The PREDICTS project—Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems (https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/our-work/biodiversity/predicts.html)—has collated from published studies a large, reasonably representative database of comparable samples of biodiversity from multiple sites that differ in the nature or intensity of human impacts relating to land use. We have used this evidence base to develop global and regional statistical models of how local biodiversity responds to these measures. We describe and make freely available this 2016 release of the database, containing more than 3.2 million records sampled at over 26,000 locations and representing over 47,000 species. We outline how the database can help in answering a range of questions in ecology and conservation biology. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most geographically and taxonomically representative database of spatial comparisons of biodiversity that has been collated to date; it will be useful to researchers and international efforts wishing to model and understand the global status of biodiversity.

We review progress in our understanding of the importance of waterbirds as dispersal vectors of other organisms, and identify priorities for further research. Waterbirds are excellent for long‐distance dispersal (LDD), whereas other vectors such as fish and mammals disperse similar propagules, but over shorter distances. Empirical studies of internal and external transport by waterbirds have shown that the former mechanism generally is more important. Internal transport is widely recognised for aquatic plants and aquatic invertebrates with resting eggs, but also is important for other organisms (e.g., terrestrial flowering plants not dispersed by frugivores, bryophytes, tardigrades, fish eggs). Waterbird vectors also are important in terrestrial habitats, and provide connectivity across terrestrial–aquatic boundaries. There are important differences in the roles of different waterbird species, especially those using different habitats along the aquatic–terrestrial gradient. Early attempts to predict zoochory based on propagule morphology have been found wanting, and more research is needed into how the traits of vectors and vectored organisms (including life history, dormancy and growth traits) explain dispersal interactions. Experimental studies have focused on the potential of propagules to survive internal or external transport, and research into factors determining the establishment success of propagules after dispersal is lacking. Recent spatially explicit models of seed dispersal by waterbirds should be expanded to include invertebrate dispersal, and to compare multiple bird species in the same landscape. Network approaches have been applied to plant–waterbird dispersal interactions, and these are needed for invertebrates. Genetic studies support effective LDD of plants and invertebrates along waterbird flyways, but there remains a lack of examples at a local scale. Next Generation Sequencing and genomics should be applied to waterbird‐mediated dispersal across the landscape. More studies of biogeography, community ecology, or population genetics should integrate waterbird movements at the design stage. Zoochory research has paid little attention to the dispersal of non‐pathogenic microbes (both eukaryotic and prokaryotic). Nevertheless, there is evidence that dispersal via avian guts can be central to the connectivity of aquatic microbial metacommunities. More work on microbial dispersal by waterbirds should explore its implications for biogeochemistry, and the interchange with gut flora of other aquatic organisms. In the Anthropocene, the role of migratory waterbirds in LDD of plants and other organisms is particularly important, for example in compensating for loss of large migratory mammals and fish, allowing native species to adjust their distributions under global warming, and spreading alien species along flyways after their initial introductions by human vectors. Recent technological advances have opened exciting opportunities that should be fully exploited to further our understanding of dispersal by waterbirds.

Aim: Urban biodiversity, and its associated ecosystem services, is an important component of the quality of life of urban residents. The "luxury effect" posits a positive association between biodiversity and socioeconomic status in urban areas, and is thus reflective of environmental injustice, as the benefits associated with biodiversity are not equitably shared across society. We aimed to determine the generality of the luxury effect, and to identify the factors causing its variation across published studies.Location: Urbanized landscapes globally.Time period: Current.Major taxa studied: Terrestrial animals and plants.Methods: We tested the luxury effect across a sample of 337 estimates of the relationship between biodiversity measures and socioeconomic status from 96 studies via a meta‐analysis, addressing three hypotheses: (a) the luxury effect is more pronounced where water availability is limited, (b) the luxury effect is more pronounced in developing than developed countries, (c) the luxury effect is stronger in exotic compared to native species.Results: There was a significant overall luxury effect: there was a positive association between terrestrial biodiversity measures and socioeconomic status. The strength of the luxury effect was greater in arid areas. There was limited support for a stronger luxury effect in exotic species, but no support for any association with development status.Main conclusions: Many key and emerging climate impacts are concentrated in urban areas. Therefore, the degree of environmental injustice represented by the luxury effect may be amplified in the future, especially in arid regions. The objective to increase urban biodiversity through more equitable management and provision of water resources could form part of a wider strategy for sustainable development of cities to promote environmental justice, enhancing the quality of life of urban residents across all sectors of society. Challenges remain to ensure that any such strategy prioritizes conservation goals for native biodiversity.