WRITE BACK WRITE BACK WRITE BACK
25
The public perception of
animal diversity: what do
postage stamps tell us?
Peer-reviewed letter
The biodiversity crisis and its conse-
quences are key issues in modern
times, within and outside of the acad-
emic world. Assessing how the gen-
eral public perceives biodiversity is
important given the public’s strong
influence on decision makers. We
quantified public perception of ani-
mal diversity using information
derived from one of the world’s most
popular hobbies – philately, or stamp
collecting (Dimson and Spaenjers
2011). We estimated the quantity of
issued stamps illustrating animals
using data retrieved from two widely
used “buy and sell” internet sites:
Delcampe (www.delcampe.net) and
eBay (www.ebay.com). These sites
were monitored for “listings” of fau-
nal-themed stamps during 35 consec-
utive days, and mean values were cal-
culated for each taxon. To minimize
the potential problem of non-inde-
pendence for data obtained during
consecutive days, we also calculated
means based on three randomly
selected non-consecutive dates (6
March, 9 April, and 30 August 2012)
that were separated by more than 30
days (ie for a period greater than the
maximum period a given listing can
be advertised continuously). In this
context, “listing” is a particular
advertisement, which may consist of
one stamp or, more commonly, a set
of stamps about the same topic.
Because the mean number of daily
listings on Delcampe was greater than
that on eBay (413 000 versus 66 000),
and because the faunal categories dis-
played were more detailed (reflecting
monophyletic taxa), only results
obtained for Delcampe are presented
here (although similar trends were
seen on eBay). We compared the
observed number of listings per taxon
to the expected number of listings
based on the estimated number of
animal species of each taxon (Brusca
and Brusca 2003; Pough et al. 2008).
Comparisons were performed at four
© The Ecological Society of America
6
(a) Animalia (b) Chordata 9
20 4
15 2
0
10
–2
Stamp abundance relative to
5
–4
taxon species richness
0 –6
–5 –8
–10 –10
–15 –12
Chordata Crustacea Insecta Mollusca Others Amphibia Aves Mammalia Pisces Reptilia
90 20
80 (c) Mammalia (d) Aves
70 15
60
50 10
40
30 5
20
10 0
0
–10 –5
–20
–30 –10
a a a a a a s a s a
id tyl or ce er ph ial tyl te de nti
ric ac niv ta pt or up ac ma ci de
a es es es es es es es es es es es es es es es es es es
rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm rm
ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo ifo
so iod ar Ce hiro om ars od Pri bos Ro er od dri oni mb cul on allGru ser can pter Pic llari tac isc trig ion
ro
Af Ar
t C C ag M ris
L
s
Pr
o
s p a
An A har Cic olu CuFal
c G s e o
PaPel nic
e sit en S uth
oc P ph r
Pe C C
oe Pr S St
Ph
Figure 1. Postage stamps issued relative to the number expected to be issued, assuming
that stamp issuing should reflect the actual species diversity of each taxon. Stamp
“issuing” is based on the number of stamps advertised on three non-consecutive dates
(see text) at the Delcampe site (means ± 95% confidence intervals are presented). Blue
bars represent the ratio between observed and expected values and show taxa for which
stamp issuing was greater than expected. Red bars represent the ratio between expected
and observed values × −1, and show taxa for which stamp issuing was smaller than
expected. Differences between observed and expected values were highly significant in
all comparisons (Chi-square test, P << 0.001). A separate test was performed for each
of the three dates. The mammalian categories are Orders except for the “Marsupials”,
which is a grouping of several metatherian Orders.
taxonomic levels (Figure 1). The ers, and cuckoos) were 2.6–4.2 less
results for calculating observed values represented than expected (Figure 1d).
based on 35 consecutive days and 3 These discrepancies were even stronger
non-consecutive days were virtually among mammals. Perissodactyls (eg
identical; the histograms in Figure 1 horses, rhinoceroses) and proboscideans
are based on the data from the non- (eg elephants) were, respectively, 57
consecutive days. and 78.8 times more represented
Species belonging to Phylum Chor- than expected, whereas rodents and
data were on average 15.9 times more bats were, respectively, 12.8 and 21.8
represented than expected, whereas times less represented than expected
members of Subphylum Crustacea, (Figure 1c).
Class Insecta, and Phylum Mollusca, as We then imagined a scenario where
well as other invertebrates, were 1.8 to biologists could somehow influence
7.1 times less represented than the issuing of stamps. Would the
expected (Figure 1a). Within Chordata, results be different? We were able to
birds and mammals were 2.8 and 4.5 approach this question given that
times more represented than expected, agreements between non-governmen-
respectively; conversely, reptiles, fish, tal organizations dedicated to wildlife
and amphibians were 2.6, 5, and 10.7 preservation and postal services have
times less represented, respectively been established worldwide. For
(Figure 1b). Among birds, some Orders instance, since 1983, WWF authorizes
(penguins, flamingoes, ostriches and the use of its logo on stamps illustrat-
allies, ducks, birds of prey) were ing animal species, most commonly
4.6–18.4 times more represented than those listed within one of the
expected, whereas others (passerines, International Union for Conservation
hummingbirds, toucans and woodpeck- of Nature (IUCN) risk categories.
www.frontiersinecology.org

(a)
10
(b)
Figure 2. Examples of over-represented and under-represented taxa in postage stamps
illustrating animals. (a) One favorite in philately, the scarlet macaw (Ara macao),
depicted on a four-stamp set issued by Belize in 2003. (b) A set of stamps showing
several insects issued by the UK in 2008.
Therefore, we compared the observed
number of WWF stamps with the
expected number of stamps based on
the respective diversity of each animal
taxon on the IUCN Red List.
We identified the same general pat-
tern previously observed for all stamps
and all animals, but with a weaker bias
– most notably for Chordata (within
Kingdom Animalia); mammalian
Orders Perissodactyla and Probosci-
dea; and avian Orders Phoenicopteri-
formes, Sphenisciformes, and Struthi-
oniformes (WebFigure 1). However,
although WWF stamps seem to
reduce the bias and favor the issuing
of stamps illustrating less popular
taxa, the dataset with which WWF
stamps were compared is biased itself;
for instance, on the IUCN Red
List, there are more vertebrates than
invertebrates.
Educational programs are known to
be effective in increasing the number
and variety of species that people,
regardless of age or gender, can recog-
nize (Weilbacher 1993; Lindemann-
Matthies 2002). Stamps cannot be
regarded as a conventional “educa-
tional program” but, given their wide
audience, their impact on public opin-
ion can be large. For example, when
the World Health Organization
www.frontiersinecology.org
launched an international campaign
for the eradication of malaria in the
early 1960s, 110 countries issued
stamps dedicated to that campaign
(Borgsteede 2001). Our results show
what kind of message concerning ani-
mal diversity people are receiving
directly or indirectly through stamps.
We found that images of birds and
mammals, and especially some groups
within those taxa, appear much more
frequently on stamps than members of
other groups with greater diversity
(Figure 2), reinforcing the public per-
ception that the former are perhaps
“more important” in nature. As
Wilson (1987) pointed out, “if human
beings were not so impressed by size
alone, they would consider an ant
more wonderful than a rhinoceros”.
The 21st century is considered to
be the century of extinctions (Dubois
2003; Rudd 2011). However, as some
have argued, people will only miss a
species if they know it and have
developed a relationship with it
(Weilbacher 1993). In this sense,
postage stamps may represent an
important but so far underestimated
tool to disseminate information
about the enormous diversity of plant
and animal species living on Earth.
To increase the effectiveness of this
Write Back
tool, we suggest that conservation
societies should be encouraged to
work with governments and postal
agencies to promote the issuance of
plant and animal stamps that will
help to broaden the public’s exposure
to groups of organisms that are not
normally featured.
André Nemésio*, Diana P Seixas,
and Heraldo L Vasconcelos
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia,
Minas Gerais, Brazil
*
(andre.nemesio@gmail.com)
Borgsteede FHM. 2001. Parasites on
stamps: where parasitology meets phi-
lately. Acta Parasit 46: 58–61.
Brusca RC and Brusca GJ. 2003. Inverte-
brates (2nd edn). Sunderland, UK:
Sinauer Associates.
Dimson E and Spaenjers C. 2011. Ex post:
the investment performance of col-
lectible stamps. J Financ Econ 100:
443–58.
Dubois A. 2003. The relationships between
taxonomy and conservation biology in
the century of extinctions. Comp Rend
Biol 326: S9–S21.
Lindemann-Matthies P. 2002. The influ-
ence of an educational program on
children’s perception of biodiversity. J
Environ Educ 33: 22–31.
Pough FH, Janis CM, and Heiser JB. 2008.
Vertebrate life (8th edn). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rudd MA. 2011. Scientists’ opinions on
the global status and management of
biological diversity. Conserv Biol 25:
1165–75.
Weilbacher M. 1993. The renaissance of
the naturalist. J Environ Educ 25: 4–7.
Wilson EO. 1987. The little things that
run the world (the importance and
conservation of invertebrates). Conserv
Biol 1: 344–46.
doi:10.1890/13.WB.001
New tracking philosophy
for birds
Peer-reviewed letter
In 1835 the English poet William
Wordsworth wrote “Resplendent
Wanderer! followed with glad eyes,
Where’er her course; mysterious Bird!
To whom, by wondering Fancy stirred”,
capturing both our fascination with
bird movement and our helplessness
to determine it. But things have since
changed. Minute leg rings allow for
banded individuals to be resighted by
© The Ecological Society of America