ArticlePloS one2024
Patterns of primates crop foraging and the impacts on incomes of smallholders across the mosaic agricultural landscape of Wolaita zone, southern Ethiopia.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Crop Feeding Behavior of Rhesus Macaques in a Forest-Farm Mosaic in Central Nepal: Implications for Human-Wildlife Coexistence.American journal of primatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Crop foraging by primates is a prevalent form of human-wildlife conflict, especially near protected areas. This behavior poses significant economic challenges for subsistence farmers, jeopardizing both livelihoods and conservation efforts. This study aimed to assess patterns of primate crop-foraging events and estimate maize damage in protected and unprotected fields in southern Ethiopia. Data were collected over 12 months between 2020 and 2021 in the Sodo Zuriya and Damot Gale districts of Southern Ethiopia. A team of six field experts and 25 farmers participated in the study, during which maize damage inflicted by primates was assessed using 25 deployed camera traps. Linear mixed models were used to explore the relationship between maize damage by primates and spatio-temporal variables. Olive baboons and grivet monkeys were found to target maize more frequently during June, July, and August. Olive baboons forage in the morning, while grivet monkeys do so in the afternoon. The average maize yield losses due to primate damage were 43.1% in protected fields and 31.4% in unprotected fields. Of the total damage, 43.1% occurred in protected fields situated 50 meters from the forest edge. Conversely, unprotected fields experienced lower rates of damage: 14.4%, 13.2%, 3.7%, and 0.1% at distances of 50 m, 100 m, 200 m, and 300 m from the forest edge, respectively. Camera traps captured 47 photos of baboons, 21 photos of grivet monkeys, and documented eight primate crop-foraging events. This study revealed that maize fields within 50 meters of the forest edge faced significant damage. Despite the use of wire mesh fencing, it was largely ineffective in deterring olive baboons and grivet monkeys. Additionally, while human guarding is often considered an effective protective strategy, these findings suggest its ineffectiveness due to inconsistent implementation. Overall, this study provides valuable insights for promoting primate conservation and mitigating human-primate conflicts.
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.