Philippa Kaur

Chapman, R. F. Chemoreception: The significance of receptor numbers. Adv. Insect Physiol. 16, 247–356 (1982).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Greenfield, M. D. Signalers and Receivers: Mechanisms and Evolution of Arthropod Communication (Oxford University Press, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Wyatt, T. D. Pheromones and Animal Behavior: Chemical Signals and Signatures (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Elgar, A. et al. Insect antennal morphology: The evolution of diverse solutions to odorant perception. Yale J. Biol. Med. 91, 457–469 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dötterl, S. & Vereecken, N. J. The chemical ecology and evolution of bee-flower interactions: a review and perspectives. Can. J. Zool. 88, 668–697 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Leonard, A. S., Dornhaus, A. & Papaj, D. R. Why are floral signals complex, an outline of functional hypotheses. In Evolution of Plant-Pollinator Relationships (ed. Patiny, S.) (Cambridge University Press, USA, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Colazza, S., Peri, E., Salerno, G. & Conti, E. Host Searching by Egg Parasitoids: Exploitation of Host Chemical Cues. In Egg Parasitoids in Agroecosystems with Emphasis on Trichogramma (eds Consoli, F. L. et al.) 97–147 (Springer, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Kelber, A. et al. Light intensity limits the foraging activity in nocturnal and crepuscular bees. Behav. Ecol. 17, 63–72 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C., Jorge, A. & Ornosa, C. Antennal morphology and sensillar equipment vary with pollen diet specialization in Andrena bees. Arthropod Struct. Develop. 57, 100950 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Spaethe, J., Brockmann, A., Halbig, C. & Tautz, J. Size determines antennal sensitivity and behavioral threshold to odors in bumblebee workers. Naturwissenschaften. 94, 733–739 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J., Kelber, A., Wallén, R. & Wcislo, W. The physiological optics of ocelli in nocturnal and diurnal bees and wasps. Arthropod Struct. Dev. 35, 293–305 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Keesey, I. W. et al. Inverse resource allocation between vision and olfaction across the genus Drosophila. Nat. Commun. 10, 1162. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09087-z (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Keil, T. A. Morphology and Development of the Peripheral Olfactory Organs. In Insect Olfaction (ed. Hansson, B. S.) 5–47 (Springer, 1999).
Google Scholar 
Stöckl, A. et al. Differential investment in visual and olfactory brain areas reflects behavioural choices in hawk moths. Sci. Rep. 6, 26041. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep26041 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bulova, S., Purce, K., Khodak, P., Sulger, E. & O’Donnell, S. Into the black and back: The ecology of brain investment in Neotropical army ants (Formicidae: Dorylinae). Sci. Nat. 103, 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-016-1353-4 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Freelance, C. B. et al. The eyes have it: Dim-light activity is associated with the morphology of eyes but not antennae across insect orders. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 134, 303–315 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Barrett, M. et al. Neuroanatomical differentiation associated with alternative reproductive tactics in male arid land bees, Centris pallida and Amegilla dawsoni. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sens. Neural. Behav. Physiol. 207, 497–504 (2021).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Newland, P. Physiological properties of afferents from tactile hairs on the hindlegs of the locust. J. Exp. Biol. 155, 487–503 (1991).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dahake, A., Stöckl, A., Foster, J., Sane, S. P. & Kelber, A. The roles of vision and antennal mechanoreception in hawkmoth flight control. eLife e37606 (2018).Sane, S. P., Dieudonné, A., Willis, M. A. & Daniel, T. L. Antennal mechanosensors mediate flight control in moths. Science 315, 863–866 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. Compound Eye Structure: Matching Eye to Environment. In Adaptive Mechanisms in the Ecology of Vision (eds Archer, S. et al.) 51–72 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998).
Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. Visual acuity in insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 42, 147–177 (1997).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. & Nilsson, D. E. Animal Eyes (Oxford University Press, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Jander, U. & Jander, R. Allometry and resolution of bee eyes (Apoidea). Arthropod Struct. Dev. 30, 179–193 (2002).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Berry, R., van Kleef, J. & Stange, G. The mapping of visual space by dragonfly lateral ocelli. J. Comp. Physiol. A 193, 495–513 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Hung, Y. S. & Ibbotson, M. R. Ocellar structure and neural innervation in the honeybee. Front. Neuroanat. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2014.00006 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Greiner, B. Visual adaptations in the night-active wasp Apoica pallens. J. Comp. Neurol. 495, 255–262 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Klotz, J. H., Reid, B. L. & Gordon, W. C. Variation of ommatidia number as a function of worker size in Camponotus pennsylvanicus (DeGeer) (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insect Soc. 39, 233–236 (1992).
Google Scholar 
Narendra, A. et al. Caste-specific visual adaptations to distinct daily activity schedules in Australian Myrmecia ants. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1141–1149 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Piwczyński, M. et al. Molecular phylogeny of Miltogramminae (Diptera: Sarcophagidae): Implications for classification, systematics and evolution of larval feeding strategies. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 116, 49–60 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Spofford, M. G. & Kurczewski, F. E. Comparative larvipositional behaviors and cleptoparasitic frequencies of Nearctic species of Miltogrammini (Diptera, Sarcophagidae). J. Nat. Hist. 24, 731–755 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Alcock, J. The natural history of a miltogrammine fly, Miltogramma rectangularis (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 73, 208–219 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Newcomer, E. J. Notes on the habits of a digger wasp and its inquiline flies. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 23, 552–563 (1930).
Google Scholar 
Ristich, S. S. The host relationship of a miltogrammid fly Senotainia trilineata (VDW). Ohio J. Sci. 56, 271–274 (1956).
Google Scholar 
Giordani, G. Contributo alla conoscenza della Senotainia tricuspis Meig, dittero sarcofagide, endoparassita dell’ape domestica. Boll. Istit. Entomol. Univ. Bologna 21, 61–84 (1955).
Google Scholar 
Povolný, D. & Verves, Yu. G. The flesh-flies of Central Europe (Insecta, Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Spixiana (Supplement) 24, 1–260 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Evans, H. E. & O’Neill, K. M. The sand wasps: Natural history and behavior (Harvard University Press, 2007).
Google Scholar 
O’Neill, K. M. Solitary Wasps: Natural History and Behavior (Cornell University Press, 2001).
Google Scholar 
Pape, T. The Sarcophagidae (Diptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomol. Scand. 19, 1–203 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C., Ouadragou, M., Gadallah, N. & Andrietti, F. Potential role of evasive flights and nest closures in an African sand wasp, Bembix sp. near capensis Lepeletier 1845 (Hymenoptera Crabronidae), against a parasitic satellite fly. Trop. Zool. 22, 1–14 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C. Interactions between the social digger wasp, Cerceris rubida, and its brood parasitic flies at a Mediterranean nest aggregation. J. Insect Behav. 30, 86–102 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Pape, T. A new species of Hoplacephala Macquart (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) from Namibia, with a discussion of generic monophyly. Zootaxa 1183, 57–68 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Haynie, J. L. & Bryant, P. J. Development of the eye-antenna imaginal disc and morphogenesis of the adult head in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Zool. 237, 293–308 (1986).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hódar, J. A. The use of regression equations for estimation of arthropod biomass in ecological studies. Acta Oecol. 17, 421–433 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Hogue, J. N. & Hawkins, C. P. Morphological variation in adult aquatic insects: Associations with developmental temperature and seasonal growth patterns. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 10, 309–321 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Seidl, R. & Kaiser, W. Visual field size, binocular domain and the ommatidial array of the compound eyes in worker honey bees. J. Comp. Physiol. A 143, 17–26 (1981).
Google Scholar 
Stuckenberg, B. R. Antennal evolution in the Brachycera (Diptera), with a reassessment of terminology relating to the flagellum. Stud. Dipterol. 6, 33–48 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Lemmon, A. R., Emme, S. A. & Lemmon, E. M. Anchored hybrid enrichment for massively high-throughput phylogenomics. Syst. Biol. 61, 727–744 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Young, A. D. et al. Anchored enrichment dataset for true flies (order Diptera) reveals insights into the phylogeny of flower flies (family Syrphidae). BMC Evol. Biol. 16, 1–13 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Gillung, J. P. et al. Anchored phylogenomics unravels the evolution of spider flies (Diptera, Acroceridae) and reveals discordance between nucleotides and amino acids. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 128, 233–245 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Buenaventura, E., Szpila, K., Cassel, B. K., Wiegmann, M. & Pape, T. An anchored hybrid enrichment-based dataset challenges the traditional classification of flesh flies (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Syst. Entomol. 45, 281–301 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Grzywacz, A. et al. Towards a new classification of Muscidae (Diptera): A comparison of hypotheses based on multiple molecular phylogenetic approaches. Syst. Entomol. 46, 508–525 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Misof, B. et al. Phylogenomics resolves the timing and pattern of insect evolution. Science 346, 763–767 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Nguyen, L. T., Schmidt, H. A., Von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. IQ-TREE: A fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 268–274 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yan, L. et al. A phylotranscriptomic framework for flesh fly evolution (Diptera, Calyptratae, Sarcophagidae). Cladistics https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12449 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Maddison, W. P. & Maddison, D. R. Mesquite: A Modular System for Evolutionary analysis. Version 3.61. http://www.mesquiteproject.org (2019).Hansen, T. F. Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation. Evolution 51, 1341–1351 (1997).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, T. F., Pienaar, J. & Orzack, S. H. A comparative method for studying adaptation to a randomly evolving environment. Evolution 62, 1965–1977 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Labra, A., Pienaar, J. & Hansen, T. F. Evolution of thermal physiology in Liolaemus lizards: Adaptation, phylogenetic inertia and niche tracking. Am. Nat. 174, 204–220 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, T. F. Use and Misuse of Comparative Methods in the Study of Adaptation. In Modern Phylogenetic Comparative Methods and Their Application in Evolutionary Biology: Concepts and Practice (ed. Garamszegi, L. Z.) 351–379 (Springer, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Greiner, B., Ribi, W. A. & Warrant, E. J. Retinal and optical adaptations for nocturnal vision in the halictid bee Megalopta genalis. Cell Tissue Res. 316, 377–390 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J. et al. Nocturnal vision and landmark orientation in a tropical halictid bee. Curr. Biol. 14, 1309–1318 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Somanathan, H., Kelber, A., Wallén, R., Borges, R. M. & Warrant, E. J. Visual ecology of Indian carpenter bees II: Visual adaptations to nocturnal and diurnal lifestyles. J. Comp. Physiol. A 195, 571–583 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Menzi, U. Visual adaptation in nocturnal and diurnal ants. J. Comp. Physiol. 160, 11–21 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Moser, J. C. et al. Eye size and behaviour of day and night-flying leafcutting ant alates. J. Zool. 264, 69–75 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Greiner, B. et al. Eye structure correlates with distinct foraging-bout timing in primitive ants. Curr. Biol. 17, R879–R880 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J. Seeing in the dark: Vision and visual behaviour in nocturnal bees and wasps. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 1737–1746 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Leys, R. & Hogendoorn, K. Correlated evolution of mating behaviour and morphology in large carpenter bees (Xylocopa). Apidologie 39, 119–132 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Snyder, A. W. Physics of Vision in Compound Eyes. In Handbook of Sensory Physiology: Vision in Invertebrates (ed. Autrum, H. J.) (Springer, 1979).
Google Scholar 
McCorquodale, D. B. Digger wasp provisioning flights as a defense against a nest parasite, Senotainia trilineata. Can. J. Zool. 64, 1620–1627 (1986).
Google Scholar 
Gilbert, C. & Strausfeld, N. J. The functional organization of male-specific visual neurons in flies. J. Comp. Physiol. A 169, 395–411 (1991).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Trischler, C., Boeddeker, N. & Egelhaaf, M. Characterisation of a blowfly male-specific neuron using behaviourally generated visual stimuli. J. Comp. Physiol. A 193, 559–572 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Taylor, G. J. et al. The dual function of orchidbee ocelli as revealed by X-Ray microtomography. Curr. Biol. 26, 1319–1324 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hengstenberg, R. Multisensory Control in Insect Oculomotor Systems. In Visual Motion and Its Role in the Stabilization of Gaze (eds Miles, F. A. & Wallmann, J.) (Elsevier, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Schuppe, H. & Hengstenberg, R. Optical properties of the ocelli of Calliphora erythrocephala and their role in the dorsal light response. J. Comp. Physiol. A 173, 143–149 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Crosskey, R. W. & Lane, R. P. Introduction to Diptera. In Medical Insects and Arachnids (eds Lane, R. P. & Crosskey, R. W.) (Chapman and Hall, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Abouzied, E. M. Antennal and maxillary palp sensillae of male and female Liosarcophaga babiyari Lehrer (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Bull. Ent. Soc. Egypt 85, 29–48 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Wasserman, S. L. & Itagaki, H. The olfactory responses of the antenna and maxillary palp of the fleshfly, Neobellieria bullata (Diptera: Sarcophagidae), and their sensitivity to blockage of nitric oxide synthase. J. Insect Physiol. 49, 271–280 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Khedre, A. M. Olfactory sensilla on the antennae and maxillary palps of the fleshfly Wohlfahrtia nuba (Wied.) (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Egypt Ger. Soc. Zool. 24, 171–193 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Pezzi, M. et al. Ultrastructural morphology of the antenna and maxillary palp of Sarcophaga tibialis (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Med. Entomol. 53, 807–814 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Smallegange, R. C., Kelling, F. J. & Den Otter, C. J. Types and numbers of sensilla on antennae and maxillary palps of small and large houseflies, Musca domestica (Diptera, Muscidae). Microsc. Res. Tech. 71, 880–886 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, D., Wang, Q. K., Yang, Y. Z., Chen, Y. O. & Li, K. Sensory organs of the antenna of two Fannia species (Diptera: Fanniidae). Parasitol. Res. 112, 2177–2185 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Been, T. H., Schomaker, C. H. & Thomas, G. Olfactory sensilla on the antenna and maxillary palp of the sheep head fly, Hydrotaea irritans (Fallen) (Diptera: Muscidae). Int. J. Insect Morphol. Embryol. 17, 121–133 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Zacharuk, R. Y. & Antennal, S. Comparative Insect Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. In Pergamon Press (eds Kerkut, G. A. & Gilbert, L. I.) (1985).
Google Scholar 
Sukontason, K. et al. Antennal sensilla of some forensically important flies in families Calliphoridae Sarcophagidae and Muscidae. Micron 35, 671–679 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mamiya, A., Straw, A. D., Tómasson, E. & Dickinson, M. H. Active and passive antennal movements during visually guided steering in flying Drosophila. J Neurosci 31, 6900–6914 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fuller, S. B., Straw, A. D., Peek, M. Y., Murray, R. M. & Dickinson, M. H. Flying Drosophila stabilize their vision-based velocity controller by sensing wind with their antennae. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 111, E1182–E1191 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Nalbach, G. Extremely non-orthogonal axes in a sense organ for rotation: Behavioural analysis of the dipteran haltere system. Neuroscience 61, 149–163 (1994).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rozanski, A. N. et al. Differential investment in visual and olfactory brain regions is linked to the sensory needs of a wasp social parasite and its host. J. Comp. Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.25242 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

Tropical forest restoration areaTo determine the geographic distribution of land available for tropical forest restoration, we used a widely applied global forest restoration map2. This dataset limits potential restoration area to regions that are biogeophysically suitable for forest, and excludes croplands. To define the tropics, we masked the potential restoration map with the following three ecoregions from the Ecoregions2017 vegetation map34: ‘Tropical and Subtropical Moist Broadleaf Forests’, ‘Tropical and Subtropical Dry Broadleaf Forests’, and ‘Tropical and Subtropical Coniferous Forests’. The resulting restoration mask includes all tropical and subtropical forest ecoregions with some that are outside the tropical latitudes, but excludes wetlands and high mountain areas (Extended Data Fig. 4). The restoration mask was converted from a presence–absence raster at its native ~350 m resolution to a 0.5° geographical grid by aggregating to the fraction of each 0.5° grid cell available for restoration. Any uncertainties in the allocation of restorable area, distinguishing crop and pasture, and forest to non-forest classification from the original forest restoration map were also implicitly included in our restoration extent. While the resulting restoration area is relatively small, its spatial distribution is representative for most of the humid tropics.To prioritize for carbon uptake capacity, we selected all grid cells with restoration area greater than 1 ha and ranked these by carbon storage density (above ground and below ground; g m−2) at 2100 under the default scenario. We then selected the top n grid cells with greatest carbon density until cumulatively 64 Mha of restored area was reached. Similarly, for cost we calculated the restoration cost for each grid cell following ref. 27 and sorted the grid cells by their cost, beginning with the lowest value, until 64 Mha were reached. To consider the combined impact of carbon uptake and restoration costs, we divided our restoration cost layer by the total carbon uptake per grid cell from restoration and ranked the cost per carbon uptake from cheapest to most expensive, selecting the n grid cells with the lowest values until 64 Mha were reached. We then used the selected grid cells to mask carbon uptake under the various climate change and CO2 fertilization scenarios. To factor in climate change in the prioritization process, we used the same restoration cost layer but used the carbon density and total carbon uptake layers with climate change impacts in CO22014 for the year 2100.Vegetation modelWe used the LPJ-LMfire DGVM19, a version of the Lund-Potsdam-Jena DGVM (LPJ)35. LPJ-LMfire is driven by gridded fields of climate, soil texture and topography at 0.5° resolution, and with a time series of atmospheric CO2 concentrations (see Supplementary Information). To simulate land use, LPJ-LMfire separates grid cells into fractional tiles of ‘unmanaged’ land that has never been under land use, ‘managed’ land, and areas ‘recovering’ from land use36. Restoration removes land from the ‘managed’ tile and transfers it to the ‘recovering’ tile; land is never reallocated to the ‘unmanaged’ tile. The tiles are treated differently with respect to wildfire: on the ‘unmanaged’ and ‘recovering’ tiles, lightning-ignited wildfires are not suppressed, while fire is excluded from ‘managed’ tiles. For our analysis of total carbon (above and below ground), we only used the ‘recovering’ tile.Climate dataClimate forcing used to drive LPJ-LMfire comes from the output of 13 GCMs in simulations produced for the CMIP6 Supplementary Table 2 (refs. 37,38). For each GCM, we obtained simulations for the historical period (1850–2014) and four future SSPs (SSP1-26, SSP2-45, SSP3-70 and SSP5-85 covering 2015–2100). We used only GCMs that archived all seven climate variables needed to run LPJ-LMfire: 2 m temperature (tas, K), precipitation (pr, kg m−2 s−1), convective precipitation (prc, kg m−2 s−1), cloud cover (clt, %), minimum and maximum daily temperature (tmin, tmax, K), and 10 m surface wind speed (sfcWind, m s−1) (Supplementary Fig. 2). For each model, we concatenated the historical simulation with a future scenario, calculated anomalies with respect to 1971–1990 and added those to observed 30 year climatologies to create bias-corrected monthly climate time series covering 1850–2100 (see Supplementary Information). Where multiple ensemble members were available from a GCM, we chose the first simulation.Simulation protocolWe drove LPJ-LMfire with the GCM simulations described in the previous section, and the same atmospheric CO2 concentrations and land use boundary conditions as those used in the CMIP6 simulations. All forcings cover the historical period (1850–2014) and the individual future SSPs (2015–2100). Each LPJ-LMfire simulation was initialized for 1,020 years with 1850 atmospheric CO2 and land use, and the 1850s climatology of each CMIP6 GCM. This was followed by simulations with transient climate from 1850 to 2100 for each CMIP6 GCM under each of the four SSPs. For each the 13 CMIP6 GCMs running each of the SSP scenarios, we conducted two CO2 experiments (CO22014 and CO2free) and two fire experiments. In total, we ran 221 vegetation model simulations covering the range of future climate, CO2 and fire scenarios.Atmospheric CO2 in these simulations either followed the CMIP6 historical and SSP trajectory for the entire 1850–2100 run (CO2free), or followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, and was then fixed at 2014 concentrations for the remainder of the simulation (CO22014). This allowed us to test the vegetation response to future climate change in the absence of additional CO2 fertilization of photosynthesis. Our simulations ended with the standard SSP projections in 2100, 80 years after restoration begins. We therefore could not assess the fate of restored carbon beyond that point. On the basis of the trends in the multi-model mean carbon uptake rates, we estimated that only under severe climate change will carbon storage be reduced shortly after 2100 in CO22014.In control simulations, land use followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, after which it was fixed under 2014 conditions until 2100. Land use after 2014 was fixed at 2014 levels because it is the last year with common land use between all scenarios, which allowed us to identify future climate change impacts on restoration permanence and avoid influences from land abandonment and expansion prescribed in the different SSP scenarios.In the restoration experiments, land use also followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, but then diverged: cropland extent remained at 2014 levels until 2100, while pasture (or non-cropland land use) remained constant from 2014 to 2020 and was then linearly reduced by the restoration area from 2020 to 2030. From 2030, land use remained constant at that lower level until 2100. The amount of restoration in a grid cell was limited by the pasture area, that is, once all of the available pasture area had been restored, no additional restoration took place. Because it is highly unlikely to be practical to restore the entire target area of tropical forest at once, we linearly increased the restoration area from 2020 to 2030, which caused an expansion-driven increase in carbon uptake over the 11 year period (Extended Data Fig. 1). This means that two factors controlled carbon uptake over time in our experimental design: first the expansion of the restoration area, accounting for approximately 19.7 Pg C, and second the long-term effect of carbon accumulation (Extended Data Fig. 5).Primary climate change impacts, such as drought and heat stress that reduce carbon uptake, were implicitly included in the climate forcing data, while secondary climate change impacts from wildfire were simulated by LPJ-LMfire on the basis of climate. To quantify the contribution of wildfire on the carbon storage from restoration, we repeated the simulations described above with fires turned off in LPJ-LMfire.Restoration opportunity indexWe created a restoration opportunity index to evaluate the suitability of locations for restoration on the basis of the ability for restoration to result in net carbon uptake over 2020–2100 and to store this carbon without episodes of major loss. For each of the 13 realizations of the four SSPs in the CO22014 experiment, we identified all restoration grid cells (1) that had a net carbon uptake by 2100 relative to 2030, and (2) where temporal reductions in total carbon storage over 2030–2100 were More

Webb, B. Cognition in insects. Philos. Trans. R. Soc B 367, 2715–2722 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Lorenz, K. The Foundations of Ethology 347–352 (Springer, 1981).
Google Scholar 
Davis, R. L. Olfactory memory formation in Drosophila: From molecular to systems neuroscience. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 28, 275–302 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Prokopy, R. J., Averill, A. L., Cooley, S. S. & Roitberg, C. A. Associative learning in egglaying site selection by apple maggot flies. Science 218, 76–77 (1982).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tempel, B. L., Bonini, N., Dawson, D. R. & Quinn, W. G. Reward learning in normal and mutant Drosophila. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 80, 1482–1486 (1983).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cook, D. F. Influence of previous mating experience on future mating success in maleLucilia cuprina (Diptera: Calliphoridae). J. Insect Behav. 8, 207–217 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Raubenheimer, D. & Tucker, D. Associative learning by locusts: Pairing of visual cues with consumption of protein and carbohydrate. Anim. Behav. 54, 1449–1459 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Harari, A. R. & Landolt, P. J. Feeding experience enhances attraction of female Diaprepes abbreviatus (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) to food plant odors. 8. J. Insect Behav. 12, 415–422 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Menzel, R. Memory dynamics in the honeybee. J. Comp. Physiol. A 185, 323–340 (1999).ADS 

Google Scholar 
McCall, P. J. & Kelly, D. W. Learning and memory in disease vectors. Trends Parasitol. 18, 429–433 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Alonso, W. J. & Schuck-Paim, C. The ‘ghosts’ that pester studies on learning in mosquitoes: Guidelines to chase them off. Med. Vet. Entomol. 20, 157–165 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
WHO. Global Vector Control Response 20217–22030 (World Health Organization, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Rocklöv, J. & Dubrow, R. Climate change: An enduring challenge for vector-borne disease prevention and control. Nat. Immunol. 21, 479–483 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bhatt, S. et al. The effect of malaria control on Plasmodium falciparum in Africa between 2000 and 2015. Nature 526, 207–211 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hemingway, J. et al. Averting a malaria disaster: Will insecticide resistance derail malaria control?. The Lancet 387, 1785–1788 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Martinez-Torres, D. et al. Molecular characterization of pyrethroid knockdown resistance (kdr) in the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae ss. Insect Mol. Biol. 7, 179–184 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chandre, F. et al. Current distribution of a pyrethroid resistance gene (kdr) in Anopheles gambiae complex from West Africa and further evidence for reproductive isolation of the Mopti form. Parassitologia 41, 319–322 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Weill, M. et al. The unique mutation in ace-1 giving high insecticide resistance is easily detectable in mosquito vectors. Insect Mol. Biol. 13, 1–7 (2004).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Du, W. et al. Independent mutations in the Rdl locus confer dieldrin resistance to Anopheles gambiae and An. arabiensis. Insect Mol. Biol. 14, 179–183 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hemingway, J. & Ranson, H. Insecticide resistance in insect vectors of human disease. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45, 371–391 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ranson, H. et al. Pyrethroid resistance in African anopheline mosquitoes: What are the implications for malaria control?. Trends Parasitol. 27, 91–98 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Liu, N. Insecticide resistance in mosquitoes: Impact, mechanisms, and research directions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 60, 537–559 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wood, O., Hanrahan, S., Coetzee, M., Koekemoer, L. & Brooke, B. Cuticle thickening associated with pyrethroid resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles funestus. Parasit Vectors 3, 67 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Balabanidou, V. et al. Cytochrome P450 associated with insecticide resistance catalyzes cuticular hydrocarbon production in Anopheles gambiae. PNAS 113, 9268–9273 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Balabanidou, V. et al. Mosquitoes cloak their legs to resist insecticides. Proc Biol. Sci. 286, 20191091 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Muirhead-Thomson, R. C. The significance of irritability, behaviouristic avoidance and allied phenomena in malaria eradication. Bull. World Health Organ. 22, 721–734 (1960).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Georghiou, G. P. The evolution of resistance to pesticides. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3, 133–168 (1972).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Grieco, J. P. et al. A new classification system for the actions of IRS chemicals traditionally used for malaria control. PLoS ONE 2, e716 (2007).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chareonviriyaphap, T. et al. Review of insecticide resistance and behavioral avoidance of vectors of human diseases in Thailand. Parasit Vectors 6, 280 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chilaka, N., Perkins, E. & Tripet, F. Visual and olfactory associative learning in the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto. Malar. J. 11, 27 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Vinauger, C., Lahondère, C., Cohuet, A., Lazzari, C. R. & Riffell, J. A. Learning and memory in disease vector insects. Trends Parasitol. 32, 761–771 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Carrasco, D. et al. Behavioural adaptations of mosquito vectors to insecticide control. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 34, 48–54 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tomberlin, J. K., Rains, G. C., Allan, S. A., Sanford, M. R. & Lewis, W. J. Associative learning of odor with food- or blood-meal by Culex quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae). Naturwissenschaften 93, 551–556 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Menda, G. et al. Associative learning in the dengue vector mosquito, Aedes aegypti: Avoidance of a previously attractive odor or surface color that is paired with an aversive stimulus. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 218–223 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Vinauger, C., Lutz, E. K. & Riffell, J. A. Olfactory learning and memory in the disease vector mosquito Aedes aegypti. J. Exp. Biol. 217, 2321–2330 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
WHO. Guidelines for laboratory and field-testing of long-lasting insecticidal nets (World Health Organization, 2013).
Google Scholar 
WHO. Test procedures for insecticide resistance monitoring in malaria vector mosquitoes 2nd edn. (World Health Organization, 2016).
Google Scholar 
Rivero, A., Vézilier, J., Weill, M., Read, A. F. & Gandon, S. Insecticide control of vector-borne diseases: When is insecticide resistance a problem?. PLoS Pathog. 6, e1001000 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Maciel-de-Freitas, R. et al. Undesirable consequences of insecticide resistance following Aedes aegypti control activities due to a dengue outbreak. PLoS ONE 9, e92424 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sherrard-Smith, E. et al. Systematic review of indoor residual spray efficacy and effectiveness against Plasmodium falciparum in Africa. Nat. Commun. 9, 4982 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dusfour, I. et al. Management of insecticide resistance in the major Aedes vectors of arboviruses: Advances and challenges. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 13, e0007615 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Perrin, A. et al. Variation in the susceptibility of urban Aedes mosquitoes infected with a densovirus. Sci. Rep. 10, 18654 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, A. L. et al. The importance of vector control for the control and elimination of vector-borne diseases. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 14, e0007831 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wills, A. B. et al. Physical durability of PermaNet 2.0 long-lasting insecticidal nets over three to 32 months of use in Ethiopia. Malar. J. 12, 242 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gnanguenon, V., Azondekon, R., Oke-Agbo, F., Beach, R. & Akogbeto, M. Durability assessment results suggest a serviceable life of two, rather than three, years for the current long-lasting insecticidal (mosquito) net (LLIN) intervention in Benin. BMC Infect. Dis. 14, 69 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Boussougou-Sambe, S. T. et al. Physical integrity and residual bio-efficacy of used LLINs in three cities of the South-West region of Cameroon 4 years after the first national mass-distribution campaign. Malar. J. 16, 31 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Janko, M. M., Churcher, T. S., Emch, M. E. & Meshnick, S. R. Strengthening long-lasting insecticidal nets effectiveness monitoring using retrospective analysis of cross-sectional, population-based surveys across sub-Saharan Africa. Sci. Rep. 8, 17110 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Djènontin, A. et al. The residual life of bendiocarb on different substrates under laboratory and field conditions in Benin, Western Africa. BMC Res Notes 6, 458 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mugenyi, L. et al. Estimating the optimal interval between rounds of indoor residual spraying of insecticide using malaria incidence data from cohort studies. PLoS ONE 15, e0241033 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kreppel, K. S. et al. Emergence of behavioural avoidance strategies of malaria vectors in areas of high LLIN coverage in Tanzania. Sci. Rep. 10, 14527 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Parker, J. E. A. et al. Infrared video tracking of Anopheles gambiae at insecticide-treated bed nets reveals rapid decisive impact after brief localised net contact. Sci. Rep. 5, 13392 (2015).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Spitzen, J., Koelewijn, T., Mukabana, W. R. & Takken, W. Visualization of house-entry behaviour of malaria mosquitoes. Malar. J. 15, 233 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Spitzen, J. & Takken, W. Keeping track of mosquitoes: A review of tools to track, record and analyse mosquito flight. Parasit. Vectors https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-018-2735-6 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jones, J., Murray, G. & McCall, P. J. A minimal 3D model of mosquito flight behavior around the human baited bed net. Malar. J. 20, (2021)Sougoufara, S., Ottih, E. C. & Tripet, F. The need for new vector control approaches targeting outdoor biting anopheline malaria vector communities. Parasit. Vectors 13, 295 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Okumu, F. O. & Moore, S. J. Combining indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated nets for malaria control in Africa: A review of possible outcomes and an outline of suggestions for the future. Malar. J. 10, 208 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Deletre, E. et al. Repellent, irritant and toxic effects of 20 plant extracts on adults of the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae Mosquito. PLoS One 8, e82103 (2013).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

Stork, N. E. How many species of insects and other terrestrial arthropods are there on earth? (2017). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-020117.Scudder, G. Insect Biodiversity: Science and Society—Google Books (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009).
Google Scholar 
Lami, F., Boscutti, F., Masin, R., Sigura, M. & Marini, L. Seed predation intensity and stability in agro-ecosystems: Role of predator diversity and soil disturbance. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 288, 106720 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Gallai, N., Salles, J. M., Settele, J. & Vaissière, B. E. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol. Econ. 68, 810–821 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Consoli, F. L., Parra, J. R. P. & Zucchi, R. A. Egg Parasitoids in Agroecosystems with Emphasis on Trichogramma (Springer Science, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Sánchez-Guillén, R. A., Córdoba-Aguilar, A., Hansson, B., Ott, J. & Wellenreuther, M. Evolutionary consequences of climate-induced range shifts in insects. Biol. Rev. 91, 1050–1064 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zalucki, M. P. et al. Estimating the economic cost of one of the world’s major insect pests, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae): Just how long is a piece of string?. J. Econ. Entomol. 105, 1115–1129 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dornelas, M. & Daskalova, G. N. Nuanced changes in insect abundance. Science (80-). 368, 368–369 (2020).CAS 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Didham, R. K. et al. Interpreting insect declines: Seven challenges and a way forward. Insect Conserv. Divers. 13, 103–114 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Greenwood, B. M., Bojang, K. & Whitty, C. J. M. Malaria. Lancet 365, 98 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Dangles, O. & Casas, J. Ecosystem services provided by insects for achieving sustainable development goals. Ecosyst. Serv. 35, 109–115 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Burkholder, W. E. & Ma, M. Pheromones for monitoring and control of stored-product insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 30, 257–272 (1985).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Morris, R. F. Sampling insect populations. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 5, 243–264 (1960).
Google Scholar 
Strickland, A. H. Sampling crop pests and their hosts. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 6, 201–220 (1961).
Google Scholar 
Bannerman, J. A., Costamagna, A. C., McCornack, B. P. & Ragsdale, D. W. Comparison of relative bias, precision, and efficiency of sampling methods for natural enemies of soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J. Econ. Entomol. 108, 1381–1397 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Osborne, J. L. et al. Harmonic radar: A new technique for investigating bumblebee and honey bee foraging flight. VII Int. Symp. Pollinat. 437, 159–164 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Zink, A. G. & Rosenheim, J. A. State-dependent sampling bias in insects: Implications for monitoring western tarnished plant bugs. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 113, 117–123 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Rancourt, B., Vincent, C. & De Oliveira, A. D. Circadian activity of Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera: Miridae) and effectiveness of sampling techniques in strawberry fields. J. Econ. Entomol 93, 1160–1166 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Binns, M. R. & Nyrop, J. P. Sampling insect populations for the purpose of IPM decision making. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37, 427–453. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.37.1.427 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
Portman, Z. M., Bruninga-Socolar, B. & Cariveau, D. P. The state of bee monitoring in the United States: A call to refocus away from bowl traps and towards more effective methods. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 113, 337–342 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Montgomery, G. A., Belitz, M. W., Guralnick, R. P. & Tingley, M. W. Standards and best practices for monitoring and benchmarking insects. Front. Ecol. Evolut. 8, 579193 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Bick, E., Dryden, D. M., Nguyen, H. D. & Kim, H. A novel CO2-based insect sampling device and associated field method evaluated in a strawberry agroecosystem. J. Econ. Entomol. 113, 1037–1042 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wen, C. & Guyer, D. Image-based orchard insect automated identification and classification method. Comput. Electron. Agric. 89, 110–115 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Chen, Y., Why, A., Batista, G., Mafra-Neto, A. & Keogh, E. Flying insect classification with inexpensive sensors. J. Insect Behav. 27, 657–677 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Potamitis, I. & Rigakis, I. Novel noise-robust optoacoustic sensors to identify insects through wingbeats. IEEE Sens. J. 15, 4621–4631 (2015).CAS 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Eliopoulos, P. A., Potamitis, I., Kontodimas, D. C. & Givropoulou, E. G. Detection of adult beetles inside the stored wheat mass based on their acoustic emissions. J. Econ. Entomol. 108, 2808–2814 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ärje, J. et al. Automatic image-based identification and biomass estimation of invertebrates. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 922–931 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Hobbs, S. E. & Hodges, G. An optical method for automatic classification and recording of a suction trap catch. Bull. Entomol. Res. 83, 47–51 (1993).
Google Scholar 
O’Neill, M. A., Gauld, I. D., Gaston, K. J. & Weeks, P. Daisy: An automated invertebrate identification system using holistic vision techniques. in Proceedings of the Inaugural Meeting BioNET-INTERNATIONAL Group for Computer-Aided Taxonomy (BIGCAT) 13–22 (1997).Chesmore, E. D. Methodologies for automating the identification of species. in First BioNet-International Work. Gr. Autom. Taxon. 3–12 (2000).Martineau, M. et al. A survey on image-based insect classification. Pattern Recognit. 65, 273–284 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Silva, D. F., De Souza, V. M. A., Batista Geapa, K. E. & Ellis, D. P. W. Applying machine learning and audio analysis techniques to insect recognition in intelligent traps. in Proceedings—2013 12th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications, ICMLA 2013. (2013).Capinera, J. L. & Walmsley, M. R. Visual responses of some sugarbeet insects to sticky traps and water pan traps of various colors. J. Econ. Entomol., 71(6), 926–927 (1978).
Google Scholar 
Moore, A., Miller, J. R., Tabashnik, B. E. & Gage, S. H. Automated identification of flying insects by analysis of wingbeat frequencies. J. Econ. Entomol. 79, 1703–1706 (1986).
Google Scholar 
Riley, J. R. Angular and temporal variations in the radar cross-sections of insects. Proc. Inst. Electr. Eng. (IET) 120, 1229–1232 (1973).
Google Scholar 
Reed, S. C., Williams, C. M. & Chadwick, L. E. Frequency of wing-beat as a character for separating species races and geographic varieties of Drosophila. Genetics 27, 349 (1942).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mankin, R. W., Hagstrum, D. W., Smith, M. T., Roda, A. L. & Kairo, M. T. K. Perspective and promise: a century of insect acoustic detection and monitoring. Am. Entomol. 57(1), 30–44 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Drake, V. A. & Reynolds, D. R. Radar Entomology: Observing Insect Flight and Migration (Cabi, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Long, T. et al. Entomological radar overview: System and signal processing. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 35, 20–32 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Drake, V. A., Hatty, S., Symons, C. & Wang, H. Insect monitoring radar: Maximizing performance and utility. Remote Sens. 12, 596 (2020).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Brydegaard, M. & Jansson, S. Advances in entomological laser radar. IET Int. Radar Conf. https://doi.org/10.1049/joe.2019.0598 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jansson, S. Entomological Lidar: Target Characterization and Field Applications (Department of Physics, Lund University, 2020).
Google Scholar 
Malmqvist, E. From Fauna to Flames: Remote Sensing with Scheimpflug-Lidar (Department of Physics, Lund University, 2019).
Google Scholar 
Mankin, R. W., Hagstrum, D. W., Smith, M. T., Roda, A. L. & Kairo, M. T. K. Perspective and promise: A century of insect acoustic detection and monitoring. Am. Entomol. 57, 30–44 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Miller-Struttmann, N. E., Heise, D., Schul, J., Geib, J. C. & Galen, C. Flight of the bumble bee: Buzzes predict pollination services. PLoS ONE 12, 1–14 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Li, Y. et al. Mosquito detection with low-cost smartphones: Data acquisition for malaria research. arXiv:1711.06346 [stat.ML] (2017).Mukundarajan, H., Hol, F. J. H., Castillo, E. A., Newby, C. & Prakash, M. Using mobile phones as acoustic sensors for high-throughput mosquito surveillance. Elife 6, 1–26 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Osborne, J. L. et al. A landscape-scale study of bumble bee foraging range and constancy, using harmonic radar. J. Appl. Ecol. 36, 519–533 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Smith, A. D., Riley, J. R. & Gregory, R. D. A method for routine monitoring of the aerial migration of insects by using a vertical-looking radar. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 340, 393–404 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Chapman, J. W., Smith, A. D., Woiwod, I. P., Reynolds, D. R. & Riley, J. R. Development of vertical-looking radar technology for monitoring insect migration. Comput. Electron. Agric. 35(2–3), 95–110 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Schaefer, G. W. & Bent, G. A. An infra-red remote sensing system for the active detection and automatic determination of insect flight trajectories (IRADIT). Bull. Entomol. Res. 74, 261–278 (1984).
Google Scholar 
Farmery, M. J. Optical studies of insect flight at low altitude. (Doctoral dissertation, University of York, 1981).Farmery, M. J. The effect of air temperature on wingbeat frequency of naturally flying armyworm moth (Spodoptera exempta). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 32, 193–194 (1982).
Google Scholar 
Malmqvist, E. & Brydegaard, M. Applications of KHZ-CW lidar in ecological entomology. EPJ Web Conf. 119, 25016. https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/2016I11925016 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brydegaard, M. et al. Lidar reveals activity anomaly of malaria vectors during pan-African eclipse. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay5487 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Malmqvist, E. et al. The bat–bird–bug battle: Daily flight activity of insects and their predators over a rice field revealed by high-resolution Scheimpflug Lidar. Roy. Soc. Open Sci. 5(4), 172303 (2018).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Fristrup, K. M., Shaw, J. A. & Tauc, M. J. Development of a wing-beat-modulation scanning lidar system for insect studies. Lidar Remote Sens. Environ. Monit. 2017, 15. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2274656 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoffman, D. S., Nehrir, A. R., Repasky, K. S., Shaw, J. A. & Carlsten, J. L. Range-resolved optical detection of honeybees by use of wing-beat modulation of scattered light for locating land mines. Appl. Opt. 46, 3007–3012 (2007).PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Jansson, S., Malmqvist, E. & Mlacha, Y. Real-time dispersal of malaria vectors in rural Africa monitored with lidar. Plos one. 16(3), e0247803 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jansson, S. & Brydegaard, M. Passive kHz lidar for the quantification of insect activity and dispersal. Anim. Biotelemet. 6, 6 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Jansson, S. P. & Sørensen, M. B. An optical remote sensing system for detection of aerial and aquatic fauna. U.S. Patent Application No. 16/346,322 (2019).Malmqvist, E., Jansson, S., Török, S. & Brydegaard, M. Effective parameterization of laser radar observations of atmospheric fauna. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant. Electron. 22, 1 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Drake, V. A., Wang, H. K. & Harman, I. T. Insect Monitoring Radar: Remote and network operation. Comput. Electron. Agric. 35, 77–94 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Kirkeby, C. et al. Advances in automatic identification of flying insects using optical sensors and machine learning. Sci. Rep. 11, 1555 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Jacques, S. L. Erratum: Optical properties of biological tissues: A review (Physics in Medicine and Biology (2013) 58). Phys. Med. Biol. 58, 5007–5008 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Li, M. et al. Bark beetles as lidar targets and prospects of photonic surveillance. J. Biophoton. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.202000420 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brydegaard, M. Advantages of shortwave infrared LIDAR entomology. in Laser Applications to Chemical, Security and Environmental Analysis LW2D-6 (Optical Society of America, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Brydegaard, M., Jansson, S., Schulz, M. & Runemark, A. Can the narrow red bands of dragonflies be used to perceive wing interference patterns? Ecol. Evol. 8(11), 5369–5384 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gebru, A. et al. Multiband modulation spectroscopy for the determination of sex and species of mosquitoes in flight. J. Biophotonics 11(8), e201800014 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Potamitis, I. Classifying insects on the fly. Ecol. Inform. 21, 40–49 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Heathcote, G. D. The comparison of yellow cylindrical, flat and water traps, and of Johnson suction traps, for sampling aphids. Ann. Appl. Biol. 45, 133–139 (1957).
Google Scholar 
Vaishampayan, S. M., Kogan, M., Waldbauer, G. P. & Woolley, J. Spectral specific responses in the visual behavior of the greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 18, 344–356 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Mound, L. A. Studies on the olfaction and colour sensitivity of Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 5, 99–104 (1962).
Google Scholar 
Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat. Methods 17, 261–272 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Van Der Kooi, C. J., Stavenga, D. G., Arikawa, K., Belušič, G. & Kelber, A. Evolution of insect color vision: From spectral sensitivity to visual ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 66, 435–461 (2021).PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

Site descriptionThis experiment was conducted in two long-term P-trial grassland sites (Site A and Site B) situated in proximity (~ 350 m) to each other in the dairy farm at Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Co. Wexford, Ireland (6°49′ W, 52°29′ N). The sites were grazed permanent grasslands before establishment. When the experiment was established in 1995, 16 (10 m × 2 m) plots were formed in each site in a fully randomised block design with four replicates. The two sites established were selected to represent different soil types and drainage classes. Site A is a moderately drained brown earth and site B is an imperfectly drained gley soil31. Each year in February, each plot received one of the four phosphorous (P) fertilization rates (16% P superphosphate): 0 (P0), 15 (P15), 30 (P30), and 45 (P45) kg P ha−1 year−1. All plots were initially sown with Lolium perenne and reseeded in 2016 with the same species. However, plant species such as Poa trivialis, Agropyron repens, Trifolium repens were present to a lesser extent. Above-ground biomass is harvested each month between February and August followed by 40 kg N ha−1 fertilizer applications. In the year (2019) of this experiment and the years before, SulCAN as a solid was applied at the first or second week of each month during February-August and potassium (K) as muriate of potash (KCl) was applied in February at a rate of 125 kg K ha−1. SulCAN contains 26.7% N in the form of nitric and ammoniacal nitrogen and 5% water soluble Sulphur. For this study plots receiving P0, P15 and P45 at the two field sites were set up to carry out this experiment. The two sites were selected as they had slightly different soil properties and thus there was an opportunity to consider a soil × treatment effect in the experiment.Experimental designFertilizer N and substrate C were applied on 8 May and 12 June in the experiment undertaken between May and July 2019, which represents the main growing season in Ireland. Within each plot, an area of 1 m × 1 m was selected. Following N fertilizer application (40 kg N ha−1) to all plots, carbon substrate [mixture of glucose (40%), sodium acetate (30%) and methanol (30%)] was applied once within the selected area using a sprayer watering can. Labile C available in animal excreta usually contains carbohydrates, volatile fatty acids, and alcohols32; as such different carbon substrates were applied to mimic this. Our review of the literature also indicated that C source types could differentially affect denitrifying communities and consequently denitrification rate. Thus, a mixture of three C sources was used to decrease bias of one microbial group over another as a result of single substrate use. Carbon was supplied to alleviate C-limitations of denitrification and nitrification processes as observed by O’Neill et al.29 in soils from this trial and to ensure equal substrate availability across all soil P levels. Equivalent C input rate of 0.63 g C m−2 day−1 was added to represent a daily rate of plant carbon input from Lolium perenne dominated ecosystem33. Soil samples were collected on eight occasions throughout the experimental period. Soil was sampled from across each selected area to a depth of 10 cm, sieved through 4 mm sieve and analysed for soil mineral N and microbial biomass.Soil properties, plant biomass and climate parametersPhysico-chemical soil properties were characterized by taking samples from 10 cm depth from each plot in the two sites before the commencement of the experiment. Soil pH was measured in water (2:1, water volume:soil mass) using Sally pH Auto analyser Dilution System (Gilson 215, Gilson, Dunstable, England). Soil organic matter (SOM) content was determined from mass loss on ignition at 550 °C for 7 h. Total C and total N concentrations were measured using a TrueSpec C/N analyser (TruSpec, LECO Corporation, Michigan, USA). Plant available P, potassium (K), and magnesium (Mg) were estimated using Morgan’s extraction34 and analysed using a Lachat QuickChem 8500 Series 2 Flow injection Analyzer (Lachat, QuickChem, 5600 Loveland, Colorado, USA). Particle size analysis was performed using the Pipette method35, where 2 mm sieved dry soil (20 g) was pre-treated with 6% H2O2, 3% NH4OH, and 5% sodium hexametaphosphate before separating soil aliquots into particle sizes. Water Holding Capacity (WHC) was determined from the mass difference between water-saturated and then overnight dried (105 °C) soil. Bulk density was determined by dividing weight of oven-dried soil by the total soil volume.To determine the mineral N concentrations, ten gram fresh soil was extracted with 50 mL 2 M KCl (5:1 solution to soil ratio). The supernatant was filtered through Whatman No. 1 filter paper and filtrates were stored in a cold room at 4 °C for about a week until analysis. Ammonium (NH4+) and nitrate (NO3−) concentrations in the extracts were analysed by the Aquakem 600 discrete analyser.Above-ground plant biomass from each plot of both sites was harvested twice during the experiment period (June 10 and July 11, 2019) to a height of ~ 5 cm using a Haldrup plot harvester. The total harvested biomass weight from each plot was recorded and a 100 g sub-sample was taken for dry matter (DM) analysis. Each fresh herbage sub-sample was weighed and placed in an oven at 70 °C for 3 days, and dry weight of the biomass was determined after re-weighing.Rainfall records for the experiment period were obtained from a Met Éireann weather observing station located in Teagasc dairy farm in Johnstown Castle, Co. Wexford., situated within a 100 m distance from the experimental sites. Volumetric soil moisture content and temperature was measured to 5 cm depth on individual plots on each gas sampling occasion using a handheld theta probe (WET-2 WET Sensor, Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, England). Water-filled pore space (WFPS) were calculated from the soil moisture values, bulk density of the soils, and soil particle density (2.65 g cm−3).Microbial biomass, glomalin-related soil protein and potential denitrification activitySoils were analysed for microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN), phosphorus (MBP) and carbon (MBC) using the fumigation extraction method as described respectively in (Brooks et al.36,37, and Vance et al.38). Five gram fumigated (24 h) and non-fumigated soil samples were extracted with 100 mL 0.5 M NaHCO3 and analysed for P colorimetrically using an Aquakem 600 discrete analyser (Thermo Electron OY, Vantaa, Finland). In order to avoid the spike readings by the instrument due to the effervescent nature of NaHCO3, one millilitre of 10% HCl was added to 10 mL extracts and diluted to 50 mL using distilled water. Microbial P was calculated by subtracting the P concentration of non-fumigated samples from fumigated samples, and dividing the result by an extraction factor of 0.437.Microbial biomass C and N were determined similarly using chloroform fumigation method with extraction period of 48 h with 0.5 M K2SO438. The extracts of the fumigated and non-fumigated samples were analysed for total C and N using a TOC-L CPH/CPN analyser (Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan), and the differences, divided by correction factors of 0.45 and 0.54, were used to estimate the microbial biomass C and N, respectively.Glomalin is a glycoprotein produced by AMF and can be used as an indicator of mycorrhizal colonization in the plant root-soil interface39. Total glomalin-related soil protein (GRPS) was extracted by 90 min of autoclaving (121 °C) of 1 g air-dried soil in 8 mL of 50 mM sodium citrate adjusted to pH 8.0 with HCl40. Three additional sequential extractions were performed with the sodium citrate solution by autoclaving for 60 min until no red-brown color was visible in the last supernatant. After autoclaving, the samples were centrifuged at 10,000 revolutions per minute (rpm) for 5 min. The amounts of glomalin in the extracts were quantified using the Bradford dye-binding assay with bovine serum albumin (BSA) as the standard (2 mg mL−1). In a 96-well plate, replicated 200 µL of standard or extracts and 50 µL of dye reagent were added in each well and mixed using a microplate mixer. The Bradford-reactive substance was determined by measuring absorbance at 600 nm using Microplate Reader (Modulus Microplate Multimode Reader, Turner BioSystems, Sunnyvale, California, USA). Sample concentrations were determined using the standard curve. Potential denitrification activity (PDA) was determined using the acetylene inhibition method, modified from Pell et al.41. Briefly, replicated 20 g fresh soils were added into two identical flasks from a sample of soil. The flasks were then sealed with a rubber stopper and flushed and filled with helium after evacuating the headspace air. In one of the replicas, 10% of the headspaces were removed and replaced by acetylene. All flasks were incubated at 15 °C on an orbital shaker at 175 rpm for 30 min followed by the addition of a nutrient solution containing 75 mmol L−1 KNO3, 37.5 mmol L−1 Na-succinate, 25 mmol L−1 glucose, and 75 mM Na-acetate. Gas samples were taken from the headspace every 1 h for 5 h. N2O concentrations were determined using a gas chromatograph (Bruker, Scion 456-GC, Livingston, Scotland), and PDA was calculated from the rate of change of N2O concentrations over time from acetylene amended flasks.N2O and CO2 flux measurementsGas samples (N2O and CO2 fluxes) were measured before and after the application of N fertilizer and C substrates, with a daily sampling for 10 days directly after C + N additions and 3–4 times a week in the third and fourth week and 2–3 times a week in the subsequent weeks. A rectangular (40 × 40 cm) static collar, made of stainless steel (opaque), was anchored 5 cm deep into the soil within the marked area of 1 m × 1 m in each of the selected plots. During gas sampling, a 10 cm tall chamber lid fitted with two septa on top was placed on the collar lined with neoprene rubber band. To ensure hermetic sealing of the headspace during sampling, the ring area of the collar was half-filled with water, and a 10 kg weight was placed on the top of the lid to compress the seal. Gas samples were collected between 09:30 and 11:30 local time using a 10 mL Luer lock syringe fitted with a hypodermic needle via one of the septa at 0, 20, and 40 min after chamber closure. Prior to transferring the final sample into a pre-evacuated 7 mL glass vial, air in the chamber headspace was mixed by flushing the syringe three times. Gas samples were analysed using a gas chromatograph (Bruker, Scion 456-GC, Livingston, Scotland) fitted with an electron capture detector to analyse for N2O concentrations and a thermal conductivity detector to analyse for CO2 concentrations. Daily Fluxes (F) were calculated for each plot using the following equation:$$ F = left( {frac{Delta C}{{Delta t}}} right) times left( {frac{M times P}{{T times R}}} right) times left( frac{V}{A} right) $$where ∆C is the change in gas concentration in the chamber headspace during chamber enclosure period in ppbv, ∆t is chamber closing period in minutes, so ∆C/∆t is the slope of the gas concentration with time. M is the molar mass of N2O-N (28 g mol−1) and CO2-C (12 g mol−1), P and T are the atmospheric pressure (Pa) and temperature (K). Atmospheric pressure values were obtained from the nearby weather station whereas for T, wet sensor values were used. V is the headspace volume of the closed chamber (m3) and A is surface are of the chamber (m3). R is the ideal gas constant (8.314 J K−1 mol−1). Daily flux for each treatment is reported as the average of the replicates.Cumulative N2O and CO2 emissions were calculated over each application period by multiplying the daily N2O and CO2 fluxes by the number of days between two consecutive measurements. A summation of the cumulative flux of each application period is reported as the total cumulative flux.Statistical analysisANOVAs with repeated measures were used to test for the C + N addition effect on N2O and CO2 emissions, MBC, MBN, MBP, NO3−, and NH4+ with P treatment, site, and day of measurement as fixed effects, and individual plots as a random effect. Two-way ANOVA was applied to test for main and interaction effects of P treatment and site on cumulative N2O and CO2 emissions, soil property parameters (Table 1), plant biomass, and GRSP. Prior to analysis, response variables were checked for normality (sphericity for repeated ANOVA) and homogeneity of variance, and log transformed when required. Tukey’s HSD post-hoc tests were conducted to identify pair-wise comparisons of significant effects at P  More

.readcube-buybox { display: none !important;}

The fourteenth-century pandemic known as the Black Death might not have been as devastating as was previously thought, an analysis of ancient pollen suggests1.

Access options

Access through your institution

Change institution

Buy or subscribe

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

Additional access options:

Log in

Learn about institutional subscriptions

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00435-6

ReferencesIzdebski, A. et al. Nature Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01652-4 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Download references

Subjects

Ecology

Latest on:

Ecology

Brazil opens highly protected caves to mining, risking fauna
Correspondence 15 FEB 22

Richard Leakey (1944–2022)
Obituary 28 JAN 22

Emphasizing declining populations in the Living Planet Report
Matters Arising 26 JAN 22

Jobs

Director of Microscopy Operations

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (St. Jude)
Memphis, TN, United States

POSTDOCTORAL POSITIONS IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING

KU Leuven
Leuven, Belgium

MRC Postdoctoral Research Scientist

Medical Research Council
London, United Kingdom

Postdoctoral fellow in X-ray multibeam ptychographic imaging at PETRA III/MAX IV

German Electron Synchrotron (DESY)
Hamburg, Germany More

Breed, M.D., Cook, C. & Krasnec, M.O. Cleptobiosis in social insects. Psyche 484765 (2012).Sakagami, S., Roubik, D. & Zucchi, R. Ethology of the robber stingless bee, Lestrimelitta limao (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Sociobiology 21, 237–277 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Rasmussen, C. & Cameron, S. A. Global stingless bee phylogeny supports ancient divergence, vicariance, and long distance dispersal. Biol. J. Lin. Soc. 99, 206–232 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Roubik, D. W. Ecology and Natural History of Tropical Bees (Cambridge University Press, 1989).
Google Scholar 
Camargo, J. M. F. & Pedro, S. R. M. Meliponini Lepeletier, 1836. in Catalogue of the Bees (Hymenoptera, Apoidea) in the Neotropical Region (ed Moure, J. S.). 272–578. (Sociedade Brasileira de Entomologia, 2007).Nogueira-Neto. P. Behavior problems related to the pillages made by some parasitic stingless bees (Meliponinae, Apidae). in Development and Evolution of Behavior: Essays in Memory of T.C. Schneirla (ed. Aronson, L.R.). 416–434. (W. H. Freeman, 1970).Quezada-Euán, J. J. G. & González-Acereto, J. Notes on the nest habits and host range of cleptobiotic Lestrimelitta niitkib (Ayala 1999) (Hymenoptera: Meliponini) from the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Acta Zool. Mexicana 86, 245–249 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Rech, A. R., Schwade, M. A. & Schwade, M. R. M. Abelhas-sem-ferrão amazônicas defendem meliponarios contra saques de outras abelhas. Acta Amazon. 43, 389–394 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Grüter, C., von Zuben, L. G., Segers, F. H. I. D. & Cunningham, J. P. Warfare in stingless bees. Insect. Soc. 63, 223–236 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Cini, A., Bruschini, C., Poggi, L. & Cervo, R. Fight or fool? Physical strength, instead of sensory deception, matters in host nest invasion by a wasp social parasite. Anim. Behav. 81, 1139–1145 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Quezada-Euán, J. J. G. et al. Does sensory deception matter in eusocial obligate food robber systems? A study of Lestrimelitta and stingless bee hosts. Anim. Behav. 85, 817–823 (2013).
Google Scholar 
van Zweden, J. S. & D’Ettorre, P. Nestmate recognition in social insects and the role of hydrocarbons. In Insect hydrocarbons: biology, biochemistry, and chemical ecology (eds Blomquist, G. J. & Bagnères, A. G.) 222–243 (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Blomquist, G. J. & Bagnères, A. G. Insect Hydrocarbons: Biology, Biochemistry and Chemical Ecology (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Nash, D. R. & Boomsma, J. J. Communication between hosts and social parasites. In Sociobiology of Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (eds d’Etorre, P. & Hughes, D. P.) 55–79 (Oxford University Press, 2008).
Google Scholar 
Martin, S. J., Shemilt, S., da S Lima, C. B. & de Carvalho, C. A. L. Are isomeric alkenes used in species recognition among neo-tropical stingless bees (Melipona spp). J. Chem. Ecol. 43, 1066–1072 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chung, H. & Carroll, S. B. Wax, sex and the origin of species: Dual roles of insect cuticular hydrocarbons in adaptation and mating. BioEssays 37, 822–830 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Finck, J., Berdan, E. L., Mayer, F., Ronacher, B. & Geiselhardt, S. Divergence of cuticular hydrocarbons in two sympatric grasshopper species and the evolution of fatty acid synthases and elongases across insects. Nat. Sci. Rep. 6, 33695 (2016).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Buellesback, J., Vetter, S. G. & Schmitt, T. Differences in the reliance on cuticular hydrocarbons as sexual signaling and species discrimination cues in parasitoid wasps. Front. Zool. 15, 22 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Medina-Medina, L.A. & Gonzalez-Acereto, J.A. La respuesta defensiva de Scaptotrigona pectoralis como un contundente escudo de protección contra las incursiones de Lestrimelitta niitkib dirigidas a otras especies de abejas sin aguijón. in VI Congreso Iberoamericano de Apicultura. 171–173. (1998).National Institute of Standards and Technology. Mass Spectral Library. (NIST/EPA/NIH, 2011).Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. Using Multivariate Statistics (Harper Collins College, 1996).
Google Scholar 
SAS Institute. SAS/STAT 9.2 User’s Guide. (SAS Institute Cary, 2008).Rasband, W.S. ImageJ. (U.S. National Institutes of Health, 1997–2012).Quezada-Euán, J.J.G., Paxton, R.J., Palmer, K.A., May-Itzá, W.D.J., Tay, W.T. & Oldroyd, B.P. Morphological and molecular characters reveal differentiation in a Neotropical social bee, Melipona beecheii (Apidae: Meliponini). Apidologie 38, 247–258 (2007).Rohlf, F. J. TPSDIG: Version 2.12. (New York State University, 2008).Klingenberg, C. P. MorphoJ: An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 11, 353–357 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Francoy, T.M., Grassi, M.L., Imperatriz-Fonseca, V.L., May-Itzá, W.D.J. & Quezada-Euán, J.J.G. Geometric morphometrics of the wing as a tool for assigning genetic lineages and geographic origin to Melipona beecheii (Hymenoptera: Meliponini). Apidologie 42, 499–507 (2011).Ratnasingham, S. & Hebert, P. D. N. A DNA-based registry for all animal species: the Barcode Index Number (BIN) system. PLoS ONE 8, e66213 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hurtado-Burillo, M., Ruiz, C., May-Itzá, W.D.J., Quezada-Eúan, J.J.G., & De la Rúa, P. Barcoding stingless bees: Genetic diversity of the economically important genus Scaptotrigona in Mesoamerica. Apidologie 44, 1–10 (2013).Folmer, O., Black, M., Hoeh, W., Lutz, R. & Vrigenhoek, R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotech. 3, 294–299 (1994).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Packer, L., Sheffield, C.S., Gibbs, J., de Silva, N., Best, L.R. et al. The campaign to barcode the bees of the world: progress, problems and prognosis. in Memorias VI Congreso Mesoamericano Sobre Abejas Nativas, Guatemala. 178–180. (2009).Tamura, K., Stecher, G., & Kumar, S. MEGA11: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol. Biol. Evolut. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msab120. (2021)Oliveira, F.F.d. & Marchi, P. Três espécies novas de Lestrimelitta Friese (Hymenoptera, Apidae) da Costa Rica, Panamá e Guiana Francesa. Rev. Bras. Entomol. 49, 1–6 (2005).González, V. H. & Griswold, T. L. New species and previously unknown males of neotropical cleptobiotic stingless bees (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Lestrimelitta). Caldasia 34, 227–245 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Marchi, P. & Melo, G.A.R. Revisão taxonômica das espêcies brasileiras do gênero Lestrimelitta Friese (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponina). Rev. Bras. Entomol. 50, 6–30 (2006).Gonzalez, V., Rasmussen, C. & Velasquez, A. Una especie nueva de Lestrimelitta y un cambio de nombre en Lasioglossum (Hymenoptera: Apidae, Halictidae). Rev. Colomb. Entomol. 36, 319–324 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Ratnasingham, S. & Hebert, P. D. N. BOLD: The barcode of life data system (https://www.barcodinglife.org). Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 355–364 (2007).Ayala, R. Revisión de las abejas sin aguijón de México (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini). Folia Entomol. Mexicana 106, 1–123 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Ruano, F. & Tinaut, A. The assault process of the slave-making ant Rossomyrmex minuchae (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Sociobiology 43, 201–209 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Errard, C. et al. Coevolution-driven cuticular hydrocarbon variation between the slave-making ant Rossomyrmex minuchae and its host Proformica longiseta (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Chemoecology 16, 235–240 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dettner, K. & Liepert, C. Chemical mimicry and camouflage. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 39, 129–154 (1994).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lenoir, A., d’Ettorre, P. & Errard, C. Chemical ecology and social parasitism in ants. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 46, 573–599 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Von Beeren, C., Pohl, S. & Witte, V. On the use of adaptive resemblance terms in chemical ecology. Psyche 2012, 635761 (2012).Lambardi, D., Dani, F. R., Turillazzi, S. & Boomsma, J. J. Chemical mimicry in an incipient leaf-cutting ant social parasite. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 843–851 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Uboni, A., Bagnères, A. G., Christidès, J. P. & Lorenzi, M. C. Cleptoparasites, social parasites and a common host: Chemical insignificance for visiting host nests, chemical mimicry for living in. J. Insect Physiol. 58, 1259–1264 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Quezada-Euán, J. J. G. et al. Body size differs in workers produced across time and is associated with variation in the quantity and composition of larval food in Nannotrigona perilampoides (Hymenoptera, Meliponini). Insect. Soc. 58, 31–38 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Nunes, T. M., Mateus, S., Turatti, I. C., Morgan, E. & Zucchi, R. Nestmate recognition in the stingless bee Frieseomelitta varia (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponini): Sources of chemical signals. Anim. Behav. 81, 463–467 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Gutiérrez, E., Ruiz, D., Solís, T., May-Itzá, W.d.J., Moo-Valle, H. & Quezada-Euán, J.J.G. Does larval food affect cuticular profiles and recognition in eusocial bees? A test on Scaptotrigona gynes (Hymenoptera: Meliponini). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 70, 871–879 (2016).Jones, S. M. et al. The role of wax and resin in the nestmate recognition system of a stingless bee, Tetragonisca angustula. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 66, 1–12 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Leonhardt, S.D. Chemical ecology of stingless bees. J. Chem. Ecol. 43, 385–402 (2021).Akino, T. Chemical strategies to deal with ants: a review of mimicry, camouflage, propaganda, and phytomimesis by ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and other arthropods. Myrmecol. News 11, 173–181 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Lenoir, A., Hefetz, A., Simon, T. & Soroker, V. Comparative dynamics of gestalt odour formation in two ant species Camponotus fellah and Aphaenogaster senilis (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Physiol. Entomol. 26, 275–283 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Von Beeren, C. et al. Chemical and behavioral integration of army ant-associated rove beetles—A comparison between specialists and generalists. Front. Zool. 15, 8 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Kather, R. & Martin, S. J. Cuticular hydrocarbon profiles as a taxonomic tool: Advantages, limitations and technical aspects. Physiol. Entomol. 37, 25–32 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Menzel, F., Blaimer, B. B. & Schmitt, T. How do cuticular hydrocarbons evolve? Physiological constraints and climatic and biotic selection pressures act on a complex functional trait. Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 284, 20161727 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Savolainen, R. & Vepsäläinen, K. Sympatric speciation through intraspecific social parasitism. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 100, 7169–7174 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hartke, J., Sprenger, P.P., Sahm, J, Winterberg, H., Orivel, J. et al. Cuticular hydrocarbons as potential mediators of cryptic species divergence in a mutualistic ant association. Ecol. Evolut. 9, 9160–9176 (2019).Doebeli, M. & Dieckmann, U. Evolutionary branching and sympatric speciation caused by different types of ecological interactions. Am. Nat. 156, S77–S101 (2000).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Thibert-Plante, X. & Gavrilets, S. Evolution of mate choice and the so-called magic traits in ecological speciation. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1004–1013 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cabej, N. R. Epigenetic Principles of Evolution (Elsevier, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Quezada-Euán, J. J. G. Stingless Bees of Mexico: The Biology, Management and Conservation of an Ancient Heritage (Springer, 2018).
Google Scholar 
Von Zuben, L. G. et al. Interspecific chemical communication in raids of the robber bee Lestrimelitta limao. Insect. Soc. 63, 339–347 (2016).
Google Scholar  More

Mogollón JM, Bouwman AF, Beusen AH, Lassaletta L, van Grinsven HJ, Westhoek H. More efficient phosphorus use can avoid cropland expansion. Nat Food. 2021;2:509–18.Article 

Google Scholar 
Goldhammer T, Brüchert V, Ferdelman TG, Zabel M. Microbial sequestration of phosphorus in anoxic upwelling sediments. Nat Geosci. 2010;3:557–61.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Oliverio AM, Bissett A, McGuire K, Saltonstall K, Turner BL, Fierer N. The role of phosphorus limitation in shaping soil bacterial communities and their metabolic capabilities. mBio. 2020;11:e01718–20.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu X, Rensing C, Han D, Xiao KQ, Dai Y, Tang Z, et al. Genome-resolved metagenomics reveals distinct phosphorus acquisition strategies between soil microbiomes. mSystems. 2022;7:e01107–21.PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Long XE, Yao H, Huang Y, Wei W, Zhu YG. Phosphate levels influence the utilisation of rice rhizodeposition carbon and the phosphate-solubilizing microbial community in a paddy soil. Soil Bio Biochem. 2018;118:103–14.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dai Z, Liu G, Chen H, Chen C, Wang J, Ai S, et al. Long-term nutrient inputs shift soil microbial functional profiles of phosphorus cycling in diverse agroecosystems. ISME J. 2020;14:757–70.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Liang J, Liu J, Jia P, Yang T, Zeng Q, Zhang S, et al. Novel phosphate-solubilizing bacteria enhance soil phosphorus cycling following ecological restoration of land degraded by mining. ISME J. 2020;14:1600–13.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Willsky GR, Bennett RL, Malamy MH. Inorganic phosphate transport in Escherichia coli: involvement of two genes which play a role in alkaline phosphatase regulation. J Bacteriol. 1973;113:529–39.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wanner BL. Gene regulation by phosphate in enteric bacteria. J Cell Biochem. 1993;51:47–54.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Li J, Lu J, Wang H, Fang Z, Wang X, Feng S, et al. A comprehensive synthesis unveils the mysteries of phosphate‐solubilizing microbes. Biol Rev. 2021;96:2771–93.Article 

Google Scholar 
Hessen DO, Jeyasingh PD, Neiman M, Weider LJ. Genome streamlining and the elemental costs of growth. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25:75–80.Article 

Google Scholar 
Li J, Mau RL, Dijkstra P, Koch BJ, Schwartz E, Liu XA, et al. Predictive genomic traits for bacterial growth in culture versus actual growth in soil. ISME J. 2019;13:2162–72.Article 

Google Scholar 
Giovannoni SJ, Cameron Thrash J, Temperton B. Implications of streamlining theory for microbial ecology. ISME J. 2014;8:1553–65.Article 

Google Scholar 
Ye L, Mei R, Liu WT, Ren H, Zhang XX. Machine learning-aided analyses of thousands of draft genomes reveal specific features of activated sludge processes. Microbiome. 2020;8:1–13.Article 

Google Scholar 
Farhat MB, Boukhris I, Chouayekh H. Mineral phosphate solubilization by Streptomyces sp. CTM396 involves the excretion of gluconic acid and is stimulated by humic acids. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2015;362:1–8.Article 

Google Scholar 
Bücking H, Shachar-Hill Y. Phosphate uptake, transport and transfer by the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus intraradices is stimulated by increased carbohydrate availability. New Phytol. 2005;165:899–912.Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang L, Xu M, Liu Y, Zhang F, Hodge A, Feng G. Carbon and phosphorus exchange may enable cooperation between an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus and a phosphate‐solubilizing bacterium. New Phytol. 2016;210:1022–32.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Spohn M, Kuzyakov Y. Phosphorus mineralization can be driven by microbial need for carbon. Soil Biol Biochem. 2013;61:69–75.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Huang Y, Dai Z, Lin J, Li D, Ye H, Dahlgren RA, et al. Labile carbon facilitated phosphorus solubilization as regulated by bacterial and fungal communities in Zea mays. Soil Biol Biochem. 2021;163:108465.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yao Q, Li Z, Song Y, Wright SJ, Guo X, Tringe SG, et al. Community proteogenomics reveals the systemic impact of phosphorus availability on microbial functions in tropical soil. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018;2:499–509.Article 

Google Scholar  More