Philippa Kaur

Mild shading facilitates sesquiterpenoid accumulation and growth in Atractylodes lancea rhizomeTo determine a concrete shading value for the production of high-quality and high-yielding AR, we examined the major compounds, including the sesquiterpenoids hinesol (Hin), β-eudesmol (Edu), and atractylone (Atl), and the polyacetylene atractylodin (Atd), as well as the biomass of AR at different growth stages (Fig. 1A–C) under various light intensities. The sum of these four volatile oils as the total volatile oil content was subsequently analyzed. The results revealed that the accumulation of volatile oils was significantly different (p  More

Data sourcesThis study builds on two datasets; 666 livestock anthrax outbreaks collected over 60 years (1957–2017) by the Kenya Directorate of Veterinary Services (KDVS), and 13 reported anthrax outbreaks we investigated between 2017 and 201811,13. These datasets were combined with data from targeted active anthrax surveillance we conducted in 2019–2020 (see below) to define anthrax suitable areas in Kenya, including hotspots, and subsequently assessed effectiveness of livestock vaccination as a control strategy.Targeted active surveillance-collected anthrax data, 2019–2020Active anthrax surveillance was conducted for 12 months between 2019 and 2020 in randomly selected areas to ensure representation of all AEZs of the country. AEZs are land units defined based on the patterns of soil, landforms and climatic characteristics. Kenya has seven AEZs that include agro-alpine, high potential, medium potential, semi-arid, arid, very-arid and desert. In 2013, Kenya devolved governance into 47 semi-autonomous counties that are subdivided into 290 subcounties which are in turn divided into 1450 administrative wards, the smallest administrative units in the country. Using a geographic map that condensed Kenya into five AEZs; agro-alpine, high potential, medium potential, semi-arid, and arid/very arid zones, we randomly selected 4 administrative sub-counties from each AEZ (N = 20). To increase geographic spread of the study and enhance detection of anthrax outbreaks, we surveilled the larger administrative county (consisting of 20 to 45 administrative wards) where the randomly selected sub-counties were located. As shown in Fig. S1, we ultimately carried out the active anthrax surveillance in 18 counties, containing 523 administrative wards, the latter being used for measuring spatial association (see below).We conducted the surveillance between April 2019 and June 2020, through 523 animal health practitioners (AHPs), one in each ward, after intensive training to identify anthrax using a standard case definition, and to collect and electronically transmit the data weekly using telephone-based short messaging system (SMS) to a central server hosted by KDVS. Regarding case definition, any livestock death classified as anthrax through clinical or laboratory diagnosis was considered an anthrax event. Using standard guidelines issued by the KDVS, a clinical diagnosis was made by the AHPs across the country as an acute cattle, sheep or goat disease characterized by sudden death with or without bleeding from natural orifices, accompanied by absence of rigor mortis. Further, if the carcass was accidentally opened, failure of blood to clot and/or the presence of splenomegaly were included. In pigs, symptoms included swelling of the face and neck with oedema. A laboratory confirmed anthrax was diagnosed using Gram and methylene blue stains followed by identification of the capsule and typical rod-shaped B. anthracis in clinical specimens that the AHPs submitted to the central or regional veterinary investigation laboratories in Kenya. One case of anthrax in either species was considered an outbreak.During the surveillance, the programmed server sent prompting texts directly to the AHPs’ cell phones every Friday of each week for the 52 weeks. The AHPs interacted with the platform by responding to prompting questions sent via SMS to their telephones. Data were securely stored in an online encrypted platform which was subsequently downloaded into Ms Excel for analysis. This surveillance detected 119 anthrax outbreaks, whose partial data were used to model effects of climate change on future anthrax distribution in Kenya14. Here, we integrated these active surveillance data with other datasets to conduct detailed ENM and kernel-smoothed density mapping with a goal of refining suitable anthrax areas including crystalizing hotspots in the country.Anthrax outbreak incidence per livestock population by countyWe knew the total number of livestock per county and wards by species for the active surveillance period. The counties represented the level of disease management including vaccine distribution while the wards within counties represented the modeling unit for targeting control. Therefore, we estimated the outbreak incidence as the total number of outbreaks per livestock species per 100,000 head of that species.Ecological niche modeling and validationWe used boosted regression tree (BRT) algorithm as previously published13. In those studies, we estimated the geographic distribution of anthrax in southern Kenya using 69 spatially unique outbreak points (thinned from the 86 outbreaks in the records) and 18 environmental variables resampled to 250 m resolution. In this study, the final experiments were run with a learning rate (lr) = 0.001, bagging fraction (br) = 5, and maximum tree = 2500. We then mapped anthrax suitability as the mean output of the 100 experiments and the lower 2.5% and upper 97.5% mapped as confidence intervals. We determined variable contribution and derived partial dependence as previously described13. As BRTs are a random walk and each experiment randomly resamples training and test data, it was necessary to repeat those outputs along with the map predictions.Here, our goal was to evaluate the BRT models built with records data from 2011 to 2017 data and use the predict function to calculate model accuracy metrics using the 2017–2020 outbreaks as presence points and the sub-counties reporting zero outbreaks during the 2019–2020 active surveillance period as absence points. The model of southern Kenya was projected onto all of Kenya using climate variables clipped to the whole of Kenya. We tested the BRT models in two ways; first, evaluating 2011–2017 data models with holdout data using a random resampling and multi-modeling approach. Here, we report the area under curve (AUC) for each of the original training/testing split into the 69 historical points and the 2017–2020 data serving as independent data, the latter representing true model validation. Second, to determine the total percentage of surveillance data predicted and map areas of anthrax suitability to compare with kernel density estimates (see below), we produced a dichotomized map using the Youden index cutoff17 following Otieno et al.14.Outbreak concentrations from kernel density estimation (KDE)To describe the spatial concentration of reported outbreaks, we calculated descriptive spatial statistics, including the spatial mean, standard distance, and standard deviational ellipse of outbreak locations from the prospective surveillance dataset following Blackburn et al.18 These spatial statistics help to differentiate the geographic focus (spatial mean) and dispersion of outbreak reports from year to year and across the sampling period. We then conducted kernel density estimation (KDE) to visualize the concentration of anthrax outbreaks per square kilometer per year and across the study period18. We used the spatstat package for all KDE analyses using the quadratic kernel function19:$$fleft( x right) = frac{1}{{nh^{2} }} mathop sum limits_{i = 1}^{n} Kleft( {frac{{x – X_{i} }}{h}} right)$$where h is the bandwidth, x-Xi is the distance to each anthrax outbreak i. Finally, K is the quadratic kernel function, defined as:$$Kleft( x right) = frac{3}{4}left( {1 – x^{2} } right), left| x right| le 1$$$$Kleft( x right) = 0,x > 1$$This function was employed to estimate anthrax outbreak concentration across space using each outbreak weighted as one. We calculated the bandwidth (kernel) using hopt that uses the sample size (number of outbreaks) and the standard distance to estimate bandwidth. Finally, we estimated bandwidth for each year and then averaged them to apply the same fixed bandwidth for each year under study in Q-GIS version 3.1.8. The resulting outputs were map surfaces representing the spatial concentrations of outbreaks across the country per 1 km2 for each study year and all study years combined. For this study, we used the cutoff criteria of Nelson and Boots19 to identify outbreak hotspots as areas with density values in the upper 25%, 10%, and 5% of outbreak concentrations. The analyses identified these areas by year (2017–2020) and for all surveillance years combined.Local spatial clustering at the ward levelAnthrax outbreak incidence per livestock speciesThe ENM and KDE-derived maps provide a first estimate of potential risk and outbreak concentration, respectively. We were also interested in estimating anthrax outbreak intensity relative to livestock populations at a local level. For the active surveillance period, we knew the total number of outbreaks per ward (the smallest administrative spatial unit) by livestock species. For this two-year period, we estimated the ward-level outbreak incidence as the total number of outbreaks per livestock species per 10,000 head of that species. To estimate livestock population per ward, we extracted the values in the raster file of the areal weighted gridded livestock of the world data using the zonal statistic routine in Q-GIS version 3.1.8, into the polygon consisting of all pixels per ward as the total population19,20. We calculated outbreak incidence as the number of outbreaks per ward cattle population per 10,000 cattle for each administrative ward. We limited this analysis to those 18 counties participating in the active surveillance study (Fig. S1), as we could appropriately assume any ward with no reports was a ‘true zero’ for the estimation. Given that most reported outbreaks were in domestic cattle (see results below), we here report those results involving cattle alone. Given the overall high number of wards and the high number of wards without outbreaks, we performed the empirical Bayes smoothing and spatial Bayes smoothing routines in GeoDa version 1.12.1.161 to reduce the variance in anthrax incidence estimates20,21. To evaluate smoothing routine performance, we box plotted rates per ward and selected the method with the greatest reduction in outliers21. Smoothed rates were mapped as choropleth map in Q-GIS version 3.1.8 using the four equal area bins.Spatial cluster analysisWe used Local Moran’s I16 to test for spatial cluster of livestock anthrax in cattle using the smoothed outbreak incidence estimates. The Local Moran’s I statistic tests whether individual wards are part of spatial cluster, like incidence estimates surrounded by similar estimate (high-high or low-low) or spatial outliers where wards with significantly high or low estimates are surrounded by dissimilar values (high-low or low–high). The local Moran’s I is written as16:$$I_{i} = Z_{i} sum W_{ij} Z_{j}$$where Ii is the statistic for a ward i, Zi is the difference between the incidence at i and the mean anthrax incidence rate for all of wards in the study, Zj is the difference between anthrax risk at ward j and the mean for all wards. Wij is the weights matrix. In this study, the 1st order queen contiguity was employed. Here, Wij equals 1/n if a ward shared a boundary or vertex and 0 if not. For this study, Local Moran’s I was performed on the wards using 999 permutations and p = 0.05 using GeoDa version 1.12.1.161.Assessing effectiveness of cattle vaccination in burden hotspotsAs a first estimate of how we might scale up livestock anthrax vaccination efforts in Kenya, we slightly adjusted a simple published anthrax outbreak simulation model in a cattle population. For this study we applied an early mathematical approach of Funiss and Hahn22 to simulate anthrax at the ward level. While other recent models are available23,24, these are difficult to parameterize or require time series data we could not derive with the surveillance approach in this study. Like the more recent models, Funiss and Hahn22 assumed anthrax transmission was driven by cattle accessing spore-contaminated environments. Here the proportion of infected cattle each day depended on the population of susceptible animals in the population and probability of getting infected. This probability depends on environmental contamination (“a”), and a fraction of anthrax carcasses in the environment on a day (“f,”). Each day, the newly infected cattle are transferred to an incubation period vector, “d,” waiting to die following a probability “p”. In this model, all infected animals, “n,” die following the incubation periods given by the vector, “p”, in which pi is the probability of a cow dying i days after the infection. Following death, the cattle are transferred to a carcass state, providing a direct infection source to the susceptible cattle via environmental contamination. Environmental contamination “a,” is therefore defined as the number of spores ingested by an animal in a day. This environmental contamination depends on spores from carcasses and an assumed spore decay rate γ22.The complete set of difference equations with a daily time step is given by:$${text{S}}_{(t + 1)} = {text{S}}_{(t)} – {text{ S}}_{(t)} *left( {{1} – {text{e}}^{{ – left( {{text{a}}_{t} + gamma {text{f}}_{{{text{t}} + 1}} } right)}} } right)$$$${text{I}}_{(t + 1)} = {text{I}}_{(t)} + {text{ S}}_{(t)} *left( {{1} – {text{e}}^{{ – left( {{text{a}}_{{text{t}}} + gamma {text{f}}_{{{text{t}} + {1}}} } right)}} } right)$$where the expression (left( {{1} – {text{e}}^{{ – left( {{text{a}}_{t} + gamma {text{f}}_{{{text{t}} + 1}} } right)}} } right)) denotes the probability of an animal becoming infected and at + γft+1 is the mean number of spores ingested by a cow in a day. The equation for environmental contamination, a, is given by:$${text{a}}_{t + 1} {-}{text{a}}_{{text{t}}} = alpha {text{a}}_{{text{t}}} + beta {text{c}}_{{{text{t}} + {1}}}$$The newly infected animals die after a certain number of days. The distribution of incubation periods is given by the vector, p. On each day, the new cases are placed in a due-to-die vector, d, and when they die, they are subsequently moved down one step to fresh carcasses, ft. The fresh carcasses provide a direct source of infection to the susceptible cattle via the ‘fresh carcass term’, γ. These carcasses decay or are scavenged or disposed by man. The equation expressing the disseminating carcasses, c, is:$${text{C}}_{t + 1} – {text{c}}_{t} = {text{f}}_{t + 1} – delta {text{c}}_{t}$$The model parameters variables are provided in Table 1 and are similar to those used by Funiss and Hahn22 to generate a standard run. We ran the model for one year and extrapolated to cattle population in the identified hotspot wards.Table 1 Model parameters and variables.Full size table More

Russia invades UkraineThe global science community was quick to condemn Russian’s invasion of Ukraine in February. Research organizations moved fast to cut ties with Russia, stopping funding and collaborations, and journals came under pressure to boycott Russian authors.The situation escalated when Russian forces attacked Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, Zaporizhzhia, in March, prompting fears of a nuclear accident. Russian troops continue to occupy the power plant. Since the invasion began, thousands of civilians have been killed and millions displaced; many others, including scientists, have fled the country.The war has affected research in space and climate science, disrupted fieldwork and played a significant part in the global energy crisis. The invasion could also precipitate a new era for European defence research.JWST delights astronomers

Stephans Quintet, a grouping of five galaxies, taken by NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope.Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, and STScI via Getty

NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) — the most complex telescope ever built — reached its destination in space in January after decades of planning. In July, astronomers were awed by the telescope’s first image — of thousands of distant galaxies in the constellation Volans. Since then, the US$10-billion observatory has captured a steady stream of spectacular images, and astronomers have been working feverishly on early data. Insights include detailed observations of an exoplanet, and leading contenders for the most distant galaxy ever seen.NASA also decided not to rename the telescope, despite calls from some astronomers to do so because the telescope’s namesake, a former NASA administrator, held high-ranking government positions in the 1950s and 1960s, when the United States systematically fired gay and lesbian government employees. A NASA investigation “found no evidence that Webb was either a leader or proponent of firing government employees for their sexual orientation”, the agency said in a statement in November.AI predicts protein structuresResearchers announced in July that they had used the revolutionary artificial-intelligence (AI) network AlphaFold to predict the structures of more than 200 million proteins from roughly one million species, covering almost every known protein from all organisms whose genomes are held in databases. The development of AlphaFold netted its creators at the London-based AI company DeepMind, owned by Alphabet, one of this year’s US$3-million Breakthrough prizes — the most lucrative awards in science.AlphaFold isn’t the only player on the scene. Meta (formerly Facebook), in California, has developed its own AI network, called ESMFold, and used it to predict the shapes of roughly 600 million possible proteins from bacteria, viruses and other microorganisms that have not been isolated or cultured. Scientists are using these tools to dream up proteins that could form the basis of new drugs and vaccines.Monkeypox goes global

The monkeypox virus (shown here as a coloured transmission electron micrograph) is related to the smallpox virus.Credit: CDC/Science Photo Library

The rapid global spread of monkeypox (recently renamed ‘mpox’ by the World Health Organization) this year caught many scientists off guard. Previously, the virus had mainly been confined to Central and West Africa, but from May this year, infections started appearing in Europe, the United States, Canada and many other countries, mostly in young and middle-aged men who have sex with men. The virus is related to smallpox, and the circulating strain only rarely causes severe disease or death. But its fast spread led the World Health Organization to declare the global outbreak a ‘public-health emergency of international concern’, the agency’s highest alert level, in July.As cases soared, researchers got to work trying to understand the dynamics of the disease. Studies confirmed that it is transmitted primarily through repeated skin-to-skin contact, and trials of possible treatments got under way. Existing smallpox vaccines were also used to suppress the virus in some countries. Six months after mpox infections first started increasing, vaccination efforts and behavioural changes seemed to have curbed its spread in Europe and the United States. Researchers predict a range of scenarios from here — the most hopeful being that the virus fizzles out in non-endemic countries over the next few months or years.The Moon has a revivalThe Moon has become a popular destination for space missions this year. First off the launch pad, in August, was South Korea’s Danuri probe, which is expected to arrive at its destination in January and orbit the Moon for a year. The mission is the country’s first foray beyond Earth’s orbit and is carrying a host of experiments.Last month, NASA’s hotly anticipated Artemis programme — which aims to send astronauts to the Moon in the next few years — finally kicked off with the launch of an uncrewed capsule called Orion, a joint venture with the European Space Agency. As part of a test flight to see whether the system can transport people safely to the Moon, the capsule flew out past the Moon and made its way back to Earth safely this month.A lunar spacecraft made by a Japanese company launched this month. ispace’s M1 lander is aiming to be the first of several private ventures to land on the surface of the Moon next year. The lander will carry two rovers, one for the United Arab Emirates and another for the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA. The rovers will be a first for both countries.Climate-change funding

People cross a flooded highway in Sindh province, Pakistan in August.Credit: Waqar Hussein/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock

There were many reasons to feel despondent about the United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP27) in Egypt last month, but an agreement on a new ‘loss and damage’ fund was one bright spot. The fund will help low- and middle-income countries to cover the cost of climate-change impacts, such as the catastrophic floods in Pakistan this year, which caused more than US$30 billion worth of damage and economic losses.But calls at COP27 to phase out fossil fuels were blocked by oil-producing states, and many blamed the lack of progress on the energy crisis sparked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. High natural-gas prices have led some European nations to rely temporarily on coal. Global carbon emissions from fossil fuels are expected to hit 37.5 billion tonnes this year, a new record. The window to limit warming to 1.5–2 ºC above pre-industrial temperatures is disappearing fast — and might even have passed.Omicron’s offspring drive the pandemicOmicron and its descendants dominated all other coronavirus variants this year. The fast-spreading strain was first detected in southern Africa in November 2021, and quickly spread around the globe. From early on, it was clear that Omicron could evade immune-system defences more successfully than previous variants, which has meant that vaccines are less effective. Throughout the year, a diverse group of immune-dodging offshoots of Omicron has emerged, making it challenging for scientists to predict coming waves of infection.Vaccines based on Omicron variants have been rolled out in some countries in the hope they will offer greater protection than previous jabs, but early data suggest the extra benefit is modest. Nasal sprays against COVID-19 have also become a tool in the vaccine arsenal. The idea is that these stop the virus at the site where it first takes hold. In September, China and India approved needle-free COVID-19 vaccines that are delivered through the nose or mouth, and many similar vaccines are in various stages of development.Pig organs transplanted into people

Surgeons in Baltimore, Maryland transplanted the first pig heart into a person in January.Credit: EyePress News/Shutterstock

In January, US handyman David Bennett became the first person to receive a transplanted heart from a genetically modified pig — a crucial first step in determining whether animals could provide a source of organs for people who need them. Bennett survived for another eight weeks after the transplant, but researchers were impressed that he lived for that long, given that the human immune system attacks non-genetically modified pig organs in minutes. A few months later, two US research groups independently reported transplanting pig kidneys into three people who had been declared legally dead because they did not have brain function. The organs weren’t rejected and started producing urine. Researchers say the next step is clinical trials to test such procedures thoroughly in living people.Elections and science

Luís Inácio Lula da Silva was elected president of Brazil in October.Credit: Fabio Vieira/FotoRua/NurPhoto via Getty

National elections in Brazil, Australia and France brought relief for many researchers. After three years of science-damaging policies under right-wing president Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil narrowly elected leftist labour leader and former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to lead the country in October. Scientists are hopeful that Lula’s return will result in a desperately needed boost to research funding and greater protection for the Amazon rainforest.French researchers were buoyed by President Emmanuel Macron’s victory over far-right candidate Marine Le Pen in April, and the election of Anthony Albanese as prime minister in Australia in May was seen as a good thing for science and climate-change action, too. In China, Xi Jinping cemented his legacy with an historic third term as head of the Chinese Communist Party. Xi has placed science and innovation at the heart of his country’s growth strategy.In other nations, it was unclear how research would fare under new leaders, such as Giorgia Meloni, the far-right candidate elected as Italy’s first female prime minister in October. Science was not a priority for the United Kingdom’s three prime ministers this year, although they have retained previous commitments to raise research funding. After Boris Johnson reisgned, Liz Truss was in the position for just seven weeks before she too resigned and the current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took over.Environmental push beginsThis week, conservation and political leaders are attempting to finalize a global deal to protect the environment. The UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties (COP15) is under way in Montreal, Canada. A new biodiversity treaty, known as the post-2020 Global Diversity Framework, has been delayed by more than two years because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Progress towards an agreement has been slow, and the deal looked under threat when negotiations stalled over financing during international talks in Nairobi in June. Financial pledges from some nations to support biodiversity helped discussions to move forward, but estimates suggest that US$700 billion more is needed annually to protect the natural world. At the meeting, delegates will hopefully agree on targets to stabilize species’ declines by 2030 and reverse them by mid-century. More

Schendel, V., Rash, L. D., Jenner, R. A. & Undheim, E. A. The diversity of venom: The importance of behavior and venom system morphology in understanding its ecology and evolution. Toxins 11(11), 666 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Casewell, N. R., Wüster, W., Vonk, F. J., Harrison, R. A. & Fry, B. G. Complex cocktails: The evolutionary novelty of venoms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28(4), 219–229 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pineda, S. S. et al. Structural venomics reveals evolution of a complex venom by duplication and diversification of an ancient peptide-encoding gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117(21), 11399–11408 (2020).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Chippaux, J. P., Williams, V. & White, J. Snake venom variability: Methods of study, results and interpretation. Toxicon 29(11), 1279–1303 (1991).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lyons, K., Dugon, M. M. & Healy, K. Diet breadth mediates the prey specificity of venom potency in snakes. Toxins 12(2), 74 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S. et al. Venom gland size and venom complexity—essential trophic adaptations of venomous predators: A case study using spiders. Mol. Ecol. 27(21), 4257–4269 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Phuong, M. A., Mahardika, G. N. & Alfaro, M. E. Dietary breadth is positively correlated with venom complexity in cone snails. BMC Genom. 17(1), 401 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Holding, M. L., Biardi, J. E. & Gibbs, H. L. Coevolution of venom function and venom resistance in a rattlesnake predator and its squirrel prey. Proc. R. Soc. B. 283(1829), 20152841 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S., Líznarová, E., Bočánek, O. & Zdráhal, Z. Venom of prey-specialized spiders is more toxic to their preferred prey: A result of prey-specific toxins. J. Anim. Ecol. 87(6), 1639–1652 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S., Coddington, J. A. & Blackledge, T. A. Evolution of stenophagy in spiders (Araneae): Evidence based on the comparative analysis of spider diets. Evolution 66(3), 776–806 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Herzig, V., King, G. F. & Undheim, E. A. Can we resolve the taxonomic bias in spider venom research?. Toxicon: X 1, 100005 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Platnick, N. A relimitation and revision of the Australasian ground spider family Lamponidae (Araneae: Gnaphosoidea). Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 2000(245), 1–328 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
World Spider Catalog. Version 22.0. Natural History Museum Bern. http://wsc.nmbe.ch. Accessed 15 Mar 2021 (2021).White, J. & Weinstein, S. A. A phoenix of clinical toxinology: White-tailed spider (Lampona spp.) bites. A case report and review of medical significance. Toxicon 87, 76–80 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rash, L. D., King, R. G. & Hodgson, W. C. Sex differences in the pharmacological activity of venom from the white-tailed spider (Lampona cylindrata). Toxicon 38, 1111–1127 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Young, A. R. & Pincus, S. J. Comparison of enzymatic activity from three species of necrotising arachnids in Australia: Loxosceles rufescens, Badumna insignis and Lampona cylindrata. Toxicon 39, 391–400 (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Michálek, O., Petráková, L. & Pekár, S. Capture efficiency and trophic adaptations of a specialist and generalist predator: A comparison. Ecol. Evol. 7(8), 2756–2766 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Klint, J. K. et al. Spider-venom peptides that target voltage-gated sodium channels: Pharmacological tools and potential therapeutic leads. Toxicon 60(4), 478–491 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Diniz, M. R. et al. An overview of Phoneutria nigriventer spider venom using combined transcriptomic and proteomic approaches. PLoS ONE 13(8), e0200628 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, D. et al. The aromatic head group of spider toxin polyamines influences toxicity to cancer cells. Toxins 9(11), 346 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Herzig, V. & King, G. F. The cystine knot is responsible for the exceptional stability of the insecticidal spider toxin ω-hexatoxin-Hv1a. Toxins 7(10), 4366–4380 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wang, X. H. et al. Discovery and characterization of a family of insecticidal neurotoxins with a rare vicinal disulfide bridge. Nat. Struct. Biol. 7(6), 505–513 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yuan, C. H. et al. Discovery of a distinct superfamily of Kunitz-type toxin (KTT) from tarantulas. PLoS ONE 3(10), e3414 (2008).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Luo, J. et al. Molecular diversity and evolutionary trends of cysteine-rich peptides from the venom glands of Chinese spider Heteropoda venatoria. Sci. Rep. 11, 3211 (2021).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cole, J., Buszka, P. A., Mobley, J. A. & Hataway, R. A. Characterization of the venom proteome for the wandering spider, Ctenus hibernalis (Aranea: Ctenidae). J. Proteom. Bioinform. 9, 196–199 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Korolkova, Y. et al. New Insectotoxin from Tibellus Oblongus Spider venom presents novel daptation of ICK Fold. Toxins 13(1), 29 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Koua, D. et al. Proteotranscriptomic insights into the venom composition of the wolf spider Lycosa tarantula. Toxins 12(8), 501 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Liberato, T., Troncone, L. R. P., Yamashiro, E. T., Serrano, S. M. & Zelanis, A. High-resolution proteomic profiling of spider venom: Expanding the toxin diversity of Phoneutria nigriventer venom. Amino Acids 48(3), 901–906 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Oldrati, V. et al. Peptidomic and transcriptomic profiling of four distinct spider venoms. PLoS ONE 12(3), e0172966 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
King, G. F. & Hardy, M. C. Spider-venom peptides: Structure, pharmacology, and potential for control of insect pests. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 58, 475–496 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Turner, A. J., Isaac, R. E. & Coates, D. The neprilysin (NEP) family of zinc metalloendopeptidases: Genomics and function. BioEssays 23(3), 261–269 (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Casewell, N. R., Harrison, R. A., Wüster, W. & Wagstaff, S. C. Comparative venom gland transcriptome surveys of the saw-scaled vipers (Viperidae: Echis) reveal substantial intra-family gene diversity and novel venom transcripts. BMC Genom. 10(1), 1–12 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tan, C. H., Tan, K. Y., Fung, S. Y. & Tan, N. H. Venom-gland transcriptome and venom proteome of the Malaysian king cobra (Ophiophagus hannah). BMC Genom. 16(1), 1–21 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tan, K. Y., Tan, C. H., Chanhome, L. & Tan, N. H. Comparative venom gland transcriptomics of Naja kaouthia (monocled cobra) from Malaysia and Thailand: Elucidating geographical venom variation and insights into sequence novelty. PeerJ 5, e3142 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Undheim, E. A. et al. A proteomics and transcriptomics investigation of the venom from the barychelid spider Trittame loki (brush-foot trapdoor). Toxins. 5(12), 2488–2503 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
do Nascimento, S. M., de Oliveira, U. C., Nishiyama-Jr, M. Y., Tashima, A. K. & Silva Junior, P. I. D. Presence of a neprilysin on Avicularia juruensis (Mygalomorphae: Theraphosidae) venom. Toxin Rev. 41(2), 370–379 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zobel-Thropp, P. A. et al. Not so dangerous after all? Venom composition and potency of the Pholcid (daddy long-leg) spider Physocyclus mexicanus. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 256 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Diniz, M. R. et al. An overview of Phoneutria nigriventer spider venom using combined transcriptomic and proteomic approaches. PLoS ONE 13(8), e0200628 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
He, Q. et al. The venom gland transcriptome of Latrodectus tredecimguttatus revealed by deep sequencing and cDNA library analysis. PLoS ONE 8(11), e81357 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Haney, R. A., Ayoub, N. A., Clarke, T. H., Hayashi, C. Y. & Garb, J. E. Dramatic expansion of the black widow toxin arsenal uncovered by multi-tissue transcriptomics and venom proteomics. BMC Genom. 15(1), 1–18 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Haney, R. A., Matte, T., Forsyth, F. S. & Garb, J. E. Alternative transcription at venom genes and its role as a complementary mechanism for the generation of venom complexity in the common house spider. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 85 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lüddecke, T. et al. An economic dilemma between molecular weapon systems may explain an arachno-atypical venom in wasp spiders (Argiope bruennichi). Biomolecules 10(7), 978 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fainzilber, M., Gordon, D., Hasson, A., Spira, M. E. & Zlotkin, E. Mollusc-specific toxins from the venom of Conus textile neovicarius. Eur. J. Biochem. 202(2), 589–595 (1991).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pawlak, J. et al. Denmotoxin, a three-finger toxin from the colubrid snake Boiga dendrophila (Mangrove Catsnake) with bird-specific activity. J. Biol. Chem. 281(39), 29030–29041 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Krasnoperov, V. G., Shamotienko, O. G. & Grishin, E. V. Isolation and properties of insect and crustacean-specific neurotoxins from the venom of the black widow spider (Latrodectus mactans tredecimguttatus). J. Nat. Toxins 1, 17–23 (1992).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, X. et al. A comparative analysis of the venom gland transcriptomes of the fishing spiders Dolomedes mizhoanus and Dolomedes sulfurous. PLoS ONE 10(10), e0139908 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuzmenkov, A. I., Sachkova, M. Y., Kovalchuk, S. I., Grishin, E. V. & Vassilevski, A. A. Lachesana tarabaevi, an expert in membrane-active toxins. Biochem. J. 473(16), 2495–2506 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S. & Toft, S. Trophic specialisation in a predatory group: The case of prey-specialised spiders (Araneae). Biol. Rev. 90(3), 744–761 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nyffeler, M. & Pusey, B. J. Fish predation by semi-aquatic spiders: A global pattern. PLoS ONE 9(6), e99459 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S. & Lubin, Y. Prey and predatory behavior of two zodariid species (Araneae, Zodariidae). J. Arachnol. 37(1), 118–121 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Michálek, O., Kuhn-Nentwig, L. & Pekár, S. High specific efficiency of venom of two prey-specialized spiders. Toxins 11(12), 687 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Modahl, C. M., Mrinalini, Frietze, S. & Mackessy, S. P. Adaptive evolution of distinct prey-specific toxin genes in rear-fanged snake venom. Proc. R. Soc. B. 285(1884), 20181003 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harris, R. J., Zdenek, C. N., Harrich, D., Frank, N. & Fry, B. G. An appetite for destruction: Detecting prey-selective binding of α-neurotoxins in the venom of Afro-Asian elapids. Toxins 12(3), 205 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Duran, L. H., Rymer, T. L. & Wilson, D. T. Variation in venom composition in the Australian funnel-web spiders Hadronyche valida. Toxicon: X 8, 100063 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kuhn-Nentwig, L., Schaller, J. & Nentwig, W. Purification of toxic peptides and the amino acid sequence of CSTX-1 from the multicomponent venom of Cupiennius salei (Araneae: Ctenidae). Toxicon 32(3), 287–302 (1994).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Friedel, T. & Nentwig, W. Immobilizing and lethal effects of spider venoms on the cockroach and the common mealbeetle. Toxicon 27(3), 305–316 (1989).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Eggs, B., Wolff, J. O., Kuhn-Nentwig, L., Gorb, S. N. & Nentwig, W. Hunting without a web: How lycosoid spiders subdue their prey. Ethology 121(12), 1166–1177 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Andrews, S. FastQC: A quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. Available online at: http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc (2015).Bolger, A. M., Lohse, M. & Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: A flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30(15), 2114–2120 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Song, L. & Florea, L. Rcorrector: Efficient and accurate error correction for Illumina RNA-seq reads. GigaScience 4(1), s13742–s14015 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grabherr, M. G. et al. Trinity: Reconstructing a full-length transcriptome without a genome from RNA-Seq data. Nat. Biotechnol. 29(7), 644 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gilbert, D. EvidentialGene: Evidence directed gene predictions for eukaryotes. Available online at: http://arthropods.eugenes.org/EvidentialGene/ (2010).Langmead, B., Trapnell, C., Pop, M. & Salzberg, S. L. Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome. Genome Biol. 10(3), 1–10 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Seppey, M., Manni, M. & Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO: Assessing genome assembly and annotation completeness. In Gene Prediction (ed. Kollmar, M.) 227–245 (Humana, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Haas, B. TransDecoder. Available online at: https://github.com/TransDecoder/TransDecoder (2015).Petersen, T. N., Brunak, S., Von Heijne, G. & Nielsen, H. SignalP 4.0: Discriminating signal peptides from transmembrane regions. Nat. Methods 8(10), 785–786 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Altschul, S. F. et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: A new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25(17), 3389–3402 (1997).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
UniProt. The universal protein knowledgebase in 2021. Nucleic Acids Res. 49(1), 480–489 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Eddy, S. R. A probabilistic model of local sequence alignment that simplifies statistical significance estimation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 4(5), e1000069 (2008).Article 
ADS 
MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
Finn, R. D. et al. Pfam: The protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 42(1), 222–230 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wong, E. S., Hardy, M. C., Wood, D., Bailey, T. & King, G. F. SVM-based prediction of propeptide cleavage sites in spider toxins identifies toxin innovation in an Australian tarantula. PLoS ONE 8(7), e66279 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
King, G. F., Gentz, M. C., Escoubas, P. & Nicholson, G. M. A rational nomenclature for naming peptide toxins from spiders and other venomous animals. Toxicon 52(2), 264–276 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available online at: https://www.R-project.org/ (2019).Venables, W. N. & Ripley, B. D. Random and mixed effects in Modern Applied Statistics with S 271–300 (Springer, New York, 2002).Pekár, S. & Brabec, M. Modern Analysis of Biological Data: Generalized Linear Models in R (Masaryk University Press, 2016).
Google Scholar 
Halekoh, U., Højsgaard, S. & Yan, J. The R package geepack for generalized estimating equations. J. Stat. Softw. 15(2), 1–11 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pekár, S. & Brabec, M. Generalized estimating equations: A pragmatic and flexible approach to the marginal GLM modelling of correlated data in the behavioural sciences. Ethology 124(2), 86–93 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Sampling strategies and dataThe inner Oslofjorden phytoplankton dataset is a compilation of data mostly assembled from the monitoring program, financed since 1978 by a cooperation between the municipalities around the fjord, united in the counsel for technical water and sewage cooperation called “Fagrådet for Vann- og avløpsteknisk samarbeid i Indre Oslofjord”. The monitoring program started in 1973 and is ongoing. The program has sampled environmental parameters and chlorophyll since 1973, but for the first 25 years, phytoplankton data is only reported for the years 1973, 1974, 1988/9, 1990, 1994 and 1995. Since 1998, yearly sampling has been conducted, and from 2006 to 2019, the sampling frequency was approximately monthly. In addition, we have compiled research and monitoring data from researchers at the University of Oslo from 1896 and 1916, 1933–34 and 1962–1965.The records from 1896 and 1897 were collected using zoo-plankton net13. The phytoplankton collection in 1916–1917 used buckets or Nansen flasks for sampling. From 1933 to 1984, phytoplankton samples were collected using Nansen bottles and then from 1985–2020 with Niskin bottles from research vessels. The exception is the period from 2006 to 2018 when samples were also collected with FerryBox- equipped ships of opportunity14 with refrigerated autosamplers (Table 2).Since the 1990s, quantitative phytoplankton samples have mostly been preserved in Lugol’s solution, except for spring and autumn samples in the period 1990–2000 that were preserved in formalin. The records from 1896, 1897 and 1916 were preserved in ethanol, and between 1933 and 1990, samples were preserved in formalin. Sampling strategies and methods are listed in Table 2.The records from 1896 and 1897 were quantified by weight, and taxon abundance is categorised as “rare” (r), “rather common” (+), “common” (c) and “very common” (cc)13. In 1916 and 1917, Grans filtration method15 was used, and the number was given in cell counts per litre. From 1916 to 1993, the data is reported only as phytoplankton abundance (N, number of cells per litre). For most years after 1994, the dataset includes both abundance and biomass (μg C per litre), except for 2003, 2004, 2017 and 2018. Phytoplankton was identified and quantified using the sedimentation method of Utermöhl (1958)16. Biovolume for each species is calculated according to HELCOM 200617 and converted to biomass (μg C) following Menden-Deuer & Lessards (2000)18.Data inventoryThe inner Oslofjorden Phytoplankton dataset was compiled in 2020, comprising quantitative phytoplankton cell counts from inner Oslofjorden since 1896. Previously, parts of the data have been available as handwritten or printed tables in reports and published sources19,20,21 (Fig. 2). All sources are digitally available from the University of Oslo Library, the website for “Fagrådet” (http://www.indre-oslofjord.no/) or the NIVA online report database (https://www.niva.no/rapporter). Data from 1994 and onwards have been accessed digitally from the NIVA’s databases. They are also available from client reports from the monitoring project for inner Oslofjorden from the online sites listed above.The first known, published investigation of hydrography and plankton in the upper water column of the inner Oslofjorden was by Hjort & Gran (1900)13. Samples were collected during a hydrographical and biological investigation covering both the Skagerrak and Oslofjorden. There is only one sampling event from Steilene (Dk 1), but some phytoplankton data were obtained at Drøbak, just south of the shallow sill separating the inner and outer Oslofjorden, from winter 1896 to autumn 1897. Twenty years later, Gran and Gaarder (1927)22 conducted a study that included culture experiments at Drøbak field station (at the border between the inner and outer Oslofjorden) in March – April 1916 and August – September 1917. A higher frequency investigation was carried out from June 1933 to May 1934, covering 12 stations in inner and outer Oslofjorden where phytoplankton was analysed by microscopic examination23. The extensive program (the Oslofjord Project) conducted from 1962–1964 covered many parameters, and we have extracted the data for phytoplankton. From 1973 and onward, the research vessel-based monitoring program was financed by the municipalities around the fjord, and since 2006 NIVA has supplemented the monitoring program using FerryBox ships of opportunity. Samples from 4 m depth were collected using a refrigerated autosampler system (Teledyne ISCO) connected to a FerryBox system on M/S Color Festival and M/S Color Fantasy through cooperation between NIVA and Color Line A/S. Since 2018, the FerryBox has been part of the Norwegian Ships of Opportunity Program research infrastructure funded by the Research Council of Norway.The indicated depth of 3.5–4 m is an estimated average, as the actual sampling depth depends on shipload and sea conditions.Several other research projects have sampled from inner Oslofjorden between 1886 and 2000 with different aims. Data from relevant projects reporting on the whole phytoplankton community have also been included in this database.Data compilationThe data already digitalised were compiled from MS Excel files, and other data were manually entered into the standard format in MS Excel files. All collected data were then integrated into one MS Excel database, and this file was used for upload into GBIF. Data can be downloaded from GBIF in different formats and be linked together by the measurementsorfacts table.Quality control and standardisationAfter compilation, the data were checked for errors that could occur during manual digitalisation or just the compilation process. Duplicates and zero values were removed (Fig. 2). The major quantitative unit is phytoplankton abundance in cells per litre. Due to varying scopes of sampling and the development of gear and instruments, the number of species identified may vary between projects. Some of the earliest records were registered as “present”, indicating the amount in comments.Metadata, such as geographical reference, depth and methodology accessed from papers and reports, were accessible from the data source. When data was accessed from the NIVA internal databases, the metadata information was provided by the database owners/researchers.TaxonomyThe taxonomy of microalgae is in constant revision as new knowledge and techniques for identification are developing. Several historical species names recorded in this database are synonyms of accepted names in 2021. We have used the original names in our database and matched them to accepted names and Aphia ID using the taxon match tool available in the open-access reference system; World Register of Marine Species (Worms)24. The taxon match was conducted in March 2021.The nomenclature in Worms is quality assured by a wide range of taxonomic specialists. The Aphia ID is a unique and stable identifier for each available name in the database24. We also cross-checked the last updated nomenclature in Algaebase25 (March 2022) to assign species to a valid taxon name. When Algaebase and Worms were not in accordance, Algaebase taxonomy was usually chosen except in the case of Class Bacillariophyceae.Before matching the species list, the original species names were cleaned from spelling mistakes or just spelling mismatches like spaces, commas, etc. The original name is, however, left in one column in the database. For registrations where a species identification is uncertain, e.g. Alexandrium cf. tamarense, we used only Alexandrium. For registrations where the full name is uncertain, e.g. cf. Alexandrium tamarense, we used the name and Aphia ID for higher taxa, in this case, order. For others, e.g. “pennate diatoms” or “centric diatoms“, we used the name and Aphia ID for class. When names for, e.g. order and class were not recognised automatically by the matching tool in World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS), these were matched manually. Only very few records, mostly “cysts” and “unidentified monads”, could not be matched neither automatically nor manually but were assigned to general “protists” with affiliated ID. More

The phototrophic species Rhodovastum atsumiense G2-11 acquired MGCs from an unknown alphaproteobacterial MTB by recent HGTIn a systematic database search for novel MGCs, we identified several orthologs of known magnetosome genes in the recently released draft genome sequence of the culturable anoxygenic phototroph Rhodovastum atsumiense G2-11 [25]. This finding was unexpected as, after isolation of G2-11 from a paddy field more than 20 years ago, no magnetosome formation has been reported [26]. Furthermore, no MTB has been identified so far among phototrophs or within the Acetobacteraceae family to which G2-11 belongs [26] (Fig. 1a).Fig. 1: Phylogeny, chromosome, and MGCs organization of G2-11.a The maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree based on ribosomal proteins demonstrates the position of G2-11 (highlighted in red) within family Acetobacteraceae (highlighted in the yellow box). The Azospirillaceae family was used as an outgroup based on the latest Alphaproteobacteria phylogeny. Branch length represents the number of base substitutions per site. Values at nodes indicate branch support calculated from 500 replicates using non-parametric bootstrap analysis. Bootstrap values 20 genes with no homology to known magnetosome genes (Fig. 1c). In contrast, the compact MGCs in G2-11 include only a few genes that could not be associated with magnetosome biosynthesis.Tetranucleotide usage patterns are frequently employed as a complementary tool to group organisms since they bear a reliable phylogenetic signal [32]. Likewise, deviations of tetranucleotide usage in a certain fragment from the flanking genome regions can indicate HGT [21]. Comparison of the z-normalized tetranucleotide frequencies of the MGCs (27.5 kb) with the flanking upstream (117.7 kb) and downstream (79.5 kb) fragments showed a considerably lower correlation between them (Pearson’s r = 0.88 with both flanking fragments) than between the flanking fragments themselves (Pearson’s r = 0.97, Fig. 1e). This indicates a significant difference in the tetranucleotide composition of the MGCs compared to the flanking genomic regions and supports a foreign origin of the magnetosome genes in G2-11 suggested by the phylogenetic analysis. Besides, the presence of a mobile element (transposase) and position of the MGCs directly downstream of a tRNA gene, a common hotspot for integration of genomic islands [33,34,35], suggests that the MGCs of G2-11 are indeed located on a genomic island, i.e., represent MAI, like in many other MTB [20, 21]. Unfortunately, the lack of other representatives of the genus Rhodovastum makes it impossible to infer whether the MAI was transferred directly to G2-11 or the last common ancestor of the genus. Nonetheless, its compact organization and conspicuous tetranucleotide usage suggest a relatively recent HGT event.G2-11 does not form magnetosomes under laboratory conditionsAlthough magnetosome genes discovered in G2-11 comply with the minimal set required for magnetosome biomineralization in MSR-1 [36], no magnetosomes have been detected in this organism. It might have several explanations: (i) the strain might switch to the magnetotactic lifestyle only under very specific, yet not tested, conditions; (ii) it once was able to synthesize magnetosomes in its natural environment but lost this ability upon subcultivation due to mutations before its characterization; (iii) the strain might naturally not exploit magnetotaxis as its genes might be non-functional or not actively expressed. To clarify which of these explanations is most likely, we first tested whether G2-11 can form magnetosomes under different laboratory conditions. To this end, the strain was cultivated photoheterotrophically, anoxic or microoxic, in a complex medium with potassium lactate and soybean peptone, as commonly used for MSR-1 (FSM) [37], as well as in minimal media with different C-sources previously shown to support growth in G2-11 (glucose, pyruvate, L-glutamine, and ethanol) [26]. All media were supplied with 50 μM ferric citrate to provide sufficient iron for magnetite biomineralization. Since magnetosome biosynthesis is possible only under low oxygen tension, aerobic chemoheterotrophic growth of G2-11 was not tested. The best growth was observed in the complex FSM medium and a minimal medium with glucose or pyruvate, whereas L-glutamine and ethanol supported only weak growth (Supplementary Fig. S3). Irrespective of the growth stage, none of the tested cultures demonstrated magnetic response as measured by a magnetically induced differential light scattering assay (Cmag) [38]. Consistently, micrographs of cells collected from stationary phase cultures did not show any magnetosome-like particles (Supplementary Fig. S3). This confirmed that G2-11 indeed cannot biosynthesize magnetosomes, at least under the conditions available for the laboratory tests. During cultivation, we also noticed that G2-11 cells did not move at any growth stage despite the initial description of this organism as motile using a single polar flagellum [26], and containing several flagellum synthesis operons and other motility-related genes. Moreover, the cells tended to adhere to glass surfaces under all tested conditions and formed a dense clumpy biofilm immersed in a thick extracellular matrix (Supplementary Fig. S3a-ii).Considering that G2-11 generally lacks magnetosomes and appears to have a stationary lifestyle, which is not consistent with magnetotaxis, we assessed whether the maintenance of MGCs comes at fitness costs for the organism. To this end, we deleted the entire region containing the magnetosome genes (in the following, referred to as the MAI region) using the genetic tools we established for G2-11 in this work (Supplementary Fig. S4a, see Materials and Methods for details). After PCR screening, replica plating test, and genome re-sequencing, two of G2-11 ΔMAI mutants were selected for further analysis (Supplementary Fig. S5). These mutants showed no significant differences in the growth behavior compared to the wildtype (WT) when incubated in minimal media supplied with acetate or pyruvate as a sole carbon source (Supplementary Fig. S4b). This finding suggests that the presence of the magnetosome genes neither provides benefits nor poses any substantial metabolic burden for G2-11, at least under the given experimental conditions.RNAseq reveals poor expression levels and antisense transcription in the MGCs of G2-11We set on to determine whether the magnetosome genes are transcribed in G2-11. To this end, we analyzed its whole transcriptome for the photoheterotrophic conditions, under which the best growth was observed, in two biological replicates. The expression levels of all the encoded genes calculated as TPM (transcripts per million) demonstrated a high correlation between the two replicates (Pearson’s r = 0.98). Most genes of the (mms6-like1)(mmsF-like1)mamH1IEKLMOH2 cluster were only poorly or not transcribed at all (Fig. 2a, Supplementary dataset). Transcription of mms6-like1, mamF-like1, mamL, mamH1, mamI, and mamK, for example, did not pass the noise background threshold (TPM ≤ 2) in both replicates and were unlikely to be expressed, whereas mamE, mamM, mamH2, feoAm, and feoBm slightly exceeded the threshold in at least one replicate and might be weakly transcribed (Fig. 2a). Although the TPM of mamO (TPM = 5.67–6.10, Supplementary dataset) exceeded the background threshold, the coverage plot reveals that the number of mapped reads sharply rises at its 3’-end, whereas the 5’-end has low read coverage (Fig. 2b). This indicates the presence of an internal transcription start site (TSS) and its associated promoter within the coding sequence of mamO instead of the full transcription of the gene. Localization of an active promoter within mamO was recently described in MSR-1, suggesting that the transcriptional organization of MGCs may be more broadly conserved across MTB than assumed previously [39].Fig. 2: Transcription of the magnetosome genes in G2-11.a Log10 of the transcript abundances for all genes in the G2-11 genome presented as TPM (transcripts per million). Red dots represent the magnetosome genes. Red rectangle shows genes with TPM below the threshold, and blue rectangle shows genes with expression levels above median. R1 and R2: biological replicates. Pearson’s r and the p value is presented on the graph. b RNAseq coverage of reads mapped on the positive (red) and negative (blue) strands of the genome in the MAI region. The gray balk shows the gene map: genes encoded on the negative strand are colored in black, on the positive – in green. Red arrows indicate the anti-sense transcription in the mamPAQRBST operon. Green arrows indicate the intragenic TSS within mamO. TSS are indicated with dashed lines and black arrowheads that show the direction of transcription.Full size imageTranscription of genes within the mag123, (mms6-like2)(mmsF-like2), and mamAPQRBST clusters significantly exceeded the threshold, with the expression levels of mag1, mamT, and mamS being above the overall median. At the same time, antisense transcription was detected in the mamAPQRBST region, with the coverage considerably exceeding the sense transcription (Fig. 2b). This antisense RNA (asRNA) likely originated from a promoter controlling the tRNA gene positioned on the negative strand downstream of mamT. Such long asRNAs have the potential to interfere with sense transcripts, thereby significantly decreasing the expression of genes encoded on the opposite strand [40].In summary, the RNAseq data revealed extremely low or lack of transcription of several genes that are known to be essential for magnetosome biosynthesis (mamL, mamI, mamM, mamE, and mamO) [27, 41]. Additionally, the detected antisense transcription can potentially attenuate expression of the mamAPQRBST cluster that also comprises essential genes, i.e., mamQ and mamB. Although other factors, like the absence of several accessory genes mentioned above and the potential accumulation of point mutations, might also be involved, the lack or insufficient transcription of the essential magnetosome genes appears to be the primary reason for the absence of magnetosome biosynthesis in G2-11.Magnetosome proteins from G2-11 are functional in a model magnetotactic bacteriumAlthough visual inspection of the G2-11 magnetosome genes did not reveal any frameshifts or other apparent mutations, accumulation of non-obvious functionally deleterious point substitutions in the essential genes could not be excluded. Therefore, we next tested whether at least some of the magnetosome genes from G2-11 still encode functional proteins that can complement isogenic mutants of the model magnetotactic bacterium MSR-1. In addition, we analyzed the intracellular localization of their products in both MSR-1 and G2-11 by fluorescent labeling.One of the key proteins for magnetosome biosynthesis in MSR-1 is MamB, as its deletion mutant is severely impaired in magnetosome vesicle formation and is entirely devoid of magnetite crystals [42, 43]. Here, we observed that expression of MamB[G2-11] partially restored magnetosome chain formation in MSR-1 ΔmamB (Fig. 3a, b-i, b-ii). Consistently, MamB[G2-11] tagged with mNeonGreen (MamB[G2-11]-mNG) was predominantly localized to magnetosome chains in MSR-1, suggesting that the magnetosome vesicle formation was likely restored to the WT levels (Fig. 3b-iii).Fig. 3: Genetic complementation and intracellular localization of magnetosome proteins from G2-11 in MSR-1 isogenic mutants.a TEM micrograph of MSR-1 wildtype (WT). b MSR-1 ΔmamB::mamB[G2-11]. b-i TEM micrograph and b-ii magnetosome chain close-up; b-iii) 3D-SIM Z-stack maximum intensity projection of MSR-1 ΔmamB::mamB[G2-11]-mNG. c MSR-1ΔmamQ::mamQ[G2-11]. c-i TEM micrograph and c-ii close-up of the particles; c-iii 3D-SIM Z-stack maximum intensity projection. d MSR-1 ΔmamK::mamK[G2-11]. d-i TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔmamK; d-ii TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔmamK::mamK[G2-11]; d-iii 3D-SIM Z-stack maximum intensity projection of MSR-1 ΔmamK::mNG-mamK[G2-11]. e MSR-1 ΔmamKY::mamK[G2-11]. e-i-ii Representative cells of MSR-1 ΔmamKY mutant showing examples of a short chain, cluster (e-i), and ring-shaped chain (e-ii); (e-iii) TEM micrograph of MSR ΔmamKY::mamK[G2-11] mutant showing the complemented phenotype; e-iv distribution of cells with different phenotypes in the populations of MSR-1 ΔmamKY and MSR-1 ΔmamKY::mamK[G2-11] mutants (N  > 50 cells for each strain population); e-v 3D-SIM Z-stack maximum intensity projection of MSR-1 ΔmamKY::mNG-mamK[G2-11]. f MSR-1 ΔmamJ::mamJ-like[G2-11]. f-i TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔmamJ; f-ii TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔmamJ::mamJ-like[G2-11]; f-iii 3D-SIM Z-stack maximum intensity projection of MSR-1 ΔmamJ::mamJ-like[G2-11]-gfp. g MSR-1 ΔF3::mmsF-like1[G2-11] and ΔF3::mmsF-like2[G2-11]. g-i TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔF3; g-ii TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔF3::mmsF-like1[G2-11]; g-iii TEM micrograph of MSR-1 ΔF3::mmsF-like2[G2-11]; g-iv magnetosome diameter distribution in MSR-1 ΔF3 and the mutants complemented with mmsF-like1/mmsF-like2. Asterisks indicate points of significance calculated using Kruskal–Wallis test (****p 50 cells for each of two randomly selected insertion mutants MSR-1 ΔmamKY::mamK[G2-11] revealed that the long magnetosome chains were restored in 35-40% of the population (Fig. 3e-iv). Of note, mNG-MamK[G2-11] formed slightly shorter filaments in MSR-1 ΔmamKY than in ΔmamK, which were also characteristically displaced to the outer cell curvature due to the lack of mamY [46] (Fig. 3e-v).MamJ attaches magnetosomes to the MamK filament in MSR-1, mediating their chain-like arrangement. Elimination of mamJ disrupts this linkage, causing magnetosomes to aggregate owing to magnetic interactions [47] (Fig. 3f-i). In MSR-1, MamJ is encoded within the mamAB operon, between mamE and mamK. Within the (mms6-like1)(mmsF-like1)mamH1IEKLMOH2 cluster of G2-11, there is an open reading frame (ORF) encoding a hypothetical protein that is located in a syntenic locus (Fig. 1c). Although the hypothetical protein from G2-11 and MamJ from MSR-1 differ considerably in length (563 vs. 426 aa), share only a low overall sequence similarity (31%), and are not identified as orthologues by reciprocal blast analyses, multiple sequence alignments revealed a few conserved amino acids at their N- and C-termini (Supplementary Fig. S6). Moreover, in both proteins, these conserved residues are separated by a large region rich in acidic residues (pI 3.3 and 3.2) suggesting that the G2-11 protein might be a distant MamJ homolog. To test if it implements the same function as MamJ, we transferred this gene to MSR-1 ΔmamJ. Interestingly, it indeed restored chain-like magnetosome arrangement, which, however, often appeared as closed rings rather than linear chains (Fig. 3f-ii). Despite this difference, it indicated the ability of the hypothetical protein (hereafter referred to as MamJ-like[G2-11]) to attach magnetosomes to MamK, suggesting that in the native context, it can have a function identical to MamJ. Consistently, its fluorescently labeled version was often observed in ring-like structures within the cytoplasm of MSR-1 ΔmamJ, suggesting that it is indeed localized to magnetosomes (Fig. 3f-iii).In magnetospirilla, magnetosome proteins MmsF, MamF, and MmxF share an extensive similarity. Their individual and collective elimination gradually reduces the magnetite crystal size and disrupts the chain formation in MSR-1 (Fig. 3g-i; Paulus, manuscript in preparation). The MAI of G2-11 includes two genes, whose products have high similarity to these proteins, designated here as MmsF-like1[G2-11] and MmsF-like2[G2-11]. Expression of each of them in the MSR-1 ΔmmsFΔmamFΔmmxF triple mutant (ΔF3) partially restored the magnetosome size and led to the formation of short magnetosome chains in MSR ΔF3::mmsF-like1[G2-11] (Fig. 3g-ii) or clusters in MSR-1 ΔF3::mmsF-like2[G2-11] (Fig. 3g-iii, iv). Consistently, fluorescently tagged mNG-MmsF-like1[G2-11] and mNG-MmsF-like2[G2-11] localized to magnetosomes in the pattern resembling that in the TEM micrographs of the complemented corresponding mutants (Fig. 3g-v, vii), or were perfectly targeted to the magnetosome chains in MSR-1 WT (Fig. 3g-vi, viii).In G2-11, MamB[G2-11]-mNG, mNG-MamQ[G2-11], MamJ-like[G2-11]-GFP, mNG-MmsF-like1[G2-11], and mNG-MmsF-like2[G2-11] were patchy-like or evenly distributed in the inner and intracellular membranes (Supplementary Fig. S7). No linear structures that would indicate the formation of aligned magnetosome vesicles were observed in these mutants. As expected, mNG-MamK[G2-11] formed filaments in G2-11 (Supplementary Fig. S7c).Expression of MamM, MamO, MamE, and MamL failed to complement the corresponding deletion mutants of MSR-1 (not shown). Although detrimental mutations in the genes cannot be excluded, this result can be attributed to the lack of their native, cognate interaction partners, likely due to the large phylogenetic distances between the respective orthologues.Transfer of MGCs from MSR-1 endows G2-11 with magnetosome biosynthesis that is rapidly lost upon subcultivationHaving demonstrated the functionality of several G2-11 magnetosome genes in the MSR-1 background, we wondered whether, conversely, the G2-11 background is permissive for magnetosome biosynthesis. To this end, we transferred the well-studied MGCs from MSR-1 into G2-11, thereby mimicking an HGT event under laboratory conditions. The magnetosome genes from MSR-1 were previously cloned on a single vector pTpsMAG1 to enable the one-step transfer and random insertion into the genomes of foreign organisms [23]. Three G2-11 mutants with different positions of the integrated magnetosome cassette were incubated under anoxic phototrophic conditions with iron concentrations (50 μM) sufficient for biomineralization in the donor organism MSR-1. The obtained transgenic strains indeed demonstrated a detectable magnetic response (Cmag = 0.38 ± 0.11) [38], and TEM confirmed the presence of numerous electron-dense particles within the cells (Fig. 4), which, however, were significantly smaller than magnetosome crystals of MSR-1 (ranging 18.5 ± 4.3 nm to 19.9 ± 5.0 nm in three G2-11 MAG insertion mutants vs 35.4 ± 11.5 nm in MSR-1 WT, Fig. 4b) and formed only short chains or were scattered throughout the cells (Fig. 4a, c-i). Mapping of the particle elemental compositions with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) in STEM mode revealed iron- and oxygen-dominated compositions, suggesting they were iron oxides. High-resolution TEM (HRTEM) images and their FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) patterns were consistent with the structure of magnetite (Fig. 4c). Thus, G2-11 was capable of genuine magnetosome formation after acquisition of the MGCs from MSR-1.Fig. 4: Magnetosome biosynthesis by G2-11 upon transfer of the MGCs from MSR-1.a A cell with magnetosomes (i) and a close-up of the area with magnetosome chains (ii). Scale bars: 1 µm. b Violin plots displaying magnetosome diameter in three MAG insertion mutants of G2-11 in comparison to MSR-1. Asterisks indicate points of significance calculated using the Kruskal–Wallis test (**** designates p  More

Putz, F. E. et al. Conserv. Lett. 5, 296–303 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blaser, J., Sarre, A., Poore, D. & Johnson, S. Status of Tropical Forest Management 2011. ITTO Tech. Ser. No. 38 (International Tropical Timber Organization, 2011); available at https://go.nature.com/3usq2an
Google Scholar 
Malhi, Y. et al. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05523-1 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zwerts, J. A. et al. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 3, e568 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilkie, D. S., Bennett, E. L., Peres, C. A. & Cunningham, A. A. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1223, 120–128 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Putz, F. E., Blate, G. M., Redford, K. H., Fimbel, R. & Robinson, J. Conserv. Biol. 15, 7–20 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Doak, D. F. et al. The statistical inevitability of stability‐diversity relationships in community ecology. Am. Nat. 151, 264–276 (1998).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Schläpfer, F. & Schmid, B. Ecosystem effects of biodiversity: a classification hypotheses and exploration of empirical results. Ecol. Appl. 9, 893–912 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lehman, C. L. & Tilman, D. Biodiversity, stability, and productivity in competitive communities. Am. Nat. 156, 534–552 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Allan, E. et al. More diverse plant communities have higher functioning over time due to turnover in complementary dominant species. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 17034–17039 (2011).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Isbell, F. et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477, 199–202 (2011).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wagg, C. et al. Plant diversity maintains long-term ecosystem productivity under frequent drought by increasing short-term variation. Ecology 98, 2952–2961 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Isbell, F. et al. Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes. Nature 526, 574–577 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Reich, P. B. et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss escalate through time as redundancy fades. Science 336, 589–592 (2012).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Guerrero-Ramírez, N. R. et al. Diversity-dependent temporal divergence of ecosystem functioning in experimental ecosystems. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1639–1642 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Meyer, S. T. et al. Effects of biodiversity strengthen over time as ecosystem functioning declines at low and increases at high biodiversity. Ecosphere 7, e01619 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Huang, Y. et al. Impacts of species richness on productivity in a large-scale subtropical forest experiment. Science 362, 80–83 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bongers, F. J. et al. Functional diversity effects on productivity increase with age in a forest biodiversity experiment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1594–1603 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Weisser, W. W. et al. Biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning in a 15-year grassland experiment: Patterns, mechanisms, and open questions. Basic Appl. Ecol. 23, 1–73 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guerrero-Ramírez, N. R., Reich, P. B., Wagg, C., Ciobanu, M. & Eisenhauer, N. Diversity-dependent plant–soil feedbacks underlie long-term plant diversity effects on primary productivity. Ecosphere 10, e02704 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eisenhauer, N. The shape that matters: how important is biodiversity for ecosystem functioning. Sci. China Life Sci. 65, 651–653 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Impacts of plant diversity on biomass production increase through time because of species complementarity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 18123–18128 (2007).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Marquard, E. et al. Plant species richness and functional composition drive overyielding in a six-year grassland experiment. Ecology 90, 3290–3302 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zuppinger-Dingley, D. et al. Selection for niche differentiation in plant communities increases biodiversity effects. Nature 515, 108–111 (2014).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M. & Hector, A. Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature 412, 72–76 (2001).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wang, S. et al. How complementarity and selection affect the relationship between ecosystem functioning and stability. Ecology 102, e03347 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yan, Y. et al. Mechanistic links between biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning and stability in a multi-site grassland experiment. J. Ecol. 109, 3370–3378 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barry, K. E. et al. The future of complementarity: disentangling causes from consequences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34, 167–180 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yachi, S. & Loreau, M. Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity in a fluctuating environment: the insurance hypothesis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 1463–1468 (1999).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gonzalez, A. & Loreau, M. The causes and consequences of compensatory dynamics in ecological communities. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40, 393–414 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thibaut, L. M. & Connolly, S. R. Understanding diversity–stability relationships: towards a unified model of portfolio effects. Ecol. Lett. 16, 140–150 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Craven, D. et al. Multiple facets of biodiversity drive the diversity–stability relationship. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1579–1587 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tilman, D., Reich, P. B. & Knops, J. M. H. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment. Nature 441, 629–632 (2006).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning (Princeton Univ. Press,2010).Loreau, M. & de Mazancourt, C. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability: a synthesis of underlying mechanisms. Ecol. Lett. 16, 106–115 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Isbell, F. et al. Quantifying effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning across times and places. Ecol. Lett. 21, 763–778 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Maron, J. L., Marler, M., Klironomos, J. N. & Cleveland, C. C. Soil fungal pathogens and the relationship between plant diversity and productivity. Ecol. Lett. 14, 36–41 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schnitzer, S. A. et al. Soil microbes drive the classic plant diversity–productivity pattern. Ecology 92, 296–303 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marquard, E. et al. Changes in the abundance of grassland species in monocultures versus mixtures and their relation to biodiversity effects. PLoS ONE 8, e75599 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Roscher, C. et al. Identifying population- and community-level mechanisms of diversity–stability relationships in experimental grasslands. J. Ecol. 99, 1460–1469 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Civitello, D. J. et al. Biodiversity inhibits parasites: broad evidence for the dilution effect. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 8667–8671 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kulmatiski, A., Beard, K. H. & Heavilin, J. Plant–soil feedbacks provide an additional explanation for diversity–productivity relationships. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 3020–3026 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
van Moorsel, S. J. et al. Co-occurrence history increases ecosystem stability and resilience in experimental plant communities. Ecology 102, e03205 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schöb, C., Brooker, R. W. & Zuppinger-Dingley, D. Evolution of facilitation requires diverse communities. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1381–1385 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Temperton, V. M., Mwangi, P. N., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Schmid, B. & Buchmann, N. Positive interactions between nitrogen-fixing legumes and four different neighbouring species in a biodiversity experiment. Oecologia 151, 190–205 (2007).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Furey, G. N. & Tilman, D. Plant biodiversity and the regeneration of soil fertility. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2111321118 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gubsch, M. et al. Foliar and soil δ15N values reveal increased nitrogen partitioning among species in diverse grassland communities. Plant Cell Environ. 34, 895–908 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Roscher, C., Schmid, B., Buchmann, N., Weigelt, A. & Schulze, E.-D. Legume species differ in the responses of their functional traits to plant diversity. Oecologia 165, 437–452 (2011).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Eisenhauer, N. et al. Plant diversity effects on soil microorganisms support the singular hypothesis. Ecology 91, 485–496 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fornara, D. A. & Tilman, D. Plant functional composition influences rates of soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation. J. Ecol. 96, 314–322 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lange, M. et al. Plant diversity increases soil microbial activity and soil carbon storage. Nat. Commun. 6, 6707 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, S. et al. Species richness promotes ecosystem carbon storage: evidence from biodiversity-ecosystem functioning experiments. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20202063 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cong, W.-F. et al. Plant species richness promotes soil carbon and nitrogen stocks in grasslands without legumes. J. Ecol. 102, 1163–1170 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Leimer, S. et al. Mechanisms behind plant diversity effects on inorganic and organic N leaching from temperate grassland. Biogeochemistry 131, 339–353 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, Q. et al. Consistently positive effect of species diversity on ecosystem, but not population, temporal stability. Ecol. Lett. 24, 2256–2266 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hector, A. et al. General stabilizing effects of plant diversity on grassland productivity through population asynchrony and overyielding. Ecology 91, 2213–2220 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Turnbull, L. A., Levine, J. M., Loreau, M. & Hector, A. Coexistence, niches and biodiversity effects on ecosystem functioning. Ecol. Lett. 16, 116–127 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wright, A. J. et al. Flooding disturbances increase resource availability and productivity but reduce stability in diverse plant communities. Nat. Commun. 6, 6092 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fischer, F. M. et al. Plant species richness and functional traits affect community stability after a flood event. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 371, 20150276 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roscher, C. et al. A functional trait-based approach to understand community assembly and diversity–productivity relationships over 7 years in experimental grasslands. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 15, 139–149 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eisenhauer, N. et al. Biotic interactions, community assembly, and eco-evolutionary dynamics as drivers of long-term biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships. Res. Ideas Outcomes 5, e47042 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
van Moorsel, S. J., Schmid, M. W., Hahl, T., Zuppinger-Dingley, D. & Schmid, B. Selection in response to community diversity alters plant performance and functional traits. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 33, 51–61 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
van Moorsel, S. J. et al. Community evolution increases plant productivity at low diversity. Ecol. Lett. 21, 128–137 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roeder, A. et al. Plant diversity effects on plant longevity and their relationships to population stability in experimental grasslands. J. Ecol. 109, 2566–2579 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cadotte, M. W., Dinnage, R. & Tilman, D. Phylogenetic diversity promotes ecosystem stability. Ecology 93, S223–S233 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pu, Z., Daya, P., Tan, J. & Jiang, L. Phylogenetic diversity stabilizes community biomass. J. Plant Ecol. 7, 176–187 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Carrara, F., Giometto, A., Seymour, M., Rinaldo, A. & Altermatt, F. Experimental evidence for strong stabilizing forces at high functional diversity of aquatic microbial communities. Ecology 96, 1340–1350 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hooper, D. U. et al. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a conceensus of current knowledge. Ecol. Monogr. 75, 3–35 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ruijven, J. V. & Berendse, F. Contrasting effects of diversity on the temporal stability of plant populations. Oikos 116, 1323–1330 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Proulx, R. et al. Diversity promotes temporal stability across levels of ecosystem organization in experimental grasslands. PLoS ONE 5, e13382 (2010).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hoaglin, D. C., Iglewicz, B. & Tukey, J. W. Performance of some resistant rules for outlier labeling. JASA 81, 991–999 (1986).Article 
MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M. & de Mazancourt, C. Species synchrony and its drivers: neutral and nonneutral community dynamics in fluctuating environments. Am. Nat. 172, E48–E66 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gross, K. et al. Species richness and the temporal stability of biomass production: a new analysis of recent biodiversity experiments. Am. Nat. 183, 1–12 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmid, B., Baruffol, M., Wang, Z. & Niklaus, P. A. A guide to analyzing biodiversity experiments. J. Plant Ecol. 10, 91–110 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rosseel, Y. lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 48, 1–36 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar  More