Chat de Biet

Felis bietiA. Milne-Edwards, 1892

Animal

VULR 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 Felis bieti 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

4 partenaires écologiques documentés directement dans GloBI.

Partenaires

Espèces avec interactions documentées

Types d'interactions

Prédation, pollinisation, parasitisme…

Connectance

0.143

Densité des liens dans le sous-graphe affiché

Rang animalia

59 %

Percentile vs ensemble des animalia

Liste rouge IUCN

VU · Vulnérablecritères C1↘Décroissante

Évaluation complète

Évaluation: 2022 · v3.1
Altitude: 2000 – 5000 m
Profondeur: – m

État de la populationTexte officiel évaluation IUCNExpert

Population trend is decreasing. The population is only distributed in the eastern part of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, and there is a high likelihood of fragmentation. The population is considered to be declining given the continued threats, expanded infrastructure construction in the area, lack of protection, indirect poisoning, and the apparent scarcity in surveyed areas. The open availability of skin trade in the range areas, though sporadic and at a low level, suggest a continued presence of hunting in spite of legal protection. Based on the pressures on the habitat of the Chinese Mountain Cat and the evidence of hybridization with domestic cats potentially jeopardizing the genetic integrity of the species, a continuing decline in mature individuals of 10% over the next 10 years is projected.

Based on the extent of occurrence (EOO) of 941,620 km² of the species and applying density estimates from the closely related wildcat, the number of mature individuals of the Chinese Mountain Cat can conservatively be estimated at less than 10,000 mature individuals. We can assume that only a part of the EOO is inhabited by the species based on the records collected. Therefore, for the population size estimation, we assumed a conservative occupancy range of 50% and 25% of the EOO, which corresponds to 470,810 km² and 235,405 km², respectively. We further assumed a density range of 1–10 individuals/100 km². Thus, the population was estimated at 2,354–47,081. Assuming that 50% of the individuals are mature, we estimate a population size of 1,177–23,540 mature individuals. Based on this calculation and considering all the threats currently acting on the species and further emerging threats, we conservatively estimate less than 10,000 mature individuals.

Menaces identifiées(10 menaces classées CMP-IUCN)

1_1
Housing & urban areas
UnknownUnknownOngoing
1_2
Commercial & industrial areas
UnknownUnknownOngoing
1_3
Tourism & recreation areas
UnknownUnknownOngoing
2_3_1
Nomadic grazing
UnknownUnknownOngoing
2_3_2
Small-holder grazing, ranching or farming
UnknownUnknownOngoing
2_3_3
Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming
UnknownUnknownOngoing
4_1
Roads & railroads
UnknownUnknownOngoing
5_1_1
Intentional use (species is the target)
UnknownUnknownOngoing
5_1_2
Unintentional effects (species is not the target)
UnknownUnknownOngoing
8_3
Introduced genetic material
UnknownUnknownOngoing

Description complète des menacesTexte détaillé évaluation IUCNExpert

As in the previous assessments (Sanderson et al. 2010a, Riordan et al. 2015), accidental killing through the control of rodents and pikas using poisons and illegal trade for furs likely remain threats to F. bieti. Small mammal control programmes using poisonous chemicals still occur in the region.

Killing for the skin trade and for articles of traditional clothing and accessories was once widespread in part of the range and might still exist (Chen et al. 2005), though probably only on a small scale now and an opportunistic basis, as the cat’s skin does not have a high value in the market. There are no reliable figures for the number of skins in trade and most numbers were gathered through direct observation. In Sichuan province, 30 Chinese Mountain Cat pelts were taken in 1980. Around 50 skins were reported to be openly sold in Songpan and Jiuzhaigou in 1998 and 2001, and in three towns (Kangding, Tagong, and Luhuo) in Ganzi in 2005 (Wang 1990, Nowell and Jackson 1996, Chen et al. 2005). In 1986, George Schaller counted 16 Chinese Mountain Cat skins for sale in the markets in Lingxia, Gansu province (Sunquist and Sunquist 2002). International market and trade of the cat’s skin do not seem to be a major threat.

In addition, we evaluated that grazing and infrastructure development are leading to habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation in the region (for instance, see the impact of roads on the Plateau endemic species such as the Tibetan antelope by Xu et al. 2019 and Przewalski’s gazelle by Yu et al. 2017) may influence the Chinese Mountain Cat as well. Incidences of human-caused mortality such as road kills have been reported in recent years (Li S, Song D, Liu Y, pers. obs., 2020). These habitat-associated factors may have been underestimated and likely threaten the free-ranging population of the Chinese Mountain Cat. More field studies and monitoring are needed in this respect.

Furthermore, we cannot overlook the potential of genetic introgression from local domestic cats to Chinese mountain cats, which, if confirmed, would be an issue with profound conservation implications. A recent study (Yu et al. 2021) revealed a widespread signal of genetic admixture from F. bieti to sympatric F. catus that are likely recent Plateau arrivals, raising the concern of the opposite direction of gene flow that may potentially disrupt the genetic integrity of the Chinese Mountain Cat. A complex hybridization scenario is also evident for an ancient introgression from the Asiatic wildcat to the Chinese Mountain Cat. A greater sampling and assessment of genetic materials from individuals living in the wild is urgently required to be able to examine the issue concerning hybridization between the Chinese Mountain Cat and local domestic cats as well as to further clarify its taxonomy (see taxonomic notes).

Overall, there is an immediate need to assess the efficacy of current measures in place for the protection of the species, including the effectiveness of current protected area management to safeguard China’s only endemic felid.

Habitats préférentiels (classification IUCN)

1_4Forest - Temperate★
3_4Shrubland - Temperate★
4_4Grassland - Temperate★
8_2Desert - Temperate★

Mesures de conservation recommandéesStratégies de conservation IUCNExpert

The Chinese Mountain Cat is included on CITES Appendix II (http://www.cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php). It has been upgraded to list of the National First-Class Protected Animals under the Law of the People’s Republic of on the Conservation of Wild Animals in February 2021. This revision of China’s protected species list marks the first major update of the inventory since its introduction in 1989 and also represents a landmark event for the conservation of the Chinese Mountain Cat. It is now under the highest level of protection measure by the wildlife legislations of China, in which any person hunts, kills, or trades the species in violation of the law would bear criminal liability.

In the past decade, the implementation of infrared camera trapping in conservation and monitoring programmes in protected areas (e.g. national parks, nature reserves) has revealed many more confirmed records of the Chinese Mountain Cats over its range (Han et al. 2020). Nevertheless, there is an urgent need for a full and systematic survey of the Chinese Mountain Cat. Basic information such as the identification of key areas and populations, abundance and threats assessments are required to develop effective conservation action plans. There is an urgent need to assess the efficacy of current measures in place for the protection of the species, including the effectiveness of current protected area management to safeguard China’s only endemic felid.

Actions de conservation (10)Conservation Actions Classification Scheme — IUCNExpert

1_1Site/area protection
1_2Resource & habitat protection
2_2Invasive/problematic species control
3_1_2Trade management
3_4_1Captive breeding/artificial propagation
3_4_2Genome resource bank
4_2Training
4_3Awareness & communications
5_1_2National level
5_4_2National level

Stress écologiques (10)Stresses Classification — IUCNExpert

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_2Ecosystem degradation
1_2Ecosystem degradation

Usage & commerce (1)Use & Trade — IUCNExpert

10Wearing apparel, accessories
internationalnationalsubsistance

Priorités de recherche (13)Research Needed Classification — IUCNExpert

1_1Taxonomy
1_2Population size, distribution & trends
1_3Life history & ecology
1_4Harvest, use & livelihoods
1_5Threats
1_6Actions
2_1Species Action/Recovery Plan
2_2Area-based Management Plan
2_3Harvest & Trade Management Plan
3_1Population trends
3_2Harvest level trends
3_3Trade trends
3_4Habitat trends

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

Royaumes biogéographiques

Palearctic

Systèmes (terrestre/eau douce/marin)

Terrestrial

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

IUCN. 2022. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-1. Available at: <a href="www.iucnredlist.org">www.iucnredlist.org</a>. (Accessed: 21 July 2022).
Yu, H., Xing, Y.-T., Meng, H., He, B., L, W.-J., Qi, X.-Z., Zhao, J.-Y., Zhuang, Y., Xu, X., Yamaguchi, N., Driscoll, C.A., O’Brien, S.J. and Luo, S.-J. 2021. Genomic evidence for the Chinese mountain cat as a wildcat conspecific (Felis silvestris bieti) and its introgression to domestic cats. Science Advances 7: eabg0221.
Han, X.S., Chen, H.Q., Dong, Z.Y., Xiao, L.Y., Zhao, X. and Lu, Z. 2020. Discovery of first active breeding den of Chinese Mountain Cat (Felis bieti). Zoological Research 41: 341-344.
Xu, W, Huang, Q, Stabach, J, Buho, H, Leimgruber, P. 2019. Railway underpass location affects migration distance in Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii). PLoS One 14(2): e0211798.
Kitchener, A.C., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Eizirik, E., Gentry, A., Werdelin, L., Wilting, A., Yamaguchi, N., Abramov, A.V., Christiansen, P., Driscoll, C., Duckworth, J.W., Johnson, W., Luo, S.-J., Meijaard, E., O'Donoghue, P., Sanderson, J., Seymour, K., Bruford, M., Groves, C., Hoffman, M., Nowell, K., Timmons, Z. and Tobe, S. 2017. A revised taxonomy of the Felidae. The final report of the Cat Classification Task Force of the IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group. Cat News Special Issue 11.
Yu, H., Song, S., Liu, J., Li, S., Zhang, L., Wang, D., and Luo, S.-J. 2017. Effects of the Qinghai-Tibet railway on the landscape genetics of the endangered Przewalski’s gazelle (Procapra przewalskii). Scientific Reports 7: 17983.
Li, G., Davis, B.W., Eizirik, E. and Murphy, W.J. 2016. Phylogenomic evidence for ancient hybridization in the genomes of living cats (Felidae). Genome Research 26: 1-11.
Webb, R., Francis, S., Telfer, P. and Guillemont, A. 2016. Chinese mountain cat and Pallas's cat co-existing on the Tibetan Plateau in Sinchuan. Cat News 63: 31-33.
Riordan, P., Sanderson, J., Bao, W., Abdukadir, A. and Shi, K. 2015. Felis bieti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T8539A50651398. Available at: <a href=". https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T8539A50651398.en.">. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T8539A50651398.en.</a>. (Accessed: 25 June 2021.).
Sanderson, J., Yin, Y. and Drubgayal, N. 2010b. Of the only endemic cat species in China. Cat News Special Issue 5: 18-20.
Sanderson, J., Mallon, D.P. and Driscoll, C. 2010a. Felis bieti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.T8539A12915152.
Kitchener, A.C. and Rees, E.E. 2009. Modelling the dynamic biogeography of the wildcat: implications for taxonomy and conservation. Journal of Zoology 279(2): 144-155.
State Forestry Administration of China. 2009. National Survey of China‘s Key Terrestrial Wildlife Species. China Forestry Publishing House, Beijing, China.
Smith, A.T. and Xie, Y. 2008. A Guide to the Mammals of China. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Driscoll, C.A., Menotti-Raymond, M., Roca, A.L. Hupe, K., Johnson, W.E., Geffen, E., Harley, E.H., Delibes, M., Pontier, D., Kitchener, A.C., Yamaguchi, N., O’Brien, S.J. and Macdonald, D.W. 2007. The Near Eastern origin of cat domestication. Science 317: 519-523.
Yin, Y.F., Drubygal, Achu, Lu, Z. and Sanderson, J. 2007. First photographs in nature of the Chinese mountain cat. Cat News 47: 6-7.
Johnson, A., Vongkhamheng, C., Hedemark, M. and Saithongdam, T. 2006. Effects of human-carnivore conflict on tiger (Panthera tigris) and prey populations in Lao PDR. Animal Conservation 9: 421-430.
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. Science 311: 73-77.
Chen, N.M., Li, L., Shan, S., Yin, Y.F., and Sanderson, J. 2005. Status of the Chinese mountain cat in Sichuan province (China). Cat News 43: 25-27.
He, L., García-Perea, R., Li, M. and Wei, F. 2004. Distribution and conservation status of the endemic Chinese mountain cat Felis bieti. Oryx 38(1): 55-61.
Sunquist, M. and Sunquist, F. 2002. Wild Cats of the World. University of Chicago Press.
Wang, S. 1998. China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals. Pisces. National Environmental Protection Agency.
Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. 1996. Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Tan, B.J. 1991. Chinese desert cat. Typescript.
Wang, S. 1990. The Chinese desert cat (Felis bieti). Felid 4: 1.
Liao, Y. 1988. Some biological informations on desert cat in Qinghai. Acta Theriologica Sinica 8: 128-131.
Gao, Y. et al. 1987. Fauna Sinica. Mammalia. Vol.8: Carnivora. Science Press, Beijing, China [in Chinese].
Groves, C.P. 1980. The Chinese Mountain Cat (Felis bieti). Carnivores 3: 35-41.
Corbet, G.B. 1978. The Mammals of the Palaearctic Region: a Taxonomic Review. British Museum (Natural History) and Cornell University Press, London, UK and Ithaca, NY, USA.
Guggisberg, C.A.W. 1975. Wild Cats of the World. Taplinger Publishing Company, New York, USA.

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

assessor

Luo, S.-J., Han, S., Song, D., Li, S., Liu, Y., He, B., Zhang, M. & Yamaguchi, N.

evaluator

Mallon, D.P., Riordan, P. & Sanderson, J.

Luo, S.-J., Han, S., Song, D., Li, S., Liu, Y., He, B., Zhang, M. & Yamaguchi, N. 2022. Felis bieti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2022: e.T8539A213200674. Accessed on 05 May 2026.

Traits biologiques

20 valeurs · 5 sources

Morphologie(4)

Masse adulte: 5,49 kg; PanTHERIA
Longueur: 78,4 cm; PanTHERIA
Masse naissance: -999000 mg; PanTHERIA
Masse au sevrage: -999000 mg; PanTHERIA

Cycle de vie(1)

Longévité max: -999 mois; PanTHERIA

Voir 15 traits de plus (2 catégories)

Reproduction(6)

Taille de portée: -999; PanTHERIA
Sevrage: -999 j; PanTHERIA
Portées par an: -999; PanTHERIA
Gestation: -999 j; PanTHERIA
Intervalle naissances: -999 j; PanTHERIA
Maturité sexuelle: -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.