Philippa Kaur

Szathmáry E. Toward major evolutionary transitions theory 2.0. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:10104–11. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1421398112CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Niklas KJ, Newman SA. The origins of multicellular organisms. Evol Dev. 2013;15:41–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/ede.12013Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pfeiffer T, Bonhoeffer S. An evolutionary scenario for the transition to undifferentiated multicellularity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:1095–8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0335420100CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fisher RM, Regenberg B, Multicellular group formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Royal Soc B: Biol Sci. 2019;286. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1098Umen JG. Green algae and the origins of multicellularity in the plant kingdom. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2014;6:a016170 https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a016170Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Knoll AH. The multiple origins of complex multicellularity. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci. 2011;39:217–39. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100209CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bonner JT. The origins of multicellularity. Integr Biol Issues N. Rev. 1998;1:27–36.Article 

Google Scholar 
Tarnita CE, Taubes CH, Nowak MA. Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together. J Theor Biol. 2013;320:10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ratcliff WC, Denison RF, Borrello M, Travisano M. Experimental evolution of multicellularity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109:1595–1600. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115323109Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Koschwanez JH, Foster KR, Murray AW. Sucrose utilization in budding yeast as a model for the origin of undifferentiated multicellularity. PLoS Biol. 2011;9:e1001122 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001122CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kuzdzal-Fick JJ, Chen L, Balázsi G. Disadvantages and benefits of evolved unicellularity versus multicellularity in budding yeast. Ecol Evol. 2019;9:8509–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5322Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Brückner S, Schubert R, Kraushaar T, Hartmann R, Hoffmann D, Jelli E, et al. Kin discrimination in social yeast is mediated by cell surface receptors of the flo11 adhesin family. eLife 2020;9. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55587Smukalla S, Caldara M, Pochet N, Beauvais A, Guadagnini S, Yan C, et al. FLO1 is a variable green beard gene that drives biofilm-like cooperation in budding yeast. Cell. 2008;135:726–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.09.037CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Driscoll WW, Travisano M, Synergistic cooperation promotes multicellular performance and unicellular free-rider persistence. Nat Commun. 2017;8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15707Pentz JT, Márquez-Zacarías P, Bozdag GO, Burnetti A, Yunker PJ, Libby E, et al. Ecological advantages and evolutionary limitations of aggregative multicellular development. Curr Biol. 2020;30:4155–.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.08.006.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Goossens K, Willaert R. Flocculation protein structure and cell-cell adhesion mechanism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Lett. 2010;32:1571–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-010-0352-3CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Di Gianvito P, Tesnière C, Suzzi G, Blondin B, Tofalo R. FLO5 gene controls flocculation phenotype and adhesive properties in a Saccharomyces cerevisiae sparkling wine strain. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09990-9CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Veelders M, Brückner S, Ott D, Unverzagt C, Mösch HU, Essen LO. Structural basis of flocculin-mediated social behavior in yeast. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:22511–6. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1013210108Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Verstrepen KJ, Jansen A, Lewitter F, Fink GR. Intragenic tandem repeats generate functional variability. Nat Genet. 2005;37:986–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1618CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Verstrepen KJ, Klis FM. Flocculation, adhesion and biofilm formation in yeasts. Mol Microbiol. 2006;60:5–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2006.05072.xCAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Verstrepen KJ, Reynolds TB, Fink GR. Origins of variation in the fungal cell surface. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2:533–40. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro927CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kraushaar T, Brückner S, Veelders M, Rhinow D, Schreiner F, Birke R, et al. Interactions by the fungal Flo11 adhesin depend on a fibronectin type III-like adhesin domain girdled by aromatic bands. Structure. 2015;23:1005–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2015.03.021CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chen L, Noorbakhsh J, Adams RM, Samaniego-Evans J, Agollah G, Nevozhay D, et al. Two-dimensionality of yeast colony expansion accompanied by pattern formation. PLoS Comput Biol. 2014;10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003979Oppler ZJ, Parrish ME, Murphy HA, Variation at an adhesin locus suggests sociality in natural populations of the yeast saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc Royal Soc B: Biol Sci. 2019;286. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1948Lo WS, Dranginis AM. The cell surface flocculin Flo11 is required for pseudohyphae formation and invasion by Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Biol Cell. 1998;9:161–71. https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.9.1.161CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
El-Kirat-Chatel S, Beaussart A, Vincent SP, Abellán Flos M, Hols P, Lipke PN, et al. Forces in yeast flocculation. Nanoscale. 2015;7:1760–7. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4nr06315eCAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kobayashi O, Hayashi N, Kuroki R, Sone H. Region of Flo1 proteins responsible for sugar recognition. J Bacteriol. 1998;180:6503–10. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.180.24.6503-6510.1998CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kapsetaki SE, West SA. The costs and benefits of multicellular group formation in algae. Evolution. 2019;73:1296–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.13712Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Quintero-Galvis JF, Paleo-López R, Solano-Iguaran JJ, Poupin MJ, Ledger T, Gaitan-Espitia JD, et al. Exploring the evolution of multicellularity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae under bacteria environment: An experimental phylogenetics approach. Ecol Evol. 2018;8:4619–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3979Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Goossens KV, Ielasi FS, Nookaew I, Stals I, Alonso-Sarduy L, Daenen L, et al. Molecular mechanism of flocculation self-recognition in yeast and its role in mating and survival. mBio. 2015;6:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00427-15CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. J Theor Biol. 1964;7:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Queller DC, Ponte E, Bozzaro S, Strassmann JE. Single-gene greenbeard effects in the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum. Science. 2003;299:105–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1077742CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Foty RA, Steinberg MS. The differential adhesion hypothesis: A direct evaluation. Dev Biol. 2005;278:255–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.11.012CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nowak MA. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science. 2006;314:1560–3. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nadell CD, Foster KR, Xavier JB. Emergence of spatial structure in cell groups and the evolution of cooperation. PLoS Comput Biol. 2010;6:e1000716 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000716CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Drescher K, Nadell CD, Stone HA, Wingreen NS, Bassler BL. Solutions to the public goods dilemma in bacterial biofilms. Curr Biol. 2014;24:50–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.10.030CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Liu CG, Li ZY, Hao Y, Xia J, Bai FW, Mehmood MA, Computer simulation elucidates yeast flocculation and sedimentation for efficient industrial fermentation. Biotechnol J. 2018;13. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201700697Boraas ME, Seale DB, Boxhorn JE. Phagotrophy by flagellate selects for colonial prey: A possible origin of multicellularity. Evol Ecol. 1998;12:153–64. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006527528063Article 

Google Scholar 
Staps M, van Gestel J, Tarnita CE. Emergence of diverse life cycles and life histories at the origin of multicellularity. Nat Ecol Evol. 2019;3:1197–205. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0940-0Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
De Vargas Roditi L, Boyle KE, Xavier JB. Multilevel selection analysis of a microbial social trait. Mol Syst Biol. 2013;9:684 https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2013.42Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Damore JA, Gore J. Understanding microbial cooperation. J Theor Biol. 2012;299:31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.03.008Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Denoth Lippuner A, Julou T, Barral Y. Budding yeast as a model organism to study the effects of age. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2014;38:300–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6976.12060CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Janssens GE, Veenhoff LM. The natural variation in lifespans of single yeast cells is related to variation in cell size, ribosomal protein, and division time. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0167394 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167394CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ross-Gillespie A, Gardner A, West SA, Griffin AS. Frequency dependence and cooperation: Theory and a test with bacteria. Am Nat. 2007;170:331–42. https://doi.org/10.1086/519860Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Healey D, Axelrod K, Gore J. Negative frequency-dependent interactions can underlie phenotypic heterogeneity in a clonal microbial population. Mol Syst Biol. 2016;12:877 https://doi.org/10.15252/msb.20167033CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Harrow GL, Lees JA, Hanage WP, Lipsitch M, Corander J, Colijn C, et al. Negative frequency-dependent selection and asymmetrical transformation stabilise multi-strain bacterial population structures. ISME J. 2021;15:1523–38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-00867-wCAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Avilés L. Solving the freeloaders paradox: Genetic associations and frequency-dependent selection in the evolution of cooperation among nonrelatives. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002;99:14268–73. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.212408299CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fisher RM, Cornwallis CK, West SA. Group formation, relatedness, and the evolution of multicellularity. Curr Biol. 2013;23:1120–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.004CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pentz JT, Travisano M, Ratcliff WC, Clonal development is evolutionarily superior to aggregation in wild-collected Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In Artificial Life 14 – Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems, ALIFE 2014, 2014;550–4. 10.7551/978-0-262-32621-6-ch088.Melbinger A, Cremer J, Frey E, The emergence of cooperation from a single mutant during microbial life cycles. J Royal Soc Interface. 2015;12. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2015.0171 More

Huxley, J. Evolution. The Modern Synthesis (Allen & Unwin, 1942).Bay, R. A. & Palumbi, S. R. Rapid acclimation ability mediated by transcriptome changes in reef-building corals. Genome Biol. Evol. 7, 1602–1612 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Palumbi, S. R., Barshis, D. J., Traylor-Knowles, N. & Bay, R. A. Mechanisms of reef coral resistance to future climate change. Science 344, 895–898 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bang, C. et al. Metaorganisms in extreme environments: do microbes play a role in organismal adaptation? Zoology 127, 1–19 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fraune, S., Forêt, S. & Reitzel, A. M. Using Nematostella vectensis to study the interactions between genome, epigenome, and bacteria in a changing environment. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 1–8 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Kolodny, O. & Schulenburg, H. Opinion piece Microbiome-mediated plasticity directs host evolution along several distinct time scales. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 375, 20190589 (2020).Reshef, L., Koren, O., Loya, Y., Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. The coral probiotic hypothesis. Environ. Microbiol. 8, 2068–2073 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Webster, N. S. & Reusch, T. B. H. Microbial contributions to the persistence of coral reefs. ISME J. 11, 2167–2174 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Totton, A. K. The British sea anemones. Nature 135, 977–978 (1935).
Google Scholar 
Hand, C. & Uhlinger, K. R. The unique, widely distributed, estuarine sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis Stephenson: a review, new facts, and questions. Estuaries 17, 501–501 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Darling, J. A., Reitzel, A. M. & Finnerty, J. R. Regional population structure of a widely introduced estuarine invertebrate: Nematostella vectensis Stephenson in New England. Mol. Ecol. 13, 2969–2981 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Darling, J. A. et al. Rising starlet: the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. BioEssays 27, 211–221 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hand, C. & Uhlinger, K. R. The culture, sexual and asexual reproduction, and growth of the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Biol. Bull. 182, 169–176 (1992).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pearson, C. V. M., Rogers, A. D. & Sheader, M. The genetic structure of the rare lagoonal sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis Stephenson (Cnidaria; Anthozoa) in the United Kingdom based on RAPD analysis. Mol. Ecol. 11, 2285–2293 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Reitzel, A. M., Darling, J. A., Sullivan, J. C. & Finnerty, J. R. Global population genetic structure of the starlet anemone Nematostella vectensis: multiple introductions and implications for conservation policy. Biol. Invasions 10, 1197–1213 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Stefanik, D. J., Friedman, L. E. & Finnerty, J. R. Collecting, rearing, spawning and inducing regeneration of the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. Nat. Protoc. 8, 916–923 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fritzenwanker, J. H. & Technau, U. Induction of gametogenesis in the basal cnidarian Nematostella vectensis (Anthozoa). Dev. Genes Evol. 212, 99–103 (2002).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mortzfeld, B. M. et al. Response of bacterial colonization in Nematostella vectensis to development, environment, and biogeography. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 1764–1781 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Baldassarre, L. et al. Contribution of maternal and paternal transmission to bacterial colonization in Nematostella vectensis. Front. Microbiol. 12, 2892 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Domin, H. et al. Predicted bacterial interactions affect in vivo microbial colonization dynamics in Nematostella. Front. Microbiol. 9, 728 (2018).Guest, J. J. R. et al. Contrasting patterns of coral bleaching susceptibility in 2010 suggest an adaptive response to thermal stress. PLoS ONE 7, e33353–e33353 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Puisay, A., Pilon, R., Goiran, C. & Hédouin, L. Thermal resistances and acclimation potential during coral larval ontogeny in Acropora pulchra. Mar. Environ. Res. 135, 1–10 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Van Oppen, M. J. H., Oliver, J. K., Putnam, H. M. & Gates, R. D. Building coral reef resilience through assisted evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2313 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Torda, G. et al. Rapid adaptive responses to climate change in corals. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 627–636 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Yu, Xiaopeng et al. Thermal acclimation increases heat tolerance of the scleractinian coral Acropora pruinosa,. Sci. Total Environ. 733, 139319–139319 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jury, C. P. & Toonen, R. J. Adaptive responses and local stressor mitigation drive coral resilience in warmer, more acidic oceans. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, 20190614–20190614 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Sully, S., Burkepile, D. E., Donovan, M. K., Hodgson, G. & van Woesik, R. A global analysis of coral bleaching over the past two decades. Nat. Commun. 10, 5 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Thomas, L. et al. Mechanisms of thermal tolerance in reef-building corals across a fine-grained environmental mosaic: lessons from Ofu,. Am. Samoa. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 434 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Oliver, T. A. & Palumbi, S. R. Many corals host thermally resistant symbionts in high-temperature habitat. Coral Reefs 30, 241–250 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Kenkel, C. D. & Matz, M. V. Gene expression plasticity as a mechanism of coral adaptation to a variable environment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 14 (2017).Barker, V. Exceptional thermal tolerance of coral reefs in American Samoa a review. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 4, 427 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Bourne, D., Iida, Y., Uthicke, S. & Smith-Keune, C. Changes in coral-associated microbial communities during a bleaching event. ISME J. 2, 350–63 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Carrier, T. J. & Reitzel, A. M. The hologenome across environments and the implications of a host-associated microbial repertoire. Front. Microbiol. 8, 802 (2017).Koren, O. & Rosenberg, E. Bacteria associated with mucus and tissues of the coral Oculina patagonica in summer and winter. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 5254–5259 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Littman, R., Willis, B. L. & Bourne, D. G. Metagenomic analysis of the coral holobiont during a natural bleaching event on the Great Barrier Reef. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 3, 651–60 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ziegler, M., Seneca, F. O., Yum, L. K., Palumbi, S. R. & Voolstra, C. R. Bacterial community dynamics are linked to patterns of coral heat tolerance. Nat. Commun. 8, 14213–14213 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Thurber, R. V. et al. Metagenomic analysis of stressed coral holobionts. Environ. Microbiol. 11, 2148–2163 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
van Oppen, M. J. H. & Blackall, L. L. Coral microbiome dynamics, functions and design in a changing world. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 557–567 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Moran, N. A. & Yun, Y. Experimental replacement of an obligate insect symbiont. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2093–2096 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ainsworth, T. D. T. et al. The coral core microbiome identifies rare bacterial taxa as ubiquitous endosymbionts. ISME J. 9, 2261–2274 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hester, E. R., Barott, K. L., Nulton, J., Vermeij, M. J. A. & Rohwer, F. L. Stable and sporadic symbiotic communities of coral and algal holobionts. ISME J. 10, 1157–1169 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bourne, D. G., Morrow, K. M. & Webster, N. S. Insights into the coral microbiome: underpinning the health and resilience of reef ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 70, 340 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Pollock, F. J. et al. Reduced diversity and stability of coral-associated bacterial communities and suppressed immune function precedes disease onset in corals. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6, 31312497 (2019).Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: the hologenome theory of evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 32, 723–735 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Elena, S. F. & Lenski, R. E. Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4, 457–469 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hehemann, J. H. et al. Transfer of carbohydrate-active enzymes from marine bacteria to Japanese gut microbiota. Nature 464, 908–912 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bourne, D. G. Microbiological assessment of a disease outbreak on corals from Magnetic Island (Great Barrier Reef, Australia). Coral Reefs 24, 304–312 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Leach, W. B., Carrier, T. J. & Reitzel, A. M. Diel patterning in the bacterial community associated with the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Ecol. Evol. 9, 9935–9947 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pootakham, W. et al. Heat-induced shift in coral microbiome reveals several members of the Rhodobacteraceae family as indicator species for thermal stress in Porites lutea. MicrobiologyOpen 8, e935 (2019).Webster, N. Host-associated coral reef microbes respond to the cumulative pressures of ocean warming and ocean acidification. Sci. Rep. 6, 19324 (2016).Van, K. L., Ae, A., Schupp, P. & Slattery, M. The distribution of dimethylsulfoniopropionate in tropical Pacific coral reef invertebrates. Coral Reefs 25, 321–327 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Rypien, K. L., Ward, J. R. & Azam, F. Antagonistic interactions among coral-associated bacteria. Environ. Microbiol. 12, 28–39 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Blazejak, A., Erséus, C., Amann, R. & Dubilier, N. Coexistence of bacterial sulfide oxidizers, sulfate reducers, and spirochetes in a gutless worm (oligochaeta) from the Peru margin. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71, 1553–1561 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dubilier, N. et al. Phylogenetic diversity of bacterial endosymbionts in the gutless marine oligochete Olavius loisae (Annelida). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 178, 271–280 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Rincón-Rosales, R., Lloret, L., Ponce, E. & Martínez-Romero, E. Erratum: Rhizobia with different symbiotic efficiencies nodulate Acaciella angustissima in Mexico, including Sinorhizobium chiapanecum sp. nov. which has common symbiotic genes with Sinorhizobium mexicanum (FEMS Microbiology Ecology (2009) 67 (103-117)). FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 68, 255–255 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Rosenberg, E. & DeLong, E. F., Stackebrandt, E., Lory, S., Thompson, F. The Prokaryotes—Prokaryotic Biology and Symbiotic Associations. (Springer, 2013).Kimura, H., Higashide, Y. & Naganuma, T. Endosymbiotic microflora of the Vestimentiferan Tubeworm (Lamellibrachia sp.) from a Bathyal Cold Seep. Mar. Biotechnol. 5, 593–603 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Melillo, A. A., Bakshi, C. S. & Melendez, J. A. Francisella tularensis antioxidants harness reactive oxygen species to restrict macrophage signaling and cytokine production. J. Biol. Chem. 285, 27553–27560 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rabadi, S. M. et al. Antioxidant defenses of Francisella tularensis modulate macrophage function and production of proinflammatory cytokines. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 5009–5021 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
McBride, M. J. in The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea. Vol. 9783642389542, 643–676 (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2014).Augustin, R., Fraune, S. & Bosch, T. C. G. How Hydra senses and destroys microbes. Semin. Immunol. 22, 54–58 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Augustin, R. et al. A secreted antibacterial neuropeptide shapes the microbiome of Hydra. Nat. Commun. 8, 698 (2017).Franzenburg, S. et al. Distinct antimicrobial peptide expression determines host species-specific bacterial associations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E3730–E3738 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fraune, S., Abe, Y. & Bosch, T. C. G. G. Disturbing epithelial homeostasis in the metazoan Hydra leads to drastic changes in associated microbiota. Environ. Microbiol. 11, 2361–9 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Brennan, J. J. et al. Sea anemone model has a single Toll-like receptor that can function in pathogen detection, NF-κB signal transduction, and development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E10122–E10131 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sullivan, J. C. et al. Two alleles of NF-κB in the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis are widely dispersed in nature and encode proteins with distinct activities. PLoS ONE 4, e7311 (2009).Wolenski, F. S. et al. Characterization of the core elements of the NF-B signaling pathway of the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Mol. Cell. Biol. 31, 1076–1087 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gáliková, M., Klepsatel, P., Senti, G. & Flatt, T. Steroid hormone regulation of C. elegans and Drosophila aging and life history. Exp. Gerontol. 46, 141–147 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Taubenheim, J., Kortmann, C. & Fraune, S. Function and evolution of nuclear receptors in environmental-dependent postembryonic development. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 9, 653792 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Becker, P. B. & Workman, J. L. Nucleosome remodeling and epigenetics. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 5, a017905–a017905 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Barno, A. R., Villela, H. D. M., Aranda, M., Thomas, T. & Peixoto, R. S. Host under epigenetic control: a novel perspective on the interaction between microorganisms and corals. BioEssays 43, 2100068.Reitzel, A. M. et al. Physiological and developmental responses to temperature by the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 484, 115–130 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Chua, C. M., Leggat, W., Moya, A. & Baird, A. H. Temperature affects the early life history stages of corals more than near future ocean acidification. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 475, 85–92 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ericson, J. A. et al. Combined effects of two ocean change stressors, warming and acidification, on fertilization and early development of the Antarctic echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri. Polar Biol. 35, 1027–1034 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Sheppard Brennand, H., Soars, N., Dworjanyn, S. A., Davis, A. R. & Byrne, M. Impact of ocean warming and ocean acidification on larval development and calcification in the sea urchin Tripneustes gratilla. PLoS ONE 5, e11372 (2010).Bernal, M. A. et al. Phenotypic and molecular consequences of stepwise temperature increase across generations in a coral reef fish. Mol. Ecol. 27, 4516–4528 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Clark, M. S. et al. Molecular mechanisms underpinning transgenerational plasticity in the green sea urchin Psammechinus miliaris. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Donelson, J. et al. Rapid transgenerational acclimation of a tropical reef fish to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 30–32 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Miller, G. M., Watson, S. A., Donelson, J. M., McCormick, M. I. & Munday, P. L. Parental environment mediates impacts of increased carbon dioxide on a coral reef fish. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 858–861 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Munday, P. L. Transgenerational acclimation of fishes to climate change and ocean acidification. F1000Prime Rep. 6, 99–99 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ryu, T. et al. An epigenetic signature for within-generational plasticity of a reef fish to ocean warming. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 284 (2020).Veilleux, H. et al. Molecular processes of transgenerational acclimation to a warming ocean. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 1074–1078 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zhao, C. et al. Transgenerational effects of ocean warming on the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus intermedius. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 151, 212–219 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Eirin-Lopez, J. M. & Putnam, H. M. Marine Environmental Epigenetics. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 11, 335–368 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Fallet, M., Luquet, E., David, P. & Cosseau, C. Epigenetic inheritance and intergenerational effects in mollusks. Gene 729, 144166–144166 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Putnam, H. M. & Gates, R. D. Preconditioning in the reef-building coral Pocillopora damicornis and the potential for trans-generational acclimatization in coral larvae under future climate change conditions. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 2365–2372 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Daxinger, L. & Whitelaw, E. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: more questions than answers. Genome Res. 20, 1623–1628 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ptashne, M. Epigenetics: core misconcept. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 7101–7103 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rivera, H. E., Chen, C.-Y., Gibson, M. C. & Tarrant, A. M. Plasticity in parental effects confers rapid larval thermal tolerance in the estuarine anemone Nematostella vectensis. J. Exp. Biol. 224, jeb236745 (2021).Hirose, E. & Fukuda, T. Vertical transmission of photosymbionts in the colonial ascidian Didemnum molle: The larval tunic prevents symbionts from attaching to the anterior part of larvae. Zool. Sci. 23, 669–674 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Padilla-Gamiño, J. L., Pochon, X., Bird, C., Concepcion, G. T. & Gates, R. D. From parent to gamete: vertical transmission of Symbiodinium (Dinophyceae) ITS2 sequence assemblages in the reef building coral Montipora capitata. PLoS ONE 7, e38440–e38440 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sharp, K. H., Eam, B., John Faulkner, D. & Haygood, M. G. Vertical transmission of diverse microbes in the tropical sponge Corticium sp. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 622–629 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sipkema, D. et al. Similar sponge-associated bacteria can be acquired via both vertical and horizontal transmission. Environ. Microbiol. 17, 3807–3821 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Apprill, A., Marlow, H. Q., Martindale, M. Q. & Rappé, M. S. The onset of microbial associations in the coral Pocillopora meandrina. ISME J. 3, 685–699 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sharp, K. H., Distel, D. & Paul, V. J. Diversity and dynamics of bacterial communities in early life stages of the Caribbean coral Porites astreoides. ISME J. 6, 790–801 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lesser, M. P., Stat, M. & Gates, R. D. The endosymbiotic dinoflagellates (Symbiodinium sp.) of corals are parasites and mutualists. Coral Reefs 32, 603–611 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ceh, J., Raina, J. B., Soo, R. M., van Keulen, M. & Bourne, D. G. Coral-bacterial communities before and after a coral mass spawning event on Ningaloo Reef. PLoS ONE 7, e36920 (2012).Ricardo, G. F., Jones, R. J., Negri, A. P. & Stocker, R. That sinking feeling: suspended sediments can prevent the ascent of coral egg bundles. Sci. Rep. 6, 21567 (2016).Leite, D. C. A. D. et al. Broadcast spawning coral Mussismilia Hispida can vertically transfer its associated bacterial core. Front. Microbiol. 8, 176–176 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Epstein, H. E. et al. Microbiome engineering: enhancing climate resilience in corals. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17, 108 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Peixoto, R. S. et al. Beneficial microorganisms for corals (BMC) Proposed mechanisms for coral health and resilience. Front. Microbiol. 8, 341 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chakravarti, L. J., Beltran, V. H. & van Oppen, M. J. H. Rapid thermal adaptation in photosymbionts of reef-building corals. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 4675–4688 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Damjanovic, K., Blackall, L. L., Webster, N. S. & van Oppen, M. J. H. H. The contribution of microbial biotechnology to mitigating coral reef degradation. Microb. Biotechnol. 10, 1236–1243 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Damjanovic, K., Van Oppen, M. J. H., Menéndez, P. & Blackall, L. L. Experimental inoculation of coral recruits with marine bacteria indicates scope for microbiome manipulation in Acropora tenuis and Platygyra daedalea. Front. Microbiol. 10, 1702 (2019).Rosado, P. M. et al. Marine probiotics: increasing coral resistance to bleaching through microbiome manipulation. ISME J. 13, 921–936 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fraune, S. et al. Bacteria-bacteria interactions within the microbiota of the ancestral metazoan Hydra contribute to fungal resistance. ISME J. 9, 1543–1556 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fadrosh, D. W. et al. An improved dual-indexing approach for multiplexed 16 S rRNA gene sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform. Microbiome 2, 6 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rausch, P. et al. Analysis of factors contributing to variation in the C57BL/6 J fecal microbiota across German animal facilities. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 306, 343–355 (2016).PubMed 

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 

Google Scholar 
Faith, J. J. et al. The long-term stability of the human gut microbiota. Science 341, 1237439–1237439 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Segata, N. et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 12, R60–R60 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Andrews, S. FastQC: A Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data [Online]. Available online at: http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/ (2010).Bolger, A. M., Lohse, M. & Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30, 2114–2120 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kim, D., Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods 12, 357–360 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pertea, M. et al. StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA-seq reads. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 290–295 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Shao, M. & Kingsford, C. accurate assembly of transcripts through phase-preserving graph decomposition. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 1167–1169 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Niknafs, Y. S., Pandian, B., Iyer, H. K., Chinnaiyan, A. M. & Iyer, M. K. TACO produces robust multisample transcriptome assemblies from RNA-seq. Nat. Methods 14, 68–70 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pertea, M. & Pertea, G. GFF Utilities: GffRead and GffCompare. F1000Research 9, 304–304 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Manni, M., Berkeley, M. R., Seppey, M., Simão, F. A. & Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO update: novel and streamlined workflows along with broader and deeper phylogenetic coverage for scoring of eukaryotic, prokaryotic, and viral genomes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 4647–4654 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. & Shi, W. FeatureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923–930 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550–550 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Law, C. W., Chen, Y., Shi, W. & Smyth, G. K. Voom: Precision weights unlock linear model analysis tools for RNA-seq read counts. Genome Biol. 15, R29–R29 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

RESEARCH HIGHLIGHT
01 July 2022

Rock doves on some Scottish islands show almost no sign of having interbred with domestic pigeons.

The relatively long, slender bill of this rock dove from the Outer Hebridean islands of Scotland are characteristic of feral pigeons’ ancestors. Credit: W. J. Smith et al./iScience

.readcube-buybox { display: none !important;}
Charles Darwin developed his theory of natural selection in part by studying a form of artificial selection: the nineteenth-century rage for pigeon breeding, which created a wealth of fantastical varieties of pigeon (Columba livia). So widespread was pigeon fancying that it seeded the world with escaped domestic birds and their feral descendants, which then hybridized with their wild ancestors, the rock doves.

Access options

/* style specs start */
style{display:none!important}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 *{align-content:stretch;align-items:stretch;align-self:auto;animation-delay:0s;animation-direction:normal;animation-duration:0s;animation-fill-mode:none;animation-iteration-count:1;animation-name:none;animation-play-state:running;animation-timing-function:ease;azimuth:center;backface-visibility:visible;background-attachment:scroll;background-blend-mode:normal;background-clip:borderBox;background-color:transparent;background-image:none;background-origin:paddingBox;background-position:0 0;background-repeat:repeat;background-size:auto auto;block-size:auto;border-block-end-color:currentcolor;border-block-end-style:none;border-block-end-width:medium;border-block-start-color:currentcolor;border-block-start-style:none;border-block-start-width:medium;border-bottom-color:currentcolor;border-bottom-left-radius:0;border-bottom-right-radius:0;border-bottom-style:none;border-bottom-width:medium;border-collapse:separate;border-image-outset:0s;border-image-repeat:stretch;border-image-slice:100%;border-image-source:none;border-image-width:1;border-inline-end-color:currentcolor;border-inline-end-style:none;border-inline-end-width:medium;border-inline-start-color:currentcolor;border-inline-start-style:none;border-inline-start-width:medium;border-left-color:currentcolor;border-left-style:none;border-left-width:medium;border-right-color:currentcolor;border-right-style:none;border-right-width:medium;border-spacing:0;border-top-color:currentcolor;border-top-left-radius:0;border-top-right-radius:0;border-top-style:none;border-top-width:medium;bottom:auto;box-decoration-break:slice;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;break-after:auto;break-before:auto;break-inside:auto;caption-side:top;caret-color:auto;clear:none;clip:auto;clip-path:none;color:initial;column-count:auto;column-fill:balance;column-gap:normal;column-rule-color:currentcolor;column-rule-style:none;column-rule-width:medium;column-span:none;column-width:auto;content:normal;counter-increment:none;counter-reset:none;cursor:auto;display:inline;empty-cells:show;filter:none;flex-basis:auto;flex-direction:row;flex-grow:0;flex-shrink:1;flex-wrap:nowrap;float:none;font-family:initial;font-feature-settings:normal;font-kerning:auto;font-language-override:normal;font-size:medium;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal;font-style:normal;font-synthesis:weight style;font-variant:normal;font-variant-alternates:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-position:normal;font-weight:400;grid-auto-columns:auto;grid-auto-flow:row;grid-auto-rows:auto;grid-column-end:auto;grid-column-gap:0;grid-column-start:auto;grid-row-end:auto;grid-row-gap:0;grid-row-start:auto;grid-template-areas:none;grid-template-columns:none;grid-template-rows:none;height:auto;hyphens:manual;image-orientation:0deg;image-rendering:auto;image-resolution:1dppx;ime-mode:auto;inline-size:auto;isolation:auto;justify-content:flexStart;left:auto;letter-spacing:normal;line-break:auto;line-height:normal;list-style-image:none;list-style-position:outside;list-style-type:disc;margin-block-end:0;margin-block-start:0;margin-bottom:0;margin-inline-end:0;margin-inline-start:0;margin-left:0;margin-right:0;margin-top:0;mask-clip:borderBox;mask-composite:add;mask-image:none;mask-mode:matchSource;mask-origin:borderBox;mask-position:0 0;mask-repeat:repeat;mask-size:auto;mask-type:luminance;max-height:none;max-width:none;min-block-size:0;min-height:0;min-inline-size:0;min-width:0;mix-blend-mode:normal;object-fit:fill;object-position:50% 50%;offset-block-end:auto;offset-block-start:auto;offset-inline-end:auto;offset-inline-start:auto;opacity:1;order:0;orphans:2;outline-color:initial;outline-offset:0;outline-style:none;outline-width:medium;overflow:visible;overflow-wrap:normal;overflow-x:visible;overflow-y:visible;padding-block-end:0;padding-block-start:0;padding-bottom:0;padding-inline-end:0;padding-inline-start:0;padding-left:0;padding-right:0;padding-top:0;page-break-after:auto;page-break-before:auto;page-break-inside:auto;perspective:none;perspective-origin:50% 50%;pointer-events:auto;position:static;quotes:initial;resize:none;right:auto;ruby-align:spaceAround;ruby-merge:separate;ruby-position:over;scroll-behavior:auto;scroll-snap-coordinate:none;scroll-snap-destination:0 0;scroll-snap-points-x:none;scroll-snap-points-y:none;scroll-snap-type:none;shape-image-threshold:0;shape-margin:0;shape-outside:none;tab-size:8;table-layout:auto;text-align:initial;text-align-last:auto;text-combine-upright:none;text-decoration-color:currentcolor;text-decoration-line:none;text-decoration-style:solid;text-emphasis-color:currentcolor;text-emphasis-position:over right;text-emphasis-style:none;text-indent:0;text-justify:auto;text-orientation:mixed;text-overflow:clip;text-rendering:auto;text-shadow:none;text-transform:none;text-underline-position:auto;top:auto;touch-action:auto;transform:none;transform-box:borderBox;transform-origin:50% 50%0;transform-style:flat;transition-delay:0s;transition-duration:0s;transition-property:all;transition-timing-function:ease;vertical-align:baseline;visibility:visible;white-space:normal;widows:2;width:auto;will-change:auto;word-break:normal;word-spacing:normal;word-wrap:normal;writing-mode:horizontalTb;z-index:auto;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;-ms-appearance:none;appearance:none;margin:0}.LiveAreaSection-193358632{width:100%}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .login-option-buybox{display:block;width:100%;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-access-options{display:block;font-weight:700;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child)::before{transform:translateY(-50%);content:””;height:1rem;position:absolute;top:50%;left:0;border-left:2px solid #999}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child){padding-left:10px}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li{display:inline-block;position:relative;vertical-align:middle;padding-right:10px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;flex:1;flex-direction:row-reverse;margin:-30px -15px 0}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .box-inner{width:100%;height:100%}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:1;flex-basis:255px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .subscribe-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:4;flex-basis:300px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .subscribe-buybox-nature-plus{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:4;flex-basis:100%;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:29%;margin-left:29%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .asia-link{color:#069;cursor:pointer;text-decoration:none;font-size:1.05em;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:1.05em6}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:10%;margin-left:10%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:30%;margin-left:30%;font-size:14px;color:#222;opacity:.8px;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .usps-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:30%;margin-left:30%;font-size:14px;color:#222;opacity:.8px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-buybox{display:block;font-size:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;padding-top:30px;text-align:center}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-from{font-size:14px;padding-right:10px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .issue-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;text-align:center;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:19px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .no-price-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;line-height:18px;text-align:center;padding-right:10%;padding-left:10%;padding-bottom:20px;padding-top:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .vat-buybox{display:block;margin-top:5px;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:11px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;padding-bottom:15px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:17px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container{display:flex;padding-right:20px;padding-left:20px;justify-content:center}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container >*{flex:1px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container >a:hover,.Button-505204839:hover,.Button-1078489254:hover,.Button-2808614501:hover{text-decoration:none}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-button{background:#fff;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-asia{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;margin-top:75px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-label-asia,.ButtonLabel-3869432492,.ButtonLabel-3296148077,.ButtonLabel-1566022830{display:block;color:#fff;font-size:17px;line-height:20px;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;cursor:pointer}.Button-505204839,.Button-1078489254,.Button-2808614501{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;max-width:320px;margin-top:10px}.Button-505204839 .readcube-label,.Button-1078489254 .readcube-label,.Button-2808614501 .readcube-label{color:#069}
/* style specs end */Subscribe to Nature+Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals$29.99monthlySubscribe to JournalGet full journal access for 1 year$199.00only $3.90 per issueAll prices are NET prices.VAT will be added later in the checkout.Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.Buy articleGet time limited or full article access on ReadCube.$32.00All prices are NET prices.

Additional access options:

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01780-2

References

Subjects

Conservation biology

Subjects

Conservation biology More

Gao, Y., Schofield, O. M. & Leustek, T. Characterization of sulfate assimilation in marine algae focusing on the enzyme 5′-adenylylsulfate reductase. Plant Physiol. 123, 1087–1096 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Huang, C.-W., Walker, M. E., Fedrizzi, B., Gardner, R. C. & Jiranek, V. Hydrogen sulfide and its roles in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a winemaking context. FEMS Yeast Res. 17, 058 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Kopriva, S., Calderwood, A., Weckopp, S. C. & Koprivova, A. Plant sulfur and big data. Plant Sci. 241, 1–10 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shibagaki, N. & Grossman, A. The state of sulfur metabolism in algae: From ecology to genomics. In Sulfur Metabolism in Phototrophic Organisms (eds Hell, C. D. R. et al.) 231–267 (Springer, 2008).
Google Scholar 
Fakhraee, M. & Katsev, S. Organic sulfur was integral to the Archean sulfur cycle. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–8 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ho, T. Y. et al. The elemental composition of some marine phytoplankton 1. J. Phycol. 39, 1145–1159 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jørgensen, B. B. Unravelling the sulphur cycle of marine sediments. Environ. Microbiol. 21, 3533–3538 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
El Mahrad, B. et al. Social-environmental analysis for the management of coastal lagoons in North Africa. Front. Environ. Sci. 8, 37 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Srarfi, F. Etude géochimique et état de pollution de la lagune de Bizerte. These de doctorat, Univ. Tunis el Manar 122 (2007).FAO. La Situation Mondiale Des Pêches et de L’aquaculture 2020 (Food & Agriculture Organisation, 2020).
Google Scholar 
Soto, D. & Wurmann, C. The Future of Ocean Governance and Capacity Development 379–384 (Brill Nijhoff, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Ran, W. et al. Storage of starch and lipids in microalgae: Biosynthesis and manipulation by nutrients. Bioresour. Technol. 291, 121894 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Aikawa, S. et al. Improving polyglucan production in cyanobacteria and microalgae via cultivation design and metabolic engineering. Biotechnol. J. 10, 886–898 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Klok, A., Lamers, P., Martens, D., Draaisma, R. & Wijffels, R. Edible oils from microalgae: Insights in TAG accumulation. Trends Biotechnol. 32, 521–528 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yuan, Y. et al. Enhancing carbohydrate productivity of Chlorella sp. AE10 in semi-continuous cultivation and unraveling the mechanism by flow cytometry. Appl. Biochem. 185, 419–433 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rodríguez, M. C., Matulewicz, M. C., Noseda, M., Ducatti, D. & Leonardi, P. I. Agar from Gracilaria gracilis (Gracilariales, Rhodophyta) of the Patagonic coast of Argentina-Content, structure and physical properties. Biores. Technol. 100, 1435–1441 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Lee, W.-K. et al. Factors affecting yield and gelling properties of agar. J. Appl. Phycol. 29, 1527–1540 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Fethi, M. & Ghedifa, A. B. Optimum ranges of combined abiotic factor for Gracilaria gracilis aquaculture. J. Appl. Phycol. 31, 3025–3040 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Friedlander, M. Inorganic nutrition in pond cultivated Gracilaria conferta (Rhodophyta): Nitrogen, phosphate and sulfate. J. Appl. Phycol. 13, 279–286 (2001).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lee, W.-K., Namasivayam, P. & Ho, C.-L. Effects of sulfate starvation on agar polysaccharides of Gracilaria species (Gracilariaceae, Rhodophyta) from Morib, Malaysia. J. Appl. Phycol. 26, 1791–1799 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Carfagna, S. et al. Impact of sulfur starvation in autotrophic and heterotrophic cultures of the extremophilic microalga Galdieria phlegrea (Cyanidiophyceae). Plant Cell Physiol. 57, 1890–1898 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Collén, P. N., Camitz, A., Hancock, R. D., Viola, R. & Pedersén, M. Effect of nutrient deprivation and resupply on metabolites and enzymes related to carbon allocation in gracilaria tenuistipitata (rhodophyta) 1. J. Phycol. 40, 305–314 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Collier, J. L. & Grossman, A. A small polypeptide triggers complete degradation of light-harvesting phycobiliproteins in nutrient-deprived cyanobacteria. EMBO J. 13, 1039–1047 (1994).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Richaud, C., Zabulon, G., Joder, A. & Thomas, J.-C. Nitrogen or sulfur starvation differentially affects phycobilisome degradation and expression of the nblA gene in Synechocystis strain PCC 6803. J. Bacteriol. 183, 2989–2994 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lloyd, A. G., Dodgson, K. S. & Rose, F. A. Infrared studies on sulphate esters I. Polysaccharide sulphates. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 46, 108–115 (1961).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kawachi, M. & Noël, M.-H. Sterilization and sterile technique. In Algal Culturing Techniques (ed. Anderson, R. A.) 65–81 (Academic Press, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Harrison, P. J. & Berges, J. A. Marine culture media. In Algal Culturing Techniques (ed. Anderson, R. A.) 21–34 (Academic Press, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Guiry, M. & Cunningham, E. Photoperiodic and temperature responses in the reproduction of north-eastern Atlantic Gigartina acicularis (Rhodophyta: Gigartinales). Phycologia 23, 357–367 (1984).
Google Scholar 
Kolmert, Å., Wikström, P. & Hallberg, K. B. A fast and simple turbidimetric method for the determination of sulfate in sulfate-reducing bacterial cultures. J. Microbiol. Methods 41, 179–184 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Destombe, C., Godin, J., Nocher, M., Richerd, S. & Valero, M. In Fourteenth International Seaweed Symposium (eds Brown, M. T. & Lahaye, M.) 131–137 (Springer, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Rueness, J. & Tananger, T. In Eleventh International Seaweed Symposium (eds Bird, C. J. & Ragan, M. A.) 303–307 (Springer, 1984).
Google Scholar 
Shea, R. & Chopin, T. Effects of germanium dioxide, an inhibitor of diatom growth, on the microscopic laboratory cultivation stage of the kelp, Laminaria saccharina. J. Appl. Phycol. 19, 27–32 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dawes, C., Orduna-Rojas, J. & Robledo, D. Response of the tropical red seaweed Gracilaria cornea to temperature, salinity and irradiance. J. Appl. Phycol. 10, 419–425 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Yaphe, W. & Arsenault, G. Improved resorcinol reagent for the determination of fructose, and of 3, 6-anhydrogalactose in polysaccharides. Anal. Biochem. 13, 143–148 (1965).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mensi, F., Ksouri, J., Seale, E., Romdhane, M. S. & Fleurence, J. A statistical approach for optimization of R-phycoerythrin extraction from the red algae Gracilaria verrucosa by enzymatic hydrolysis using central composite design and desirability function. J. Appl. Phycol. 24, 915–926 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dubois, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Rebers, P. T. & Smith, F. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28, 350–356 (1956).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bradford, M. M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 72, 248–254 (1976).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sörbo, B. Sulfate: Turbidimetric and nephelometric methods. Methods Enzymol. 143, 3–6 (1987).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Redmond, S., Green, L., Yarish, C., Kim, J. & Neefus, C. New England Seaweed Culture Handbook (University of Connecticut Sea Garent, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Kakita, H. & Kamishima, H. Effects of environmental factors and metal ions on growth of the red alga Gracilaria chorda Holmes (Gracilariales, Rhodophyta). J. Appl. Phycol. 18, 469–474 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Berges, J. A., Franklin, D. J. & Harrison, P. J. Evolution of an artificial seawater medium: Improvements in enriched seawater, artificial water over the last two decades. J. Phycol. 37, 1138–1145 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Shpigun, L. K., Kolotyrkina, I. Y. & Zolotov, Y. A. Experience with flow-injection analysis in marine chemical research. Anal. Chim. Acta 261, 307–314 (1992).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cosano, J., de Castro, M. & Valcarcel, M. Flow injection analysis of water. Part 1: Automatic preconcentration determination of sulphate, ammonia and iron (II)/iron (III). J. Autom. Chem. 15, 141–146 (1993).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Van Staden, J. & Taljaard, R. Determination of sulphate in natural waters and industrial effluents by sequential injection analysis. Anal. Chim. Acta 331, 271–280 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Petersen, S. P. & Ahring, B. K. Analysis of sulfate in sewage sludge using ion chromatographic techniques. J. Microbiol. Methods 12, 225–230 (1990).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rand, M., Greenberg, A., Taras, K. & Franson, M. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water (American Public Health Association, 1975).
Google Scholar 
Wanner, G., Henkelmann, G., Schmidt, A. & Köst, H.-P. Nitrogen and sulfur starvation of the cyanobacterium Synechococcus 6301 an ultrastructural, morphometrical, and biochemical comparison. Zeitschrift Naturforschung C 41, 741–750 (1986).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Molloy, F. & Bolton, J. The effect of season and depth on the growth of Gracilaria gracilis at Lüderitz, Namibia. Bot. Mar. 39, 407–414 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Mensi, F., Nasraoui, S., Bouguerra, S., Ben Ghedifa, A. & Chalghaf, M. Effect of lagoon and sea water depth on Gracilaria gracilis growth and biochemical composition in the northeast of Tunisia. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–12 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Mensi, F., Ksouri, J., Hammami, W. & Romdhane, M. État des connaissances et perspectives de recherches sur la culture de Gracilariales (Gracilaria et Gracilariopsis): Application a la lagune de Bizerte. Bull. Inst. Natn. Scien. Tech. Mer Salammbô 41, 101–119 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Sugimoto, K., Sato, N. & Tsuzuki, M. Utilization of a chloroplast membrane sulfolipid as a major internal sulfur source for protein synthesis in the early phase of sulfur starvation in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. FEBS Lett. 581, 4519–4522 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cakmak, T. et al. Nitrogen and sulfur deprivation differentiate lipid accumulation targets of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Bioengineered 3, 343–346 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ostaszewska-Bugajska, M., Rychter, A. M. & Juszczuk, I. M. Antioxidative and proteolytic systems protect mitochondria from oxidative damage in S-deficient Arabidopsis thaliana. J. Plant Physiol. 186, 25–38 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, L. et al. Sulfur deficiency-induced glucosinolate catabolism attributed to two β-glucosidases, BGLU28 and BGLU30, is required for plant growth maintenance under sulfur deficiency. Plant Cell Physiol. 61, 803–813 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Takahashi, H., Kopriva, S., Giordano, M., Saito, K. & Hell, R. Sulfur assimilation in photosynthetic organisms: Molecular functions and regulations of transporters and assimilatory enzymes. Annu. Rev. Plant biol. 62, 157–184 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Butterfield, N. J. Bangiomorpha pubescens n. gen., n. sp.: Implications for the evolution of sex, multicellularity, and the Mesoproterozoic/Neoproterozoic radiation of eukaryotes. Paleobiology 26, 386–404 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Collier, J. L. & Grossman, A. R. Chlorosis induced by nutrient deprivation in Synechococcus sp. strain PCC 7942: Not all bleaching is the same. J. Bacteriol. 174, 4718–4726. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.174.14.4718-4726.1992 (1992).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kaur, H. et al. Cys-Gly specific dipeptidase Dug1p from S. cerevisiae binds promiscuously to di-, tri-, and tetra-peptides: Peptide-protein interaction, homology modeling, and activity studies reveal a latent promiscuity in substrate recognition. Biochimie 93, 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2010.09.008 (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Said, R. B. et al. Effects of depth and initial fragment weights of Gracilaria gracilis on the growth, agar yield, quality, and biochemical composition. J. Appl. Phycol. 30, 2499–2512 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Bird, K. T. Agar production and quality from Gracilaria sp. strain G—16: Effects of environmental factors. Bot. Mar. 31, 33–38 (1988).
Google Scholar 
Cote, G. & Hanisak, M. Production and properties of native agars from Gracilaria tikvahiae and other red algae. Bot. Mar. 29, 359–366 (1986).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lahaye, M. & Yaphe, W. Effects of seasons on the chemical structure and gel strength of Gracilaria pseudoverrucosa agar (Gracilariaceae, Rhodophyta). Carbohydr. Polym. 8, 285–301 (1988).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yaphe, W. Eleventh International Seaweed Symposium 171–174 (Springer, 1984).
Google Scholar 
Duckworth, M., Hong, K. & Yaphe, W. The agar polysaccharides of Gracilaria species. Carbohydr. Res. 18, 1–9 (1971).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rotem, A., Roth-Bejerano, N. & Arad, S. Effect of controlled environmental conditions on starch and agar contents of Gracilaria sp. (Rhodophyceae) 1. J. Phycol. 22, 117–121 (1986).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Arad, S. M., Lerental, Y. B. & Dubinsky, O. Effect of nitrate and sulfate starvation on polysaccharide formation in Rhodella reticulata. Bioresour. Technol. 42, 141–148 (1992).CAS 

Google Scholar  More

Mangrove forests thrive along tropical and subtropical shorelines and their distribution extends to warm temperate regions1. They are globally recognized for the valuable ecosystem services they provide2 but are expected to be substantially influenced by climate change-related physical processes in the future3,4. Under warming winter temperatures, poleward expansion is predicted for mangroves5,6, with potential implications for ecosystem structure and functioning, as well as human livelihoods and well-being7,8. The global distribution, abundance and species richness of mangroves is governed by a broad range of biotic and environmental factors, including temperature and precipitation9 and diverse geomorphological and hydrological gradients10. Climate and aspects related to coastal geography (for example, floodplain area) determine the availability of suitable habitat for establishment11,12. However, the potential for mangroves to track changing environmental conditions and expand their distributions ultimately depends on dispersal11,13. The importance of dispersal in controlling mangrove distributions has been demonstrated by mangrove distributional responses to historical climate variability14, past mangrove (re)colonization of oceanic islands15 and from the long-term survival of mangrove seedlings planted beyond natural range limits16. As such, quantifying changes in the factors that influence dispersal is important for understanding climate-driven distributional responses of mangroves under future climate conditions.In mangroves, dispersal is accomplished by buoyant seeds and fruits (hereafter referred to as ‘propagules’). In combination with prevailing currents, the spatial scale of this process, ranging from local retention to transoceanic dispersal over thousands of kilometres13, is determined by propagule buoyancy17, that is, the density difference between that of propagules and the surrounding water. Hence, the course of dispersal trajectories for propagules from these species depends on the interaction between spatiotemporal changes in both propagule density and that of the surrounding water, rendering this process sensitive to climate-driven changes in coastal and open-ocean water properties. The biogeographic implications of such density differences were recognized more than a century ago by Henry Brougham Guppy, who discussed18 ‘the far-reaching influence on plant-distribution and on plant-development that the relation between the specific weight of seeds and fruits and the density of sea-water must possess’.Since the time of Guppy’s early observations, climate change from human activities has driven pronounced changes in ocean temperature and salinity, with further changes predicted throughout the twenty-first century19. Ocean density is a nonlinear function of temperature, salinity and pressure20; therefore, these changes may influence dispersal patterns of mangrove propagules by altering their buoyancy and floating orientation. As Guppy noted18, ‘[for] plants whose seeds or fruits are not much lighter than seawater […] the effect of increased density of the water is to extend the flotation period’ or ‘to increase the number that floated for a given period’. Guppy also reported that the seedlings of the widespread mangrove genera Rhizophora and Bruguiera present exceptional examples of propagules with densities somewhere between seawater and freshwater18. Previous studies of the impacts of climate change on mangroves have focused on factors such as sea level rise, altered precipitation regimes and increasing temperature and storm frequency4,21,22,23 but the potential impact of climate-driven changes in seawater properties on mangroves has not yet been examined. This is somewhat surprising, as the ocean is the primary dispersal medium of this ‘sea-faring’ coastal vegetation and dispersal is a key process that governs a species’ response to climate change by changing its geographical range. This knowledge gap contrasts with recent efforts to expose links between climate change and dispersal in other ecologically important marine taxa such as zooplankton and fish species24,25,26,27.In this study, we investigate predicted changes in sea surface temperature (SST), sea surface salinity (SSS) and sea surface density (SSD) for coastal waters bordering mangrove forests (hereafter referred to as ‘coastal mangrove waters’), over the next century. Using a biogeographic classification system for coastal and shelf areas28, we examine spatiotemporal changes in these surface ocean properties, with a particular focus on the world’s two major mangrove diversity hotspots: (1) the Atlantic East Pacific (AEP) region, including all of the Americas, West and Central Africa and (2) the Indo West Pacific (IWP) region, extending from East Africa eastwards to the islands of the central Pacific1. Finally, we synthesize available data on the density of mangrove propagules for different mangrove species and explore the potential impact of climate-driven changes in SSD on propagule dispersal.To assess changes in SST and SSS throughout the global range of mangrove forests, we used present (2000–2014) and future (2090–2100) surface ocean properties from the Bio-ORACLE database29,30. SSD estimates were derived from these variables using the UNESCO EOS-80 equation of state polynomial for seawater31. Changes in SST, SSS and SSD (Fig. 1) were calculated for four representative concentration pathways (RCPs) and derived for coastal waters closest to the 583,578 polygon centroids from the 2015 Global Mangrove Watch (GMW) database32. After removing duplicates, our dataset contained 10,108 unique mangrove occurrence locations, with corresponding present conditions and predicted future changes in mean SST, SSS and SSD. Under the low-warming scenario RCP 2.6, mean SST of coastal mangrove waters is predicted to change by +0.64 (±0.11) °C and mean SSS by −0.06 (±0.25) practical salinity units (PSU). Combined, this results in an average change in mean SSD of −0.25 (±0.20) kg m−3 in coastal mangrove waters by the late twenty-first century (Supplementary Table 1). These values roughly double under RCP 4.5 (Supplementary Table 2), while under RCP 6.0, a change of +1.69 (±0.14) °C in mean SST, −0.21 (±0.42) PSU in mean SSS and −0.71 (±0.32) kg m−3 in mean SSD is predicted (Supplementary Table 3). Under RCP 8.5, our study predicts a change in SST of +2.84 (±0.21) °C (range 2.11–4.01 °C), a change in SSS of −0.30 (±0.74) PSU (−2.01–1.26 PSU) and a corresponding change in SSD of −1.17 (±0.56) kg m−3 (−2.53–0.03 kg m−3) (Supplementary Table 4).Fig. 1: Global map showing the change in sea surface variables across mangrove bioregions under RCP 8.5.a–c, Change in SST (a), SSS (b) and SSD (c). Changes in SST and SSS are based on present-day (2000–2014) and future (2090–2100) marine fields from the Bio-ORACLE database29,30, from which SSD data were derived. The vertical line (19° E) separates the two major mangrove bioregions: the AEP and IWP.Full size imageSpatial variability in predicted surface ocean property changes was examined by considering the two major mangrove bioregions (AEP and IWP) (Fig. 2) and using the Marine Ecoregions of the World (MEOW) biogeographic classification28 (Fig. 3). Both the range and changes in mean SST were comparable for the AEP and IWP mangrove bioregions, for all respective RCP scenarios (Fig. 2a and Supplementary Tables 1–4). Under RCP 8.5, mean SST in both mangrove bioregions is predicted to warm ~2.8 °C by 2100, which is roughly 4.5 times the predicted increase in mean SST under RCP 2.6 (Supplementary Tables 1 and 4). Predictions for the RCP 8.5 scenario are generally consistent with reported global ocean temperature trends33 and show that the greatest warming occurs in coastal waters near the Galapagos Islands (change in mean SST of 3.92 ± 0.06 °C). Pronounced SST increases are also predicted for Hawaii (change in mean SST of 3.36 ± 0.05 °C), the Southeast Australian Shelf (3.30 ± 0.25 °C), Northern and Southern New Zealand (3.25 ± 0.07 °C and 3.34 ± 0.02 °C, respectively), Warm Temperate Northwest Pacific (3.27 ± 0.16 °C), the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (3.24 ± 0.08 °C), Somali/Arabian Coast (3.23 ± 0.15 °C), South China Sea (3.07 ± 0.10 °C), the Tropical East Pacific (3.09 ± 0.15 °C) and the Warm Temperate Northwest Atlantic (3.14 ± 0.13 °C) (Fig. 3b and Supplementary Tables 4).Fig. 2: Change in surface ocean properties for coastal waters bordering mangrove forests and in the two major mangrove bioregions, the AEP and IWP, for different RCPs.a–c, Variation in SST (a), SSS (b) and SSD (c) under various RCP scenarios. Grey indicates global distribution (n = 10,108), orange denotes AEP (n = 3,190) and green represents IWP (n = 6,918). Data for SST and SSS consist of present-day (2000–2014) and future (2090–2100) marine fields from the Bio-ORACLE database29,30, from which SSD data were derived. The cat-eye plots50 show the distribution of the data. Median and mean values are indicated with black and white circles, respectively, and the vertical lines represent the interquartile range.Full size imageFig. 3: Global spatial variability in SST, SSS and SSD for coastal waters bordering mangrove forests under RCP 8.5.a, Global map showing the provinces (colour code and numbers) from the MEOW database28 used to investigate spatial patterns in mangrove coastal ocean water changes by 2100. b–d, Longitudinal gradient of the change in SST (b), SSS (c) and SSD (d) under RCP 8.5 in the AEP and the IWP mangrove bioregions; circles are coloured according to the MEOW province in which respective mangrove sites are located.Full size imagePredicted SSS changes exhibit an opposite trend in the AEP and IWP bioregions, with increased salinity in the AEP and reduced salinity in the IWP under global warming (RCP 2.6–RCP 8.5; Fig. 2b); this is reflected in contrasting SSD changes in both mangrove bioregions (Fig. 2c) and associated with predicted global changes in precipitation, with extensions of the rainy season over most of the monsoon domains, except for the American monsoon34. Under RCP 8.5, the spatially averaged change in mean SSS is +0.51 (±0.57) PSU in the AEP and −0.68 (±0.44) PSU in the IWP region. The maximum decrease in mean SSS (−2.01 PSU) is predicted for the Gulf of Guinea in the AEP bioregion (Fig. 3c and Supplementary Table 4). Within the IWP, the Western Indian Ocean region shows little or no changes in SSS, which contrasts with the pronounced freshening trends predicted in the eastern part of this ocean basin and the Tropical West Pacific (Figs. 1b and 3c). Increased freshening is predicted in the Bay of Bengal (SSS change: −1.17 ± 0.43 PSU), the Sunda Shelf (SSS change: −1.21 ± 0.29 PSU) and the Western Coral Triangle province (mean SSS change: −0.80 ± 0.17 PSU) (Fig. 3c and Supplementary Table 4). Within the AEP, salinity increases exceed +0.96 PSU in the Tropical Northwestern Atlantic, +0.80 in the Warm Temperate Northwest Atlantic and +0.68 in the West African Transition (Fig. 3c and Supplementary Table 4). The spatial heterogeneity in SSS across the global range of mangrove forests corresponds with observed changes in SSS35. Trends in SSD (Fig. 3d) strongly track changes in SSS (Fig. 3c) rather than SST. All RCP scenarios predict an overall decrease in SSD for both mangrove bioregions; however, the predicted decrease in SSD in the IWP region was a factor of 2 (RCP 6.0) and 2.5 (RCP 2.6, RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5) stronger than in the AEP (Figs. 2 and 3d and Supplementary Tables 1–4).Propagule density values from our literature survey range from 1,080 kg m−3 for different mangrove species (Fig. 4 and Supplementary Table 5). The low densities reported for Heritiera littoralis propagules provide a strong contrast with the near-seawater propagule densities reported for Avicennia and members of the Rhizophoraceae (Bruguiera, Rhizophora and Ceriops). Floating characteristics of the latter may be particularly sensitive to changes in SSD. To illustrate the potential influence of changing ocean conditions on mangrove propagule dispersal, we considered threshold water density values (1,020 and 1,022 kg m−3) that are within the range where elongated propagules of important mangrove genera tend to change floating orientation (Fig. 4a). More specifically, we determined the ocean surface area with an SSD below or equal to these thresholds under different climate change scenarios (Fig. 5). Under RCP 8.5, the ocean surface covered by mangrove coastal waters (coastal waters bordering present mangrove forests) with a density ≤1,020 kg m−3 increases ~27% by 2100, notably more so in the IWP (~37%) than in the AEP (~6%) (Supplementary Table 6). A threshold of 1,022 kg m−3 results in increases of roughly +11% (global), +12% (IWP) and +8% (AEP) (Supplementary Table 7). Similar spatial patterns are observed for open-ocean waters within the global latitudinal range of mangroves (Fig. 5 and Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2).Fig. 4: Potential effect of future declines in SSD on mangrove propagule dispersal.a, Range of reported propagule density values for wide-ranging mangrove species and present and future range of SSD for coastal waters along the range of those mangrove species. Mangrove propagule data are extracted from the literature (Supplementary Table 5). H. lit, Heritiera littoralis; X. gra, Xylocarpus granatum; A. ger, Avicennia germinans; A. mar, Avicennia marina; B. gym, Bruguiera gymnorrhiza; C. tag, Ceriops tagal; R. man, Rhizophora mangle; R. muc, Rhizophora mucronata. Bottom part adapted from ref. 51. b, Conceptual figure of the potential effects of ocean warming and freshening on mangrove propagule dispersal. Ocean warming and freshening drive changes in SSD and may reduce the timeframe for opportunistic colonization. For a propagule with a specific density and floating profile under present surface ocean conditions, reduced SSD of coastal and open-ocean waters may reduce floatation time (shaded area) and hence, reduce the proportion of long-distance dispersers. For simplicity, the density of propagules is assumed to increase linearly over time, although the actual increase may be nonlinear.Full size imageFig. 5: Future changes in SSD.a–d, Spatial extent of coastal and open-ocean surface waters with a density ≤1,020 kg m−3 (a,b) and 1,022 kg m−3 (c,d), for present (2000–2014) (a,c) and future (2090–2100; RCP 8.5) (b,d) scenarios. Data are shown for surface ocean waters within the global latitudinal range of mangrove forests (between 32° N and 38° S). The two density thresholds considered are within the range of densities at which mangrove propagule buoyancy and floating orientation of several mangrove genera change, as reported in available literature. Black dots along the coast represent the global mangrove extent from the 2015 GMW dataset32. Magenta-coloured circles represent SSD values More

Fink, D. et al. Crowdsourcing meets ecology: he misphere wide spatiotemporal species distribution models. AI Mag. 35, 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v35i2.2533 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chandler, M. et al. Contribution of citizen science towards international biodiversity monitoring. Biol. Cons. 213, 280–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.004 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmeller, D. S. et al. Advantages of volunteer-based biodiversity monitoring in Europe. Conserv. Biol. 23, 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01125.x (2009).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Boakes, E. H. et al. Distorted views of biodiversity: Spatial and temporal bias in species occurrence data. PLoS Biol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000385 (2010).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Follett, R. & Strezov, V. An analysis of citizen science based research: Usage and publication patterns. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143687 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zattara, E. E. & Aizen, M. A. Worldwide occurrence records suggest a global decline in bee species richness. One Earth 4, 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.12.005 (2021).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dickinson, J. L. et al. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10, 291–297. https://doi.org/10.1890/110236 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kosmala, M., Wiggins, A., Swanson, A. & Simmons, B. Assessing data quality in citizen science. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14, 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1436 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bayraktarov, E. et al. Do big unstructured biodiversity data mean more knowledge?. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00239 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Burgess, H. K. et al. The science of citizen science: Exploring barriers to use as a primary research tool. Biol. Cons. 208, 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.014 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Isaac, N. J. B. & Pocock, M. J. O. Bias and information in biological records. Biol. J. Lin. Soc. 115, 522–531. https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12532 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
August, T., Fox, R., Roy, D. B. & Pocock, M. J. O. Data-derived metrics describing the behaviour of field-based citizen scientists provide insights for project design and modelling bias. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67658-3 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Boakes, E. H. et al. Patterns of contribution to citizen science biodiversity projects increase understanding of volunteers’ recording behaviour. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep33051 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Di Cecco, G. J. et al. Observing the observers: How participants contribute data to iNaturalist and implications for biodiversity science. Bioscience 71, 1179–1188. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab093 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kamp, J., Oppel, S., Heldbjerg, H., Nyegaard, T. & Donald, P. F. Unstructured citizen science data fail to detect long-term population declines of common birds in Denmark. Divers. Distrib. 22, 1024–1035. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12463 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Altwegg, R. & Nichols, J. D. Occupancy models for citizen-science data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 8–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.13090 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Courter, J. R., Johnson, R. J., Stuyck, C. M., Lang, B. A. & Kaiser, E. W. Weekend bias in citizen science data reporting: Implications for phenology studies. Int. J. Biometeorol. 57, 715–720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-012-0598-7 (2013).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Amano, T., Lamming, J. D. L. & Sutherland, W. J. Spatial gaps in global biodiversity information and the role of citizen science. Bioscience 66, 393–400. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw022 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J. et al. What determines spatial bias in citizen science? Exploring four recording schemes with different proficiency requirements. Divers. Distrib. 22, 1139–1149. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12477 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Girardello, M. et al. Gaps in butterfly inventory data: A global analysis. Biol. Cons. 236, 289–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.05.053 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Husby, M., Hoset, K. S. & Butler, S. Non-random sampling along rural-urban gradients may reduce reliability of multi-species farmland bird indicators and their trends. Ibis https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12896 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Petersen, T. K., Speed, J. D. M., Grøtan, V. & Austrheim, G. Species data for understanding biodiversity dynamics: The what, where and when of species occurrence data collection. Ecol. Solut. Evid. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12048 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Egerer, M., Lin, B. B. & Kendal, D. Towards better species identification processes between scientists and community participants. Sci. Total Environ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133738 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jimenez, M. F., Pejchar, L. & Reed, S. E. Tradeoffs of using place-based community science for urban biodiversity monitoring. Conserv. Sci. Pract. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.338 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Branchini, S. et al. Using a citizen science program to monitor coral reef biodiversity through space and time. Biodivers. Conserv. 24, 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0810-7 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Snall, T., Kindvall, O., Nilsson, J. & Part, T. Evaluating citizen-based presence data for bird monitoring. Biol. Cons. 144, 804–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.11.010 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gardiner, M. M. et al. Lessons from lady beetles: Accuracy of monitoring data from US and UK citizen-science programs. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10, 471–476. https://doi.org/10.1890/110185 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Troudet, J., Grandcolas, P., Blin, A., Vignes-Lebbe, R. & Legendre, F. Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09084-6 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Johansson, F. et al. Can information from citizen science data be used to predict biodiversity in stormwater ponds?. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66306-0 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Everett, G. & Geoghegan, H. Initiating and continuing participation in citizen science for natural history. BMC Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0062-3 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Richter, A. et al. The social fabric of citizen science drivers for long-term engagement in the German butterfly monitoring scheme. J. Insect Conserv. 22, 731–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-018-0097-1 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
MacPhail, V. J., Gibson, S. D. & Colla, S. R. Community science participants gain environmental awareness and contribute high quality data but improvements are needed: Insights from Bumble Bee Watch. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9141 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Maund, P. R. et al. What motivates the masses: Understanding why people contribute to conservation citizen science projects. Biol. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108587 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Moczek, N., Nuss, M. & Kohler, J. K. Volunteering in the citizen science project “Insects of Saxony”—The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the bank of questions. Insects https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12030262 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Branchini, S. et al. Participating in a citizen science monitoring program: Implications for environmental education. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131812 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kelemen-Finan, J., Scheuch, M. & Winter, S. Contributions from citizen science to science education: An examination of a biodiversity citizen science project with schools in Central Europe. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 40, 2078–2098. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1520405 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deguines, N., Prince, K., Prevot, A. C. & Fontaine, B. Assessing the emergence of pro-biodiversity practices in citizen scientists of a backyard butterfly survey. Sci. Total Environ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136842 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Peter, M., Diekötter, T., Höffler, T. & Kremer, K. Biodiversity citizen science: Outcomes for the participating citizens. People Nat. 3, 294–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10193 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, T. B., Bailey, R. L., Martin, V., Faulkner-Grant, H. & Bonter, D. N. The role of citizen science in management of invasive avian species: What people think, know, and do. J. Environ. Manage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111709 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Parrish, J. K. et al. Hoping for optimality or designing for inclusion: Persistence, learning, and the social network of citizen science. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 1894–1901. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1807186115 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mac Domhnaill, C., Lyons, S. & Nolan, A. The citizens in citizen science: Demographic, socioeconomic, and health characteristics of biodiversity recorders in Ireland. Citiz. Sci.: Theory Pract. 5, 16. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.283 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
van der Wal, R., Sharma, N., Mellish, C., Robinson, A. & Siddharthan, A. The role of automated feedback in training and retaining biological recorders for citizen science. Conserv. Biol. 30, 550–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12705 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bloom, E. H. & Crowder, D. W. Promoting data collection in pollinator citizen science projects. Citiz. Sci.: Theory Pract. 5, 3. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.217 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnston, A., Fink, D., Hochachka, W. M. & Kelling, S. Estimates of observer expertise improve species distributions from citizen science data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12838 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kelling, S. et al. Using semistructured surveys to improve citizen science data for monitoring biodiversity. Bioscience 69, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz010 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Koen, B., Loosveldt, G., Vandenplas, C. & Stoop, I. Response rates in the european social survey: Increasing, decreasing, or a matter of fieldwork efforts?. Surv. Methods: Insights Field https://doi.org/10.13094/SMIF-2018-00003 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gideon, L. Handbook of Survey Methodology for the Social Sciences (Springer, 2012).Book 

Google Scholar 
Wolf, C., Joye, D., Smith, T. W. & Fu, Y. C. The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology (SAGE Publications Ltd, 2016).Book 

Google Scholar 
Richter, A. et al. Motivation and support services in citizen science insect monitoring: A cross-country study. Biol. Conserv. 263, 109325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109325 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnston, A., Moran, N., Musgrove, A., Fink, D. & Baillie, S. R. Estimating species distributions from spatially biased citizen science data. Ecol. Model. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2019.108927 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Isaac, N. J. B., van Strien, A. J., August, T. A., de Zeeuw, M. P. & Roy, D. B. Statistics for citizen science: Extracting signals of change from noisy ecological data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 1052–1060. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12254 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Liao, H.-I., Yeh, S.-L. & Shimojo, S. Novelty vs. familiarity principles in preference decisions: Task context of past experience matters. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00043 (2011).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Park, J., Shimojo, E. & Shimojo, S. Roles of familiarity and novelty in visual preference judgments are segregated across object categories. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 14552–14555. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1004374107 (2010).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tiago, P., Gouveia, M. J., Capinha, C., Santos-Reis, M. & Pereira, H. M. The influence of motivational factors on the frequency of participation in citizen science activities. Nat. Conserv.-Bulg. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.18.13429 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Davis, A., Taylor, C. E. & Martin, J. M. Are pro-ecological values enough? Determining the drivers and extent of participation in citizen science programs. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 24, 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2019.1641857 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bell, S. et al. What counts? Volunteers and their organisations in the recording and monitoring of biodiversity. Biodivers. Conserv. 17, 3443–3454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9357-9 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Toomey, A. H. & Domroese, M. C. Can citizen science lead to positive conservation attitudes and behaviors?. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 20, 50–62 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dennis, E. B., Morgan, B. J. T., Brereton, T. M., Roy, D. B. & Fox, R. Using citizen science butterfly counts to predict species population trends. Conserv. Biol. 31, 1350–1361. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12956 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Callaghan, C. T., Poore, A. G. B., Major, R. E., Rowley, J. J. L. & Cornwell, W. K. Optimizing future biodiversity sampling by citizen scientists. Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1487 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Outhwaite, C. L., Gregory, R. D., Chandler, R. E., Collen, B. & Isaac, N. J. B. Complex long-term biodiversity change among invertebrates, bryophytes and lichens. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 384. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1111-z (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bowler, D. E. et al. Winners and losers over 35 years of dragonfly and damselfly distributional change in Germany. Divers. Distrib. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13274 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar  More

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 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Almond, R., Grooten, M. & Peterson, T. Living Planet Report 2020-Bending the Curve of Biodiversity Loss (World Wildlife Fund, 2020).
Google Scholar 
Beverton, R. Fish resources; threats and protection. Neth. J. Zool. 42, 139–175 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jackson, S. & Head, L. Australia’s mass fish kills as a crisis of modern water: Understanding hydrosocial change in the Murray-Darling Basin. Geoforum 109, 44–56 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rees, H. C. et al. REVIEW: The detection of aquatic animal species using environmental DNA—a review of eDNA as a survey tool in ecology. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 1450–1459 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rees, H. C. et al. The application of eDNA for monitoring of the Great Crested Newt in the UK. Ecol. Evol. 4, 4023–4032 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, C. et al. Research on the biodiversity of Qinhuai River based on environmental DNA metabacroding. Acta Ecol. Sin. 42, 611–624 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deiner, K., Walser, J.-C., Mächler, E. & Altermatt, F. Choice of capture and extraction methods affect detection of freshwater biodiversity from environmental DNA. Biol. Cons. 183, 53–63 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thomsen, P. F. et al. Monitoring endangered freshwater biodiversity using environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 21, 2565–2573 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Miralles, L., Parrondo, M., Hernandez de Rojas, A., Garcia-Vazquez, E. & Borrell, Y. J. Development and validation of eDNA markers for the detection of Crepidula fornicata in environmental samples. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 146, 827–830 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Takahara, T., Minamoto, T., Yamanaka, H., Doi, H. & Kawabata, Z. Estimation of fish biomass using environmental DNA. PLoS ONE 7, e35868 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Aglieri, G. et al. Environmental DNA effectively captures functional diversity of coastal fish communities. Mol. Ecol. 30, 3127–3139 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yang, H. et al. Effectiveness assessment of using riverine water eDNA to simultaneously monitor the riverine and riparian biodiversity information. Sci. Rep. 11, 24241 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Altermatt, F. et al. Uncovering the complete biodiversity structure in spatial networks: the example of riverine systems. Oikos 129, 607–618 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stat, M. et al. Combined use of eDNA metabarcoding and video surveillance for the assessment of fish biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 33, 196–205 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

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).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gao, W. Beijing Vertebrate Key (Beijing Publishing House, 1994).
Google Scholar 
Wang, H. Beijing Fish and Amphibians and Reptiles (Beijing Publishing House, 1994).
Google Scholar 
Chen, W., Hu, D. & Fu, B. Research on Biodiversity of Beijing Wetland (Science Press, 2007).
Google Scholar 
Zhang, C. et al. Fish species diversity and conservation in Beijing and adjacent areas. Biodivers. Sci. 19, 597–604 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yamamoto, S. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals local fish communities in a species-rich coastal sea. Sci. Rep. 7, 40368 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shaw, J. L. A. et al. Comparison of environmental DNA metabarcoding and conventional fish survey methods in a river system. Biol. Cons. 197, 131–138 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fu, M., Xiao, N., Zhao, Z., Gao, X. & Li, J. Effects of Urbanization on Ecosystem Services in Beijing. Res. Soil Water Conserv. 23, 235–239 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Hao, L. & Sun, G. Impacts of urbanization on watershed ecohydrological processes: progresses and perspectives. Acta Ecol. Sin. 41, 13–26 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Su, G. et al. Human impacts on global freshwater fish biodiversity. Science 371, 835–838 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yan, B. et al. Effects of urban development on soil microbial functional diversity in Beijing. Res. Environ. Sci. 29, 1325–1335 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xiao, N., Gao, X., Li, J. & Bai, J. Evaluation and Conservation Measures of Beijing Biodiversity (China Forestry Publishing House, 2018).
Google Scholar 
Xu, S., Wang, Z., Liang, J. & Zhang, S. Use of different sampling tools for comparison of fish-aggregating effects along horizontal transect at two artificial reef sites in Shengsi. J. Fish. China 40, 820–831 (2016).
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. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 150088 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, J., Kobert, K., Flouri, T. & Stamatakis, A. PEAR: a fast and accurate Illumina Paired-End reAd mergeR. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 30, 614–620 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, S., Zhou, Y., Chen, Y. & Gu, J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 34, 884–890 (2018).Article 
CAS 

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

Google Scholar 
Callahan, B. J., McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. P. Exact sequence variants should replace operational taxonomic units in marker-gene data analysis. ISME J. 11, 2639–2643 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Iwasaki, W. et al. MitoFish and MitoAnnotator: A mitochondrial genome database of fish with an accurate and automatic annotation pipeline. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2531–2540 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, H. Beijing Fish Records (Beijing Publishing House, 1984).
Google Scholar 
Du, L. et al. Fish community characteristics and spatial pattern in major rivers of Beijing City. Res. Environ. Sci. 32, 447–457 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Shen, W. & Ren, H. TaxonKit: A practical and efficient NCBI taxonomy toolkit. J. Genet. Genomics 48, 844–850 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Karr, J. R. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6, 21–27 (1981).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, C. & Zhao, Y. Fishes in Beijing and Adjacent Areas (China. Science Press, 2013).
Google Scholar 
Wu, H. & Zhong, J. Fauna Sinica, Osteichthyes, Perciformess(Five),Gobioidei (Science Press, 2008).
Google Scholar 
Di, Y. et al. Distribution of fish communities and its influencing factors in the Nansha and Beijing sub-center reaches of the Beiyun River. Acta Sci. Circumst. 41, 156–163 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Walters, D. M., Freeman, M. C., Leigh, D. S., Freeman, B. J. & Pringle, C. M. in Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems Vol. 47 American Fisheries Society Symposium 69–85 (2005).Hu, X., Zuo, D., Liu, B., Huang, Z. & Xu, Z. Quantitative analysis of the correlation between macrobenthos community and water environmental factors and aquatic ecosystem health assessment in the North Canal River Basin of Beijing. Environ. Sci. 43, 247–255 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Kadye, W. T., Magadza, C. H. D., Moyo, N. A. G. & Kativu, S. Stream fish assemblages in relation to environmental factors on a montane plateau (Nyika Plateau, Malawi). Environ. Biol. Fishes 83, 417–428 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, T. A. & Kraft, C. E. Stream fish assemblages in relation to landscape position and local habitat variables. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 134, 430–440 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blabolil, P. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding uncovers environmental correlates of fish communities in spatially heterogeneous freshwater habitats. Ecol. Ind. 126, 107698 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xie, R. et al. eDNA metabarcoding revealed differential structures of aquatic communities in a dynamic freshwater ecosystem shaped by habitat heterogeneity. Environ. Res. 201, 111602 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Qu, C. et al. Comparing fish prey diversity for a critically endangered aquatic mammal in a reserve and the wild using eDNA metabarcoding. Sci. Rep. 10, 16715 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pont, D. et al. Environmental DNA reveals quantitative patterns of fish biodiversity in large rivers despite its downstream transportation. Sci. Rep. 8, 10361 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Doble, C. J. et al. Testing the performance of environmental DNA metabarcoding for surveying highly diverse tropical fish communities: A case study from Lake Tanganyika. Environ. DNA 2, 24–41 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Xu, N. et al. Monitoring seasonal distribution of an endangered anadromous sturgeon in a large river using environmental DNA. Sci. Nat. 105, 62 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Laramie, M. B., Pilliod, D. S. & Goldberg, C. S. Characterizing the distribution of an endangered salmonid using environmental DNA analysis. Biol. Cons. 183, 29–37 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harper, L. R. et al. Development and application of environmental DNA surveillance for the threatened crucian carp (Carassius carassius). Freshw. Biol. 64, 93–107 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ushio, M. et al. Quantitative monitoring of multispecies fish environmental DNA using high-throughput sequencing. Metabarcoding Metagenomics 2, e2329 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Evans, N. T. et al. Quantification of mesocosm fish and amphibian species diversity via environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 16, 29–41 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gloor, G. B., Macklaim, J. M., Pawlowsky-Glahn, V. & Egozcue, J. J. Microbiome datasets are compositional: and this is not optional. Front. Microbiol. 8, 2224 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Harrison, J. B., Sunday, J. M. & Rogers, S. M. Predicting the fate of eDNA in the environment and implications for studying biodiversity. Proc. Biol. Sci. 286, 20191409 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kelly, R. P., Shelton, A. O. & Gallego, R. Understanding PCR processes to draw meaningful conclusions from environmental DNA studies. Sci. Rep. 9, 12133 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Civade, R. et al. Spatial representativeness of environmental DNA metabarcoding signal for fish biodiversity assessment in a natural freshwater system. PLoS ONE 11, e0157366 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Barnes, M. A. et al. Environmental conditions influence eDNA persistence in aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 1819–1827 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shogren, A. J. et al. Water flow and biofilm cover influence environmental DNA detection in recirculating streams. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 8530–8537 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhao, B., van Bodegom, P. M. & Trimbos, K. The particle size distribution of environmental DNA varies with species and degradation. Sci. Total Environ. 797, 149175 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Falkowski, P. et al. The global carbon cycle: a test of our knowledge of Earth as a system. Science 290, 291–296 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
McMahon, S. & Parnell, J. Weighing the deep continental biosphere. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 87, 113–120 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Magnabosco, C. et al. The biomass and biodiversity of the continental subsurface. Nat. Geosci. 11, 707–717 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gleeson, T., Befus, K. M., Jasechko, S., Luijendijk, E. & Cardenas, M. B. The global volume and distribution of modern groundwater. Nat. Geosci. 9, 161–167 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stevanović, Z. Karst waters in potable water supply: a global scale overview. Environ. Earth Sci. 78, 662 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Poulson, T. L. & White, W. B. The cave environment. Science 165, 971–981 (1969).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rusterholtz, K. J. & Mallory, L. M. Density, activity, and diversity of bacteria indigenous to a karstic aquifer. Microb. Ecol. 28, 79–99 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, H. J. et al. Impact of hydrologic boundaries on microbial planktonic and biofilm communities in shallow terrestrial subsurface environments. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 94, fiy191 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Alexander, M. Introduction to Soil Microbiology (Wiley, 1977).Griebler, C. & Lueders, T. Microbial biodiversity in groundwater ecosystems. Freshw. Biol. 54, 649–677 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krumholz, L. R., McKinley, J. P., Ulrich, G. A. & Suflita, J. M. Confined subsurface microbial communities in Cretaceous rock. Nature 386, 64–66 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Probst, A. J. et al. Differential depth distribution of microbial function and putative symbionts through sediment-hosted aquifers in the deep terrestrial subsurface. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 328–336 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Magnabosco, C. et al. A metagenomic window into carbon metabolism at 3 km depth in Precambrian continental crust. ISME J. 10, 730–741 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stevens, T. O. & McKinley, J. P. Lithoautotrophic microbial ecosystems in deep basalt aquifers. Science 270, 450–455 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tiago, I. & Veríssimo, A. Microbial and functional diversity of a subterrestrial high pH groundwater associated to serpentinization. Environ. Microbiol. 15, 1687–1706 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mccollom, T. M. & Amend, J. P. A thermodynamic assessment of energy requirements for biomass synthesis by chemolithoautotrophic micro-organisms in oxic and anoxic environments. Geobiology 3, 135–144 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Momper, L., Jungbluth, S. P., Lee, M. D. & Amend, J. P. Energy and carbon metabolisms in a deep terrestrial subsurface fluid microbial community. ISME J. 11, 2319–2333 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jewell, T. N. M., Karaoz, U., Brodie, E. L., Williams, K. H. & Beller, H. R. Metatranscriptomic evidence of pervasive and diverse chemolithoautotrophy relevant to C, S, N and Fe cycling in a shallow alluvial aquifer. ISME J. 10, 2106–2117 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Herrmann, M., Rusznyák, A. & Akob, D. M. Large fractions of CO2-fixing microorganisms in pristine limestone aquifers appear to be involved in the oxidation of reduced sulfur and nitrogen compounds. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 81, 2384–2394 (2015).Peterson, B. J. Aquatic primary productivity and the 14C–CO2 method: a history of the productivity problem. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 359–385 (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
Viviani, D. A., Karl, D. M. & Church, M. J. Variability in photosynthetic production of dissolved and particulate organic carbon in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre. Front. Mar. Sci. 2, 73 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kohlhepp, B. et al. Aquifer configuration and geostructural links control the groundwater quality in thin-bedded carbonate–siliciclastic alternations of the Hainich CZE, central Germany. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 21, 6091–6116 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pedersen, K. & Ekendahl, S. Assimilation of CO2 and introduced organic compounds by bacterial communities in groundwater from southeastern Sweden deep crystalline bedrock. Microb. Ecol. 23, 1–14 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
Partensky, F. & Garczarek, L. Prochlorococcus: advantages and limits of minimalism. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 2, 305–331 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Karl, D. M., Hebel, D. V., Björkman, K. & Letelier, R. M. The role of dissolved organic matter release in the productivity of the oligotrophic North Pacific Ocean. Limnol. Oceanogr. 43, 1270–1286 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Liang, Y. et al. Estimating primary production of picophytoplankton using the carbon-based ocean productivity model: a preliminary study. Front. Microbiol. 8, 1926 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Steinberg, D. K. et al. Overview of the US JGOFS Bermuda Atlantic Time-series Study (BATS): a decade-scale look at ocean biology and biogeochemistry. Deep Sea Res. 2 48, 1405–1447 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gundersen, K., Orcutt, K. M., Purdie, D. A., Michaels, A. F. & Knap, A. H. Particulate organic carbon mass distribution at the Bermuda Atlantic Time-series Study (BATS) site. Deep Sea Res. 2 48, 1697–1718 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Karl, D. M. & Lukas, R. The Hawaii Ocean Time-series (HOT) program: background, rationale and field implementation. Deep Sea Res. 2 43, 129–156 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
Martiny, A. C., Vrugt, J. A. & Lomas, M. W. Concentrations and ratios of particulate organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in the global ocean. Sci. Data 1, 140048 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Martiny, A. C., Vrugt, J. A. & Lomas, M. W. Data from: Concentrations and ratios of particulate organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in the global ocean. Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.d702p (2015).Schwab, V. F. et al. 14C-free carbon Is a major contributor to cellular biomass in geochemically distinct groundwater of shallow sedimentary bedrock aquifers. Water Resour. Res. 55, 2104–2121 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Taubert, M. et al. Bolstering fitness via CO2 fixation and organic carbon uptake: mixotrophs in modern groundwater. ISME J 16, 1153–1162 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rimstidt, J. D. & Vaughan, D. J. Pyrite oxidation: a state-of-the-art assessment of the reaction mechanism. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67, 873–880 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, W. et al. Genomic insights into the uncultured genus “Candidatus Magnetobacterium” in the phylum Nitrospirae. ISME J. 8, 2463–2477 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kato, S. et al. Genome-enabled metabolic reconstruction of dominant chemosynthetic colonizers in deep-sea massive sulfide deposits. Environ. Microbiol. 20, 862–877 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Anantharaman, K. et al. Thousands of microbial genomes shed light on interconnected biogeochemical processes in an aquifer system. Nat. Commun. 7, 13219 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kojima, H., Watanabe, T. & Fukui, M. Sulfuricaulis limicola gen. nov., sp. nov., a sulfur oxidizer isolated from a lake. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 66, 266–270 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strous, M., Van Gerven, E., Kuenen, J. G. & Jetten, M. Effects of aerobic and microaerobic conditions on anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) sludge. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 63, 2446–2448 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ji, X., Wu, Z., Sung, S. & Lee, P.-H. Metagenomics and metatranscriptomics analyses reveal oxygen detoxification and mixotrophic potentials of an enriched anammox culture in a continuous stirred-tank reactor. Water Res. 166, 115039 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dalsgaard, T. et al. Oxygen at nanomolar levels reversibly suppresses process rates and gene expression in anammox and denitrification in the oxygen minimum zone off northern Chile. mBio 5, e01966 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, R. L., Böhlke, J. K., Song, B. & Tobias, C. R. Role of anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) in nitrogen removal from a freshwater aquifer. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 12169–12177 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strous, M., Heijnen, J. J., Kuenen, J. G. & Jetten, M. S. M. The sequencing batch reactor as a powerful tool for the study of slowly growing anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing microorganisms. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 50, 589–596 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kits, K. D. et al. Kinetic analysis of a complete nitrifier reveals an oligotrophic lifestyle. Nature 549, 269–272 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rittmann, B. E. & McCarty, P. L. Environmental Biotechnology: Principles and Applications (McGraw-Hill Education, 2001).Zhang, Y. et al. Nitrifier adaptation to low energy flux controls inventory of reduced nitrogen in the dark ocean. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 117, 4823–4830 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
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).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lehmann, R. & Totsche, K. U. Multi-directional flow dynamics shape groundwater quality in sloping bedrock strata. J. Hydrol. 580, 124291 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Küsel, K. et al. How deep can surface signals be traced in the Critical Zone? Merging biodiversity with biogeochemistry research in a central German Muschelkalk landscape. Front. Earth Sci. 4, 32 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yan, L. et al. Environmental selection shapes the formation of near-surface groundwater microbiomes. Water Res. 170, 115341 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pack, M. A. et al. A method for measuring methane oxidation rates using low levels of 14C-labeled methane and accelerator mass spectrometry: methane oxidation rates by AMS. Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods 9, 245–260 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nielsen, E. S. The use of radio-active carbon (C14) for measuring organic production in the sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 18, 117–140 (1952).Article 

Google Scholar 
Xu, X. et al. Modifying a sealed tube zinc reduction method for preparation of AMS graphite targets: reducing background and attaining high precision. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 259, 320–329 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Merser, S. Acetabulum online interactive statistical calculators. Accessed Feb, 2021. https://acetabulum.dk/anova.htmlBermuda Oceanographic Timeseries, accessed 21 Oct 2020, http://batsftp.bios.edu/BATS/production/bats_primary_production.txtHawaiian Oceanographic Timeseries, accessed 21 Oct 2020, ftp://ftp.soest.hawaii.edu/hot/primary_productionHawaiian Oceanographic Timeseries, accessed 21 Oct 2020, https://hahana.soest.hawaii.edu/FTP/hot/microscopy/EPIslides.txtKumar, S. et al. Nitrogen loss from pristine carbonate-rock aquifers of the Hainich Critical Zone Exploratory (Germany) is primarily driven by chemolithoautotrophic anammox processes. Front. Microbiol. 8, 1951 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Füssel, J. et al. Nitrite oxidation in the Namibian oxygen minimum zone. ISME J. 6, 1200–1209 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
McIlvin, M. R. & Altabet, M. A. Chemical conversion of nitrate and nitrite to nitrous oxide for nitrogen and oxygen isotopic analysis in freshwater and seawater. Anal. Chem. 77, 5589–5595 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dalsgaard, T., Thamdrup, B., Farías, L. & Revsbech, N. P. Anammox and denitrification in the oxygen minimum zone of the eastern South Pacific. Limnol. Oceanogr. 57, 1331–1346 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thamdrup, B. et al. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation in the oxygen-deficient waters off northern Chile. Limnol. Oceanogr. 51, 2145–2156 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Taubert, M. et al. Tracking active groundwater microbes with D2O labelling to understand their ecosystem function. Environ. Microbiol. 20, 369–384 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bushnell, B. BBMap (SourceForge, 2014); http://sourceforge.net/projects/bbmapBornemann, T. L. V. et al. Geological degassing enhances microbial metabolism in the continental subsurface. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.07.980714 (2020).Nurk, S., Meleshko, D., Korobeynikov, A. & Pevzner, P. A. metaSPAdes: a new versatile metagenomic assembler. Genome Res. 27, 824–834 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hyatt, D. et al. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 119 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu, Y.-W., Simmons, B. A. & Singer, S. W. MaxBin 2.0: an automated binning algorithm to recover genomes from multiple metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics 32, 605–607 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. T. et al. Unusual biology across a group comprising more than 15% of domain bacteria. Nature 523, 208–211 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sieber, C. M. K. et al. Recovery of genomes from metagenomes via a dereplication, aggregation and scoring strategy. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 836–843 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Olm, M. R., Brown, C. T., Brooks, B. & Banfield, J. F. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J. 11, 2864–2868 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Murat Eren, A. et al. Anvi’o: an advanced analysis and visualization platform for ‘omics data. PeerJ 3, e1319 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Aramaki, T. et al. KofamKOALA: KEGG Ortholog assignment based on profile HMM and adaptive score threshold. Bioinformatics 36, 2251–2252 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Graham, E. D., Heidelberg, J. F. & Tully, B. J. Potential for primary productivity in a globally-distributed bacterial phototroph. ISME J. 12, 1861–1866 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kanehisa, M., Sato, Y. & Morishima, K. BlastKOALA and GhostKOALA: KEGG tools for functional characterization of genome and metagenome sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 428, 726–731 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W. & Lipman, D. J. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403–410 (1990).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pelikan, C. et al. Diversity analysis of sulfite- and sulfate-reducing microorganisms by multiplex dsrA and dsrB amplicon sequencing using new primers and mock community-optimized bioinformatics. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 2994–3009 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lücker, S., Nowka, B., Rattei, T., Spieck, E. & Daims, H. The genome of Nitrospina gracilis Illuminates the metabolism and evolution of the major marine nitrite oxidizer. Front. Microbiol. 4, 27 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Orellana, L. H., Rodriguez-R, L. M. & Konstantinidis, K. T. ROCker: accurate detection and quantification of target genes in short-read metagenomic data sets by modeling sliding-window bitscores. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, e14 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Chaumeil, P.-A., Mussig, A. J., Hugenholtz, P. & Parks, D. H. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Bioinformatics 36, 1925–1927 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Parks, D. H. et al. A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 996–1004 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Parks, D. H. et al. A complete domain-to-species taxonomy for Bacteria and Archaea. Nat. Biotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0501-8 (2020).Matsen, F. A., Kodner, R. B. & Armbrust, E. V. pplacer: linear time maximum-likelihood and Bayesian phylogenetic placement of sequences onto a fixed reference tree. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 538 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jain, C., Rodriguez-R, L. M., Phillippy, A. M., Konstantinidis, K. T. & Aluru, S. High throughput ANI analysis of 90 K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat. Commun. 9, 5114 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S. & Arkin, A. P. FastTree 2—approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS ONE 5, e9490 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eddy, S. R. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1002195 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ondov, B. D. et al. Mash: fast genome and metagenome distance estimation using MinHash. Genome Biol. 17, 132 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Letunic, I. & Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL): an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Bioinformatics 23, 127–128 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Emiola, A. & Oh, J. High throughput in situ metagenomic measurement of bacterial replication at ultra-low sequencing coverage. Nat. Commun. 9, 4956 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wegner, C.-E. et al. Biogeochemical regimes in shallow aquifers reflect the metabolic coupling of the elements nitrogen, sulfur, and carbon. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 85, e02346-18 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Core Team, 2018).RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R (RStudio Team, 2016).Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the tidyverse. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1686 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Neuwirth, E. RColorBrewer: ColorBrewer Palettes. R package version 1.1-2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RColorBrewer (2014). More