More stories

  • in

    Modelling of life cycle cost of conventional and alternative vehicles

    Life cycle cost modelAn analysis of life cycle costs is an economic analysis of the assessment of the total cost of acquisition, ownership and liquidation of a product. It is applicable during the entire life cycle of the product or a life cycle stage or combination of different stages21 and22.There are five period phases of the vehicle life cycle:Generally, the total costs for the above listed phases are acquisition costs, ownership costs and liquidation costs21 and22. For the LCC model, I recommend to divide the life cycle costs into four categories:$$LCC={C}_{P}+{C}_{M}+{C}_{O}+{C}_{D},$$
    (1)
    $${LCC}_{s}=frac{LCC}{t},$$
    (2)

    where LCC—the life cycle cost of vehicles, LCCs—the specific life cycle cost of vehicles, CP—the vehicle purchase cost, CM—the maintenance cost, CO—operating state of vehicle cost, CD—the vehicle disposal cost, t—the time of vehicle operation.The model for evaluating the economic viability of products is based on the general LCC model which is based on acquisition and ownership costs$$LCC={C}_{P}+{C}_{OW},$$
    (3)

    where CP—purchase cost, COW—ownership costs.Acquisition cost (CP) is represented by the purchase price at the time of acquisition of the assessed passenger vehicle.Ownership cost (COW) is significant during the life cycle of a motor vehicle and varies according to the type of the vehicle. This cost includes the costs of maintenance and operation time can be defined as follows10$${C}_{Ow}={C}_{M}+{C}_{O},$$
    (4)

    where CM—cost of maintenance, CO—operation cost.The cost of ownership a vehicle (COW) can be defined as follows$${C}_{OW}={C}_{O}+{C}_{MC}+{C}_{MP},$$
    (5)

    where CO—operation cost, CMC—corrective maintenance cost, CMP—preventive maintenance cost.The cost of ownership (COW) may include the operating and maintenance costs which consist of the corrective maintenance cost (CMC) and the cost of preventive maintenance (CMP) of a motor vehicle.Calculation of operating costsOperating cost CO is determined by the price and amount consumed of conventional or alternative types of fuel. It cover the cost of fuel CF, operating fluids, oils and lubricants COL that are supplied during vehicle operation (not during service inspection), tyres CT, accumulator batteries CAB, vehicle insurance fee and road tax or other mandatory fees CIRT, cost of the motorway tax sticker CMT, mandatory vehicle inspection and emission measurement in special vehicles CETC. The costs are calculated according to$${C}_{O}={C}_{F}+{C}_{OL}+{C}_{T}+{C}_{AB}+{C}_{IRT}+{C}_{MT}+{C}_{ETC}.$$
    (6)
    Fuel costs (CF) are affected by the average consumption of a given type of propulsion vehicle. Then the comparative fuel costs (CF) can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{F}=frac{{bar{c}}_{aF}}{100}{p}_{F}{t}_{l},$$
    (7)

    where CF—total fuel costs (EUR), (bar{c})aF—average fuel consumption (l/100 km), pF—fuel price (EUR/l), tl—service life of a passenger vehicle (km).Costs for operating fluids, oils and lubricants (COL) are any costs for operating fluids, oils and lubricants that are replenished during operation and not during service maintenance; it can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{OL}=frac{{bar{c}}_{aOL}}{100}{p}_{OL}{t}_{l},$$
    (8)

    where (bar{c})aOL—average consumption of oil and lubricant (l/100 km), pOL—price of oil and lubricant (EUR/l).The cost of tyres (CT) can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{T}=frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aT}}{n}_{T}{p}_{T},$$
    (9)

    where (bar{d})aT—average life of a passenger vehicle tyre (km), nt—number of tyres on the passenger vehicle (pc), pT—price of one piece of tyre (EUR).Accumulator battery costs (CAB) —can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{AB}=frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aAB}}{n}_{AB}{p}_{AB},$$
    (10)

    where (bar{d}_{aB})—average life of one accumulator battery (km), nAB—number of accumulator batteries in the passenger vehicle (pc), pAB—price of an accumulator battery (EUR).Costs arising from laws (CIRT) are the costs of motor vehicle insurance (compulsory liability, accident insurance, or other). Some of them can be omitted in case of the same costs due to the simplification of the model. Otherwise, they can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{IRT}=left({C}_{SI}+{C}_{AI}+{C}_{RT}+{C}_{R}right){t}_{la},$$
    (11)
    where CS1—price of mandatory annual insurance of a passenger vehicle (EUR), CA1—price of the annual accident insurance of a passenger vehicle (EUR), CRT—price of annual road tax (EUR), CR—price of statutory fee (EUR), tla—operating time of the passenger vehicle until decommissioning (years).The cost of obtaining a motorway sticker (CMT) may be omitted if the same type of passenger vehicle is compared. Otherwise, the cost of a motorway sticker (CMT) can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{MT}={c}_{MT}{t}_{la},$$
    (12)

    where cMT—price of annual motorway sticker for the passenger vehicle (EUR).The costs of the mandatory vehicle inspection and emission measurement (CETC) include the costs incurred for the measurement of emissions of the drive engine unit (CE) and for the technical inspection of the passenger vehicle (CTC). For the proposed model, the costs of the mandatory technical inspections and emission measurements can be expressed by the equation$${C}_{ETC}=left({C}_{E}+{C}_{TC}right)frac{{y}_{n}}{{t}_{la}},$$
    (13)

    where CE—costs related to the measurement of passenger vehicle emissions (EUR), CTC—costs of mandatory technical inspection (EUR), yn—number of years of legal validity of emission measurement and technical condition for the given type of the passenger vehicle (years).Calculation of maintenance costThe total costs for vehicle maintenance CM consist of the cost of preventive maintenance CMP and the cost of corrective maintenance CMC10,11$${C}_{M}={C}_{MC}+{C}_{MP}.$$
    (14)
    Vehicle maintenance costs include the cost of material and the cost of labour$${C}_{M}={(C}_{MCM}+{C}_{MCL}+{C}_{MCF})+left({C}_{MPM}+{C}_{MPL}+{C}_{MPF}right),$$
    (15)

    where CM—cumulative maintenance costs, CMC—corrective maintenance costs, CMP—preventive maintenance costs, CMCM—costs of material used for corrective maintenance, CMCL—costs of labour force for corrective maintenance, CMCF—costs of workshop equipment used for corrective maintenance, CMPM—costs of material used for preventive maintenance, CMPL—costs of labour force for preventive maintenance, CMPF—costs of workshop equipment used for preventive maintenance.

    Preventive maintenance costs (CMP) are costs that include all costs associated with preventive maintenance performed to reduce degradation and mitigate the likelihood of failure. At present, preventive maintenance is performed at predetermined time intervals (according to the manufacturer’s preventive maintenance program) or when a specified number of kilometres are not covered before the next service maintenance, depending on the time. In practice, for passenger cars, it is usually 1 or 2 years, depending on the use of engine oil. This mainly includes the cost of:

    material consumed during preventive maintenance,

    work spent on preventive maintenance,

    workshop equipment, training of preventive maintenance specialists.$${C}_{MP}=frac{{t}_{l}}{MTB{M}_{p}}left({C}_{MPM}+{(bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pm})right),$$
    (17)

    where MTBMp—mean operating time between preventive maintenances (km), CMPM—costs of material used for preventive maintenance (EUR), (bar{c})p—average hourly cost of labour and workshop equipment used for maintenance (EUR/hour), ̅tpm—mean time of labour-intensity per one preventive maintenance (hour).

    Design of a model for the analysis of selected life cycle costs of a passenger motor vehicleThe model for performing an analysis of life cycle costs for the purchase of a new motor vehicle is based on the basic Eq. (3), (18). We will not count the costs of improvement (CE) and the costs of the decommissioning phase (CD) for the mentioned model due to the calculations of costs that are unnecessary for the analysis. Then the model can be expressed as follows$$LCC={C}_{P}+{C}_{O}+{C}_{M}.$$
    (18)
    Then, the following Eqs. (6), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (16) and (17) are substituted into the given equation, and the selected costs can be calculated for individual vehicles. The resulting model for calculating the LCC costs has the following form$$LCC={C}_{p}+frac{{bar{c}}_{aF}}{100}{p}_{F}{t}_{l}+frac{{bar{c}}_{aOL}}{100}{p}_{OL}{t}_{l}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aT}}{n}_{T}{p}_{T}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aAB}}{n}_{AB}{p}_{AB}+{C}_{SI}{t}_{la}+{c}_{MT}{t}_{la}+left({C}_{E}+{C}_{TC}right)frac{{y}_{n}}{{t}_{la}}+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTBF}left({bar{c}}_{m}+{(bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pc})right)+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTB{M}_{p}}left({C}_{OMPM}+{bar{(c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pm})right).$$
    (19)
    It is presented in a Fig. 6.Figure 6Structure of model input parameters for LCC model calculation.Full size imageIn this way, the cumulative costs for each passenger motor vehicle are calculated. Since the passenger motor vehicles may have a different service life tl which is expressed in kilometres, it is recommended to convert this equation to specific costs which are related to one kilometre of use. The selected LCCS life cycle specific costs can be expressed by the following equation$${LCC}_{S}=frac{LCC}{{t}_{l}}.$$
    (20)
    LCC model input values and items affecting ownership costs for alternative drivesThe process of the calculation of selected life cycle costs for the propulsion of passenger vehicles and the structure of individual cost items is shown in Fig. 6. These are the input parameters to the LCC model.The total life cycle costs are divided into two main cost groups, which are the ownership and acquisition costs for a given drive type. Fuel costs are determined by the price and the quantity of conventional or alternative fuel consumed. For the calculation of the selected LCCs, the authors of the paper assume that the availability of conventional and alternative fuels is not limited in any way. It is assumed that the availability of fuels is ideal, which is not entirely true in practice. This is dependent on the support for each alternative fuel in each state.In practice, therefore, multiple costs may arise due to the distance to the refuelling station to provide alternative fuels such as E85, CNG, LPG and hydrogen. In addition, there is a distance to the charging station for electric drives.Another item that affects the cost of operation for hybrid passenger vehicles is the percentage of alternative fuel driving, which can have a significant impact on life cycle costs. Values for this item are given as a percentage, which is then converted into the number of kilometres driven on alternative and conventional fuel.One of the important parameters for calculating the life cycle operating costs for the hybrid-electric and electric drive is the setting of a threshold value for the capacity of the electric vehicle battery (EV battery) when the replacement is performed. For the model calculation, a limit value of 70% of the electric vehicle battery capacity at 20 °C was set.Return on investmentReturn on investment (ROI) is a performance measure used to evaluate the efficiency or profitability of an investment or compare the efficiency of a number of different investments. ROI tries to directly measure the amount of return on a particular investment, relative to the investment’s cost. To calculate ROI, the benefit (or return) of an investment is divided by the cost of the investment. The result is expressed as a percentage or a ratio12,23.For our calculation of the return on investment ROI on alternative and conventional passenger car propulsion the following formula is used, which is expressed as a percentage$$ROI=frac{{LCC}_{A}-{LCC}_{C}}{{LCC}_{C}}100,$$
    (21)

    where LCCA—selected live cycle costs of the alternative passenger car propulsion (EUR), LCCC—selected live cycle costs of the conventional passenger car propulsion (EUR).The return on investment of an alternative vehicle ROIAV purchase expresses after how many kilometres the increased cost of purchasing an alternative fuel vehicle compared to a conventional one is recovered. If the value is negative, the payback will not occur for various reasons. The following equation is used to calculate ROIAV$${ROI}_{AV}=frac{{C}_{{P}_{AV}}-{C}_{{P}_{CV}}}{frac{{C}_{O{W}_{CV}}-{C}_{O{W}_{AV}}}{{t}_{l}}}$$
    (22)

    where ({C}_{{P}_{AV}})—purchase cost on alternative vehicle (EUR), ({C}_{{P}_{CV}})—purchase cost on conventional vehicle (EUR), ({C}_{O{W}_{CV}})—ownership cost on conventional vehicle (EUR), ({C}_{O{W}_{AV}})—ownership cost on alternative vehicle (EUR), tl—service life of the passenger vehicle (km).Ownership costs on conventional vehicle are expressed by the following equation$${C}_{{OW}_{CV}}={left(frac{{bar{c}}_{aF}}{100}{p}_{F}{t}_{l}+frac{{bar{c}}_{aOL}}{100}{p}_{OL}{t}_{l}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aT}}{n}_{T}{p}_{T}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aAB}}{n}_{AB}{p}_{AB}+{C}_{SI}{t}_{la}+{c}_{MT}{t}_{la}+left({C}_{E}+{C}_{TC}right)frac{{y}_{n}}{{t}_{la}}+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTBF}left({bar{c}}_{m}+{(bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pc})right)+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTB{M}_{p}}left({C}_{OMPM}+({bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pm})right)right)}_{CV}.$$
    (23)
    Ownership costs on alternative vehicle are expressed by the following equation$${C}_{{OW}_{AV}}={left(frac{{bar{c}}_{aF}}{100}{p}_{F}{t}_{l}+frac{{bar{c}}_{aOL}}{100}{p}_{OL}{t}_{l}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aT}}{n}_{T}{p}_{T}+frac{{t}_{l}}{{bar{d}}_{aAB}}{n}_{AB}{p}_{AB}+{C}_{SI}{t}_{la}+{c}_{MT}{t}_{la}+left({C}_{E}+{C}_{TC}right)frac{{y}_{n}}{{t}_{la}}+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTBF}left({bar{c}}_{m}+{(bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pc})right)+frac{{t}_{l}}{MTB{M}_{p}}left({C}_{OMPM}+({bar{c}}_{p}{bar{t}}_{pm})right)right)}_{AV}.$$
    (24)
    The rate of return on investment for the purchase of an alternative vehicle depending on the kilometres travelled to is expressed by the following equation$${ROI}_{AV({t}_{o})}={(C}_{{P}_{AV}}-{C}_{{P}_{CV}})-({C}_{O{W}_{CV}left({t}_{o}right)}-{C}_{O{W}_{AV}left({t}_{o}right)}) quad text{when} ;to = (0-tl)$$
    (25)

    where to—operation of the passenger vehicle (km). More

  • in

    Evidence for a mixed-age group in a pterosaur footprint assemblage from the early Upper Cretaceous of Korea

    Wellnhofer, P. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Pterosaurs (Crescent Books, 1991).Unwin, D. M. The pterosaurs from deep time (Pi Press, 2005).Witton, M. P. Pterosaurs: Natural History (Anatomy (Princeton University Press, 2013).Book 

    Google Scholar 
    Williams, C. J. et al. Helically arranged cross struts in azhdarchid pterosaur cervical vertebrae and their biomechanical implications. iScience 24, 102338 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bestwick, J., Unwin, D. M., Butler, R. J. & Purnell, M. A. Dietary diversity and evolution of the earliest flying vertebrates revealed by dental microwear texture analysis. Nat. Commun. 11, 5293 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ryang, W. H. Characteristics of strike-slip basin formation and sedimentary fills and the Cretaceous small basins of the Korean Peninsula. J. Geo. Soc. Korea 49, 31–45 (2013).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Kim, B. G. & Park, B. G. Geological report of the Dongbok sheet (1:50,000) (Geological Survey of Korea, Seoul, 1966).Lee, H., Sim, M. S. & Choi, T. Stratigraphic evolution of the northern part of the Cretaceous Neungju basin South Korea. Geosci. J. 23, 849–865 (2019).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Paik, I. S., Huh, M., So, Y. H., Lee, J. E. & Kim, H. J. Traces of evaporites in Upper Cretaceous lacustrine deposits of Korea: Origin and paleoenvironmental implications. J. Asian Earth Sci. 30, 93–107 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Cohen, K. M., Finney, S. M., Gibbard, P. L. & Fan, J.-X. The ICS international Chronostratigraphic chart. Episodes 36, 199–204 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Calvo, J. O. & Lockley, M. G. The first pterosaur tracks from Gondwana. Cretac. Res. 22, 585–590 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kukihara, R. & Lockley, M. G. Fossil footprints from the dakota group (Cretaceous) john martin reservoir, bent county, Colorado: New insights into the paleoecology of the Dinosaur freeway. Cretac. Res. 33, 165–182 (2012).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. & Schumacher, B. A new pterosaur swim tracks locality from the Cretaceous Dakota Group of eastern Colorado: implications for pterosaur swim track behavior. Fossil Footprints of Western North America. Bull. NM Mus. Nat. Hist. Sci, 365–371 (2014).Smith, R. E., Martill, D. M., Unwin, D. M. & Steel, L. Edentulous pterosaurs from the Cambridge Greensand (Cretaceous) of eastern England with a review of Ornithostoma Seeley, 1871. Proc. Geol. Assoc. (2020).Ibrahim, N., Unwin, D. M., Martill, D. M., Baidder, L. & Zouhri, S. A new pterosaur (Pterodactyloidea: Azhdarchidae) from the Upper Cretaceous of Morocco. PLoS ONE 5, e10875 (2010).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Martill, D. M. & Ibrahim, N. An unusual modification of the jaws in cf. Alanqa, a mid-Cretaceous azhdarchid pterosaur from the Kem Kem beds of Morocco. Cretac. Res. 53, 59–67 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jacobs, M. L., Martill, D. M., Ibrahim, N. & Longrich, N. A new species of Coloborhynchus (Pterosauria, Ornithocheiridae) from the mid-Cretaceous of North Africa. Cretac. Res. 95, 77–88 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jacobs, M. L. et al. New toothed pterosaurs (Pterosauria: Ornithocheiridae) from the middle Cretaceous Kem Kem beds of Morocco and implications for pterosaur palaeobiogeography and diversity. Cretac. Res. 110, 104413 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    McPhee, J. et al. A new ? Chaoyangopterid (Pterosauria: Pterodactyloidea) from the Cretaceous Kem Kem beds of southern Morocco. Cretac. Res. 110, 104410 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Martill, D. M. et al. A new tapejarid (Pterosauria, Azhdarchoidea) from the mid-Cretaceous Kem Kem beds of Takmout, southern Morocco. Cretac. Res. 112, 104424 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Martill, D. M., Unwin, D. M., Ibrahim, N. & Longrich, N. A new edentulous pterosaur from the Cretaceous Kem Kem beds of south eastern Morocco. Cretac. Res. 84, 1–12 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, R. E. et al. Small, immature pterosaurs from the Cretaceous of Africa: implications for taphonomic bias and palaeocommunity structure in flying reptiles. Cretac. Res. 130, 105061 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, R. E., Martill, D. M., Kao, A., Zouhri, S. & Longrich, N. A long-billed, possible probe-feeding pterosaur (Pterodactyloidea: ?Azhdarchoidea) from the mid-Cretaceous of Morocco North Africa. Cretac. Res. 118, 104643 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kellner, A. W. A. et al. First complete pterosaur from the Afro-Arabian continent: insight into pterodactyloid diversity. Sci. Rep. 9, 17875 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Elgin, R. A. & Frey, E. A new azhdarchoid pterosaur from the Cenomanian (Late Cretaceous) of Lebanon. Swiss J. Geosci. 104, 21–33 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Averianov, A. O., Kurochkin, E. N., Pervushov, E. M. & Ivanov, A. V. Two bone fragments of ornithocheiroid pterosaurs from the Cenomanian of Volgograd Region, southern Russia. Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 50 (2005).Averianov, A. & Kurochkin, E. A new pterosaurian record from the Cenomanian of the Volga region. Paleontol. J. 44, 695–697 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nessov, L. Flying reptiles from the Jurassic and cretaceous of the USSR and significance of their remains for the reconstruction of paleogeographical conditions. Vestn. Leningr. Gos. Univ. Ser. 7, 28 (1990).
    Google Scholar 
    Bakhurina, N. N. & Unwin, D. M. A survey of pterosaurs from the Jurassic and Cretaceous of the former Soviet Union and Mongolia. (1995).Averianov, A. O. New records of azhdarchids (Pterosauria, Azhdarchidae) from the Late Cretaceous of Russia, Kazakhstan, and Central Asia. Paleontol. J. 41, 189–197 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Averianov, A. Mid-Cretaceous ornithocheirids (Pterosauria, Ornithocheiridae) from Russia and Uzbekistan. Paleontol. J. 41, 79–86 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Huh, M., Paik, I. S., Chung, C. H., Hwang, K. G. & Kim, B. S. Theropod tracks from Seoyuri in Hwasun, Jeollanamdo, Korea: occurrence and paleontological significance. J. Geo. Soc. Korea 39, 461–478 (2003).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Huh, M. et al. Well-preserved theropod tracks from the Upper Cretaceous of Hwasun County, southwestern South Korea, and their paleobiological implications. Cretac. Res. 27, 123–138 (2006).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G., Huh, M. & Kim, B. S. Ornithopodichnus and pes-only sauropod Trackways from the Hwasun tracksite Cretaceous of Korea. Ichnos 19, 93–100 (2012).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hwang, K. G., Huh, M. & Paik, I. S. A unique trackway of small theropod from Seoyu-ri, Hwasun-gun Jeollanam province. J. Geo. Soc. Korea 42, 69–78 (2006).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Kim, B. S. & Huh, M. Analysis of the acceleration phase of a theropod dinosaur based on a Cretaceous trackway from Korea. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 293, 1–8 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marchetti, L. et al. Defining the morphological quality of fossil footprints. Problems and principles of preservation in tetrapod ichnology with examples from the Palaeozoic to the present. Earth-Sci. Rev. 193, 109–145 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rodríguez-de La Rosa, R. A. Pterosaur tracks from the latest Campanian Cerro del Pueblo formation of southeastern Coahuila. Mexico. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 271, 275–282 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G. & Meyer, C. Crocodylomorph trackways from the Jurassic to early cretaceous of North America and Europe: Implications for Ichnotaxonomy. Ichnos 11, 167–178 (2004).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ambroggi, R. & De Lapparent, A. Les empreintes de pas fossiles du Maestrichtien d’Agadir. Notes du Service Géologique du Maroc 10, 43–57 (1954).
    Google Scholar 
    Stokes, W. L. Pterodactyl tracks from the Morrison Formation. J. Paleontol. 31, 952–954 (1957).
    Google Scholar 
    Delair, J. Note on Purbeck fossil footprints, with descriptions of two hitherto unknown forms from Dorset. Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society. 92–100 (1963).Hwang, K.-G., Huh, M. I. N., Lockley, M. G., Unwin, D. M. & Wright, J. L. New pterosaur tracks (Pteraichnidae) from the Late Cretaceous Uhangri Formation, southwestern Korea. Geol. Mag. 139, 421–435 (2002).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mazin, J.-M. & Pouech, J. The first non-pterodactyloid pterosaurian trackways and the terrestrial ability of non-pterodactyloid pterosaurs. Geobios 58, 39–53 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Masrour, M., de Ducla, M., Billon-Bruyat, J.-P. & Mazin, J.-M. Rediscovery of the Tagragra tracksite (Maastrichtian, Agadir, Morocco): Agadirichnus elegans Ambroggi and Lapparent 1954 is Pterosaurian Ichnotaxon. Ichnos 25, 285–294 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wright, J. L., Unwin, D. M., Lockley, M. G. & Rainforth, E. C. Pterosaur tracks from the Purbeck limestone formation of Dorset England. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 108, 39–48 (1997).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G. et al. The fossil trackway Pteraichnusis pterosaurian, not crocodilian: Implications for the global distribution of pterosaur tracks. Ichnos 4, 7–20 (1995).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Billon-Bruyat, J.-P. & Mazin, J.-M. The systematic problem of tetrapod ichnotaxa: the case study of Pteraichnus Stokes, 1957 (Pterosauria, Pterodactyloidae). Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 217, 315–324 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pascual Arribas, C. & Sanz Pérez, E. Huellas de Pterosaurios en el grupo Oncala (Soria, España). Pteraichnus palaciei-saenzi, nov. icnosp. Estudios Geol. 56, 73–100 (2000).
    Google Scholar 
    Calvo, M. M., Vidarte, C. F., Fuentes, F. M. & Fuentes, M. M. Huellas de Pterosaurios en la Sierra de Oncala (Soria, España). Nuevas icnoespecies: pteraichnus vetustior, Pteraichnus parvus. Pteraichnus manueli. Celtiberia 54, 471–490 (2004).
    Google Scholar 
    Fuentes Vidarte, C., Meijide Calvo, M., Meijide Fuentes, F. & Meijide Fuentes, M. Pteraichnus longipodus nov. icnosp. en la Sierra de Oncala (Soria, España). Studia Geologica Salmanticensia, 103–114 (2004).Peng, B.-X., Du, Y.-S., Li, D.-Q. & Bai, Z.-C. The first discovery of the early Cretaceous Pterosaur track and its significance in Yanguoxia, Yongjing County, Gansu Province. Earth Sci.-J. China Univ. Geosci. 29, 21–24 (2004).
    Google Scholar 
    Lee, Y.-N., Lee, H.-J., Lü, J. & Kobayashi, Y. New pterosaur tracks from the Hasandong formation (Lower Cretaceous) of Hadong County South Korea. Cretac. Res. 29, 345–353 (2008).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lee, Y.-N., Azuma, Y., Lee, H.-J., Shibata, M. & Lü, J. The first pterosaur trackways from Japan. Cretac. Res. 31, 263–273 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, R. et al. Pterosaur tracks from the early late cretaceous of Dongyang City, Zhejiang Province China. Geol. Bull. China. 32, 693–698 (2013).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Li, Y., Wang, X. & Jiang, S. A new pterosaur tracksite from the Lower Cretaceous of Wuerho, Junggar Basin, China: inferring the first putative pterosaur trackmaker. PeerJ 9, e11361 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ha, S. et al. Diminutive pterosaur tracks and trackways (Pteraichnus gracilis ichnosp. Nov.) from the lower Cretaceous Jinju formation, Gyeongsang basin. Korea. Cretac. Res. 131, 105080 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Sánchez-Hernández, B., Przewieslik, A. G. & Benton, M. J. A reassessment of the Pteraichnus ichnospecies from the early Cretaceous of Soria Province Spain. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 29, 487–497 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhou, X. et al. A new darwinopteran pterosaur reveals arborealism and an opposed thumb. Curr. Biol. 31, 2429-2436.e2427 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lü, J. et al. Dragons of the Skies (recent advances on the study of pterosaurs from China) (Zhejiang Science and Technology Press, 2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Beccari, V. et al. Osteology of an exceptionally well-preserved tapejarid skeleton from Brazil: Revealing the anatomy of a curious pterodactyloid clade. PLoS ONE 16, e0254789 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lü, J. A new boreopterid pterodactyloid pterosaur from the Early Cretaceous Yixian Formation of Liaoning Province, northeastern China. Acta Geologica Sinica-English Edition 84, 241–246 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bennett, S. C. Terrestrial locomotion of pterosaurs: A reconstruction based on Pteraichnus trackways. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 17, 104–113 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wang, X. & Lü, J. Discovery of a pterodactylid pterosaur from the Yixian Formation of western Liaoning China. Chin. Sci. Bull. 46, A3–A8 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Frey, E. et al. A new specimen of nyctosaurid pterosaur, cf. Muzquizopteryx sp. from the Late Cretaceous of northeast Mexico. Revista mexicana de ciencias geológicas 29, 131–139 (2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Wu, W.-H., Zhou, C.-F. & Andres, B. The toothless pterosaur Jidapterus edentus (Pterodactyloidea: Azhdarchoidea) from the Early Cretaceous Jehol Biota and its paleoecological implications. PLoS ONE 12, e0185486 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lü, J. et al. The toothless pterosaurs from China. Acta Geol. Sin. 90, 2513–2525 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Zhang, X., Jiang, S., Cheng, X. & Wang, X. New Material of Sinopterus (Pterosauria, Tapejaridae) from the Early Cretaceous Jehol Biota of China. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 91 (2019).Bestwick, J., Unwin, D. M., Butler, R. J., Henderson, D. M. & Purnell, M. A. Pterosaur dietary hypotheses: A review of ideas and approaches. Biol. Rev. 93, 2021–2048 (2018).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, H. et al. New anatomical information on Dsungaripterus weii Young, 1964 with focus on the palatal region. PeerJ 8, e8741 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Li, D. et al. A manus dominated pterosaur track assemblage from Gansu, China: Implications for behavior. Sci. Bull. 60, 264–272 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Masrour, M., Pascual-Arribas, C., de Ducla, M., Hernández-Medrano, N. & Pérez-Lorente, F. Anza palaeoichnological site. Late Cretaceous. Morocco. Part I. The first African pterosaur trackway (manus only). J. African Earth Sci. 134, 766–775 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bramwell, C. D. & Whitfield, G. R. Biomechanics of Pteranodon. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 267, 503–581 (1974).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bennett, S. C. Terrestrial locomotion of pterosaurs: a reconstruction based on Pteraichnus trackways. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 17, 104–113 (1997).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mazin, J.-M., Billon-Bruyat, J.-P., Hantzpergue, P. & Lafaurie, G. Ichnological evidence for quadrupedal locomotion in pterodactyloid pterosaurs: Trackways from the Late Jurassic of Crayssac (southwestern France). Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 217, 283–296 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Henderson, D. M. Pterosaur body mass estimates from three-dimensional mathematical slicing. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 30, 768–785 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G. & Wright, J. L. Pterosaur swim tracks and other ichnological evidnce of behaviour and ecology. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 217, 297–313 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M., Mitchell, L. & Odier, G. P. Small Theropod track assemblages from middle Jurassic Eolianites of eastern Utah: Paleoecological insights from dune Ichnofacies in a transgressive sequence. Ichnos 14, 131–142 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fiorillo, A. R., Hasiotis, S. T., Kobayashi, Y. & Tomsich, C. S. A pterosaur manus track from Denali National park, Alaska Range, Alaska United States. Palaios 24, 466–472 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bell, P. R., Fanti, F. & Sissons, R. A possible pterosaur manus track from the late Cretaceous of Alberta. Lethaia 46, 274–279 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stinnesbeck, W. et al. Theropod, avian, pterosaur, and arthropod tracks from the uppermost Cretaceous Las Encinas Formation, Coahuila, northeastern Mexico, and their significance for the end-Cretaceous mass extinction. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 129, 331–348 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Xing, L. et al. Late Cretaceous ornithopod-dominated, theropod, and pterosaur track assemblages from the Nanxiong Basin, China: New discoveries, ichnotaxonomy, and paleoecology. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 466, 303–313 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G., Gierlinski, G. D., Adach, L., Schumacher, B. & Cart, K. Newly discovered tetrapod ichnotaxa from the Upper Blackhawk Formation Utah. Bull. N. M. M. Nat. Hist. Sci. 79, 469–480 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Lockley, M. G. & Gillette, D. Pterosaur and bird tracks from a new Late Cretaceous locality in Utah. Verteb. Paleontol. Utah 99, 355–359 (1999).
    Google Scholar 
    Bennett, S. C. The ontogeny of Pteranodon and other pterosaurs. Paleobiology 19, 92–106 (1993).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bennett, S. C. Year-classes of pterosaurs from the Solnhofen Limestone of Germany: taxonomic and systematic implications. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 16, 432–444 (1996).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chiappe, L. M., Codorniú, L., Grellet-Tinner, G. & Rivarola, D. Argentinian unhatched pterosaur fossil. Nature 432, 571–572 (2004).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Codorniú, L., Chiappe, L. & Rivarola, D. Neonate morphology and development in pterosaurs: evidence from a Ctenochasmatid embryo from the Early Cretaceous of Argentina. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 455, 83–94 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mickelson, D. L., Lockley, M. G., Bishop, J. & Kirkland, J. A New Pterosaur Tracksite from the Jurassic Summerville Formation, near Ferron Utah. Ichnos 11, 125–142 (2004).Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Assessment of solar radiation resource from the NASA-POWER reanalysis products for tropical climates in Ghana towards clean energy application

    Geography and climatology of study areaThe area of study, Ghana, is on the coastal edge of tropical West African, bounded in latitude 4.5° N and 11.5° N and longitude 3.5° W and 1.5° E, and characterized by a tropical monsoon climate system23,24. Figure 1 shows map of the study area indicating the selected twenty two (22) sunshine measurement stations distributed across the four main climatological zones and Table 1 summarizes the geographical positions of selected stations.Figure 1Adapted from Asilevi27.Map of the study area showing all twenty two (22) synoptic stations distributed in four main climatological zones countrywide.Full size imageTable 1 Geographical position and elevation for study sites.Full size tableAtmospheric clarity over the area is closely connected to cloud amount distribution and rainfall activities, largely determined by the oscillatory migration of the Inter-Tropical Discontinuity (ITD), accounting for the West African Monsoon (WAM)25,26.Owing to the highly variable spatiotemporal distribution of cloud amount vis-à-vis rainfall activities, resulting in contrasting climatic conditions in different parts of the region, the country is partitioned by the Ghana Meteorological Agency (GMet) into four main agro-ecological zones namely, the Savannah, Transition, Forest and Coastal zones as shown in Fig. 123. As a result, the region experiences an estimated Global solar radiation (GSR) intensity peaks in April–May and then in October–November, with the highest monthly average of 22 MJm−2 day−1 over the savannah climatic zone and the lowest monthly average of 13 MJm−2 day−1 over the forest climatic zone27.Research datasetsGround-based measurement dataDaily sunshine duration measurement datasets (n) spanning 1983–2018 where derived for estimating Global solar radiation (GSR). The measurements were taken by the Campbell-Stokes sunshine recorder, mounted at the 22 stations shown in Fig. 1, under unshaded conditions to ensure optimum sunlight exposure. The device concentrates sunlight onto a thin strip of sunshine card, which causes a burnt line representing the total period in hours during which sunshine intensity exceeds 120.0 Wm−2 according to World Meteorological Organization (WMO) recommendations27. The as-received daily records were quality control checked by ensuring 0 ≤ n ≤ N, where N is the astronomical day length representing the possible maximum duration of sunshine in hours determined by Eq. 1 from the latitude (ϕ) of the site of interest and the solar declination (δ) computed by Eq. 227:$$ {text{N}} = frac{2}{15}cos^{ – 1} left[ { – tan phi tan {updelta }} right] $$
    (1)
    $$ {updelta } = 23.45sin left[ {360^{{text{o}}} times frac{{284 + {text{J}}}}{365}} right] $$
    (2)
    where J represents the number for the Julian day of the year (first January is 1 and second January is 2).NASA-POWER Global solar radiation (GSR) reanalysis dataThe satellite-based Global solar radiation (GSR) dataset for specific longitudes and latitudes of all 22 stations, assessed in the study, were retrieved from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Prediction of Worldwide Energy Resources (NASA-POWER) reanalysis repository based on the Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA-2) assimilation model products, developed from Surface Radiation Budget, and spanning equal study period (1983–2018). The datasets are accessible on a daily and monthly temporal resolution scales at 0.5° × 0.5° spatial coverage via a user friendly web-based mapping portal: https://power.larc.nasa.gov/data-access-viewer/17. The advantage of the NASA-POWER reanalysis GSR, is the wide spatial coverage, and thus can be used to develop a high spatial resolution of solar radiation across the study area.The POWER Project analyzes, synthesizes and makes available surface radiation related parameters on a global scale, primarily from the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), Global Energy and Water cycle Experiment (GEWEX), Surface Radiation Budget (SRB) project (Version 2.9), the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES), FLASHFlux (Fast Longwave and Shortwave Radiative Fluxes from CERES and MODIS), and the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO)17. Table 2 shows the source satellites and the corresponding temporal coverage used in the development of NASA-POWER GSR products.Table 2 Satellites providing the NASA-POWER GSR datasets20.Full size tableThe monthly average NASA-POWER all-sky shortwave surface radiation reanalysis products are statistically validated, showing reasonable biases of − 6.6–13%, against a global network of surface radiation measurement metadata in an integrated database from the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN) of the World Radiation Monitoring Center (WRMC)20,22. The datasets are widely used in renewable energy application16,22, agricultural modelling of crop yields28, crop simulation exercises29, and plant disease modelling30.Furthermore, in order to assess the suitability of the NASA-POWER surface solar radiation products for the study area, a synthetic sunshine duration based Global solar radiation (GSR) is developed from the Angstrom-Prescott sunshine duration model by Eq. 3 for comparisons27.$$ {text{GSR}} = left[ {{text{a}} + {text{b}}frac{{text{n}}}{{text{N}}}} right]{text{H}}_{{text{o}}} $$
    (3)
    were Ho (kWhm−2 day−1) is the daily extraterrestrial solar radiation on an horizontal surface, n is the daily sunshine duration measurements obtained from the Ghana Meteorological Agency (GMet), and N is the maximum possible daily sunshine duration or the day length in hours determined by Eq. 1. Generalized regression constants a = 0.25 and b = 0.5 for the study area were determined by Asilevi27 from experimental radiometric data based on correlation regression analysis between atmospheric clarity index (GSR/Ho) and atmospheric cloudlessness index (n/N), for estimating solar radiation over the study area, and compared with other satellite data retrieved from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the German Aerospace Centre (DLR)27. Ho was calculated from astronomical parameters by Eq. 4:$$ {text{H}}_{0} = frac{{24{ } cdot { }60}}{pi } cdot {text{G}}_{{{text{sc}}}} cdot {text{d}}_{{text{r}}} left[ {omega_{{text{s}}} sin varphi sin delta + cos varphi cos delta sin omega_{{text{s}}} } right] $$
    (4)
    where Gsc is the Solar constant in MJm−2 min−1, dr is the relative Earth–Sun distance in meters (m), (omega_{s}) is the sunset hour angle (angular distance between the meridian of the observer and the meridian whose plane contains the sun), (delta) is the angle of declination in degrees (°) and (varphi) is the local latitude. A detailed presentation of the calculation was published in a previous work27.Statistical assessment analysisFor the purpose of assessing the NASA-POWER derived monthly mean GSR (GSRn) datasets in comparison with the estimated Global Solar Radiation (GSRe) datasets used in this paper, the following deviation and correlation methods in Eqs. 5–11, each showing a complimentary result were used: Standard deviation (({upsigma })), residual error (RE), Root mean square error (RMSE), Mean bias error (MBE), Mean percentage error (MPE), Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r), and Willmott index of agreement (d) for n observations31,32,33,34,35. GSRe, GSRn, and RE represent the estimated GSR, NASA-POWER GSR, and the residual error between GSRe and GSRn respectively. A positive RE indicates that sunshine-based estimated GSR is larger than the NASA-POWER reanalysis dataset, while a negative RE indicates that sunshine-based estimated GSR is smaller than the NASA-POWER reanalysis dataset. The arithmetic mean of any dataset is µ.The standard deviation (({upsigma })) was used to check the upper and lower limits of distribution around the mean deviations between GSRe and GSRn in order to ascertain violations between both datasets33. The RMSE is a standard statistical metric to quantify error margins in meteorology and climate research studies, and by definition is always positive, representing zero in the ideal case, plus a smaller value signifying a good marginal deviation31. The MBE is a good indicator for under-or overestimation in observations, with MBE values closest to zero being desirable. The MPE further indicates the percentage deviation between the GSRe and GSRn individual datasets35.$$ {upsigma } = sqrt {frac{1}{{{text{n}} – 1}}mathop sum limits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {{text{GSR}} – {upmu }} right)^{2} } $$
    (5)
    $$ {text{RE}} = {text{GSR}}_{{text{e}}} – {text{GSR}}_{{text{n}}} $$
    (6)
    $$ {text{RMSE}} = sqrt {frac{1}{{text{n}}}mathop sum limits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {{text{RE}}} right)^{2} } $$
    (7)
    $$ {text{MBE}} = frac{1}{{text{n}}}mathop sum limits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {{text{RE}}} right) $$
    (8)
    $$ {text{MPE}} = frac{1}{{text{n}}}mathop sum limits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {frac{{{text{RE}}}}{{{text{GSR}}_{{text{e}}} }} times 100{text{% }}} right) $$
    (9)
    $$ {text{r}} = frac{{mathop sum nolimits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {{text{GSR}}_{{text{e}}} – {upsigma }_{{text{e}}} } right)left( {{text{GSR}}_{{text{n}}} – {upsigma }_{{text{n}}} } right)}}{{left( {{text{n}} – 1} right){upsigma }_{{text{e}}} {upsigma }_{{text{n}}} }} $$
    (10)
    $$ {text{d}} = 1 – left[ {frac{{mathop sum nolimits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {{text{GSR}}_{{text{e}}} – {text{GSR}}_{{text{n}}} } right)^{2} }}{{mathop sum nolimits_{{{text{i}} = 1}}^{{text{n}}} left( {left| {{text{GSR}}_{{text{e}}} – {text{GSR}}_{{{text{nave}}}} left| + right|{text{GSR}}_{{text{n}}} – {text{GSR}}_{{{text{nave}}}} } right|} right)^{2} }}} right] $$
    (11)
    Further, as with other statistical studies in meteorology36, the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was used to quantify the strength of correlation between GSRe and GSRn. Finally, the Willmott index of agreement (d) commonly used in meteorological literature computed from Eq. 7 is used to assess the degree of GSRe/GSRn agreement34. More

  • in

    Multi-marker DNA metabarcoding detects suites of environmental gradients from an urban harbour

    Breed, M. F. et al. The potential of genomics for restoring ecosystems and biodiversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 20, 615–628 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Carpenter, S. R., Stanley, E. H. & Vander Zanden, M. J. State of the world’s freshwater ecosystems: Physical, chemical, and biological changes. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 36, 75–99 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Geist, J. Integrative freshwater ecology and biodiversity conservation. Ecol. Indic. 11, 1507–1516 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jeppesen, E., Søndergaard, M., Meerhoff, M., Lauridsen, T. L. & Jensen, J. P. Shallow lake restoration by nutrient loading reduction–some recent findings and challenges ahead. Hydrobiologia 584, 239–252 (2007).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Søndergaard, M. & Jeppesen, E. Anthropogenic impacts on lake and stream ecosystems, and approaches to restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. 44, 1089–1094 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marburg, A. E., Turner, M. G. & Kratz, T. K. Natural and anthropogenic variation in coarse wood among and within lakes. J. Ecol. 94, 558–568 (2006).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Schindler, D. W. Recent advances in the understanding and management of eutrophication. Limnol. Oceanogr. 51, 356–363 (2006).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lau, S. S. S. & Lane, S. N. Continuity and change in environmental systems: The case of shallow lake ecosystems. Prog. Phys. Geogr. Earth Environ. 25, 178–202 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Brinkhurst, R. O. Distribution and abundance of Tubificid (Oligochaeta) species in Toronto harbour, Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 27, 1961–1969 (1970).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wood, L. W. & Chua, K. E. Glucose flux at the sediment-water interface of Toronto Harbour, Lake Ontario, with reference to pollution stress. Can. J. Microbiol. 19, 413–420 (1973).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nriagu, J. O., Wong, H. K. T. & Snodgrass, W. J. Historical records of metal pollution in sediments of Toronto and Hamilton harbours. J. Gt. Lakes Res. 9(3), 365–373 (1983).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Toronto & Region Remedial Action Plan. Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan (1989).Dahmer, S. C., Matos, L. & Morley, A. Restoring Toronto’s waters: Progress toward delisting the Toronto and Region area of concern. Aquat. Ecosyst. Health Manag. 21, 229–233 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Munawar, M., Norwood, W., McCarthy, L. & Mayfield, C. In situ bioassessment of dredging and disposal activities in a contaminated ecosystem: Toronto Harbour. Hydrobiologia https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1896-2_62 (1989).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Dahmer, S. C., Matos, L. & Jarvie, S. Assessment of the degradation of aesthetics beneficial use impairment in the Toronto and region area of concern. Aquat. Ecosyst. Health Manag. 21, 276–284 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan. Within Reach: 2015 Toronto an Region Remedial Action Plan Progress Report (2016).Burniston, D. & Waltho, J. Report on Sediment Quality in the Toronto Inner Harbour 2007 (2011).Elbrecht, V., Vamos, E. E., Meissner, K., Aroviita, J. & Leese, F. Assessing strengths and weaknesses of DNA metabarcoding-based macroinvertebrate identification for routine stream monitoring. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 1265–1275 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Emilson, C. E. et al. DNA metabarcoding and morphological macroinvertebrate metrics reveal the same changes in boreal watersheds across an environmental gradient. Sci. Rep. 7, 12777 (2017).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Aylagas, E., Borja, Á., Muxika, I. & Rodríguez-Ezpeleta, N. Adapting metabarcoding-based benthic biomonitoring into routine marine ecological status assessment networks. Ecol. Indic. 95, 194–202 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bush, A. et al. Studying ecosystems with DNA metabarcoding: Lessons from biomonitoring of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 434 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Serrana, J. M., Miyake, Y., Gamboa, M. & Watanabe, K. Comparison of DNA metabarcoding and morphological identification for stream macroinvertebrate biodiversity assessment and monitoring. Ecol. Indic. 101, 963–972 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fernández, S., Rodríguez-Martínez, S., Martínez, J. L., Garcia-Vazquez, E. & Ardura, A. How can eDNA contribute in riverine macroinvertebrate assessment? A metabarcoding approach in the Nalón River (Asturias, Northern Spain). Environ. DNA 1, 385–401 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hajibabaei, M. et al. Watered-down biodiversity? A comparison of metabarcoding results from DNA extracted from matched water and bulk tissue biomonitoring samples. PLoS ONE 14, e0225409 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Baird, D. J. & Hajibabaei, M. Biomonitoring 2.0: A new paradigm in ecosystem assessment made possible by next-generation DNA sequencing. Mol. Ecol. 21, 2039–2044 (2012).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hajibabaei, M., Baird, D. J., Fahner, N. A., Beiko, R. & Golding, G. B. A new way to contemplate Darwin’s tangled bank: How DNA barcodes are reconnecting biodiversity science and biomonitoring. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. Biol. Sci. 371, 20150330 (2016).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Beermann, A. J., Zizka, V. M. A., Elbrecht, V., Baranov, V. & Leese, F. DNA metabarcoding reveals the complex and hidden responses of chironomids to multiple stressors. Environ. Sci. Eur. 30, 26 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bush, A. et al. DNA metabarcoding reveals metacommunity dynamics in a threatened boreal wetland wilderness. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 8539–8545 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Compson, Z. G. et al. Chapter Two—Linking DNA Metabarcoding and Text Mining to Create Network-Based Biomonitoring Tools: A Case Study on Boreal Wetland Macroinvertebrate Communities. In Advances in Ecological Research Vol. 59 (eds Bohan, D. A. et al.) 33–74 (Academic Press, 2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Fernandes, K. et al. DNA metabarcoding—A new approach to fauna monitoring in mine site restoration. Restor. Ecol. 26, 1098–1107 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fernandes, K. et al. Invertebrate DNA metabarcoding reveals changes in communities across mine site restoration chronosequences. Restor. Ecol. 27, 1177–1186 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Poikane, S. et al. Benthic macroinvertebrates in lake ecological assessment: A review of methods, intercalibration and practical recommendations. Sci. Total Environ. 543, 123–134 (2016).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Macher, J.-N. et al. Comparison of environmental DNA and bulk-sample metabarcoding using highly degenerate cytochrome c oxidase I primers. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 18, 1456–1468 (2018).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marshall, N. T. & Stepien, C. A. Macroinvertebrate community diversity and habitat quality relationships along a large river from targeted eDNA metabarcode assays. Environ. DNA 2, 572–586 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Metro Toronto and Region Remedial Action Plan. Updates on Actions 2013–2014. (2013).López-López, E. & Sedeño-Díaz, J. E. Biological indicators of water quality: The role of fish and macroinvertebrates as indicators of water quality. In Environmental Indicators (eds Armon, R. H. & Hänninen, O.) 643–661 (Springer Netherlands, 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9499-2_37.Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    Berry, O. et al. A Comparison of Morphological and DNA Metabarcoding Analysis of Diets in Exploited Marine Fishes (2015).Sweeney, B. W., Battle, J. M., Jackson, J. K. & Dapkey, T. Can DNA barcodes of stream macroinvertebrates improve descriptions of community structure and water quality?. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 30, 195–216 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Banerji, A. et al. Spatial and temporal dynamics of a freshwater eukaryotic plankton community revealed via 18S rRNA gene metabarcoding. Hydrobiologia 818, 71–86 (2018).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Porter, T. M. et al. Widespread occurrence and phylogenetic placement of a soil clone group adds a prominent new branch to the fungal tree of life. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 46, 635–644 (2008).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rosling, A. et al. Archaeorhizomycetes: Unearthing an ancient class of ubiquitous soil fungi. Science 333, 876–879 (2011).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mandaville, S. M. Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Freshwaters—Taxa Tolerance Values, Metrics, and Protocols, vol. 128. http://lakes.chebucto.org/H-1/tolerance.pdf (2002).Trzcinski, M. K. et al. The effects of food web structure on ecosystem function exceeds those of precipitation. J. Anim. Ecol. 85, 1147–1160 (2016).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Liu, X. & Wang, H. Contrasting patterns and drivers in taxonomic versus functional diversity, and community assembly of aquatic plants in subtropical lakes. Biodivers. Conserv. 27(12), 3103–3118 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kovalenko, K. E., Brady, V. J., Ciborowski, J. J. H., Ilyushkin, S. & Johnson, L. B. Functional changes in littoral macroinvertebrate communities in response to watershed-level anthropogenic stress. PLoS ONE 9, e101499 (2014).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Luiza-Andrade, A., Montag, L. F. A. & Juen, L. Functional diversity in studies of aquatic macroinvertebrates community. Scientometrics 111, 1643–1656 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    MacMillan, G. A., Chételat, J., Heath, J. P., Mickpegak, R. & Amyot, M. Rare earth elements in freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 19, 1336–1345 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pastorino, P. et al. Macrobenthic invertebrates as tracers of rare earth elements in freshwater watercourses. Sci. Total Environ. 698, 134282 (2020).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kulaš, A. et al. Ciliates (Alveolata, Ciliophora) as bioindicators of environmental pressure: A karstic river case. Ecol. Indic. 124, 107430 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Persaud, D., Lomas, T., Boyd, D. & Mathai, S. Historical Development and Quality of the Toronto Waterfront Sediments (1985).Milani, D. & Grapentine, L. Assessment of Sediment Quality in the Bay of Quinte Area Of Concern (2000).Reynoldson, T. B., Bailey, R. C., Day, K. E. & Norris, R. H. Biological guidelines for freshwater sediment based on BEnthic Assessment of SedimenT (the BEAST) using a multivariate approach for predicting biological state. Aust. J. Ecol. 20(1), 198–219 (1995).Article 

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

    Google Scholar 
    Leray, M. et al. A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: Application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents. Front. Zool. 10, 34 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhan, A. et al. High sensitivity of 454 pyrosequencing for detection of rare species in aquatic communities. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 558–565 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gibson, J. et al. Simultaneous assessment of the macrobiome and microbiome in a bulk sample of tropical arthropods through DNA metasystematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, 8007–8012 (2014).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gibson, J. F. et al. Large-scale biomonitoring of remote and threatened ecosystems via high-throughput sequencing. PLoS ONE 10, e0138432 (2015).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Porter, T. M. & Hajibabaei, M. METAWORKS: A flexible, scalable bioinformatic pipeline for multi-marker biodiversity assessments. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202960 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Köster, J. & Rahmann, S. Snakemake—a scalable bioinformatics workflow engine. Bioinformatics 28, 2520–2522 (2012).PubMed 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Anon. Conda. (2016).Porter, T. M. & Hajibabaei, M. Automated high throughput animal CO1 metabarcode classification. Sci. Rep. 8, 4226 (2018).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Porter, T. M. Eukaryote CO1 Reference set for the RDP Classifier (Zenodo, 2017) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4741447.Book 

    Google Scholar 
    Porter, T. M. SILVA 18S Reference Set for the RDP Classifier(Zenodo, 2018) https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4741433.Book 

    Google Scholar 
    R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Core Team, 2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer-Verlag, 2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3.Book 
    MATH 

    Google Scholar 
    Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package (2020).Komsta, L. & Novomestky, F. moments: Moments, cumulants, skewness, kurtosis and related tests (2015).U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Freshwater Biological Traits Database (Final Report) EPA/600/R-11/038F. (2012)U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Freshwater Biological Traits Database (2012).Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. An online tool that unifies, standardises and codifies more than 20,000 European freshwater organisms and their ecological preferences. Ecol. Indic. 53, 271–282 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Moog, O. Fauna Aquatica Austriaca – Catalogue for autecological Classification of Austrian Aquatic Organisms (1995).Tachet, H., Bournaud, M., Richoux, P., Usseglio-Polatera, P. Invertébrés d’eau douce – systématique, biologie, écologie (2010).Nally, R. M. & Walsh, C. J. Hierarchical partitioning public-domain software. Biodivers. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000009515.11717.0b (2004).Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Index system of rural human settlement in rural revitalization under the perspective of China

    Parra-Lopez, C., Groot, J. C. J., Carmona-Torres, C. & Rossing, W. A. H. Integrating public demands into model-based design for multifunctional agriculture: an application to intensive Dutch dairy landscapes. Ecol. Econ. 67(4), 538–551 (2008).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pinto-Correia, T., Guiomar, N., Guerra, C.A. et al. Assessing the ability of rural (2016)UPA. Desarrollo rural. Oportunidades Desaprovechadas La Tierra 254, 31–33 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Abreu, I., Nunes, J. M. & Mesias, F. J. Can rural development Be measured? Design and application of a synthetic index to Portuguese municipalities. Soc. Indic. Res. 145, 1107–1123 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Doxiadis, C. A. Ekistics: an introduction to the science of human settlements (Oxford University Press, 1968).
    Google Scholar 
    Algeciras, J. A. R., Coch, H. & Perez, G. D. L. P. Human thermal comfort conditions and urban planning in hot-humid climates-The case of Cuba. Int. J. Biometeorol. 60, 1151–1164 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhang, H., Zhang, S. & Liu, Z. Evolution and influencing factors of China’s rural population distribution patterns since 1990. PLoS ONE 15, e0233637 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Eurostat. Eurostat Regional Yearbook. 2019 Edition. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2019)Overview of CAP Reform 2014–2020. Agricultural Policy Perspectives. Brief, no. 5, December 2013. European Commission.Marsden, T. & Sonnino, R. Rural development and the regional state: denying multifunctional agriculture in the UK. J. Rural Stud. 24(4), 422–431 (2008).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Adamowicz, M. Normative Aspects of Rural Development Strategy and Policy in The European Union Normative Aspects of Rural Development Strategy and Policy in The European Union, (2018)Léon, Y. Rural development in Europe: a research frontier for agricultural economists. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 32, 301–317 (2005).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Biegańska, J., Środa-Murawska, S., Kruzmetra, Z. & Swiaczny, F. Peri-Urban development as a significant rural development trend. Quaest. Geogr. 37, 125–140 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lee I.-H. Change of rural development policy in South Korea After Korean War. J. Reg City Plan, 2021.Oh, Y.-Y. et al. The selection of proper resource and change of salinity in Helianthus tuberosus L. cultivated in Saemangeum reclaimed tidal land. Korean J. Environ. Agric. 37, 73–78 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yoon, J.-Y., Jeong, J.-H. & Choi, S.-K. Validation of reference genes for quantifying changes in physiological gene expression in apple tree under cold stress and virus infection. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 26, 144–158 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Faradiba, F. & Zet, L. The impact of climate factors, disaster, and social community in rural development. J. Asian Finance Econ. Bus. 7, 707–717 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kaneko, M., Ohta, R., Vingilis, E. & Mathews, M. Thomas Robert freeman; systematic scoping review of factors and measures of rurality: toward the development of a rurality index for health care research in Japan. BMC Health Services Res. 21, 1–11 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yokoyama, S. Sustainable activities for rural development, New Frontiers in Regional Science: Asian Perspectives, (2019).Georgios, C., & Barraí, H. Social innovation in rural governance: a comparative case study across the marginalised rural EU. J. Rural Stud. (2021)Michalek, J. & Zarnekow, N. Application of the rural development index to analysis of rural regions in Poland and Slovakia. Soc. Indic. Res. 105, 1–37 (2012).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Liu, Y., Wang, G. & Zhang, F. Spatio-temporal dynamic patterns of rural area development in eastern coastal China. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 23, 173–181 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kim, T.-H. & Yang, S.-R. Construction of the rural development index: the case of Vietnam. J. Rural Dev. 39, 113–142 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Houkai, W. Current top ten frontier issues [J]in the study of agriculture. Rural Areas Rural Econ. China 4, 2–6 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Hu, Y., Fu, R. & Jin, S. Ecological environment concern in the organic link between poverty alleviation and rural revitalization. Reform 10, 141–148 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Zhang H., Gao L., & Yan K. On the theoretical origin, main innovation and realization path of rural revitalization thought rural economy in China, (11), 2–16 (2018).Feiwei, S. & Zegan, X. Construction and empirical analysis of the index system of beautiful villages in Zhejiang Province. J. Huazhong Agric. Univ. (Social Sciences Edition) 02, 45-51+132 (2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Research Group of Shanghai Rural Revitalization Index. Construction and evaluation of the index system of rural revitalization in Shanghai. Sci. Dev. 9, 56–63 (2020).World Bank, Expanding the Measure of Wealth. Indicators of Environmentally Sustainable Development. World Bank, Washington, D.C. (1997)Hicks, D. A. The inequality-adjusted human development index: a constructive proposal. World Dev. 25, 1283–1298 (1997).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhao, R., Shao, C. & He, R. Spatiotemporal evolution of ecosystem health of China’s Provinces based on SDGs. Int. J Environ. Res. Public Health 18, 10569 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kageyama, A., Desenvolvimento rural : conceitos e aplicaçao ao caso brasileiro. UFRGS Editora, Porto Alegre (Brasil) (2008).Abreu, I. Construçao de um índice de desenvolvimento rural e sua aplicaçao ao Alto Alentejo. Instituto Polit´ecnico de Portalegre (2014)Castellani, V. & Sala, S. Sustainable performance index for tourism policy development. Tour. Manag. 31, 871–880 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hashemi, N. The role of ecotourism in sustainable rural development. J. Rural Dev. Stud. 13(3), 173–188 (2010).
    Google Scholar 
    Alkire, S., Conconi, A., & Seth, S. Multidimensional Poverty Index 2013: Brief methodological note and results. Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) (2014b)Alkire, S., Foster, J. & Santos, M. E. Where did identification go?. J. Econ. Inequal. 9, 501–505 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Alkire, S. et al. Multidimensional poverty measurement and analysis (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015).MATH 
    Book 

    Google Scholar 
    Alkire, S., & Seth, S. Identifying destitution through linked subsetsof multidimensionally poor: an ordinal approach, OPHI Working Paper 99. University of Oxford (2016)Li, X., Yang, H., Jia, J., Shen, Y. & Liu, J. Index system of sustainable rural development based on the concept of ecological livability. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 86, 1–12 (2021).
    Google Scholar 
    Guo, X. & Hu, Y. Construction of evaluation index system of rural revitalization level. Agric. Econ. Manag. 05, 5–15 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Kong, X. & Xia, J. The value logic relation and synergy path choice between rural revitalization strategy and rural integration development. J. Northwest Univ. (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) 49(02), 10–18 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Wen, T. Three hundred years: the context and development of Chinese rural construction. Open Age. (04) (2016)Ren, C. A Study on the basis, constraints and institutional supply of industrial prosperity. Acad. Acad. 07, 15–27 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Ye, X., Cheng, Y., Zhao, J. & Ning, X. Rural revitalization during the 14th Five-year plan: trend judgment, general thinking and safeguard mechanism. Rural Econ. 09, 1–9 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Zhu, Q. The sociological explanation of the prosperity of rural industry-industry in the context of rural revitalization. J. China Agric. Univ. (Social Sciences Edition) 35(03), 89–95 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Bithas, K. A bioeconomic approach to sustainability with ecological thresholds as an operational indicator. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 6, 100027 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zheng, X. The East Asian experience of Rural Revitalization and its Enlightenment to China—Take Japan and South Korea as an example. Lanzhou J. 11, 200–208 (2019).ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Srivastava, P. K., Kulshreshtha, K., Monhanty, C. S., Pushpangadan, P. & Singh, A. Stakeholder-based SWOT analysis for successful municipal solid waste managementin Lucknow, India. Waste Manag 25(5), 531–537 (2005).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Alcon, F., Tapsuwan, S., Martínez-Paz, J. M., Brouwer, R. & Miguel, M. Forecasting deficit irrigation adoption using a mixed stakeholder assessment methodology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 83, 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.003 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, Y., Yang, G., Sweeney, S. & Feng, Y. Household biogas use in rural China: a study of opportunities and constraints. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 14(1), 545–549 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yeh, C. H. A problem-based selection of multi-attribute decision-making methods. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 9(2), 169–181 (2002).MATH 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chakraborty, S., & Yeh, C. -H. A simulation comparison of normalization procedures for TOPSIS, In 2009 International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering, IEEE, 2009.Yoon, K. & Hwang, C. L. Multiple attribute decision making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 4(4), 287–288 (1995).
    Google Scholar 
    Sharma, N., Khan, Z.A., Siddiquee, A.N., Wahid, M.A. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C:J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 233 (2019) 1–10.Maniraj, S. & Thanigaivelan, R. Optimization of electrochemical micromachining process parameters for machining of AMCs with different % compositions of GGBS using Taguchi and TOPSIS methods. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 72, 3057–3066 (2019).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Martinez-Fernandez, C. et al. Shrinking cities in Australia, Japan, Europe and the USA: From a global process to local policy responses. Prog. Plan. 105, 1–48 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mo, G. Green poverty reduction: the value orientation and realization path of ecological poverty alleviation in the battle against poverty—a series of studies on the mechanism of improving the performance of precision poverty alleviation. Modern Econ. Discuss. 11, 10–14 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Wu, L. Echanism and path selection of poverty alleviation in deep-poverty areas. Chin. Soft Sci. 7, 63–70 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Shengzu, Gu. et al. Countermeasure reflections on advancing the poverty relief in the 13th five-year plan. China Financial Res 2, 7–16 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Xie, Z. & Xunwu, J. Giving full play to the advantages of financial financing to help lift out of poverty. China Finance 3, 83–84 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Chen, W. A Way to realize the effective linkage between poverty relief and rural revitalization. Guizhou Soc. Sci. 1, 11–14 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Bijker, R. & Haartsen, T. More than counterurbanisation: migration to popular andless-popular rural areas in the Netherlands. Popul. Space Place 18, 643–657 (2012).Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Major biodiversity summit will go ahead in Canada not China: what scientists think

    Deforestation, in places such as the Amazon, contributes to biodiversity loss.Credit: Ivan Valencia/Bloomberg/Getty

    Researchers are relieved that a pivotal summit to finalize a new global agreement to save nature will go ahead this year, after two-years of delays because of the pandemic. But they say the hard work of negotiating an ambitious deal lays ahead.The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) announced yesterday that the meeting will move from Kunming in China to Montreal in Canada. The meeting of representatives from almost 200 member states of the CBD — known as COP15 — will now run from 5 to 17 December. China will continue as president of the COP15 and Huang Runqiu, China’s minister of ecology and environment, will continue as chairman.Conservation and biodiversity scientists were growing increasingly concerned that China’s strict ‘zero COVID’ strategy, which uses measures such as lockdowns to quash all infections, would force the host nation to delay the meeting again. Researchers warned that another setback to the agreement, which aims to halt the alarming rate of species extinctions and protect vulnerable ecosystems, would be disastrous for countries’ abilities to meet ambitious targets to protect biodiversity over the next decade.“We are relieved and thankful that we have a firm date for these critically important biodiversity negotiations within this calendar year,” says Andrew Deutz, an expert in biodiversity law and finance at the Nature Conservancy, a conservation group in Virginia, US. “The global community is already behind in agreeing, let alone implementing, a plan to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030,” he says.With the date now set, Anne Larigauderie, executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, says the key to success in Montreal will be for the new global biodiversity agreement to focus on the direct and indirect drivers of nature loss, and the behaviors that underpin them. “Policy should be led by science, action adequately resourced and change should be transformative,” she adds.New locationThe decision to move the meeting came about after representatives of the global regions who make up the decision-making body of the COP reached a consensus to shift it to Montreal. China and Canada then thrashed out the details of how the move would work. The CBD has provisions that if a host country is unable to hold a COP, the meeting shifts to the home of the convention’s secretariat, Montreal.Announcing the decision, Elizabeth Mrema, executive secretary of the CBD, said in a statement, “I want to thank the government of China for their flexibility and continued commitment to advancing our path towards an ambitious post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.”In a statement, Runqiu said, “China would like to emphasize its continued strong commitment, as COP president, to ensure the success of the second part of COP 15, including the adoption of an effective post 2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, and to promote its delivery throughout its presidency.”China also agreed to pay for ministers from the least developed countries and small Island developing states to travel to Montreal to participate in the meeting.Work aheadPaul Matiku, an environmental scientist and head of Nature Kenya, a conservation organization in Nairobi, Kenya, says the move “is a welcome decision” after “the world lost patience after a series of postponements”.But he says that rich nations need to reach deeper into their pockets to help low- and middle-income countries — which are home to much of the world’s biodiversity — to implement the deal, including meeting targets such as protecting at least 30% of the world’s land and seas and reducing the rate of extinction. Disputes over funding already threaten to stall the agreement. At a meeting in Geneva in March, nations failed to make progress on the new deal because countries including Gabon and Kenya argued that the US$10 billion of funding per year proposed in the draft text of the agreement was insufficient. They called for $100 billion per year in aid.“The extent to which the CBD is implemented will depend on the availability of predictable, adequate financial flows from developed nations to developing country parties,” says Matiku.Talks on the agreement are resuming in Nairobi from 21-26 June, where Deutz hopes countries can find common ground on key issues such as financing before heading to Montreal. Having a firm date set for the COP15 will help push negotiations forward, he says.“Negotiators only start to compromise when they are up against a deadline. Now they have one,” he says. More

  • in

    Incongruences between morphology and molecular phylogeny provide an insight into the diversification of the Crocidura poensis species complex

    Foote, M. The evolution of morphological diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28, 129–152 (1997).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Félix, M. A. Phenotypic evolution with and beyond genome evolution. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 119, 291–347 (2016).PubMed 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Carroll, S. B. Evo-devo and an expanding evolutionary synthesis: A genetic theory of morphological evolution. Cell 134, 25–36 (2008).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Harvey, P. & Pagel, M. The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. (Oxford University Press, 1991).Huxley, J. S. & Teissier, G. Terminology of relative growth. Nature 137, 780–781 (1936).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Klingenberg, C. P. Size, shape, and form: Concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics. Dev. Genes Evol. 226, 113–137 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Russell, E. S. Form and Function: A Contribution to the History of Animal Morphology. (John Murray, 1916).Goswami, A. & Polly, P. D. Methods for studying morphological integration and modularity. Paleontol. Soc. Pap. 16, 213–243 (2010).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Vidal-García, M., Byrne, P. G., Roberts, J. D. & Keogh, J. S. The role of phylogeny and ecology in shaping morphology in 21 genera and 127 species of Australo-Papuan myobatrachid frogs. J. Evol. Biol. 27, 181–192 (2014).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Erwin, D. H. Disparity: Morphological pattern and developmental context. Palaeontology 50, 57–73 (2007).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fišer, C., Robinson, C. T. & Malard, F. Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept. Mol. Ecol. 27, 613–635 (2018).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wilson, D. E. & Mittermeier, R. A. Handbook of the Mammals of the World: Volume 8: Insectivores. vol. 8 (Lynx Edicions, 2018).Jacquet, F. et al. Phylogeography and evolutionary history of the Crocidura olivieri complex (Mammalia, Soricomorpha): From a forest origin to broad ecological expansion across Africa. BMC Evol. Biol. 15, 71. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-015-0344-y (2015).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ceríaco, L. M. P. et al. Description of a new endemic species of shrew (Mammalia, Soricomorpha) from PrÍncipe Island (Gulf of Guinea). Mammalia 79, 325–341 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nicolas, V. et al. Multilocus phylogeny of the Crocidura poensis species complex (Mammalia, Eulipotyphla): Influences of the palaeoclimate on its diversification and evolution. J. Biogeogr. 46, 871–883 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Konečný, A., Hutterer, R., Meheretu, Y. & Bryja, J. Two new species of Crocidura (Mammalia: Soricidae) from Ethiopia and updates on the Ethiopian shrew fauna. J. Vertebr. Biol. 69, 20064.1. https://doi.org/10.25225/jvb.20064 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Couvreur, T. L. P. et al. Tectonics, climate and the diversification of the tropical African terrestrial flora and fauna. Biol. Rev. 96, 16–51 (2021).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mayr, E. & O’Hara, R. J. The biogeographic evidence supporting the Pleistocene forest refuge hypothesis. Evolution 40, 55–67 (1986).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wiens, J. J. & Graham, C. H. Niche conservatism: Integrating evolution, ecology, and conservation biology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36, 519–539 (2005).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, T. B., Wayne, R. K., Girman, D. J. & Bruford, M. W. A role for ecotones in generating rainforest biodiversity. Science 276, 1855–1857 (1997).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Needham, A. E. & Hardy, A. C. The form-transformation of the abdomen of the female pea-crab, Pinnotheres pisum Leach. Proc. R Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 137, 115–136 (1950).ADS 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Hanken, J. & Hall, B. K. The Skull, Volume 3: Functional and Evolutionary Mechanisms. (University of Chicago Press, 1993).Hautier, L., Lebrun, R. & Cox, P. G. Patterns of covariation in the masticatory apparatus of hystricognathous rodents: Implications for evolution and diversification. J. Morphol. 273, 1319–1337 (2012).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Aristide, L. et al. Multiple factors behind early diversification of skull morphology in the continental radiation of New World monkeys. Evolution 72, 2697–2711 (2018).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hardin, G. The competitive exclusion principle. Science 131, 1292–1297 (1960).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Denys, C. et al. Shrews (Mammalia, Eulipotyphla) from a biodiversity hotspot, Mount Nimba (West Africa), with a field identification key to species. Zoosystema 43, 729–757 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Estevo, C. A., Nagy-Reis, M. B. & Nichols, J. D. When habitat matters: Habitat preferences can modulate co-occurrence patterns of similar sympatric species. PLoS One 12, e0179489. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179489 (2017).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Spaeth, P. A. Morphological convergence and coexistence in three sympatric North American species of Microtus (Rodentia: Arvicolinae). J. Biogeogr. 36, 350–361 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Adams, D. C., Berns, C. M., Kozak, K. H. & Wiens, J. J. Are rates of species diversification correlated with rates of morphological evolution?. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 276, 2729–2738 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Caumul, R. & Polly, P. D. Phylogenetic and environmental components of morphological variation: Skull, mandible, and molar shape in marmots (marmota, Rodentia). Evolution 59, 2460–2472 (2005).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Da Silva, F. O. et al. The ecological origins of snakes as revealed by skull evolution. Nat. Commun. 9, 376. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02788-3 (2018).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Hirano, T., Kameda, Y., Kimura, K. & Chiba, S. Substantial incongruence among the morphology, taxonomy, and molecular phylogeny of the land snails Aegista, Landouria, Trishoplita, and Pseudobuliminus (Pulmonata: Bradybaenidae) occurring in East Asia. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 70, 171–181 (2014).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ge, D., Yao, L., Xia, L., Zhang, Z. & Yang, Q. Geometric morphometric analysis of skull morphology reveals loss of phylogenetic signal at the generic level in extant lagomorphs (Mammalia: Lagomorpha). Contrib. Zool. 84, 267–284 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zou, Z. & Zhang, J. Morphological and molecular convergences in mammalian phylogenetics. Nat. Commun. 7, 12758. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12758 (2016).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ananjeva, N. B. Current state of the problems in the phylogeny of squamate reptiles (Squamata, Reptilia). Biol. Bull. Rev. 9, 119–128 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Revell, L. J., Harmon, L. J. & Collar, D. C. Phylogenetic signal, evolutionary process, and rate. Syst. Biol. 57, 591–601 (2008).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Klingenberg, C. P. & Marugán-Lobón, J. Evolutionary covariation in geometric morphometric data: Analyzing integration, modularity, and allometry in a phylogenetic context. Syst. Biol. 62, 591–610 (2013).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Cardini, A. & Polly, P. D. Larger mammals have longer faces because of size-related constraints on skull form. Nat. Commun. 4, 2458. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3458 (2013).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Esquerré, D., Sherratt, E. & Keogh, J. S. Evolution of extreme ontogenetic allometric diversity and heterochrony in pythons, a clade of giant and dwarf snakes. Evolution 71, 2829–2844 (2017).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marroig, G. & Cheverud, J. M. Size as a line of least evolutionary resistance: Diet and adaptive morphological radiation in New World monkeys. Evolution 59, 1128–1142 (2005).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Cornette, R., Tresset, A., Houssin, C., Pascal, M. & Herrel, A. Does bite force provide a competitive advantage in shrews? The case of the greater white-toothed shrew. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 114, 795–807 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rodgers, G. M., Downing, B. & Morrell, L. J. Prey body size mediates the predation risk associated with being “odd”. Behav. Ecol. 26, 242–246 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Damuth, J. Population density and body size in mammals. Nature 290, 699–700 (1981).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Verschuren, D. Decadal and century-scale climate variability in tropical Africa during the past 2000 years. In Past Climate Variability Through Europe and Africa (eds. Battarbee, R. W., Gasse, F. & Stickley, C. E.) 139–158 (Springer Netherlands, 2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2121-3_8.Smith, T. B., Schneider, C. J. & Holder, K. Refugial isolation versus ecological gradients. Genetica 112, 383–398 (2001).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Brown, W. L. Jr. & Wilson, E. O. Character displacement. Syst. Biol. 5, 49–64 (1956).
    Google Scholar 
    Vogel, P. et al. Genetic identity of the critically endangered Wimmer’s shrew Crocidura wimmeri. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 111, 224–229 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Esselstyn, J. A. et al. Fourteen new, endemic species of shrew (genus Crocidura) from Sulawesi reveal a spectacular island radiation. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 454, 1–108 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Evin, A., Bonhomme, V. & Claude, J. Optimizing digitalization effort in morphometrics. Biol. Methods Protoc. 5, bpaa023. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomethods/bpaa023 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Blomberg, S. P., Garland, T. & Ives, A. R. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: Behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57, 717–745 (2003).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Adams, D. C. A generalized K statistic for estimating phylogenetic signal from shape and other high-dimensional multivariate data. Syst. Biol. 63, 685–697 (2014).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kembel, S. W. et al. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 1463–1464 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Revell, L. J. phytools: Phylogenetic Tools for Comparative Biology (and Other Things). (2021).Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. WorldClim 2: New 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pebesma, E. Simple features for R: Standardized support for spatial vector data. R J. 10, 439 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. (2020).Dray, S., Legendre, P. & Peres-Neto, P. R. Spatial modelling: A comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbour matrices (PCNM). Ecol. Model. 196, 483–493 (2006).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Borcard, D., Gillet, F. & Legendre, P. Numerical Ecology with R. (Springer, 2018).Dray, S. et al. adespatial: Multivariate Multiscale Spatial Analysis. (2021).Collyer, M. & Adams, D. RRPP: Linear Model Evaluation with Randomized Residuals in a Permutation Procedure. (2021).Kassambara, A. rstatix: Pipe-Friendly Framework for Basic Statistical Tests. (2021).Borcard, D., Legendre, P. & Drapeau, P. Partialling out the spatial component of ecological variation. Ecology 73, 1045–1055 (1992).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rohlf, F. J. & Corti, M. Use of two-block partial least-squares to study covariation in shape. Syst. Biol. 49, 740–753 (2000).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Schlager, S., Jefferis, G. & Ian, D. Morpho: Calculations and Visualisations Related to Geometric Morphometrics. (2020). More

  • in

    Top-down control of planktonic ciliates by microcrustacean predators is stronger in lakes than in the ocean

    Sherr, E. B. & Sherr, B. F. Role of microbes in pelagic food webs: A revised concept. Limnol. Oceanogr. 33, 1225–1227 (1988).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Weisse, T. Pelagic microbes—Protozoa and the microbial food web. In The Lakes Handbook, Vol. 1—Limnology and Limnetic Ecology (eds O’Sullivan, P. & Reynolds, C. S.) 417–460 (Blackwell Science Ltd, 2004).
    Google Scholar 
    Foissner, W. Protist diversity: Estimates of the near-imponderable. Protist 150, 363–368 (1999).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Sommer, U. & Sommer, F. Cladocerans versus copepods: The cause of contrasting top–down controls on freshwater and marine phytoplankton. Oecologia 147, 183–194 (2006).ADS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wiackowski, K., Brett, M. T. & Goldman, C. R. Differential effects of zooplankton species on ciliate community structure. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39, 486–492 (1994).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Armengol, L., Calbet, A., Franchy, G., Rodríguez-Santos, A. & Hernández-León, S. Planktonic food web structure and trophic transfer efficiency along a productivity gradient in the tropical and subtropical Atlantic Ocean. Sci. Rep. 9, 2044. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-38507-9 (2019).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Carrick, H. J., Fahnenstiel, G. L., Stoermer, E. F. & Wetzel, R. G. The importance of zooplankton-protozoan trophic couplings in Lake Michigan. Limnol. Oceanogr. 36, 1335–1345. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1991.36.7.1335 (1991).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jack, J. D. & Gilbert, J. J. Effects of metazoan predators on ciliates in freshwater plankton communities. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 44, 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1550-7408.1997.tb05699.x (1997).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Sanders, R. W. & Wickham, S. A. Planktonic protozoa and metazoa: Predation, food quality and population control. Mar. Microb. Food Webs 7, 197–223 (1993).
    Google Scholar 
    Kiørboe, T. How zooplankton feed: Mechanisms, traits and trade-offs. Biol. Rev. 86, 311–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00148.x (2011).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Gliwicz, Z. M. Zooplankton. The Lakes Handbook: Limnology and Limnetic Ecology Vol. 1 (eds P. O’Sullivan & C. S. Reynolds) 461–516 (Blackwell Science Ltd, 2004).Wickham, S. A. The direct and indirect impact of Daphnia and cyclops on a freshwater microbial food web. J. Plankton Res. 20, 739–755 (1998).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gilbert, J. J. Suppression of rotifer populations by Daphnia: A review of the evidence, the mechanisms, and the effects on zooplankton community structure. Limnol. Oceanogr. 33, 1286–1303 (1988).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lampert, W. & Muck, P. Multiple aspects of food limitation in zooplankton communities: The Daphnia-Eudiaptomus example. Ergebnisse der Limnologie/Adv. Limnol. 21, 311–322 (1985).
    Google Scholar 
    Kiørboe, T. What makes pelagic copepods so successful?. J. Plankton Res. 33, 677–685. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbq159 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Paffenhöfer, G.-A. Heterotrophic protozoa and small metazoa: Feeding rates and prey-consumer interactions. J. Plankton Res. 20, 121–133 (1998).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Forró, L., Korovchinsky, N. M., Kotov, A. A. & Petrusek, A. Global diversity of cladocerans (Cladocera; Crustacea) in freshwater. In Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment 177–184 (Springer, 2007).Jack, J. D. & Gilbert, J. J. Susceptibilities of different-sized ciliates to direct suppression by small and large cladocerans. Freshw. Biol. 29, 19–29 (1993).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jürgens, K. Impact of Daphnia on planktonic microbial food webs—A review. Mar. Microb. Food Webs 8, 295–324 (1994).
    Google Scholar 
    Calbet, A. & Saiz, E. The ciliate-copepod link in marine ecosystems. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 38, 157–167. https://doi.org/10.3354/ame038157 (2005).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Saiz, E. & Calbet, A. Scaling of feeding in marine calanoid copepods. Limnol. Oceanogr. 52, 668–675 (2007).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Steinberg, D. K. & Landry, M. R. Zooplankton and the ocean carbon cycle. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 9, 413–444 (2017).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pierce, R. W. & Turner, J. T. Ecology of planktonic ciliates in marine food webs. Rev. Aquat. Sci. 6, 139–181 (1992).
    Google Scholar 
    Oghenekaro, E. U. & Chigbu, P. Population dynamics and life history of marine cladocera in the maryland coastal bays, USA. J. Coast. Res. 35, 1225–1236 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pestorić, B., Lučić, D & Joksimović, D. Cladocerans spatial and temporal distribution in the coastal south Adriatic waters (Montenegro). Stud. Mar. 25, 101–120 (2011).Adrian, R. & Schneider-Olt, B. Top-down effects of crustacean zooplankton on pelagic microorganisms in a mesotrophic lake. J. Plankton Res. 21, 2175–2190. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/21.11.2175 (1999).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Burns, C. W. & Schallenberg, M. Relative impacts of copepods, cladocerans and nutrients on the microbial food web of a mesotrophic lake. J. Plankton Res. 18, 683–714. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/18.5.683 (1996).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).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lewis, W. M. Jr. Global primary production of lakes: 19th Baldi Memorial Lecture. Inland Waters 1, 1–28 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Moore, C. et al. Processes and patterns of oceanic nutrient limitation. Nat. Geosci. 6, 701–710. https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO1765 (2013).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gilbert, J. J. Jumping behavior in the oligotrich ciliates Strobilidium velox and Halteria grandinella and its significance as a defense against rotifers. Microb. Ecol. 27, 189–200 (1994).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Weisse, T. & Sonntag, B. Ciliates in planktonic food webs: communication and adaptive response. In Biocommunication of Ciliates (eds Witzany, G. & Nowacki, M.) 351–372 (Springer International Publishing, 2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Burns, C. W. & Gilbert, J. J. Predation on ciliates by freshwater calanoid copepods: Rates of predation and relative vulnerabilities of prey. Freshw. Biol. 30, 377–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.1993.tb00822.x (1993).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lampert, W. & Sommer, U. Limnoecolgy 2nd edn. (Oxford University Press, 2007).
    Google Scholar 
    Almeda, R., Someren Gréve, H. & Kiørboe, T. Prey perception mechanism determines maximum clearance rates of planktonic copepods. Limnol. Oceanogr. 63, 2695–2707. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10969 (2018).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Holling, C. S. The components of predation as revealed by a study of small-mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Can. Entomol. 91, 293–320 (1959).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fenchel, T. Ecology of protozoa. The Biology of Free-living Phagotrophic Protists (Science Tech./Springer, 1987).
    Google Scholar 
    Weisse, T. et al. Functional ecology of aquatic phagotrophic protists—Concepts, limitations, and perspectives. Eur. J. Protistol. 55, 50–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejop.2016.03.003 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Wickham, S. A. Cyclops predation on ciliates: Species-specific differences and functional responses. J. Plankton Res. 17, 1633–1646 (1995).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Coats, D. W. & Bachvaroff, T. R. Parasites of tintinnids. In The Biology and Ecology of Tintinnid Ciliates: Models for Marine Plankton (eds Dolan, R. et al.) 145–170 (Wiley, 2012).Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    Guillou, L. et al. Widespread occurrence and genetic diversity of marine parasitoids belonging to Syndiniales (Alveolata). Environ. Microbiol. 10, 3349–3365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01731.x (2008).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Brun, P. G., Payne, M. R. & Kiørboe, T. A trait database for marine copepods. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 9, 99–113. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-99-2017 (2017).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Armengol, L., Franchy, G., Ojeda, A., Santana-del Pino, Á. & Hernández-León, S. Effects of copepods on natural microplankton communities: Do they exert top-down control?. Mar. Biol. 164, 136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-017-3165-2 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Moriarty, R. & O’Brien, T. Distribution of mesozooplankton biomass in the global ocean. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 5, 45–55 (2013).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Landry, M. R., Al-Mutairi, H., Selph, K. E., Christensen, S. & Nunnery, S. Seasonal patterns of mesozooplankton abundance and biomass at Station ALOHA. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 48, 2037–2061 (2001).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Turner, J. T. The importance of small planktonic copepods and their roles in pelagic marine food webs. Zool. Stud. 43, 255–266 (2004).
    Google Scholar 
    Heneghan, R. F. et al. A functional size-spectrum model of the global marine ecosystem that resolves zooplankton composition. Ecol. Model. 435, 109265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109265 (2020).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wang, Q. et al. Predicting temperature impacts on aquatic productivity: Questioning the metabolic theory of ecology’s “canonical” activation energies. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 1172–1185. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11105 (2019).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Montagnes, D. J. Ecophysiology and behavior of tintinnids. In The Biology and Ecology of Tintinnid Ciliates: Models for Marine Plankton (eds Dolan, R. et al.) 85–121 (Wiley, 2012).Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    McManus, G. B. & Santoferrara, L. F. Tintinnids in microzooplankton communities. In The Biology and Ecology of Tintinnid Ciliates: Models for Marine Plankton (eds Dolan, R. et al.) 198–213 (Wiley, 2012).Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    Fileman, E., Petropavlovsky, A. & Harris, R. Grazing by the copepods Calanus helgolandicus and Acartia clausi on the protozooplankton community at station L4 in the Western English Channel. J. Plankton Res. 32, 709–724. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbp142 (2010).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zeldis, J. R. & Décima, M. Mesozooplankton connect the microbial food web to higher trophic levels and vertical export in the New Zealand Subtropical Convergence Zone. Deep Sea Res. Part I Oceanogr. Res. Pap. 155, 103146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2019.103146 (2020).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stoecker, D. K. Predators of tintinnids. In The Biology and Ecology of Tintinnid Ciliates: Models for Marine Plankton (eds Dolan, J. R. et al.) 122–144 (Wiley, 2012).Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    Levinsen, H. & Nielsen, T. G. The trophic role of marine pelagic ciliates and heterotrophic dinoflagellates in arctic and temperate coastal ecosystems: A cross-latitude comparison. Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 427–439. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2002.47.2.0427 (2002).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gallienne, C. & Robins, D. Is Oithona the most important copepod in the world’s oceans?. J. Plankton Res. 23, 1421–1432. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/23.12.1421 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stoecker, D. K. & Egloff, D. A. Predation by Acartia tonsa Dana on planktonic ciliates and rotifers. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 110, 53–68 (1987).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stoecker, D. & Pierson, J. Predation on protozoa: Its importance to zooplankton revisited. J. Plankton Res. 41, 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbz027 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Diehl, S. & Feissel, M. Intraguild prey suffer from enrichment of their resources: A microcosm experiment with ciliates. Ecology 82, 2977–2983 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Broglio, E., Saiz, E., Calbet, A., Trepat, I. & Alcaraz, M. Trophic impact and prey selection by crustacean zooplankton on the microbial communities of an oligotrophic coastal area (NW Mediterranean Sea). Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 35, 65–78 (2004).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Sommer, U. et al. Beyond the Plankton Ecology Group (PEG) Model: Mechanisms driving plankton succession. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 43, 429–448. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160251 (2012).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    IGKB. Jahresbericht der Internationalen Gewässerschutzkommission für den Bodensee: Limnologischer Zustand des Bodensees Nr. 43 (2018–2019), 128 https://www.igkb.org/oeffentlichkeitsarbeit/limnologischer-zustand-des-sees-gruene-berichte/. (2020).Wetzel, R. G. Limnology—Lake and River Ecosystems 3rd edn. (Academic Press, 2001).
    Google Scholar 
    Kumar, R. Effects of Mesocyclops thermocyclopoides (Copepoda: Cyclopoida) predation on the population growth patterns of different prey species. J. Freshw. Ecol. 18, 383–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/02705060.2003.9663974 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Porter, K. G., Pace, M. L. & Battey, F. J. Ciliate protozoans as links in freshwater planktonic food chains. Nature 277, 563–565 (1979).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Landry, M. & Fagerness, V. Behavioral and morphological influences on predatory interactions among marine copepods. Bull. Mar. Sci. 43, 509–529 (1988).
    Google Scholar 
    Krainer, K.-H. & Müller, H. Morphology, infraciliature and ecology of a nerw planktonic ciliate, Histiobalantium bodamicum n. sp. (Scuticociliatida: Histiobalantiidae). Eur. J. Protistol. 31, 389–395 (1995).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lu, X., Gao, Y. & Weisse, T. Functional ecology of two contrasting freshwater ciliated protists in relation to temperature. J. Eukaryot. Microb. 68, e12823. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeu.12823 (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Menden-Deuer, S. & Lessard, E. J. Carbon to volume relationships for dinoflagellates, diatoms, and other protist plankton. Limnol. Oceanogr. 45, 569–579. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2000.45.3.0569 (2000).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bergkemper, V. & Weisse, T. Phytoplankton response to the summer heat wave 2015—A case study from Lake Mondsee, Austria. Inland Waters 7, 88–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/20442041.2017.1294352 (2017).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Crosbie, N. D., Teubner, K. & Weisse, T. Flow-cytometric mapping provides novel insights into the seasonal and vertical distributions of freshwater autotrophic picoplankton. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 33, 53–66. https://doi.org/10.3354/ame033053 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Dokulil, M. T. & Teubner, K. Deep living Planktothrix rubescens modulated by environmental constraints and climate forcing. Hydrobiologia 698, 29–46 (2012).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Weisse, T., Lukić, D. & Lu, X. Container volume may affect growth rates of ciliates and clearance rates of their microcrustacean predators in microcosm experiments. J. Plankton Res. 43, 288–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/fbab017 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Bergkemper, V. & Weisse, T. Do current European lake monitoring programmes reliably estimate phytoplankton community changes? Hydrobiologia 824, 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-017-3426-6 (2018).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rosen, R. A. Length-dry weight relationships of some freshwater zooplanktona. J. Freshw. Ecol. 1, 225–229 (1981).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Frost, B. W. Effects of size and concentration of food particles on the feeding behavior of the marine planktonic copepod Calanus pacificus. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17, 805–815 (1972).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R.RStudio, http://www.rstudio.com/ (PBC, 2021).Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol. Methods Res. 33, 261–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124104268644 (2004).MathSciNet 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hansen, P. J., Bjørnsen, P. K. & Hansen, B. W. Zooplankton grazing and growth: Scaling within the 2–2,000-μm body size range. Limnol. Oceanogr. 42, 687–704. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.1997.42.4.0687 (1997).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar  More