Talk:Jaguarundi

Jaguarundi has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 22, 2020. (Reviewed version).

	This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mammals Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Central America
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Central America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Central America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Central AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Central AmericaCentral America articles

South America: Ecuador / Guyana / Suriname / Venezuela / French Guiana Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ecuador (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Guyana (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Suriname (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Venezuela (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by the French Guiana work group (assessed as Low-importance).

A fact from Jaguarundi appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 June 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi has several features in common with mustelids such as otters and weasels? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jaguarundi.

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

• Jaguarundi have been found in Florida as well, thought to have been raised as pets by natives to keep rodent populationss down in their villages. (One was seen in my neighbor's backyard about two months ago in Punta Gorda, FL)

• An addition to this not mentioned in this text anywhere is that they have been seen in southern Arizona. I have seen one my self In the Pajarito Mountains which come up into southern Arizona from Mexico. (added by Kevin Rigg) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.246.89.234 (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• There has never been a documented Jaguarundi in Florida. Take a look. http://www.lakecityreporter.com/articles/2004/08/29/news/top_story/news01.txt--Counsel 00:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For an interesting read and list of sightings about jaguarundi in FL (although old) read On the Trail of the Jaguarondi by Wilfred Neill, Florida Wildlife, July 1961. Personally, I've heard many supposed sightings, but I think they are cats, mink, or otters. It's possible that a captive escapes not an again, but I don't believe there is a breeding population. As the FWC article above says, at least one would get hit on the road now and again. --Paddling bear 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Texas: Jaguarundi

Despite its name, the jaguarundi's closet relative is the mountain lion. It does not share either's ferocious reputation mostly because the rodent hunter is only 30 inches from nose to tail. They are also born with spots like a leopard but lose them with age. The mini cat that looks more like a weasel than a cougar is common in Central and South America, where it was used as a Pied Piper on small village rat populations, but the Gulf Coast of the Lone Star State is the only place they are found in the states, according to Big Cat Rescue. The often solitary animals occasionally forage and travel in pairs, communicating with 13 distinct recorded vocalizations. Carrie Bell 7/13/2018

WikiCats: I've raised this to B-class, since subheaders, and several citations, have been added since it was rated at Start-class, making for a well laid out and informative article, but still falling short of GA status. Anaxial 20:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have Wild Cats of the World, 2002, which states jaguarundi is debated between Herpailurus and Felis, but no mention of Puma. I wanted someone to check that citation, are we sure it's now Puma? Even though genetics suggest they split from that lineage, it doesn't mean they are in Puma. I think the right side bar with taxonomy should go with accepted name until a new one is accepted, so while there is debate, side bar should say Herpailurus as my book does. Thanks, [User:Paddling bear|Paddling bear]] 21:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

No response yet, but either we need a citation for the paragraph saying they are in genus puma or I edit it back. An article that says genetic research finds that puma and jaguarundi are related doesn't mean that the accepted binomial name was changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paddling bear (talk • contribs) 16:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OCLC 62265494. is more recent and is the canonical listing of mammalian taxonomy. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

While the living jaguarundi and puma do indeed form a clade; this neglects the fact that Puma concolor and Miracinonyx form a clade judging by morphological and molecular evidence. "Puma" yaguarondi is thus invalid on grounds of being paraphyletic.

Barnett, Ross et al. 2005. Evolution of the extinct Sabretooths and the American cheetah-like cat. Current Biology. Volume 15, Issue 15 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.168.32 (talk) 15:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A single paper does not invalidate canon. It must be accepted by other biologists. Until a secondary source adopts this overturning, then canon stands. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contains no etymology for either "jaguarundi" or "eyra". Tomer^talk 00:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i believe something is wrong here. if you look at the spanish version of this page you will see this animal is endangered and here it says "least concern". which one is correct? Please can someone figure it out? Nov. 2008

• I looked it up on google and found 5+ websites that say it's endangered, and none say it's not. So, yes, it's endangered.
  • However, the only website that counts is that of the
    IUCN, which is the official body for deciding whether animals are endangered or not. They say (in a link provided in the article) that the jauguarundi is of "Least Concern", and not endangered (nor has it ever been endangered). Individual subspecies, for example on islands, may well be endangered, but the species as a whole is not, and the article is about the species - although information on the status of subspecies can certainly be added. It may also be that other, local, bodies classify the animal as "endangered", in which case that should be added to the text on conservation, with sources to the bodies concerned. However, requests that the official international status be changed would need to be addressed to the IUCN, not us, because wikipedia can only report on what the publications actually say. Anaxial (talk) 16:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]

The final illustration in this article appears to be a tayra (Eira barbara) or tolomuco, a kind of weasel. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tayra

Mark Iannone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.66.62.214 (talk) 18:07, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I suspect you're right, and even if not, it certainly isn't a very good picture of a jaguarundi, since the proportions are all wrong. So I've removed it from the article. Anaxial (talk) 16:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jaguarundi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070616200443/http://www.coryi.org/Florida_panther/Miscellaneous_Panther_Material/Genomic%20ancestry%20of%20the%20American%20puma.pdf to http://www.coryi.org/Florida_panther/Miscellaneous_Panther_Material/Genomic%20ancestry%20of%20the%20American%20puma.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031107150747/http://ds.dial.pipex.com/agarman/bco/jundi.htm to http://ds.dial.pipex.com/agarman/bco/jundi.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Leo1pard (talk) 17:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Things have been changed. Now the jaguarundi is considered to belong to a

I got this earlier in the month from somebody in Colonia:

8<-----

Today being the first of the month, I took a pick-up load of dog (and cat) food down to the old dairy buildings at the bottom of my farm which are used as an official refuge for medium and large stray dogs.

It also has a self-selected population of stray freeloading cats who take advantage of us and the volunteer manager's good nature. All the usual characters were there hoping for a leaking sack but as I was unloading the pick-up, a truly monstrous dark red beast emerged from the bushes and glowered at me for disturbing his/her slumbers. Never before have I seen such an enormous pussycat.

[I pointed out the photo etc. in this article]

Well spotted. That sounds awfully like the monstrous dark red beast that emerged from the bushes and glowered at me.

I'd better order an extra bag of Kit-e-kat biscuits  :-)

>8-----

MarkMLl (talk) 07:34, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Jaguarundi/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Usernameunique (talk · contribs) 23:20, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

• The first sentence is a bit contorted. Perhaps "In 1803 Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire described two specimens..."?

• Right, reworded.

• BhagyaMani seems to think differently about the wording, we could discuss it here. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:55, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to interfere here. As explained in my edit summary: the usual sequence in Taxonomy is first the taxon's name followed by author and year of publication of the description. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:27, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Link Felis?

• Linked in the next section. I don't think it would be relevant to mention and link the genus explicitly in Taxonomy as it is clear from the scientific name.

• The seven bulleted specimens are all sourced to the original papers. How was it determined that they were all actually probably jaguarundis?

• Back then authors usually described specimens as new species or subspecies of existing ones, and other authors would often argue many are just synonyms instead. So these are all supposed to be jaguarundis instead of a new species (and later we realize why not subspecies) based on several morphological features, but only 'probably' as it was not, say, genetically proved or something. I have now added a ref to prove these are considered synonyms today.

• Any word on what happened to the six that aren't in the Turin Museum of Natural History?

• Unable to find any reliable details of those. This part of the article was mostly written by another editor who seems to have access to the source.

• By "the source," do you mean the Turin Museum of Natural History? Also pinging BhagyaMani, who made that edit. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• No I presumed the original article cited inline is the source. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:27, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• In 2017, the
  IUCN Cat Specialist Group listed the jaguarundi as a monotypic taxon
  of the genus Herpailurus." Also, I would spell out IUCN.

Re: what happened to the six that aren't in the Turin Museum of Natural History? : These skins are probably still part of the collections of those museum, whose curators described them. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re your thank you note: You are welcome. I removed the link to the museum in Turin so to make this consistent with the other list entries without the current locations of specimens; the more so as for Taxonomy, the

type locality is the more important info. And just a small warning: this pdf in the url is ~30MB large with 602 pages. If I understand Holmberg's text correctly, he did not see those bones in the Turin museum himself, but only assumed that they were of a jaguarundi. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:19, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

• Can extripated be linked to local extinction?

• Done.

• (represented by H. pumoides) — What's this?

• It means it was one of the earliest species of the genus when it came into existence after the split. There may be other species which are extinct now but fossils of only this one have been found. Later the species we see today came into existence while H. pumoides died out.

Physical characteristics

• kittens are spotted for a short duration — Any photos to add somewhere in the article?

• None that I could find on Commons. There are pics on Flickr but we can't see the underside in those, just the plain coat. No useful detail added.

• earlier these morphs were considered two different species — When? Is it worth adding something to "Taxonomy" about this?

• The sources aren't clear when.. and I can't find any papers clarifying these are not two species. So I think it has more context in this section instead of Taxonomy.

Behavior and ecology

• an individual was recorded swimming across the Tuichi River (Bolivia). — How far is that?

• Not mentioned anywhere.

Diet

• [30][34][35][36] — Any reason for four citations here? It's not a big deal (and I frequently use a bunch of citations in a row myself), but it's curious that you do so in only one place.

• Actually no one source covers the full range of prey mentioned in the article, I picked bits from different sources so a bunch might be necessary.

• take 400 g (14 oz) vertebrate prey — of vertebrate prey?

• Means prey that are vertebrates.

Reproduction

• across the range — Across what range?

• The 'range' mentioned anywhere in the article, say in Taxonomy where we talk about the subspecies, refers to the whole area where the cat occurs.

• the coat color gradually changes — Does it tend to be from a particular color to another particular color?

• The source says 'in stages', not quite sure what it means so I stuck to 'gradually'.

• they simply play with it until the mother ingests it — Meaning once they see the mother eating it, they decide to follow her example?

• No they don't eat any prey till around 6 weeks.

• Lifespan up to 15 years has been recorded in captivity — What about in the wild? And should it be lifespans? Same comments for the relevant portion of the lead.

• No clear details about the wild.. probably because it is a poorly studied species. I think 'lifespan' suits better.. I mean the general lifespan of all individuals in the species as a whole.

Distribution and habitat

• The jaguarundi is noted for its resistance to environmental disturbances in its habitat; it can successfully thrive in reforested areas — Reforested, or deforested?

• Reforested. Means it can adapt even to areas that have been left to recover after a destruction of cover.

• It is possibly
  extinct
  in the US — But what about the following paragraph?

• Okay I should say they are only reports as such, and it is a pretty confusing situation. Reworded.

Threats and conservation

• The jaguarundi has been listed as
  Least Concern on the IUCN Red List
  since 2002. — What about pre-2002?

• Nice article, Sainsf. Have there been any efforts at domestication? --Usernameunique (talk) 01:54, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks :) No, I could not find any reliable details on that or jaguarundi as pets. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:50, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking another article of mine :) I've gone through your comments and I'll reply to them soon. Cheers, and stay safe. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:35, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sainsf. I've made a few more light edits to the article, and am now passing. --Usernameunique (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 10:18, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Jaguarundi

• ... that despite being a member of the
  ISBN 978-0-8018-5789-8
  .

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Branchiobdellida

Improved to Good Article status by Sainsf (talk). Self-nominated at 17:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC).[reply]

It doesn't look anything like an otter or a weasel! Gatoclass (talk) 10:09, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look exactly like them, but has many of their features for sure as the given and many other sources note (especially if you compare this cat and the tayra). Maybe the pictures on Commons can't show this well as they don't show a clear, full body view. This is an interesting fact because this cat looks less like most others in its own family but resembles this other family. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 10:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked at the sources yet, but the article nowhere states that this species "superficially resembles mustelids" - all it says is that it has some features in common with them, which is a completely different statement. At the very least, you need to include the hook statement in the article. Update: now I have looked at the sources, and one of them says the cat "is sometimes said to resemble a weasel or otter in external appearance". The resemblance is lost on me, but apparently somebody thinks otherwise. But based on that source, the hook statement is nonetheless an overstatement. I think the hook will work if you add "is said to superficially resemble" or something like that. But you still need to have the same statement in the article. Gatoclass (talk) 11:09, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. The wording was a bit too strong and I should have backed it up with more sources cited inline. I stick to 'similar features' as that is what most sources say, the 'superficial' claim is not that common. I think it should be better now. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 16:35, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• ALT1: ... that despite being a member of the cat family, the jaguarundi (pictured) has several features in common with mustelids (such as otters and weasels)?

ALT1 is good to go, in my opinion. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 08:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Full review needed, since it never has been done; superseding highly premature tick. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral : Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed : Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good article. Open to other hooks. --evrik ^(talk) 00:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, I came by to promote this. We don't put words in parentheses in hooks. Do you have a source that verifies otters and weasels? Otherwise we'll end the hook at "mustelids". Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:48, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Yoninah: Maybe we can change it to a comma, but the examples would be very helpful as "mustelid" is not a common term. All the 4 sources after the relevant sentence in the article mention otters and/or weasels, two of them are [1] and [2]. Sainsf (t · c) 06:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you. Restoring tick. Yoninah (talk) 10:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]