ReviewProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023
Biocultural vulnerability exposes threats of culturally important species.
Review in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Considerations for biobanking of nonhuman genome data connected to Indigenous Peoples and lands.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Endangered species laws and the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and sciences in risk assessments.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Indigenous peoples and local community reports of climate change impacts on biodiversity.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
- Vulnerability of marine megafauna to global at-sea anthropogenic threats.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Understandings and critiques of biocultural diversity conservation and future recommendations for conservation actors.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
- Vegetation change threatens the sustainability of cultural keystone species and traditional ecological knowledge in a social-ecological system.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The generations of cultural ecosystem services research.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Biocultural vulnerability of traditional crops in the Indian Trans-Himalaya.Science advances · 2025Article
- Cultural integration of invasive species.npj biodiversity · 2025Review
- Ecological Civilisation and Amphibian Sustainability through Reproduction Biotechnologies, Biobanking, and Conservation Breeding Programs (RBCs).Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
- Rural reality contradicts the ethnographic literature-a nationwide survey on folk beliefs and people's affection for the stork in Poland.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The past is a foreign country.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- Biocultural aspects of species extinctions.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2023Review
- Indigenous peoples and local communities as partners in the sequencing of global eukaryotic biodiversity.npj biodiversity · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are growing calls for conservation frameworks that, rather than breaking the relations between people and other parts of nature, capture place-based relationships that have supported social-ecological systems over the long term. Biocultural approaches propose actions based on biological conservation priorities and cultural values aligned with local priorities, but mechanisms that allow their global uptake are missing. We propose a framework to globally assess the biocultural status of specific components of nature that matter to people and apply it to culturally important species (CIS). Drawing on a literature review and a survey, we identified 385 wild species, mostly plants, which are culturally important. CIS predominate among Indigenous peoples (57%) and ethnic groups (21%). CIS have a larger proportion of Data-Deficient species (41%) than the full set of International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) species (12%), underscoring the disregard of cultural considerations in biological research. Combining information on CIS biological conservation status (IUCN threatened status) and cultural status (language vitality), we found that more CIS are culturally Vulnerable or Endangered than they are biologically and that there is a higher share of bioculturally Endangered or Vulnerable CIS than of either biologically or culturally Endangered CIS measured separately. Bioculturally Endangered or Vulnerable CIS are particularly predominant among Indigenous peoples, arguably because of the high levels of cultural loss among them. The deliberate connection between biological and cultural values, as developed in our "biocultural status" metric, provides an actionable way to guide decisions and operationalize global actions oriented to enhance place-based practices with demonstrated long-term sustainability.
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.