Revalidation of Manis aurita , based on integrative genomic and morphological evidence

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,739 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
ABSTRACT Pangolins face severe conservation threats globally, necessitating accurate taxonomy for effective conservation. Previous genomic research on the Chinese pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) identified two deeply divergent lineages (MPA and MPB), suggesting underestimated species diversity. The recent description of M. indoburmanica (corresponding to MPB), however, did not assess its relationship with historical names, particularly the subspecies M. p. aurita, leaving the group’s taxonomic status uncertain. To resolve this issue, we employed an integrative framework, analyzing genomic and morphological data from museum specimens including the lectotype of M. p. aurita to clarify phylogenetic relationships and taxonomy within M. pentadactyla sensu lato. Our results demonstrate that MPB, which includes both M. indoburmanica and M. p. aurita, is geographically restricted to the southern Himalayas and thus distinct from other M. pentadactyla populations. Genomic analyses indicate the two clades diverged ∼1.8 Ma and have remained largely isolated, with only minimal gene flow with congeners. Furthermore, morphometric analyses of both cranial and external features reveal consistent and significant differentiation between the Himalayan lineage (MPB) and M. pentadactyla sensu stricto. Collectively, these congruent findings provide unequivocal support for the revalidation of Manis aurita Hodgson, 1836, thereby establishing it as a distinct extant species of Asian pangolin. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes Revised manuscript has updated figures, tables. We have added new WGS data from lectotype. http://datadryad.org/share/tUnpoAtBaYbC-LxLmopIeUXwwngHX96olu7F6k_uTBk

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00