ArticleBMC zoology2026
Contrasting urban ecology of two hedgehog species in Central European contact zone.
Article in BMC zoology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding how closely related species coexist in shared environments provides key insights into their ecological differentiation and adaptive potential. In Central Europe, the European hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus, EE) and the Northern white-breasted hedgehog (E. roumanicus, ER) meet in an extensive contact zone that includes large urban areas. Using a seven-year dataset from the Prague Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre, we compared the two species in terms of spatial distribution, seasonal activity, and rehabilitation outcomes to assess their ecological patterns in an urban environment.
resultsThe species exhibited distinct spatiotemporal patterns. While the EE was mainly confined to the southwestern part of the city, the ER dominated in the east, suggesting a dispersal barrier associated with the Vltava River. The EE showed a later and narrower reproductive period, consistent with one annual litter, whereas the ER showed earlier juvenile admissions and a pattern consistent with two litters per year. The EE further showed increased late-season admissions and lower release rates, while the ER had higher rehabilitation success.
conclusionsThese differences suggest an ecological asymmetry between the EE and the ER within the Prague contact zone, with the ER showing signs of greater tolerance of urban conditions and the EE appearing more constrained under local urban conditions. Our findings demonstrate that wildlife rehabilitation center data can serve as an important source of comparative ecological information and help reveal how closely related species respond to human-dominated environments when interpreted with caution.
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.