16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Global wildlife trade permeates the Tree of Life

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Legal and illegal wildlife trade is a multibillion dollar industry that is driving several species toward extinction. Even though wildlife trade permeates the Tree of Life, most analyses to date focused on the trade of a small selection of charismatic vertebrate species. Given that vertebrate taxa represent only 3% of described species, this is a significant bias that prevents the development of comprehensive conservation strategies. In this short contribution, we discuss the significance of global wildlife trade considering the full diversity of organisms for which data are available in the IUCN database. We emphasize the importance of being fast and effective in filling the knowledge gaps about non-vertebrate life forms, in order to achieve an in-depth understanding of global trading patterns across the full canopy of the Tree of Life, and not just its most appealing twig.

          Highlights

          • Global wildlife trade is a multibillion dollar industry that is driving several species toward extinction.

          • Most analyses on global wildlife trade are biased toward vertebrates.

          • Multiple datasets suggest that a huge fraction of illegal and legal traded wildlife is plant and invertebrates.

          • It is fundamental to fill this knowledge gap about global trade of non-vertebrate life forms.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Scientists' warning to humanity on insect extinctions

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Adapting the IUCN Red List criteria for invertebrates

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Scientific research on animal biodiversity is systematically biased towards vertebrates and temperate regions

              Over the last 25 years, research on biodiversity has expanded dramatically, fuelled by increasing threats to the natural world. However, the number of published studies is heavily weighted towards certain taxa, perhaps influencing conservation awareness of and funding for less-popular groups. Few studies have systematically quantified these biases, although information on this topic is important for informing future research and conservation priorities. We investigated: i) which animal taxa are being studied; ii) if any taxonomic biases are the same in temperate and tropical regions; iii) whether the taxon studied is named in the title of papers on biodiversity, perhaps reflecting a perception of what biodiversity is; iv) the geographical distribution of biodiversity research, compared with the distribution of biodiversity and threatened species; and v) the geographical distribution of authors’ countries of origin. To do this, we used the search engine Web of Science to systematically sample a subset of the published literature with ‘biodiversity’ in the title. In total 526 research papers were screened—5% of all papers in Web of Science with biodiversity in the title. For each paper, details on taxonomic group, title phrasing, number of citations, study location, and author locations were recorded. Compared to the proportions of described species, we identified a considerable taxonomic weighting towards vertebrates and an under-representation of invertebrates (particularly arachnids and insects) in the published literature. This discrepancy is more pronounced in highly cited papers, and in tropical regions, with only 43% of biodiversity research in the tropics including invertebrates. Furthermore, while papers on vertebrate taxa typically did not specify the taxonomic group in the title, the converse was true for invertebrate papers. Biodiversity research is also biased geographically: studies are more frequently carried out in developed countries with larger economies, and for a given level of species or threatened species, tropical countries were understudied relative to temperate countries. Finally, biodiversity research is disproportionately authored by researchers from wealthier countries, with studies less likely to be carried out by scientists in lower-GDP nations. Our results highlight the need for a more systematic and directed evaluation of biodiversity studies, perhaps informing more targeted research towards those areas and taxa most depauperate in research. Only by doing so can we ensure that biodiversity research yields results that are relevant and applicable to all regions and that the information necessary for the conservation of threatened species is available to conservation practitioners.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Biol Conserv
                Biol. Conserv
                Biological Conservation
                The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                0006-3207
                0006-3207
                20 May 2020
                July 2020
                20 May 2020
                : 247
                : 108503
                Affiliations
                [a ]Laboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
                [b ]Molecular Ecology Group (MEG), IRSA-Water Research Institute, National Research Council, Verbania Pallanza, Italy
                Author notes
                [1]

                Equal contribution.

                Article
                S0006-3207(20)30067-7 108503
                10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108503
                7237378
                32454527
                20881c8c-9f3f-4104-84fc-3d5021e97729
                © 2020 The Authors

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 17 January 2020
                : 3 March 2020
                : 6 March 2020
                Categories
                Article

                Ecology
                cites,international trading,iucn,plant blindness,trafficking,vertebratism
                Ecology
                cites, international trading, iucn, plant blindness, trafficking, vertebratism

                Comments

                Comment on this article