A tool for rapid assessment of wildlife markets in the Asia-Pacific Region for risk of future zoonotic disease outbreaks.

Decades of warnings that the trade and consumption of wildlife could result in serious zoonotic pandemics have gone largely unheeded. Now the world is ravaged by COVID-19, with tremendous loss of life, economic and societal disruption, and dire predictions of more destructive and frequent pandemics. There are now calls to tightly regulate and even enact complete wildlife trade bans, while others call for more nuanced approaches since many rural communities rely on wildlife for sustenance. Given pressures from political and societal drivers and resource limitations to enforcing bans, increased regulation is a more likely outcome rather than broad bans. But imposition of tight regulations will require monitoring and assessing trade situations for zoonotic risks. We present a tool for relevant stakeholders, including government authorities in the public health and wildlife sectors, to assess wildlife trade situations for risks of potentially serious zoonoses in order to inform policies to tightly regulate and control the trade, much of which is illegal in most countries. The tool is based on available knowledge of different wildlife taxa traded in the Asia-Pacific Region and known to carry highly virulent and transmissible viruses combined with relative risks associated with different broad categories of market types and trade chains.

Disentangling the relative effects of bushmeat availability on human nutrition in central Africa.

We studied links between human malnutrition and wild meat availability within the Rainforest Biotic Zone in central Africa. We distinguished two distinct hunted mammalian diversity distributions, one in the rainforest areas (Deep Rainforest Diversity, DRD) containing taxa of lower hunting sustainability, the other in the northern rainforest-savanna mosaic, with species of greater hunting potential (Marginal Rainforest Diversity, MRD). Wild meat availability, assessed by standing crop mammalian biomass, was greater in MRD than in DRD areas. Predicted bushmeat extraction was also higher in MRD areas. Despite this, stunting of children, a measure of human malnutrition, was greater in MRD areas. Structural equation modeling identified that, in MRD areas, mammal diversity fell away from urban areas, but proximity to these positively influenced higher stunting incidence. In DRD areas, remoteness and distance from dense human settlements and infrastructures explained lower stunting levels. Moreover, stunting was higher away from protected areas. Our results suggest that in MRD areas, forest wildlife rational use for better human nutrition is possible. By contrast, the relatively low human populations in DRD areas currently offer abundant opportunities for the continued protection of more vulnerable mammals and allow dietary needs of local populations to be met.