Journal Search Engine

to

Search Advanced Search Adode Reader(link)
Download PDF Export Citation Korean Bibliography
ISSN : 1226-9999(Print)
ISSN : 2287-7851(Online)
Korean J. Environ. Biol. Vol.43 No.4 pp.527-536
DOI : https://doi.org/10.11626/KJEB.2025.43.4.527

Commercial breeding of non-native amphibians and reptiles in South Korea: Trends and potential ecological risks

Soo Jeong Park, Eugene Kim1, Injeong Jeon2, Kyo Soung Koo3*
Underwood International College, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Republic of Korea
1School of Biological Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, 92093, USA
2Gumi Youth-led Ecological Monitoring Team, Gumi 39196, Republic of Korea
3Korean Environmental Geography Institute, Sejong 30141, Republic of Korea
*Corresponding author Kyo Soung Koo Tel. 044-868-6122 E-mail. flqpfj@hanmail.net

Contribution to Environmental Biology


▪ This study analyzed the trends in the importation and commercial breeding of non-native amphibian and reptile species since 2008.


▪ It specifically examined the potential ecological impacts of these introduced species on native environments in Korea, highlighting the urgent need for effective policies, continuous monitoring, and public education to protect domestic ecosystems.


03/12/2025 16/12/2025 22/12/2025

Abstract


This study investigated trends and characteristics of the non-native amphibian and reptile pet market in South Korea, focusing on commercial breeding practices based on online data collected through August 2021. A total of 351 commercial breeding cases involving 106 species (79 reptiles and 27 amphibians) were documented. The Burmese python was first recorded in 2008, followed by the golden tree frog in 2015. Since 2013, commercial breeding activity has significantly increased, particularly among squamates and testudines. The corn snake emerged as the most frequently bred reptile, while the Dendrobatidae family was the only amphibian group noted among the most commonly bred species. According to IUCN Red List criteria, 77.5% of the bred species were classified as Least Concern. However, species of conservation concern were also identified, including one Extinct, three Critically Endangered, and one Endangered species. Private breeders represented 67.9% of the cases, achieving a breeding success rate of 73.3%. Despite evident market growth and breeder activity, the prevalence of endangered and invasive species, along with insufficient regulation, poses significant risks to biodiversity. These findings highlight the urgent need for enhanced monitoring, stricter legal frameworks, and targeted public education to mitigate the impacts of the expanding exotic pet market in Korea.


East Asia , herpetology , IUCN , pet , captive breeding

초록

    1. INTRODUCTION

    Keeping animals provides psychological comfort, attachment, and social well-being for owners (Pasmans et al. 2017;Haddon et al. 2021). Moreover, the pet market satisfies people’s desire to own rare animals with attractive colors and shapes (Warwick 2014;Measey et al. 2019). The high profit associated with trading rare species is another major factor contributing to the expansion of the pet industry (Tapley et al. 2011;Koo et al. 2020a;Gippet and Bertelsmeier 2021). In addition, recent advancements in social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, have accelerated the growth of the pet market by making non-native animals more visible and accessible to the public (Siriwat and Nijman 2018;Spee et al. 2019). This visibility provided by social media has further fueled the demand for exotic pets. However, the increasing popularity of such animals has led to serious ecological consequences when owners release unwanted pets into the wild.

    Multiple studies have reported that the release of nonnative pets has caused various ecological disruptions, including predation on native species, habitat degradation, and disease transmission (Warwick 2014;Stringham and Lockwood 2018). For instance, cases such as the predation by Burmese pythons (Dove et al. 2011), erosion caused by green iguanas (Krysko et al. 2007), and the global spread of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (O’Hanlon et al. 2018) through the pet trade demonstrate the serious impacts of introduced herpetofauna on native biodiversity (Stuart et al. 2004;Skerratt et al. 2017). Moreover, the introduction of non-native species has caused adverse impacts not only on biodiversity but also on human health and socioeconomic systems (Lovell et al. 2006;Kettunen et al. 2009;Bradshaw et al. 2016;Jardine and Sanchirico 2017;Soto et al. 2022). Therefore, understanding human-driven factors such as captive breeding is essential for managing biological invasions effectively.

    Captive breeding of amphibian and reptile species is common in the pet market. This practice can reduce the trauma associated with wild capture and long-distance transport during importation (Ebedes et al. 2006). However, it also raises animal welfare concerns due to restrictive housing conditions, poor hygiene, and stress during the sales process (Warwick 1997;Altherr and Freyer 2001;Auliya 2003). In addition, inbreeding to produce more novel and attractive color morphs can lead to serious health issues, including renal anomalies and inherited defects (Spellerberg 1976;Miller 1998). In South Korea, the American bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) was introduced through commercial breeding in the 1970s, but subsequent releases by breeders resulted in its establishment as one of the most dominant invasive amphibians (Oh and Hong 2007;Kang et al. 2019). This case exemplifies how economic motives in the pet and farming industries can unintentionally drive biological invasions.

    In South Korea, nearly 700 species of non-native amphibians and reptiles have been traded as pets through online markets (Koo et al. 2020a). Over 20 species have been observed in the wild, with several turtles such as the Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta elegans), River Cooter (Pseudemys concinna), and Peninsula Cooter (P. peninsularis) establishing self-sustaining populations (Koo and Sung, 2019;Koo et al. 2020b, 2022;Cheon et al. 2023). Hybridization between the endangered native species (Mauremys reevesii) and non-native species (M. sinensis) has also been reported (Baek et al. 2024). Recently, the Korean government has initiated nationwide surveys to assess the ecological impacts of nonnative species (NIE 2021, 2022). Nevertheless, identifying which species are being traded or imported remains challenging, as import records often lack specific taxonomic information.

    When non-native species are imported into South Korea, they are often simply labeled as “turtles,” “snakes,” or by generic English names without specifying the exact species. As a result, there is no accurate understanding of which species are being imported or in what quantities. Moreover, large-scale smuggling of non-native species is suspected, but no official data are available to confirm it. Currently, private breeding is not regulated under domestic law, and if the current trend continues, the problem is likely to become even more serious in the future (Hill et al. 2024). Consequently, social media can serve as a valuable tool for the early detection and monitoring of trade in non-native species. By systematically analyzing social media data, it is possible to strengthen early warning systems and improve management strategies for invasive species in South Korea. This highlights the need for integrating digital surveillance into national biodiversity management frameworks (Lockwood et al. 2019).

    The number of people using social media platforms such as YouTube and Facebook has been steadily increasing (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010;Auxier and Anderson 2021). Although the reliability of data obtained from social media remains controversial, such data are sometimes used in scientific research because they allow researchers to collect abundant survey information through cost-effective methods (Burn 2014;Toivonen et al. 2019). These data are particularly useful for studies investigating interactions between humans and nature (Di Minin et al. 2015). For example, social media data have been employed to analyze suppliers’ profits from trading non-native species, consumer preferences related to such trade, and the public perception of nonnative species (Measey et al. 2019;Kim et al. 2020;Harrington et al. 2021;Nehemy et al. 2022;Gippet et al. 2023).

    Most previous studies have focused on the import and trade of non-native species, which are useful for understanding their introduction and spread across continents or countries. However, few studies have explored the commercial breeding of these species, which limits our ability to analyze and manage non-native populations effectively. Therefore, this study investigates the following aspects: (1) changes in the commercial breeding of non-native amphibians and reptiles, (2) characteristics of commercial breeding by target species or groups, (3) the international protection level of target species, and (4) the types of breeders. The primary objective of this study is to enhance the management of non-native species and bridge the existing knowledge gap on commercial breeding practices in South Korea.

    2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

    2.1. Data collection

    Data on commercial breeding cases were collected from social network platforms and major web search engines, including Google, YouTube, Daum, and Naver. We used keywords related to breeding, such as “cultivation,” “breeding,” “rearing,” “caring,” and “housing,” along with taxon-specific terms including “reptile,” “amphibian,” “frog,” “turtle,” “snake,” “lizard,” “salamander,” “non-native species,” and “rare species.” All searches were conducted in both Korean and English. Redundant entries were removed, and data collection was conducted until August 31, 2021.

    2.2. Data categorization

    Data were classified by species imported into South Korea and by taxonomic order within each class (Koo et al. 2020a). For amphibians, we included Anura (frogs and toads) and Caudata (salamanders), but excluded Gymnophiona (caecilians) due to the absence of relevant cases. Reptiles were categorized into Squamata (lizards and snakes), Testudines (turtles), and Crocodilia (crocodiles). To improve temporal accuracy, data were organized based on the date when the original materials (writings, photos, and videos) were created, rather than the upload date on the internet. Species identification and taxonomic classification followed the IUCN Red List (www.iucnredlist.org), the Reptile Database (www. reptile-database.org), and AmphibiaWeb (www.amphi biaweb.org). In cases where species or genus names were not clearly specified in the source materials, such as Dendrobatidae and Lampropeltis, records were categorized at the family level to minimize taxonomic ambiguity and analytical errors. According to their IUCN conservation status, commercially bred non-native species were grouped into relevant categories. Commercial breeders were further classified as private breeders or pet shops based on their selling methods and business registration characteristics.

    2.3. Statistical analysis

    Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate temporal trends and frequency distributions in commercial breeding data. Linear regression analyses were conducted to examine temporal trends in the number of commercially bred species for each group, with year as the predictor variable; Caudata was excluded from the regression because of its small sample size. Chi-square (χ2) tests compared observed frequencies among taxonomic groups (amphibians vs. reptiles, Squamata, Testudines, Anura, Caudata), IUCN conservation status categories, and breeder types (private breeders vs. pet shops).

    All analyses assumed independence of observations and adequate expected cell frequencies (>5 for chisquare tests). Temporal data used creation dates of original materials for accuracy, excluding upload dates. Statistical significance was set at α=0.05, with all computations conducted using SPSS version 26.0 (IBM, USA).

    3. RESULTS

    3.1. Diversity of commercial breeding in South Korea

    Overall, a total of 351 cases of non-native amphibian and reptile breeding were identified, consisting of 48 amphibian and 303 reptile cases (Supplementary dataset). These represented 106 species across 77 genera, including 79 reptile species in 55 genera and 27 amphibian species in 22 genera. There was a significant difference in the frequency of commercial breeding between reptiles and amphibians (Chi-square test, χ2=160.920, df=1, p<0.001). Among all taxa, Squamata was the most frequently bred group (59.3%, n=208) recorded in South Korea (χ2=119.108, df=4, p<0.001), followed by Testudines (27.1%, n=95), Anura (12.8%, n=45), and Caudata (0.9%, n=3) (Fig. 1). No crocodilian species were involved in commercial breeding in South Korea.

    3.2. Trend in commercial breeding

    The first documented case of commercial breeding for non-native reptiles in South Korea was the Burmese python (Python bivittatus) in 2008, while for amphibians it was the golden tree frog (Polypedates leucomystax) in 2015, respectively (Supplementary dataset). With the exception of Caudata, all major taxonomic groups showed a statistically significant increase in commercial breeding cases over time (Fig. 2).

    3.3. Most commonly bred species in South Korea

    The top 10 species accounted for 53.6% of all commercial breeding cases in South Korea (Fig. 3). Among the top 10 species, the corn snake (Pantherophis guttatus) was the most frequently bred species, comprising 9.7% (n=34) of cases. Notably, only one amphibian species, a member of the family Dendrobatidae, was included in the top 10.

    3.4. Conservation status of commercially bred species

    Most commercially bred species in South Korea were classified as Least Concern (LC), representing 77.5% (n=69) of the 89 species recorded (n=89, χ2=240.326, df=5, p<0.001) (Fig. 4). Notably, one species (Pelusios castaneus) had a status of Extinct (EX), while three species (Astrochelys radiata, Malacochersus tornieri, Pangshura sylhetensis) were classified as Critically Endangered (CR), and one species (Clemmys guttata) as Endangered (EN). These results indicate that the majority of commercially bred species are relatively common, while a few threatened taxa are also involved in trade, warranting attention to conservation concerns.

    3.5. Type of commercial breeder

    The proportion of private breeders was 67.9% (n= 220), while pet shops accounted for 32.1% (n=104) of all cases (n=324, χ2=104.000, p<0.001). Of the 337 total breeding attempts, 247 (73.3%) were successful: 72.3% (159/220) for private breeders and 76.0% (79/ 104) for pet shops.

    4. DISCUSSION

    The non-native amphibian and reptile pet market, along with commercial breeding activity in South Korea, has expanded rapidly in recent years and is projected to continue growing. This trend reflects not only rising demand among consumers to keep exotic pets, but also increased profitability for sellers (Measey et al. 2019). Currently, more than 500 non-native reptile species are available in the Korean market at prices ranging from $1 to $80,000 (Koo et al. 2020a). In contrast, non-native amphibians are sold for up to $100, making reptiles the primary focus of commercial breeding efforts (NIE 2015). Reptiles are especially favored as terrestrial vertebrates for trade due to their quiet behavior, ease of feeding, and simple housing requirements (Paré 2006;Bush et al. 2014;Scheffers et al. 2019). The combination of high market value and ease of care has contributed to the rapid increase in reptile imports and commercial breeding (Marshall et al. 2020). However, because reptiles often have long lifespans and may reach large sizes, owners may eventually be unable to care for their pets and face pressure to release them into the wild. Thus, the long-term management of large exotic reptiles represents a growing challenge for wildlife authorities.

    Although the ball python is a globally favored species in the pet trade (Valdez 2021), the commercial breeding and sale of reptiles in South Korea largely centers on smaller species such as the corn snake and leopard gecko (Koo et al. 2020a). Due to the lack of targeted case studies on the commercial breeding of imported species, the specific reasons behind these preferences in Korea remain unclear. Nevertheless, it is plausible that the predominance of smaller species is influenced by local housing conditions, as Koreans generally favor communal living environments (apartments) over single-family homes, which may limit available breeding space.

    Species classified as Least Concern (LC) are not subject to active protection measures, as urgent conservation is not yet required (IUCN 2022). As a result, these species can be imported easily and make up a large portion of the pet market. The majority of amphibians and reptiles traded as pets in South Korea are LC species (Bush et al. 2014;Measey et al. 2019). Nonetheless, 22.5% of species involved in commercial breeding fell into categories above Near Threatened (NT), indicating the need for protective measures. Additionally, several endangered species were found among those bred commercially. While some records may reflect misidentified names, the possibility of smuggling cannot be ruled out. The prevalence of non-native species and commercial breeding activities is likely underestimated, as this study analyzed only publicly accessible data. Therefore, it is crucial to clarify when and how non-native - including endangered - species are imported and distributed, in order to monitor and prevent illegal trade. Establishing transparent tracking and reporting systems could play an essential role in this process.

    Unlike Europe and the United States (e.g., Florida), South Korea currently lacks specific regulations governing the commercial breeding of non-native species (Meshaka 2005;Stringham and Lockwood 2018). The absence of such regulation poses challenges for effective management, increasing the risk of issues such as hybridization, inbreeding, illegal trade, and the unintended introduction of non-native taxa (Valdez 2021). One notable example is the production of “morphs”- animals created by artificial hybridization and selected for uncommon colors and patterns, which often fetch high prices in the marketplace (Valdez 2021). Enthusiasts seeking rare morphs may spend up to $20,000 for a single animal (Collis and Fenili 2011). Because morphs yield higher profits than wild-type individuals, commercial breeders are likely to prioritize producing species such as corn snakes and leopard geckos, which are capable of generating diverse and lucrative morphs (Valdez 2021). In the worst cases, individuals with little market appeal may be discarded. Furthermore, the lack of breeding regulation enables practices such as forced or highly selective inbreeding for color or pattern, which may ultimately result in increased rates of genetic disorders and disease among captive populations, emphasizing the urgent need for standardized welfare and breeding guidelines (Spellerberg 1976;Miller 1998).

    Importing, propagating, and breeding non-native species can offer important benefits. When private breeders and pet shops possess excellent husbandry and management skills, collaborative efforts with researchers may support the conservation of endangered or rare species (Pasmans et al. 2017;Browne et al. 2018, 2019). Additionally, interacting with animals can reduce negative emotions and promote positive ones, resulting in improvements in psychological, physiological, and social health (Pasmans et al. 2017;Janssens et al. 2020). Nevertheless, responsible keeping of exotic species requires meeting minimum welfare standards for animals, educating owners, maintaining hygiene, discouraging indiscriminate wild capture, and establishing appropriate veterinary services (Pasmans et al. 2017). As South Korea moves forward, it is essential to focus on the positive human and animal outcomes that can be achieved through well-managed protection and welfare measures, rather than allowing indiscriminate importation and proliferation.

    The use of social media for research offers a major advantage by enabling researchers to access information about rare species that would otherwise be difficult to obtain (Burn 2014;Toivonen et al. 2019). However, online data are subject to the uploader’s subjective selection, meaning that content perceived negatively by the public-such as breeding failures, animal mortality, or the use of animals as food-is unlikely to be shared (Scheffers et al. 2019;Koo et al. 2020a). Nonetheless, social media can still serve as a valuable source for understanding the current status of non-native species and forecasting future trends in their import and trade (Measey et al. 2019;Gippet and Bertelsmeier 2021).

    5. CONCLUSION

    The results of this study highlight the dynamic and complex nature of the non-native amphibian and reptile pet market in South Korea, driven by economic, social, and technological factors. The lack of regulatory oversight and the widespread popularity of morphs and exotic species further underscore the potential risks to ecological integrity, animal welfare, and effective species management. To promote sustainable and responsible practices, there is an urgent need for comprehensive policies that integrate accurate monitoring, public education, and cooperation between breeders, researchers, and authorities. Only through such multi-faceted approaches can the challenges posed by the rapid expansion of the exotic pet trade be addressed, ensuring better outcomes for both wildlife and society.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    We thank Young Hae Hwang, Hee Jin Baek, and Hui Jeong Seo for their assistance with this study, and Taeeun Um for providing the illustrations (as well). We thank members of the Animal Behavior Lab at Ewha Womans University who supported the preparation of this study and provided valuable comments. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) (grant number: RS-2021-KE001530, RS-2021-KE001362).

    SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS

    Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at https://doi.org/10.11626/ KJEB.2025.43.4.527.

    CRediT authorship contribution statement

    SJ Park: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing-Original draft. E Kim: Investigation, Writing- Review & editing. I Jeon: Writing-Review & editing. KS Koo: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing-Review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisition. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    Declaration of Competing Interest

    The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

    Figure

    KJEB-43-4-527_F1.jpg

    Number of commercially bred non-native amphibians and reptiles by taxonomic group in South Korea. Bars show case numbers by group. Animal silhouettes represent each group.

    KJEB-43-4-527_F2.jpg

    Commercial breeding cases of non-native amphibians and reptiles in South Korea from January 2008 to August 2021. Taxon silhouettes indicate the year when the first commercial breeding was confirmed for each group.

    KJEB-43-4-527_F3.jpg

    Top 10 non-native amphibian and reptile species targeted for commercial breeding in South Korea. The three most frequently bred species are the corn snake, leopard gecko, and diamondback terrapin. Illustrations by Taeeun Um.

    KJEB-43-4-527_F4.jpg

    IUCN conservation status categories of non-native amphibian and reptile species commercially bred in South Korea.

    Table

    Reference

    1. Altherr F and D Freyer. 2001. Morbidity and Mortality in Private Husbandry of Reptiles. A Report by Pro Wildlife to the RSPCA. Munich, Germany.
    2. Auliya M. 2003. Hot Trade in Cool Creatures: A Review of the Live Reptile Trade in the European Union in the 1990s with a Focus on Germany. TRAFFIC Europe. Brussels, Belgium.
    3. Auxier B and M Anderson. 2021. Social Media Use in 2021. Pew Research Center. Washington, DC, USA.
    4. Baek HJ, E Cheong, Y Kim, KS Koo, SH Kim, CD Park and JD Yoon. 2024. Geographical distribution of Mauremys sinensis, Mauremys reevesii, and their hybrids in South Korea. Animals 14:2626.
    5. Bradshaw CJ, B Leroy, C Bellard, D Roiz, C Albert, A Fournier, M Barbet-Massin, JM Salles, F Simard and F Courchamp. 2016. Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects. Nat. Commun. 7:12986.
    6. Browne RK, AJ Silla, R Upton, G Della-Togna, R Marcec-Greaves, NV Shishova, VK Uteshev, B Proaño, OD Pérez, N Mansour, SA Kaurova, EN Gakhova, J Cosson, B Dyzuba, LI Kramarova, D McGinnity, M Gonzalez, J Clulow and S Clulow. 2019. Sperm collection and storage for the sustainable management of amphibian biodiversity. Theriogenology 133:187e200.
    7. Browne RK, P Janzen, MF Bagaturov and DK van Houte. 2018. Amphibian keeper conservation breeding programs. J. Zool. Res. 2:29-46.
    8. Burn CC. 2014. In social media offers new insights into human and animal behaviour: how to harness them scientifically. pp. 253-255. In: Proceedings of Measuring Behavior 2014. 9th International Conference on Methods and Techniques in Behavioral Research (Spink AJ, EL van den Broek, LWS Loijens, M Woloszynowska-Fraser and LPJJ Noldus, eds.). Noldus Information Technology. Wageningen, Netherlands.
    9. Bush ER, SE Baker and DW Macdonald. 2014. Global trade in exotic pets 2006-2012. Conserv. Biol. 28:663-676.
    10. Cheon SJ, M Rahman, JA Lee, SM Park, JH Park, DH Lee and HC Sung. 2023. Confirmation of the local establishment of alien invasive turtle, Pseudemys peninsularis, in South Korea, using eggshell DNA. PLoS One 18:e0281808.
    11. Collis AH and RN Fenili. 2011. The Modern US Reptile Industry. Georgetown Economic Services. Washington, DC, USA.
    12. Di Minin E, H Tenkanen and T Toivonen. 2015. Prospects and challenges for social media data in conservation science. Front. Environ. Sci. 3:63.
    13. Dove CJ, RW Snow, MR Rochford and FJ Mazzotti. 2011. Birds consumed by the invasive Burmese python (Python molurus bivittatus) in Everglades National Park, Florida, USA. Wilson J. Ornithol. 123:126-131.
    14. Ebedes H, J van Rooyen and JG Du Toit. 2006. Capturing wild animals. pp. 328-430. In: Game Ranch Management (Bothma J du P and JG Du Toit, eds.). 4th Ed. Van Schaik Publishers. Pretoria, South Africa.
    15. Gippet JM and C Bertelsmeier. 2021. Invasiveness is linked to greater commercial success in the global pet trade. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 118:e2016337118.
    16. Gippet JMW, Z Sherpa and C Bertelsmeier. 2023. Reliability of social media data in monitoring the global pet trade in ants. Conserv. Biol. 37:e13994.
    17. Haddon C, OH Burman, P Assheton and A Wilkinson. 2021. Love in cold blood: Are reptile owners emotionally attached to their pets? Anthrozoös 34:739-749.
    18. Harrington LA, M Auliya, H Eckman, AP Harrington, DW Macdonald and N D’Cruze. 2021. Live wild animal exports to supply the exotic pet trade: A case study from Togo using publicly available social media data. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 3:e430.
    19. Hill KGW, OC Stringham, S Moncayo, A Toomes, JJ Tyler, P Cassey and S Delean. 2024. Who’s a pretty bird? Predicting the traded abundance of bird species in Australian online pet trade. Biol. Invasions 26:975-988.
    20. IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee. 2022. Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 15.1. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Gland, Switzerland.
    21. Janssens M, J Eshuis, S Peeters, J Lataster, J Reijnders, MJ Enders-Slegers and N Jacobs. 2020. The pet-effect in daily life: An experience sampling study on emotional wellbeing in pet owners. Anthrozoös 33:579-588.
    22. Jardine SL and JN Sanchirico. 2017. Estimating the cost of invasive species control. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 87:242-257.
    23. Kang HJ, KS Koo and HC Sung. 2019. Current distribution of American bullfrog Rana catesbeiana Shaw, 1802 in the Republic of Korea. BioInvasions Rec. 8:942-946.
    24. Kaplan AM and M Haenlein. 2010. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Bus. Horiz. 53:59-68.
    25. Kettunen M, P Genovesi, S Gollasch, S Pagad, U Starfinger, P ten Brink and C Shine. 2009. Technical Support to EU Strategy on Invasive Alien Species (IAS). Institute for European Environmental Policy. Brussels, Belgium.
    26. Kim H, SM Park, Y Jang and KS Koo. 2020. Public perception on non-native species: based on the news articles about the alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii ). Korean J. Environ. Ecol. 34:396-401.
    27. Koo KS and HC Sung. 2019. Analysis on the important environmental factors for reproduction of Trachemys scripta elegans in Jeju Island, South Korea. Korean J. Ecol. Environ. 52:378- 384.
    28. Koo KS, H Kang, A Kim, S Kwon, MF Chuang, JY Seo and Y Jang. 2022. First report on the natural breeding of river cooter, Pseudemys concinna Le Conte (1830), in the Republic of Korea. BioInvasions Rec. 12:306-312.
    29. Koo KS, HR Park, JH Choi and HC Sung. 2020a. Present status of non-native amphibians and reptiles traded in Korean online pet shop. Korean J. Environ. Ecol. 34:106-114.
    30. Koo KS, S Song, JH Choi and HC Sung. 2020b. Current distribution and status of non-native freshwater turtles in the Wild, Republic of Korea. Sustainability 12:4042.
    31. Krysko KL, KM Enge, EM Donlan, JC Seitz and EA Golden. 2007. Distribution, natural history, and impacts of the introduced green iguana (Iguana iguana) in Florida. Iguana 14:142-151.
    32. Lockwood JL, DJ Welbourne, CM Romagosa, P Cassey, NE Mandrak, A Strecker, B Leung, OC Stringham, B Udell, DJ Episcopio-Sturgeon, MF Tlusty, J Sinclair, MR Springborn, EF Pienaar, AL Rhyne and R Keller. 2019. When pets become pests: The role of the exotic pet trade in producing invasive vertebrate animals. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17:323-330.
    33. Lovell SJ, SF Stone and L Fernandez. 2006. The economic impacts of aquatic invasive species: a review of the literature. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 35:195-208.
    34. Marshall BM, C Strine and AC Hughes. 2020. Thousands of reptile species threatened by under-regulated global trade. Nat. Commun. 11:4738.
    35. Measey J, A Basson, AD Rebelo, AL Nunes, G Vimercati, M Louw and NP Mohanty. 2019. Why have a pet amphibian? Insights from YouTube. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7:52.
    36. Meshaka WE. 2005. Amphibians and Reptiles: Status and Conservation in Florida. Krieger Publishing Company. Malabar, FL, USA.
    37. Miller DVMHA. 1998. Urinary diseases of reptiles: pathophysiology and diagnosis. Semin. Avian Exot. Pet Med. 7:93-103.
    38. Nehemy IKR, TO Gomes, F Paiva, WK Kubo, JEA Júnior, NF Neves and VA São Pedro. 2022. Herpeto -commerce: A look at the illegal online trade of amphibians and reptiles in Brazil. Cuad. Herpetol. 36:185-196.
    39. NIE. 2015. Nationwide Survey of Non-native Species in Korea (I). National Institute of Ecology. Seocheon, Korea.
    40. NIE. 2021. Information for the Field Management of Invasive Alien Species in Korea. National Institute of Ecology. Seocheon, Korea.
    41. NIE. 2022. Nationwide Survey of Non-Native Species in Korea. National Institute of Ecology. Seocheon, Korea.
    42. O’Hanlon SJ, A Rieux, RA Farrer, GM Rosa, B Waldman, A Bataille, TA Kosch, KA Murray, B Brankovics, M Fumagalli, … , E Wombwell, KR Zamudio, DM Aanensen, TY James, MTP Gilbert, C Weldon, J Bosch, F Balloux, TWJ Garner and MC Fisher. 2018. Recent Asian origin of chytrid fungi causing global amphibian declines. Science 621-627.
    43. Oh HS and CE Hong. 2007. Current conditions of habitat for Rana catesbeiana and Trachemys scripta elegans imported to Jeju-do, including proposed management plans. Korean J. Environ. Ecol. 21:311-317.
    44. Paré JA. 2006. An overview of pet reptile species and proper handling. pp. 1661-1664 In: Proceedings of the North American Veterinary Conference. North American Veterinary Conference. Orlando, FL, USA.
    45. Pasmans F, S Bogaerts, J Braeckman, AA Cunningham, T Hellebuyck, RA Griffiths, M Sparreboom, BR Schmidt and A Martel. 2017. Future of keeping pet reptiles and amphibians: Towards integrating animal welfare, human health and environmental sustainability. Vet. Rec. 181:450-450.
    46. Scheffers BR, BF Oliveira, I Lamb and DP Edwards. 2019. Global wildlife trade across the tree of life. Science 366:71-76.
    47. Siriwat P and V Nijman. 2018. Illegal pet trade on social media as an emerging impediment to the conservation of Asian otters species. J. Asia-Pac. Biodivers. 11:469-475.
    48. Skerratt LF, L Berger, R Speare, S Cashins, KR McDonald, AD Phillott, HB Hines and N Kenyon. 2017. Spread of chytridiomycosis has caused the rapid global decline and extinction of frogs. EcoHealth 4:125-134.
    49. Soto I, RN Cuthbert, A Kouba, C Capinha, A Turbelin, EJ Hudgins, C Diagne, F Courchamp and PJ Haubrock. 2022. Global economic costs of herpetofauna invasions. Sci. Rep. 12:10829.
    50. Spee LB, SJ Hazel, E Dal Grande, WSJ Boardman and AL Chaber. 2019. Endangered exotic pets on social media in the Middle East: Presence and impact. Animals 9:480.
    51. Spellerberg IF. 1976. The amphibian and reptile trade with particular reference to collecting in Europe. Biol. Conserv. 10:221- 232.
    52. Stringham OC and JL Lockwood. 2018. Pet problems: Biological and economic factors that influence the release of alien reptiles and amphibians by pet owners. J. Appl. Ecol. 55:2632- 2640.
    53. Stuart SN, JS Chanson, NA Cox, BE Young, ASL Rodrigues, DL Fischman and RW Waller. 2004. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306:1783-1786.
    54. Tapley B, RA Griffiths and I Bride. 2011. Dynamics of the trade in reptiles and amphibians within the United Kingdom over a ten-year period. Herpetol. J. 21:27-34.
    55. Toivonen T, V Heikinheimo, C Fink, A Hausmann, T Hiippala, O Järv, H Tenkanen and E Di Minin. 2019. Social media data for conservation science: A methodological overview. Biol. Conserv. 233:298-315.
    56. Valdez JW. 2021. Using Google trends to determine current, past, and future trends in the reptile pet trade. Animals 11:676.
    57. Warwick C. 1997. The shelf life of reptiles. pp. 1952-1997. In: The Animal Dealers: Evidence of Abuse of Animals in the Commercial Trade (Drayer ME, ed.). Animal Welfare Institute. Washington, DC, USA.
    58. Warwick C. 2014. The morality of the reptile “pet” trade. J. Anim. Ethics. 4:74-94.

    Vol. 40 No. 4 (2022.12)

    Journal Abbreviation 'Korean J. Environ. Biol.'
    Frequency quarterly
    Doi Prefix 10.11626/KJEB.
    Year of Launching 1983
    Publisher Korean Society of Environmental Biology
    Indexed/Tracked/Covered By

    Contact info

    Any inquiries concerning Journal (all manuscripts, reviews, and notes) should be addressed to the managing editor of the Korean Society of Environmental Biology. Yongeun Kim,
    Korea University, Seoul 02841, Korea.
    E-mail: kjeb@koseb.org
    Tel: +82-2-3290-3496 / +82-10-9516-1611