| Title |
The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1126/science.aar7121 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaitlyn M Gaynor, Cheryl E Hojnowski, Neil H Carter, Justin S Brashares |
| Abstract |
Rapid expansion of human activity has driven well-documented shifts in the spatial distribution of wildlife, but the cumulative effect of human disturbance on the temporal dynamics of animals has not been quantified. We examined anthropogenic effects on mammal diel activity patterns, conducting a meta-analysis of 76 studies of 62 species from six continents. Our global study revealed a strong effect of humans on daily patterns of wildlife activity. Animals increased their nocturnality by an average factor of 1.36 in response to human disturbance. This finding was consistent across continents, habitats, taxa, and human activities. As the global human footprint expands, temporal avoidance of humans may facilitate human-wildlife coexistence. However, such responses can result in marked shifts away from natural patterns of activity, with consequences for fitness, population persistence, community interactions, and evolution. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 408 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 79 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 33 | 8% |
| Canada | 19 | 5% |
| Spain | 16 | 4% |
| Germany | 8 | 2% |
| Mexico | 8 | 2% |
| Japan | 7 | 2% |
| Brazil | 6 | 1% |
| Australia | 6 | 1% |
| Other | 59 | 14% |
| Unknown | 167 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 269 | 66% |
| Scientists | 119 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 12 | 3% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1272 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 224 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 221 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 162 | 13% |
| Researcher | 158 | 12% |
| Other | 44 | 3% |
| Other | 142 | 11% |
| Unknown | 321 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 456 | 36% |
| Environmental Science | 286 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 2% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 1% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 15 | 1% |
| Other | 96 | 8% |
| Unknown | 373 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1834. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2024.
All research outputs
#5,496
of 25,734,859 outputs
Outputs from Science
#296
of 83,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83
of 342,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#10
of 1,177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,734,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83,266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.