The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rough Trade: Animal Welfare in the Global Wildlife Trade
Abstract
Wildlife trade is a big and burgeoning business, but its welfare impacts have not been studied comprehensively. We review the animal welfare impacts of the wildlife trade as they were reported in the literature between 2006 and 2011. Rarely was the term welfare mentioned, evidence of welfare impact documented, or welfare improvement recommended. Literature focused on mammals and on animals killed on site, for luxury goods or food, and for traditional medicine. Welfare impacts may be underreported, particularly in international, illegal, and wild-caught trade and trade in reptiles. Greater attention should perhaps be paid to the welfare of animals traded alive and in larger numbers (e.g., birds, reptiles, amphibians) and to those—including mammals—potentially subject to greater impacts through live use (e.g., as pets). More evidence-based research is needed. Animal welfare should be integrated with wider issues; collaboration between conservationists and welfarists and the development of health and welfare levers to influence trade offer benefits to both people and wildlife.
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
Guidelines for systematic review in Conservation and environmental management
PULLIN, A. S., & STEWART, G. B. (2006) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x · Cited by 1,137
An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast Asia
Nijman, V. (2010) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-009-9758-4 · Cited by 567
Wildlife, Exotic Pets, and Emerging Zoonoses1
Chomel, B. B., Belotto, A., & Meslin, F.-X. (2007) · Emerging Infectious Diseases · doi:10.3201/eid1301.060480 · Cited by 551
Handbook of Laboratory Animal Management and Welfare
(2003) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470751077 · Cited by 418
Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K. S., Faucitano, L., Dadgar, S., Shand, P., González, L. A., & Crowe, T. G. (2012) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.010 · Cited by 401
Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in its Cultural Context
Whiting, T. L. (2011) · PubMed Central · Cited by 291
Wildlife trade, consumption and conservation awareness in southwest China
Zhang, L., Hua, N., & Sun, S. (2008) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-008-9358-8 · Cited by 282
Review of methodology of quantitative reviews using meta‐analysis in ecology
Gates, S. (2002) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2002.00634.x · Cited by 235
International Illegal Trade in Wildlife: Threats and U.S. Policy
Wyler, L. S., & Sheikh, P. A. (2008) · University of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · Cited by 232
Global Patterns of Mammalian Diversity, Endemism, and Endangerment
Ceballos, G., & Brown, J. H. (1995) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09030559.x · Cited by 225
Cited by
Challenges to animal welfare during transportation of wild mammals: A review (1990–2020)
Pohlin, F., Hooijberg, E. H., & Meyer, L. C. R. (2021) · Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine · doi:10.1638/2019-0029 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Venue
- BioScience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 928-938
- ISSN
- 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3244
- OpenAlex
- W2105557471
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 41
- FWCI
- 4.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Rough Trade: Animal Welfare in the Global Wildlife Trade. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1525/bio.2013.63.12.6
- The paper
- Rough Trade: Animal Welfare in the Global Wildlife Trade. (2013). BioScience. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.12.6
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.