Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35666869›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022

Global protected areas seem insufficient to safeguard half of the world's mammals from human-induced extinction.

David R Williams, Carlo Rondinini, David Tilman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Role of protected areas in mitigating range loss and local extinctions of terrestrial mammals.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Evaluating protected areas' coverage of threats to terrestrial biodiversity.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. From science to impact: Conserving ecological connectivity in large conservation landscapes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Conservation priorities for functionally unique and specialized terrestrial vertebrates threatened by biological invasions.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

David R WilliamsSustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0379-1800
Carlo RondininiGlobal Mammal Assessment Programme, Dipartimento di Biologia e Biotecnologie "Charles Darwin," Sapienza Università di Roma, 00185 Rome, Italy.
David TilmanBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.ORCID 0000-0001-6395-7676

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs) are a cornerstone of global conservation and central to international plans to minimize global extinctions. During the coming century, global ecosystem destruction and fragmentation associated with increased human population and economic activity could make the long-term survival of most terrestrial vertebrates even more dependent on PAs. However, the capacity of the current global PA network to sustain species for the long term is unknown. Here, we explore this question for all nonvolant terrestrial mammals for which we found sufficient data, ∼4,000 species. We first estimate the potential population size of each such mammal species in each PA and then use three different criteria to estimate if solely the current global network of PAs might be sufficient for their long-term survival. Our analyses suggest that current PAs may fail to provide robust protection for about half the species analyzed, including most species currently listed as threatened with extinction and a third of species not currently listed as threatened. Hundreds of mammal species appear to have no viable protected populations. Underprotected species were found across all body sizes, taxonomic groups, and geographic regions. Large-bodied mammals, endemic species, and those in high-biodiversity tropical regions were particularly poorly protected by existing PAs. As new international biodiversity targets are formulated, our results suggest that the global network of PAs must be greatly expanded and most importantly that PAs must be located in diverse regions that encompass species not currently protected and must be large enough to ensure that protected species can persist for the long term.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesMammalsAnimalsBiodiversityExtinction, BiologicalHumansextinction riskgap analysisland-use changemammalsprotected areas

Identifiers

PMID35666869
PMCPMC9214487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.