Reacción a "Conservation efforts focus on a few popular species"

The press release adequately and accurately reflects the main findings of this study.

This study is of a very high quality. The authors have done an exceptional job analysing a total of 14,566 projects focused on the protection of specific species that have been carried out between 1992 and 2016. The aim of this study was to analyse which groups have been allocated a larger budget for their conservation and what category of protection the species considered within these groups had. To do so, the authors rely on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, which provides a solid basis for the analysis. Subsequently, the authors detail in a very precise way how the funds of the projects studied have been distributed for the conservation of species under different categories of threat.

The work is truly illuminating, providing novel and valuable information by bringing together raw data involving different groups of species. It lays a fundamental foundation for future, more targeted research that can focus on particular groups, species or geographic areas. Furthermore, although it was not the authors' objective, it is necessary to point out that, on many occasions, the conservation of a species depends directly on the protection of its habitat, something that was not taken into account in this study and which cannot be ignored.

This study highlights a worrying reality. The more charismatic and larger species tend to receive more attention and funding for their conservation. However, other species that are not considered as attractive but are in a more vulnerable situation do not receive the support they should. We must bear in mind that the value of a species is not just about its appearance; fungi, amphibians or reptiles also play a fundamental role in the functioning of ecosystems and often go unnoticed.

We cannot allow the conservation of a species to be based on its popularity.