Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39827902›Full record

ReviewConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025

An interdisciplinary approach to improving conservation outcomes for parasites.

Timothy M Brown, Alison M Dunn, Rupert J Quinnell, Ellen Clarke, Andrew A Cunningham, Simon J Goodman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Silent predators: Revealing the parasites of Himalayan musk deer (International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. An interdisciplinary approach to improving conservation outcomes for parasites.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Timothy M BrownSchool of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5508-7623
Alison M DunnSchool of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4855-1077
Rupert J QuinnellSchool of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1557-7745
Ellen ClarkeSchool of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science, Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Cultures, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1839-6405
Andrew A CunninghamInstitute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3543-6504
Simon J GoodmanSchool of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4118-8575

Funding

The Leverhulme Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Parasites represent a significant proportion of Earth's biodiversity and play important roles in the ecology and biology of ecosystems and hosts, making them an important target for conservation. Despite increasing calls to prioritize protection for parasites in the academic literature, they remain undervalued and underrepresented in global biodiversity conservation efforts, not least due to the perception that the interests of parasite and host conservation are opposing and the common misconception that parasites are a threat, rather than a benefit, to conservation. We considered whether taking an interdisciplinary approach to parasite conservation research will generate novel insights and solutions concerning why and how parasite conservation should be practiced for the benefit of parasites, their hosts, ecosystems, and people. We argue that 2 of the main barriers to more widespread parasite conservation are the knowledge gap concerning the role of sociocultural factors affecting the willingness to enact parasite conservation and the lack of a consistent and cohesive philosophical basis for parasite conservation. Possible sociocultural barriers to parasite conservation include misconceptions of the risks posed by parasites, taxonomic bias, differences in conservation values, economic constraints, and technical challenges. The use of social science can generate insights into levels of awareness and support for parasite conservation and improve understanding of how human values and attitudes mediate conservation practices concerning parasites. Such knowledge will have a critical role in addressing sociocultural barriers and improving support for parasite conservation. Issues with the current philosophical basis for parasite conservation include contradictory accounts of which parasites merit conservation, insufficient explanation of how different conservation values apply to parasite biodiversity, and the existence of a false antagonism between host and parasite conservation. Greater engagement with philosophical work on environmental ethics and biological unitization will strengthen existing arguments for parasite conservation and will support conservation decision-making processes.

Indexed as

BiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesParasitesAnimalsEcosystembiodiversidad infravaloradaciencias sociales de la conservacióncoextincióncoextinctionconservación ex situconservación holobionteconservation philosophyconservation prioritizationconservation social scienceex situ conservationfilosofía de la conservaciónholobiont conservationparasitologíaparasitologypriorización de la conservaciónunderappreciated biodiversity

Identifiers

PMID39827902
PMCPMC11780194

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.