Next Article in Journal
Recruitment and Controlled Growth of Juveniles of the Critically Endangered Fan Mussel Pinna nobilis in the Northern Adriatic
Previous Article in Journal
Phenotypic and Genetic Diversity of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Accessions from Kazakhstan
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impacts of Mycobacterium leprae-Infection on Wild Populations of the Nine-Banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) Species Complex: A Systematic Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 17
Issue 10
10.3390/d17100665
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Armadillos May Be an Underexploited Source of Food Security for Rural Communities in the Peruvian Amazon

by
Brian M. Griffiths
* and
Gabriela Pajuelo Chávez
The Earth Commons—Georgetown University’s Institute for Environment & Sustainability, Georgetown University, 3700 O St. NW, Washington, DC 20007, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2025, 17(10), 665; https://doi.org/10.3390/d17100665
Submission received: 30 August 2025 / Revised: 19 September 2025 / Accepted: 23 September 2025 / Published: 23 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecology, Behavior, and Conservation of Armadillos)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Subsistence hunting remains vital for food security and cultural identity in the Amazon, but its sustainability is uncertain. In Loreto, Peru, hunters often target commercially valuable species such as paca (Cuniculus paca), collared peccary (Pecari tajacu), and red brocket deer (Mazama americana). Other species, including the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus), are commonly eaten but rarely sold, suggesting potential as “subsistence-only” game. We conducted weekly interviews with 19 hunters in the Indigenous Maijuna community of Sucusari from 2018 to 2019, recording 671 hunting events. Market-preferred species dominated sales, while armadillos accounted for 14 kills (58 kg) and only 0.22% of sales. Complementary camera trap surveys in 2023 (7259 trap nights) recorded 410 independent detections of armadillos. A multiseason occupancy model indicated high occupancy (98.0%, 95% CI: 91.2–99.7%) across the basin, with positive associations with palm density and elevation, and no evidence of reduced occupancy under hunting pressure. These results suggest armadillos are both widespread and resilient, supported by their unique reproductive strategy of producing four genetically identical offspring per pregnancy. Promoting subsistence use of resilient species like armadillos could enhance local food security while reducing pressure on vulnerable taxa, aligning conservation and livelihood goals in Amazonian communities.

1. Introduction

Subsistence hunting is a critical source of food security and a connection to traditional cultural livelihoods for millions of local and Indigenous people across the Amazon basin [1,2]. Hunting activity is widespread, and rural communities that are further from urban centers are more likely to hunt for dietary protein [3]. Many of these rural hunters may also send wild meat through complex supply chains to local urban centers [4,5] where the trade or sale of meat may contribute greatly to the food security of urban consumers [6], particularly those with a cultural connection to hunting practices [7]. Together, rural hunters sell hundreds of thousands of mammals to urban centers each year [5,6], which likely represent only a small fraction of the animals that are actually hunted [8].
Unsustainable hunting, driven by commercial activity, is one of the main causes of biodiversity decline across the tropics, including in the Amazon [9,10]. However, the sustainability of hunting is difficult to define and measure. Recent studies have shown that community-based conservation and management practices can be effective and sustainable for Amazonian mammals when local ecological, political, and cultural conditions are met [11,12]. As taste preferences for wild meat change [13], hunters may increasingly target those species which are highly sellable and prioritizing that meat for sale [14]. Hunters may continue to target a broad array of species, but only use less-sellable species for subsistence or for gifting to others to build social capital [15]. This blend of economic and sociocultural pressures, combined with physiological and ecological characteristics of species like reproductive rates [16], complicates estimations of sustainability.
Amazonian hunters target a variety of species, but the majority of hunting focuses on large-bodied mammals. In Loreto, Peru, hunting pressure is concentrated on the paca (Cuniculus paca), collared peccary (Pecari tajacu), and red brocket deer (Mazama americana), since they are commercially valuable [5,6,14] and may be more widely available than other large-bodied ungulates, like the endangered Brazilian tapir (Tapirus terrestris) [17,18] and white-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari) [19,20,21]. Published data from community surveys suggests that other species are heavily targeted by hunters but may not be sold into supply chains. For example, studies across the Amazon have shown that armadillos like the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) often make up 3–7% of total harvests of hunters [14,22,23,24,25], but may make up much more in some areas, especially Brazil [26,27,28,29]. Recent studies from markets in Loreto, Peru, suggest that less than 0.2% of all meat traded is armadillo meat, while historically that margin was closer to 0.5–0.6% [6]. In contrast, armadillos may be more heavily traded in Brazilian commercial centers [30,31].
Decisions that rural hunters make in the forest on which species to kill and how to use the meat affect food security [15], regional supply chains [4,5], and the conservation of species. In this study, we use data from extensive interviews with rural hunters in an Indigenous community in Loreto, Peru, to understand how hunters use armadillos as a source of food security in contrast to species they harvest for sale. We used extensive camera trap surveys to understand the distribution of nine-banded armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus) in the study area as a measure of their availability for hunting. We explore this information in light of current knowledge on armadillo reproduction, conservation, and management to assess whether large-scale armadillo hunting can be a sustainable protein and income source.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Site

This research was conducted in collaboration with the Maijuna (also known as the Orejón), a Western Tucanoan Indigenous people of the northeastern Peruvian Amazon with an estimated population of around 600 individuals [32]. The Maijuna inhabit four communities: Puerto Huamán and Nueva Vida along the Yanayacu River, Sucusari along the Sucusari River, and San Pablo de Totolla (Totoya) along the Algodón River. Historically, the Maijuna lived in the interfluvial areas between these rivers, but beginning in the early 20th century they gradually moved downriver to their present-day communities under pressure from missionaries and patrones—colonists who exploited Indigenous labor to extract forest resources [33,34]. Although the Peruvian government granted titles to their four communities in the 1970s, these lands encompass only a fraction of the broader Maijuna ancestral territory. In response to ongoing threats from illegal logging and poaching, the Maijuna formed their own federation, the Federación de Comunidades Nativas Maijuna (FECONAMAI), in 2004. Their efforts culminated in the establishment of the 391,040-hectare Maijuna–Kichwa Regional Conservation Area (MKRCA) in 2015, which is jointly managed by Maijuna and Kichwa communities alongside the regional government of Loreto [35].
Fieldwork took place in the Maijuna community of Sucusari (72.92995° W, 3.24373° S), located along the Sucusari River (Figure 1). Sucusari lies approximately 120 km by river from the city of Iquitos—the commercial and political center of Loreto—although the distance can be reduced to about 70 km by crossing the isthmus at the town of Mazán between the Napo and Amazon Rivers. The community’s titled territory covers 4771 hectares, directly adjoining the MKRCA. Sucusari is home to 166 residents, distributed among monofamilial and plurifamilial households [36]. The population is composed of approximately 59% Maijuna, 35% mestizo, and 6% Kichwa. Subsistence activities include hunting, fishing, swidden-fallow agriculture, and the gathering of non-timber forest products, many of which are also sold for income in local markets and in Iquitos [32]. Hunting is carried out exclusively by men, typically using shotguns, machetes, or with the assistance of dogs, and is both a source of household protein and income as well as an integral part of community sharing practices [14,15].

2.2. Hunter Interviews

From September 2018 to June 2019, we carried out weekly semi-structured interviews in Spanish [37] with 19 hunters, representing 90.48% of all active hunters, to document prey selection decisions and the economic aspects of hunting. The hunters interviewed ranged in age from 22 to 68, with an average age of 41. Of these, ten identified as Maijuna, eight as mestizo, and one as Kichwa. When a hunter was not home during our visit, we made at least two additional attempts in the following days. If he was still unavailable after three visits, we collected the information for that week during the next scheduled interview.
During each interview, hunters provided details about every hunting trip, including the time of departure, duration, and travel methods (boat, canoe, or on foot) [38]. They reported which animals they encountered, the locations of these encounters (marked on a base map of local landmarks), and whether they attempted to kill the animals. If they did not attempt a kill, we asked them to explain why. All reported locations of encounters and kills were digitized in ArcGIS [39] to extract coordinates. Responses related to decision-making were coded following Berg & Lune (2014), with reasons for not shooting categorized into broader themes: “Killed,” “Escaped,” “Low Return,” “Attack-Limited,” and “Conservation” [14,37].
When hunters reported a successful kill, we asked how many kilograms of meat were sold, the buyers, and the sale price. They were also asked how much meat was consumed within their household, as well as how much was given away and to whom. To measure carcass and meat portions, hunters relied on spring scales, which were commonly owned by all community members.
We summarized all interview data by species to understand the individual contributions that each species made to subsistence and income for hunters during the study period, in terms of the total amount of meat consumed and sold, and the proportions of all meat consumed and sold that belong to each species. All analyses were conducted in R (version 4.4.0) [40].

2.3. Camera Trap Surveys

We deployed camera traps (Bushnell Trophy Cam, Bushnell Outdoor Products, Hyde Park, Utah) in a grid across the Sucusari River basin in January 2023 and July 2023. We set 44 camera traps in January and 58 camera traps in July, with the goal of covering as much of the river basin as was accessible at the time of fieldwork (Figure 1). Camera traps were set at stations 2 km apart along a grid surrounding the Sucusari River, north of the community of Sucusari. At each camera station, biologists working with local Maijuna guides chose a camera site without any actively fruiting palms within 50 m, prioritizing placing the cameras perpendicular to game trails when present. All vegetation was cleared from within 10 m of the camera site and the camera was placed 50 cm from the ground facing the cleared space [41]. Camera traps were placed in hybrid mode, recording one video and three photos every time motion was sensed, with a delay of two minutes between triggers. Camera traps were left in the field for at least 90 days before they were recovered and images were downloaded.
All nine-banded armadillos were manually identified in camera trap images by a team of citizen scientists, and identifications were checked by the lead author. Photographs of armadillos on the same camera that were separated by more than 30 min were classified as independent visit events.
We used a multiseason occupancy model to assess the occupancy of nine-banded armadillos in the Sucusari River basin. We used each week of camera activity as a new interval in the model. We used the survey effort in each interval (number of days the camera was active) and whether a trail was present in front of the camera as detection covariates. We used the density of palms surrounding the camera (number of palms in a 10 m radius), the percentage of the 1 km grid cell surrounding the camera station that was covered by wetlands [42,43], elevation, and surface roughness as habitat-based occupancy covariates under the hypothesis that armadillos may prefer to live in upland forests. Elevation and surface roughness were calculated using LANDSAT Collection 2 data. We also included hunting pressure (the number of km walked by hunters within a 1 km grid cell) [38] as an occupancy covariate under the hypothesis that armadillos may avoid heavily hunted areas. All covariates were checked for collinearity before inclusion, with a correlation cutoff of 0.7 [44]. The model was validated using a posterior goodness-of-fit assessment using the Freeman–Tukey statistic, where a Bayesian p-value of between 0.1 and 0.9 indicates adequate model fit [45]. We calculated the multiseason occupancy model using the tPGOcc function in the spOccupancy package [45] in R.

3. Results

3.1. Hunter Interviews

A total of 671 hunts were recorded using participatory mapping interviews over the course of the study period. The most commonly killed species were the paca (Cuniculus paca, 195 kills), collared peccary (Pecari tajacu, 78 killed), and black agouti (Dasyprocta fuliginosa, 53 kills). The top contributing species in terms of mass harvested were the paca (999.5 kg), Brazilian tapir (Tapirus terrestris, 730 kg), and the collared peccary (688 kg) (Table 1). The paca and collared peccary were also sold the most frequently, making up 44.35% and 26.10% of all meat sold, respectively. The red brocket deer (Mazama americana) was also commonly sold, with 545 kg of meat making up 17.99% of all meat sold (Table 1). Nine-banded armadillos were the fifth-most commonly killed species with 14 kills, constituting 58 kg of wild meat. Armadillos were rarely sold, with only 4 kg (one single animal) sold during the study period, making up only 0.22% of all meat sales.
The amount of meat harvested for each species was highly correlated with the proportional contribution of that species towards total sales, with a correlation coefficient of 0.91 (Figure 2a), indicating that hunters may be targeting the most valuable game species. A large grouping of species were commonly harvested but rarely sold (Figure 2b), including the nine-banded armadillo, yellow-footed tortoise (Chelonoidis denticulatus), kinkajou (Potos flavus), common wooly monkey (Lagothrix lagotricha), monk saki (Pithecia monachus), South American coati (Nasua nasua), Spix’s guan (Penelope jacquacu), and gray brocket deer (Mazama gouazoubira) (Table 1). Many species were killed five times or fewer during the study period and made only small contributions to game harvests (though the contributions of the giant anteater Myrmecophaga tridactyla are notable due to its large body size).
Of all hunted species, only the paca, collared peccary, black agouti, and nine-banded armadillo are listed by the IUCN as having both Least Concern status and a stable population trend. All other species labeled as Least Concern have decreasing or unknown population trends, and several hunted species are listed as Vulnerable (Table 1).

3.2. Camera Trap Surveys

Camera traps in January 2023 recorded 190 independent records of nine-banded armadillos across 3267 camera nights of survey effort. In July 2023, 220 nine-banded armadillos were recorded across 3992 camera nights of survey effort. The multiseason occupancy model showed a baseline occupancy of 98.03% (95% CI: 91.16–99.69%) for nine-banded armadillos, with a detection probability of 15.48% (95% CI: 5.77–32.99%) on average. Of all the occupancy covariates tested, only density of palms and elevation had 95% confidence intervals around the coefficient estimates that did not overlap with 0. Both had positive coefficients (Table 2), indicating armadillos were more likely to occupy habitats with more dense palms and higher elevations. Neither of the detection covariates had confidence intervals that excluded 0, indicating that armadillos were equally likely to be detected whether or not trails were present, and regardless of survey effort (Table 2). Bayesian p-values for the Freeman–Tukey statistic for 18 of the 20-week time intervals were between 0.15 and 0.9, with one p-value at 0.086 (week 19) and one at 0.9519 (week 1), indicating slightly poorer model fit at the very beginning and very end of the survey, but a strong fit for the majority of the survey.

4. Discussion

The paca, collared peccary, red brocket deer, and tapir were clearly the largest contributors to meat harvested, but the majority of meat from the paca, collared peccary, and red brocket deer was sold. These species earn the highest prices in the regional market, including in the urban markets of Iquitos [5,6,14]. The paca and collared peccary are the most in demand species across the region by a healthy margin [6]. While they both have a Least Concern Red List status and stable population trends, likely due in part to their widespread distribution, the enormous commercial demand for wild meat from these species suggests that they may face increasing hunting pressure leading to overexploitation. Though it was also commonly sold, the tapir is a common subsistence food for the Maijuna, and its use is often dictated by sociocultural norms [15]. Accordingly, the tapir falls slightly below the expected sale rate given the high correlation between meat harvested and contribution to sales (Figure 2a). However, the tapir is an endangered species and is extremely vulnerable to hunting pressure due to its low reproductive rate [16].
The nine-banded armadillo was clearly a subsistence food source for hunters: commonly hunted but rarely sold. The black agouti, and giant anteater were also in this grouping of species with over 50 kg harvested. Given that the giant anteater is endangered, the nine-banded armadillo and black agouti represent perhaps the most likely candidates for “subsistence only” species that may be sustainable which are commonly eaten. This trend also appears in regional market data [6], where these species are sold very infrequently relative to other species, though their distribution is also widespread. This lack of sales may be due to a less popular taste of the animal among urban consumers or perhaps the smaller body size relative to other commonly sold species. If larger bodied species like the paca and collared peccary begin to decline in accessibility, it is possible that the armadillo and agouti will become more major contributors to regional supply chains, prompting hunters to sell more of the meat. The black agouti has a very high reproductive rate relative to most other game species [16], making it a strong candidate for subsistence hunters to harvest sustainably. While Mayor et al. [16] did not assess the potential for nine-banded armadillos to be harvested sustainably based on their reproductive rate, their natural history suggests that they may also be strong candidates for sustainable subsistence hunting. Nine-banded armadillos have four young per pregnancy, where a single embryo splits into four [46]; a unique reproductive strategy that may create a uniquely high reproductive rate for the animal’s body size. Furthermore, they may reach relatively high local densities, contributing to their resilience and their capacity to maintain healthy populations despite hunting pressure [47].
The occupancy model for nine-banded armadillos showed that the species is extremely widespread in the Sucusari River basin; on average, they occupied over 98% of habitats. Though the species is nocturnal, hunters in Sucusari routinely hunt at night with LED flashlights [14]. Hunting pressure was not significant in the occupancy model, suggesting that the occupancy of the species is high regardless of hunting pressure; therefore hunting has not depressed their distribution. While these camera trap surveys were not set up to assess population density directly, occupancy provides strong evidence that the species is widely available to hunters. It is possible that hunting pressure has resulted in a decline in population density without affecting occupancy. The occupancy model would not detect such a decline, so these results should be interpreted with caution. We recommend that future studies be designed with the goal of leveraging emerging methods and models to assess population density from camera trap images, including Random Encounter Models (REMs), which have previously been applied to armadillos [47], and camera trap distance sampling.
Overall, evidence suggests that nine-banded armadillos are a strong potential source of sustainable wild meat harvests that is currently not being strongly exploited; indeed, it is possible that the population of nine-banded armadillos can sustain higher levels of hunting pressure than they are currently experiencing. The low price and lack of commercial demand for armadillo meat indicates that they are unlikely to be overexploited by commercial activity. Armadillos, including the nine-banded armadillo, are commonly hunted by communities across Amazonia [22,24,25,48,49], but often make up no more than about 5% of total wild meat harvests. Some communities have taken larger advantage of the subsistence potential of nine-banded armadillos, where they make up more than 10–15% of harvests [26,27,28,29,30]. We suggest that the Maijuna could do the same in their local forests, increasing hunting pressure on armadillos, as a resilient species, to provide food security and lessen the hunting pressure on more vulnerable subsistence species like primates and tapirs. Since many of these vulnerable species perform critical ecosystem services and functions, shifting hunting pressure towards more resilient species could support the structure and function of the forest itself. Armadillos and similar species represent the opportunity to continue practicing cultural livelihoods, ensure food security, and sustainably manage vulnerable and endangered game species in the region.

Author Contributions

B.M.G. led fieldwork, analysis and writing of the manuscript. G.P.C. led data visualization and initial exploration of data and supported editing of writing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Funding for this study was provided by the ACEER Foundation and Georgetown University.

Institutional Review Board Statement

All aspects of this study were approved by George Mason University’s Institutional Review Board, project #1288488-1 (17 September 2018).

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the Maijuna community of Sucusari for their collaboration and leadership in conservation research. We would also like to thank Elizabeth Benson for support during fieldwork, and OnePlanet, the ACEER Foundation, and Georgetown University for financial support of the lead author for camera trapping work. We would like to thank volunteers at the Morpho Institute for their efforts in identifying mammals in camera trap images.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. Fa, J.E.; Peres, C.A.; Meeuwig, J. Bushmeat Exploitation in Tropical Forests: An Intercontinental Comparison. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 16, 232–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Nunes, A.V.; Peres, C.A.; Constantino, P.d.A.L.; Santos, B.A.; Fischer, E. Irreplaceable Socioeconomic Value of Wild Meat Extraction to Local Food Security in Rural Amazonia. Biol. Conserv. 2019, 236, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zayonc, D.; Robinson, B.E.; Coomes, O.T.; Takasaki, Y.; Abizaid, C. Use of Community Characteristics to Predict Hunting and Game Harvests in Western Amazonian Forests. Conserv. Biol. 2025, 39, e70016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Van Vliet, N.; Quiceno, M.P.; Cruz, D.; de Aquino, L.J.N.; Yagüe, B.; Schor, T.; Hernandez, S.; Nasi, R. Bushmeat Networks Link the Forest to Urban Areas in the Trifrontier Region between Brazil, Colombia, and Peru. Ecol. Soc. 2015, 20, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Huerta, F.B.; Gilmore, M.P.; Bowler, M.; Griffiths, B.M. Socioeconomic Drivers of Wild Meat Consumption in the City of Iquitos, Peru. Conserv. Biol. 2025, 35, e70056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mayor, P.; Bizri, H.R.E.; Morcatty, T.Q.; Moya, K.; Bendayán, N.; Solis, S.; Neto, C.F.A.V.; Kirkland, M.; Arevalo, O.; Fang, T.G.; et al. Wild Meat Trade over the Last 45 Years in the Peruvian Amazon. Conserv. Biol. 2021, 36, e13801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Morsello, C.; Yagüe, B.; Beltreschi, L.; Van Vliet, N.; Adams, C.; Schor, T.; Quiceno-Mesa, M.P.; Cruz, D. Cultural Attitudes Are Stronger Predictors of Bushmeat Consumption and Preference than Economic Factors among Urban Amazonians from Brazil and Colombia. Ecol. Soc. 2015, 20, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lozano, E.P.; Fang, T.G. Economic Analysis of Wildlife Use in the Peruvian Amazon. In People in Nature; Wildlife Conservation in South and Central America; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 191–208. [Google Scholar]
  9. Benítez-López, A.; Alkemade, R.; Schipper, A.M.; Ingram, D.J.; Verweij, P.A.; Eikelboom, J.A.J.; Huijbregts, M.A.J. The Impact of Hunting on Tropical Mammal and Bird Populations. Science 2017, 356, 180–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Benítez-López, A.; Santini, L.; Schipper, A.M.; Busana, M.; Huijbregts, M.A. Intact but Empty Forests? Patterns of Hunting-Induced Mammal Defaunation in the Tropics. PLoS Biol. 2019, 17, e3000247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Mahabale, D.; Bodmer, R.; Pizuri, O.; Uraco, P.; Chota, K.; Antunez, M.; Groombridge, J. Sustainability of Hunting in Community-Based Wildlife Management in the Peruvian Amazon. Sustainability 2025, 17, 914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bodmer, R.E.; Puertas, P.; Fang, T.; Antúnez, M.; Soplín, S.; Caro, J.; Pérez, P.; El Bizri, H.R.; Arenas, M.; Nieto, J.C.; et al. Management of Subsistence Hunting of Mammals in Amazonia: A Case Study in Loreto, Peru. In Amazonian Mammals: Current Knowledge and Conservation Priorities; Spironello, W.R., Barnett, A.A., Lynch, J.W., Bobrowiec, P.E.D., Boyle, S.A., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 275–297. ISBN 978-3-031-43071-8. [Google Scholar]
  13. Koster, J.M.; Hodgen, J.J.; Venegas, M.D.; Copeland, T.J. Is Meat Flavor a Factor in Hunters’ Prey Choice Decisions? Hum. Nat. 2010, 21, 219–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Griffiths, B.M.; Bowler, M.; Kolowski, J.; Stabach, J.; Benson, E.L.; Gilmore, M.P. Revisiting Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT) in a Changing Amazon: Implications for Conservation and Management. Hum. Ecol. 2022, 50, 545–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Griffiths, B.M.; Gilmore, M.P. Differential Use of Game Species in an Amazonian Indigenous Community: Navigating Economics, Subsistence, and Social Norms. J. Ethnobiol. 2022, 42, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Mayor, P.; El Bizri, H.; Bodmer, R.E.; Bowler, M. Assessment of Mammal Reproduction for Hunting Sustainability through Community-Based Sampling of Species in the Wild. Conserv. Biol. 2017, 31, 912–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rosa, D.C.P.; Brocardo, C.R.; Rosa, C.; Castro, A.B.; Norris, D.; Fadini, R. Species-Rich but Defaunated: The Case of Medium and Large-Bodied Mammals in a Sustainable Use Protected Area in the Amazon. Acta Amaz. 2021, 51, 323–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Caballero Dulce, Y.E. Estado Poblacional de Mamíferos y Aves Silvestres En Hábitats Inundables y de Tierra Firme En La Cuenca Alta Del Putumayo, Frontera Perú–Colombia. Master’s Thesis, Universidad Nacional Agraria de la Selva, Tingo María, Perú, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  19. Fragoso, J.M.V.; Antunes, A.P.; Silvius, K.M.; Constantino, P.A.L.; Zapata-Ríos, G.; Bizri, H.R.E.; Bodmer, R.E.; Camino, M.; de Thoisy, B.; Wallace, R.B.; et al. Large-Scale Population Disappearances and Cycling in the White-Lipped Peccary, a Tropical Forest Mammal. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0276297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mandujano, S.; Reyna-Hurtado, R. Recent Studies on White-Lipped Peccary and Collared Peccary in the Neotropics. In Ecology and Conservation of Tropical Ungulates in Latin America; Gallina-Tessaro, S., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 415–438. ISBN 978-3-030-28868-6. [Google Scholar]
  21. Altrichter, M.; Taber, A.; Beck, H.; Reyna-Hurtado, R.; Lizarraga, L.; Keuroghlian, A.; Sanderson, E.W. Range-Wide Declines of a Key Neotropical Ecosystem Architect, the Near Threatened White-Lipped Peccary Tayassu Pecari. Oryx 2012, 46, 87–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Constantino, P.d.A.L.; Fortini, L.B.; Kaxinawa, F.R.S.; Kaxinawa, A.M.; Kaxinawa, E.S.; Kaxinawa, A.P.; Kaxinawa, L.S.; Kaxinawa, J.M.; Kaxinawa, J.P. Indigenous Collaborative Research for Wildlife Management in Amazonia: The Case of the Kaxinawá, Acre, Brazil. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 2718–2729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Constantino, P.d.A.L. Subsistence Hunting with Mixed-Breed Dogs Reduces Hunting Pressure on Sensitive Amazonian Game Species in Protected Areas. Environ. Conserv. 2019, 46, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Constantino, P.d.A.L. Deforestation and Hunting Effects on Wildlife across Amazonian Indigenous Lands. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. De Souza-Mazurek, R.R.; Pedrinho, T.; Feliciano, X.; Hilário, W.; Gerôncio, S.; Marcelo, E. Subsistence Hunting among the Waimiri Atroari Indians in Central Amazonia, Brazil. Biodivers. Conserv. 2000, 9, 579–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Balée, W. Ka’apor Ritual Hunting. Hum. Ecol. 1985, 13, 485–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hames, R.B. A Comparison of the Efficiencies of the Shotgun and the Bow in Neotropical Forest Hunting. Hum. Ecol. 1979, 7, 219–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mesquita, G.P.; Barreto, L.N. Evaluation of Mammals Hunting in Indigenous and Rural Localities in Eastern Brazilian Amazon. Ethnobiol. Conserv. 2015, 4, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Parry, L.; Barlow, J.; Peres, C.A. Allocation of Hunting Effort by Amazonian Smallholders: Implications for Conserving Wildlife in Mixed-Use Landscapes. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142, 1777–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rebello, F.K.; Gonçalves, P.C.T.; Souza, C.C.M.D.; Santos, M.A.S.D.; Bezerra, A.S.; Soares, B.C.; Lopes, M.L.B.; Loureiro, J.P.B.D. Segmentation of the Wild Animal Meat Consumer Market in Belém Municipality, Pará State, Brazilian Amazon. J. Agric. Stud. 2022, 10, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. van Vliet, N.; Mesa, M.P.Q.; Cruz-Antia, D.; de Aquino, L.J.N.; Moreno, J.; Nasi, R. The Uncovered Volumes of Bushmeat Commercialized in the Amazonian Trifrontier between Colombia, Peru & Brazil. Ethnobiol. Conserv. 2014, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  32. Gilmore, M.P. The Maijuna: Past, Present, and Future. Perú Maijuna Rapid Biol. Soc. Invent. Rep. 2010, 22, 226. [Google Scholar]
  33. Bellier, I. Los Mai Huna. In Guía Etnográfica de la Alta Amazonía; Santos, F., Barclay, F., Eds.; FLASCO-SEDE: Quito, Ecuador, 1994; pp. 1–180. [Google Scholar]
  34. Bellier, I. Mai Huna Tomo I. In Los Pueblos Indios en sus Mitos No 7; Abya-Yala: Quito, Ecuador, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  35. Establecen Área de Conservacio n Regional Maijuna Kichwa, Ubicada en el Departamento de Loreto. Decreto No. 008-2015. Available online: http://www.elperuano.com.pe/NormasElperuano/2015/06/17/1252025-2.html (accessed on 31 October 2024).
  36. Roncal, C.M.; Bowler, M.; Gilmore, M.P. The Ethnoprimatology of the Maijuna of the Peruvian Amazon and Implications for Primate Conservation. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 2018, 14, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Berg, B.L.; Lune, H. Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences; Pearson: Harlow, UK, 2014; ISBN 978-1-292-02249-9. [Google Scholar]
  38. Griffiths, B.M.; Kolowski, J.; Bowler, M.; Gilmore, M.P.; Benson, E.; Lewis, F.; Stabach, J. Assessing the Accuracy of Distance-and Interview-Based Measures of Hunting Pressure. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 2021, 4, e592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). ArcGIS; Release 10.6; Environmental Systems Research Institute: Redlands, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  40. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; Version 4.4.0; R Core Team: Vienna, Austria, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  41. Tobler, M.W.; Carrillo-Percastegui, S.E.; Pitman, R.L.; Mares, R.; Powell, G. An Evaluation of Camera Traps for Inventorying Large- and Medium-Sized Terrestrial Rainforest Mammals. Anim. Conserv. 2008, 11, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Griffiths, B.M.; Hansbrough, G.; Griffiths, L.G.; Valderrama, D.; Gilmore, M.P. Drivers of Geophagy of Large-Bodied Amazonian Herbivorous and Frugivorous Mammals. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Gumbricht, T.; Roman-Cuesta, R.M.; Verchot, L.; Herold, M.; Wittmann, F.; Householder, E.; Herold, N.; Murdiyarso, D. An Expert System Model for Mapping Tropical Wetlands and Peatlands Reveals South America as the Largest Contributor. Glob. Change Biol. 2017, 23, 3581–3599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Dormann, C.F.; Elith, J.; Bacher, S.; Buchmann, C.; Carl, G.; Carré, G.; Marquéz, J.R.G.; Gruber, B.; Lafourcade, B.; Leitao, P.J. Collinearity: A Review of Methods to Deal with It and a Simulation Study Evaluating Their Performance. Ecography 2013, 36, 27–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Doser, J.W.; Finley, A.O.; Kéry, M.; Zipkin, E.F. spOccupancy: An R Package for Single-species, Multi-species, and Integrated Spatial Occupancy Models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2022, 13, 1670–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Loughry, W.J.; Prodöhl, P.A.; McDonough, C.M.; Avise, J.C. Polyembryony in Armadillos: An Unusual Feature of the Female Nine-Banded Armadillo’s Reproductive Tract May Explain Why Her Litters Consist of Four Genetically Identical Offspring. Am. Sci. 1998, 86, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. McTigue, L.E.; DeGregorio, B.A. Nine-Banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) Occupancy and Density Across an Urban-to-Rural Gradient. Southeast. Nat. 2024, 23, 529–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sirén, A. Festival Hunting by the Kichwa People in the Ecuadorian Amazon. J. Ethnobiol. 2012, 32, 30–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zapata Rios, Z. Sustentabilidad de La Cacería de Subsistencia: El Caso de Cuatro Comunidades Quichuas En La Amazonía Nororiental Ecuatoriana. Mastozoología Neotrop. 2001, 8, 59–66. [Google Scholar]
Diversity 17 00665 g001
Figure 1. Map of the study site, the Sucusari River basin in Loreto, Peru, with the locations of camera traps deployed in January 2023 and July 2023. Study focal area shown in red square.
Figure 1. Map of the study site, the Sucusari River basin in Loreto, Peru, with the locations of camera traps deployed in January 2023 and July 2023. Study focal area shown in red square.
Diversity 17 00665 g001
Diversity 17 00665 g002
Figure 2. (a) Proportional contributions of all hunted species to total meat sales, and (b) proportional contributions of species which contributed less than 2% to total meat sales (subsistence species) and their IUCN Red List status.
Figure 2. (a) Proportional contributions of all hunted species to total meat sales, and (b) proportional contributions of species which contributed less than 2% to total meat sales (subsistence species) and their IUCN Red List status.
Diversity 17 00665 g002
Table 1. Species targeted by hunters in Sucusari, Loreto, Peru with their IUCN Red List conservation status and population trends.
Table 1. Species targeted by hunters in Sucusari, Loreto, Peru with their IUCN Red List conservation status and population trends.
Common NameScientific NameRed List StatusPopulation TrendMass Harvested (kg)Proportional Contribution to Total Sold Meat
PacaCuniculus pacaLCStable999.50.444
Brazilian tapirTapirus terrestrisVUDecreasing7300.075
Collared peccaryPecari tajacuLCStable6880.261
Red brocket deerMazama americanaDDUnknown5450.180
Black agoutiDasyprocta fuliginosaLCStable164.50.007
Giant anteaterMyrmecophaga tridactylaVUDecreasing1070.008
Nine-banded armadilloDasypus novemcinctusLCStable580.002
Gray brocket deerMazama gouazoubiraLCDecreasing440.011
Common wooly monkeyLagothrix lagotrichaVUDecreasing340.000
Yellow-footed TortoiseChelonoidis denticulatusVUUnknown33.50.009
KinkajouPotos flavusLCDecreasing220.000
South American coatiNasua nasuaLCDecreasing21.50.000
Monk sakiPithecia monachusLCDecreasing17.50.000
Red howler monkeyAlouatta seniculusLCDecreasing150.003
Spix’s guanPenelope jacquacuLCDecreasing7.50.000
Yellow-handed titi monkeyCallicebus luciferLCUnknown50.000
South American tamanduaTamandua tetradactylaLCUnknown40.000
Dusky titi monkeyCallicebus molochLCUnknown20.000
Table 2. Multiseason occupancy model results for the nine-banded armadillo in Sucusari, Loreto, Peru. Statistically significant covariates (p < 0.05) shown in bold.
Table 2. Multiseason occupancy model results for the nine-banded armadillo in Sucusari, Loreto, Peru. Statistically significant covariates (p < 0.05) shown in bold.
CovariateCoeff. Est.SD95% CI
Occupancy
Intercept3.90460.8752(2.33, 5.76)
Density of palms (10 m radius)1.68570.5996(0.56, 2.92)
Elevation (m)1.63690.6771(0.14, 2.87)
Distance to river (km)0.66310.5827(−0.5, 1.84)
Surface roughness (m)0.56270.8427(−0.95, 2.33)
Wetlands (%)0.23360.8515(−1.39, 1.9)
Hunting pressure (km walked by hunters in grid cell)0.19830.5125(−0.76, 1.32)
Detection
Intercept1.69710.528(−2.79, −0.71)
Trail present (ref: not present)−0.12950.158(−0.43, 0.18)
Camera trapping effort0.10570.0759(−0.04, 0.26)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Griffiths, B.M.; Pajuelo Chávez, G. Armadillos May Be an Underexploited Source of Food Security for Rural Communities in the Peruvian Amazon. Diversity 2025, 17, 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17100665

AMA Style

Griffiths BM, Pajuelo Chávez G. Armadillos May Be an Underexploited Source of Food Security for Rural Communities in the Peruvian Amazon. Diversity. 2025; 17(10):665. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17100665

Chicago/Turabian Style

Griffiths, Brian M., and Gabriela Pajuelo Chávez. 2025. "Armadillos May Be an Underexploited Source of Food Security for Rural Communities in the Peruvian Amazon" Diversity 17, no. 10: 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17100665

APA Style

Griffiths, B. M., & Pajuelo Chávez, G. (2025). Armadillos May Be an Underexploited Source of Food Security for Rural Communities in the Peruvian Amazon. Diversity, 17(10), 665. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17100665

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop