Search

Natural native forests are rapidly being replaced by anthropogenic forests often with a strong presence of invasive alien plant species. Eucalypt species are widely planted worldwide, with Eucalyptus globulus plantations being particularly expressive in Portugal. Poor forestry practices often lead to the associated expansion of invasive species, such as Acacia dealbata. However, we still know relatively little about the functioning of anthropogenic forests, such as seed and pollen dispersal services. Here, we compared bird abundance and richness and the seed and pollen dispersal networks in both forest types. Anthropogenic forests presented lower bird abundance, and smaller, more simplified, and more random (abundance-based) seed dispersal services than those of natural forests. Interestingly, the pollen dispersal network was more similar than the seed dispersal network for both forest types and dominated by opportunistic and neutral processes, given the absence of specialized nectarivorous. The proportion of birds transporting seeds decreased, while those carrying pollen significantly increased in the anthropogenic forest compared to the native forest. Our work highlights the impact of anthropogenic forests on bird abundance, with consequences for seed dispersal services and forest regeneration., (© 2024 International Society of Zoological Sciences, Institute of Zoology/Chinese Academy of Sciences and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Zoonotic and vector-borne infectious diseases are among the most direct human health consequences of biodiversity change. The COVID-19 pandemic increased health policymakers' attention on the links between ecological degradation and disease, and sparked discussions around nature-based interventions to mitigate zoonotic emergence and epidemics. Yet, although disease ecology provides an increasingly granular knowledge of wildlife disease in changing ecosystems, we still have a poor understanding of the net consequences for human disease. Here, we argue that a renewed focus on wildlife-borne diseases as complex socio-ecological systems—a 'people and nature' paradigm—is needed to identify local interventions and transformative system-wide changes that could reduce human disease burden. We discuss longstanding scientific narratives of human involvement in zoonotic disease systems, which have largely framed people as ecological disruptors, and discuss three emerging research areas that provide wider system perspectives: how anthropogenic ecosystems construct new niches for infectious disease, feedbacks between disease, biodiversity and social vulnerability and the role of human-to-animal pathogen transmission ('spillback') in zoonotic disease systems. We conclude by discussing new opportunities to better understand the predictability of human disease outcomes from biodiversity change and to integrate ecological drivers of disease into health intervention design and evaluation. This article is part of the discussion meeting issue 'Bending the curve towards nature recovery: building on Georgina Mace's legacy for a biodiverse future'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]