Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: Setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

Full text

ZOOLOGIA 41: e24005 | https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.e24005 |
August 26, 2024
Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: Setting the baseline knowledge on
the animal diversity in Brazil
Walter A. Boeger1,9, Michel P. Valim2,9, Hussam Zaher3,9, José A. Rafael4,9, Rafaela C. Forzza5, Alexandre R. Percequillo6,9, Cristiana S.
Serejo7,9, André R.S. Garraoni 8,9, Adalberto J. Santos9, Adam Slipinski9, Adelita M. Linzmeier9, Adolfo R. Calor9, Adrian A. Garda9,
Adriano B. Kury9, Agatha C.S. Fernandes9, Aisur I. Agudo-Padrón9, Alberto Akama9, Alberto M. da Silva Neto9, Alejandro L.
Burbano9, Aleksandra Menezes9, Alessandre Pereira-Colavite9, Alexander Anichtchenko9, Alexander C. Lees9, Alexandra M.R.
Bezerra9, Alexandre C. Domahovski9, Alexandre D. Pimenta9, Alexandre L.P. Aleixo9, Alexandre P. Marceniuk9, Alexandre S. de
Paula9, Alexandre Somavilla9, Alexandre Specht9, Alexssandro Camargo9, Alfred F. Newton9, Aline A.S. da Silva9, Aline B. dos
Santos9, Aline D. Tassi9, Allan C. Aragão9, Allan P.M. Santos9, Alvaro E. Migotto9, Amanda C. Mendes9, Amanda Cunha9, Amazonas
Chagas Júnior9, Ana A.T. de Sousa9, Ana C. Pavan9, Ana C.S. Almeida9, Ana L.B.G. Peronti9, Ana L. Henriques-Oliveira9, Ana L.
Prudente9, Ana L. Tourinho9, Ana M.O. Pes9, Ana P. Carmignotto9, Ana P.G. da Silva Wengrat9, Ana P.S. Dornellas9, Anamaria Dal
Molin9, Anderson Puker9, André C. Morandini9, André da S. Ferreira9, André L. Martins9, André M. Esteves9, André S. Fernandes9,
André S. Roza9, Andreas Köhler9, Andressa Paladini9, Andrey J. de Andrade9, Ângelo P. Pinto9, Anna C. de A. Salles9, Anne I.
Gondim9, Antonia C.Z. Amaral9, Antonio A.A. Rondón9, Antonio Brescovit9, Antônio C. Lofego9, Antonio C. Marques9, Antonio
Macedo9, Artur Andriolo9, Augusto L. Henriques9, Augusto L. Ferreira Júnior9, Aurino F. de Lima9, Ávyla R. de A. Barros9, Ayrton
do R. Brito9, Bárbara L.V. Romera9, Beatriz M.C. de Vasconcelos9, Benjamin W. Frable9, Bernardo F. Santos9, Bernardo R. Ferraz9,
Brunno B. Rosa9, Brunno H.L. Sampaio9, Bruno C. Bellini9, Bruno Clarkson9, Bruno G. de Oliveira9, Caio C.D. Corrêa9, Caleb C.
Martins9, Camila F. de Castro-Guedes9, Camilla Souto9, Carla de L. Bicho9, Carlo M. Cunha9, Carlos A. de M. Barboza9, Carlos A.S.
de Lucena9, Carlos Barreto9, Carlos D.C.M. de Santana9, Carlos E.Q. Agne9, Carlos G.C. Mielke9, Carlos H.S. Caetano9, Carlos H.W.
Flechtmann9, Carlos J.E. Lamas9, Carlos Rocha9, Carolina S. Mascarenhas9, Cecilia B. Margaría9, Cecilia Waichert9, Celina Digiani9,
Célio F.B. Haddad9, Celso O. Azevedo9, Cesar J. Benetti9, Charles M.D. dos Santos9, Charles R. Bartlett9, Cibele Bonvicino9, Cibele S.
Ribeiro-Costa9, Cinthya S.G. Santos9, Cíntia E.L. Justino9, Clarissa Canedo9, Claudia C. Bonecker9, Cláudia P. Santos9, Claudio J.B.
de Carvalho9, Clayton C. Gonçalves9, Cleber Galvão9, Cleide Costa9, Cléo D.C. de Oliveira9, Cristiano F. Schwertner9, Cristiano L.
Andrade9, Cristiano M. Pereira9, Cristiano Sampaio9, Cristina de O. Dias9, Daercio A. de A. Lucena9, Daiara Manfio9, Dalton de S.
Amorim9, Dalva L. de Queiroz9, Dalva L. de Queiroz9, Daniara Colpani9, Daniel Abbate9, Daniel A. Aquino9, Daniel Burckhardt9,
Daniel C. Cavallari9, Daniel de C. Schelesky Prado9, Daniel L. Praciano9, Daniel S. Basílio9, Daniela de C. Bená9, Daniela G.P. de
Toledo9, Daniela M. Takiya9, Daniell R.R. Fernandes9, Danilo C. Ament9, Danilo P. Cordeiro9, Darliane E. Silva9, Darren A. Pollock9,
David B. Muniz9, David I. Gibson9, David S. Nogueira9, Dayse W.A. Marques9, Débora Lucatelli9, Deivys M.A. Garcia9, Délio Baêta9,
Denise N.M. Ferreira9, Diana Rueda-Ramírez9, Diego A. Fachin9, Diego de S. Souza9, Diego F. Rodrigues9, Diego G. de Pádua9,
Diego N. Barbosa9, Diego R. Dolibaina9, Diogo C. Amaral9, Donald S. Chandler9, Douglas H.B. Maccagnan9, Edilson Caron9,
Edrielly Carvalho9, Edson A. Adriano9, Edson F. de Abreu Júnior9, Edson H.L. Pereira9, Eduarda F.G. Viegas9, Eduardo Carneiro9,
Eduardo Colley9, Eduardo Eizirik9, Eduardo F. dos Santos9, Eduardo M. Shimbori9, Eduardo Suárez-Morales9, Eliane P. de Arruda9,
Elisandra A. Chiquito9, Élison F.B. Lima9, Elizeu B. de Castro9, Elton Orlandin9, Elynton A. do Nascimento9, Emanuel Razzolini9,
Emanuel R.R. Gama9, Enilma M. de Araujo9, Eric Y. Nishiyama9, Erich L. Spiessberger9, Érika C.L. dos Santos9, Eugenia F.
Contreras9, Eunice A.B. Galati9, Evaldo C. de Oliveira Junior9, Fabiana Gallardo9, Fabio A. Hernandes9, Fábio A. Lansac-Tôha9,
Fabio B. Pitombo9, Fabio Di Dario9, Fábio L. dos Santos9, Fabio Mauro9, Fabio O. do Nascimento9, Fabio Olmos9, Fabio R. Amaral9,
Fabio Schunck9, Fábio S. P. de Godoi9, Fabrizio M. Machado9, Fausto E. Barbo9, Federico A. Agrain9, Felipe B. Ribeiro9, Felipe F.F.
Moreira9, Felipe F. Barbosa9, Fenanda S. Silva9, Fernanda F. Cavalcanti9, Fernando C. Straube9, Fernando Carbayo9, Fernando
Carvalho Filho9, Fernando C.V. Zanella9, Fernando de C. Jacinavicius9, Fernando H.A. Farache9, Fernando Leivas9, Fernando M.S.
Dias9, Fernando Mantellato9, Fernando Z. Vaz-de-Mello9, Filipe M. Gudin9, Flávio Albuquerque9, Flavio B. Molina9, Flávio D.
Passos9, Floyd W. Shockley9, Francielly F. Pinheiro9, Francisco de A.G. de Mello9, Francisco E. de L. Nascimento9, Francisco L.
Franco9, Francisco L. de Oliveira9, Francisco T. de V. Melo9, Freddy R.B. Quijano9, Frederico F. Salles9, Gabriel Bi9, Gabriel C.
Queiroz9, Gabriel L. Bizarro9, Gabriela Hrycyna9, Gabriela Leviski9, Gareth S. Powell9, Geane B. dos Santos9, Georey E. Morse9,
George Brown9, George M.T. Mattox9, Geraldo Zimbrão9, Gervásio S. Carvalho9, Gil F.G. Miranda9, Gilberto J. de Moraes9, Gilcélia
M. Lourido9, Gilmar P. Neves9, Gilson R.P. Moreira9, Giovanna G. Montingelli9, Giovanni N. Maurício9, Gláucia Marconato9,
Guilherme E.L. Lopez9, Guilherme L. da Silva9, Guilherme Muricy9, Guilherme R.R. Brito9, Guilherme S.T. Garbino9, Gustavo E.
Flores9, Gustavo Graciolli9, Gustavo S. Libardi9, Heather C. Proctor9, Helcio R. Gil-Santana9, Henrique R. Varella9, Hermes E.
Escalona9, Hermes J. Schmitz9, Higor D.D. Rodrigues9, Hilton de C. Galvão Filho 9, Hingrid Y.S. Quintino9, Hudson A. Pinto9, Hugo
L. Rainho9, Igor C. Miyahira9, Igor de S. Gonçalves9, Inês X. Martins9, Irene A. Cardoso9, Ismael B. de Oliveira9, Ismael Franz9,
Itanna O. Fernandes9, Ivan F. Golfetti9, Ivanklin S. Campos-Filho9, Ivo de S. Oliveira9, Jacques H.C. Delabie9, Jader de Oliveira9,
Jadila S. Prando9, James L. Patton9, Jamille de A. Bitencourt9, Janaina M. Silva9, Jandir C. Santos9, Janine O. Arruda9, Jeerson S.
Valderrama9, Jeronymo Dalapicolla9, Jéssica P. Oliveira9, Jiri Hájek9, João P. Morselli9, João P. Narita9, João P.I. Martin9, Jocélia
Grazia9, Joe McHugh9, Jorge J. Cherem9, José A.S. Farias Júnior9, Jose A.M. Fernandes9, José F. Pacheco9, José L.O. Birindelli9, José
RESEARCH ARTICLE
TAXONOMIC CATALOG OF THE BRAZILIAN FAUNA
1 / 13
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
ISSN 1984-4689 (online)
scielo.br/zool

M. Rezende9, Jose M. Avendaño9, José M. Barbanti Duarte9, José R. Inácio Ribeiro9, José R.M. Mermudes9, José R. Pujol-Luz9,
Josenilson R. dos Santos9, Josenir T. Câmara9, Joyce A. Teixeira9, Joyce R. do Prado9, Juan P. Botero9, Julia C. Almeida9, Julia
Kohler9, Julia P. Gonçalves9, Julia S. Beneti9, Julian P. Donahue9, Juliana Alvim9, Juliana C. Almeida9, Juliana L. Segadilha9, Juliana
M. Wingert9, Julianna F. Barbosa9, Juliano Ferrer9, Juliano F. dos Santos9, Kamila M.D. Kuabara9, Karine B. Nascimento9, Karine
Schoeninger9, Karla M. Campião9, Karla Soares9, Kássia Zilch9, Kim R. Barão9, Larissa Teixeira9, Laura D. do N.M. de Sousa9,
Leandro L. Dumas9, Leandro M. Vieira9, Leonardo H.G. Azevedo9, Leonardo S. Carvalho9, Leonardo S. de Souza9, Leonardo S.G.
Rocha9, Leopoldo F.O. Bernardi9, Letícia M. Vieira9, Liana Johann9, Lidianne Salvatierra9, Livia de M. Oliveira9, Lourdes M.A.
El-moor Loureiro9, Luana B. Barreto9, Luana M. Barros9, Lucas Lecci9, Lucas M. de Camargos9, Lucas R.C. Lima9, Lucia M.
Almeida9, Luciana R. Martins9, Luciane Marinoni9, Luciano de A. Moura9, Luciano Lima9, Luciano N. Naka9, Lucília S. Miranda9,
Lucy M. Salik9, Luis E.A. Bezerra9, Luis F. Silveira9, Luiz A. Campos9, Luiz A.S. de Castro9, Luiz C. Pinho9, Luiz F.L. Silveira9, Luiz F.M.
Iniesta9, Luiz F.C. Tencatt9, Luiz R.L. Simone9, Luiz R. Malabarba9, Luiza S. da Cruz9, Lukas Sekerka9, Lurdiana D. Barros9, Luziany
Q. Santos9, Maciej Skoracki9, Maira A. Correia9, Manoel A. Uchoa9, Manuella F.G. Andrade9, Marcel G. Hermes9, Marcel S.
Miranda9, Marcel S. de Araújo9, Marcela L. Monné9, Marcelo B. Labruna9, Marcelo D. de Santis9, Marcelo Duarte9, Marcelo Kno9,
Marcelo Nogueira9, Marcelo R. de Britto9, Marcelo R.S. de Melo9, Marcelo R. de Carvalho9, Marcelo T. Tavares9, Marcelo V.
Kitahara9, Marcia C.N. Justo9, Marcia J.C. Botelho9, Márcia S. Couri9, Márcio Borges-Martins9, Márcio Felix9, Marcio L. de Oliveira9,
Marco A. Bologna9, Marco S. Gottschalk9, Marcos D.S. Tavares9, Marcos G. Lhano9, Marcus Bevilaqua9, Marcus T.T. Santos9,
Marcus V. Domingues9, Maria A.M. Sallum9, María C. Digiani9, Maria C.A. Santarém9, Maria C. do Nascimento9, María de los A.M.
Becerril9, Maria E.A. dos Santos9, Maria I. da S. dos Passos9, Maria L. Felippe-Bauer9, Mariana A. Cherman9, Mariana Terossi9,
Marie L.C. Bartz9, Marina F. de C. Barbosa9, Marina V. Loeb9, Mario Cohn-Haft9, Mario Cupello9, Marlúcia B. Martins9, Martin L.
Christofersen9, Matheus Bento9, Matheus dos S. Rocha9, Maurício L. Martins9, Melissa O. Segura9, Melissa Q. Cardenas9, Mércia
E. Duarte9, Michael A. Ivie9, Michael M. Mincarone9, Michela Borges9, Miguel A. Monné9, Mirna M. Casagrande9, Monica A.
Fernandez9, Mônica Piovesan9, Naércio A. Menezes9, Natalia P. Benaim9, Natália S. Reategui9, Natan C. Pedro9, Nathalia H. Pecly9,
Nelson Ferreira Júnior9, Nelson J. da Silva Júnior9, Nelson W. Perioto9, Neusa Hamada9, Nicolas Degallier9, Ning L. Chao9, Noeli J.
Ferla9, Olaf H.H. Mielke9, Olivia Evangelista9, Oscar A. Shibatta9, Otto M.P. Oliveira9, Pablo C.L. Albornoz9, Pablo M. Dellapé9,
Pablo R. Gonçalves9, Paloma H.F. Shimabukuro9, Paschoal Grossi9, Patrícia E. da S. Rodrigues9, Patricia O.V. Lima9, Paul Velazco9,
Paula B. dos Santos9, Paula B. Araújo9, Paula K.R. Silva9, Paula R. Riccardi9, Paulo C. de A. Garcia9, Paulo G.H. Passos9, Paulo H.C.
Corgosinho9, Paulo Lucinda9, Paulo M.S. Costa9, Paulo P. Alves9, Paulo R. de O. Roth9, Paulo R.S. Coelho9, Paulo R.M. Duarte9,
Pedro F. de Carvalho9, Pedro Gnaspini9, Pedro G.B. Souza-Dias9, Pedro M. Linardi9, Pedro R. Bartholomay9, Peterson R. Demite9,
Petr Bulirsch9, Piter K. Boll9, Rachel M.M. Pereira9, Rafael A.P.F. Silva9, Rafael B. de Moura9, Rafael Boldrini9, Rafaela A. da Silva9,
Rafaela L. Falaschi9, Ralf T.S. Cordeiro9, Ramon J.C.L. Mello9, Randal A. Singer9, Ranyse B. Querino9, Raphael A. Heleodoro9,
Raphael de C. Castilho9, Reginaldo Constantino9, Reinaldo C. Guedes9, Renan Carrenho9, Renata S. Gomes9, Renato Gregorin9,
Renato J.P. Machado9, Renato S. Bérnils9, Renato S. Capellari9, Ricardo B. Silva9, Ricardo Kawada9, Ricardo M. Dias9, Ricardo
Siewert9, Ricaro Brugnera9, Richard A.B. Leschen9, Robert Constantin9, Robert Robbins9, Roberta R. Pinto9, Roberto E. dos Reis9,
Robson T. da C. Ramos9, Rodney R. Cavichioli9, Rodolfo C. de Barros9, Rodrigo A. Caires9, Rodrigo B. Salvador9, Rodrigo C.
Marques9, Rodrigo C. Araújo9, Rodrigo de O. Araujo9, Rodrigo de V.P. Dios9, Rodrigo Johnsson9, Rodrigo M. Feitosa9, Roger W.
Hutchings9, Rogéria I.R. Lara9, Rogério V. Rossi9, Roland Gerstmeier9, Ronald Ochoa9, Rosa S.G. Hutchings9, Rosaly Ale-Rocha9,
Rosana M. da Rocha9, Rosana Tidon9, Rosangela Brito9, Roseli Pellens9, Sabrina R. dos Santos9, Sandra D. dos Santos9, Sandra V.
Paiva9, Sandro Santos9, Sarah S. de Oliveira9, Sávio C. Costa9, Scott L. Gardner9, Sebastián A. Muñoz Leal9, Sergio Aloquio9, Sergio
L.C. Bonecker9, Sergio L. de S. Bueno9, Sérgio M. de Almeida9, Sérgio N. Stampar9, Sérgio R. Andena9, Sergio R. Posso9, Sheila P.
Lima9, Sian de S. Gadelha9, Silvana C. Thiengo9, Simone C. Cohen9, Simone N. Brandão9, Simone P. Rosa9, Síria L.B. Ribeiro9,
Sócrates D. Letana9, Sonia B. dos Santos9, Sonia C.S. Andrade9, Stephane Dávila9, Stéphanie Vaz9, Stewart B. Peck9, Susete W.
Christo9, Suzan B.Z. Cunha9, Suzete R. Gomes9, Tácio Duarte9, Taís Madeira-Ott9, Taísa Marques9, Talita Roell9, Tarcilla C. de
Lima9, Tatiana A. Sepulveda9, Tatiana F. Maria9, Tatiana P. Ruschel9, Thaiana Rodrigues9, Thais A. Marinho9, Thaís M. de Almeida9,
Thaís P. Miranda9, Thales R.O. Freitas9, Thalles P.L. Pereira9, Thamara Zacca9, Thaynara L. Pacheco9, Thiago F. Martins9, Thiago M.
Alvarenga9, Thiago R. de Carvalho9, Thiago T.S. Polizei9, Thomas C. McElrath9, Thomas Henry9, Tiago G. Pikart9, Tiago J. Porto9,
Tiago K. Krolow9, Tiago P. Carvalho9, Tito M. da C. Lotufo9, Ulisses Caramaschi9, Ulisses dos S. Pinheiro9, Ulyses F.J. Pardiñas9,
Valéria C. Maia9, Valeria Tavares9, Valmir A. Costa9, Vanessa S. do Amaral9, Vera C. Silva9, Vera R. dos S. Wol9, Verônica
Slobodian9, Vinícius B. da Silva9, Vinicius C. Espíndola9, Vinicius da Costa-Silva9, Vinicius de A. Bertaco9, Vinícius Padula9, Vinicius
S. Ferreira9, Vitor C.P. da Silva9, Vítor de Q. Piacentini9, Vivian E. Sandoval-Gómez9, Vivian Trevine9, Viviane R. Sousa9, Vivianne B.
de Sant’Anna9, Wayne N. Mathis9, Wesley de O. Souza9, Wesley D. Colombo9, Wioletta Tomaszewska9, Wolmar B. Wosiacki9,
Ximena M.C. Ovando9, Yuri L.R. Leite9
1Biological Interactions and Graduate Program in Ecology and Conservation, Universidade Federal do Paraná.
Curitiba, PR, Brazil. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico.
2Universidade Iguaçu, Nova Iguaçu, and Universidade Santa Úrsula. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
3Museu de Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
4Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia. Manaus, AM, Brazil.
5Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ,
Brazil.
6Laboratório de Mamíferos, Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz de
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 20242 / 13

Queiroz”, Universidade de São Paulo. Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
7Setor de Carcinologia, Departamento de Invertebrados, Museu Nacional, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
8Departamento de Biologia Animal, Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Campinas, SP, Brazil.
9Further details of each specific author are available here: Boeger W, Valim MP (2024) Brazilian Zoology Group
2023, Brazil. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10491755
Corresponding author: Walter A Boeger (wboeger@gmail.com)
https://zoobank.org/B9FD1175-9E33-403F-B5A4-584F7278A27F
ABSTRACT. The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a
traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited
to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this
context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil
(CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list
of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time
by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with
125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000
species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of
Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 spe-
cies). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera
(628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species.
Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct eorts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil,
but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those
in science, health, conservation eorts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is
evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, an-
thropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others.
KEY WORDS. Biodiversity, knowledge management, taxonomy, web services, zoology.
The biosphere is characterized as a high-level complex
network whose attributes represent emergent properties
arising from the nature of the interactions between species.
The functioning of the biosphere is directly related to the
organization of these networks and subnetworks, which de-
termines the degree of resilience of communities subjected
to environmental changes, such as the disturbances imposed
by humans or resulting from present and future climate
changes (Solé and Levin 2022). Therefore, understanding
the functioning of a complex system at various levels of bio-
logical diversity (e.g., individuals, populations, communities,
and ecosystems) depends on our knowledge of the units
that make up each of the vertices (or actors) of the network
at each level of complexity. The planning of programs and
actions for human, animal, and plant health, environmen-
tal conservation, and even biotechnological developments
requires the knowledge of these actors (Valdecasas and
Camacho 2003, Wheeler et al. 2012, Thomson et al. 2018). In
biological systems, these actors represent the fundamental
elements of the evolutionary process that shape the struc-
ture and functioning of communities, ecosystems, and the
biosphere (Wheeler et al. 2012). Recognizing the identity and
boundaries of the species involved in these interactions is
the responsibility of taxonomists. The assignment of names
to these entities is governed by rules and conventions (ICNZ
1999). Taxonomists are trained to recognize this fundamen-
tal unit of biological systems using traditional methods, such
as comparative morphology, or more recent methods, such
as geometric morphometry, phylogenetic, phylogeography,
and genomics. Species are biological entities that result from
“No name, no information, wrong name, wrong information”
Attributed to Meredith Lane (Botanist) in Brooks, Hoberg, and Boeger (2019)
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 3 / 13

evolutionary changes (heritable information) that have ac-
cumulated since the appearance of life on the planet. These
accumulated changes not only characterize a species but
also its ability to survive environmental challenges (Agosta
and Brooks 2020). Today, the planet may host more than
8.5 million species that interact in an extensive network,
defining the structure and functioning of the biosphere
(Mora et al. 2011).
Species are named according to the rules of nomen-
clature specific to the group in question, but all originate
from the Linnean Binomial System (Linné 1758). The Lin-
nean classification system is hierarchical and was created
for the sole purpose of cataloging life on Earth. However,
today, the system of classification is strongly centered on the
evolutionary relationships of species and therefore carries
fundamental informative content for understanding and
planning for the maintenance of the biosphere. Thus, the
contextualization of the phylogenetic relationships of spe-
cies at higher hierarchical levels informs about their history,
nature, ecology, and ability to resolve conflicts and survive
challenges (Agosta and Brooks 2020).
Taxonomy is a living and dynamic science, much more
important than many believe, being able to question pre-ex-
isting hypotheses (e.g., species delimitation, classification),
detect errors, and correct them, thereby increasing the in-
formative content of scientific names and their hierarchical
contextualization. Taxonomy is increasingly necessary in
the face of challenges associated with the mass extinction
of the Anthropocene (Dubois 2003). Precisely because of
the dynamic structure of taxonomy and classifications, the
reduced temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy
of lists made available in a traditional manner in scientific
journals has been a challenge for activities requiring up-
dated information (Conix et al. 2021, Hobern et al. 2021).
Furthermore, lists published in scientific journals are static
(cross-sectional) and often limited to one or a few bet-
ter-known taxonomic groups.
Errors in taxonomy, especially those associated with
the use of invalid names (e.g., junior synonyms) and in-
correct determination of species, may result in mistaken
decisions in cascade in their application, which include
scientific research, conservation and management programs,
assignment of their level of threat, recognition of the na-
tive-invasive status, regulations, judicial decisions, among
others (Bortolus 2008, Directorate-General for Environment
(European Commission) et al. 2022). Hence, the availability
of a validated, taxonomically inclusive, and updated species
list is of extreme importance to environmental decisions and
regional planning. The oer of taxonomic tools in associa-
tion with the validated species list, such as keys, descriptions,
photographs, and illustrations, should increase the ability
of users to correctly perform species determination and
have access to corresponding information on its biological
and distributional data. This is particularly significant in
megadiverse countries, such as Brazil, and will soon be
implemented in the CTFB.
Paradoxically, worldwide impediments in taxonomy,
especially the loss of specialists in diverse groups, pose an
immeasurable risk to our ability to understand, describe,
and manage nature (Giangrande 2003, Raposo et al. 2021).
Besides this and other reasons (Agnarsson and Kuntner
2007), taxonomic impediment seems to associated also with
a ruling of the International Code for Zoological Nomen-
clature, which indicates that the original descriptions of a
species do not need to be cited (Agnarsson and Kuntner
2007, Wägele et al. 2011). As a rule, while the species name
(and associated authorship) is cited in many studies (some-
times thousands of times), studies containing the original
description do not receive similar recognition (Agnarsson
and Kuntner 2007). Consequently, in a society dominated
by bibliometrics (e.g., impact factor, number of citations)
and lack of credit, the science of taxonomy has become
unattractive to young researchers with a drastic reduction
in the number of taxonomists in various groups. Without
a strong taxonomy and dynamic, widely available database
of the elements of the biosphere (i.e., species), we cannot
adequately intervene environmentally, especially during
critical times such as those that follow (Thomson et al. 2018,
Vogel Ely et al. 2017, Löbl et al. 2023).
The Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB,
available at: http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/) may help mitigate the
above-mentioned impediments. The CTFB makes animal
biodiversity information fully available to the public, sci-
entists, and decision makers. The Catálogo is an initiative
inspired and based on the experience and online system of
the Flora e Funga do Brasil, also hosted in Jardim Botânico
do Rio de Janeiro (JBRJ). Additionally, the CTFB is one of the
key components of the Sistema Brasileiro de Biodiversidade
(SiBBr), a project of the Ministério de Ciência, Tecnologia
e Inovação (MCTI). The MCTI and the Ministério de Meio
Ambiente (MMA) provided initial funding for this initiative,
with resources from the Federal Government of Brazil and
the Global Environment Fund (GEF). The CTFB, the Flora
e Funga do Brasil, and two emerging initiatives – the Lista
de Microorganismos do Brasil and the Lista de Fósseis do
Brasil – compose the basis for the future Catálogo da Vida
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 20244 / 13

do Brasil (CVB). The CVB will integrate these lists into a
single comprehensive system, magnifying the usefulness of
the information on the biodiversity of the country.
Annotated lists of species, revised in near-real-time,
in association with elements of their distribution, ecology,
and nomenclature, represent up-to-date fundamental tools
for all professionals involved in studies in biology, medi-
cine, veterinary, agriculture, government, regulations, and
biotechnology (Borsch et al. 2020, Brazilian Flora Group
2021). Broad and public access to information about Bra-
zilian biodiversity and ecosystems also contributes to the
appreciation of biological diversity in society. The public
can search for species that occur in their states or habitats
of interest, whereas researchers, students, and consultants
can assess the distribution and nomenclature of their work.
In addition, managers and decision makers from various
institutions, public or private, can use the system as a basis
for the application and development of laws and resolutions
of governmental institutions. Furthermore, validated species
lists such as the CTFB and CVB can provide information on
outdated species determination of specimens of museum
collections and allow automatic detection and correction
of biodiversity databases (e.g., correction of distributional
data from secondary species lists such as invasive species).
Tools are still required to allow real-time integration among
biodiversity databases in Brazil; however, initiatives such as
DarwinCoreJson (Pinheiro and Dalcin 2024) are likely to
be incorporated into the infrastructure in the near future.
The genesis of the CTFB dates to 2010, with the es-
tablishment of SciELO Biodiversity, a project funded by the
Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
(FAPESP) and led by Hussam Zaher, Director of the Museu
de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo (MZUSP), and Abel
Packer, Director of the Scientific Electronic Library Online
(SciELO). The SciELO Biodiversity project was developed
within a network formed by the Biodiversity Heritage Library
(BHL) and SciELO, originally designed to create a system for
managing scientific information sources in biodiversity.
The primary goal of integrating SciELO Biodiversity
and CTFB was to provide a novel and robust platform for
the development of information and scientific knowledge
infrastructure in biodiversity for Brazil. In this context, CTFB
is a natural extension of SciELO Biodiversity, oering verified
information on the scientific names used in systems dealing
with Brazilian biodiversity.
The SciELO Biodiversity Program facilitated the con-
ception of the first version of the biodiversity information
network structure, enabling interoperability between spe-
cies lists and other biodiversity information systems (e.g.,
GIBIF, SiBBr, Flora, and Funga). This model proposal was
presented to a group of 28 experts in the field during the
“First Workshop for the Development of the Taxonomic
Catalog of Brazilian Fauna Species,” held on June 13, 2012,
in São Paulo (Fig. 1). This workshop, organized through
resources from the SciELO Biodiversity Program, marked
the inception of the CTFB and set the foundation for the
program’s structural framework. A general coordination
nucleus was established, comprising Hussam Zaher, José
Albertino Rafael, and Walter A. Boeger, representing the
major knowledge areas of Vertebrates, Hexapoda, and
Non-Hexapoda Invertebrates, respectively. Later, Dr. Rafaela
C. Forzza, coordinator of the Flora e Funga do Brasil, joined
the coordinating nucleus when the CTFB was incorporated
into the biodiversity information infrastructure at Jardim
Botânico do Rio de Janeiro (JBRJ) (Ministério do Meio
Ambiente (MMA), Brazil) under her charge. The initial
CTFB group also included other participants from the First
Workshop as Coordinators of the Major Animal Groups
addressed in the Catalogue.
Other meetings of the organizing group followed,
including two organizational meetings. One, that occurred
in Rio de Janeiro, at the JBRJ in September 11, 2013 with
representatives of the Ministério do Meio Ambiente (MMA),
Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia e Inovação Tecnológica
(MCTI), Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodi-
versidade (ICMBio) and JBRJ. The second one, in Brasília
from May 12 to 14, 2015 (Fig. 2), was organized with 36 taxa
coordinators to discuss the final preparations for the launch
of the online system. These preparations included the defi-
nition of the team of specialists and coordinators for each
major taxon, deadlines, and goals. Initially, the goal of the
project was to compile a list of valid species names of ani-
mals to be completed by the public launching of the CTFB.
After this meeting, since June 2015, Michel P. Valim joined
the coordination committee, bringing his expertise from the
taxa he coordinated (insects and mites ectoparasites) to help
with other biological groups, and serving as a liaison with
the IT team to solve problems with the platform, moving
the project forward. On December 21, 2015, in Brasília, a
public search site was launched. At the time of launch, the
database consisted of more than 116 thousand validated
names of animals occurring in Brazil, and introduced and
domesticated species were not accounted for.
Due to limited funding for improvements and assis-
tantships, CTFB is mostly supported by voluntary work by
taxonomists. It is this group of scientists that maintains
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 5 / 13

lists of specific taxa under their responsibility. Presently,
the management design for the CTFB is organized by
coordinators of large groups (i.e., Chordata, Invertebrates
except for Arthropoda, Hexapoda, and Arthropoda, except
for Hexapoda), each managing sub-coordinators of subor-
dinated taxa. These latter coordinate all authors of specific
taxa. In general, this management system has been eective
in providing an eective and rapid update of the taxonomic
and ecological information on most major taxa, with few
exceptions. All contributing taxonomists (more than 800 at
this time (see Boeger and Valim 2024) have been invited at
some point, according to the demand, but the CTFB is open
to all specialists in dierent groups of animals interested in
collaboration. The CTFB is strongly based on the community
eorts of scientists who recognize the importance of an
updated species list of the fauna of Brazil.
The CTFB is licensed under the CC (https://creative-
commons.org/licenses/by/4.0). The system comprises a public
consulting page (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/) and a workspace
area for associated specialists. Searches can be performed on
the public consulting page with a combination of keywords,
varying from taxonomy, biology, and distribution. In con-
trast, the workspace provides administrative and database
resources for coordinators and taxonomists. Furthermore,
the complete database of the CTFB is also provided through
the IPT (Integrated Publishing Toolkit; https://ipt.jbrj.gov.br/
jbrj/resource?r=catalogo_taxonomico_da_fauna_do_brasil).
The data retrieved from the public consultation page reflect
the real-time data available in the CTFB. The data provided
by the IPT are updated monthly and presented in the Darwin
Core format (Wieczorek et al. 2012).
The inclusion of a species name in the CTFB is prefera-
bly based on the following criteria: (1) type specimens whose
type locality is in Brazil; (2) data from literature and scientific
collections (e.g., indexed scientific publications, testimonial
material in scientific collections; genetic identity based on
sequences deposited in an online database); and 3) other
types of records (e.g., photographs, slides, and non-indexed
publications) at the discretion of the coordinator and the
team of specialists.
Figure 1. Participants of the First Workshop for the Development of the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil, held on
June 13th, 2012, in São Paulo. Numbers on the photograph refer to the zoologists and collaborators present in the meeting.
1. Mariana Galera; 2. Marcelo Roberto de Souto Melo; 3. Cristiano de Campos Nogueira; 4. Giuseppe Puorto; 5. João Paulo
Pena Barbosa; 6. Renato Silveira Bérnils; 7. Marcelo Duarte; 8. Abel Packer; 9. Magno Vicente Segalla; 10. Rafaela C. Forzza;
11. Marcela Laura Monné Freire; 12. Alexandre Reis Percequillo; 13. Simone C. Cohen; 14. Luiz Ricardo Lopes de Simone;
15. Rodney R. Cavichiolli; 16. Carlos José Einicker Lamas; 17. Hussam El Dine Zaher; 18. Walter A. Boeger; 19. Adriano Bri-
lhante Kury; 20. Cristiana S. Serejo; 21. José Eugênio Grillo; 22. Marcos Domingos Siqueira Tavares; 23. Renato Gregorin.
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 20246 / 13

Since 2015, additional data inputted by the zoologists
involved in the CTFB has resulted not only in the increase
in the number of validated species of animals in Brazil but
also in additional nomenclatural (e.g., synonyms), ecological,
and distributional data. A synthesis of the current species
richness of many taxonomic groups of Brazilian fauna is pre-
sented herein and in associated articles in this new section
of Zoologia, focusing on subordinate groups.
The database analyzed herein was extracted on January
1, 2024, though the IPT-GBIF (Integrated Publishing Toolkit,
Brazilian Zoology Group 2023). The taxa used herein do not
necessarily reflect recent changes in animal classification (e.g.,
Acanthocephala is presently considered a member of Rotifera
or Syndermata – Dunn et al. 2014, Siela et al. 2016; Sipuncul-
ida and Echiura are considered members of Annelida – Struck
et al. 2007). The list includes mostly native species with only
a limited number of introduced, invasive, or domesticated
species. Manipulation of the database was processed in R (R
Core Team 2021) using RStudio (RStudio Team 2020).
By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nom-
inal species, with 125,138 considered valid (Table 1). Most
of the valid species are arthropods (82.3% with more than
102,000 species) and chordates (7.69% with over 11,000
species). These taxa are followed by a cluster composed of
Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species),
Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All
remaining groups have less than 1,000 species reported in
Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species),
Figure 2. Group photo of CTFB coordinators involved in the meeting from 12th to 14th on May 2015 in Brasília, Brazil, at
the Ministério de Meio Ambiente (MMA). Numbers on the photograph refer to the zoologists and collaborators present in
the meeting. 1. Adriano Brilhante Kury; 2. Martin Lindsey Christoersen; 3. Renato Silveira Bérnils; 4. Wolmar Benjamim
Wosiacki; 5. Michel P. Valim; 6. Luis Fábio Silveira; 7. Élison Fabricio Bezerra Lima; 8. Ângelo Parisi Pinto; 9. Jocélia Grazia;
10. André Esteves; 11. Keila Elizabeth Mafadem Juarez; 12. Guilherme Muricy; 13. Leandro Manzoni Vieira; 14. Fernando
Carbayo; 15. Otto Müller P. Oliveira; 16. Naércio Aquino Menezes; 17. Magno Vicente Segalla; 18. Hussam El Dine Zaher;
19. Alexandre Reis Percequillo; 20. Marcelo Roberto de Souto Melo; 21. Walter A. Boeger; 22. Cristiana S. Serejo; 23. Marcela
Laura Monné Freire; 24. Frederico Falcão Salles; 25. Simone C. Cohen; 26. Mirna Martins Casagrande; 27. Antonio Arno-
vis Agudelo Rondôn; 28. Reginaldo Constantino; 29. Daniela Maeda Takiya; 30. Fernando Zagury Vaz-de-Mello; 31. José
Albertino Rafael; 32. Márcio Luiz de Oliveira; 33. Cleide Costa; 34. Douglas Zepellini Filho; 35. Marcos Gonçalves Lhano;
36. Renato Gregorin; 37. Allan Paulo Moreira dos Santos.
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 7 / 13

Roti fera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species), represent-
ing those with more than 500 species.
Uncovering the global and regional richness of animal
species is not a simple task. Taxonomists have described new
entities they call species, and have arranged them into mean-
ingful classifications for more than 250 years worldwide.
However, except for those groups that are more attractive
to scientists (aesthetically, ecologically, or economically),
we are far from revealing a significant portion of the global
biodiversity. Hence, eorts to discover species that are yet
unknown to science have been greatly asymmetric over time,
geography, and taxonomic groups.
The resulting list of each taxonomic group of animal
species in Brazil, assembled at the CTFB, is no exception.
In general, the number of species registered in the CTFB
is higher than previous estimates of known species, such
as those provided by Lewinsohn and Prado (2005) (Table
1) – except for Arthropoda, Echiura, Nematoda, Nemertea,
and Platyhelminthes. This dierence reflects descriptions
published from 2005 (date of publication of Lewinsohn and
Prado 2005) onward as well as the eorts of the CTFB team
in recovering all records of species in the literature. This
literature review led many groups (megadiverse or not) to
compile their diversity in Brazil for the first time.
Table 1. Number of known valid nominal species in Brazil according to the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB)
followed by the approximate percentage of increase (+) or decrease (–) from the estimations of Lewinsohn and Prado (2015)
(third column), and estimated known number of species in the world by Chapman (2009).
Taxon CTFB (until January 1st, 2024) Brazil (Lewinsohn and Prado 2005) World (Chapman 2009)
Acanthocephala 71 (+42%) 30–50 1,150
Acoelomorpha 33 – –
Annelida 1,833 (+67%) 1,000–1,100 17,763
Arthropoda 102,931 (-13%) 88,790–118,290 1,141,139
Brachiopoda 3 (-25%) 4 ~350
Bryozoa 520 (+83%) 284 –
Chaetognatha 25 (+39%) 18 ~70
Chordata 9,617 (+34%) 7,120–7,150 64,788
Cnidaria 831(+76%) 470 9,795
Ctenophora 14 (+600%) 2 ~100
Echinodermata 348 (+6%) 329 7,003
Echiura 7 (-22%) 9 ~140
Entoprocta 17 (+70%) 10 ~150
Gastrotricha 87 (+26%) 69 ~400
Kinorhyncha 5 (+400%) 1 ~150
Loricifera 1 0 ~100
Mollusca 3,567 (+19%) 2,400–3,000 ~85,000
Nematoda 1,447 (-50%) 1,280–2,880 Up to 25,000
Nematomorpha 16 (+33%) 12 ~240
Nemertea 39 (-0.9%) 43 ~900
Onychophora 23 (+475%) 4 165
Pentastomida 17 – ~130
Phoronida 4 (+100%) 2 16
Placozoa 1 0 1
Platyhelminthes 2,292 (-0.3%) 1,040–2,300 20,000
Porifera 628 (+57%) 300–400 ~6,000
Priapulida 1 1 17
Rotifera 606 (+33%) 457 ~2,000
Sipuncula 39 (+30%) 30 –
Tardigrada 95 (+42%) 67 ~750
Total 125,138
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 20248 / 13

The systematic update of the list of valid species within
the CTFB is an exceptional opportunity to continuously
evaluate estimations of species richness in Brazil.
For instance, analyses of species richness and distribu-
tion among states strongly suggest that our knowledge of the
biodiversity of the country is still limited, except for most
groups of Chordata. This poses a major problem as discussed
by (Costello et al. 2013): “Can we describe all species before
they become extinct?”
Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and
guide eorts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil,
but it is also fundamental in providing the best-available
list of valid species to users, including those in science,
health, conservation eorts, biotechnology, agricultural
sciences, and any other initiative involving animal species.
Current eorts in these areas are based on incomplete and
non-validated biodiversity catalogues (Mora et al. 2011). The
agility of a continuously validated taxonomic list (and the
corresponding information) is fundamental for providing
important data on species identity for either species-based
or community-based initiatives (Ely et al. 2017). Changes in
the classification and delimitation of species can be rapidly
implemented in the CTFB, which may immediately induce
improvements in research, red lists, legislation, and conser-
vation eorts for the involved species (Feijó and Brandão
2022). This is especially significant considering that modern
taxonomy is heavily rooted in evolution and phylogeny, and
that a name carries more information than just an identity
(Wheeler et al. 2012, Brooks et al. 2019).
A rapid search of the literature emphasizes the impor-
tance of the CTFB in many of the previously mentioned ar-
eas. The CTFB has been cited approximately 960 times since
2015, according to Google Scholar (accessed on November
23, 2023), in scientific papers and theses in diverse areas of
biology and others. For instance, the CTFB has supported the
discovery of new animal taxa and inventories (Victorino et
al. 2023, Zatti et al. 2023), and taxonomic reviews including
the articles in this journal section.
Examples of the importance if the CTFB in revealing
the richness of species of the Brazilian fauna are the pres-
ent knowledge on Mollusca and Diptera (Hexapoda). The
integrated and collaborative eorts of specialists within the
CTFB increased by approximately 40% of species in Mollusca
(Machado et al. 2023) and almost 50% in the number of valid
species of Diptera reported by the specialized publications
of “A catalogue of the Diptera of the Americas South of the
United States” (e.g., Secretaria da Agricultura do Estado do
São Paulo 1966, Pont 1974, Wirth 1974, and others). Further-
more, CTFB has supported studies on taxonomy (Santos et al.
2020) and phylogeny (Bi et al. 2022, Schuster and Machado
2023), ecology (Pompeo et al. 2023), phylogeography (Nunes
Freire Lima 2023), biogeography (Dias 2020), interactions
(dos Santos Azevedo et al. 2018, Carvalho 2020, da Silva Biz
et al. 2022), invasive species (Santos 2023b), and conservation
(Correa et al. 2019, Bustamante et al. 2023). The amplitude
of interest in the CTFB has also been observed in studies on
anthropology (Santos et al. 2023a, pest control (Pantoja et al.
2023), education (Santana et al. 2023), forensic science (Silva
et al. 2023), health (Feijó Almeida 2023), pest management
(Torrez 2022), law (de Santana Silva et al. 2022, Jaruche Neto
2021), and architecture (Junqueira and Sucena 2021). Fur-
thermore, the CTFB is an open and ecient tool in Brazil
that provides curated and validated information to many
additional biodiversity systems, such as the SiBBr (https://
www.sibbr.gov.br/) and the Global Biodiversity Information
Facility (GBIF) (https://www.gbif.org/).
Until this series of published papers within the newly
dedicated section of Zoologia, only three publications an-
alyzed the complete database of particular animal groups
derived from the CTFB in assorted journals (Santos et
al. 2020, Duarte and Lecci 2023, Machado and Martins
2023). Submission of manuscripts based on the database
on animal diversity provided by the CTFB is welcome and
encouraged.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express our gratitude to all the spe-
cialists and coordinators who, despite their valuable con-
tributions to the CTFB, have chosen not to be included as
co-authors in this article. Financial or technical support was
provided by the Ministério de Meio Ambiente, Ministério de
Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação, the Jardim Botânico do Rio
de Janeiro, Scielo Brazil. Special thanks go to in Abel Packer,
Eduardo Dalcin (JBRJ), and the IT team of COPPETEC/UFRJ.
LITERATURE CITED
Agnarsson I, Kuntner M (2007) Taxonomy in a Changing
World: Seeking Solutions for a Science in Crisis. Syste-
matic Biology 56: 531–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/106
35150701424546
Agosta SJ, Brooks DR (2020) The Major Metaphors of Evo-
lution: Darwinism Then and Now (2). Springer Interna-
tional Publishing, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-52086-1
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 9 / 13

Bi G, Leschen RA, Hsiao Y, Daniel GM, Casari SA (2022)
The systematics of Dysmorphocerinae (Cantharidae)
based on larvae. Insect Systematics & Evolution 54: 312–
347. https://doi.org/10.1163/1876312X-bja10041
Boeger W, Valim MP (2024) Brazilian Zoology Group 2023.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10491755
Borsch T, Berendsohn W, Dalcin E, Delmas M, Demissew S,
Elliott A, et al. (2020) World Flora Online: Placing taxo-
nomists at the heart of a definitive and comprehensive
global resource on the world’s plants. Taxon 69(6): 1311–
1341. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12373
Bortolus A (2008) Error cascades in the biological sciences:
the unwanted consequences of using bad taxonomy in eco-
logy. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 37:
114–118. https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2008)37[114:E-
CITBS]2.0.CO;2
Brazilian Flora Group (2022) Brazilian Flora 2020: Leve-
raging the power of a collaborative scientific network.
Taxon 71(1): 178–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12640
Brazilian Zoology Group (2024) Catálogo Taxonômico da
Fauna do Brasil. Version 1.9. https://doi.org/10.15468/
c4cauy
Brooks DR, Hoberg EP, Boeger WA (2019) The Stockholm
Paradigm: Climate Change and Emerging Disease. Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, Chicago, 400 pp.
Bustamante MM, Calaça FJS, Pompermaier VT, da Silva
MRSS, Silveira R (2023) Eects of land use changes on
soil biodiversity conservation. In: Sustainability Challen-
ges of Brazilian Agriculture: Governance, Inclusion, and
Innovation. Springer, 125–143.
Carvalho APC (2020) Reconhecimento e teste de prefe-
rência de plantas hospedeiras de Omophoita octoguttata
(Fabricius, 1775) (Chrysomelidae, Galerucinae, Alticini).
Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul, Licenciatura em
Ciências Biológicas, Realeza, 25 pp.
Chapman AD (2009) Numbers of Living Species in Aus-
tralia and the World. Department of the Environment,
Walter, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, 82 pp.
Conix S, Garnett ST, Thiele KR, Christidis L, van Dijk PP,
Bánki OS, et al. (2021) Towards a global list of accepted
species III. Independence and stakeholder inclusion. Or-
ganisms Diversity & Evolution 21: 631–643. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13127-021-00496-x
Correa CM, Puker A, Lara MA, Rosa CS, Korasaki V (2019)
Importance of urban parks in conserving biodiversity of
flower chafer beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea: Ceto-
niinae) in Brazilian Cerrado. Environmental Entomolo-
gy 48: 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvy176
Costello MJ, May RM, Stork NE (2013) Can we name ear-
th’s species before they go extinct? Science 339: 413–416.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230318
da Silva Biz L, Cascaes MF, Luciano BFL, Preuss G, Bôlla
DAS, Graciolli G, Carvalho F (2022) Parasitic interac-
tions between bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera) and flies
(Insecta: Diptera) in the intersection area of temperate
and tropical climates in Brazil. Studies on Neotropical
Fauna and Environment 57: 291–300. https://doi.org/10.
1080/01650521.2020.1869490
de Santana Silva D, Marques MM, Cerewuta PMM (2022)
Posse Ilegal de Animais Silvestres no Brasil. Facit Bu-
siness and Technology Journal 2: 98–114.
Dias ES (2020) Systematic and biogeography of Leptoce-
ridae (Trichoptera) with review of Achoropsyche Hol-
zenthal, 1984. PhD Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo,
Ribeirão Preto, 107 pp. https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/dis-
poniveis/59/59131/tde-17062021-185152/publico/tese.pdf
Directorate-General for Environment (European Commis-
sion), Hochkirch A, Casino A, Penev L, Allen D, Tilley L,
Georgiev T, Gospodinov K, Barov B (2022) European Red
List of insect taxonomists. Publications Oce of the Eu-
ropean Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/364246
[Accessed: 01/03/2024]
dos Santos Azevedo W, Abegg AD, De França DPF (2018)
Predator-prey interaction between the snakes Apostole-
pis ammodites and Psomophis joberti (Snakes: Dipsadi-
dae). Herpetology Notes 11: 263–265.
Duarte T, Lecci LS (2023) A scientometric approach to the
taxonomy of Brazilian Plecoptera: An overview of data.
Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 67: e20230056. https://
doi.org/10.1590/1806-9665-rbent-2023-0056
Dubois A (2003) The relationships between taxonomy
and conservation biology in the century of extinc-
tions. Comptes Rendus Biologies 326: 9–21. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00022-2
Dunn CW, Girib et G, Edgecombe GD, Hejnol A (2014) Animal
phylogeny and its evolutionary implications. Annual Re-
view of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 45: 371–395.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091627
Feijó A, Brandão MV (2022) Taxonomy as the first step
towards conservation: an appraisal on the taxonomy of
medium- and large-sized Neotropical mammals in the
21st century. Zoologia 39: e22007. https://doi.org/10.1590/
s1984-4689.v39.e22007
Feijó Almeida J (2023) Bioecologia de mosquitos (Diptera:
Culicidae) e infecções verticais de arbovírus, em uma
agrovila na Amazônia brasileira. PhD Thesis, Instituto
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 202410 / 13

Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Manaus, 85 pp. ht-
tps://repositorio.inpa.gov.br/handle/1/39669
Giangrande A (2003) Biodiversity, conservation, and the
‘Taxonomic impediment’. Aquatic Conservation: Ma-
rine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13: 451–459. https://doi.
org/10.1002/aqc.584
Hobern D, Barik SK, Christidis L, Garnett ST, Kirk P, Orrell
TM, et al. (2021) Towards a global list of accepted species
VI: The Catalogue of Life checklist. Organisms Diversity
& Evolution 21: 677–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-
021-00516-w
ICNZ (1999) International Code of Zoological Nomencla-
ture. International Commission on Zoological No-
menclature, London, 4th ed., 344 pp.
Jaruche Neto A (2021) O tráfico de animais no Brasil: impli-
cações jurídicas e obrigatoriedade da proteção ambien-
tal. Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, São Paulo,
85 pp. https://dspace.mackenzie.br/items/fbfe112e-3f9e-
-4593-994b-60e3bc1c7dac
Junqueira MEB, Sucena F (2021) Centro de Tratamento
a Animais Silvestres. Centro Universitário de Várzea
Grande Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, Varzea
Grande, 65 pp. https://www.repositoriodigital.univag.
com.br/index.php/arquit/article/download/707/697
Lewinsohn TM, Prado PI (2005) How many species are
there in Brazil? Conservation Biology 19: 619–624.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00680.x
Linné C von (1758) Systema naturae per regna tria naturae,
secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum charac-
teribus, dierentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio decima, re-
formata. G.E. Beer, Stockholm, 824 pp.
Löbl I, Klausnitzer B, Hartmann M, Krell F-T (2023) The Si-
lent Extinction of Species and Taxonomists – An appeal
to science policymakers and legislators. Diversity 15:
1053. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15101053
Machado FM, Miranda MS, Salvador RB, Pimenta AD, Côr-
tes MO, Gomes JAJ, et al. (2023) How many species of
Mollusca are there in Brazil? A collective taxonomic ef-
fort to reveal this still unknown diversity. Zoologia 40:
e23026 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v40.e23026
Machado RJP, Martins CC (2023) The extant fauna of Neu-
roptera (Insecta) from Brazil: diversity, distribution and
history. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 66: e20220083.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9665-RBENT-2022-0083
Mora C, Tittensor DP, Adl S, Simpson AGB, Worm B (2011)
How Many Species Are There on Earth and in the
Ocean? Plos Biology 9: e1001127. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pbio.1001127
Nunes Freire Lima ILM (2023) Filogeografia da espécie
Subulo gouazoubira (Mammalia: Cervidae) na Caa-
tinga. Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias,
Unesp, Jaboticabal, 126 pp. https://repositorio.unesp.br/
items/4564572e-616d-4bc9-9aaf-1af237a7a661
Pantoja KRP, Menezes EGO, de Oliveira DG, Pinheiro JML,
Bezerra VMS, de Azevedo FFM, de Carvalho Júnior RN
(2023) Bioactive phenolic compounds and biological ac-
tivities of Mururé Bark (Brosimum acutifolium), a natural
antioxidant. In: Functional Food – Upgrading natural
and synthetic sources. IntechOpen, Rijeka. https://www.
intechopen.com/online-first/87873
Pinheiro H, Dalcin E (2024) edalcin/DarwinCoreJSON: se-
gundo release para o Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/
zenodo.10782707
Pompeo PN, Oliveira Filho LCI, Alexandre D, Lovatel
AC, da Silva PM, Sousa JP, et al. (2023) How does the
subtropical landscape configuration influence the eco-
morphological traits and community composition of
ground-dwelling beetles in southern Brazil? Applied
Soil Ecology 189: 104949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ap-
soil.2023.104949
Pont AC (1974) A catalogue of the Diptera of the Americas
south of the United States. Family Anthomyiidae. A cata-
logue of the Diptera of the Americas south of the United
States. Family Anthomyiidae. Available from: https://
www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19740517405 [Ac-
cessed: 18/12/2023]
R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for sta-
tistical computing. Available from: https://www.R-pro-
ject.org
Raposo MA, Kirwan GM, Lourenço ACC, Sobral G, Bock-
mann FA, Stopiglia R (2021) On the notions of taxono-
mic ‘impediment’, ‘gap’, ‘inflation’ and ‘anarchy’, and their
eects on the field of conservation. Systematics and Bio-
diversity 19: 296–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2
020.1829157
RStudio Team (2020) RStudio: Integrated development for
R. http://www.rstudio.com
Santana CMB, dos Santos Calegari A, Carvalho GS, Soares
JPR, de Almeida EAE, Jorge J, Franzolin F (2023) Local
biodiversity: students’ interests and perceptions, and
teaching materials. International Journal of Science
Education: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.
2263916
Santos APM, Dumas LL, Henriques-Oliveira AL, Souza
WRM, Camargos LM, Calor AR, Pes AMO (2020) Taxo-
nomic Catalog of the Brazilian Fauna: order Trichop-
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 11 / 13

tera (Insecta), diversity and distribution. Zoologia 37:
e46392. https://doi.org/10.3897/zoologia.37.e46392
Santos SS (2023a) Uso de animais pelas populações tradi-
cionais: um panorama da Etnozoologia no Brasil. Uni-
versidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, 146 pp. ht-
tps://repositorio.ufpb.br/jspui/handle/123456789/26716
Santos TG (2023b) Flutuação sazonal da mosca invasora
Drosophila nasuta (Diptera, Drosophilidae) na Floresta
Atlântica do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. B.S. thesis, Universi-
dade Federal de Pernambuco, 29 pp. https://repositorio.
ufpe.br/handle/123456789/49872
Schuster PA, Machado RJP (2023) Insights on the evolution
of Ululodini (Insecta: Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae: As-
calaphinae), focusing on the systematics of the genus
Ascalorphne Banks, 1915. Revista Brasileira de Entomo-
logia 66: e20220070. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9665-R-
BENT-2022-0070
Secretaria da Agricultura do Estado do São Paulo (1966) Ca-
talogue of the Diptera of the Americas South of United.
Departamento de Zoologia, Secretaria da Agricultura,
São Paulo, 843 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.110114
Siela M, Schmidt H, Struck TH, Rosenkranz D, Mark Wel-
ch DB, Hankeln T, Herlyn H (2016) Phylogeny of Synder-
mata (syn. Rotifera): Mitochondrial gene order verifies
epizoic Seisonidea as sister to endoparasitic Acanthoce-
phala within monophyletic Hemirotifera. Molecular
Phylogenetics and Evolution 96: 79–92. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ympev.2015.11.017
Silva JOA, Brasil LS, Carvalho-Filho FS (2023) Flesh flies
(Diptera: Sarcophagidae) of forensic importance collec-
ted from pig carcasses in the Cerrado of Northeastern
Brazil. Journal of Medical Entomology 60: 272–281.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjad003
Solé R, Levin S (2022) Ecological complexity and the bios-
phere: the next 30 years. Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 377: 20210376.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0376
Struck TH, Schult N, Kusen T, Hickman E, Bleidorn C, McHu-
gh D, Halanych KM (2007) Annelid phylogeny and the
status of Sipuncula and Echiura. BMC Evolutionary Bio-
logy 7: 57. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-57
Thomson SA, Pyle RL, Ahyong ST, Alonso-Zarazaga M, Am-
mirati J, Araya JF, et al. (2018) Taxonomy based on science
is necessary for global conservation. Plos Biology 16:
e2005075. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2005075
Torrez AAA (2022) Avaliação da predação de sementes de
Aniba rosaeodora Ducke e estratégias para o manejo inte-
grado de pragas em viveiros, Manaus, Amazonas, Brasil.
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, Manaus,
111 pp. https://repositorio.inpa.gov.br/handle/1/38747
Valdecasas AG, Camacho AI (2003) Conservation to the res-
cue of taxonomy. Biodiversity & Conservation 12: 1113–
1117. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023082606162
Victorino BI, Penteado-Dias AM, Dias Filho MM (2023)
New species and new records of Ichneumonidae (Hyme-
noptera) in Southeast Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biolo-
gy 83: e266746. Available from: https://www.scielo.br/j/
bjb/a/qqY6zPBNYhyfBfsjtN9m7Rj/?lang=en
Vogel Ely C, Bordignon SAL, Trevisan R, Boldrini II (2017)
Implications of poor taxonomy in conservation. Jour-
nal for Nature Conservation 36: 10–13. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jnc.2017.01.003
Wägele H, Klussmann-Kolb A, Kuhlmann M, Haszprunar G,
Lindberg D, Koch A, Wägele JW (2011) The taxonomist –
an endangered race. A practical proposal for its survival.
Frontiers in Zoology 8: 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-
9994-8-25
Wheeler QD, Knapp S, Stevenson DW, Stevenson J, Blum SD,
Boom BM, et al. (2012) Mapping the biosphere: exploring
species to understand the origin, organization and sustai-
nability of biodiversity. Systematics and Biodiversity 10:
1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2012.665095
Wieczorek J, Bloom D, Guralnick R, Blum S, Döring M, Gio-
vanni R, et al. (2012) Darwin Core: An Evolving Commu-
nity-Developed Biodiversity Data Standard. Plos One 7:
e29715. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029715
Wirth WW (1974) A catalogue of the Diptera of the Ameri-
cas south of the United States. 14. Family Ceratopogoni-
dae. Museu Zoologia, Universidade de São Paulo, 89 pp.
Zatti SA, Araújo BL, Adriano EA, Maia AA (2023) A new
freshwater Ceratomyxa species (Myxozoa: Ceratomyxi-
dae) parasitizing a sciaenid fish from the Amazon Basin,
Brazil. Parasitology International 97: 102796. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2017.02.006
Submitted: January 18, 2024
Accepted: July 22, 2024
Editorial responsibility: Anderson Feijó
Author Contributions
WAB and MPV designed the study, analyzed the data,
organized, and wrote the manuscript; HZ wrote the
historical portion and revised the manuscript; JAR,
RCF, ARP, CSS revised the manuscript. All the above
authors have coordinated the teams of various major
W.A. Boeger et al.
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 202412 / 13

groups of animals. These and the remaining authors are
members of the Brazilian Zoology Group 2023, which
was responsible for entering and validating classification
and species names, also providing a review of the many
versions of the manuscript.
Competing Interests
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
How to cite this article
Boeger WA, Valim MP, Zaher H, Rafael JA, Forzza RC, Per-
cequillo AR, Serejo CS, et al. (2024) Catálogo Taxonômi-
co da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge
on the animal diversity in Brazil. Zoologia 41: e24005.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.e24005
Published by
Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia at Scientific Electronic
Library Online (https://www.scielo.br/zool)
Copyright
© 2024 The Authors.
Animal diversity in Brazil
ZOOLOGIA 41:
e24005
| https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689.v41.
e24005
| August 26, 2024 13 / 13