Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40289901›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025

Including the urbanization gradient in people-centered wildlife conservation in Amazonia.

Lísley P Lemos, Denis Valle, Thaís Queiroz Morcatty, Willandia Chaves

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Informal supply chains of wild meat from rural Amazonia and food security in an urban center.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Including the urbanization gradient in people-centered wildlife conservation in Amazonia.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    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

4 authors.

Lísley P LemosDepartment of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech), Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2037-1549
Denis ValleSchool of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatics Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9830-8876
Thaís Queiroz MorcattyRede de Pesquisa para Estudos sobre Diversidade, Conservação e Uso da Fauna na Amazônia (RedeFauna), Manaus, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3095-7052
Willandia ChavesDepartment of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech), Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5487-3822

Funding

Global Change CenterVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conservation policy in the Amazon traditionally focuses on rural areas, overlooking the socioecological roles of urban populations. This oversight can hinder sustainability by neglecting rural-urban connections. We compared the prevalence and quantity of wild meat consumed, bartered, and traded commercially in rural, peri-urban, and urban areas of the Brazilian Amazon to inform policies aimed at including local people in conservation. We also examined social factors influencing wildlife access. These factors included household management (single vs. dual adult households), household dependency (ratio of minors to working adults), residence status (single-sited vs. multisited households), frequency of rural area visits by urban residents, and market access by peri-urban and rural residents. We surveyed 782 households in Manaus and Carauari (Manaus: 299 urban, 90 peri-urban, 120 rural; Carauari: 159 urban, 41 peri-urban, 73 rural) about social factors related to wildlife used that are linked to urbanization. Results revealed widespread wildlife use across urbanization categories. The percentage of urban households that consumed (Manaus 22%, Carauari 57%), bartered (Manaus 17%, Carauari 30%), and traded (Manaus 21%, Carauari 7%) wildlife was substantial. Market access was higher in Manaus than in Carauari. Commercial trade in chelonians and barter of mammals and birds increased as access to markets increased. Commercial wildlife trade was present in urban households (Carauari 21% [95% CI 7-34], Manaus 16% [95% CI 6-26]) but higher in peri-urban Manaus (chelonian trade 44% [95% CI 22-62]). Given these high prevalence levels, especially near expanding urban areas, such as Manaus, wildlife barter and commercial trade likely contribute to unsustainable harvesting pressures, affecting people's sovereignty. Our research underscores the need for inclusive policies that regulate subsistence hunting to uphold rural rights; integration of fish and wildlife management in community-based conservation frameworks to enhance food security and reduce wildlife dependence; and inclusion of wildlife users in integrated development programs through community-based conservation to curtail wildlife trade, ultimately creating sustainable and just pathways for the urbanizing Amazonia.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesMeatUrbanizationAnimalsAnimals, WildBrazilCommerceHumansRural Populationcarne silvestrehogares multisedeindirect questionsmultisited householdsperi‐urbanperiurbanopolicypolíticaspreguntas indirectasruraluso de faunawildlife usewild meat农村城市周边多住址家庭政策野味野生动物利用间接问题

Identifiers

PMID40289901
PMCPMC12124168

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.