Search

Species sensitivity to forest fragmentation varies latitudinally, peaking in the tropics. A prominent explanation for this pattern is that historical landscape disturbance at higher latitudes has removed fragmentation-sensitive species or promoted the evolution of more resilient survivors. However, it is unclear whether this so-called extinction filter is the dominant driver of geographic variation in fragmentation sensitivity, particularly because climatic factors may also cause latitudinal gradients in dispersal ability, a key trait mediating sensitivity to habitat fragmentation. Here we combine field survey data with a morphological proxy for avian dispersal ability (hand-wing index) to assess responses to forest fragmentation in 1,034 bird species worldwide. We find that fragmentation sensitivity is strongly predicted by dispersal limitation and that other factors—latitude, body mass and historical disturbance events—have relatively limited explanatory power after accounting for species differences in dispersal. We also show that variation in dispersal ability is only weakly predicted by historical disturbance and more strongly associated with intra-annual temperature fluctuations (seasonality). Our results suggest that climatic factors play a dominant role in driving global variation in the impacts of forest fragmentation, emphasizing the need for more nuanced environmental policies that take into account local context and associated species traits.

Halting the alarming rate of species extinction, driven primarily by habitat destruction, motivated the international community to adopt the Global Biodiversity Framework (2022) and its targets aimed at reversing habitat and species loss. Because of urgency and resource constraints, a key challenge is meeting targets effectively and efficiently. Here we conduct a global prioritization linking 70,492 unique population maps and life history characteristics for 861 threatened terrestrial mammal species. Incorporating individual population data to identify priority areas for conservation nearly doubled the likely long-term persistence of species for the same amount of land compared with a typical approach based on species distributions alone. We map and rank global mammal persistence priority areas and assess how well the current protected area (PA) system captures these important regions. Our results offer a clearer, quantifiable link between conservation actions and global extinction risk than previously possible at a global scale.

Sustaining the organisms, ecosystems and processes that underpin human wellbeing is necessary to achieve sustainable development. Here we define critical natural assets as the natural and semi-natural ecosystems that provide 90% of the total current magnitude of 14 types of nature’s contributions to people (NCP), and we map the global locations of these critical natural assets at 2 km resolution. Critical natural assets for maintaining local-scale NCP (12 of the 14 NCP) account for 30% of total global land area and 24% of national territorial waters, while 44% of land area is required to also maintain two global-scale NCP (carbon storage and moisture recycling). These areas overlap substantially with cultural diversity (areas containing 96% of global languages) and biodiversity (covering area requirements for 73% of birds and 66% of mammals). At least 87% of the world’s population live in the areas benefitting from critical natural assets for local-scale NCP, while only 16% live on the lands containing these assets. Many of the NCP mapped here are left out of international agreements focused on conserving species or mitigating climate change, yet this analysis shows that explicitly prioritizing critical natural assets and the NCP they provide could simultaneously advance development, climate and conservation goals.