Tapping into non-English-language science for the conservation of global biodiversity.

The widely held assumption that any important scientific information would be available in English underlies the underuse of non-English-language science across disciplines. However, non-English-language science is expected to bring unique and valuable scientific information, especially in disciplines where the evidence is patchy, and for emergent issues where synthesising available evidence is an urgent challenge. Yet such contribution of non-English-language science to scientific communities and the application of science is rarely quantified. Here, we show that non-English-language studies provide crucial evidence for informing global biodiversity conservation. By screening 419,679 peer-reviewed papers in 16 languages, we identified 1,234 non-English-language studies providing evidence on the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation interventions, compared to 4,412 English-language studies identified with the same criteria. Relevant non-English-language studies are being published at an increasing rate in 6 out of the 12 languages where there were a sufficient number of relevant studies. Incorporating non-English-language studies can expand the geographical coverage (i.e., the number of 2° × 2° grid cells with relevant studies) of English-language evidence by 12% to 25%, especially in biodiverse regions, and taxonomic coverage (i.e., the number of species covered by the relevant studies) by 5% to 32%, although they do tend to be based on less robust study designs. Our results show that synthesising non-English-language studies is key to overcoming the widespread lack of local, context-dependent evidence and facilitating evidence-based conservation globally. We urge wider disciplines to rigorously reassess the untapped potential of non-English-language science in informing decisions to address other global challenges. Please see the Supporting information files for Alternative Language Abstracts.

Understanding spatial patterns of poaching pressure using ranger logbook data to optimize future patrolling strategies.

Poaching is driving many species toward extinction, and as a result, lowering poaching pressure is a conservation priority. This requires understanding where poaching pressure is high and which factors determine these spatial patterns. However, the cryptic and illegal nature of poaching makes this difficult. Ranger patrol data, typically recorded in protected area logbooks, contain information on patrolling efforts and poaching detection and should thus provide opportunities for a better understanding of poaching pressure. However, these data are seldom analyzed and rarely used to inform adaptive management strategies. We developed a novel approach to making use of analog logbook records to map poaching pressure and to test environmental criminology and predator-prey relationship hypotheses explaining poaching patterns. We showcase this approach for Golestan National Park in Iran, where poaching has substantially depleted ungulate populations. We digitized data from >4800 ranger patrols from 2014 to 2016 and used an occupancy modeling framework to relate poaching to (1) accessibility, (2) law enforcement, and (3) prey availability factors. Based on predicted poaching pressure and patrolling intensity, we provide suggestions for future patrol allocation strategies. Our results revealed a low probability (12%) of poacher detection during patrols. Poaching distribution was best explained by prey availability, indicating that poachers target areas with high concentrations of ungulates. Poaching pressure was estimated to be high (>0.49) in 39% of our study area. To alleviate poaching pressure, we recommend ramping up patrolling intensity in 12% of the national park, which could be achievable by reducing excess patrols in about 20% of the park. However, our results suggest that for 27% of the park, it is necessary to improve patrolling quality to increase detection probability of poaching, for example, by closing temporal patrolling gaps or expanding informant networks. Our approach illustrates that analog ranger logbooks are an untapped resource for evidence-based and adaptive planning of protected area management. Using this wealth of data can open up new avenues to better understand poaching and its determinants, to expand effectiveness assessments to the past, and, more generally, to allow for strategic conservation planning in protected areas.

Defining practical and robust study designs for interventions targeted at terrestrial mammalian predators.

Conflicts between humans and mammalian predators are globally widespread and increasing, creating a long-lasting challenge for conservation and local livelihoods. Protection interventions, which are essential to conflict mitigation, should be based on solid evidence of effectiveness produced by robust study designs. Yet, it is unclear what study designs have been used in predator-targeted interventions and how they can be improved to provide best practices for replications. I examined how applications of five study designs (before-after, before-after-control-impact, control-impact, crossover [i.e., the same randomly assigned study units acting as treatments and controls during alternating trials], and randomized controlled trial) have changed over time and how these changes are related to authors, predator species, countries, and intervention types (aversion, husbandry, mixed interventions, invasive management, lethal control, and noninvasive management). I applied multinomial regression modeling to 434 cases (28 predator species and 45 countries) from 244 studies published from 1955 to 2020. Study design was related only to intervention type. Less reliable before-after and control-impact studies were the most common (47.7% and 38.2% of cases, respectively), and their use increased over years as did all interventions. The contribution of the most robust before-after-control-impact (7.4%), randomized controlled trial (5.3%), and crossover designs (1.4%) remained minor over time. Crossover is suitable for aversion, most husbandry techniques, and a few other interventions, but crossover interventions also have the most limitations in terms of applicability. Randomized controlled trial is generally applicable, but impractical or inappropriate for some interventions, and before-after-control-impact appears to be the most widely applicable study design for predator-targeted interventions.

Definición de los Diseños Prácticos y Robustos para las Intervenciones Enfocadas en los Mamíferos Depredadores Terrestres Resumen Los conflictos entre los humanos y los mamíferos depredadores se ubican en todo el mundo y están en aumento, creando un desafío prolongado para la conservación y el sustento local. Las intervenciones de protección, que son esenciales para la mitigación de conflictos, deberían basarse en evidencias sólidas de la efectividad producidas por los diseños de estudios robustos. Aun así, no está claro cuáles diseños de estudio han sido utilizados para las intervenciones enfocadas en depredadores y cómo pueden mejorarse para proporcionar mejores prácticas para sus replicaciones. Examiné como las aplicaciones de cinco diseños de estudio (antes-después, control-impacto-antes-después, control-impacto, intervención cruzado [es decir, las mismas unidades de estudio asignadas al azar actúan como tratamiento y control durante pruebas alternantes] y prueba de control aleatorio) han cambiado con el tiempo y cómo estos cambios están relacionados con los autores, las especies depredadoras, los países y los tipos de intervención (aversión, crianza, intervenciones mixtas, manejo invasivo, control letal y manejo no invasivo). Apliqué un modelo de regresión multinomial a 434 casos (28 especies de depredadores y 45 países) de 244 estudios publicados entre 1955 y 2020. El diseño del estudio sólo estuvo relacionado con el tipo de intervención. Los estudios más comunes fueron los menos confiables: antes-después y control-impacto (47.7% y 38.2% de los casos, respectivamente). La contribución de los diseños más robustos de antes-después-control-impacto (7.4%), prueba de control aleatorio (5.3%) e intervenciones cruzadas (1.4%) permaneció escasa con el tiempo. Las intervenciones cruzadas son adecuadas para la aversión, la mayoría de las técnicas de crianza y unas cuantas intervenciones más, pero también tienen las mayores limitaciones en lo que se refiere a la aplicabilidad. La prueba de control aleatorio tiene una aplicabilidad generalizada, pero es impráctica o inapropiada para algunas intervenciones, mientras que el estudio antes-después-control-impacto parece ser el diseño de estudio con la aplicación más amplia para las intervenciones enfocadas en depredadores.

Dealing with false positive risk as an indicator of misperceived effectiveness of conservation interventions.

As human pressures on the environment continue to spread and intensify, effective conservation interventions are direly needed to prevent threats, reduce conflicts, and recover populations and landscapes in a liaison between science and conservation. It is practically important to discriminate between true and false (or misperceived) effectiveness of interventions as false perceptions may shape a wrong conservation agenda and lead to inappropriate decisions and management actions. This study used the false positive risk (FPR) to estimate the rates of misperceived effectiveness of electric fences (overstated if reported as effective but actually ineffective based on FPR; understated otherwise), explain their causes and propose recommendations on how to improve the representation of true effectiveness. Electric fences are widely applied to reduce damage to fenced assets, such as livestock and beehives, or increase survival of fenced populations. The analysis of 109 cases from 50 publications has shown that the effectiveness of electric fences was overstated in at least one-third of cases, from 31.8% at FPR = 0.2 (20% risk) to 51.1% at FPR = 0.05 (5% risk, true effectiveness). In contrast, understatement reduced from 23.8% to 9.5% at these thresholds of FPR. This means that truly effective applications of electric fences were only 48.9% of all cases reported as effective, but truly ineffective cases were 90.5%, implying that the effectiveness of electric fences was heavily overstated. The main reasons of this bias were the lack of statistical testing or improper reporting of test results (63.3% of cases) and interpretation of marginally significant results (p < 0.05, p < 0.1 and p around 0.05) as indicators of effectiveness (10.1%). In conclusion, FPR is an important tool for estimating true effectiveness of conservation interventions and its application is highly recommended to disentangle true and false effectiveness for planning appropriate conservation actions. Researchers are encouraged to calculate FPR, publish its constituent statistics (especially treatment and control sample sizes) and explicitly provide test results with p values. It is suggested to call the effectiveness "true" if FPR < 0.05, "suggestive" if 0.05 ≤ FPR < 0.2 and "false" if FPR ≥ 0.2.

In the shadows of snow leopards and the Himalayas: density and habitat selection of blue sheep in Manang, Nepal.

There is a growing agreement that conservation needs to be proactive and pay increased attention to common species and to the threats they face. The blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur) plays a key ecological role in sensitive high-altitude ecosystems of Central Asia and is among the main prey species for the globally vulnerable snow leopard (Panthera uncia). As the blue sheep has been increasingly exposed to human pressures, it is vital to estimate its population dynamics, protect the key populations, identify important habitats, and secure a balance between conservation and local livelihoods. We conducted a study in Manang, Annapurna Conservation Area (Nepal), to survey blue sheep on 60 transects in spring (127.9 km) and 61 transects in autumn (134.7 km) of 2019, estimate their minimum densities from total counts, compare these densities with previous estimates, and assess blue sheep habitat selection by the application of generalized additive models (GAMs). Total counts yielded minimum density estimates of 6.0-7.7 and 6.9-7.8 individuals/km2 in spring and autumn, respectively, which are relatively high compared to other areas. Elevation and, to a lesser extent, land cover indicated by the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) strongly affected habitat selection by blue sheep, whereas the effects of anthropogenic variables were insignificant. Animals were found mainly in habitats associated with grasslands and shrublands at elevations between 4,200 and 4,700 m. We show that the blue sheep population size in Manang has been largely maintained over the past three decades, indicating the success of the integrated conservation and development efforts in this area. Considering a strong dependence of snow leopards on blue sheep, these findings give hope for the long-term conservation of this big cat in Manang. We suggest that long-term population monitoring and a better understanding of blue sheep-livestock interactions are crucial to maintain healthy populations of blue sheep and, as a consequence, of snow leopards.

A comparison of common metrics used to quantify the effectiveness of conservation interventions.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based conservation is urgently needed to identify, apply and promote effective interventions for mitigation of threats and recovery of the natural environment. Estimation of intervention effectiveness is subject to robust study design and statistical analysis, and much progress is documented in these fields. In contrast, little is understood about the accuracy and biases (underestimation and overestimation) of different effectiveness metrics and how they are affected by sample size. METHODS: In this study, a dataset (n = 500 cases) consisting of random, positive, integer numbers was simulated to produce frequency input data for the 2 × 2 contingency table. For each case, three metrics of the relative risk, odds ratio and the magnitude of change were calculated, their disparity was estimated and the characteristics of treatment (with intervention) and control (without intervention) samples significantly affecting this disparity were studied by means of linear regression. Further, four case studies from different conservation interventions are provided to support the results. RESULTS: The study has shown that the relative risk and the magnitude of change produce identical estimates of intervention effectiveness only when treatment and control samples are equal, or when the number of target outcomes (e.g., number of livestock killed by predators) in treatment sample reaches zero. In other situations, the magnitude of change gives overestimates or underestimates, depending on relationships between treatment and control sample sizes. The table summarizing the conditions of equalities and biases between these two metrics is provided. These conditions are valid for both reduction-aimed interventions reducing negative target outcomes (e.g., livestock protection to reduce livestock losses to predators) and for addition-aimed interventions increasing positive target outcomes (e.g., establishment of protected areas to increase species presence). No significant effects on the odds ratio were found. CONCLUSION: Researchers should set equal treatment and control sample sizes so that to produce identical estimates of intervention effectiveness by the relative risk and the magnitude of change. Otherwise, these estimates are biased if produced by the magnitude of change and the relative risk should be used instead. As setting equal treatment and control samples can be impractical, I encourage researchers and practitioners to use the relative risk in estimation of intervention effectiveness. This will not take additional efforts as both metrics are calculated from the same contingency table. Treatment and control sample sizes, along with their sub-samples affected and not by an intervention, should be explicitly reported by researchers to allow independent evaluation of intervention effectiveness. This approach can help obtain more accurate information on intervention effectiveness for making better decisions in conservation actions.

Variation and conservation implications of the effectiveness of anti-bear interventions.

Human-bear conflicts triggered by nuisance behaviour in public places and damage to livestock, crops, beehives and trees are among the main threats to bear populations globally. The effectiveness of interventions used to minimize bear-caused damage is insufficiently known and comparative reviews are lacking. We conducted a meta-analysis of 77 cases from 48 publications and used the relative risk of damage to compare the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions, invasive management (translocations) and lethal control (shooting) against bears. We show that the most effective interventions are electric fences (95% confidence interval = 79.2-100% reduction in damage), calving control (100%) and livestock replacement (99.8%), but the latter two approaches were applied in only one case each and need more testing. Deterrents varied widely in their effectiveness (13.7-79.5%) and we recommend applying these during the peak periods of damage infliction. We found shooting (- 34.2 to 100%) to have a short-term positive effect with its effectiveness decreasing significantly and linearly over time. We did not find relationships between bear density and intervention effectiveness, possibly due to differences in spatial scales at which they were measured (large scales for densities and local fine scales for effectiveness). We appeal for more effectiveness studies and their scientific publishing in regard to under-represented conflict species and regions.

How long do anti-predator interventions remain effective? Patterns, thresholds and uncertainty.

Human-predator conflicts are globally widespread, and effective interventions are essential to protect human assets from predator attacks. As effectiveness also has a temporal dimension, it is of importance to know how long interventions remain most effective and to determine time thresholds at which effectiveness begins to decrease. To address this, we conducted a systematic review of the temporal changes in the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions against terrestrial mammalian predators, defining a temporal trend line of effectiveness for each published case. We found only 26 cases from 14 publications, mainly referring to electric fences (n = 7 cases) and deterrents (n = 7 cases). We found electric fences and calving control to remain highly effective for the longest time, reducing damage by 100% for periods between three months and 3 years. The effectiveness of acoustical and light deterrents as well as guarding animals eroded quite fast after one to five months. Supplemental feeding was found to be counter-productive by increasing damage over time instead of reducing it. We stress that it is vital to make monitoring a routine requirement for all intervention applications and suggest to standardize periods of time over which monitoring can produce meaningful and affordable information.

Cattle selectivity by leopards suggests ways to mitigate human-leopard conflict.

Addressing widespread livestock losses to carnivores requires information on which livestock categories are preferentially selected. We analyzed an individual-based database of cattle grazing in forest (n = 932) and having been killed (n = 70) by leopards (Panthera pardus) in the Hyrcanian forest, Iran. We calculated Jacobs' selectivity index for cattle age, sex, and coloration across four scales: the study area as a whole, three sites, nine villages, and 60 cattle owners. Naturally colored cattle were significantly preferred by leopards at all scales in comparison with black and black-and-white cattle, and there was also a preference for males and juveniles at the study area level. More research is needed to see whether cattle losses would decrease if the share of naturally colored individuals in local holdings was reduced and males and juveniles had limited access to forest. We conclude that phenotypic and biologic characteristics of livestock can affect depredation and appeal for more research in this direction, particularly within the predator-prey framework.

Effects of shepherds and dogs on livestock depredation by leopards (Panthera pardus) in north-eastern Iran.

Human-carnivore conflicts over livestock depredation are increasingly common, yet little is understood about the role of husbandry in conflict mitigation. As shepherds and guarding dogs are most commonly used to curb carnivore attacks on grazing livestock, evaluation and improvement of these practices becomes an important task. We addressed this issue by studying individual leopard (Panthera pardus) attacks on sheep and goats in 34 villages near Golestan National Park, Iran. We obtained and analyzed data on 39 attacks, which included a total loss of 31 sheep and 36 goats in 17 villages. We applied non-parametric testing, Poisson Generalized Linear Modelling (GLM) and model selection to assess how numbers of sheep and goats killed per attack are associated with the presence and absence of shepherds and dogs during attacks, depredation in previous years, villages, seasons, ethnic groups, numbers of sheep and goats kept in villages, and distances from villages to the nearest protected areas. We found that 95.5% of losses were inflicted in forests when sheep and goats were accompanied by shepherds (92.5% of losses) and dogs (77.6%). Leopards tended to kill more sheep and goats per attack (surplus killing) when dogs were absent in villages distant from protected areas, but still inflicted most losses when dogs were present, mainly in villages near protected areas. No other variables affected numbers of sheep and goats killed per attack. These results indicate that local husbandry practices are ineffectual and the mere presence of shepherds and guarding dogs is not enough to secure protection. Shepherds witnessed leopard attacks, but could not deter them while dogs did not exhibit guarding behavior and were sometimes killed by leopards. In an attempt to make practical, low-cost and socially acceptable improvements in local husbandry, we suggest that dogs are raised to create a strong social bond with livestock, shepherds use only best available dogs, small flocks are aggregated into larger ones and available shepherds herd these larger flocks together. Use of deterrents and avoidance of areas close to Golestan and in central, core areas of neighboring protected areas is also essential to keep losses down.

Habitat selection by Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) is primarily driven by avoidance of human activity during day and prey availability during night.

The greatest threat to the protected Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in Central Europe is human-induced mortality. As the availability of lynx prey often peaks in human-modified areas, lynx have to balance successful prey hunting with the risk of encounters with humans. We hypothesized that lynx minimize this risk by adjusting habitat choices to the phases of the day and over seasons. We predicted that (1) due to avoidance of human-dominated areas during daytime, lynx range use is higher at nighttime, that (2) prey availability drives lynx habitat selection at night, whereas high cover, terrain inaccessibility, and distance to human infrastructure drive habitat selection during the day, and that (3) habitat selection also differs between seasons, with altitude being a dominant factor in winter. To test these hypotheses, we analyzed telemetry data (GPS, VHF) of 10 lynx in the Bohemian Forest Ecosystem (Germany, Czech Republic) between 2005 and 2013 using generalized additive mixed models and considering various predictor variables. Night ranges exceeded day ranges by more than 10%. At night, lynx selected open habitats, such as meadows, which are associated with high ungulate abundance. By contrast, during the day, lynx selected habitats offering dense understorey cover and rugged terrain away from human infrastructure. In summer, land-cover type greatly shaped lynx habitats, whereas in winter, lynx selected lower altitudes. We concluded that open habitats need to be considered for more realistic habitat models and contribute to future management and conservation (habitat suitability, carrying capacity) of Eurasian lynx in Central Europe.

Assessing the Role of Livestock in Big Cat Prey Choice Using Spatiotemporal Availability Patterns.

Livestock is represented in big cat diets throughout the world. Husbandry approaches aim to reduce depredation, which may influence patterns of prey choice, but whether felids have a preference for livestock or not often remains unclear as most studies ignore livestock availability. We assessed prey choice of the endangered Persian leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor) in Golestan National Park, Iran, where conflict over livestock depredation occurs. We analyzed leopard diet (77 scats) and assessed wild and domestic prey abundance by line transect sampling (186 km), camera-trapping (2777 camera days), double-observer point-counts (64 scans) and questionnaire surveys (136 respondents). Based on interviews with 18 shepherds, we estimated monthly grazing time outside six villages with 96 conflict cases to obtain a small livestock (domestic sheep and goat) availability coefficient. Using this coefficient, which ranged between 0.40 and 0.63 for different villages, we estimated the numbers of sheep and goats available to leopard depredation. Leopard diet consisted mainly of wild boar (Sus scrofa) (50.2% biomass consumed), but bezoar goat (Capra aegagrus) was the most preferred prey species (Ij = 0.73), whereas sheep and goats were avoided (Ij = -0.54). When absolute sheep and goat numbers (~11250) were used instead of the corrected ones (~6392), avoidance of small livestock appeared to be even stronger (Ij = -0.71). We suggest that future assessments of livestock choice by felids should incorporate such case-specific corrections for spatiotemporal patterns of availability, which may vary with husbandry methods. Such an approach increases our understanding of human-felid conflict dynamics and the role of livestock in felid diets.

Dissatisfaction with Veterinary Services Is Associated with Leopard (Panthera pardus) Predation on Domestic Animals.

Human-carnivore conflicts challenge biodiversity conservation and local livelihoods, but the role of diseases of domestic animals in their predation by carnivores is poorly understood. We conducted a human-leopard (Panthera pardus) conflict study throughout all 34 villages around Golestan National Park, Iran in order to find the most important conflict determinants and to use them in predicting the probabilities of conflict and killing of cattle, sheep and goats, and dogs. We found that the more villagers were dissatisfied with veterinary services, the more likely they were to lose livestock and dogs to leopard predation. Dissatisfaction occurred when vaccination crews failed to visit villages at all or, in most cases, arrived too late to prevent diseases from spreading. We suggest that increased morbidity of livestock makes them particularly vulnerable to leopard attacks. Moreover, conflicts and dog killing were higher in villages located closer to the boundaries of the protected area than in distant villages. Therefore, we appeal for improved enforcement and coordination of veterinary services in our study area, and propose several priority research topics such as veterinarian studies, role of wild prey in diseases of domestic animals, and further analysis of potential conflict predictors.

Presence-absence surveys of prey and their use in predicting leopard (Panthera pardus) densities: a case study from Armenia.

It is important to predict how many individuals of a predator species can survive in a given area on the basis of prey sufficiency and to compare predictive estimates with actual numbers to understand whether or not key threats are related to prey availability. Rugged terrain and low detection probabilities do not allow for the use of traditional prey count techniques in mountain areas. We used presence-absence occupancy modeling and camera-trapping to estimate the abundance and densities of prey species and regression analysis to predict leopard (Panthera pardus) densities from estimated prey biomass in the mountains of the Nuvadi area, Meghri Ridge, southern Armenia. The prey densities were 12.94 ± 2.18 individuals km(-2) for the bezoar goat (Capra aegagrus), 6.88 ± 1.56 for the wild boar (Sus scrofa) and 0.44 ± 0.20 for the roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). The detection probability of the prey was a strong function of the activity patterns, and was highest in diurnal bezoar goats (0.59 ± 0.09). Based on robust regression, the estimated total ungulate prey biomass (720.37 ± 142.72 kg km(-2) ) can support a leopard density of 7. 18 ± 3.06 individuals 100 km(-2) . The actual leopard density is only 0.34 individuals 100 km(-2) (i.e. one subadult male recorded over the 296.9 km(2) ), estimated from tracking and camera-trapping. The most plausible explanation for this discrepancy between predicted and actual leopard density is that poaching and disturbance caused by livestock breeding, plant gathering, deforestation and human-induced wild fires are affecting the leopard population in Armenia.