Gentrification drives patterns of alpha and beta diversity in cities.

While there is increasing recognition that social processes in cities like gentrification have ecological consequences, we lack nuanced understanding of the ways gentrification affects urban biodiversity. We analyzed a large camera trap dataset of mammals (>500 g) to evaluate how gentrification impacts species richness and community composition across 23 US cities. After controlling for the negative effect of impervious cover, gentrified parts of cities had the highest mammal species richness. Change in community composition was associated with gentrification in a few cities, which were mostly located along the West Coast. At the species level, roughly half (11 of 21 mammals) had higher occupancy in gentrified parts of a city, especially when impervious cover was low. Our results indicate that the impacts of gentrification extend to nonhuman animals, which provides further evidence that some aspects of nature in cities, such as wildlife, are chronically inaccessible to marginalized human populations.

Disturbance type and species life history predict mammal responses to humans.

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.

Wealth and urbanization shape medium and large terrestrial mammal communities.

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.

Urbanization, climate and species traits shape mammal communities from local to continental scales.

Human-driven environmental changes shape ecological communities from local to global scales. Within cities, landscape-scale patterns and processes and species characteristics generally drive local-scale wildlife diversity. However, cities differ in their structure, species pools, geographies and histories, calling into question the extent to which these drivers of wildlife diversity are predictive at continental scales. In partnership with the Urban Wildlife Information Network, we used occurrence data from 725 sites located across 20 North American cities and a multi-city, multi-species occupancy modelling approach to evaluate the effects of ecoregional characteristics and mammal species traits on the urbanization-diversity relationship. Among 37 native terrestrial mammal species, regional environmental characteristics and species traits influenced within-city effects of urbanization on species occupancy and community composition. Species occupancy and diversity were most negatively related to urbanization in the warmer, less vegetated cities. Additionally, larger-bodied species were most negatively impacted by urbanization across North America. Our results suggest that shifting climate conditions could worsen the effects of urbanization on native wildlife communities, such that conservation strategies should seek to mitigate the combined effects of a warming and urbanizing world.