ArticleScientific reports2021
Different patterns of human activities in nature during Covid-19 pandemic and African swine fever outbreak confirm direct impact on wildlife disruption.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human-Elephant Conflict in Thailand over the Past Decade (2014-2023): Occurrence, Geographical Distribution, and Temporal Trends.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Global urban activity changes from COVID-19 physical distancing restrictions.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Wild Boar Proves High Tolerance to Human-Caused Disruptions: Management Implications in African Swine Fever Outbreaks.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Odor Fences Have No Effect on Wild Boar Movement and Home Range Size.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Wild boar carcasses in the center of boar activity: crucial risks of ASF transmission.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Assessment of Ecological Bridges at Wildlife Crossings in Türkiye: A Case Study of Wild Boar Crossings on the Izmir-Çeşme Motorway.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- The effect of COVID-19 confinement on the activity behaviour of red deer.Global ecology and conservation · 2023Article
- Worse sleep and increased energy expenditure yet no movement changes in sub-urban wild boar experiencing an influx of human visitors (anthropulse) during the COVID-19 pandemic.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Similar Trajectories in Current Alcohol Consumption and Tick-Borne Diseases: Only Parallel Changes in Time or Links Between?Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Implementation of various restrictions to eradicate viral diseases has globally affected human activity and subsequently nature. But how can the altered routines of human activity (restrictions, lockdowns) affect wildlife behaviour? This study compared the differences between human and wildlife occurrences in the study forest area with acreage of 5430.6 ha in 2018 (African swine fever outbreak, complete entrance ban), 2019 (standard pattern) and 2020 (COVID-19 restrictions) during the breeding season. The number of visitors was lower by 64% in 2018 (non-respecting of the entry ban by forest visitors) compared to standard 2019, while in 2020, the number of visitors increased to 151%. In the COVID-19 period, distinct peaks in the number of visitors were observed between 8-11 AM and 4-7 PM. The peaks of wildlife activity were recorded between 4-7 AM and 9-12 PM. Animals avoided the localities that were visited by humans during the people-influenced time (24 h after people visit), which confirmed the direct negative impact of human activities on wildlife.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.