Response to ‘Risky conclusions regarding shrinking rhino horns’: Clarification on a statistically determined reduction of relative horn length in five species of rhinoceros since 1885

IF 4.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION People and Nature Pub Date : 2024-03-21 DOI:10.1002/pan3.10584
O. E. Wilson, Michael D. Pashkevich, K. Rookmaaker, E. Turner
{"title":"Response to ‘Risky conclusions regarding shrinking rhino horns’: Clarification on a statistically determined reduction of relative horn length in five species of rhinoceros since 1885","authors":"O. E. Wilson, Michael D. Pashkevich, K. Rookmaaker, E. Turner","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10584","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\nIn their response to Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022), Ferreira et al. argue that our conclusions regarding shrinking rhino horns were risky, given the low sample size used for this assessment, the variation in rhino horn length related to non‐heritable factors (including age, sex, environment and behaviour) and the low impact that current selective trophy hunting has on rhino numbers.\n\nWe agree that our sample size was low and that many factors can influence horn length and therefore we discussed these points as important caveats in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022).\n\nHowever, we argue that although many factors can lead to variation in horn length, they do not explain the decline in relative horn length over time that we observed, and we note that the response does not offer an alternative explanation for this temporal shift.\n\nAlthough selective hunting is currently a minor factor in rhino mortality, this may have been relatively more important and to have had a potentially greater selective influence in the past.\n\nOur dataset does not allow identification of factors driving this change, and in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022), we offered selective hunting as one possible explanation for the relative decline, calling for more work to investigate this further.\n\nWe highlight that the focus of Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) was far more than an assessment of changing relative horn length and instead aimed to demonstrate that a wide range of data can be extracted effectively from image repositories for use in a conservation context.\n\nWe hope that the results in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) will provide a useful starting point for future research, including addressing the questions raised by Ferreira et al.\n\nUltimately, we feel that the attention given to Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) reveals the enduring interest people have in rhinos, a topic addressed in other parts of our original paper, which we encourage readers to read in its entirety.\n\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":52850,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"People and Nature","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10584","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In their response to Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022), Ferreira et al. argue that our conclusions regarding shrinking rhino horns were risky, given the low sample size used for this assessment, the variation in rhino horn length related to non‐heritable factors (including age, sex, environment and behaviour) and the low impact that current selective trophy hunting has on rhino numbers. We agree that our sample size was low and that many factors can influence horn length and therefore we discussed these points as important caveats in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022). However, we argue that although many factors can lead to variation in horn length, they do not explain the decline in relative horn length over time that we observed, and we note that the response does not offer an alternative explanation for this temporal shift. Although selective hunting is currently a minor factor in rhino mortality, this may have been relatively more important and to have had a potentially greater selective influence in the past. Our dataset does not allow identification of factors driving this change, and in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022), we offered selective hunting as one possible explanation for the relative decline, calling for more work to investigate this further. We highlight that the focus of Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) was far more than an assessment of changing relative horn length and instead aimed to demonstrate that a wide range of data can be extracted effectively from image repositories for use in a conservation context. We hope that the results in Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) will provide a useful starting point for future research, including addressing the questions raised by Ferreira et al. Ultimately, we feel that the attention given to Wilson, Pashkevich, Rookmaaker, et al. (2022) reveals the enduring interest people have in rhinos, a topic addressed in other parts of our original paper, which we encourage readers to read in its entirety. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对 "关于犀牛角缩减的危险结论 "的回应:澄清自 1885 年以来经统计确定的五种犀牛相对角长度减少的情况
在对 Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的回应中,Ferreira 等人认为我们关于犀牛角萎缩的结论是有风险的,因为此次评估使用的样本量较少,犀牛角长度的变化与非遗传因素(包括年龄、性别、环境和行为)有关,而且目前选择性的战利品狩猎对犀牛数量的影响较小。我们同意我们的样本量较少,而且许多因素都会影响犀牛角的长度,因此我们在 Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的文章中将这些观点作为重要的注意事项进行了讨论。(然而,我们认为,尽管许多因素都可能导致犀牛角长度的变化,但这些因素并不能解释我们观察到的犀牛角相对长度随时间推移而下降的现象,而且我们注意到,这种反应并不能为这种时间上的变化提供替代解释。虽然目前选择性捕猎是导致犀牛死亡的一个次要因素,但在过去这可能相对更为重要,而且可能具有更大的选择性影响。我们的数据集无法识别驱动这一变化的因素,而在 Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的研究中,我们将选择性捕猎作为相对下降的一种可能解释,并呼吁开展更多工作来进一步研究这一问题。我们强调,Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的研究重点远不止于评估相对角长度的变化,而是旨在证明可以从图像资源库中有效提取各种数据,用于保护工作。我们希望 Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的研究结果能为未来的研究提供一个有用的起点,包括解决 Ferreira 等人提出的问题。最终,我们认为对 Wilson、Pashkevich、Rookmaaker 等人(2022 年)的关注揭示了人们对犀牛的持久兴趣,我们的原始论文中的其他部分也涉及了这一主题,我们鼓励读者阅读全文。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
People and Nature
People and Nature Multiple-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
103
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
From cash to conservation: Which wildlife species appear on banknotes? Slugs Count: Assessing citizen scientist engagement and development, and the accuracy of their identifications The frequent five: Insights from interviews with urban wildlife professionals in Germany Gugwilx'ya'ansk and goats: Indigenous perspectives on governance, stewardship and relationality in mountain goat (mati) hunting in Gitga'at territory Using gross ecosystem product to harmonize biodiversity conservation and economic development in Southwestern China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1