Now, researchers have confirmed that a previously unrecognized Asian pangolin species, Manis aurita, has been living in Nepal and Northern India. The findings, published in Communications Biology, clarify how different pangolin species are related, where they live, and how they can be distinguished. That information could also help authorities identify where illegally traded pangolins are being hunted and strengthen efforts to stop poaching.

"We can't protect what we do not know, and now that we have confirmed that this other species of pangolin exists, we can use that information to help protect these endangered animals," says Anderson Feijó, the Negaunee Assistant Curator of Mammals at the Field Museum and co-corresponding author of the study.

"This finding marks the culmination of more than five years of research that began in Nepal, where we first documented evidence suggesting that Himalayan pangolins represented a distinct evolutionary lineage," says Narayan Koju, a researcher at the Nepal Engineering College at Pokhara University and the study's first author. "The confirmation of Manis aurita as a valid species demonstrates the importance of long-term research, international collaboration, and museum collections. Most importantly, it provides a strong scientific basis for conservation planning, wildlife forensics, and efforts to protect one of the world's most trafficked mammals from extinction."

Untangling the Pangolin Family Tree

The classification of these Himalayan pangolins had already begun to change in 2025. That year, another research team determined that animals previously grouped together as Chinese pangolins actually represented two species. One occurs mainly in China, while the other inhabits the Himalayan foothills across parts of Nepal, India, Bhutan, and Myanmar. The researchers named the mountain-dwelling form Manis indoburmanica, or the Indo-Burmese pangolin.

But scientific naming follows a rule of priority: when the same species has been given more than one scientific name, the earliest valid name takes precedence.

At the time, Feijó and his colleagues were already conducting a decade-long investigation into pangolin evolution. Their work combined DNA evidence with physical characteristics to determine how many pangolin species exist and how those species are related.

During that research, they encountered records of Manis aurita, a pangolin described in 1836. Over time, M. aurita had been reclassified as a subspecies of the Chinese pangolin.

"This left us with a core taxonomic riddle: what is the relationship between indoburmanica and aurita? Are they the same species or different species?" says Kai He, another of the paper's co-corresponding authors and a researcher at the South China Biodiversity Research Center at Guangzhou University. "The ultimate, most thrilling piece of the puzzle came from the Natural History Museum in London. Thanks to their incredible expertise and assistance, the NHM team successfully sequenced the DNA directly from the historical type specimen of the Nepalese subspecies (aurita). This specimen dates back to 1836, making it nearly 190 years old."

DNA From 1836 Provides the Answer

Genetic material recovered from the historic museum specimen settled the question. Modern Himalayan pangolin samples matched aurita, showing that the animals described in 2025 as M. indoburmanica were actually members of the species first named M. aurita.

As a result, M. aurita is the correct scientific name.

"This taxonomic clarification provides a crucial scientific basis for combating illegal poaching and lays the groundwork for protecting this cryptic endangered species," says Yan Hua, a co-corresponding author of the study and researcher at the Guangdong Academy of Forestry.

The Himalayan pangolin M. aurita (briefly formerly known as M. indoburmanica) differs from the Chinese pangolin in several subtle but important ways.

"Compared to the Chinese pangolin, the Himalayan pangolin has a bigger body, a longer tail, and smaller ears," says Feijó. The revived name aurita itself refers to the animal's distinctive ears.

The two species are also separated geographically. Their known ranges do not overlap. For critically endangered animals, especially those facing intense pressure from poaching, understanding exactly which species lives where can be essential for conservation.

A New Tool Against Pangolin Trafficking

Pangolin scales are believed to be a powerful aphrodisiac in traditional Chinese medicine practices, helping drive a large illegal trade in the animals. Preventing that trafficking is difficult in part because authorities often encounter scales rather than intact animals.

"In the marketplaces you basically only find pangolin scales, not the whole animals, which makes it hard to know which species are being hunted and where they are coming from," says Feijó.

The DNA methods used in the new research could make those seizures much more informative. Conservation scientists may be able to analyze confiscated scales, determine which pangolin species they came from, and then use that information to identify regions where poaching pressure is especially intense.

That could allow conservationists and law enforcement agencies to work backward from illegally traded material to the populations being targeted.

A clearer understanding of species boundaries can also improve efforts to return pangolins to areas where they once lived. Reintroduction programs need to ensure that they are releasing the appropriate species into the appropriate geographic range.

"Before, you might have introduced Chinese pangolins into Nepal, because you didn't know the difference," says Feijó. "By defining the differences between the species and the limits of where each species is found, we can make better conservation decisions."

Museum Collections Reveal Hidden Biodiversity

The researchers say these practical conservation advances would have been much harder without natural history museums. Museum collections preserve pangolin specimens collected more than a century ago, giving scientists access to animals from locations and populations that can be extremely difficult to sample today.

"Using museum collections allows us to have access to more individuals across the species' range," says Feijó. "If you only rely on fresh material, since the animals are so rare to find in the wild, this greatly limits the information that you can gather. We used collections to have a more complete sampling of the species. It's a big advantage to have this resource available as a repository of material that we can look back and keep learning from."

This study was contributed to by scientists from Guangzhou University, Nepal Engineering College, Pokhara University, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of Washington, the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, the University of Sevilla, the Guangdong Academy of Forestry, Tribhuan University, Aspect Ecology Oxfordshire, the Chinese Wildlife Forensic Science Service, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and the Field Museum.