Bushmeat Exploitation in Tropical Forests: an Intercontinental Comparison
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: We calculated extraction and production rates of bushmeat species in two main tropical, moist‐forest regions, the Amazon and Congo basins. Extraction was estimated from the average number of animals consumed per person per year from anthropological studies that reported animal kills brought into settlements in the regions. We calculated extraction rates ( kg / km 2 /year) for 57 and 31 mammalian taxa in the Congo and Amazon, respectively. We then examined the sustainability of these extraction rates by basin and by taxa, using extraction‐to‐production ( E:P ) mass‐balance equations. Production (tonnes/year) was calculated as the product of r max (the intrinsic rate of natural increase), mammal biomass, and total area of forest in each region. Species exploitation rates at specific body masses were significantly greater in the Congo than in the Amazon. The E :P ratio for the Congo was 2.4, 30 times the Amazon's ratio of 0.081. Thus, Congo Basin mammals must annually produce approximately 93% of their body mass to balance current extraction rates, whereas Amazonian mammals must produce only 4% of their body mass. We calculated sustainability levels derived from Robinson and Redford's harvest model for each taxa. On a basin‐wide level, 60% and none of the mammal taxa in the Congo and Amazon basins, respectively, were exploited unsustainably. To evaluate the effect of error on the estimates of E :P , we conducted a sensitivity analysis, which suggests that the mass‐balance was most sensitive to error in standing stock but that our results are robust. We estimated that over 5 million tons of wild mammal meat feed millions in Neotropical (0.15 million) and Afrotropical (4.9 million) forests annually. Our Congo basin estimates are four times higher than those calculated for the region by other workers, and we conclude that the current situation of bushmeat extraction in African rain forests is more precarious than previously thought.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it