Map_thumbnail_large_font

Leopardus pardalis 

Scope: Global
Status_ne_offStatus_dd_offStatus_lc_onStatus_nt_offStatus_vu_offStatus_en_offStatus_cr_offStatus_ew_offStatus_ex_off

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Mammalia Carnivora Felidae

Scientific Name: Leopardus pardalis
Species Authority: (Linnaeus, 1758)
Common Name(s):
English Ocelot
Spanish Manigordo, Gato Onza, Ocelote, Tigrillo
Taxonomic Notes: Taxonomy is currently under review by the IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group. This species is genetically very diverse across its range and shows a high degree of population structure, with four distinct clusters: Central America and Mexico, north-northwest South America, north-northeast South America and southern South America. The demarcation between northern and southern South America was identified as the Amazon river (Eizirik et al. 1998).

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Least Concern ver 3.1
Year Published: 2016
Date Assessed: 2014-05-10
Assessor(s): Paviolo, A., Crawshaw, P., Caso, A., de Oliveira, T., Lopez-Gonzalez, C.A., Kelly, M., De Angelo, C. & Payan, E.
Reviewer(s): Nowell, K., Hunter, L., Schipper, J., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Lanz, T. & Breitenmoser, U.
Contributor(s): Di Blanco, Y., Quiroga, V., Cruz, P., Leite-Pitman, M.R.P., Eizirik, E. & Valderrama, C.
Justification:
The Ocelot has a wide distribution, from northern Argentina to the southwestern United States, being the most common felid species in most of the tropical and subtropical habitats of the Neotropics; it is listed as Least Concern. Densities seem to increase with rainfall and decrease with latitude, with the highest densities in tropical areas (Di Bitetti et al. 2008). Even though there are indications of specific population declines, these do not seem to affect the species to the point of categorizing it under any threat category rangewide. Its extensive occurrence in Brazil, added to the remaining area of present distribution allows an effective population of >40,000 mature individuals (Oliveira et al. 2013). At least in some areas of the Amazon basin, populations are apparently healthy and stable. The species is, nevertheless, impacted by habitat loss and fragmentation, intense logging activities, vehicle collisions and poaching (Di Bitetti et al. 2008, Payan et al. 2013). In Colombia, Ocelots manage to survive in oil palm landscapes and extensive cattle ranches in the llanos and Inter-Andean valleys (Boron and Payan 2013, Diaz-Pulido and Payan 2011). In Argentina, the species still is found in all the subtropical area and although it is affected by poaching and logging (Di Bitetti et al. 2006, 2008, 2010), a total of 1,500 to 8,000 individuals is estimated for this country at the southern range of the species (Aprile et al. 2012). Populations of northeastern Mexico and Texas have experienced dramatic declines and the genetic impacts of isolation are apparent, particularly in Texas (Janecka et al. 2011 and Janecka et al. 2014). The number of Ocelots in Texas is believed to be between 50 – 80 individuals. These areas will certainly need attention or Ocelots are likely to be extirpated there.
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:The Ocelot is widely distributed from United States and Mexico through Central and South America south to North Argentina, southern Brazil and Uruguay, found in every country except Chile.  In the United States was recorded in Arizona (Strangl and Young 2011, Avilas-Villegas and Lamberton-Moreno 2012) and in two isolated subpopulations in the southern tip of Texas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010). At Uruguay was recorded at the Rivera Department, near the Brazilian border (Andrade-Nuñez and Aide 2010).
Countries occurrence:
Native:
Argentina; Belize; Bolivia, Plurinational States of; Brazil; Colombia; Costa Rica; Ecuador; El Salvador; French Guiana; Guatemala; Guyana; Honduras; Mexico; Nicaragua; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Suriname; Trinidad and Tobago; United States (Arizona, Texas); Uruguay; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
Additional data:
Upper elevation limit (metres):3000
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:Ocelot population densities throughout its entire range varies widely from 2.5 to 160/100 km². At a continental scale, Ocelot densities decrease with latitude and increase with rainfall (Di Bitetti et al. 2008). Primary productivity seems to determine the abundance of this wild cat across their range, but at a local scale their abundance may be affected by logging and poaching or by competition with other species (Di Bitetti et al. 2008). The lowest densities are found at the Pine Forest of Belize (Dillon and Kelly 2007), dry areas of Mexico (Gonzalez et al. 2003) and the Caatinga in northeastern Brazil (Oliveira 2012). The maximum estimated density was found at the Barro Colorado Island in Panamá (Rodgers et al. 2014). The species is considered Endangered in Mexico (Norma Oficial Mexicana 2010) and in United States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010), Vulnerable in Colombia (Rodriguez-Mahecha et al. 2006) and Argentina (Aprile et al. 2012). In Brazil, populations outside the Amazon are listed as Vulnerable (Machado et al. 2005).
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Population severely fragmented:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:The species occupies a wide spectrum of habitats types, ranging from scrublands to tropical rain forests. What all these habitats have in common is a well-structured vegetation cover (Emmons 1988, Emmons et al. 1989, Sunquist and Sunquist 2002). Ocelots were recorded in mangrove forests, coastal marshes, savanna grasslands, thorn scrubs, and tropical and subtropical forest (primary, secondary, evergreen, seasonal and montane). The species typically occurs at elevations below 3,000 m but there are occasional reports of the species up to 3,000 m (Nowell and Jackson 1996, Sunquist and Sunquist 2002).

The Ocelot is a medium sized felid (11 kg), with a litter size of 1.4 kittens (1–4), and typically nocturno-crepuscular activity, but that could also be active during daytime (Oliveira and Cassaro 2005, Di Bitetti et al. 2006). Throughout much of its range tends to be the most abundant cat species. The Ocelot also reaches higher density estimates than its sympatric smaller species and was suggested that also negatively impact its small guild members (Di Bitetti et al. 2010, Oliveira et al. 2010). The species use similar habitat and show similar abundance patterns than Jaguars and Pumas and appear not to be affected by these species (Di Bitetti et al 2010, Davis et al. 2011)  Its diet includes small mammals, birds and reptiles, but include also larger sized prey (>800 g), such as agoutis, armadillos, pacas, monkeys, etc. that in some areas can constitute the most important items (Crawshaw 1995, Sunquist and Sunquist 2002, Moreno et al. 2006, Bianchi et al. 2010)

The home ranges of males are larger than the ranges of the sympatric females, but high variation exist on the size between regions (Dillon and Kelly 2008).  The largest home ranges (43 km² for males and 16 km² for females) were observed in Subtropical forest of Brazil and Argentina (Crawshaw 1995) and the smallest (2 to 6 km² for males and 1 to 3 km² for females) were observed in Texas (US), Brazilian Pantanal, Peruvian Amazonia and Bolivian Chaco (Navarro 1985, Emmons 1988, Crawshaw and Quigley 1989, Laack 1991, Maffei and Noss 2008).
Systems:Terrestrial
Movement patterns:Not a Migrant

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): At present the major threats for the species are habitat loss and fragmentation, retaliatory killing due to depredation of poultry and illegal trade of pets and pelts (Sunquist and Sunquiest 2002).The Ocelot has been described as being tolerant in some degree to habitat disturbs and persists in wooded patches near human settlements. However, Ocelot abundance is negatively affected by anthropogenic effects like poaching and logging (Di Bitetti et al. 2008). Although widespread commercial harvests for the fur trade ceased decades ago, some illegal trade still persists.

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: Included on CITES Appendix I. The species is protected across most of its range, with hunting banned in Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, French Guiana, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela, and hunting regulations in place in Peru (Nowell and Jackson 1996). Part of the species range includes protected areas, including some capable of maintaining long-term viable populations.

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.5. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.6. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.7. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Mangrove Vegetation Above High Tide Level
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.9. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane
suitability:Marginal  
2. Savanna -> 2.1. Savanna - Dry
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
2. Savanna -> 2.2. Savanna - Moist
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.5. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.6. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical Moist
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration
3. Species management -> 3.2. Species recovery
3. Species management -> 3.3. Species re-introduction -> 3.3.1. Reintroduction
3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.1. Captive breeding/artificial propagation
3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.2. Genome resource bank
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.2. National level
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.3. Sub-national level

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
In-Place Species Management
  Subject to ex-situ conservation:Yes
In-Place Education
  Included in international legislation:Yes
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:Yes
1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.1. Housing & urban areas
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.2. Commercial & industrial areas
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry farming
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.2. Wood & pulp plantations -> 2.2.2. Agro-industry plantations
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming & ranching -> 2.3.3. Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & quarrying
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

4. Transportation & service corridors -> 4.1. Roads & railroads
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.2. Unintentional effects (species is not the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.3. Persecution/control
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood harvesting -> 5.3.5. Motivation Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.1. Recreational activities
♦ timing:Future    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.1. Fire & fire suppression -> 7.1.3. Trend Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.2. Dams & water management/use -> 7.2.11. Dams (size unknown)
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

8. Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases -> 8.1.1. Unspecified species
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

9. Pollution -> 9.2. Industrial & military effluents -> 9.2.3. Type Unknown/Unrecorded
♦ timing:Ongoing    
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

1. Research -> 1.1. Taxonomy
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
1. Research -> 1.6. Actions
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends

Bibliography [top]

Andrade-Núñez, M J., and Aide, T.M. 2010. Effects of habitat and landscape characteristics on medium and large mammal species richness and composition in northern Uruguay. Zoologia (Curitiba) 27(6): 909-917.

Aprile G., Cuyckens, E., De Angelo, C., Di Bitetti, M., Lucherini, M., Muzzachiodi, N., Palacios, R., Paviolo, A., Quiroga, V. and Soler, L. 2012. Family: Felidae. In: R.A. Ojeda, V. Chillo, Vand G.B. Díaz Isenrath (ed.), Libro Rojo de los Mamíferos Amenazados de la Argentina, SAREM, Mendoza.

Avila-Villegas, S. and Lamberton-Moreno, J.A. 2012. Wildlife Survey and monitoring in the Sky Island region with an emphasis on neotropical felids. In: G.J. Gottfried, P.F. Ffolliott, B.S. Gebow, L.G. Eskew and L.C. Collins (eds), Merging Science and Management in a Rapidly Changing World: Biodiversity and Management of the Madrean Archipelago III and 7th Conference on Research and Resource Management in the Southwestern Deserts, pp. 1-5.

Bianchi, R.D.C., Mendes, S.L, and Júnior, P.D.M. 2010. Food habits of the ocelot, Leopardus pardalis, in two areas in southeast Brazil. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 45(3): 111-119.

Boron, V. and Payan, E. 2013. Abundancia de carnívoros en el agropaisaje de las plantaciones de palma de aceite del valle medio del río Magdalena, Colombia. In: C. Castaño-Uribe, J.F. Gonzalez-Maya, C. Ange, D. Zarrate-Charry and M. Vela-Vargas (eds), In Plan de Conservación de Felinos del Caribe Colombiano 2007-2012: Los felinos y su papel en la planificación regional integral basada en especies clave, pp. 165-176. Santa Marta: Fundación Herencia Ambiental Caribe, ProCAT, Colombia, The Sierra to Sea Institute.

Crawshaw, P.G. 1995. Comparative ecology of ocelot (Felis pardalis) and jaguar (Panthera onca) in a protected subtropical forest in Brazil and Argentina. University of Florida.

Crawshaw, P.G. and Quigley, H. 1989. Notes on ocelot movement and activity in the Pantanal region, Brazil. Biotropica 21(4): 377-379.

Davis, M.L., Kelly, M.J. and Stauffer, D.F. 2011. Carnivore co‐existence and habitat use in the Mountain Pine Ridge Forest Reserve, Belize. Animal Conservation 14(1): 56-65.

Diaz-Pulido, A. and Payán, E. 2011. Densidad de ocelotes (Leopardus pardalis) en los Llanos colombianos. Mastozoología Neotropical 18: 63-71.

Di Bitetti, M.S., De Angelo, C.D., Di Blanco, Y E. and Paviolo, A. 2010. Niche partitioning and species coexistence in a Neotropical felid assemblage. Acta Oecologica 36(4): 403-412.

Di Bitetti, M.S., Paviolo, A. and De Angelo, C. 2006. Density, habitat use and activity patterns of ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) in the Atlantic Forest of Misiones, Argentina. Journal of Zoology 270: 153-163.

Di Bitetti, M.S., Paviolo, A., De Angelo, C.D. and Di Blanco, Y.E. 2008. Local and continental correlates of the abundance of a Neotropical cat, the ocelot (Leopardus pardalis). Journal of Tropical Ecology 24(2): 189-200.

Dillon, A. and Kelly, M.J. 2007. Ocelot Leopardus pardalis in Belize: the impact of trap spacing and distance moved on density estimates. Oryx 41(4): 469-477.

Dillon, A. and Kelly, M.J. 2008. Ocelot home range, overlap and density: comparing radio telemetry with camera trapping. Journal of Zoology 275(4): 391-398.

Eizirik, E., Bonatto, S.L., Salzano, F.M., Johnson, W.E., O'Brien, S.J., Crawshaw Jr., P.G., Vie, J.-C. and Brousset, D.M. 1998. Phylogeographic patterns and evolution of the mitochondrial DNA control region in two neotropical cats (Mammalia, felidae). Journal of Molecular Evolution 47: 613-624.

Emmons, L.H. 1988. A field study of ocelots (Felis pardalis) in Peru. Rev. Ecol. (Terre Vie) 43:133-157.

Emmons, L. H., Sherman, P., Bolster, D., Goldizen, A. and Terborgh, J. 1989. Ocelot behavior in moonlight. Advances in Neotropical Mammalogy: 233-242.

González, C.A.L., Brown, D.E. and Gallo-Reynoso, J.P. 2003. The ocelot Leopardus pardalis in north-western Mexico: ecology, distribution and conservation status. Oryx 37(3): 358-364.

IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 30 June 2016).

Janecka, J.E., Tewes, M.E., Laack, L., Caso, A., Grassman, L.I. and Honeycutt, R.L. 2014. Loss of Genetic Diversity among Ocelots in the United States during the 20th Century Linked to Human Induced Population Reductions. Plos One 9(2): e89384.

Janecka J.E., Tewes M.E., Laack, L.L., Caso, A., Grassman, L.I. Jr, Haines, A.M., Shindle D.B., Davis, B.W., Murphy, W.J. and Honeycutt, R.L. 2011. Reduced genetic diversity and isolation of remnant ocelot populations occupying a severely fragmented landscape in southern Texas. Animal Conservation 14: 608-619.

Laack, L L. 1991. Ecology of the ocelot (Felis pardalis) in south Texas. Masters Thesis, Texas A & I.

Machado, A.B.M., Drummond, G.M. and Martins, C.S. 2005. Lista da Fauna Brasileira Ameaçada de Extinção: Incluindo as Espécies Quase Ameaçadas e Deficientes em Dados. Fundação Biodiversitas, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Maffei, L. and Noss, A. J. 2008. How small is too small? Camera trap survey areas and density estimates for ocelots in the Bolivian Chaco. Biotropica 40(1): 71-75.

Moreno, R.S., Kays, R.W. and Samudio Jr, R. 2006. Competitive release in diets of ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) and puma (Puma concolor) after jaguar (Panthera onca) decline. Journal of Mammalogy 87(4): 808-816.

Navarro Lopez, D. 1985. Status and distribution of the Ocelot (Felis pardalis) in South Texas. Texas A & I.

NORMA OFICIAL MEXICANA (2010) NOM-059-SEMARNAT-2010. 2010. Protección ambiental-Especies nativas de México de flora y fauna silvestres-Categoría de riesgo y especificaciones para su inclusión, exclusión o cambio-Lista de especies en riesgo. Diario Oficial de la Federación. Distrito Federal, Mexico.

Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. 1996. Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Oliveira, G.P. 2012. Ecologia da Jaguatirica, Leopardus pardalis (LINNAEUS, 1758), na Caatinga do Piauí. Universidade de Brasília.

Oliveira, T.G. de, Almeida, L.B. de and Campos, C.B. de. 2013. Avaliação do risco de extinção da jaguatirica Leopardus pardalis no Brasil. Biodiversidade Brasileira 3(1): 66-75.

Oliveira, T.G. de and Cassaro, K. 2005. Guia de campo dos felinos do Brasil. Instituto Pró-Carnívoros/Fundação Parque Zoológico de São Paulo/Sociedade de Zoológicos do Brasil/Pró-Vida Brasil, São Paulo, Brazil.

Oliveira, T.G. de, Tortato, M.A., Silveira, L., Kasper, C.B., Mazim, F.D., Lucherini, M. Jácomo, A.T., Soares, J.B.G., Marques, R.V. and Sunquist, M. 2010. Ocelot ecology and its effect in the small-felid guild in the lowland Neotropics. In: D.W. Macdonald and A. Loveridge (eds), Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids, pp. 563-584. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Payan, E., Soto, C., Diaz-Pulido, A., Benitez, A. and Hernandez, A. 2013. Wildlife road crossing and mortality: lessons for wildlife friendly road design in Colombia. International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, Arizona: 1-18.

Rodgers, T.W., Giacalone, J., Heske, E.J., Janeèka, J.E., Phillips, C.A. and Schooley, R.L. 2014. Comparison of noninvasive genetics and camera trapping for estimating population density of ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. Tropical Conservation Science 7(4): 690-705.

Rodriguez-Mahecha, J.V., Alberico, M., Trujillo, F. and Jorgenson, J. 2006. Libro Rojo de los Mamíferos de Colombia. Serie Libros Rojos de Especies Amenazadas de Colombia. Conservación Internacional Colombia & Ministerio de Ambiente, vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial, Bogota, Colombia.

Stangl Jr, F.B., and Young, J.H. 2011. The ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) in northern Texas, with comments on its northern biogeography. Western North American Naturalist 71(3): 412-417.

Sunquist, M. and Sunquist, F. 2002. Wild Cats of the World. University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Draft Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) Recovery Plan, First Revision. .S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico.


Citation: Paviolo, A., Crawshaw, P., Caso, A., de Oliveira, T., Lopez-Gonzalez, C.A., Kelly, M., De Angelo, C. & Payan, E. 2016. Leopardus pardalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T11509A97212355. . Downloaded on 28 September 2016.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided