Philippa Kaur

1.Gattuso, J.-P. et al. Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios. Science 349, aac4722 (2015).
Google Scholar 
2.Caldeira, K. & Wickett, M. E. Anthropogenic carbon and ocean pH. Nature 425, 365 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
3.Hönisch, B. et al. The geological record of ocean acidification. Science 335, 1058–1063 (2012).
Google Scholar 
4.Turley, C. & Gattuso, J.-P. Future biological and ecosystem impacts of ocean acidification and their socioeconomic-policy implications. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 4, 278–286 (2012).
Google Scholar 
5.San Martin, V. A. et al. Linking social preferences and ocean acidification impacts in mussel aquaculture. Sci. Rep. 9, 4719 (2019).
Google Scholar 
6.Falkenberg, L. et al. Ocean acidification and human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17, 4563 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
7.Loewe, M. & Rippin, N. The Sustainable Development Goals of the Post-2015 Agenda. Comments on the OWG and SDSN Proposals (German Development Institute 2015).8.Doney, S. C. et al. The impacts of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems and reliant human communities. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 45, 83–112 (2020).
Google Scholar 
9.Ekstrom, J. et al. Vulnerability and adaptation of US shellfisheries to ocean acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 207–214 (2015).
Google Scholar 
10.Ponce Oliva, R. D. et al. Ocean acidification, consumers’ preferences, and market adaptation strategies in the mussel aquaculture industry. Ecol. Econ. 158, 42–50 (2019).
Google Scholar 
11.Quatrinni, A. M. et al. Palaeoclimate ocean conditions shaped the evolution of corals and their skeletons through deep time. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1531–1538 (2020).
Google Scholar 
12.Thomsen, J. et al. Naturally acidified habitat selects for ocean acidification-tolerant mussels. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602411 (2017).
Google Scholar 
13.Rastrick, S. S. P. et al. Using natural analogues to investigate the effects of climate change and ocean acidification on Northern ecosystems. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 75, 2299–2311 (2018).
Google Scholar 
14.Hall-Spencer, J. M. et al. Volcanic carbon dioxide vents reveal ecosystem effects of ocean acidification. Nature 454, 96–99 (2008).CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Agostini, S. et al. Ocean acidification drives community shifts towards simplified non-calcified habitats in a subtropical–temperate transition zone. Sci. Rep. 8, 11354 (2018).
Google Scholar 
16.Riquelme-Bugueño, R. et al. Diel vertical migration into anoxic and high-pCO2 waters: acoustic and net-based krill observations in the Humboldt Current. Sci. Rep. 10, 17181 (2020).
Google Scholar 
17.Pérez et al. Riverine discharges impact physiological traits and carbon sources for shell carbonate in the marine intertidal mussel Perumytilus purpuratus. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 969–983 (2016).
Google Scholar 
18.Vargas, C. A. et al. Species-specific responses to ocean acidification should account for local adaptation and adaptive plasticity. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0084 (2017).
Google Scholar 
19.Saavedra et al. Local habitat influences on feeding and respiration of the intertidal mussels Perumytilus purpuratus exposed to increased pCO2 levels. Estuaries Coast. 41, 1118–1129 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Riebesell, U. & Gattuso, J.-P. Lessons learned from ocean acidification research. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 12–14 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
21.Tilbrook, B. et al. An enhanced ocean acidification observing network: from people to technology to data synthesis and information exchange. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 337 (2019).
Google Scholar 
22.Barry, J. P., Hall-Spencer, J. M. and Tyrrell, T. in Guide to Best Practices for Ocean Acidification Research and Data Reporting (eds Riebesell, U. et al.) Ch. 3 (Publications Office of the European Union, 2010).23.Vargas, C. A. et al. Influence of glacier melting and river discharges on the nutrient distribution and DIC recycling in the southern Chilean Patagonia. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 123, 256–270 (2018).
Google Scholar 
24.Feely, R. A. et al. Evidence for upwelling of corrosive ‘acidified’ water onto the Continental Shelf. Science 320, 1490–1492 (2008).CAS 

Google Scholar 
25.Vargas, C. A. et al. Riverine and corrosive upwelling waters influences on the carbonate system in the coastal upwelling area off Central Chile: implications for coastal acidification events. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 121, 1468–1483 (2016).
Google Scholar 
26.Cao, Z. et al. Dynamics of the carbonate system in a large continental shelf system under the influence of both a river plume and coastal upwelling. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 116, G02010 (2010).
Google Scholar 
27.Feely, R. A. et al. The combined effects of ocean acidification, mixing, and respiration on pH and carbonate saturation in an urbanized estuary. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 88, 442–449 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
28.Cai, W.-J. et al. Acidification of subsurface coastal waters enhanced by eutrophication. Nat. Geosci. 4, 766–770 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
29.Kwiatkowski, L. et al. Nighttime dissolution in a temperate coastal ocean ecosystem increases under acidification. Sci. Rep. 6, 22984 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
30.Wolfe, K., Nguyen, H. D., Davey, M. & Byrne, M. Characterizing biogeochemical fluctuations in a world of extremes: a synthesis for temperate intertidal habitats in the face of global change. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 3858–3879 (2020).
Google Scholar 
31.Shaw, E. C., Phinn, S. R., Tilbrook, B. & Steven, A. Natural in situ relationships suggest coral reef calcium carbonate production will decline with ocean acidification. Limnol. Oceanogr. 60, 777–788 (2015).
Google Scholar 
32.Takeshita, Y. et al. Coral reef carbonate chemistry variability at different functional scales. Front. Mar. Sci. 5, 175 (2018).
Google Scholar 
33.Brodeur, J. R. et al. Chesapeake Bay inorganic carbon: spatial distribution and seasonal variability. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 99 (2019).
Google Scholar 
34.Hoshijima, U. & Hofmann, G. E. Variability of seawater chemistry in a kelp forest environment is linked to in situ transgenerational effects in the purple sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 62 (2019).
Google Scholar 
35.Koweek, D. A. et al. A year in the life of a central California kelp forest: physical and biological insights into biogeochemical variability. Biogeosciences 14, 31–44 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Cornwall, C. E. & Hurd, C. L. Experimental design in ocean acidification research: problems and solutions. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 73, 572–581 (2016).
Google Scholar 
37.Kapsenberg, L. & Hofmann, G. E. Ocean pH time-series and drivers of variability along the northern Channel Islands, California, USA. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 953–968 (2016).
Google Scholar 
38.Hofmann, G. E. et al. High-frequency dynamics of ocean pH: a multi-ecosystem comparison. PLoS ONE 6, e28983 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Baumann, H. Experimental assessments of marine species sensitivities to ocean acidification and co-stressors: how far have we come? Can. J. Zool. 97, 399–408 (2019).
Google Scholar 
40.Cornwall, C. E. et al. Diurnal fluctuations in seawater pH influence the response of a calcifying macroalga to ocean acidification. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20132201 (2013).
Google Scholar 
41.Rivest, E. B., Comeau, S. & Cornwall, C. E. The role of natural variability in shaping the response of coral reef organisms to climate change. Curr. Clim. 3, 271–281 (2017).
Google Scholar 
42.Sanford, E. & Kelly, M. W. Local adaptation in marine invertebrates. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 3, 509–535 (2011).
Google Scholar 
43.Lewis, C. N. et al. Sensitivity to ocean acidification parallels natural pCO2 gradients experienced by Arctic copepods under winter sea ice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E4960–E4967 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
44.Spalding, M. D. et al. Marine ecoregions of the world: a bioregionalization of coastal and shelf areas. BioScience 57, 573–583 (2007).
Google Scholar 
45.Aguilera, V. M., Vargas, C. A. & Dewitte, B. Intraseasonal hydrographic variations and nearshore carbonates system off northern Chile during the 2015 El Niño event. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 125, e2020JG005704 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
46.Fassbender, A. J. et al. Seasonal carbonate chemistry variability in marine surface waters of the US Pacific Northwest. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 10, 1367–1401 (2018).
Google Scholar 
47.Reum, J. C. P. et al. Seasonal carbonate chemistry covariation with temperature, oxygen, and salinity in a fjord estuary: implications for the design of ocean acidification experiments. PLoS ONE 9, e89619 (2014).
Google Scholar 
48.Wallace, R. B. et al. Coastal ocean acidification: the other eutrophication problem. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 148, 1–13 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
49.Rutgersson, A. et al. The annual cycle of carbon dioxide and parameters influencing the air–sea carbon exchange in the Baltic Proper. J. Mar. Syst. 74, 381–394 (2008).
Google Scholar 
50.Clargo, N. M., Salt, L. A., Thomas, H. & de Baar, H. J. W. Rapid increase of observed DIC and pCO2 in the surface waters of the North Sea in the 2001–2011 decade ascribed to climate change superimposed by biological processes. Mar. Chem. 177, 566–581 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
51.Ericson, Y. et al. Temporal variability in surface water pCO2 in Adventfjorden (West Spitsbergen) with emphasis on physical and biogeochemical drivers. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 123, 4888–4905 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
52.Geilfus, N.-X. et al. Spatial and temporal variability of seawater pCO2 within the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and Baffin Bay during the summer and autumn 2011. Cont. Shelf Res. 156, 1–10 (2018).
Google Scholar 
53.Islam, F. et al. Sea surface pCO2 and O2 dynamics in the partially ice-covered Arctic Ocean. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 122, 1425–1438 (2016).
Google Scholar 
54.Copin-Montégut, C., Bégovic, M. & Merlivat, L. Variability of the partial pressure of CO2 on diel to annual time scales in the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Mar. Chem. 85, 169–189 (2004).
Google Scholar 
55.Pardo, P. C. et al. Surface ocean carbon dioxide variability in South Pacific boundary currents and Subantarctic waters. Sci. Rep. 9, 7592 (2019).
Google Scholar 
56.Gagliano, M., McCormick, M. I., Moore, J. A. & Depczynski, M. The basics of acidification: baseline variability of pH on Australian coral reefs. Mar. Biol. 157, 1849–1856 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
57.Takeshita, Y. et al. Including high-frequency variability in coastal acidification projections. Biogeosciences 12, 5853–5870 (2015).
Google Scholar 
58.Carter, H. A., Ceballos-Osuna, L., Miller, N. A. & Stillman, J. H. Impact of ocean acidification on metabolism and energetics during early life stages of the intertidal porcelain crab Petrolisthes cinctipes. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 1412–1422 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Ceballos-Osuna, L., Carter, H. A., Miller, N. A. & Stillman, J. H. Effects of ocean acidification on early life-history stages of the intertidal porcelain crab Petrolisthes cinctipes. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 1405–1411 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
60.Miller, S. H. et al. Effect of elevated pCO2 on metabolic responses of porcelain crab (Petrolisthes cinctipes) larvae exposed to subsequent salinity stress. PLoS ONE 9, e109167 (2014).
Google Scholar 
61.Bayne, B. L. Metabolic expenditure. Dev. Aquacult. Fish. Sci. 41, 331–415 (2017).
Google Scholar 
62.Waldbusser, G. G. et al. Slow shell building, a possible trait for resistance to the effects of acute ocean acidification. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 1969–1983 (2016).
Google Scholar 
63.Dorey, N., Lancon, P., Thorndyke, M. & Dupont, S. Assessing physiological tipping point for sea urchin larvae exposed to a broad range of pH. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 3355–3367 (2013).
Google Scholar 
64.Kelly, M. W., Padilla-Gamiño, J. L. & Hofmann, G. E. Natural variation and the capacity to adapt to ocean acidification in the keystone sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2536–2546 (2015).
Google Scholar 
65.Gaitán-Espitia, J. D. et al. Spatio–temporal environmental variation mediates geographical differences in phenotypic responses to ocean acidification. Biol. Lett. 13, 20160865 (2017).
Google Scholar 
66.Calosi, P. et al. Distribution of sea urchins living near shallow water CO2 vents is dependent upon species acid–base and ion-regulatory abilities. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 73, 470–484 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
67.Foo, S. A., Dworjanyn, S. A., Poore, A. G. B. & Byrne, M. Adaptive capacity of the habitat modifying sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii to ocean warming and ocean acidification: performance of early embryos. PLoS ONE 7, e42497 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
68.Chan, K. Y. K., Grünbaum, D., Arnberg, M. & Dupont, S. Impacts of ocean acidification on survival, growth, and swimming behaviours differ between larval urchins and brittlestars. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 73, 951–996 (2016).
Google Scholar 
69.Stumpp, M. et al. Acidified seawater impacts sea urchin larvae pH regulatory systems relevant for calcification. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 18192–18197 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
70.Stumpp, M. et al. Digestion in sea urchin larvae impaired under ocean acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 1044–1049 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
71.Thor, P. & Dupont, S. Transgenerational effects alleviate severe fecundity loss during ocean acidification in a ubiquitous planktonic copepod. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 2261–2271 (2015).
Google Scholar 
72.Gibbin, E. M. et al. The evolution of phenotypic plasticity under global change. Sci. Rep. 7, 17253 (2017).
Google Scholar 
73.Gibbin, E. M. et al. Can multi-generational exposure to ocean warming and acidification lead to the adaptation of life history and physiology in a marine metazoan? J. Exp. Biol. 220, 551–563 (2017).
Google Scholar 
74.Dam, H. G. et al. Rapid, but limited, zooplankton adaptation to simultaneous warming and acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 780–786 (2021).
Google Scholar 
75.Byrne, M. Impact of ocean warming and ocean acidification on marine invertebrate life history stages: vulnerabilities and potential for persistence in a changing ocean. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. 49, 1–42 (2011).
Google Scholar 
76.Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L., Crim, R. N. & Singh, G. G. Meta-analysis reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine organisms. Ecol. Lett. 13, 1419–1434 (2010).
Google Scholar 
77.Kroeker et al. Impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms: quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 1884–1896 (2013).
Google Scholar 
78.Takahashi, T., Sutherland, S. C. & Kozyr, A. LDEO Database (Version 2019): Global Ocean Surface Water Partial Pressure of CO2 Database: Measurements Performed During 1957–2019 (NCEI Accession 0160492) Version 9.9 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Centers for Environmental Information); https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/OTG.NDP088(V2015)79.Manly, B. F. J. Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology (CRC Press, 1997).80.Martinez, W. L. & Martinez, A. R. Computational Statistics Handbook with MATLAB (CRC Press, 2002). More

1.Martiny JBH, Bohannan BJM, Brown JH, Colwell RK, Fuhrman JA, Green JL, et al. Microbial biogeography: putting microorganisms on the map. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006;4:102–12.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Caswell H, Cohen JE. Disturbance, interspecific interaction and diversity in metapopulations. Biol J Linn Soc. 1991;42:193–218.
Google Scholar 
3.Tolker-Nielsen T, Molin S. Spatial organization of microbial biofilm communities. Microb Ecol. 2000;40:75–84.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Yanni D, Márquez-Zacarías P, Yunker PJ, Ratcliff WC. Drivers of spatial structure in social microbial communities. Curr Biol. 2019;29:R545–50.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
5.Ho A, Angel R, Veraart AJ, Daebeler A, Jia Z, Kim SY, et al. Biotic interactions in microbial communities as modulators of biogeochemical processes: methanotrophy as a model system. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1–11.
Google Scholar 
6.Falkowski PG, Fenchel T, Delong EF. The microbial engines that drive earth’s biogeochemical cycles. Science. 2008;320:1034–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
7.Overmann J, van Gemerden H. Microbial interactions involving sulfur bacteria: Implications for the ecology and evolution of bacterial communities. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2000;24:591–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.García-Bayona L, Comstock LE. Bacterial antagonism in host-associated microbial communities. Science. 2018;361:1–11.
Google Scholar 
9.Coyte KZ, Schluter J, Foster KR. The ecology of the microbiome: Networks, competition, and stability. Science. 2015;350:663–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Wang X, Li X, Ling J. Streptococcus gordonii LuxS/autoinducer-2 quorum-sensing system modulates the dual-species biofilm formation with Streptococcus mutans. J Basic Microbiol. 2017;57:605–16.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
11.Hotterbeekx A, Kumar-Singh S, Goossens H, Malhotra-Kumar S. In vivo and In vitro interactions between Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus spp. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2017;7:1–13.
Google Scholar 
12.Dal Co A, van Vliet S, Kiviet DJ, Schlegel S, Ackermann M. Short-range interactions govern the dynamics and functions of microbial communities. Nat Ecol Evol. 2020;4:366–75. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-1080-2.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Justice NB, Sczesnak A, Hazen TC, Arkin AP. Environmental selection, dispersal, and organism interactions shape community assembly in high-throughput enrichment culturing. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017;83:1–16.
Google Scholar 
14.Hilker M. New synthesis: parallels between biodiversity and chemodiversity. J Chem Ecol. 2014;40:225–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Raguso R, Agrawal A, Douglas A, Jander G, Kessler A, Poveda K, et al. The raison d’être of chemical ecology. Ecology. 2015;96:617–30.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Tilman D. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology. 1994;75:2–16.
Google Scholar 
17.Geyrhofer L, Brenner N. Coexistence and cooperation in structured habitats. BMC Ecol. 2020;20:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-020-00281-y.Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Wakano JY, Nowak MA, Hauert C. Spatial dynamics of ecological public goods. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:7910–4.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
19.Nemergut DR, Schmidt SK, Fukami T, O’Neill SP, Bilinski TM, Stanish LF, et al. Patterns and processes of microbial community assembly. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2013;77:342–56.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
20.Lowery NV, Ursell T. Structured environments fundamentally alter dynamics and stability of ecological communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:379–88.CAS 

Google Scholar 
21.Lee JZ, Craig Everroad R, Karaoz U, Detweiler AM, Pett-Ridge J, Weber PK, et al. Metagenomics reveals niche partitioning within the phototrophic zone of a microbial mat. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:1–19.
Google Scholar 
22.Quinn RA, Comstock W, Zhang T, Morton JT, da Silva R, Tran A, et al. Niche partitioning of a pathogenic microbiome driven by chemical gradients. Sci Adv. 2018;4:1–12.
Google Scholar 
23.Fenchel T, Finlay B. Oxygen and the spatial structure of microbial communities. Biol Rev. 2008;83:553–69.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Esteban DJ, Hysa B, Bartow-McKenney C. Temporal and spatial distribution of the microbial community of winogradsky columns. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–21.
Google Scholar 
25.Azam F. Microbial control of oceanic carbon flux: The plot thickens. Science. 1998;280:694–6.CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.McNally L, Brown SP. Building the microbiome in health and disease: niche construction and social conflict in bacteria. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2015;370:1–8.
Google Scholar 
27.Schreiber F, Ackermann M. Environmental drivers of metabolic heterogeneity in clonal microbial populations. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2020;62:202–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.11.018.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
28.Lopez D, Vlamakis H, Kolter R. Biofilms. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 2010;2:1–11.
Google Scholar 
29.Picketts STA, Cadenasso ML. Landscape ecology: spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems. NCASI Techn Bull. 1999;2:420.
Google Scholar 
30.Chao L, Levin BR. Structured habitats and the evolution of anticompetitor toxins in bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1981;78:6324–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
31.Rainey PB, Travisano M. Adaptive radiation in a heterogeneous environment. Nature. 1998;394:69–72.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Cardinale BJ. Biodiversity improves water quality through niche partitioning. Nature. 2011;472:86–91.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Bengtsson J, Grime JP, Hector A, et al. Ecology: biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science. 2001;294:804–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
34.Wellborn GA, Langerhans RB. Ecological opportunity and the adaptive diversification of lineages. Ecol Evol. 2015;5:176–95.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
35.Czárán TL, Hoekstra RF. Killer-sensitive coexistence in metapopulations of micro-organisms. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2003;270:1373–8.
Google Scholar 
36.West SA, Griffin AS, Gardner A, Diggle SP. Social evolution theory for microorganisms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006;4:597–607.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Wagner M, Loy A, Nogueira R, Purkhold U, Lee N, Daims H. Microbial community composition and function in wastewater treatment plants. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2002;81:665–80.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
38.Johnson DR, Lee TK, Park J, Fenner K, Helbling DE. The functional and taxonomic richness of wastewater treatment plant microbial communities are associated with each other and with ambient nitrogen and carbon availability. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:4851–60.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
39.Liébana R, Arregui L, Santos A, Murciano A, Marquina D, Serrano S. Unravelling the interactions among microbial populations found in activated sludge during biofilm formation. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;92:1–13.
Google Scholar 
40.Reasoner DJ, Geldreich EE. A new medium for the enumeration and subculture of bacteria from potable water. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1985;49:1–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
41.Parada AE, Needham DM, Fuhrman JA. Every base matters: assessing small subunit rRNA primers for marine microbiomes with mock communities, time series and global field samples. Environ Microbiol. 2015;18:1403–14.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
42.Junkins EN, Stevenson BS. Using plate-wash PCR and high-throughput sequencing to measure cultivated diversity for natural product discovery efforts. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:1–14.
Google Scholar 
43.Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17:10–12.
Google Scholar 
44.Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJA, Holmes SP. DADA2: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016;13:581–3.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
45.Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:590–6.
Google Scholar 
46.Yilmaz P, Parfrey LW, Yarza P, Gerken J, Pruesse E, Quast C, et al. The SILVA and “all-species Living Tree Project (LTP)” taxonomic frameworks. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:643–8.
Google Scholar 
47.Davis NM, Proctor DM, Holmes SP, Relman DA, Callahan BJ. Simple statistical identification and removal of contaminant sequences in marker-gene and metagenomics data. Microbiome. 2018;6:1–14.
Google Scholar 
48.Wright ES. DECIPHER: Harnessing local sequence context to improve protein multiple sequence alignment. BMC Bioinformatics. 2015;16:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-015-0749-z.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Wright ES. Using DECIPHER v2.0 to analyze big biological sequence data in R. R J. 2016;8:352–9.
Google Scholar 
50.Schliep KP. phangorn: phylogenetic analysis in R. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:592–3.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. Phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:1–11.
Google Scholar 
52.Willis A, Bunge J. Estimating diversity via frequency ratios. Biometrics. 2015;71:1042–9.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
53.Pielou EC. The measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections. J Theor Biol. 1966;13:131–44.
Google Scholar 
54.Levene H. Robust tests for equality of variances. In: Olkin I, editor. Contributions to probability and statistics: essays in honor of Harold Hotelling. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, California, USA; 1960. p. 278–92.55.Fox J, Weisberg S. An R companion to applied regression. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2019.56.Lozupone C, Knight R. UniFrac: a new phylogenetic method for comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:8228–35.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
57.Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al. vegan: community ecology package. R Package; 2019.58.Martin BD, Witten D, Willis AD. Modeling microbial abundances and dysbiosis with beta-binomial regression. Ann Appl Stat. 2020;14:94–115.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
59.Chambers MC, MacLean B, Burke R, Amodei D, Ruderman DL, Neumann S, et al. A cross-platform toolkit for mass spectrometry and proteomics. Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30:918–20.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
60.Pluskal T, Castillo S, Villar-Briones A, Orešič M. MZmine 2: modular framework for processing, visualizing, and analyzing mass spectrometry-based molecular profile data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11:1–11.61.Myers OD, Sumner SJ, Li S, Barne S, Du X. One step forward for reducing false positive and false negative compound identifications from mass spectrometry metabolomics data: new algorithms for constructing extracted ion chromatograms and detecting chromatographic peaks. Anal Chem. 2017;89:8696–703.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
62.Wang M, Carver JJ, Phelan VV, Sanchez LM, Garg N;, Peng Y, et al. Sharing and community curation of mass spectrometry data with GNPS. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;34:828–37.
Google Scholar 
63.Nothias LF, Petras D, Schmid R, Dührkop K, Rainer J, Sarvepalli A, et al. Feature-based molecular networking in the GNPS analysis environment. Nat Methods. 2020;17:905–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-020-0933-6.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, Baliga NS, Wang JT, Ramage D, et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models. Genome Res. 2003;13:2498–504. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110001910481/.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
65.R Core Team. R: a language and environment for R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2018. https://www.r-project.org/.66.Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.
Google Scholar 
67.Djoumbou Feunang Y, Eisner R, Knox C, Chepelev L, Hastings J, Owen G, et al. ClassyFire: automated chemical classification with a comprehensive, computable taxonomy. J Cheminform. 2016;8:1–20.
Google Scholar 
68.O’Brien J, Wright GD. An ecological perspective of microbial secondary metabolism. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2011;22:552–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2011.03.010.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
69.Thierbach S, Wienhold M, Fetzner S, Hennecke U. Synthesis and biological activity of methylated derivatives of the Pseudomonas metabolites HHQ, HQNO and PQS. Beilstein J Org Chem. 2019;15:187–93.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
70.Morales-Soto N, Dunham SJB, Baig NF, Ellis JF, Madukoma CS, Bohn PW, et al. Spatially dependent alkyl quinolone signaling responses to antibiotics in Pseudomonas aeruginosa swarms. J Biol Chem. 2018;293:9544–52.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
71.Heeb S, Fletcher MP, Chhabra SR, Diggle SP, Williams P, Cámara M. Quinolones: from antibiotics to autoinducers. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2011;35:247–74.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
72.Grollman AP. Inhibitors of protein biosynthesis. II. Mode of action of anisomycin. J Biolog Chem. 1967;242:3226–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)95953-3.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Sobin BA, Tanner FW Jr. Anisomycin, a new anti-protozoan antibiotic. J Am Chem Soc. 1954;76:4053–4053.CAS 

Google Scholar 
74.Gross H, Stockwell VO, Henkels MD, Nowak-Thompson B, Loper JE, Gerwick WH. The genomisotopic approach: a systematic method to isolate products of orphan biosynthetic gene clusters. Chem Biol. 2007;14:53–63.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
75.Jang JY, Yang SY, Kim YC, Lee CW, Park MS, Kim JC, et al. Identification of orfamide A as an insecticidal metabolite produced by Pseudomonas protegens F6. J Agric Food Chem. 2013;61:6786–91.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
76.Ma Z, Geudens N, Kieu NP, Sinnaeve D, Ongena M, Martins JC, et al. Biosynthesis, chemical structure, and structure-activity relationship of orfamide lipopeptides produced by Pseudomonas protegens and related species. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1–16.
Google Scholar 
77.Figueira V, Vaz-Moreira I, Silva M, Manaia CM. Diversity and antibiotic resistance of Aeromonas spp. in drinking and waste water treatment plants. Water Res. 2011;45:5599–611.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
78.Skwor T, Stringer S, Haggerty J, Johnson J, Duhr S, Johnson M, et al. Prevalence of potentially pathogenic antibiotic-resistant Aeromonas spp. in treated urban wastewater effluents versus recipient riverine populations: a 3-year comparative study. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2020;86:1–16.
Google Scholar 
79.Janda JM, Abbott SL. The genus Aeromonas: taxonomy, pathogenicity, and infection. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2010;23:35–73.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
80.Rema T, Lawrence JR, Dynes JJ, Hitchcock AP, Korber DR. Microscopic and spectroscopic analyses of chlorhexidine tolerance in Delftia acidovorans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:5673–86.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
81.Assanta MA, Roy D, Lemay MJ, Montpetit D. Attachment of Arcobacter butzleri, a new waterborne pathogen, to water distribution pipe surfaces. J Food Protect. 2002;65:1240–7.
Google Scholar 
82.Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP. Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science. 1999;284:1318–22.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
83.Harrison F, Paul J, Massey RC, Buckling A. Interspecific competition and siderophore-mediated cooperation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. ISME J. 2008;2:49–55.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
84.Inglis RF, Roberts PG, Gardner A, Buckling A. Spite and the scale of competition in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Am Nat. 2011;178:276–85.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
85.van der Meij A, Worsley SF, Hutchings MI, van Wezel GP. Chemical ecology of antibiotic production by Actinomycetes. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2017;41:392–416.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
86.Traxler MF, Kolter R. Natural products in soil microbe interactions and evolution. Nat Prod Rep. 2015;32:956–70.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
87.Kinkel LL, Schlatter DC, Xiao K, Baines AD. Sympatric inhibition and niche differentiation suggest alternative coevolutionary trajectories among Streptomycetes. ISME J. 2014;8:249–56. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2013.175. [Internet]Available fromCAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
88.Pacala SW, Levin SA. Biologically generated spatial pattern and the coexistence of competing species. In: Tilman D, Kareiva P, editors. Spatial ecology: the role of space in population dynamics and interspecific interactions; Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA; 1997.89.Zhou J, Ning D. Stochastic community assembly: does it matter in microbial ecology? Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2017;81:1–32.
Google Scholar 
90.Haig SJ, Quince C, Davies RL, Dorea CC, Collinsa G. The relationship between microbial community evenness and function in slow sand filters. mBio. 2015;6:1–12.
Google Scholar 
91.Wittebolle L, Marzorati M, Clement L, Balloi A, Daffonchio D, Heylen K, et al. Initial community evenness favours functionality under selective stress. Nature. 2009;458:623–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
92.Davies J, Ryan KS. Introducing the parvome: bioactive compounds in the microbial world. ACS Chem Biol. 2012;7:252–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
93.Bassler BL, Losick R. Bacterially speaking. Cell. 2006;125:237–46.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
94.Venturi V. Regulation of quorum sensing in Pseudomonas. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2006;30:274–91.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
95.Granato ET, Meiller-Legrand TA, Foster KR. The evolution and ecology of bacterial warfare. Curr Biol. 2019;29:R521–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.04.024.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
96.Estrela S, Brown SP. Community interactions and spatial structure shape selection on antibiotic resistant lineages. PLoS Comput Biol. 2018;14:1–21.CAS 

Google Scholar 
97.Hibbing ME, Fuqua C, Parsek MR, Peterson SB. Bacterial competition: surviving and thriving in the microbial jungle. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:15–25.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
98.Garcia-Garcera M, Rocha EPC. Community diversity and habitat structure shape the repertoire of extracellular proteins in bacteria. Nat Commun. 2020;11:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14572-x.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Butchart, S. H. M. et al. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328, 1164–1168 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Buchanan, G. M., Butchart, S. H. M., Chandler, G. & Gregory, R. D. Assessment of national-level progress towards elements of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Ecol. Indic. 116, 106497 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Butchart, S. H. M. et al. in Global Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Science–Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (eds Berkes, F. & Brooks, T. M.) Ch. 3 (IPBES Secretariat, 2019); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.38320534.Maxwell, S. L. et al. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586, 217–227 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Locke, H. Nature needs half: a necessary and hopeful new agenda for protected areas. Nat. N. S. W. 58, 7–17 (2014).
Google Scholar 
6.Dinerstein, E. et al. An ecoregion-based approach to protecting half the terrestrial realm. Bioscience 67, 534–545 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Dinerstein, E. et al. A global deal for nature: guiding principles, milestones, and targets. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2869 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Mehrabi, Z., Ellis, E. C. & Ramankutty, N. The challenge of feeding the world while conserving half the planet. Nat. Sustain. 1, 409–412 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Kok, M. T. J. et al. Assessing ambitious nature conservation strategies within a 2 degree warmer and food-secure world. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.08.04.236489 (2020).10.Rosa, I. M. D. et al. Multiscale scenarios for nature futures. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1416–1419 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Obermeister, N. Local knowledge, global ambitions: IPBES and the advent of multi-scale models and scenarios. Sustain. Sci. 14, 843–856 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Pereira, L. M. et al. Developing multiscale and integrative nature–people scenarios using the Nature Futures Framework. People Nat. 2, 1172–1195 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Rabin, S. S. et al. Impacts of future agricultural change on ecosystem service indicators. Earth Syst. Dynam. 11, 357–376 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Springmann, M. et al. Global and regional health effects of future food production under climate change: a modelling study. Lancet 387, 1937–1946 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Springmann, M. et al. Health and nutritional aspects of sustainable diet strategies and their association with environmental impacts: a global modelling analysis with country-level detail. Lancet Planet. Health 2, e451–e461 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Dinerstein, E. et al. A “Global Safety Net” to reverse biodiversity loss and stabilize Earth’s climate. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb2824 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Locke, H. et al. Three global conditions for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use: an implementation framework. Natl Sci. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwz136 (2019).18.Waldron, A. et al. Protecting 30% of the Planet for Nature: Costs, Benefits and Economic Implications (Campaign for Nature, 2020).19.Strassburg, B. B. N. et al. Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration. Nature 586, 724–729 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.O’Neill, B. C. et al. The roads ahead: narratives for Shared Socioeconomic Pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 169–180 (2015).21.Riahi, K. et al. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 153–168 (2017).22.Tauli-Corpuz, V., Alcorn, J., Molnar, A., Healy, C. & Barrow, E. Cornered by PAs: adopting rights-based approaches to enable cost-effective conservation and climate action. World Dev. 130, 104923 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Kashwan, P. V., Duffy, R., Massé, F., Asiyanbi, A. P. & Marijnen, E. From racialized neocolonial global conservation to an inclusive and regenerative conservation. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 63, 4–19 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
24.The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2017: Building Resilience for Peace and Food Security (FAO, 2017).25.Schleicher, J. et al. Protecting half of the planet could directly affect over one billion people. Nat. Sustain. 2, 1094–1096 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Allan, J. R. et al. The minimum land area requiring conservation attention to safeguard biodiversity. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/839977 (2021).27.Brockington, D. & Wilkie, D. Protected areas and poverty. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370, 20140271 (2015).28.Protected Planet Report 2020 (UNEP–WCMC and IUCN, 2021).29.Naidoo, R. et al. Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav3006 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Dutta, A., Allan, J., Shimray, G., General, S. & Pact, A. I. P. RE: “A ‘Global Safety Net’ to reverse biodiversity loss and stabilize Earth’s climate”. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb2824 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Simmons, B. A., Nolte, C. & McGowan, J. Tough questions for the “30 × 30” conservation agenda. Front. Ecol. Environ. 19, 322–323 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Jung, M. et al. Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7 (2021).33.The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Version 2019.2 (IUCN, 2019).34.The World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA Partnership, 2019); www.keybiodiversityareas.org35.Mogg, S., Fastre, C. & Visconti, P. Targeted expansion of protected areas to maximise the persistence of terrestrial mammals. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/608992 (2019).36.Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual (Gurobi Optimization, 2019).37.Hanson, J. O. et al. prioritizr: Systematic Conservation Prioritization in R. R package version 5.0.3 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=prioritizr (2020).38.Hurtt, G., Chini, L., Frolking, S. & Sahajpal, R. Land-Use Harmonization (LUH2) (Global Ecology Laboratory, Univ. Maryland, 2017).39.Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, accessed April 2019); www.protectedplanet.net40.Dellink, R., Chateau, J., Lanzi, E. & Magné, B. Long-term economic growth projections in the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 200–214 (2017).41.Jones, B. & O’Neill, B. C. Spatially explicit global population scenarios consistent with the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 84003 (2016).42.van Vuuren, D. P. et al. The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Climatic Change 109, 5–31 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Engström, K. et al. Assessing uncertainties in global cropland futures using a conditional probabilistic modelling framework. Earth Syst. Dynam. 7, 893–915 (2016).44.Alexander, P. et al. Drivers for global agricultural land use change: the nexus of diet, population, yield and bioenergy. Glob. Environ. Change 35, 138–147 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Popp, A. et al. Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options. Climatic Change 123, 495–509 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.GBD Results Tool (IHME, 2020); http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool47.KC, S. & Lutz, W. The human core of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways: population scenarios by age, sex and level of education for all countries to 2100. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 181–192 (2017). More

1.Gaston, K. J. Global patterns of biodiversity. Nature 405, 220–227 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Friis, E. M., Crane, P. R. & Pedersen, K. R. Early Flowers and Angiosperm Evolution (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).3.Blomenkemper, P. et al. A hidden cradle of plant evolution in Permian tropical lowlands. Science 362, 1414–1416 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Kenrick, P. & Crane, P. R. The Origin and Early Diversification of Land Plants: A Cladistic Study (Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, 1997).5.Puttick, M. N. et al. The interrelationships of land plants and the nature of the nature of the ancestral embryophyte. Curr. Biol. 28, 733–745 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Morris, J. L. et al. The timescale of early land plant evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 2274–2283 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Wellman, C. H., Steemans, P. & Vecoli, M. in Early Palaeozoic Biogeography and Palaeogeography (eds Harper, D. & Servais, T.) Ch. 29 (Geological Society of London, 2014).8.Edwards, D. et al. Piecing together the eophytes—a new group of ancient plants containing cryptospores. New Phytol. 233, 1440–1455 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Gray, J. The microfossil record of early land plants; advances in understanding of early terrestrialization, 1970–1984. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 309, 167–195 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Wellman, C. H. Cryptospores from the type area for the Caradoc Series (Ordovician) in southern Britain. Palaeontology 55, 103–136 (1996).
Google Scholar 
11.Torsvik, T. H. & Cocks, L. R. M. Earth History and Palaeogeography (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).12.Harland, W. B. The Geology of Svalbard (Geological Society of London, 1997).13.Davies, N. S., Berry, C. M., Marshall, J. E. A., Wellman, C. H. & Lindemann, F.-J. The Devonian landscape factory: plant–sediment interactions in the Old Red Sandstone of Svalbard and the rise of vegetation as a biogeomorphic agent. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2020-225 (2021).14.Blieck, A., Goujet, D. & Janvier, P. The vertebrate stratigraphy of the Lower Devonian (Red Bay Group and Wood Bay Formation) of Spitsbergen. Mod. Geol. 11, 197–217 (1987).
Google Scholar 
15.Blom, H. & Goujet, D. Thelodont scales from the Lower Devonian Red Bay Group, Spitsbergen. Palaeontology 45, 795–820 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Pernègre, V. N. & Blieck, A. A revised heterostrachan-cased ichthyostratigraphy of the Wood Bay Formation (Lower Devonian, Spitsbergen), and correlation with Russian Arctic archipelagos. Geodiversitas 38, 5–20 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Wellman, C. H. & Richardson, J. B. Sporomorph assemblages from the ‘Lower Old Red Sandstone’ of Lorne Scotland. Spec. Pap. Palaeontol. 55, 41–101.18.Richardson J. B. Taxonomy and classification of some new Early Devonian cryptospores from England. Spec. Pap. Palaeontol. 55, 7–40 (1996).19.Steemans, P. Etude palynostratgraphique du Devonian Inferieur dans l’Ouest de l’Europe. Mém. Soc. Géol. Minér. Bretagne 27, 1–453 (1989).
Google Scholar 
20.Rodriguez, R. M. Palinologia de las Formaciones del Silurico Superior-Devonico Inferior de la Cordillera Cantabrica, Noroeste de España (Institución Fray Bernardino de Sahagún, de la Excelentísima Diputación provincial de León y del Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de León, 1983).21.Richardson, J. B., Rodriguez, R. M. & Sutherland, S. J. E. Palynological zonation of Mid-Palaeozoic sequences from the Cantabrian Mountains, NW Spain: implications for inter-regional and interfacies correlation of the Ludfor/Pridoli and Silurian/Devonian boundaries, and plant dispersal patterns. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Lond. 57, 115–162 (2001).
Google Scholar 
22.Rubinstein, C. & Steemans, P. Miospore assemblages from the Silurian–Devonian boundary, in borehole A1–61, Ghadames Basin, Libya. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 118, 397–412 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Spina, A. & Vecoli, M. Palynostratigraphy and vegetational change in the Siluro-Devonian of the Ghadamis basin, North Africa. Palaeogeog. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 282, 1–18 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Hao, S. G. & Gensel, P. G. in Plants Invade the Land (eds Gensel, P. G. & Edwards, D.) 103–119 (Columbia Univ. Press, 2001).25.Wellman, C. H. et al. Spore assemblages from the Lower Devonian Xujiachong Formation from Qujing, Yunnan, China. Palaeontology 55, 583–611 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Hao, S. & Xue, J. The Early Devonian Posongchong Flora of Yunnan (Science Press, 2013).27.Edwards, D., & Li, C.-S. Further insights into the Lower Devonian terrestrial vegetation of Sichuan Province, China. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 253, 37–48 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Gao, L. Early Devonian spore and acritarchs from the Guijiatum Formation of Qujing, China. Bull. Inst. Geol. Chin. Acad. Sci. 9, 125–136 (1984).
Google Scholar 
29.Tian, J. et al. Late Silurian to early Devonian palynomorphs from Qujing, Yunnan, southwest China. Acta Geol. Sin. 85, 559–568 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Høeg, O. A. The Downtonian and Dittonian flora of Spitsbergen. Skr. Svalbard Ishavet 83, 1–229 (1942).
Google Scholar 
31.Morris, J. L., Edwards, D. & Richardson, J. B. in Transformative Paleobotany (eds Krings, M. et al.) 49–67 (Academic Press, 2018).32.McSweeney, F. R., Shimeta, J. & Buckeridge, J. St. J. S. Two new genera of early Tracheophyta (Zosterophyllaceae) from the upper Silurian–Lower Devonian of Victoria, Australia. Alcheringa https://doi.org/10.1080/03115518.2020.1744725 (2020).33.Xue, J. H. et al. Silurian–Devonian terrestrial revolution in South China: taxonomy, diversity, and character evolution of vascular plants in a paleogeographically isolated low-latitude region. Earth Sci. Rev. 180, 92–125 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Hao, S. G. et al. Zosterophyllum Penhallow around the Silurian–Devonian boundary of northeastern Yunnan, China. Int. J. Plant Sci. 168, 477–489 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Hao, S. G. et al. Earliest rooting system and root: shoot ratio from a new Zosterophyllum plant. New Phytol. 185, 217–225 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Xue, J.-Z. Two zosterophyll plants from the Lower Devonian (Lochkovian) Xitun Formation of northeastern Yunnan, China. Acta Geol. Sin. 83, 504–512 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Xue, J.-Z. Lochkovian plants from the Xitun Formation of Yunnan, China and their palaeophytogeographical significance. Geol. Mag. 149, 333–344 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Sun, Y. et al. Lethally high temperatures during the early Triassic greenhouse. Science 6105, 366–370 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Meng, X. Y. & Gai, Z. K. Falxcornus, a new genus of Tridensaspidae (Galeaspida, stem-Gnathostomata) from the Lower Devonian in Qujing, Yunnan, China. Hist. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2021.1952198 (2021).40.Traverse, A. Paleopalynology 2nd edn (Springer, 2007). More

1.Hungate, B. A., Dukes, J. S., Shaw, M. R., Luo, Y. & Field, C. B. Nitrogen and climate change. Science 302, 1512–1513 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Wieder, W. R., Cleveland, C. C., Smith, W. K. & Todd-Brown, K. Future productivity and carbon storage limited by terrestrial nutrient availability. Nat. Geosci. 8, 441–444 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Sulman, B. N. et al. Diverse mycorrhizal associations enhance terrestrial C storage in a global model. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 33, 501–523 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Wieder, W. R., Cleveland, C. C., Lawrence, D. M. & Bonan, G. B. Effects of model structural uncertainty on carbon cycle projections: biological nitrogen fixation as a case study. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 044016 (2015).5.Shi, M., Fisher, J. B., Brzostek, E. R. & Phillips, R. P. Carbon cost of plant nitrogen acquisition: global carbon cycle impact from an improved plant nitrogen cycle in the Community Land Model. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 1299–1314 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Meyerholt, J., Zaehle, S. & Smith, M. J. Variability of projected terrestrial biosphere responses to elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 due to uncertainty in biological nitrogen fixation. Biogeosciences 13, 1491–1518 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Fisher, J. B. et al. Carbon cost of plant nitrogen acquisition: a mechanistic, globally applicable model of plant nitrogen uptake, retranslocation, and fixation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 24, GB1014 (2010).8.Wang, Y. P. & Houlton, B. Z. Nitrogen constraints on terrestrial carbon uptake: Implications for the global carbon-climate feedback. Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L24403 (2009).9.Houlton, B. Z., Wang, Y.-P., Vitousek, P. M. & Field, C. B. A unifying framework for dinitrogen fixation in the terrestrial biosphere. Nature 454, 327–330 (2008).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Steidinger, B. S. et al. Climatic controls of decomposition drive the global biogeography of forest-tree symbioses. Nature 569, 404–408 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
11.van Velzen, R., Doyle, J. J. & Geurts, R. A resurrected scenario: single gain and massive loss of nitrogen-fixing nodulation. Trends Plant Sci. 24, 49–57 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Mills, B. et al. Modelling the long-term carbon cycle, atmospheric CO2, and Earth surface temperature from late Neoproterozoic to present day. Gondwana Res. 67, 172–186 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Fowler, D. et al. The global nitrogen cycle in the twenty-first century. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 20130164 (2013).14.Rogers, A. et al. A roadmap for improving the representation of photosynthesis in Earth system models. New Phytol. 213, 22–42 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Prévost, D., Antoun, H. & Bordeleau, L. M. Effects of low temperatures on nitrogenase activity in sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia) nodulated by Arctic rhizobia. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 45, 205–210 (1987).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Rainbird, R. M., Atkins, C. A. & Pate, J. S. Effect of temperature on nitrogenase functioning in cowpea nodules. Plant Physiol. 73, 392–394 (1983).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Dalton, D. A. & Zobel, D. B. Ecological aspects of nitrogen fixation by Purshia tridentata. Plant Soil 48, 57–80 (1977).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Waughman, G. J. The effect of temperature on nitrogenase activity. J. Exp. Bot. 28, 949–960 (1977).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Wheeler, C. T. The causation of the diurnal changes in nitrogen fixation in the nodules of Alnus glutinosa. New Phytol. 70, 487–495 (1971).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Schomberg, H. H. & Weaver, R. W. Nodulation, nitrogen fixation, and early growth of arrowleaf clover in response to root temperature and starter nitrogen. Agron. J. 84, 1046 (1992).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Kou-Giesbrecht, S. & Menge, D. N. L. Nitrogen-fixing trees increase soil nitrous oxide emissions: a meta-analysis. Ecology 102, e03415 (2021).22.Bytnerowicz, T. A., Min, E., Griffin, K. L. & Menge, D. N. L. Repeatable, continuous and real‐time estimates of coupled nitrogenase activity and carbon exchange at the whole‐plant scale. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 960–970 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Menge, D. N. L., Lichstein, J. W. & Ángeles-Pérez, G. Nitrogen fixation strategies can explain the latitudinal shift in nitrogen-fixing tree abundance. Ecology 95, 2236–2245 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Staccone, A. et al. A spatially explicit, empirical estimate of tree-based biological nitrogen fixation in forests of the United States. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 32, e2019GB006241 (2020).25.Cierjacks, A. et al. Biological flora of the British Isles: Robinia pseudoacacia. J. Ecol. 101, 1623–1640 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Benson, D. R. & Dawson, J. O. Recent advances in the biogeography and genecology of symbiotic Frankia and its host plants. Physiol. Plant. 130, 318–330 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Kumarathunge, D. P. et al. Acclimation and adaptation components of the temperature dependence of plant photosynthesis at the global scale. New Phytol. 222, 768–784 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Heskel, M. A. et al. Convergence in the temperature response of leaf respiration across biomes and plant functional types. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 3832–3837 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Kou-Giesbrecht, S. et al. A novel representation of biological nitrogen fixation and competitive dynamics between nitrogen-fixing and non-fixing plants in a land model (GFDL LM4.1-BNF). Biogeosciences 18, 4143–4183 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Hardy, R. W. F., Holsten, R. D., Jackson, E. K. & Burns, R. C. The acetylene-ethylene assay for N2 fixation: laboratory and field evaluation. Plant Physiol. 43, 1185–1207 (1968).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Cassar, N., Bellenger, J. P., Jackson, R. B., Karr, J. & Barnett, B. A. N2 fixation estimates in real-time by cavity ring-down laser absorption spectroscopy. Oecologia 168, 335–342 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Taylor, B. N., Chazdon, R. L. & Menge, D. N. L. Successional dynamics of nitrogen fixation and forest growth in regenerating Costa Rican rainforests. Ecology 100, e02637 (2019).34.Kok, B. A Critical Consideration of the Quantum Yield of Chlorella-Photosynthesis (W. Junk, 1948).35.Liang, L. L. et al. Macromolecular rate theory (MMRT) provides a thermodynamics rationale to underpin the convergent temperature response in plant leaf respiration. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 1538–1547 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Gunderson, C. A., O’hara, K. H., Campion, C. M., Walker, A. V. & Edwards, N. T. Thermal plasticity of photosynthesis: the role of acclimation in forest responses to a warming climate. Glob. Change Biol. 16, 2272–2286 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Medlyn, B. E. et al. Temperature response of parameters of a biochemically based model of photosynthesis. II. A review of experimental data. Plant Cell Environ. 25, 1167–1179 (2002).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Slot, M. & Winter, K. In situ temperature relationships of biochemical and stomatal controls of photosynthesis in four lowland tropical tree species. Plant Cell Environ. 40, 3055–3068 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Murphy, B. K. & Stinziano, J. R. A derivation error that affects carbon balance models exists in the current implementation of the modified Arrhenius function. New Phytol. 6, 2371–2381 (2021).40.Yan, W. & Hunt, L. A. An equation for modelling the temperature response of plants using only the cardinal temperatures. Ann. Bot. 84, 607–614 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Farquhar, G. D. & Busch, F. A. Changes in the chloroplastic CO2 concentration explain much of the observed Kok effect: a model. New Phytol. 214, 570–584 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Farquhar, G. D., Von Caemmerer, S. & Berry, J. A. A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149, 78–90 (1980).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Duursma, R. A. Plantecophys – an R package for analysing and modelling leaf gas exchange data. PLoS ONE 10, e0143346 (2015).44.Bernacchi, C. J., Singsaas, E. L., Pimentel, C., Portis, A. R. Jr & Long, S. P. Improved temperature response functions for models of Rubisco-limited photosynthesis. Plant Cell Environ. 24, 253–260 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.De Kauwe, M. G. et al. A test of the ‘one-point method’ for estimating maximum carboxylation capacity from field-measured, light-saturated photosynthesis. New Phytol. 210, 1130–1144 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Bolker, B. M. & R. Core Team. bbmle: Tools for General Maximum Likelihood Estimation (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2014).47.Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Multimodel inference: understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol. Methods Res. 33, 261–304 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Bolker, B. M. Ecological Models and Data in R (Princeton Univ. Press, 2008).49.Venables, W. & Ripley, B. Modern Applied Statistics with S (Springer, 2002).50.Bytnerowicz, T. A. tbytnero/Bytnerowicz-Akana-Griffin-Menge-N-fix-Temp: Bytnerowicz_Akana_Griffin_Menge_2022_Nature_Plants https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5764790 (2021). More

1.Arora, V. K. & Boer, G. J. A parameterization of leaf phenology for the terrestrial ecosystem component of climate models. Glob. Change Biol. 11, 39–59 (2005).
Google Scholar 
2.Richardson, A. D. et al. Terrestrial biosphere models need better representation of vegetation phenology: results from the North American Carbon Program Site Synthesis. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 566–584 (2012).
Google Scholar 
3.Peñuelas, J., Rutishauser, T. & Filella, I. Phenology feedbacks on climate change. Science 324, 887–888 (2009).
Google Scholar 
4.Richardson, A. D. et al. Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365, 3227–3246 (2010).
Google Scholar 
5.Diez, J. M. et al. Forecasting phenology: from species variability to community patterns. Ecol. Lett. 15, 545–553 (2012).
Google Scholar 
6.Hegland, S. J., Nielsen, A., Lazaro, A., Bjerknes, A. L. & Totland, O. How does climate warming affect plant-pollinator interactions? Ecol. Lett. 12, 184–195 (2009).
Google Scholar 
7.Fu, Y. H. et al. Declining global warming effects on the phenology of spring leaf unfolding. Nature 526, 104–107 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
8.Zhang, H., Yuan, W., Liu, S. & Dong, W. Divergent responses of leaf phenology to changing temperature among plant species and geographical regions. Ecosphere 6, art250 (2015).
Google Scholar 
9.Zhang, G., Zhang, Y., Dong, J. & Xiao, X. Green-up dates in the Tibetan Plateau have continuously advanced from 1982 to 2011. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 4309–4314 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
10.Menzel, A. et al. European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern. Glob. Change Biol. 12, 1969–1976 (2006).
Google Scholar 
11.Cleland, E. E., Chuine, I., Menzel, A., Mooney, H. A. & Schwartz, M. D. Shifting plant phenology in response to global change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 357–365 (2007).
Google Scholar 
12.Menzel, A., Sparks, T. H., Estrella, N. & Roy, D. B. Altered geographic and temporal variability in phenology in response to climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 15, 498–504 (2006).
Google Scholar 
13.Zhang, X., Tarpley, D. & Sullivan, J. T. Diverse responses of vegetation phenology to a warming climate. Geophys. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007gl031447 (2007).14.Fitter, A. H. & Fitter, R. S. Rapid changes in flowering time in British plants. Science 296, 1689–1691 (2002).CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Primack, R. B. et al. Spatial and interspecific variability in phenological responses to warming temperatures. Biol. Conserv. 142, 2569–2577 (2009).
Google Scholar 
16.Cleland, E. E., Chiariello, N. R., Loarie, S. R., Mooney, H. A. & Field, C. B. Diverse responses of phenology to global changes in a grassland ecosystem. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 13740–13744 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
17.Wang, H., Dai, J., Zheng, J. & Ge, Q. Temperature sensitivity of plant phenology in temperate and subtropical regions of China from 1850 to 2009. Int. J. Climatol. 35, 913–922 (2015).
Google Scholar 
18.Chuine, I. M., Morin, X. & Bugmann, H. Warming, photoperiods, and tree phenology. Science 329, 277–278 (2010).
Google Scholar 
19.Chuine, I. A unified model for budburst of trees. J. Theor. Biol. 207, 337–347 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Murray, M., Cannell, M. G. R. & Smith, R. I. Date of budburst of fifteen tree species in Britain following climatic warming. J. Appl. Ecol. 26, 693–700 (1989).
Google Scholar 
21.Man, R., Lu, P. & Dang, Q. L. Insufficient chilling effects vary among boreal tree species and chilling duration. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 1354 (2017).
Google Scholar 
22.Cannell, M. G. R. & Smith, R. I. L. Thermal time, chill days and prediction of budburst in Picea sitchensis. J. Appl. Ecol. 20, 951–963 (1983).
Google Scholar 
23.Fu, Y. H. et al. Increased heat requirement for leaf flushing in temperate woody species over 1980-2012: effects of chilling, precipitation and insolation. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 2687–2697 (2015).
Google Scholar 
24.Zhang, H., Liu, S., Regnier, P. & Yuan, W. New insights on plant phenological response to temperature revealed from long-term widespread observations in China. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 2066–2078 (2018).
Google Scholar 
25.Yu, H., Luedeling, E. & Xu, J. Winter and spring warming result in delayed spring phenology on the Tibetan Plateau. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 22151–22156 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Asse, D. et al. Warmer winters reduce the advance of tree spring phenology induced by warmer springs in the Alps. Agric. For. Meteorol. 252, 220–230 (2018).
Google Scholar 
27.Ettinger, A. K. et al. Winter temperatures predominate in spring phenological responses to warming. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 1137–1142 (2020).
Google Scholar 
28.Chuine, I. & Régnière, J. Process-based models of phenology for plants and animals. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 48, 159–182 (2017).
Google Scholar 
29.Caffarra, A., Donnelly, A., Chuine, I. & Jones, M. B. Modelling the timing of Betula pubescens budburst. I. Temperature and photoperiod: a conceptual model. Clim. Res. 46, 147–157 (2011).
Google Scholar 
30.Luterbacher, J., Dietrich, D., Xoplaki, E., Grosjean, M. & Wanner, H. European seasonal and annual temperature variability, trends, and extremes since 1500. Science 303, 1499–1503 (2004).CAS 

Google Scholar 
31.Ciais, P. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).32.Fu, Y. H. et al. Daylength helps temperate deciduous trees to leaf-out at the optimal time. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 2410–2418 (2019).
Google Scholar 
33.Wolkovich, E. M. et al. A simple explanation for declining temperature sensitivity with warming. Glob. Change Biol. 27, 4947–4949 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
34.Templ, B. et al. Pan European Phenological database (PEP725): a single point of access for European data. Int. J. Biometeorol. 62, 1109–1113 (2018).
Google Scholar 
35.Kramer, K. Selecting a model to predict the onset of growth of Fagus sylvatica. J. Appl. Ecol. 31, 172–181 (1994).
Google Scholar 
36.Chuine, I., Cour, P. & Rousseau, D.-D. Selecting models to predict the timing of flowering of temperate trees: implications for tree phenology modelling. Plant Cell Environ. 22, 1–13 (1999).37.Savas, R. Investigations on the annual cycle of development of forest trees. II. Autumn dormancy and winter dormancy https://eurekamag.com/research/000/414/000414639.php (1974).38.Hänninen, H. Modelling bud dormancy release in trees from cool and temperate regions. Acta. Fenn. 14, 499–454 (1990).
Google Scholar 
39.Harrington, C. A., Gould, P. J. & St. Clair, J. B. Modeling the effects of winter environment on dormancy release of Douglas-fir. Ecol. Manag. 259, 798–808 (2010).
Google Scholar 
40.Zhang, H., Yuan, W., Liu, S., Dong, W. & Fu, Y. Sensitivity of flowering phenology to changing temperature in China. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 120, 1658–1665 (2015).
Google Scholar 
41.Richardson, A. D. et al. Influence of spring phenology on seasonal and annual carbon balance in two contrasting New England forests. Tree Physiol. 29, 321–331 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
42.Piao, S. et al. Plant phenology and global climate change: current progresses and challenges. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 1922–1940 (2019).
Google Scholar 
43.Körner, C. & Basler, D. Phenology under global warming. Science 327, 1461–1462 (2010).
Google Scholar 
44.Zohner, C. M. & Renner, S. S. Common garden comparison of the leaf-out phenology of woody species from different native climates, combined with herbarium records, forecasts long-term change. Ecol. Lett. 17, 1016–1025 (2014).
Google Scholar 
45.Vitasse, Y. & Basler, D. What role for photoperiod in the bud burst phenology of European beech. Eur. J. For. Res. 132, 1–8 (2012).
Google Scholar 
46.Lenz, A., Hoch, G., Körner, C. & Vitasse, Y. Convergence of leaf-out towards minimum risk of freezing damage in temperate trees. Funct. Ecol. 30, 1480–1490 (2016).
Google Scholar 
47.Wang, Y. et al. Forest controls spring phenology of juvenile Smith fir along elevational gradients on the southeastern Tibetan Plateau. Int. J. Biometeorol. 63, 963–972 (2019).
Google Scholar 
48.Marquis, B., Bergeron, Y., Simard, M. & Tremblay, F. Probability of sping frosts, not growing degree-days, drives onset of spruce bud burst in plantations at the boreal-temperate forest ecotone. Front. Plant Sci. 11, 1031 (2020).
Google Scholar 
49.Shen, M., Piao, S., Cong, N., Zhang, G. & Jassens, I. A. Precipitation impacts on vegetation spring phenology on the Tiberan Plateau. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 3647–3656 (2015).
Google Scholar 
50.Liu et al. Temperature, precipitation, and insolation effects on autumn vegetation phenology in temperate China. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 644–655 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
51.Minder, J. R., Mote, P. W. & Lundquist, J. D. Surface temperature lapse rates over complex terrain: lessons from the Cascade Mountains. J. Geophys. Res. 115, D14122 (2010).
Google Scholar 
52.Navarro-Serrano et al. Elevation effects on air temperature in a topographically complex mountain valley in the Spanish Pyrenees. Atmosphere 11, 656 (2020).
Google Scholar 
53.Chen, L. et al. Leaf senescence exhibits stronger climatic responses during warm than during cold autumns. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 777–780 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
54.Leys, C., Ley, C., Klein, O., Bernard, P. & Licata, L. Detecting outliers: do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 764–766 (2013).
Google Scholar 
55.Beer, C. et al. Harmonized European long-term climate data for assessing the effect of changing temporal variability on land–atmosphere CO2 fluxes. J. Clim. 27, 4815–4834 (2014).
Google Scholar 
56.Olsson, C. & Jönsson, A. M. Process-based models not always better than empirical models for simulating budburst of Norway spruce and birch in Europe. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 3492–3507 (2014).
Google Scholar 
57.Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S. & Gupta, V. K. Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J. Hydrol. 158, 265–284 (1994).
Google Scholar 
58.Bluemel, K. & Chmielewski, F. Shortcomings of classical phenological forcing models and a way to overcome them. Agric. For. Meteorol. 164, 10–19 (2012).
Google Scholar  More

1.Brooks, B. W. et al. Are harmful algal blooms becoming the greatest inland water quality threat to public health and aquatic ecosystems? Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35, 6–13 (2016).
Google Scholar 
2.Lopez, C., Jewett, E., Dortch, Q., Walton, B. & Hudnell, H. Scientific Assessment of Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms (United States National Ocean Service, 2008)3.Huisman, J. et al. Cyanobacterial blooms. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 16, 471–483 (2018).
Google Scholar 
4.Paerl, H. W. & Paul, V. J. Climate change: links to global expansion of harmful cyanobacteria. Water Res. 46, 1349–1363 (2012).
Google Scholar 
5.Carmichael, W. W. The toxins of cyanobacteria. Sci. Am. 270, 78–86 (1994).
Google Scholar 
6.Carmichael, W. W. et al. Human fatalities from cyanobacteria: chemical and biological evidence for cyanotoxins. Environ. Health Persp. 109, 663–668 (2001).
Google Scholar 
7.Botswana: mystery elephant deaths caused by cyanobacteria. BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54234396 (2020).8.Paerl, H. W. & Huisman, J. Blooms like it hot. Science 320, 57–58 (2008).
Google Scholar 
9.O’Neil, J. M., Davis, T. W., Burford, M. A. & Gobler, C. J. The rise of harmful cyanobacteria blooms: the potential roles of eutrophication and climate change. Harmful Algae 14, 313–334 (2012).
Google Scholar 
10.Kutser, T. Quantitative detection of chlorophyll in cyanobacterial blooms by satellite remote sensing. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 2179–2189 (2004).
Google Scholar 
11.Kutser, T., Metsamaa, L., Strömbeck, N. & Vahtmäe, E. Monitoring cyanobacterial blooms by satellite remote sensing. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 67, 303–312 (2006).
Google Scholar 
12.Binding, C. E., Pizzolato, L. & Zeng, C. EOLakeWatch; delivering a comprehensive suite of remote sensing algal bloom indices for enhanced monitoring of Canadian eutrophic lakes. Ecol. Indic. 121, 106999 (2021).
Google Scholar 
13.Stumpf, R. P. et al. Challenges for mapping cyanotoxin patterns from remote sensing of cyanobacteria. Harmful Algae 54, 160–173 (2016).
Google Scholar 
14.Matthews, M. W. Eutrophication and cyanobacterial blooms in South African inland waters: 10 years of MERIS observations. Remote Sens. Environ. 155, 161–177 (2014).
Google Scholar 
15.Mishra, S. et al. Measurement of cyanobacterial bloom magnitude using satellite remote sensing. Sci. Rep. 9, 18310 (2019).
Google Scholar 
16.Hu, C. et al. Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) observations of cyanobacteria blooms in Taihu Lake, China. J. Geophys. Res. 115, C04002 (2010).
Google Scholar 
17.Song, K. et al. Climatic versus anthropogenic controls of decadal trends (1983–2017) in algal blooms in lakes and reservoirs across China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 2929–2938 (2021).
Google Scholar 
18.Coffer, M. M., Schaeffer, B. A., Darling, J. A., Urquhart, E. A. & Salls, W. B. Quantifying national and regional cyanobacterial occurrence in US lakes using satellite remote sensing. Ecol. Indic. 111, 105976 (2020).
Google Scholar 
19.Ho, J., Michalak, A. & Pahlevan, N. Widespread global increase in intense lake phytoplankton blooms since the 1980s. Nature 574, 667–670 (2019).
Google Scholar 
20.Dierssen, H. M., Kudela, R. M., Ryan, J. P. & Zimmerman, R. C. Red and black tides: quantitative analysis of water-leaving radiance and perceived color for phytoplankton, colored dissolved organic matter, and suspended sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 51, 2646–2659 (2006).
Google Scholar 
21.Michalak, A. M. et al. Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 6448–6452 (2013).
Google Scholar 
22.Binding, C., Greenberg, T., McCullough, G., Watson, S. & Page, E. An analysis of satellite-derived chlorophyll and algal bloom indices on Lake Winnipeg. J. Great Lakes Res. 44, 436–446 (2018).
Google Scholar 
23.Guo, L. Doing battle with the green monster of Taihu Lake. Science 317, 1166–1166 (2007).
Google Scholar 
24.Moradi, M. Comparison of the efficacy of MODIS and MERIS data for detecting cyanobacterial blooms in the southern Caspian Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 87, 311–322 (2014).
Google Scholar 
25.Schindler, D. W. Eutrophication and recovery in experimental lakes: implications for lake management. Science 184, 897–899 (1974).
Google Scholar 
26.Qin, B. et al. Water depth underpins the relative roles and fates of nitrogen and phosphorus in lakes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 3191–3198 (2020).
Google Scholar 
27.Beman, J. M., Arrigo, K. R. & Matson, P. A. Agricultural runoff fuels large phytoplankton blooms in vulnerable areas of the ocean. Nature 434, 211–214 (2005).
Google Scholar 
28.Yu, C. et al. Managing nitrogen to restore water quality in China. Nature 567, 516–520 (2019).
Google Scholar 
29.Zhang, X. et al. Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature 528, 51–59 (2015).
Google Scholar 
30.Hobbie, S. E. et al. Contrasting nitrogen and phosphorus budgets in urban watersheds and implications for managing urban water pollution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 4177–4182 (2017).
Google Scholar 
31.Wang, Z. China’s wastewater treatment goals. Science 338, 604–604 (2012).
Google Scholar 
32.Sutton, M. A. et al. The European Nitrogen Assessment: Sources, Effects and Policy Perspectives (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).33.Litke, D. W. Review of Phosphorus Control Measures in the United States and Their Effects on Water Quality (US Geological Survey, 1999).34.Kosten, S. et al. Warmer climates boost cyanobacterial dominance in shallow lakes. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 118–126 (2012).
Google Scholar 
35.Carey, C. C., Ibelings, B. W., Hoffmann, E. P., Hamilton, D. P. & Brookes, J. D. Eco-physiological adaptations that favour freshwater cyanobacteria in a changing climate. Water Res. 46, 1394–1407 (2012).
Google Scholar 
36.Wells, M. L. et al. Harmful algal blooms and climate change: learning from the past and present to forecast the future. Harmful Algae 49, 68–93 (2015).
Google Scholar 
37.Elliott, J. A. The seasonal sensitivity of cyanobacteria and other phytoplankton to changes in flushing rate and water temperature. Glob. Change Biol 16, 864–876 (2010).
Google Scholar 
38.Jeppesen, E. et al. in Shallow Lakes ’95 (eds Kufel, L. et al.) 151–164 (Springer, 1997).39.O’Reilly, C. M. et al. Rapid and highly variable warming of lake surface waters around the globe. Geophys. Res. Lett. 42, 773–710,781 (2015).
Google Scholar 
40.Janssen, A. B. G. et al. How to model algal blooms in any lake on earth. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain 36, 1–10 (2019).
Google Scholar 
41.Woodcock, C. E. et al. Free access to Landsat imagery. Science 320, 1011 (2008).
Google Scholar 
42.Zhu, Z. & Woodcock, C. E. Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 118, 83–94 (2012).
Google Scholar 
43.Masek, J. G. et al. A Landsat surface reflectance dataset for North America, 1990–2000. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 3, 68–72 (2006).
Google Scholar 
44.Vermote, E., Justice, C., Claverie, M. & Franch, B. Preliminary analysis of the performance of the Landsat 8/OLI land surface reflectance product. Remote Sens. Environ. 185, 46–56 (2016).
Google Scholar 
45.Irish, R. R. Landsat 7 Science Data Users Handbook 415–430 (US Geological Survey, 2000).46.Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I. & Schmitt, O. Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach. Nat. Commun. 7, 13603 (2016).
Google Scholar 
47.Wang, J. et al. Recent global decline in endorheic basin water storages. Nat. Geosci. 11, 926–932 (2018).
Google Scholar 
48.Pekel, J.-F., Cottam, A., Gorelick, N. & Belward, A. S. High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes. Nature 540, 418–422 (2016).
Google Scholar 
49.McNally, A. et al. A land data assimilation system for sub-Saharan Africa food and water security applications. Sci. Data 4, 170012 (2017).
Google Scholar 
50.CIESIN Gridded Population of the World v.4 (NASA SEDAC, 2018).51.Bouwman, L. et al. Exploring global changes in nitrogen and phosphorus cycles in agriculture induced by livestock production over the 1900–2050 period. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20882–20887 (2013).
Google Scholar 
52.Pickens, A. H. et al. Mapping and sampling to characterize global inland water dynamics from 1999 to 2018 with full Landsat time-series. Remote Sens. Environ. 243, 111792 (2020).
Google Scholar 
53.Feng, L. & Hu, C. Land adjacency effects on MODIS Aqua top-of-atmosphere radiance in the shortwave infrared: statistical assessment and correction. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 122, 4802–4818 (2017).
Google Scholar 
54.Walsh, S. E. et al. Global patterns of lake ice phenology and climate: model simulations and observations. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 103, 28825–28837 (1998).
Google Scholar 
55.Yang, X., Pavelsky, T. M. & Allen, G. H. The past and future of global river ice. Nature 577, 69–73 (2020).
Google Scholar 
56.Hu, C. et al. Dynamic range and sensitivity requirements of satellite ocean color sensors: learning from the past. Appl. Opt. 51, 6045–6062 (2012).
Google Scholar 
57.Kuhn, C. & Butman, D. Declining greenness in Arctic-boreal lakes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2021219118 (2021).
Google Scholar 
58.Kirillin, G. et al. Physics of seasonally ice-covered lakes: a review. Aquat. Sci. 74, 659–682 (2012).
Google Scholar 
59.Kotovirta, V., Toivanen, T., Järvinen, M., Lindholm, M. & Kallio, K. Participatory surface algal bloom monitoring in Finland in 2011–2013. Environ. Syst. Res. 3, 24 (2014).
Google Scholar 
60.Cronberg, G., Annadotter, H. & Lawton, L. A. The occurrence of toxic blue-green algae in Lake Ringsjön, southern Sweden, despite nutrient reduction and fish biomanipulation. Hydrobiologia 404, 123–129 (1999).
Google Scholar 
61.Romarheim, A. T. & Riise, G. Development of Cyanobacteria in Årungen (Norsk vannforening, 2009)62.Robertson, A. R. The CIE 1976 color‐difference formulae. Color Res. Appl. 2, 7–11 (1977).
Google Scholar 
63.Mouw, C. B. et al. Aquatic color radiometry remote sensing of coastal and inland waters: challenges and recommendations for future satellite missions. Remote Sens. Environ. 160, 15–30 (2015).
Google Scholar 
64.Wasmund, N., Nausch, G. & Matthäus, W. Phytoplankton spring blooms in the southern Baltic Sea—spatio-temporal development and long-term trends. J. Plankton Res. 20, 1099–1117 (1998).
Google Scholar 
65.Hu, C. A novel ocean color index to detect floating algae in the global oceans. Remote Sens. Environ. 113, 2118–2129 (2009).
Google Scholar 
66.Fairman, H. S., Brill, M. H. & Hemmendinger, H. How the CIE 1931 color-matching functions were derived from Wright-Guild data. Color Res. Appl. 22, 11–23 (1997).
Google Scholar 
67.Chander, G., Markham, B. L. & Helder, D. L. Summary of current radiometric calibration coefficients for Landsat MSS, TM, ETM+, and EO-1 ALI sensors. Remote Sens. Environ. 113, 893–903 (2009).
Google Scholar 
68.Feng, L. et al. Radiometric cross-calibration of Gaofen-1 WFV cameras using Landsat-8 OLI images: a solution for large view angle associated problems. Remote Sens. Environ. 174, 56–68 (2016).
Google Scholar 
69.Yu, X. et al. An empirical algorithm to seamlessly retrieve the concentration of suspended particulate matter from water color across ocean to turbid river mouths. Remote Sens. Environ. 235, 111491 (2019).
Google Scholar 
70.Hou, X., Feng, L., Chen, X. & Zhang, Y. Dynamics of the wetland vegetation in large lakes of the Yangtze Plain in response to both fertilizer consumption and climatic changes. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 141, 148–160 (2018).
Google Scholar 
71.Lee, Z., Pahlevan, N., Ahn, Y.-H., Greb, S. & O’Donnell, D. Robust approach to directly measuring water-leaving radiance in the field. Appl. Opt. 52, 1693–1701 (2013).
Google Scholar 
72.Liu, L., Peng, W., Wu, L. & Liu, L. Water quality assessment of Danjiangkou Reservoir and its tributaries in China. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 112, 012008 (2018).
Google Scholar 
73.Li, X. et al. The color formation mechanism of the blue karst lakes in Jiuzhaigou Nature Reserve, Sichuan, China. Water 12, 771 (2020).
Google Scholar 
74.Wurtsbaugh, W. & Marcarelli, A. Eutrophication in Farmington Bay, Great Salt Lake, Utah 2005 Annual Report (Utah State Univ., 2006).75.Hammer, U. T. Saline Lake Ecosystems of the World Vol. 59 (Springer, 1986). More

1.Holway, D. A. & Suarez, A. V. Animal behavior: An essential component of invasion biology. TREE 14, 328–330 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Chapple, D. G., Simmonds, S. M. & Wong, B. B. M. Can behavioral and personality traits influence the success of unintentional species introductions? Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 57–64 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Weis, J. & Sol, D. Behaviour and the Invasion Process. in Biological Invasions and Animal Behaviour 5–116 (Cambridge University Press, 2016).4.Cote, J., Fogarty, S., Weinersmith, K., Brodin, T. & Sih, A. Personality traits and dispersal tendency in the invasive mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis). Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 277, 1571–1579 (2010).
Google Scholar 
5.Myles-Gonzalez, E., Burness, G., Yavno, S., Rooke, A. & Fox, M. G. To boldly go where no goby has gone before: Boldness, dispersal tendency, and metabolism at the invasion front. Behav. Ecol. 26, 1083–1090 (2015).
Google Scholar 
6.Mutascio, H. E., Pittman, S. E. & Zollner, P. A. Investigating movement behavior of invasive Burmese pythons on a shy–bold continuum using individual-based modeling. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 15, 25–31 (2017).
Google Scholar 
7.Chuang, A. Living Life on the Edge: The Role of Invasion Processes in Shaping Personalities in a Non-Native Spider Species (The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.Book 

Google Scholar 
8.Blackburn, T. M. et al. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 333–339 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Pintor, L. M., Sih, A. & Kerby, J. L. Behavioral correlations provide a mechanism for explaining high invader densities and increased impacts on native prey. Ecology 90, 581–587 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Petren, K. & Case, T. J. An experimental demonstration of exploitation competition in an ongoing invasion. Ecology 77, 118–132 (1996).
Google Scholar 
11.Wright, T. F., Eberhard, J. R., Hobson, E. A., Avery, M. L. & Russello, M. A. Behavioral flexibility and species invasions: The adaptive flexibility hypothesis. Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 22, 393–404 (2010).
Google Scholar 
12.Dick, J. T. A. Role of behaviour in biological invasions and species distributions; lessons from interactions between the invasive Gammarus pulex and the native G. duebeni (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Contrib. Zool. 77, 91–98 (2008).
Google Scholar 
13.Dick, J. T. A. et al. Invader Relative Impact Potential: A new metric to understand and predict the ecological impacts of existing, emerging and future invasive alien species. J. Appl. Ecol. 54, 1259–1267 (2017).
Google Scholar 
14.Dick, J. T. A., Elwood, R. W. & Montgomery, W. I. The behavioural basis of a species replacement: differential aggresssion and predation between the introduced Gammarus pulex and the native G. duebeni celticus (Amphipoda). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 37, 393–398 (1995).
Google Scholar 
15.Dick, J. T. A. et al. Ecological impacts of an invasive predator explained and predicted by comparative functional responses. Biol. Invasions 15, 837–846 (2013).
Google Scholar 
16.Dick, J. T. A. et al. Advancing impact prediction and hypothesis testing in invasion ecology using a comparative functional response approach. Biol. Invasions 16, 735–753 (2014).
Google Scholar 
17.Iacarella, J. C., Dick, J. T. A. & Ricciardi, A. A spatio-temporal contrast of the predatory impact of an invasive freshwater crustacean. Divers. Distrib. 21, 803–812 (2015).
Google Scholar 
18.Toscano, B. J. & Griffen, B. D. Trait-mediated functional responses: Predator behavioural type mediates prey consumption. J. Anim. Ecol. 83, 1469–1477 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.MacCrimmon, H. R. World distribution of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri): further observations. J. Fish. Res. Board Canada 28, 663–704 (1971).
Google Scholar 
20.MacCrimmon, H. R., Marshall, T. L. & Gots, B. L. World distribution of brown trout, Salmo trutta: further observations. J. Fish. Res. Board Canada 27, 811–818 (1970).
Google Scholar 
21.Crawford, S. S. & Muir, A. M. Global introductions of salmon and trout in the genus Oncorhynchus: 1870–2007. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 18, 313–344 (2008).
Google Scholar 
22.Crowl, T. A., Townsend, C. R. & Mcintosh, A. R. The impact of introduced brown and rainbow trout on native fish: The case of Australasia. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 241, 217–241 (1992).
Google Scholar 
23.Hasegawa, K. Invasions of rainbow trout and brown trout in Japan: A comparison of invasiveness and impact on native species. Ecol. Freshw. Fish 29, 419–428 (2020).
Google Scholar 
24.Cambray, J. A. The global impact of alien trout species—A review; with reference to their impact in South Africa. African J. Aquat. Sci. 28, 61–67 (2003).
Google Scholar 
25.Dunham, J. B., Wheeler, A. & Rosenberger, A. Assessing the consequences of nonnative trout in headwater ecosystems in western North America. Fisheries 29, 37–41 (2004).
Google Scholar 
26.Fausch, K. D., Taniguchi, Y., Nakano, S., Grossman, G. D. & Townsend, C. R. Flood disturbance regimes influence rainbow trout invasion success among five holarctic regions. Ecol. Appl. 11, 1438–1455 (2001).
Google Scholar 
27.Anderson, R. M. & Nehring, R. B. Effects of a catch-and-release regulation on a wild trout population in Colorado and its acceptance by Anglers. North Am. J. Fish. Manag. 4, 257–265 (1984).
Google Scholar 
28.Young, K. A. et al. A trial of two trouts: Comparing the impacts of rainbow and brown trout on a native galaxiid. Anim. Conserv. 13, 399–410 (2010).
Google Scholar 
29.Conrad, J. L., Weinersmith, K. L., Brodin, T., Saltz, J. B. & Sih, A. Behavioural syndromes in fishes: A review with implications for ecology and fisheries management. J. Fish Biol. 78, 395–435 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
30.Mowles, S. L., Cotton, P. A. & Briffa, M. Consistent crustaceans: The identification of stable behavioural syndromes in hermit crabs. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 66, 1087–1094 (2012).
Google Scholar 
31.Sih, A., Bell, A. & Johnson, J. C. Behavioral syndromes: An ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 372–378 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Bell, A. M. Behavioural differences between individuals and two populations of stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). J. Evol. Biol. 18, 464–473 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Bourne, G. R. & Sammons, A. J. Boldness, aggression and exploration: evidence for a behavioural syndrome in male pentamorphic livebearing fish, Poecilia parae. AACL Bioflux 1, 39–50 (2008).
Google Scholar 
34.Lukas, J. et al. Consistent behavioral syndrome across seasons in an invasive freshwater fish. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 466 (2021).ADS 

Google Scholar 
35.Gjedrem, T., Gjøen, H. M. & Gjerde, B. Genetic origin of Norwegian farmed Atlantic salmon. Aquaculture 98, 41–50 (1991).
Google Scholar 
36.Huntingford, F. & Adams, C. Behavioural syndromes in farmed fish: Implications for production and welfare. Behaviour 142, 1207–1221 (2005).
Google Scholar 
37.Alvarez, D. & Nicieza, A. G. Predator avoidance behaviour in wild and hatchery-reared brown trout : The role of experience and domestication. J. Fish Biol. 63, 1565–1577. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1095-8649.2003.00267.x (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Geffroy, B. et al. Evolutionary dynamics in the anthropocene: Life history and intensity of human contact shape antipredator responses. PLoS Biol. 18, 1–17 (2020).
Google Scholar 
39.Lincoln, R. F. & Scott, A. P. Production of all-female triploid rainbow trout. Aquaculture 30, 375–380 (1983).
Google Scholar 
40.Maxime, V. The physiology of triploid fish: Current knowledge and comparisons with diploid fish. Fish Fish. 9, 67–78 (2008).
Google Scholar 
41.Chatterji, R., Longley, D., Sandford, D., Roberts, D. & Stubbing, D. Performance of stocked triploid and diploid brown trout and their effects on wild brown trout in UK rivers. (2008).42.Benfey, T. J. The physiology and behavior of triploid fishes. Rev. Fish. Sci. 7, 39–67 (1999).
Google Scholar 
43.Carter, C. G. et al. Food consumption, feeding behaviour, and growth of triploid and diploid Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., parr.. Can. J. Zool. 72, 609–617 (1994).
Google Scholar 
44.Weber, G. M., Hostuttler, M. A., Cleveland, B. M. & Leeds, T. D. Growth performance comparison of intercross-triploid, induced triploid, and diploid rainbow trout. Aquaculture 433, 85–93 (2014).
Google Scholar 
45.Øverli, Ø., Pottinger, T. G., Carrick, T. R., Øverli, E. & Winberg, S. Differences in behaviour between rainbow trout selected for high- and low-stress responsiveness. J. Exp. Biol. 205, 391–395 (2002).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Sadoul, B., Leguen, I., Colson, V., Friggens, N. C. & Prunet, P. A multivariate analysis using physiology and behavior to characterize robustness in two isogenic lines of rainbow trout exposed to a confinement stress. Physiol. Behav. 140, 139–147 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
47.Adriaenssens, B. & Johnsson, J. I. Learning and context-specific exploration behaviour in hatchery and wild brown trout. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 132, 90–99 (2011).
Google Scholar 
48.Näslund, J. & Johnsson, J. I. State-dependent behavior and alternative behavioral strategies in brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) fry. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 70, 2111–2125 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
49.Mortensen, E. Density-dependent mortality of trout fry (Salmo trutta L.) and its relationship to the management of small streams. J. Fish Biol. 11, 613–617 (1977).
Google Scholar 
50.Armstrong, J. D. & Nislow, K. H. Critical habitat during the transition from maternal provisioning in freshwater fish, with emphasis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta). J. Zool. 269, 403–413 (2006).
Google Scholar 
51.Walsh, R. N. & Cummins, R. A. The open-field test: A critical review. Psychol. Bull. 83, 482–504 (1976).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
52.Adriaenssens, B. & Johnsson, J. I. Shy trout grow faster: Exploring links between personality and fitness-related traits in the wild. Behav. Ecol. 22, 135–143 (2010).
Google Scholar 
53.Sneddon, L. U. The bold and the shy: Individual differences in rainbow trout. J. Fish Biol. 62, 971–975 (2003).
Google Scholar 
54.Adriaenssens, B. Individual variation in behaviour: personality and performance of brown trout in the wild (University of Gothenburg, 2010).55.Elias, A., Thrower, F. & Nichols, K. M. Rainbow trout personality: Individual behavioural variation in juvenile Oncorhynchus mykiss. Behaviour 155, 205–230 (2018).
Google Scholar 
56.Dick, J. T. A. et al. Functional responses can unify invasion ecology. Biol. Invasions 19, 1667–1672 (2017).
Google Scholar 
57.Sloman, K. A., Metcalfe, N. B., Taylor, A. C. & Gilmour, K. M. Plasma cortisol concentrations before and after social stress in rainbow trout and brown trout. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 74, 383–389 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
58.Sadoul, B., Blumstein, D. T., Alfonso, S. & Geffroy, B. Human protection drives the emergence of a new coping style in animals. PLoS Biol. 19, 1–11 (2021).
Google Scholar 
59.Campbell, J. M., Carter, P. A., Wheeler, P. A. & Thorgaard, G. H. Aggressive behavior, brain size and domestication in clonal rainbow trout lines. Behav. Genet. 45, 245–254 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
60.Berejikian, B. A., Mathews, S. B. & Quinn, T. P. Effects of hatchery and wild ancestry and rearing environments on the development of agonistic behavior in steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fry. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53, 2004–2014 (1996).
Google Scholar 
61.Laverty, C. et al. Assessing the ecological impacts of invasive species based on their functional responses and abundances. Biol. Invasions 19, 1653–1665 (2017).
Google Scholar 
62.Alexander, M. E., Dick, J. T. A., Weyl, O. L. F., Robinson, T. B. & Richardson, D. M. Existing and emerging high impact invasive species are characterized by higher functional responses than natives. Biol. Lett. 10, 20130946 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
63.Dickey, J. W. E., Cuthbert, R. N., Steffen, G. T., Dick, J. T. A. & Briski, E. Sea freshening may drive the ecological impacts of emerging and existing invasive non-native species. Divers. Distrib. 27, 144–156 (2021).
Google Scholar 
64.Sadler, J., Pankhurst, P. M. & King, H. R. High prevalence of skeletal deformity and reduced gill surface area in triploid Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Aquaculture 198, 369–386 (2001).
Google Scholar 
65.Benfey, T. J. & Biron, M. Acute stress response in triploid rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Aquaculture 184, 167–176 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
66.Sadler, J., Pankhurst, N. W., Pankhurst, P. M. & King, H. Physiological stress responses to confinement in diploid and triploid Atlantic salmon. J. Fish Biol. 56, 506–518 (2000).
Google Scholar 
67.Berrebi, P., Splendiani, A., Palm, S. & Berna, R. Genetic diversity of domestic brown trout stocks in Europe. Aquaculture 544, 737043 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
68.Gross, R., Lulla, P. & Paaver, T. Genetic variability and differentiation of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) strains in northern and Eastern Europe. Aquaculture 272, 139–146 (2007).
Google Scholar 
69.Whelan, K. Assessing and mitigating the impact of a major rainbow trout escape on the wild salmon and trout populations of the Mourne river system, Northern Ireland. (2017).70.Shelton, J. et al. Temperature mediates the impact of non-native rainbow trout on native freshwater fishes in South Africa’s Cape Fold Ecoregion. Biol. Invasions 20, 2927–2944 (2018).
Google Scholar 
71.Michelangeli, M. et al. Sex-dependent personality in two invasive species of mosquitofish. Biol. Invasions 22, 1353–1364 (2020).
Google Scholar 
72.Friard, O. & Gamba, M. BORIS: A free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1325–1330 (2016).
Google Scholar 
73.R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (2018).74.RStudio Team. RStudio Team (2020). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com/. 2019 (2020).75.Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N. J., Saveliev, A. A. & Smith, G. M. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer https://doi.org/10.1086/648138 (2008).Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
76.Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M. & Walker, S. C. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 18637 (2015).
Google Scholar 
77.Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L. & Müller, K. dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation. R package version. Media https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer-Verlag, 2016).MATH 

Google Scholar 
79.Barton, K. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. 2020 (2020).80.Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P. & Herve, M. emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.5.2-1 (2020).81.Pritchard, D. frair: tools for functional response analysis. R package version 0.0.100 (2017).82.Juliano, S. A. Predation and functional response curves. in Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (eds. Scheiner, S. & Gurevitch, J.) Chapter 10 (2001).83.Rogers, D. Random search and insect population models. J. Anim. Ecol. 41, 369–383 (1972).
Google Scholar 
84.Bolker, B. M. Rogers random predator equation: extensions and estimation by numerical integration. 1–20 (2012). More