Biodiversity monitoring for a just planetary future

The wildlife nextdoor: Socioeconomics and race predict social media carnivore reports

Social media and other internet-based, community generated datasets are emerging as valuable tools in advancing our understanding of biodiversity distributions across urban environments. However, it is unclear how best to harness these data for managing and mitigating human-wildlife conflicts in an urbanizing world. In this study, we analyzed 2584 posts and comments on carnivore sightings, human-carnivore interactions, and attitudes towards carnivores via the neighborhood-based social media platform Nextdoor, focusing on 52 peri-urban neighborhoods near the Angeles National Forest in California. We focused on the two most frequently discussed species: coyote (Canis latrans) and American black bear (Ursus americanus). We analyzed social-ecological covariates as potential predictors of carnivore reports, and also compared sightings of these species to data collected on the biodiversity logging application, iNaturalist. We found that whiter, wealthier, less densely populated neighborhoods closer to the national forest tended to report more black bear sightings and conflict, while coyote conflict and sightings did not show a clear relationship with metrics of racial makeup or urban intensity. However, whiter, wealthier neighborhoods had higher percentages of the population registered to Nextdoor, indicating a possible racial bias in participation. Comments expressing positive attitudes towards black bears were almost five times more common than positive attitudes towards coyotes. Finally, the number of Nextdoor reports for both species were 11 times more numerous than observations on iNaturalist within the same window of time and locations. We conclude that Nextdoor can be a viable data platform for predicting human-wildlife interactions. However, potential utility for coexistence will be nullified if researchers and managers do not fully account for the socioeconomic and racial biases influencing who participates in the reporting process. Building a more inclusive and accessible platform could therefore be beneficial for equity in wildlife data reporting and for engaging a diverse public in urban nature.

Reimagining species on the move across space and time

Climate change is already leaving a broad footprint of impacts on biodiversity, from an individual caterpillar emerging earlier in spring to dominant plant communities migrating poleward. Despite the various modes of how species are on the move, we primarily document shifting species along only one gradient (e.g., latitude or phenology) and along one dimension (space or time). In this opinion article we present a unifying framework for integrating the study of species on the move over space and time and from micro to macro scales. Future conservation planning and natural resource management will depend on our ability to use this framework to improve understanding, attribution, and prediction of species on the move.

Mammals on the Margins: Identifying the Drivers and Limitations of Range Expansion

Accurately estimating species distributions is critical for tracking how biodiversity is shaped by global change. While some species are expanding their ranges, the importance of factors like climate change, habitat change, and human avoidance for explaining this expansion is not well understood. Here, we used observations of 94 North American mammals on iNaturalist to (1) identify errors of omission in the existing range maps; (2) differentiate between extra-range populations that are likely products of natural expansions vs. introductions; and (3) test hypotheses about where natural range expansions occur. We found a substantial percentage of observations were outside both IUCN (16%) and Area of Habitat (36%) maps, suggesting that integrating contemporary citizen science data would improve existing range maps. We estimated that most observations outside IUCN ranges were natural expansions and 95% of species had at least one naturally expanding population. We also identified introductions for 36% of species, which were particularly extensive for several species. We show that natural range expansions are generally associated with a lighter human footprint and less habitat change and are not associated with warming temperatures. This suggests that habitat modifications by humans constrain the ability of species to expand their range to track a changing climate. We also found substantial variation in the directionality of effects from all factors across species, meaning that our species-specific findings will be useful for conservation planning. Our study demonstrates that citizen science data can be useful for conservation by tracking how organisms are responding, or failing to respond, to global change.

Restoring functional farmland biodiversity for biological pest control

Roughly 40% of global agri-food production is lost to pests during an era when productivity gains are essential to humanity. Restoring farmland biodiversity for conservation biological control offers potential to secure win-win outcomes for yield and the environment. However, achieving this is hindered by gaps in our understanding of agrobiodiversity, including a lack of data on the occurrence, identity, and interactions of farm-dwelling (plant, animal, microbial) biota. Limited interdisciplinary collaboration and weak policy frameworks exacerbate these issues. Comprehensive data capture using standardized metrics, universal protocols, farmer-scientist cooperation, and next-generation tools could consolidate the evidence base on which to reform farming practice. This will involve ecologists stepping outside their comfort zones to promote behavioral change and make ecological intensification a reality.

Out of the blue carbon box: toward investable blue natural capital

In 2019, we found that the concept of blue carbon had begun to solidify in the preceding decade around activities that could achieve mitigation through conservation and restoration and on ecosystems with high levels of data. Five years later, the available data have increased, and so too have the ecosystems that are included in national carbon markets and carbon market methodologies (e.g. seaweed and supratidal forests). While the implementation of blue carbon strategies continues to advance in both the carbon and emerging biodiversity markets, the scale of investment is inadequate for the action needed to meet global targets of the Paris Agreement and Kunming-Global Biodiversity Framework. The developing finance mechanisms for investment in blue natural capital offer additional potential for action on conservation and restoration of blue carbon ecosystems at large scales, although governance systems are challenged to deliver just and equitable outcomes. Blue carbon research and implementation is characterized by deep collaboration among diverse disciplines and actors, which continues to be crucial to achieving conservation and restoration goals.

The Thermal Stress History of South Atlantic Reefs Reveals Increasing Intensity, Duration, Frequency, and Likely Undocumented Bleaching Episodes

The primary consequence of global warming for reefs is coral bleaching, often leading to extensive coral mortality. Although bleaching is well-documented globally, the thermal stress and bleaching experienced by the unique South Atlantic reefs remain largely unknown due to insufficient monitoring on both spatial and temporal scales. Therefore, this work aimed to reconstruct past thermal stress episodes across South Atlantic reefs, and assessed whether episodes are becoming more intense, longer-lasting, and more frequent. We retrieved daily 5 km-resolution Degree Heating Week (DHW) data from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Watch server for 33 reef sites spanning the last 40 years. For each thermal stress episode, we assessed the intensity (maximum DHW value), duration (number of continuous days under stress), and frequency (number of days between episodes). Generalized linear models were fitted to intensity, duration, and frequency data to evaluate the influence of latitude and the time x region interaction as predictors. We recorded multiple thermal stress episodes, increasing from 2010 onwards, ranging from 10 episodes between 1985-89 and 75 between 2020-24. Intensity and duration increased over time across the entire South Atlantic. Frequency also increased across the Southwestern Atlantic coast and oceanic islands, but not for Africa. Episodes at higher latitudes were more intense, prolonged, and frequent. The validity of the thermal stress history reconstruction was groundtruthed using information from the Abrolhos Bank, the only consistently monitored reef site in the South Atlantic-DHW data accurately matched the observed bleaching episodes at this site. With this, our dataset shows that multiple bleaching episodes likely occurred in the South Atlantic, but went undocumented in the field. Therefore, the information currently available for the South Atlantic likely underestimates the extent of bleaching occurring in the area, which is experiencing increases in intensity, duration, and frequency of thermal stress.

Addressing data disparities is critical for biodiversity assessments

Biodiversity and nature assessments such as the US National Nature Assessment assess the state of biodiversity and the contributions of nature to humans.. Using three species relevant to public health, the economy, and ecosystem services, we illustrate here how socioeconomics relate to biodiversity data availability. Inequities in biodiversity records could risk inaccurate ecological assessments and hamper equitable policies.

Strategies for advancing inclusive biodiversity research through equitable practices and collective responsibility

Biodiversity research is essential for addressing the global biodiversity crisis, necessitating diverse participation and perspectives of researchers from a wide range of backgrounds. However, conservation faces a significant inclusivity problem because local expertise from biodiversity-rich but economically disadvantaged regions is often underrepresented. This underrepresentation is driven by linguistic bias, undervalued contributions, parachute science practices, and capacity constraints. Although fragmented solutions exist, a unified multistakeholder approach is needed to address the interconnected and systemic conservation issues. We devised a holistic framework of collective responsibility across all research participants and tailored strategies that embrace diversity and dismantle systemic barriers to equitable collaboration. This framework delineates the diverse actors and practices required for promoting inclusivity in biodiversity research, assigning clear responsibilities to researchers, publishers, institutions, and funding bodies. Strategies for researchers include cultivating self-awareness, expanding literature searches, fostering partnerships with local experts, and promoting knowledge exchange. For institutions, we recommend establishing specialized liaison roles, implementing equitable policies, allocating resources for diversity initiatives, and enhancing support for international researchers. Publishers can facilitate multilingual dissemination, remove financial barriers, establish inclusivity standards, and ensure equitable representation in peer review. Funders must remove systemic barriers, strengthen research networks, and prioritize equitable resource allocation. Implementing these stakeholder-specific strategies can help dismantle deep-rooted biases and structural inequities in biodiversity research, catalyzing a shift toward a more inclusive and representative model that amplifies diverse perspectives and maximizes collective knowledge for effective global conservation.

Progress in developing and operationalizing the Monitoring Framework of the Global Biodiversity Framework

The failure to halt the global decline in biodiversity by 2020 contributed to the adoption of the ambitious Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which includes transparency and responsibility as foundations. The Global Biodiversity Framework identifies the actions needed so that societies are living in harmony with nature by 2050. To support the delivery of this ambition, the transparency and responsibility mechanisms defined in the Global Biodiversity Framework include a detailed Monitoring Framework designed to prompt evidence-based actions and track progress towards its goals and targets at the national and global level. The Monitoring Framework includes a set of indicators selected by the Parties through a political process. These indicators have since been operationalized through a scientific process led by an expert group focused on assessing and clarifying their methods. Most indicators are now ready to inform on progress, but key limitations of data availability and methodological challenges remain. The onus is now on the Parties to resource implementation and on the scientific community to support indicator use and development. Implementation of the Monitoring Framework will provide an unprecedented view of the state of biodiversity at the national level, which can be used to assess both national and global progress. Investment to overcome the Monitoring Framework's weaknesses will improve our ability to measure progress and mobilize the actions needed to protect and restore biodiversity and the many benefits we receive from nature.