it can survive in areas without tree cover, and, as yet, no evidence for population persistence in landscape remote from native forest. The heavy widespread ongoing deforestation in South-east Asia in the last half-century will thus have greatly reduced the area available to the species, and in areas retaining high levels of forest conversion (e.g. Sumatra) declines are doubtless ongoing. Much forest has also been degraded and fragmented: the available evidence suggests this will have had relatively little effect (e.g., Viet Nam: Willcox et al. 2012; Singapore: Chua et al. 2012; Java: Moore and Wihermanto 2014). Although there is as yet no confirmation of large numbers in higher montane areas (over 1,500 m) there is still a sizeable altitudinal band holding the species above the zone of heaviest forest clearance, the lowlands. Hunting is another potential threat but in reality seems to have little effect on the species's populations within remaining habitat. Especially in Indochina, where general mammal hunting levels are extremely high, most active hunting is with dogs and projectiles by day, and most passive trapping (snares etc.) is at ground level. The species's nocturnal, arboreal, habits therefore insulate it from the sort of heavy pressures facing ground-dwelling and/or diurnal species (Willcox et al. 2012). Active night hunting appears to be the only effective means of hunting this civet and, because this is labour-intensive, is relatively rarely undertaken for arboreal mammals in most of this species's range (e.g. Walston and Duckworth 2003). In Lao PDR, Viet Nam and Myanmar, spotlight hunting does occur, but again the impact on this species is minimal because hunters focus on taking higher market value species (in terms of yield per unit effort) such as ungulates and frogs, and concentrate for these almost exclusively at ground level (e.g. Walston and Duckworth 2003).

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

1_6Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland★
1_9Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane★
14_3Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations

Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert

Small-toothed Palm Civet is Totally Protected in Peninsular Malaysia, but only Protected in Sabah and Sarawak under the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 (WPA 1972). It is not protected in Thailand (Chutipong et al. 2014a), Viet Nam or Cambodia (GMA Small Carnivore Workshop 2006). The species has been recorded from many protected areas in some countries of its range. Although it is not confirmed in many protected areas in some countries, notably Myanmar, this is more likely to reflect the patchiness of surveys using methods likely to find this species; many large protected areas in northern South-east Asian evergreen and semi-evergreen forest so far without records presumably support the species. Outside Java there are no obvious conservation needs. Given repeated suggestions of the taxonomic distinctiveness of the genus in Java and its rarity there, the highest priority conservation needs are to clarify the genus's taxonomy and to survey specifically for it in Java so that, if it truly is rare rather than merely under-recorded, areas for its conservation can be identified and managed.

Actions de conservation (2)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert

1_1Site/area protection
2_1Site/area management

Stress écologiques (17)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert

1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_1Ecosystem conversion
1_1Ecosystem conversion
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
1_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation
2_1Species mortality
2_2Species disturbance

Usage & commerce (1)Use & Trade — IUCNExpert

1Food - human
internationalnationalsubsistance

Priorités de recherche (3)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert

1_1Taxonomy
1_2Population size, distribution & trends
3_1Population trends

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

Royaumes biogéographiques

Indomalayan

Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)

Terrestrial

Références bibliographiques (30)Sources scientifiques de l'évaluation IUCNExpert

IUCN. 2024. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2024-2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 28 October 2024).
IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-1. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 30 June 2016).
Chutipong, W., Lynam, A.J., Steinmetz, R., Savini, T. and Gale, G.A. 2014b. Sampling of mammalian carnivores in western Thailand: issues of rarity and detectability. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 65: 521–535.
Chutipong, W., Tantipisanuh, N., Ngoprasert, D., Lynam, A.J., Steinmetz, R., Jenks, K.E., Grassman, L.I., Jr., Tewes, M., Kitamura, S., Baker, M.C., McShea, W., Bhumpakphan, N., Sukmasuang, R., Gale, G.A., Harich, F.K., Treydte, A.C., Cutter, P., Cutter, P.B., Suwanrat, S., Siripattaranukul, K., Hala-Bala Wildlife Research Station, Wildlife Research Division and Duckworth, J.W. 2014a. Current distribution and conservation status of small carnivores in Thailand: a baseline review. Small Carnivore Conservation 51: 96–136.
Nijman, V., Spaan, D., Rode-Margono, E.J., Roberts, P.D., Wirdateti and Nekaris, K.A.I. 2014. Trade in Common Palm Civet Paradoxurus hermaphroditus in Javan and Balinese markets, Indonesia. Small Carnivore Conservation 51: 11–17.
Murali, K.C., Kumar, A., Khatiwara, S. and Bonpo, C. 2014. Further observations of Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata in Namdapha National Park, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 45–46.
Raman, T.R.S. and Zakhuma. 2014. Occurrence of Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata in Dampa Tiger Reserve, Mizoram, India. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 47–49.
Rode-Margono, E.J., Voskamp, A., Spaan, D., Lehtinen, J.K., Roberts, P.D., Nijman, V. and Nekaris, K.A.I. 2014. Records of small carnivores and of medium-sized nocturnal mammals on Java, Indonesia. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 1–11.
Gray, T.N.E., Pin C., Phan C., Crouthers, R., Kamler, J.F. and Prum S. 2014. Camera-trap records of small carnivores from eastern Cambodia, 1999–2013. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 20–24.
Wahyudi, D. and Stuebing, R. 2014. Camera trapping as a conservation tool in a mixed-use landscape in East Kalimantan. Journal of Indonesian Natural History 1(2): 37–46.
Moore, R.S. and Wihermanto. 2014. Observations of Javan Small-toothed Palm Civets Arctogalidia trivirgata trilineata apparently feeding on the nectar of Calliandra calothyrsus. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 68–70.
Kakati, K. and Srikant, S. 2014. First camera-trap record of Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalida trivirgata from India. Small Carnivore Conservation 50: 50–53.
Naniwadekar, R., Shukla, U., Viswanathan, A. and Datta, A. 2013. Records of small carnivores from in and around Namdapha Tiger Reserve, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Small Carnivore Conservation 49: 1–8.
Iseborn, T., Rogers, L.D., Rawson, B. and Nekaris, K.A.I. 2012. Sightings of Common Palm Civets Paradoxurus hermaphroditus and of other civet species at Phnom Samkos Wildlife Sanctuary and Veun Sai–Siem Pang Conservation Area, Cambodia. Small Carnivore Conservation 46: 26–29.
Willcox, D.H.A., Tran Q.P., Vu L., Tran V.B. and Hoang M.D. 2012. Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata records from human-influenced habitats in Vietnam. Small Carnivore Conservation 47: 46–53.
Chua, M.A.H., Lim, K.K.P. and Low, C.H.S. 2012. The diversity and status of the civets (Viverridae) of Singapore. Small Carnivore Conservation 47: 1–10.
Moore, R.S. 2011. Sightings of Javan Small-toothed Palm Civets Arctogalidia trivirgata trilineata on Gunung Salak, West Java, Indonesia. Small Carnivore Conservation 44: 38–39.
Low, C.H.S. 2011. Observations of civets, linsangs, mongooses and non-lutrine mustelids from Peninsular Malaysia. Small Carnivore Conservation 45: 8–13.
Eaton, J.A., Wüst, R., Wirth, R., Shepherd, C.R., Semiadi, G., Hall, J. and Duckworth, J.W. 2010. Recent records of the Javan Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia (trivirgata) trilineata. Small Carnivore Conservation 43: 16–22.
Duckworth, J.W. and Nettelbeck, A.R. 2008. Observations of Small-toothed Palm Civets Arctogalidia trivirgata in Khao Yai National Park, Thailand, with notes on feeding technique. Natural History Bulletin of the Siam Society 55(1): 187–192.
Than Zaw, Saw Htun, Saw Htoo Tha Po, Myint Maung, Lynam, A.J., Kyaw Thinn Latt and Duckworth, J.W. 2008. Status and distribution of small carnivores in Myanmar. Small Carnivore Conservation 38: 2–28.
Belden, G., Stuebing, R. and Nyegang, M. 2007. Small carnivores in mixed-use forest in Bintulu Division, Sarawak, Malaysia. Small Carnivore Conservation 36: 35-37.
Schipper. J. 2007. Camera-trap avoidance by Kinkajous Potos flavus: rethinking the “non-invasive” paradigm. Small Carnivore Conservation 36: 38-41.
Holden, J. 2006. Small carnivores in central Sumatra. Small Carnivore Conservation 34/35: 35-38.
Su Su. 2005. Small carnivores and their threats in Hlawga Wildlife Park, Myanmar. Small Carnivore Conservation 33: 6-13.
Borissenko, A.V., Ivanova, N. . and Polet, G. 2004. First recent record of the Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata from Vietnam. Small Carnivore Conservation 30: 5–6.
Bell, D., Roberton, S. and Hunter, P.R. 2004. Animal origins of SARS coronavirus: possible links with the international trade in small carnivores. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences 359: 1107–1114.
Suyanto, A. 2003. Mammals of Gunung Halimun National Park, West Java. Puslit-Biologi-LIPI, Bogor, Indonesia.
Walston, J.L. and Duckworth, J.W. 2003. The first record of Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata from Cambodia, with notes on surveying the species. Small Carnivore Conservation 28: 12–13.
Colon, C.P. 2002. Ranging behaviour and activity of the Malay civet (Viverra tangalunga) in a logged and an unlogged forest in Danum Valley, East Malaysia. Journal of Zoology (London) 257: 473–485.

Évaluateurs & contributeurs (3)Personnes ayant contribué à l'évaluation IUCNExpert

assessor

Willcox, D.H.A., Duckworth, J.W., Timmins, R.J., Chutipong, W., Choudhury, A.U., Roberton, S., Long, B., Hearn, A. & Ross, J.

contributor

Azlan, M.J.

evaluator

Schipper, J.

⚠ 1 erratum publié après l'évaluation.

Willcox, D.H.A., Duckworth, J.W., Timmins, R.J., Chutipong, W., Choudhury, A.U., Roberton, S., Long, B., Hearn, A. & Ross, J. 2024. Arctogalidia trivirgata (amended version of 2016 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2024: e.T41691A259342969. Accessed on 05 May 2026.

Traits biologiques

22 valeurs · 6 sources

Morphologie(4)

Masse adulte: 2,01 kg; AnAge
Longueur: 52,7 cm; PanTHERIA
Masse naissance: -999000 mg; PanTHERIA
Masse au sevrage: -999000 mg; PanTHERIA

Cycle de vie(1)

Longévité max: 16 ans; AnAge

Voir 17 traits de plus (3 catégories)

Reproduction(6)

Sevrage: 2 mois; AnAge
Taille de portée: 3; AnAge
Portées par an: 2; AnAge
Maturité sexuelle: 3 ans; AnAge
Gestation: 1,5 mois; AnAge
Intervalle naissances: 6 mois; AnAge

Écologie & habitat(9)

Invertébrés (%): 20 %; elton_mammals
Graines (%): 0 %; elton_mammals
Fruits (%): 20 %; elton_mammals
Nectar (%): 0 %; elton_mammals
Charognard (%): 0 %; elton_mammals
Poissons (%): 0 %; elton_mammals
Autre végétal (%): 0 %; elton_mammals
Vert. ectothermes (%): 20 %; elton_mammals
Vert. endothermes (%): 40 %; elton_mammals

Divers(2)

Taux métabolique: 3.08 W; AnAge
Température corporelle: 36,2 °C; AnAge

Sources priorisées par qualité scientifique (peer-reviewed spécialisées → Wikidata fallback). Unités auto-converties, valeur max retenue en cas de mesures multiples. Méthodologie · Citations.

Répartition mondiale

Aucune observation géoréférencée avec précision suffisante (<10 km) dans GBIF pour cette espèce.

Chant

1 captation · Xeno-canto

cri d’alarmeA

Hot-link CDN Xeno-canto. Chaque captation porte sa propre licence Creative Commons (visible quand la piste est active) et l'attribution de son auteur.

Consulter sur les bases externes

Taxonomie

CoL XR Wikispecies Wikidata Wikipedia FR

Observations & statuts

GBIF iNaturalist EOL IUCN

Cartographie

GBIF Maps

Bibliographie

BHL OpenAlex

Note nomenclaturale & synonymesDétails taxonomiques + synonymes CoLExpert

Note nomenclaturale

TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHN

Synonymes (18)— redirigent vers cette page

Arctogalidia sumatranaLyon, 1908
Arctogalidia tingiaLyon, 1908
Arctogalidia trivirgata bancanaSchwarz, 1913
Arctogalidia trivirgata fuscaMiller, 1906
Arctogalidia trivirgata inornataMiller, 1901
Arctogalidia trivirgata leucotis(Horsfield, 1851)
Arctogalidia trivirgata macraMiller, 1913
Arctogalidia trivirgata majorMiller, 1906
Arctogalidia trivirgata millsiWroughton, 1921
Arctogalidia trivirgata minorLyon, 1906
Arctogalidia trivirgata simplexMiller, 1902
Arctogalidia trivirgata stigmatica(Temminck, 1853)
Arctogalidia trivirgata stigmaticus(Temminck, 1853)
Arctogalidia trivirgata sumatranaLyon, 1908
Arctogalidia trivirgata tingiaLyon, 1908
Arctogalidia trivirgata trilineata(Wagner, 1841)
Arctogalidia trivirgata trivirgata(Gray, 1832)
Paradoxurus trivirgatusGray, 1832

Sources : Catalogue of Life Cross-References (synonymes) · TAXREF v18 INPN/MNHN (commentaires FR).