The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness.

Human activities may impact animal habitat and resource use, potentially influencing contemporary evolution in animals. In the United Kingdom, COVID-19 lockdown restrictions resulted in sudden, drastic alterations to human activity. We hypothesized that short-term daily and long-term seasonal changes in human mobility might result in changes in bird habitat use, depending on the mobility type (home, parks and grocery) and extent of change. Using Google human mobility data and 872 850 bird observations, we determined that during lockdown, human mobility changes resulted in altered habitat use in 80% (20/25) of our focal bird species. When humans spent more time at home, over half of affected species had lower counts, perhaps resulting from the disturbance of birds in garden habitats. Bird counts of some species (e.g. rooks and gulls) increased over the short term as humans spent more time at parks, possibly due to human-sourced food resources (e.g. picnic refuse), while counts of other species (e.g. tits and sparrows) decreased. All affected species increased counts when humans spent less time at grocery services. Avian species rapidly adjusted to the novel environmental conditions and demonstrated behavioural plasticity, but with diverse responses, reflecting the different interactions and pressures caused by human activity.

No abstract

Objective. To compare the regenerative capacity of 2 distinct bilayer implants for the restoration of osteochondral defects in a preliminary sheep model. Methods. Critical sized osteochondral defects were treated with a novel biomimetic poly-ε-caprolactone (PCL) implant (Treatment No. 2; n = 6) or a combination of Chondro-Gide and Orthoss (Treatment No. 1; n = 6). At 19 months postoperation, repair tissue (n = 5 each) was analyzed for histology and biochemistry. Electromechanical mappings (Arthro-BST) were performed ex vivo. Results. Histological scores, electromechanical quantitative parameter values, dsDNA and sGAG contents measured at the repair sites were statistically lower than those obtained from the contralateral surfaces. Electromechanical mappings and higher dsDNA and sGAG/weight levels indicated better regeneration for Treatment No. 1. However, these differences were not significant. For both treatments, Arthro-BST revealed early signs of degeneration of the cartilage surrounding the repair site. The International Cartilage Repair Society II histological scores of the repair tissue were significantly higher for Treatment No. 1 (10.3 ± 0.38 SE) compared to Treatment No. 2 (8.7 ± 0.45 SE). The parameters cell morphology and vascularization scored highest whereas tidemark formation scored the lowest. Conclusion. There was cell infiltration and regeneration of bone and cartilage. However, repair was incomplete and fibrocartilaginous. There were no significant differences in the quality of regeneration between the treatments except in some histological scoring categories. The results from Arthro-BST measurements were comparable to traditional invasive/destructive methods of measuring quality of cartilage repair.