Human proximity often have negative consequences for wildlife. However, animals may also benefit from human proximity in terms of availability of resources and protection against predators and parasites. We recorded t...Human proximity often have negative consequences for wildlife. However, animals may also benefit from human proximity in terms of availability of resources and protection against predators and parasites. We recorded the distance between all birds detected during the breeding season along 18 5-kin transects and the nearest inhabited house in three areas of 50 km2 in Spain, France, and Denmark. More than three quarters of birds were located closer than 100 m to the nearest house, while the null expectation was less than a third. Mean distance for species was correlated with degree of bird urbanization and with flight initiation distance. Habitat specialist species with small breeding territories tended to live closer to houses. Birds from species having more broods per year, larger annual fecundity and lower nest predation rate lived closer to human habitation. Breeding range size, population density, and continental breeding population sizes were larger for species living closer to human habitation. Most relationships between distance to houses and bird traits had a strong phylogenetic signal, but most additive trait effects remained after phylogenetic correction. Proximity to human habitation was a main driver of the distribution of birds, with most individuals and species tightly linked to inhabited houses. Living close to human habitation was associated with success in the colonization of urban habitats and with consistent changes in distribution, abundance, behavior, and life history. Replicated measurements of the spatial and tempo- ral variation in these distributions may be useful for monitoring and analyzing the ongoing process of organisms＇ urbanization.展开更多
文摘Human proximity often have negative consequences for wildlife. However, animals may also benefit from human proximity in terms of availability of resources and protection against predators and parasites. We recorded the distance between all birds detected during the breeding season along 18 5-kin transects and the nearest inhabited house in three areas of 50 km2 in Spain, France, and Denmark. More than three quarters of birds were located closer than 100 m to the nearest house, while the null expectation was less than a third. Mean distance for species was correlated with degree of bird urbanization and with flight initiation distance. Habitat specialist species with small breeding territories tended to live closer to houses. Birds from species having more broods per year, larger annual fecundity and lower nest predation rate lived closer to human habitation. Breeding range size, population density, and continental breeding population sizes were larger for species living closer to human habitation. Most relationships between distance to houses and bird traits had a strong phylogenetic signal, but most additive trait effects remained after phylogenetic correction. Proximity to human habitation was a main driver of the distribution of birds, with most individuals and species tightly linked to inhabited houses. Living close to human habitation was associated with success in the colonization of urban habitats and with consistent changes in distribution, abundance, behavior, and life history. Replicated measurements of the spatial and tempo- ral variation in these distributions may be useful for monitoring and analyzing the ongoing process of organisms＇ urbanization.
