Gaps in global wildlife trade monitoring leave amphibians vulnerable
Curation statements for this article:-
Curated by eLife
Evaluation Summary:
These are pressing times for nature, standing alone the impact of multiple (human-based) ecological stressors. Wildlife trade is one of these stressors. And, although it is an acute one, it is the easiest solvable global ecological problem. The authors increase dramatically our understanding of legal and illegal trade of amphibians, and offer a wider methodology (however, and importantly, not necessarily a more complex one) to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences) of amphibians' trade. The work will inspire in conservation biologists similar approaches to learn about the trade of other taxa.
(This preprint has been reviewed by eLife. We include the public reviews from the reviewers here; the authors also receive private feedback with suggested changes to the manuscript. Reviewer #1 agreed to share their name with the authors.)
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (eLife)
Abstract
As the biodiversity crisis continues, we must redouble efforts to understand and curb pressures pushing species closer to extinction. One major driver is the unsustainable trade of wildlife. Trade in internationally regulated species gains the most research attention, but this only accounts for a minority of traded species and we risk failing to appreciate the scale and impacts of unregulated legal trade. Despite being legal, trade puts pressure on wild species via direct collection, introduced pathogens, and invasive species. Smaller species-rich vertebrates, such as reptiles, fish, and amphibians, may be particularly vulnerable to trading because of gaps in regulations, small distributions, and demand of novel species. Here, we combine data from five sources: online web searches in six languages, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) trade database, Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) trade inventory, IUCN assessments, and a recent literature review, to characterise the global trade in amphibians, and also map use by purpose including meat, pets, medicinal, and for research. We show that 1215 species are being traded (17% of amphibian species), almost three times previous recorded numbers, 345 are threatened, and 100 Data Deficient or unassessed. Traded species origin hotspots include South America, China, and Central Africa; sources indicate 42% of amphibians are taken from the wild. Newly described species can be rapidly traded (mean time lag of 6.5 years), including threatened and unassessed species. The scale and limited regulation of the amphibian trade, paired with the triptych of connected pressures (collection, pathogens, invasive species), warrants a re-examination of the wildlife trade status quo, application of the precautionary principle in regard to wildlife trade, and a renewed push to achieve global biodiversity goals.
Article activity feed
-
Author Response:
Evaluation Summary:
These are pressing times for nature, standing alone the impact of multiple (human-based) ecological stressors. Wildlife trade is one of these stressors. And, although it is an acute one, it is the easiest solvable global ecological problem. The authors increase dramatically our understanding of legal and illegal trade of amphibians, and offer a wider methodology (however, and importantly, not necessarily a more complex one) to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences) of amphibians' trade. The work will inspire in conservation biologists similar approaches to learn about the trade of other taxa.
We thank the readers for their opinion and completely agree, we hope that our analysis facilitates better analysis and the development of better strategies to prevent unsustainable trade.
Author Response:
Evaluation Summary:
These are pressing times for nature, standing alone the impact of multiple (human-based) ecological stressors. Wildlife trade is one of these stressors. And, although it is an acute one, it is the easiest solvable global ecological problem. The authors increase dramatically our understanding of legal and illegal trade of amphibians, and offer a wider methodology (however, and importantly, not necessarily a more complex one) to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences) of amphibians' trade. The work will inspire in conservation biologists similar approaches to learn about the trade of other taxa.
We thank the readers for their opinion and completely agree, we hope that our analysis facilitates better analysis and the development of better strategies to prevent unsustainable trade.
Reviewer #1 (Public Review):
By linking several databases, the authors tried to measure the impact of trade on all amphibian species. Thereby origins of species traded, volumes, the purpose for trade have been assessed while noting that several loopholes exist in making overall robust assessments e.g., dynamics in trade and taxonomy. However, indicating that gaps and shortcomings are based on the way current databases available have been set up, the authors did an enormous job in applying the extensive digital methods to achieve the best possible reflection of the current amphibian trade. Through the use of several software programmes to measure/analyse current databases, also figures could be built to visualize e.g. trends. This is one of the major strengths of this paper. With the various specifically named methodological queries as well as the use of categorized keywords, which were essential for the inclusion and linking of the various databases, unambiguous results could be generated in the best possible sense, on the basis of which correct and convincing recommendations were made. To make it explicitly clear again, due to the lack of data on the global anthropogenic use of amphibian species, this seemingly complex applied methodological approach was necessary to shed light on the dark. In return, the effort would have been many times less, there would have been more comprehensive and informative databases that transparently and up-to-date illuminate the population status of species, their threats and the impact of trade. The importance of this work is essential to understand how much the various interest groups are lagging behind in order to communicate responsibly and transparently the use of resources, in this case the most threatened group of vertebrates, amphibians; thus, it is difficult to understand as the reader learns here how easy it is to trade species that have already been classified as threatened.
Thank you for this, we wholeheartedly agree, and greatly appreciate the reviewers comments
If I would have to mention weaknesses of this paper there are none that I would address explicitly. Apart from the comprehensive Suppl. Mat., I would just not overload the actual manuscript with figures and make sure that these are self-explanatory. As already mentioned, the methodological part in particular is very extensive and complex, but this is essential for this type of study.
Thank you, we have looked again at figure legends to ensure they are self-explanatory, and easy to follow.
Reviewer #2 (Public Review):
While it is wildly assumed that the trade in wildlife is well documented and data are thorough and widely available, this is not the case. The authors scour online sources (databases, websites, marketplaces), in multiple languages, to assess the true extent of wildlife trade related to those values reported and find large discrepancies. Wildlife trade has both direct and indirect effects on wild populations of amphibian species and therefore having more accurate values is essential for measuring potential effects. They call for change in how data are collected and reported so that those data can properly influence policy and conservation measures.
Thank you, we are glad this is clear and that the need for such an approach is apparent.
-
Evaluation Summary:
These are pressing times for nature, standing alone the impact of multiple (human-based) ecological stressors. Wildlife trade is one of these stressors. And, although it is an acute one, it is the easiest solvable global ecological problem. The authors increase dramatically our understanding of legal and illegal trade of amphibians, and offer a wider methodology (however, and importantly, not necessarily a more complex one) to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences) of amphibians' trade. The work will inspire in conservation biologists similar approaches to learn about the trade of other taxa.
(This preprint has been reviewed by eLife. We include the public reviews from the reviewers here; the authors also receive private feedback with suggested changes to the manuscript. Reviewer #1 agreed to …
Evaluation Summary:
These are pressing times for nature, standing alone the impact of multiple (human-based) ecological stressors. Wildlife trade is one of these stressors. And, although it is an acute one, it is the easiest solvable global ecological problem. The authors increase dramatically our understanding of legal and illegal trade of amphibians, and offer a wider methodology (however, and importantly, not necessarily a more complex one) to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and consequences) of amphibians' trade. The work will inspire in conservation biologists similar approaches to learn about the trade of other taxa.
(This preprint has been reviewed by eLife. We include the public reviews from the reviewers here; the authors also receive private feedback with suggested changes to the manuscript. Reviewer #1 agreed to share their name with the authors.)
-
Reviewer #1 (Public Review):
By linking several databases, the authors tried to measure the impact of trade on all amphibian species. Thereby origins of species traded, volumes, the purpose for trade have been assessed while noting that several loopholes exist in making overall robust assessments e.g., dynamics in trade and taxonomy. However, indicating that gaps and shortcomings are based on the way current databases available have been set up, the authors did an enormous job in applying the extensive digital methods to achieve the best possible reflection of the current amphibian trade. Through the use of several software programmes to measure/analyse current databases, also figures could be built to visualize e.g. trends. This is one of the major strengths of this paper. With the various specifically named methodological queries as …
Reviewer #1 (Public Review):
By linking several databases, the authors tried to measure the impact of trade on all amphibian species. Thereby origins of species traded, volumes, the purpose for trade have been assessed while noting that several loopholes exist in making overall robust assessments e.g., dynamics in trade and taxonomy. However, indicating that gaps and shortcomings are based on the way current databases available have been set up, the authors did an enormous job in applying the extensive digital methods to achieve the best possible reflection of the current amphibian trade. Through the use of several software programmes to measure/analyse current databases, also figures could be built to visualize e.g. trends. This is one of the major strengths of this paper. With the various specifically named methodological queries as well as the use of categorized keywords, which were essential for the inclusion and linking of the various databases, unambiguous results could be generated in the best possible sense, on the basis of which correct and convincing recommendations were made. To make it explicitly clear again, due to the lack of data on the global anthropogenic use of amphibian species, this seemingly complex applied methodological approach was necessary to shed light on the dark. In return, the effort would have been many times less, there would have been more comprehensive and informative databases that transparently and up-to-date illuminate the population status of species, their threats and the impact of trade. The importance of this work is essential to understand how much the various interest groups are lagging behind in order to communicate responsibly and transparently the use of resources, in this case the most threatened group of vertebrates, amphibians; thus, it is difficult to understand as the reader learns here how easy it is to trade species that have already been classified as threatened.
If I would have to mention weaknesses of this paper there are none that I would address explicitly. Apart from the comprehensive Suppl. Mat., I would just not overload the actual manuscript with figures and make sure that these are self-explanatory. As already mentioned, the methodological part in particular is very extensive and complex, but this is essential for this type of study.
-
Reviewer #2 (Public Review):
While it is wildly assumed that the trade in wildlife is well documented and data are thorough and widely available, this is not the case. The authors scour online sources (databases, websites, marketplaces), in multiple languages, to assess the true extent of wildlife trade related to those values reported and find large discrepancies. Wildlife trade has both direct and indirect effects on wild populations of amphibian species and therefore having more accurate values is essential for measuring potential effects. They call for change in how data are collected and reported so that those data can properly influence policy and conservation measures.
-
-
