Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35589969›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2022

Searching the web builds fuller picture of arachnid trade.

Benjamin M Marshall, Colin T Strine, Caroline S Fukushima, Pedro Cardoso, Michael C Orr, Alice C Hughes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
12.1field-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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Ecosystem services provided by spiders.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022
    Article
  14. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Benjamin M MarshallSchool of Biology, Institute of Science, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9554-0605
Colin T Strine *School of Biology, Institute of Science, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5614-292X
Caroline S FukushimaLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, PO17 (Pohjoinen Rautatiekatu 13), 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Pedro CardosoLaboratory for Integrative Biodiversity Research (LIBRe), Finnish Museum of Natural History (LUOMUS), University of Helsinki, PO17 (Pohjoinen Rautatiekatu 13), 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Michael C OrrBeijing Institute of Zoology, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9096-3008
Alice C Hughes *Department of Biological Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong. ach_conservation2@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0675-7552
University of Helsinki · FIInstitute of Zoology · CNSuranaree University of Technology · THUniversity of Hong Kong · HKUniversity of Stirling · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildlife trade is a major driver of biodiversity loss, yet whilst the impacts of trade in some species are relatively well-known, some taxa, such as many invertebrates are often overlooked. Here we explore global patterns of trade in the arachnids, and detected 1,264 species from 66 families and 371 genera in trade. Trade in these groups exceeds millions of individuals, with 67% coming directly from the wild, and up to 99% of individuals in some genera. For popular taxa, such as tarantulas up to 50% are in trade, including 25% of species described since 2000. CITES only covers 30 (2%) of the species potentially traded. We mapped the percentage and number of species native to each country in trade. To enable sustainable trade, better data on species distributions and better conservation status assessments are needed. The disparity between trade data sources highlights the need to expand monitoring if impacts on wild populations are to be accurately gauged and the impacts of trade minimised.

Indexed as

ArachnidaAnimalsAnimals, WildBiodiversityCommerceHumans

Identifiers

PMID35589969
PMCPMC9120460
OpenAlexW4280516099

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.