Philippa Kaur

1.Li, J. et al. Development, progress and future prospects in cryobiotechnology of Lilium spp. Plant Methods 15, 125 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Jin, L., Zhang, Y., Yan, L., Guo, Y. & Niu, L. Phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity of bulb extracts of six Lilium species native to China. Molecules 17, 9361–9378 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Zhao, B., Zhang, J., Guo, X. & Wang, J. Microwave-assisted extraction, chemical characterization of polysaccharides from Lilium davidii var. unicolor Salisb and its antioxidant activities evaluation. Food Hydrocoll. 31, 346–356 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Wu, Z. et al. In vitro study of the growth, development and pathogenicity responses of Fusarium oxysporum to phthalic acid, an autotoxin from Lanzhou lily. World J. Microb. Biot. 31, 1227–1234 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Wu, Z. et al. Identification of autotoxins from root exudates of Lanzhou lily (Lilium davidii var. unicolor). Allelopathy J. 35, 35–48 (2015).
Google Scholar 
6.Vaitauskienė, K., Šarauskis, E., Naujokienė, V. & Liakas, V. The influence of free-living nitrogen-fixing bacteria on the mechanical characteristics of different plant residues under no-till and strip-till conditions. Soil Till. Res. 154, 91–102 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Doornbos, R. F., van Loon, L. C. & Bakker, P. A. H. M. Impact of root exudates and plant defense signaling on bacterial communities in the rhizosphere. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 32, 227–243 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Liu, X. et al. Long-term greenhouse cucumber production alters soil bacterial community structure. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nut. 20, 306–321 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
9.Liu, X. et al. Microbial community diversities and taxa abundances in soils along a seven-year gradient of potato monoculture using high throughput pyrosequencing approach. PLoS ONE 9, e86610 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
10.Li, X., Ding, C., Zhang, T. & Wang, X. Fungal pathogen accumulation at the expense of plant-beneficial fungi as a consequence of consecutive peanut monoculturing. Soil Biol. Biochem. 72, 11–18 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
11.Zhao, Q. et al. Long-term coffee monoculture alters soil chemical properties and microbial communities. Sci. Rep. 8, 6116 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Shang, Q. et al. Illumina-based analysis of the rhizosphere microbial communities associated with healthy and wilted Lanzhou lily (Lilium davidii var. unicolor) plants grown in the field. World J. Microb. Biot. 32, 95 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
13.Wu, K. et al. Effects of bio-organic fertilizer plus soil amendment on the control of tobacco bacterial wilt and composition of soil bacterial communities. Biol. Fert. Soils 50, 961–971 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Baćmaga, M., Wyszkowska, J. & Kucharski, J. The influence of chlorothalonil on the activity of soil microorganisms and enzymes. Ecotoxicology 27, 1188–1202 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Ding, H. et al. Influence of chlorothalonil and carbendazim fungicides on the transformation processes of urea nitrogen and related microbial populations in soil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 26, 31133–31141 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Passari, A. K. et al. Biocontrol of Fusarium wilt of Capsicum annuum by rhizospheric bacteria isolated from turmeric endowed with plant growth promotion and disease suppression potential. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 150, 831–846 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Wang, L. et al. Application of bioorganic fertilizer significantly increased apple yields and shaped bacterial community structure in orchard soil. Microb. Ecol. 73, 404–416 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Bi, Y. et al. Differential effects of two earthworm species on Fusarium wilt of strawberry. Appl. Soil Ecol. 126, 174–181 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Zhao, F. et al. Vermicompost improves microbial functions of soil with continuous tomato cropping in a greenhouse. J. Soil Sediment 20, 380–391 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Mendes, R. et al. Deciphering the rhizosphere microbiome for disease-suppressive bacteria. Science 332, 1097–1100 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Hermans, S. M. et al. Bacteria as emerging indicators of soil condition. Appl. Environ. Microb. 83, 13 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Brown, M. E. & Chang, M. C. Y. Exploring bacterial lignin degradation. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 19, 1–7 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Tian, J., Pourcher, A., Bouchez, T., Gelhaye, E. & Peu, P. Occurrence of lignin degradation genotypes and phenotypes among prokaryotes. Appl. Microbiol. Biot. 98, 9527–9544 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.She, S. et al. Significant relationship between soil bacterial community structure and incidence of bacterial wilt disease under continuous cropping system. Arch. Microbiol. 199, 267–275 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Shen, Z. et al. Soils naturally suppressive to banana Fusarium wilt disease harbor unique bacterial communities. Plant Soil 393, 21–33 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Feng, X. Y. The taxonomic characteristics of various genera of terrestrial earthworms in China. Chin. J. Zool. 1, 44–47 (1985).
Google Scholar 
27.Wu, W. R. Studies on the Germplasm Resources and Quality Estimation of Dilong (Eartheworm) (Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, 2008).
Google Scholar 
28.Zhou, L. et al. Effects of lily/maize intercropping on rhizosphere microbial community and yield of Lilium davidii var. unicolor. J. Basic Microb. 58, 892–901 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Shi, G. Y. et al. Soil fungal diversity loss and appearance of specific fungal pathogenic communities associated with the consecutive replant problem (CRP) in lily. Front. Microbiol. 11, 1649 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Blouin, M. et al. A review of earthworm impact on soil function and ecosystem services. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 64, 161–182 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Doran, J. W. & Zeiss, M. R. Soil health and sustainability: Managing the biotic component of soil quality. Appl. Soil Ecol. 15, 3–11 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Kaneda, S., Ohkubo, S., Wagai, R. & Yagasaki, Y. Soil temperature and moisture-based estimation of rates of soil aggregate formation by the endogeic earthworm Eisenia japonica (Michaelsen, 1892). Biol. Fert. Soils 52, 789–797 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Bottinelli, N. et al. Earthworms accelerate soil porosity turnover under watering conditions. Geoderma 156, 43–47 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Eriksen-Hamel, N. S. & Whalen, J. K. Impacts of earthworms on soil nutrients and plant growth in soybean and maize agroecosystems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 120, 442–448 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Rousk, J., Brookes, P. C. & Baath, E. The microbial PLFA composition as affected by pH in an arable soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 42, 516–520 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Stiles, C. M. & Murray, T. D. Infection of field-grown winter wheat by cephalosporium gramineum and the effect of soil pH. Phytopathology 86, 177–183 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Weyman-Kaczmarkowa, W. & Pedziwilk, Z. The development of fungi as affected by pH and type of soil, in relation to the occurrence of bacteria and soil fungistatic activity. Microbiol. Res. 155, 107–112 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Salmon, S. Earthworm excreta (mucus and urine) affect the distribution of springtails in forest soils. Biol. Fert. Soils 34, 304–310 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.García-Montero, L. G., Valverde-Asenjo, I., Grande-Ortíz, M. A., Menta, C. & Hernando, S. Impact of earthworm casts on soil pH and calcium carbonate in black truffle burns. Agroforest. Syst. 87, 815–826 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Bending, G. D., Turner, M. K. & Jones, J. E. Interactions between crop residue and soil organic matter quality and the functional diversity of soil microbial communities. Soil Biol. Biochem. 34, 1073–1082 (2002).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Wang, H. et al. Effects of long-term application of organic fertilizer on improving organic matter content and retarding acidity in red soil from China. Soil Till. Res. 195, 104382 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Blouin, M., Sery, N., Cluzeau, D., Brun, J. J. & Bédécarrats, A. Balkanized research in ecological engineering revealed by a bibliometric analysis of earthworms and ecosystem services. Environ. Manage. 52, 309–320 (2013).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Wu, Y., Zhang, N., Wang, J. & Sun, Z. An integrated crop-vermiculture system for treating organic waste on fields. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 51, 8–14 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Basker, A., Macgregor, A. N. & Kirkman, J. H. Influence of soil ingestion by earthworms on the availability of potassium in soil: An incubation experiment. Biol. Fert. Soils 14, 300–303 (1992).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Canellas, L. P., Olivares, F. L., Okorokova-Facanha, A. L. & Facanha, A. R. Humic acids isolated from earthworm compost enhance root elongation, lateral root emergence, and plasma membrane H+-ATPase activity in maize roots. Plant Physiol. 130, 1951–1957 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Dvorak, J. et al. Sensing microorganisms in the gut triggers the immune response in Eisenia andrei earthworms. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 57, 67–74 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Ma, X., Xing, M., Wang, Y., Xu, Z. & Yang, J. Microbial enzyme and biomass responses: Deciphering the effects of earthworms and seasonal variation on treating excess sludge. J. Environ. Manage. 170, 207–214 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Groffman, P. M. et al. Earthworms increase soil microbial biomass carrying capacity and nitrogen retention in northern hardwood forests. Soil Biol. Biochem. 87, 51–58 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Gomez-Brandon, M., Lazcano, C., Lores, M. & Dominguez, J. Detritivorous earthworms modify microbial community structure and accelerate plant residue decomposition. Appl. Soil Ecol. 44, 237–244 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Dempsey, M. A., Fisk, M. C. & Fahey, T. J. Earthworms increase the ratio of bacteria to fungi in northern hardwood forest soils, primarily by eliminating the organic horizon. Soil Biol. Biochem. 43, 2135–2141 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Wolfarth, F., Schrader, S., Oldenburg, E. & Weinert, J. Contribution of the endogeic earthworm species Aporrectodea caliginosa to the degradation of deoxynivalenol and Fusarium biomass in wheat straw. Mycotoxin Res. 27, 215–220 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Paul, B. K., Lubbers, I. M. & van Groenigen, J. W. Residue incorporation depth is a controlling factor of earthworm-induced nitrous oxide emissions. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 1141–1151 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Chen, Y., Chang, S. K. C., Chen, J., Zhang, Q. & Yu, H. Characterization of microbial community succession during vermicomposting of medicinal herbal residues. Bioresource Technol. 249, 542–549 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Tao, J. et al. Effects of earthworms on soil enzyme activity in an organic residue amended rice-wheat rotation agro-ecosystem. Appl. Soil Ecol. 42, 221–226 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Bertrand, M. et al. Earthworm services for cropping systems. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35, 553–567 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Jayasinghe, B. A. T. D. & Parkinson, D. Earthworms as the vectors of actinomycetes antagonistic to litter decomposer fungi. Appl. Soil Ecol. 43, 1–10 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Fierer, N., Bradford, M. A. & Jackson, R. B. Toward an ecological classification of soil bacteria. Ecology 88, 1354–1364 (2007).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Kopecky, J. et al. Actinobacterial community dominated by a distinct clade in acidic soil of a waterlogged deciduous forest. Fems Microbiol. Ecol. 78, 386–394 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Sun, J., Zhang, Q., Zhou, J. & Wei, Q. Pyrosequencing technology reveals the impact of different manure doses on the bacterial community in apple rhizosphere soil. Appl. Soil Ecol. 78, 28–36 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Bull, A. T., Stach, J. E. M., Ward, A. C. & Goodfellow, M. Marine actinobacteria: perspectives, challenges, future directions. Anton. Leeuw. Int. J. G. 87, 65–79 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Wang, Q. et al. Long-term fertilization changes bacterial diversity and bacterial communities in the maize rhizosphere of Chinese Mollisols. Appl. Soil Ecol. 125, 88–96 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Jones, R. T. et al. A comprehensive survey of soil acidobacterial diversity using pyrosequencing and clone library analyses. ISME J. 3, 442–453 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Liu, L. et al. Neorhizobium lilium sp. nov., an endophytic bacterium isolated from Lilium pumilum bulbs in Hebei province. Arch. Microbiol. 202, 609–616 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Vessey, J. K. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant Soil 255, 571–586 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Taylor, W. J. & Draughon, F. A. Nannocystis exedens: A potential biocompetitive agent against Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus. J. Food Protect. 64, 1030–1034 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Viswanathan, R. & Samiyappan, R. Induced systemic resistance by fluorescent pseudomonads against red rot disease of sugarcane caused by Colletotrichum falcatum. Crop Prot. 21, 1–10 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Wolters, V. Invertebrate control of soil organic matter stability. Biol. Fert. Soils 31, 1–19 (2000).MathSciNet 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Manna, M. C., Jha, S., Ghosh, P. K. & Achaya, C. L. Comparative efficacy of three epigeic earthworms under different deciduous forest litters decomposition. Bioresource Technol. 88, 197–206 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Felten, D. & Emmerling, C. Earthworm burrowing behaviour in 2D terraria with single-and multi-species assemblages. Biol. Fert. Soils 45, 789–797 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Wang, Z. et al. Soil protist communities in burrowing and casting hotspots of different earthworm species. Soil Biol. Biochem. 144, 107774 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Danielle, J., Yvan, C. & Daniel, C. Interactions between earthworm species in artificial soil cores assessed through the 3D reconstruction of the burrow systems. Geoderma 102, 123–137 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
72.Gomes, N. C. M. et al. Dynamics of fungal communities in bulk and maize rhizosphere soil in the tropics. Appl. Environ. Microb. 69, 3758–3766 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Bao, S. D. Analytical Methods of Soil Agrochemistry 3rd edn. (China Agricultural Press, 2000).
Google Scholar 
74.Chen, S., Zhou, Y., Chen, Y. & Gu, J. Fastp: An ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics 34, i884–i890 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
75.Magoč, T. & Salzberg, S. L. FLASH: Fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 27, 2957–2963 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
76.Edgar, R. C. UPARSE: Highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nat. Methods 10, 996–998 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
77.Stackebrandt, E. & Goebel, B. M. Taxonomic note: A place for DNA-DNA reassociation and 16S rRNA sequence analysis in the present species definition in bacteriology. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Micr. 44, 846–849 (1994).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Wang, Q., Garrity, G. M., Tiedje, J. M. & Cole, J. R. Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 5261–5267 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Fahad, S. et al. Crop production under drought and heat stress: Plant responses and management options. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 1147 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Engelbrecht, B. M., Kursar, T. A. & Tyree, M. T. Drought effects on seedling survival in a tropical moist forest. Trees 19, 312–321 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Michaelian, M., Hogg, E. H., Hall, R. J. & Arsenault, E. Massive mortality of aspen following severe drought along the southern edge of the Canadian boreal forest. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 2084–2094 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Lehner, B., Döll, P., Alcamo, J., Henrichs, T. & Kaspar, F. Estimating the impact of global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: A continental, integrated analysis. Clim. Change 75, 273–299 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Allen, C. D. et al. A global overview of drought and heat-induced tree mortality reveals emerging climate change risks for forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 259, 660–684 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
6.IPCC. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Cambridge University Press, 2013).7.Nayyar, H., Kaur, S., Singh, S. & Upadhyaya, H. D. Differential sensitivity of Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large-seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress during seed filling: Effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield. J. Sci. Food Agric. 86, 2076–2082 (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Bodner, G., Nakhforoosh, A. & Kaul, H.-P. Management of crop water under drought: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35, 401–442 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Osakabe, Y., Osakabe, K., Shinozaki, K. & Tran, L.-S.P. Response of plants to water stress. Front. Plant Sci. 5, 86 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Anjum, S. A. et al. Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 6, 2026–2032 (2011).
Google Scholar 
11.Farooq, M., Wahid, A., Kobayashi, N., Fujita, D. & Basra, S. Sustainable Agriculture 153–188 (Springer, Berlin, 2009).Book 

Google Scholar 
12.Schneider, F. & Don, A. Root-restricting layers in German agricultural soils. Part I: extent and cause. Plant Soil 442, 433–451 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Gupta, A., Rico-Medina, A. & Caño-Delgado, A. I. The physiology of plant responses to drought. Science 368, 266–269 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Basu, S., Ramegowda, V., Kumar, A. & Pereira, A. Plant adaptation to drought stress. F1000Research 5 (2016).15.Coskun, D., Britto, D. T., Huynh, W. Q. & Kronzucker, H. J. The role of silicon in higher plants under salinity and drought stress. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 1072 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Schaller, J., Puppe, D., Kaczorek, D., Ellerbrock, R. & Sommer, M. Silicon cycling in soils revisited. Plants 10, 295 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Epstein, E. The anomaly of silicon in plant biology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 11–17 (1994).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Ma, J. F. & Yamaji, N. Silicon uptake and accumulation in higher plants. Trends Plant Sci. 11, 392–397 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Gong, H. J., Chen, K. M., Chen, G. C., Wang, S. M. & Zhang, C. L. Effects of silicon on growth of wheat under drought. J. Plant Nutr. 26, 1055–1063 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Hattori, T. et al. Application of silicon enhanced drought tolerance in Sorghum bicolor. Physiol. Plant. 123, 459–466 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Chen, W., Yao, X., Cai, K. & Chen, J. Silicon alleviates drought stress of rice plants by improving plant water status, photosynthesis and mineral nutrient absorption. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 142, 67–76 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Ibrahim, M. A., Merwad, A.-R.M. & Elnaka, E. A. Rice (Oryza Sativa L.) tolerance to drought can be improved by silicon application. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 49, 945–957 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Alzahrani, Y., Kuşvuran, A., Alharby, H. F., Kuşvuran, S. & Rady, M. M. The defensive role of silicon in wheat against stress conditions induced by drought, salinity or cadmium. Ecotox. Environ. Safe. 154, 187–196 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Meunier, J. D. et al. Effect of phytoliths for mitigating water stress in durum wheat. New Phytol. 215, 229–239 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Schaller, J., Cramer, A., Carminati, A. & Zarebanadkouki, M. Biogenic amorphous silica as main driver for plant available water in soils. Sci. Rep. 10, 2424 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Schaller, J., Frei, S., Rohn, L. & Gilfedder, B. S. Amorphous silica controls water storage capacity and phosphorus mobility in soils. Front. Environ. Sci. 8, 94 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Neu, S., Schaller, J. & Dudel, E. G. Silicon availability modifies nutrient use efficiency and content, C:N: P stoichiometry, and productivity of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Sci. Rep. 7, 40829 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Schaller, J. et al. Silicon increases the phosphorus availability of Arctic soils. Sci. Rep. 9, 449 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
29.Munné-Bosch, S. & Alegre, L. Die and let live: Leaf senescence contributes to plant survival under drought stress. Funct. Plant Biol. 31, 203–216 (2004).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Joshi, S. et al. Improved wheat growth and yield by delayed leaf senescence using developmentally regulated expression of a cytokinin biosynthesis gene. Front. Plant Sci. 10, 1285 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Rivero, R. M. et al. Delayed leaf senescence induces extreme drought tolerance in a flowering plant. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 19631–19636 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Chapman, E. A., Orford, S., Lage, J. & Griffiths, S. Capturing and selecting senescence variation in wheat. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 638738 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Camp, P. J., Huber, S. C., Burke, J. J. & Moreland, D. E. Biochemical changes that occur during senescence of wheat leaves: I. Basis for the reduction of photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. 70, 1641–1646 (1982).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Lopes, M. S. & Reynolds, M. P. Stay-green in spring wheat can be determined by spectral reflectance measurements (normalized difference vegetation index) independently from phenology. J. Exp. Bot. 63, 3789–3798 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Rodriguez, D. et al. Modelling the response of wheat canopy assimilation to atmospheric CO2 concentrations. New Phytol. 150, 337–346 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Moureaux, C. et al. Carbon balance assessment of a Belgian winter wheat crop (Triticum aestivum L.). Glob. Change Biol. 14, 1353–1366 (2008).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Gao, X. P., Zou, C. Q., Wang, L. J. & Zhang, F. S. Silicon improves water use efficiency in maize plants. J. Plant Nutr. 27, 1457–1470 (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Agarie, S., Uchida, H., Agata, W., Kubota, F. & Kaufman, P. B. Effects of silicon on transpiration and leaf conductance in rice plants (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Prod. Sci. 1, 89–95 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Dakora, F. D. & Nelwamondo, A. Silicon nutrition promotes root growth and tissue mechanical strength in symbiotic cowpea. Funct. Plant Biol. 30, 947–953 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Steudle, E. & Peterson, C. A. How does water get through roots?. J. Exp. Bot. 49, 775–788 (1998).CAS 

Google Scholar 
41.Gao, X., Zou, C., Wang, L. & Zhang, F. Silicon decreases transpiration rate and conductance from stomata of maize plants. J. Plant Nutr. 29, 1637–1647 (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Vandegeer, R. K. et al. Silicon deposition on guard cells increases stomatal sensitivity as mediated by K+ efflux and consequently reduces stomatal conductance. Physiol. Plant. 171, 358–370 (2020).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
43.Flexas, J. & Medrano, H. Drought-inhibition of photosynthesis in C3 plants: Stomatal and non-stomatal limitations revisited. Ann. Bot. 89, 183–189 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Kuhla, J., Pausch, J. & Schaller, J. Effect on soil water availability, rather than silicon uptake by plants, explains the beneficial effect of silicon on rice during drought. Plant Cell Environ. (2020).45.Schaller, J. et al. Silicon accumulation in rice plant aboveground biomass affects leaf carbon quality. Plant Soil 444, 399–407 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.IUSS_Working_Group_Wrb. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome, 2015).47.Schüller, H. Die CAL-Methode, eine neue Methode zur Bestimmung des pflanzenverfügbaren Phosphates in Böden. Z. Pflanzenernähr. Bodenkd. 123, 48–63 (1969).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Huth, V. et al. Divergent NEE balances from manual-chamber CO2 fluxes linked to different measurement and gap-filling strategies: A source for uncertainty of estimated terrestrial C sources and sinks?. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 180, 302–315 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Livingston, G. & Hutchinson, G. Enclosure-based measurement of trace gas exchange: applications and sources of error. Biog. Trace Gases Meas. Emiss. Soil Water 51, 14–51 (1995).
Google Scholar 
50.Hoffmann, M. et al. Detecting small-scale spatial heterogeneity and temporal dynamics of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks: A comparison between automatic chamber-derived C budgets and repeated soil inventories. Biogeosciences 14, 1003–1019 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Davidson, E., Savage, K., Verchot, L. & Navarro, R. Minimizing artifacts and biases in chamber-based measurements of soil respiration. Agric. For. Meteorol. 113, 21–37 (2002).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Kutzbach, L. et al. CO2 flux determination by closed-chamber methods can be seriously biased by inappropriate application of linear regression. Biogeosciences 4, 1005–1025 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Langensiepen, M., Kupisch, M., van Wijk, M. T. & Ewert, F. Analyzing transient closed chamber effects on canopy gas exchange for optimizing flux calculation timing. Agric. For. Meteorol. 164, 61–70 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Webb, E. K., Pearman, G. I. & Leuning, R. Correction of flux measurements for density effects due to heat and water vapour transfer. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 106, 85–100 (1980).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Leiber-Sauheitl, K., Fuß, R., Voigt, C. & Freibauer, A. High greenhouse gas fluxes from grassland on histic gleysol along soil carbon and drainage gradients. Biogeosci. Discuss. 10 (2013).56.Adamsen, F. et al. Measuring wheat senescence with a digital camera. Crop Sci. 39, 719–724 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Idso, S., Pinter, P. Jr., Jackson, R. & Reginato, R. Estimation of grain yields by remote sensing of crop senescence rates. Remote Sens. Environ. 9, 87–91 (1980).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Kandel, T. P., Elsgaard, L. & Lærke, P. E. Measurement and modelling of CO2 flux from a drained fen peatland cultivated with reed canary grass and spring barley. Gcb Bioenergy 5, 548–561 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Görres, C.-M., Kutzbach, L. & Elsgaard, L. Comparative modeling of annual CO2 flux of temperate peat soils under permanent grassland management. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 186, 64–76 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar  More

Study sites and samplingThe study was conducted in Garhwal region (Western Himalaya) from 2016 to 2017 at eight Rhododendron arboreum rich areas in four hill districts (Chamoli, Tehri, Pauri and Rudraprayag). Voucher specimen of Rhododendron arboreum collected and have been deposited in the Herbarium, Botany department, HNB Garhwal University (specimen no. GUH 8510)6. Identification of R. arboreum has been done through A Field Guide book authored by Rai et al.7. Since it is a wild species and flowers have been collected for our research and field study under the permission from competent authority of State Forest Department, Govt. of Uttarakhand. According to IUCN’s Red List Categories and Criteria, globally Rhododendron arboreum comes under Least Concern (LC) category8. These sites are situated between 30°08′47″ to 30°24′06″ N latitude and 78°25′05″ to 79°12′39″ E longitude with altitudes from 1820 m asl in Nandasain and 2270 m asl in Jadipani (Table 1; Fig. 1). All sites were well stocked (mean stand density ≥ 500 tree/ha) with Rhododendron arboreum trees mixed with Quercus leucotrichophora. We referred these resource rich sites as R. arboreum habitats (Table 1). Stratified random sampling method (i.e. stand density and CBH class’s strata) were carried out these eight sites. Total sampled area 0.2 ha in each site; two sample plots (size of each plot is 0.1 ha or 31.62 × 31.62 m) nested within 0.2 ha in each site were laid out for trees enumeration. Sample size (number of R. arboreum tree) for a total population in each site were 166 in Phadkhal; 110 in Khirsu; 104 in Khadpatiya; 166 in Ghimtoli; 80 in Jadipani; 74 in Ranichauri; 74 in Nandasain and 96 in Nauti. Out of the standing trees in sample plots, flower bearing trees were 96 in Phadkhal; 90 in Khirsu; 102 in Khadpatiya; 126 in Ghimtoli; 64 in Jadipani; 58 in Ranichauri; 68 in Nandasain and 82 in Nauti, and without flower or smaller trees were 70 in Phadkhal; 20 in Khirsu; 02 in Khadpatiya; 40 in Ghimtoli; 16 in Jadipani; 16 in Ranichauri; 06 in Nandasain and 14 in Nauti. The individuals of all tree species in each plot were recorded along with their CBH (circumference at breast height, 1.3 m above from the ground). Individuals were categorized as mature trees (≥ 31 cm CBH), saplings (11–30 cm CBH) and seedlings (≤ 10 cm CBH)9. Further all the tree individuals have been grouped into 8 CBH classes: (A) 5–15 cm, (B) 16–25 cm, (C) 26–35 cm, (D) 36–45 cm, (E) 46–55 cm, (F) 56–65 cm, (G) 66–75 cm, (H) 76–85 cm. Recorded data were used for the analysis of density10.Table 1 Physical characteristics of study sites in four districts of Garhwal region.Full size tableFigure 1Locations of Rhododendron arboreum study sites in Garhwal region (ARC GIS software 10.5 version was used for map preparation. The map was created by Mr. Raman Patel, Research scholar, Dept. of Geology, HNB Garhwal University, Srinagar, Uttarakhand, India).Full size imageFlower yield estimationFlower yield (kg/tree) was estimated during full bloom (flowering season/harvest season February–April 2017). In each sample plot, numbers of flower bearing trees varied from 29–63 trees/0.1 ha. At each site of 0.2 ha sample plot, total 40 trees, 05 flower bearing trees in each of the 08 CBH classes were marked for estimation of flower yield. The number of main branches, the number of sub- branches/offshoots per main branches (i.e. average per five randomly selected main branches per tree), and the amount of flower per sub-branches/offshoot (i.e. the average per five offshoots from the low, middle and upper canopy of each tree) were counted form marked individuals. This way flower yield/tree was calculated9,11,12.The flowers from all CBH classes in each site were mixed and weighted in 5 lots of 1 kg each. The number of flowers in each lot was then counted and the mean value (400.0 ± 9.56) was considered as a standard for conversion into kilograms. Based on this conversion flower yield kg/tree was obtained. Flower yield data were pooled and mean yield (kg/tree) for each CBH class (A–H) calculated. For each site, flower yield in kg/0.2 ha was obtained by multiplying flower yield/tree by the density of flower bearing trees/0.2 ha. The total yield kg/ha for each site was calculated as total yield = (yield/ha) × density of flower bear trees/ha9,11,12.Extraction/harvesting and marketing trendsFlower extraction and collection were totally dependent on market availability and accessibility of site; one of the selected sites (Ranichauri) was easily accessible, while Phadkhal, Khirsu and Jadipani were moderately accessible. Khadpatiya, Ghimtoli, Nandasain and Nauti sites were far-flung from market (Table 1). The highest extraction was recorded between second week of February and first week of April. During this period, data was obtained for three consecutive days at each site.Questionnaire based survey was carried out in selective forest fringe villages. Across the sites, total sixteen villages were selected for questionnaire survey, three villages each in Jadipani, Ranichauri, Nandasain and Nauti sites, while one village each in Phadkhal, Khirsu, Khadpatiya and Ghimtoli. In each village 15 families were randomly chosen for semi-structured questionnaire survey.Considering the market availability for trading of the R. arboreum flower products, Nandasain and Nauti sites are located nearest to local market whereas Khadpatiya and Ghimtoli sites are farthest from local market. As far as the access to resources is concerned, four sites represent open and easy access to resource and four sites represent open and moderate access of resource (Table 1). During questionnaire survey, villagers were asked about the number of persons involved in resource collection (hereafter referred as collectors), age of collectors, timing of collection (early morning and late evening) etc. Ten individuals in each group (adults and children) were randomly interviewed on their harvest load to generate data on the average collection per individual, the number of days spent in flower collection, and the total income generated through this activity.Squash/juice making factories are generally located nearby urban centers; local NGOs and small entrepreneurs are engaged in this work. These peoples purchase flower from the collectors or middleman for preparation of value product (squash). Collectors of each families (varied from n = 15 in Nanadasain to n = 31 in Jadipani) and buyers (n = 5 each site) were contacted to obtain information on the benefits accrued. The income values are given in Indian rupees (USD 1 = Rs. 68.00, 2017 exchange rates). Projections of potential (probable/-could generate) income (with flower processed into juice or squash) were made. The involvement of rural inhabitants as flowers collectors and the income that subsequently accrued (within a 10 km radius of fringe area) was also analyzed for sixteen villages across the sites. One adult member from each household was contacted in a village to collect information on involvement of flower collection/extraction.Juice/squash preparation methods and value-added productsThe collected flowers are graded for their size and healthiness and the stamens are separated from petals by laborers in the juice processing unit. Petals are cleaned washed with tap water and grinded into small pieces. The petal mass is retained in the water and then boiled for one hour. The slurry (aqueous solution) obtained in this process is left at room temperature for cooling and when it get cold, filtered through linen cloth. The filtrate solution is the pure juice of the flower. For the preparation of squash from the pure juice, about 2 kg of sugar is boiled in one liter of water. Further one liter of pure juice and a small quantity of citric acid (10 g/2 kg sugar) are added to this solution. The mixture is boiled again for 30 min and then left to cool at room temperature13. The obtained solution known as squash is then filtered through linen cloth and stored into containers and bottles for marketing. For long term storage and good test and aroma small amount of sodium benzoate and vanilla or kawra is also mixed in the squash.Cost–benefit analysis of value- added productsThe cost–benefit analysis of value added products prepared from the R. arboreum flowers was calculated in Rs./day which includes labour charges of workers involved in flower collection and materials/items required for preparation of different value added products viz: sugar, preservatives, essence, plastic containers/bottles, packaging materials etc. Labour charge was calculated on the basis of existing daily wages as per market rates. The monetary output was calculated as per the current market rates of the products (Table 2). The cost- benefit analysis of the squash product prepared from the flowers was calculated as Rs./day which includes: (i) Man days incumbent for the flowers extraction from the forest and for the preparation of squash product, (ii) Essential items such as sugar, preservatives etc. and their monetary equivalents, (iii) The total quantity of squash product and their monetary equivalents.Table 2 Market cost in rupees (Rs.) of essential commodity in the preparation of R. arboreum juice/squash in Garhwal region.Full size tableStatistical analysisData failed to meet the assumption of normality (Shapiro–Wilk test) as well as homogeneity (Levene statistic); therefore, a non-parametric test (i.e. Independent–Samples Kruskal–Wallis test) was applied for one-way ANOVA. However, to find the interaction of site and cbh on flower production (yield), the same data set was subjected to two-way analysis using univariate analysis. To find if (?) flower yield depends on tree diameter or not, data of actual cbh and flower yield per tree were used to determine a correlation (Pearson Correlation Coefficient) between them. In case of correlation found significant then regression equation was developed to predict flower production based on tree diameter. All analysis were performed using IBM-SPSS 16.0 version14.Ethics approval and consent to participateAll necessary approval, free prior informed consent, permit, and certification were secured. This was done to adhere to the ethical standards of human participation in scientific research. This study was approved by Research and Consultancy Cell (Ethics Committee) of HNB Garhwal University, Srinagar Garhwal, Uttarakhand, India. All the methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. More

Toxicity of spirotetramat to F. occidentalis eggsThe indoor toxicity of spirotetramat to 0-h-, 12-h-, and 24-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis using egg dipping method and leaf dipping method was shown in Table 1 after egg hatching was observed for 144 h. The results suggested that the LC50 value gradually decreased as the egg age increased. The two methods have the same trend. And in the leaf dipping method, according to the confidence limits analysis, 0-h-old eggs are significantly more sensitive to spirotretramat than 24-h-old eggs.Table 1 Toxicity of spirotetramat to F. occidentalis eggs.Full size tableEgg external shape observationsExternal morphology of normally developed isolated 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis in the control treatment (Fig. 1a) were compared with those treated with spirotetramat (Fig. 1b, c). After spirotetramat treatment, some eggs appeared darker, yellowish-brown, and with embryonic development abnormalities (Fig. 1b); some of the egg embryo cells treated with spirotetramat appeared atrophied, and there were obvious gaps between the outer and the inner egg embryo cells, compared with the control treatment (Fig. 1c). Some eggs ruptured at the top after the egg shell was treated with spirotetramat, and the internal egg embryo cells flowed out, thus failing to form a complete embryo (Fig. 1d); the full egg embryo cells formed a control treatment.Figure 1The effect of spirotetramat on external morphology of isolated 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) 0-h-old isolated eggs of normal developing thrips; (b) yellowish-brown, developmentally deformed eggs after spirotetramat treatment; (c) eggs with shrunken oocytes after spirotetramat treatment; (d) eggs with apical rupture of the eggshell after spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageThe effect of spirotetramat on external morphology of live F. occidentalis 0-h-old eggs (Fig. 2b, c) was compared with normal development in the control treatment (Fig. 2a). Similar to the effect on external morphology of isolated 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis, the eggs treated with spirotetramat also showed abnormal embryonic development (Fig. 2b), egg embryo cell atrophy (Fig. 2c) and the phenomenon of rupture of the egg shell and outflow of embryo cells.Figure 2The effect of spirotetramat on external morphology of living 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) External morphology of live 0-h-old eggs of normal developing thrips; (b) developmentally deformed eggs after spirotetramat treatment; (c) eggs with shrunken oocytes after spirotetramat treatment; (d) eggs with apical rupture of the eggshell after spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageCompared with the control (Fig. 3a), the isolated 24-h-old eggs treated with spirotetramat (Fig. 3b) did not show obvious external morphological differences. After spirotetramat treatment, the eggs were still white and plump and with no embryonic deformities, egg cell atrophy or egg shell rupture, and could still develop normally. There were clear red eye spots on the head end, and embryo movement was clearly seen under the super-depth microscope (Fig. 3b). Similarly, the live 24-h-old eggs in the control treatment (Fig. 4a) and those treated with spirotetramat (Fig. 4b) showed no obvious external morphological differences, and the eggs developed normally.Figure 3The effect of spirotetramat on external morphology of isolated 24-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) Normally developing 24-h-isolated eggs in the control group; (b) 24-h-old eggs after spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageFigure 4The effect of spirotetramat on external morphology living of 24-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) Normally developing 24-h-live eggs in the control group; (b) live 24-h-old eggs after spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageEffect of egg hatchingThe 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis treated with spirotetramat did not hatch normally, and the mortality rate was 100% (Fig. 5). Among them, 77 eggs eventually showed rupture of the egg shell, the internal egg embryo cells flowed out and they did not hatch; 23 eggs showed no changes in external morphology, but did not hatch after continuous observation for 144 h, and showed no developmental phenomena such as embryo movement under a super-depth microscope, which was regarded as egg death. In the control treatment, 96 eggs hatched normally, and only six eggs did not rupture but did not hatch normally and were considered dead.Figure 5Effect of spirotetramat on hatching rate of F. occidentalis 0-h-old eggs.Full size imageThere was no significant difference between the 24-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis treated with spirotetramat and the control treatment. After spirotetramat treatment, 93 eggs hatched normally, and the shells of seven eggs were not ruptured (Fig. 6). Any eggs not hatched after 144 h of continuous observation were considered dead. In the control treatment, 95 eggs hatched normally and five eggs did not rupture but did not hatch normally, and so were considered dead.Figure 6The effect of spirotetramat on hatching rate of F. occidentalis 24-h-old eggs.Full size imageSEM observationsThe F. occidentalis eggs in the control treatment were kidney-shaped, with regular egg morphology, smooth surfaces and no folds or protrusions (Fig. 7a). At 24 h after spirotetramat treatment, part of the egg shells treated with spirotetramat had fallen off the chorion, and the embryonic material was exposed (Fig. 7b). The surface of the egg shell was uneven and severely wrinkled (Fig. 7c). The pores of some eggs treated with spirotetramat were sunken down and shrunken (Fig. 7d). Spirotetramat treatment of 0-h-old eggs affect clearly egg shells, resulting in shrinkage of egg shells, ovarian depression and egg malformations, and destroyed the egg shell structure. Thus, normal embryonic development was affected, and disrupted normal hatching.Figure 7The effect of spirotetramat on the surface of egg shells of F. occidentalis 0-h-old eggs. (a) 0-h-old eggs in the control treatment; (b) eggs shells were shed 24 h after treatment with spirotetramat; (c) the surface of the egg shell was uneven and severely wrinkled; (d) the pores of some eggs were sunken down and shrunken after treatment with spirotetramat.Full size imageThe shells of eggs treated with spirotetramat (Fig. 8b) showed no significant difference compared with controls (Fig. 8a). The eggs of the two groups of F. occidentalis were regular in shape, with smooth surfaces and without folds or protrusions. Thus, development of 24-h-old eggs showed some resistance to spirotetramat. Spirotetramat did not destroy the egg shell surface structure of 24-h-old eggs, indicating a high resistance to spirotetramat.Figure 8The effect of spirotetramat on the egg shell surface of F. occidentalis 24-h-old eggs. (a) 24-h-old eggs in the control treatment; (b) 24-h-old eggs in the spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageTEM observationsThe TEM observations showed that the egg structure of the control treatment was complete, the protoplasm and yolk were clearly observed inside the egg and the yolk was packed in the void of the protoplasm network (Fig. 9a). The egg shell structure was clear, and the outer and inner egg shell were clearly observed, as was the yolk membrane and the dense layer structure (Fig. 9c). Eggs treated with spirotetramat were flocculent, and no clear internal material was observed. The protoplasm and yolk structure were blurred, and flocculation in the protoplasm appeared to agglomerate and form blocks (Fig. 9b). The egg shell structure was unclear, and no clear outer egg shell, inner egg shell, yolk membrane and lamellar structures were observed. The egg shell was also filled with many flocs (Fig. 9d).Figure 9The effect of spirotetramat on the structure of F. occidentalis 0-h-old eggs. (a) and (b) 0-h-old eggs in the control treatment; (c) and (d) 0-h-old eggs in the spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageEffect on embryonic developmentThe initial eggs of the control group were kidney-shaped, white and full of vitellin (Fig. 10a). After 12 h of development, the eggs were larger and of oval shape (Fig. 10b). After 24 h of development, the egg had increased in volume, a partially transparent region appeared in the embryo and the embryo had transparent top follicles (Fig. 10c). After 36 h of development, some yolk granules disappeared and eggs became smooth and translucent (Fig. 10d). After 48 h of development, the insect outline was visible within the egg, a pair of antennae were visible on the head and a red eye point was clearly observed on the head during the blastokinesis phenomenon (Fig. 10e). After 60 h of development, embryo color deepened, the eye point was clearer and the head, femur, tibia and tarsus were clear (Fig. 10f). After 72 h of development, the egg shell began to break at the head, the tail constantly jittered, internal fluid flowed and the larva hatched from the top of the egg (Fig. 10g).Figure 10The embryonic development process of control 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) Control initial eggs; (b) eggs after 12 h of development; (c) eggs after 24 h of development; (d) eggs after 36 h of development; (e) eggs after 48 h of development; (f) eggs after 60 h of development; (g) eggs hatching as larvae after 72 h of development.Full size imageEggs of F. occidentalis were initially white, kidney-shaped and full of vitellin (Fig. 11a). Following treatment with spirotetramat, after 12 h of development, the eggs became large and oval, and the embryo was a pale brown color (Fig. 11b). After 24 h of development, color of the egg deepened to dark brown. There was a gap between the egg and the egg shell, and a small amount of spillage appeared at the end of the egg (Fig. 11c). After 36 h of development, the egg shell ruptured, material flowed out of the egg and embryo development did not proceed (Fig. 11d).Figure 11Effects of spirotetramat on development of 0-h-old eggs of F. occidentalis. (a) Frankliniella occidentalis initial eggs; (b) eggs developing 12 h after spirotetramat treatment; (c) eggs developing 24 h after spirotetramat treatment; (d) eggs developing 36 h after spirotetramat treatment.Full size imageIn the control treatment, the egg volume increased at 24 h, the embryo had a partially transparent area and there was a transparent follicle on the top of the embryo (Fig. 12a). After 12 h of development, some of the yolk particles disappeared and the egg body was smooth and translucent (Fig. 12b). After 24 h of development, the body outline, a pair of antennae and red eye spots were visible, and there was obvious embryo movement (Fig. 12c). At 36 h of development, the head, leg segments, tibia and tarsus were apparent (Fig. 12d). After 48 h of development, the embryo moved violently, internal body fluid flowed and the larva was ready to hatch (Fig. 12e). After 60 h of development, the larva emerged from its shell (Fig. 12f).Figure 1224-h-old eggs embryo development of F. occidentalis in control treatment. (a) Control 24-h-old eggs; (b) eggs after 12 h of development; (c) eggs after 24 h of development; (d) eggs after 36 h of development; (e) eggs after 48 h of development; (f) eggs hatching as larvae after 60 h of development.Full size imageThe 24 h old eggs of F. occidentalis showed enlarged volume, and there were transparent follicles on the top of the embryo (Fig. 13a). After 24 h eggs were treated with spirotetramat, they developed for 12–36 h, and the developmental status was the same as that of the control. The embryos developed normally, and there was no egg body discoloration or egg shell rupture (Fig. 13b–d). After 48 h of development, hairy scales appeared on the surface of the egg shell, and the egg body turned yellowish-brown in color, but the egg shell was not broken and no internal material overflow was seen (Fig. 13e). After 60 h of development, larvae hatched normally (Fig. 13f).Figure 13The effect of spirotetramat on embryonic development of F. occidentalis 24-h-old eggs. (a) Frankliniella occidentalis 24-h-old eggs; (b) eggs developing 12 h after spirotetramat treatment; (c) eggs developing 24 h after spirotetramat treatment; (d) eggs developing 36 h after spirotetramat treatment; (e) eggs developing 48 h after spirotetramat treatment; (f) eggs hatching as larvae after 60 h of development.Full size image More

1.Vinogradova, Y. K., Mayorov, S. R. & Khorun, L. V. Chernaya kniga flory Sredney Rossii (Chuzherodnye vidy rasteniy v ekosistemakh Sredney Rossii) (The Black-book of the flora of the Middle Russia (Alien species in the plant communities of the Middle Russia). (GEOS, 2010).2.Straigytė, L., Cekstere, G., Laivins, M. & Marozas, V. The spread, intensity and invasiveness of the Acer negundo in Riga and Kaunas. Dendrobiology 74, 157–168 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Merceron, N. R., Lamarque, L. J., Delzon, S. & Porté, A. J. Killing it softly: girdling as an efficient eco-friendly method to locally remove invasive Acer negundo. Ecol. Restor. 34, 297–305 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Gusev, A. P., Shpilevskaya, N. S. & Veselkin, D. V. The influence of Acer negundo L. on progressive successions in Belarusian landscapes. Vestnik Vitebskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. 94, 47–53 (2017).
Google Scholar 
5.Veselkin, D. V. & Korzhinevskaya, A. A. Spatial factors of understory adventization in park forests of a large city. Izvestiya Akademii Nauk, Seriya Geograficheskaya. 4, 54–64 (2018).
Google Scholar 
6.Veselkin, D. V., Korzhinevskaya, A. A. & Podgayevskaya, E. N. The species composition and abundance of alien and invasive understory shrubs and trees in urban forests of Yekaterinburg. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Biologiya. 42, 102–118 (2018).
Google Scholar 
7.Emelyanov, A. V. & Frolova, S. V. Ash-leaf maple (Acer negundo L.) in coastal phytocenoses of the Vorona River. Russ. J. Biol. Invasions 2, 161–163 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Saccone, P., Pagès, J.-P., Girel, J., Brun, J.-J. & Michalet, R. Acer negundo invasion along a successional gradient: Early direct facilitation by native pioneers and late indirect facilitation by conspecifics. New Phytol. 187, 831–842. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03289.x (2010).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Kostina, M. V., Yasinskaya, O. I., Barabanshchikova, N. S. & Orlyuk, F. A. Toward a issue of box elder invasion into the forests around Moscow. Russ. J. Biol. Invasions 7, 47–51 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Veselkin, D. V. & Dubrovin, D. I. Diversity of the grass layer of urbanized communities dominated by invasive Acer negundo. Russ. J. Ecol. 50, 413–421 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Reinhart, K. O., Greene, E. & Callaway, R. M. Effects of Acer platanoides invasion on understory plant communities and tree regeneration in the Rocky Mountains. Ecography 28, 573–582 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Schuster, M. J. & Reich, P. B. Amur maple (Acer ginnala): an emerging invasive plant in North America. Biol. Invasions 20, 2997–3007 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Richardson, D. M. et al. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: Concepts and definitions. Divers. Distrib. 6, 93–107 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Gorchov, D. L. & Trisel, D. E. Competitive effects of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae), on the growth and survival of native tree seedlings. Plant Ecol. 166, 13–24 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Knight, K. S., Oleksyn, J., Jagodzinski, A. M., Reich, P. B. & Kasprowicz, M. Overstorey tree species regulate colonization by native and exotic plants: A source of positive relationships between understorey diversity and invasibility. Divers. Distrib. 14, 666–675 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Niinemets, Ü. A review of light interception in plant stands from leaf to canopy in different plant functional types and in species with varying shade tolerance. Ecol. Res. 25, 693–714 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Allison, S. D. & Vitousek, P. M. Rapid nutrient cycling in leaf litter from invasive plants in Hawaii. Oecologia 141, 612–619 (2004).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Gioria, M. & Osborne, B. A. Resource competition in plant invasions: Emerging patterns and research needs. Front. Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00501 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
19.Bonifacio, E. et al. Alien red oak affects soil organic matter cycling and nutrient availability in low-fertility well-developed soils. Plant Soil 395, 215–229 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Horodecki, P. & Jagodzínski, A. M. Tree species effects on litter decomposition in pure stands on afforested post-mining sites. For. Ecol. Manag. 406, 1–11 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Zhang, P., Li, B., Wu, J. & Hu, S. Invasive plants differentially affect soil biota through litter and rhizosphere pathways: a meta-analysis. Ecol. Lett. 22, 200–210 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Callaway, R. M., Thelen, G. C., Rodriguez, A. & Holben, W. E. Soil biota and exotic plant invasion. Nature 427, 731–733 (2004).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Stinson, K. A. et al. Invasive plant suppresses the growth of native tree seedlings by disrupting belowground mutualisms. PLoS Biol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040140 (2006).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
24.Suding, K. N. et al. Consequences of plant-soil feedbacks in invasion. J. Ecol. 101, 298–308 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Mueller, K. E. et al. Light, earthworms, and soil resources as predictors of diversity of 10 soil invertebrate groups across monocultures of 14 tree species. Soil Biol. Biochem. 92, 184–198 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Kamczyc, J., Dyderski, M. K., Horodecki, P. & Jagodzinski, A. M. Mite communities (Acari, Mesostigmata) in the initially decomposed ‘litter islands’ of 11 tree species in scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forest. Forests https://doi.org/10.3390/f10050403 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Veselkin, D. V., Rafikova, O. S. & Ekshibarov, E. D. The soil of invasive Acer negundo thickets is unfavorable for mycorrhizal formation in native herbs. Zh. Obshch. Biol. 80, 214–225 (2019).
Google Scholar 
28.Gilliam, F. S. & Roberts, M. R. Interactions between the herbaceous layer and overstory canopy of eastern forests in The herbaceous layer in forests of Eastern North America (ed. Gilliam, F. S.) 233–254 (Oxford, 2014).29.Landuyt, D. et al. The functional role of temperate forest understorey vegetation in a changing world. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 3625–3641 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Czapiewska, N., Dyderski, M. K. & Jagodzinski, A. M. Seasonal dynamics of floodplain forest understory—Impacts of degradation, light availability and temperature on biomass and species composition. Forests https://doi.org/10.3390/f10010022 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Canham, C. D., Finzi, A. C., Pacala, S. W. & Burbank, D. H. Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests: Interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees. Can. J. For. Res. 24, 337–349 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Barbier, S., Gosselin, F. & Balandier, P. Influence of tree species on understory vegetation diversity and mechanisms involved—A critical review for temperate and boreal forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 254, 1–15 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Reinhart, K. O., Gurnee, J., Tirado, R. & Callaway, R. M. Invasion through quantitative effects: Intense shade drives native decline and invasive success. Ecol. Appl. 16, 1821–1831 (2006).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.Nilsson, C., Engelmark, O., Cory, J., Forsslund, A. & Carlborg, E. Differences in litter cover and understory flora between stands of introduced lodgepole pine and native Scots pine in Sweden. For. Ecol. Manag. 255, 1900–1905 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Bravo-Monasterio, P., Pauchard, A. & Fajardo, A. Pinus contorta invasion into treeless steppe reduces species richness and alters species traits of the local community. Biol. Invasions 18, 1883–1894 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Lanta, V., Hyvönen, T. & Norrdahl, K. Non-native and native shrubs have differing impacts on species diversity and composition of associated plant communities. Plant Ecol. 214, 1517–1528 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Dyderski, M. K. & Jagodzinski, A. M. Similar impacts of alien and native tree species on understory light availability in a temperate forest. Forests https://doi.org/10.3390/f10110951 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Bottollier-Curtet, M. et al. Light interception principally drives the understory response to boxelder invasion in riparian forests. Biol. Invasions 14, 1445–1458 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Cusack, D. F. & McCleery, T. L. Patterns in understory woody diversity and soil nitrogen across native- and non-native-urban tropical forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 318, 34–43 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Berg, C., Drescherl, A. & Essl, F. Using relevé-based metrics to explain invasion patterns of alien trees in temperate forests. Tuexenia. 37, 127–142 (2017).
Google Scholar 
41.Hladyz, S., Abjornsson, K., Giller, P. S. & Woodward, G. Impacts of an aggressive riparian invader on community structure and ecosystem functioning in stream food webs. J. Appl. Ecol. 48, 443–452 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Call, L. J. & Nilsen, E. T. Analysis of interactions between the invasive tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima) and the native black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia). Plant Ecol. 176, 275–285 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Dorning, M. & Cipollini, D. Leaf and root extracts of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii, inhibit seed germination of three herbs with no autotoxic effects. Plant Ecol. 184, 287–296 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Kumar, A. S. & Bais, H. P. Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion in Plant communication from an ecological perspective. Signaling and communication in plants (ed. Baluška, F. & Ninkovic, V.) 61–74 (Berlin, 2010).45.Cipollini, D., Rigsby, C. M. & Barto, E. K. Microbes as targets and mediators of allelopathy in plants. J. Chem. Ecol. 38, 714–727 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
46.Nielsen, J. A., Frew, R. D., Whigam, P. A., Callaway, R. M. & Dickinson, K. J. M. Germination and growth responses of co-occurring grass species to soil from under invasive Thymus vulgaris. Allelopath. J. 35, 139–152 (2015).
Google Scholar 
47.Gruntman, M., Segev, U., Glauser, G. & Tielbörger, K. Evolution of plant defences along an invasion chronosequence: Defence is lost due to enemy release—but not forever. J. Ecol. 105, 255–264 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Maron, J. L. & Marler, M. Effects of native species diversity and resource additions on invader impact. Am. Nat. 172, 18–33 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Hejda, M., Pyšek, P. & Jarošík, V. Impact of invasive plants on the species richness, diversity and composition of invaded communities. J. Ecol. 97, 393–403 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Adams, J. M. et al. A cross-continental test of the enemy release hypothesis: leaf herbivory on Acer platanoides (L.) is three times lower in North America than in its native Europe. Biol. Invasions 11, 1005–1016 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Cincotta, C. L., Adams, J. M. & Holzapfel, C. Testing the enemy release hypothesis: A comparison of foliar insect herbivory of the exotic Norway maple (Acer platanoides L.) and the native sugar maple (A. saccharum L.). Biol. Invasions 11, 379–388 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Veselkin, D. V. et al. Levels of leaf damage by phyllophages in invasive Acer negundo and Native Betula pendula and Salix caprea. Russ. J. Ecol. 50, 511–516 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Gioria, M., Pyšek, P. & Moravcová, L. Soil seed banks in plant invasions: promoting species invasiveness and long-term impact on plant community dynamics. Preslia 84, 327–350 (2012).
Google Scholar 
54.Csiszár, A. Allelopathic effect of invasive woody plant species in Hungary. Acta Silvatica et Lignaria Hungarica. 5, 9–17 (2009).
Google Scholar 
55.Csiszár, Á. et al. Allelopathic potential of some invasive plant species occurring in Hungary. Allelopath. J. 31, 309–318 (2013).
Google Scholar 
56.Yeryomenko, Y. A. Allelopathic activity of invasive arboreal species. Russ. J. Biol. Invasions 5, 146–150 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Veselkin, D. V., Kiseleva, O. A., Ekshibarov, E. D., Rafikova, O. S. & Korzhinevskaya, A. A. Abundance and diversity of seedlings of the soil seed bank in the monospecific stands of the invasive species Acer negundo L.. Russ. J. Biol. Invasions. 9, 108–113 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Davies, C. E., Moss, D. & Hill, M. O. EUNIS Habitat Classification Revised 2004 (European Topic Centre on Nature Protection and Biodiversity, (2004).59.Dopico, E., Ardura, A. & Garcia-Valguez, E. Exploring changes in biodiversity through pictures: A citizen science experience. Soc. Nat. Resour. 30, 1049–1063. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1284292 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Fitzgerald, N. B., Kirkpatrick, J. B. & Scott, J. J. Rephotography, permanent plots and remote sensing data provide varying insights on vegetation change on subantarctic Macquarie Island, 1980–2015. Austral Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13015 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Rosenberg, M. S. & Anderson, C. D. PASSAGE: Pattern analysis, spatial statistics, and geographic exegesis version 2. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2, 229–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2010.00081.x (2011).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.CABI. Fall Armyworm (FAW) Portal. www.cabi.org/isc/fallarmyworm (2020).2.Westbrook, J., Nagoshi, R., Meagher, R., Fleischer, S. & Jairam, S. Modeling seasonal migration of fall armyworm moths. Int. J. Biometeorol. 60, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-015-1022-x (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Nagoshi, R. & Meagher, R. Review of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: noctuidae) genetic complexity and migration. Fla. Entomol. 91, 546–554. https://doi.org/10.1653/0015-4040-91.4.546 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Nagoshi, R. N., Meagher, R. L. & Jenkins, D. A. Puerto Rico fall armyworm has only limited interactions with those from Brazil or Texas but could have substantial exchanges with Florida populations. J. Econ. Entomol. 103, 360–367. https://doi.org/10.1603/EC09253 (2010).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
5.Johnson, S. J. Migration and the life history strategy of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda in the western hemisphere. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 8, 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742758400022591 (1987).Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Abrahams, P. et al. Fall Armyworm: Impacts and Implications for Africa. Evidence Note 2 (CABI, 2017).
Google Scholar 
7.Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Fall armyworm migration across the Lesser Antilles and the potential for genetic exchanges between North and South American populations. PLoS ONE 12, e0171743. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171743 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
8.Arias, O. et al. Population genetic structure and demographic history of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): Implications for insect resistance management programs. Pest Manag. Sci. 75, 2948–2957. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5407 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Nagoshi, R. et al. Analysis of strain distribution, migratory potential, and invasion history of fall armyworm populations in northern Sub-Saharan Africa. Sci. Rep. 8, 3710–3710. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21954-1 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
10.Nagoshi, R. N., Adamczyk, J. J., Meagher, R. L., Gore, J. & Jackson, R. Using stable isotope analysis to examine fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) host strains in a cotton habitat. J. Econ. Entomol. 100, 1569. https://doi.org/10.1603/0022-0493(2007)100[1569:USIATE]2.0.CO2 (2007).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
11.Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Southeastern Asia fall armyworms are closely related to populations in Africa and India, consistent with common origin and recent migration. Sci. Rep. 10, 1421. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58249-3 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
12.Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Genetic characterization of fall armyworm infesting South Africa and India indicate recent introduction from a common source population. PLoS ONE 14, e0217755. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217755 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
13.Nayyar, N. et al. Population structure and genetic diversity of invasive Fall Armyworm after 2 years of introduction in India. Sci. Rep. 11, 7760. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87414-5 (2021).ADS 
MathSciNet 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
14.Zhang, L. et al. Genetic structure and insecticide resistance characteristics of fall armyworm populations invading China. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 20, 1682–1696. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13219 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
15.Raymond, L., Plantegenest, M. & Vialatte, A. Migration and dispersal may drive to high genetic variation and significant genetic mixing: The case of two agriculturally important, continental hoverflies (E. pisyrphus balteatus and S. phaerophoria scripta). Mol. Ecol. 22, 5329–5339. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12483 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Stevens, L. et al. Migration and gene flow among domestic populations of the Chagas insect vector Triatoma dimidiata (Hemiptera: Reduviidae) detected by microsatellite loci. J. Med. Entomol. 52, 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjv002 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Arias, R. S., Blanco, C. A., Portilla, M., Snodgrass, G. L. & Scheffler, B. E. First microsatellites from Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and their potential use for population genetics. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 104, 576–587. https://doi.org/10.1603/an10135 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Pavinato, V. A., Martinelli, S., de Lima, P. F., Zucchi, M. I. & Omoto, C. Microsatellite markers for genetic studies of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. Genet. Mol. Res.: GMR https://doi.org/10.4238/2013.February.8.1 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Nagoshi, R., Silvie, P. & Meagher, R. Comparison of haplotype frequencies differentiate fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) corn-strain populations from Florida and Brazil. J. Econ. Entomol. 100, 954–961 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Agapow, P.-M. & Burt, A. Indices of multilocus linkage disequilibrium. Mol. Ecol. Notes 1, 101–102. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-8278.2000.00014.x (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Weir, B. S. Genetic Data Analysis II: Methods for Discrete Population Genetic Data (Sinauer, 1996).
Google Scholar 
22.Nei, M. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 70, 3321. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.70.12.3321 (1973).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
23.Hedrick, P. W. A standardized genetic differentiation measure. Evolution 59, 1633–1638. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01814.x (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Jost, L. O. U. GST and its relatives do not measure differentiation. Mol. Ecol. 17, 4015–4026. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03887.x (2008).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Evanno, G., Regnaut, S. & Goudet, J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: A simulation study. Mol. Ecol. 14, 2611–2620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02553.x (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
26.Jombart, T. adegenet: A R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24, 1403–1405. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btn129 (2008).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
27.Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Comparative molecular analyses of invasive fall armyworm in Togo reveal strong similarities to populations from the eastern United States and the Greater Antilles. PLoS ONE 12, e0181982. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181982 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Nagoshi, R. N., Goergen, G., Plessis, H. D., van den Berg, J. & Meagher, R. Genetic comparisons of fall armyworm populations from 11 countries spanning sub-Saharan Africa provide insights into strain composition and migratory behaviors. Sci. Rep. 9, 8311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44744-9 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Buès, R., Bouvier, J. C. & Boudinhon, L. Insecticide resistance and mechanisms of resistance to selected strains of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the south of France. Crop Prot. 24, 814–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2005.01.006 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Armes, N. J., Jadhav, D. R. & DeSouza, K. R. A survey of insecticide resistance in Helicoverpa armigera in the Indian subcontinent. Bull. Entomol. Res. 86, 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485300039298 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Parry, H. R. et al. Estimating the landscape distribution of eggs by Helicoverpa spp., with implications for Bt resistance management. Ecol. Model. 365, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.10.004 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Jones, C. M., Parry, H., Tay, W. T., Reynolds, D. R. & Chapman, J. W. Movement ecology of pest Helicoverpa: Implications for ongoing spread. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 64, 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-011118-111959 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Tucker, M. R., Mwandoto, S. & Pedgley, D. E. Further evidence for windborne movement of armyworm moths, Spodoptera exempta, in East Africa. Ecol. Entomol. 7, 463–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1982.tb00689.x (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Rose, D. J. W. et al. Downwind migration of the African army worm moth, Spodoptera exempta, studied by mark-and-capture and by radar. Ecol. Entomol. 10, 299–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1985.tb00727.x (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Rose, D. J. W., Dewhurst, C. F. & Page, W. W. The African Armyworm Handbook: The Status, Biology, Ecology, Epidemiology and Management of Spodoptera exempta (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) (Natural Resources Institute, 2000).
Google Scholar 
36.Chapman, J. W., Reynolds, D. R. & Wilson, K. Long-range seasonal migration in insects: Mechanisms, evolutionary drivers and ecological consequences. Ecol. Lett. 18, 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12407 (2015).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Nagoshi, R. N. & Meagher, R. L. Using intron sequence comparisons in the triose-phosphate isomerase gene to study the divergence of the fall armyworm host strains. Insect Mol. Biol. 25, 324–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/imb.12223 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
38.Hall, T. A. BioEdit: A user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl. Acid Symp. Ser. 41, 95–98 (1999).CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Thompson, J. D., Higgins, D. G. & Gibson, T. J. CLUSTAL W: Improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucl. Acids Res. 22, 4673–4680. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/22.22.4673 (1994).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
40.R Core Team. R Foundation for Statistical Computing (R Core Team, 2020).
Google Scholar 
41.Paradis, E. pegas: An R package for population genetics with an integrated–modular approach. Bioinformatics 26, 419–420. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp696 (2010).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
42.Adamack, A. & Gruber, B. PopGenReport: Simplifying basic population genetic analyses in R. Methods Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12158 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Goudet, J. Hierfstat, a package for r to compute and test hierarchical F-statistics. Mol. Ecol. Notes 5, 184–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00828.x (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Winter, D. MMOD: An R library for the calculation of population differentiation statistics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2012.03174.x (2012).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Kamvar, Z. N., Tabima, J. F. & Grünwald, N. J. Poppr: An R package for genetic analysis of populations with clonal, partially clonal, and/or sexual reproduction. PeerJ 2, e281. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.281 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
46.Raymond, M. & Rousset, F. GENEPOP (version 1.2): Population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J. Hered. 86, 248–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a111573 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Oksanen, J. et al. Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.0-2. (2012).48.Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M. & Donnelly, P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Earl, D. A. & von Holdt, B. M. STRUCTURE HARVESTER: A website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv. Genet. Resour. 4, 359–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12686-011-9548-7 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Jakobsson, M. & Rosenberg, N. A. CLUMPP: A cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23, 1801–1806. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btm233 (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Rosenberg, N. A. DISTRUCT: A program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4, 137–138. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00566.x (2004).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Pyšek, P. et al. Naturalized alien flora of the world. Preslia 89, 203–274 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Pyšek, P. et al. Scientists’ warning on invasive alien species. Biol. Rev. (2020).3.Vilà, M. et al. Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: A meta-analysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 14, 702–708 (2011).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Pyšek, P. et al. A global assessment of invasive plant impacts on resident species, communities and ecosystems: The interaction of impact measures, invading species’ traits and environment. Glob. Chang. Biol. 18, 1725–1737 (2012).ADS 
PubMed Central 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
5.Le Roux, J. J. et al. Recent anthropogenic plant extinctions differ in biodiversity hotspots and coldspots. Curr. Biol. 29, 2912-2918.e2 (2019).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
6.Hulme, P. E. et al. Greater focus needed on alien plant impacts in protected areas. Conserv. Lett. 7, 459–466 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Foxcroft, L. C., Pyšek, P., Richardson, D. M., Genovesi, P. & MacFadyen, S. Plant invasion science in protected areas: progress and priorities. Biol. Invasions 19, 1353–1378 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Novoa, A. et al. Invasion syndromes: A systematic approach for predicting biological invasions and facilitating effective management. Biol. Invasions 22, 1801–1820 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Foxcroft, L. C., Pickett, S. T. A. & Cadenasso, M. L. Expanding the conceptual frameworks of plant invasion ecology. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 13, 89–100 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Scholes, R. J. & Archer, S. R. Tree-grass interactions in savannas. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28, 517–544 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Biodiversity Synthesis (Island Press, 2005).
Google Scholar 
12.Foxcroft, L. C., Richardson, D. M., Rejmánek, M. & Pyšek, P. Alien plant invasions in tropical and sub-tropical savannas: Patterns, processes and prospects. Biol. Invasions 12, 3913–3933 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Rejmánek, M., Huntley, B. J., Le Roux, J. J. & Richardson, D. M. A rapid survey of the invasive plant species in western Angola. Afr. J. Ecol. 55, 56–69 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Shackleton, R. T., Foxcroft, L. C., Pyšek, P., Wood, L. E. & Richardson, D. M. Assessing biological invasions in protected areas after 30 years: Revisiting nature reserves targeted by the 1980s SCOPE programme. Biol. Conserv. 243, 108424 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Skarpe, C. Dynamics of savanna ecosystems. J. Veg. Sci. 3, 293–300 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Okin, G. S. et al. Spatial patterns of soil nutrients in two southern African savannas. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 113, G2 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Ridolfi, L., Laio, F. & D’Odorico, P. Fertility island formation and evolution in dryland ecosystems. Ecol. Soc. 13, 5 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Perroni-Ventura, Y., Montaña, C. & Garcí-a-Oliva, F. Carbon-nitrogen interactions in fertility island soil from a tropical semi-arid ecosystem. Funct. Ecol. 24, 233–242 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Belnap, J. & Susan, L. P. Soil biota in an ungrazed grassland: response to annual grass (Bromus tectorum) invasion. Ecol. Appl. 51, 1261–1275. (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Ludwig, F., Kroon, H., Prins, H. H. T. & Berendse, F. Effects of nutrients and shade on tree-grass interactions in an East African savanna. J. Veg. Sci. 12, 579–588 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Reinhart, K. O. & Callaway, R. M. Soil biota and invasive plants. New Phytol. 170, 445–457 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Weidenhamer, J. D. & Callaway, R. M. Direct and indirect effects of invasive plants on soil chemistry and ecosystem function. J. Chem. Ecol. 36, 59–69 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Levine, J. M., Pachepsky, E., Kendall, B. E., Yelenik, S. G. & Lambers, J. H. R. Plant-soil feedbacks and invasive spread. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1005–1014 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.du Toit, J. T., Rogers, K. H. & Biggs, H. C. The Kruger Experience: Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity. (Island Press, 2003).25.Foxcroft, L. C., Van Wilgen, N. J., Baard, J. A. & Cole, N. S. Biological invasions in South African National Parks. Bothalia 47, 11 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Pyšek, P. et al. Into the great wide open: do alien plants spread from rivers to dry savanna in the Kruger National Park?. NeoBiota 60, 61–77 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Kueffer, C., Pyšek, P. & Richardson, D. M. Integrative invasion science: Model systems, multi-site studies, focused meta-analysis and invasion syndromes. New Phytol. 200, 615–633 (2013).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Lotter, W. D. & Hoffmann, J. H. An integrated management plan for the control of Opuntia stricta (Cactaceae) in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. Koedoe 41, 63–68 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Hoffmann, J. H., Moran, V. C., Zimmermann, H. G. & Impson, F. A. C. Biocontrol of a prickly pear cactus in South Africa: Reinterpreting the analogous, renowned case in Australia. J. Appl. Ecol. 13737, 1365–2664. (2020).
Google Scholar 
30.Foxcroft, L. C., Rouget, M., Richardson, D. M. & MacFadyen, S. Reconstructing 50 years of Opuntia stricta invasion in the Kruger National Park, South Africa: Environmental determinants and propagule pressure. Divers. Distrib. 10, 427–437 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Novoa, A., Le Roux, J. J., Robertson, M. P., Wilson, J. R. U. & Richardson, D. M. Introduced and invasive cactus species: A global review. AoB Plants 7, 1 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Foxcroft, L. C., Hoffmann, J. H., Viljoen, J. J. & Kotze, J. J. Environmental factors influencing the distribution of Opuntia stricta, an invasive alien plant in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 73, 109–112 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Foxcroft, L. C. & Rejmánek, M. What helps Opuntia stricta invade Kruger National Park, South Africa: Baboons or elephants?. Appl. Veg. Sci. 10, 265–270 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Anderson, E. F. The Cactus Family. (Timber Press, 2001).35.Reyes-Agüero, J. A., Aguirre, R. J. R. & Valiente-Banuet, A. Reproductive biology of Opuntia: A review. J. Arid Environ. 64, 549–585 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Robertson, M. P. et al. Assessing local scale impacts of Opuntia stricta (Cactaceae) invasion on beetle and spider diversity in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Afr. Zool. 46, 205–223 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Butterfield, B. J. & Briggs, J. M. Patch dynamics of soil biotic feedbacks in the Sonoran Desert. J. Arid Environ. 73, 96–102 (2009).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Neffar, S., Chenchouni, H., Beddiar, A. & Redjel, N. Rehabilitation of degraded rangeland in drylands by Prickly Pear (Opuntia ficus-indica L.) plantations: Effect on soil and spontaneous vegetation. Ecol. Balk. 5, 63–76 (2013).39.Garner, W. & Steinberger, Y. A proposed mechanism for the formation of ‘Fertile Islands’ in the desert ecosystem. J. Arid Environ. 16, 257–262 (1989).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Marchante, H., Elizabete M, & Helena, F. Invasion of the Portuguese dune ecosystems by the exotic species Acacia longifolia (Andrews) Willd.: effects at the community level. Plant invasions: ecological threats and management solutions. pp. 75–85 (2003).41.Marchante, E. et al. Short-and long-term impacts of Acacia longifolia invasion on the belowground processes of a Mediterranean coastal dune ecosystem. Appl. Soil Ecol. 40(2), 210–217 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Yelenik, S. G., Stock, W. D. & Richardson, D. M. Ecosystem level impacts of invasive Acacia saligna in the South African fynbos. Restor. Ecol. 12(1), 44–51 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Werner, C. et al. High competitiveness of a resource demanding invasive acacia under low resource supply. Plant Ecol. 206(1), 83–96 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Le Maitre, D. C. et al. Impacts of invasive Australian acacias: implications for management and restoration. Divers. Distrib. 17(5), 1015–1029 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Bargali, K. & Bargali, S. S. Acacia nilotica: a multipurpose leguminous plant. Nat. Sci. 7, 11–19 (2009).
Google Scholar 
46.Rughöft, S. et al. Community composition and abundance of bacterial, archaeal and nitrifying populations in savanna soils on contrasting bedrock material in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1638 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
47.Neilson, J. W. et al. Life at the hyperarid margin: Novel bacterial diversity in arid soils of the Atacama Desert, Chile. Extremophiles 16, 553–566 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
48.de Vos, P. et al. The Firmicutes. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. (Springer, 2009).49.Brockett, B. F. T., Prescott, C. E. & Grayston, S. J. Soil moisture is the major factor influencing microbial community structure and enzyme activities across seven biogeoclimatic zones in western Canada. Soil Biol. Biochem. 44, 9–20 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Yang, Y., Dou, Y. & An, S. Testing association between soil bacterial diversity and soil carbon storage on the Loess Plateau. Sci. Total Environ. 626, 48–58 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Rajaniemi, T. K. & Allison, V. J. Abiotic conditions and plant cover differentially affect microbial biomass and community composition on dune gradients. Soil Biol. Biochem. 41, 102–109 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Novoa, A., Rodríguez, R., Richardson, D. & González, L. Soil quality: A key factor in understanding plant invasion? The case of Carpobrotus edulis (L.) N.E.Br. Biol. Invasions 16, 429–443 (2014).53.Penfield, S. Seed dormancy and germination. Curr. Biol. 27, R874–R878 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Tielbörger, K. & Prasse, R. Do seeds sense each other? Testing for density-dependent germination in desert perennial plants. Oikos 118, 792–800 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Renne, I. J. et al. Eavesdropping in plants: delayed germination via biochemical recognition. J. Ecol. 102, 86–94 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Yannelli, F. A., Novoa, A., Lorenzo, P., Rodríguez, J. & Le Roux, J. J. No evidence for novel weapons: biochemical recognition modulates early ontogenetic processes in native species and invasive acacias. Biol. Invasions 22, 549–562 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Al-Wakeel, S. A. M., Gabr, M. A., Hamid, A. A. & Abu-El-Soud, W. M. Allelopathic effects of Acacia nilotica leaf residue on Pisum sativum L. Allelopath. J. 19, 411 (2007).
Google Scholar 
58.Scholes, M. C., Scholes, R. J., Otter, L. B. & Woghiren, A. J. Biogeochemistry: The cycling of elements. in The Kruger Experience: Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity (eds. du Toit, J. T., Rogers, K. H. & Biggs, H. C.) 130–148 (Island Press, 2003).59.Kyalangalilwa, B., Boatwright, J. S., Daru, B. H., Maurin, O. & van der Bank, M. Phylogenetic position and revised classification of Acacia s.l. (Fabaceae: Mimosoideae) in Africa, including new combinations in Vachellia and Senegalia. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 172, 500–523 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.van Wyk, B. & van Wyk, P. Field Guide to Trees of Southern Africa. (Struik Nature, 2013).61.Coates Palgrave, K. & Coates Palgrave, M. Palgrave’s Trees of Southern Africa. (Struik Publishers, 2002).62.Novoa, A., Kumschick, S., Richardson, D. M., Rouget, M. & Wilson, J. R. U. Native range size and growth form in Cactaceae predict invasiveness and impact. NeoBiota 30, 75–90 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Allen, S. E. Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials. (Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1989).64.Tabatabai, M. A. & Bremner, J. M. Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1, 301–307 (1969).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Kandeler, E. & Gerber, H. Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biol. Fertil. Soils 6, 68–72 (1988).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Allison, S. D. & Vitousek, P. M. Extracellular enzyme activities and carbon chemistry as drivers of tropical plant litter decomposition. Biotropica 36, 285–296 (2004).
Google Scholar 
67.German, D. P., Chacon, S. S. & Allison, S. D. Substrate concentration and enzyme allocation can affect rates of microbial decomposition. Ecology 92, 1471–1480 (2011).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Lane, D. J. et al. Rapid determination of 16S ribosomal RNA sequences for phylogenetic analyses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 82, 6955–6959 (1985).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Tringe, S. G. & Hugenholtz, P. A renaissance for the pioneering 16S rRNA gene. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 11, 442–446 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Bukin, Y. S. et al. The effect of 16s rRNA region choice on bacterial community metabarcoding results. Sci. Data 6, 1–14 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
71.Chakravorty, S., Helb, D., Burday, M., Connell, N. & Alland, D. A detailed analysis of 16S ribosomal RNA gene segments for the diagnosis of pathogenic bacteria. J. Microbiol. Methods 69, 330–339 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
72.Beckers, B. et al. Performance of 16s rDNA primer pairs in the study of rhizosphere and endosphere bacterial microbiomes in metabarcoding studies. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1–15 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Thijs, S. et al. Comparative evaluation of four bacteria-specific primer pairs for 16S rRNA gene surveys. Front. Microbiol. 8, 1–15 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
74.Schloss, P. D., & Westcott, S. L. Assessing and improving methods used in operational taxonomic unit-based approaches for 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77(10), 3219–3226 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
75.Schloss, P. D. et al. Introducing mothur: Open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75, 7537–7541 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
76.Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C. & Knight, R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27, 2194–2200 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
77.Wang, Q., Garrity, G. M., Tiedje, J. M. & Cole, J. R. Naïve Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 5261–5267 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
78.McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. Waste not, want not: Why rarefying microbiome data is inadmissible. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003531 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
79.Weiss, S. et al. Normalization and microbial differential abundance strategies depend upon data characteristics. Microbiome 5, 1–18 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
80.de Cárcer, D. A., Denman, S. E., McSweeney, C. & Morrison, M. Evaluation of subsampling-based normalization strategies for tagged high-throughput sequencing data sets from gut microbiomes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77, 8795–8798 (2011).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
81.Chiapusio, G., Sánchez, A. M., Reigosa, M. J., González, L. & Pellissier, F. Do germination indices adequately reflect allelochemical effects on the germination process?. J. Chem. Ecol. 23, 2445–2453 (1997).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
82.Oksanen, J. F. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.3-3. (2016).83.Jost, L. Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113, 363–375 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
84.Jost, L. The relation between evenness and diversity. Diversity 2, 207–232 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
85.Jost, L. Partitioning diversity into independent alpha and beta components. Ecology 88, 2427–2439 (2007).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
86.Charney, N. & Record, S. vegetarian: Jost Diversity Measures for Community Data. R package version 1.2. (2012).87.Anderson, M. J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral. Ecol. 26, 32–46 (2001).
Google Scholar 
88.Segata, N. et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 12, 1–18 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
89.Clarke, K. R. Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Aust. J. Ecol. 18, 117–143 (1993).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Lyman, C. P. & Chatfield, P. O. Physiology of hibernation in mammals. Physiol. Rev. 35, 403–425 (1955).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Geiser, F. Hibernation. Curr. Biol. 23, R188–R193 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Humphries, M. M., Thomas, D. W. & Speakman, J. R. Climate-mediated energetic constraints on the distribution of hibernating mammals. Nature 418, 313–316 (2002).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Wilkinson, G. S. & Adams, D. M. Recurrent evolution of extreme longevity in bats. Biol. Lett. 15, 20180860 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Frick, W. F., Reynolds, D. S. & Kunz, T. H. Influence of climate and reproductive timing on demography of little brown myotis Myotis lucifugus. J. Anim. Ecol. 79, 128–136 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Willis, C. K. Trade-offs influencing the physiological ecology of hibernation in temperate-zone bats. Integr. Comp. Biol. 57, 1214–1224 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Lane, J. E. In Living in a Seasonal World 51–61 (Springer, 2012).8.Inouye, D. W., Barr, B., Armitage, K. B. & Inouye, B. D. Climate change is affecting altitudinal migrants and hibernating species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97, 1630–1633 (2000).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Lane, J. E., Kruuk, L. E., Charmantier, A., Murie, J. O. & Dobson, F. S. Delayed phenology and reduced fitness associated with climate change in a wild hibernator. Nature 489, 554–557 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Feder, M. E. In New Directions in Ecological Physiology (eds M. E. Feder, A. F. Bennett, W. W. Burggren, & R. B Huey) 38–75 (Cambridge University Press, 1987).11.Geiser, F. Metabolic rate and body temperature reduction during hibernation and daily torpor. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 66, 239–274. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.physiol.66.032102.115105 (2004).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Boyles, J. G. et al. A global heterothermic continuum in mammals. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 22, 1029–1039 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Ruf, T. & Arnold, W. Effects of polyunsaturated fatty acids on hibernation and torpor: A review and hypothesis. Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 294, R1044-1052. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00688.2007 (2008).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Ruf, T. & Geiser, F. Daily torpor and hibernation in birds and mammals. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12137 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
15.Heldmaier, G., Ortmann, S. & Elvert, R. Natural hypometabolism during hibernation and daily torpor in mammals. Respir. Physiol. Neurobiol. 141, 317–329 (2004).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.van Breukelen, F. & Martin, S. L. The hibernation continuum: Physiological and molecular aspects of metabolic plasticity in mammals. Physiology 30, 273–281 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
17.Nowack, J., Levesque, D. L., Reher, S. & Dausmann, K. H. Variable climates lead to varying phenotypes: ‘Weird’mammalian torpor and lessons from non-Holarctic species. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 60 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Stawski, C., Willis, C. & Geiser, F. The importance of temporal heterothermy in bats. J. Zool. 292, 86–100 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Thomas, D. W., Dorais, M. & Bergeron, J.-M. Winter energy budgets and cost of arousals for hibernating little brown bats, Myotis lucifugus. J. Mammal. 71, 475–479 (1990).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Kunz, T. H., Wrazen, J. A. & Burnett, C. D. Changes in body mass and fat reserves in pre-hibernating little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus). Ecoscience 5, 8–17 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Thomas, D. W. & Cloutier, D. Evaporative water loss by hibernating little brown bats, Myotis lucifugus. Physiol. Zool. 65, 443–456 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Kornfeld, S. F., Biggar, K. K. & Storey, K. B. Differential expression of mature microRNAs involved in muscle maintenance of hibernating little brown bats, Myotis lucifugus: A model of muscle atrophy resistance. Genom. Proteom. Bioinform. 10, 295–301 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Eddy, S. F., Morin, P. Jr. & Storey, K. B. Differential expression of selected mitochondrial genes in hibernating little brown bats, Myotis lucifugus. J. Exp. Zool. A Comp. Exp. Biol. 305, 620–630 (2006).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Brigham, R., Ianuzzo, C., Hamilton, N. & Fenton, M. Histochemical and biochemical plasticity of muscle fibers in the little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus). J. Comp. Physiol. B. 160, 183–186 (1990).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.McGuire, L. P., Mayberry, H. W. & Willis, C. K. R. White-nose syndrome increases torpid metabolic rate and evaporative water loss in hibernating bats. Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 313, R680–R686 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Jonasson, K. A. & Willis, C. K. Hibernation energetics of free-ranging little brown bats. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 2141–2149 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Klüg-Baerwald, B. J. & Brigham, R. M. Hung out to dry? Intraspecific variation in water loss in a hibernating bat. Oecologia 183, 977–985 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Dunbar, M. B. & Brigham, R. M. Thermoregulatory variation among populations of bats along a latitudinal gradient. J. Comp. Physiol. B 180, 885–893 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Yacoe, M. E. Protein metabolism in the pectoralis muscle and liver of hibernating bats, Eptesicus fuscus. J. Comp. Physiol. 152, 137–144 (1983).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Yacoe, M. E. Maintenance of the pectoralis muscle during hibernation in the big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus. J. Comp. Physiol. 152, 97–104 (1983).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Twente, J. W. & Twente, J. Biological alarm clock arouses hibernating big brown bats, Eptesicus fuscus. Can. J. Zool. 65, 1668–1674 (1987).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Boratyński, J. S., Willis, C. K., Jefimow, M. & Wojciechowski, M. S. Huddling reduces evaporative water loss in torpid Natterer’s bats, Myotis nattereri. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 179, 125–132 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
33.Hope, P. R. & Jones, G. Warming up for dinner: Torpor and arousal in hibernating Natterer’s bats (Myotis nattereri) studied by radio telemetry. J. Comp. Physiol. B. 182, 569–578 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Park, K. J., Jones, G. & Ransome, R. D. Torpor, arousal and activity of hibernating greater horseshoe bats (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum). Funct. Ecol. 14, 580–588 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Ben-Hamo, M., Muñoz-Garcia, A., Williams, J. B., Korine, C. & Pinshow, B. Waking to drink: Rates of evaporative water loss determine arousal frequency in hibernating bats. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 573–577 (2013).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
36.Lausen, C. & Barclay, R. Winter bat activity in the Canadian prairies. Can. J. Zool. 84, 1079–1086 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.McGuire, L. P. et al. Similar physiology in hibernating bats across broad geographic ranges. J. Comp. Physiol. B. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00360-021-01400-x (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
38.Zuur, A., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A. & Smith, G. M. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R (Springer, New York, 2009).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar 
39.Hothorn, T. & Everitt, B. S. A handbook of statistical analyses using R (CRC Press, London, 2014).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar 
40.United States Fish and Wildlife Service. National white-nose syndrome decontamination protocol-Version 09-13-2018. http://www.whitenosesyndrome.org (2018).41.Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre. Guidelines for decontamination of equipment and clothing to prevent the spread of white-nose syndrome (the causal fungus: Pseudogymnoascus destructans) in Canada, http://www2.cwhc-rcsf.ca/wns_decontamination.php (2020).42.R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2020).43.McGuire, L. P., Guglielmo, C. G., Mackenzie, S. A. & Taylor, P. D. Migratory stopover in the long-distance migrant silver-haired bat, Lasionycteris noctivagans. J. Anim. Ecol. 81, 377–385 (2012).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Nagorsen, D. W. & Brigham, R. M. Bats of British Columbia. Vol. 1 (UBC Press, 1993).45.Villa, B. R. & Cockrum, E. L. Migration in the guano bat Tadarida brasiliensis mexicana (Saussure). J. Mammal. 43, 43–64 (1962).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Kunkel, E. L. Ecology and energetics of partial migration and facultative hibernation of Mexican free-tailed bats MS thesis, Texas Tech University (2020).47.Sandel, J. K. et al. Use and selection of winter hibernacula by the eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus) in Texas. J. Mammal. 82, 173–178 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Jones, C. & Pagels, J. Notes on a population of Pipistrellus subflavus in southern Louisiana. J. Mammal. 49, 134–139 (1968).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.McClure, M. M. et al. A hybrid corelative-mechanistic approach for modeling and mapping winter distributions of North American bat species. J. Biogeogr. 48, 2429–2444 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.McClure, M. M. et al. Linking surface and subterranean climate: Implications for the study of hibernating bats and other cave dwellers. Ecosphere 11, E03274 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Perry, R. W. A review of factors affecting cave climates for hibernating bats in temperate North America. Environ. Rev. 21, 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2012-0042 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Hranac, C. R. et al. What is winter? Modelling spatial variation in bat host traits and hibernation and their implications for overwintering energetics. Ecol. Evol. 11, 11604–11614 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.McGuire, L., Muise, K. A., Shrivastav, A. & Willis, C. K. R. No evidence of hyperphagia during prehibernation in a northern population of little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus). Can. J. Zool. 94, 821–827 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Czenze, Z. J., Jonasson, K. A. & Willis, C. K. Thrifty females, frisky males: Winter energetics of hibernating bats from a cold climate. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 90, 502–511 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Kurta, A. The misuse of relative humidity in ecological studies of hibernating bats. Acta Chiropt. 16, 249–254 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Weller, T. J. et al. A review of bat hibernacula across the western United States: Implications for white-nose syndrome surveillance and management. PLoS One 13, e0205647 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
57.Gearhart, C., Adams, A. M., Pinshow, B. & Korine, C. Evaporative water loss in Kuhl’s pipistrelles declines along an environmental gradient, from mesic to hyperarid. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 240, 110587 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Thomas, D. W. & Geiser, F. Periodic arousals in hibernating mammals: Is evaporative water loss involved?. Funct. Ecol. 11, 585–591 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Haase, C. G. et al. Incorporating evaporative water loss into bioenergetic models of hibernation to test for relative influence of host and pathogen traits on white-nose syndrome. PLoS One 14, e0222311 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Willis, C. K. Conservation physiology and conservation pathogens: White-nose syndrome and integrative biology for host–pathogen systems. Integr. Comp. Biol. 55, 631–641 (2015).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Frick, W. F. et al. Disease alters macroecological patterns of North American bats. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 24, 741–749 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Willis, C. K., Menzies, A. K., Boyles, J. G. & Wojciechowski, M. S. Evaporative water loss is a plausible explanation for mortality of bats from white-nose syndrome. Integr. Comp. Biol. 51, 364–373. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icr076 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
63.Wilder, A. P., Frick, W. F., Langwig, K. E. & Kunz, T. H. Risk factors associated with mortality from white-nose syndrome among hibernating bat colonies. Biol. Lett. 7, 950–953 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Langwig, K. E. et al. Sociality, density-dependence and microclimates determine the persistence of populations suffering from a novel fungal disease, white-nose syndrome. Ecol. Lett. 15, 1050–1057. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01829.x (2012).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
65.Voigt, C. C. & Kingston, T. Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World (Springer, New York, 2016).Book 

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

Google Scholar  More