New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Rare Designation May Not Be Well-Done

A study in the journal Public Library of Science ONE found that calling an endangered species "rare" may focus the kind of attention on it that could speed its demise. Christie Nicholson reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

Which would you rather see: a rare Nepalese gharial or a common vole? Even without knowing what these animals are, you might be more intrigued by the gharial, simply because it is rare. This is the conclusion of research published in the journal Public Library of Science ONE.

The researchers say that labeling endangered animals as “rare,” may harm the species, raising its value and so putting it at greater risk of being exploited within the illegal pet-trade, for either medicines or exotic zoos.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Scientists created a Web site where users could view images of either “rare” or “common” animals. When users clicked on one of the two options, up popped a progress bar showing the images in the process of downloading. But, irritatingly, the download took a whopping six minutes (although users did have the option to cancel). When the download finally completed, the images were designed not to show up!

Well, significantly more users chose the rare slideshow, waited for it to download and often tried again after it didn’t work. So, maybe to save the endangered gharial, we ought to just call it just a tired, ugly crocodile.

—Christie Nicholson

NOTE:  For more on endangered species please read our blog, 60-Second Extinction Countdown.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe