SynthesisNature communications2026
Native and introduced megafauna have convergent effects on animals and ecosystems: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Nature communications, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduced large herbivores (henceforth megafauna) are thought to have 'harmful' effects on ecosystems by disrupting coevolutionary dynamics. If this is the case, their effects should be distinct from those of native megafauna. We use a systematic meta-analytic dataset of 3,532 observations from 235 articles to test whether there is any difference between the effects of native, introduced, and invasive megafauna on animals, soil, and a variety of ecosystem processes. Among 32 ecological responses, we only find moderate evidence that invasive megafauna have more neutral effects on soil compaction than native megafauna. We then compare the effects of introduced megafauna to intact African megafauna assemblages, the closest proxies for the communities that dominated Earth's continents for millions of years. We find moderate evidence that introduced megafauna reduces soil magnesium more than African megafauna, but no differences among the other responses. Our results suggest that nativeness is unlikely to be a biological attribute of megafauna. While the effects of introduced megafauna may seem unusual in reference to modern defaunated baselines, we suggest that broader lenses-and objective research across the cascading indirect effects of megafauna-will help us better understand the role of introduced megafauna in a time of rising global novelty.
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.