Philippa Kaur

Donia, M. S. & Fischbach, M. A. Small molecules from the human microbiota. Science 349, 1254766 (2015).Koh, A., De Vadder, F., Kovatcheva-Datchary, P. & Bäckhed, F. From dietary fiber to host physiology: short-chain fatty acids as key bacterial metabolites. Cell 165, 1332–1345 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Koppel, N., Rekdal, V. M. & Balskus, E. P. Chemical transformation of xenobiotics by the human gut microbiota. Science 356, eaag2770 (2017).Myhrstad, M. C., Tunsjø, H., Charnock, C. & Telle-Hansen, V. H. Dietary fiber, gut microbiota, and metabolic regulation—current status in human randomized trials. Nutrients 12, 859 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, R., Liu, W., Piao, M. & Zhu, H. A review of the relationship between the gut microbiota and amino acid metabolism. Amino Acids 49, 2083–2090 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tyson, G. W. et al. Community structure and metabolism through reconstruction of microbial genomes from the environment. Nature 428, 37–43 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Flint, H. J., Scott, K. P., Louis, P. & Duncan, S. H. The role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 9, 577–589 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lloyd-Price, J. et al. Multi-omics of the gut microbial ecosystem in inflammatory bowel diseases. Nature 569, 655–662 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yang, Q. et al. Metabolomics biotechnology, applications, and future trends: a systematic review. RSC Adv. 9, 37245–37257 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Castelli, F. A. et al. Metabolomics for personalized medicine: the input of analytical chemistry from biomarker discovery to point-of-care tests. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 414, 759–789 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dias-Audibert, F. L. et al. Combining machine learning and metabolomics to identify weight gain biomarkers. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8, 6 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zheng, C., Zhang, S., Ragg, S., Raftery, D. & Vitek, O. Identification and quantification of metabolites in 1H NMR spectra by Bayesian model selection. Bioinformatics 27, 1637–1644 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Information Resources Management Association. Bioinformatics: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (IGI Global, 2013).Johnson, C. H. & Gonzalez, F. J. Challenges and opportunities of metabolomics. J. Cell. Physiol. 227, 2975–2981 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ayling, M., Clark, M. D. & Leggett, R. M. New approaches for metagenome assembly with short reads. Brief. Bioinform. 21, 584–594 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brumfield, K. D., Huq, A., Colwell, R. R., Olds, J. L. & Leddy, M. B. Microbial resolution of whole genome shotgun and 16S amplicon metagenomic sequencing using publicly available neon data. PLoS ONE 15, e0228899 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Garza, D. R., van Verk, M. C., Huynen, M. A. & Dutilh, B. E. Towards predicting the environmental metabolome from metagenomics with a mechanistic model. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 456–460 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Noecker, C. et al. Metabolic model-based integration of microbiome taxonomic and metabolomic profiles elucidates mechanistic links between ecological and metabolic variation. MSystems 1, e00013–15 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yin, X. et al. A comparative evaluation of tools to predict metabolite profiles from microbiome sequencing data. Front. Microbiol. 11, 3132 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kettle, H., Louis, P., Holtrop, G., Duncan, S. H. & Flint, H. J. Modelling the emergent dynamics and major metabolites of the human colonic microbiota. Environ. Microbiol. 17, 1615–1630 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Quinn, R. A. et al. Niche partitioning of a pathogenic microbiome driven by chemical gradients. Sci. Adv. 4, eaau1908 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, T., Goyal, A., Dubinkina, V. & Maslov, S. Evidence for a multi-level trophic organization of the human gut microbiome. PLoS Comput. Biol. 15, e1007524 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Goyal, A., Wang, T., Dubinkina, V. & Maslov, S. Ecology-guided prediction of cross-feeding interactions in the human gut microbiome. Nat. Commun. 12, 1335 (2021).Mallick, H. et al. Predictive metabolomic profiling of microbial communities using amplicon or metagenomic sequences. Nat. Commun. 10, 3136 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Le, V., Quinn, T. P., Tran, T. & Venkatesh, S. Deep in the bowel: highly interpretable neural encoder–decoder networks predict gut metabolites from gut microbiome. BMC Genom. 21, 256 (2020).Reiman, D., Layden, B. T. & Dai, Y. MiMeNet: exploring microbiome–metabolome relationships using neural networks. PLoS Comput. Biol. 17, e1009021 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Morton, J. T. et al. Learning representations of microbe–metabolite interactions. Nat. Methods 16, 1306–1314 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, R. T., Rubanova, Y., Bettencourt, J. & Duvenaud, D. Neural ordinary differential equations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31, 6572–6583 (NeurIPS, 2018).Lu, Y., Zhong, A., Li, Q. & Dong, B. Beyond finite layer neural networks: bridging deep architectures and numerical differential equations. In International Conference on Machine Learning 3276–3285 (PMLR, 2018).Qiu, C., Bendickson, A., Kalyanapu, J. & Yan, J. Accuracy and architecture studies of residual neural network solving ordinary differential equations. Preprint at arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2101.03583 (2021).Dutta, S., Rivera-Casillas, P. & Farthing, M. W. Neural ordinary differential equations for data-driven reduced order modeling of environmental hydrodynamics. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2104.13962 (2021).Marsland III, R. et al. Available energy fluxes drive a transition in the diversity, stability, and functional structure of microbial communities. PLoS Comput. Biol. 15, e1006793 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Franzosa, E. A. et al. Gut microbiome structure and metabolic activity in inflammatory bowel disease. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 293–305 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Swenson, T. L., Karaoz, U., Swenson, J. M., Bowen, B. P. & Northen, T. R. Linking soil biology and chemistry in biological soil crust using isolate exometabolomics. Nat. Commun. 9, 19 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Litonjua, A. A. et al. Effect of prenatal supplementation with vitamin D on asthma or recurrent wheezing in offspring by age 3 years: the VDAART randomized clinical trial. JAMA 315, 362–370 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Litonjua, A. A. et al. Six-year follow-up of a trial of antenatal vitamin D for asthma reduction. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 525–533 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee-Sarwar, K. A. et al. Integrative analysis of the intestinal metabolome of childhood asthma. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 144, 442–454 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee-Sarwar, K. et al. Association of the gut microbiome and metabolome with wheeze frequency in childhood asthma. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 147, AB53 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harvard Willett Food Frequency Questionnaire (T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Department of Nutrition, Harvard Univ., 2015).Plan and Operation of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–94 (National Centre for Health Statistics, 1994).Nelson, K. M., Reiber, G. & Boyko, E. J. Diet and exercise among adults with type 2 diabetes: findings from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III). Diabetes Care 25, 1722–1728 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marriott, B. P., Olsho, L., Hadden, L. & Connor, P. Intake of added sugars and selected nutrients in the United States, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2006. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 50, 228–258 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moshfegh, A. Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Food Surveys Research Group, 2022); http://www.ars.usda.gov/nea/bhnrc/fsrgRidlon, J. M., Kang, D.-J. & Hylemon, P. B. Bile salt biotransformations by human intestinal bacteria. J. Lipid Res. 47, 241–259 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bachmann, V. et al. Bile salts modulate the mucin-activated type VI secretion system of pandemic Vibrio cholerae. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9, e0004031 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ramírez-Pérez, O., Cruz-Ramón, V., Chinchilla-López, P. & Méndez-Sánchez, N. The role of the gut microbiota in bile acid metabolism. Ann. Hepatol. 16, 21–26 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jia, W., Xie, G. & Jia, W. Bile acid-microbiota crosstalk in gastrointestinal inflammation and carcinogenesis. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 15, 111–128 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heinken, A. et al. Systematic assessment of secondary bile acid metabolism in gut microbes reveals distinct metabolic capabilities in inflammatory bowel disease. Microbiome 7, 75 (2019).Duboc, H. et al. Connecting dysbiosis, bile-acid dysmetabolism and gut inflammation in inflammatory bowel diseases. Gut 62, 531–539 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thomas, J. P., Modos, D., Rushbrook, S. M., Powell, N. & Korcsmaros, T. The emerging role of bile acids in the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Front. Immunol. 13, 246 (2022).Kristal, A. R., Peters, U. & Potter, J. D. Is it time to abandon the food frequency questionnaire? Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 14, 2826–2828 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Scalbert, A. et al. The food metabolome: a window over dietary exposure. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 99, 1286–1308 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bolyen, E. et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 852–857 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 13, 581–583 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Evans, A. M. et al. High resolution mass spectrometry improves data quantity and quality as compared to unit mass resolution mass spectrometry in high-throughput profiling metabolomics. Metabolomics 4, 1 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Blum, R. E. et al. Validation of a food frequency questionnaire in Native American and Caucasian children 1 to 5 years of age. Matern. Child Health J. 3, 167–172 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kingma, D. P. & Ba, J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980 (2014).Wang, T. wt1005203/mnode: initial release. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7602940 (2023). More

Alston, J. M. et al. Reciprocity in restoration ecology: When might large carnivore reintroduction restore ecosystems?. Biol. Conserv. 234, 82–89 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ripple, W. J. & Beschta, R. L. Large predators limit herbivore densities in northern forest ecosystems. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 58, 733–742 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Estes, J. A. & Duggins, D. O. Sea otters and kelp forests in Alaska: Generality and variation in a community ecological paradigm. Ecol. Monogr. 65, 75–100 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmitz, O. J., Beckerman, A. P. & O’Brien, K. M. Behaviorally mediated trophic cascades: Effects of predation risk on food web interactions. Ecology 78, 1388–1399 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Power, M. E. Top-down and bottom-up forces in food webs: Do plants have primacy. Ecology 73, 733–746 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
Travers, T., Lea, M. A., Alderman, R., Terauds, A. & Shaw, J. Bottom-up effect of eradications: The unintended consequences for top-order predators when eradicating invasive prey. J. Appl. Ecol. 58, 801–811 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stoessel, M., Elmhagen, B., Vinka, M., Hellström, P. & Angerbjörn, A. The fluctuating world of a tundra predator guild: bottom-up constraints overrule top-down species interactions in winter. Ecography (Cop.) 42, 488–499 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wolf, C. & Ripple, W. J. Rewilding the world ’s large carnivores. R. Soc. Open Sci. 5, 172235 (2018).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Krofel, M. & Jerina, K. Mind the cat: Conservation management of a protected dominant scavenger indirectly affects an endangered apex predator. Biol. Conserv. 197, 40–46 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Prugh, L. R. & Sivy, K. J. Enemies with benefits: Integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores. Ecol. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.13489 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Caro, T. M. & Stoner, C. J. The potential for interspecific competition among African carnivores. Biol. Conserv. 110, 67–75 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Linnell, J. D. C. & Strand, O. Interference interactions, co-existence and conservation of mammalian carnivores. Divers. Distrib. 6, 169–176 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Newsome, T. M. et al. Top predators constrain mesopredator distributions. Nat. Commun. 8, 15469 (2017).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Crooks, K. & Soulé, M. Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a fragmented system. Nature 400, 563–566 (1999).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Schoener, T. W. Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185, 27–39 (1974).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fedriani, J. M., Fuller, T. K., Sauvajot, R. M. & York, E. C. Competition and intraguild predation among three sympatric carnivores. Oecologia 125, 258–270 (2000).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Monterroso, P., Díaz-Ruiz, F., Lukacs, P. M., Alves, P. C. & Ferreras, P. Ecological traits and the spatial structure of competitive coexistence among carnivores. Ecology 101, 1–16 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Karanth, K. U. et al. Spatio-temporal interactions facilitate large carnivore sympatry across a resource gradient. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 284, 20161860 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferreiro-Arias, I., Isla, J., Jordano, P. & Benítez-López, A. Fine-scale coexistence between Mediterranean mesocarnivores is mediated by spatial, temporal, and trophic resource partitioning. Ecol. Evol. 11, 15520–15533 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Di Bitetti, M. S., De Angelo, C. D., Di Blanco, Y. E. & Paviolo, A. Niche partitioning and species coexistence in a Neotropical felid assemblage. Acta Oecol. 36, 403–412 (2010).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Carvalho, J. C. & Gomes, P. Feeding resource partitioning among four sympatric carnivores in the Peneda-Gerês National Park (Portugal). J. Zool. 263, 275–283 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gil-Sánchez, J. M., Mañá-Varela, B., Herrera-Sánchez, F. J. & Urios, V. Spatio-temporal ecology of a carnivore community in middle atlas NW of Morocco. Zoology 146, 125904 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Monterroso, P., Alves, P. C. & Ferreras, P. Plasticity in circadian activity patterns of mesocarnivores in Southwestern Europe: Implications for species coexistence. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 68, 1403–1417 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gallagher, A. J., Creel, S., Wilson, R. P. & Cooke, S. J. Energy landscapes and the landscape of fear. Trends Ecol. Evol. 32, 88–96 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sergio, F. & Hiraldo, F. Intraguild predation in raptor assemblages: A review. Ibis 150, 132–145 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jiménez, J. et al. Restoring apex predators can reduce mesopredator abundances. Biol. Conserv. 238, 108234 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Palomares, F., Ferreras, P., Fedriani, J. M. & Delibes, M. Spatial relationships between Iberian lynx and other carnivores in an area of south-western Spain. J. Appl. Ecol. 33, 5–13 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wooster, E. I. F., Ramp, D., Lundgren, E. J., O’Neill, A. J. & Wallach, A. D. Red foxes avoid apex predation without increasing fear. Behav. Ecol. 32, 895–902 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Santos, F. et al. Prey availability and temporal partitioning modulate felid coexistence in Neotropical forests. PLoS ONE 14, 1–23 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barrientos, R. & Virgós, E. Reduction of potential food interference in two sympatric carnivores by sequential use of shared resources. Acta Oecol. 30, 107–116 (2006).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
MacArthur, R. H. & Pianka, E. R. On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am. Nat. 100, 603–609 (1966).Article 

Google Scholar 
López-Martín, J. M. Comparison of feeding behaviour between stone marten and common genet: living in coexistence. Martes Carniv. Communities 137–155 (2006).Sarmento, P. et al. Adapt or perish: How the Iberian lynx reintroduction affects fox abundance and behaviour. Hystrix Ital. J. Mammal. 32, 48–54 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Forsyth, D. M., Ramsey, D. S. L. & Woodford, L. P. Estimating abundances, densities, and interspecific associations in a carnivore community. J. Wildl. Manag. 83, 1090–1102 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Monterroso, P. et al. Disease-mediated bottom-up regulation: An emergent virus affects a keystone prey, and alters the dynamics of trophic webs. Sci. Rep. 6, 1–9 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritchie, E. G. et al. Ecosystem restoration with teeth: What role for predators?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 265–271 (2012).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Santos-Reis, M. et al. Relationships between stone martens, genets and cork oak woodlands in Portugal. Martens Fish. Hum.-Altered Environ. Int. Perspect. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-22691-5_7 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Goszczyński, J., Posłuszny, M., Pilot, M. & Gralak, B. Patterns of winter locomotion and foraging in two sympatric marten species: Martes martes and Martes foina. Can. J. Zool. 85, 239–249 (2007).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Díaz-Ruiz, F., Caro, J., Delibes-Mateos, M., Arroyo, B. & Ferreras, P. Drivers of red fox (Vulpes vulpes) daily activity: Prey availability, human disturbance or habitat structure?. J. Zool. 298, 128–138 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zanón Martínez, J. I., Seoane, J., Kelly, M. J., Sarasola, J. H. & Travaini, A. Assessing carnivore spatial co-occurrence and temporal overlap in the face of human interference in a semi-arid forest. Ecol. Appl. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2482 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Allen, M. L., Sibarani, M. C., Utoyo, L. & Krofel, M. Terrestrial mammal community richness and temporal overlap between tigers and other carnivores in Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park Sumatra. Anim. Biodivers. Conserv. 1, 97–107 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vilella, M., Ferrandiz-Rovira, M. & Sayol, F. Coexistence of predators in time: Effects of season and prey availability on species activity within a Mediterranean carnivore guild. Ecol. Evol. 10, 11408–11422 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Santos, N. et al. Protein metabolism and physical fitness are physiological determinants of body condition in Southern European carnivores. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–11 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferreras, P., Travaini, A., Cristina Zapata, S. & Delibes, M. Short-term responses of mammalian carnivores to a sudden collapse of rabbits in Mediterranean Spain. Basic Appl. Ecol. 12, 116–124 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moreno, S. Reproduction of Garden Dormouse Eliomys quercinus lusitanicus, in southwest Spain. Mammalia 52, 401–408 (1988).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bakaloudis, D. E., Vlachos, C. G., Papakosta, M. A., Bontzorlos, V. A. & Chatzinikos, E. N. Diet composition and feeding strategies of the stone marten (Martes foina) in a typical mediterranean ecosystem. Sci. World J. 2012, 1–11 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pereira, L. M., Owen-Smith, N. & Moleón, M. Facultative predation and scavenging by mammalian carnivores: Seasonal, regional and intra-guild comparisons. Mamm. Rev. 44, 44–55 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gil-Sánchez, J. M., Ballesteros-Duperón, E. & Bueno-Segura, J. F. Feed ing ecology of the Iberian lynx Lynx pardinus in east ern. Acta Theriol. (Warsz) 51, 85–90 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krofel, M., Huber, D. & Kos, I. Diet of Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx in the northern Dinaric Mountains (Slovenia and Croatia). Acta Theriol. (Warsz) 56, 315–322 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Virgós, E., Baniandrés, N., Burgos, T. & Recio, M. R. Intraguild predation by the eagle owl determines the space use of a mesopredator carnivore. Diversity 12, 13–15 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gordon, C. E., Feit, A., Grüber, J. & Letnic, M. Mesopredator suppression by an apex predator alleviates the risk of predation perceived by small prey. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 282, 20142870 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Draper, J. P., Young, J. K., Schupp, E. W., Beckman, N. G. & Atwood, T. B. Frugivory and seed dispersal by carnivorans. Front. Ecol. Evol. 10, 864864 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
González-Varo, J. P., López-Bao, J. V. & Guitián, J. Functional diversity among seed dispersal kernels generated by carnivorous mammals. J. Anim. Ecol. 82, 562–571 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Virgós, E., Llorente, M. & Cortés, Y. Geographical variation in genet (Genetta genetta L.) diet: A literature review. Mamm. Rev. 29, 117–126 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fedriani, J. M., Ayllón, D., Wiegand, T. & Grimm, V. Intertwined effects of defaunation, increased tree mortality and density compensation on seed dispersal. Ecography (Cop.) 43, 1352–1363 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Burgos, T. et al. Predation risk can modify the foraging behaviour of frugivorous carnivores: Implications of rewilding apex predators for plant–animal mutualisms. J. Anim. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13682 (2022).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Escribano-Ávila, G. et al. Spanish juniper gain expansion opportunities by counting on a functionally diverse dispersal assemblage community. Ecol. Evol. 3, 3751–3763 (2013).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gazzola, A. & Balestrieri, A. Nutritional ecology provides insights into competitive interactions between closely related Martes species. Mamm. Rev. 50, 82–90 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Simón, M. A. et al. Diez años de conservación del lince ibérico, 326 (2012).Royle, J. A., Chandler, R. B., Sollmann, R. & Gardner, B. Spatial Capture-Recapture (Elsevier, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Rodríguez, A. & Calzada, J. Lynx pardinus (errata version published in 2020). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T12520A174111773.en (Accessed 27 January 2023) (2015).Gil-Sánchez, J. M. et al. The use of camera trapping for estimating Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) home ranges. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 57, 1203–1211 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gerber, B. D., Karpanty, S. M. & Kelly, M. J. Evaluating the potential biases in carnivore capture-recapture studies associated with the use of lure and varying density estimation techniques using photographic-sampling data of the Malagasy civet. Popul. Ecol. 54, 43–54 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jiménez, J., Díaz-Ruiz, F., Monterroso, P., Tobajas, J. & Ferreras, P. Occupancy data improves parameter precision in spatial capture–recapture models. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9250 (2022).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ferreras, P., DÍaz-Ruiz, F. & Monterroso, P. Improving mesocarnivore detectability with lures in camera-trapping studies. Wildl. Res. 45, 505–517 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ridout, M. S. & Linkie, M. Estimating overlap of daily activity patterns from camera trap data. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 14, 322–337 (2009).Article 
MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Jiménez, J. et al. Estimating carnivore community structures. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41036 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Genovesi, P., Sinibaldi, I. & Boitani, L. Spacing patterns and territoriality of the stone marten. Can. J. Zool. 75, 1966–1971 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Royle, J. A. & Converse, S. J. Hierarchical spatial capture-recapture models: Modelling population density in stratified populations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 37–43 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Palomares, F. & Delibes, M. Spatio-temporal ecology and behavior of European genets in southwestern Spain. J. Mammal. 75, 714–724 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Camps, D. Jineta – Genetta genetta. En Encicl. Virtual los Vertebr. Españoles. Salvador. A., Barja, I. (Eds.). Mus. Nac. Ciencias Nat. Madrid. https://www.vertebradosibericos.org/ (2017).Efford, M. Density estimation in live-trapping studies. Oikos 106, 598–610 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
de Valpine, P. et al. Programming with models: Writing statistical algorithms for general model structures with NIMBLE. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 26, 403–413 (2017).Article 
MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
NIMBLE Development Team. NIMBLE user manual (2017).Morin, D. J., Waits, L. P., McNitt, D. C. & Kelly, M. J. Efficient single-survey estimation of carnivore density using fecal DNA and spatial capture-recapture: A bobcat case study. Popul. Ecol. 60, 197–209 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gelman, A. et al. Bayesian Data Analysis (CRC Press, 2013).Book 

Google Scholar 
Weitzman, M. S. Measure of the Overlap of Income Distribution of White and Negro Families in the United States. Technical report No 22 (1970).Jammalamadaka, S. R. & Sengupta, A. Topics in Circular Statistics. Series on Multivariate Analyisis Vol. 5 (World Scientific, 2001).Book 

Google Scholar 
Efron, B. & Tibshirani, R. J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap (CRC Press, 1994).Book 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Mielke, P. W., Berry, K. J. & Johnson, E. S. Multi-response permutation proccedures for a priori classifications. Commun. Stat. Theory Methods 5, 1409–1424 (1976).Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa, S., Johnson, P. C. D. & Schielzeth, H. The coefficient of determination R2 and intra-class correlation coefficient from generalized linear mixed-effects models revisited and expanded. J. R. Soc. Interface 14, 20170213 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M. & Walker, S. C. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models. R Packag. version 1.1.21 (2020).Barton, K. Package “MuMIn: Multi-model inference” for R. R Packag. Version 1.9.5 45 (2013). More

Synthetic data for Fig. 1To provide examples of the proposed two hypotheses, i.e., species-response hypothesis and community structure hypothesis, for Fig. 1, we generated synthetic data assuming bivariate lognormal distributions of species relative woody productivity pi and species standing biomass Bi, where i for species identity, with log-log linear, (or power-law) correlations, ln pi = k + b ln Bi, as in left-hand panels of Fig. 1. The slope (scaling exponent) b is common at –0.15, and the constant k = –3.4 and –3.8 for tropical and temperate forests respectively for species response hypothesis (Fig. 1a), whereas k = –3.6 for both ‘tropical’ and ‘temperate’ forests for the community structure hypothesis (Fig. 1b). Mean ln Bi are –0.6 for two forests in Fig. 1a, while they are –1.0 and –0.2 for tropical and temperate forest respectively in Fig. 1b, Standard deviations of ln Bi and ln pi are 2.0 and 0.65 respectively for all forests, except those in tropical forest in Fig. 1b are 1.6 and 0.6, respectively. In the left-hand panels, the Bi axis ranges 0.005–500 (Mg C ha–1), and the pi axis ranges 0.001–0.5 (yr–1). In the right-hand panels, the axis for B = Σi Bi ranges 50–500 (Mg C ha–1) and the axis for P = Σi pi Bi ranges 0.5–20 (Mg C ha–1 yr–1).Forest plot dataWe selected 60 forest plots located in old-growth forests along the climatic gradient of insular eastern Asia, located on Java (3 plots), Kalimantan (5 plots), Peninsular Malaysia (2 plots), Taiwan (6 plots), and the Japanese archipelago (44 plots), ranging from 6.8°S to 44.4°N latitude and from 20 to 1,880 m in elevation (Supplementary Fig. 1, Supplementary Data 1). We collected climate data for all the plots for the period 1981–2010 from CHELSA version 2.139; these are the period-average annual and monthly ground surface mean temperature, precipitation, and potential evapotranspiration. The potential evapotranspiration was estimated by Hargreaves-Samani equation40 based on monthly data of these climatic variables. Supplementary Data 2 presents mean annual temperature (MAT, °C), annual precipitation (AP, mm yr–1), annual potential evapotranspiration (PET, mm yr–1), monthly-data-based Thornthwaite moisture index (TMI) and the climatic types defined by TMI26. The target region is in Asian monsoon climate41,42, and moist forest ecosystems predominate from tropics in Southeast Asia to sub-boreal biomes in northern Japan. Across 60 plots, MAT ranges from 2.0 °C to 26.6 °C, AP-PET ranges from 58.5 to 5049 mm yr–1, and plots are classified as “perhumid” or “humid” by TMI (Supplementary Data 2); the smallest TMI for the plot in cloud forest on Hahajima Island, oceanic Ogasawara Islands, where AP-PET was +217 mm yr–1 (against +58.5 by CHELSA39) based on the weather station records on the island. AP-PET sowed no correlation with MAT or with any forest structural or dynamic variable, in contrast to MAT exhibiting significant correlations to all forest variables (Supplementary Fig. 5). We therefore mainly employ MAT to quantify climatic dependence of the 60 plots. According to bioclimatic classification of the region43,44, we define forest biomes into tropical (MAT ≥ 24 °C), subtropical (20–24 °C), warm-temperate (12–20 °C), cool-temperate (5–12 °C) and sub-boreal or subalpine ( More

Non-prokaryotic metagenomic sequences confound average genome size estimationsIn this work, we employed MicrobeCensus22 for de novo estimation of the average genome size (AGS) of microorganisms captured in shotgun metagenome sequences (Fig. 1a; Supplementary Data 1). Briefly, MicrobeCensus optimally aligns metagenomic reads to a set of 30 conserved single-copy gene (CSCG) families found in prokaryotes 22. Based on these mappings, the relative abundance of each CSCG is then computed and used to estimate AGS based on the proportionality principle—that is, the AGS of the community is inversely proportional to the relative abundance of each marker genes22. Finally, a weighted average AGS is calculated that excludes outliers to obtain a robust AGS estimate for a given metagenomic sample22.Fig. 1: Eukaryotic and viral metagenomic reads bias AGS estimates in marine microbial metagenomes.a Schematic workflow of procedures used for estimating AGS in metagenomic samples. AGS is estimated based directly on preprocessed high-quality metagenomic reads (AGS1) and after three iterative steps to remove potential eukaryotic reads (AGS2) and viral reads detected based on the RefSeq viral genome database (AGS3) or de novo (AGS4). See the “Methods” section for more details. b Relationship between depth and proportion of total putative eukaryotic and viral sequences in marine metagenomic collections. The blue line indicates the fitted one-tailed Spearman correlation (r), with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals for the curve indicated by grey bands. The density distribution of the estimated proportion of contaminants is shown in green, with the corresponding median values (µ) highlighted. Values in parenthesis denote the filter size range of sampled metagenomes. c The fraction of ‘contaminating’ reads is highest in the epipelagic ocean relative to other ocean depth layers. EPI Epipelagic (~3–200 m), MES Mesopelagic (200–1000 m), BAT Bathypelagic (1000–4000 m). Values in parenthesis indicate the number of metagenomes. Only the results from the Malaspina Vertical Profiles (MProfile) metagenomes are shown as they cover greater depths of the global ocean (mean 1114 m; Supplementary Data 1). d Eukaryotic and viral metagenomic sequences significantly increase AGS estimates for prokaryotic plankton in marine metagenomes. Values in parenthesis show number of metagenomes for AGS1 and AGS2. e AGS estimates decreased in most metagenomic samples (85%; n = 220) after decontamination compared to predictions directly from preprocessed metagenomes by 1–19% (n = 39). Boxplots (c–e) show the median as middle horizontal (c, d) or vertical (e) lines and interquartile ranges as boxes (whiskers extend no further than 1.5 times the interquartile ranges). Data are shown as circular symbols, while mean values are shown as white colored diamonds. Values at the top (c, d) indicate the adjusted significant P-values of the unpaired (c) and paired (d) two-sided Wilcoxon test with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.Full size imageOf note, the AGS of complete prokaryotic genomes increases with the cumulative number of associated phages and other mobile genetic elements37. Similarly, AGS estimates derived from metagenomic sequences of uncultured “free-living” microbes (captured in 0.1–3 µm-size filters) may also be affected by putative phage and eukaryotic microbiomes sequenced concurrently in fractionated seawater samples (see,8,22). To evaluate this possibility in our AGS predictions, we compared AGS estimates obtained directly from quality-controlled metagenomes with estimates from the same metagenomes iteratively subjected to three (de novo) decontamination procedures to filter out potential eukaryotic and viral sequence reads (Fig. 1a; see details in the “Methods” section). Overall, putatively ‘contaminating’ viral and eukaryotic reads accounted for 1% to 20% (average 7.5%) of the high-quality trimmed sequences in the four microbial metagenome collections (Fig. 1b; Supplementary Data 1). As expected, the average proportion of contaminating sequences in metagenomes from large (0.2–3.0 µm) and small (0.1–1.2 µm) size fraction filters were the highest (~11%) and lowest (~5%), respectively (Fig. 1b). In addition, the proportion of contaminating reads was significantly dependent on the depth layer of the ocean (Kruskal-Wallis χ2 = 32.40, df = 2, p  200–1000 m), and bathypelagic (BAT,  > 1000–4000 m). c AGS estimates in the “free-living” (0.2–0.8 µm) and particle-associated (0.8–20 µm) bathypelagic microbiome sampled latitudinally at 4000 m depth during the Malaspina expedition. Boxplots show the median as middle horizontal line and interquartile ranges as boxes (whiskers extend no further than 1.5 times the interquartile ranges). Data are shown as circular symbols, while mean values are shown as white colored diamonds. Values at the top indicate the adjusted significant P-values of the unpaired (b) and paired (c) two-sided Wilcoxon test with Benjamini-Hochberg correction. The number of metagenomes analyzed is indicated in parentheses in all three panels. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.Full size imageThe median AGS estimate range of 2.2 to ~3.0 Mbp in the sampled free-living (0.1–3 µm in size) marine prokaryotic communities (n = 209 metagenomes) is consistent with other large-scale metagenome sequence-based estimates and the sizes of metagenome-assembled prokaryotic genomes (MAGs; in 0.22–3 µm filters) from the photic ocean (surface to mesopelagic) based on the Tara Oceans Expedition (1.5–2.3 Mbp)15,16. Overall, our metagenome sequence-based AGS estimates support the unimodal distribution of prokaryotic genome sizes recently demonstrated in environmental genomes in several biomes38 and on cultured isolates (including marine bacterioplankton)14,39. However, estimates from isolates are likely biased since current cultivation approaches tend to favor copiotrophs (see, ref. 3).We next tested whether the derived AGS estimates depended on microbial cell size by analyzing 25 paired bathypelagic metagenomes (MDeep; Supplementary Data 1) sampled during the global Malaspina Expedition40 in which both prokaryotic life strategies, free-living (0.2–0.8 µm size) and particle-associated (0.8–20 µm size), were sampled simultaneously35. The analyzed metagenomes (MDeep) were from the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Ocean provinces and cover a spatial distance of 9437 km with an average depth (± SD) of 3688 ± 526 m at the tropical and subtropical latitudes (–33.55°N to 32.0788°N). These microbial metagenomes were also screened for contaminating eukaryotic and viral sequences as indicated in Fig. 1a (see details in the “Methods” section and Supplementary Data 1). The genomes of bathypelagic prokaryotes associated with marine particles (5.6 ± 0.97 Mbp) were twice as large (paired two-sided Wilcoxon test, p  3 µm) prokaryotes, respectively (Supplementary Data 3). These estimates are also consistent with those of MAGs reconstructed from the same metagenomes in the Challenger Deep (Mariana Trench)43. Overall, this reinforces the patterns of larger AGS in particle-associated compared to free-living bathypelagic prokaryotes, and larger microbial genomes in the deep ocean compared to the upper ocean.AGS patterns are not geographically constrainedExamination of the geographic patterns of AGS estimates showed that AGS distribution was independent of geographic distance in both the regional (Red Sea, Mantel statistic r = 0.01824, p = 0.2971) and global (MProfile, r = –0.01413, p = 0.7924) ocean metagenomes. Furthermore, AGS estimates in the vertically profiled global Malaspina metagenomes (MProfile, n = 81) were significantly independent of the Longhurst biogeochemical province sampled (n = 9; Kruskal-Wallis χ2 = 1.0006, df = 8, p = 0.9982; Supplementary Data 1). The lack of covariance between the patterns of AGS estimates and geographic distance or Longhurst province sampled may reflect the high connectivity of microbial communities throughout the global ocean, particularly the redistributive effects of circulation by ocean currents and other transport processes, as well as the enormous population sizes of plankton that allow dispersal constraints to be overcome44,45. This is consistent with the relatively small differences in microbial assemblages recently found in different ocean basins23,46. Another possible explanation is the effect of seasonality, which can cause selection of different taxa, resulting in the succession of microbial communities and affecting their distribution (see, ref. 47), and thus influence AGS patterns.An assessment of the relationship between AGS and measured environmental variables (Supplementary Fig. S1; Data 1)—separately for the Red Sea metagenomes (regional scale) and Malaspina Vertical Profiles metagenomes (global scale), showed that the cumulative effect of temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, and depth on AGS patterns was significant at both the regional scale (n = 45; Mantel statistic r = 0.1944, p = 0.0057) and the global scale (n = 81; Mantel statistic r = 0.1779, p = 1 × 10–4). This result suggests that environmental conditions are a driving force behind predicted AGS patterns in the marine microbiome. While no significant interaction effect was evident between many environmental variables (i.e., salinity, depth, oxygen, nitrate, and phosphate) in controlling AGS patterns (one-way ANOVA, p  More

Vitamin B12 biosynthesis potential of different bacteriaB vitamins play a key role in complex marine microbial interactions as they are obligatory cofactors in various essential metabolic reactions in all living organism [13, 14, 39,40,41]. An exciting fact about B12 is that genes for synthesis of this complex cofactor have never made the transition to the eukaryotic kingdom, although it is required by both prokaryotes and eukaryotes. De novo synthesis is restricted to a minor fraction of bacteria and archaea, thus, suggesting that the ability to synthesise B12 is disproportionate to its demand in nature [1, 4]. This phenomenon can be observed in various habitats, for example in the soil microbiome, where the proportion of B12 producers is less than one tenth [8]. Similar findings have been shown for the microbiome on human skin, where only 1% of the core species are predicted to produce B12 de novo, while 39 % of the species are predicted to use B12 for metabolism [42]. In order to adequately answer this fundamental question regarding the balance between B12 availability and consumption, we should aim to better understand the synthesis potential of individual prototrophic prokaryotes.Here we present intra- and extracellular B12 concentrations of various B12 prototrophic, alphaproteobacterial strains. The concentration of intracellular B12 differs widely between the various heterotrophic bacteria examined. Converted, B12 molecules detected per cell ranged between 664 to 26,619 in the analysed bacterial cultures, including B12-provider and B12-retainer. Such strong variation in intracellular B12 concentrations have already been shown for a number of other prokaryotes, including Archaea, heterotrophic bacteria, and cyanobacteria [11, 34]. Also, in these studies, the detected intracellular B12 values differed up to three orders of magnitude and showed values similar to the ones we detected. Whether factors such as cell size, which we did not consider in our analysis, or the exact growth phase in which we took the samples had an influence on the strong variation cannot be clarified here. It is quite conceivable that different B12 requirements of the individual cells or different regulatory mechanisms of B12 synthesis played a decisive role for the intracellular B12 concentrations. Nevertheless, we can conclude that not only the genetic B12 biosynthetic potential within a microbial community is decisive, but rather which prokaryote is actually present is crucial for the availability of B12.The extracellular concentrations of B12 detected in M. algicola and P. inhibens were about 8 and 256 times lower than respective intracellular levels. For example, M. algicola secreted about 936 B12 molecules per cell, which was roughly 85 times more as detected for P. inhibens. On the basis of the detected B12 demand of T. pseudonana determined by the bioassay, we can calculate that the eukaryote requires roughly 135,000 B12 molecules per cell, if we base the limitation of cell number solely on B12 availability. Thus, it would take about 144 living M. algicola cells that release B12 to cover the requirements for the growth of one T. pseudonana cell. In fact, the bacterial cell numbers in the stationary phase of the B12-provider-diatom co-cultures were at least 110 times higher than the cell numbers of T. pseudonana. These calculations are all based on ideal laboratory conditions, with sufficient supply of inorganic nutrients and organic substrates and may differ in natural environments where viral infections or sloppy feeding can lead to cell disruption and subsequent release of intracellular B12 [43, 44]. Also, B12 requirement of T. pseudonana cells can vary under different growth conditions. For example, it has been shown that growth of T. pseudonana even with 1 pM of B12 can result in a significant change in the metabolite pool of the diatom, which in turn may have implications for the interaction with bacteria [45]. Nevertheless, our data give a first approximate insight into the interplay between B12-producers and -consumers in the world of microorganisms.Bacterial effects on the growth of T. pseudonana
Growth characteristics of T. pseudonana in co-culture show not only the obligatory provision of B12 by bacteria but also other bacterial factors that influence growth. For example, we observed that Sulfitobacter litoralis, a representative of the Roseobacter group, showed inhibitory behaviour towards the diatom. Other studies have shown that Roseobacter group isolates can produce inhibitory substances, roseobacticides, which can suppress the growth of eukaryotic phototrophs [46]. The provision of B12 leads to a promotion in growth and, at the same time, growth of the diatom is inhibited. One reason for the different growth characteristics of the diatoms observed in co-culture with different bacteria could be the adaptation to different habitats where the bacterial isolates naturally occur.In contrast to these observations, Celeribacter baekdonensis DSM 27375 significantly stimulated the growth of T. pseudonana. Even though C. baekdonensis did not provide B12 despite being synthesized, its presence in co-culture with B12 addition significantly increased the growth rate and growth yield of T. pseudonana compared to the positive control of the corresponding experimental run. In previous bacterial-diatom co-culture experiments, it has been shown that the excretion of cyclic peptides, diketopiperazines, by a bacterium, significantly increased diatom cell numbers [47]. Another plausible scenario is the synthesis and excretion of indoleacetic acid (IAA) by C. baekdonensis, which is a growth-promoting hormone for diatoms [48]. A similar effect is also conceivable for C. baekdonensis and would be exciting to explore in greater depth.A finding that appears to be overlooked in the context of our actual question is the fact that the expected bacterial cell death does not necessarily lead to the release of B12, which would promote the growth of T. pseudonana, and thus promote the interaction. Even after up to six weeks in co-culture, we cannot observe significant growth of T. pseudonana despite the presence of a bacterial B12 prototroph. This fact highlights the importance of cell lysis mechanisms in nature, for example caused by viral infections or sloppy feeding. Already today, these two natural processes are considered to play a significant role in the turnover of dissolved organic matter [44, 49,50,51] and are likely to also have a decisive influence on the release of B-vitamins in marine ecosystems [23]. Additionally, T. pseudonana is known to secret a B12 binding protein under B12 deficient conditions that has an affinity constant of 2 × 1011 M−1. This protein might help them to acquire B12 from the surroundings, when it is released through bacterial cell lysis mechanism [52]. Other phytoplankton might also have a similar strategy to scavenge B12 from the environment. When intracellular B12 is considered as a reservoir for other B12 auxotrophic microorganisms, then, for example, already 19 M. algicola cells would be sufficient to enable the growth of one T. pseudonana cell.The vital cofactor B12 is not shared by all prototrophic bacteriaAbout half of the marine phytoplankton species are B12 auxotrophs and rely on prototrophic prokaryotes to obtain this essential vitamin [1, 53]. Several co-culture experiments have confirmed that individual marine bacterial isolates, mainly Alphaproteobacteria, enable phytoplankton species to overcome their auxotrophy by providing the essential cofactor [13,14,15,16, 27, 28]. In our study we hypothesised that not all B12 prototrophs share B12 with other microorganisms and to prove that we performed individual co-culture experiments between T. pseudonana and 33 B12 prototrophic bacteria. B12 prototrophy of the bacterial isolates was confirmed by their genetic ability to synthesize B12 (Supplementary table S2) and their ability to grow in B12-free medium. The results of our study support this hypothesis, as we were able to identify one group of bacteria that enables growth of T. pseudonana by the supply of the essential cofactor, B12-providers. On the other hand, we also identified a second group of B12 prototrophic bacteria that did not support the growth of the diatom, the B12-retainers. Moreover, while categorizing them into B12-providers and B12-retainers, we observed that there are species within one genus, such as P. inhibens and P. galleciensis, in which one is a B12-provider and the other is a B12-retainer, respectively, although both of them possess the necessary genes for B12 biosynthesis. Yet, the question remains why some bacteria share the cofactor, and others, despite an obligatory interaction enforced in co-culture, do not. In the following, we describe and discuss three scenarios that we consider plausible, whereby not only one scenario has to be correct, but rather all three can take place in the B12-retainer strains that we have identified.First, biosynthesis of metabolites, such as the energetically costly B12 cofactor, are subject to intracellular regulation. Transcriptional regulation of the B12 biosynthesis pathway determines whether, and in what quantity B12 is synthesised in the cell. For example, sigma factors can alter the specificity of an RNA polymerase for a particular promoter, so that gene expression is enhanced or reduced [54]. In the case of the bacterial isolate Propionibacterium strain UF1, the riboswitch cbiMCbl was identified to regulate the gene expression of the cobA operon and thus controls B12 biosynthesis [55]. It is also known that sufficient availability of B12 can repress B12 biosynthesis gene expression in bacteria [56, 57]. In gram-negative proteobacteria as well as in cyanobacteria, for example, cobalamin (pseudocobalamin, in case of some bacteria) biosynthesis and B12 transport genes are regulated by inhibition of translation initiation, whereas in some gram-positive bacteria gene regulation proceeds by transcriptional antitermination [58]. The mechanisms described above are likely to also occur in the bacterial isolates that we tested. The large difference between the detected intracellular B12 concentrations could therefore be due to differences in gene regulation of the different bacteria and may also have had an influence on the release of B12 in the co-culture with T. pseudonana.Second, cobalamin, which we referred to here as B12 for simplicity, belongs to a group of B12-like metabolites, called cobamides. Each cobamide differs in the lower ligand attached. For example, the common cobamide, cobalamin, which is bioavailable to most microorganisms, carries 5,6-dimethylbenzimidazol (DMB) as its lower ligand, whereas pseudocobalamin synthesised by cyanobacteria in high concentrations in the ocean and being less or not bioavailable to most microorganisms, has adenine attached as its lower ligand [11, 41, 59, 60]. In general, the lower ligands of cobamides can be divided into benzimidazoles, purines, and phenols, and more than a dozen cobamides and cobamide-analogs have already been discovered [61]. However, research into the synthesis and actual diversity of cobamides, especially in marine bacteria and archaea, is still in its infancy. In our study, we were unable to detect intracellular B12 in four out of eight bacterial B12-retainer strains, although the cell counts at the time of sampling should have been sufficient for its detection. However, as is generally the case, our LC-MS analysis only targets cobalamin (B12) with its different upper ligands (adenosyl-, cyano-, methyl-, and hydroxy-cobalamin). Therefore, we cannot exclude the possibility that the here studied bacteria synthesise different cobamides, which are possibly not or less bioavailable to T. pseudonana, and not covered by our analytical measurement method. This speculation was supported by the fact that one of these four B12- retainer strains, Sulfitobacter sp. DFL-23, does not possess the DMB synthesis gene bluB and there was no intracellular B12 detected in this strain (Supplementary table S2 and Table 2). Again, it is difficult to explain this phenomenon solely depending on the presence of annotated DMB synthesis gene, as for Loktanella salsilacus DSM 16199 no bluB gene was annotated, still we detected intracellular B12 in this strain using our detection method (Supplementary table S2 and Table 2).Third, the bacteria we have identified as B12-retainer simply may not have actively released the synthesised B12 into their environment. Regardless of the importance of B12 for the vast majority of living organisms on our planet, its excretion mechanisms are to our knowledge still largely unknown. Its size of more than 1,350 Dalton does not allow sufficient diffusion through the cell membrane, which would enable microbial interactions [32]. Thus, it is likely that an unknown mechanism is required for its release. This assumption is further supported by the fact that we were able to detect intracellular B12 in four of the eight B12-retainer strains and at concentrations comparable to those detected in the B12-provider strains. In addition, we could detect intracellular B12 in P. xiamenensis, but none in its exometabolome. On the other hand, presence of extracellular B12 was detected in the exometabolome of both the provider strains examined, M. algicola and P. inhibens. Our findings show that not all bacteria share the pivotal cofactor with their environment, which has an impact on our current understanding of the marine B12 cycle and presumably in other ecosystems as well. The active exchange of B12 and thus microbial interaction plays a much smaller role than previously assumed for a relatively large number of bacteria. Consequently, for some of the B12 prototrophic bacteria within a community, it is likely that the cofactor is only released upon cell lysis.B12 production in the marine ecosystem and ecological implicationsLooking at the original source of B12 in nature, namely prototrophic bacteria and archaea, the bacteria studied here show pronounced differences between the biosynthetic potentials of the cofactors and the ability to share them with their environment. Thus, the natural source of vitamin B12 within a given ecosystem does not primarily depend on the ratio of prototrophic bacteria, but even more crucially on how much of the cofactor is synthesised by the prototrophic prokaryotes within an ecosystem and is actively released. The fact that some bacteria do not voluntarily share B12 with ambient microorganisms, significantly increases the importance of processes, such as sloppy feeding by zooplankton or virus infections [44, 49,50,51], for the release of vitamins in the marine and likely also other ecosystems.Our results also contribute to the controversially discussed question of whether B12 prototrophic bacteria live in symbiosis with phototrophic microorganisms [13, 30]. Despite numerous co-cultivation experiments demonstrating the obligatory provision of B12 by individual bacteria to phototrophic microorganisms, the decisive question of the mechanism of provision has so far been overlooked [13,14,15,16, 27, 28]. In our view, however, this question is crucial when assessing whether a symbiotic interaction is taking place. Our results support the hypothesis that a bacterial mechanism for the active release is likely to exist, as our experiments distinguish between B12-provider and B12-retainer within prototrophic bacteria. Looking at the ecological niches and the isolation sites of the two respective groups, differences can be identified. Most B12-provider strains were isolated from or discovered in association with eukaryotic microorganisms, whereas most B12-retainer strains were isolated as free-living in the ocean (Supplementary table S4). Moreover, six of the tested bacterial strains were isolated from dinoflagellates and five of them were B12-provider. Since we used a diatom as a B12 auxotrophic organism in our study, it would also be interesting to know if these B12-provider strains also provide B12 to other phytoplankton, such as dinoflagellates. Also, in this study we only studied bacteria from the alphaproteobacteria class, since a large share of them are known to be B12 prototrophs and abundant in the marine ecosystem. For future studies, it would be interesting to see if a similar pattern of B12 provisioning can be observed in bacteria from other classes. Our results indicate that the B12 prototrophy of a bacterium does not necessarily indicate a mutualistic interaction with other auxotrophic microorganisms. However, the bacterial group of B12-provider in particular seems to favour living in close proximity to other microorganisms, which is why the exchange of B12 for e.g. organic compounds can establish itself as a distinct symbiotic interaction between individual microorganisms. More

Liang, J. et al. Positive biodiversity-productivity relationship predominant in global forests. Science 354, aaf8957 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Huang, Y. et al. Impacts of species richness on productivity in a large-scale subtropical forest experiment. Science 362, 80–83 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Luo, S. et al. Community‐wide trait means and variations affect biomass in a biodiversity experiment with tree seedlings. Oikos 129, 799–810 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pérez-Harguindeguy, N. et al. New handbook for standardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust. J. Bot. 61, 167–234 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bergmann, J. et al. The fungal collaboration gradient dominates the root economics space in plants. Sci. Adv. 6, 1–10 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Freschet, G. T. et al. Root traits as drivers of plant and ecosystem functioning: current understanding, pitfalls and future research needs. N. Phytol. 232, 1123–1158 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhong, Y. et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal trees influence the latitudinal beta-diversity gradient of tree communities in forests worldwide. Nat. Commun. 12, 1–12 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Carteron, A., Vellend, M. & Laliberté, E. Mycorrhizal dominance reduces local tree species diversity across US forests. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 370–374 (2022).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, R. P., Brzostek, E. & Midgley, M. G. The mycorrhizal‐associated nutrient economy: a new framework for predicting carbon–nutrient couplings in temperate forests. N. Phytol. 199, 41–51 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Averill, C., Turner, B. L. & Finzi, A. C. Mycorrhiza-mediated competition between plants and decomposers drives soil carbon storage. Nature 505, 543–545 (2014).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Craig, M. E. et al. Tree mycorrhizal type predicts within‐site variability in the storage and distribution of soil organic matter. Glob. Chang. Biol. 24, 3317–3330 (2018).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
van der Heijden, M. G. A. et al. Mycorrhizal fungal diversity determines plant biodiversity, ecosystem variability and productivity. Nature 396, 69–72 (1998).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Klironomos, J. N., McCune, J., Hart, M. & Neville, J. The influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae on the relationship between plant diversity and productivity. Ecol. Lett. 3, 137–141 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wagg, C., Jansa, J., Stadler, M., Schmid, B. & Van Der Heijden, M. G. A. Mycorrhizal fungal identity and diversity relaxes plant-plant competition. Ecology 92, 1303–1313 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Luo, S., Schmid, B., De Deyn, G. B. & Yu, S. Soil microbes promote complementarity effects among co‐existing trees through soil nitrogen partitioning. Funct. Ecol. 32, 1879–1889 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferlian, O. et al. Mycorrhiza in tree diversity–ecosystem function relationships: conceptual framework and experimental implementation. Ecosphere 9, e02226 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tedersoo, L. & Bahram, M. Mycorrhizal types differ in ecophysiology and alter plant nutrition and soil processes. Biol. Rev. 94, 1857–1880 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rineau, F. et al. The ectomycorrhizal fungus Paxillus involutus converts organic matter in plant litter using a trimmed brown-rot mechanism involving Fenton chemistry. Environ. Microbiol. 14, 1477–1487 (2012).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lindahl, B. D. & Tunlid, A. Ectomycorrhizal fungi – potential organic matter decomposers, yet not saprotrophs. N. Phytol. 205, 1443–1447 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hodge, A. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi influence decomposition of, but not plant nutrient capture from, glycine patches in soil. N. Phytol. 151, 725–734 (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Read, D. J. & Perez-Moreno, J. Mycorrhizas and nutrient cycling in ecosystems – A journey towards relevance? N. Phytol. 157, 475–492 (2003).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Toju, H., Kishida, O., Katayama, N. & Takagi, K. Networks depicting the fine-scale co-occurrences of fungi in soil horizons. PLoS ONE 11, 1–18 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Taylor, D. L. et al. A first comprehensive census of fungi in soil reveals both hyperdiversity and fine-scale niche partitioning. Ecol. Monogr. 84, 3–20 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, W. et al. Root morphology and mycorrhizal symbioses together shape nutrient foraging strategies of temperate trees. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 8741–8746 (2016).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Liu, X. et al. Partitioning of soil phosphorus among arbuscular and ectomycorrhizal trees in tropical and subtropical forests. Ecol. Lett. 21, 713–723 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Averill, C., Bhatnagar, J. M., Dietze, M. C., Pearse, W. D. & Kivlin, S. N. Global imprint of mycorrhizal fungi on whole-plant nutrient economics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 23163–23168 (2019).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dietrich, P. et al. Tree diversity effects on productivity depend on mycorrhizae and life strategies in a temperate forest experiment. Ecology 104, e3896 https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.3896 (2022).Averill, C., Dietze, M. C. & Bhatnagar, J. M. Continental-scale nitrogen pollution is shifting forest mycorrhizal associations and soil carbon stocks. Glob. Chang. Biol. 24, 4544–4553 (2018).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jo, I., Fei, S., Oswalt, C. M., Domke, G. M. & Phillips, R. P. Shifts in dominant tree mycorrhizal associations in response to anthropogenic impacts. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav6358, (2019).Fei, S. et al. Impacts of climate on the biodiversity-productivity relationship in natural forests. Nat. Commun. 9, 5436 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bongers, F. J. et al. Functional diversity effects on productivity increase with age in a forest biodiversity experiment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1594–1603 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schoener, T. W. Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185, 27–39 (1974).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tilman, D., Lehman, C. L. & Thomson, K. T. Plant diversity and ecosystem productivity: theoretical considerations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 1857–1861 (1997).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Schwilk, D. W. & Ackerly, D. D. Limiting similarity and functional diversity along environmental gradients. Ecol. Lett. 8, 272–281 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wagg, C., Jansa, J., Schmid, B. & van der Heijden, M. G. A. Belowground biodiversity effects of plant symbionts support aboveground productivity. Ecol. Lett. 14, 1001–1009 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Agerer, R. Exploration types of ectomycorrhizae: a proposal to classify ectomycorrhizal mycelial systems according to their patterns of differentiation and putative ecological importance. Mycorrhiza 11, 107–114 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheng, L. et al. Mycorrhizal fungi and roots are complementary in foraging within nutrient patches. Ecology 97, 2815–2823 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wambsganss, J. et al. Tree species mixing causes a shift in fine-root soil exploitation strategies across European forests. Funct. Ecol. 35, 1886–1902 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gerz, M., Guillermo Bueno, C., Ozinga, W. A., Zobel, M. & Moora, M. Niche differentiation and expansion of plant species are associated with mycorrhizal symbiosis. J. Ecol. 106, 254–264 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Niklaus, P. A., Baruffol, M., He, J. S., Ma, K. & Schmid, B. Can niche plasticity promote biodiversity–productivity relationships through increased complementarity? Ecology 98, 1104–1116 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Barry, K. E. et al. The future of complementarity: disentangling causes from consequences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34, 167–180 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jacobs, L. M., Sulman, B. N., Brzostek, E. R., Feighery, J. J. & Phillips, R. P. Interactions among decaying leaf litter, root litter and soil organic matter vary with mycorrhizal type. J. Ecol. 106, 502–513 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Midgley, M. G., Brzostek, E. & Phillips, R. P. Decay rates of leaf litters from arbuscular mycorrhizal trees are more sensitive to soil effects than litters from ectomycorrhizal trees. J. Ecol. 103, 1454–1463 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kumar, A., Phillips, R. P., Scheibe, A., Klink, S. & Pausch, J. Organic matter priming by invasive plants depends on dominant mycorrhizal association. Soil Biol. Biochem. 140, 107645 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tedersoo, L., Bahram, M. & Zobel, M. How mycorrhizal associations drive plant population and community biology. Science 367, eaba1223 (2020).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kitajima, K. & Poorter, L. Functional basis for resource niche partitioning by tropical trees. Trop. For. community Ecol. 1936, 160–181 (2008).MacArthur, R. H. Patterns of species diverstiy. Biol. Rev. 40, 510–533 (1965).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pellissier, V., Barnagaud, J. Y., Kissling, W. D., Şekercioğlu, Ç. & Svenning, J. C. Niche packing and expansion account for species richness–productivity relationships in global bird assemblages. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 27, 604–615 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Huang, Y. et al. Effects of enemy exclusion on biodiversity–productivity relationships in a subtropical forest experiment. J. Ecol. 110, 2167–2178. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.13940 (2022).Tilman, D. Community invasibility, recruitment limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology 78, 81–92 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Feng, Y. et al. Multispecies forest plantations outyield monocultures across a broad range of conditions. Science 376, 865–868 (2022).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Harper, J. L. Population biology of plants. (1977).Ewel, J. J. Designing agricultural ecosystems for the humid tropics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17, 245–271 (1986).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grossiord, C. Having the right neighbors: how tree species diversity modulates drought impacts on forests. N. Phytol. 228, 42–49 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Allen, M. F. Mycorrhizal fungi: highways for water and nutrients in arid soils. Vadose Zo. J. 6, 291–297 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brzostek, E. R. et al. Chronic water stress reduces tree growth and the carbon sink of deciduous hardwood forests. Glob. Chang. Biol. 20, 2531–2539 (2014).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Liese, R., Lübbe, T., Albers, N. W. & Meier, I. C. The mycorrhizal type governs root exudation and nitrogen uptake of temperate tree species. Tree Physiol. 38, 83–95 (2018).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Linton, M. J., Sperry, J. S. & Williams, D. G. Limits to water transport in Juniperus osteosperma and Pinus edulis: Implications for drought tolerance and regulation of transpiration. Funct. Ecol. 12, 906–911 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, D. M. et al. Co-occurring woody species have diverse hydraulic strategies and mortality rates during an extreme drought. Plant. Cell Environ. 41, 576–588 (2018).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lin, G. et al. Mycorrhizal associations of tree species influence soil nitrogen dynamics via effects on soil acid–base chemistry. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 31, 168–182 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Read, D. J. Mycorrhizas in ecosystems. Experientia 47, 376–391 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hobbie, S. E. Plant species effects on nutrient cycling: revisiting litter feedbacks. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 357–363 (2015).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
De Schrijver, A. et al. Tree species traits cause divergence in soil acidification during four decades of postagricultural forest development. Glob. Chang. Biol. 18, 1127–1140 (2012).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M. & Hector, A. Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature 412, 72–76 (2001).Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Braghiere, R. K. et al. Modeling global carbon costs of plant nitrogen and phosphorus acquisition. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 14, 1–23 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eisenhauer, N. et al. Biotic interactions as mediators of context-dependent biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationships. Res. Ideas Outcomes 8, e85873 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fisher, J. B. et al. Tree-mycorrhizal associations detected remotely from canopy spectral properties. Glob. Chang. Biol. 22, 2596–2607 (2016).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Soudzilovskaia, N. A. et al. Global mycorrhizal plant distribution linked to terrestrial carbon stocks. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–10 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Burrill, E. A. et al. The forest inventory and analysis database. USDA . Serv. 2, 1026 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Chao, A., Chiu, C.-H. & Jost, L. Unifying species diversity, phylogenetic diversity, functional diversity, and related similarity and differentiation measures through hill numbers. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 45, 297–324 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cleland, D. T. et al. Ecological subregions: Sections and subsections for the conterminous United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-76D (2007).Soudzilovskaia, N. A. et al. FungalRoot: global online database of plant mycorrhizal associations. N. Phytol. 227, 955–966 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gallion, J. et al. Indiana DNR State Forest Properties Report of Continuous Forest Inventory (CFI) Summary of years 2015–2019. 1–25 (2020).Dormann, C. F. et al. Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography 30, 609–628 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Craven, D. et al. A cross-scale assessment of productivity–diversity relationships. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1940–1955 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paquette, A. & Messier, C. The effect of biodiversity on tree productivity: from temperate to boreal forests. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 20, 170–180 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/ (2020).Dowle, M. & Srinivasan, A. data.table: Extension of ‘data.frame‘. R package version 1.14.2 (2021).Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York, 2016.Kassambara, A. ggpubr: ‘ggplot2’ Based Publication Ready Plots. R package version 0.4.0 (2020).Dunnington, D. ggspatial: Spatial Data Framework for ggplot2. R package version 1.1.5 (2021).Robert, J. Hijmans. raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. R package version 3.5-2 (2021).Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L. & Müller, K. dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation. R package version 1.0.8 (2022).Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lefcheck, J. S. piecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equation modeling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 573–579 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Luo, S. et al. High productivity in forests with mixed mycorrhizal strategies. Figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22060238. (2023). More

Ellis, E. C. et al. People have shaped most of terrestrial nature for at least 12,000 years. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2023483118 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Williams, B. A. et al. Change in terrestrial human footprint drives continued loss of intact ecosystems. One Earth 3, 371–382 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuipers, K. J. J. et al. Habitat fragmentation amplifies threats from habitat loss to mammal diversity across the world’s terrestrial ecoregions. One Earth 4, 1505–1513 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Venter, O. et al. Sixteen years of change in the global terrestrial human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation. Nat. Commun. 7, 12558 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Watson, J. E. M. & Venter, O. Mapping the continuum of humanity’s footprint on land. One Earth 1, 175–180 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Foley, J. A. et al. Global consequences of land use. Science 309, 570–574 (2005).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Glidden, C. K. et al. Human-mediated impacts on biodiversity and the consequences for zoonotic disease spillover. Curr. Biol. 31, R1342–R1361 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Grobbelaar, A. A. et al. Resurgence of yellow fever in Angola, 2015-2016. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 22, 1854–1855 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gubler, D. J. Epidemic dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever as a public health, social and economic problem in the 21st century. Trends Microbiol. 10, 100–103 (2002).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hotez, P. J. Neglected tropical diseases in the Anthropocene: the cases of Zika, Ebola, and other infections. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 10, e0004648 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paixão, E. S., Teixeira, M. G. & Rodrigues, L. C. Zika, chikungunya and dengue: the causes and threats of new and re-emerging arboviral diseases. BMJ Glob. Health 3, e000530 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rosenberg, R. et al. Vital signs: trends in reported vectorborne disease cases – United States and territories, 2004-2016. Morb. Mortal. Wk. Rep. 67, 496–501 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
World Malaria Report 2020: 20 Years of Global Progress and Challenges (WHO, 2020); https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/337660Lambin, E. F., Tran, A., Vanwambeke, S. O., Linard, C. & Soti, V. Pathogenic landscapes: interactions between land, people, disease vectors, and their animal hosts. Int. J. Health Geogr. 9, 54 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shocket, M. S. et al. Transmission of West Nile and five other temperate mosquito-borne viruses peaks at temperatures between 23 °C and 26 °C. eLife 9, e58511 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kilpatrick, A. M. & Randolph, S. E. Drivers, dynamics, and control of emerging vector-borne zoonotic diseases. Lancet 380, 1946–1955 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Franklinos, L. H. V., Jones, K. E., Redding, D. W. & Abubakar, I. The effect of global change on mosquito-borne disease. Lancet Infect. Dis. 19, e302–e312 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Keys, P. W., Barnes, E. A. & Carter, N. H. A machine-learning approach to human footprint index estimation with applications to sustainable development. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 044061 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Venter, O. et al. Global terrestrial human footprint maps for 1993 and 2009. Sci. Data 3, 160067 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Di Marco, M., Ferrier, S., Harwood, T. D., Hoskins, A. J. & Watson, J. E. M. Wilderness areas halve the extinction risk of terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 573, 582–585 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hill, J. E., DeVault, T. L., Wang, G. & Belant, J. L. Anthropogenic mortality in mammals increases with the human footprint. Front. Ecol. Environ. 18, 13–18 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Elsen, P. R., Monahan, W. B. & Merenlender, A. M. Topography and human pressure in mountain ranges alter expected species responses to climate change. Nat. Commun. 11, 1974 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Su, J., Yin, H. & Kong, F. Ecological networks in response to climate change and the human footprint in the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomeration, China. Landsc. Ecol. 36, 2095–2112 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, A. J. et al. A policy-driven framework for conserving the best of Earth’s remaining moist tropical forests. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1377–1384 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dos Santos, C. V. B., da Paixão Sevá, A., Werneck, G. L. & Struchiner, C. J. Does deforestation drive visceral leishmaniasis transmission? A causal analysis. Proc. R. Soc. B 288, 20211537 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
MacDonald, A. J. & Mordecai, E. A. Amazon deforestation drives malaria transmission, and malaria burden reduces forest clearing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 22212–22218 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Honório, N. A. et al. Dispersal of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) in an urban endemic dengue area in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz 98, 191–198 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodrigues, N. B. et al. Brazilian Aedes aegypti as a competent vector for multiple complex arboviral coinfections. J. Infect. Dis. 224, 101–108 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Weinstein, J. S., Leslie, T. F. & von Fricken, M. E. Spatial associations between land use and infectious disease: Zika virus in Colombia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17, E1127 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heukelbach, J., Alencar, C. H., Kelvin, A. A., de Oliveira, W. K. & Pamplona de Góes Cavalcanti, L. Zika virus outbreak in Brazil. J. Infect. Dev. Countr. 10, 116–120 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lowe, R. et al. The Zika virus epidemic in Brazil: from discovery to future implications. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15, E96 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alves, M. C. G. P., de Matos, M. R., de Lourdes Reichmann, M. & Dominguez, M. H. Estimation of the dog and cat population in the State of São Paulo. Rev. Saude Publica 39, 891–897 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mordecai, E. A. et al. Thermal biology of mosquito-borne disease. Ecol. Lett. 22, 1690–1708 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gage, K. L., Burkot, T. R., Eisen, R. J. & Hayes, E. B. Climate and vectorborne diseases. Am. J. Prev. Med. 35, 436–450 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Doenças e Agravos de Notificação – 2007 em Diante (SINAN) (DATASUS, Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, 2021); https://datasus.saude.gov.br/acesso-a-informacao/doencas-e-agravos-de-notificacao-de-2007-em-diante-sinan/SIVEP – MALÁRIA Notificação de Casos (Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, 2021); http://200.214.130.44/sivep_malaria/R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020); https://www.R-project.org/Sorichetta, A. et al. High-resolution gridded population datasets for Latin America and the Caribbean in 2010, 2015, and 2020. Sci. Data 2, 150045 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harris, I., Osborn, T. J., Jones, P. & Lister, D. Version 4 of the CRU TS monthly high-resolution gridded multivariate climate dataset. Sci. Data 7, 109 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Souza at. al. Reconstructing three decades of land use and land cover changes in Brazilian biomes with Landsat archive and Earth Engine. Remote Sens. 12, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12172735 (2020).Fountain-Jones, N. M. et al. How to make more from exposure data? An integrated machine learning pipeline to predict pathogen exposure. J. Anim. Ecol. 88, 1447–1461 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Genuer, R., Poggi, J.-M. & Tuleau-Malot, C. Variable selection using random forests. Pattern Recogn. Lett. 31, 2225–2236 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wei, T. et al. Package ‘corrplot’. Statistician 56, e24 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Ratner, B. The correlation coefficient: its values range between +1/−1, or do they? J. Target. Meas. Anal. Mark. 17, 139–142 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ishwaran, H. & Kogalur, U. B. Fast unified random forests for survival, regression, and classification (RF-SRC) (2019).O’Brien, R. & Ishwaran, H. A random forests quantile classifier for class imbalanced data. Pattern Recognit. 90, 232–249 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Silge, J. & Mahoney, M. spatialsample: spatial resampling infrastructure. R version 0.2.1 (2023).Bhatt, S. et al. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature 496, 504–507 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Weaver, S. C. & Forrester, N. L. Chikungunya: evolutionary history and recent epidemic spread. Antivir. Res. 120, 32–39 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Puntasecca, C. J., King, C. H. & LaBeaud, A. D. Measuring the global burden of chikungunya and Zika viruses: a systematic review. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 15, e0009055 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Baeza, A., Santos-Vega, M., Dobson, A. P. & Pascual, M. The rise and fall of malaria under land-use change in frontier regions. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 108 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
de Araújo Pedrosa, F. & de Alencar Ximenes, R. A. Sociodemographic and environmental risk factors for American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL) in the State of Alagoas, Brazil. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 81, 195–201 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gonçalves, N. V. et al. Cutaneous leishmaniasis: spatial distribution and environmental risk factors in the state of Pará, Brazilian Eastern Amazon. J. Infect. Dev. Countr. 13, 939–944 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leishmaniasis (Pan American Health Organization, 2022); https://www.paho.org/en/topics/leishmaniasisHarhay, M. O., Olliaro, P. L., Costa, D. L. & Costa, C. H. N. Urban parasitology: visceral leishmaniasis in Brazil. Trends Parasitol. 27, 403–409 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Authors and AffiliationsCenter for Evolutionary Hologenomics, Globe Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkMorten T. Limborg & Jacob A. RasmussenSanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, UKPhysilia Y. S. ChuaAuthorsMorten T. LimborgPhysilia Y. S. ChuaJacob A. RasmussenCorresponding authorsCorrespondence to
Morten T. Limborg or Physilia Y. S. Chua. More