Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science
Published
2026-05-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq3396
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.07

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals

L. Martínez, Fiona McDuie, Molly Hardesty‐Moore, Nicholas W. Bakner et al.
1 citations
Science
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
16.07
article

Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals

L. Martínez, Fiona McDuie, Molly Hardesty‐Moore, Nicholas W. Bakner, Tayler N. LaSharr, Scott W. Yanco, Michael L. Casazza, W. Jetz, Andy J. Boyce, Michael J. Chamberlain, Christopher R. DeSorbo, L. Mark Elbroch, Jean‐François Therrien, Tyler R. Petroelje, Julia Sommerfeld, Tana L. Verzuh, Brett R. Jesmer, R Stevens, David Lumpkin, John F. Benson, Tal Avgar, Bryan M. Kluever, Robert C. Dowler, Rachel A. Smiley, Josée Lefebvre, Marcella J. Kelly, Dean E. Beyer, Nathan J. Svoboda, Matthew J. Kauffman, Darren DeBloois, Avery Shawler, Kimberly A. Sager‐Fradkin, Jason E. Hawley, Tony W. Mong, Mackenzie R. Jeffress, Betsy A. Evans, David W. Wolfson, John A. Stephenson, Anna C. Ortega, Michael J. Cherry, Juliet Cohen, Christopher K. Williams, Brittany L. Wagler, Joël Bêty, John M. Marzluff, Ben Carlson, Julie Young, John Elliott, Scott Jennings, J. Clint Perkins, Nils Warnock, Eric Vander Wal, Laura Prugh, Christian Rutz, Christopher C. Wilmers, Bret A. Collier, Levi Newediuk, Roland Kays, Alyson Courtemanch, Douglas McCauley, Keith Bildstein, Song Gao, David Bird, Nathaniel Bowersock, Vickie DeNicola, Federico Ossi, Michael Seer, Sarah C. Davidson, Guillaume Bastille-Rousseau, Robert Patchett, Daniel R. Stahler, Cory Overton, Matthias-Claudio Loretto, Scott LaPoint, W. Mark Ford, David Barber, Pierre Legagneux, Shannon Skalos, Kristin Barker, Jerrold L. Belant, Kevin L. Monteith, Diego Ellis-Soto, Joseph G. Barnes, Thomas Mueller, Meredith VanAcker, Dan E. Varland, Myles Lamont, Daniel Dupont, David Hancock, Ruth Y. Oliver, Phillipe J. Thomas, Stephen L. Webb
article en
1 citations

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.

ScienceVol. 392(6800)
Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT), University of California, Riverside (US), Alaska Department of Fish and Game (US), Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US), Goethe University Frankfurt (DE), University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US), Louisiana State University (US), Utah State University (US), Texas Tech University (US), University of Wyoming (US), United States Geological Survey (US), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (US), African Wildlife Foundation (US), University of Minnesota (US), Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA), National Park Service (US), Michigan Department of Natural Resources (US), Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (US), Missouri Department of Conservation (US), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (US), North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences (US), Panthera Corporation (US), Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (US), Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (US), Environment and Climate Change Canada (CA), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (US), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), North Carolina State University (US), University of British Columbia (CA), University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna (AT), University of California, Santa Barbara (US), University of Georgia (US), University of St Andrews (GB), Texas A&M University – Kingsville (US), Université du Québec à Rimouski (CA), University of California, Santa Cruz (US), University of Konstanz (DE), University of Washington (US), University of Michigan (US), Sierra College (US), Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute (US), Black Rock Forest Consortium (US), Hawk Mountain Sanctuary (US), World Wildlife Fund Canada (CA), Yale University (US), Angelo State University (US), Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (CA), Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé (FR), Biodiversity Research Institute (US), Center for Northern Studies (CA), Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (DE), National Zoological Park (US), Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior (DE), Utah Department of Natural Resources (US), Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribal Council (US), Wyoming Game and Fish Department (US), Nevada Department of Wildlife (US), Linguagen (United States) (US), Université Laval (CA), Conservation Biology Institute, University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus (CA), McGill University (CA), San Jose State University (US), The Ohio State University (US), Université de Saint-Boniface (CA), Columbia University (US), Okanagan University College (CA), Virginia Tech (US), University of Delaware (US), Michigan State University (US), School for Field Studies (US), Marshall University (US), Texas A&M University (US), University of California, Berkeley (US)
National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, ASCRS Research Foundation, National Geographic Society, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Horizon Therapeutics, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, University of California, Santa Barbara, Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, Materials Research Science and Engineering Center, University of California, San Diego, Wyoming Game and Fish Department
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
16.07
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.