We live amid a global wave of anthropogenically driven biodiversity loss: species and population extirpations and, critically, declines in local species abundance. Particularly, human impacts on animal biodiversity are an under-recognized form of global environmental change. Among terrestrial vertebrates, 322 species have become extinct since 1500, and populations of the remaining species show 25% average decline in abundance. Invertebrate patterns are equally dire: 67% of monitored populations show 45% mean abundance decline. Such animal declines will cascade onto ecosystem functioning and human well-being. Much remains unknown about this “Anthropocene defaunation”; these knowledge gaps hinder our capacity to predict and limit defaunation impacts. Clearly, however, defaunation is both a pervasive component of the planet’s sixth mass extinction and also a major driver of global ecological change.

Anthropocene defaunation, the global extinction of faunal species and populations and the decline in abundance of individuals within populations, has been predominantly documented in terrestrial ecosystems, but indicators suggest defaunation has been more severe in freshwater ecosystems. Marine defaunation is in a more incipient stage, yet pronounced effects are already apparent and its rapid acceleration seems likely. Defaunation now impacts the planet's wildlife with profound cascading consequences, ranging from local to global coextinctions of interacting species to the loss of ecological services critical for humanity. Slowing defaunation will require aggressively reducing animal overexploitation and habitat destruction; mitigating climate disruption; and stabilizing the impacts of human population growth and uneven resource consumption. Given its omnipresence, defaunation should receive status of major global environmental change and should be addressed with the same urgency as deforestation, pollution, and climatic change. Global action is needed to prevent defaunation's current trajectory from catalyzing the planet's sixth major extinction.

Looking back to move forward: The current impacts of humanity on nature are rapid and destructive, but species turnover and change have occurred throughout the history of life. Although there is much debate about the best approaches to take in conservation, ultimately, we need to permit or enhance the resilience of natural systems so that they can continue to adapt and function into the future. In a Review, Barnosky et al. argue that the best way to do this is to look back at paleontological history as a way to understand how ecological resilience is maintained, even in the face of change. Science , this issue p. eaah4787

Populations of large wildlife are declining on local and global scales. The impacts of this pulse of size-selective defaunation include cascading changes to smaller animals, particularly rodents, and alteration of many ecosystem processes and services, potentially involving changes to prevalence and transmission of zoonotic disease. Understanding linkages between biodiversity loss and zoonotic disease is important for both public health and nature conservation programs, and has been a source of much recent scientific debate. In the case of rodent-borne zoonoses, there is strong conceptual support, but limited empirical evidence, for the hypothesis that defaunation, the loss of large wildlife, increases zoonotic disease risk by directly or indirectly releasing controls on rodent density. We tested this hypothesis by experimentally excluding large wildlife from a savanna ecosystem in East Africa, and examining changes in prevalence and abundance of Bartonella spp. infection in rodents and their flea vectors. We found no effect of wildlife removal on per capita prevalence of Bartonella infection in either rodents or fleas. However, because rodent and, consequently, flea abundance doubled following experimental defaunation, the density of infected hosts and infected fleas was roughly twofold higher in sites where large wildlife was absent. Thus, defaunation represents an elevated risk in Bartonella transmission to humans (bartonellosis). Our results (i) provide experimental evidence of large wildlife defaunation increasing landscape-level disease prevalence, (ii) highlight the importance of susceptible host regulation pathways and host/vector density responses in biodiversity–disease relationships, and (iii) suggest that rodent-borne disease responses to large wildlife loss may represent an important context where this relationship is largely negative. Significance Understanding the effects of biodiversity loss on zoonotic disease is of pressing importance to both conservation science and public health. This paper provides experimental evidence of increased landscape-level disease risk following declines in large wildlife, using the case study of the rodent-borne zoonosis, bartonellosis, in East Africa. This pattern is driven not by changes in community composition or diversity of hosts, as frequently proposed in other systems, but by increases in abundance of susceptible hosts following large mammal declines. Given that rodent increases following large wildlife declines appear to be a widespread pattern, we suggest this relationship is likely to be general.

Humanity has triggered the sixth mass extinction episode since the beginning of the Phanerozoic. The complexity of this extinction crisis is centred on the intersection of two complex adaptive systems: human culture and ecosystem functioning, although the significance of this intersection is not properly appreciated. Human beings are part of biodiversity and elements in a global ecosystem. Civilization, and perhaps even the fate of our species, is utterly dependent on that ecosystem's proper functioning, which society is increasingly degrading. The crisis seems rooted in three factors. First, relatively few people globally are aware of its existence. Second, most people who are, and even many scientists, assume incorrectly that the problem is primarily one of the disappearance of species, when it is the existential threat of myriad population extinctions. Third, while concerned scientists know there are many individual and collective steps that must be taken to slow population extinction rates, some are not willing to advocate the one fundamental, necessary, ‘simple’ cure, that is, reducing the scale of the human enterprise. We argue that compassionate shrinkage of the human population by further encouraging lower birth rates while reducing both inequity and aggregate wasteful consumption—that is, an end to growthmania—will be required. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Ecological complexity and the biosphere: the next 30 years’.