Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42387092›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2026

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

Narayan Prasad Koju, Zeling Zeng, Guihua Zhang, Zhicheng Yao, Xia Huang, Xiaoyun Wang, Melissa T R Hawkins, Arlo Hinckley, Mary Faith C Flores, Ce Guo and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Narayan Prasad Koju *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4303-0520
Zeling Zeng *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Guihua Zhang *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Zhicheng Yao *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Xia Huang *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaoyun Wang *South China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Melissa T R HawkinsDivision of Mammals, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Arlo HinckleyDivision of Mammals, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
Mary Faith C FloresDivision of Mammals, Department of Vertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-6027-080X
Ce GuoGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Silviculture, Protection and Utilization, Guangdong Academy of Forestry, Guangzhou, China.
Jun LiGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Silviculture, Protection and Utilization, Guangdong Academy of Forestry, Guangzhou, China.
Devendra MaharjanNatural History Museum, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Saraswoti ByanjankarAspect Ecology, West Court, Oxfordshire, UK.
Lianghua HuangWildlife Forensic Science Service, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Wenhua YuSouth China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China.
Liang LengChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Kai HeSouth China Biodiversity Research Center, School of Life Sciences, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China. hekai@gzhu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-6234-2589
Anderson FeijóNegaunee Integrative Research Center, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL, USA. afeijo@fieldmuseum.org.ORCID 0000-0002-4643-2293
Yan HuaGuangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Silviculture, Protection and Utilization, Guangdong Academy of Forestry, Guangzhou, China. wildlife530@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-8316-3937

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

GenomicsPangolinsAnimalsPhylogeny

Identifiers

PMID42387092
PMCPMC13323723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.