Cited by 27Wildlife Ecology and ConservationWildlife Conservation and Criminology AnalysesConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management

The effect of bushmeat consumption on migratory wildlife in the Serengeti ecosystem, Tanzania

Open access
Rentsch, Dennis, Packer, Craig·2015·Oryx

Abstract

Bushmeat hunting is a threat to wildlife populations in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, including to migratory wildebeest Connochaetes taurinus and other wildlife populations in the Serengeti ecosystem. Accurate assessments of offtake through bushmeat hunting are necessary to determine whether hunting pressure on the wildebeest population is unsustainable. We used a panel dataset of local bushmeat consumption to measure offtake of wildlife and examine the long-term threat to the Serengeti wildebeest population. Based on these data we estimate an annual offtake of 97,796–140,615 wildebeest (6–10% of the current population), suggesting that previous estimates based on ecological models underestimated the effect of poaching on these populations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0030605313001038

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Up to 12% of the wildebeest population is removed each year for bushmeat.

    “While the long-term population trend is relatively stable and indicative of food limitation (Fig. S29), a large percentage of the population (up to 12% year -1 ) is removed each year for bushmeat ( 38 ), and this offtake may dampen the role of food competition in wildebeest mortality, and potentially compensate other demographic components such as birth rates or juvenile survival.”

    From Cross-boundary human impacts compromise the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem (2019) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Introduction estimates annual bushmeat offtake at 97,796–140,615 wildebeest, or 6–10% of the current population; the Results give the same annual range. This supports substantial yearly removal for bushmeat, but not the claimed upper figure of 12%. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • This offtake may dampen the role of food competition in wildebeest mortality and potentially compensate other demographic components such as birth rates or juvenile survival.

    “While the long-term population trend is relatively stable and indicative of food limitation (Fig. S29), a large percentage of the population (up to 12% year -1 ) is removed each year for bushmeat ( 38 ), and this offtake may dampen the role of food competition in wildebeest mortality, and potentially compensate other demographic components such as birth rates or juvenile survival.”

    From Cross-boundary human impacts compromise the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem (2019) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Abstract and Results report annual bushmeat offtake of 97,796–140,615 wildebeest, supporting substantial annual removal. The Abstract gives this as 6–10% of the current population, not the cited upper figure of 12%. The sentence places the citation on the offtake estimate; the proposed effects on food competition, birth rates, and juvenile survival are the citing authors’ subsequent inference. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rentsch, D., & Packer, C.
Affiliations
  • Frankfurt Zoological Society (DE)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Rentsch, Dennis
Venue
Oryx
Published
2014-07-15
Volume
49
Issue
2
Pages
287-294
ISSN
  • 0030-6053 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3008
OpenAlex
W2136289625
Cited by
27
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Oryx (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • Zoologische Gesellschaft Frankfurt
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Keywords
bushmeat consumption, poaching, Connochaetes taurinus, hunting pressure, Serengeti ecosystem, wildlife decline, panel data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review