Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34017002›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

A pan-African spatial assessment of human conflicts with lions and elephants.

Enrico Di Minin, Rob Slotow, Christoph Fink, Hans Bauer, Craig Packer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effects of climate, land use, and human population change on human-elephant conflict risk in Africa and Asia.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Social Disruption Impairs Predatory Threat Assessment in African Elephants.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Enrico Di MininHelsinki Lab of Interdisciplinary Conservation Science, Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. enrico.di.minin@helsinki.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5562-318X
Rob SlotowSchool of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9469-1508
Christoph FinkHelsinki Lab of Interdisciplinary Conservation Science, Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Hans BauerWildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, University of Oxford, Tubney, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5031-5842
Craig PackerSchool of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3939-8162
University of Helsinki · FIUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

African lions (Panthera leo) and African savanna (Loxodonta africana) and forest (L. cyclotis) elephants pose threats to people, crops, and livestock, and are themselves threatened with extinction. Here, we map these human-wildlife conflicts across Africa. Eighty-two percent of sites containing lions and elephants are adjacent to areas with considerable human pressure. Areas at severe risk of conflict (defined as high densities of humans, crops, and cattle) comprise 9% of the perimeter of these species' ranges and are found in 18 countries hosting, respectively, ~ 74% and 41% of African lion and elephant populations. Although a variety of alternative conflict-mitigation strategies could be deployed, we focus on assessing the potential of high-quality mitigation fences. Our spatial and economic assessments suggest that investments in the construction and maintenance of strategically located mitigation fences would be a cost-effective strategy to support local communities, protect people from dangerous wildlife, and prevent further declines in lion and elephant populations.

Indexed as

ElephantsHuman-Animal InteractionLionsAfricaAnimal DistributionAnimal HusbandryAnimal MigrationAnimalsCattleConservation of Natural ResourcesCrops, AgriculturalForestsGrasslandHumansPopulation DynamicsSpatial Analysis

Identifiers

PMID34017002
PMCPMC8138028
OpenAlexW3161858081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.