Urbanization causes biotic homogenization of woodland bird communities at multiple spatial scales.

Urbanization is a major contributor to biodiversity declines. However, studies assessing effects of urban landscapes per se (i.e., disentangled from focal habitat effects) on biodiversity across spatial scales are lacking. Understanding such scale-dependent effects is fundamental to preserve habitats along an urbanization gradient in a way that maximizes overall biodiversity. We investigated the impact of landscape urbanization on communities of woodland-breeding bird species in individual (local scale) and across multiple (regional scale) cities, while controlling for the quality of sampled habitats (woodlands). We conducted bird point counts and habitat quality mapping of trees, dead wood, and shrubs in 459 woodlands along an urban to rural urbanization gradient in 32 cities in Sweden. Responses to urbanization were measured as local and regional total diversity (γ), average site diversity (α), and diversity between sites (ß). We also assessed effects on individual species and to what extent dissimilarities in species composition along the urbanization gradient were driven by species nestedness or turnover. We found that landscape urbanization had a negative impact on γ-, α-, and ß-diversity irrespective of spatial scale, both regarding all woodland-breeding species and red-listed species. At the regional scale, dissimilarities in species composition between urbanization levels were due to nestedness, that is, species were lost with increased landscape urbanization without being replaced. In contrast, dissimilarities at the local scale were mostly due to species turnover. Because there was no difference in habitat quality among woodlands across the urbanization gradient, we conclude that landscape urbanization as such systematically causes poorer and more homogeneous bird communities in adjacent natural habitats. However, the high local turnover and the fact that several species benefited from urbanization demonstrates that natural habitats along the entire urbanization gradient are needed to maintain maximally diverse local bird communities.

Growth of non-English-language literature on biodiversity conservation.

English is widely recognized as the language of science, and English-language publications (ELPs) are rapidly increasing. It is often assumed that the number of non-ELPs is decreasing. This assumption contributes to the underuse of non-ELPs in conservation science, practice, and policy, especially at the international level. However, the number of conservation articles published in different languages is poorly documented. Using local and international search systems, we searched for scientific articles on biodiversity conservation published from 1980 to 2018 in English and 15 non-English languages. We compared the growth rate in publications across languages. In 12 of the 15 non-English languages, published conservation articles significantly increased every year over the past 39 years, at a rate similar to English-language articles. The other three languages showed contrasting results, depending on the search system. Since the 1990s, conservation science articles in most languages increased exponentially. The variation in the number of non-English-language articles identified among the search systems differed markedly (e.g., for simplified Chinese, 11,148 articles returned with local search system and 803 with Scopus). Google Scholar and local literature search systems returned the most articles for 11 and 4 non-English languages, respectively. However, the proportion of peer-reviewed conservation articles published in non-English languages was highest in Scopus, followed by Web of Science and local search systems, and lowest in Google Scholar. About 20% of the sampled non-English-language articles provided no title or abstract in English; thus, in theory, they were undiscoverable with English keywords. Possible reasons for this include language barriers and the need to disseminate research in countries where English is not widely spoken. Given the known biases in statistical methods and study characteristics between English- and non-English-language studies, non-English-language articles will continue to play an important role in improving the understanding of biodiversity and its conservation.

RESUMEN: El inglés es reconocido como el idioma de la ciencia y las publicaciones en inglés (PI) cada vez son más. Con frecuencia se asume que el número de publicaciones en idiomas diferentes al inglés está disminuyendo. Esta suposición contribuye al uso reducido de las publicaciones que no están en inglés en las ciencias, prácticas y políticas de la conservación, especialmente a nivel internacional. Sin embargo, el número de artículos de conservación publicados en diferentes idiomas está muy mal documentado. Usamos sistemas de búsqueda locales e internacionales para buscar artículos científicos sobre la conservación de la biodiversidad publicados entre 1980 y 2018 en inglés y en quince idiomas diferentes al inglés. También comparamos la tasa de incremento de publicaciones en los diferentes idiomas. En doce de los quince idiomas diferentes al inglés, los artículos de conservación publicados incrementaron significativamente cada año durante los últimos 39 años, una tasa similar a los artículos en inglés. Los otros tres idiomas mostraron resultados contrastantes según el sistema de búsqueda. Desde la década de 1990, los artículos sobre ciencias de la conservación incrementaron exponencialmente en la mayoría de los idiomas. La variación en el número de artículos identificados en idiomas diferentes al inglés difirió notablemente de acuerdo con los sistemas de búsqueda (p. ej.: en el caso del chino simplificado, obtuvimos 11,148 artículos con el sistema de búsqueda local y 803 con Scopus). Google Scholar y los sistemas locales de búsqueda arrojaron la mayor cantidad de artículos en 11 y 4 idiomas diferentes al inglés, respectivamente. Sin embargo, la proporción de artículos sobre conservación revisados por pares y publicados en idiomas diferentes al inglés fue mayor en Scopus, seguida por Web of Science y los sistemas locales de búsqueda, con la menor proporción en Google Scholar. Aproximadamente el 20% de la muestra de artículos en idiomas diferentes al inglés no contaban con título o con resumen en inglés; por lo tanto, en teoría, eran imposibles de encontrar mediante palabras clave en inglés. Las posibles explicaciones de esto incluyen las barreras del idioma y la necesidad de difundir la investigación en países en los que el inglés no se habla extensamente. Con los sesgos conocidos de los métodos estadísticos y de las características de estudio entre los trabajos en inglés y en otros idiomas, los artículos en idiomas diferentes al inglés seguirán desempeñando un papel importante en el entendimiento de la biodiversidad y su conservación. Incremento de la Literatura sobre la Conservación de la Biodiversidad en Idiomas Diferentes al Inglés.

Temporal patterns in ecosystem services research: A review and three recommendations.

Temporal aspects of ecosystem services have gained surprisingly little attention given that ecosystem service flows are not static but change over time. We present the first systematic review to describe and establish how studies have assessed temporal patterns in supply and demand of ecosystem services. 295 studies, 2% of all studies engaging with the ecosystem service concept, considered changes in ecosystem services over time. Changes were mainly characterised as monotonic and linear (81%), rather than non-linear or through system shocks. Further, a lack of focus of changing ecosystem service demand (rather than supply) hampers our understanding of the temporal patterns of ecosystem services provision and use. Future studies on changes in ecosystem services over time should (1) more explicitly study temporal patterns, (2) analyse trade-offs and synergies between services over time, and (3) integrate changes in supply and demand and involve and empower stakeholders in temporal ecosystem services research.