The knowledge landscape of jaguar science: rapid growth, thematic structure, and regional inequalities

Marco Aurélio Mendes Elias , Philip Teles Soares, José Alexandre Felizola Diniz-Filho, Anah Teresa de Almeida Jácomo, Tiago Silveira, Leandro Silveira

Understanding how scientific effort is distributed is essential for evaluating the evidence available to guide species conservation. We assessed the temporal, thematic, methodological, and spatial organization of jaguar (Panthera onca) research across the species’ range. Using 1,028 bibliographic records, we applied a metadata-based scope filter, defining a primary analytical corpus of 857 articles and an inclusive sensitivity corpus of 989. We analyzed publication growth from 1946–2024, author-keyword networks, high-specificity research-domain and methodological indicators, article-based spatial concentration across nine regions, and anthropogenic context using the Human Impact Index. Publication output increased strongly and nonlinearly, with the negative-binomial generalized additive model explaining 96% of deviance. Population and abundance, human–wildlife conflict and coexistence, and movement and connectivity were the most frequent research domains, whereas camera trapping was the most frequent methodological approach. Spatial analyses included 237 georeferenced terrestrial articles. Research was strongly concentrated in the Pantanal, Mesoamerica, and Atlantic Forest, but was underrepresented relative to range area in the Andes and Chocó–Darién, Amazon, and Guiana Shield. These patterns were stable to the broader scope definition. Research concentration showed no strong association with region-wide anthropogenic pressure, although studies within several extensive regions tended to occur in more human-influenced portions than the regional average. Jaguar research therefore shows substantial growth and partial alignment with applied conservation challenges but remains geographically uneven. Expanding representative research in underrepresented regions, while maintaining work in threatened landscapes, would strengthen the evidence base for range-wide conservation planning and improve coordination among countries, institutions, and regional research traditions.