ArticlePloS one2024
Mammal responses to human recreation depend on landscape context.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Human Shield Hypothesis: Does Predator Avoidance of Humans Create Refuges for Prey?Ecology letters · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding Multi-Scale and Multi-Species Habitat Selection by Mammals in the Eastern Himalayan Biodiversity Hotspot.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid growth in outdoor recreation may have important and varied effects on terrestrial mammal communities. Few studies have investigated factors influencing variation in observed responses of multiple mammal species to recreation. We used data from 155 camera traps, in western Alberta (Canada), and a hierarchical Bayesian community modelling framework to document 15 mammal species responses to recreation, test for differential responses between predators and prey, and evaluate the influence of local context. Factors characterizing context were trail designation (i.e., use by motorized vs non-motorized), management type, forest cover, landscape disturbance, and season. We used three measures to characterize variation in recreation pressure: distance to trail, trail density, and an index of recreation intensity derived from the platform Strava. We found limited evidence for strong or consistent effects of recreation on mammal space use. However, mammal space use was better explained by an interaction between recreation and the influencing factors than by either on their own. The strongest interaction was between trail density and management type; mammals were more likely to avoid sites near a higher density of trails in areas with more restrictive management. We found that responses to recreation varied with the trail designation, although there were not clear or consistent differences between responses to trails designated for motorized vs. non-motorized use. Overall, we found that responses were species- and context-dependent. Limiting the density of trails may be important for reducing negative impacts to mammals within conservation areas. We show that using multiple measures of recreation yields more insight into the varied effects of human disturbances on wildlife. We recommend investigating how different characteristics of recreation (noise, speed, and visibility) influence animal behaviors. Multispecies monitoring and modelling across multiple landscapes that vary in recreation pressure can lead to an adaptive management approach to ensuring outdoor recreation coexistence with 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.