Animal Diversity Web

Di­ver­sity

Dasy­po­di­dae is the only ex­tant fam­ily in the order Cin­gu­lata, which also con­tains ex­tinct fam­i­lies Glyptodon­ti­dae and Pam­patheri­idae. Dasy­po­di­dae con­tains three sub­fam­i­lies: Tolypeuti­nae, Eu­phracti­nae, and Dasy­po­d­i­nae. These are fur­ther di­vided into one, six and three gen­era, re­spec­tively. Ar­madil­los are by far the most di­verse group of xe­narthrans, with a total of twenty-one ex­tant species and two ex­tinct species iden­ti­fied in the fam­ily Dasy­po­di­dae. These species vary in size, form, and be­hav­ior, but all pos­sess char­ac­ter­is­tic bony armor. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; "Check­list of Mam­mal Names", 2005)

Ge­o­graphic Range

Ar­madil­los have a strictly New World dis­tri­b­u­tion, rang­ing from the cen­tral United States (Mis­souri) through Cen­tral and South Amer­ica, as far south as Cape Horn (at the south­ern tip of South Amer­ica).

Nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus) have the most north­ern dis­tri­b­u­tion. Their range orig­i­nally spanned from South Amer­ica into Mex­ico but has ex­panded steadily north­ward into the South­ern United States Their range cur­rently ex­tends through­out the Mid­west, and nine-banded ar­madil­los have re­cently been found as far north as Ne­braska. Sci­en­tists spec­u­late that global cli­mate change and loss of nat­ural preda­tors could con­tribute to the north­ward ex­pan­sion of this typ­i­cally more neotrop­i­cal species. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990)

• Biogeographic Regions
• nearctic
  • native
• neotropical
  • native

Habi­tat

Ar­madil­los are found in a wide array of habi­tats, from deserts and moun­tains to wet­lands and sandy coastal re­gions. All mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae are ter­res­trial, and most are fos­so­r­ial, liv­ing in bur­rows. They typ­i­cally re­main on the ground, be­cause their plated armor and heavy bones pre­vent them from climb­ing trees (as with most mem­bers of the closely re­lated fam­ily Pi­losa) or swim­ming. Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus is an ex­cep­tion, as it is known to swim awk­wardly. Some dasy­po­dids, such as mem­bers of Tolypeuti­nae, are strictly ter­res­trial and not fos­so­r­ial. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; Viz­caino and Milne, 2005)

• Habitat Regions
• temperate
• tropical
• terrestrial

• Terrestrial Biomes
• desert or dune
• savanna or grassland
• chaparral
• forest
• rainforest
• scrub forest
• mountains

• Aquatic Biomes
• coastal

• Wetlands
• swamp

• Other Habitat Features
• suburban
• agricultural
• riparian

Sys­tem­atic and Tax­o­nomic His­tory

Dasy­po­di­dae is cur­rently clas­si­fied under order Cin­gu­lata, which con­tains all pre­his­toric and ex­tant ar­madil­los, iden­ti­fi­able by their os­si­fied der­mis. Order Cin­gu­lata is cur­rently in­cluded in su­per­order Cin­gu­lata, which also con­tains the hairy xe­narthrans of order Pi­losa (sloths and anteaters).

All xe­narthrans have spe­cial­ized and unique lat­eral ar­tic­u­la­tions on their ver­te­brae and share a strictly New World dis­tri­b­u­tion. Xe­narthrans were for­merly clas­si­fied with pan­golins (order Pholi­dota) and aard­varks (order Tubu­li­den­tata) in Eden­tata be­cause of their re­duced den­ti­tion. Eden­tata was re­clas­si­fied when ge­netic data demon­strated that the order is poly­phyletic. Pan­golins and aard­varks strictly in­habit the Old World and lack xe­narthran ver­te­bral ar­tic­u­la­tions. Eden­tata is oc­ca­sion­ally used in­ter­change­ably with Cin­gu­lata but is no longer an ac­cepted clas­si­fi­ca­tion. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; McBee and Baker, 1982)

Ar­madil­los are an an­cient group; fos­silized scutes are known from the late Pa­le­ocene of South Amer­ica. Ar­madil­los evolved and di­ver­si­fied in that con­ti­nent dur­ing the Ter­tiary, prob­a­bly en­ter­ing North Amer­ica when a land bridge con­nected the con­ti­nents in the Pliocene. (Bar­low, 1984)

• Synonyms

  • Edentata

• Synapomorphies

  • Ossified dermal layer (armor)
  • Bifurcated lateral vertebral articulation
  • No enamel in severely reduced, homodont adult teeth

Phys­i­cal De­scrip­tion

All mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae have armor on their sides, back and tail, as well as the top of their head, which makes up their char­ac­ter­is­tic “shell.” This armor is com­posed of a se­ries of plates of os­si­fied scutes cov­ered with a leath­ery ker­ati­nous skin. The scutes are arranged into mov­able bands, which usu­ally over­lap to ef­fec­tively seal gaps in the armor. Areas of soft skin and some­times hair are lo­cated be­tween the bands. In some species, the ven­tral sur­face is cov­ered in dense hairs. The belly is soft and un­pro­tected by bone, al­though some species are able to curl into a ball. The limbs have ir­reg­u­lar plates cov­er­ing at least parts of their sur­faces, and they also may be hairy. The top of the head is al­ways cov­ered by a shield of ker­atin-cov­ered scutes, and the long rat-like tail is cov­ered by bony rings.

The armor may be an adap­ta­tion for pro­tec­tion and de­fense against pre­da­tion, but also could serve as pro­tec­tion against abra­sive soil and bit­ing in­sects (ben­e­fi­cial to the fos­so­r­ial lifestyle). The arrange­ment of armor plates and bands varies widely and is used to dif­fer­en­ti­ate species and fam­i­lies. The armor may con­sti­tute fif­teen per­cent of the an­i­mal's en­tire body weight. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; McBee and Baker, 1982)

Dasy­po­dids range in size from pink fairy ar­madil­los (Chlamypho­rus trun­ca­tus: 90 g, 11.4 to 15 cm) to giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus: 50 kg, 80 to 100 cm). Ar­madil­los have a long snout, and their ears range in size from small to very large and pro­tu­ber­ant. Sex­ual di­mor­phism is lim­ited, but some­times males are slightly larger. Males have no scro­tum, and their testes do not de­scend past the pelvic gir­dle. Fe­males lack a true vagina, but in­stead have a sin­gu­lar uro­gen­i­tal exit. Body col­ors are mostly gray or brown, though pink fairy ar­madil­los have a pink­ish shell and pure white, dense fur on their sides and ven­ters.

Dasy­po­dids can be con­sid­ered slightly het­erother­mic, be­cause their reg­u­la­tory sys­tems are not ad­vanced enough to com­pletely pre­vent fluc­tu­a­tions in body tem­per­a­ture due to changes in am­bi­ent tem­per­a­ture. How­ever, they do main­tain a rel­a­tively con­stant body tem­per­a­ture under non-stress­ful con­di­tions and thus are typ­i­cally de­scribed as ho­moio­ther­mic. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; Cetica, et al., 2005; McBee and Baker, 1982)

Most ar­madil­los have short, thick limb bones that in­clude ex­panded crests and processes for the at­tach­ment of mus­cles. The tibia and fibula are fused both prox­i­mally and dis­tally. Dig­ging habits and abil­i­ties are cor­re­lated with fore­limb, but not hindlimb, mor­phol­ogy. Ar­madillo fore­limbs have 3 to 5 toes, de­pend­ing on the species, but their hindlimbs al­ways have 5. The toes are armed with heavy, curved claws, which aid in dig­ging and de­fense.

The post­cra­nial skele­ton of ar­madil­los is mod­i­fied for dig­ging and to ac­com­mo­date the armor. The axial skele­ton is rigid and may or may not con­tact the cara­pace. The pelvis of some species is es­pe­cially strongly built and en­larged. The ribs may be broad­ened, and parts of ribs that in most mam­mals are car­ti­lage are os­si­fied in some species of ar­madil­los. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; McBee and Baker, 1982; Viz­caino and Milne, 2005)

Ar­madil­los have a flat­tened skull and a flat­tened, long lower jaw. The zy­go­matic arch is com­plete and a jugal is pre­sent. Ar­madillo den­ti­tion is sim­ple and ho­mod­ont, as the teeth sim­i­lar, re­duced, and peg-like in adults. Adults lack ca­nines, and most have no in­cisors. Dasy­po­dids ac­tu­ally have 4 to 6 pri­mor­dial in­cisors at birth, but these teeth are ab­sorbed early in life. The pre­max­il­lae and lacrimals are small. Their den­tal for­mu­lae sim­ply pro­vide upper / lower (num­ber of upper over num­ber of lower teeth) due to the lack of in­cisors and ca­nines and sim­i­lar­ity be­tween the peg-like teeth that do exist. After de­vel­op­ment is com­plete, cheek teeth (mo­lars and pre­mo­lars) vary from 7-8/7-8 to 18/19. Adult teeth com­pletely lack enamel and are made up of a den­tine core sur­rounded by ce­men­tum, which wears down very eas­ily. Den­tal for­mula and tooth shape vary among species, and even among mem­bers of the same species, due to dif­fer­ent wear pat­terns and dif­fer­ences in de­vel­op­men­tal pat­terns among in­di­vid­u­als. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; McBee and Baker, 1982)

• Other Physical Features
• endothermic
• heterothermic
• homoiothermic
• bilateral symmetry

• Sexual Dimorphism
• sexes alike
• male larger

Re­pro­duc­tion

Most species of Dasy­po­di­dae are polyg­y­nous. Males and fe­males of some species en­gage in courtship prior to mat­ing. The best ac­counts of courtship are doc­u­mented for nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus) and, to a lesser ex­tent, south­ern three-banded ar­madil­los (Tolypeutes mat­a­cus).

Male and fe­male D. novem­cinc­tus pair when the fe­male is in es­trus. Males of this species pair with 1 to 3 fe­males in a sin­gle breed­ing sea­son, while fe­males pair with only 1 to 2 males. Mate pair­ings last any­where from 1 to 4.5 months. Breed­ing male mem­bers of the species main­tain prime liv­ing ter­ri­tory through ag­gres­sion.

In D. novem­cinc­tus, the male mem­ber of a mat­ing pair for­ages with the fe­male for sev­eral days prior to mat­ing. Pe­ri­od­i­cally, the male at­tempts to mount the fe­male, or touches her back with his claws, caus­ing her to lift her tail. Once she lifts her tail, the male sniffs her anal re­gion to de­tect changes in anal se­cre­tions that in­di­cate her sex­ual in­ter­est. When she is sex­u­ally re­cep­tive, the fe­male lies flat on the ground as the male sniffs and licks the area near her anus. In order to mate, the fe­male must flip onto her back so the male can mount her with­out her dor­sal armor get­ting in the way. The male scratches at the fe­male’s dor­sal armor and con­tin­ues to lick and scratch near the anus until the fe­male fully turns over. Cop­u­la­tion lasts any­where from 3 to 15 min­utes.

South­ern three-banded ar­madil­los (T. mat­a­cus) also form mat­ing pairs dur­ing the breed­ing sea­son, though the du­ra­tion of this pair­ing is not known. Prior to cop­u­la­tion, the male softly touches the fe­male’s dor­sal armor to as­sess her sex­ual re­cep­tive­ness.

Six-banded ar­madil­los (Eu­phrac­tus sex­cinc­tus) in cap­tiv­ity do not dis­play mate-pair­ing be­hav­ior. In­stead, males and fe­males ran­domly meet while for­ag­ing, nuz­zle, and then mate. Males and fe­males do not closely as­so­ci­ate be­fore or after pe­ri­ods of cop­u­la­tion. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los", 1990; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003)

• Mating System
• polygynous

Ar­madil­los are dioe­cious, iteroparous, and vi­vip­a­rous. The age at which males and fe­males be­come sex­u­ally ma­ture varies with species. Male and fe­male large hairy ar­madil­los (Chaetophrac­tus vil­lo­sus) reach sex­ual ma­tu­rity after 9 months of age. Male Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus be­come sex­u­ally ma­ture about 6 months after birth, while fe­males be­come sex­u­ally ma­ture after about 1 year. Male and fe­male giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus) and Pichi ar­madil­los (Za­edyus pichiy) reach sex­ual ma­tu­rity be­tween 9 and 12 months of age.

The breed­ing sea­son for most species of Dasy­po­di­dae be­gins dur­ing the spring and sum­mer months, be­tween April and June. Some species in cap­tiv­ity are able to breed any­time through­out the year. Ges­ta­tion pe­riod also varies with species. For in­di­vid­u­als of the genus Dasy­pus, ges­ta­tion is ex­tended due to em­bry­onic di­a­pause. Em­bry­onic di­a­pause is a delay in em­bryo im­plan­ta­tion that lasts any­where from 4 months to 2 years de­pend­ing on the species. This delay is ad­van­ta­geous, as it al­lows a fe­male to give birth dur­ing times of sea­sonal and en­vi­ron­men­tal pros­per­ity, when chances of off­spring sur­vival are greater.

In most species, fe­male ar­madil­los pro­duce a lit­ter of 1 to 3 off­spring, usu­ally born be­tween the months of Feb­ru­ary and July. How­ever, species of the genus Dasy­pus un­dergo a process called monozy­gotic poly­em­bry­ony, in which 1 egg pro­duces be­tween 2 and 12 iden­ti­cal em­bryos de­pend­ing on the species. All off­spring born from this process are the same sex.

Ges­ta­tion pe­riod and lit­ter size vary with species. Small hairy ar­madil­los (Chaetophrac­tus vellero­sus) have a ges­ta­tion pe­riod of about 65 days and give birth to 1 to 2 off­spring. Large hairy ar­madil­los (Chaetophrac­tus vil­lo­sus) are unique in that they are able to give birth more than once a year, pro­duc­ing 1 to 2 off­spring in each lit­ter. The ges­ta­tion pe­riod of C. vil­lo­sus is 60 to 75 days. Giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus) have a ges­ta­tion pe­riod of about 4 months and pro­duce 1 or 2 off­spring per year. South­ern three-banded ar­madil­los (Tolypeutes mat­a­cus) pro­duce 1 off­spring per breed­ing sea­son, though tim­ing of ges­ta­tion is un­known. Six-banded ar­madil­los (Eu­phrac­tus sex­cinc­tus) pro­duce 1 to 3 off­spring after a ges­ta­tion pe­riod of about 60 days. Pichi ar­madil­los (Za­edyus pichiy) have a ges­ta­tion pe­riod of about 60 days, after which 1 to 3 off­spring are born. Data on lit­ter size and ges­ta­tion pe­riod for most other species are not yet avail­able. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los", 1990; An­der­son and Jones Jr., 1984; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; Hayssen, et al., 1993; Mac­Don­ald, 1987; Nowak, 1999; Vaughan, et al., 2000)

• Key Reproductive Features
• iteroparous
• seasonal breeding
• year-round breeding
• gonochoric/gonochoristic/dioecious (sexes separate)
• sexual
• fertilization
• viviparous
• delayed implantation
• embryonic diapause

De­pend­ing on the species, ar­madil­los are pre­co­cial or al­tri­cial. Ju­ve­nile nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus) weigh 28.6 to 114 grams at birth, are born with their eyes open and able to walk fairly quickly. New­borns of this species pos­sess pink leath­ery skin. After sev­eral days, the skin so­lid­i­fies to form the dor­sal armor. About 20 days after birth, D. novem­cinc­tus move around out­side of their nests, and within 2 to 3 weeks, they are able to leave the bur­row for short pe­ri­ods of time. Wean­ing oc­curs 4 to 5 months after birth. Males of this species do not pro­vide care to their off­spring.

South­ern three-banded ar­madil­los (Tolypeutes mat­a­cus) also pro­duce pre­co­cial young. New­borns are very sim­i­lar in ap­pear­ance to adults. New­borns weigh on av­er­age 113 g, pos­sess de­vel­oped claws, and have scute marks. Their eyes re­main closed, and they are un­able to hear for the first 3 to 4 weeks of life. On the day their are born, how­ever, they are able roll into the pro­tec­tive sphere that is char­ac­ter­is­tic of the species.

Some species, such as giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus), pos­sess a thick skin at birth but are blind and need their mother's help in order to sur­vive. Wean­ing in this species oc­curs be­tween 4 and 5 months after birth. Wean­ing times known for other species are es­ti­mated to be about 6 weeks (Za­edyus pichiy), and 7 to 8 weeks (Chaetophrac­tus vellero­sus).

A high level of fe­male parental in­vest­ment is noted among six-banded ar­madil­los (Eu­phrac­tus sex­cinc­tus). New­borns are soft and vul­ner­a­ble at birth. Moth­ers are ex­tremely pro­tec­tive of their off­spring, and if they sense a threat, they be­come ag­gres­sive. Moth­ers may pick up their young and move them to a safer bur­row, if nec­es­sary. (Nowak, 1999; "Ar­madil­los", 1990; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; Nowak, 1999)

• Parental Investment
• altricial
• precocial
• female parental care
• pre-hatching/birth
  • provisioning
    • female
  • protecting
    • female
• pre-weaning/fledging
  • provisioning
    • female
  • protecting
    • female
• pre-independence
  • provisioning
    • female
  • protecting
    • female
• post-independence association with parents
• extended period of juvenile learning

Lifes­pan/Longevity

The lifes­pan of ar­madil­los varies with species. Some species live only 9 years (Za­edyus pichiy), while oth­ers can live as long as 23 years (Chaetophrac­tus vil­lo­sus). In cap­tiv­ity, Eu­phrac­tus sex­tinc­tus has been doc­u­mented to live up to 18 years, and Tolypeutes mat­a­cus up to 17.

Among nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus), pre­na­tal mor­tal­ity is com­mon, and ju­ve­niles tend to have a higher mor­tal­ity rate than adults. Pre- and post­na­tal mor­tal­ity in­for­ma­tion for this and other species, how­ever, is not well known. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990; "En­cy­clopædia Bri­tan­nica", 2009; Bur­ton and Bur­ton, 1969; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; Nowak, 1999)

Be­hav­ior

Most species of Dasy­po­di­dae for­age and live alone, though some have been found to so­cial­ize and for­age in pairs or small groups. Most species are noc­tur­nal or cre­pus­cu­lar. Six-banded ar­madil­los (Eu­phrac­tus sex­cinc­tus) and Pichi ar­madil­los (Za­edyus pichiy) are able to for­age dur­ing the bright­est hours of the day, de­spite high tem­per­a­tures. As sea­sons change from sum­mer to win­ter and tem­per­a­tures cool, many species of Dasy­po­di­dae be­come more di­ur­nal. Za­edyus pichiy and Chaetophrac­tus na­tioni are the only two species of Dasy­po­di­dae known to hi­ber­nate.

Ar­madil­los are highly fos­so­r­ial, and most dasy­po­dids sleep and nest within un­der­ground bur­rows. These bur­rows are large and deep and are usu­ally lo­cated near food sources. While a sin­gle bur­row may be used mul­ti­ple times by the same an­i­mal, mem­bers of sev­eral species con­struct a new bur­row each day. Mem­bers of other species di­vide their time among each of sev­eral bur­rows at dif­fer­ent lo­ca­tions. Nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus) build bur­rows that have sev­eral pas­sages that all lead to one space un­der­ground. In times of dan­ger, in­di­vid­u­als use the clos­est pas­sage as an es­cape. Many species sleep for at least 16 hours a day.

Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus dis­play a wide va­ri­ety of in­ter­est­ing be­hav­iors. They are good swim­mers and can cross a body of water by sev­eral means. In one ap­proach, they in­flate their stom­ach and in­testines, which in­creases their buoy­ancy and al­lows them to “float” along the sur­face of the water. A sec­ond method is to “doggy-pad­dle” through the water, using their snouts as a sort of snorkel. Al­ter­na­tively, they can walk across the bot­tom of the body of water (at low to mod­er­ate depths) due to their high spe­cific grav­ity and abil­ity to hold their breath for long pe­ri­ods of time. This species has also been known to take mud baths and climb fences in cap­tiv­ity. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los", 1990; An­der­son and Jones Jr., 1984; Bur­ton and Bur­ton, 1969; Feld­hamer, et al., 2007; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; Mac­Don­ald, 1987; McBee and Baker, 1982; Nowak, 1999; Reid, 1997; Se­beok, 1968; "Wild An­i­mals of North Amer­ica", 1998; Wil­son and Ruff, 1999)

• Key Behaviors
• terricolous
• fossorial
• diurnal
• nocturnal
• crepuscular
• motile
• sedentary
• hibernation
• solitary
• territorial

Com­mu­ni­ca­tion and Per­cep­tion

Dasy­po­dids have a well-de­vel­oped sense of smell and hear­ing. Vi­sion, how­ever, varies with species; some species have ad­e­quate and oth­ers have poor vi­sion. Poor vi­sion may be as­so­ci­ated with the noc­tur­nal or cre­pus­cu­lar be­hav­ior of most species. Ar­madil­los tend to have acute hear­ing and are able to pick up and react to cer­tain noises that sig­nify po­ten­tial dan­ger. How­ever, some species, such as Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus, tend to ig­nore even threat­en­ing sounds if they are busy for­ag­ing. All species of Dasy­po­di­dae use their acute sense of smell to find other in­di­vid­u­als (such as po­ten­tial mates), their bur­rows, prey, or preda­tors. Their taste buds and sense of taste are not well de­vel­oped.

Ar­madil­los com­mu­ni­cate mainly through sound and smell. They re­lease se­cre­tions from glands within skin pouches, lo­cated on dif­fer­ent areas of their bod­ies. These se­cre­tions are used to mark their bur­rows and iden­tify other in­di­vid­u­als, such as po­ten­tial mates or off­spring. Dur­ing es­trus, fe­male nine-banded ar­madil­los (D. novem­cinc­tus) pro­duce a se­cre­tion near the anus in­di­cat­ing that she is re­cep­tive to mat­ing. Six-banded ar­madil­los (Eu­phrac­tus sex­cinc­tus) mark their bur­rows by se­cret­ing a foul-smelling sub­stance from yel­low glands lo­cated on their pelvic shields.

Mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae are able to pro­duce sev­eral forms of vo­cal­iza­tions. While for­ag­ing for food, some species pro­duce a muf­fled grunt­ing sound. Male and fe­male nine-banded ar­madil­los (D. novem­cinc­tus) let out a “chuck­ing” sound while in their mat­ing pairs. Also within this species, moth­ers and their off­spring softly buzz to one an­other. When star­tled, some species of Dasy­po­di­dae scream or growl. Greater fairy ar­madil­los (Ca­lyp­tophrac­tus re­tusus) are able to cre­ate an un­usual sound sim­i­lar to that of a cry­ing human baby. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los", 1990; An­der­son and Jones Jr., 1984; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; Nowak, 1999; Tal­mage and Buchanan, 1954)

• Communication Channels
• acoustic
• chemical

• Other Communication Modes
• scent marks

• Perception Channels
• visual
• tactile
• acoustic
• chemical

Food Habits

Ar­madil­los are pri­mar­ily in­sec­tiv­o­rous, al­though diet varies greatly among species. Some species are om­niv­o­rous for­agers, feed­ing on a va­ri­ety of sources such as small an­i­mals, plant mat­ter, in­sects, and arach­nids. Oth­ers are strictly myrme­cophagic (ant-eat­ing), using the sticky sub­stance on their tongues to cap­ture large num­bers of in­sects. Some mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae eat car­rion, and there have been doc­u­mented cases of ar­madil­los raid­ing human grave­yards in South Amer­ica.

Ar­madil­los have very poor eye­sight and thus hunt and find food pri­mar­ily with their sense of smell. Ar­madil­los are strong dig­gers and use their claws to dig up a va­ri­ety of oth­er­wise un­avail­able food sources. An­other in­di­ca­tion of their gen­er­al­ist life-style is their lack of spe­cial­ized teeth. (Whit­man, 2006)

• Primary Diet
• carnivore
  • eats terrestrial vertebrates
  • eats eggs
  • insectivore
  • eats non-insect arthropods
  • scavenger
• herbivore
  • folivore
  • frugivore
• omnivore

Pre­da­tion

Two of the major threats cur­rently fac­ing wild ar­madil­los are do­mes­tic dogs and hu­mans (many ar­madillo species are hunted for their meat). Wild cats (pumas and jaguars), wild dogs (coy­otes and bush dogs), and bears may also prey on dasy­po­dids, al­though pre­da­tion does not seem to have a large ef­fect on ar­madillo pop­u­la­tions.

When threat­ened, ar­madil­los often re­treat to the safety of a bur­row. Their armor also acts as a de­ter­rent to preda­tors. How­ever, there is con­sid­er­able vari­a­tion in re­sponse to preda­tors among dasy­po­dids. For ex­am­ple, ar­madil­los of the genus Tolypeutes can roll com­pletely into a ball, while nine-banded ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus) have the abil­ity to leap ver­ti­cally into the air. If a nine-banded ar­madillo (D. novem­cinc­tus) is cap­tured by a preda­tor, its most com­mon re­sponse is to play dead. Some spe­ices, such as hairy ar­madil­los (Chaetophrac­tus na­tion­i­can), snarl to frighten preda­tors. As a last re­sort, ar­madil­los may use their pow­er­ful dig­ging legs to claw at at­tack­ers. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003; McBee and Baker, 1982; Schae­fer and Hostetler, 2008)

• Known Predators

  • Humans (Homo sapiens)
  • Domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)
  • Pumas (Puma concolor)
  • Jaguars (Panthera onca)
  • Coyotes (Canis latrans)
  • Bears (Ursidae)

Ecosys­tem Roles

Al­though ar­madil­los can exist in rel­a­tively high den­si­ties (dasy­po­dids ac­count for the high­est mam­malian bio­mass after sloths in trop­i­cal rain­forests), they have rel­a­tively lit­tle im­pact on their re­spec­tive en­vi­ron­ments. This is due in part to their low me­tab­o­lism. Ad­di­tion­ally, ar­madil­los pri­mar­ily prey upon in­ver­te­brates, which have ex­tremely short life cy­cles so pop­u­la­tions are able to re­cover from pre­da­tion quickly. As om­ni­vores, most species of ar­madil­los do not heav­ily rely on any sin­gle prey source. As a re­sult, dasy­po­dids do not seem to ex­hibit much of an im­pact on prey pop­u­la­tions. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; Whit­man, 2006)

Ar­madil­los are gen­er­ally ter­res­trial to fos­so­r­ial and can thrive in a va­ri­ety of habi­tats. They are known for their ten­dency to con­struct elab­o­rate bur­rows on agri­cul­tural land. While a nui­sance to farm­ers, these bur­rows pro­vide homes for a va­ri­ety of other species, in­clud­ing rab­bits, skunks, and pos­sums. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; Whit­man, 2006)

Ar­madil­los are rel­a­tively re­sis­tant to par­a­sites, as their shells and sparsely-haired ven­ters limit their vul­ner­a­bil­ity to ec­topar­a­sites. Among those that do af­fect mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae are fungi, viruses, pro­to­zoans, helminths, and var­i­ous arthro­pods. Ar­madillo species in South Amer­ica have a no­tice­ably wider array of arthro­pod par­a­sites than their North Amer­i­can coun­ter­parts, al­though through­out the range of Dasy­po­di­dae there are only around fifty known par­a­sites. Ar­madil­los are known to host the bac­terium My­cobac­terium lep­rae, which causes lep­rosy. Trans­mis­sion to hu­mans is rare, but pos­si­ble. (Diniz, et al., 1997; Feld­hamer, et al., 2003)

• Ecosystem Impact
• creates habitat

Eco­nomic Im­por­tance for Hu­mans: Pos­i­tive

Ar­madil­los have long been used as a food source in a va­ri­ety of cul­tures, and al­though cer­tain species such as giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus) are being over-har­vested, most pop­u­la­tions re­main sta­ble. Ar­madil­los help con­trol the pop­u­la­tions of a va­ri­ety of harm­ful in­sect species, in­clud­ing fire ants (Solenop­sis). The neg­a­tive view of ar­madil­los by the agri­cul­ture in­dus­try is slowly chang­ing, in part due to the fact that ar­madil­los are the only preda­tor of fire ants in North Amer­ica. Dasy­po­dids are also used in re­search on re­pro­duc­tion, as some species are able to pro­duce iden­ti­cal, same-sex off­spring. In ad­di­tion, ar­madil­los are used to study organ trans­plants, birth de­fects, and dis­eases in­clud­ing lep­rosy, ty­phus, and trichi­nosis. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003)

• Positive Impacts
• food
• research and education
• controls pest population

Eco­nomic Im­por­tance for Hu­mans: Neg­a­tive

Ar­madil­los are gen­er­ally viewed as pests, as they can cause de­struc­tion of sub­ur­ban and agri­cul­tural areas through ex­ces­sive dig­ging. This view is es­pe­cially promi­nent within the agri­cul­tural com­mu­nity, as holes cre­ated by bur­row­ing species of Dasy­po­di­dae can harm both crops and live­stock. Ad­di­tion­ally, ar­madil­los host the bac­terium My­cobac­terium lep­rae, which causes lep­rosy. Trans­mis­sion to hu­mans, while rare, is pos­si­ble. The pub­lic view of dasy­po­dids, is slowly be­com­ing more pos­i­tive as aware­ness of their eco­nomic ben­e­fits in­creases. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003)

• Negative Impacts
• injures humans
  • carries human disease

Con­ser­va­tion Sta­tus

While only two mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae, giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus) and pink fairy ar­madil­los (Chlamypho­rus trun­ca­tus), are listed as en­dan­gered, 12 of 20 mem­bers are cur­rently listed as vul­ner­a­ble, en­dan­gered, near threat­ened, or data de­fi­cient. Be­cause many species of Dasy­po­di­dae are fos­so­r­ial, they have not been thor­oughly stud­ied, so the sta­tus of many groups is not well de­fined. For ex­am­ple, hairy long-nosed ar­madil­los (Dasy­pus pi­lo­sus) are rec­og­nized as a species based only on a few skins from Peru. Due to a lack of in­for­ma­tion, it is very dif­fi­cult to as­cer­tain the exact con­ser­va­tion sta­tus of many dasy­po­dids. ("An­i­mal Life Re­source", 2009)

The main threats fac­ing Dasy­po­di­dae are ex­ploita­tion for food and habi­tat loss. As land is con­verted for agri­cul­ture, po­ten­tial habi­tat for both giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus) and pink fairy ar­madil­los (Chlamypho­rus trun­ca­tus) is re­duced. In ad­di­tion, Pri­odontes max­imus is still hunted for meat in some areas even though it is pro­tected in Brazil, Colom­bia, Peru, and Suri­name. Con­ser­va­tion ef­forts are planned to breed P. max­imus in cap­tiv­ity to help pro­tect the species. ("Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae)", 2003; "An­i­mal Life Re­source", 2009)

Ar­madil­los are quick and hard to catch, but when caught and cooked, they are con­sid­ered a del­i­cacy in many parts of Latin Amer­ica. Hunt­ing is listed as the main cause for the IUCN "Vul­ner­a­ble" clas­si­fi­ca­tion of giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus). (Cuel­lar, et al., 2008)

• IUCN Red List [Link]

  Not Evaluated

Other Com­ments

Ar­madil­los are the only mam­mals other than hu­mans that can con­tract and carry lep­rosy. It is un­clear why ar­madil­los, which are so dis­tantly re­lated to hu­mans, are the only other mam­mals to carry the dis­ease. Be­cause of this unique fea­ture, dasy­po­dids have been used as mod­els for bio­med­ical re­search with lep­rosy. De­spite rel­a­tively high rates of car­ry­ing the dis­ease in cer­tain areas (es­pe­cially the south­ern United States), health risk to hu­mans has been deemed low by many stud­ies, as trans­mis­sion be­tween ar­madil­los and hu­mans is dif­fi­cult. (Storrs, et al., 1974)

Teeth are of lit­tle use to most mem­bers of Dasy­po­di­dae. They mostly eat in­sects, which re­quire min­i­mal chew­ing. Giant ar­madil­los (Pri­odontes max­imus), whose sci­en­tific name iron­i­cally means "biggest saw-teeth" in Greek, pri­mar­ily eat ants and ter­mites and can­not use their teeth for mas­ti­ca­tion be­cause they are too weak. ("Ar­madil­los", 1990)

Con­trib­u­tors

An­thony Capizzo (au­thor), Uni­ver­sity of Michi­gan-Ann Arbor, Erika Moses (au­thor), Uni­ver­sity of Michi­gan-Ann Arbor, Ethan Shirley (au­thor), Uni­ver­sity of Michi­gan-Ann Arbor, Phil Myers (au­thor), Uni­ver­sity of Michi­gan-Ann Arbor, Gail Mc­Cormick (ed­i­tor), An­i­mal Di­ver­sity Web Staff.

Ref­er­ences

The Book Di­vi­sion Na­tional Ge­o­graphic So­ci­ety. 1998. Wild An­i­mals of North Amer­ica. Wash­ing­ton, D.C.: The Na­tional Ge­o­graphic So­ci­ety.

Net In­dus­tries. 2009. "An­i­mal Life Re­source" (On-line). Ar­madil­los: Dasy­po­di­dae: Con­ser­va­tion Sta­tus. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 15, 2009 at http://​animals.​jrank.​org/​.

2003. Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae). Pp. 181-186 in M Hutchins, D Kleiman, V Geist, M Mc­Dade, eds. Grz­imek's An­i­mal Life En­cy­clo­pe­dia, Vol. 12-16, 2nd Edi­tion. Farm­ing­ton Hills, Michi­gan: Thom­son Gale.

1990. Ar­madil­los. Pp. 612-627 in S Parker, ed. Grz­imek's En­cy­clo­pe­dia of Mam­mals, Vol. 2, 1st Edi­tion. New York: Mc­Graw-Hill Pub­lish­ing Com­pany.

2005. Check­list of Mam­mal Names. Pp. 8-9 in D Wil­son, D Reeder, eds. Mam­mal Species of the World: A Tax­o­nomic and Ge­o­graphic Ref­er­ence (3rd ed), Vol. 2, 142. United States: Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity Press. Ac­cessed Jan­u­ary 01, 2013 at http://​www.​vertebrates.​si.​edu/​msw/​mswcfapp/​msw/​index.​cfm.

2009. "En­cy­clopædia Bri­tan­nica" (On-line). Ar­madillo. Ac­cessed Jan­u­ary 01, 2013 at http://​www.​britannica.​com/​EBchecked/​topic/​35045/​armadillo.

An­der­son, S., J. Jones Jr.. 1984. Or­ders and Fam­i­lies of Re­cent Mam­mals of the World. New York: Wi­ley-In­ter­science; John Wiley & Sons.

Bar­low, J. 1984. Xe­narthrans and pholi­dotes. Pp. 219-239 in S An­der­son, J Jones, Jr., eds. Or­ders and Fam­i­lies of Re­cent Mam­mals of the World. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Bur­ton, M., R. Bur­ton. 1969. Ar­madillo. Pp. 85-87 in In­ter­na­tional Wildlife En­cy­clo­pe­dia, Vol. 1, 3rd Edi­tion. New York: Mar­shall Cavendish Cor­po­ra­tion. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 12, 2009 at http://​books.​google.​com/​books?​id=FuExHhF9IvIC&​pg=PA86&​dq=Dasypodidae+lifespan#​PPP1,M1.

Cetica, P., H. Al­dana Mar­cos, M. Merani. 2005. Mor­phol­ogy of fe­male gen­i­tal tracts in Dasy­po­di­dae (Xe­narthra,. Zoomor­phol­ogy, 124: 57-65. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 17, 2009 at http://​link.​springer.​com/​article/​10.​1007%2Fs00435-005-0111-5.

Cuel­lar, E., D. Mer­ritt, G. Porini. 2008. "Pri­odontes max­imus" (On-line). IUCN Red List. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 15, 2009 at http://​www.​iucnredlist.​org/​details/​18144.

Diniz, L., E. Costa, P. Oliveira. 1997. "NCBI Pubmed" (On-line). Clin­i­cal dis­or­ders in Ar­madil­los (Dasy­po­di­dae, Eden­tata) in capi­tiv­ity. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 16, 2009 at http://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​pubmed/​9467299?​dopt=Abstract.

Feld­hamer, G., L. Drick­amer, S. Vessey, J. Mer­ritt, C. Kra­jew­ski. 2007. Mam­mal­ogy: Adap­ta­tion, Di­ver­sity, Ecol­ogy. United States: The Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity Press.

Feld­hamer, G., B. Thomp­son, J. Chap­man. 2003. Wild An­i­mals of North Amer­ica: Bi­ol­ogy, Man­age­ment & Con­ser­va­tion. Bal­ti­more, Mary­land: Johns Hop­kins Press.

Hayssen, V., A. Tein­hoven, A. Tein­hoven, S. As­dell. 1993. As­dell's Pat­terns of Mam­malian Re­pro­duc­tion: A Com­pendium of Species-spe­cific Data. United States: Cor­nell Uni­ver­sity Press. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 17, 2009 at http://​books.​google.​com/​books?​id=yQzSe71g2AcC&​printsec=frontcover#​PPP9,M1.

Mac­Don­ald, D. 1987. Ar­madil­los. Pp. 780-783 in The En­cy­clo­pe­dia of Mam­mals, 2 Edi­tion. New York: Facts on File Pub­li­ca­tions.

McBee, K., R. Baker. 1982. Dasy­pus novem­cinc­tus. Mam­malian Species, 162: 1-9. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 27, 2009 at http://​www.​science.​smith.​edu/​msi/​pdf/​i0076-3519-162-01-0001.​pdf.

Nowak, R. 1999. Pp. 158-168 in Walker's Mam­mals of the World, Vol. 1, 6th Edi­tion. Bal­ti­more, Mary­land and Lon­don: The Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity Press.

Par­adiso, J. 1975. Walker's Mam­mals of the World, Third Edi­tion. Bal­ti­more: Johns Hop­kins Uni­ver­sity Press.

Reid, F. 1997. A Field Guide to the Mam­mals of Cen­tral Amer­ica and South­east Mex­ico. New York: Ox­ford Uni­ver­sity Press. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 13, 2009 at http://​books.​google.​com/​books?​id=TXQe9P5Z_​7UC&​pg=PA59&​dp=Dasypodidae+lifespan#​PPP1,M1.

Sav­age, R., M. Long. 1986. Mam­mal Evo­lu­tion, an Il­lus­trated Guide. New York: Facts of File Pub­li­ca­tions.

Schae­fer, J., M. Hostetler. 2008. "Uni­ver­sity of Florida IFAS Ex­ten­sion" (On-line). The Nine-banded Ar­madillo (Dasy­pus Novem­cinc­tus). Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 16, 2009 at http://​edis.​ifas.​ufl.​edu/​UW082.

Se­beok, T. 1968. An­i­mal Com­mu­ni­ca­tion. Bloom­ing­ton, Lon­don: In­di­ana Uni­ver­sity Press.

Storrs, E., G. Walsh, H. Burch­field, C. Bin­ford. 1974. Lep­rosy in the Ar­madillo: New Model for Bio­med­ical Re­search. Sci­ence, 183, no. 4127: 851-852. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 15, 2009 at http://​www.​sciencemag.​org/​cgi/​content/​abstract/​183/​4127/​851.

Tal­mage, R., G. Buchanan. 1954. The Ar­madillo: A Re­view of Its Nat­ural His­tory, Ecol­ogy, Anatomy and Re­pro­duc­tive Phys­i­ol­ogy. Pp. 1-12 in The Rice In­sti­tute Pam­phlet, Vol. 41, 1st Edi­tion. Hous­ton, Texas: The Rice In­sti­tute.

Vaughan, T. 1986. Mam­mal­ogy. Third Edi­tion. Fort Worth: Saun­ders Col­lege Pub­lish­ing.

Vaughan, T., J. Ryan, N. Czaplewski. 2000. Mam­mal­ogy, Fourth Edi­tion. United States: Thom­son Learn­ing.

Viz­caino, S., N. Milne. 2005. Struc­ture and func­tion in ar­madillo limbs (Mam­malia:. Jour­nal of Zo­ol­ogy, 257, 1: 117-127. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 17, 2009 at http://​onlinelibrary.​wiley.​com/​doi/​10.​1017/​S0952836902000717/​abstract.

Whit­man, A. 2006. "Tree of Life Web Pro­ject" (On-line). The Ar­madillo's Story. Ac­cessed Feb­ru­ary 15, 2009 at http://​tolweb.​org/​treehouses/?​treehouse_​id=4288.

Wil­son, D., D. Reeder. 1993. Mam­mal Species of the World, A Tax­o­nomic and Ge­o­graphic Ref­er­ence. Wash­ing­ton: Smith­son­ian In­sti­tu­tion Press.

Wil­son, D., S. Ruff. 1999. The Smith­son­ian Book of North Amer­i­can Mam­mals. Wash­ing­ton and Lon­don: Smith­son­ian In­sti­tu­tion Press in as­so­ci­a­tion with the Amer­i­can So­ci­ety of Mam­mol­o­gists.