Animal Finder

Browse all 642 animal profiles on FaunaHub by group and by taxonomy, or search by common or scientific name. Every filter is built from what the profiles already record — where the data does not support an axis, it is not offered.

Looking for two animals side by side? The Animal Compare Center has 290 of these animals in at least one published comparison. For questions, guides and care articles, site search covers the whole site.

Matches animal names, scientific names and profile tags. For questions, guides and comparisons, use site search.

Browse a slice

Loading animals…

Filtering needs JavaScript. Every animal is still reachable — the groups below link to the full, browsable index for each part of the collection.

Browse by group

Each of these is a full index you can read straight through, and the same six shelves the group filter uses.

Ready-made slices

The browse buttons above apply these filters in the tool. Each one also has a hub page behind it that indexes the same subject in full.

How these filters are built

Every filter is derived from data FaunaHub already publishes. Animal group is the encyclopedia shelf each profile declares in its own breadcrumb. Taxonomic group comes from the taxonomy registry that the coverage pages read. The coverage refinements — a comparison page, a conservation record, a domestication entry — are facts about what this site publishes for an animal, checked for all 642 profiles.

Nothing here is generated, inferred or filled in. A profile with no recorded taxonomic group shows no taxonomic tag rather than a guessed one, and the panel states how many profiles carry a value on each axis.

An axis is only offered as a filter when the data behind it covers at least half the collection and holds a small, consistent set of values. Several obvious axes fail that test today. They are listed below rather than quietly omitted, because a missing filter is a gap in FaunaHub’s structured data — future editorial work, not a decision that habitat does not matter.

Axes measured for the Animal Finder and the reason each was not offered as a filter
Axis	Recorded for	Distinct values	Why it is not a filter
Continent	283 of 64244.1%	7	The fauna geography registry covers land, freshwater and coastal species by design and excludes purely marine ones, so a continent filter would silently omit a large part of the collection rather than report it as unknown.
Habitat	283 of 64244.1%	12	Habitat tags exist only on the profiles the fauna geography registry covers. Filtering on them would present a partial editorial pass as a property of the animal.
Ocean depth zone	43 of 6426.7%	5	Recorded only for the marine species on the ocean depth pages.
Diet	561 of 64287.4%	508	Present on most profiles, but as a written sentence rather than a category. Sorting those sentences into carnivore, herbivore and omnivore would be assigning a classification the editors never made.
Class (taxon)	371 of 64257.8%	79	Written freely, often with a parenthetical gloss, so the same class appears under several spellings. The taxonomy registry carries the same information already normalised.
Habitat (written)	291 of 64245.3%	288	A description of where the animal lives, not a category it belongs to.
Activity pattern	59 of 6429.2%	43	Recorded on too few profiles, and as prose rather than a category.
Conservation status	55 of 6428.6%	1	FaunaHub's Red List records are a genuine IUCN enum, but only a handful are joined to an encyclopedia profile. The conservation category pages under /endangered-animals are where that data is complete.
Domestic or wild	23 of 6423.6%	1	The domestication registry is a reviewed list of domesticated animals. Everything absent from it defaults to wild WITHOUT having been individually checked, so offering a wild/domestic toggle would imply an audit that has not happened. The documented half is offered as a coverage refinement instead.

Taxonomic group is recorded for 497 of 642 profiles and is offered with that gap stated in the panel. Every figure on this page is computed at build time from the same index the tool loads, so the prose and the tool cannot disagree. Index generated 2026-08-29.

Geography, conservation, diet, lifespan and behaviour each have a hub that indexes them properly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why can I filter by group but not by habitat, diet or continent?

Because a filter is a promise that the collection can be sliced that way, and for those axes it cannot. Habitat and continent are recorded for 283 of 642 profiles, so a continent filter would silently hide more than half the animals rather than reporting them as unrecorded. Diet is written on most profiles, but as a sentence — 561 profiles carry 508 different diet descriptions — and sorting those sentences into carnivore, herbivore and omnivore would mean assigning a classification FaunaHub's editors never made. The full measurement for every axis considered is in the coverage table on this page.

Does the Finder cover every animal on FaunaHub?

It covers all 642 animal profiles in the encyclopedia — the pages at /animals. It deliberately does not mix in the Red List species pages under /endangered-animals, which are a conservation dataset with their own categories and their own index. Site search covers both at once.

Can I share or bookmark a filtered view?

No, and that is a deliberate trade. Filters and search text live in the page rather than in the address bar, because FaunaHub's site-wide analytics reports the full URL of every page view — so putting what you typed into the URL would send it to a third party. The browse buttons reach the useful slices in one click instead.

Where do the group labels come from?

Animal group is the encyclopedia shelf each profile already declares and links to in its own breadcrumb. Taxonomic group comes from FaunaHub's taxonomy registry, which records class- and phylum-level groups. Nothing on this page is generated or inferred: every label is a value that already exists on the profile or in a registry the site's own pages read.

Why do some animals show no group tag?

Because FaunaHub has not filed them under one yet, and saying so is more useful than guessing. The taxonomic registry covers 497 of 642 profiles; the rest are absent from it, which is a gap in FaunaHub's records rather than a statement about the animal. Filtering on that axis narrows to the animals that have been filed, and the panel says how many that is.