Global COVID-19 lockdown highlights humans as both threats and custodians of the environment.

The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from 89 different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness.

Differential reporting of biodiversity in two citizen science platforms during COVID-19 lockdown in Colombia.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the potential of using data from long-term citizen science projects to answer questions about the impacts of unexpected events on biodiversity. We evaluate the suitability of data from the citizen science platforms iNaturalist and eBird to describe the effects of the "anthropause" on biodiversity observation in Colombia. We compared record distribution according to human footprint, sampling behaviors, overall and conservation priority species composition during the strictest phase of the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020 to the same periods in 2015-2019. Overall participation in both platforms during the lockdown was high when compared to previous years, but records were concentrated on highly-transformed regions, had lower sampling efforts, and fewer species were recorded. For eBird, species composition was similar to that observed in previous years, and records of species of conservation concern declined in proportion to the decrease in overall species richness across samples. For iNaturalist, the species pool sampled each year remained too dissimilar for comparisons. Once differences in observer behaviors are accounted for, data from these platforms can be used in unplanned comparisons of relatively common species, in regions with high levels of human transformation, and at narrowly defined geographical contexts. To increase the potential of citizen science to monitor rarer species, more natural areas, or be used in large-scale analyses, we need to build and strengthen more diverse networks of observers that can further promote decentralization, democratization, and cost-effectiveness in biodiversity research.