In brief
A new report by the University of Melbourne shows 107,356 species are traded globally across plants, animals and fungi. Professor Alice Hughes argues that most traded species lack reliable data on quantity and origin, calling for standardized, global monitoring. The study warns the true scale of wildlife trade may be far greater and emphasizes the need for coordinated reporting to protect biodiversity.
A study led by the University of Melbourne’s School of BioSciences has revealed that more than 107,000 species are used and traded worldwide, more than twice the previous estimate of about 50,000 species. The findings, published in the journal Science Advances and released by the university on Saturday, came from data gathered on plants, animals and fungi and underscore major gaps in global monitoring of wildlife trade.
The research identified exactly 107,356 species in trade, covering timber, seafood, medicinal plants, pets, cut flowers, ornamental fish, and fungi – most of which are legal, the study notes. According to the University of Melbourne’s press statement, wildlife trade is “a well-established driver of biodiversity loss” but information on its extent and sustainability has remained incomplete.
Professor Alice Hughes, lead researcher, said, “For most of these species we have little to no data. There is no data on quantity and origins, let alone the population level data to assess if trade poses a risk to species survival.” She added that the existing global biodiversity framework’s trade target covers only about 2 to 3 percent of species in trade, leaving the remaining 97 percent unaccounted for.
Hughes highlighted that wildlife trade extends far beyond high‑profile illegal species such as elephants and pangolins. While the majority of the 107,356 species are traded legally, the research points to a widespread lack of reliable information on originating locations, trade flows and population impacts.
To address the data gaps, the study’s authors called for standardized data collection and more comprehensive, transparent, globally coordinated reporting. They suggest that existing customs and animal health inspection processes could be adapted to improve wildlife trade monitoring, providing a practical pathway for implementation.
"Existing customs and animal health inspection processes could be adapted to improve wildlife trade monitoring," the researchers added. Their recommendations emphasize coordinated global efforts to capture quantitative and provenance data for species across all 107,000-plus species traded, a step they see as essential for assessing sustainability and mitigating biodiversity loss.
