Pidgeon Anna M, Flather Curtis H, Radeloff Volker C, Lepczyk Christopher A, Keuler Nicholas S, Wood Eric M, Stewart Susan I, Hammer Roger B
SILVIS Lab, Department of Forest and Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, 53706, U.S.A..
Conserv Biol. 2014 Oct;28(5):1291-301. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12291. Epub 2014 May 8.
As people encroach increasingly on natural areas, one question is how this affects avian biodiversity. The answer to this is partly scale-dependent. At broad scales, human populations and biodiversity concentrate in the same areas and are positively associated, but at local scales people and biodiversity are negatively associated with biodiversity. We investigated whether there is also a systematic temporal trend in the relationship between bird biodiversity and housing development. We used linear regression to examine associations between forest bird species richness and housing growth in the conterminous United States over 30 years. Our data sources were the North American Breeding Bird Survey and the 2000 decennial U.S. Census. In the 9 largest forested ecoregions, housing density increased continually over time. Across the conterminous United States, the association between bird species richness and housing density was positive for virtually all guilds except ground nesting birds. We found a systematic trajectory of declining bird species richness as housing increased through time. In more recently developed ecoregions, where housing density was still low, the association with bird species richness was neutral or positive. In ecoregions that were developed earlier and where housing density was highest, the association of housing density with bird species richness for most guilds was negative and grew stronger with advancing decades. We propose that in general the relationship between human settlement and biodiversity over time unfolds as a 2-phase process. The first phase is apparently innocuous; associations are positive due to coincidence of low-density housing with high biodiversity. The second phase is highly detrimental to biodiversity, and increases in housing density are associated with biodiversity losses. The long-term effect on biodiversity depends on the final housing density. This general pattern can help unify our understanding of the relationship of human encroachment and biodiversity response.
随着人们对自然区域的侵占日益增加，一个问题是这如何影响鸟类生物多样性。对此问题的答案部分取决于尺度。在大尺度上，人口和生物多样性集中在相同区域且呈正相关，但在局部尺度上，人类与生物多样性呈负相关。我们调查了鸟类生物多样性与住房开发之间的关系是否也存在系统性的时间趋势。我们使用线性回归来检验美国本土30年来森林鸟类物种丰富度与住房增长之间的关联。我们的数据来源是北美繁殖鸟类调查和2000年美国十年一度的人口普查。在9个最大的森林生态区，住房密度随时间持续增加。在美国本土，除地面筑巢鸟类外，几乎所有鸟类群落的物种丰富度与住房密度之间的关联都是正相关。我们发现随着时间推移住房增加，鸟类物种丰富度呈系统性下降轨迹。在住房密度仍然较低的较新开发的生态区，与鸟类物种丰富度的关联是中性或正相关。在开发较早且住房密度最高的生态区，大多数鸟类群落的住房密度与鸟类物种丰富度的关联为负，且随着时间推移几十年间这种关联变得更强。我们提出，一般来说，人类定居与生物多样性之间的关系随时间呈现为一个两阶段过程。第一阶段显然无害；由于低密度住房与高生物多样性的巧合，关联为正。第二阶段对生物多样性极具危害，住房密度增加与生物多样性丧失相关。对生物多样性的长期影响取决于最终的住房密度。这种一般模式有助于统一我们对人类侵占与生物多样性响应关系的理解。
