Philippa Kaur

Woese, C. R., Kandler, O. & Wheelis, M. L. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 87, 4576–4579 (1990).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sapp, J. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 69, 292–305 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chatton, É. Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool. 8, 1–84 (1925).
Google Scholar 
Soyer-Gobillard, M.-O. & Schrevel, J. The Discoveries and Artistic Talents of Édouard Chatton and André Lwoff, Famous Biologists (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2020).Macfarlane, J. M. The Causes and Course of Organic Evolution: A Study in Bioenergics (Macmillan, 1918).Haeckel, E. Systematische Phylogenie. Erster Theil (Verlag von Georg Reimer, 1894).Stanier, R. Y., Douderoff, M. & Adelberg, E. The Microbial World 2nd edn (Prentice Hall, 1963).Williams, T. A., Cox, C. J., Foster, P. G., Szöllősi, G. J. & Embley, T. M. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 138–147 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Steckbeck, W. Science 98, 487–488 (1943).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Creese, M. R. S. & Creese, T. M. Ladies in the Laboratory III (Scarecrow Press, 2010). More

Di Giacomo, G., Hadrich, J., Hutchison, W. D., Peterson, H. & Rogers, M. Economic impact of spotted wing drosophila (Diptera: Drosophilidae) yield loss on minnesota raspberry farms: A grower survey. J. Integr. Pest Manag. https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmz006 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Farnsworth, D. et al. Economic analysis of revenue losses and control costs associated with the spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura), in the California raspberry industry. Pest. Manag. Sci. 73, 1083–1090. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.4497 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Beers, E. H., Van Steenwyk, R. A., Shearer, P. W., Coates, W. W. & Grant, J. A. Developing Drosophila suzukii management programs for sweet cherry in the western United States. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1386–1395. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2279 (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tait, G. et al. Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae): A decade of research towards a sustainable integrated pest management program. J. Econ. Entomol. 114, 1950–1974. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toab158 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Daane, K. M. et al. First exploration of parasitoids of Drosophila suzukii in South Korea as potential classical biological agents. J. Pest Sci. 89, 823–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-016-0740-0 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Abram, P. K. et al. New records of Leptopilina, Ganaspis, and Asobara species associated with Drosophila suzukii in North America, including detections of L. japonica and G. brasiliensis. J. Hymenoptera Res. 78, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3897/jhr.78.55026 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chabert, S., Allemand, R., Poyet, M., Eslin, P. & Gibert, P. Ability of European parasitoids (Hymenoptera) to control a new invasive Asiatic pest, Drosophila suzukii. Biol. Control 63, 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2012.05.005 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gonzalez-Cabrera, J., Moreno-Carrillo, G., Sanchez-Gonzalez, J. A., Mendoza-Ceballos, M. Y. & Arredondo-Bernal, H. C. Single and Combined Release of Trichopria drosophilae (Hymenoptera: Diapriidae) to Control Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Neotrop. Entomol. 48, 949–956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-019-00707-3 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rossi Stacconi, M. V., Grassi, A., Ioriatti, C. & Anfora, G. Augmentative releases of Trichopria drosophilae for the suppression of early season Drosophila suzukii populations. Biocontrol 64, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-018-09914-0 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Poyet, M. et al. The wide potential trophic niche of the asiatic fruit fly Drosophila suzukii: The key of its invasion success in temperate Europe?. PLoS ONE 10, e0142785. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142785 (2015).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mazzetto, F. et al. Drosophila parasitoids in northern Italy and their potential to attack the exotic pest Drosophila suzukii. J. Pest Sci. 89, 837–850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-016-0746-7 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, X. G., Kacar, G., Biondi, A. & Daane, K. M. Foraging efficiency and outcomes of interactions of two pupal parasitoids attacking the invasive spotted wing drosophila. Biol. Control 96, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2016.02.004 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rossi Stacconi, M. V. et al. Host location and dispersal ability of the cosmopolitan parasitoid Trichopria drosophilae released to control the invasive spotted wing Drosophila. Biol. Control 117, 188–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.11.013 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Esteban-Santiago, J. M., Rodríguez-Leyva, E., Lomeli-Flores, J. R. & González-Cabrera, J. Demographic parameters of Trichopria drosophilae in three host species. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 169, 330–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.13026 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Häussling, B. J. M., Lienenluke, J. & Stokl, J. The preference of Trichopria drosophilae for pupae of Drosophila suzukii is independent of host size. Sci. Rep. 11, 995. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80355-5 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wang, X. G., Kacar, G., Biondi, A. & Daane, K. M. Life-history and host preference of Trichopria drosophilae, a pupal parasitoid of spotted wing drosophila. Biocontrol 61, 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10526-016-9720-9 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Woltz, J. M. & Lee, J. C. Pupation behavior and larval and pupal biocontrol of Drosophila suzukii in the field. Biol. Control 110, 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2017.04.007 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ballman, E. S., Collins, J. A. & Drummond, F. A. Pupation behavior and predation on Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) Pupae in Maine wild blueberry fields. J. Econ. Entomol. 110, 2308–2317. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/tox233 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Guillén, L., Aluja, M. N., Equihua, M. & Sivinski, J. Performance of two fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) pupal parasitoids (Coptera haywardi [Hymenoptera: Diapriidae] and Pachycrepoideus vindemiae [Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae]) under different environmental soil conditions. Biol. Control 23, 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1006/bcon.2001.1011 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yi, C. et al. Life history and host preference of Trichopria drosophilae from Southern China, one of the effective pupal parasitoids on the Drosophila species. Insects 11, 103. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11020103 (2020).Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
BoychevaWoltering, S., Romeis, J. & Collatz, J. Influence of the rearing host on biological parameters of Trichopria drosophilae, a potential biological control agent of Drosophila suzukii. Insects. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10060183 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Otto, M. & Mackauer, M. The developmental strategy of an idiobiont ectoparasitoid, Dendrocerus carpenteri: Influence of variations in host quality on offspring growth and fitness. Oecologia 117, 353–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050668 (1998).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bates, D., Machler, M., Bolker, B. M. & Walker, S. C. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Vienna, Austria, 2008).Johnson, S. N. & Gregory, P. J. Chemically-mediated host-plant location and selection by root-feeding insects. Physiol. Entomol. 31, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3032.2005.00487.x (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bezerra Da Silva, C. S., Park, K. R., Blood, R. A. & Walton, V. M. Intraspecific competition affects the pupation behavior of spotted-wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii). Sci. Rep. 9, 7775. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44248-6 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Renkema, J. M. & Devkota, S. Pupation depth of spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) and effects of field sanitation in Florida strawberries. Viii Int. Strawberry Symp. 1156, 849–855. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2017.1156.125 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tsitsipis, J. A. & Papanicolaou, E. P. Pupation depth in artificially reared olive fruits-flies Dacus-oleae (Diptera, Tephritidae), as affected by several physical characteristics of the substrates. Annales De Zoologie Ecologie Animale 11, 31–40 (1979).
Google Scholar 
Dimou, I., Koutsikopoulos, C., Economopoulos, A. P. & Lykakis, J. Depth of pupation of the wild olive fruit fly, Bactrocera (Dacus) oleae (Gmel.) (Dipt., Tephritidae), as affected by soil abiotic factors. J. Appl. Entomol. 127, 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0418.2003.00686.x (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
de Belle, J. S., Hilliker, A. J. & Sokolowski, M. B. Genetic localization of foraging (for): A major gene for larval behavior in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 123, 157–163. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/123.1.157 (1989).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sokolowski, M. B. et al. Ecological genetics and behaviour of Drosophila melanogaster larvae in nature. Anim. Behav. 34, 403–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(86)80109-9 (1986).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodriguez, L., Sokolowski, M. B. & Shore, J. S. Habitat selection by Drosophila melanogaster larvae. J. Evol. Biol. 5, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1420-9101.1992.5010061.x (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
McIntosh, H., Atucha, A., Townsend, P. A., Hills, W. B. & Guédot, C. Plastic mulches reduce adult and larval populations of Drosophila suzukii in fall-bearing raspberry. J. Pest. Sci. 95, 525–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-021-01456-2 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ballman, E. & Drummond, F. Larval movement of spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura) (Diptera: Drosophilidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 92, 412–421. https://doi.org/10.2317/0022-8567-92.1.412 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Swedish environment minister Annika Strandhäll before the start of the Stockholm +50 Climate Summit. Few world leaders will be attending.Credit: Fredrik Persson/TT News Agency/AFP/Getty

Sustainability is now a household term, but it wasn’t always so.Fifty years ago, the United Nations held its Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm. This landmark event gave the concept of sustainable development its first international recognition. Sweden and the UN are marking the occasion this week with Stockholm+50, an international meeting that serves as both commemoration and call to action.The world is deep in planetary and human crises, with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals off track and multilateral agreements on climate change and biodiversity behind schedule. Governments need to integrate sustainability into economic planning — and listen to researchers, who are ready with evidence-based arguments and tools to help them do so.Fifty years ago, the time was ripe for an environmental agenda to enter the world stage. Optimistic ideas of economic growth as a driver of progress, propelled by the Industrial Revolution, needed to accommodate concerns over damage to the natural environment. Books such as Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962) — which raised awareness about harms caused by pesticides — brought scientific information about environmental risks into the mainstream.In March 1972, a team of researchers and policymakers sounded another alarm in The Limits to Growth, one of the first reports to forecast catastrophic consequences if humans kept exploiting Earth’s limited supply of natural resources. The conference in Stockholm followed a few months later, steered to success by its secretary-general, Canadian industrialist Maurice Strong. That set crucial institutions in motion, starting with the establishment of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), based in Nairobi — the first UN body to be headquartered in a developing country. UNEP went on to facilitate a new international law — the 1987 Montreal Protocol to phase out ozone-depleting substances — and co-founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It assisted in establishing the first action plans for sustainable development through landmark international agreements on biodiversity, climate and desertification.But there were mistakes and missed opportunities. The establishment of multiple agencies and policy instruments created a disjointed governance system. Newly created environment ministers wielded little power. In national budgets, environmental protection was siloed away from economic development and social concerns. For a long time, action on climate change remained unfocused. And the economic drivers of environmental change were overlooked.And so, 50 years after that momentous conference, the world remains in crisis. With impending climate and biodiversity crises, the warnings issued by visionaries now hit even closer.Stockholm+50 promises “clear and concrete recommendations and messages for action at all levels”. More than 90 ministers are expected to attend, but only 10 heads of government. That’s a missed opportunity for high-level action. World leaders are needed because their presence signals that sustainability remains at the top of their agendas.Awareness of the need to embed sustainability into policymaking has broken into the mainstream, although much of it is still talk. City governments around the world are implementing ambitious climate action plans through the C40 Cities network. Some companies, too, are adopting sustainability principles, from reporting (and reducing) their carbon footprints to ensuring that investments, as far as possible, do not harm the environment.But this urgency has not ascended to heads of state and government. With a handful of exceptions — such as Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, Scotland and Wales — most nations seem unwilling to systemically integrate their economic, environmental and social policymaking.Doing so is not only good for the environment; it is also sound economics and good for well-being. The food and energy crisis driving poverty and diminishing living standards around the world might have been triggered by the shocks of a pandemic and war on Ukraine — but it is driven just as much by the depletion of natural resources.Ahead of the 1972 conference, 2,200 environmental scientists signed a letter — called the Menton Message — to then UN secretary-general U Thant. The signatories had a sense that the world was moving towards multiple crises. They urged “massive research into the problems that threaten the survival of mankind”, such as hunger, wars, environmental degradation and natural-resource depletion. The UN system went on to play a big part in building the body of knowledge that has shown why sustainability is necessary, and in creating the policy architecture to make it happen. But to do the Stockholm vision justice, there must be bolder action from heads of government and from the UN system. The planned creation of a board of science advisers to UN secretary-general António Guterres needs to be accelerated. Once established, the board must find a way to bring joined-up action on sustainability closer to world leaders.Researchers can now join a successor to the Menton Message that has been organized by the International Science Council, the global science network Future Earth and the Stockholm Environment Institute. In an open letter addressed to world citizens, the authors write: “After 50 years, pro-environmental action seems like one step forward and two back. The world produces more food than needed, yet many people still go hungry. We continue to subsidize and invest in fossil fuels, even though renewable energy is increasingly cost-effective. We extract resources where the price is lowest, often in direct disregard of local rights and values.”World leaders must listen to the research community, and accept the evidence and narrative offered to help them to navigate meaningful change. Environmental sustainability does not impede prosperity and well-being — in fact, it is vital to them. People in power need to sit up and take notice. More

Marzluff, J. M. Worldwide urbanization and its effects on birds. In Avian Ecology and Conservation in an Urbanizing World (eds Marzluff, J. et al.) 19–47 (Springer, Boston, 2001).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
McKinney, M. L. Effects of urbanization on species richness: A review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosyst. 11, 161–176 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Luniak, M. Synurbization–adaptation of animal wildlife to urban development in Proceedings 4th international urban wildlife symposium (eds. Shaw, W., Harris, L.,Vandruff, L.) 50–55 (University of Arizona, Tucson, ARI, 2004).Isaksson, C. Impact of urbanization on birds in Bird Species how they arise, modify and vanish (ed. Tietze D. T.) 235–257 (Springer, 2018).Minias, P. Successful colonization of a novel urban environment is associated with an urban behavioural syndrome in a reed-nesting waterbird. Ethology 121, 1178–1190 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Møller, A. P. et al. Urban habitats and feeders both contribute to flight initiation distance reduction in birds. Behav. Ecol. 26, 861–865 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jokimäki, J. & Suhonen, J. Distribution and habitat selection of wintering birds in urban environments. Landsc. Urban Plan. 39, 253–263 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Francis, R. A. & Chadwick, M. A. What makes a species synurbic?. Appl. Geogr. 32, 514–521 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Møller, A. P. et al. High urban population density of birds reflects their timing of urbanization. Oecologia 170, 867–875 (2012).PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Tella, J. L. et al. Offspring body condition and immunocompetence are negatively affected by high breeding densities in a colonial seabird: A multiscale approach. Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 1455–1461 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Savoca, M. S., Bonter, D. N., Zuckerberg, B., Dickinson, J. L. & Ellis, J. C. Nesting density is an important factor affecting chick growth and survival in the Herring Gull. Condor 113, 565–571 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Minias, P., Włodarczyk, R. & Janiszewski, T. Opposing selective pressures may act on the colony size in a waterbird species. Evol. Ecol. 29, 283–297 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kamiński, M. et al. Density-dependence of nestling immune function and physiological condition in semi-precocial colonial bird: A cross-fostering experiment. Front. Zool. 18, 7 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ward, P. & Zahavi, A. The importance of certain assemblages of birds as “information-centres” for food-finding. Ibis 115, 517–534 (1973).Article 

Google Scholar 
Danchin, E. & Wagner, R. H. The evolution of coloniality: The emergence of new perspectives. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12, 342–347 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. R. & Brown, M. B. Coloniality in the Cliff Swallow: The Effect of Group Size on Social Behavior (University of Chicago Press, 1996).
Google Scholar 
Evans, J. C., Votier, S. C. & Dall, S. R. Information use in colonial living. Biol. Rev. 91, 658–672 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. R. & Brown, M. B. Avian coloniality. In Current Ornithology (eds Brown, C. R. & Brown, M. B.) 1–82 (Springer, Boston, 2001).
Google Scholar 
Coulson, J. C., Duncan, N. & Thomas, C. Changes in the breeding biology of the herring gull (Larus argentatus) induced by reduction in the size and density of the colony. J. Anim. Ecol. 51, 739–756 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ots, I. & Horak, P. Great tits Parus major trade health for reproduction. Proc. R. Soc. B. 263, 1443–1447 (1996).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Richner, H. & Tripet, F. Ectoparasitism and the trade-off between current and future reproduction. Oikos 86, 535–538 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fokkema, R. W., Ubels, R. & Tinbergen, J. M. Great tits trade off future competitive advantage for current reproduction. Behav. Ecol. 27, 1656–1664 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Horak, P. & Leberton, J. D. Survival of adult Great Tits Parus major in relation to sex and habitat; a comparison of urban and rural populations. Ibis 140, 205–209 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stracey, C. M. & Robinson, S. K. Are urban habitats ecological traps for a native songbird? Season-long productivity, apparent survival, and site fidelity in urban and rural habitats. J. Avian Biol. 43, 50–60 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sepp, T., McGraw, K. J., Kaasik, A. & Giraudeau, M. A review of urban impacts on avian life-history evolution: Does city living lead to slower pace of life?. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 1452–1469 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, J. N., Gentry, K. E., Luther, D. A. & Derryberry, E. P. Surviving in the city: Higher apparent survival for urban birds but worse condition on noisy territories. Ecosphere 9, e02440 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnston, R. F. & Janiga, M. Feral Pigeons (Oxford University Press on Demand, 1995).
Google Scholar 
Giunchi, D., Mucci, N., Bigi, D., Mengoni, C. & Baldaccini, N. E. Feral pigeon populations: Their gene pool and links with local domestic breeds. Zoology 142, 125817 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sol, D. Artificial selection, naturalization, and fitness: Darwin’s pigeons revisited. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 93, 657–665 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Giunchi, D., Albores-Barajas, Y. V., Baldaccini, N. E., Vanni, L. & Soldatini, C. Feral pigeons: Problems, dynamics and control methods. In Integrated Pest Management and Pest Control. Current and Future Tactics (eds Soloneski, S. & Larramendy, M.) 215–240 (InTechOpen, London, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Senar, J. C., Navalpotro, H., Pascual, J. & Montalvo, T. Nicarbazin has no effect on reducing feral pigeon populations in Barcelona. Pest Manag. Sci. 77, 131–137 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rose, E., Nagel, P. & Haag-Wackernagel, D. Spatio-temporal use of the urban habitat by feral pigeons (Columba livia). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60, 242–254 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Corbel, H. et al. Stress response varies with plumage colour and local habitat in feral pigeons. J. Ornithol. 157, 825–837 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Møller, A. P., Merino, S., Brown, C. R. & Robertson, R. J. Immune defense and host sociality: A comparative study of swallows and martins. Am. Nat. 158, 136–145 (2001).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drzewińska-Chańko, J. et al. Immunocompetent birds choose larger breeding colonies. J. Anim. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13540 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Saino, N., Suffritti, C., Martinelli, R., Rubolini, D. & Møller, A. P. Immune response covaries with corticosterone plasma levels under experimentally stressful conditions in nestling barn swallows (Hirundo rustica). Behav. Ecol. 14, 318–325 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Goutte, A. et al. Long-term survival effect of corticosterone manipulation in black-legged kittiwakes. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 167, 246–251 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Møller, A. P., Christe, P., Erritzøe, J. & Mavarez, J. Condition, disease and immune defence. Oikos 83, 301–306 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Navarro, C., Marzal, A., De Lope, F. & Møller, A. P. Dynamics of an immune response in house sparrows Passer domesticus in relation to time of day, body condition and blood parasite infection. Oikos 101, 291–298 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Toïgo, C., Gaillard, J. M., Van Laere, G., Hewison, M. & Morellet, N. How does environmental variation influence body mass, body size, and body condition? Roe deer as a case study. Ecography 29, 301–308 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jacquin, L. et al. A potential role for parasites in the maintenance of color polymorphism in urban birds. Oecologia 173, 1089–1099 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Meillère, A., Brischoux, F., Parenteau, C. & Angelier, F. Influence of urbanization on body size, condition, and physiology in an urban exploiter: A multi-component approach. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135685 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Peig, J. & Green, A. J. New perspectives for estimating body condition from mass/length data: The scaled mass index as an alternative method. Oikos 118, 1883–1891 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jacquin, L. et al. Melanin-based coloration is related to parasite intensity and cellular immune response in an urban free living bird: The feral pigeon Columba livia. J. Avian Biol. 42, 11–15 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Liker, A., Papp, Z., Bókony, V. & Lendvai, A. Z. Lean birds in the city: Body size and condition of house sparrows along the urbanization gradient. J. Anim. Ecol. 77, 789–795 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Audet, J. N., Ducatez, S. & Lefebvre, L. The town bird and the country bird: Problem solving and immunocompetence vary with urbanization. Behav. Ecol. 27, 637–644 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kurucz, K., Purger, J. J. & Batáry, P. Urbanization shapes bird communities and nest survival, but not their food quantity. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 26, e01475 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Partecke, J., Schwabl, I. & Gwinner, E. Stress and the city: Urbanization and its effects on the stress physiology in European blackbirds. Ecology 87, 1945–1952 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bailly, J. et al. Negative impact of urban habitat on immunity in the great tit Parus major. Oecologia 182, 1053–1062 (2016).PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Glądalski, M. et al. Differences in use of bryophyte species in tit nests between two contrasting habitats: An urban park and a forest. Eur. Zool. J. 88, 807–815 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tella, J. L., Scheuerlein, A. & Ricklefs, R. E. Is cell–mediated immunity related to the evolution of life-history strategies in birds?. Proc. R. Soc. B 269, 1059–1066 (2002).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. R. & Brown, M. B. Empirical measurement of parasite transmission between groups in a colonial bird. Ecology 85, 1619–1626 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Brien, V. A. & Brown, C. R. Group size and nest spacing affect Buggy Creek virus (Togaviridae: Alphavirus) infection in nestling house sparrows. PLoS ONE 6, e25521 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Wilcoxen, T. E. et al. Effects of bird-feeding activities on the health of wild birds. Conserv. Physiol. 3, cov058 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moyers, S. C., Adelman, J. S., Farine, D. R., Thomason, C. A. & Hawley, D. M. Feeder density enhances house finch disease transmission in experimental epidemics. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 373, 20170090 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Møller, A. P. Successful city dwellers: A comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the Western Palearctic. Oecologia 159, 849–858 (2009).PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Watson, H., Videvall, E., Andersson, M. N. & Isaksson, C. Transcriptome analysis of a wild bird reveals physiological responses to the urban environment. Sci. Rep. 7, 44180 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hasselquist, D. & Nilsson, J. Å. Physiological mechanisms mediating costs of immune responses: What can we learn from studies of birds?. Anim. Behav. 83, 1303–1312 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Biard, C., Monceau, K., Motreuil, S. & Moreau, J. Interpreting immunological indices: The importance of taking parasite community into account. An example in blackbirds Turdus merula. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 960–972 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leclaire, S., Czirják, G. Á., Hammouda, A. & Gasparini, J. Feather bacterial load shapes the trade-off between preening and immunity in pigeons. BMC Evol. Biol. 15, 60 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vinkler, M., Adelman, J. S. & Ardia, D. R. Evolutionary and ecological immunology. In Avian Immunology 3rd edn (eds Kaspers, B. et al.) 519–558 (Academic Press, London, 2021).
Google Scholar 
Davis, A. K., Maney, D. L. & Maerz, J. C. The use of leukocyte profiles to measure stress in vertebrates: A review for ecologists. Funct. Ecol. 22, 760–772 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Indykiewicz, P., Podlaszczuk, P., Kamiński, M., Włodarczyk, R. & Minias, P. Central–periphery gradient of individual quality within a colony of Black-headed Gulls. Ibis 161, 744–758 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vleck, C. M., Vertalino, N., Vleck, D. & Bucher, T. L. Stress, corticosterone, and heterophil to lymphocyte ratios in free-living Adélie penguins. Condor 102, 392–400 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Davis, A. K., Cook, K. C. & Altizer, S. Leukocyte profiles in wild house finches with and without mycoplasmal conjunctivitis, a recently emerged bacterial disease. EcoHealth 1, 362–373 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lobato, E., Moreno, J., Merino, S., Sanz, J. J. & Arriero, E. Haematological variables are good predictors of recruitment in nestling pied flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca). Ecoscience 12, 27–34 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bobby Fokidis, H., Greiner, E. C. & Deviche, P. Interspecific variation in avian blood parasites and haematology associated with urbanization in a desert habitat. J. Avian Biol. 39, 300–310 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Padgett, D. A. & Glaser, R. How stress influences the immune response. Trends Immunol. 24, 444–448 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dimitrov, S. et al. Cortisol and epinephrine control opposing circadian rhythms in T cell subsets. Blood 113, 5134–5143 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ilmonen, P., Hasselquist, D., Langefors, Å. & Wiehn, J. Stress, immunocompetence and leukocyte profiles of pied flycatchers in relation to brood size manipulation. Oecologia 136, 148–154 (2003).PubMed 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Minias, P., Gach, K., Włodarczyk, R. & Janiszewski, T. Colony size affects nestling immune function: A cross-fostering experiment in a colonial waterbird. Oecologia 190, 333–341 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Cyr, N. E., Earle, K., Tam, C. & Romero, L. M. The effect of chronic psychological stress on corticosterone, plasma metabolites, and immune responsiveness in European starlings. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 154, 59–66 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schoech, S. J., Bowman, R. & Reynolds, S. J. Food supplementation and possible mechanisms underlying early breeding in the Florida Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). Horm. Behav. 46, 565–573 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ibáñez-Álamo, J. D. et al. Physiological stress does not increase with urbanization in European blackbirds: Evidence from hormonal, immunological and cellular indicators. Sci. Total Environ. 721, 137332 (2020).PubMed 
Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bonier, F. Hormones in the city: Endocrine ecology of urban birds. Horm. Behav. 61, 763–772 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Valdebenito, J. O. et al. Seasonal variation in sex-specific immunity in wild birds. Sci. Rep. 11, 1349 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hetmański, T. Timing of breeding in the Feral Pigeon Columba livia f. domestica in Słupsk (NW Poland). Acta Ornithol. 39, 105–110 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dijkstra, C. et al. An adaptive annual rhythm in the sex of first pigeon eggs. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64, 1393–1402 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Swanson, D. L. Seasonal variation of vascular oxygen transport in the dark-eyed junco. Condor 92, 62–66 (1990).Article 

Google Scholar 
Niedojadlo, J., Bury, A., Cichoń, M., Sadowska, E. T. & Bauchinger, U. Lower haematocrit, haemoglobin and red blood cell number in zebra finches acclimated to cold compared to thermoneutral temperature. J. Avian Biol. 49, e01596 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roulin, A. Condition-dependence, pleiotropy and the handicap principle of sexual selection in melanin-based colouration. Biol. Rev. 91, 328–348 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Statistics Poland. https://stat.gov.pl/en/ (2021).Sol, D. & Senar, J. C. Urban pigeon populations: Stability, home range, and the effect of removing individuals. Can. J. Zool. 73, 1154–1160 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Minias, P. Reproduction and survival in the city: Which fitness components drive urban colonization in a reed-nesting waterbird?. Curr. Zool. 62, 79–87 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Meissner, W. & Fischer, I. Sexing of common gull, Larus canus, using linear measurements. Folia Zool. 66, 183–188 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Haag-Wackernagel, D., Heeb, P. & Leiss, A. Phenotype-dependent selection of juvenile urban feral pigeons Columba livia. Bird Study 53, 163–170 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harter, T. S., Reichert, M., Brauner, C. J. & Milsom, W. K. Validation of the i-STAT and HemoCue systems for the analysis of blood parameters in the bar-headed goose, Anser indicus. Conserv. Physiol. 3, cov021 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Minias, P. The use of haemoglobin concentrations to assess physiological condition in birds: A review. Conserv. Physiol. 3, cov007 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Martin, L. B. et al. Phytohemagglutinin-induced skin swelling in birds: Histological support for a classic immunoecological technique. Funct. Ecol. 20, 290–299 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, G. P., Shilton, C. M. & Shine, R. Measuring amphibian immunocompetence: Validation of the phytohemagglutinin skin-swelling assay in the cane toad, Rhinella marina. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2, 341–348 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kennedy, M. W. & Nager, R. G. The perils and prospects of using phytohaemagglutinin in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 653–655 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vinkler, M., Bainová, H. & Albrecht, T. Functional analysis of the skin-swelling response to phytohaemagglutinin. Funct. Ecol. 24, 1081–1086 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Turmelle, A. S., Ellison, J. A., Mendonça, M. T. & McCracken, G. F. Histological assessment of cellular immune response to the phytohemagglutinin skin test in Brazilian free-tailed bats (Tadarida brasiliensis). J. Comp. Physiol. B 180, 1155–1164 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Griffiths, R., Double, M. C., Orr, K. & Dawson, R. J. A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol. Ecol. 7, 1071–1075 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Çakmak, E., Akın Pekşen, Ç. & Bilgin, C. C. Comparison of three different primer sets for sexing birds. J. Vet. Diagn. Investig. 29, 59–63 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kaiser, H. F. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 141–151 (1960).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B. & Christensen, R. H. B. lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. 82, 1–26 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jaeger, B. C., Edwards, L. J., Das, K. & Sen, P. K. An R 2 statistic for fixed effects in the generalized linear mixed model. J. Appl. Stat. 44, 1086–1105 (2017).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, P. C. Extension of Nakagawa & Schielzeth’s R2GLMM to random slopes models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 944–946 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bartoń, K. MuMIn: Multi-model inference. R package ver. 1.43.17. CRAN: The Comprehensive R Archive Network, Berkeley, CA, USA. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn (2020).Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar 
Kahle, D. J. & Wickham, H. ggmap: Spatial visualization with ggplot2. R J. 5, 144–161 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. D. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Vol. 239 (Oxford University Press, 1991).Oyston, J. W., Hughes, M., Wagner, P. J., Gerber, S. & Wills, M. A. What limits the morphological disparity of clades? Interface Focus 5, 0042 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Hartmann, K. & Mooers, A. O. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature 491, 444–448 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Webb, C. O. Exploring the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities: an example for rain forest trees. Am. Naturalist 156, 145–155 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Purvis, A., Gittleman, J. L. & Brooks, T. Phylogeny and conservation. (Cambridge University Press, 2005).Page, R. D. M. Parallel phylogenies: reconstructing the history of host-parasite assemblages. Cladistics 10, 155–173 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Weaver, S. C. & Vasilakis, N. Molecular evolution of dengue viruses: contributions of phylogenetics to understanding the history and epidemiology of the preeminent arboviral disease. Infect., Genet. Evolution 9, 523–540 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tassy, P. Trees before and after Darwin. J. Zool. Syst. Evolut. Res. 49, 89–101 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heather, J. M. & Chain, B. The sequence of sequencers: The history of sequencing DNA. Genomics 107, 1–8 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pyron, R. A. Post-molecular systematics and the future of phylogenetics. Trends Ecol. Evolution 30, 384–389 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sansom, R. S. & Wills, M. A. Differences between hard and soft phylogenetic data. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 284, 20172150 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Scotland, R. W., Olmstead, R. G. & Bennett, J. R. Phylogeny reconstruction: the role of morphology. Syst. Biol. 52, 539–548 (2003).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Regier, J. C. et al. Arthropod relationships revealed by phylogenomic analysis of nuclear protein-coding sequences. Nature 463, 1079–1083 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Callender-Crowe, L. M. & Sansom, R. S. Osteological characters of birds and reptiles are more congruent with molecular phylogenies than soft characters are. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 194, 1–13 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wahlberg, N. et al. Synergistic effects of combining morphological and molecular data in resolving the phylogeny of butterflies and skippers. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 272, 1577–1586 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
He, L. et al. A molecular phylogeny of selligueoid ferns (Polypodiaceae): Implications for a natural delimitation despite homoplasy and rapid radiation. Taxon 67, 237–249 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fernández, R., Edgecombe, G. D. & Giribet, G. Phylogenomics illuminates the backbone of the Myriapoda Tree of Life and reconciles morphological and molecular phylogenies. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–7 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Eme, L., Spang, A., Lombard, J., Stairs, C. W. & Ettema, T. J. G. Archaea and the origin of eukaryotes. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 15, 711–723 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Asher, R. J., Bennett, N. & Lehmann, T. The new framework for understanding placental mammal evolution. BioEssays 31, 853–864 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shoshani, J. & McKenna, M. C. Higher taxonomic relationships among extant mammals based on morphology, with selected comparisons of results from molecular data. Mol. Phylogenetics Evolution 9, 572–584 (1998).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Beck, R. M. D. & Baillie, C. Improvements in the fossil record may largely resolve current conflicts between morphological and molecular estimates of mammal phylogeny. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 285, 20181632 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zou, Z. T. & Zhang, J. Z. Morphological and molecular convergences in mammalian phylogenetics. Nat. Commun. 7, 1–9 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Hillis, D. M. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18, 23–42 (1987).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thompson, N. Alfred Russell Wallace Contributions to the theory of Natural Selection, 1870, and Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace, ‘On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties’ (Papers presented to the Linnean Society 30th June 1858). (Routledge, 2004).Croizat, L. Panbiogeography; or an introductory synthesis of zoogeography, phytogeography, and geology, with notes on evolution, systematics, ecology, anthropology, etc., Vol. 1, 2a & 2b (Published by the author, Caracas., 1958).Means, J. C. & Marek, P. E. Is geography an accurate predictor of evolutionary history in the millipede family Xystodesmidae? PeerJ 5, e3854 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wills, M. A., Barrett, P. M. & Heathcote, J. F. The modified gap excess ratio (GER*) and the stratigraphic congruence of dinosaur phylogenies. Syst. Biol. 57, 891–904 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fisher, D. C. Stratocladistics: integrating temporal data and character data in phylogenetic inference. Annu. Rev. Ecol., Evolution Syst. 39, 365–385 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lazarus, D. B. & Prothero, D. R. The role of stratigraphic and morphologic data in phylogeny. J. Paleontol. 58, 163–172 (1984).
Google Scholar 
Camerini, J. R. Evolution, biogeography, and maps: an early history of Wallace’s Line. Isis 84, 700–727 (1993).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Upchurch, P., Hunn, C. A. & Norman, D. B. An analysis of dinosaurian biogeography: evidence for the existence of vicariance and dispersal patterns caused by geological events. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 269, 613–621 (2002).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Ronquist, F. & Sanmartín, I. Phylogenetic methods in biogeography. Annu. Rev. Ecol., Evolution, Syst. 42, 441–464 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-2., https://www.iucnredlist.org (2019).GBIF.org. GBIF Home Page, https://www.gbif.org/ (2019).Uetz, P., Freed, P., Aguilar, R. & Hošek, J. The reptile database., http://www.reptiledatabase.org (2019).Archie, J. W. Homoplasy excess ratios: new indices for measuring levels of homoplasy in phylogenetic systematics and a critique of the consistency index. Syst. Zool. 38, 253–269 (1989).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilkinson, M. On phylogenetic relationships within Dendrotriton (Amphibia: Caudata: Plethodontidae) is there sufficient evidence? Herpetological J. 7, 55–65 (1997).
Google Scholar 
O’Connor, A. & Wills, M. A. Measuring stratigraphic congruence across trees, higher taxa, and time. Syst. Biol. 65, 792–811 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Colless, D. H. Review of phylogenetics: the theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics. Syst. Zool. 31, 100–104 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lartillot, N. & Philippe, H. Improvement of molecular phylogenetic inference and the phylogeny of Bilateria. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 363, 1463–1472 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sansom, R. S., Choate, P. G., Keating, J. N. & Randle, E. Parsimony, not Bayesian analysis, recovers more stratigraphically congruent phylogenetic trees. Biol. Lett. 14, 20180263 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rosa, B. B., Melo, G. A. & Barbeitos, M. S. Homoplasy-based partitioning outperforms alternatives in Bayesian analysis of discrete morphological data. Syst. Biol. 68, 657–671 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lucena, D. A. & Almeida, E. A. Morphology and Bayesian tip-dating recover deep Cretaceous-age divergences among major chrysidid lineages (Hymenoptera: Chrysididae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 194, 36–79 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Reilly, J. E. et al. Bayesian methods outperform parsimony but at the expense of precision in the estimation of phylogeny from discrete morphological data. Biol. Lett. 12, 20160081 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, M. R. Bayesian and parsimony approaches reconstruct informative trees from simulated morphological datasets. Biol. Lett. 15, 20180632 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wiens, J. The role of morphological data in phylogeny reconstruction. Syst. Biol. 53, 653–661 (2004).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Leary, M. A. & Kaufman, S. G. MorphoBank 3.0: Web application for morphological phylogenetics and taxonomy., http://www.morphobank.org (2012).de Queiroz, A. & Gatesy, J. The supermatrix approach to systematics. Trends Ecol. Evolution 22, 34–41 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilkinson, M. A comparison of two methods of character construction. Cladistics 11, 297–308 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brazeau, M. D. Problematic character coding methods in morphology and their effects. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 104, 489–498 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Drummond, A. J., Ho, S. Y. W., Phillips, M. J. & Rambaut, A. Relaxed phylogenetics and dating with confidence. PLoS Biol. 4, e88 (2006).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Reilly, J. E., Puttick, M. N., Pisani, D. & Donoghue, P. C. Probabilistic methods surpass parsimony when assessing clade support in phylogenetic analyses of discrete morphological data. Palaeontology 61, 105–118 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Keating, J. N., Sansom, R. S., Sutton, M. D., Knight, C. G. & Garwood, R. J. Morphological phylogenetics evaluated using novel evolutionary simulations. Syst. Biol. 69, 897–912 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Makarenkov, V. et al. Weighted bootstrapping: a correction method for assessing the robustness of phylogenetic trees. BMC Evolut. Biol. 10, 1–16 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stayton, C. T. The definition, recognition, and interpretation of convergent evolution, and two new measures for quantifying and assessing the significance of convergence. Evolution 69, 2140–2153 (2015).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sattler, R. Homology – a continuing challenge. Syst. Bot. 9, 382–394 (1984).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jenner, R. A. & Schram, F. R. The grand game of metazoan phylogeny: rules and strategies. Biol. Rev. 74, 121–142 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pisani, D. & Wilkinson, M. Matrix representation with parsimony, taxonomic congruence, and total evidence. Syst. Biol. 51, 151–155 (2002).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Arcila, D. et al. Testing the utility of alternative metrics of branch support to address the ancient evolutionary radiation of tunas, stromateoids, and allies (Teleostei: Pelagiaria). Syst. Biol. 70, 1123–1144 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Felsenstein, J. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Naturalist 125, 1–15 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bremer, K. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10, 295–304 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, W. E. et al. The late Miocene radiation of modern Felidae: a genetic assessment. Science 311, 73–77 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Van der Made, J. Biogeography and climatic change as a context to human dispersal out of Africa and within Eurasia. Quat. Sci. Rev. 30, 1353–1367 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
May, F., Rosenbaum, B., Schurr, F. M. & Chase, J. M. The geometry of habitat fragmentation: Effects of species distribution patterns on extinction risk due to habitat conversion. Ecol. Evolution 9, 2775–2790 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Swofford, D. L. et al. Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods. Syst. Biol. 50, 525–539 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jaeger, J. J. & Martin, M. African marsupials – vicariance or dispersion? Nature 312, 379–379 (1984).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, B. T. et al. The drivers of tropical speciation. Nature 515, 406–409 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Simkanin, C. et al. Exploring potential establishment of marine rafting species after transoceanic long-distance dispersal. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 28, 588–600 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Raxworthy, C. J., Forstner, M. R. J. & Nussbaum, R. A. Chameleon radiation by oceanic dispersal. Nature 415, 784–787 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Stehli, F. G. & Webb, S. D. The great American biotic interchange., Vol. 4 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2013).Ronquist, F. Dispersal-vicariance analysis: A new approach to the quantification of historical biogeography. Syst. Biol. 46, 195–203 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ricklefs, R. E. & Bermingham, E. The concept of the taxon cycle in biogeography. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 11, 353–361 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ma, H. An analysis of the equilibrium of migration models for biogeography-based optimization. Inf. Sci. 180, 3444–3464 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yiming, L., Niemelä, J. & Dianmo, L. Nested distribution of amphibians in the Zhoushan archipelago, China: can selective extinction cause nested subsets of species? Oecologia 113, 557–564 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Crisci, J. V., Katinas, L. & Posadas, P. Historical Biogeography: An Introduction. (Harvard University Press, 2003).Chen, R. et al. Adaptive innovation of green plants by horizontal gene transfer. Biotechnol. Adv. 46, 107671 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schönknecht, G., Weber, A. P. & Lercher, M. J. Horizontal gene acquisitions by eukaryotes as drivers of adaptive evolution. BioEssays 36, 9–20 (2014).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Smith, A. B. Echinoderm phylogeny: morphology and molecules approach accord. Trends Ecol. Evolution 7, 224–229 (1992).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bateman, R. M., Hilton, J. & Rudall, P. J. Morphological and molecular phylogenetic context of the angiosperms: contrasting the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches used to infer the likely characteristics of the first flowers. J. Exp. Bot. 57, 3471–3503 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Morris, J. L. et al. The timescale of early land plant evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 115, E2274–E2283 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Richter, S. The Tetraconata concept: hexapod-crustacean relationships and the phylogeny of Crustacea. Org. Diversity Evolution 2, 217–237 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dunn, C. W. et al. Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life. Nature 452, 745–749 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Caravas, J. & Friedrich, M. Of mites and millipedes: recent progress in resolving the base of the arthropod tree. BioEssays 32, 488–495 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Howard, R. J. et al. The Ediacaran origin of Ecdysozoa: integrating fossil and phylogenomic data. J. Geol. Soc. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2021-107 (2022).Newman, M. E. J. A model of mass extinction. J. Theor. Biol. 189, 235–252 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cobbett, A., Wilkinson, M. & Wills, M. A. Fossils impact as hard as living taxa in parsimony analyses of morphology. Syst. Biol. 56, 753–766 (2007).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ruta, M., Krieger, J., Angielczyk, K. & Wills, M. A. The evolution of the tetrapod humerus: morphometrics, disparity, and evolutionary rates. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 109, 351–369 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Puttick, M. N., Thomas, G. H. & Benton, M. J. High rates of evolution preceded the origins of birds. Evolution 68, 1497–1510 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sansom, R. S. & Wills, M. A. Fossilization causes organisms to appear erroneously primitive by distorting evolutionary trees. Sci. Rep. 3, 1–5 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brinkworth, A., Sansom, R. & Wills, M. A. Phylogenetic incongruence and homoplasy in the appendages and bodies of arthropods: why broad character sampling is best. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 187, 100–116 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, J. W. & Smith, S. A. The past sure is tense: on interpreting phylogenetic divergence time estimates. Syst. Biol. 67, 340–353 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Barba-Montoya, J., Dos Reis, M. & Yang, Z. H. Comparison of different strategies for using fossil calibrations to generate the time prior in Bayesian molecular clock dating. Mol. Phylogenetics Evolution 114, 386–400 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sanderson, M. J. & Donoghue, M. J. Patterns of variation in levels of homoplasy. Evolution 43, 1781–1795 (1989).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Alroy, J. Fossilworks: Gateway to the Paleobiology Database, http://fossilworks.org (2019).Benton, M. J. The Fossil Record 2. (Chapman & Hall, 1993).Cohen, K. M., Harper, D. A. T. & Gibbard, P. L. ICS International Chronostratigraphic Chart 2021/02, http://www.stratigraphy.org/ (2021).Gradstein, F. & Ogg, J. Geologic time scale 2004–why, how, and where next! Lethaia 37, 175–181 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rohde, R. A. The GeoWhen Database, (2005).O’Leary, M. A. et al. The placental mammal ancestor and the post–K-Pg radiation of placentals. Science 339, 662–667 (2013).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kluge, A. G. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Biol. 38, 7–25 (1989).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tolson, P. J. Phylogenetics of the boid snake genus Epicrates and Caribbean vicariance theory. Occasional Pap. Mus. Zool., Univ. Mich. 715, 1–68 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Clopper, C. J. & Pearson, E. S. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26, 404–413 (1934).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Drainage area and branching ratio: a matter of scaleGeomorphological and ecological viewpoints on river networks generally differ owing to discordant definitions of the fundamental unit (the node) used to analyze them. From a geomorphological perspective, the determination of a river network entails the definition of an observational scale. Real river networks can be extracted from digital elevation models (DEMs) via algorithms for flow direction determination such as D8 (i.e., each pixel drains towards the lowest of its 8 nearest neighbors53). After the outlet location has been specified (and hence the upstream area A spanned by the river network), the first observational scale required is thus the pixel length l of the DEM, which defines the extent of a network node. A second scale is then needed to distinguish the portion of the drainage network effectively belonging to the channel network. The simplest but still widely used method53 defines channels as those pixels whose drainage area exceeds a threshold value AT. Hydrologically based criteria to determine the appropriate value for AT exist54; however, for the sake of simplicity, we here consider AT as a free parameter.BBTs and RBNs are random constructs, and as such they do not satisfy the optimality criterion of minimizing total energy expenditure, which is the fundamental physical process shaping fluvial landscapes. Furthermore, neither of these networks is a spanning tree, which is a key attribute of real fluvial landforms10: in fact, in both BBTs and RBNs, the extent of the drained domain is not defined. As a result, the drainage area at an arbitrary network node cannot in principle be attributed, unless by using the number of upstream nodes as a proxy. This has practical implications from an ecological viewpoint because drainage area is the master variable controlling several attributes of a river, such as width, depth, discharge, or slope3,55, which in turn impact habitat characteristics and the ecology of organisms therein56.In BBTs and RBNs, branching probability p has been defined35,38,45,46,47 as the probability that a network node is branching, i.e. connected to two upstream nodes. As such, the branching probability of a realized river network (be it a real river or a synthetic construct) could be evaluated as the ratio between the number of links NL constituting a network and the total number of network nodes N; if a unit distance between two adjacent nodes is assumed, the denominator equals the total network length. We note that the former definition of branching probability only holds in the context of the generation of a synthetic random network; it is in fact improper to refer to a “probability” when analyzing the properties of a realized river network. We clarify this aspect by introducing the concept of branching ratio pr for the latter definition (pr = NL/N). Moreover, in the case of BBTs, p and pr do not coincide (see Methods). Importantly, p and pr have no parallel in the literature on fluvial forms, nor do they refer to any of the well-studied measures of rivers’ fractal character.The choice of different observational scales for the same drainage network results in different values of NL and N, and hence of pr. Remarkably, the very same drainage network can result in river networks that virtually assume any value of pr (ranging from 0 to 1) and N (up to the upper bound A) depending on the choice of AT and A (the latter corresponding to a given l value when measured in the number of pixels; Fig. 1d–i); networks with low AT/A ratios result in high N (Fig. 2a), while networks with low AT result in high pr (Fig. 2b). Furthermore, pr does not identify the inherent (i.e., scale-independent) branching character of a given river network in relation to other river networks. In fact, by extracting different river networks at various scales (i.e., various AT values) and assessing the rivers’ rank in terms of pr, one observes that rivers that look more “branching” (i.e., have higher pr) than others for a given AT value can become less “branching” for a different AT value (Fig. 3). We therefore conclude that branching probability is a non-descriptive property of a river network, which by no means describes its inherent branching character, and depends on the observational scale.Fig. 2: Variation of N and pr as a function of observational scales for OCNs and real river networks.a Expected value of number of network nodes N as a function of threshold area AT and total drained area A (from Eq. (1)); the white dots indicate the values of AT and A used to generate the OCNs used in this analysis. b Expected value of branching ratio pr as a function of AT and A (from Eq. (1)); symbols as in a.Full size imageFig. 3: Values of branching ratio as a function of AT for the 50 real river networks analyzed in this study.a Natural values of pr in logarithmic scale. b z-normalized branching ratios (i.e., for each AT value, values of pr are normalized so that they have null mean and unit standard deviation), which better shows how rivers rank differently in terms of pr for different observation scales (i.e., AT). Lines connect dots relative to the same river. For visual purposes, rivers that rank first, second, second-to-last or last in at least one of the AT groups are displayed in colors; the other rivers are displayed in grey.Full size imageScaling is also crucial when looking at river networks from an ecological perspective. In this case, the relevant scale determining the dimension l of a node is the extent of habitat within which individuals (due to e.g. physical constrains) can be assigned to a single population57,58; the riverine connectivity and ensuing dispersal among these populations give rise to a metapopulation at the river network level. The specific spatial scale largely depends on the targeted species (e.g. being larger for fish than for aquatic insects), and it is conceivably much larger than (or, at least, it has no reason to be equal to) the pixel size of the DEM on which the river network is extracted. Since the evaluation of pr depends on the number of nodes N, which, in turn, is defined based on the scale length l, the resulting pr of a river network under this perspective would depend on the characteristics of the target taxa, which is inconsistent with the alleged role of pr as a scale-invariant property of river networks.Note also that using the ecological definition of l (i.e., spatial range of a local population) to discretize a real river network into N nodes, and from there calculate the branching ratio pr = NL/N, is problematic. Indeed, this would imply an elongation of all links shorter than l (which constitute a non-negligible fraction of the total links, under the assumption of exponential distribution of link lengths51), hence preventing a correct estimation of the connectivity patterns (i.e., distances between nodes) and the resulting ecological metrics of the river network (see section Ecological implications).From an ecological perspective, it could be reasonable to consider AT as a parameter expressing how a particular taxon perceives the suitable landscape, rather than a value to be determined from geomorphological arguments: for instance, large fishes inhabit wide and deep river reaches, and do not access small headwaters56. In this case, imposing a large AT would result in a coarser, less branching network constituted by few main channels (Fig. 1f, i), which could mimic the potentially available habitat for such species. Conversely, aquatic insects inhabit also small headwaters17,59, therefore their perceived landscape would resemble the finely resolved networks of Fig. 1d, g, characterized by low AT and higher (apparent) pr.Topology and scaling of river networks and random analoguesTo verify the topological (i.e., Horton’s laws on bifurcation and length ratios) and scaling (i.e., probability distribution of drainage areas) relationships of the different network types, we extracted from DEMs 50 real river networks encompassing a wide range of drainage areas (Fig. 4), and we generated 50 OCNs, 50 RBNs and 50 BBTs of comparable size (see Methods).Fig. 4: Location of real river basins used in the analysis.River basins are shown in dark grey; countries in light grey. Rivers’ numbering is sorted in ascending order according to drainage area values.Full size imageTypical values3,7,60 for the bifurcation ratio RB lie between 3 and 5, while length ratios (RL) range between 1.5 and 3.5. As expected, we observed that the real rivers and OCNs used in our analysis have RB and RL values within the aforementioned ranges (Fig. 5a, b). The same is true for RBNs, while the RB and RL values found for BBTs are lower than the typical ranges. This finding holds regardless of the scale (subsumed by AT) at which real river networks and OCNs are extracted (Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2). Remarkably, BBTs fail to satisfy Horton’s laws despite the statistical inevitability of such laws for any network argued by ref. 61. To this regard, we note that the networks analyzed by ref. 61 did not include constructs where all paths from the source nodes to the outlet have the same length, which is the defining feature of BBTs (Fig. 1a).Fig. 5: Comparison of topological and scaling properties of the different networks.a Scaling of number of network links Nω as a function of stream order ω for the various network types (rivers and OCNs obtained with AT = 20 pixels; RBNs and BBTs derived accordingly – see Methods). b Mean link length Lω (in units of l) as a function of ω. Networks used are as in panel a. c Scaling of drainage areas: probability P[A ≥ a] to randomly sample a node with drainage area A ≥ a as a function of a. The displayed trend lines are fitted on the ensemble values for the 50 network replicates, by excluding nodes with drainage area larger than 2000 pixels (cutoff value marked with a black solid line). The scaling coefficients β reported correspond to the slopes of the fitted trend lines. Extended details on all panels are provided in the Supplementary Methods.Full size imageWhile the power-law scaling of areas in OCNs (Fig. 5c) has an exponent β ≈ 0.45 that closely resembles the one found for the real rivers (β ≈ 0.46) and within the typically observed range8,10 β = 0.43 ± 0.02, drainage areas of RBNs scale as a power law with an exponent β ≈ 0.51, which departs from the observed range. Conversely, BBTs do not show any power-law scaling of areas. Scaling exponents of drainage areas fitted separately for each real river network yielded values in the range 0.36÷0.57 (Supplementary Table 1). In particular, we observed that these values tend to the expected range β = 0.43 ± 0.02 for increasing values of A, expressed in number of pixels (Supplementary Fig. 3), hence implying that highly resolved catchments are required in order to properly estimate β. Interestingly, the observed values of Horton ratios and scaling exponent β for RBNs are compatible with the values RB = 4, RL = 2, β = 0.5 predicted for Shreve’s random topology model3,60,62, which is actually equivalent to a RBN with infinite links.Ecological implicationsWe compared the different network types via two metrics that express the ecological value of a landscape for a metapopulation: the coefficient of variation of a metapopulation CVM and the metapopulation capacity λM. The coefficient of variation of a metapopulation63 is a measure of metapopulation stability (a metapopulation being more stable the lower CVM is), while the metapopulation capacity42,64 expresses the potential for a metapopulation to persist in the long run (persistence being more likely the higher λM is). Both measures are among the most universal metrics describing dynamics of spatially fragmented populations24,40. In order to assess the impact of the two landscape features mostly affecting metapopulation dynamics, i.e. spatial connectivity and spatial distribution of habitat patches, we calculated these metrics for the four network types under two different scenarios: uniform (CVM,U, λM,U) and non-uniform (CVM,H, λM,H) spatial distribution of habitat patch sizes. In the first scenario, CVM,U and λM,U assess stability and persistence (respectively) of a metapopulation solely based on pairwise distances between network nodes; in the second scenario, CVM,H and λM,H depend on the interplay between pairwise distances and spatially heterogeneous habitat availability (namely, downstream nodes being larger than upstream ones).We found that the values of CVM (be it derived with uniform (CVM,U) or nonuniform (CVM,H) distributions of patch sizes) obtained for OCNs match strikingly well those of real rivers (Fig. 6). These CVM values are consistently lower than those found for RBNs, while values of CVM for BBTs are even higher. Notably, this result holds for different values of AT (and hence different pr values) at which real rivers and OCNs are extracted (Fig. 6a–c; g–i), and for values of mean dispersal distance α (see Methods) spanning multiple orders of magnitude (Supplementary Figs. 4–7).Fig. 6: Comparison of values of metapopulation metrics across river network types and observational scales (AT).a–c CVM,U. d–f λM,U. g–i CVM,H. j–l λM,H. Boxplot elements are as follows: center line, median; notches, (pm 1.58cdot {{{{{{{rm{IQR}}}}}}}}/sqrt{50}), where IQR is the interquartile range; box limits, upper and lower quartiles; whiskers, extending up to the most extreme data points that are within ±1.5 ⋅ IQR; circles, outliers. Metapopulation metric values were obtained by setting α = 100 l. Note that in Eq. (1), given A = 40, 000, AT = 20 results in E[N] ≈ 4574, E[pr] ≈ 0.228; AT = 100 yields E[N] ≈ 2231, E[pr] ≈ 0.098; AT = 500 results in E[N] ≈ 1088, E[pr] ≈ 0.042.Full size imageFor a constant α value, the CVM of real rivers, OCNs and RBNs decreases as the resolution at which the network is extracted increases (i.e., AT decreases; see Fig. 6 and Supplementary Figs. 4–7). This is expected63, since a decrease in AT corresponds to an increase in N (Fig. 2a), leading to a decrease in CVM. Indeed, a larger ecosystem, constituted of more patches, has the potential to include a larger (and more diverse) number of subpopulations, which increases stability at a metapopulation level through statistical averaging–a phenomenon widely known as the portfolio effect65. We also found that BBT networks do not generally follow the above-described pattern of decreasing CVM with increasing N; rather, the CVM of BBTs increases with N when the mean dispersal distance α is set to intermediate to high values (Fig. 6 and Supplementary Figs. 5–7), and only when α is very low (e.g. α = 10 l as in Supplementary Fig. 4) and a uniform patch-size distribution is assumed does CVM,U follow the expected decreasing trend with increasing N.However, we need to warn against the conclusion that river networks with higher values of pr (and hence lower AT, see Fig. 2b) are inherently associated with higher metapopulation stability. Indeed, our result was obtained by changing the scale at which we observed the same river networks, and not by increasing the river networks’ size. If the number of network nodes (and, consequently, the branching ratio pr) is determined by the scale at which the landscape is observed, one cannot directly assume that any of such nodes is a node (or patch) in the ecological sense, i.e. the geographical span of a local population: the extent of such patches should be determined based on the mobility characteristics of the focus species, and should be independent of the scale at which the river network is observed. In contrast, we note that, if different river networks spanning different catchment areas (say, in km2) are compared, all of them extracted from the same DEM (same l and same AT in km2), then the larger river network will appear more branching (i.e., have larger pr). Indeed, by selecting catchments with larger A (in km2) for fixed l and AT (in km2), one moves towards the top-left corner of Fig. 2a, b (i.e., perpendicular to the level curves AT/A). The apparent higher “branchiness” of the river network with larger A will result in lower values of CVM; however, the higher metapopulation stability of the larger network will not be due to its (alleged) inherent more branching character, but only dictated by its larger habitat availability.We observed that metapopulation capacity λM values of OCNs (be it evaluated under uniform (λM,U) or non-uniform (λM,H) patch-size distribution assumption) are the closest to those of real rivers, while RBNs (and even more so BBTs) generally overestimate λM with respect to real rivers and OCNs (Fig. 6d–f; j–l). This result holds irrespective of the choice of AT and for intermediate to high values of α (Supplementary Figs. 5–7). When the mean dispersal distance is instead set to very low values (α = 10 l – Supplementary Fig. 4) and the river network is extracted at a high resolution (i.e., low AT), the metapopulation capacity of OCNs under assumption of uniform patch-size distribution (λM,U) is underestimated with respect to that of real rivers. A likely explanation for this apparent mismatch is that, for low values of AT, the number of nodes N tends to be somewhat higher for the extracted river networks used in this analysis than for OCNs (Supplementary Fig. 8), and the effect of the different dimensionality of real rivers and OCNs in the metapopulation capacity estimation tends to be more evident as the mean dispersal distance decreases. Interestingly, such mismatch is absent when a non-uniform patch size distribution is assumed, as λM,H values for OCNs match those for real rivers regardless of the mean dispersal distance value and the river network resolution (Fig. 6; Supplementary Figs. 4–7).The OCN construct encapsulates both random and deterministic processes, the former related to the stochastic nature of the OCN generation algorithm, and the latter pertaining to the minimization of total energy expenditure that characterizes OCN configurations. As such, OCNs reproduce the aggregation patterns of real river networks. From an ecological viewpoint, this implies that both pairwise distances between nodes and the distribution of patch sizes (expressed as a function of drainage areas, or of a proxy thereof such as the number of nodes upstream) are much closer to those of real networks than is the case for fully random synthetic networks as BBTs and RBNs. In particular, BBTs and (to a lesser extent) RBNs tend to underestimate pairwise distances with respect to real rivers and OCNs, as documented by a comparison of mean pairwise distances across network types (Supplementary Fig. 9a–c). Our analysis shows that the connectivity structure of these random networks (subsumed by the matrix of pairwise distances) is too compact with respect to that of real rivers, which leads to an overestimation of the role of dispersal in increasing the ability of a metapopulation to persist in the long run, but also an increased likelihood of synchrony among the different local populations, which results in higher instability.Comparison of patch size distributions among the network types expressed in terms of CVM,0 (i.e., the portion of CVM,H that uniquely depends on the distribution of patch sizes and not on pairwise distances) shows that, while for coarsely resolved networks (AT = 500) no clear differences in CVM,0 emerged, for highly resolved networks (AT = 20) BBTs heavily underestimate the CVM,0 of real rivers and OCNs, while RBNs slightly overestimate it (Supplementary Fig. 9d–f). As a result of the interplay of differences in distance matrices and patch size distributions, BBTs and (to a lesser extent) RBNs generally tend to overestimate the coefficient of variation of a metapopulation and the metapopulation capacity of real rivers and OCNs in both scenarios of uniform and non-uniform patch size distribution. The only exception to this trend occurs for the metapopulation capacity λM,H of very large BBTs (corresponding to AT = 20) in the case of very high dispersal distances (α = 1000 l – Supplementary Fig. 7): here, the patch-size effect (i.e., underestimation of CVM,0) predominates over the distance effect (i.e., overestimation of mean dij), resulting in an underestimation of λM,H with respect to real rivers and OCNs.Our results were derived under a number of simplifying assumptions. In particular, we acknowledge that, while the distance matrix of a landscape and the distribution of patch sizes have in general important implications for metapopulation dynamics, other factors not considered here, such as Euclidean between-patch distance48, fat-tailed dispersal kernel66 and density-dependent dispersal67 could also play a relevant role in this respect. However, it needs to be noted that, especially with regards to the assessment of the Moran effect in metapopulation synchrony (i.e., increased synchrony in local fluvial populations that are geographically close but not flow-connected48), the use of OCNs allows integration of Euclidean distances in a metapopulation model, while this is not possible for RBNs and BBTs, where Euclidean distances are not defined. Moreover, if a larger degree of realism is required for a specific ecological modelling study, such as heterogeneity in abiotic factors (e.g. water temperature or flow rates), the use of OCNs as model landscapes allows a direct integration of these variables, as they can conveniently be expressed as functions of drainage area3,55. In contrast, this is not possible for RBNs or BBTs, because only OCNs verify the scaling of areas (Fig. 5c), while RBNs and BBTs lack a proper definition of drainage areas.Our comparison of synthetic and real river networks showed that riverine metapopulations are more stable and less invasible than what would be predicted by random network analogues. Conversely, the use of OCNs as model landscapes allows capturing not only the scaling features of real rivers, but also drawing ecological conclusions that are in line with those that could be observed in real river networks. We thus support the use of OCNs as analogues of real river networks in theoretical and applied ecological modelling studies. While we found that BBTs are highly inaccurate in reproducing ecological metrics of real river networks and should be therefore discarded altogether in future modelling applications, RBNs show a certain degree of similarity with OCNs and real river networks in this respect; moreover, RBNs (as is the case for any random tree61) satisfy Horton’s laws on bifurcation and length ratios. A relevant advantage of RBNs over OCNs is that their generation algorithm is at least one order of magnitude faster49. Therefore, we acknowledge that RBNs could be considered as a suitable surrogate for real river networks as null models in cases where a large number of network replicates is required. To this end, we encourage researchers exploiting synthetic river networks (whether they be OCNs or RBNs) to always clarify the observational scales (that is, total area drained, size of a node, area drained by a headwater) subsumed by the synthetic network and which give rise to a certain complexity measure (i.e., branching ratio). Only in such a way could the predictions from these studies be compared with real river networks.In conclusion, our results advocate a tighter integration between physical (geomorphology, hydrology) and biological (ecology) disciplines in the study of freshwater ecosystems, and particularly in the perspective of a mechanistic understanding of drivers of persistence and loss of biodiversity. More

Costanza, R. et al. Nature 387, 253–260 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Toman, M. Ecol. Econom. 25, 57–60 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barbier, E. B., Burgess, J. C. & Folke, C. (eds) Paradise Lost? The Ecological Economics of Biodiversity (Routledge, 1994).
Google Scholar 
Daily, G. C. (ed.) Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems (Island, 1997).
Google Scholar 
Watson, R. T. et al. (eds) Global Biodiversity Assessment: Summary for Policy-Makers (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995).
Google Scholar 
Reid, W. V. et al. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis (A Report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (Island, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Chichilnisky, G. & Heal, G. Nature 391, 629–630 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Umaña Quesada, A. in Green Growth That Works: Natural Capital Policy and Finance Mechanisms from Around the World (eds Mandle, L. et al.) Ch. 13, 195–212 (Island, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Ouyang, Z. et al. in Green Growth That Works: Natural Capital Policy and Finance Mechanisms from Around the World (eds Mandle, L. et al.) Ch. 12, 177–194 (Island, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Salzman, J., Bennett, G., Carroll, N., Goldstein, A. & Jenkins, M. Nature Sustain. 1, 136–144 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Summary for Policymakers (eds Díaz, S. et al.) (IPBES, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Science 366, 255–258 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hamel, P. et al. npj Nature Urban Sustain. 1, 25 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mandle, L., Ouyang, Z., Salzman, J. & Daily, G. C. (eds) Green Growth That Works: Natural Capital Policy and Finance Mechanisms from Around the World (Island, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Dasgupta, P. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. Abridged Version (HM Treasury, 2021).
Google Scholar 
Arkema, K. K. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 7390–7395 (2015).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ouyang, Z. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 14593–14601 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Data UsedWe used cadastral maps from 1858 to reconstruct the LULC structure of Aksu and Kestel for the mid-nineteenth century. General Staff of the Ottoman Army produced these maps in 1:10,000 scale. These maps were one of the earliest attempts of creating cadastral maps in the Ottoman Empire. The images of historical maps scanned at 1270 dpi resolutions are provided by the Turkish Presidency State Archives of the Republic of Turkey – Department of Ottoman Archives (Map collection, HRT.h, 561–567). Individual tiles of cadastral maps are of a 1:2,000 scale. However, these maps are kept separated from their accompanying cadastral registers or documentation regarding their production process in the archives. There are no studies on the production of these cadastral maps, but few studies used them until now35,36.The LULC structures of Aksu and Kestel for the mid-twentieth century were generated using aerial photographs from June 23, 1955, with a scale of 1:30,000. These aerial photographs were captured by the US Navy Photographic Squadron VJ-62 (established on April 10, 1952, re-designated to VAP-62 on July 1956, and disestablished on October 15, 1969). The squadron conducted mapping and special photographic projects worldwide37. Lastly, the VHR satellite images of WorldView-3 (WV-3) with 0.3 m of spatial resolution, collected on September 6, 2020, were used to show the up-to-date LULC patterns of Aksu and Kestel.MethodologyFigure 2 shows the flowchart of steps followed in this study to detect the LULC changes. The workflow includes three phases: preprocessing, LULC mapping, and statistical analysis of LULC changes.Figure 2Flowchart of the processing steps for the LULC change analysis for Kestel.Full size imageData preprocessingOrthorectification is the first important step in ensuring accurate spatial positioning among the multi-temporal and multi-source images, eliminating geometric distortions, and defining all data sets on a common projection system. To align the multi-modal geospatial datasets, we first performed the orthorectification of the satellite images and then we used the orthorectified satellite images as reference for the georeferencing of the cadastral maps and aerial photographs.Satellite imagery orthorectificationWe first pan-sharpened the WV-3 images by applying the PANSHARP2 algorithm38 to fuse the panchromatic (PAN) image of 0.3 m spatial resolution with four multispectral bands (R, G, B, and near-infrared (NIR)) of 1.2 m. We then geometrically corrected the pan-sharpened (PSP) WV-3 imageries using an ALOS Global Digital Surface Model with a horizontal resolution of approximately 30 m (ALOS World 3D – 30 m), rational polynomial coefficients (RPC) file, and additional five ground control points (GCPs) for the refinement. As a geometric model, we used the RPC model with zero-order polynomial adjustment39, and orthorectified images were registered to the Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 35 N as the reference coordinate system.Georeferencing of scanned cadastral maps and aerial photographsWe used orthorectified WV-3 imageries as a reference for the geometric correction of the historical cadastral maps and the aerial photographs. We selected the spline (triangulation) transformation, a rubber sheeting method, useful for local accuracy and requiring a minimum of 10 control points, as the transformation method to determine the correct map coordinate location for each cell in the historical maps and aerial photographs. The spline transformation provides superior accuracies for the geometric correction of the historical geospatial data40,41.The lack of topographic properties of planimetric features in the historical cadastral maps and the inherent distortions of the aerial photographs due to terrain and camera tilts causes difficulties in precise georeferencing of these data sets. It increases the number of required ground control points (GCPs) for optimal image rectification. Adequate and homogenously distributed GCPs, identified from cadastral maps and aerial photographs, can ensure precise spatial alignment among different geospatial data. The best locations for GCPs were border intersections of agricultural fields and roads. As for artificial objects, places of worship and schools, which are highly probable that have remained unchanged, are other optimal locations for GCPs to perform the accurate geometric correction. Figure 3 displays samples of GCPs selected from cadastral maps and aerial photographs. We obtained 2.11 m or better overall RMSE (Root Mean Square Error) values for the geometric correction of the historical maps and aerial photographs.Figure 3Examples of GCPs selection (red crosses in blue circles) on (a), (c) Cadastral maps and their counterparts on (b), (d) Aerial photographs.Full size imageLULC classification schemeWe defined our classification scheme by analyzing the LULC classes distinguished in all three datasets (i.e., cadastral maps, aerial photographs, and WV-3 imageries). We used the classification scheme shown in Table 1. We also present codes and names of the land cover (LC) classes derived from Corine LC nomenclature42.Table 1 Classification scheme of the study.Full size tableThe legends provided on the historical cadastral maps of Aksu and Kestel delineate 15 LULC categories, which are: (1) buildings, (2) home gardens, (3) roads, (4) arable land, (5) gardens, (6) mulberry groves, (7) chestnut groves, (8) olive groves, (9) vegetable gardens, (10) forest, (11) courtyards, (12) vineyards, (13) arable fields, (14) cemeteries, (15) watercourses. Categorizing the land cover types of cadastral maps is limited with the classes available in the map legend. The legend of cadastral maps categorizes the forested area in one class named “forest”. Therefore, it was not possible to use third-level LC sub-categories in our classification schema for forest area which is separating forested areas into three subclasses (3.1.1, 3.1.2, and 3.1.3) according to the type of tree cover. Although some of the third-level LC sub-categories could be extracted from the cadastral map legend, it was not possible to extract all third level agricultural classes from single-band monochromatic aerial photographs. Although the spatial extent of fruit trees as a permanent crop could be determined from aerial photographs, it was not possible to classify these trees into different fruit types (e.g. 2.2.1 Vineyards, 2.2.2 Fruit trees and berry plantations, 2.2.3 Olive groves). Limitation on the number of forest classes is due to the historical cadastral map content; whereas limitation on the number of agricultural classes is mainly offset by the aerial photographs which have only one spectral band and we did not have any field survey or ancillary geographical data that could help the specific identification of fruit trees.Our primary focus is to find out agricultural land abandonment, deforestation/afforestation, urbanization, and rural depopulation within the historical periods. Therefore, most of the second level LULC classes are sufficient for our purpose. LULC changes within the third class level such as the conversion of third level agriculture classes among each other were not aimed to analyze in this research. Our datasets allow us to use Level 3 CORINE classes for the artificial surfaces. These classes are useful to determine residential area implications of rural depopulation or urbanization, one of the focused transformation types for our analysis.We re-organized and categorized the LULC types used in the cadastral maps, with minimum possible manipulation (only for 2.4 and 3.2 LC classes) according to the classification scheme, as shown in Table 2.Table 2 Correspondence between Corine Land Cover and historical cadastral maps nomenclature.Full size tableLULC mappingAfter aligning all geospatial data, we used the georeferenced cadastral maps, aerial photographs, and satellite images for the LULC mapping. We set the spatial extent of the selected regions based on boundaries digitized from the cadastral maps of 1858. Then we detected historical LULC changes within these extents for all geospatial datasets covering 1900 ha and 830 ha of the Aksu and Kestel regions, respectively. Figures 4 and 5 show the selected extents from the historical maps, aerial photographs, and satellite images of the Kestel and Aksu sites, respectively.Figure 4Geospatial dataset for the Kestel study region. (a) 1858 Cadastral map, (b) 1955 aerial photo, and (c) 2020 WV-3 satellite image (finer details shown in the inset images highlighted by Blue boxes).Full size imageFigure 5Geospatial dataset for the Aksu study region. (a) 1858 Cadastral map, (b) 1955 aerial photo, and (c) 2020 WV-3 satellite image (finer details shown in the inset images highlighted by red boxes).Full size imageDigitization of cadastral maps-1858 LULC mapsWe visually interpreted and manually digitized the geographic features on the historical maps and created vector data for each class. The road features in cadastral maps lack topological properties. They also include spatial errors possibly generated in the process of surveying and map production. Therefore, we cross-checked digitized road segments by visual inspection of the road data of the aerial photographs from 1955. We then further modified road polygons to represent accurate road widths. Afterward, we categorized vectorized features of the cadastral maps into the LULC classes defined in Table 1. Finally, we created the vectorized 1858 LULC map. Figure 6 presents the vectorized 1858 cadastral maps of Aksu and Kestel.Figure 6Vectorized cadastral maps of (a) Kestel and (b) Aksu with Red and green lines showing the vector boundaries.Full size imageObject-based image analysis of aerial photographs-1955 LULC mapsAt the second stage of LULC mapping, we performed the segmentation and classification of the aerial photographs using an object-based approach for generating the 1955 LULC map. The object-based image analysis (OBIA) approach in LULC mapping provides advantages over the traditional per-pixel techniques such as higher classification accuracy, depicting more accurate LULC change, and differentiating extra LULC classes33,43,44. We used the eCognition® software (Trimble Germany GmbH, Munich) to implement an object-based image analysis (OBIA). The OBIA approach contains two phases including the segmentation and classification phases that are performed to locate meaningful objects in an image and categorize the created objects, respectively.Multiple ancillary datasets have been used to support different phases of OBIA. The Open Street Map (OSM) vector data, an open-source geospatial dataset (http://www.openstreetmap.org/), has been utilized as ancillary vector data in OBIA to improve the classification of the remotely sensed images. Sertel et al. (2018) used OSM as a thematic layer for road extraction7. Since there are several limitations in extracting the roads from aerial imagery, the OSM road network data could be useful. A majority of unpaved roads in single-band aerial photographs can easily be misclassified as homogeneous areas of arable lands. Precise detection of the roads from monoband aerial photographs without multi-spectral information is difficult. Therefore, we overlaid the OSM road network data with the aerial photographs to extract the revised aerial road vectors through visual interpretation and manual digitization.We segmented the 1955 aerial photographs with the integration of 1858 LULC map produced from cadastral maps. We implemented the multi-resolution segmentation algorithm. In this segmentation method, a parameter called scale determines the size of resulting objects, and the shape and compactness parameters determine the boundaries of objects. The segmentation process of the aerial photographs was performed at multiple stages with various scale, shape, and compactness parameter values. At the initial stage, we segmented the regions according to the 1858 LULC map and we utilized large-scale parameters. The scale parameter was set to 100 and the shape parameter and the compactness were set as 0.7 and 0.3, respectively. At this stage, we focused on interpreting the objects that have not changed between 1858 and 1955. We classified the segments using the thematic layer attribute (LULC classes defined by the cadastral maps) with the highest coverage. Image objects in which the land surface has changed during 1858–1955 period were detected by visual interpretation and unclassified for further segmentation. We followed this approach to reduce the manual effort. We defined unchanged objects between 1858 and 1955 and assigned the same classes of 1858 LULC map to the objects in 1955 aerial photographs. We then segmented the remaining segments, the last time into smaller objects with the scale parameter set as 25, the shape parameter set as 0.2, and the compactness set as 0.8.We classified the remaining unclassified objects through the development of rulesets. An object can be described by several possible features as explanatory variables which are provided by eCognition. In the classification ruleset, different features and parameters can be defined to describe and extract object classes of interest and thresholds for each feature can be defined by the trial-and-error method. We tested sets of variables for the classification of the monoband aerial photographs. Object features such as the mean value of the monoband, texture after Haralick, distance to neighbor objects, shape features (e.g., rectangular fit and asymmetry), and extent features (e.g., area and length/width) were the most useful alternatives. The classification process of the parcels of the aerial photographs with LULC change started with the classification of roads constructed between 1858 and 1955 by utilizing the aerial road map. The watercourse class was the most difficult to classify since shrubs or trees mostly covered the watercourses. These areas were misclassified as forest or agricultural land. Therefore, experts in historical map reading with local geographical information performed the detection and classification of the water course class and interpreted by the cadastral map (1858) and the google map (2020). After roads and watercourses, we classified forest and agricultural lands using the optimal thresholds for the brightness feature. We calculated the thresholds using the single band of the aerial photograph combined with the area and rectangular fit features. The heterogeneous agricultural areas class principally occupied by agriculture with significant areas of natural grass and trees within the same object are separated from the arable lands using the standard deviation of the digital number (DN) values of the aerial photographs. The texture feature helped classify the permanent crops. The brightness, shape, asymmetry, and distance to road class features were the best-performing ones for classifying the remaining artificial surfaces. The manual interpretation was performed for the classification of sub-classes of artificial surface class, including the continuous/discontinuous urban fabric, industrial, commercial, and transport units, mine, dump and construction sites, and artificial, non-agricultural vegetated areas. Since these land use classes contain one or more land cover and land use categories (e.g., artificial non-agriculture land or industrial or commercial units), finding the optimal threshold and exact feature for distinguishing the subclasses of artificial surfaces is difficult. Especially in the case of using the single-band aerial photographs, manual interpretation was required.Object-based image analysis of satellite images-2020 LULC mapsWe segmented WV-3 satellite images using multi-resolution segmentation algorithm and ancillary geographic data. Similar to the aerial road map, the road network of the study region in 2020, named, WV-3 road map, was extracted by overlaying the OSM road data with the WV-3 satellite image. In the segmentation process of the WV-3 image, we used the vector boundaries of the classified aerial photograph (the 1955 LULC map) and the WV-3 road map as ancillary thematic layers. We opted for the same segmentation and classification approach used for the aerial photographs for the WV-3 image.Firstly, we segmented the satellite image into spectrally homogeneous objects using vector data of the 1955 LULC map by applying large-scale parameters. We implemented scale parameter values of 300, 200, 100, and 50 to find the optimal scale to classify objects that have not changed between 1955 and 2020. The best multi-resolution segmentation configuration was the scale of 100 and the shape and compactness parameters of 0.3 and 0.7, respectively. We classified the segments using the thematic layer attribute (LULC classes defined by the aerial maps) with the highest coverage. Segments with LULC change, e.g. the image objects in which the land surface has changed during 1955–2020 period were detected by visual interpretation and unclassified for further segmentation. As a result, we excluded the objects which were remained unchanged during 1955–2020 by assigning the prepared labels which were allocated in the previous step during the classification of 1955 aerial photographs. We then segmented the remaining objects into smaller objects to identify the changed areas in detail. At this step, the scale, shape, and compactness parameters were set as 25, 0.2, and 0.8, respectively.Except for the additional sets of variables utilized to classify the WV-3 images, we applied the rule-set developed for the classification of the aerial photograph for the classification of the remaining objects of 2020 satellite images. The additional sets of variables include the mean of G, B, R, and NIR and two spectral indices, the Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI), and the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). NDVI was calculated as the normalized difference of reflectance values in the red and NIR bands; whereas , NDWI was determined as the normalized difference of reflectance values of the green and NIR bands. Through the logical conditions, objects having specified values of NDVI and NDWI can be assigned to vegetation and water classes, respectively. The use of NDVI facilitated the delineation of terrains covered by vegetation and the NDWI improved the extraction of water bodies due to its ability to separate water and non-water objects. We separated different sub-classes of agricultural areas and forests by using optimal thresholds for NDVI which were defined by a trial and error method. Also we utilized assigning the optimal threshold to NDWI to separate water bodies from other land covers. In addition, the mean blue band layer was useful in classifying the artificial surfaces. We assessed the accuracy of each classification using error matrices (overall, user’s and producer’s accuracies, and Kappa statistics)45,46.Estimating LULC changes and LULC conversionsAfter the production of LULC maps of Aksu and Kestel for 1858, 1955, and 2020, the vector data of the LULC maps were used to quantify the LULC conversions for two different periods which are 1858–1955 and 1955–2020. To compare the LULC maps of study areas between two different dates of each study period, we provided detailed “from-to” LULC change information by calculating the LULC change transition matrix computed using overlay functions in ArcGIS.We overlaid LULC maps of 1858 and 1955 and intersected the vector boundaries of the 1858 and 1955 LULC maps to determine the conversion types of LULC classes (from which class to which class). Similarly, to quantify the LULC changes between 1955 and 2020, we overlaid the 1955 and 2020 LULC maps. Then we created transition matrices and performed statistical analysis utilizing the matrices. Finally, we discussed the main LULC change types and the driving factors of the changes in the selected study areas. More