ArticleEcology and evolution2017
Identification of human-carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bayesian belief network model to predict human-wildlife conflict in protected areas.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multi-Source Remote Sensing and Ensemble Learning for Habitat Suitability Mapping of the Common Leopard (Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Claws in the Capital: Human-Leopard Conflict Hotspots and Community Perceptions in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Short-term study fails to capture negative impacts of livestock intensification on wildlife.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Article
- Social-ecological predictors of spotted hyena navigation through a shared landscape.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Identifying the Risk Regions of Wild Boar (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- The unequal burden of human-wildlife conflict.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Article
- Identifying connectivity for two sympatric carnivores in human-dominated landscapes in central Iran.PloS one · 2022Article
- Integrating spatial analysis and questionnaire survey to better understand human-onager conflict in Southern Iran.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- African Lions and Zoonotic Diseases: Implications for Commercial Lion Farms in South Africa.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Review
- The diet of the striped hyena in Nepal's lowland regions.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Landscape predictors of human-leopard conflicts within multi-use areas of the Himalayan region.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Living on the edge: Multiscale habitat selection by cheetahs in a human-wildlife landscape.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Article
- Identification of human-carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human-carnivore conflict is a primary driver of carnivore declines worldwide and resolving these conflicts is a conservation priority. However, resources to mitigate conflicts are limited and should be focused on areas of highest priority. We conducted 820 semistructured interviews with community members living within Kenya's Maasai Mara ecosystem. A multiscale analysis was used to determine the influence of husbandry and environmental factors on livestock depredation inside livestock enclosures (bomas). Areas with a high proportion of closed habitat and protected areas had the highest risk of depredation. Depredation was most likely to occur at weak bomas and at households where there were fewer dogs. We used the results to identify potential conflict hotspots by mapping the probability of livestock depredation across the landscape. 21.4% of the landscape was classified as high risk, and within these areas, 53.4% of the households that were interviewed had weak bomas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.