Shifting mammal communities and declining species richness along an elevational gradient on Mount Kenya

Conservation areas encompassing elevation gradients are biodiversity hotspots because they contain a wide range of habitat types in a relatively small space. Studies of biodiversity patterns along elevation gradients, mostly on small mammal or bird species, have documented a peak in diversity at mid elevations. Here, we report on a field study of medium and large mammals to examine the impact of elevation, habitat type, and gross primary productivity on community structure. Species richness was observed using a camera trap transect with 219 sites situated across different habitat types from 2329 to 4657 m above the sea level on the western slope of Mt Kenya, the second highest mountain in Africa. We found that the lowest elevation natural habitats had the highest species richness and relative abundance and that both metrics decreased steadily as elevation increased, paralleling changes in gross primary productivity, and supporting the energy richness hypothesis. We found no evidence for the mid-domain effect on species diversity. The lowest elevation degraded Agro-Forestry lands adjacent to the National Park had high activity of domestic animals and reduced diversity and abundance of native species. The biggest difference in community structure was between protected and unprotected areas, followed by more subtle stepwise differences between habitats at different elevations. Large carnivore species remained relatively consistent but dominant herbivore species shifted along the elevation gradient. There was some habitat specialization and turnover in species, such that the elevation gradient predicts a high diversity of species, demonstrating the high conservation return for protecting mountain ecosystems for biodiversity conservation.

Combining camera trap surveys and IUCN range maps to improve knowledge of species distributions

Reliable maps of species distributions are fundamental for biodiversity research and conservation. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) range maps are widely recognized as authoritative representations of species' geographic limits, yet they might not always align with actual occurrence data. In recent area of habitat (AOH) maps, areas that are not habitat have been removed from IUCN ranges to reduce commission errors, but their concordance with actual species occurrence also remains untested. We tested concordance between occurrences recorded in camera trap surveys and predicted occurrences from the IUCN and AOH maps for 510 medium- to large-bodied mammalian species in 80 camera trap sampling areas. Across all areas, cameras detected only 39% of species expected to occur based on IUCN ranges and AOH maps; 85% of the IUCN only mismatches occurred within 200 km of range edges. Only 4% of species occurrences were detected by cameras outside IUCN ranges. The probability of mismatches between cameras and the IUCN range was significantly higher for smaller-bodied mammals and habitat specialists in the Neotropics and Indomalaya and in areas with shorter canopy forests. Our findings suggest that range and AOH maps rarely underrepresent areas where species occur, but they may more often overrepresent ranges by including areas where a species may be absent, particularly at range edges. We suggest that combining range maps with data from ground-based biodiversity sensors, such as camera traps, provides a richer knowledge base for conservation mapping and planning.

Disturbance type and species life history predict mammal responses to humans

Human activity and land use change impact every landscape on Earth, driving declines in many animal species while benefiting others. Species ecological and life history traits may predict success in human-dominated landscapes such that only species with "winning" combinations of traits will persist in disturbed environments. However, this link between species traits and successful coexistence with humans remains obscured by the complexity of anthropogenic disturbances and variability among study systems. We compiled detection data for 24 mammal species from 61 populations across North America to quantify the effects of (1) the direct presence of people and (2) the human footprint (landscape modification) on mammal occurrence and activity levels. Thirty-three percent of mammal species exhibited a net negative response (i.e., reduced occurrence or activity) to increasing human presence and/or footprint across populations, whereas 58% of species were positively associated with increasing disturbance. However, apparent benefits of human presence and footprint tended to decrease or disappear at higher disturbance levels, indicative of thresholds in mammal species' capacity to tolerate disturbance or exploit human-dominated landscapes. Species ecological and life history traits were strong predictors of their responses to human footprint, with increasing footprint favoring smaller, less carnivorous, faster-reproducing species. The positive and negative effects of human presence were distributed more randomly with respect to species trait values, with apparent winners and losers across a range of body sizes and dietary guilds. Differential responses by some species to human presence and human footprint highlight the importance of considering these two forms of human disturbance separately when estimating anthropogenic impacts on wildlife. Our approach provides insights into the complex mechanisms through which human activities shape mammal communities globally, revealing the drivers of the loss of larger predators in human-modified landscapes.