Continent-wide effects of urbanization on bird and mammal genetic diversity

Abstract

Urbanization and associated environmental changes are causing global declines in vertebrate populations. In general, population declines of the magnitudes now detected should lead to reduced effective population sizes for animals living in proximity to humans and disturbed lands. This is a cause for concern because effective population sizes set the rate of genetic diversity loss due to genetic drift, the rate of increase in inbreeding and the efficiency with which selection can act on beneficial alleles. We predicted that the effects of urbanization should decrease effective population size and genetic diversity, and increase population-level genetic differentiation. To test for such patterns, we repurposed and reanalysed publicly archived genetic datasets for North American birds and mammals. After filtering, we had usable raw genotype data from 85 studies and 41 023 individuals, sampled from 1008 locations spanning 41 mammal and 25 bird species. We used census-based urban–rural designations, human population density and the Human Footprint Index as measures of urbanization and habitat disturbance. As predicted, mammals sampled in more disturbed environments had lower effective population sizes and genetic diversity, and were more genetically differentiated from those in more natural environments. There were no consistent relationships detectable for birds. This suggests that, in general, mammal populations living near humans may have less capacity to respond adaptively to further environmental changes, and be more likely to suffer from effects of inbreeding.

Genetic and species-level biodiversity patterns are linked by demography and ecological opportunity

“…We also corrected elevation range for potential 419 biases introduced by species range area, because larger ranges tended to encompass greater 420 topographical heterogeneity. Human population sizes were recorded for each site in the 421 aforementioned genetic diversity database (Schmidt et al 2020a). 422…”

The Best Bang for the Bucks: Rethinking Global Investment in Biodiversity Conservation

“…Therefore, we consider country size to make population density values comparable between countries, as well as geography since islands and the mainland are subject to different levels of anthropogenic impact and extinction dynamics [26]. Similarly, the impacts of urbanization are assumed to have an overall detrimental effect on biodiversity, which is also strongly related to the size and density of human populations [27][28][29]. Further, since socio-economic aspects, such as educational level and income, also modulate people's interaction with the environment [30,31], we included the following variables: GDP, % of the GDP invested in education, and USD invested in education.…”

Spatial Paradigms in Road Networks and Their Delimitation of Urban Boundaries Based on KDE

“…In addition, it was reported that even more of Earth's land surface (approximately 75%) has been modified by humans to support urban residences [5]. This human-induced land cover change has caused considerable global climate change, environmental pollution, and biodiversity loss [6], and has also led to air pollution in urban areas and subsequent health problems for urban residents [3,7]. As such, a deeper understanding of the spatial mechanisms of urbanization is more important than ever.…”