Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals.
Saved in:
| Title: | Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Oliver, Ruth Y. (AUTHOR), Yanco, Scott W. (AUTHOR), Ellis-Soto, Diego (AUTHOR), Jesmer, Brett R. (AUTHOR), Cohen, Juliet (AUTHOR), Gao, Song (AUTHOR), Patchett, Robert (AUTHOR), Avgar, Tal (AUTHOR), Bildstein, Keith (AUTHOR), Bakner, Nicholas W. (AUTHOR), Barber, David (AUTHOR), Barker, Kristin (AUTHOR), Barnes, Joseph G. (AUTHOR), Bastille-Rousseau, Guillaume (AUTHOR), Belant, Jerrold L. (AUTHOR), Benson, John F. (AUTHOR), Bêty, Joël (AUTHOR), Beyer Jr., Dean E. (AUTHOR), Bird, David (AUTHOR), Bowersock, Nathaniel (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Science. 5/21/2026, Vol. 392 Issue 6800, p879-884. 6p. |
| Subjects: | Mammals, Location data, Attendance, Animal behavior, Game & game-birds, Habitats, Landscape changes |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | Sustainable human–wildlife coexistence requires a mechanistic understanding of the many ways that humans affect animals. However, progress is hampered by the lack of accessible data measuring the dynamic presence of people. Here, we leverage mobile-device data to disentangle how human presence and landscape modification differentially influence the use of geographic and environmental space for 37 mammal and bird species across the United States. Human presence affected more than 65% of species, with substantial variation across species. For ~60% of species that responded to human activities, the effects were interdependent—animals tended to react more strongly to human presence in less modified habitats. Our results demonstrate that human presence and landscape modification have complex combined effects on wildlife, which need to be considered for effective management. Editor's summary: Agriculture, settlements, roads, and other infrastructure profoundly shape the habitats that are available to nonhuman animals. In addition to changing their behavior to avoid or exploit these new hazards and resources, many species may also directly avoid humans. Oliver et al. examined how bird and mammal habitat use depends on both human land use and direct human presence using mobile device data to determine where people are (see the Perspective by Beaudrot). Across 37 species with geolocation data in the United States, most species responded directly to human movements, with most of these showing interactive effects between human land use and human presence. Considering only human effects on land cover will thus often provide inaccurate assessments of species' habitat use. —Bianca Lopez [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Science is the property of American Association for the Advancement of Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Sustainable human–wildlife coexistence requires a mechanistic understanding of the many ways that humans affect animals. However, progress is hampered by the lack of accessible data measuring the dynamic presence of people. Here, we leverage mobile-device data to disentangle how human presence and landscape modification differentially influence the use of geographic and environmental space for 37 mammal and bird species across the United States. Human presence affected more than 65% of species, with substantial variation across species. For ~60% of species that responded to human activities, the effects were interdependent—animals tended to react more strongly to human presence in less modified habitats. Our results demonstrate that human presence and landscape modification have complex combined effects on wildlife, which need to be considered for effective management. Editor's summary: Agriculture, settlements, roads, and other infrastructure profoundly shape the habitats that are available to nonhuman animals. In addition to changing their behavior to avoid or exploit these new hazards and resources, many species may also directly avoid humans. Oliver et al. examined how bird and mammal habitat use depends on both human land use and direct human presence using mobile device data to determine where people are (see the Perspective by Beaudrot). Across 37 species with geolocation data in the United States, most species responded directly to human movements, with most of these showing interactive effects between human land use and human presence. Considering only human effects on land cover will thus often provide inaccurate assessments of species' habitat use. —Bianca Lopez [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00368075 |
| DOI: | 10.1126/science.adq3396 |
