New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Mammals Moonlight around Human Settlements

A study of human–mammal interaction across the globe found animals are more prone to take to the night around humans. Jason G. Goldman 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!

Homo sapiens has an outsized influence on the behavior of other animals. We have long hunted them. More recently, we destroy habitats to build housing and coffee shops, and we build roads to drive from our houses to those coffee shops. But some of our influences are far more subtle.

"My collaborators and I had noticed a striking pattern in some of our own data from far-flung places like Tanzania, Canada, Nepal…where animals we were studying seemed to be more active at night when they were around people.

University of California, Berkeley, wildlife ecologist Kaitlyn Gaynor.


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.


To see if animals really were changing their activity schedules, Gaynor and her team rounded up 141 studies of 62 kinds of mammals from across six continents. And they found that mammals near people across the globe have settled on a new strategy for survival: they take to the night, when most of us are comfortably tucked into our beds counting sheep. The finding is in the journal Science. [Kaitlyn M. Gaynor, et al., The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality.]

For example, an animal that would ordinarily prefer to spend half of its active time during the daytime and half at night shifts to two thirds of its active time under darkness.

And our particular human behaviors do not seem to matter: 

"Something that surprised me in the study was just how consistent the shift towards nocturnality was across types of human disturbance. We expected to see animals being a little bit more discerning, and perhaps responding more strongly to activities like hunting, that actually do a pose a risk to the animal. But what we found is whether it is infrastructure development, or hunting, or just hiking through wilderness areas, all of these human activities elicit a response in wildlife, suggesting that they're playing it safe around us."

In a way, this reaction is a good thing. The night shift allows animals to more safely coexist with us in shared spaces. But what’s not yet clear is any long-term physiological changes animals may go through from adjusting their daily schedules because many can't simply run away from us. Nor is it obvious what impacts these changes might have on broader ecological communities, and on the food web. 

"Even if we think we're leaving no trace in the outdoors, our presence can have pretty lasting consequences."

—Jason G. Goldman 

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

Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication.

More by Jason G. Goldman

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe