W ild vertebrates are a source of food and income for millions of people throughout the tropics. However, overhunting is a major concern, causing the decline of large-bodied animal species and even driving some to extinction (Maxwell et al. 2016; Ripple et al. 2016; Benítez-López et al. 2017). Unsustainable hunting threatens the food security of rural human populations that depend on wild meat (Nasi et al. 2011; Cawthorn and Hoffman 2015). In tropical forests, wild animals are hunted with a variety of methods, involving both traditional (eg bow and arrow) and modern (eg firearms) weapons (Fa and Brown 2009). Methods have improved incrementally over time, through the use of metal wire for the manufacture of snares and traps in Africa, cheaper guns, and the availability of incandescent battery-powered flashlights for hunting at night (Hames 1979; Redford and Robinson 1987; Alvard 1995). Flashlights are used to locate animals using the eyeshine that many species exhibit, a method known as "spotlighting" or "lamping" (Hames 1979). Bright lights at night temporarily immobilize many animals, which appear to perceive the light as non-threatening; this behavior allows hunters to approach within a short distance of the targeted animals, thereby greatly improving their chances of making a kill. Powerful, white light-emitting diodes (LEDs) are increasingly replacing incandescent bulbs in flashlights. LED flashlights are brighter and approximately 10-20 times more efficient than incandescent bulbs (Pimputkar et al. 2009). Although LEDs have existed for decades as low-power indicator lights, and high-power white-light emitters have been in production since 1999, this technology has remained prohibitively expensive for hunters in developing countries for many years. Based on observations made by our collaborative research groups, LED flashlight prices became competitive with those of incandescent flashlights around 2012, and LED flashlights are now available in rural markets throughout tropical Latin America, Africa, and Asia, where they are commonly used in nocturnal hunting. We investigated the impact of LED flashlights in increasing wild mammal offtake by hunters in tropical forests through interviews with commercial and subsistence hunters in Peru, Brazil, and Gabon. We support our qualitative analysis with data from hunting events monitored for 13 years in the Brazilian Amazon, which allow for the comparison of hunting returns before and after the introduction of LED lights. Methods Hunter interviews Semi-structured questionnaires were administered to 120 shotgun hunters in three countries (Peru, Brazil, and Gabon)

Effective estimation of wildlife population abundance is an important component of population monitoring, and ultimately essential for the development of conservation actions. Diurnal line‐transect surveys are one of the most applied methods for abundance estimations. Local ecological knowledge (LEK) is empirically acquired through the observation of ecological processes by local people. LEK‐based methods have only been recognized as valid scientific methods for surveying fauna abundance in the last three decades. However, the agreement between both methods has not been extensively analysed. We compared concomitant abundance data for 91 wild species (mammals, birds and tortoises) from diurnal line transects (9,221 km of trails) and a LEK‐based method (291 structured interviews) at 18 sites in Central and Western Amazonia. We used biological and socioecological factors to assess the agreements and divergences between abundance indices obtained from both methods. We found a significant agreement of population abundance indices for diurnal and game species. This relationship was also positive regardless of species sociality (solitary or social), body size and locomotion mode (terrestrial and arboreal); and of sampled forest type (upland and flooded forests). Conversely, we did not find significant abundance covariances for nocturnal and non‐game species. Despite the general agreement between methods, line transects were not effective at surveying many species occurring in the area, with 40.2% and 39.8% of all species being rarely and never detected in at least one of the survey sites. On the other hand, these species were widely reported by local informants to occur at intermediate to high abundances. Although LEK‐based methods have been long neglected by ecologists, our comparative study demonstrated their effectiveness for estimating vertebrate abundance of a wide diversity of taxa and forest environments. This can be used simultaneously with line‐transect surveys to calibrate abundance estimates and record species that are rarely sighted during surveys on foot, but that are often observed by local people during their daily extractive activities. Thus, the combination of local and scientific knowledge is a potential tool to improve our knowledge of tropical forest species and foster the development of effective strategies to meet biodiversity conservation goals.

Understanding the repertoire of hunting techniques used by traditional peoples in tropical forests is crucial for recognizing the role of traditional knowledge in hunting activities, as well as assessing the impact of harvests on game species. We describe the hunting techniques used across Amazonia by Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples for hunting yellow-footed tortoises (Chelonoidis denticulatus), one of the most consumed species in the biome. We interviewed 178 local people in 25 communities living in seven study areas in the Peruvian and Brazilian Amazon. We used a Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) and Analysis of Similarity (ANOSIM) to compare the hunting techniques between ethnic groups and the ages of the interviewees. Four different techniques were reported: (1) trapping with bait (46%; n = 122); (2) hunting with dogs (35%; n = 92); (3) active searching (14 %; n = 37); and (4) visiting fruiting trees (5%; n = 14). Trapping with bait was alleged to be the most cost-effective technique by 67% of the interviewees. Among the baits used, 93% involved the use of wild species as rotten meat. Hunting with dogs was also frequently cited and involved eight different methods of training. The hunting techniques recorded were not significantly different among ethnic groups or generations. The consonance among the technique repertoire likely reflects a shared knowledge still in use across different cultural groups. There is a potential for applying the hunting techniques to large scale community-based monitoring and management programs, but the impact on additional species affected, such as species intentionally captured to be used as bait, should be considered. Local assessments and community-based management plans that incorporate traditional ecological knowledge are recommended to guarantee the maintenance of livelihoods and ensure the species' conservation in Amazonia.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Traditionally, humans have consumed nonhuman primates in many places, including throughout the Amazon region. However, primate consumption rates are changing with rising urbanization and market access. We characterize primate consumption in central Amazonia using 192 qualitative interviews with inhabitants in three rural villages and in the city of Tefé. We used a generalized linear model to investigate how individual consumer characteristics, such as age and gender, and livelihoods affected primate consumption. We also used principal coordinate analysis (PCoA), and word clouds and network text analyses, to describe reasons people gave for eating or avoiding primates. Our results show that men were more likely to say that they eat primates than women, and that the probability that a person said that they eat primates correlated positively with the percentage of their life lived in rural areas. People gave sentiment and ethical reasons not to eat primates. Custom influenced whether people said they eat primates both positively and negatively, while taste positively influenced whether people said they eat primates. A preference for other wild meats in rural areas, and for domestic meats in cities negatively influenced whether people said they eat primates. People also cited the perceptions that primates have a human-like appearance and that primate meat is unhealthy as reasons not to eat primates. People in urban areas also cited conservation attitudes as reasons for not eating primates. Our findings provide an understanding of factors influencing primate consumption in our study area and will be useful for designing tailored conservation initiatives by reducing hunting pressure on primates in rural settings and increasing the effectiveness of outreach campaigns in urban centers.