Habitat Loss a Real Buzzkill for Invertebrates

The number of invertebrates has fallen by nearly half over the past 35 years—the same period of time in which the human population has doubled. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Based on the sheer number of ants that have invaded my home this summer, it seems hard to believe. But a new study finds that the number of invertebrates—which include any animal without a spine—has fallen by nearly half over the past 35 years—the same period of time in which the human population has doubled. The estimate appears in the journal Science. [Rodolfo Dirzo et al: Defaunation in the Anthropocene]

When we think of extinction, we usually picture large, charismatic creatures, like the saber-toothed tiger, the wooly mammoth or the even the dodo bird. Over the past 500 years, more than 300 species of vertebrates like these have disappeared. 

But what about critters that fly…or crawl…under our radar? Butterflies, beetles, spiders, slugs and worms are all in the midst of decline. Much of that die-off is due to habitat loss. In the U.K., for example, scientists have recorded a 30 to 60 percent decrease in areas inhabited by common insects, including bees and wasps.

While fewer flying pests might seem a plus, insects also perform functions that are key to human survival, like pollinating crops and recycling nutrients. So crowding out our invertebrate allies could turn out to be a real buzzkill.   

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe