Search

Urban biodiversity provides critical ecosystem services and is a key component to environmentally and socially sustainable cities. However, biodiversity varies greatly within and among cities, leading to human communities with changing and unequal experiences with nature. The "luxury effect," a hypothesis that predicts a positive correlation between wealth, typically measured by per capita income, and species richness may be one indication of these inequities. While the luxury effect is well studied for some taxa, it has rarely been investigated for mammals, which provide unique ecosystem services (e.g., biological pest control) and exhibit significant potential for negative human-wildlife interactions (e.g., nuisances or conflicts). We analyzed a large dataset of mammal detections across 20 North American cities to test whether the luxury effect is consistent for medium- to large-sized terrestrial mammals across diverse urban contexts. Overall, support for the luxury effect, as indicated by per capita income, was inconsistent; we found evidence of a luxury effect in approximately half of our study cities. Species richness was, however, highly and negatively correlated with urban intensity in most cities. We thus suggest that economic factors play an important role in shaping urban mammal communities for some cities and species, but that the strongest driver of urban mammal diversity is urban intensity. To better understand the complexity of urban ecosystems, ecologists and social scientists must consider the social and political factors that drive inequitable human experiences with nature in cities.

COVID-19 has altered many aspects of everyday life. For the scientific community, the pandemic has called upon investigators to continue work in novel ways, curtailing field and lab research. However, this unprecedented situation also offers an opportunity for researchers to optimize and further develop available field methods. Camera traps are one example of a tool used in science to answer questions about wildlife ecology, conservation, and management. Camera traps have long battery lives, lasting more than a year in certain cases, and photo storage capacity, with some models capable of wirelessly transmitting images from the field. This allows researchers to deploy cameras without having to check them for up to a year or more, making them an ideal field research tool during restrictions on in-person research activities such as COVID-19 lockdowns. As technological advances allow cameras to collect increasingly greater numbers of photos and videos, the analysis techniques for large amounts of data are evolving. Here, we describe the most common research questions suitable for camera trap studies and their importance for biodiversity conservation. As COVID-19 continues to affect how people interact with the natural environment, we discuss novel questions for which camera traps can provide insights on. We conclude by summarizing the results of a systematic review of camera trap studies, providing data on target taxa, geographic distribution, publication rate, and publication venues to help researchers planning to use camera traps in response to the current changes in human activity.

Human activity and land use change impact every landscape on Earth, driving declines in many animal species while benefiting others. Species ecological and life history traits may predict success in human-dominated landscapes such that only species with "winning" combinations of traits will persist in disturbed environments. However, this link between species traits and successful coexistence with humans remains obscured by the complexity of anthropogenic disturbances and variability among study systems. We compiled detection data for 24 mammal species from 61 populations across North America to quantify the effects of (1) the direct presence of people and (2) the human footprint (landscape modification) on mammal occurrence and activity levels. Thirty-three percent of mammal species exhibited a net negative response (i.e., reduced occurrence or activity) to increasing human presence and/or footprint across populations, whereas 58% of species were positively associated with increasing disturbance. However, apparent benefits of human presence and footprint tended to decrease or disappear at higher disturbance levels, indicative of thresholds in mammal species' capacity to tolerate disturbance or exploit human-dominated landscapes. Species ecological and life history traits were strong predictors of their responses to human footprint, with increasing footprint favoring smaller, less carnivorous, faster-reproducing species. The positive and negative effects of human presence were distributed more randomly with respect to species trait values, with apparent winners and losers across a range of body sizes and dietary guilds. Differential responses by some species to human presence and human footprint highlight the importance of considering these two forms of human disturbance separately when estimating anthropogenic impacts on wildlife. Our approach provides insights into the complex mechanisms through which human activities shape mammal communities globally, revealing the drivers of the loss of larger predators in human-modified landscapes.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. With the accelerating pace of global change, it is imperative that we obtain rapid inventories of the status and distribution of wildlife for ecological inferences and conservation planning. To address this challenge, we launched the SNAPSHOT USA project, a collaborative survey of terrestrial wildlife populations using camera traps across the United States. For our first annual survey, we compiled data across all 50 states during a 14-week period (17 August - 24 November of 2019). We sampled wildlife at 1509 camera trap sites from 110 camera trap arrays covering 12 different ecoregions across four development zones. This effort resulted in 166,036 unique detections of 83 species of mammals and 17 species of birds. All images were processed through the Smithsonian's eMammal camera trap data repository and included an expert review phase to ensure taxonomic accuracy of data, resulting in each picture being reviewed at least twice. The results represent a timely and standardized camera trap survey of the USA. All of the 2019 survey data are made available herein. We are currently repeating surveys in fall 2020, opening up the opportunity to other institutions and cooperators to expand coverage of all the urban-wild gradients and ecophysiographic regions of the country. Future data will be available as the database is updated at eMammal.si.edu/snapshot-usa, as well as future data paper submissions. These data will be useful for local and macroecological research including the examination of community assembly, effects of environmental and anthropogenic landscape variables, effects of fragmentation and extinction debt dynamics, as well as species-specific population dynamics and conservation action plans. There are no copyright restrictions; please cite this paper when using the data for publication. Publisher PDF

Camera traps have become an important research tool for both conservation biologists and wildlife managers. Recent advances in spatially explicit capture-recapture (SECR) methods have increasingly put camera traps at the forefront of population monitoring programs. These methods allow for benchmark analysis of species density without the need for invasive fieldwork techniques. We conducted a review of SECR studies using camera traps to summarize the current focus of these investigations, as well as provide recommendations for future studies and identify areas in need of future investigation. Our analysis shows a strong bias in species preference, with a large proportion of studies focusing on large felids, many of which provide the only baseline estimates of population density for these species. Furthermore, we found that a majority of studies produced density estimates that may not be precise enough for long-term population monitoring. We recommend simulation and power analysis be conducted before initiating any particular study design and provide examples using readily available software. Furthermore, we show that precision can be increased by including a larger study area that will subsequently increase the number of individuals photo-captured. As many current studies lack the resources or manpower to accomplish such an increase in effort, we recommend that researchers incorporate new technologies such as machine-learning, web-based data entry, and online deployment management into their study design. We also cautiously recommend the potential of citizen science to help address these study design concerns. In addition, modifications in SECR model development to include species that have only a subset of individuals available for individual identification (often called mark-resight models), can extend the process of explicit density estimation through camera trapping to species not individually identifiable.

By involving the public, citizen science runs against the grain of an idealized science that leaves out the human element, and thus provides new opportunities for ecological research and society. We classify the goals of citizen science in ecology and environment into four broad categories: (1) scientific, (2) participant benefits, (3) community, and (4) policy. Although none of these goals have been well studied, we review the literature showing that these projects are most effective in tracking ecological trends over large swaths of space and time, and discuss the challenges of recruiting, training, retaining, and educating participants, maintaining and disseminating high-quality data, and connecting with the larger community and policy. Biomedical studies, where patients participate in their own treatment in randomized trials, provide an interesting comparison with citizen science in ecology, sharing challenges in recruitment and involvement of nonscientists and ethical conduct of research. Future study will help address the ethical difficulties and enhance ways for citizen science in ecology and the environment to complement scientific discovery, involve and educate the public, and guide policy founded in science and the local community.

Birdwatchers hold substantial potential as data collectors for research, and in Brazil, the birdwatching community has been growing since the early 2000s. Currently the effects of birds on forest patch restoration in agricultural landscapes is a major focus of avian conservation ecology, but these patches are not frequently visited by birdwatchers in Brazil, hindering the collection of useful bird data. We thus developed a project, Did I see a banded bird!?, which was designed to attract birdwatching volunteers to monitor birds within a forest patch. We explored three motivating factors to attract birdwatchers: (1) we offered an unprecedented opportunity for birdwatchers to record individual birds with colored bands, a challenging activity appealing to birdwatchers’ competitive nature; (2) our study area offered a new location with free, easy access and no logistical impediments; and (3) we continuously provided information on the benefits of birdwatching records for science and society to encourage participation. The project was widely announced and we had 302 applicants. However, the barriers faced throughout the project’s execution, including limited researcher-volunteer interaction, low security in the patch, and the presence of few species for birdwatchers to see, reduced the motivation and participation of most applicants. Consequently, from a list of 155 highly qualified applicants who lived near the patch and were skilled in forest birding, only 10 visited the patch. Our findings provide important guidelines for researchers planning similar citizen science projects in agricultural landscapes, mainly in countries where citizen science is still not common. A correction article relating to this publication can be found here: http://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.247