The spatial configuration and management of agricultural and other land-use practices can affect ecological assemblages, but how resident and migratory species respond to land uses is not well known, hindering our understanding of the effects of land use on biodiversity. Here, we compare alpha and beta diversity and ecosystem functioning for resident and migratory birds across three land uses: (1) primary forest, (2) secondary forest, and (3) cattle pasture. Compositionally, resident bird assemblages exhibited gradual shifts across habitats with diversity steadily declining with increasing distance from a protected area and reductions in understory vegetation. In contrast, migratory bird community composition clustered into five distinct groups, shifting 50-60% less than resident assemblages across the same gradients with no declines in richness. We found that migratory bird abundance was greater in secondary forest and cattle pasture, and migratory insectivores compensated for 68% of the abundance losses of resident forest insectivores in secondary forests and cattle pastures. Among the insectivores, increases of migratory birds in secondary forest and cattle pasture compensated for the abundance declines of resident birds that utilize foliage gleaning and sallying foraging methods. Our findings underscore the importance of local landscape evaluation and management around protected areas, highlighting the unique responses of resident and migratory birds to land use and the potential mechanisms sustaining ecosystem functions in modified habitats.

The distributions of mosquito vectors are expected to shift with rising temperatures due to climate change. But other global change patterns, like land cover change and human population growth, are simultaneously occurring. How will these changes interact to shift the future distributions of these vectors? Here, we analyzed how climate, land cover, and human population density regulate and predict habitat for two mosquito species, Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus, the primary vectors of dengue, Zika and chikungunya. We asked the following questions: How do environmental response curves derived from vector occurrence data compare to lab-derived responses? Based on these environmental response curves, which environmental drivers best predict the spatial distribution of each vector? Are environmental responses derived from large-scale (continental) occurrence data consistent at fine spatial scales? To answer these questions, we analyzed 6,317 Ae. aegypti occurrence records, 3,629 Ae. albopictus records, 10 satellite-derived environmental covariates, and two independent field surveys cover 134 sites. We found close agreement in the range of lab and environmental temperature responses, though the mean of observed temperatures was higher in the environment (31.0 °C for Ae. aegypti, 29.1 °C for Ae. albopictus) than lab predictions of the thermal optimum for transmission (29.1 °C for Ae. aegypti, 26.4 °C for Ae. albopictus). Using presence-only species distribution modeling approaches, we found that human population density was the best predictor for each vector’s spatial distribution (explaining 68.4% of model performance for Ae. aegypti, 48.7% for Ae. albopictus). These patterns were consistent in the field for presence/absence Ae. aegypti data (0.71 AUC, 0.80 recall), but failed to predict Ae. albopictus distributions in the sites we surveyed (0.53 AUC, 0.20 recall). In this session, we will explore these results and discuss the potential to predict and monitor Aedes habitat using satellite data.