Assessing the global prevalence of wild birds in trade.
CITES
aves
birds
conservación
conservation
mercado
monitoreo
monitoring
trade
Journal
Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
ISSN: 1523-1739
Titre abrégé: Conserv Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9882301
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2024
Oct 2024
Historique:
revised:
22
11
2023
received:
25
07
2023
accepted:
04
01
2024
medline:
9
9
2024
pubmed:
9
9
2024
entrez:
9
9
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Trade represents a significant threat to many wild species and is often clandestine and poorly monitored. Information on which species are most prevalent in trade and potentially threatened by it therefore remains fragmentary. We used 7 global data sets on birds in trade to identify species or groups of species at particular risk and assessed the extent to which they were congruent in terms of the species recorded in trade. We used the frequency with which species were recorded in the data sets as the basis for a trade prevalence score that was applied to all bird species globally. Literature searches and questionnaire surveys were used to develop a list of species known to be heavily traded to validate the trade prevalence score. The score was modeled to identify significant predictors of trade. Although the data sets sampled different parts of the broad trade spectrum, congruence among them was statistically strong in all comparisons. Furthermore, the frequency with which species were recorded within data sets was positively correlated with their occurrence across data sets, indicating that the trade prevalence score captured information on trade volume. The trade prevalence score discriminated well between species identified from semi-independent assessments as heavily or unsustainably traded and all other species. Globally, 45.1% of all bird species and 36.7% of globally threatened bird species had trade prevalence scores ≥1. Species listed in Appendices I or II of CITES, species with large geographical distributions, and nonpasserines tended to have high trade prevalence scores. Speciose orders with high mean trade prevalence scores included Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, Accipitriformes, Anseriformes, Bucerotiformes, and Strigiformes. Despite their low mean prevalence score, Passeriformes accounted for the highest overall number of traded species of any order but had low representation in CITES appendices. Geographical hotspots where large numbers of traded species co-occur differed among passerines (Southeast Asia and Eurasia) and nonpasserines (central South America, sub-Saharan Africa, and India). This first attempt to quantify and map the relative prevalence in trade of all bird species globally can be used to identify species and groups of species that may be at particular risk of harm from trade and can inform conservation and policy interventions to reduce its adverse impacts. Análisis de la prevalencia mundial de aves silvestres en el mercado Resumen El mercado representa una amenaza importante para muchas especies silvestres y a menudo es clandestino y mal vigilado. Por ello, la información sobre las especies más presentes en el mercado y bajo amenaza potencial todavía está fragmentada. Utilizamos siete conjuntos de datos mundiales sobre aves comercializadas para identificar especies o grupos de especies bajo riesgo especial y evaluamos hasta qué punto eran congruentes en cuanto a las especies registradas en el comercio. Utilizamos la frecuencia con la que las especies se registraban en los conjuntos de datos como base para una puntuación de prevalencia del comercio que se aplicó a todas las especies de aves a nivel mundial. Para validar la puntuación de prevalencia del comercio, realizamos búsquedas bibliográficas y cuestionarios para elaborar una lista de especies que se sabe son objeto de comercio intenso. Modelamos la puntuación para identificar los predictores significativos del mercado. Aunque los conjuntos de datos muestrearon partes distintas del amplio espectro del mercado, la congruencia entre ellos fue estadísticamente robusta en todas las comparaciones. Además, la frecuencia con la que se registraron las especies dentro de los conjuntos de datos se correlacionó positivamente con su presencia en todos los conjuntos de datos, lo que indica que la puntuación de prevalencia del mercado captó información sobre el volumen de este. La puntuación de prevalencia del mercado distinguió entre las especies identificadas a partir de evaluaciones semiindependientes como objeto de comercio intenso o insostenible y todas las demás especies. A nivel mundial, el 45.1% de todas las especies de aves y el 36.7% de las especies de aves amenazadas mundialmente tenían puntuaciones de prevalencia del mercado ≥1. Las especies incluidas en los Apéndices I o II de CITES, las especies con una amplia distribución geográfica y los no paseriformes tendieron a tener puntuaciones elevadas de prevalencia del mercado. Los órdenes de especies con puntuaciones medias de prevalencia del mercado elevadas fueron Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, Accipitriformes, Anseriformes, Bucerotiformes y Strigiformes. A pesar de su baja puntuación media de prevalencia, los Passeriformes representaron el mayor número total de especies comercializadas de todos los órdenes, pero tuvieron una baja representación en los apéndices de CITES. Los puntos calientes geográficos en los que coexisten un gran número de especies comercializadas difieren entre los paseriformes (Sudeste Asiático y Eurasia) y los no paseriformes (centro de Sudamérica, África subsahariana e India). Este primer intento de cuantificar y cartografiar la prevalencia relativa en el comercio de todas las especies de aves a escala mundial puede utilizarse para identificar especies y grupos de especies que pueden correr un riesgo especial de sufrir daños a causa del comercio y puede servir de base para intervenciones políticas y de conservación destinadas a reducir sus efectos adversos.
Autres résumés
Type: Publisher
(spa)
Análisis de la prevalencia mundial de aves silvestres en el mercado Resumen El mercado representa una amenaza importante para muchas especies silvestres y a menudo es clandestino y mal vigilado. Por ello, la información sobre las especies más presentes en el mercado y bajo amenaza potencial todavía está fragmentada. Utilizamos siete conjuntos de datos mundiales sobre aves comercializadas para identificar especies o grupos de especies bajo riesgo especial y evaluamos hasta qué punto eran congruentes en cuanto a las especies registradas en el comercio. Utilizamos la frecuencia con la que las especies se registraban en los conjuntos de datos como base para una puntuación de prevalencia del comercio que se aplicó a todas las especies de aves a nivel mundial. Para validar la puntuación de prevalencia del comercio, realizamos búsquedas bibliográficas y cuestionarios para elaborar una lista de especies que se sabe son objeto de comercio intenso. Modelamos la puntuación para identificar los predictores significativos del mercado. Aunque los conjuntos de datos muestrearon partes distintas del amplio espectro del mercado, la congruencia entre ellos fue estadísticamente robusta en todas las comparaciones. Además, la frecuencia con la que se registraron las especies dentro de los conjuntos de datos se correlacionó positivamente con su presencia en todos los conjuntos de datos, lo que indica que la puntuación de prevalencia del mercado captó información sobre el volumen de este. La puntuación de prevalencia del mercado distinguió entre las especies identificadas a partir de evaluaciones semiindependientes como objeto de comercio intenso o insostenible y todas las demás especies. A nivel mundial, el 45.1% de todas las especies de aves y el 36.7% de las especies de aves amenazadas mundialmente tenían puntuaciones de prevalencia del mercado ≥1. Las especies incluidas en los Apéndices I o II de CITES, las especies con una amplia distribución geográfica y los no paseriformes tendieron a tener puntuaciones elevadas de prevalencia del mercado. Los órdenes de especies con puntuaciones medias de prevalencia del mercado elevadas fueron Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, Accipitriformes, Anseriformes, Bucerotiformes y Strigiformes. A pesar de su baja puntuación media de prevalencia, los Passeriformes representaron el mayor número total de especies comercializadas de todos los órdenes, pero tuvieron una baja representación en los apéndices de CITES. Los puntos calientes geográficos en los que coexisten un gran número de especies comercializadas difieren entre los paseriformes (Sudeste Asiático y Eurasia) y los no paseriformes (centro de Sudamérica, África subsahariana e India). Este primer intento de cuantificar y cartografiar la prevalencia relativa en el comercio de todas las especies de aves a escala mundial puede utilizarse para identificar especies y grupos de especies que pueden correr un riesgo especial de sufrir daños a causa del comercio y puede servir de base para intervenciones políticas y de conservación destinadas a reducir sus efectos adversos.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14350Subventions
Organisme : Cambridge Conservation Initiative Collaborative Fund
ID : CCI-05-20-010
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.
Références
Abellán, P., Carrete, M., Anadón, J. D., Cardador, L., & Tella, J. L. (2016). Non‐random patterns and temporal trends (1912–2012) in the transport, introduction and establishment of exotic birds in Spain and Portugal. Diversity and Distributions, 22, 263–273.
Abensperg‐Traun, M. (2009). CITES, sustainable use of wild species and incentive‐driven conservation in developing countries, with an emphasis on southern Africa. Biological Conservation, 142, 948–963.
Aloysius, S. L. M., Yong, D. L., Lee, J. G., & Jain, A. (2019). Flying into extinction: Understanding the role of Singapore's international parrot trade in growing domestic demand. Bird Conservation International, 30, 139–155.
Alves, R. R. N., Lima, J. R. F., & Araujo, H. F. P. (2012). The live bird trade in Brazil and its conservation implications: An overview. Bird Conservation International, 23, 53–65.
Alves, R. R. N., Nogueira, E. E. G., Araujo, H. F. P., & Brooks, S. E. (2010). Bird‐keeping in the Caatinga, NE Brazil. Human Ecology, 38, 147–156.
Andersson, A. A., Tilley, H. B., Lau, W., Dudgeon, D., Bonebrake, T. C., & Dingle, C. (2021). CITES and beyond: Illuminating 20 years of global, legal wildlife trade. Global Ecology and Conservation, 26, Article e01455.
Annorbah, N. N. D., Collar, N. J., & Marsden, S. J. (2016). Trade and habitat change virtually eliminate the Grey Parrot Psittacus erithacus from Ghana. Ibis, 158, 82–91.
Argeloo, M., & Dekker, R. W. R. J. (2009). Exploitation of megapode eggs in Indonesia: The role of traditional methods in the conservation of megapodes. Oryx, 30, 59–64.
Asian Songbird Trade Specialist Group. (2022). Priority taxa list. https://www.asiansongbirdtradesg.com/taxa‐list
Baker, S. E., Cain, R., van Kesteren, F., Zommers, Z. A., D'Cruze, N., & Macdonald, D. W. (2013). Rough trade: Animal welfare in the global wildlife trade. Bioscience, 63, 928–938.
Beastall, C., Shepherd, C. R., Hadiprakarsa, Y., & Martyr, D. (2016). Trade in the Helmeted Hornbill Rhinoplax vigil: The ‘ivory hornbill’. Bird Conservation International, 26, 137–146.
Bezerra‐Santos, M. A., Mendoza‐Roldan, J. A., Thompson, R. C. A., Dantas‐Torres, F., & Otranto, D. (2021). Illegal wildlife trade: A gateway to zoonotic infectious diseases. Trends in Parasitology, 37, 181–184.
BirdLife International. (2022). State of the World's Birds 2022. Author.
Borsky, S., Hennighausen, H., Leiter, A., & Williges, K. (2020). CITES and the zoonotic disease content in international wildlife trade. Environmental and Resource Economics, 76, 1001–1017.
Borzée, A., McNeely, J., Magellan, K., Miller, J. R. B., Porter, L., Dutta, T., Kadinjappalli, K. P., Sharma, S., Shahabuddin, G., Aprilinayati, F., Ryan, G. E., Hughes, A., Abd Mutalib, A. H., Wahab, A. Z. A., Bista, D., Chavanich, S. A., Chong, J. L., Gale, G. A., Ghaffari, H., … Zhang, L. (2020). COVID‐19 highlights the need for more effective wildlife trade legislation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 35, 1052–1055.
Brochet, A.‐L., Jbour, S., Sheldon, R. D., Porter, R., Jones, V. R., Fazari, W. A., Saghier, O. A., Alkhuzai, S., Al‐Obeidi, L. A., Angwin, R., Ararat, K., Pope, M., Shobrak, M. Y., Willson, M. S., Zadegan, S. S., & Butchart, S. H. M. (2019). A preliminary assessment of the scope and scale of illegal killing and taking of wild birds in the Arabian peninsula, Iran and Iraq. Sandgrouse, 41, 154–175.
Brochet, A.‐L., van den Bossche, W., Jbour, S., Ndang'ang'a, P. K., Jones, V. R., Abdou, W. A. L. I., Al‐Hmoud, A. R., Asswad, N. G., Atienza, J. C., & Atrash, I. (2016). Preliminary assessment of the scope and scale of illegal killing and taking of birds in the Mediterranean. Bird Conservation International, 26, 1–28.
Brochet, A.‐L., van den Bossche, W., Jones, V. R., Arnardottir, H., Damoc, D., Demko, M., Driessens, G., Flensted, K., Gerber, M., Ghasabyan, M., Gradinarov, D., Hansen, J., Horváth, M., Karlonas, M., Krogulec, J., Kuzmenko, T., Lachman, L., Lehtiniemi, T., Lorgé, P., & Butchart, S. H. M. (2017). Illegal killing and taking of birds in Europe outside the Mediterranean: Assessing the scope and scale of a complex issue. Bird Conservation International, 29, 10–40.
Brooks, T. M., Pimm, S. L., Akçakaya, H. R., Buchanan, G. M., Butchart, S. H. M., Foden, W., Hilton‐Taylor, C., Hoffmann, M., Jenkins, C. N., Joppa, L., Li, B. V., Menon, V., Ocampo‐Peñuela, N., & Rondinini, C. (2019). Measuring terrestrial area of habitat (AOH) and its utility for the IUCN Red List. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 34, 977–986.
Buij, R., Nikolaus, G., Whytock, R., Ingram, D. J., & Ogada, D. (2015). Trade of threatened vultures and other raptors for fetish and bushmeat in West and Central Africa. Oryx, 50, 606–616.
Busana, M., Butchart, S. H. M., & Donald, P. F. (2022). Recent developments in the production of Area of Habitat (AOH) maps for terrestrial vertebrates. A report by BirdLife International to UNEP‐WCMC under the SPACES project. Deliverable 1: Producing a new set of AOH maps for terrestrial birds and mammals. BirdLife International.
Butchart, S. H. M. (2008). Red List Indices to measure the sustainability of species use and impacts of invasive alien species. Bird Conservation International, 18, S245–S262.
Cardoso, P., Amponsah‐Mensah, K., Barreiros, J. P., Bouhuys, J., Cheung, H., Davies, A., Kumschick, S., Longhorn, S. J., Martínez‐Muñoz, C. A., Morcatty, T. Q., Peters, G., Ripple, W. J., Rivera‐Téllez, E., Stringham, O. C., Toomes, A., Tricorache, P., & Fukushima, C. S. (2021). Scientists' warning to humanity on illegal or unsustainable wildlife trade. Biological Conservation, 263, Article 109341.
Carrete, M., & Tella, J. L. (2008). Wild‐bird trade and exotic invasions: A new link of conservation concern? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6, 207–211.
Challender, D., Cremona, P., Malsch, K., Robinson, J., Pavitt, A., Scott, J., Hoffmann, R., Joolia, A., Oldfield, T., Jenkins, R., Conde, D., Hilton‐Taylor, C., & Hoffmann, M. (2023). Identifying species likely threatened by international trade on the IUCN Red List can inform CITES trade measures. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs‐1858556/v1
Challender, D. W. S., Harrop, S. R., & MacMillan, D. C. (2015). Towards informed and multi‐faceted wildlife trade interventions. Global Ecology and Conservation, 3, 129–148.
Challender, D. W. S., Hinsley, A., & Milner‐Gulland, E. J. (2019). Inadequacies in establishing CITES trade bans. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 17(4), 199–200. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2033
Chan, D. T. C., Poon, E. S. K., Wong, A. T. C., & Sin, S. Y. W. (2021). Global trade in parrots—Influential factors of trade and implications for conservation. Global Ecology and Conservation, 30, Article e01784.
Charity, S., & Ferreira, J. M. (2020). Wildlife trafficking in Brazil. TRAFFIC International.
Chng, S. C. L., Krishnasamy, K., & Eaton, J. A. (2018). In the market for extinction: The cage bird trade in Bali. Forktail, 34, 35–41.
Collar, N. J. (2015). Helmeted Hornbills and the ivory trade: The crisis that came out of nowhere. BirdingASIA, 24, 12–17.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). (2016). Criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II (Conf., 9.24 [Rev. CoP17]). https://cites.org/sites/default/files/documents/COP/19/resolution/E‐Res‐09‐24‐R17.pdf
Cooney, R., & Abensperg‐Traun, M. (2013). Raising local community voices: CITES, livelihoods and sustainable use. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 22, 301–310.
Daboné, C., Ouéda, A., Thompson, L. J., Adjakpa, J. B., & Weesie, P. D. M. (2022). Trade in vulture parts in West Africa: Burkina Faso may be one of the main sources of vulture carcasses. Bird Conservation International, 33, Article e8.
Dahal, P. R., Lumbierres, M., Butchart, S. H. M., Donald, P. F., & Rondinini, C. (2022). A validation standard for area of habitat maps for terrestrial birds and mammals. Geoscientific Model Development, 15, 5093–5105.
Davies, A., Nuno, A. N. A., Hinsley, A. M. Y., & Martin, R. O. (2022). Live wild bird exports from West Africa: Insights into recent trade from monitoring social media. Bird Conservation International, 32, 559–572.
di Minin, E., Fink, C., Hiippala, T., & Tenkanen, H. (2019). A framework for investigating illegal wildlife trade on social media with machine learning. Conservation Biology, 33, 210–213.
do Nascimento, C. A. R., Czaban, R. E., & Alves, R. R. N. (2015). Trends in illegal trade of wild birds in Amazonas State, Brazil. Tropical Conservation Science, 8, 1098–1113.
Eason, P., Rabia, B., & Attum, O. (2015). Hunting of migratory birds in North Sinai, Egypt. Bird Conservation International, 26, 39–51.
Eaton, J. A., Shepherd, C. R., Rheindt, F. E., Harris, J. B. C., van Balen, S., Wilcove, D. S., & Collar, N. J. (2015). Trade‐driven extinctions and near‐extinctions of avian taxa in Sundaic Indonesia. Forktail, 31, 1–12.
Española, C. P., Collar, N. J., & Marsden, S. J. (2013). Are populations of large‐bodied avian frugivores on Luzon, Philippines, facing imminent collapse? Animal Conservation, 16, 467–479.
Froese, G. Z. L., & Mustari, A. H. (2019). Assessments of maleo Macrocephalon maleo nesting grounds in South‐east Sulawesi reveal severely threatened populations. Bird Conservation International, 29, 497–502.
Gastañaga, M., Macleod, R., Hennessey, B., Núñez, J. U., Puse, E., Arrascue, A., Hoyos, J., Chambi, W. M., Vasquez, J., & Engblom, G. (2010). A study of the parrot trade in Peru and the potential importance of internal trade for threatened species. Bird Conservation International, 21, 76–85.
Gilbert, M., Sokha, C., Joyner, P. H., Thomson, R. L., & Poole, C. (2012). Characterizing the trade of wild birds for merit release in Phnom Penh, Cambodia and associated risks to health and ecology. Biological Conservation, 153, 10–16.
Gómez, A., & Aguirre, A. A. (2008). Infectious diseases and the illegal wildlife trade. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1149, 16–19.
Handbook of the Birds of the World & BirdLife International. (2021). Handbook of the Birds of the World and BirdLife International digital checklist of the birds of the world (Version 6). http://datazone.birdlife.org/userfiles/file/Species/Taxonomy/HBW‐BirdLife_Checklist_v6_Dec21.zip
Harrell, F. E. (2001). Regression modeling strategies. Springer‐Verlag.
Harris, J. B. C., Tingley, M. W., Hua, F., Yong, D. L., Adeney, J. M., Lee, T. M., Marthy, W., Prawiradilaga, D. M., Sekercioglu, C. H., Suyadi, W. N., & Wilcove, D. S. (2017). Measuring the impact of the pet trade on Indonesian birds. Conservation Biology, 31, 394–405.
Hughes, A., Auliya, M., Altherr, S., Scheffers, B., Janssen, J., Nijman, V., Shepherd, C. R., D'Cruze, N., Sy, E., & Edwards, D. P. (2023). Determining the sustainability of legal wildlife trade. Journal of Environmental Management, 341, Article 117987.
Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES Secretariat.
Juergens, J., Bruslund, S., Staerk, J., Oegelund Nielsen, R., Shepherd, C. R., Leupen, B., Krishnasamy, K., Chng, S. C. L., Jackson, J., da Silva, R., Bagott, A., Alves, R. R. N., & Conde, D. A. (2021). A standardized dataset for conservation prioritization of songbirds to support CITES. Data in Brief, 36, Article 107093.
Khelifa, R., Zebsa, R., Amari, H., Mellal, M. K., Bensouilah, S., Laouar, A., & Mahdjoub, H. (2017). Unravelling the drastic range retraction of an emblematic songbird of North Africa: Potential threats to Afro‐Palearctic migratory birds. Scientific Reports, 7, Article 1092.
Krishnasamy, K., Leupen, B., & Or, O. (2016). Observations of the helmeted hornbill trade in Lao PDR. International Union for Conservation of Nature.
Lee, J., Chng, S., & Eaton, J. (2016). Conservation strategy for Southeast Asian songbirds in trade: Recommendations from the first Asian Songbird Trade Crisis Summit 2015 held in Jurong Bird Park, Singapore, 27–29 September 2015. Wildlife Reserves Singapore and TRAFFIC.
Larsson, J. (2024). eulerr: Area‐Proportional Euler and Venn Diagrams with Ellipses. R package version 7.0.2. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=eulerr
Levin, A. (2011). Illegal trade and decrease in numbers of the Saker falcon in Kazakhstan. Raptors Conservation, 23, 63–74.
Lumbierres, M., Dahal, P. R., Di Marco, M., Butchart, S. H. M., Donald, P. F., & Rondinini, C. (2022). Translating habitat class to land cover to map area of habitat of terrestrial vertebrates. Conservation Biology, 36, Article e13851.
Lumbierres, M., Dahal, P. R., Soria, C. D., Di Marco, M., Butchart, S. H. M., Donald, P. F., & Rondinini, C. (2022). Area of Habitat maps for the world's terrestrial birds and mammals. Scientific Data, 9, Article 749.
Ma, M., & Chen, Y. (2007). Saker Falcon trade and smuggling in China. Falco, 30, 11–14.
Marsden, S. J., & Royle, K. (2015). Abundance and abundance change in the world's parrots. Ibis, 157, 219–229.
Marshall, H., Collar, N. J., Lees, A. C., Moss, A., Yuda, P., & Marsden, S. J. (2020). Spatio‐temporal dynamics of consumer demand driving the Asian Songbird Crisis. Biological Conservation, 241, Article 108237.
Marthy, W., & Farine, D. R. (2018). The potential impacts of the songbird trade on mixed‐species flocking. Biological Conservation, 222, 222–231.
Martin, R. O. (2018). The wild bird trade and African parrots: Past, present and future challenges. Ostrich, 89, 139–143.
Morton, O., Scheffers, B. R., Haugaasen, T., & Edwards, D. P. (2021). Impacts of wildlife trade on terrestrial biodiversity. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 5, 540–548.
Nijman, V. (2010). An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast Asia. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19, 1101–1114.
Nijman, V., Campera, M., Ardiansyah, A., Balestri, M., Bizri, H. R. E., Budiadi, B., Dewi, T., Hedger, K., Hendrik, R., Imron, M. A., Langgeng, A., Morcatty, T. Q., Weldon, A. V., & Nekaris, K. A. I. (2021). Large‐scale trade in a songbird that is extinct in the wild. Diversity, 13, Article 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/d13060238
Nijman, V., & Nekaris, K. A.‐I. (2017). The Harry Potter effect: The rise in trade of owls as pets in Java and Bali, Indonesia. Global Ecology and Conservation, 11, 84–94.
Ogada, D., Shaw, P., Beyers, R. L., Buij, R., Murn, C., Thiollay, J. M., Beale, C. M., Holdo, R. M., Pomeroy, D., Baker, N., Krüger, S. C., Botha, A., Virani, M. Z., Monadjem, A., & Sinclair, A. R. E. (2016). Another continental vulture crisis: Africa's vultures collapsing toward extinction. Conservation Letters, 9, 89–97.
Okarda, B., Muchlish, U., Kusumadewi, S. D., & Purnomo, H. (2022). Categorizing the songbird market through big data and machine learning in the context of Indonesia's online market. Global Ecology and Conservation, 39, Article e02280.
Olsen, M. T. B., Geldmann, J., Harfoot, M., Tittensor, D. P., Price, B., Sinovas, P., Nowak, K., Sanders, N. J., & Burgess, N. D. (2021). Thirty‐six years of legal and illegal wildlife trade entering the USA. Oryx, 55(3), 432–441.
Petrovan, S. O., Aldridge, D. C., Bartlett, H., Bladon, A. J., Booth, H., Broad, S., Broom, D. M., Burgess, N. D., Cleaveland, S., Cunningham, A. A., Ferri, M., Hinsley, A., Hua, F., Hughes, A. C., Jones, K., Kelly, M., Mayes, G., Radakovic, M., Ugwu, C. A., … Sutherland, W. J. (2021). Post COVID‐19: A solution scan of options for preventing future zoonotic epidemics. Biological Reviews, 96, 2694–2715.
Pires, S. F., Olah, G., Nandika, D., Agustina, D., & Heinsohn, R. (2021). What drives the illegal parrot trade? Applying a criminological model to market and seizure data in Indonesia. Biological Conservation, 257, Article 109098.
Pires, S. F., Schneider, J. L., & Herrera, M. (2016). Organized crime or crime that is organized? The parrot trade in the neotropics. Trends in Organized Crime, 19, 4–20.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Regueira, R. F. S., & Bernard, E. (2012). Wildlife sinks: Quantifying the impact of illegal bird trade in street markets in Brazil. Biological Conservation, 149, 16–22.
Rentschlar, K. A., Miller, A. E., Lauck, K. S., Rodiansyah, M., Bobby, Muflihati, & Kartikawati (2018). A silent morning: The songbird trade in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Tropical Conservation Science, 11, Article 1940082917753909.
Rheindt, F. E., Baveja, P., Ferasyi, T. R., Nurza, A., Rosa, T. S., Haminuddin, Ramadhan, R., & Gwee, C. Y. (2019). The extinction‐in‐progress in the wild of the Barusan Shama Copsychus (malabaricus) melanurus. Forktail, 35, 28–35.
Ribeiro, J., Reino, L., Schindler, S., Strubbe, D., Vall‐llosera, M., Araújo, M. B., Capinha, C., Carrete, M., Mazzoni, S., Monteiro, M., Moreira, F., Rocha, R., Tella, J. L., Vaz, A. S., Vicente, J., & Nuno, A. (2019). Trends in legal and illegal trade of wild birds: A global assessment based on expert knowledge. Biodiversity and Conservation, 28, 3343–3369.
Robinson, J. E., & Sinovas, P. (2018). Challenges of analyzing the global trade in CITES‐listed wildlife. Conservation Biology, 32, 1203–1206.
Roe, D., Dickman, A., Kock, R., Milner‐Gulland, E. J., Rihoy, E., & Sas‐Rolfes, M. (2020). Beyond banning wildlife trade: COVID‐19, conservation and development. World Development, 136, Article 105121.
Rush, E. R., Dale, E., & Aguirre, A. A. (2021). Illegal wildlife trade and emerging infectious diseases: Pervasive impacts to species, ecosystems and human health. Animals, 11, Article 1921. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11061821
Shepherd, C. R., & Cassey, P. (2017). Songbird trade crisis in Southeast Asia leads to the formation of IUCN SSC Asian Songbird Trade Specialist Group. Journal of Indonesian Natural History, 5, 3–5.
Shepherd, C. R., Eaton, J. A., & Chng, S. C. L. (2016). Nothing to laugh about—The ongoing illegal trade in laughingthrushes (Garrulax species) in the bird markets of Java, Indonesia. Bird Conservation International, 26, 524–530.
Shepherd, C. R., & Shepherd, L. A. (2009). An emerging Asian taste for owls? Enforcement agency seizes 1,236 owls and other wildlife in Malaysia. BirdingASIA, 11, 85–86.
Shobrak, M. Y. (2015). Trapping of Saker Falcon Falco cherrug and Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus in Saudi Arabia: Implications for biodiversity conservation. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 22, 491–502.
Siriwat, P., Nekaris, K. A. I., & Nijman, V. (2020). Digital media and the modern‐day pet trade: A test of the “Harry Potter effect” and the owl trade in Thailand. Endangered Species Research, 41, 7–16.
Souto, W. M. S., Torres, M. A. R., Sousa, B. F. C. F., Lima, K. G. G. C., Vieira, L. T. S., Pereira, G. A., Guzzi, A., Silva, M. V., & Pralon, B. G. N. (2017). Singing for cages: The use and trade of Passeriformes as wild pets in an economic center of the Amazon—NE Brazil route. Tropical Conservation Science, 10, Article 1940082917689898.
Souviron‐Priego, L., Román, M. A., Olivero, J., Vargas, J. M., & Fa, J. E. (2018). The legal international wildlife trade favours invasive species establishment: The monk and ring‐necked parakeets in Spain. Ardeola, 65, 233–246.
Stretesky, P. B., McKie, R. E., Lynch, M. J., Long, M. A., & Barrett, K. L. (2018). Where have all the falcons gone? Saker falcon (Falco cherrug) exports in a global economy. Global Ecology and Conservation, 13, Article e00372.
Summers, M., Geary, M., Djuni, N., Kresno, P. A., Laya, A., Sawuwu, S., Bawotong, A., Abas, W., Tan Oga, V. M., Nur, A. M., Isfandri, M., Priest, G. V., McGowan, P. J. K., Tasirin, J. S., & Collar, N. J. (2023). Degree of egg‐taking by humans determines the fate of maleo (Macrocephalon maleo) nesting grounds across Sulawesi. Biodiversity and Conservation, 32, 899–919.
Tingley, M. W., Harris, J. B. C., Hua, F., Wilcove, D. S., & Yong, D. L. (2017). The pet trade's role in defaunation. Science, 356, Article 916.
Tittensor, D. P., Harfoot, M., McLardy, C., Britten, G. L., Kecse‐Nagy, K., Landry, B., Outhwaite, W., Price, B., Sinovas, P., Blanc, J., Burgess, N. D., & Malsch, K. (2020). Evaluating the relationships between the legal and illegal international wildlife trades. Conservation Letters, 13, Article e12724.
TRAFFIC. (2008). The illegal trade in wild birds for food through South‐east and Central Europe (Vol. 1). Author.
Trail, P. W. (2022). Dying for love: Illegal international trade in hummingbird love charms. Conservation Science and Practice, 4, Article e12679.
van Balen, S., & Collar, N. J. (2021). The vanishing act: A history and natural history of the Javan Pied Starling Gracupica jalla. Ardea, 109, 41–54.
Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). Springer.
Wang, M., Zhao, Y., & Zhang, B. (2015). Efficient test and visualization of multi‐set intersections. Scientific Reports, 5, Article 16923.
Wang, Q., Shi, J., Shen, X., & Zhao, T. (2021). Characteristics and patterns of international trade in CITES‐listed live birds in China from 2010 to 2019. Global Ecology and Conservation, 30, Article e01786.
Weston, M. K., & Menon, M. A. (2009). The illegal parrot trade in Latin America and its consequences to parrot nutrition, health and conservation. Bird Populations, 9, 76–83.
Williams, M. M., Ottosson, U., Tende, T., & Deikumah, J. P. (2021). Traditional belief systems and trade in vulture parts are leading to the eradication of vultures in Nigeria: An ethno‐ornithological study of north‐central Nigeria. Ostrich, 92, 194–202.
Williams, V. L., Cunningham, A. B., Kemp, A. C., & Bruyns, R. K. (2014). Risks to birds traded for African traditional medicine: A quantitative assessment. PLoS ONE, 9, Article e105397.
Wyatt, T. (2009). Exploring the organization of Russia Far East's illegal wildlife trade: Two case studies of the illegal fur and illegal falcon trades. Global Crime, 10, 144–154.