Human–wildlife conflict in the roof of the world: Understanding multidimensional perspectives through a systematic review

Abstract Human–wildlife conflicts have intensified by many folds and at different levels in recent years. The same is true in the case of the Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH), the roof of the world, and a region known for its wealth in biodiversity. We present a systematic literature review (SLR) using the search, appraisal, synthesis, and analysis (SALSA) framework; and for spatial and network analysis, we employed the VOSviewer software. The review—covering 240 peer—articles within a span of 27 years (from 1982 to 2019)—revealed that in the last decade, there was a 57% increase in publications but with a disproportionate geographical and thematic focus. About 82% of the research concentrated on protected areas and large carnivores and mega herbivores played a big role in such conflicts. About 53% of the studies were based on questionnaires, and the main driver reported was habitat disturbance of animals due to land‐cover change, urbanization, and increase in human population. On the management front, the studies reported the use of traditional protection techniques like guarding and fencing. Our analysis of 681 keywords revealed a prominent focus on ‘human‐wildlife conflict,’ ‘Nepal,’ ‘Bhutan,’ ‘Snow Leopard,’ and ‘Leopard’ indicating the issue linked with these species and countries. The involvement of 640 authors from 36 countries indicates increasing interest, and Nepal and India are playing key roles in the region. As for the spatial analysis that was conducted, while it showed regional variations, there were conspicuous limitations in terms of having a transboundary focus. Thus, particular attention ought to be paid to building transboundary partnerships and improving management interventions; there is also a pressing need to understand the patterns of human–wildlife convergence, especially involving meso‐mammals.


| INTRODUC TI ON
The interactions between wildlife and human beings have often resulted in agonistic behavior and conflicts (König et al., 2020;Nyhus, 2016). While instances of human-wildlife conflict (HWC) date back to prehistoric times (Berger & McGraw, 2007;Gordon, 2009), its severity and complexity have increased in the current era (Madden, 2004;Sharma et al., 2020). The animals are known to launch lethal attacks on humans, damage property, raid crops, and kill livestock; on the contrary, humans indulge in retaliatory killings, hunting, and poaching-and these could even involve endangered or keystone wildlife species, thereby posing a threat to biodiversity and imposing legal issues on humans (Peterson et al., 2010;White & Ward, 2011). HWC, thus, has led to economic and psychological disruption, as well as to the spread of zoonotic diseases; it also raises the spectre of extinction as far as certain wildlife species are concerned (Barua et al., 2013;Nyhus, 2016;Thirgood et al., 2005).
The reasons behind HWC are multiple: In the case of the wild animals, it is their habitat loss and its degradation owing to urbanization, intensification of agriculture, and growth in human population (Nyhus, 2016)-increased human dominance in natural landscapes intensifies competition for space and resources, especially for large carnivores like the Royal Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) and the common leopard (Panthera pardus)-that have led to their antagonistic behavior (DeFries et al., 2010;Zimmerman et al., 2010); while in the case of humans, it is primarily the raiding of their crops by the animals-due to food shortage (Hill, 2018) and habitat fragmentation (Choudhury, 2004) that has led to their confrontational posture (Acharya et al., 2017). It is then obvious that the mitigation of this conflict is central to human safety and the health of the ecosystem; but this requires a profound understanding of interrelated socialecological relations (Carter & Linnell, 2016;Treves et al., 2006).
Globally, research on HWC and the coexistence of humans and wildlife has exponentially grown over the last decade in the form of peerreviewed articles and reports (Holland et al., 2018;König et al., 2020;Nyhus, 2016). According to a recent study, over the last decade, 87% of the publications on HWC concentrated on the Asian countries of India, Nepal, and Indonesia (Torres et al., 2018). This region accounts for the richest collection of earth's biological diversity, but this is being continuously threatened by the expansion of agriculture and overexploitation of wildlife (Monastersky, 2014;Sodhi & Brook, 2006). The Hindu Kush Himalaya (HKH), stretching across eight countries (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan), is the highest, youngest, and one of the richest in terms of species, genetic, and ecosystem diversity among the global mountain biomes (Xu et al., 2019). Indeed, this roof of the world is home to four of the 36 global biodiversity hotspots-the Himalaya, Indo-Burma, the mountains of Southwest China, and the mountains of Central Asia (Mittermeier et al., 2011). However, in recent years, the HKH has been experiencing rapid demographic and economic growth leading to overexploitation of natural resources; this has resulted in significant Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) changes and in forest loss (Xu et al., 2019). The loss of the region's core forest areas meant a reduction in the dispersal ability of wildlife in their home ranges, thereby forcing them to move into human territory (Acharya et al., 2017). In the HKH, this problem is rather prominent in India, Nepal, and Bhutan in the form of crop-raiding monkeys and human-eating tigers . In Nepal, for example, between the years 2010 and 2014, on average, as many as 115 people were attacked annually by large mammals such as the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), the Royal Bengal tiger, the Asian black bear (Ursus thibetanus), and the common leopard . The shrinking of animal habitat also poses threat to the animal's own life, as in the case of India's West Bengal state, where, from 2004 to 2015, 62 elephant fatalities were reported; these elephants were hit by trains that were running on tracks through forest corridors (Roy & Sukumar, 2016).
Several authors employed different scientific approaches to identify the sources and causes of HWC and the means to mitigate it (Acharya et al., 2017;Bashir et al., 2018;Sarker & Røskaft, 2010).
The literature that has been published covers various dimensions of HWC, such as those related to crop and property damage, compensation and insurance schemes, people-park relations, and the threat to biodiversity Carter et al., 2014;Huang et al., 2018;Limbu & Karki, 2003).
While it is a fact that diligent efforts are being made by government bodies, research organizations, NGOs, and local communities to tackle HWC, most of their efforts are limited in scope as they are country-and location-specific. The transboundary nature of HWC is an aspect that has been less recognized in the HKH. Moreover, as observed by Wester et al. (2019), countries in the region suffer from inadequate and scattered knowledge generation, which is a major hindrance to understanding the underlying drivers and effects of HWC; this also limits efforts at collaborative natural resource governance (Davies & White, 2012). So, to arrive at a profound comprehension of the "transboundary-ness" of the HKH, a systematic review and analysis of the existing information became inevitable.
Such a review and analysis were bound to provide a holistic insight into the region's knowledge base, its information gaps, and its priority areas for future interventions (Kandel et al., 2016). Besides, the findings of this review and analysis could foster regional learning and cooperation. Taking all these factors into consideration, a systematic review of the literature on HWC in the HKH was thus conducted with two main objectives guiding it. The first objective was to characterize and analyze the scientific literature on HWC according to its spatial and temporal distribution, the scale and theme of the research, its methodological tools and approaches, taxonomy, the drivers of change, and management actions. The second objective was to analyze the collaborative network of research through the study of keywords, coauthorship links, and partnerships among countries to better understand research trends, priorities, alliances, and knowledge gaps.

| ME THODS
We followed the systematic literature review (SLR) approach of qualitative content analysis, as it is systematic, explicit, and reproducible for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of scientific information (Fink, 2019). The review was conducted using the framework of Grant and Booth (2009), which involved four sequential steps ( Figure 1): search, appraisal, synthesis, and analysis (SALSA). The steps of the SALSA framework are explained in Table 1. This method is accurate, systematic, exhaustive, and reproducible (Mengist et al., 2020;Vicente-Sáez & Martínez-Fuentes, 2018).

| Search
In this step, the relevant sources of information were identified from various databases using appropriate search strings. The search databases were Scopus (Elsevier), Google Scholar, and the Google search engine. We opted for Scopus since it is the largest database of peer-reviewed literature and has more indexed journals (Mongeon & Paul-Hus, 2016), while Google Scholar and the Google search engine were used to collect all the relevant peer-reviewed articles and gray literature (reports, conference proceedings, perspectives, keynotes, and book chapters) which were not indexed in Scopus. The term "human-wildlife" conflict in this paper refers to both direct interactions of humans with wildlife through encounters and livestock depredation, and indirect relationships expressed via people's attitudes/ perceptions and their sense of well-being (Lozano et al., 2019). Therefore, we used various combinations of search strings for an exhaustive and comprehensive literature search covering the broad dimensions of HWC. For example, for Nepal, we used the advanced search filter in Scopus with keyword strings: "Human-wildlife conflict" and "Nepal". A similar search was carried out for all the other seven countries of the HKH (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, and Pakistan) which formed our study area.
Besides, we searched for names of administrative divisions within countries-for instance, "Nepal" and "Chitwan" districts. The search string was also extended to include conflicts involving specific species or families of wildlife for each of the countries of the HKH and its administrative divisions, for instance: "human-carnivore conflict", "human-monkey conflict", "human-elephant conflict", and "humanrhino conflict". Moreover, to include the dimension of livestock depredation and crop damage by the animals, keywords such as "wildlife crop raid", "livestock depredation", and "animal attack" were used against each of the country names; this also narrowed down the volume of literature to the region of interest. The systematic search for these strings was based on the literature's title, abstract, and keywords and was carried out until December 2019 with no lower-year limit. Our search was restricted to English-language articles for this study. For the literature search on Google Scholar and the Google search engine, we employed a similar strategy, mostly aimed at retrieving gray and unindexed literature.

| Appraisal
The appraisal phase was about selecting the literature through a screening process. A total of 554 literature data, including peerreviewed journal articles and gray literature, were collected from various database sources. The initial step involved separating all the gray literature from the published peer-reviewed journal articles. We then selected the studies that were exclusively conducted within the F I G U R E 1 Flow diagram for systematic literature review using Search, Appraisal, Synthesis and Analysis (SALSA) framework HKH boundary (note that countries like India and Bangladesh have a large proportion of such studies outside the HKH). On acquiring the literature data from within our study region, we removed all duplications, which resulted in a total of 255 journal articles and 24 pieces of gray literature. These were then selected for abstract screening.
A total of 240 out of the 255 journal articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria for the final database. The literature removed after the abstract screening was on the basis that these research works did not directly adhere to HWC. All the 24 pieces of gray literature qualified to be included in the final database.

| Synthesis
The qualitative approach to synthesize the derived knowledge helps to explore, interpret, and present new perspectives on the acquired data (Vicente-Sáez & Martínez-Fuentes, 2018). Hence, in this step, we extracted the relevant data relating to HWC from the 240 journal articles. These data were then maintained and managed in MS Excel for processing. Table 2 shows the categorization of the extracted data into various classes and variables of interest; this was done to meet the SLR objectives. These data were further used for analysis through tabular and graphical representations.

| Analysis
This phase involved evaluating the synthesized data to gain meaningful information and answers to the research questions. The categories were quantified and analyzed to explain the results (Table 2). TA B L E 1 The SALSA framework (Grant & Booth, 2009)

| Temporal and spatial pattern
In the HKH, the research on the conflict between humans and wild- As shown by Figure 3, the research on HWC during the review period reveals an uneven pattern across the HKH. The largest number (87) of peer-reviewed articles was published from India which accounts for only14% of the HKH area; the second largest number (85) came from Nepal (whose entire area is within the HKH), followed by

| Spatial scale and theme
The research sites were also analyzed based on their scale-

| Research methods
Over half (53%) of the articles used data from interviews based on questionnaires and focus group discussions; about 16% used secondary data from reports, journal articles, and documents from government and nongovernment organizations; 12% carried survey results of biological samples like hair, scat, scrapes, and footprints of wild animals; 8% relied on direct observations or sightings of animals; 5% depended on camera trapping; 4% on GIS-based satellite data such as for climate, elevation, and land-cover maps; and 2% used the GPS radio-collaring method for the data collection on HWC studies in the region (Figure 5b).
The various approaches adopted in these studies to analyze data included the use of simple statistics that involved the calculation of percentage, mean, and standard deviation, as well as the use of t test-this approach was illustrated in 72% of the research articles; 13% depended on spatial mapping using GIS tools; 11% on statistical modeling techniques like logistic regression and generalized linear mixed models; and 4% relied on DNA-based molecular tracking of biological samples to understand the dietary habits of the relevant wild animals (Figure 5c).

| Focal species or taxonomical group
The classification of studies based on wildlife taxonomical groups (Peterson et al., 2010) revealed that 46% of the research focused on large carnivores (

| Drivers for the conflict
Over half (60%) of the articles considered at least one driver of change triggering HWC (Figure 6). The most frequent (27%) cause of disruption reported was disturbance of the natural landscape due to human population growth, rapid urbanization, and widespread land-use changes; 24% of these studies centered on shortage of food such as forage and wild preys; 23% discussed the proximity of human settlements to PAs, which enabled the forest communities to access them for firewood and herbal medicines, thereby leading to conflicts between these communities and the wildlife around them; 13% of the research articles were on retaliatory killing and illegal poaching of wild animals; 7% were on changes in conservation policies; 4% dealt with culture and its shifting patterns, while only 2% of the articles deliberated on how climate change was an important driver of HWC in the region. others recommended interventions such as relocation, selective culling, radio-collaring, and captive breeding of wild animals (Figure 7).

| Inclusion of perception, attitude, and gender aspects
About 22%
The total strength of the co-occurrence link or the total link strength of these keywords was high compared with the keywords with low occurrence. "India", "livestock depredation", "snow leopard", "Himalaya", and "Asian elephant" were among the top 100 keywords

F I G U R E 7 Management actions on human-wildlife conflict recommended by research articles expressed in percentages
with the highest total link strength apart from the keywords with high occurrence.
As many as 640 individual authors contributed to the research on HWC in the HKH during the study period. Among these, only 228 authors were interconnected, to each other forming 21 clusters of authors ( Figure 9). As for coauthorship, 22% (n = 52) of the papers were written by two authors, while 4% (n = 9) of them involved 10 authors. And, about 10% (n = 25) of the articles were written by a single author. The dataset also contains an article by 14 authors, the highest number, and one by 12 authors. Further, the study looked into the most sizeable contribution made by authors to research on HWC in the HKH; it was found that four authors-A.

TA B L E 4 Top 15 authors in HKH-HWC research
Author name fatalities were reported from Nepal between 2010 and 2014, which highlighted the gravity of the problem .

First author article(s) Citations
Meanwhile, there was a considerable increase in the population of livestock, especially goats, in the mountains of Bhutan, India, and Pakistan, which made them vulnerable to attacks (Tulachan, 2001).
On the contrary, Nepal also made significant progress in terms of conservation-for instance, by reversing the decreasing trendwhich lasted for three consecutive years-in the population of rhinoceros; this came about by achieving the target of zero poaching (Acharya, 2016 In the case of India, its districts of Pauri Garhwal and Chamoli in Uttarakhand drew major attention from the researchers since these districts were known to be among those with the highest number of HWCs, especially involving large carnivores (Agarwal et al., 2016;Gupta and Bhatt, 2009;Naha et al., 2018;Sondhi et al., 2016). Another focal point of interest for the researchers was Nepal's Chitwan district where several studies were conducted in and around Chitwan National Park (Lamichhane, 2019;Sapkota et al., 2014

| Spatial scale and theme
As indicated earlier, since most of the studies on HWC in the region were local, they were not able to take up the issue on a transboundary level. While it is a fact that instances of HWC in and around PAs and corridors in a transboundary complex such as the Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) between India and Nepal have been reported (Balodi & Anwar, 2018;Jasmine et al., 2015), no significant intercountry collaboration has yet taken place to tackle the problem This review establishes that half of the HWC research conducted in the region has focused on the damage caused to crops and livestock by wild animals. In this regard, it was found that Bhutanese households incurred an annual loss in income by around 25% due to crop raids by foraging animals (Tobgay et al., 2019) and by about 10%-19% because of livestock depredation (Jamtsho & Katel, 2019).
Such huge losses pose a challenge to any country's local food system, while also adversely affecting the livelihood of its people and F I G U R E 1 0 Network of country collaboration on human-wildlife conflict research in the Hindu Kush Himalaya their food and nutrition security . Hence, to address this problem, a large volume of research concentrated on understanding the foraging characteristics of animals and the pattern of livestock depredation; the studies also assessed habitats (both animals in conflict and their preys) and discussed ways of how humans and wildlife could live peacefully with each other (Aryal et al., 2015;Bargali & Ahmed, 2018;Bhattacharjee & Parthasarathy, 2013;Rao et al., 2002). Besides stressing on conserving endangered species, the researchers emphasized the threat to biodiversity in the region owing to illegal hunting, killing, and trade in animal body parts (Bhattarai & Kindlmann, 2012;Rao et al., 2010;Rimal et al., 2018;Thapa, 2014;Uprety et al., 2021). Globally, the researchers highlighted the need for shifting attention toward human-wildlife coexistence, a sustainable state wherein humans and wildlife coadapt to live in shared landscapes (König et al., 2020;Peterson et al., 2010).
Although the disharmony between biodiversity conservation efforts and communities affected by conflict is vast, smaller amount of research (15% of the total) has taken place in this area. Discord involving disagreements among communities, stakeholders, and policymakers is an area that requires an understanding of the sociopolitical processes that affect conservation management (Rastogi et al., 2014). These disagreements between the region's indigenous forest-dependent communities-who feel a sense of stewardship over the forests and grasslands-and the forest departments over governmental policies on resource utilization and compensation impede effective management and resolution of issues related to HWC.

| Research methods
The researchers collected about 53% of primary-level data from the region through household surveys and focus group discussions, and also supplemented their research with the existing secondary data. Only a small percentage of the data was collected with the aid of GPS radio-collaring, GIS-based satellite images, and camera trapping. Though the data on HWC in the region are not generally deficit, it is mostly skewed toward understanding of the human di-

| Focal species or taxonomical groups
As mentioned earlier, during the review it was found that the majority (46%) of the research on the conflict between humans and wildlife in the HKH dealt with large carnivores, with the snow leopard being the one that was researched the most (20%), followed by the leopard (18%), and the tiger (15%). The relatively large number of research articles on the conflict between snow leopards (commonly found in the high mountains of China and South Asia) and humans reflects the spate of such incidents in the Himalayas and the Karakoram range since 1994 (Rashid et al., 2020); this had to do with the dwindling number of the snow leopard's wild preys which forced it to indulge in retaliatory attacks against the high-mountain communities and pastoralists (Chetri et al., 2019;Rosen et al., 2012).
As for studies on human conflicts with other carnivores such as wolves and dholes-predators inhabiting the central-western parts of the Himalayas and the eastern Himalayas, respectively (Johnsingh et al., 2007;Xu et al., 2015)-they were much less compared with those involving snow leopards. Another conflict that attracted significant research attention was the one involving omnivores (bears, monkeys, and boars) and mega herbivores (elephants and rhinoceros), and particularly their propensity to attack livestock and crops.
In 2008, researcher P. Yonzon pointed out that in Nepal alone, up to 20,000 people in the southern lowlands were caught in conflicts with elephants, thereby suggesting that confrontations with mega herbivores were an issue of huge concern. However, while the issue of conflict with large carnivores, omnivores, and mega herbivores drew much research attention, the same could not be said of conflicts involving small carnivores, meso-mammals, birds, and reptilesonly about 1% and 0.4% of the studies covered carnivores of medium and small sizes, respectively. This was because they were perceived to pose less danger than large carnivores, though Sunar et al. (2012) found out that the yellow-throated marten alone was responsible for

| Drivers of conflict
Since the HKH is one of the most affected areas in terms of human and animal deaths due to HWC (Torres et al., 2018), it is important to understand the dynamics that drive the relationship between humans and wildlife. Most often, the factors are area-specific and highly complex; they are known to hinge on the socioecological behavior of humans, the nature of wildlife, and the availability of resources (Dickman, 2010;Nyhus, 2016). Most articles point to habitat disturbance-as a result of land-cover change and forest fragmentation, as well as due to population growth (leading to pressure on natural resources), urbanization, and industrialization-as a major cause behind HWC (Reshamwala et al., 2018). Some studies say that the unavailability of fodder in the wild  and the presence of human habitation in the vicinity of most forests have pushed the wild animals into a corner from where it becomes inevitable that they resort to attacks on humans, their livestock, and their crops.
As for research literature discussing climate change as a factor influencing HWC in the region, only about 2% of the studies took up the issue, even though that the HKH is a hotspot in terms of climate change (Sharma et al., 2019). Among those few studies, the one by Bashir et al. (2018) states that climate change affects the phenology of forage in the wild and causes a shift in habitat whereby the animals come into conflict with the nearby communities.  (Bhalla et al., 2016).

| Management interventions
Some of the researchers have also laid stress on formulating proper compensation policies and programs, which, they say, discourage retaliatory killings and build community support for conservation (Agarwala et al., 2010;Naughton-Treves et al., 2003;Persson et al., 2015). However, these compensation schemes are often vulnerable to corruption and long administrative delays; they also fail to account for transaction costs; further, in many HKH countries, the compensation policies are rather restricted in scope, as they are targeted only toward losses from large carnivores and mega herbivores (Upadhyay, 2013). In a similar vein, the conflict-response system of various government agencies in the HKH could be strengthened through a better mechanism for complaint submission by conflict victims, the lowering of transaction costs, the inclusion of relevant conflict-prone species in the scheme of things, and the standardization of policies (Karanth et al., 2018).

| Inclusion of perceptions, attitude, and gender
Several research articles also studied the HKH people's perception and attitude toward conflict with wildlife and how to manage it. Such a study of the perception and attitude of the local communities is important to ensure that wildlife management policies are effective and also sensitive to local conditions. Though most studies revealed that the communities nursed a negative attitude toward conservation authorities, such as officials of national parks, they did express a positive attitude toward conservation and coexistence, guided by religious and cultural beliefs (Anand et al., 2018;Xu et al., 2015).
Meanwhile, on the issue of gender, while it has been reported that risks and priorities in terms of HWC are seen differently by women and men (Gore & Kahler, 2012), this is a deficient area of research in the HKH. Another area of research that has to be explored substantially relates to the study of how humans and wildlife can coexist peacefully if effective wildlife management practices are in place and a mechanism developed for human-wildlife interface through appropriate tools and techniques.

| Co-occurrence of keywords, coauthorship linkages, and country collaboration
In this literature review, when we analyzed keywords, HWC featured prominently along with associated species, type of damage including hotspot areas. In the authorship, we noted, as mentioned earlier, that out of the 640 authors who worked on HWC, only 228 of them coauthored HWC publications in the HKH, thereby forming a collaborative network (Figure 9). We also noted that the authors in this network ( Figure 10) were less interconnected when compared to other areas of research in the HKH, such as in the field of ecosystem services (Kandel et al., 2020

| CON CLUS ION
This study evaluated the status, analyzed trends, and identified gaps in HWC research in the HKH. It is evident that the HKH is one of the hotspots of HWC, having suffered severe losses in terms of both human and animal lives, as well as by way of crops and livestock, but there is yet no silver-bullet option available to resolve the issue. Since the literature on HWC has been rather disproportionately focused on geographical and thematic topics such as PAs, large carnivores, and mega herbivores, a huge knowledge gap exists in this field of study. This warrants more and meticulous analyses of Most studies on HWC in the region have been on large mammals; however, given the fact that small mammals and birds also inflict damages on crops and livestock, their roles ought to be investigated in depth in future studies. Another area of study that requires close attention relates to the connection between climate change and HWC, especially because the HKH is prone to habitat degradation and shift in species habitat. Equally important is the aspect of gender which has not yet been adequately captured in the research on HWC in the region. Finally, and most importantly, it is the transboundary nature of HWC in a region that has a common ecosystem; hence, there is an urgent need for better research collaboration among the HKH countries that would also enable the academically weak countries to be on a stronger footing in tackling HWC.
In summing up this review of research literature on the conflicts between humans and wildlife in the HKH, it has to be stated that while studies in this sphere have gathered pace, there are yet vital areas that need to be explored further-only then can we be better prepared to mitigate this menace.

ACK N OWLED G M ENTS
The authors are thankful to the Director General of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) for his encouragement and support. This study was partially supported by the core funds of ICIMOD, which were contributed by the governments of Afghanistan, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Norway, Pakistan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The views and interpretations in this article are those of the authors; they are not necessarily attributable to ICIMOD and do not imply the expression of any opinion by ICIMOD concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or area of its authority or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or the endorsement of any product. We thank Shanuj Cheruvakodan for editorial inputs.

CO N FLI C T O F I NTE R E S T
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

DATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T
The datasets generated as bibliography during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.