Inequalities in noise will affect urban wildlife.

Understanding how systemic biases influence local ecological communities is essential for developing just and equitable environmental practices that prioritize both human and wildlife well-being. With over 270 million residents inhabiting urban areas in the United States, the socioecological consequences of racially targeted zoning, such as redlining, need to be considered in urban planning. There is a growing body of literature documenting the relationships between redlining and the inequitable distribution of environmental harms and goods, green space cover and pollutant exposure. However, it remains unknown whether historical redlining affects the distribution of urban noise or whether inequitable noise drives an ecological change in urban environments. Here we conducted a spatial analysis of how urban noise corresponds to the distribution of redlining categories and a systematic literature review to summarize the effects of noise on wildlife in urban landscapes. We found strong evidence to indicate that noise is inequitably distributed in redlined urban communities across the United States, and that inequitable noise may drive complex biological responses across diverse urban wildlife, reinforcing the interrelatedness of socioecological outcomes. These findings lay a foundation for future research that advances relationships between acoustic and urban ecology through centring equity and challenging systems of oppression in wildlife studies.

Equity, community, and accountability: Leveraging a department-level climate survey as a tool for action.

Organizational climate is a key determinant of diverse aspects of success in work settings, including in academia. Power dynamics in higher education can result in inequitable experiences of workplace climate, potentially harming the well-being and productivity of employees. Quantifying experiences of climate across employment categories can help identify changes necessary to create a more equitable workplace for all. We developed and administered a climate survey within our academic workplace-the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming-to evaluate experiences of climate across three employment categories: faculty, graduate students, and staff. Our survey included a combination of closed-response (e.g., Likert-scale) and open-ended questions. Most department members (82%) completed the survey, which was administered in fall 2021. Faculty generally reported more positive experiences than staff. Graduate students often fell between these two groups, though in some survey sections (e.g., mental health and well-being) students reported the most negative experiences of departmental climate. Three common themes emerged from the analysis of open-ended responses: equity, community, and accountability. We discuss how these themes correspond to concrete action items for improving our departmental climate, some of which have been implemented already, while others constitute future initiatives and/or require a collective push towards systemic change in academia. Finally, service work of this type often falls outside of job descriptions, requiring individuals to either work more or trade-off productivity in other areas that are formally evaluated. With the goal of minimizing this burden for others, we detail our process and provide the materials and framework necessary to streamline this process for other departments aiming to evaluate workplace climate as a key first step in building a positive work environment for all employees.

Identifying conservation technology needs, barriers, and opportunities.

Amid accelerating threats to species and ecosystems, technology advancements to monitor, protect, and conserve biodiversity have taken on increased importance. While most innovations stem from adaptation of off-the-shelf devices, these tools can fail to meet the specialized needs of conservation and research or lack the support to scale beyond a single site. Despite calls from the conservation community for its importance, a shift to bottom-up innovation driven by conservation professionals remains limited. We surveyed practitioners, academic researchers, and technologists to understand the factors contributing to or inhibiting engagement in the collaborative process of technology development and adoption for field use and identify emerging technology needs. High cost was the main barrier to technology use across occupations, while development of new technologies faced barriers of cost and partner communication. Automated processing of data streams was the largest emerging need, and respondents focused mainly on applications for individual-level monitoring and automated image processing. Cross-discipline collaborations and expanded funding networks that encourage cyclical development and continued technical support are needed to address current limitations and meet the growing need for conservation technologies.

Attracting Diverse Students to Field Experiences Requires Adequate Pay, Flexibility, and Inclusion.

Access to field experiences can increase participation of diverse groups in the environmental and natural resources (ENR) workforce. Despite a growing interest among the ENR community to attract and retain diverse students, minimal data exist on what factors undergraduate students prioritize when applying for field experiences. Using a nationwide survey of US undergraduate ENR students, we show that attracting most students to field experiences-especially racial or ethnic minority students-will require pay above minimum wage. However, the concurrent landscape of pay in ENR fell short of meeting many students' pay needs. Aside from pay, ENR students valued training in technical field skills and analytical or research skills, working with their desired study species or taxa, and working near school or family. Additional barriers beyond limited pay included incompatible schedules and noninclusive work environments. Our findings provide important insights for attracting a diverse workforce to this critical stage in career advancement for students in ENR.

Excluding mammalian predators increases bird densities and seed dispersal in fenced ecosanctuaries.

Islands are epicenters of animal extinctions and population declines. These losses exacerbate biodiversity loss and disrupt ecological services in areas of high endemism. Island defaunation is primarily driven by invasive mammalian predators, and mammal eradications are reversing population declines for some island species. Invasive mammal eradications may also have the capacity to restore ecological interactions, along with the recovery of island fauna. Here we show that invasive mammal eradication in fenced ecosanctuaries results in higher rates of bird foraging on fruit, and higher bird-mediated seed dispersal, than in similar forests without mammal eradication. We further show that higher foraging and seed dispersal is related to higher densities of native bird species, after accounting for natural variation in fruit availability. For the many other systems globally that are under threat from invasive mammals, New Zealand's fenced ecosanctuary model offers a promising tool for restoring biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Underrepresented faculty play a disproportionate role in advancing diversity and inclusion.

A diverse and inclusive scientific community is more productive, innovative and impactful, yet ecology and evolutionary biology continues to be dominated by white male faculty. We quantify faculty engagement in activities related to diversity and inclusion and identify factors that either facilitate or hinder participation. Through a nationwide survey, we show that faculty with underrepresented identities disproportionally engage in diversity and inclusion activities, yet such engagement was not considered important for tenure. Faculty perceived time and funding as major limitations, which suggests that institutions should reallocate resources and reconsider how faculty are evaluated to promote shared responsibility in advancing diversity and inclusion.

Using Twitter to communicate conservation science from a professional conference.

Scientists are increasingly using Twitter as a tool for communicating science. Twitter can promote scholarly discussion, disseminate research rapidly, and extend and diversify the scope of audiences reached. However, scientists also caution that if Twitter does not accurately convey science due to the inherent brevity of this media, misinformation could cascade quickly through social media. Data on whether Twitter effectively communicates conservation science and the types of user groups receiving these tweets are lacking. To address these knowledge gaps, we examined live tweeting as a means of communicating conservation science at the 2013 International Congress for Conservation Biology (ICCB). We quantified and compared the user groups sending and reading live tweets. We also surveyed presenters to determine their intended audiences, which we compared with the actual audiences reached through live tweeting. We also asked presenters how effectively tweets conveyed their research findings. Twitter reached 14 more professional audience categories relative to those attending and live tweeting at ICCB. However, the groups often reached through live tweeting were not the presenters' intended audiences. Policy makers and government and non-governmental organizations were rarely reached (0%, 4%, and 6% of audience, respectively), despite the intent of the presenters. Plenary talks were tweeted about 6.9 times more than all other oral or poster presentations combined. Over half the presenters believed the tweets about their talks were effective. Ineffective tweets were perceived as vague or missing the presenters' main message. We recommend that presenters who want their science to be communicated accurately and broadly through Twitter should provide Twitter-friendly summaries that incorporate relevant hashtags and usernames. Our results suggest that Twitter can be used to effectively communicate speakers' findings to diverse audiences beyond conference walls.