Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42240035›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2026

Identifying hotspots of faunal data deficiency to direct urgent research and monitoring.

Matt W Hayward, Danielle Verdon-Kidd, K Colyvas, Ellen Saxon, Andrea S Griffin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Identifying hotspots of faunal data deficiency to direct urgent research and monitoring.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    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

5 authors.

Matt W HaywardSchool of Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5574-1653
Danielle Verdon-KiddSchool of Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
K ColyvasSchool of Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Ellen SaxonSchool of Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.
Andrea S GriffinSchool of Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Data deficiency is a substantial challenge for extinction risk assessments because incomplete data means we cannot accurately identify priority protected areas for conservation. Here, we use the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) distributions of amphibians, sharks and rays, fish, mammals, birds, and reptiles to identify hotspots of data deficient species. We found that areas with high numbers of data deficient species were not randomly distributed and did not necessarily overlap with hotspots of biodiversity, particularly in the Amazon and West Africa. Data deficiency hotspots were concentrated around tropical South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia; however, this distribution varied between taxa. Hotspots of data deficient amphibians were concentrated around the tropical Andean forests of Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador; throughout Brazil; and in the New Guinea Highlands. The tropical forests of the Congo River basin, Papua New Guinea, and the Philippines were hotspots for avian data deficiency. Data deficient chondrichthyans were concentrated in the tropical seas, particularly around the western coast of Africa, East Asia, and the tropical Americas. Indochina was identified as the primary hotspot for data deficient freshwater fish, whereas the Indo-Pacific was the primary hotspot for data deficient marine fish. Data deficient marine mammals were broadly distributed around the southern oceans, South America, Southeast Asia, and Northwest Africa. Data deficient herpetofauna were concentrated around tropical Asia, whereas tropical South America, Indonesia, and central Africa were the hotspots for data deficient terrestrial mammals. Although data deficiency reflected drivers of biodiversity more broadly (e.g., latitude), other factors were also influential, including the amount of conservation funding invested by a country and population density. Increasing evidence suggests that data deficient species are disproportionately likely to be threatened with extinction. Scientists urgently need to focus their research efforts on these data deficiency hotspots and ensure protected area networks are suitably representative and include data deficient species. Furthermore, the accuracy of status assessments needs to be ascertained, and data deficient species need to be prioritized for study to ensure they are not lost before they are identified.

Indexed as

Animal DistributionBiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesVertebratesAnimalsExtinction, Biologicalespecie amenazadaevaluación de estadohotspotsIUCN Red ListLista Roja de la UICNpuntos calientesstatus assessmentthreatened species

Identifiers

PMID42240035
PMCPMC13613548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.