Journal for Nature Conservation 70 (2022) 126301 Available online 13 November 2022 1617-1381/© 2022 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved. Reconciling scientifc and local ecological knowledge to identify priority mammals for conservation in a dry forest area in northeast Brazil Rodolfo Assis Magalh˜ aes a, b, c, d, * , Maria Auxiliadora Drumond a, e , Rodrigo Lima Massara a, f, g , Fl´ avio Henrique Guimar˜ aes Rodrigues a, b a Programa de P´ os-Graduaç˜ ao em Ecologia, Conservaç˜ ao e Manejo da Vida Silvestre, Departamento de Gen´ etica, Ecologia e Evoluç˜ ao, Instituto de Ciˆ encias Biol´ ogicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Antˆ onio Carlos, n ◦ . 6627, Belo Horizonte, 31270-901 Minas Gerais, Brazil b Laborat´ orio de Ecologia de Mamíferos, Departamento de Gen´ etica, Ecologia e Evoluç˜ ao, Instituto de Ciˆ encias Biol´ ogicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Antˆ onio Carlos, n ◦ . 6627, Belo Horizonte, 31270-901 Minas Gerais, Brazil c EDGE of Existence Programme, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, UK d Instituto de Pesquisa e Conservaç˜ ao de Tamandu´ as no Brasil, Rua do Comercio, s/n, Sala 130 Conjunto Porto das Barcas, Parnaíba, Piauí 64200-240, Brazil e Laborat´ orio de Sistemas Socioecol´ ogicos, Departamento de Gen´ etica, Ecologia e Evoluç˜ ao, Instituto de Ciˆ encias Biol´ ogicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Antˆ onio Carlos, n ◦ . 6627, Belo Horizonte, 31270-901 Minas Gerais, Brazil f Laborat´ orio de Ecologia e Conservaç˜ ao, Departamento de Gen´ etica, Ecologia e Evoluç˜ ao, Instituto de Ciˆ encias Biol´ ogicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Antˆ onio Carlos, n ◦ . 6627, Belo Horizonte, 31270-901 Minas Gerais, Brazil g Instituto SerraDiCal de Pesquisa e Conservaç˜ ao, Rua Jos´ e Hemet´ erio de Andrade, n ◦ . 570, Belo Horizonte, 30493-180 Minas Gerais, Brazil A R T I C L E INFO Keywords: Caatinga, ethnobiology, human-wildlife coex- istence Participatory methods Poaching ABSTRACT Species prioritization for conservation is primarily based on extinction risk assessments but less on sociocultural factors that infuence conservation effectiveness. Here, we prioritized mammals for conservation according to their need for conservation attention, the feasibility of their conservation, and their potential to be used as fagship species in a rural community in northeast Brazil. We assessed species occurrence and ethnobiology through interviews, camera trapping, and active searches, and developed a prioritization scheme that accounts for species’ threat level (conservation status and local hunting pressure), cultural importance, and popularity. We found Tolypeutes tricinctus as the overall top-priority species because of its Endangered status and high popularity, which makes its conservation needed and feasible, and this species a potential conservation fagship. Panthera onca was the highest priority regarding the need for conservation attention due to its Critically Endangered status but the least feasible to conserve as it was the most unpopular species. Mazama gouazoubira was the most hunted and popular species. Despite not being threatened, it may also be prioritized for conservation, given its high hunting pressure and popularity, thereby constituting a possible local fagship species. Our results show that priority species for conservation can be reliably identifed based on measures of need for conservation attention and expected conservation feasibility in local scales using rapid assessments. Accounting for ethnobiology in species prioritization for conservation allows a better understanding of the needs, opportunities, and obstacles for their conservation, consequently leading to better resource-allocation decisions in different socio-economic scenarios. 1. Introduction Biodiversity conservation requires planning to inform resource- allocation decisions for implementing actions, given the scarcity of re- sources available for this purpose (Game et al., 2013). In a broad sense, conservation planning includes prioritizing sites to establish protected areas or to conserve a given species as well as defning priority species for conservation and adequate actions to protect them (Arponen, 2012; Game et al., 2013). Conservation planning relies on spatial data of biodiversity distri- bution when the objective is to prioritize areas (Smith et al., 2019). Species prioritization, in turn, is typically based on extinction risk * Corresponding author at: Programa de P´ os-Graduaç˜ ao em Ecologia, Conservaç˜ ao e Manejo da Vida Silvestre, Departamento de Gen´ etica, Ecologia e Evoluç˜ ao, Instituto de Ciˆ encias Biol´ ogicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Antˆ onio Carlos, n ◦ . 6627, Belo Horizonte, 31270-901 Minas Gerais, Brazil. E-mail address: rodolfoassismagalhaes@gmail.com (R. Assis Magalh˜ aes). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal for Nature Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jnc https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126301 Received 8 December 2021; Received in revised form 7 November 2022; Accepted 8 November 2022