Philippa Kaur

The overall magnitude of changes in SOC, TN, and C:N in response to chemical nitrogen fertilizers reductionThe results showed that chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction significantly decreased SOC and TN by 2.76% and 4.19% respectively, while increased C:N by 6.11% across all database (Fig. 1). SOC mainly derives from crop residues and secretions which closely related to crops growths, and crops growths were affected by fertilization, especially nitrogen fertilization20,21. The reduction of chemical nitrogen fertilizer led to poor crop growth, which reduced the amount of crop residues return, and then decreased SOC. Similarly, TN from crops was reduced due to poor crop growth. In addition, the reduction of chemical nitrogen fertilizers directly reduced the input of soil nitrogen. The increase of C:N was the result of the decrease of TN being greater than that of SOC. The responses of C:N to chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction enhanced the comprehension of the couple relationship between SOC and TN, which was beneficial to the evolution of the C-N coupling models. Moreover, the accuracy of C-N coupling models depends on the precise quantification of the responses of SOC and TN to nitrogen fertilization. And our results accurately quantified the difference responses of SOC and TN to different nitrogen fertilization regimes, thus optimizing the C-N coupling models.Figure 1The weighted response ratio (RR++) for the responses to chemical nitrogen fertilizers of soil organic carbon (SOC, a), total nitrogen (TN, b), and their ratios (C:N, c). Bars denote the overall mean response ratio RR++ and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The star (*) indicates significance when the 95% CI that do not go across the zero line. The vertical lines are drawn at lnRR = 0. The value represents independent sample size.Full size imageResponses of SOC, TN and C:N to chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction magnitudeWhen grouped by chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction magnitude, SOC showed a significant increase by 6.9% in medium magnitude, while SOC was significantly decreased by 3.10% and 7.26% in high and total magnitude respectively (Fig. 1a). Liu and Greaver22 also stated the reduction of medium nitrogen fertilizer increased the average microbial biomass from 15 to 20%, thereby increasing the SOC content. Previous studies had reported that there were strong positive correlations between soil organic matter and soil microbial biomass in both the agricultural ecosystem and natural ecosystem23,24. Numerous researchers have demonstrated the significance of nitrogen availability in soil for the plant biomass across most ecosystems25,26. Moreover, nitrogen deficient would inhibit the activity of extracellular enzymes and root activities27. Generally, soil degradation caused by continuous rising chemical nitrogen fertilizers application may inhibit the growth of crops and ultimately reduce the SOC28.TN showed no significant difference in low and medium chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction magnitude (p  > 0.05), while TN in high magnitude and total chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction magnitude exhibited a decrease with 3.10% and 9.37% respectively (Fig. 1b). Numerous studies described that the amount of nitrogen fertilizers used in China was higher than the demand of N for crop, which caused serious N leaching and runoff29,30. Chemical nitrogen fertilizers in low and medium magnitude would not decrease the TN of soil by reducing N leaching and runoff. However, the residual nitrogen in soil cannot meet the requirement for the sustainable growth of plant with litter or without exogenous nitrogen supplement, which resulted in the decrease of TN in high and total chemical nitrogen fertilizers magnitude. Consequently, optimal nitrogen fertilizers application rates will take into account crops yield and environment friendliness.Additionally, C:N had a significant increase with ranging from 1.82% to 8.98% under the four chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction magnitude (Fig. 1c), suggesting the relative increase of SOC compared to TN. Previous studies have revealed that C:N had significantly influence on the soil bacterial community structures31. And there were also considerable studies indicated that chemical nitrogen fertilizers have impact on the soil bacterial communities32,33. We may speculate that the change of C:N would bring about the variations of soil bacteria communities under the chemical nitrogen fertilizers regimes.Responses of SOC, TN, and C:N to chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction durationNegative response of SOC to short-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction was observed in our study, which was consistent with the study of Gong, et al.34 that chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction decreased SOC by reducing crop-derived carbon by one year. However, SOC was significantly increased by 1.06% and 4.65% at mid-term and long-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction respectively, which was similar with the findings of Ning, et al.11 that SOC was significantly increased under more than 5 years of chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction treatment. TN was significantly decreased by 1.96% at short-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction duration, while the results converted at mid-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction duration. The effect of long-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction on TN was not significant (p  > 0.05). The divergent response of TN to different chemical nitrogen fertilizers duration was mainly caused by the various treatments. In terms of C:N, a greater positive response was observed at short-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers duration (9.06%) than mid-term and long-term duration (1.99%). Moreover, with the prolongation of the chemical reduction time of nitrogen, the response ratio tends to zero, suggesting that the effect of chemical fertilizers gradually decrease. This may be ascribed to the buffer capacity of soil to resist the changes from external environment, including nutrients, pollutants, and redox substances35.Responses of SOC, TN, and C:N to different chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction patternsUnder the pattern of chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction without organic fertilizers supplement, SOC and TN significantly decreased by 3.83% and 11.46% respectively, however, chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction with organic fertilizers supplement significantly increased SOC and TN by 4.92% and 8.33% respectively. Moreover, C:N significantly increased under the two chemical nitrogen fertilizers patterns (p  0.05), but there was a negative effect on SOC in high and total magnitude (p  0.05). The no significant decrease at mid-term duration might result from the limited information reported in original studies of this meta-analysis36. TN showed no significant response to chemical nitrogen fertilizers without organic fertilizers supplement in the low and medium magnitude (p  > 0.05). However, TN was significantly decreased by 8.62% and 16.7% respectively in the high and total magnitude. When regarding to chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction duration, TN was significantly reduced at all of the categories, ranging from 3.13% to 13.4% (Fig. 2c). In the pattern of chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction with organic fertilizers supplement, chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction at medium, high, and total magnitudes significantly increased SOC by 13.85%, 13.03%, and 5.46%respectively, however, the response of SOC in the low chemical nitrogen fertilizers magnitude was not significant. Chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction duration significantly increased SOC by 7.01%, 1.71%, and 22.02% in the short-term, mid-term, and long-term respectively. Comparatively, TN showed a significantly increase in most chemical nitrogen fertilizers categories expect for the long-term chemical nitrogen fertilizers duration, with an increasing from 4.90% to 14.69% (Fig. 2d).Figure 2The weighted response ratio (RR++) for the responses to chemical nitrogen fertilizers of soil organic carbon (SOC, a), total nitrogen (TN, b), and their ratios (C:N, c) under the two patterns (with organic fertilizers ; without organic fertilizers). Bars denote the overall mean response ratio RR++ and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The star (*) indicates significance when the 95% CI that do not go across the zero line. The vertical lines are drawn at lnRR = 0. The values represent independent sample size.Full size imageOrganic fertilizers were mainly derived from animal manure or crops straws, which contained large amount of organic matter and nitrogen elements37,38. The application of organic fertilizers increased the input of SOC and TN directly. Moreover, organic fertilizer could promote the growth of crops by releasing phenols, vitamins, enzymes, auxins and other substances during the decomposition process, thus the SOC derived from crops would be increased37,39. In addition, organic fertilizers provide various nutrients for microbial reproduction, which increase the microbial population and organic carbon and total nitrogen content37. More importantly, the application of organic fertilizers could improve organic carbon sequestration and maintain its stability in aggregates, thereby reducing losses of SOC and TN40.C:N showed an increase under all of the chemical nitrogen fertilizers reduction with organic fertilizer supplement. The positive response of C:N to organic fertilizer supplement may be related to the higher C:N of organic fertilizer than soil. The average values of C:N of the commonly used organic fertilizers including animal manure, crop straws and biochar were 14, 60 and 30 respectively, while the C:N of soil was lower than 10 in average according to extensive literature researches41. Therefore, organic fertilizers would be a favorable alternative of chemical fertilizers for the sustainable development of agriculture.The correlation between the response of SOC, TN, and C:N and environmental variablesThe analysis of linear regression was conducted to analyze the environmental variables including mean annual temperature (MAT), mean annual precipitation (MAP), accumulated temperature above 10 °C (MATA), which may exert influence on SOC, TN and C:N. No significant correlation among the lnRR of SOC, TN, C:N and environmental variables were observed among the whole database (p  > 0.05; Fig. S1). Rule out the interference of organic fertilizers supplement, we analyzed the relationship between lnRR of SOC, TN, C:N and environmental variables as the Figures showed in Figs. 3 and 4 respectively. Under chemical nitrogen fertilizers without organic fertilizers supplement, there was a significant negative correlation between lnRR of SOC and MAT (p  More

The impacts of climate change on host–parasite dynamics are particularly complex to predict, as they involve an interplay of both physiological and behavioural factors, from both host and parasite. For example, while warming may increase parasite developmental rates and thus increase transmission, excessive heat may instead exceed thermal limits, leading to higher parasite mortality. Transmission also relates to both the distribution and abundance of host species, which may also shift under changing climates. More

Irigoien, X. et al. Nat. Commun. 5, 3271 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ariza, A. et al. Nat. Clim. Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01479-2 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Klevjer, T. A. et al. Sci. Rep. 6, 19873 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Braun, C. D. et al. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 14, 129–159 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heneghan, R. F. et al. Prog. Oceanogr. 198, 102659 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Polovina, J. J., Dunne, J. P., Woodworth, P. A. & Howell, E. A. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 68, 986–995 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheung, W. W. L. et al. Fish Fish. 10, 235–251 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hazen, E. L. et al. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 234–238 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Powers, R. P. & Jetz, W. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 323–329 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Purves, D. et al. Nature 493, 295–297 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hobday, A. J., Spillman, C. M., Paige Eveson, J. & Hartog, J. R. Fish. Oceanogr. 25, 45–56 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pons, M. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2114508119 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Barnett, T. P. et al. Penetration of human-induced warming into the world’s oceans. Science 309, 284–287 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Levitus, S. et al. Global ocean heat content 1955–2008 in light of recently revealed instrumentation problems. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L07608 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Poloczanska, E. S. et al. Global imprint of climate change on marine life. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 919–925 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
García Molinos, J. et al. Climate velocity and the future global redistribution of marine biodiversity. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 83–88 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Free, C. M. et al. Impacts of historical warming on marine fisheries production. Science 363, 979–983 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, N. F. & Grand, T. C. Physiological ecology meets the ideal-free distribution: predicting the distribution of size-structured fish populations across temperature gradients. Environ. Biol. Fishes 59, 285–298 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tittensor, D. P. et al. Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa. Nature 466, 1098–1101 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunday, J. M., Bates, A. E. & Dulvy, N. K. Global analysis of thermal tolerance and latitude in ectotherms. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1823–1830 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Waldock, C., Stuart‐Smith, R. D., Edgar, G. J., Bird, T. J. & Bates, A. E. The shape of abundance distributions across temperature gradients in reef fishes. Ecol. Lett. 22, 685–696 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stuart-Smith, R. D., Edgar, G. J. & Bates, A. E. Thermal limits to the geographic distributions of shallow-water marine species. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1846–1852 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pinsky, M. L., Worm, B., Fogarty, M. J., Sarmiento, J. L. & Levin, S. A. Marine taxa track local climate velocities. Science 341, 1239–1242 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Beaugrand, G., Edwards, M., Raybaud, V., Goberville, E. & Kirby, R. R. Future vulnerability of marine biodiversity compared with contemporary and past changes. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 695–701 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Trisos, C. H., Merow, C. & Pigot, A. L. The projected timing of abrupt ecological disruption from climate change. Nature 580, 496–501 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Levin, L. A. & Le Bris, N. The deep ocean under climate change. Science 350, 766–768 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Deutsch, C. A. et al. Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 6668–6672 (2008).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunday, J. M., Bates, A. E. & Dulvy, N. K. Thermal tolerance and the global redistribution of animals. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 686–690 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Radeloff, V. C. et al. The rise of novelty in ecosystems. Ecol. Appl. 25, 2051–2068 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lotterhos, K. E., Láruson, Á. J. & Jiang, L.-Q. Novel and disappearing climates in the global surface ocean from 1800 to 2100. Sci. Rep. 11, 15535 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mora, C. et al. The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability. Nature 502, 183–187 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Henson, S. A. et al. Rapid emergence of climate change in environmental drivers of marine ecosystems. Nat. Commun. 8, 14682 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Séférian, R. et al. Evaluation of CNRM Earth System Model, CNRM‐ESM2‐1: role of Earth system processes in present‐day and future climate. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 11, 4182–4227 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gidden, M. J. et al. Global emissions pathways under different socioeconomic scenarios for use in CMIP6: a dataset of harmonized emissions trajectories through the end of the century. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 1443–1475 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eyring, V. et al. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 1937–1958 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Beszczynska-Möller, A., Fahrbach, E., Schauer, U. & Hansen, E. Variability in Atlantic water temperature and transport at the entrance to the Arctic Ocean, 1997–2010. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 69, 852–863 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sutton, T. T. Vertical ecology of the pelagic ocean: classical patterns and new perspectives. J. Fish. Biol. 83, 1508–1527 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Richter, I. Climate model biases in the eastern tropical oceans: causes, impacts and ways forward. WIREs Clim. Change 6, 345–358 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pozo Buil, M. et al. A dynamically downscaled ensemble of future projections for the California Current System. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 612874 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leonard, M. et al. A compound event framework for understanding extreme impacts. WIREs Clim. Change 5, 113–128 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kwiatkowski, L. et al. Twenty-first century ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation, and upper-ocean nutrient and primary production decline from CMIP6 model projections. Biogeosciences 17, 3439–3470 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bopp, L. et al. Multiple stressors of ocean ecosystems in the 21st century: projections with CMIP5 models. Biogeosciences 10, 6225–6245 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheng, L., Abraham, J., Hausfather, Z. & Trenberth, K. E. How fast are the oceans warming? Science 363, 128–129 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hawkins, E. & Sutton, R. Time of emergence of climate signals. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L01702 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stuart-Smith, R. D., Edgar, G. J., Barrett, N. S., Kininmonth, S. J. & Bates, A. E. Thermal biases and vulnerability to warming in the world’s marine fauna. Nature 528, 88–92 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Filbee-Dexter, K. et al. Marine heatwaves and the collapse of marginal North Atlantic kelp forests. Sci. Rep. 10, 13388 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Román-Palacios, C. & Wiens, J. J. Recent responses to climate change reveal the drivers of species extinction and survival. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 4211–4217 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Silvy, Y., Guilyardi, E., Sallée, J.-B. & Durack, P. J. Human-induced changes to the global ocean water masses and their time of emergence. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 1030–1036 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheng, L., Zheng, F. & Zhu, J. Distinctive ocean interior changes during the recent warming slowdown. Sci. Rep. 5, 14346 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brito-Morales, I. et al. Climate velocity reveals increasing exposure of deep-ocean biodiversity to future warming. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 576–581 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Frölicher, T. L. & Laufkötter, C. Emerging risks from marine heat waves. Nat. Commun. 9, 650 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Oliver, E. C. J. et al. Marine Heatwaves. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 13, 313–342 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Perry, A. L., Low, P. J., Ellis, J. R. & Reynolds, J. D. Climate change and distribution shifts in marine fishes. Science 308, 1912–1915 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chaudhary, C., Richardson, A. J., Schoeman, D. S. & Costello, M. J. Global warming is causing a more pronounced dip in marine species richness around the equator. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2015094118 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Burrows, M. T. et al. Ocean community warming responses explained by thermal affinities and temperature gradients. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 959–963 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
IPCC Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (eds Pörtner, H.-O. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).Cahill, A. E. et al. How does climate change cause extinction? Proc. R. Soc. B280, 20121890 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hastings, R. A. et al. Climate change drives poleward increases and equatorward declines in marine species. Curr. Biol. 30, 1572–1577.e2 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jorda, G. et al. Ocean warming compresses the three-dimensional habitat of marine life. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 109–114 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dulvy, N. K. et al. Climate change and deepening of the North Sea fish assemblage: a biotic indicator of warming seas. J. Appl. Ecol. 45, 1029–1039 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thatje, S. Climate warming affects the depth distribution of marine ectotherms. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 660, 233–240 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Manuel, S. A., Coates, K. A., Kenworthy, W. J. & Fourqurean, J. W. Tropical species at the northern limit of their range: composition and distribution in Bermuda’s benthic habitats in relation to depth and light availability. Mar. Environ. Res. 89, 63–75 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Peck, L. S., Webb, K. E. & Bailey, D. M. Extreme sensitivity of biological function to temperature in Antarctic marine species. Funct. Ecol. 18, 625–630 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Peck, L. S., Morley, S. A., Richard, J. & Clark, M. S. Acclimation and thermal tolerance in Antarctic marine ectotherms. J. Exp. Biol. 217, 16–22 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Walsh, J. E. Climate of the Arctic marine environment. Ecol. Appl. 18, S3–S22 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Storch, D., Menzel, L., Frickenhaus, S. & Pörtner, H.-O. Climate sensitivity across marine domains of life: limits to evolutionary adaptation shape species interactions. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 3059–3067 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Araújo, M. B. et al. Heat freezes niche evolution. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1206–1219 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pörtner, H. O., Peck, L. & Somero, G. Thermal limits and adaptation in marine Antarctic ectotherms: an integrative view. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 362, 2233–2258 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Qu, Y.-F. & Wiens, J. J. Higher temperatures lower rates of physiological and niche evolution. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20200823 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cohen, D.M., Inada, T., Iwamoto, T. and Scialabba, N. FAO Species Catalogue, Vol. 10. Gadiform Fishes of the World (Order Gadiformes) (FAO, 1990).Strand, E. & Huse, G. Vertical migration in adult Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 64, 1747–1760 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Frölicher, T. L., Fischer, E. M. & Gruber, N. Marine heatwaves under global warming. Nature 560, 360–364 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wernberg, T. et al. Climate-driven regime shift of a temperate marine ecosystem. Science 353, 169–172 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smale, D. A. et al. Marine heatwaves threaten global biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 306–312 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheung, W. W. L. & Frölicher, T. L. Marine heatwaves exacerbate climate change impacts for fisheries in the northeast Pacific. Sci. Rep. 10, 6678 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brierley, A. S. & Kingsford, M. J. Impacts of climate change on marine organisms and ecosystems. Curr. Biol. 19, R602–R614 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bijma, J., Pörtner, H.-O., Yesson, C. & Rogers, A. D. Climate change and the oceans—what does the future hold? Mar. Pollut. Bull. 74, 495–505 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jackson, J. B. C. et al. Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 293, 629–637 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Duarte, C. M. et al. The soundscape of the Anthropocene ocean. Science 371, eaba4658 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rochman, C. M. & Hoellein, T. The global odyssey of plastic pollution. Science 368, 1184–1185 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gruber, N., Boyd, P. W., Frölicher, T. L. & Vogt, M. Biogeochemical extremes and compound events in the ocean. Nature 600, 395–407 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Madec, G. et al. NEMO ocean engine. Zenodo https://www.earth-prints.org/handle/2122/13309 (2017).Mathiot, P., Jenkins, A., Harris, C. & Madec, G. Explicit representation and parametrised impacts of under ice shelf seas in the z∗- coordinate ocean model NEMO 3.6. Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 2849–2874 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dai, A. & Bloecker, C. E. Impacts of internal variability on temperature and precipitation trends in large ensemble simulations by two climate models. Clim. Dyn. 52, 289–306 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deser, C., Phillips, A., Bourdette, V. & Teng, H. Uncertainty in climate change projections: the role of internal variability. Clim. Dyn. 38, 527–546 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Middag, R. et al. Intercomparison of dissolved trace elements at the Bermuda Atlantic Time Series station. Mar. Chem. 177, 476–489 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Welch, B. L. The generalization of Student’s’ problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 34, 28 (1947).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lenoir, J. et al. Species better track climate warming in the oceans than on land. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1044–1059 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Janzen, D. H. Why mountain passes are higher in the Tropics. Am. Nat. 101, 233–249 (1967).Article 

Google Scholar 
Seebacher, F., White, C. R. & Franklin, C. E. Physiological plasticity increases resilience of ectothermic animals to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 61–66 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, A. A. & Sgrò, C. M. Climate change and evolutionary adaptation. Nature 470, 479–485 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sandblom, E. et al. Physiological constraints to climate warming in fish follow principles of plastic floors and concrete ceilings. Nat. Commun. 7, 11447 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tewksbury, J. J., Huey, R. B. & Deutsch, C. A. Putting the heat on tropical animals. Science 320, 1296–1297 (2008).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dahlke, F. T., Wohlrab, S., Butzin, M. & Pörtner, H.-O. Thermal bottlenecks in the life cycle define climate vulnerability of fish. Science 369, 65–70 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Fauna, culture and chronology datasetsA geo-referenced dataset of chronometric dates covering the late MIS 3 (55–30 kyr cal bp) was compiled from the literature (dataset 1). The dataset included 363 radiocarbon, thermoluminescence, optically stimulated luminescence and uranium series dates obtained from 62 archaeological sites and seven palaeontological sites. These chronological determinations were obtained from ten palaeontological levels and 138 archaeological levels. The archaeological levels were culturally attributed to the Mousterian (n = 75), Châtelperronian (n = 6) and Aurignacian (n = 57) technocomplexes. A number of issues can potentially hamper the chronological assessment of Palaeolithic technocomplexes from radiocarbon dates, such as pretreatment protocols that do not remove sufficient contaminants or the quality of the bone collagen extracted. Moreover, discrepancies in cultural attributions or stratigraphic inconsistencies are commonly detected in Palaeolithic archaeology. Information regarding the quality of date determinations and cultural attribution or stratigraphic issues is provided in the Supplementary Information.Our dataset also included the presence of herbivore species recovered from each archaeo-palaeontological site (hereafter referred to as local faunal assemblages (LFAs)), their body masses and their chronology. The mean body mass of both sexes, for each species, was obtained from the PHYLACINE database53 and used in the macroecological modelling approach described below (see ‘Carrying capacity of herbivores’). For visual representation purposes, the herbivore species were grouped into four weight categories: small (500 kg). The chronology of the occurrence of each herbivore species was assumed to be the same as the dated archaeo-palaeontological layer where the species remains were recovered. Thus, to estimate the chronological range of each species in each region, all radiocarbon determinations were calibrated with the IntCal20 calibration curve54 and OxCAL4.2 software55. The BAMs were run to compute the upper and lower chronological boundaries at a CI of 95.4% of each LFA (see ‘Chronological assessment’ for more details). One of the purposes of the current study was to estimate the potential fluctuations in herbivore biomass during the stadial and interstadial periods of the late MIS 3. Accordingly, the time spans of the LFAs were classified into the discrete GS and GI phases provided by Rasmussen et al.51.Geographic settingsThe Iberian Peninsula locates at the southwestern edge of Europe (Fig. 1). It constitutes a large geographic area that exhibits a remarkable diversity of ecosystems, climates and landscapes. Both now and in the past, altitudinal, latitudinal and oceanic gradients affected the conformation of two biogeographical macroregions with different flora and fauna species pools: the Eurosiberian and Mediterranean regions13,46. In the north, along the Pyrenees and Cantabrian strip, the Eurosiberian region is characterized by oceanic influence and mild temperatures in the present day, whereas the Mediterranean region features drier summers and milder winters (Fig. 1). Between the Eurosiberian and Mediterranean regions, there is a transitional area termed Submediterranean or Supramediterranean. Lastly, the Mediterranean region is divided into two distinctive bioclimatic belts: (1) the Thermomediterranean region, located at lower latitudes, with high evapotranspiration rates and affected by its proximity to the coast; and (2) the Mesomediterranean region, with lower temperatures and wetter conditions (Fig. 1).Previous studies have shown that zoocoenosis and phytocenosis differed between these macroregions in the Pleistocene13,46. However, flora and fauna distributions changed during the stadial–interstadial cycles in the Iberian Peninsula, which suggests potential alterations in the boundaries of these biogeographical regions. The modelling approach used in this study to estimate the biomass of primary consumers is dependent on the reconstructed NPP and the herbivore guild structure in each biogeographical region. To test the suitability of the present-day biogeographical demarcations of the Iberian Peninsula during MIS 3, we assessed whether the temporal trends of NPP and the composition of each herbivore palaeocommunity differed between these biogeographical regions during the MUPT.Chouakria and Nagabhusan56 proposed a dissimilarity index to compare time series data by taking into consideration the proximity of values and the temporal correlation of the time series:$${rm{CORT}}(S_1,S_2) = frac{{mathop {sum}nolimits_{i = 1}^{p – 1} {left( {u_{left( {i + 1} right)} – u_i} right)} (v_{(i + 1)} – v_i)}}{{sqrt {mathop {sum}nolimits_{i = 1}^{p – 1} {(u_{(i + 1)} – u_i)^2} } sqrt {mathop {sum}nolimits_{i = 1}^{p – 1} {(v_{(i + 1)} – v)^2} } }}$$
(1)
where S1 and S2 are the time series of data, u and v represent the values of S1 and S2, respectively, and p is the length of values of each time series. CORT(S1, S2) belongs to the interval (−1,1). The value CORT(S1, S2) = 1 indicates that in any observed period (ti, ti+1), the values of the sequence S1 and those of S2 increase or decrease at the same rate, whereas CORT = −1 indicates that when S1 increases, S2 decreases or vice versa. Lastly, CORT(S1, S2) = 0 indicates that the observed trends in S1 are independent of those observed in S2. To complement this approach by considering not only the temporal correlation between each pair of time series but also the proximity between the raw values, these authors proposed an adaptive tuning function defined as follows:$$d{rm{CORT}}left( {S_1,S_2} right) = fleft({{rm{CORT}}left( {S_1,S_2} right)} right)times dleft( {S_1,S_2} right)$$
(2)
where$$fleft( x right) = frac{2}{{1 + exp left( {k,x} right)}},k ge 0$$
(3)
In this study, k was 2, meaning that the behaviour contribution was 76% and the contribution of the proximity between values was 24%57. Hence, f(x) modulates a conventional pairwise raw data distance (d(S1,S2)) according to the observed temporal correlation56. Consequently, dCORT adjusts the degree of similarity between each pair of observations according to the temporal correlation and the proximity between values. This function was used to compare the reconstructed NPP between biogeographical regions during MIS 3 in the Iberian Peninsula. However, two different biogeographical regions could have experienced similar evolutionary trends in their NPP, even though their biota composition was different. Therefore, this analysis was complemented with a JSI to assess whether the reconstructed herbivore species composition in each palaeocommunity differed among biogeographical regions during the late MIS 3. The JSI was based on presence–absence data and was calculated as follows:$${rm{JSI}} = frac{c}{{(a + b + c)}}$$
(4)
where c is the number of shared species in both regions and a and b are the numbers of species that were only present in one of the biogeographical regions. Therefore, the higher the value the more similar the palaeocommunities of both regions were.Chronological assessmentPivotal to any hypothesis of Neanderthal replacement patterns by AMHs is the chronology of that population turnover. To this end, we used three different approaches to provide greater confidence in the results: BAMs, the OLE model and SPD of archaeological assemblages. As detailed below, each of these approaches provides complementary information about the MUPT.First, we built a set of BAMs for the Mousterian, Châtelperronian and Aurignacian technocomplexes in each region during the MIS 3. As stated above, we compiled the available radiocarbon dates for Iberia between 55 and 30 kyr cal bp. However, not all dates or levels were included in the Bayesian chronology models. Radiocarbon determinations obtained from shell remains were incorporated in the dataset (dataset 1); however, the local variation of the reservoir age was unknown from 55 to 30 kyr bp. Because of uncertainties related to marine reservoir offsets, all BAMs that incorporated dates from marine shells were run twice: including and excluding these dates. All of the archaeological levels with cultural attribution issues or stratigraphic inconsistencies were excluded. The Supplementary Note provides a detailed description of the sites, levels and dates excluded and their justification. All BAMs were built for each technocomplex using the OxCAL4.2 software55 and IntCal20 calibration curve54.Bayesian chronology models were built for each archaeological and palaeontological level. Then, the dates associated with each technocomplex were grouped within a single phase to determine each culture’s regional appearance or disappearance. Our interest was not focused on the chronological duration of the Mousterian, Châtelperronian and Aurignacian cultures, but on the probability distribution function of the temporal boundaries of these cultures in each region. Thus, this chronological assessment aims to provide an updated chronological frame for Neanderthal replacement by AMHs in Iberia. For this reason, we did not differentiate between proto- and early Aurignacian cultures, since both are attributed to AMHs.In each BAM, we inserted into the same sequence the radiocarbon dates associated with a given technocomplex within a start and end boundary to bracket each culture, which allowed us to determine the probability distribution function for the beginning and end moment of each cultural phase6. The resolution of all models was set at 20 years. We used a t-type outlier model with an initial 5% probability for each determination, but when more than one radiocarbon date was obtained from the same bone remain, we used an s-type outlier model and the combine function. The thermoluminescence dating likelihoods were included in the models, together with their associated 1σ uncertainty ranges. When dates with low agreement ( More

Field, C. B., Behrenfeld, M. J., Randerson, J. T. & Falkowski, P. Primary production of the biosphere: integrating terrestrial and oceanic components. Science 281, 237–240 (1998).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bar-On, Y. M., Phillips, R. & Milo, R. The biomass distribution on Earth. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 6506–6511 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Choy, C., Wabnitz, C., Weijerman, M., Woodworth-Jefcoats, P. & Polovina, J. Finding the way to the top: how the composition of oceanic mid-trophic micronekton groups determines apex predator biomass in the central North Pacific. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 549, 9–25 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Pauly, D. & Christensen, V. Primary production required to sustain global fisheries. Nature 374, 255–257 (1995).Bertrand, A. et al. Broad impacts of fine-scale dynamics on seascape structure from zooplankton to seabirds. Nat. Commun. 5, 5239 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brierley, A. S. Diel vertical migration. Curr. Biol. 24, R1074–R1076 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Behrenfeld, M. J. et al. Global satellite-observed daily vertical migrations of ocean animals. Nature 576, 257–261 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Angel, M. V. & de C. Baker, A. Vertical distribution of the standing crop of plankton and micronekton at three stations in the northeast Atlantic. Biol. Oceanogr. 2, 1–30 (1982).
Google Scholar 
Cook, A. B., Sutton, T. T., Galbraith, J. K. & Vecchione, M. Deep-pelagic (0–3000 m) fish assemblage structure over the Mid-Atlantic Ridge in the area of the Charlie-Gibbs Fracture Zone. Deep Sea Res. 2 98, 279–291 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Hidaka, K., Kawaguchi, K., Murakami, M. & Takahashi, M. Downward transport of organic carbon by diel migratory micronekton in the western equatorial Pacific: its quantitative and qualitative importance. Deep Sea Res. 1 48, 1923–1939 (2001).Ariza, A., Garijo, J. C., Landeira, J. M., Bordes, F. & Hernández-León, S. Migrant biomass and respiratory carbon flux by zooplankton and micronekton in the subtropical northeast Atlantic Ocean (Canary Islands). Prog. Oceanogr. 134, 330–342 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Saba, G. K. et al. Toward a better understanding of fish-based contribution to ocean carbon flux. Limnol. Oceanogr. 66, 1639–1664 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bopp, L. et al. Multiple stressors of ocean ecosystems in the 21st century: projections with CMIP5 models. Biogeosciences 10, 6225–6245 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Kwiatkowski, L. et al. Twenty-first century ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation, and upper-ocean nutrient and primary production decline from CMIP6 model projections. Biogeosciences 17, 3439–3470 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tittensor, D. P. et al. A protocol for the intercomparison of marine fishery and ecosystem models: Fish-MIP v1.0. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 1421–1442 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Bryndum-Buchholz, A. et al. Twenty-first-century climate change impacts on marine animal biomass and ecosystem structure across ocean basins. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 459–472 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Kwiatkowski, L., Aumont, O. & Bopp, L. Consistent trophic amplification of marine biomass declines under climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 218–229 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Lotze, H. K. et al. Global ensemble projections reveal trophic amplification of ocean biomass declines with climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 12907–12912 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tittensor, D. P. et al. Next-generation ensemble projections reveal higher climate risks for marine ecosystems. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 973–981 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Heneghan, R. F. et al. Disentangling diverse responses to climate change among global marine ecosystem models. Prog. Oceanogr. 198, 102659 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Reid, S. B., Hirota, J., Young, R. E. & Hallacher, L. E. Mesopelagic-boundary community in Hawaii: micronekton at the interface between neritic and oceanic ecosystems. Mar. Biol. 109, 427–440 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Ben Mustapha, Z., Alvain, S., Jamet, C., Loisel, H. & Dessailly, D. Automatic classification of water-leaving radiance anomalies from global SeaWiFS imagery: application to the detection of phytoplankton groups in open ocean waters. Remote Sens. Environ. 146, 97–112 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Pakhomov, E. & Yamamura, O. Report of the Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment. PICES Scientific Report 38 (North Pacific Marine Science Organization, 2010).Kaartvedt, S., Staby, A. & Aksnes, D. Efficient trawl avoidance by mesopelagic fishes causes large underestimation of their biomass. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 456, 1–6 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Gjøsaeter, J. & Kawaguchi, K. A Review of the World Resources of Mesopelagic Fish Fisheries Technical Paper 193 (FAO, 1980).Catul, V., Gauns, M. & Karuppasamy, P. K. A review on mesopelagic fishes belonging to family Myctophidae. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 21, 339–354 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Benoit-Bird, K. J. & Lawson, G. L. Ecological insights from pelagic habitats acquired using active acoustic techniques. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 8, 463–490 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Annasawmy, P. et al. Micronekton diel migration, community composition and trophic position within two biogeochemical provinces of the south west Indian Ocean: insight from acoustics and stable isotopes. Deep Sea Res. 1 138, 85–97 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Haris, K. et al. Sounding out life in the deep using acoustic data from ships of opportunity. Sci. Data 8, 23 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Irigoien, X. et al. The Simrad EK60 echosounder dataset from the Malaspina circumnavigation. Sci. Data 8, 259 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Irigoien, X. et al. Large mesopelagic fishes biomass and trophic efficiency in the open ocean. Nat. Commun. 5, 3271 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Klevjer, T. A. et al. Large scale patterns in vertical distribution and behaviour of mesopelagic scattering layers. Sci. Rep. 6, 19873 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Proud, R., Cox, M., Le Guen, C. & Brierley, A. Fine-scale depth structure of pelagic communities throughout the global ocean based on acoustic sound scattering layers. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 598, 35–48 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Proud, R., Cox, M. J. & Brierley, A. S. Biogeography of the global ocean’s mesopelagic zone. Curr. Biol. 27, 113–119 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ramsay, J. O. & Silverman, B. W. Functional Data Analysis (Springer, 2005).Moriarty, R. & O’Brien, T. D. Distribution of mesozooplankton biomass in the global ocean. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 5, 45–55 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Aksnes, D. L. et al. Light penetration structures the deep acoustic scattering layers in the global ocean. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602468 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Bertrand, A., Ballón, M. & Chaigneau, A. Acoustic observation of living organisms reveals the upper limit of the oxygen minimum zone. PLoS ONE 5, e10330 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Bianchi, D., Galbraith, E. D., Carozza, D. A., Mislan, K. A. S. & Stock, C. A. Intensification of open-ocean oxygen depletion by vertically migrating animals. Nat. Geosci. 6, 545–548 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Godø, O. R., Patel, R. & Pedersen, G. Diel migration and swimbladder resonance of small fish: some implications for analyses of multifrequency echo data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 66, 1143–1148 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Agersted, M. D. et al. Mass estimates of individual gas-bearing mesopelagic fish from in situ wideband acoustic measurements ground-truthed by biological net sampling. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 78, 3658–3673 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Backus, R. & Craddock, J. in Oceanic Sound Scattering Prediction (eds Anderson, N. R. & Zahuranec, B. J.) 529–547 (Springer, 1977).Longhurst, A. Ecological Geography of the Sea (Elsevier, 2010).Spalding, M. D., Agostini, V. N., Rice, J. & Grant, S. M. Pelagic provinces of the world: A biogeographic classification of the world’s surface pelagic waters. Ocean Coast. Manage. 60, 19–30 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Sutton, T. T. et al. A global biogeographic classification of the mesopelagic zone. Deep Sea Res. 1 126, 85–102 (2017).
Google Scholar 
IPCC Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2021).Kooijman, B. & Kooijman, S. A. L. M. Dynamic Energy Budget Theory for Metabolic Organisation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010).Cheung, W. W. L., Watson, R. & Pauly, D. Signature of ocean warming in global fisheries catch. Nature 497, 365–368 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fossheim, M. et al. Recent warming leads to a rapid borealization of fish communities in the Arctic. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 673–677 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Proud, R., Handegard, N. O., Kloser, R. J., Cox, M. J. & Brierley, A. S. From siphonophores to deep scattering layers: uncertainty ranges for the estimation of global mesopelagic fish biomass. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 76, 718–733 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Chapman, R. P., Bluy, O. Z., Adlington, R. H. & Robison, A. E. Deep scattering layer spectra in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and adjacent seas. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 56, 1722–1734 (1974).
Google Scholar 
Dornan, T., Fielding, S., Saunders, R. A. & Genner, M. J. Swimbladder morphology masks Southern Ocean mesopelagic fish biomass. Proc. R. Soc. B 286, 20190353 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Escobar-Flores, P. C., O’Driscoll, R. L., Montgomery, J. C., Ladroit, Y. & Jendersie, S. Estimates of density of mesopelagic fish in the Southern Ocean derived from bulk acoustic data collected by ships of opportunity. Polar Biol. 43, 43–61 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Dornan, T., Fielding, S., Saunders, R. A. & Genner, M. J. Large mesopelagic fish biomass in the Southern Ocean resolved by acoustic properties. Proc. R. Soc. B 289, 20211781 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Reygondeau, G. et al. Climate change-induced emergence of novel biogeochemical provinces. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 657 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Blanchard, J. L. et al. Linked sustainability challenges and trade-offs among fisheries, aquaculture and agriculture. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1240–1249 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Bianchi, D., Carozza, D. A., Galbraith, E. D., Guiet, J. & DeVries, T. Estimating global biomass and biogeochemical cycling of marine fish with and without fishing. Sci. Adv. 7, eabd7554 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Grimaldo, E. et al. Investigating the potential for a commercial fishery in the northeast Atlantic utilizing mesopelagic species. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 77, 2541–2556 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Olsen, R. E. et al. Can mesopelagic mixed layers be used as feed sources for salmon aquaculture? Deep Sea Res. 2 180, 104722 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
De Robertis, A. & Higginbottom, I. A post-processing technique to estimate the signal-to-noise ratio and remove echosounder background noise. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 64, 1282–1291 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Ryan, T. E., Downie, R. A., Kloser, R. J. & Keith, G. Reducing bias due to noise and attenuation in open-ocean echo integration data. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 72, 2482–2493 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Perrot, Y. et al. Matecho: an open-source tool for processing fisheries acoustics data. Acoust. Aust. 46, 241–248 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Stanton, T. Review and recommendations for the modelling of acoustic scattering by fluid-like elongated zooplankton: euphausiids and copepods. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 793–807 (2000).
Google Scholar 
GEBCO: A Continuous Terrain Model of the Global Oceans and Land (British Oceanographic Data Centre, 2019).EchoPY v.1.1: Fisheries Acoustic Data Processing in Python (Python, 2020); https://pypi.org/project/echopyde Boor, C. A Practical Guide to Splines (Springer, 1978).Clustering (SciKit Learn, 2021); https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/clusteringEyring, V. et al. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 1937–1958 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Sonnewald, M., Dutkiewicz, S., Hill, C. & Forget, G. Elucidating ecological complexity: unsupervised learning determines global marine eco-provinces. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay4740 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Sonnewald, M. & Lguensat, R. Revealing the impact of global heating on North Atlantic circulation using transparent machine learning. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 13, e2021MS002496 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Locarnini, R. et al. World Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 1: Temperature NOAA Atlas NESDIS 81 (NOAA, 2018).García, H. et al. World Ocean Atlas 2018, Volume 3: Dissolved Oxygen, Apparent Oxygen Utilization, and Oxygen Saturation NOAA Atlas NESDIS 83 (NOAA, 2018).Sathyendranath, S. et al. ESA Ocean Colour Climate Change Initiative (Ocean_Colour_cci): Version 5.0 Data. NERC EDS Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, 19 May 2021; http://www.esa-oceancolour-cci.org More

Nearly two years into the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science, research, including some featured in this month’s issue, shows that there is still a wealth of scientific secrets to uncover in the ocean depths.
In many ways, considering the ocean as a single unit is overly broad. The global ocean covers 71% of the planet’s surface, reaches down to depths of over 10 kilometres, includes about 1.35 billion cubic kilometres of water and houses an approximated 2.2 million eukaryotic species. There are distinct regions, with distinct physical properties, and, in turn, there are distinct species. Yet, the world’s oceans do have a level of physical and thematic connectivity.
Credit: Daria Zaseda / DigitalVision Vectors / GettyPhysically, a large part of the connection is related to the presence of large rotating ocean currents that transfer heat across latitudes and contribute to ocean mixing (thermohaline circulation). Some of these currents are warming at alarming rates — up to three times faster than the rest of the ocean, leading to questions about the underlying mechanisms of the warming and expectations for change.Focusing on western boundary currents (WBCs) in the Southern Hemisphere, in an Article in this issue of Nature Climate Change, Li and colleagues answer a long-debated question on the mechanisms of change, showing that temperature-gradient-related instabilities, rather than flow-speed-related instabilities are behind the shifts. In another Article, focusing on the global future changes of eddies (including eddy-rich WBCs), Beech and colleagues report the development of a flexible method that maximizes local model resolution while minimizing computational costs, to reveal the long-term geographical specificities and nonlinear temperature increases expected to 2100 (see also the News and Views article by Yang on these papers).A recent paper1 has demonstrated the important role of large ocean currents in defining plankton biogeography and dynamics, and WBC warming has previously been linked to impacts such as fishery collapses. The tight link between physical processes and biological responses is an underscoring theme of climate change ecology, but is perhaps more apparent in the open ocean, where physical processes can be easily (if imperfectly) linked to primary productivity using remotely sensed phytoplankton pigment absorption, and where life is generally less impacted by geographical, political or disturbance-based boundaries compared with land and freshwater systems. These aspects may facilitate modelling of current and future communities, while also allowing broader assumptions to be made about biological movement and connectivity.Despite these benefits, understanding ocean change comes with its own difficulties. Biological sampling, while easy enough in the surface waters, becomes increasingly difficult at depth. Although future habitats for various organisms have been projected on the basis of their thermal limits in the ocean, these predictions often still rely on temperatures at the surface of the sea. Addressing this, Santana-Falcón and colleagues report in an Article the global mapping of ocean temperature changes to depths of 1,000 metres, and reveal the complex depth-dependent changes in thermal upper and lower bounds that marine organisms will soon be subjected to. In another Article, Ariza and colleagues neatly address the issue of directly monitoring deep-ocean change by compiling a large database of sound-based observations, and subsequently classifying the ocean’s ‘echobiomes’, defined as sound-scattering communities with comparable structural and functional properties (see also the accompanying News and Views article by Hazen). Sound-based methods are also increasingly being used on land2, and represent an exciting tool for monitoring change, particularly in hard-to-reach places such as deep forests, high mountaintops or underground. While the sound reflection method used in the study by Ariza and colleagues has limits in its ability to identify organisms at the individual or species levels, it does provide a community-level focus on change, which remains much needed in the field of global change ecology.At the other end of the spatial spectrum, research by Lee and colleagues reported in an Article also in this issue dives deep into the DNA of a keystone ocean organism (a copepod), to understand the mechanisms that may allow longer-term adaptation to warming and pH stress. The work reveals remarkable adaptation over just a few short generations, which is linked to epigenetic changes. As climate change impacts continue to escalate, the ability of organisms to invoke both shorter- and longer-term adaptations has become an increasingly relevant area of research. Epigenetics has previously been reported as a quick-response method to cope with environmental stress, and may be particularly relevant in defining the adaptation of short-lived animals such as insects and the resilience of the communities they uphold.The five research pieces linked to the oceans in this issue reveal just some of the diversity of topics, methods and scales relevant to understanding global change. Also increasingly relevant are works on ocean conservation3 and on the social and economic impacts of ocean change4,5. Like climate change science, the topic of ocean change is less of a field, and more of a cross-disciplinary theme. More

Levin, L. A. et al. The function of marine critical transition zones and the importance of sediment biodiversity. Ecosystems 4, 430–451 (2001).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wagner, G. M. & Sallema-Mtui, R. in Estuaries: A Lifeline of Ecosystem Services in the Western Indian Ocean Estuaries of the World (eds S. Diop, P. Scheren, & J. Machiwa) 183–207 (2016).Brown, C. J. et al. The assessment of fishery status depends on fish habitats. Fish Fish. 20, 1–14 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
De La Morinière, E. C., Pollux, B., Nagelkerken, I. & Van der Velde, G. Post-settlement life cycle migration patterns and habitat preference of coral reef fish that use seagrass and mangrove habitats as nurseries. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 55, 309–321 (2002).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Branton, M. & Richardson, J. S. Assessing the value of the umbrella-species concept for conservation planning with meta-analysis. Conserv. Biol. 25, 9–20 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dudgeon, D. et al. Freshwater biodiversity: Importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol. Rev. 81, 163–182 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zainal Abidin, D. H. et al. DNA-based taxonomy of a mangrove-associated community of fishes in Southeast Asia. Sci. Rep. 11, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97324-1 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gauthier, G. et al. Long-term monitoring at multiple trophic levels suggests heterogeneity in responses to climate change in the Canadian Arctic tundra. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 368, 20120482 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Valentini, A. et al. Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. 25, 929–942 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Da Fonseca, G. A. & Kent, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853 (2000).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chong, V. C., Lee, P. K. & Lau, C. M. Diversity, extinction risk and conservation of Malaysian fishes. J. Fish Biol. 76, 2009–2066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2010.02685.x (2010).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zainal Abidin, D. H. et al. Ichthyofauna of Sungai Merbok Mangrove Forest Reserve, northwest Peninsular Malaysia, and its adjacent marine waters. Check List 17, 601–631. https://doi.org/10.15560/17.2.601 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ong, J. et al. in Hutan paya laut Merbok, Kedah: Pengurusan hutan, persekitaran fizikal dan kepelbagaian flora. Vol. 23 Siri kepelbagaian biologi hutan (ed Ku Aman KA Abd Rahim AR, Abu Hassan MN, Abdullah M, Nor Hazliza MB, Latiff A) 21–33 (Jabatan Perhutanan Semenanjung Malaysia, 2015).Hookham, B., Shau-Hwai, A. T., Dayrat, B. & Hintz, W. A baseline measure of tree and gastropod biodiversity in replanted and natural mangrove stands in Malaysia: Langkawi Island and Sungai Merbok. Trop. Life Sci. Res. 25, 1 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jamaluddin, J. A. F. et al. DNA barcoding of shrimps from a mangrove biodiversity hotspot. Mitochondrial DNA Part A 30, 618–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701394.2019.1597073 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mansor, M., Mohammad-Zafrizal, M., Nur-Fadhilah, M., Khairun, Y. & Wan-Maznah, W. Temporal and spatial variations in fish assemblage structures in relation to the physicochemical parameters of the Merbok estuary, Kedah. J. Nat. Sci. Res. 2, 110–127 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Alshari, N. F. M. A. H. et al. Metabarcoding of Fish Larvae in the Merbok River reveals species diversity and distribution along its mangrove environment. Zool. Stud. 60, 60–76. https://doi.org/10.6620/ZS.2021 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deiner, K., Fronhofer, E. A., Mächler, E., Walser, J.-C. & Altermatt, F. Environmental DNA reveals that rivers are conveyer belts of biodiversity information. Nat. Commun. 7, 1–9 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Hupało, K. et al. An urban Blitz with a twist: Rapid biodiversity assessment using aquatic environmental DNA. Environ. DNA 3, 200–213 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Bohmann, K. et al. Environmental DNA for wildlife biology and biodiversity monitoring. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 358–367 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Taberlet, P., Coissac, E., Hajibabaei, M. & Rieseberg, L. H. Environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 21, 1789–1793 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ahn, H. et al. Evaluation of fish biodiversity in estuaries using environmental DNA metabarcoding. PLoS ONE 15, e0231127 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Polanco, F. A. et al. Detecting aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity in a tropical estuary using environmental DNA. Biotropica 53, 1606–1619 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Zhang, H., Yoshizawa, S., Iwasaki, W. & Xian, W. Seasonal fish assemblage structure using environmental DNA in the Yangtze Estuary and its adjacent waters. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 515. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00515 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stat, M. et al. Ecosystem biomonitoring with eDNA: Metabarcoding across the tree of life in a tropical marine environment. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–11 (2017).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
West, K. et al. Large-scale eDNA metabarcoding survey reveals marine biogeographic break and transitions over tropical north-western Australia. Divers. Distrib. 27, 1942–1957 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Hallam, J., Clare, E. L., Jones, J. I. & Day, J. J. Biodiversity assessment across a dynamic riverine system: A comparison of eDNA metabarcoding versus traditional fish surveying methods. Environ. DNA 3, 1247–1266 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Seymour, M. et al. Environmental DNA provides higher resolution assessment of riverine biodiversity and ecosystem function via spatio-temporal nestedness and turnover partitioning. Commun. Biol. 4, 1–12 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Aglieri, G. et al. Environmental DNA effectively captures functional diversity of coastal fish communities. Mol. Ecol. 30, 3127–3139 (2021).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fujii, K. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding for fish community analysis in backwater lakes: A comparison of capture methods. PLoS ONE 14, e0210357 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lecaudey, L. A., Schletterer, M., Kuzovlev, V. V., Hahn, C. & Weiss, S. J. Fish diversity assessment in the headwaters of the Volga River using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshwat. Ecosyst. 29, 1785–1800 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Zou, K. et al. eDNA metabarcoding as a promising conservation tool for monitoring fish diversity in a coastal wetland of the Pearl River Estuary compared to bottom trawling. Sci. Total Environ. 702, 134704 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Klymus, K. E., Marshall, N. T. & Stepien, C. A. Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding assays to detect invasive invertebrate species in the Great Lakes. PLoS ONE 12, 24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177643 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, C. et al. Tracking ghosts: Combined electrofishing and environmental DNA surveillance efforts for Asian carps in Ontario waters of Lake Erie. Manag. Biol. Invasion 5, 225–231. https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2014.5.3.05 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alexander, J. B. et al. Development of a multi-assay approach for monitoring coral diversity using eDNA metabarcoding. Coral Reefs 39, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-019-01875-9 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Port, J. A. et al. Assessing vertebrate biodiversity in a kelp forest ecosystem using environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 25, 527–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13481 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fritts, A. K. et al. Development of a quantitative PCR method for screening ichthyoplankton samples for bigheaded carps. Biol. Invasions 21, 1143–1153 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Maruyama, A., Nakamura, K., Yamanaka, H., Kondoh, M. & Minamoto, T. The release rate of environmental DNA from juvenile and adult fish. PLoS ONE 9, e114639 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Amberg, J. J., Merkes, C. M., Stott, W., Rees, C. B. & Erickson, R. A. Environmental DNA as a tool to help inform zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, management in inland lakes. Manag. Biol. Invasion 10, 96 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Gu, Z., Gu, L., Eils, R., Schlesner, M. & Brors, B. Circlize implements and enhances circular visualization in R. Bioinformatics 30, 2811–2812. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu393 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zainal Abidin, D. H. & Noor Adelyna, M. A. Environmental DNA (eDNA) Metabarcoding as a Sustainable Tool of Coastal Biodiversity Assessment in Universities as Living Labs for Sustainable Development 211–225 (Springer, 2020).Sard, N. M. et al. Comparison of fish detections, community diversity, and relative abundance using environmental DNA metabarcoding and traditional gears. Environ. DNA 1, 368–384 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Hoffman, J. C., Kelly, J. R., Trebitz, A. S., Peterson, G. S. & West, C. W. Effort and potential efficiencies for aquatic non-native species early detection. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 68, 2064–2079 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Yamamoto, S. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals local fish communities in a species-rich coastal sea. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–12 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Whitfield, A. K. Fish species in estuaries—From partial association to complete dependency. J. Fish Biol. 97, 1262–1264 (2020).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Carpenter, K. & Niem, V. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific. Volume 5. Bony Fishes Part 3 (Menidae to Pomacentridae). Vol. 5, 2791–3380 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2001).Carpenter, K. E. & Niem, V. FAO species identification guide for fishery purposes. The Living Marine Resources of the Western Central Pacific. Volume 6. Bony Fishes Part 4 (Labridae to Latimeriidae), Estuarine Crocodiles, Sea Turtles, Sea Snakes and Marine Mammals. Vol. 6, 3381–4218 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2001).Carpenter, K. E. & Niem, V. H. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific: Batoid fishes, chimaera and bony fishes part 1 (Elopidae to Linophrynidae). Vol. 3, 1397–2068 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1999).Carpenter, K. E. & Niem, V. H. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific. Volume 4. Bony Fishes Part 2 (Mugilidae to Carangidae). Vol. 4, 2069–2790 (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1999).Benson, D. A. et al. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D41–D47 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pentinsaari, M., Ratnasingham, S., Miller, S. E. & Hebert, P. D. N. BOLD and GenBank revisited—Do identification errors arise in the lab or in the sequence libraries?. PLoS ONE 15, e0231814–e0231814. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231814 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ardura, A., Planes, S. & Garcia-Vazquez, E. Applications of DNA barcoding to fish landings: Authentication and diversity assessment. Zookeys 365, 49–65. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.365.6409 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
ZainalAbidin, D. H. et al. Population genetics of the black scar oyster, Crassostrea iredalei: Repercussion of anthropogenic interference. Mitochondrial DNA Part A 27, 647–658 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kelly, R. P. et al. Genetic and manual survey methods yield different and complementary views of an ecosystem. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 283 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Ratnasingham, S. & Hebert, P. D. BOLD: The barcode of life data system (http://www.barcodinglife.org). Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 355–364 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Barnes, M. A. & Turner, C. R. The ecology of environmental DNA and implications for conservation genetics. Conserv. Genet. 17, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-015-0775-4 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vasconcelos, R. P. et al. Global patterns and predictors of fish species richness in estuaries. J. Anim. Ecol. 84, 1331–1341 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shah, A. S. R. M., Hashim, Z. H. & Sah, S. A. M. Freshwater fishes of Gunung Jerai, Kedah Darul Aman: A preliminary study. Trop. Life Sci. Res. 20, 59 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Md. Zain, K. et al. Fish diversity along streams in Ulu Muda Forest Reserve, Kedah, Peninsular Malaysia. Malayan Nat. J. 73, 349–361 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Thomsen, P. F. et al. Monitoring endangered freshwater biodiversity using environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 21, 2565–2573 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wang, S. et al. Methodology of fish eDNA and its applications in ecology and environment. Sci. Total Environ. 755, 142622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142622 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Deiner, K. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding: Transforming how we survey animal and plant communities. Mol. Ecol. 26, 5872–5895 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre (SEAFDEC). Status and trends of sharks fisheries in South East Asia in Malaysia Shark Fisheries (Fisheries and Resources Monitoring System (FIRMS), Rome, 2004).Zhang, S., Zhao, J. & Yao, M. A comprehensive and comparative evaluation of primers for metabarcoding eDNA from fish. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 1609–1625 (2020).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Doi, H. et al. Environmental DNA analysis for estimating the abundance and biomass of stream fish. Freshw. Biol. 62, 30–39 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hayami, K. et al. Effects of sampling seasons and locations on fish environmental DNA metabarcoding in dam reservoirs. Ecol. Evol. 10, 5354–5367 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Collins, R. A. et al. Persistence of environmental DNA in marine systems. Commun. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-018-0192-6 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Morey, K. C., Bartley, T. J. & Hanner, R. H. Validating environmental DNA metabarcoding for marine fishes in diverse ecosystems using a public aquarium. Environ. DNA 2, 330–342 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Shaw, J. L. et al. Comparison of environmental DNA metabarcoding and conventional fish survey methods in a river system. Biol. Cons. 197, 131–138 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Siegenthaler, A. et al. Metabarcoding of shrimp stomach content: Harnessing a natural sampler for fish biodiversity monitoring. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19, 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12956 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Stoeckle, M. Y., Das Mishu, M. & Charlop-Powers, Z. Improved environmental DNA reference library detects overlooked marine fishes in New Jersey, United States. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 226 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Collins, R. A. et al. Non-specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1985–2001 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Hebert, P. D., Ratnasingham, S. & De Waard, J. R. Barcoding animal life: Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 270, S96–S99 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Miya, M. et al. MiFish, a set of universal PCR primers for metabarcoding environmental DNA from fishes: Detection of more than 230 subtropical marine species. Roy. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 150088 (2015).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mariani, S., Baillie, C., Colosimo, G. & Riesgo, A. Sponges as natural environmental DNA samplers. Curr. Biol. 29, R401–R402 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bylemans, J., Gleeson, D. M., Duncan, R. P., Hardy, C. M. & Furlan, E. M. A performance evaluation of targeted eDNA and eDNA metabarcoding analyses for freshwater fishes. Environ. DNA 1, 402–414 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Chin, A. T. et al. Beta diversity changes in estuarine fish communities due to environmental change. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 603, 161–173 (2018).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sloterdijk, H. et al. Composition and structure of the larval fish community related to environmental parameters in a tropical estuary impacted by climate change. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 197, 10–26 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Malaysian Meteorological Department. Tinjauan Cuaca bagi Tempoh November 2017 hingga April 2018. National Climate Centre: Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. Retrieved on February 1st, 2018, from https://www.met.gov.my/iklim/ramalanbermusim/ (2017).Leray, M. et al. A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: Application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents. Front. Zool. 10, 34 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Geller, J., Meyer, C., Parker, M. & Hawk, H. Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all-taxa biotic surveys. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 13, 851–861 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Illumina. 16S Metagenomic Sequencing Library Preparation. https://support.illumina.com/documents/documentation/chemistry_documentation/16s/16s-metagenomic-library-prep-guide-15044223-b.pdf 1–28 (2013).Andrews, S. FastQC: A Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. (Babraham Bioinformatics (Babraham Institute, 2010).Ewels, P., Magnusson, M., Lundin, S. & Käller, M. MultiQC: Summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report. Bioinformatics 32, 3047–3048 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. UPARSE: Highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nat. Methods 10, 996–998 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Andruszkiewicz, E. A. et al. Biomonitoring of marine vertebrates in Monterey Bay using eDNA metabarcoding. PLoS ONE 12, e0176343 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Goldberg, C. S. et al. Critical considerations for the application of environmental DNA methods to detect aquatic species. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1299–1307 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Fricke, R., Eschmeyer, W. N. & Van der Laan, R. Eschmeyer’s Catalog of Fishes: Genera, species, references. http://www.calacademy.org/scientists/catalog-of-fishes-family-group-names/ (2021).Ebert, D. A. & Fowler, S. Sharks of the World (Princeton University Press, 2013).
Google Scholar 
R Core Team. RStudio: integrated development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA URL http://www.rstudio.com42, 14 (2015).McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Phyloseq: An R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8, e61217 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Oksanen, J. et al. Package ‘vegan’. Commun. Ecol. Pack. 2, 1–295 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).MATH 

Google Scholar  More