A systematic review identifies knowledge gaps and conservation needs for neotropical arboreal mammals, emphasizing ecological roles.
Monitoring neotropical arboreal mammals is essential for understanding their biology, their ecological roles in forest ecosystems and for guiding effective conservation efforts. However, despite their diversity and ecological importance, research on this taxon remains limited. A systematic literature review was conducted to assess the state of knowledge on arboreal and semi‐arboreal mammals in neotropical forests. The review aimed to identify research trends, specifically study methods used, publication trends, geographic distribution of research, protected areas research, target species, main topics addressed, knowledge gaps and future research challenges. A total of 312 studies were identified with most research conducted in Brazil ( n = 151, 49%), followed by Mexico ( n = 34, 11%), Peru ( n = 29, 9%) and Costa Rica ( n = 28, 9%). Most research was conducted in protected areas ( n = 209, 67%). Small mammals have mainly been studied using live‐capture traps ( n = 74, 69%), while larger mammals have predominantly been studied with direct observations on transects ( n = 108, 52%). The order with the highest number of studies was Primates (39%), followed by Rodentia (38%), Didelphimorphia (15%), Carnivora (4%), Pilosa (3%) and Microbiotheria (1%). The main research topics deal with behaviour (26%), species assessment (19%) and the effect of human activities (16%). There was limited research on conservation (4%) and activity patterns (2%). Research on neotropical arboreal mammals is still scarce, particularly for nocturnal and cryptic species. Out of 592 species, only 240 (40%) have been the focus of scientific studies. The lack of research on many species can be attributed to factors such as limited accessibility, challenges in studying them due to their geographic distribution, small population sizes or elusive behaviours. It is necessary to increase efforts for their evaluation to support the development and planning of better conservation strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
García‐Casimiro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: