Continent-wide effects of urbanization on bird and mammal genetic diversity
Bibliographic record
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 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 reanalyzed publicly archived genetic data sets for North American birds and mammals. After filtering, we had usable raw genotype data from 85 studies and 41,023 individuals, sampled from 1,008 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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".