Forest edges influence more than half of the world’s forests and contribute to worldwide declines in biodiversity and ecosystem functions. However, predicting these declines is challenging in heterogeneous fragmented landscapes. Here we assembled a global dataset on species responses to fragmentation and developed a statistical approach for quantifying edge impacts in heterogeneous landscapes to quantify edge-determined changes in abundance of 1,673 vertebrate species. We show that the abundances of 85% of species are affected, either positively or negatively, by forest edges. Species that live in the centre of the forest (forest core), that were more likely to be listed as threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), reached peak abundances only at sites farther than 200–400 m from sharp high-contrast forest edges. Smaller-bodied amphibians, larger reptiles and medium-sized non-volant mammals experienced a larger reduction in suitable habitat than other forest-core species. Our results highlight the pervasive ability of forest edges to restructure ecological communities on a global scale.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
Oecologia Open Access 17 September 2022
Nature Communications Open Access 01 February 2022
Cumulative effects of human footprint, natural features and predation risk best predict seasonal resource selection by white-tailed deer
Scientific Reports Open Access 20 January 2022
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Haddad, N. M. et al. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Sci. Adv. 1, e1500052 (2015)
Pfeifer, M. et al. BIOFRAG — a new database for analyzing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1524–1537 (2014)
Debinski, D. M. Forest fragmentation and matrix effects: the matrix does matter. J. Biogeogr. 33, 1791–1792 (2006)
Fletcher, R. J. Jr. Multiple edge effects and their implications in fragmented landscapes. J. Anim. Ecol. 74, 342–352 (2005)
Barlow, J. et al. Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation. Nature 535, 144–147 (2016)
Rosa, I. M. D., Smith, M. J., Wearn, O. R., Purves, D. & Ewers, R. M. The environmental legacy of modern tropical deforestation. Curr. Biol. 26, 2161–2166 (2016)
Lindenmayer, D. B. & Fischer, J. Habitat Fragmentation and Landscape Change: An Ecological and Conservation Synthesis (Island Press, 2013)
Didham, R. K. & Lawton, J. H. Edge structure determines the magnitude of changes in microclimate and vegetation structure in tropical forest fragments. Biotropica 31, 17–30 (1999)
Ewers, R. M. & Didham, R. K. Pervasive impact of large-scale edge effects on a beetle community. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 5426–5429 (2008)
Ewers, R. M., Thorpe, S. & Didham, R. K. Synergistic interactions between edge and area effects in a heavily fragmented landscape. Ecology 88, 96–106 (2007)
Fahrig, L. Rethinking patch size and isolation effects: the habitat amount hypothesis. J. Biogeogr. 40, 1649–1663 (2013)
Ewers, R. M., Marsh, C. J. & Wearn, O. R. Making statistics biologically relevant in fragmented landscapes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 699–704 (2010)
Arroyo-Rodríguez, V. & Dias, P. A. D. Effects of habitat fragmentation and disturbance on howler monkeys: a review. Am. J. Primatol. 72, 1–16 (2010)
Vetter, D., Hansbauer, M. M., Végvári, Z. & Storch, I. Predictors of forest fragmentation sensitivity in Neotropical vertebrates: a quantitative review. Ecography 34, 1–8 (2011)
Pearson, R. G. et al. Life history and spatial traits predict extinction risk due to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 217–221 (2014)
Sodhi, N. S., Liow, L. H. & Bazzaz, F. A. Avian extinctions from tropical and subtropical forests. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35, 323–345 (2004)
Cardillo, M. et al. Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species. Science 309, 1239–1241 (2005)
Purvis, A ., Gittleman, J. L ., Cowlishaw, G. & Mace, G. M. Predicting extinction risk in declining species. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267, 1947–1952 (2000)
Olalla-Tárraga, M. Á. & Rodríguez, M. Á. Energy and interspecific body size patterns of amphibian faunas in Europe and North America: anurans follow Bergmann’s rule, urodeles its converse. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 16, 606–617 (2007)
Gehring, T. M. & Swihart, R. K. Body size, niche breadth, and ecologically scaled responses to habitat fragmentation: mammalian predators in an agricultural landscape. Biol. Conserv. 109, 283–295 (2003)
Newbold, T . et al. Ecological traits affect the response of tropical forest bird species to land-use intensity. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20122131 (2013)
Mendenhall, C. D. et al. Countryside biogeography of Neotropical reptiles and amphibians. Ecology 95, 856–870 (2014)
Malcolm, J. R. Edge effects in central Amazonian forest fragments. Ecology 75, 2438–2445 (1994)
Didham, R. K., Kapos, V. & Ewers, R. M. Rethinking the conceptual foundations of habitat fragmentation research. Oikos 121, 161–170 (2012)
Kupfer, J. A., Malanson, G. P. & Franklin, S. B. Not seeing the ocean for the islands: the mediating influence of matrix-based processes on forest fragmentation effects. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 15, 8–20 (2006)
Laurance, W. F. et al. Habitat fragmentation, variable edge effects, and the landscape-divergence hypothesis. PLoS ONE 2, e1017 (2007)
Mendenhall, C. D., Karp, D. S., Meyer, C. F. J., Hadly, E. A. & Daily, G. C. Predicting biodiversity change and averting collapse in agricultural landscapes. Nature 509, 213–217 (2014)
Tscharntke, T. et al. Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes — eight hypotheses. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 87, 661–685 (2012)
Schneider-Maunoury, L. et al. Abundance signals of amphibians and reptiles indicate strong edge effects in Neotropical fragmented forest landscapes. Biol. Conserv. 200, 207–215 (2016)
Lefebvre, V., Pfeifer, M. & Ewers, R. M. BioFrag | Edge response—The BioFrag software. https://github.com/VeroL/BioFrag (2016)
De Coster, G ., Banks-Leite, C . & Metzger, J. P. Atlantic forest bird communities provide different but not fewer functions after habitat loss. Proc. R. Soc. B 282, 20142844 (2015)
Jenkins, C. N., Pimm, S. L. & Joppa, L. N. Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E2602–E2610 (2013)
Hardwick, S. R. et al. The relationship between leaf area index and microclimate in tropical forest and oil palm plantation: forest disturbance drives changes in microclimate. Agric. For. Meteorol. 201, 187–195 (2015)
Watling, J. I. & Braga, L. Desiccation resistance explains amphibian distributions in a fragmented tropical forest landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 30, 1449–1459 (2015)
Tuff, K. T., Tuff, T. & Davies, K. F. A framework for integrating thermal biology into fragmentation research. Ecol. Lett. 19, 361–374 (2016)
Lindstedt, S. L., Miller, B. J. & Buskirk, S. W. Home range, time, and body size in mammals. Ecology 67, 413–418 (1986)
Kosydar, A. J., Conquest, L. L. & Tewksbury, J. J. Can life histories predict the effects of habitat fragmentation? A meta-analysis with terrestrial mammals. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 12, 505–521 (2014)
Haskell, J. P., Ritchie, M. E. & Olff, H. Fractal geometry predicts varying body size scaling relationships for mammal and bird home ranges. Nature 418, 527–530 (2002)
Tucker, M. A . & Rogers, T. L. Examining predator–prey body size, trophic level and body mass across marine and terrestrial mammals. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20142103 (2014)
Zuckerberg, B., Fink, D., La Sorte, F. A., Hochachka, W. M. & Kelling, S. Novel seasonal land cover associations for eastern North American forest birds identified through dynamic species distribution modelling. Divers. Distrib. 22, 717–730 (2016)
Watson, J. E. M., Whittaker, R. J. & Dawson, T. P. Habitat structure and proximity to forest edge affect the abundance and distribution of forest-dependent birds in tropical coastal forests of southeastern Madagascar. Biol. Conserv. 120, 311–327 (2004)
Pittman, S. E., Osbourn, M. S. & Semlitsch, R. D. Movement ecology of amphibians: a missing component for understanding population declines. Biol. Conserv. 169, 44–53 (2014)
Newbold, T. et al. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520, 45–50 (2015)
Ewers, R. M. et al. Logging cuts the functional importance of invertebrates in tropical rainforest. Nat. Commun. 6, 6836 (2015)
Ries, L., Fletcher, R. J. Jr, Battin, J. & Sisk, T. D. Ecological responses to habitat edges: mechanisms, models, and variability explained. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35, 491–522 (2004)
Harper, K. A. et al. Edge influence on forest structure and composition in fragmented landscapes. Conserv. Biol. 19, 768–782 (2005)
Murcia, C. Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10, 58–62 (1995)
Broadbent, E. N. et al. Forest fragmentation and edge effects from deforestation and selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Biol. Conserv. 141, 1745–1757 (2008)
Ribeiro, M. C., Metzger, J. P., Martensen, A. C., Ponzoni, F. J. & Hirota, M. M. The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: how much is left, and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biol. Conserv. 142, 1141–1153 (2009)
Laurance, W. F. et al. A global strategy for road building. Nature 513, 229–232 (2014)
McCaw, W. L., Robinson, R. M. & Williams, M. R. Integrated biodiversity monitoring for the jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) forest in south-west Western Australia: the FORESTCHECK project. Aust. For. 74, 240–253 (2011)
Szabo, J. K., Vesk, P. A., Baxter, P. W. J. & Possingham, H. P. Paying the extinction debt: woodland birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia. Emu 111, 59–70 (2011)
Marsh, C. J., Lewis, O. T., Said, I. & Ewers, R. M. Community-level diversity modelling of birds and butterflies on Anjouan, Comoro Islands. Biol. Conserv. 143, 1364–1374 (2010)
Norris, K. et al. Biodiversity in a forest–agriculture mosaic — The changing face of West African rainforests. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2341–2350 (2010)
Banks-Leite, C., Ewers, R. M. & Metzger, J. P. Edge effects as the principal cause of area effects on birds in fragmented secondary forest. Oikos 119, 918–926 (2010)
Bar-Massada, A., Wood, E. M., Pidgeon, A. M. & Radeloff, V. C. Complex effects of scale on the relationships of landscape pattern versus avian species richness and community structure in a woodland savanna mosaic. Ecography 35, 393–411 (2012)
Cerezo, A., Perelman, S. & Robbins, C. S. Landscape-level impact of tropical forest loss and fragmentation on bird occurrence in eastern Guatemala. Ecol. Modell. 221, 512–526 (2010)
Gardner, T. A. et al. The value of primary, secondary, and plantation forests for a Neotropical herpetofauna. Conserv. Biol. 21, 775–787 (2007)
Barlow, J., Mestre, L. A. M., Gardner, T. A. & Peres, C. A. The value of primary, secondary and plantation forests for Amazonian birds. Biol. Conserv. 136, 212–231 (2007)
Morante-Filho, J. C., Faria, D., Mariano-Neto, E. & Rhodes, J. Birds in anthropogenic landscapes: the responses of ecological groups to forest loss in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. PLoS ONE 10, e0128923 (2015)
Stouffer, P. C., Bierregaard, R. O. Jr, Strong, C. & Lovejoy, T. E. Long-term landscape change and bird abundance in Amazonian rainforest fragments. Conserv. Biol. 20, 1212–1223 (2006)
Barlow, J. et al. Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 18555–18560 (2007)
Wells, K., Kalko, E. K. V., Lakim, M. B. & Pfeiffer, M. Effects of rain forest logging on species richness and assemblage composition of small mammals in Southeast Asia. J. Biogeogr. 34, 1087–1099 (2007)
Young, R. P. (ed.). A Biodiversity Assessment of the Centre Hills, Montserrat (Durrell, 2008)
Klingbeil, B. T. & Willig, M. R. Seasonal differences in population-, ensemble- and community-level responses of bats to landscape structure in Amazonia. Oikos 119, 1654–1664 (2010)
Cisneros, L. M. et al. Multiple dimensions of bat biodiversity along an extensive tropical elevational gradient. J. Anim. Ecol. 83, 1124–1136 (2014)
Garmendia, A., Arroyo-Rodríguez, V., Estrada, A., Naranjo, E. J. & Stoner, K. E. Landscape and patch attributes impacting medium- and large-sized terrestrial mammals in a fragmented rain forest. J. Trop. Ecol. 29, 331–344 (2013)
Struebig, M. J., Kingston, T., Zubaid, A., Mohd-Adnan, A. & Rossiter, S. J. Conservation value of forest fragments to Palaeotropical bats. Biol. Conserv. 141, 2112–2126 (2008)
Wayne, A. F., Liddelow, G. L. & Williams, M. R. Forestcheck: terrestrial vertebrate associations with fox control and silviculture in jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) forest. Aust. For. 74, 336–349 (2011)
D’Cruze, N. & Kumar, S. Effects of anthropogenic activities on lizard communities in northern Madagascar. Anim. Conserv. 14, 542–552 (2011)
Olivier, P. I., van Aarde, R. J. & Lombard, A. T. The use of habitat suitability models and species–area relationships to predict extinction debts in coastal forests, South Africa. Divers. Distrib. 19, 1353–1365 (2013)
Vilela, B. & Villalobos, F. letsR: a new R package for data handling and analysis in macroecology. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 1229–1234 (2015)
Cooper, N., Bielby, J., Thomas, G. H. & Purvis, A. Macroecology and extinction risk correlates of frogs. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 17, 211–221 (2008)
Bielby, J., Cooper, N., Cunningham, A. A., Garner, T. W. J. & Purvis, A. Predicting susceptibility to future declines in the world’s frogs. Conserv. Lett. 1, 82–90 (2008)
Vidal-García, M., Byrne, P. G., Roberts, J. D. & Keogh, J. S. The role of phylogeny and ecology in shaping morphology in 21 genera and 127 species of Australo-Papuan myobatrachid frogs. J. Evol. Biol. 27, 181–192 (2014)
Feldman, A., Sabath, N., Pyron, R. A., Mayrose, I. & Meiri, S. Body sizes and diversification rates of lizards, snakes, amphisbaenians and the tuatara. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 25, 187–197 (2016)
Meiri, S. Evolution and ecology of lizard body sizes. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 17, 724–734 (2008)
Andrews, R. M. & Sexton, O. J. Water relations of the eggs of Anolis auratus and Anolis limifrons. Ecology 62, 556–562 (1981)
Ballinger, R. E., Marion, K. R. & Sexton, O. J. Thermal ecology of the lizard, Anolis limifrons with comparative notes on three additional Panamanian Anoles. Ecology 51, 246–254 (1970)
Avila-Pires, T. C. S. Lizards of Brazilian Amazonia (Reptilia: Squamata). Zool. Verh. 299, 1–706 (1995)
Bickel, R. & Losos, J. B. Patterns of morphological variation and correlates of habitat use in chameleons. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 76, 91–103 (2002)
Brattstrom, B. H. Amphibian temperature regulation studies in the field and laboratory. Integr. Comp. Biol. 19, 345–356 (1979)
Brattstrom, B. H. Body temperatures of reptiles. Am. Midl. Nat. 73, 376–422 (1965)
Brattstrom, B. A preliminary review of the thermal requirements of amphibians. Ecology 44, 238–255 (1963)
Campbell, H. W. Ecological observations on Anolis lionotus and Anolis poecilopus (Reptilia, Sauria) in Panama. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 2516, 1–29 (1973)
Carvalho, E. A. R. Jr, Lima, A. P., Magnusson, W. E. & Albernaz, A. L. K. M. Long-term effect of forest fragmentation on the Amazonian gekkonid lizards, Coleodactylus amazonicus and Gonatodes humeralis. Austral Ecol. 33, 723–729 (2008)
Censky, E. J. & Mccoy, C. J. Female reproductive cycles of five species of snakes (Reptilia: Colubridae) from the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Biotropica 20, 326–333 (1988)
Christie, K., Stokes, V. L., Craig, M. D. & Hobbs, R. J. Microhabitat preference of Egernia napoleonis in undisturbed jarrah forest, and availability and introduction of microhabitats to encourage colonization of restored forest. Restor. Ecol. 21, 722–728 (2013)
Costa, H. C., Barros, A. B., Sueiro, L. R. & Feio, R. N. The blunt-headed vine snake, Imantodes cenchoa (Linnaeus, 1758), in Minas Gerais, southeastern Brazil. Biotemas 23, 173–176 (2010)
Duellman, W. E. & Hedges, S. B. Three new species of Pristimantis (Lissamphibia, Anura) from montane forests of the Cordillera Yanachaga in Central Peru. Phyllomedusa 6, 119–135 (2007)
Harvey, M. B., Rivas, G. A. & Manzanilla, J. Redescription of Stenocercus erythrogaster (Hallowell). Copeia 2004, 940–944 (2004)
Henderson, R. W. Lesser Antillean snake faunas: distribution, ecology, and conservation concerns. Oryx 38, 311–320 (2004)
Hirth, H. F. The ecology of two lizards on a tropical beach. Ecol. Monogr. 33, 83–112 (1963)
Hoogmoed, M. S. & Ávila-Pires, T. C. S. Studies on the species of the South American lizard genus Arthrosaura Boulenger (Reptilia: Sauria: Teiidae), with the resurrection of two species. Zool. Meded. Leiden 66, 453–484 (1992)
Irschick, D. J., Vitt, L. J., Zani, P. A. & Losos, J. B. A comparison of evolutionary radiations in mainland and Caribbean Anolis lizards. Ecology 78, 2191–2203 (1997)
Kanowski, J. J., Reis, T. M., Catterall, C. P. & Piper, S. D. Factors affecting the use of reforested sites by reptiles in cleared rainforest landscapes in tropical and subtropical Australia. Restor. Ecol. 14, 67–76 (2006)
Koehler, G., Alt, S., Gruenfelder, C., Dehling, M. & Sunyer, J. Morphological variation in Central American leaf-litter anoles: Norops humilis, N. quaggulus and N. uniformis. Salamandra (Frankf.) 42, 239–254 (2006)
Mesquita, D. O. & Colli, G. R. Geographical variation in the ecology of populations of some Brazilian species of Cnemidophorus (Squamata, Teiidae). Copeia 2003, 285–298 (2003)
Montgomery, C. E ., Reed, R. N ., Shaw, H. J ., Boback, S. M . & Walker, J. M. Distribution, habitat, size, and color pattern of Cnemidophorus lemniscatus (Sauria: Teiidae) on Cayo Cochino Pequeño, Honduras. Southwest. Nat. 52, 38–45 (2007)
Moreno-Arias, R. A., Medina-Rangel, G. F. & Castano-Mora, O. V. Lowland reptiles of Yacopi (Cundinamarca, Colombia). Rev. Acad. Colomb. Ciencias Exactas Fis. Nat. 32, 93–103 (2008)
Nichols, O. G. & Bamford, M. J. Reptile and frog utilisation of rehabilitated bauxite minesites and dieback-affected sites in Western Australia’s Jarrah Eucalyptus marginata forest. Biol. Conserv. 34, 227–249 (1985)
Presch, W. Evolutionary history of the South American microteiid lizards (Teiidae: Gymnophthalminae). Copeia 1980, 36–56 (1980)
Puente, M., Raselimanana, A. P. & Vences, M. Rediscovery and redescription of the Malagasy dwarf gecko Lygodactylus klemmeri. Zootaxa 1073, 31–35 (2005)
Rossman, D. A. Morphological variation in the endemic Colombian water snake, Helicops danieli (Serpentes, Xenododontidae). Rev. Acad. Colomb. Ciencias Exactas Fis. Nat. 26, 589–594 (2003)
Sajdak, R. A. & Henderson, R. Status of West Indian racers in the Lesser Antilles. Oryx 25, 33–38 (1991)
Sales, R. F. D., Ribeiro, L. B., Jorge, J. S. & Freire, E. M. X. Habitat use, daily activity periods, and thermal ecology of Ameiva ameiva (Squamata: Teiidae) in a caatinga area of northeastern Brazil. Phyllomedusa 10, 165–176 (2011)
Seebacher, F. & Franklin, C. E. Physiological mechanisms of thermoregulation in reptiles: a review. J. Comp. Physiol. B 175, 533–541 (2005)
Seib, R. Euryphagy in a tropical snake, Coniophanes fissidens. Biotropica 17, 57–64 (1985)
Vitt, L. J., Zani, P. A. & Lima, A. C. M. Heliotherms in tropical rain forest: the ecology of Kentropyx calcarata (Teiidae) and Mabuya nigropunctata (Scincidae) in the Curuá-Una of Brazil. J. Trop. Ecol. 13, 199–220 (1997)
Vitt, L. J., Pianka, E. R., Cooper, W. E. Jr & Schwenk, K. History and the global ecology of squamate reptiles. Am. Nat. 162, 44–60 (2003)
Van Devender, R. W. Comparative demography of the lizard Basiliscus basiliscus. Herpetologica 38, 189–208 (1982)
Vitt, L. J., Zani, P. A., Caldwell, J. P., de Araujo, M. C. & Magnusson, W. E. Ecology of whiptail lizards (Cnemidophorus) in the Amazon region of Brazil. Copeia 1997, 745–757 (1997)
Wilson, L. D. & Townsend, J. H. The herpetofauna of the rainforests of Honduras. Caribb. J. Sci. 42, 88–113 (2006)
Campbell, J. Amphibians and Reptiles of Northern Guatemala, the Yucatan, and Belize (Animal Natural History Series) (Oklahoma Univ. Press, 1999)
Cochran, D. Frogs of southeastern Brazil, 1954, Smithsonian Institution, United States National Museum Bulletin (Smithsonian Institution Press, 1954)
Henkel, F. & Schmidt, W. Amphibians and Reptiles of Madagascar, the Mascarene, the Seychelles, and the Comoro Islands (Krieger, 2000)
Vitt, L. J. & Caldwell, J. P. Herpetology: An Introductory Biology of Amphibians and Reptiles 4th edn (Academic, 2013)
Duellman, W. E. & Trueb, L. Biology of Amphibians (McGrawHill, 1986)
Savage, J. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Costa Rica: A Herpetofauna Between Two Continents, Between Two Seas (Univ. Chicago Press, 2002)
Wilman, H. et al. EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals. Ecology 95, 2027 (2014)
Jones, K. E. et al. PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90, 2648 (2009)
Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013)
Wood, S. mgcv:mixed GAM computation vehicle with GCV/AIC/REML smoothness estimation. R v.3.2.3 https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/mgcv/html/mgcv-package.html (2015)
Wickham, H. ggplot2. Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2009)
Barton, K. MuMIn: Multi-model inference. R v.1.9.13 http://cran.r-project.org/package=MuMIn (2015)
We thank D. Coomes for contributions during the early stages of the BIOFRAG project, B. Phalan, P. Stouffer, H. Possingham and the Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife for supplying additional data from Ghana, Brazil, Australia and Western Australia, respectively, J. Tylianakis for providing comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. M.P., V.L. and R.M.E. were supported by European Research Council Project number 281986. This paper represents a contribution to the Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment Initiative of Imperial College.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Reviewer Information Nature thanks P. Potapov, C. Sekercioglu and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
Extended Data Figure 1 Matrix occupancy by matrix species per edge-response type and mean number of species per habitat category.
a, Mean number of species per matrix site (number of matrix sites = 727; 7 for amphibians, 659 for birds, 51 for mammals and 10 for reptiles), weighted so that the contributions of core and edge habitats are equivalent (Methods, equations (7)–(9)). Only species classified as preferring the matrix are shown (that is, matrix core, matrix edge, matrix with no edge response). b, Mean number of species (regardless of edge-response type) in each habitat category showing which habitat can support the largest number of species after addressing the ambiguity resulting from sampling bias across different landscape configurations (Methods, equation (10)). Plots were categorized by their locations into forest-core (n = 2,955), forest-edge (n = 1,404), matrix-core (n = 388) and matrix-edge plots (n = 339). For each configuration we computed the mean number of species present per habitat category plot, which identifies the habitat that can support larger numbers of species. For amphibians, reptiles and mammals, forest-core habitats supported more species than did forest-edge, matrix-core or matrix-edge habitats. By contrast, bird species were found in larger numbers in edge habitats (in forest and matrix) than in core habitats.
Forest-core (n = 519) and matrix-core species (n = 80) displayed significantly higher edge sensitivities compared to generalists (n = 56) and to forest (n = 112) and matrix species (n = 34), with no preference for either edge or core habitats (two-sided pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction: P < 0.001). We excluded species that could not be classified (n = 113). Forest-edge species (n = 338) had significantly higher edge sensitivities compared to forest no preference, matrix no preference, generalist and matrix-edge species (P < 0.001). Matrix-edge species (n = 165) also displayed significantly lower edge sensitivities compared to matrix-core species and higher edge sensitivities compared to generalists (P < 0.001). Notched boxes show the median, 25th and 75th percentiles, error bars show 10th and 90th percentiles, and points indicate outliers. Notches display the 95% confidence interval around the median.
Extended Data Figure 3 Significant relationship between edge sensitivity and body size across edge-response types.
This excludes forest-core species that are shown in Fig. 3. Vertical lines indicate median body size of the species per taxonomic group and edge-response type (mammals forest no preference, 43.8 g; mammals matrix edge, 47.0 g; reptiles, unknown 97.5 mm). Smoothed curves and 95% confidence intervals were obtained from general additive models, with the model weighted by a variable that reflects dataset reliability (Methods). General additive models better explained the data than a null model for taxa and edge-response types shown. Edge sensitivity ranges from 0.0 (no declines in local abundance due to edge effects) to 1.0 (local extinction due to edge effects).
Combinations of C and I values characterize different landscape configurations, although some combinations are impossible by design (areas outside of the bold lines (upper right and lower left corners)). The x axis represents the percentage of tree cover at the scale of a pixel. The y axis represents I, computed from the regional standard deviation of C (a measurement of regional heterogeneity) and the regional average of C subtracted by individual values of C (a measurement of point heterogeneity and direction).
a, Landscape configuration and the amplitude of I. Top, four examples of landscape configurations comprising dense tree cover habitats (green) and matrix (cream). From left to right: creek edge, straight edge, peninsula edge and small forest patch. Bottom, maps of I that correspond to the above landscape configurations. The value of I at the central point (cross) is given for each configuration. The central point is always located on an edge and its distance to the nearest edge is always zero. Nonetheless, I increases in absolute value as the central point is increasingly surrounded by a different type of habitat. b, Forest–matrix contrast and the amplitude of I. Top, Four examples of peninsula edges between matrix (cream, C = 0%) and habitats of varying tree density (shades of green). From left to right: C = 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. Bottom, maps of I that correspond to the above landscape contrasts. The value of I at the central point (cross) is given for each configuration. The central point is always located on an edge and its distance to nearest edge is always zero. I increases as the edge contrast increases.
Extended Data Figure 6 Computing species abundance surfaces and simulated edge-response types on the graph of C − I.
a, Plots superimposed on a hypothetical map of C. Marker colours correspond to the abundance of a hypothetical species and follow the colour bar shown in c. b, Map of I corresponding to a. c, Graph of C − I: species abundance (warm colour, higher abundance) is plotted as a function of C and I measured at the species’ plots. In this example, the species is predominantly found in sites characterized by a high C and low |I|, and would be classified as a forest-core species. d, Illustration of the training set of edge-response types used for classification. Each of the seven response types has around 15 patterns associated with it in the training set; here we show two examples for the forest-core and forest-edge type and one example for the forest no-preference type. Each graph is a graph of C − I with C on the x axis and I on the y axis. Warmer colours indicate a high abundance, dark blue is 0.
About this article
Cite this article
Pfeifer, M., Lefebvre, V., Peres, C. et al. Creation of forest edges has a global impact on forest vertebrates. Nature 551, 187–191 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24457
Cumulative effects of human footprint, natural features and predation risk best predict seasonal resource selection by white-tailed deer
Scientific Reports (2022)
Nature Communications (2022)
Scale-specific landscape effects impose range-limiting constraints on the distribution of a prairie-obligate carnivore
Landscape Ecology (2022)
International Journal of Primatology (2022)