ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025
Urbanization of seed dispersal networks.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Urbanization of seed dispersal networks.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid urban expansion is affecting the composition of wild communities and creating novel ecosystems worldwide. Seed dispersal is key for ecosystem persistence, particularly in fragmented landscapes. However, generalizations regarding the impacts of urbanization are still difficult due to the lack of studies encompassing the urban matrix. We examined the seed dispersal networks in natural forests and urban areas in Tenerife Island to explore the effects of urbanization on seed dispersal. For 1 year, we observed frugivory events and identified seeds in animal feces in natural forests and urban areas of the island. We also conducted transect surveys in each area to assess the abundance of fleshy fruits and frugivorous animals. We identified 150 interactions between 83 plant and 18 animal species in the forest and 89 interactions between 41 plant and 9 animal species in urban areas. The urban matrix supported half the species richness of fleshy-fruited plants and frugivorous animals relative to the forest. Urbanization simplified seed dispersal networks, reducing interaction diversity. Novel interactions dominated the urban seed dispersal network, where non-native plants were highly used by native frugivores, accounting for 61% of the interactions (vs. 15% in the forest). Eight frugivore species (42% of the frugivores) likely maintained the functional connectivity between these habitats, potentially facilitating the spread of non-native species from urban areas (where non-native species are more common) into the forests due to their generalist and flexible diets. Six frugivorous species (32%) completely avoided urban areas, which acted as barriers to dispersal, likely hindering the dispersal of many plants across urban landscapes. Our results underscore the importance of promoting the use of native plants as ornamentals, enhancing habitat connectivity between forests and urban areas, and preventing the introduction of non-native fleshy-fruited plants. Ultimately, these findings highlight the need for sustainable urban planning and active stakeholder engagement to protect the seed dispersal service.
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.