Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33589802›Full record

SynthesisNature ecology & evolution2021

Impacts of wildlife trade on terrestrial biodiversity.

Oscar Morton, Brett R Scheffers, Torbjørn Haugaasen, David P Edwards

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nature ecology & evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
26.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 227 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Prevalence of traded bird species in key biodiversity areas.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  3. How illegal wildlife trade adheres to and defies conventional market behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Evaluating synthetic substitutes to reduce illegal harvesting and support species recovery.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Equity considerations in the proposed wildlife protocol to the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Wildlife trade investigations benefit from multivariate stable isotope analyses.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  14. Guidelines for addressing disease risks in wildlife trade.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025
    Article
  15. The need for carbon finance schemes to tackle overexploitation of tropical forest wildlife.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  16. The magnitude of legal wildlife trade and implications for species survival.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  17. Global dynamics of functional composition in CITES-traded reptiles.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Oscar MortonDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. omorton1@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5483-4498
Brett R ScheffersDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2423-3821
Torbjørn HaugaasenFaculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0901-5324
David P EdwardsDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. david.edwards@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8562-3853
University of Sheffield · GBNorwegian University of Life Sciences · NOUniversity of Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wildlife trade is worth billions of dollars annually and affects most major taxonomic groups. Despite this, a global understanding of the trade's impacts on species populations is lacking. We performed a quantitative meta-analysis of the wildlife trade that synthesized 506 species-level effect sizes from 31 studies, estimating trade-driven declines in mammals (452 effect sizes), birds (36) and reptiles (18). Overall, species declined in abundance by 62% (95% confidence interval (CI), 20 to 82%) where trade occurs. Reductions involving national or international trade were greatest, driving declines of 76% (95% CI, 36 to 91%) and 66% (95% CI, 12 to 87%), respectively. The impacts of trade were pervasive, requiring over 102 hours of travel time from settlements for trade to have no mean effect. Current protective measures fail species, with significant declines even where the harvesting for trade occurs in protected areas. Population declines tracked species threat status, indicating heightened extirpation and extinction risk in traded species. Critically, for such a severe global threat to wildlife, our analysis unearthed a limited number of studies using treatment versus control comparisons, and no studies on amphibians, invertebrates, cacti or orchids. Improved management, tackling both unsustainable demand and trade reporting, must be a conservation priority to prevent rampant trade-induced declines.

Indexed as

Animals, WildCommerceAnimalsBiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesInternationality

Identifiers

PMID33589802
OpenAlexW3131419516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.