Philippa Kaur

Sites description and field operationsA total of six field studies were conducted in two different regions over two seasons. Four studies (two dryland and two irrigated) were in Kansas, United States (dryland: 39°4′30″ N, − 96°44′43″ W, irrigated: 39°4′25″N, − 96°43′12″ W) during the 2019 and 2020 growing seasons (hereafter referred to as USDry19, USIrr19, USDry20, and USIrr20 studies). The remaining two studies (dryland) were in Entre Rios, Argentina (31°50′49″ S; 60°32′16″ W) during the 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 growing seasons (hereafter referred to as Arg19 and Arg20 studies). The soils were Fluventic Hapludolls [silt loam, 40% sand, 13% clay, 47% silt, organic matter (OM) 1.7%, 7.7 pH, 31.1 ppm P (Bray−1)] at the US dryland studies, and Pachic Argiudolls [silty clay loam, 10.1% sand, 30.6% clay and 59.3% silt, OM 3.2%, 6.8 pH, 34.7 ppm P (Bray−1)] at the US irrigated studies. At the Argentinian studies soil was a Vertic Argiudoll in 2019 [silty clay loam to clay loam, 3.9% sand, 27.6% clay, 67.9% silt, OM 2.65%, 7.2 pH, 12.5 ppm P (Bray−1)] and an Acuic Argiudoll in 2020 [silt loam to silty-clay-loam, 5.6% sand, 28.6% clay, 65.8% silt, OM 3.33%].The US dryland and irrigated studies were sown on June 4, 2019, and May 20, 2020. In 2019, the dryland study was replanted on June 29 due to poor emergence after the first sowing. The studies in Argentina were sown on December 5 in 2018 and November 20 in 2019. At all six studies, plots were kept free of weeds, pests, and diseases through recommended chemical control.The genotypes used in the US were P40A47X (MG 4.0) and P39A58X (MG 3.9) (Corteva Agriscience, Johnston, IA, USA) in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Both varieties are tolerant to glyphosate and dicamba herbicides (RR2X) and have low lodging probability. For the northeast region of Kansas, recommended sowing dates range from May 15 to June 15 along with MG 421. In addition, recommended seeding rates are between 270 and 355 thousand seeds ha−1 for low-yielding environments and 190 to 285 thousand seeds ha−1 for medium- and high-yielding environments13. In Argentina, the genotype AW5815IPRO (MG 5.8, Bayer, Leverkusen, Germany) was used both in 2020 and 2021, it is tolerant to glyphosate and sulfonylureas, and has low lodging probability. Recommended sowing dates for Entre Rios considering soybeans as a single crop range from October 20 to December 10, and MG usually range from 4 to 6; lastly, seeding rate recommendations are between 200 and 250 thousand seeds ha−1 in the region22.Study designThe studies carried out in the US were arranged as a split plot design with three replicates in both 2019 and 2020. In 2019, the main plot treatment factor was planter type with two levels [John Deere (Moline, Illinois, US) Max Emerge planter (ME, 12 rows), and John Deere Exact Emerge Planter (EE, 16 rows)], and the split-plot treatment factor was seeding rate with two levels (160 and 321 thousand seeds ha−1). In 2020 the main plot treatment factor was also planter type with two levels (ME and EE), and the split-plot treatment factor was seeding rate with four levels (160, 215, 270 and 321 thousand seeds ha−1). Planting speed was 7 km h−1 in both studies and years, plots were 24 and 32 rows wide when planted with ME and EE, respectively, with 0.76 m row spacing. Plot length was 80 m in the dryland studies and 160 m in the irrigated studies. The studies in Argentina were arranged as a single replicate of each seeding rate (100, 230, 360 and 550 thousand seeds ha−1) in both years. Planting speed was 5.5 km h−1 in both years, and plots were 10 rows wide with 0.52 m row spacing and 350 m in length.All treatment factors in US studies were evaluated with the overall goal of producing substantial variation in the variable of interest, plant-to-plant spatial uniformity, rather than to make an inference of their effect on yield. The Argentinian studies were only used for selection of stand uniformity variables due to the single replicate. Plant spatial uniformity variables were first fitted using the data from US studies (details below), and then the best explanatory metrics were selected to re-fit the relationships combining both data sets from US and Argentina. Finally, sowing dates, maturity groups, and seeding rates evaluated in this study at both locations (Arg and US) were aligned with those recommended for each region.Data collection and spacing uniformity variablesTwo segments of 2 m in length were established early in the season inside each plot. At the V5 (US studies) and R1 (Arg studies) soybean development stage23, the cumulative distance of the plants within each segment was measured and then used to calculate multiple derived variables. Plant spacing (cm) was calculated as the average distance between neighboring plants. In addition, the distance from a plant to each neighboring plant was classified as shorter or longer than the plant spacing (named nearest and farthest neighbor distance, respectively). Achieved versus Target Evenness Index (ATEI, dimensionless) was calculated as the ratio between the observed plant spacing and the theoretical plant spacing (TPS, cm), where TPS is the expected plant spacing derived from a specific seeding rate and row width (Eq. 1).$$ATEI = frac{Spacing;(cm) }{{TPS;(cm)}}$$
(1)
The ATEI index was designed to account for the proximity of the observed plant spacing to the TPS. Values closer to 1 indicate that the plant spacing is close to the TPS and values that are below or above 1 indicate that the plant spacing is lower or higher than the TPS, respectively; thereby departing from an ideal plant spacing. Hence, ATEI values greater than 1 depict both (i) non-uniform plant-to-plant spacing distribution and (ii) plant densities below the target (seeding rate). To further understand the meaning of ATEI, the relative density (rd) was calculated as the ratio between plant density (based on the number of plants in the 2 m segment) and seeding rate.To account for the unevenness of distance from a plant to both neighboring plants within the row, we used the Evenness Index (EI, dimensionless), calculated as the ratio between the distance to the nearest neighbor (cm) and the plant spacing (cm) of a given plant (Eq. 2). The Evenness Index values range from 0 to 1, a value closer to 1 indicates that a plant is equidistantly spaced to both of its neighboring plants within the row, if zero then those plants are occupying the same position (as doubles). It is important to note that EI does not provide information on the spacing (in distance, cm) or how close the spacing is compared to the TPS, but only describes the unevenness distance of a plant to its neighboring plants within a row.$$Evenness ;Index; (EI) = frac{nearest; neighbor ;(cm)}{{Spacing; (cm)}}$$
(2)
In addition, the distance from a plant to its preceding neighboring plant, and the TPS were used to classify the position of each plant into one of eight classes (Fig. 1). Plants were classified in classes ranging from “double” (preceding plant distance  Double-skip) as a function of seeding rate, planter type and their interaction (fixed effects), and block nested in site-year (random effect) (Tables 1 and 2). Independent models for each of the 4 US studies were built assessing the effects of planter type, seeding rate, and their interaction (fixed effects), and seeding rate nested in planter type, and in block (random effects) on the same variables previously mentioned (Supplementary Table 1). The models were run using the lmer function from lme4 package in R (R Core Team, 2021). In addition, the US and Arg studies were combined to evaluate the effect of site-year on yield, plant density, and all stand uniformity variables (Supplementary Fig. 1) using the lm function from package stats. Means separation were performed using Fisher’s LSD (Least Significance Difference) test (alpha = 0.05) with emmeans function from package emmeans.Table 1 Effect of planter type, seeding rate, and their interaction on variables from plant position classification for all US studies. References: percentage of perfectly spaced plants (Perfect), percentage of plants misplaced by 66% (Mis 66), percentage of plants misplaced by 33% (Mis 33), percentage of double plants (Double), percentage of short skips plants (Short-skip), percentage of long skip plants (Long-skip), percentage of double skips plants (Double-skip), and percentage of greater than double skip plants ( > Double-skip).Full size tableTable 2 Effect of planter type, seeding rate, and their interaction on yield and stand uniformity variables for all US studies. References: Spacing between plants standard deviation (Spacing sd), achieved versus targeted evenness index mean and standard deviation (ATEI and ATEI sd, respectively), and evenness index mean and standard deviation (EI and EI sd, respectively).Full size tableCommunity-scale data from the four US studies were combined and fitted to bivariate linear regression models with yield as the response variable and each of the stand spatial uniformity variables as the explanatory variable. Significant models (alpha = 0.05) were further evaluated by calculating the coefficient of determination (R2) and root mean squared error (RMSE) (Fig. 2). Models with the lower RMSE and higher R2 were selected as those that best captured the effect of non-uniform stands on soybean yield. After variables were selected, both US and Arg data sets were combined and the linear regressions between the selected variables and yield were re-fitted to assess the consistency of the relationships when an independent data set was included. Community-scale yield from US and Arg studies was modelled as a function of the selected stand uniformity variable, country (US and Arg), and their interaction (fixed effects) (Fig. 3). The spatial uniformity metric showing the most consistent relationship for both US and Arg studies (i.e., non-significant interaction between stand uniformity metric and country), was selected to continue the analysis. The bivariate linear regression models were run with function lm.Figure 2Relationship between stand uniformity variables and soybean yield for US studies. ATEI mean and sd achieved versus targeted evenness index mean and standard deviation, EI mean and sd evenness index mean and standard deviation, Perfect percentage of perfectly spaced plants, R2 coefficient of determination, RMSE root mean square error. All stand uniformity variables presented a significant slope at alpha = 0.05.Full size imageFigure 3Relationship of spacing standard deviation (Spacing sd, cm) and achieved versus targeted evenness index standard deviation (ATEI sd) to soybean yield. Different colors and line types denote different countries (Argentina, Arg—full line, red points; United States, US—dashed line, blue points). R2 coefficient of determination, RMSE root mean square error.Full size imageDifferent environmental conditions and seeding rate levels may modify the effect of plant spatial uniformity on yield. To explore this, each of the studies from Arg and US were separated into low- (USDry19 and ArgDry20, mean of 2.7 Mg ha−1), medium- (USIrr19, USDry20 and ArgDry19, mean of 3.0 Mg ha−1), and high- (USIrr20, mean of 4.3 Mg ha−1) yield environments based on the effect of site-year on yield (Supplementary Fig. 1). Additionally, the tested seeding rates were separated in low ( 300 thousand seeds ha−1) levels based on the current optimal seeding rate for medium yielding environments (235 thousand seeds ha−1, 4 Mg ha−1)13 and the extreme values proposed by Suhre et al.11 (148 and 445 thousand seeds ha−1). This classification was used to model yield as a function of (i) the selected stand uniformity metric, yield environment, and their interaction, and (ii) the selected stand uniformity metric, seeding rate levels, and their interaction. These models were tested to obtain a robust conclusion on the overall effect of yield environment and seeding rate levels, and their interactions (all treated as fixed effects) with plant-to-plant spatial uniformity relative to the response variable, soybean yield. The Akaike information criteria (AIC) was used to compare the full (with interactions) relative to the reduced models (single effects).Ethics declarationsExperimental research and field studies on plants including the collection of plant material, complied with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation. More

Study site and field data collectionPermanent 1 m2 photoquadrats were established on Heron Reef in 1962/63, using 9 mm diameter mild steel (rebar) pegs, which were replaced over time. From the 1990’s, replacement pegs were stainless steel for greater longevity. Four sites were established, the protected (south) crest, inner flat, exposed (north) crest and exposed pools. Co-ordinates for each site are presented in Table 1, the layout shown in Fig. 2, and sites have been well described previously5,6. At each census, a 1 m2 frame divided into a 5 × 5 grid using string was placed over the pegs, and the quadrat photographed from directly above at low tide. From 1963 until 2003, a 35 mm camera and colour slide film were used. The camera was attached to a tripod affixed to the 1 m2 frame, and captured around 2/3 of the quadrat. The frame (and camera) were then rotated 180 degrees to capture the remainder of the quadrat. After 2003, a hand-held digital camera was used, with the entire quadrat being captured in a single image. Concurrent with each census, mud maps of each quadrat were hand drawn in the field, and all colonies identified in situ by someone with expertise in coral taxonomy.Table 1 Coordinates of the study sites on Heron Island Reef (WGS84).Full size tableFig. 2Quadrat layouts for each of the four sites respectively, noting that the north crest and north ridge have been treated as a single north crest site in previous publications. Underlining indicates original 1962/63 quadrats. Other quadrats were added in or after 2008, as indicated in the text. Contiguous quadrats are pictured bordering each other. Spacing between separate quadrats or groups of quadrats is not shown to scale. Note that up until 2005, NRNW was known as NR. The acronyms in each quadrat represent its name.Full size imageAt the protected (south) crest, a set of six contiguous quadrats were established in 1963 in a 2 × 3 arrangement parallel to the waterline, and about 420 m southeast of the island. This site is exposed at low tide, and was photographed once all water had drained off it. Images of quadrats A, C & E (the shoreward row) from 1963 to 2012 have been fully processed, and the data have been through QA/QC. Data after 2012 exist as images only. These quadrats form the basis of previous analyses1,4,5,6 for this site. Photographs are available for quadrats B, D & F, but apart from 2003–2010, have not been processed. In 2010, an additional two quadrats were established either side of the original six, leading to a 2 × 5 arrangement. Again, only imagery is available for these additional quadrats.At the inner flat, two pairs of contiguous quadrats were established in 1962, 44 m apart, about 70 m south of the island. This site is covered by ~10 cm of water at low tide, so could only be photographed on a still day. Imagery for this site is only available to 2012, after which the marker stakes appear to have been removed in a cleanup of the area. Images for one quadrat in each pair have been processed, but have not been subject to full QA/QC.At the exposed (north) crest main site, a set of four contiguous quadrats was established about 1100 m northeast of the island in 1963. An additional single quadrat (north ridge) was established 326 m to the east. Images from 1963 to 2012 have been fully processed, and the data have been through QA/QC. Data after 2012 exist as images only. In 2005, the single north ridge quadrat was expanded to 4 m2, and in 2008, both subsites were expanded to six quadrats in a 2 × 3 arrangement. These additional quadrats have been digitised up to 2012, but have not been through full QA/QC.The exposed pools are two individual quadrats about 5 m apart about 30 m north of the eastern (north ridge) exposed crest site. These are on the edge of a natural pool, and range from ~5–50 cm deep at low tide, and so could only be photographed on a calm day. Imagery for this site is only available until 2005, after which the marker stakes could not be relocated. Images from 1963 to 1998 have been processed, but have not been through full QA/QC.Retrieval of coral composition data from the photoquadratsProcessing of the images involved scanning the colour slides to produce digital images, and then orthorectifying each image to a 1 m2 basemap in ArcGIS (ESRI Ltd). The corners of the frame, and the holes for the string grid, were used as control points for the orthorectification. For images that originated as colour slides, each half of the quadrat was individually orthorectified to the same basemap, producing a single image of the entire quadrat (see Fig. 3). While contiguous quadrats were orthorectified individually, they were done so against a basemap containing all quadrats in the group, meaning that the resulting images can be easily merged to create a single image of the group. The outlines of all visible coral colonies ( >~1 cm2), and other benthic organisms such as algae and clams, were then digitised in ArcGIS to create a single shapefile for each quadrat for each year. Each colony was represented as an individual feature within the shapefile, and was assigned a unique colony number and species based on the mud maps drawn in the field. Colony numbers were consistent across years, allowing individual colonies to be tracked over time. If a colony underwent fission, the original colony number was retained for each, with the addition of a unique identifier after a decimal point. For example, if colony 35 split in two, the resultant colonies were identified as 35.1 and 35.2. If 35.2 later split again, the resultant colonies were identified as 35.2.1 and 35.2.2. If the colony overlapped the edge of the quadrat, only the area within the quadrat was digitised, and a flag was applied to indicate that only part of the colony was included (edgestatus = 1 in the data). Upon completion of digitisation, ArcGIS was used to calculate the area and perimeter of all colonies. While multiple census were conducted in 1963, 1971 and 1983, only a single census in each year has been processed. There are currently no plans to undertake further digitisation or QA/QC of this data set.Fig. 3Example orthorectified and stitched (prior to 2001) images from the NCNE quadrat, showing the effects of a cyclone that removed all colonies in 1972, and slow recovery over subsequent decades.Full size image More

Johnson, N. et al. (eds) Global Soil Biodiversity Atlas (EU, 2016).
Google Scholar 
FAO et al. State of Knowledge of Soil Biodiversity — Status, Challenges and Potentialities (FAO, 2020).
Google Scholar 
Cameron, E. K. et al. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2, 1042–1043 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van den Hoogen, J. et al. Nature 572, 194–198 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, H. R. P. et al. Science 366, 480–485 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guerra, C. A. et al. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05292-x (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moore, J. C. & de Ruiter, P. C. Energetic Food Webs: An Analysis of Real and Model Ecosystems (Oxford Univ. Press, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Wolters V. et al. Bioscience 50, 1089–1098 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schimel, J. P. & Schaeffer, S. M. Front. Microbiol. 3, 348 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
IPCC. In Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability: Summary for Policymakers (eds Shukla, P. R. et al.) 50 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).
Google Scholar 
Chenu, C. et al. Soil Till. Res. 188, 41–52 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Liang, C., Schimel, J. P. & Jastrow, J. D. Nature Microbiol. 2, 17105 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hannula, S. E. & Morriën, E. Geoderma 413, 115767 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Walas, Ł, Ganatsas, P., Iszkuło, G., Thomas, P. A. & Dering, M. Spatial genetic structure and diversity of natural populations of Aesculus hippocastanum L. in Greece. PLoS ONE 14, e0226225 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Song, Y. G. et al. Past, present and future suitable areas for the relict tree Pterocarya fraxinifolia (Juglandaceae): Integrating fossil records, niche modeling, and phylogeography for conservation. Eur. J. For. Res. 140, 1323–1339 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dyderski, M. K., Paź, S., Frelich, L. E. & Jagodziński, A. M. How much does climate change threaten European forest tree species distributions?. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 1150–1163 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chakraborty, D., Móricz, N., Rasztovits, E., Dobor, L. & Schueler, S. Provisioning forest and conservation science with high-resolution maps of potential distribution of major European tree species under climate change. Ann. For. Sci. 78, 1–18 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Williams, J. N. et al. Using species distribution models to predict new occurrences for rare plants. Divers. Distrib. 15, 565–576 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Watling, J. I. et al. Performance metrics and variance partitioning reveal sources of uncertainty in species distribution models. Ecol. Modell. 309, 48–59 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P. & Schapire, R. E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190, 231–259 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, S. J., Dudík, M. & Schapire, R. E. [Internet] Maxent software for modeling species niches and distributions. url: http://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/maxent/. Accessed 13 July 2022.Elith, J. et al. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers. Distrib. 17, 43–57 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marcer, A., Sáez, L., Molowny-Horas, R., Pons, X. & Pino, J. Using species distribution modelling to disentangle realised versus potential distributions for rare species conservation. Biol. Conserv. 166, 221–230 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rigling, A., Eilmann, B., Koechli, R. & Dobbertin, M. Mistletoe-induced crown degradation in Scots pine in a xeric environment. Tree Physiol. 30, 845–852 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sangüesa-Barreda, G., Linares, J. C. & Camarero, J. J. Mistletoe effects on Scots pine decline following drought events: Insights from within-tree spatial patterns, growth and carbohydrates. Tree Physiol. 32, 585–598 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kollas, C., Gutsch, M., Hommel, R., Lasch-Born, P. & Suckow, F. Mistletoe-induced growth reductions at the forest stand scale. Tree Physiol. 38, 735–744 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schulze, E. D. & Ehleringer, J. R. The effect of nitrogen supply on growth and water-use efficiency of xylem-tapping mistletoes. Planta 162, 268–275 (1984).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Escher, P. et al. Transpiration, CO2 assimilation, WUE, and stomatal aperture in leaves of Viscum album L: Effect of abscisic acid (ABA) in the xylem sap of its host (Populus x euamericana). Plant Physiol. Biochem. 46, 64–70 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zweifel, R., Bangerter, S., Rigling, A. & Sterck, F. J. Pine and mistletoes: How to live with a leak in the water flow and storage system?. J. Exp. Bot. 63, 2565–2578 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mutlu, S., Osma, E., Ilhan, V., Turkoglu, H. I. & Atici, O. Mistletoe (Viscum album) reduces the growth of the Scots pine by accumulating essential nutrient elements in its structure as a trap. Trees 30, 815–824 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tsopelas, P., Angelopoulos, A., Economou, A. & Soulioti, N. Mistletoe (Viscum album) in the fir forest of Mount Parnis Greece. For. Ecol. Manag. 202, 59–65 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dobbertin, M. & Rigling, A. Pine mistletoe (Viscum album ssp. austriacum) contributes to Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) mortality in the Rhone valley of Switzerland. For. Pathol. 36, 309–322 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lech, P., Żółciak, A. & Hildebrand, R. Occurrence of European mistletoe (Viscum album L.) on forest trees in Poland and its dynamics of spread in the period 2008–2018. Forests 11, 83 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Iszkuło, G. et al. Jemioła jako zagrożenie dla zdrowotności drzewostanów iglastych. Sylwan 164, 226–236 (2020) ([In Polish]).
Google Scholar 
Mellado, A., Morillas, L., Gallardo, A. & Zamora, R. Temporal dynamic of parasite-mediated linkages between the forest canopy and soil processes and the microbial community. New Phytol. 211, 1382–1392 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mellado, A. & Zamora, R. Generalist birds govern the seed dispersal of a parasitic plant with strong recruitment constraints. Oecologia 176, 139–147 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hódar, J. A., Lázaro-González, A. & Zamora, R. Beneath the mistletoe: parasitized trees host a more diverse herbaceous vegetation and are more visited by rabbits. Ann. For. Sci. 75, 1–8 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zuber, D. Biological flora of Central Europe: Viscum album L. Flora Morphol. Distrib Funct. Ecol. Plants 199, 181–203 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Urech, K. & Baumgartner, S. Chemical constituents of Viscum album L.: Implications for the pharmaceutical preparation of mistletoe. In: Mistletoe: From mythology to evidence-based medicine. (eds. Zänker, K.S. & Kaveri, S. V.), 11–23. (S. Karger AG, Basel, Switzerland, 2015).Singh, B. N. et al. European Viscum album: a potent phytotherapeutic agent with multifarious phytochemicals, pharmacological properties and clinical evidence. RSC Adv. 6, 23837–23857 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jeffree, C. E. & Jeffree, E. P. Redistribution of the potential geographical ranges of mistletoe and colorado beetle in Europe in response to the temperature component of climate change. Funct. Ecol. 10, 562–577 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
Troels-Smith, J. Ivy, mistletoe and elm climate indicators-fodder plants. A contribution to the interpretation of the pollen zone border VII-VIII. Dan. Geol. Undersøg. IV Række 4, 1–32 (1960).
Google Scholar 
Dobbertin, M. et al. The upward shift in altitude of pine mistletoe (Viscum album ssp. austriacum) in Switzerland—the result of climate warming?. Int. J. Biometeorol. 50, 40–47 (2005).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zamora, R. & Mellado, A. Identifying the abiotic and biotic drivers behind the elevational distribution shift of a parasitic plant. Plant Biol. 21, 307–317 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Barney, C. W., Hawksworth, F. G. & Geils, B. W. Hosts of Viscum album. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 28, 187–208 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Böhling, N. et al. Notes on the Cretan mistletoe, Viscum album subsp. creticum subsp. nova (Loranthaceae/Viscaceae). Isr. J. Plant Sci. 50, 77–84 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Plants of the World Online [Internet] url: https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:921668-1. Accessed 13 July 2022.Zuber, D. & Widmer, A. Phylogeography and host race differentiation in the European mistletoe (Viscum album L.). Mol. Ecol. 18, 1946–1962 (2009).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schaller, G., Urech, K., Grazi, G. & Giannattasio, M. Viscotoxin composition of the three European subspecies of Viscum album. Planta Med 64, 677–678 (1998).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kahle-Zuber, D. Biology and evolution of the European mistletoe (Viscum album). Doctoral Thesis. ETH Zurich. (2008).Zuber, D. & Widmer, A. Genetic evidence for host specificity in the hemi-parasitic Viscum album L. (Viscaceae). Mol. Ecol. 9, 1069–1073 (2000).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mejnartowicz, L. Relationship and genetic diversity of mistletoe [Viscum album L.] subspecies. Acta Soc. Bot. Pol. Pol. 75, 39–49 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Xie, W., Adolf, J. & Melzig, M. F. Identification of Viscum album L. miRNAs and prediction of their medicinal values. PLoS ONE 12, e0187776 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Valle, A. C. V., de Carvalho, A. C. & Andrade, R. V. Viscum album-literature review. Int. J. Sci. Res 10, 63–71 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Schröder, L. et al. The gene space of European mistletoe (Viscum album). Plant J. 109, 278–294 (2022).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sangüesa-Barreda, G. et al. Delineating limits: Confronting predicted climatic suitability to field performance in mistletoe populations. J. Ecol. 106, 2218–2229 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
GBIF.org [Internet] GBIF Occurrence Download Doi: https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.zw6f5q. Accessed 27 July 2021.GBIF.org [Internet] GBIF Occurrence Download Doi: https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.6wmc9d. Accessed 6 August 2021.FloraWeb [Internet] url: https://www.floraweb.de. Accessed 10 December 2021.Pladias – Database of the Czech Flora and Vegetation. [Internet] url: www.pladias.cz. Accessed 14 July 2022.Zając, A., Zając, M., Tertil, R. & Harman, I. Atlas rozmieszczenia roślin naczyniowych w Polsce. 593 (Instytut Botaniki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Kraków, 2001) [In Polish].Idžojtić, M., Kogelnik, M., Franjić, J. & Škvorc, Ž. Hosts and distribution of Viscum album L. ssp. album in Croatia and Slovenia. Plant Biosyst. 140, 50–55 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Varga, I. et al. Changes in the Distribution of European Mistletoe (Viscum album) in Hungary During the Last Hundred Years. Folia Geobot 49, 559–577 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wild, J. et al. Plant distribution data for the Czech Republic integrated in the Pladias database. Preslia 91, 1–24 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krasylenko, Y. et al. The European mistletoe (Viscum album L.): Distribution, host range, biotic interactions, and management worldwide with special emphasis on Ukraine. Botany 98, 499–516 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Karger, D. N. et al. Climatologies at high resolution for the Earth land surface areas. Sci. Data 4, 170122 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Karger D. N., et al. Data from: Climatologies at high resolution for the earth’s land surface areas. Dryad Digital Repository (2018).Gutjahr, O. et al. Max planck institute earth system model (MPI-ESM1. 2) for the high-resolution model intercomparison project (HighResMIP). Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 3241–3281 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hijmans, R. J., & van Etten, J. raster: Geographic analysis and modeling with raster data. R package version 2.0-12. (2012).R Core Team. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. [Internet] url: https://cran.r-project.org/ Accessed 14 July 2022.Chakraborty, D., Móricz, N., Rasztovits, E., Dobor, L. & Schueler, S. Provisioning forest and conservation science with European tree species distribution models under climate change (Version v1). Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3686918 (2020).Wang, Z., Chang, Y. I., Ying, Z., Zhu, L. & Yang, Y. A parsimonious threshold-independent protein feature selection method through the area under receiver operating characteristic curve. Bioinformatics 23, 2788–2794 (2007).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lobo, J. M., Jiménez-Valverde, A. & Hortal, J. The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modelling. Ecography 33, 103–114 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
QGIS Development Team. QGIS Geographic Information Sys-tem. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. [Internet]. url: https://www.qgis.org/en/site/. Accessed 14 July 2022.Fischer, J. T. Water relations of mistletoes and their hosts. In: The biology of mistletoes. (eds. Calder, M., & Bernhard, T.), 163–184 (Academic Press, Sydney, 1983).Skre, O. The regional distribution of vascular plants in Scandinavia with requirements for high summer temperatures. Norweg. J. Bot. 26, 295–318 (1979).
Google Scholar 
Wangerin, B. Loranthaceae. In: Lebensgeschichte der Blütenpflanzen Mitteleuropas (eds. Kirchner, O. V., Loew, E., & Schroeter, C.) 2, 953–1146 (E. Ulmer, Stuttgart, 1937).Rybalka, I. A. Relationship between density of the white mistletoe (Viscum album L.) and some landscape and environmental characteristics of urban areas in the case of Kharkiv. Ekologicheskiy Vestnik 1, 87–97 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Patykowski, J. & Kołodziejek, J. Comparative analysis of antioxidant activity in leaves of different hosts infected by mistletoe (Viscum album L. subsp. album). Arch. Biol. Sci. 65, 851–861 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Skrypnik, L., Maslennikov, P., Feduraev, P., Pungin, A. & Belov, N. Ecological and landscape factors affecting the spread of European mistletoe (Viscum album L.) in urban areas (A Case Study of the Kaliningrad City, Russia). Plants 9, 394 (2020).PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kunick, W. Veränderungen von Flora und Vegetation einer Grosstadt dargestellt am Beispiel von Berlin (West). PhD Thesis, Technische Universität (1974). [In German].Kołodziejek, J., Patykowski, J. & Kołodziejek, R. Distribution, frequency and host patterns of European mistletoe (Viscum album subsp. album) in the major city of Lodz Poland. Biol. 68, 55–64 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Caudullo, G., Welk, E. & San-Miguel-Ayanz, J. Chorological maps for the main European woody species. Data Brief 12, 662–666 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, M. S. & Ignizio, D. A. Bioclimatic predictors for supporting ecological applications in the conterminous United States. US Geol. Surv. Data Ser. 691, 4–9 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Luther, P., Becker, H. & Leroi, R. Die Mistel: Botanik, Lektine, medizinische Anwendung. Springer (1987).Gazol, A. et al. Distinct effects of climate warming on populations of silver fir (Abies alba) across Europe. J. Biogeogr. 42, 1150–1162 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tikkanen, O. P. et al. Freezing tolerance of seeds can explain differences in the distribution of two widespread mistletoe subspecies in Europe. For. Ecol. Manag. 482, 118806 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pilichowski, S. et al. Wpływ Viscum album ssp. austriacum (Wiesb.) Vollm. na przyrost radialny Pinus sylvestris L. Sylwan 162, 452–459 (2018) ([In Polish]).
Google Scholar 
Szmidla, H., Tkaczyk, M., Plewa, R., Tarwacki, G. & Sierota, Z. Impact of common mistletoe (Viscum album L.) on scots pine forests—A call for action. Forests 10, 847 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wójcik, R. & Kędziora, W. Abundance of Viscum in central Poland: Results from a large-scale mistletoe inventory. Environ. Sci. Proc. 3, 98 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Sangüesa-Barreda, G., Linares, J. C. & Camarero, J. J. Drought and mistletoe reduce growth and water-use efficiency of Scots pine. For. Ecol. Manag. 296, 64–73 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mathiasen, R. L., Nickrent, D. L., Shaw, D. C. & Watson, D. M. Mistletoes: Pathology, systematics, ecology, and management. Plant Dis. 92, 988–1006 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Catal, Y. & Carus, S. Effect of pine mistletoe on radial growth of crimean pine (Pinus nigra) in Turkey. J. Environ. Biol. 32, 263 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Skre, O. High temperature demands for growth and development in Norway Spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst.] in Scandinavia. Meld Nor Landbrukshøgsk 51, 1–29 (1971).
Google Scholar 
Utaaker, K. A temperature-growth index—the respiration equivalent—used in climatic studies on the meso-scale in Norway. Agric. Meteorol. 5, 351–359 (1968).Article 

Google Scholar 
Iversen, J. Viscum, Hedera and Ilex as climate indicators: A contribution to the study of the post-glacial temperature climate. Geol. fören. Stockh. förh. 66, 463–483 (1944).Article 

Google Scholar 
Briggs, J. Mistletoe, Viscum album (Santalaceae), in Britain and Ireland; a discussion and review of current status and trends. Brit. Ir. Bot. 3, 419–454 (2021).
Google Scholar  More

Bardgett, R. D. & van der Putten, W. H. Belowground biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Nature 515, 505–511 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guerra, C. A. et al. Tracking, targeting, and conserving soil biodiversity. Science 371, 239–241 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wall, D. H. et al. (eds) Soil Ecology and Ecosystem Services (Oxford University Press, 2012).Jansson, J. K. & Hofmockel, K. S. Soil microbiomes and climate change. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 35–46 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
de Vries, F. T. et al. Soil food web properties explain ecosystem services across European land use systems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 14296–14301 (2013).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Adhikari, K. & Hartemink, A. E. Linking soils to ecosystem services—a global review. Geoderma 262, 101–111 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pereira, P., Bogunovic, I., Muñoz-Rojas, M. & Brevik, E. C. Soil ecosystem services, sustainability, valuation and management. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 5, 7–13 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wall, D. H., Nielsen, U. N. & Six, J. Soil biodiversity and human health. Nature 528, 69–76 (2015).Delgado-Baquerizo, M. et al. The proportion of soil-borne pathogens increases with warming at the global scale. Nat. Clim. Chang. 10, 550–554 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rillig, M. C. et al. The role of multiple global change factors in driving soil functions and microbial biodiversity. Science 366, 886–890 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guerra, C. A. et al. Global vulnerability of soil ecosystems to erosion. Landsc. Ecol. 35, 823–842 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Geisen, S., Wall, D. H. & van der Putten, W. H. Challenges and opportunities for soil biodiversity in the Anthropocene. Curr. Biol. 29, R1036–R1044 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jung, M. et al. Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1499–1509 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xu, H. et al. Ensuring effective implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity targets. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 411–418 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Díaz, S. et al. (eds). Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019); https://zenodo.org/record/3553579#.YyhIsXbMK70Phillips, H. R. P. et al. Global distribution of earthworm diversity. Science 366, 480–485 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van den Hoogen, J. et al. Soil nematode abundance and functional group composition at a global scale. Nature 572, 194–198 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delgado-baquerizo, M. et al. A global atlas of the dominant bacteria found in soil. Science 325, 320–325 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tedersoo, L. et al. Global diversity and geography of soil fungi. Science 346, 1256688 (2014).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xu, X., Thornton, P. E. & Post, W. M. A global analysis of soil microbial biomass carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in terrestrial ecosystems: global soil microbial biomass C, N and P. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 22, 737–749 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Djukic, I. et al. Early stage litter decomposition across biomes. Sci. Total Environ. 628–629, 1369–1394 (2018).Guerra, C. A. et al. Global projections of the soil microbiome in the Anthropocene. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 30, 987–999 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cameron, E. K. et al. Global mismatches in aboveground and belowground biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 33, 1187–1192 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
El Moujahid, L. et al. Effect of plant diversity on the diversity of soil organic compounds. PLoS One 12, e0170494 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guerra, C. A. et al. Blind spots in global soil biodiversity and ecosystem function research. Nat. Commun. 11, 3870 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fierer, N. & Jackson, R. B. The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 626–631 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tedersoo, L. et al. Regional-scale in-depth analysis of soil fungal diversity reveals strong pH and plant species effects in Northern Europe. Front. Microbiol. 11, 1953 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Popp, A. et al. Land-use futures in the shared socio-economic pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 331–345 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dornelas, M. et al. Assemblage time series reveal biodiversity change but not systematic loss. Science 344, 296–299 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Egoh, B., Reyers, B., Rouget, M., Bode, M. & Richardson, D. M. Spatial congruence between biodiversity and ecosystem services in South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 142, 553–562 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jürgens, N. et al. The BIOTA Biodiversity Observatories in Africa—a standardized framework for large-scale environmental monitoring. Environ. Monit. Assess. 184, 655–678 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wyborn, C. & Evans, M. C. Conservation needs to break free from global priority mapping. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1322–1324 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hautier, Y. et al. Local loss and spatial homogenization of plant diversity reduce ecosystem multifunctionality. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 50–56 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhou, Z., Wang, C. & Luo, Y. Meta-analysis of the impacts of global change factors on soil microbial diversity and functionality. Nat. Commun. 11, 3072 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eisenhauer, N., Schulz, W., Scheu, S. & Jousset, A. Niche dimensionality links biodiversity and invasibility of microbial communities. Funct. Ecol. 27, 282–288 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wagg, C., Bender, S. F., Widmer, F. & van der Heijden, M. G. A. Soil biodiversity and soil community composition determine ecosystem multifunctionality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 5266–5270 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Haines-Young, R. H. & Potschin, M. B. in Ecosystems Ecology: A New Synthesis (eds Raffaelli, D. G. & Frid, C. L. J.) Ch. 6 (2012).Smith, L. C. et al. Large‐scale drivers of relationships between soil microbial properties and organic carbon across Europe. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 30, 2070–2083 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Keesstra, S. et al. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Sci. Total Environ. 610-611, 997–1009 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Le Provost, G. et al. Contrasting responses of above- and belowground diversity to multiple components of land-use intensity. Nat. Commun. 12, 3918 (2021).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tanneberger, F. et al. The power of nature‐based solutions: how peatlands can help us to achieve key EU sustainability objectives. Adv. Sustain. Syst. 5, 2000146 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnston, A. et al. Observed and predicted effects of climate change on species abundance in protected areas. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 1055–1061 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hannah, L. et al. Protected area needs in a changing climate. Front. Ecol. Environ. 5, 131–138 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gallardo, B. et al. Protected areas offer refuge from invasive species spreading under climate change. Glob. Chang. Biol. 23, 5331–5343 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Neill, B. C. et al. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 169–180 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fedele, G., Donatti, C. I., Bornacelly, I. & Hole, D. G. Nature-dependent people: mapping human direct use of nature for basic needs across the tropics. Glob. Environ. Change 71, 102368 (2021).Visconti, P. et al. Protected area targets post-2020. Science 364, 239–241 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Allan, J. R. et al. The minimum land area requiring conservation attention to safeguard biodiversity. Science 376, 1094–1101 (2022).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Maestre, F. T. et al. Plant species richness and ecosystem multifunctionality in global drylands. Science 335, 214–218 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delgado-Baquerizo, M. et al. Changes in belowground biodiversity during ecosystem development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 116, 6891–6896 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mace, G. M. Whose conservation? Science 345, 1558–1560 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Amaral-Zettler, L. A., McCliment, E. A., Ducklow, H. W. & Huse, S. M. A method for studying protistan diversity using massively parallel sequencing of V9 hypervariable regions of small-subunit ribosomal RNA genes. PLoS One 4, e6372 (2009).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Stoeck, T. et al. Multiple marker parallel tag environmental DNA sequencing reveals a highly complex eukaryotic community in marine anoxic water. Mol. Ecol. 19, 21–31 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ramirez, K. S. et al. Biogeographic patterns in below-ground diversity in New York City’s Central Park are similar to those observed globally. Proc. Biol. Sci. 281, 20141988 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. & Flyvbjerg, H. Error filtering, pair assembly and error correction for next-generation sequencing reads. Bioinformatics 31, 3476–3482 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. UNOISE2: improved error-correction for Illumina 16S and ITS amplicon sequencing. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/081257 (2016).Tedersoo, L. et al. Towards understanding diversity, endemicity and global change vulnerability of soil fungi. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.17.484796 (2022).Quast, C. et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D590–D596 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delgado-Baquerizo, M. et al. Global homogenization of the structure and function in the soil microbiome of urban greenspaces. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg5809 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, H. R. P., Heintz-Buschart, A. & Eisenhauer, N. Putting soil invertebrate diversity on the map. Mol. Ecol. 29, 655–657 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xiong, W. et al. A global overview of the trophic structure within microbiomes across ecosystems. Environ. Int. 151, 106438 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drummond, A. J. et al. Evaluating a multigene environmental DNA approach for biodiversity assessment. Gigascience 4, 46 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Oliverio, A. M., Gan, H., Wickings, K. & Fierer, N. A DNA metabarcoding approach to characterize soil arthropod communities. Soil Biol. Biochem. 125, 37–43 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Horton, D. J., Kershner, M. W. & Blackwood, C. B. Suitability of PCR primers for characterizing invertebrate communities from soil and leaf litter targeting metazoan 18S ribosomal or cytochrome oxidase I (COI) genes. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 80, 43–48 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delgado-Baquerizo, M. et al. Multiple elements of soil biodiversity drive ecosystem functions across biomes. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 210–220 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Carter, M. R. & Gregorich, E. G. (eds) Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis (CRC Press, 2007).Sparks, D. L. et al. (eds) Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 3: Chemical Methods (Wiley, 2020).Nguyen, N. H. et al. FUNGuild: an open annotation tool for parsing fungal community datasets by ecological guild. Fungal Ecol. 20, 241–248 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bell, C. W. et al. High-throughput fluorometric measurement of potential soil extracellular enzyme activities. J. Vis. Exp. 81, e50961 (2013).Wang, L. et al. Diversifying livestock promotes multidiversity and multifunctionality in managed grasslands. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 116, 6187–6192 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Durán, J., Delgado-Baquerizo, M., Rodríguez, A., Covelo, F. & Gallardo, A. Ionic exchange membranes (IEMs): a good indicator of soil inorganic N production. Soil Biol. Biochem. 57, 964–968 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Friedman, J. H. Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann. Stat. 29, 1189–1232 (2001).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sharma, N. XGBoost. The Extreme Gradient Boosting for Mining Applications (GRIN Verlag, 2018).Chen, T. & Guestrin, C. XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. In Proc. 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 785–794 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2016).Wilson. ParBayesianOptimization: Parallel Bayesian Optimization of Hyperparameters. R version 1 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ParBayesianOptimization (2021).Hastie, T., Friedman, J. & Tibshirani, R. The Elements of Statistical Learning (Springer, 2001).Jackson, D. A. & Chen, Y. Robust principal component analysis and outlier detection with ecological data. Environmetrics 15, 129–139 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Breiman, L. Bagging predictors. Mach. Learn. 24, 123–140 (1996).MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C. J. & Olshen, R. A. Classification and Regression Trees (Routledge, 1984).Ord, J. K. & Getis, A. Local spatial autocorrelation statistics: distributional issues and an application. Geogr. Anal. 27, 286–306 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Getis, A. & Ord, J. K. The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr. Anal. 24, 189–206 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Prasannakumar, V., Vijith, H., Charutha, R. & Geetha, N. Spatio-temporal clustering of road accidents: GIS based analysis and assessment. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 21, 317–325 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, G. Comparing spatial clustering tests based on rare to common spatial events. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 28, 691–699 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Araújo, M. B. et al. Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments. Sci. Adv. 5, eaat4858 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rousseeuw, P. J. & van Zomeren, B. C. Unmasking multivariate outliers and leverage points. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 85, 633–639 (1990).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hempel, S., Frieler, K., Warszawski, L., Schewe, J. & Piontek, F. A trend-preserving bias correction—the ISI-MIP approach. Earth Syst. Dyn. 4, 219–236 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lawrence, D. M. et al. The Land Use Model Intercomparison Project (LUMIP) contribution to CMIP6: rationale and experimental design. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 2973–2998 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kim, H. et al. A protocol for an intercomparison of biodiversity and ecosystem services models using harmonized land-use and climate scenarios. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 4537–4562 (2018).Dufresne, J.-L. et al. Climate change projections using the IPSL-CM5 Earth System Model: from CMIP3 to CMIP5. Clim. Dyn. 40, 2123–2165 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hurtt, G. C. et al. Harmonization of land-use scenarios for the period 1500–2100: 600 years of global gridded annual land-use transitions, wood harvest, and resulting secondary lands. Clim. Change 109, 117 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hurtt, G. C. et al. Harmonization of global land use change and management for the period 850–2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6. Geosci. Model Dev. 13, 5425–5464 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Riahi, K. et al. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 153–168 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Neill, B. C. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim. Change 122, 387–400 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Newbold, T. et al. Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520, 45–50 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Powers, R. P. & Jetz, W. Global habitat loss and extinction risk of terrestrial vertebrates under future land-use-change scenarios. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 323–329 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Pecl, G. T. et al. Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: impacts on ecosystems and human well-being. Science 355, (2017).IPBES. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (IPBES secretariat, 2019). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3831673.Elton, C. S. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. (University of Chicago Press, 1958).Lockwood, J. L., Hoopes, M. F. & Marchetti, M. P. Invasion Ecology. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2013).O’Dowd, D. J., Green, P. T. & Lake, P. S. Invasional “meltdown” on an oceanic island. Ecol. Lett. 6, 812–817 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Doherty, T. S., Glen, A. S., Nimmo, D. G., Ritchie, E. G. & Dickman, C. R. Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 113, 11261–11265 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Spatz, D. R. et al. Globally threatened vertebrates on islands with invasive species. Sci. Adv. 3, (2017).Pimentel, D. et al. Economic and environmental threats of alien plant, animal, and microbe invasions. Agriculture, Ecosyst. Environ. 84, 1–20 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, B. D. & Broadhurst, L. M. The economic cost of managing invasive species in Australia. NeoBiota 31, 1–18 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Kolar, C. S. & Lodge, D. M. Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol. Evolution 16, 199–204 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Jeschke, J. M. & Strayer, D. L. Invasion success of vertebrates in Europe and North America. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 102, 7198–7202 (2005).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lovell, R. S. L., Blackburn, T. M., Dyer, E. E. & Pigot, A. L. Environmental resistance predicts the spread of alien species. Nat. Ecol. Evolution 5, 322–329 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Blackburn, T. M. et al. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol. Evolution 26, 333–339 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G., Simmonds, S. M. & Wong, B. B. M. Can behavioral and personality traits influence the success of unintentional species introductions? Trends Ecol. Evolution 27, 57–64 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G. & Wong, B. B. M. The role of behavioural variation across different stages of the introduction process. in Biological Invasions and Animal Behaviour (eds. Weis, Judith, S. & Sol, Daniel.) 7–25 (Cambridge University Press, 2016).Holway, D. & Suarez, A. Animal behavior: an essential component of invasion biology. Trends Ecol. Evolution 14, 328–330 (1999).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Felden, A. et al. Behavioural variation and plasticity along an invasive ant introduction pathway. J. Anim. Ecol. 87, 1653–1666 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
D’Amore, D. M., Popescu, V. D. & Morris, M. R. The influence of the invasive process on behaviours in an intentionally introduced hybrid, Xiphophorus helleri-maculatus. Anim. Behav. 156, 79–85 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Perkins, T. A., Boettiger, C. & Phillips, B. L. After the games are over: life‐history trade‐offs drive dispersal attenuation following range expansion. Ecol. Evolution 6, 6425–6434 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Phillips, B. L., Brown, G. P., Travis, J. M. J. & Shine, R. Reid’s Paradox revisited: the evolution of dispersal kernels during range expansion. Am. Naturalist 172, S34–S48 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Shine, R., Brown, G. P. & Phillips, B. L. An evolutionary process that assembles phenotypes through space rather than through time. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 108, 5708–5711 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lindström, T., Brown, G. P., Sisson, S. A., Phillips, B. L. & Shine, R. Rapid shifts in dispersal behavior on an expanding range edge. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 110, 13452–13456 (2013).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Heger, T. & Jeschke, J. M. The enemy release hypothesis as a hierarchy of hypotheses. Oikos 123, 741–750 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Colautti, R. I., Ricciardi, A., Grigorovich, I. A. & MacIsaac, H. J. Is invasion success explained by the enemy release hypothesis? Ecol. Lett. 7, 721–733 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Wilson, J. R. U., Dormontt, E. E., Prentis, P. J., Lowe, A. J. & Richardson, D. M. Something in the way you move: dispersal pathways affect invasion success. Trends Ecol. Evolution 24, 136–144 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Wilson, S. & Swan, G. A complete guide to reptiles of Australia. (New Holland Publishers, 2021).Chapple, D. G., Miller, K. A., Kraus, F. & Thompson, M. B. Divergent introduction histories among invasive populations of the delicate skink (Lampropholis delicata): has the importance of genetic admixture in the success of biological invasions been overemphasized? Diversity Distrib. 19, 134–146 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Chapple, D., Knegtmans, J., Kikillus, H. & van Winkel, D. Biosecurity of exotic reptiles and amphibians in New Zealand: building upon Tony Whitaker’s legacy. J. R. Soc. N.Z. 46, 66–84 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G., Whitaker, A. H., Chapple, S. N. J., Miller, K. A. & Thompson, M. B. Biosecurity interceptions of an invasive lizard: Origin of stowaways and human-assisted spread within New Zealand. Evolut. Appl. 6, 324–339 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Tingley, R., Thompson, M. B., Hartley, S. & Chapple, D. G. Patterns of niche filling and expansion across the invaded ranges of an Australian lizard. Ecography 39, 270–280 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G. et al. Biology of the invasive delicate skink (Lampropholis delicata) on Lord Howe Island. Aust. J. Zool. 62, 498–506 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Moule, H. et al. A matter of time: temporal variation in the introduction history and population genetic structuring of an invasive lizard. Curr. Zool. 61, 456–464 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G., Simmonds, S. M. & Wong, B. B. M. Know when to run, know when to hide: can behavioral differences explain the divergent invasion success of two sympatric lizards? Ecol. Evolution 1, 278–289 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Cromie, G. L. & Chapple, D. G. Impact of tail loss on the behaviour and locomotor performance of two sympatric Lampropholis skink species. PLoS ONE 7, e34732 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Brand, J. A. et al. Rapid shifts in behavioural traits during a recent fish invasion. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 75, 134 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Myles-Gonzalez, E., Burness, G., Yavno, S., Rooke, A. & Fox, M. G. To boldly go where no goby has gone before: boldness, dispersal tendency, and metabolism at the invasion front. Behav. Ecol. 26, 1083–1090 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Pintor, L. M., Sih, A. & Bauer, M. L. Differences in aggression, activity and boldness between native and introduced populations of an invasive crayfish. Oikos 117, 1629–1636 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Mueller, J. C. et al. Selection on a behaviour-related gene during the first stages of the biological invasion pathway. Mol. Ecol. 26, 6110–6121 (2017).MathSciNet 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Snell-Rood, E. C. An overview of the evolutionary causes and consequences of behavioural plasticity. Anim. Behav. 85, 1004–1011 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Niemelä, P. T., Niehoff, P. P., Gasparini, C., Dingemanse, N. J. & Tuni, C. Crickets become behaviourally more stable when raised under higher temperatures. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 73, 81 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Polverino, G. et al. Psychoactive pollution suppresses individual differences in fish behaviour. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 288, 20202294 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Royauté, R., Garrison, C., Dalos, J., Berdal, M. A. & Dochtermann, N. A. Current energy state interacts with the developmental environment to influence behavioural plasticity. Anim. Behav. 148, 39–51 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Michelangeli, M., Chapple, D. G., Goulet, C. T., Bertram, M. G. & Wong, B. B. M. Behavioral syndromes vary among geographically distinct populations in a reptile. Behav. Ecol. 30, 393–401 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Nicolaus, M., Tinbergen, J. M., Ubels, R., Both, C. & Dingemanse, N. J. Density fluctuations represent a key process maintaining personality variation in a wild passerine bird. Ecol. Lett. 19, 478–486 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lapiedra, O., Schoener, T. W., Leal, M., Losos, J. B. & Kolbe, J. J. Predator-driven natural selection on risk-taking behavior in anole lizards. Science 360, 1017–1020 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gruber, J., Brown, G., Whiting, M. J. & Shine, R. Geographic divergence in dispersal-related behaviour in cane toads from range-front versus range-core populations in Australia. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 71, 38 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Gruber, J., Brown, G., Whiting, M. J. & Shine, R. Is the behavioural divergence between range-core and range-edge populations of cane toads (Rhinella marina) due to evolutionary change or developmental plasticity? R. Soc. Open Sci. 4, 170789 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Morgan, D., Waas, J. R. & Innes, J. Do territorial and non-breeding Australian Magpies Gymnorhina tibicen influence the local movements of rural birds in New Zealand? Ibis 148, 330–342 (2006).
Google Scholar 
O’leary, R. A. & Jones, D. N. Foraging by suburban Australian magpies during dry conditions. Corella 26, 53–54 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Wright, T. F., Eberhard, J. R., Hobson, E. A., Avery, M. L. & Russello, M. A. Behavioral flexibility and species invasions: the adaptive flexibility hypothesis. Ethol. Ecol. Evolution 22, 393–404 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Dingemanse, N. J. & Wolf, M. Between-individual differences in behavioural plasticity within populations: causes and consequences. Anim. Behav. 85, 1031–1039 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ducatez, S., Sol, D., Sayol, F. & Lefebvre, L. Behavioural plasticity is associated with reduced extinction risk in birds. Nat. Ecol. Evolution 4, 788–793 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Cole, E. F. & Quinn, J. L. Personality and problem-solving performance explain competitive ability in the wild. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 279, 1168–1175 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Webster, M. M., Ward, A. J. W. & Hart, P. J. B. Individual boldness affects interspecific interactions in sticklebacks. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63, 511–520 (2009).
Google Scholar 
McGhee, K. E., Pintor, L. M. & Bell, A. M. Reciprocal behavioral plasticity and behavioral types during predator-prey interactions. Am. Naturalist 182, 704–717 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ioannou, C. C., Payne, M. & Krause, J. Ecological consequences of the bold–shy continuum: the effect of predator boldness on prey risk. Oecologia 157, 177–182 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Moran, N. P., Wong, B. B. M. & Thompson, R. M. Weaving animal temperament into food webs: implications for biodiversity. Oikos 126, 917–930 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Bellard, C., Cassey, P. & Blackburn, T. M. Alien species as a driver of recent extinctions. Biol. Lett. 12, 20150623 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Moule, H., Michelangeli, M., Thompson, M. B. & Chapple, D. G. The influence of urbanization on the behaviour of an Australian lizard and the presence of an activity–exploratory behavioural syndrome. J. Zool. 298, 103–111 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Michelangeli, M., Wong, B. B. M. & Chapple, D. G. It’s a trap: sampling bias due to animal personality is not always inevitable. Behav. Ecol. 27, 62–67 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Michelangeli, M., Melki-Wegner, B., Laskowski, K., Wong, B. B. M. & Chapple, D. G. Impacts of caudal autotomy on personality. Anim. Behav. 162, 67–78 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Shine, R. Locomotor speeds of gravid lizards: Placing “costs of reproduction” within an ecological context. Funct. Ecol. 17, 526–533 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Naimo, A. C., Jones, C., Chapple, D. G. & Wong, B. B. M. Has an invasive lizard lost its antipredator behaviours following 40 generations of isolation from snake predators? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 75, 131 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Brand, J. A. et al. Population differences in the effect of context on personality in an invasive lizard. Behav. Ecol. 32, 1363–1371 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Goulet, C. T., Thompson, M. B., Michelangeli, M., Wong, B. B. M. & Chapple, D. G. Thermal physiology: a new dimension of the pace‐of‐life syndrome. J. Anim. Ecol. 86, 1269–1280 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Michelangeli, M., Goulet, C. T., Kang, H. S., Wong, B. B. M. & Chapple, D. G. Integrating thermal physiology within a syndrome: locomotion, personality and habitat selection in an ectotherm. Funct. Ecol. 32, 970–981 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Bell, A. M. Randomized or fixed order for studies of behavioral syndromes? Behav. Ecol. 24, 16–20 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Friard, O. & Gamba, M. BORIS: a free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods Ecol. Evolution 7, 1325–1330 (2016).
Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/. (2019).Bürkner, P. C. brms: an R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. J. Stat. Softw. 80, 1–28 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Munson, A. A., Michelangeli, M. & Sih, A. Stable social groups foster conformity and among-group differences. Anim. Behav. 174, 197–206 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Royauté, R. & Dochtermann, N. A. Comparing ecological and evolutionary variability within datasets. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 75, 127 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Dalos, J., Royauté, R., Hedrick, A. V. & Dochtermann, N. A. Phylogenetic conservation of behavioural variation and behavioural syndromes. J. Evolut. Biol. 35, 311–321 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Miller, K. A., Duran, A., Melville, J., Thompson, M. B. & Chapple, D. G. Sex-specific shifts in morphology and colour pattern polymorphism during range expansion of an invasive lizard. J. Biogeogr. 44, 2778–2788 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Michelangeli, M., Chapple, D. G. & Wong, B. B. M. Are behavioural syndromes sex specific? Personality in a widespread lizard species. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 70, 1911–1919 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A. & Gabry, J. Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Stat. Comput. 27, 1413–1432 (2017).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. Repeatability for Gaussian and non-Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Rev. 85, 935–956 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chapple, D. G. et al. Data from Chapple et al. “Biological invasions as a selective filter driving behavioral divergence”. Monash University. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.26180/18851036.v2 (2022). More

Steinhausen, W. Über die Beobachtungen der Cupula in den Bogengangsampullen des Labyrinthes des Lebendes Hechts. Pflug. Arch. 232, 500–512 (1933).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wever, E. G. The reptile ear. (Princeton University Press, 1978).Wilson, V. J. & Melvill Jones, G. Mammalian vestibular physiology. (Plenum Press, 1979).Spoor, F. & Zonneveld, F. Comparative review of the human bony labyrinth. Yearb. Phys. Anthropol. 41, 211–251 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rabbitt, R. D., Damiano, E. R. & Grant, J. W. Biomechanics of the semicircular canals and otolith organs. In: Highstein, F. M., Ray, R. R., Popper, A. N. (eds) Springer Handbook Of Auditory Research, vol. 19, The Vestibular System, pp. 153–201 (Springer, New York, 2004).Georgi, J. A. & Sipla, J. S. Comparative and functional anatomy of balance in aquatic reptiles and birds. In: Thewissen, J. G. M., Nummela, S. (eds) Sensory Evolution On The Threshold, Adaptations In Secondarily Aquatic Vertebrates.pp. 233–256 (University of California Press, 2008).David, R. et al. Motion from the past. A new method to infer vestibular capacities of extinct species. C. R. Palevol. 9, 397–410 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Oman, C. M., Marcus, E. N. & Curthoys, I. S. The influence of the semicircular canal morphology on endolymph flow dynamics. Acta Otolaryngol. 103, 1–13 (1987).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Georgi, J. A., Sipla, L. S. & Forster, C. A. Turning semicircular canal function on its head: dinosaurs and a novel vestibular analysis. PLoS One 8, e58517 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Spoor, F., Bajpai, S., Hussain, S. T., Kumar, K. & Thewissen, J. G. M. Vestibular evidence for the evolution of aquatic behaviour in early cetaceans. Nature 417, 163–166 (2002).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Spoor, F. et al. The primate semicircular canal system and locomotion. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 10808–10812 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cox, P. G. & Jeffery, N. Geometry of the semicircular canals and extraocular muscles in rodents, lagomorphs, felids and modern humans. J. Anat. 213, 83–596 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Cox, P. G. & Jeffery, N. Semicircular canals and agility: the influence of size and shape measures. J. Anat. 216, 37–47 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Silcox, M. T. et al. Semicircular canal system in early primates. J. Hum. Evol. 56, 315–327 (2009).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lebrun, R. et al. Deep evolutionary roots of strepsirrhine primate labyrinthine morphology. J. Anat. 216, 368–380 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Billet, G. et al. High morphological variation of vestibular system accompanies slow and infrequent locomotion in three-toed sloths. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 279, 3932–3939 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Gunz, P., Ramsier, M., Kuhrig, M., Hublin, J.-J. & Spoor, F. The mammalian bony labyrinth reconsidered, introducing a comprehensive geometric morphometric approach. J. Anat. 220, 529–543 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Malinzak, M. D., Kaya, R. F. & Hullar, T. E. Locomotor head movements and semicircular canal morphology in primates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 914–919 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alloing-Séguier, L. et al. The bony labyrinth in diprotodontian marsupial mammals: diversity in extant and extinct forms and relationships with size and phylogeny. J. Mamm. Evol. 20, 191–198 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Berlin, J. C., Kirk, E. C. & Rowe, T. B. Functional implications of ubiquitous semicircular canal non-orthogonality in mammals. PLoS One 8, e79585 (2013).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Davies, K. T. J., Bates, P. J. J., Maryanto, I., Cotton, J. A. & Rossiter, S. J. The evolution of bat vestibular systems in the face of potential antagonistic selection pressures for flight and echolocation. PLoS One 8, e61998 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Grohé, C. et al. Bony labyrinth shape variation in extant Carnivora: a case study of Musteloidea. J. Anat. 228, 366–383 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pfaff, C., Martin, T. & Ruf, I. Bony labyrinth morphometry indicates locomotor adaptations in the squirrel-related clade (Rodentia, Mammalia). Proc. R. Soc. B 282, 20150744 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Melville Jones, G. & Spells, K. E. A theoretical and comparative study of the functional dependence of the semicircular canal upon its physical dimensions. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 157, 403–419 (1963).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kemp, A. D. & Kirk, E. C. Eye size and visual acuity influence vestibular anatomy in mammals. Anat. Rec. 297, 781–790 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ekdale, E. G. Form and function of the mammalian ear. J. Anat. 228, 324–337 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Goyens, J. High ellipticity reduces semicircular canal sensitivity in squamates compared to mammals. Sci. Rep. 9, 16428 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Witmer, L. M., Chatterjee, S., Franzosa, J. & Rowe, T. Neuroanatomy of flying reptiles and implications for flight, posture and behaviour. Nature 425, 950–953 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lautenschlager, S., Rayfield, E. J., Altangerel, P., Zanno, L. E. & Witmer, L. M. The endocranial anatomy of Therizinosauria and its implications for sensory and cognitive function. PLoS ONE 7, e52289 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cuthbertson, R. S., Maddin, H. C., Holmes, R. B. & Anderson, J. S. The braincase and endosseous labyrinth of Plioplatecarpus peckensis (Mosasauridae, Plioplatecarpinae), with functional implications for locomotor behavior. Anat. Rec. 298, 1597–1611 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schade, M., Rauhut, O. W. M. & Evers, S. W. Neuroanatomy of the spinosaurid Irritator challengeri (Dinosauria: Theropoda) indicates potential adaptations for piscivory. Sci. Rep. 10, 9259 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Benson, R. B. J., Starmer-Jones, E., Close, R. A. & Walsh, S. A. Comparative analysis of vestibular ecomorphology in birds. J. Anat. 231, 990–1018 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dudgeon, T. W., Maddin, H. C., Evans, D. C. & Mallon, J. C. The internal cranial anatomy of Champsosaurus (Choristodera: Champsosauridae): implications for neurosensory function. Sci. Rep. 10, 7122 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bronzati, M. et al. Deep evolutionary diversification of semicircular canals in archosaurs. Curr. Biol. 31, 2520–2529 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, M., Hoffman, E. A., Norell, M. A. & Bhullar, B.-A. S. The early origin of a birdlike inner ear and the evolution of dinosaurian movement and vocalization. Science 372, 601–609 (2021).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ernst, C. H. & Barbour, R. W. Turtles Of The World. (Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 1989).Evers, S. W. & Benson, R. B. J. A new phylogenetic hypothesis of turtles with implications for the timing and number of evolutionary transitions to marine lifestyles in the group. Palaeontology 62, 93–134 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Joyce, W. G. A review of the fossil record of basal Mesozoic turtles. Bull. Peabody Mus. Nat. Hist. 58, 65–113 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lautenschlager, S., Ferreira, G. S. & Werneburg, I. Sensory evolution and ecology of early turtles revealed by digital endocranial reconstructions. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1–7 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Felsenstein, J. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 123, 1–15 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sugiura, N. Further analysis of the data by Akaike’s information criterion and the finite corrections. Commun. Stat. Theory Methods 7, 13–26 (1978).MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Foth, C. et al. Comparative analysis of the shape and size of the middle ear cavity of turtles reveals no correlation with habitat ecology. J. Anat. 235, 1078–1097 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Neenan, J. M. et al. Evolution of the sauropterygian labyrinth with increasingly pelagic lifestyles. Curr. Biol. 27, 3852–3858 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Loza, C. M., Latimer, A. E., Sánchez-Villagra, M. R. & Carlini, A. A. Sensory anatomy of the most aquatic of carnivorans: the Antarctic Ross seal, and convergences with other mammals. Biol. Lett. 13, 20170489 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Werneburg, I. & Maier, W. Diverging development of akinetic skulls in cryptodire and pleurodire turtles: an ontogenetic and phylogenetic study. Vertebr. Zool. 69, 113–143 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Ferreira, G. S. & Werneburg, I. Evolution, diversity, and development of the craniocervical system in turtles with special reference to jaw musculature. In: Ziermann, J., Diaz, R. R. Jr, Diogo, R. (eds) Heads, Jaws and Muscles: Evolution, Development, Anatomical Diversity And Function (Springer, Cham, 2019).David, R. J. A. et al. Comment on “The early origin of a birdlike inner ear and the evolution of dinosaurian movement and vocalization”, Science (in press).Schwab, J. A. et al. Inner ear sensory system changes as extinct crocodylomorphs transitioned from land to water. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 117, 10422–10428 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yang, L. M. & Ornitz, D. M. Sculpturing the skull through neurosensory epithelial-mesenchymal signaling. Dev. Dyn. 248, 88–97 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kandel, B. M. & Hullar, T. E. The relationship of head movements to semicircular canal size in cetaceans. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 1175–1181 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Moll, D. Food and feeding behavior of the turtle, Dermatemys mawei, in Belize. J. Herpetol. 23, 445–447 (1989).Article 

Google Scholar 
Evers, S. W. et al. Neurovascular anatomy of the protostegid turtle Rhinochelys pulchriceps and comparisons of membranous and endosseous labyrinth shape in an extant turtle. Zool. J. Linn. Soci. 187, 800–828 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Ekdale, E. G. Comparative anatomy of the bony labyrinth (inner ear) of placental mammals. PLoS One 8, e66624 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Joyce, W. G. Phylogenetic relationships of Mesozoic turtles. Bull. Peabody Mus. Nat. Hist. 48, 3–102 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sterli, J. & De La Fuente, M. S. Anatomy of Condorchelys antiqua Sterli, 2008, and the origin of the modern jaw closure mechanism in turtles. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 30, 351–366 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferreira, G. S. et al. Feeding biomechanics suggests progressive correlation of skull architecture and neck evolution in turtles. Sci. Rep. 10, 5505 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Aerts, P., Van Damme, J. & Herrel, A. Intrinsic mechanics and control of fast cranio-cervical movements in aquatic feeding turtles. Am. Zool. 41, 1299–1310 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Herrel, A., Van Damme, J. & Aerts, P. Cervical anatomy and function in turtles. In Biology Of Turtles. In: Wyneken, J., Godfrey, M. H., Bels, V. (eds) pp. 163–185 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2008).Narazaki, T., Sato, K., Abernathy, K. J., Marshall, G. J. & Miyazaki, N. Loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) use vision to forage on gelatinous prey in mid-water. PLoS One 8, e66043 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guthrie, D. M. “Role of vision in fish behaviour”. In: T. J. Pitcher (eds) The Behaviour Of Teleost Fishes. pp. 75–113 (Springer, Boston, 1986).Sterli, J. & Joyce, W. G. The cranial anatomy of the Early Jurassic turtle Kayentachelys aprix. Acta Paleontol. Pol. 52, 675–694 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Werneburg, I. The tendinous framework in the temporal skull region of turtles and considerations about its morphological implications in amniotes: a review. Zool. Sci. 30, 141–153 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Werneburg, I. Neck motion in turtles and its relation to the shape of the temporal skull region. C. R. Palevol. 14, 527–548 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
TTWG, Turtle Taxonomy Working Group, Rhodin, A. G. J. et al. Turtles of the world, 8th edition: annotated checklist of taxonomy, synonymy, distribution with maps, and conservation status. Chelonian Res. Monogr. 7, 1–292 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Gower, J. C. Generalized Procrustes analysis. Psychometrika 40, 33–50 (1975).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Adams, D. C., Collyer, M. L., Kaliontzopoulou, A. Geomorph: Software for geometric morphometric analyses. R package version 3.1.0. https://cran.r-project.org/package=geomorph (2019).R Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/ (2019).Rholf, E. J. & Corti, M. Use of two-block partial least-squares to study covariation in shape. Syst. Biol. 49, 740–753 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Adams, D. C. & Felice, R. N. Assessing trait covariation and morphological integration on phylogenies using evolutionary covariance matrices. PLoS One 9, e94335 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kendall, D. G. The diffusion of shape. Adv. Appl. Probab. 9, 428–430 (1977).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bookstein, F. L. Landmark methods for forms without landmarks: morphometrics of group differences in outline shape. Med. Image Anal. 1, 97–118 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gunz, P., Mitteroecker, P. & Bookstein, F. L. “Semilandmarks in three dimensions. In: Slice, D. E. (ed) Modern Morphometrics in Physical Anthropology, pp. 73–98 (Kluwer Academic, 2005).Webster, M. & Sheets, H. A practical introduction to land- mark-based geometric morphometrics. In: Alroy, J., Hunt, G. (eds) Quantitative Methods in Paleobiology. Paleontological Society Papers 16, pp. 163–188 (Paleontological Society, 2010).Gunz, P. & Mitteroecker, P. Semilandmarks: a method for quantifying curves and surfaces. Hystrix 24, 103–109 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Bookstein, F. L. Size and shape spaces for landmark data in two dimensions. Stat. Sci. 1, 181–242 (1986).MATH 

Google Scholar 
Pereira, A. G., Sterli, J., Moreira, F. R. R. & Schrago, C. G. Multilocus phylogeny and statistical biogeography clarify the evolutionary history of major lineages of turtles. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 113, 59–66 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bapst, D. W. paleotree: an R package for paleontological and phylogenetic analyses of evolution. Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 803–807 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lloyd, G. T. Estimating morphological diversity and tempo with discrete character-taxon matrices: implementation, challenges, progress, and future directions. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 118, 131–151 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferreira, G. S., Bronzati, M., Langer, M. C. & Sterli, J. Phylogeny, biogeography, and diversification patterns of side-necked turtles (Testudines: Pleurodira). R. Soc. Open Sci. 5, 171773 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bapst, D. W. A stochastic rate-calibrated method for time-scaling phylogenies of fossil taxa. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 724–733 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Laurin, M. The evolution of body size, Cope’s Rule and the origin of amniotes. Syst. Biol. 53, 594–622 (2004).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pace, C. M., Blob, R. W. & Westneat, M. W. Comparative kinematics of the forelimb during swimming in red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta) and spiny softshell (Apalone spinifera) turtles. J. Exp. Biol. 204, 3261–3271 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Claude, J., Paradis, E., Tong, H. & Auffray, J.-C. A geometric morphometric assessment of the effects of environment and cladogenesis on the evolution of the turtle shell. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 79, 485–501 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Angielczyk, K. D., Feldman, C. R. & Miller, G. R. Adaptive evolution of plastron shape in emydine turtles. Evolution 65, 377–394 (2011).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Angielczyk, K. D., Burroughs, R. W. & Feldman, C. R. Do turtles follow the rules? Latitudinal gradients in species richness, body size, and geographic range area of the World’s turtles. J. Exp. Zool. Mol. Dev. Evol. 324, 270–294 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pritchard, P. C. H. Oiscivory in turtles, and evolution of the long-necked Chelidae. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 52, 87–110 (1984).
Google Scholar 
Joyce, W. G. et al. A new pelomedusoid turtle, Sahonachelys mailakavava, from the Late Cretaceous of Madagascar provides evidence for convergent evolution of specialized suction feeding among pleurodires. R. Soc. Open Sci. 8, 210098 (2021).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Adams, D. C. A method for assessing phylogenetic least squares models for shape and other high‐dimensional multivariate data. Evolution 68, 2675–2688 (2014).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Adams, D. C., Collyer, M. L. & Kaliontzopoulou, A. Multivariate phylogenetic comparative methods: evaluations, comparisons, and recommendations. Syst. Biol. 67, 14–31 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Collyer, M. L., Sekora, D. J. & Adams, D. C. A method for analysis of phenotypic change for phenotypes described by high-dimensional data. Heredity 115, 357–365 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lowi-Merri, T. M., Benson, R. B. J., Claramunt, S. & Evans, D. C. The relationship between sternum variation and mode of locomotion in birds. BMC Biol. 19, 1–23 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Adams, D. C. & Collyer, M. L. Phylogenetic ANOVA: group-clade aggregation, biological challanges, and a refined permutation procedure. Evolution 72, 1204–1215 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Friedman, S. T., Martinez, C. M., Price, S. A. & Wainwright, P. C. The influence of size on body shape diversification across Indo-Pacific shore fishes. Evolution 73, 1873–1884 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Foth, C., Rabi, M. & Joyce, W. G. Skull variation in extant and extinct Testudinata and its relation to habitat and feeding ecology. Acta Zool. 98, 310–325 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grafen, A. The phylogenetic regression. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 326, 119–157 (1989).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritz, C. & Spiess, A.-N. qpcR: an R package for sigmoidal model selection in quantitative real-rime polymerase chain reaction analysis. Bioinformatics 24, 1549–1551 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Akaike, H. Information Theory As An extension Of The Maximum Likelihood Principle. In: Petrov, B. N., Csaki, F. (eds) Second International Symposium on Information Theory, pp. 267–281 (Akademiai Kiado, New York, 1973).Burnham, K. P., Anderson, D. Model selection and multi-model inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. (Springer, New York, 2002).Nagelkerke, N. J. D. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 78, 691–692 (1991).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S. & Sarkar, D., R. Core Team. nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1–141, URL: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme. (2019).Pagel, M. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401, 877–884 (1999).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Racicot, R. A. & Colbert, M. W. Morphology and variation in porpoise (Cetacea: Phocoenidae) cranial endocasts. Anat. Rec. 296, 979–992 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Evers, S. W. Code and Data to “Independent origin of large labyrinth size in turtles”. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7024572 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar  More

DefinitionWe present here a new statistical approach to measure and characterize light pollution. The objective is to define an indicator which is not limited to clear sky measurements and does not require a precise calibration of a photometer. The key attributes of the indicator are the following:

It requires the automated acquisition of a large number of zenithal NSB measures when the Sun is below (-18^{circ }) and the Moon below (-5^{circ });

The acquisitions must at least cover a period of 6 months in order to record a wide range of possible weather conditions from perfectly clear to totally overcast skies. The objective is to obtain a significant sample of every type of cloud conditions (e.g. cloud density and ceiling altitude) as well as a good characterization of the average clear sky ;

It is based on the analysis of the zenithal NSB measure dispersion which is directly linked to the level of light pollution a site experiences.

As presented above in Fig. 2, the NSB density histograms, which are assembled from a large number of NSB measures, display a higher density zone which denotes a characteristic clear sky level that we name nominal NSB in the scope of the indicator calculation. On both sides of the clear sky level (above and below), NSB measures are distributed in a way that reflect the zenithal night sky luminance in cloudy conditions: NSB measures above the clear sky level mean that the light pollution is amplified by clouds while those below the clear sky level indicate a darker environment where clouds mask light pollution from distant sources as well as natural light sources. The calculation of the indicator is based on the evaluation of the NSB measure dispersion on both sides of the nominal NSB (i.e. characteristic clear sky level). Since there can have strong variations of artificial light emitted into the environment at the beginning and end of the night (decrease then increase of human activity, extinction of public lighting, etc.), the range of NSB measures retained for calculating the indicator is restricted to a portion in the middle of the night, typically 2 h.Figure 8 shows a typical NSB density histogram for a site which is quite severely impacted by light pollution. It covers a 2 h time range between 23:00 UTC and 01:00 UTC and one can easily see that the zone above the nominal NSB is much higher and denser than the one below, i.e. cloud conditions create more often a brighter environment than a darker one and with a greater amplitude.Figure 8NSB density histogram where the nominal NSB that represents the most common clear sky conditions is identified. It delimits two areas, the NSB bright dispersion above the nominal NSB and the NSB dark dispersion below.Full size imageBased on the determination of the nominal NSB, a quantitative indicator, called NDR for NSB Dispersion Ratio, is calculated in the following way:$$begin{aligned} NDR = (N_b cdot MAD_b) / (N_d cdot MAD_d) end{aligned}$$where (N_b) is the number of measures above the nominal NSB (brighter sky), (N_d) is the number of measures below the nominal NSB (darker sky), (MAD_b) is the median absolute deviation of the measures in the bright dispersion zone (above the nominal NSB) and (MAD_d) is the median absolute deviation of the measures in the dark dispersion zone (below the nominal NSB). The median absolute deviation is a statistical tool used to measure the variability of a data set, which is exactly what we try to achieve with the two NSB extensions above and below the nominal NSB. It is formally defined as (MAD = median(|X_i – tilde{{mathbf {X}}}|)) where (X_i) in our case represents an NSB value and (tilde{{mathbf {X}}}) is (median(X_i)). The median absolute deviation is a better choice than the usual standard deviation to measure the spread of NSB measures since the data does not follow a normal distribution.In order to make the determination of the NSB Dispersion Ratio stronger from a statistical standpoint, we use a bootstrapping with replacement resampling method on the set of night portions used to compute the indicator. Assuming we have N night portions at our disposal, we randomly select a sample of N items in this set of night portions knowing that a given item can appear multiple times in the sample (hence the bootstrapping with replacement). The NDR value is then computed for the considered sample. This process is repeated 1000 times and the average NDR value if eventually computed. This average value represents the actual NDR indicator of the considered site.The NDR indicator takes into account both the number of NSB values on each side of the nominal NSB and the dispersion of these values. This is what makes it relevant as an indicator of light pollution which encompasses all kinds of meteorological conditions experienced at a particular site. On that aspect, it is therefore not an astronomical light pollution indicator since it is not focused on clear sky conditions. On the opposite, it requires to have a significant number of NSB measures in all sorts of cloudy conditions so that a valid NDR indicator can be derived.A key aspect of the NDR calculation methodology is to determine the level of the nominal NSB, i.e. the typical clear sky level, since it will be used to differentiate the NSB measures that go in each of the two sets to calculate the bright and dark dispersions. As we have seen earlier in the article, such a determination can be biased by natural light sources that raise or lower clear sky NSB at different times of the night. This can result into a “blurry” high density zone which makes the determination of the nominal NSB difficult or even impossible depending on the observation period. Based on the quantitative estimate of the different natural light sources presented above, the most important bias to address is the contribution of the Galactic plane. This contribution must be eliminated for all the NSB measures which are used to calculate the NDR indicator. In order to do that, Noxi, the Ninox processing software developed by DarkSkyLab, calculates for each NSB measure the corresponding Galactic plane and star fields contribution using the galactic coordinates of the zenith and integrating the combined flux of all stars in the field of view using the UCAC4 astrometry and photometry star catalogue. It is not possible to cancel the contribution of the airglow due to its unpredictable nature, but since it only appears in rare occasions, it is not seen as a problem and is ignored. Regarding the contribution of the zodiacal light, it is considered as minimal at the zenith and it is also ignored.As an example, Fig. 9 shows on the left an NSB density histogram where the Galactic plane bias has not been corrected in the data, and on the right the same data but with the Galactic plane bias corrected. It is easy to see that in the latter the nominal NSB is much easier to determine, providing a more accurate reference level to calculate the NDR indicator. Once the Galactic plane bias has been corrected, the nominal NSB is determined as the highest density zone of the NSB histogram. It must be noted that, as of today, all the NSB measures are corrected from the Galactic plane bias without regards to the presence of clouds or high levels of light pollution. This results into an additional source of inaccuracy that will be addressed in the future through the implementation of two heuristics within the Noxi software:

1.

A first heuristic will determine if a night portion is considered as having a clear sky or not so that the Galactic bias correction is applied only if the sky is clear. In order to do that, we have developed an indicator called the NSS (for Night Sky Stability). To determine the NSS for a full night of measures or just a night portion, we fit the NSB curve with a degree 10 polynomial and we then compute the difference between each NSB measure and it polynomial counterpart. As a result, we obtain a set of residuals. The variance of all the residuals defines the NSS for the considered NSB dataset. Below a given value, the sky is considered as clear knowing that the NSS indicator has been calibrated on several NSB data sets for which the corresponding weather conditions are known;

2.

A second heuristic will allow us to weight the Galactic bias correction to be applied to NSB measures according to their value. For non-polluted skies with high values of NSB, the full Galactic bias correction will be applied while below a certain NSB threshold (for instance 21 mag(_{mathrm{SQM}})/arcsec(^{2}) which corresponds roughly to the brightest parts of the Milky Way) no correction will be applied.

Figure 9NSB density histograms of the same data set with no correction of the Galactic plane bias applied on the left and a full correction applied on the right.Full size imageThe NDR indicator is unitless since it is the ratio of two quantities with the same unit (mag(_{mathrm{SQM}})/arcsec(^{2})). For the data set presented in Fig. 9, the NDR value which is obtained is 25 (which is justified by the fact that the bright extension in the density histogram is much higher and denser than the dark extension). This denotes a quite high level of light pollution despite the fact that the nominal NSB is at a level of 21.6 mag(_{mathrm{SQM}})/arcsec(^{2}). This highlights the fact that there is not always a strict correlation between the typical clear sky NSB obtained for a given site and its NDR indicator, i.e. the presence of clouds decreases the NSB more than we could have expected just by knowing the clear sky NSB. On that respect, the NDR ratio brings more information that the clear sky NSB alone.In addition to provide an indicator which is representative of light pollution in all possible atmospheric conditions, the NDR provides a tool to compare locations in a more meaningful way than just using a set of standalone NSB evaluations. First it is not dependent of an inter-calibration between different systems and second its statistical nature makes it more robust when it comes to perform comparisons.NDR into practiceThe NDR indicator has been calculated for several different sites by DarkSkyLab during various projects in France that involved NSB measuring sessions in the field. To demonstrate some of the results that have been obtained, Fig. 10 provides the density histograms of 4 different sites which have quite different light pollution profiles.Figure 10NSB density histograms of 4 different sites used to compute the NDR indicator. The nominal NSB (which corresponds to the most common clear sky conditions) is noted with a white tick mark next to the vertical axis. Relative levels of the bright and dark dispersion terms (((N_b cdot MAD_b)) and ((N_d cdot MAD_d))) are noted respectively with an orange tick mark and a green tick mark. The computed values of the NDR indicator and nominal NSB are provided in the top-left corner of each figure.Full size imageTo build these diagrams, only the measures acquired during a few hours in the middle of the nights have been used to ensure the maximum stability of the NSB curves and avoid lighting extinctions that create large gaps in NSB profiles. The Galactic plane bias is corrected on all plots and the same NSB scale is used in order to perform comparisons between the 4 sites. One can notice that the number of measures and nights for the 4 sites are quite different. However, they are all sufficient to derive a meaningful value of the NDR indicator using the bootstrapping with replacement resampling method described above, but it is clear that the more NSB measures used, the more accurate the NDR indicator.Table 2 summarizes the NDR indicators as well as the nominal NSB for the 4 sites which are sorted in the order of decreasing NDR indicator values.Table 2 Summary of the nominal NSB and NDR indicators of the 4 different sites.Full size tableOne can see that the NDR indicator values are not strictly correlated to the nominal NSB values, e.g. despite the fact that the nominal NSB of site (a) is slightly better than the one of site (b), the NDR indicator value is much larger for site (a) than for site (b). This can be explained if we consider the specificities of each site:

Cervières (a) is a small village in the Haut-Forez area, France, which is surrounded by large cities (Lyon, Saint-Etienne and Clermont-Ferrand at a distance between 50 to 80 km) and a closer mid-size city (Roanne at 30 km). At the top of that, the town of Noirétable and a large highway rest area are just 2 km away without any nocturnal extinction applied (as opposed to the village of Cervières itself for which public lighting is turned off from 23:00 to 05:00 local time). These conditions are favourable to the presence of a constant light pollution background which has a negative impact on the zenithal NSB measures in most cloudy conditions (distant large cities for high elevation clouds and Noirétable and the highway rest area for lower elevation clouds). Only rare cloud conditions actually protect the site from the effect of mid-distance light sources. In clear sky conditions, however, the fact that there is no close light sources provides reasonably good NSB levels;

The Copernic Association Observatory (b) is located 6 km from the large town of Gap in the mountain area of Hautes-Alpes in the south of France. There is no significant short distant light sources but in many cloud conditions the contribution of Gap has a very negative impact on the zenithal luminance. However, due to the fact that the observatory is at a higher altitude on the hills surrounding the city of Gap, there are cloud conditions that make the site darker. In clear sky conditions, the proximity of Gap does not permit a quality better than that of a rural sky;

The Astrièves Observatory (c) is located near the center of the small town of Gresse-en-Vercors in the Parc Naturel Régional du Vercors. There is a full nocturnal extinction of the village for a large part of the night resulting in a good sky quality in clear sky conditions. The large city of Grenoble is at a distance of 30 km in a valley at the north-east, and the two locations are separated by a few mountains which efficiently help masking the light pollution as soon as the cloud ceiling is below a certain altitude, resulting into a dark environment. On the opposite, high elevation clouds reflect the light from Grenoble and increase the zenithal luminance;

Eourres (d) is a small and isolated village located 20 km west of Sisteron in the department of Hautes-Alpes, France, which is surrounded by mountains. There is no significant light sources closer than those of Sisteron and this results into a very good night sky quality with, most of the times, a very dark environment in cloudy conditions.

Figure 11 provides a graphical representation of the NDR indicator values for the 4 sites. On the NDR scale, the value 1 indicates that the bright and dark dispersion terms (respectively ((N_b cdot MAD_b)) and ((N_d cdot MAD_d))) are equal, which means there is a balance between dark and bright conditions at the zenith on the considered site with reference to the most common clear sky level.Figure 11Summary of the NDR indicators obtained for the 4 sites. The diagram uses 1 as the pivotal value to delineate sites according to the two bright and dark dispersion terms ((N_b cdot MAD_b)) and ((N_d cdot MAD_d)).Full size imageThe NDR can theoretically vary between 0 (totally dark site) and several hundreds (extremely bright site) but in practice the best sites can reach NDR indicator values down to 0.3 in the best preserved locations and up to 200 for very large and polluted cities.Robustness of the NDR indicatorIt is important to evaluate how the NDR indicator is dependant on the number of measures used to compute it and to figure out what would be the minimum number of night sessions required to obtain a meaningful NDR indicator value at a given site. To achieve that, we have used the data from two of the four sites presented above (the two which have the largest number or recorded nights: Cervières with 424 nights and the Astrièves Observatory with 373 nights). The 1000-step bootstrapping procedure has been repeatedly executed on each data set with a regularly decreasing sample of nights: starting from the full number of nights, a decrement of 10 nights is applied at each step until only 20 nights are remaining. At every bootstrap step, each sample is composed of n nights randomly chosen among the N available ones knowing that any night can be selected several times.Figure 12 shows the NDR indicator values that have been obtained for each of the two sites as a function of the night sample considered. The 95% confidence interval is plotted against each NDR indicator value (it is preferred to the standard deviation since the NSB distribution in the data sets is not normal). In the right plot of Fig. 12, the last confidence interval for the 24 night sample is too wide to fit in the y-axis NDR range (the top value is 195).Figure 12Results of the NDR resampling on the two data sets of Cervières and Astrièves Observatory. The horizontal axis is the number of nights considered into the night sample and the vertical axis provides the NDR indicator obtained for each sampling set through a 1000-iteration bootstrapping with replacement calculation.Full size imageDiscussion on the required number of nightsWe can see in Fig. 12 that the NDR indicator and the confidence interval remain stable down to 200 nights. Below this threshold, the NDR starts to become unstable with growing confidence intervals. Based on this data, we can estimate that the minimum number of nights required to compute a robust NDR indicator is 200 (therefore between 7 and 8 months since there are periods around the full moons where there is no night portions recorded).However, depending on the measuring session objectives, the NDR indicator can be considered as accurate enough even when using a smaller number of nights. If the goal is simply to get a first estimate of the light pollution level at a given site, we can consider that 90 nights (a little more than 3 months of measures) are enough. On the opposite, if we want to perform a comparison between several sites for evaluating the impact of light pollution on a particular species, we might want to perform at least 200 nights of measurement to get a better accuracy for the NDR indicator. The experience from DarkSkyLab through many NSB measuring sessions is that 3 to 4 months of measures are required to get a meaningful density histogram, hence an accurate enough NDR indicator, so that a site can be sufficiently characterized from a light pollution perspective. Such a measuring period usually guarantees that the clear sky nominal NSB is well defined and that various cloud conditions have been observed. This estimate is sustained by the results obtained in Fig. 12.Value of the NDR indicator for ecological researchThe study of the impact of light pollution on biodiversity is currently in full expansion, amplifying a political and citizen demand for the reclamation of the night2,32,33.We identify three main contributions of the NDR indicator for ecological research. First, it overcomes the limits of an old problem of communication in terms of measurement units between disciplines and potentially limits the use of units without real meaning from a biodiversity point of view34,35. Secondly, the use of the NDR indicator limits the common biases linked to a characterization of the effects of anthropogenic light which is too limited in time and space35. Indeed, the life history traits of species are not only shaped by the intensity of light emitted into the nocturnal environment but also by its variation over time34,35,36. Currently, the characterization of light pollution is too often limited in time and space, which can lead to misinterpretation37. Thirdly, the NDR indicator provides ecological researchers with a unit of measurement that integrates a sufficiently long time step to study the impact of light pollution on the evolutionary processes at work in the life of species and particularly on population dynamics and animal behavior36,38,39.Limitations and future improvements of the NDR indicatorThe main limitation of the NDR indicator resides in the possible difficulty to identify a well defined value for the nominal NSB, i.e. the NSB value that represents the most common clear sky conditions of a given site. For the most part, this is due to the contribution of the Galactic plane to the zenithal sky brightness and, to a lower extent, to the contribution of other natural light sources (dense star fields, airglow and zodiacal light). The residual spread of NSB measures is due to changing atmospheric conditions at various time scales, but, for this particular contribution, we can expect a statistical compensation to eliminate a systematic associated bias.At the moment, the contribution of the Galactic plane and star fields is canceled into the NSB measures by calculating in the Noxi software the integrated flux of all the stars that belong to the field of view (using the UCAC4 star catalogue). However, this approach has proven some limitations, especially in the southern hemisphere where the Galactic center goes through the zenith and is particularly bright. A probable explanation for that lack of predictability is the fact that the Galactic plane contains diffuse sources such as nebulae which are not accounted for into the star catalogues and which actually cannot be ignored. To address this issue, DarkSkyLab has the project to create a brightness map of the Galactic plane with a square degree resolution or better so that the contribution of all sources can be correctly accounted for.In addition to better correcting the Galactic plane bias, an improvement must be made with regards to the NSB measures that need to be corrected. At the moment, all NSB measures are corrected from the Galactic plane bias without regards to the presence of clouds or high levels of light pollution. So a first heuristic must be implemented to only apply the bias correction to clear sky NSB measures. An other heuristic must also be developed to reduce the correction applied as a function of the NSB level.A third limitation of the NDR indicator is related to a possible lack of cloudy conditions at some sites (e.g. in the Atacama desert in Chile with more than 320 clear nights per year), the reason simply being that the NDR indicator requires the presence of clouds to differentiate the bright and dark extensions into the NSB density histograms. This means that the NDR indicator can hardly be used for such astronomy-oriented sites which experience rare cloudy conditions. More