Researchers compared dozens of genomes, skulls and skins. DNA extracted from the specimen used to describe the animal in Nepal in 1836 matched pangolins living in the southern Himalayas – restoring the scientific name *Manis aurita*.
!The Himalayan pangolin and the Pangolin Collection at the Field Museum
File name: `himalayan-pangolin-manis-aurita-museum-dna.webp` OLD: הPangolin The Himalayan Golden mantis and treasure Field Museum Next to pangolin specimens Caption: to the left: The Himalayan pangolin, Golden mantisRight: Mammal curator Anderson Pijo next to pangolin specimens in the collections of the Field Museum in Chicago. Credit: Tulshi Laxmi Suwal; Bella Koscal/Field Museum Rights: Press photo from the Field Museum website; full credit must be retained. The original page
The Himalayan pangolin is not an animal that was previously unknown to science. For years, researchers had recognized the populations living in Nepal and the southern Himalayan regions, but classified them as part of the Chinese pangolin. Now, a combination of historical DNA, Genomics And anatomical comparisons show that this is a separate species.
The finding also demonstrates the value of Nature collections Historical: A small piece of a specimen collected nearly 190 years ago managed to resolve a dispute that could not be settled using animals living today alone.
A name that disappeared from the books
In 1836, British naturalist Brian Houghton Hodgson described a pangolin from Nepal and gave it the name Golden mantisOver the years, its status was downgraded to a subspecies, and it was finally assimilated into the species known as the Chinese pangolin, Manis pentadactyla.
In 2025, another team proposed recognizing the Himalayan and Indo-Burmese populations as an independent species called Indo-Burmese manisBut a crucial question remains: Did the animal described by Hodgson in 1836 belong to the same lineage?
To answer this question, researchers extracted DNA from a historical specimen kept at the Natural History Museum in London. Its DNA was found to be compatible with modern Himalayan pangolins. In accordance with the rules of precedence in zoological nomenclature, the old name Golden mantis is the valid name, while Indo-Burmese manis It became synonymous later.
The DNA and the skulls told the same story
The study included 55 complete genomes, 70 mitochondrial genomes, 44 skulls, and 26 skins. According to the genetic analysis, the Himalayan lineage separated from that of the Chinese pangolin about 1.8 million years ago, and since then there has been only limited gene flow between them.
Body structure also supported the separation. Compared to the Chinese pangolin, the Himalayan pangolin is larger, has a longer tail, and has smaller ears. The researchers also identified measurable differences in skull structure.
The accumulation of genetic and anatomical evidence led them to the conclusion that theGolden mantis Status of an independent species. The results of the study were published in the journal Biology Communications.
Not just a debate about names
The distinction between species is especially important in the case of Pangolins, which are among the mammals most affected by illegal trade. Their scales and meat are sought after in illegal markets, and many animals are caught far from where they were caught.
When all populations in a region are considered one species, it is difficult to identify which ones are most severely affected. The new definition will make it possible to compare DNA from confiscated scales to genetic databases, identify the species and sometimes also narrow down the geographic area from which they came.
Such information could help authorities identify hunting and trafficking hotspots, and decide where to release rescued pangolins. Releasing an animal in an area outside its natural range could harm its chances of survival and also mix populations that have been isolated for a long time.
It is still too early to determine what the official conservation status of Golden mantisScientific recognition of a species does not immediately update the lists of conservation bodies, and a separate assessment of population size, distribution area, and threats to it is required.
The museum as a genetic time machine
Pangolins are nocturnal, solitary, and difficult to locate, so collecting new specimens is limited. Museum collections can fill the gap: they preserve specimens from regions and periods that are currently difficult or impossible to sample.
In this case, the 1836 specimen served as a kind of sealed genetic evidence. It allowed researchers to connect the original description, the historical animal, and the populations living today – and put a name that had been forgotten for generations back on the species map.
Questions and Answers
Is this a pangolin that was just discovered? No. The Himalayan populations were known, but were considered part of the Chinese pangolin. The new one is proof that they represent a separate species.
Why is the 1836 specimen so important? This is the historical example related to the original description of Golden mantisMatching its DNA to modern-day pangolins determined which scientific name took precedence.
How is the Himalayan pangolin different from the Chinese pangolin? Profound genetic differences were found, as well as differences in body size, tail length, ear size, and skull structure.
How will recognizing the species help protect it? It may allow for more accurate identification of confiscated scales, mapping of hunting areas, assessing the status of populations, and releasing animals in appropriate areas.
More on the subject on the science website
- Corona – pangolins and bats?
- A new species of mammal has been discovered in South America: it looks like a cross between a cat and a bear
- A hidden new species of wild cat has been identified in Brazil
- How elephant tusks turn into ivory in the hands of criminal organizations
- Research in the Negev: New water points improved the genetic diversity of wild animals
Sources
For the original publication: Opening the original publication
