Ontologia

Chat doré

Caracal aurata(Temminck, 1827)

VULR Monde (IUCN)
  1. Animal
  2. Chordata
  3. Mammalia
  4. Carnivora
  5. Felidae
Pays · région · aire protégée · écorégion · biome
Chargement du graphe…

Indicateurs du réseau écologique

Comment lire ce graphe

Ce graphe représente les interactions écologiques documentées entre Caracal aurata 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

23 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires
23
Espèces avec interactions documentées
Types d'interactions
6
Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…
Connectance
0.055
Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché
Rang animalia
87 %
Percentile vs ensemble des animalia

Liste rouge IUCN

VU · Vulnérablecritères A2c+3cDécroissante
Évaluation complète
Évaluation
2015 · v3.1
Altitude
03600 m
Profondeur
m
État de la populationExpert

The African Golden Cat is infrequently observed in the wild, and generally considered rare. In areas of heavy human hunting, Golden Cats were not recorded (e.g. Dibouka village in central Gabon (Henschel 2008) and Korup National Park (NP) in southwest Cameroon (TEAM, http://www.teamnetwork.org)). In an area of putatively suitable habitat in Equatorial Guinea, just 16% of the area was found to be occupied by African Golden Cats due to human disturbance (Martinez Marti 2011).

Menaces identifiées(10 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

  • 2_2_2
    Agro-industry plantations
    Rapid DeclinesMinority (<50%)Future
  • 3_2
    Mining & quarrying
    Rapid DeclinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
  • 5_1_2
    Unintentional effects (species is not the target)
    Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
  • 5_3_4
    Unintentional effects: (large scale) [harvest]
    Rapid DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
  • 2_1_1
    Shifting agriculture
    Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Ongoing
  • 2_1_2
    Small-holder farming
    Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Ongoing
  • 2_3_2
    Small-holder grazing, ranching or farming
    Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMinority (<50%)Ongoing
  • 5_3_5
    Motivation Unknown/Unrecorded
    Causing/Could cause fluctuationsMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
  • 2_1_3
    Agro-industry farming
    Slow, Significant DeclinesMinority (<50%)Ongoing
  • 4_1
    Roads & railroads
    Slow, Significant DeclinesMajority (50-90%)Ongoing
Description complète des menacesExpert
At least 6.5% of forest (projected from FAO 2011) in Golden Cat range countries has been lost in the past three Golden Cat generations (15 years, Pacifici et al. 2013). This translates into, at minimum, an equivalent loss of range for the Golden Cat as a result of habitat loss and fragmentation. Prior to the year 2000, West and East Africa had already suffered an 88-92% reduction in rainforest, while Central Africa’s rainforest extent was reduced by 40% (Laurance et al. 2006).

Intensive hunting for bushmeat (>1 million tonnes per year harvested in the Congo Basin, the species’ main stronghold; Wilkie and Carpenter 1999), leading to ‘empty forest syndrome’ (Sayer 1992), likely accounts for greater reduction in area of occupancy (AOO) for the Golden Cat than deforestation, but is more difficult to quantify. Within 10–15 km of roads and settlements, large and medium bodied mammals experience sharp declines in population (Laurance et al. 2006, Blake et al. 2007, Henschel 2008). In excess of 64% of forest habitat in the Congo Basin lies within 10 km of a road and is also predicted to be affected by higher hunting pressure (Blake et al. 2007). Development of roads increased rapidly in the past 15 years (e.g. 35% increase in the Democratic Republic of Congo and >300% increase in northern Republic of Congo since the year 2000; Laporte et al. 2007). Golden Cat populations within these highly impacted areas are likely to be severely reduced or extirpated through direct mortality and loss of prey.

Golden cats are often not a primary target species, but are frequently killed by wire-snares (four individuals in two months in 20 km2 in Gabon; Bahaa-el-din pers. obs.; and 13 individuals in three months in Lobéké, Cameroon; Ray et al. 2005), probably owing to similarities in body size and trail use to target species such as duikers. In an area of moderate bushmeat hunting, Golden Cats were recorded at less than a quarter of the population densities that they are found at in pristine areas (Bahaa-el-din et al. in prep). Where more intense hunting occurs, such as in village hunting areas (e.g. Dibouka village in central Gabon; Henschel 2008) and national parks (e.g. Korup NP in southwest Cameroon; TEAM, http://www.teamnetwork.org), camera trap and bushmeat studies did not record the species despite the presence of suitable habitat contiguous with the main forest of the Congo Basin.

Recent landscape-scale Golden Cat surveys in mainland Equatorial Guinea (Rio Muni) emphasize that prior range estimates based on forest cover may have significantly overestimated remaining golden cat range. An estimated 78% of Rio Muni consists of tropical dense forest and therefore putatively suitable habitat, but Golden Cats were found to occupy just 16% of the area (Martinez Marti 2011). Its presence in the area was correlated with rugged, inaccessible terrain away from human disturbance (Martinez Marti 2011). Golden Cats were reported by locals to be easy to hunt and locally extirpated long before other medium-to-large mammal species (Martinez Marti 2011).

These threats will intensify, as the human population within the species’ range shows the fastest growth rates in the world (+2.6-2.8% per annum for West, Central and East Africa; FAO 2011). The population in main Golden Cat range countries, estimated at nearly a quarter of a billion for 2013, is projected to almost quadruple by 2100 (UN 2012, http://esa.un.org/wpp/).

The current “stampede of foreign investment” in mining activities and associated infrastructure development in Africa is of immediate concern (Edwards et al. 2014). In Central Africa, 42% of ecologically important areas would be directly impacted if there were complete development of mineral resources in the region (assuming that ecological impacts extend within 10 km of mines; Edwards et al. 2014). China’s mineral investment alone has quadrupled in 10 years (Zhang 2011). In addition, it is predicted that the conversion of forests to oil palm plantations, which has caused extensive loss of forest habitat and biodiversity in Southeast Asia, will have similar impacts in Africa (particularly in West and Central Africa) as it expands over the coming years (Wich et al. 2014). The realisation of these investments includes habitat destruction and degradation, relocation of human populations into previously remote areas and massive-scale infrastructural development including road and rail which in turn lead to the aforementioned surge in bushmeat hunting in these areas (Edwards et al. 2014).

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

  • 1_5Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
  • 1_6Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
  • 1_7Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Mangrove Vegetation Above High Tide Level
  • 1_9Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane
Mesures de conservation recommandéesExpert
Included on CITES Appendix II. Hunting of this species is prohibited in Angola, Benin, Burkina Faso, Congo, Ghana, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Democratic Republic of Congo, with hunting regulations in place in Gabon, Liberia and Togo (Nowell and Jackson 1996).

Key protected areas for the species include: Gola F.R. (Sierra Leone), Mount Nimba Strict N.R. (Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea), Sapo N.P. (Liberia), Taï and Comoé National Parks (Côte d'Ivoire), Gashaka Gumti N.P. (Nigeria), Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon), Lopé N.P. and Ivindo N.P. (Gabon), Odzala and Nouabale-Ndoki National Parks (Congo Republic) and Dzangha-Ndoki National Parks (CAR), Virunga N.P. (DR Congo), Queen Elizabeth and Bwindi Impenetrable National Parks (Uganda) (Butynski and Ray 2013).

There is a need for further survey work to acquire reliable population density estimates in various forest types, including disturbed habitats, in order to help better determine the population status across the range of the species.
Actions de conservation (7)Expert
  • 1_1Site/area protection
  • 1_2Resource & habitat protection
  • 2_1Site/area management
  • 5_1_2National level
  • 5_2Policies and regulations
  • 5_3Private sector standards & codes
  • 5_4_2National level
Stress écologiques (19)Expert
  • 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
  • 1_3Indirect ecosystem effects
  • 2_1Species mortality
  • 2_1Species mortality
  • 2_2Species disturbance
Usage & commerce (3)Expert
  • 10Wearing apparel, accessories
    subsistance
  • 11Other household goods
    subsistance
  • 3Medicine - human & veterinary
    subsistance
Priorités de recherche (8)Expert
  • 1_2Population size, distribution & trends
  • 1_3Life history & ecology
  • 1_4Harvest, use & livelihoods
  • 1_5Threats
  • 1_6Actions
  • 3_1Population trends
  • 3_4Habitat trends
  • 4Other
Niche IUCN globaleExpert

Royaumes biogéographiques

Afrotropical

Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)

Terrestrial
Références bibliographiques (24)Expert
  1. IUCN. 2015. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 23 June 2015).
  2. Wich, S.A., Garcia-Ulloa, J., Kühl, H.S., Humle, T., Lee, J.S. and Koh, L.P. 2014. Will oil palm's homecoming spell doom for Africa's great apes? <i>Current Biology</i> 24: 1659–1663.
  3. Edwards, D.P., Sloan, S., Weng, L., Dirks, P., Sayer, J. and Laurance, W.F. 2014. Mining and the African environment. <i>Conservation Letters</i> 7(3): 302-311.
  4. Pacifici, M., Santini, L., Di Marco, M., Baisero, D., Francucci, L., Grottolo Marasini, G., Visconti, P. and Rondinini, C. 2013. Generation length for mammals. <i>Nature Conservation</i> 5: 87–94.
  5. Ray, J. and Butynski, T. 2013. <i>Profelis aurata</i>. In: J. Kingdon and M. Hoffmann (eds), <i>The Mammals of Africa. Volume V: Carnivores, Pangolins, Equids and Rhinoceroses</i>, Bloomsbury Publishing, London.
  6. FAO. 2011. State of the world's forests. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome.
  7. Martinez Marti, C. 2011. The leopard (<i>Panthera pardus</i>) and the golden cat (<i>Caracal aurata</i>) in Equatorial Guinea: A national assessment of status, distribution and threat. Conservation International & Panthera, New York.
  8. Zhang, H. 2011. Trends in Chinese trade and investment in Africa’s mining sector. Chinese Academy of Land Resources and Economy. Unpublished report.
  9. Henschel, P. 2008. The conservation biology of the leopard <i>Panthera pardus</i> in Gabon: Status, threats and strategies for conservation. PhD Thesis. University of Göttingen, Göttingen.
  10. Laporte, N.T., Stabach, J.A., Grosch, R., Lin, T.S. and Goetz, S.J. 2007. Expansion of industrial logging in Central Africa. <i>Science</i> 316(5830): 1451.
  11. Blake, S., Strindberg, S., Boudjan, P., Makombo, C., Inogwabini, B.-I., Ilambu, O., Grossmann, F., Bene-Bene, L., de Semboli, B., Mbenzo, V., S'Hwa, D., Bayogo, R., Williamson, L., Fay, M., Hart, J. and Maisels, F. 2007. Forest elephant crisis in the Congo Basin. <i>Plos Biology</i> 5: 945-953.
  12. Laurance, W.F., Croes, B.M., Tchignoumba, L., Lahm, S. A., Alonso, A., Lee, M.E., Campbell, P. and Ondzeano, C. 2006. Impacts of roads and hunting on Central African rainforest mammals. <i>Conservation Biology</i> 20(4): 1251-1261.
  13. Johnson, W.E., Eizirik, E., Pecon-Slattery, J., Murphy, W.J., Antunes, A., Teeling, E. and O'Brien, S.J. 2006. The late Miocene radiation of modern Felidae: a genetic assessment. <i>Science</i> 311: 73-77.
  14. Wozencraft, W.C. 2005. Order Carnivora. In: D.E. Wilson and D.M. Reeder (eds), <i>Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Third Edition</i>, pp. 532-628. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  15. Ray, J.C., Hunter, L. and Zigouris, J. 2005. Setting conservation and research priorities for larger African carnivores. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, USA.
  16. Henschel, P., Abernethy, K.A. and White, L.J.T. 2005. Leopard food habits in the Lope National Park, Gabon, Central Africa. <i>African Journal of Ecology</i> 43: 21-28.
  17. Ray, J.C. and Sunquist, M.E. 2001. Trophic relations in a community of African rainforest carnivores. <i>Oecologia</i> 127: 395-408.
  18. Wilkie, D.S. and Carpenter, J.F. 1999. Bushmeat hunting in the Congo Basin. An assessment of impact and options for mitigation. <i>Biodiversity Conservation</i> 8: 927–945.
  19. Hart, J.A., Katembo, M. and Punga, K. 1996. Diet, prey selection and ecological relations of leopard and golden cat in the Ituri Forest, Zaire. <i>African Journal of Ecology</i> 34: 364-379.
  20. Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. 1996. <i>Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan</i>. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
  21. Sayer, J. 1992. A future for Africa’s tropical forests. In: J.A. Sayer C.S. Harcourt and N.M. Collins (eds), <i>Africa: The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forest</i>, pp. 81-93. Macmillan, London.
  22. Král, B., and Zima, J. 1980. Karyosystematika celedi Felidae. <i>Gazella (Prague)</i> 2/3: 45-53.
  23. Kingdon, J. 1977. <i>East African Mammals: An Atlas of Evolution in Africa. Volume IIIA (Carnivores)</i>. Academic Press, London, UK.
  24. Pocock, R.I. 1917. The classification of the existing Felidae. <i>Annals and Magazine of Natural History, ser. 8</i> 20: 329-350.
Évaluateurs & contributeurs (3)Expert
assessor
Bahaa-el-din, L., Mills, D., Hunter, L. & Henschel, P.
contributor
Sogbohossou, E.
evaluator
Nowell, K., Hoffmann, M., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Lanz, T. & Breitenmoser, U.

Bahaa-el-din, L., Mills, D., Hunter, L. & Henschel, P. 2015. Caracal aurata. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T18306A50663128. Accessed on 05 May 2026.

Traits biologiques

20 valeurs · 6 sources

Morphologie(4)

Masse adulte
11 kg
AnAge
Masse naissance
248 g
AnAge
Longueur
79,8 cm
PanTHERIA
Masse au sevrage
-999000 mg
PanTHERIA

Cycle de vie(1)

Longévité max
21 ans
AnAge
Voir 15 traits de plus (2 catégories)

Reproduction(6)

Taille de portée
2
AnAge
Sevrage
3,9 mois
PanTHERIA
Portées par an
-999
PanTHERIA
Maturité sexuelle
1,8 ans
AnAge
Gestation
2,7 mois
AnAge
Intervalle naissances
-999 j
PanTHERIA

Écologie & habitat(9)

Invertébrés (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Graines (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Fruits (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Nectar (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Charognard (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Poissons (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Autre végétal (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Vert. ectothermes (%)
0 %
elton_mammals
Vert. endothermes (%)
100 %
elton_mammals

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.

Consulter sur les bases externes

Observations & statuts

Cartographie

Bibliographie

Note nomenclaturale & synonymesExpert

Note nomenclaturale

TAXREF v18 — INPN/MNHN

Synonymes (3)— redirigent vers cette page

  • Felis aurataTemminck, 1827
  • Profelis aurata(Temminck, 1827)
  • Profelis aurata cottoni(Lydekker, 1907)

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