SynthesisOecologia2025
Positive and negative impacts of electrical infrastructure on animal biodiversity: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Oecologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrical infrastructure networks are predicted to greatly expand in response to the expected 48% increase in global energy demand by 2040. While assessments of electrical infrastructure are abundant, mixed effects on animal diversity have been reported, warranting further evaluation to determine true effects. We conducted a systematic literature review covering individual, population, and community-level assessments to determine the impacts posed to animal biodiversity by electrical infrastructure and the measures to reduce impacts. Our results show that the literature around electrical infrastructure and animal biodiversity has grown exponentially since the start of the millennium and is biased towards birds and mammals in economically developed countries. We found the majority of reported impacts were negative, occurring primarily through barrier effects (collision) and use of linear features as a resource (electrocution), causing significant population impacts in select species. However, we also found that electrical infrastructure provided positive effects (increased habitat provisioning) to certain taxonomic groups (e.g. corvids, storks), which suggests the potential to encourage conservation efforts using appropriate mitigation on electrical infrastructure. We found the majority of current literature detailed mitigation measures focused on reducing collisions through line (51%) and tower alterations (30%), but often omitted the impacts of EMF, noise, and UV, indicating significant knowledge gaps. On a wider scale, we found that mortality from electrical infrastructure ranked lower than building collisions and predation from feral cats, but remained higher than other anthropogenic energy sources, indicating the potential to cause significant impacts to large-bodied bird species if not addressed.
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.