ReviewGlobal change biology2026
Global Trends in Drought Impacts on Wildlife-A Review.
Review in Global change biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Elephant space use and habitat selection change across drought timescales.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
- Global Trends in Drought Impacts on Wildlife-A Review.Global change biology · 2026Review
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
Drought is expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change, highlighting the urgency of understanding drought impacts on wildlife across geographies and taxonomic groups. We conducted a review of peer-reviewed articles from 1982 to 2024, focusing on the impacts of anomalous drought on terrestrial vertebrates. We recorded 3324 total wildlife responses, 188 from single-species studies and 3136 from multi-species studies. Within single-species studies, 66% of responses were negative, 32% were unclear, and 2% were positive, illustrating the widespread threat of increasing drought to global wildlife. Within multi-species studies, 24% of responses were negative, and 5% were positive. Notably, 71% of responses within multi-species papers were categorized as "unclear", highlighting the need for additional investigation and the complexity of synthesizing a diverse literature. Drought impacts are not evenly tested across taxa, with birds being the most frequently studied (51% of documented responses), followed by mammals (28%), amphibians (16%), and reptiles (5%). Geographically, studies tended to occur most often where recent increases in anomalous drought have been observed (e.g., the Southwestern United States, South Africa, and Southeastern Australia). The sophistication of how drought is measured has increased over time, whereby studies increasingly defined drought as an anomalous event in comparison to a long-term average through the use of drought indices, rather than as a short-term weather event. However, we did not see consistency in indices used across the literature, which has the potential to present challenges for interpretation and synthesis. This review summarizes the predominantly negative impacts of drought on terrestrial vertebrates and the growing challenge of conserving wildlife in a changing world, while also highlighting gaps in our understanding of drought-wildlife relationships that can guide future research.
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.