ArticleGlobal change biology2025
Mammals on the Margins: Identifying the Drivers and Limitations of Range Expansion.
Article in Global change biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thermophilization: Concepts, Methods, and Implications of Changes in Community Composition due to Global Warming.Global change biology · 2026Review
- Land vertebrates increasingly exposed to multiple extreme events by 2085.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- Community Science: Big Insights From Small Mammal Data.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Coyote Range Expansion in the Human-Modified Tropics of Mesoamerica.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Accurately estimating species distributions is critical for tracking how biodiversity is shaped by global change. While some species are expanding their ranges, the importance of factors like climate change, habitat change, and human avoidance for explaining this expansion is not well understood. Here, we used observations of 94 North American mammals on iNaturalist to (1) identify errors of omission in the existing range maps; (2) differentiate between extra-range populations that are likely products of natural expansions vs. introductions; and (3) test hypotheses about where natural range expansions occur. We found a substantial percentage of observations were outside both IUCN (16%) and Area of Habitat (36%) maps, suggesting that integrating contemporary citizen science data would improve existing range maps. We estimated that most observations outside IUCN ranges were natural expansions and 95% of species had at least one naturally expanding population. We also identified introductions for 36% of species, which were particularly extensive for several species. We show that natural range expansions are generally associated with a lighter human footprint and less habitat change and are not associated with warming temperatures. This suggests that habitat modifications by humans constrain the ability of species to expand their range to track a changing climate. We also found substantial variation in the directionality of effects from all factors across species, meaning that our species-specific findings will be useful for conservation planning. Our study demonstrates that citizen science data can be useful for conservation by tracking how organisms are responding, or failing to respond, to global change.
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.