The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The roles and values of wild foods in agricultural systems
Open accessAbstract
Almost every ecosystem has been amended so that plants and animals can be used as food, fibre, fodder, medicines, traps and weapons. Historically, wild plants and animals were sole dietary components for hunter–gatherer and forager cultures. Today, they remain key to many agricultural communities. The mean use of wild foods by agricultural and forager communities in 22 countries of Asia and Africa (36 studies) is 90–100 species per location. Aggregate country estimates can reach 300–800 species (e.g. India, Ethiopia, Kenya). The mean use of wild species is 120 per community for indigenous communities in both industrialized and developing countries. Many of these wild foods are actively managed, suggesting there is a false dichotomy around ideas of the agricultural and the wild: hunter–gatherers and foragers farm and manage their environments, and cultivators use many wild plants and animals. Yet, provision of and access to these sources of food may be declining as natural habitats come under increasing pressure from development, conservation-exclusions and agricultural expansion. Despite their value, wild foods are excluded from official statistics on economic values of natural resources. It is clear that wild plants and animals continue to form a significant proportion of the global food basket, and while a variety of social and ecological drivers are acting to reduce wild food use, their importance may be set to grow as pressures on agricultural productivity increase.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Global Consequences of Land Use
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., et al. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1111772 · Cited by 13,272
Bushmeat Hunting, Wildlife Declines, and Fish Supply in West Africa
Brashares, J. S., Arcese, P., Sam, M. K., Coppolillo, P. B., Sinclair, A. R. E., & Balmford, A. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1102425 · Cited by 637
A biodiversity intactness index
Scholes, R. J., & Biggs, R. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03289 · Cited by 577
de Merode, E., Homewood, K., & Cowlishaw, G. (2004) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2003.10.005 · Cited by 339
Evidence for post‐depletion sustainability in a mature bushmeat market
COWLISHAW, G., MENDELSON, S., & ROWCLIFFE, J. M. (2005) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01046.x · Cited by 206
Cited by
Farm production, market access and dietary diversity in Malawi
Koppmair, S., Kassie, M., & Qaim, M. (2017) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980016002135 · Cited by 389
Improving diets with wild and cultivated biodiversity from across the landscape
Powell, B., Thilsted, S. H., Ickowitz, A., Termote, C., Sunderland, T., & Herforth, A. (2015) · Food Security · doi:10.1007/s12571-015-0466-5 · Cited by 382
Akinola, R., Pereira, L. M., Mabhaudhi, T., de Bruin, F.-M., & Rusch, L. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12083493 · Cited by 322
Crabtree, S. A., Bird, D. W., & Bird, R. B. (2019) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10745-019-0053-z · Cited by 42
Contrasting approaches to projecting long-run global food security
Godfray, H. C. J., & Robinson, S. (2015) · Oxford Review of Economic Policy · doi:10.1093/oxrep/grv006 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Bharucha, Z., & Pretty, J.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2010-09-27
- Volume
- 365
- Issue
- 1554
- Pages
- 2913-2926
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2101239553
- Cited by
- 689
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 21.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The roles and values of wild foods in agricultural systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2010.0123
- The paper
- Bharucha, Z., & Pretty, J. (2010). The roles and values of wild foods in agricultural systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0123
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.