Philippa Kaur

1.McNaughton, S. J., Ruess, R. W. & Seagle, S. W. Large mammals and process dynamics in Aftican ecosystems. Bioscience 38, 794–800 (1988).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Vanni, M. J. Nutrient cycling by animals in freshwater ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 341–370 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Schmitz, O. J. et al. Animating the carbon cycle. Ecosystems 17, 344–359 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Doughty, C. E. et al. Global nutrient transport in a world of giants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 868–873 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Allgeier, J. E., Burkepile, D. E. & Layman, C. A. Animal pee in the sea: consumer-mediated nutrient dynamics in the world’s changing oceans. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 2166–2178 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Duffy, J. E. Biodiversity and ecosystem function: the consumer connection. Oikos 99, 201–219 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59–67 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Loreau, M. et al. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294, 804–808 (2001).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
9.Hooper, D. U. et al. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol. Monogr. 75, 3–35 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.McIntyre, P. B., Jones, L. E., Flecker, A. S. & Vanni, M. J. Fish extinctions alter nutrient recycling in tropical freshwaters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 4461–4466 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Pigot, A. L. et al. Macroevolutionary convergence connects morphological form to ecological function in birds. Nat. Ecol. Evolution 4, 230–239 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. D. The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. (Oxford University Press, 1991).13.Wiens, J. J. et al. Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and conservation biology. Ecol. Lett. 13, 1310–1324 (2010).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
14.Weeks, B., Claramunt, S. & Cracraft, J. Integrating systematics and biogeography to disentangle the roles of history and ecology in biotic assembly. J. Biogeogr. 43 (2016).15.Reiners, W. A. Complementary models for ecosystems. Am. Nat. 127, 59–73 (1986).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Schreck, C. B. & Moyle, P. B. Methods for Fish Biology. (American Fisheries Society, 1990).17.Sterner, R. W. & Elser, J. J. Ecological Stoichiometry: The Biology of Elements from Molecules to the Biosphere. 429 (2002).18.Vaitla, B. et al. Predicting nutrient content of ray-finned fishes using phylogenetic information. Nat. Commun. 9, 3742 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
19.Gonzalez, A. L. et al. Ecological mechanisms and phylogeny shape invertebrate stoichiometry: a test using detritus-based communities across Central and South America. Funct. Ecol. 32, 2448–2463 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Atkinson, C. L., van Ee, B. C. & Pfeiffer, J. M. Evolutionary history drives aspects of stoichiometric niche variation and functional effects within a guild. Ecology 101, e03100 (2020).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
21.Schluter, D. The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation. (OUP Oxford, 2000).22.Allgeier, J. E., Wenger, S. & Layman, C. A. Taxonomic identity best explains variation in body nutrient stoichiometry in a diverse marine animal community. Sci. Rep. 10, 13718 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Allgeier, J. E., Wenger, S. J., Schindler, D. E., Rosemond, A. D. & Layman, C. A. Metabolic theory and taxonomic identity predict nutrient cycling in a diverse food web. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2640–2647 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Odum, H. T. & Odum, E. P. Trohic structure and productivity of a windward coral reef community on Eniwetok Atoll. Ecol. Monogr. 25, 291–320 (1955).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Hatcher, B. G. Coral reef primary productivity—a beggars banquet. Trends Ecol. Evolut. 3, 106–111 (1988).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Deangelis, D. L. Energy-flow, nutrient cycling, and ecosystem resilience. Ecology 61, 764–771 (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Allgeier, J. E., Valdivia, A., Cox, C. & Layman, C. A. Fishing down nutrients on coral reefs. Nat. Commun. 7, 1–5 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
28.Allgeier, J. E., Layman, C. A., Mumby, P. J. & Rosemond, A. D. Consistent nutrient storage and supply mediated by diverse fish communities in coral reef ecosystems. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 2459–2472 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Allgeier, J. E., Layman, C. A., Mumby, P. J. & Rosemond, A. D. Biogeochemical implications of biodiversity loss across regional gradients of coastal marine ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 85, 132 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Bellwood, D. R. & Wainwright, P. C. CHAPTER 1—The History and Biogeography of Fishes on Coral Reefs. in Coral Reef Fishes (ed Sale, P. F.) 5–32 (Academic Press, 2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012615185-5/50003-7.31.Littler, M. M., Littler, D. S. & Titlyanov, E. A. Comparisons of N- and P-limited productivity between high granitic islands versus low carbonate atolls in the Seychelles Archipelago: a test of the relative-dominance paradigm. Coral Reefs 10, 199–209 (1991).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Haßler, K. et al. Provenance of nutrients in submarine fresh groundwater discharge on Tahiti and Moorea, French Polynesia. Appl. Geochem. 100, 181–189 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
33.Carew, J. L. & Mylroie, J. E. Geology of the Bahamas. Geol. Hydrogeol. Carbonate Isl. 54, 91–139 (1997).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Allgeier, J. E., Rosemond, A. D., Mehring, A. S. & Layman, C. A. Synergistic nutrient co-limitation across a gradient of ecosystem fragmentation in subtropical mangrove-dominated wetlands. Limnol. Oceanogr. 55, 2660–2668 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Koch, M. S. & Madden, C. J. Patterns of primary production and nutrient availability in a Bahamas lagoon with fringing mangroves. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 219, 109–119 (2001).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Hendrixson, H. A., Sterner, R. W. & Kay, A. D. Elemental stoichiometry of freshwater fishes in relation to phylogeny, allometry and ecology. J. Fish. Biol. 70, 121–140 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Vanni, M. J., Flecker, A. S., Hood, J. M. & Headworth, J. L. Stoichiometry of nutrient recycling by vertebrates in a tropical stream: linking species identity and ecosystem processes. Ecol. Lett. 5, 285–293 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Vanni, M. J. & McIntyre, P. B. Predicting nutrient excretion of aquatic animals with metabolic ecology and ecological stoichiometry: a global synthesis. Ecology 97, 3460–3471 (2016).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
39.Sokal, R. R. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. (eds Paul H. Harvey, Mark D. Pagel) (Oxford University Press, New York, 1991). viii + 239 pp. ISBN 0-19-854640-8. $24.95 (paper). Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 88, 405–406 (1992).40.Downs, K. N., Hayes, N. M., Rock, A. M., Vanni, M. J. & González, M. J. Light and nutrient supply mediate intraspecific variation in the nutrient stoichiometry of juvenile fish. Ecosphere 7, e01452 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Sterner, R. W. & George, N. B. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus stoichiometry of cyprinid fishes. Ecology 81, 127–140 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Brown, W. L. Jr & Wilson, E. O. Character displacement. Syst. Biol. 5, 49–64 (1956).
Google Scholar 
43.Losos, J. B. Ecological character displacement and the study of adaptation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 5693–5695 (2000).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Dayan, T. & Simberloff, D. Ecological and community-wide character displacement: the next generation. Ecol. Lett. 8, 875–894 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Abrams, P. A. Evolution and the consequences of species introductions and deletions. Ecology 77, 1321–1328 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Buchan, K. C. The Bahamas. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 41, 94–111 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Siu, G. et al. Shore fishes of french polynesia. Cybium 41 (2017).48.Miloslavich, P. et al. Marine biodiversity in the Caribbean: regional estimates and distribution patterns. PloS ONE 5, 119–126 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
49.Schaus, M. H. & Vanni, M. J. Effects of gizzard shad on phytoplankton and nutrient dynamics: role of sediment feeding and fish size. Ecology 81, 1701–1719 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Whiles, M. R., Huryn, A. D., Taylor, B. W. & Reeve, J. D. Influence of handling stress and fasting on estimates of ammonium excretion by tadpoles and fish: recommendations for designing excretion experiments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 7, 1–7 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Taylor, B. W. et al. Improving the fluorometric ammonium method: matrix effects, background fluorescence, and standard additions. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 26, 167–177 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.APHA. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Pollution Control Federation. (1995).53.Mouillot, D. et al. Functional over-redundancy and high functional vulnerability in global fish faunas on tropical reefs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 13757–13762 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Rabosky, D. L. et al. An inverse latitudinal gradient in speciation rate for marine fishes. Nature 559, 392–395 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
55.Chang, J., Rabosky, D. L., Smith, S. A. & Alfaro, M. E. An r package and online resource for macroevolutionary studies using the ray-finned fish tree of life. Methods Ecol. Evolut. 10, 1118–1124 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Revell, L. J. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol. Evolut. 3, 217–223 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Hadfield, J. D. & Nakagawa, S. General quantitative genetic methods for comparative biology: phylogenies, taxonomies and multi-trait models for continuous and categorical characters. J. Evolut. Biol. 23, 494–508 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Hadfield, J. D. MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R Package. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–22 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. A general and simple method for obtaining R 2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evolut. 4, 133–142 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Gelman, A. & Hill, J. Data Analysis Using Regression. (Cambridge University Press, 2007).61.Kembel, S. W. et al. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 1463–1464 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
62.Jackson, A. L., Inger, R., Parnell, A. C. & Bearhop, S. Comparing isotopic niche widths among and within communities: SIBER—Stable Isotope Bayesian Ellipses in R. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 595–602 (2011).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

The research was carried out on the basis of direct measurements in the surroundings of four selected working coal-fired power plants and four working coking plants. The samples of suspended dust PM10, respirable fraction PM2.5 and submicron particulate matter PM1 were collected in the surroundings of power generation facilities and in the surroundings of coking plants.Location of measurement pointsThe location of the measurement points was selected in southern Poland, around the selected four working coal-fired power plants and four working coking plants. The sampling points in the surroundings of the power plant (P1, P2, P3 and P4) and the coking plant (K1, K2, K3 and K4) were located at the distance of approximately 2 km to the north-east from the respective object (Fig. 1).Figure 1Location of the sampling sites (the map was generated based on data from the BDL18 website).Full size imageThe location of the measurement points was a compromise, taking into account the representativeness of the receptor, the possibility to connect the testing equipment and the consent of the property owners. To eliminate the impact of a heating season, and especially that of low emissions, presented in the studies by19, the measurement sessions were carried out only in the summer season. The samples of particulate matter were collected on a weekly basis, with 4 sessions at one site. The methodology applied in this work is presented in20,21. The location of measurement sites:

point P1: 50° 08′ 37.87″ N; 18° 32′ 15.76″ (Golejów—a suburban district of Rybnik in the Śląskie Voivodeship, in the vicinity of a working power plant with a capacity of 1775 MW; population:

2 300);

point P2: 50° 45′ 35.41″ N; 17° 56′ 20.43″ E (Świerkle—a rural area in the Opolskie Voivodeship (Dobrzeń Wielki commune) near a working power plant with a capacity of 1,492 MW; population: 520);

point P3: 50° 12′ 33.46″ N; 19° 28′ 28.77″ E (Czyżówka—rural area in the Małopolskie Voivodeship (commune of Trzebinia) near a working power plant with a capacity of 786 MW; population: 700);

point P4: 50° 13′ 48.90″ N; 19° 13′ 24.45″ E (suburbs of Jaworzno (Śląskie Voivodeship) in the vicinity of a 1,345 MW power plant; number of inhabitants: 95 500);

K1 point: 50° 10′ 11.36″ N; 18° 40′ 34.35″ E (Czerwionka—Leszczyny in the Śląskie Voivodeship, in the vicinity of a small coking plant; number of inhabitants: 27 300);

K2 point: 50° 3′ 19.76″ N; 18° 30′ 21.69″ E (Popielów—a suburban district of Rybnik in the Śląskie Voivodeship, surrounded by a small working coking plant; population:3 300);

K3 point: 50° 21′ 24.08″ N; 19° 21′ 37.46″ E (Łęka—Dąbrowa Górnicza district, in the Śląskie Voivodeship, surrounded by a large coking plant; number of inhabitants: 700);

K4 point: 50° 21′ 0.47″ N; 18° 53′ 15.44″ E (Bytom—a city in the Śląskie Voivodeship, a small coking plant located on the outskirts of the city; population: 174 700).

The state of air pollution with particulate matter in the area investigated in the study is affected by various local sources of pollution emissions. At the measurement sites P1, P2, P3 and P4, the emissions are mainly from power plant chimneys, but also from auxiliary processes, i.e. coal storage and its transport. In addition, the recorded emissions are also influenced by other industrial plants operating in the vicinity of the measurement sites, domestic and municipal sector and the impact of automotive industry. The measurement sites K1, K2, K3 and K4 involve primarily the emissions accompanying the processes of coal coking as well as auxiliary processes, i.e. coal deposition, its transmission, management of products and post-production wastes. Additionally, they are affected by the emissions from industrial plants and low emission sources operating in this area, as well as the emission from the combustion of solid fuels for domestic or municipal purposes, as well as by the automotive industry.Sampling processThe samples of suspended dust (PM10), respirable fraction (PM2.5) and submicron particulate matter (PM1) were collected using the Dekati PM10 cascade impactor serial No. 6648 by Dekati (Finland) with the air flow rate of (1.8 {mathrm{m}}^{3}/mathrm{h}). The impactor Dekati PM10 guarantees the collection of dust samples for three cutpoint diameters: 10 μm, 2.5 μm and 1 μm. For the sampling at the first, second and third stages of the impactor, polycarbonate filters were used (Nuclepore 800 203, with the diameter of 25 mm, by Whatman International Ltd., Maidstone, UK). At the fourth stage, the dust was collected on a Teflon filter for particles ≤ 1 μm in diameter (Pall Teflo R2PJ047, 47 mm in diameter, by Pall International Ltd., New York, NY, USA). The average volume of air passing through the filters was approximately 300 m3. The impactor’s capture efficiency was characterized by the uncertainty below 2.8%. The mass of dust collected at the individual stages of the impactor was determined by the gravimetric method, and it was referenced to the volume of passed air (left(mathrm{mu g}/{mathrm{m}}^{3}right)) according to the PN-EN1234122. All impactor samples were analysed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS).The samples were collected at a height of 1.5 m from the ground, i.e. in the breathing zone for people. The respective dust fractions were collected in 7-day cycles from 28 May to 24 September 2014 (16 weeks) in the surroundings of four working coal-fired power plants and from 4 May to 28 August 2015 (16 weeks) in the surroundings of four working coking plants. The measurement campaign comprised four measurement sessions separately for each sampling site. One session comprised dust sampling at each stage of the Dekati PM10 cascade impactor and filters used for reference. The filters were taken back after study period and labeled during the collection process in the field and stored in the plastic containers for safe transportation and storage in laboratory for further analysis.In each measurement session, blind filters were stored at the sampling site, but they were not subjected to exposure. The sample data were corrected from these blanks. The length of the measurement cycles was conditioned by the need to collect an appropriate amount of research material (with the aerodynamic diameter of the dust grains  10 μm). Analogous (7-day) periods of dust sampling were used in the studies by4,23.Polycarbonate and Teflon filters were conditioned before and after dust collection at a temperature of 20 ± 1 °C (relative humidity 50%(pm ) 5%) for 48 h, and then weighed on a microbalance with an accuracy of 1 (mathrm{mu g}) (MXA5/1, by RADWAG, Poland).Taking into account the measurement sessions at four sites in the surroundings of the power plant (P1 (div) P4) and at four sites in the surroundings of the coking plant (K1 (div) K4), the aggregate number of samples exceeded 450.Chemical analysisThe qualitative and quantitative analysis of the obtained solutions was performed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry using an ICP-MS instrument (NexION 300D, PerkinElmer, Inc., Waltham, MA, USA). For all elements determined simultaneously, the same parameters of the instrument were used, which are presented in the publications20,21,24.As standards for the determination of 75As, 111Cd, 59Co, 53Cr, 200Hg, 55Mn, 60Ni, 206Pb, 121Sb and 82Se, we applied the 1000 (mathrm{mu g}/{mathrm{cm}}^{3}) CertPUR ICP multi-element standard solution VI for ICP-MS by Merck, Germany. Ten repetitions were performed for all samples. The determined limits of detection (LOD) were based on 10 independent measurements for blank test. For the results obtained in that way, the mean value and the value of the standard deviation SD were calculated. The values of LOD for individual elements were determined on the basis of the dependence (1):$$mathrm{LOD}= {mathrm{x}}_{mathrm{sr}}+ 3mathrm{SD}$$
(1)

where: xśr—mean concentration value of the element, (mathrm{g}/{mathrm{dm}}^{3}), SD—standard deviation.The determination correctness of the content of the elements was verified with the use of certified reference materials: European Reference Material ERM-CZ120 and Standard Reference Material SRM 1648a (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA). The recovery with the use of the said certified reference materials was respectively as follows: As (111% for ERM-CZ120 and 96% for SRM 1648a), Cd (97% and 105%), Co (108% and 97%), Cr (103% and 94%), Mn (106% and 100%), Ni (107% and 102%), Pb (107% and 105%) and Sb (99% and 91%). The certified reference materials did not contain Hg or Se. More

1.Singh, M. & Bhatia, H. S. Thermal time requirement for phenophases of apple genotypes in Kullu valley. J. Agrometeorol. 13(1), 46–49 (2011).
Google Scholar 
2.Amgain, L. P. Agro-meteorological indices in relation to phenology and yields of promising wheat cultivars in Chitwan, Nepal. J. Agric. Environ. 14, 111–120 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A. & Khalid, A. Color-break effect on Kinnow (Citrus nobilis Lour x Citrus deliciosa Tenora) fruit‘s internal quality at early ripening stages under varying environmental conditions. Sci. Hortic. 256, 108514 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Singh, M. & Jangra, S. Thermal indices and heat use cultivars in Himachal Himalay. Clim. Change 4(14), 224–234 (2018).
Google Scholar 
5.Singh, M., Niwas, R., Godara, A. K. & Khichar, M. L. Pheno-thermal response of plum genotypes in semi-arid region of Haryana. J. Agrometeorol 17(2), 230–233 (2015).
Google Scholar 
6.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A. & Khalid, A. Impact of varying agrometeorological indices on peel color and composition of Kinnow fruit (Citrus nobilis Lour x Citrus deliciosa Tenora) grown at different ecological zones. J. Sci. Food Agric. 100(6), 2688–2704 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
7.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A., Khan, M. F. & Khalid, A. Environmental variables influence the developmental stages of the citrus leafminer, infestation level and mined leaves physiological response of Kinnow mandarin. Sci. Rep. 11(1), 1–20 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
8.Plett, S. Comparison of seasonal thermal indices for measurement of corn maturity in a prairie environment. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72(4), 1157–1162 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Dalal, R. P. S., Kumar, A. & Singh, R. Agrometeorological-heat and energy use of Kinnow Mandarin (Citrus nobilis Lour* Citrus deliciosa Tenore). Int. J. Pure App. Biosci 5(2), 506–512 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A. & Khalid, A. Impact of climate variables on growth and development of Kinnow fruit (Citrus nobilis Lour x Citrus deliciosa Tenora) grown at different ecological zones under climate change scenario. Sci. Hortic. 260, 108868 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A. & Khalid, A. Increasing level of abiotic and biotic stress on Kinnow fruit quality at different ecological zones in climate change scenario. Environ. Exp. Bot. 171, 103936 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A. & Khalid, A. Impact of climate variables on fruit internal quality of Kinnow mandarin (Citrus nobilis Lour x Citrus deliciosa Tenora) in ripening phase grown under varying environmental conditions. Sci. Hortic. 265, 109235 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Nawaz, R., Abbasi, N. A., Hafiz, I. A., Khalid, A. & Ahmad, T. Economic analysis of citrus (Kinnow Mandarin) during on-year and off-year in the Punjab Province. Pakistan. J Hortic 5(250), 2376–3354 (2018).
Google Scholar 
14.Khalid, M. S., Malik, A. U., Saleem, B. A., Khan, A. S. & Javed, N. Horticultural mineral oil application and tree canopy management improve cosmetic fruit quality of Kinnow mandarin. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 7(23), 3464–3472 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Nawaz, R. et al. Impact of climate change on kinnow fruit industry of Pakistan. Agrotechnology https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9881.1000186 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Mazhar, M. S., Malik, A. U., Jabbar, A., Malik, O. H. & Khan, M. N. Fruit blemishes caused by abiotic and biotic factors in Kinnow mandarin. Acta Hortic. 1120, 483–490 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Solomon. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contributions of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Cambridge University Press, 2007).18.Ullah, R., Shivakoti, G. P. & Ali, G. Factors effecting farmers’ risk attitude and risk perceptions: The case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. Disast. Risk Reduct. 13, 151–157 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Ward, N. L. & Masters, G. J. Linking climate change and species invasion: An illustration using insect herbivores. Glob. Change Biol. 13(8), 1605–1615 (2007).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Hellmann, J. J., Byers, J. E., Bierwagen, B. G. & Dukes, J. S. Five potential consequences of climate change for invasive species. Conserv. Biol. 22(3), 534–543 (2008).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
21.Bale, J. S. et al. Herbivory in global climate change research: Direct effects of rising temperature on insect herbivores. Glob. Change Biol. 8(1), 1–6 (2002).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Stocker, T.F. et al. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of IPCC the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014).23.Jones, G. V., White, M. A., Cooper, O. R. & Storchmann, K. Climate change and global wine quality. Clim. Change. 73, 319–343 (2005).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Webb, L., Whetton, P. & Barlow, E. W. R. Modeled impact of future climate change on phenology of wine grapes in Australia. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 13, 165–175 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Ferguson, J. J., Koch, K. E. & Huang, T. B. 240 Fruit removal effects on growth and carbon allocation in young citrus trees. HortScience 34(3), 483D – 483 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Zekri, M. Factors affecting citrus production and quality, Citrus Industry. ifas.ufl.edu (2011).27.Ladaniya, M. S. Physico−chemical, respiratory and fungicide residue changes in wax coated mandarin fruit stored at chilling temperature with intermittent warming. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48(2), 150–158 (2011).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Monselise, S. P. & Goldschmidt, E. E. Alternate bearing in fruit trees. Hort. Rev. (Am. Soc. Hort. Sci.) 4, 128–173 (1982).
Google Scholar 
29.Garcia-Luis, A., Fornes, F. & Guardiola, J. L. Leaf carbohydrates and flower formation in Citrus. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 120, 222–227 (1995).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Dalezios, N. R., Loukas, A. & Bampzelis, D. Assessment of NDVI and agrometeorological indices for major crops in central Greece. Phys. Chem. Earth,Parts A/B/C 27(23–24), 1025–1029 (2002).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Dalezios, N. R., Loukas, A. & Bampzelis, D. The role of agrometeorological and agrohydrological indices in the phenology of wheat in central Greece. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts A/B/C 27(23–24), 1019–1023 (2002).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Schmidt, D. et al. Base temperature, thermal time and phyllochron of escarole cultivation. Hortic. Bras. 36(4), 466–472 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Forland, E. J., Skaugen, T. E., Benestad, R. E., Hanssen-Bauer, I. & Tveito, O. E. Variations in thermal growing, heating, and freezing indices in the Nordic Arctic, 1900–2050. Arct. Antarct. Alp. Res. 36(3), 347–356 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Gavilan, R. G. The use of climatic parameters and indices in vegetation distribution. A case study in the Spanish Sistema Central. Int. J. Biometeorol. 50(2), 111–120 (2005).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Schwartz, M. D., Ahas, R. & Aasa, A. Onset of spring starting earlier across the Northern Hemisphere. Glob. Change Biol. 12(2), 343–351 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Kaleem, S., Hassan, F. & Saleem, A. Influence of environmental variations on physiological attributes of sunflower. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 8(15) (2009).37.Monselise, S. P., Brosh, P. & Costo, J. Off-season bloom in ‘Temple’ orange repressed by Gibberellin [Treatment]. HortScience (1981).38.Davies, F. S. & Albrigo, L. G. Citrus Crop Production Science in Agriculture (CAB International, 1994).
Google Scholar 
39.Wheaton, T. A. Alternate bearing of citrus. Proc. Int. Semin. Citric. 1, 224–228 (1992).
Google Scholar 
40.Flore, J. A. & Lakso, A. N. Environmental and physiological regulation of photosynthesis in fruit crops. Hortic. Rev. 11, 111–157 (1986).
Google Scholar 
41.Goldschmidt, E. E. Carbohydrate supply as a critical factor for citrus fruit development and productivity. Hort. Sci. 34, 1020–1024 (1999).
Google Scholar 
42.Stander, O. P. J. 2018. Critical factors concomitant to the physiological development of alternate bearing in citrus (Citrus spp.) (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University) (2018).43.Iglesias, D. J. et al. Physiology of citrus fruiting. Braz. J. Plant. Physiol. 19(4), 333–362 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Scholefield, P. B., Oag, D. R. & Sedgley, M. The relationship between vegetative and reproductive development in the mango in northern Australia. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 37(4), 425–433 (1986).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Goldschmidt, E. E. & Golomb, A. The carbohydrate balance of alternate-bearing citrus trees and the significance of reserves for flowering and fruiting. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 107, 206–208 (1982).
Google Scholar 
46.Hodgson, R. W. & Cameron, S. H. Studies on the bearing behavior of the “Fuerte” avocado variety. Calif. Avocado Soc. Yrbk. 1935, 150–165 (1935).
Google Scholar 
47.Seyyednejad, M., Ebrahimzadeh, H. & Talaie, A. Carbohydrate content in olive Zard cv and alternate bearing pattern. Int. Sugar J. 103(1226), 84–87 (2001).CAS 

Google Scholar 
48.Chacko, E. K., Reddy, Y. T. N. & Ananthanarayanan, T. V. Studies on the relationship between leaf number and area and fruit development in mango (Mangifera indica L). J. Hort. Sci. 57, 483–492 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Nishikawa, F., Iwasaki, M., Fukamachi, H. & Matsumoto, H. The effect of fruit bearing on low-molecular-weight metabolites in stems of Satsuma Mandarin (Citrus unshiu Marc.). Hortic. J. 85(1), 23–29 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Verreynne, J. S. & Lovatt, C. J. The effect of crop load on budbreak influences return bloom in alternate bearing ‘Pixie’mandarin. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 134(3), 299–307 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Dovis, V. L. et al. Roots are important sources of carbohydrates during flowering and fruiting in ‘Valencia’sweet orange trees with varying fruit load. Sci. Hortic. 174, 87–95 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Martínez-Alcántara, B. et al. Carbon utilization by fruit limits shoot growth in alternate-bearing citrus trees. J. Plant Physiol. 176, 108–117 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
53.Monerri, C. et al. Relation of carbohydrate reserves with the forthcoming crop, flower formation and photosynthetic rate, in the alternate bearing ‘Salustiana’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis L.). Sci. Hortic. 129(1), 71–78 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Khan, S. R. A. Citrus Quality to meet Global Demand. Pakissan.com. http://www.pakissan.com/english/agri.overview/citrus.quality.to.meet.global.demand (2008).55.Moss, G. I., Bellamy, J. & Bevington, K. B. Controlling biennial bearing. Austral. Citrus News 50, 6–7 (1974).
Google Scholar 
56.Davis, K., Stover, E. & Wirth, F. Economic of fruit thinning: A review focusing on apple and citrus Production and marketing reports. Hort. Technol. 14(2), 282–289 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Usman, M., Ashraf, I., Chaudhary, K. M. & Talib, U. Factors impeding citrus supply chain in central Punjab, Pakistan. Int. J. Agric. Ext. 6, 01–05 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Ghafoor, U., Muhammad, S. & Chaudhary, K. M. Constrains in availability of inputs and information to citrus (Kinnow) growers of tehsil Toba Tek Singh, Pakistan. J. Agric. Sci. 45(4), 520–522 (2008).
Google Scholar 
59.Choudhary, D., Singh, R., Dagar, C. S., Kumar, A. & Singh, S. Temperature based agrometeorological indices for Indian mustard under different growing environments in western Haryana, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 7(1), 1025–1035 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Hardy, S. & Khurshid, T. Calculating heat units for citrus. In Primefacts (NSW Department of Primary Industries, 2007).
Google Scholar 
61.Bootsma, A., Anderson, D. & Gameda, S. Potential impacts of climate change on agroclimatic indices in southern regions of Ontario and Quebec. Tech. Bull. ECORC Contrib. 03–284, 69–92 (2004).
Google Scholar 
62.Gordeev, A. V., Kleschenko, A. D., Chernyakov, B. A. & Sirotenko, O. D. Bioclimatic Potential of Russia: Theory and Practice (Tovarischestvo nauchnykh izdanyi KMK, 2006) ((in Russian)).
Google Scholar 
63.Karing, P., Kallis, A. & Tooming, H. Adaptation principles of agriculture to climate change. Climate Res. 12(2–3), 175–183 (1999).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Chen, C. S. Digital computer simulation of heat units and their use for predicting plant maturity. Int. J. Biometeorol. 17(4), 329–335 (1973).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Darby, H. M. & Lauer, J. G. Harvest date and hybrid influence on corn forage yield, quality, and preservation. Agron. J. 94(3), 559–566 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Cesaraccio, C., Spano, D., Duce, P. & Snyder, R. L. An improved model for determining degree-day values from daily temperature data. Int. J. Biometeorol. 45(4), 161–169 (2001).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
67.Fealy, R. & Fealy, R. M. The spatial variation in degree days derived from locational attributes for the 1961 to 1990 period. Ir. J. Agric. Food Res. 47, 1–11 (2008).
Google Scholar 
68.Dolkar, D. et al. Effect of meteorological parameters on plant growth and fruit quality of Kinnow mandarin. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 88(7), 1004–1012 (2018).
Google Scholar 
69.Ferree, D. C. & Warrington, I. J. (eds) Apples: Botany, Production, and Uses (CABI, 2003).
Google Scholar 
70.Moretti, C. L., Mattos, L. M., Calbo, A. G. & Sargent, S. A. Climate changes and potential impacts on postharvest quality of fruit and vegetable crops: A review. Food Res. Int. 43(7), 1824–1832 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Chelong, I. A. & Sdoodee, S. Pollen viability, pollen germination and pollen tube growth of shogun (Citrus reticulate Blanco) under climate variability in southern Thailand. J. Agric. Technol 8, 2297–2307 (2012).
Google Scholar 
72.García-Tejero, I. et al. Positive impact of regulated deficit irrigation on yield and fruit quality in a commercial citrus orchard [Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck, cv. salustiano]. Agric. Water Manag. 97(5), 614–622 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Zekri, M. & Rouse, R. E. Citrus Problems in the Home Landscape (University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service, 2002).
Google Scholar 
74.Barkhordarian, A., Saatchi, S. S., Behrangi, A., Loikith, P. C. & Mechoso, C. R. A recent systematic increase in vapor pressure deficit over tropical South America. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 1–12 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
75.Li, M., Yao, J., Guan, J. & Zheng, J. Observed changes in vapor pressure deficit suggest a systematic drying of the atmosphere in Xinjiang of China. Atmos. Res. 248, 105199 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
76.Carnicer, J., Barbeta, A., Sperlich, D., Coll, M. & Peñuelas, J. Contrasting trait syndromes in angiosperms and conifers are associated with different responses of tree growth to temperature on a large scale. Front. Plant Sci. 4, 409 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
77.Hatfield, J. L. & Prueger, J. H. Temperature extremes: Effect on plant growth and development. Weather Clim. Extrem. 10, 4–10 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Brodribb, T. J. & McAdam, S. A. Passive origins of stomatal control in vascular plants. Science 331(6017), 582–585 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
79.Mott, K. A. & Peak, D. Testing a vapour-phase model of stomatal responses to humidity. Plant Cell Environ. 36(5), 936–944 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
80.Allen, L. H. & Vu, J. C. Carbon dioxide and high temperature effects on growth of young orange trees in a humid, subtropical environment. Agric. For. Meteorol. 149(5), 820–830 (2009).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
81.Novick, K. A. et al. The increasing importance of atmospheric demand for ecosystem water and carbon fluxes. Nat. Clim. Change 6(11), 1023–1027 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
82.De Carcer, P. S., Signarbieux, C., Schlaepfer, R., Buttler, A. & Vollenweider, P. Responses of antinomic foliar traits to experimental climate forcing in beech and spruce saplings. Environ. Exp. Bot. 140, 128–140 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
83.Dai, A. Increasing drought under global warming in observations and models. Nat. Clim. Change 3(1), 52–58 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
84.Franks, P. J., Cowan, I. R. & Farquhar, G. D. The apparent feedforward response of stomata to air vapour pressure deficit: Information revealed by different experimental procedures with two rainforest trees. Plant Cell Environ. 20(1), 142–145 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
85.Grossiord, C. et al. Plant responses to rising vapor pressure deficit. New Phytol. 226(6), 1550–1566 (2020).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
86.do Carmo Araújo, S. A. et al. Photosynthetic characteristics of dwarf elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.) genotypes, under stress water. Acta Sci. Anim. Sci. 32(1), 1–7 (2010).
Google Scholar 
87.Shirke, P. A. & Pathre, U. V. Influence of leaf-to-air vapour pressure deficit (VPD) on the biochemistry and physiology of photosynthesis in Prosopis juliflora. J. Exp. Bot. 55(405), 2111–2120 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
88.Ribeiro, R. V., Machado, E. C., Santos, M. G. & Oliveira, R. F. Photosynthesis and water relations of well-watered orange plants as affected by winter and summer conditions. Photosynthetica 47(2), 215–222 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
89.Ribeiro, R. V., Machado, E. C., Santos, M. G. & Oliveira, R. F. Seasonal and diurnal changes in photosynthetic limitation of young sweet orange trees. Environ. Exp. Bot. 66(2), 203–211 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
90.Wong, S. C., Cowan, I. R. & Farquhar, G. D. Stomatal conductance correlates with photosynthetic capacity. Nature 282(5737), 424–426 (1979).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
91.Bevington, K. B. & Castle, W. S. Annual root growth pattern of young citrus trees in relation to shoot growth, soil temperature, and soil water content. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 110(6), 840–845 (1985).
Google Scholar 
92.Khurshid, T. & Hutton, R. J. Heat unit mapping a decision support system for selection and evaluation of citrus cultivars. In International Symposium on Harnessing the Potential of Horticulture in the Asian-Pacific Region 694, 265–269 (2004).93.Dalal, R. P. S. & Raj Singh, A. K. ,. Prevailing weather condition impact on different phenophases of Kinnow Mandarin (Citrus nobilis Lour* Citrus deliciosa Tenore). Int. J. Pure App. Biosci 5(2), 497–505 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
94.Koshita, Y. Effect of temperature on fruit color development. In Abiotic Stress Biology in Horticultural Plants 47–58 (Springer, 2015).
Google Scholar 
95.Sastry, P. S. N. & Chakravarty, N. V. K. Energy summation indices for wheat crop in India. Agric. Meteorol. 27, 45–48 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
96.Moriondo, M., Giannakopoulos, C. & Bindi, M. Climate change impact assessment: The role of climate extremes in crop yield simulation. Clim. Change 104(3), 679–701 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
97.Hilgeman, R. H., Dunlap, J. A. & Sharp, P. O. Effect of time of harvest of ‘Valencia’ oranges in Arizona on fruit grade and size and yield, the following year. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 90, 103–109. Fruit Load Limits Root Growth, Summer Vegetative Shoot Development, and Flowering in Alternatebearing ‘Nadorcott’ Mandarin Trees (1967).98.Dalal, R. P. S., Beniwal, B. S. & Sehrawat, S. K. Seasonal variation in growth, leaf physiology and fruit development in Kinnow, a Mandarin Hybrid. J. Plant Stud. 2(1), 72–77 (2013).
Google Scholar 
99.Bower, J. P. The Pre-and post -Harvest Application Potential for Crop- Set TM and ISR2000TM on Citrus. http://en.engormix.com/MAagriculture/articles/th-pre (2007).100.Sharma, N., Sharma, S. & Niwas, R. Thermal time and phenology of citrus in semi-arid conditions. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 6(5), 27–30 (2017).
Google Scholar 
101.Goldschmidt, E. E. & Koch, K. E. Citrus. In Photoassimilate Distribution in Plants and Crops: Source-Sink Relations (eds Zaminski, E. & Schaffer, A. A.) 797–823 (Marcel Dekker, 1996).
Google Scholar 
102.Munoz-Fambuena, N. et al. Fruit regulates seasonal expression of flowering genes in alternate-bearing ‘Moncada’ mandarin. Ann. Bot. 108, 511–519 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
103.Shalom, L. et al. Fruit load induces changes in global gene expression and in abscisic acid (ABA) and indole acetic acid (IAA) homeostasis in citrus buds. J. Exp. Bot. 65(12), 3029–3044 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
104.Smith, P. F. Collapse of ‘Murcott’ tangerine trees [Root starvation]. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 101, 23–25 (1976).CAS 

Google Scholar 
105.Koshita, Y., Takahara, T., Ogata, T. & Goto, A. Involvement of endogenous plant hormones (IAA, ABA, GAs) in leaves and flower bud formation of satsuma mandarin (Citrus unshiu Marc). Sci. Hortic. 79(3–4), 185–194 (1999).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
106.Whiley, A. W., Rasmussen, T. S. & Wolstenholme, B. N. Delayed harvest effects on yield, fruit size and starch cycling in avocado (Persea americana Mill.) in subtropical environments. I. the early-maturing cv. Fuerte. Sci. Hortic. 66(1–2), 23–34 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
107.Syvertsen, J. P. & Lloyd, J. J. Citrus. Handb. Environ. Physiol. Fruit Crops 2, 65–99 (1994).
Google Scholar 
108.Scholefield, P. B., Sedgley, M. & Alexander, D. M. Carbohydrate cycling in relation to shoot growth, floral initiation and development and yield in the avocado. Sci. Hortic. 25(2), 99–110 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
109.Shalom, L. et al. Alternate bearing in citrus: Changes in the expression of flowering control genes and in global gene expression in on-versus off-crop trees. PLoS ONE 7(10), e46930 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
110.der Merwe, V. & Schalk, I. Studies on the Phenology and Carbohydrate Status of Alternate Bearing ‘Nadorcott’mandarin trees (Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch: Stellenbosch University, 2012).111.Ward, D. L. Factors affecting Pre-harvest Fruit Drop of Apple. Ph.D thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 143 (2004).112.Blanusa, T., Else, M. A., Davies, W. J. & Atkinson, C. J. Regulation of sweet cherry fruit abscission: The role of photo-assimilation, sugars and abscisic acid. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 81(4), 613–620 (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
113.Nartvaranant, P., Sornsanid, K. & Nuanpraluk, S. Preharvest Fruit Drop and Seasonal Variation of Plant Nutrient in ‘Thongdee’and ‘Khao Nam Pleung’pummelo on Nakhon Chaisri-Mae Klong river basin regions. Research Project Report (Thailand Research Fund, 2010).
Google Scholar 
114.Ruiz, R., Garcıa-Luis, A., Monerri, C. & Guardiola, J. L. Carbohydrate availability in relation to fruitlet abscission in Citrus. Ann. Bot. 87(6), 805–812 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
115.Atkinson, C. J. The effects of phloem girdling on the abscission of Prunus avium L. fruits. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 77(1), 22–27 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
116.Spiegel-Roy, P. & Goldschmidt, E. E. The Biology of Citrus (Cambridge University Press, 1996).Book 

Google Scholar 
117.Thind, S. K. & Kumar, K. Integrated management of fruit drop in Kinnow mandarin. Indian J Hort 65(4), 497–499 (2008).
Google Scholar 
118.Kumar, A., Avasthe, R. K., Pandey, B., Lepcha, B. & Rahman, H. Effect of fruit size and orchard location on fruit quality and seed traits of mandarin (Citrus reticulata) in Sikkim Himalayas. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 81(9), 821 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
119.Ashraf, M. Y., Gul, A., Ashraf, M., Hussain, F. & Ebert, G. Improvement in yield and quality of Kinnow (Citrus deliciosa × Citrus nobilis) by potassium fertilization. J. Plant Nutr. 33, 1625–1637 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
120.Ibrahim, M., Ahmad, N., Anwar, S. A. & Majeed, T. Effect of micronutrients on citrus fruit yield growing on calcareous soils. In Advances in Plant and Animal Boron Nutrition 179–182 (2007).121.Razi, M. F. D., Khan, I. A. & Jaskani, M. J. Citrus plant nutritional profile in relation to Huanglongbing prevalence in Pakistan. Pak. J. Agri. Sci. 48, 299–304 (2011).
Google Scholar 
122.Valiente, J. I. & Albrigo, L. G. Flower bud induction of sweet orange trees [Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck]: Effect of low temperatures, crop load, and bud age. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 129(2), 158–164 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
123.Yakushiji, H. et al. Sugar accumulation enhanced by osmoregulation in satsuma mandarin fruit. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 121, 466–472 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
124.Holland, N., Menezes, H. C. & Lafuente, M. T. Carbohydrates as related to the heat induced chilling tolerance and respiratory rate of ‘Fortune’ mandarin fruit harvested at different maturity stages. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 25, 181–191 (2002).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
125.Chelong, I. A. & Sdoodee, S. Effect of climate variability and degree-day on development, yield and quality of shogun (Citrus reticulata Blanco) in Southern Thailand. J. Nat. Sci. 47, 333–341 (2013).
Google Scholar 
126.Khalid, M. S. et al. Geographical location and agro-ecological conditions influence kinnow mandarin (Citrus nobilis × Citrus deliciosa) fruit quality. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 20, 647–654 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
127.Guardiola, J. L. & García-Luis, A. Increasing fruit size in Citrus. Thinning and stimulation of fruit growth. Plant Growth Regul. 31(1–2), 121–132 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
128.Hield, H. Z. & Hilgeman, R. H. Alternate bearing and chemical fruit thinning of certain citrus varieties. Proc. Intl. Citrus Symp. 3, 1145–1153 (1969).
Google Scholar 
129.Verreynne, J. S. The Mechanism and Underlying Physiology Perpetuating Alternate Bearing in ‘Pixie’mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco) (University of California, 2005).
Google Scholar 
130.Sanginés de Cárcer, P. et al. Vapor–pressure deficit and extreme climatic variables limit tree growth. Glob. Change Biol. 24(3), 1108–1122 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Milligan, R. J., Spence, G., Roberts, J. M. & Bailey, D. M. Fish communities associated with cold-water corals vary with depth and substratum type. Deep Sea Res. Part I Oceanogr. Res. Pap. 114, 43–54 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Anderson, T. J., Syms, C., Roberts, D. A. & Howard, D. F. Multi-scale fish-habitat associations and the use of habitat surrogates to predict the organisation and abundance of deep-water fish assemblages. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 379, 34–42 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Agardy, T., di Sciara, G. N. & Christie, P. Mind the gap: Addressing the shortcomings of marine protected areas through large scale marine spatial planning. Mar. Policy 35, 226–232 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Hinderstein, L. M. et al. Mesophotic coral ecosystems: Characterization, ecology, and management. Coral Reefs 29, 247–251 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Baldwin, C. C., Tornabene, L. & Robertson, D. R. Below the mesophotic. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–13 (2018).
Google Scholar 
6.Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Poloczanska, E. S., Skirving, W. & Dove, S. Coral reef ecosystems under climate change and ocean acidification. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 158 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Rocha, L. A. et al. Mesophotic coral ecosystems are threatened and ecologically distinct from shallow water reefs. Science 361(6399), 281–284 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Cerrano, C. et al. Temperate mesophotic ecosystems: gaps and perspectives of an emerging conservation challenge for the Mediterranean Sea. Eur. Zool. J. 86, 370–388 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Williams, J., Jordan, A., Harasti, D., Davies, P. & Ingleton, T. Taking a deeper look: Quantifying the differences in fish assemblages between shallow and mesophotic temperate rocky reefs. PLoS ONE 14, e0206778 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Lesser, M. P., Slattery, M. & Leichter, J. J. Ecology of mesophotic coral reefs. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 375, 1–8 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Armstrong, R. A., Pizarro, O. & Roman, C. Underwater robotic technology for imaging mesophotic coral ecosystems. in Mesophotic Coral Ecosystems. 973–988. (Springer, 2019).12.Stoner, A. W., Ryer, C. H., Parker, S. J., Auster, P. J. & Wakefield, W. W. Evaluating the role of fish behavior in surveys conducted with underwater vehicles. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 65, 1230–1243 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Durden, J. M. et al. Perspectives in visual imaging for marine biology and ecology: From acquisition to understanding. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev. 54, 1–72 (2016).
Google Scholar 
14.Stevens, T. & Connolly, R. M. Local-scale mapping of benthic habitats to assess representation in a marine protected area. Mar. Freshw. Res. 56, 111–123 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Bernard, A. T. et al. New possibilities for research on reef fish across the continental shelf of South Africa. S. Afr. J. Sci. 110, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1590/sajs.2014/a0079 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Rees, S. E., Foster, N. L., Langmead, O., Pittman, S. & Johnson, D. E. Defining the qualitative elements of Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 with regard to the marine and coastal environment in order to strengthen global efforts for marine biodiversity conservation outlined in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14. Mar. Policy 93, 241–250 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
17.South African National Biodiversity Institute. South Africa Announces New Marine Protected Area Network. https://www.sanbi.org/media/south-africa-announces-new-marine-protected-area-network/. (2018).18.der Bank, V., Harris, L., Atkinson, L., Kirkman, S., & Karenyi, N. Marine Realm in South African National Biodiversity Assessment 2018 Technical Report. Vol. 4 (South African National Biodiversity Institute, 2019).19.Sink, K. The marine protected areas debate: Implications for the proposed Phakisa marine protected areas network. S. Afr. J. Sci. 112, 9–10 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Turpie, J. K., Beckley, L. E. & Katua, S. M. Biogeography and the selection of priority areas for conservation of South African coastal fishes. Biol. Conserv. 92, 59–72 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Götz, A. & Phillips, M. SAEON Elwandle Applies Expertise to Marine Protected Area Management in Amathole. http://www.saeon.ac.za/enewsletter/archives/2016/august2016/doc03 (2019).22.DEA (Department of Environmental Affairs). Notice Declaring the Amathole Offshore Marine Protected Area Under Section 22A of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No.57 of 2003). Government Gazette, Republic of South Africa (2016).23.Green, A. N. et al. Relict and contemporary influences on the postglacial geomorphology and evolution of a current swept shelf: The Eastern Cape Coast, South Africa. Mar. Geol. 427, 106230 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Parker, D., Winker, H., Attwood, C. & Kerwath, S. Dark times for dageraad Chrysoblephus cristiceps: Evidence for stock collapse. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 38, 341–349. https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2016.1200142 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Kerwath, S. et al. Tracking the decline of the world’s largest seabream against policy adjustments. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 610, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12853 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.African Coelacanth Ecosystem Programme Project. African Coelacanth Ecosystem Programme Project Overviews 2017/2018. (2018).27.Donovan, B. A Retrospective Assessment of the Port Alfred Linefishery with Respect to the Changes in the South African Fisheries Management Environment (Rhodes University, 2010).
Google Scholar 
28.International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN Global Species Programme Red List Unit, 2017).
Google Scholar 
29.Götz, A., Kerwath, S. E., Attwood, C. G. & Sauer, W. H. H. Effects of fishing on population structure and life history of roman Chrysoblephus laticeps (Sparidae). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 362, 245–259 (2008).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.McCord, M. & Zweig, T. Fisheries: Facts and Trends. http://awsassets.wwf.org.za/downloads/wwf_a4_fish_facts_report_lr.pdf (2011).31.Southern African Marine Linefish Species Profiles (South African Association for Marine Biological Research, 2013).32.Smith, J. L. B. Smiths’ Sea Fishes. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-82858-4 (Springer, 1986).33.Compagno, L. J. V., Ebert, D. A. & Smale, M. J. Guide to the Sharks and Rays of Southern Africa (Struik, 1989).
Google Scholar 
34.Peres, M. B. & Klippel, S. Reproductive biology of Southwestern Atlantic wreckfish, Polyprion americanus (Teleostei: Polyprionidae). Environ. Biol. Fish. 68, 163–173 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Baillon, S., Hamel, J.-F., Wareham, V. E. & Mercier, A. Deep cold-water corals as nurseries for fish larvae. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10, 351–356 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Sink, K. J., Boshoff, W., Samaai, T., Timm, P. G. & Kerwath, S. E. Observations of the habitats and biodiversity of the submarine canyons at Sodwana Bay: Coelacanth research. S. Afr. J. Sci. 102, 466–474 (2006).
Google Scholar 
37.Heemstra, P. C. & Heemstra, E. Coastal Fishes of Southern Africa (National Inquiry Services Centre, 2004).
Google Scholar 
38.Epstein, H. E. & Kingsford, M. J. Are soft coral habitats unfavourable? A closer look at the association between reef fishes and their habitat. Environ. Biol. Fish. 102, 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-019-0845-4 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Booth, A. J. & Buxton, C. D. The biology of the panga, Pterogymnus laniarius (Teleostei: Sparidae), on the Agulhas Bank, South Africa. Environ. Biol. Fish. 49, 207–226 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Turner, J. A., Babcock, R. C., Hovey, R. & Kendrick, G. A. Deep thinking: A systematic review of mesophotic coral ecosystems. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 74, 2309–2320. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsx085 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Heyns, E., Bernard, A. T., Richoux, N. & Götz, A. Depth-related distribution patterns of subtidal macrobenthos in a well-established marine protected area. Mar. Biol. 163, 39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-016-2816-z (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Bridge, T. C. L. et al. Topography, substratum and benthic macrofaunal relationships on a tropical mesophotic shelf margin, central Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Coral Reefs 30, 143–153 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Doty, M. S. & Oguri, M. The Island mass effect. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 22, 33–37 (1956).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Fabricius, K. E., Logan, M., Weeks, S. & Brodie, J. The effects of river run-off on water clarity across the central Great Barrier Reef. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 84, 191–200 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Foster, M. S. Rhodoliths: Between rocks and soft places. J. Phycol. 37, 659–667 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Littler, M. M., Littler, D. S. & Dennis Hanisak, M. Deep-water rhodolith distribution, productivity, and growth history at sites of formation and subsequent degradation. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 150, 163–182 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Tait, R. V. & Dipper, F. Elements of marine ecology (Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998).
Google Scholar 
48.Williams, A. & Bax, N. J. Delineating fish-habitat associations for spatially based management: An example from the south-eastern Australian continental shelf. Mar. Freshw. Res. 52, 513 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Pearson, R. & Stevens, T. Distinct cross-shelf gradient in mesophotic reef fish assemblages in subtropical eastern Australia. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 532, 185–196 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.MacDonald, C., Bridge, T. & Jones, G. Depth, bay position and habitat structure as determinants of coral reef fish distributions: Are deep reefs a potential refuge?. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 561, 217–231 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Fukunaga, A., Kosaki, R. K. & Wagner, D. Changes in mesophotic reef fish assemblages along depth and geographical gradients in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Coral Reefs 36, 785–790 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Sih, T. L., Cappo, M. & Kingsford, M. Deep-reef fish assemblages of the Great Barrier Reef shelf-break (Australia). Sci. Rep. 7, 10886 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
53.Colwell, R. K. & Lees, D. C. The mid-domain effect: Geometric constraints on the geography of species richness. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 70–76 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Colwell, R. K., Rahbek, C. & Gotelli, N. J. The mid-domain effect and species richness patterns: What have we learned so far?. Am. Nat. 163, E1-23 (2004).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Makwela, M. S. et al. Notes on a remotely operated vehicle survey to describe reef ichthyofauna and habitats—Agulhas Bank, South Africa. Bothalia 46, 1–7 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Quantum GIS Development Team. Quantum GIS Geographic Information System. (2002).57.Kleczkowski, M., Babcock, R. C. & Clapin, G. Density and size of reef fishes in and around a temperate marine reserve. Mar. Freshw. Res. 59, 165 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Althaus, F. et al. A standardised vocabulary for identifying benthic biota and substrata from underwater imagery: The CATAMI classification scheme. PLoS ONE 10, e0141039 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020).60.Charrad, M., Ghazzali, N., Boiteau, V. & Maintainer, A. N. NbClust: An R package for determining the relevant number of clusters in a data set. J. Stat. Softw. 61, 1 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Liaw, A. & Wiener, M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R. News 2, 18–22 (2002).
Google Scholar 
62.De’ath, G. Multivariate regression trees: A new technique for modeling species-environment relationships. Ecology 83, 1105 (2002).
Google Scholar 
63.Zuur, A. F. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R (Springer, 2009).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar 
64.South African National Biodiversity Institute. https://www.sanbi.org/. (2021). More

1.Mauchamp, L., Mouly, A., Badot, P.-M. & Gillet, F. Impact of nitrogen inputs on multiple facets of plant biodiversity in mountain grasslands: Does nutrient source matter?. Appl. Veg. Sci. 19, 206–217 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Mesbahi, G., Michelot-Antalik, A., Goulnik, J. & Plantureux, S. Permanent grassland classifications predict agronomic and environmental characteristics well, but not ecological characteristics. Ecol. Indic. 110, 105956 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Karimi, B. et al. Biogeography of soil microbial habitats across France. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1399–1411 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Mahaut, L., Fort, F., Violle, C. & Freschet, G. T. Multiple facets of diversity effects on plant productivity: Species richness, functional diversity, species identity and intraspecific competition. Funct. Ecol. 34, 287–298 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Tilman, D. The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: A search for general principles. Ecology 80, 1455–1474 (1999).
Google Scholar 
6.van der Heijden, M. G. A., Bardgett, R. D. & van Straalen, N. M. The unseen majority: Soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 11, 296–310 (2008).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
7.Tardy, V. et al. Stability of soil microbial structure and activity depends on microbial diversity: Linking microbial diversity and stability. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 6, 173–183 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
8.Philippot, L. et al. Loss in microbial diversity affects nitrogen cycling in soil. ISME J. 7, 1609–1619 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Fierer, N., Barberan, A. & Laughlin, D. C. Seeing the forest for the genes: Using metagenomics to infer the aggregated traits of microbial communities. Front. Microbiol. 5, 614 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Loreau, M. Linking biodiversity and ecosystems: Towards a unifying ecological theory. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 49–60 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Buchin, S., Martin, B., Dupont, D., Bornard, A. & Achilleos, C. Influence of the composition of Alpine highland pasture on the chemical, rheological and sensory properties of cheese. J. Dairy Res. 66, 579–588 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
12.Bugaud, C., Buchin, S., Hauwy, A. & Coulon, J.-B. Flavour and texture of cheeses according to grazing type: The Abundance cheese. INRA Prod. Anim. 15, 31–36 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Monnet, J. C., Berodier, F. & Badot, P. M. Characterization and localization of a cheese georegion using edaphic criteria (Jura Mountains, France). J. Dairy Sci. 83, 1692–1704 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
14.Mariotte, P., Vandenberghe, C., Kardol, P., Hagedorn, F. & Buttler, A. Subordinate plant species enhance community resistance against drought in semi-natural grasslands. J. Ecol. 101, 763–773 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Montel, M.-C. et al. Traditional cheeses: Rich and diverse microbiota with associated benefits. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 177, 136–154 (2014).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
16.Bouton, Y., Guyot, P., Berthier, F., & Beuvier, E. Investigation of bacterial community development from raw milk and starter to curd and mature Comte cheese. in Cheese ripening and technology: abstracts of IDF symposium held in Banff, Canada, March 2000 (ed. International Dairy Federation) 85 (Brussel, Belgium, 2000).17.Demarigny, Y., Beuvier, E., Buchin, S., Pochet, S. & Grappin, R. Influence of raw milk microflora on the characteristics of Swiss-type cheese. Lait 77, 151–167 (1997).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Bouton, Y., Buchin, S., Duboz, G., Pochet, S. & Beuvier, E. Effect of mesophilic lactobacilli and enterococci adjunct cultures on the final characteristics of a microfiltered milk Swiss-type cheese. Food Microbiol. 26, 183–191 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
19.Vacheyrou, M. et al. Cultivable microbial communities in raw cow milk and potential transfers from stables of sixteen French farms. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 146, 253–262 (2011).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
20.Verdier-Metz, I. et al. Cow teat skin, a potential source of diverse microbial populations for cheese production. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 78, 326–333 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Doyle, C. J., Gleeson, D., O’Toole, P. W. & Cotter, P. D. Impacts of seasonal housing and teat preparation on raw milk microbiota: A high-throughput sequencing study. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 83(e02694–16), e02694-e2716 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
22.Frétin, M. et al. Bacterial community assembly from cow teat skin to ripened cheeses is influenced by grazing systems. Sci. Rep. 8, 200 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
23.Falentin, H. et al. Bovine teat microbiome analysis revealed reduced alpha diversity and significant changes in taxonomic profiles in quarters with a history of mastitis. Front. Microbiol. 7, 480 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Fierer, N. Embracing the unknown: disentangling the complexities of the soil microbiome. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 15, 579–590 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
25.Vorholt, J. A. Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10, 828–840 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
26.Dequiedt, S. et al. Biogeographical patterns of soil bacterial communities. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 1, 251–255 (2009).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
27.Sadet-Bourgeteau, S. et al. Lasting effect of repeated application of organic waste products on microbial communities in arable soils. Appl. Soil Ecol. 125, 278–287 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Nacke, H. et al. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of bacterial community structure along different management types in german forest and grassland soils. PLoS ONE 6, e17000 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Coolon, J. D., Jones, K. L., Todd, T. C., Blair, J. M. & Herman, M. A. Long-term nitrogen amendment alters the diversity and assemblage of soil bacterial communities in Tallgrass Prairie. PLoS ONE 8, e67884 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Toyota, K. & Kuninaga, S. Comparison of soil microbial community between soils amended with or without farmyard manure. Appl. Soil Ecol. 33, 39–48 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Garnier, E. & Navas, M.-L. A trait-based approach to comparative functional plant ecology: Concepts, methods and applications for agroecology: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 32, 365–399 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Mauchamp, L., Mouly, A., Badot, P.-M. & Gillet, F. Impact of management type and intensity on multiple facets of grassland biodiversity in the French Jura Mountains. Appl. Veg. Sci. 17, 645–657 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Chytrý, M. et al. European map of alien plant invasions based on the quantitative assessment across habitats. Divers. Distrib. 15, 98–107 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Klaudisová, M., Hejcman, M. & Pavlů, V. Long-term residual effect of short-term fertilizer application on Ca, N and P concentrations in grasses Nardus stricta L. and Avenella flexuosa L. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 85, 187–193 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
35.Terrat, S. et al. Mapping and predictive variations of soil bacterial richness across France. PLoS ONE 12, e0186766 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Terrat, S. et al. Improving soil bacterial taxa–area relationships assessment using DNA meta-barcoding. Heredity 114, 468–475 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Navrátilová, D. et al. Diversity of fungi and bacteria in species-rich grasslands increases with plant diversity in shoots but not in roots and soil. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiy208 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Zhang, Q. et al. Niche differentiation in the composition, predicted function, and co-occurrence networks in bacterial communities associated with antarctic vascular plants. Front. Microbiol. 11, 1036 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Falardeau, J., Keeney, K., Trmčić, A., Kitts, D. & Wang, S. Farm-to-fork profiling of bacterial communities associated with an artisan cheese production facility. Food Microbiol. 83, 48–58 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Plassart, P. et al. Soil parameters, land use, and geographical distance drive soil bacterial communities along a European transect. Sci. Rep. 9, 605 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
41.Rastogi, G., Coaker, G. L. & Leveau, J. H. J. New insights into the structure and function of phyllosphere microbiota through high-throughput molecular approaches. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 348, 1–10 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
42.Andrews, T., Neher, D. A., Weicht, T. R. & Barlow, J. W. Mammary microbiome of lactating organic dairy cows varies by time, tissue site, and infection status. PLoS ONE 14, e0225001 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Karimi, B. et al. Biogeography of soil bacteria and archaea across France. Sci. Adv. 4, 1808 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Lewin, G. R. et al. Evolution and ecology of Actinobacteria and their bioenergy applications. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 70, 235–254 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Li, N. et al. Variation in raw milk microbiota throughout 12 months and the impact of weather conditions. Sci. Rep. 8, 2371 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
46.Lavoie, K., Touchette, M., St-Gelais, D. & Labrie, S. Characterization of the fungal microflora in raw milk and specialty cheeses of the province of Quebec. Dairy Sci. Technol. 92, 455–468 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
47.Verdier-Metz, I. & Monsallier, F. Place des pâturages des bovins dans les flux microbiens laitiers. Fourrages 6, 1–10 (2012).
Google Scholar 
48.Laforest-Lapointe, I., Paquette, A., Messier, C. & Kembel, S. W. Leaf bacterial diversity mediates plant diversity and ecosystem function relationships. Nature 546, 145–147 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
49.Fierer, N. & Jackson, R. B. The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 626–631 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Mallet, A. et al. Quantitative and qualitative microbial analysis of raw milk reveals substantial diversity influenced by herd management practices. Int. Dairy J. 27, 13–21 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Kottek, M., Grieser, J., Beck, C., Rudolf, B. & Rubel, F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Metz 15, 259–263 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Beck, H. E. et al. Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution. Sci. Data 5, 180214 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.QGIS.org. QGIS Geographic Information System. QGIS Association. http://www.qgis.org (2021).54.Homburger, H. & Hofer, G. Diversity change of mountain hay meadows in the Swiss Alps. Basic Appl. Ecol. 13, 132–138 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Gillet, F., Mauchamp, L., Badot, P.-M. & Mouly, A. Recent changes in mountain grasslands: a vegetation resampling study. Ecol. Evol. 6, 2333–2345 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Maabel, E. Transformation of cover-abundance values in phytosociology and its effects on community similarity. Vegetatio 39, 97–114 (1979).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Jost, L. The relation between evenness and diversity. Diversity 26, 207–230 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.ChemidlinPrévost-Bouré, N. et al. Validation and application of a PCR primer set to quantify fungal communities in the soil environment by real-time quantitative PCR. PLoS ONE 6, e24166 (2011).ADS 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Djemiel, C. et al. BIOCOM-PIPE: A new user-friendly metabarcoding pipeline for the characterization of microbial diversity from 16S, 18S and 23S rRNA gene amplicons. BMC Bioinform. 21, 492. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-03829-3 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Cole, J. R. et al. The ribosomal database project: Improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, D141–D145 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
61.Bardou, P., Mariette, J., Escudié, F., Djemiel, C. & Klopp, C. jvenn: An interactive Venn diagram viewer. BMC Bioinform. 15, 293 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5–7. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (2020).63.Segata, N. et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 12, R60 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Asnicar, F., Weingart, G., Tickle, T. L., Huttenhower, C. & Segata, N. Compact graphical representation of phylogenetic data and metadata with GraPhlAn. PeerJ 3, e1029. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1029 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
65.Yekutieli, D. & Benjamini, Y. The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Ann. Statist. 29, 1165–1188 (2001).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
66.Gysi, D. M., Voigt, A., Fragoso, T. M., Almaas, E. & Nowick, K. wTO: an R package for computing weighted topological overlap and a consensus network with integrated visualization tool. BMC Bioinform. 19, 392 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Kursa, M. B. & Rudnicki, W. R. Feature Selection with the Boruta Package. J. Stat. Soft. 36, 11 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Falconer, D. S. & Mackay, T. F. C. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 4th edn (Longman, 1996).2.Xiong, W. et al. Nat. Plants https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-021-00988-w (2021).3.Tadesse, W. et al. Crop Breed Genet Genom. 1, e190005 (2019).
Google Scholar 
4.Li, X., Guo, T., Mu, Q., Li, X. & Yu, J. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 6679–6684 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Anderson, D. R. Model Based Inference in the Life Sciences (Springer, 2008).6.Zhao, Y. et al. Sci. Adv. 7, eabf9106 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Shi, L., Li, B., Kim, C., Kellnhofer, P. & Matusik, W. Nature 591, 234–239 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Li, J. et al. Mol. Ecol. 28, 3544–3560 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.CGIAR. One CGIAR, https://www.cgiar.org/food-security-impact/one-cgiar/ More

1.Campbell, J. E. et al. Large historical growth in global terrestrial gross primary production. Nature 544, 84–87 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
2.Schwalm, C. R. et al. Modeling suggests fossil fuel emissions have been driving increased land carbon uptake since the turn of the 20th Century. Sci. Rep. 10, 9059 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Wenzel, S., Cox, P. M., Eyring, V. & Friedlingstein, P. Projected land photosynthesis constrained by changes in the seasonal cycle of atmospheric CO2. Nature 538, 499–501 (2016).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
4.Piao, S. et al. Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 14–27 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Ellsworth, D. S. et al. Elevated CO2 does not increase eucalypt forest productivity on a low-phosphorus soil. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 279–282 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Hararuk, O., Campbell, E. M., Antos, J. A. & Parish, R. Tree rings provide no evidence of a CO2 fertilization effect in old-growth subalpine forests of western Canada. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 1222–1234 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Jiang, M. et al. The fate of carbon in a mature forest under carbon dioxide enrichment. Nature 580, 227–231 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
8.Friedlingstein, P. et al. Uncertainties in CMIP5 climate projections due to carbon cycle feedbacks. J. Clim. 27, 511–526 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Koven, C. D. et al. Controls on terrestrial carbon feedbacks by productivity versus turnover in the CMIP5 earth system models. Biogeosciences 12, 5211–5228 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Norby, R. J. & Zak, D. R. Ecological lessons from free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE) experiments. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 42, 181–203 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Sigurdsson, B. D., Medhurst, J. L., Wallin, G., Eggertsson, O. & Linder, S. Growth of mature boreal Norway spruce was not affected by elevated [CO2] and/or air temperature unless nutrient availability was improved. Tree Physiol. 33, 1192–1205 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
12.Walker, A. P. et al. Integrating the evidence for a terrestrial carbon sink caused by increasing atmospheric CO2. N. Phytol. 229, 2413–2445 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Gedalof, Z. & Berg, A. A. Tree ring evidence for limited direct CO2 fertilization of forests over the 20th century. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 24, (2010).14.van der Sleen, P. et al. No growth stimulation of tropical trees by 150 years of CO2 fertilization but water-use efficiency increased. Nat. Geosci. 8, 24–28 (2015).ADS 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Girardin, M. P. et al. No growth stimulation of Canada’s boreal forest under half-century of combined warming and CO2 fertilization. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E8406–E8414 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Giguère-Croteau, C. et al. North America’s oldest boreal trees are more efficient water users due to increased [CO2], but do not grow faster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 2749–2754 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
17.Walker, A. P. et al. Decadal biomass increment in early secondary succession woody ecosystems is increased by CO2 enrichment. Nat. Commun. 10, 454 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Du, E. et al. Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation. Nat. Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0530-4 (2020).19.Schimel, J. P. & Bennett, J. Nitrogen mineralization: challenges of a changing paradigm. Ecology 85, 591–602 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Vitousek, P. M. & Howarth, R. W. Nitrogen limitation on land and in the sea: how can it occur? Biogeochemistry 13, 87–115 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Näsholm, T., Kielland, K. & Ganeteg, U. Uptake of organic nitrogen by plants. N. Phytol. 182, 31–48 (2009).Article 
CAS 

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

Google Scholar 
24.Terrer, C., Vicca, S., Hungate, B. A., Phillips, R. P. & Prentice, I. C. Mycorrhizal association as a primary control of the CO2 fertilization effect. Science 353, 72–74 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
25.Terrer, C. et al. Ecosystem responses to elevated CO2 governed by plant–soil interactions and the cost of nitrogen acquisition. N. Phytol. 217, 507–522 (2018).CAS 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
27.Terrer, C. et al. A trade-off between plant and soil carbon storage under elevated CO2. Nature 591, 599–603 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
29.Smith, S. E. & Read, D. J. Mycorrhizal symbiosis. (Academic Press, 2010).30.Pellitier, P. T. & Zak, D. R. Ectomycorrhizal fungi and the enzymatic liberation of nitrogen from soil organic matter: why evolutionary history matters. N. Phytol. 217, 68–73 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Phillips, R. P. et al. Roots and fungi accelerate carbon and nitrogen cycling in forests exposed to elevated CO2. Ecol. Lett. 15, 1042–1049 (2012).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
32.Terrer, C. et al. Nitrogen and phosphorus constrain the CO2 fertilization of global plant biomass. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 684–689 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Christian, N. & Bever, J. D. Carbon allocation and competition maintain variation in plant root mutualisms. Ecol. Evol. 8, 5792–5800 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Hortal, S. et al. Role of plant–fungal nutrient trading and host control in determining the competitive success of ectomycorrhizal fungi. ISME J. 11, 2666–2676 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Bogar, L. et al. Plant-mediated partner discrimination in ectomycorrhizal mutualisms. Mycorrhiza 29, 97–111 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
36.Bödeker, I. T. M., Nygren, C. M. R., Taylor, A. F. S., Olson, Å. & Lindahl, B. D. ClassII peroxidase-encoding genes are present in a phylogenetically wide range of ectomycorrhizal fungi. ISME J. 3, 1387–1395 (2009).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Hobbie, E. A. & Agerer, R. Nitrogen isotopes in ectomycorrhizal sporocarps correspond to belowground exploration types. Plant Soil 327, 71–83 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Koide, R. T., Fernandez, C. & Malcolm, G. Determining place and process: functional traits of ectomycorrhizal fungi that affect both community structure and ecosystem function. N. Phytol. 201, 433–439 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Lindahl, B. D. et al. A group of ectomycorrhizal fungi restricts organic matter accumulation in boreal forest. Ecol. Lett. 24, 1341–1351 (2021).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
40.van der Linde, S. et al. Environment and host as large-scale controls of ectomycorrhizal fungi. Nature 558, 243–248 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
42.Bödeker, I. T. M. et al. Ectomycorrhizal Cortinarius species participate in enzymatic oxidation of humus in northern forest ecosystems. N. Phytol. 203, 245–256 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
43.Bogar, L. & Peay, K. Processes maintaining the coexistence of ectomycorrhizal fungi at a fine spatial scale. in Biogeography of Mycorrhizal Symbiosis (ed. Tedersoo, L.) vol. 230 79–105 (Springer, 2017).44.Xu, K. et al. Tree-ring widths are good proxies of annual variation in forest productivity in temperate forests. Sci. Rep. 7, 1945 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
45.Nehrbass‐Ahles, C. et al. The influence of sampling design on tree-ring-based quantification of forest growth. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 2867–2885 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Mathias, J. M. & Thomas, R. B. Disentangling the effects of acidic air pollution, atmospheric CO2, and climate change on recent growth of red spruce trees in the Central Appalachian Mountains. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 3938–3953 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Fierer, N., Barberán, A. & Laughlin, D. C. Seeing the forest for the genes: using metagenomics to infer the aggregated traits of microbial communities. Front. Microbiol. 5, 614 (2014).48.Zak, D. R. & Pregitzer, K. S. Spatial and temporal variability of nitrogen cycling in northern lower Michigan. Science 36, 367–380 (1990).
Google Scholar 
49.Zak, D. R., Pregitzer, K. S. & Host, G. E. Landscape variation in nitrogen mineralization and nitrification. Can. J. Res. 16, 1258–1263 (1986).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Chen, J. & Gupta, A. K. Parametric Statistical Change Point Analysis: With Applications to Genetics, Medicine, and Finance. (Springer Science & Business Media, 2011).51.Thomas, R. Q., Canham, C. D., Weathers, K. C. & Goodale, C. L. Increased tree carbon storage in response to nitrogen deposition in the US. Nat. Geosci. 3, 13–17 (2010).ADS 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
52.Pellitier, P. T., Zak, D. R., Argiroff, W. A. & Upchurch, R. A. Coupled shifts in ectomycorrhizal communities and plant uptake of organic nitrogen along a soil gradient: an isotopic perspective. Ecosystems (2021).53.Sterkenburg, E., Clemmensen, K. E., Ekblad, A., Finlay, R. D. & Lindahl, B. D. Contrasting effects of ectomycorrhizal fungi on early and late stage decomposition in a boreal forest. ISME J. 12, 2187–2197 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Lilleskov, E. A., Hobbie, E. A. & Fahey, T. J. Ectomycorrhizal fungal taxa differing in response to nitrogen deposition also differ in pure culture organic nitrogen use and natural abundance of nitrogen isotopes. N. Phytol. 154, 219–231 (2002).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Kohler, A. et al. Convergent losses of decay mechanisms and rapid turnover of symbiosis genes in mycorrhizal mutualists. Nat. Genet. 47, 410–415 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
56.Moeller, H. V., Peay, K. G. & Fukami, T. Ectomycorrhizal fungal traits reflect environmental conditions along a coastal California edaphic gradient. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 87, 797–806 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
57.Defrenne, C. E. et al. Shifts in Ectomycorrhizal fungal communities and exploration types relate to the environment and fine-root traits across interior douglas-fir forests of Western Canada. Front. Plant Sci. 10, 643 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Fawal, N. et al. PeroxiBase: a database for large-scale evolutionary analysis of peroxidases. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D441–D444 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
59.Lombard, V., Golaconda Ramulu, H., Drula, E., Coutinho, P. M. & Henrissat, B. The carbohydrate-active enzymes database (CAZy) in 2013. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D490–D495 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Garajova, S. et al. Single-domain flavoenzymes trigger lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases for oxidative degradation of cellulose. Sci. Rep. 6, 28276 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Janusz, G. et al. Lignin degradation: microorganisms, enzymes involved, genomes analysis and evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 41, 941–962 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Shah, F. et al. Ectomycorrhizal fungi decompose soil organic matter using oxidative mechanisms adapted from saprotrophic ancestors. N. Phytol. 209, 1705–1719 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Baldrian, P. Fungal laccases – occurrence and properties. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 30, 215–242 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Fernandez, C. W. & Kennedy, P. G. Revisiting the ‘Gadgil effect’: do interguild fungal interactions control carbon cycling in forest soils? N. Phytol. 209, 1382–1394 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Reich, P. B. et al. Nitrogen limitation constrains sustainability of ecosystem response to CO2. Nature 440, 922–925 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
66.Oren, R. et al. Soil fertility limits carbon sequestration by forest ecosystems in a CO2-enriched atmosphere. Nature 411, 469–472 (2001).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Norby, R. J., Warren, J. M., Iversen, C. M., Medlyn, B. E. & McMurtrie, R. E. CO2 enhancement of forest productivity constrained by limited nitrogen availability. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 19368–19373 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Andrew, C. & Lilleskov, E. A. Productivity and community structure of ectomycorrhizal fungal sporocarps under increased atmospheric CO2 and O3. Ecol. Lett. 12, 813–822 (2009).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
69.Näsholm, T. et al. Are ectomycorrhizal fungi alleviating or aggravating nitrogen limitation of tree growth in boreal forests? N. Phytol. 198, 214–221 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
70.Finzi, A. C. et al. Increases in nitrogen uptake rather than nitrogen-use efficiency support higher rates of temperate forest productivity under elevated CO2. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 14014–14019 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Merkel, D. Soil Nutrients in Glaciated Michigan Landscapes: Distribution of Nutrients and Relationships with Stand Productivity. (Doctoral Thesis Submitted to Michigan State University, 1988).72.Host, G. E. & Pregitzer, K. S. Geomorphic influences on ground-flora and overstory composition in upland forests of northwestern lower Michigan. Can. J. Res. 22, 1547–1555 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Edwards, I. P. & Zak, D. R. Phylogenetic similarity and structure of Agaricomycotina communities across a forested landscape. Mol. Ecol. 19, 1469–1482 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
74.Schimel, D., Stephens, B. B. & Fisher, J. B. Effect of increasing CO2 on the terrestrial carbon cycle. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 436–441 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
75.Medlyn, B. E. et al. Using ecosystem experiments to improve vegetation models. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 528–534 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
76.Peñuelas, J. et al. Shifting from a fertilization-dominated to a warming-dominated period. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1438–1445 (2017).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
77.McClaugherty, C. A., Pastor, J., Aber, J. D. & Melillo, J. M. Forest litter decomposition in relation to soil nitrogen dynamics and litter quality. Ecology 66, 266–275 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Pastor, J., Aber, J. D., McClaugherty, C. A. & Melillo, J. M. Aboveground production and N and P cycling along a nitrogen mineralization gradient on Blackhawk Island, Wisconsin. Ecology 65, 256–268 (1984).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
79.Serra-Maluquer, X., Mencuccini, M. & Martínez-Vilalta, J. Changes in tree resistance, recovery and resilience across three successive extreme droughts in the northeast Iberian Peninsula. Oecologia 187, 343–354 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
80.Vitousek, P. Nutrient cycling and nutrient use efficiency. Am. Nat. 119, 553–572 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
81.Darrouzet-Nardi, A., Ladd, M. P. & Weintraub, M. N. Fluorescent microplate analysis of amino acids and other primary amines in soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 57, 78–82 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
82.Ibáñez, I., Zak, D. R., Burton, A. J. & Pregitzer, K. S. Anthropogenic nitrogen deposition ameliorates the decline in tree growth caused by a drier climate. Ecology 99, 411–420 (2018).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
83.Lines, E. R., Zavala, M. A., Purves, D. W. & Coomes, D. A. Predictable changes in aboveground allometry of trees along gradients of temperature, aridity and competition. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 21, 1017–1028 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
84.Taylor, D. L. et al. Accurate estimation of fungal diversity and abundance through improved lineage-specific primers optimized for illumina amplicon sequencing. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 82, 7217–7226 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
85.Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 13, 581–583 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
86.Nilsson, R. H. et al. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D259–D264 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
87.Konar, A. et al. High-quality genetic mapping with ddRADseq in the non-model tree Quercus rubra. BMC Genomics 18, 417 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
88.Sork, V. L. et al. First draft assembly and annotation of the genome of a California Endemic oak. Genes|Genomes|Genet. 6, 3485–3495 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
89.Wood, D. E., Lu, J. & Langmead, B. Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol. 20, 257 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
90.Buchfink, B., Xie, C. & Huson, D. H. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat. Methods 12, 59–60 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
91.Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–1760 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
92.Treiber, M. L., Taft, D. H., Korf, I., Mills, D. A. & Lemay, D. G. Pre- and post-sequencing recommendations for functional annotation of human fecal metagenomes. BMC Bioinforma. 21, 74 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
93.Peng, M. et al. Comparative analysis of basidiomycete transcriptomes reveals a core set of expressed genes encoding plant biomass degrading enzymes. Fungal Genet. Biol. 112, 40–46 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
94.Floudas, D. et al. Uncovering the hidden diversity of litter-decomposition mechanisms in mushroom-forming fungi. ISME J. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-020-0667-6 (2020).95.Kriventseva, E. V. et al. OrthoDB v10: sampling the diversity of animal, plant, fungal, protist, bacterial and viral genomes for evolutionary and functional annotations of orthologs. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D807–D811 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
96.Quinn, T. P., Erb, I., Richardson, M. F. & Crowley, T. M. Understanding sequencing data as compositions: an outlook and review. Bioinformatics 34, 2870–2878 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
97.Ferrier, S., Manion, G., Elith, J. & Richardson, K. Using generalized dissimilarity modelling to analyse and predict patterns of beta diversity in regional biodiversity assessment. Divers. Distrib. 13, 252–264 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
98.Duhamel, M. et al. Plant selection initiates alternative successional trajectories in the soil microbial community after disturbance. Ecol. Monogr. 89, e01367 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
99.Qin, C., Zhu, K., Chiariello, N. R., Field, C. B. & Peay, K. G. Fire history and plant community composition outweigh decadal multi-factor global change as drivers of microbial composition in an annual grassland. J. Ecol. 108, 611–625 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
100.Oksanen, J., et al. Package vegan.101.Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the Tidyverse. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1686 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
102.Spiegelhalter, D. J., Best, N. G., Carlin, B. P. & Linde, A. V. D. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B Stat. Methodol. 64, 583–639 (2002).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Lundberg, J. G., Kottelat, M., Smith, G. R., Stiassny, M. L. J. & Gill, A. C. So many fishes, so little time: An overview of recent ichthyological discovery in continental waters. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 87, 26–62 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Relyea, R. A. The impact of insecticides and herbicides on the biodiversity and productivity of aquatic communities. Ecol. Appl. 15, 618–627 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Miya, M. et al. MiFish, a set of universal PCR primers for metabarcoding environmental DNA from fishes: Detection of more than 230 subtropical marine species. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 150088 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Clare, A. I. M. et al. Beyond biodiversity: Can environmental DNA (eDNA) cut it as a population genetics tool?. Genes 10, 192 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Tsuji, S., Shibata, N., Sawada, H. & Ushio, M. Quantitative evaluation of intraspecific genetic diversity in a natural fish population using environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 20, 1323–1332 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Miya, M., Gotoh, R. O. & Sado, T. MiFish metabarcoding: A high-throughput approach for simultaneous detection of multiple fish species from environmental DNA and other samples. Fish. Sci. 86, 939–970 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Dagosta F. C. P. & de Pinna, M. C. C. The fishes of the Amazon: Distribution and biogeographical patterns, with a comprehensive list of species. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist, 431, 1–163 (2019).8.Jézéquel, C., Tedesco, P. A. & Bigorne, R. A database of freshwater fish species of the Amazon Basin. Sci. Data 7, 96 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Reis, R. E., Kullander, S. O. & Ferraris, C. J. Check List of the Freshwater Fishes of South and Central America. (Edipucrs, 2003).10.Tedesco, P. et al. A global database on freshwater fish species occurrence in drainage basins. Sci. Data 4, 170141 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Brito, P. M., Meunier, F. J. & Leal, M. E. C. Origine et diversification de líchthyofaune Neotropical: Une revue. Cybium 31, 139–153 (2007).
Google Scholar 
12.Lowe-McConnell, R. H. Ecological Studies in Tropical Fish Communities (Cambridge University Press, 1987).Book 

Google Scholar 
13.Bloom, D. D. & Lovejoy, N. R. On the origins of marine derived fishes in South America. J. Biogeogr. 44, 1927–1938 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.de Santana, C. D. et al. Unexpected species diversity in electric eels with a description of the strongest living bioelectricity generator. Nat. Commun. 10, 4000 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Carvalho, L. N., Zuanon, J. & Sazima, I. Natural history of Amazon fishes. In Tropical Biology and Natural Resources Theme (ed. Del-Claro, K.), K. Del-Claro & R. J. Marquis (Session Eds. the Natural History Session), Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) (Eolss Publishers, 2007).16.Cardoso, Y. P. et al. A continental-wide molecular approach unraveling mtDNA diversity and geographic distribution of the Neotropical genus Hoplias. PLoS ONE 13, e0202024 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
17.Hebert, P. D. N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S. L. & de Waard, J. R. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 270, 313–321 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Baldwin, C. C., Castillo, C. I., Weigt, L. A. & Victor, B. C. Seven new species within western Atlantic Starksia atlantica, S. lepicoelia, and S. sluiteri (Teleostei, Labrisomidae), with comments on congruence of DNA barcodes and species. ZooKeys 79, 21–27 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Robertson, D. R. et al. Deep-water bony fishes collected by the B/O Miguel Oliver on the shelf edge of Pacific Central America: An annotated, illustrated and DNA-barcoded checklist. Zootaxa 4348, 1–125 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Weigt, L. A. et al. Using DNA barcoding to assess Caribbean reef fish biodiversity: Expanding taxonomic and geographic coverage. PLoS ONE 7, e41059 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Seberg, O. et al. Global genome biodiversity network: Saving a blueprint of the tree of life—a botanical perspective. Ann. Bot. 118, 393–399 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Parenti, L. R. et al. Fishes collected during the 2017 MarineGEO assessment of Kāne‘ohe Bay, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK 100, 607–637 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Droege, G. et al. The Global Genome Biodiversity Network (GGBN) Data Standard specification. Database https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baw125 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
24.Marques, V. et al. Blind assessment of vertebrate taxonomic diversity across spatial scales by clustering environmental DNA metabarcoding sequences. Ecography 43, 1779–1790 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Leray, M., Knowlton, N., Shien-Lei, H., Nguyen, B. N. & Machida, R. J. GenBank is a reliable resource for 21st biodiversity research. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 22651–22656 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Dillman, C. B. et al. Forensic investigations into a GenBank anomaly: Endangered taxa and the importance of voucher specimens in molecular studies. J. Appl. Ichthyol. 30, 1300–1309 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Locatelli, N. S., McIntyre, P. B., Therkildsen, N. O. & Baetscher, D. S. GenBank’s reliability is uncertain for biodiversity researchers seeking species-level assignment for eDNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 32211–32212 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Jerde, C. L., Wilson, E. A. & Dressler, T. L. Measuring global fish species richness with eDNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19, 19–22 (2019).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Nobile, A. B. et al. DNA metabarcoding of Neotropical ichthyoplankton: Enabling high accuracy with lower cost. Metabarcoding Metagenom. 3, 35060 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Cilleros, K. et al. Unlocking biodiversity and conservation studies in high diversity environments using environmental DNA (eDNA): A text with Guianese freshwater fishes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19, 27–46 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
31.Sales, N. G., Wangensteen, O. S., Carvalho, D. C. & Mariani, S. Influence of preservation methods, sample medium and sampling time on eDNA recovery in a neotropical river. Environ. DNA 1, 119–130 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Jackman, J. M. C. et al. eDNA in a bottleneck: Obstacles to fish metabarcoding studies in megadiverse freshwater systems. Environ. DNA https://doi.org/10.1002/edna3.191 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Valentini, A. et al. Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. 25, 929–942 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.McElroy, M. E. et al. Calibrating environmental DNA metabarcoding to conventional surveys for measuring fish species richness. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 276 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Dudgeon, D. Freshwater Biodiversity: Status (Cambridge University Press, 2020).Book 

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

Google Scholar 
37.Milan, D. T., Mendes, I. S. & Carvalho, D. C. New 12S metabarcoding primers for enhanced Neotropical freshwater fish biodiversity assessment. Sci. Rep. 10, 17966 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Deagle, B. E., Jarman, S. N., Coissac, E., Pompanon, F. & Taberlet, P. DNA metabarcoding and the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I marker: Not a perfect match. Biol. Lett. 10, 20140562 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Collins, R. A. et al. Non-specific amplification compromises environmental DNA metabarcoding with COI. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1985–2001 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Antich, A. et al. To denoise or to cluster, that is not the question: optimizing pipelines for COI metabarcoding and metaphylogeography. BMC Bioinf. 22, 177 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Vieira, T. B. et al. A multiple hypothesis approach to explain species richness patterns in neotropical stream-dweller fish communities. PLoS ONE 13, e0204114 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
42.Zuanon, J., Bockmann, F. A. & Sazima, I. A remarkable sand-dwelling fish assemblage from central Amazonia, with comments on the evolution of psammophily in South American freshwater fishes. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 4, 107–118 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Sazima, I., Carvalho, L. N., Mendonça, F. P. & Zuanon, J. Fallen leaves on the water-bed: Diurnal camouflage of three night-active fish species in an Amazonian streamlet. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 4, 119–122 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Espírito-Santo, H. M. V. & Zuanon, J. Temporary pools provide stability to fish assemblages in Amazon headwater streams. Ecol. Freshw. Fish 26, 475–483 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.de Pinna, M. C. C., Zuanon, J., Rapp-Py-Daniel, L. R. & Petry, P. A new family of neotropical freshwater fishes from deep fossorial Amazonian habitat, with a reappraisal of morphological characiform phylogeny (Teleostei: Ostariophysi). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 182, 76–106 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
46.López-Rojas, H., Lundberg, J. G. & Marsh, E. Design and operation of a small trawling apparatus for use with dugout canoes. N. Am. J. Fish. Manag. 4, 331–334 (1984).Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Marrero, C. & Taphorn, D. C. Notas sobre la historia natural y la distribution de los peces Gymnotiformes in la cuenca del Rio Apure y otros rios de la Orinoquia. Biollania 8, 123–142 (1991).
Google Scholar 
48.Cox-Fernandes, C., Podos, J. & Lundberg, J. G. Amazonian ecology: Tributaries enhance the diversity of electric fishes. Science 305, 1960–1962 (2004).ADS 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
49.Peixoto, L. A. W., Dutra, G. M. & Wosiack, W. B. The electric. Glassknife fishes of the Eigenmannia trilineata group (Gymnotiformes: Sternopygidae): Monophyly and description of seven new species. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 175, 384–414 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
50.de Santana, C. D. & Vari, R. P. Electric fishes of the genus Sternarchorhynchus (Teleostei, Ostariophysi, Gymnotiformes); phylogenetic and revisionary studies. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 159, 223–371 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Castro, R. M. C. Evolução da ictiofauna de riachos sul-americanos: Padrões gerais e possíveis processos causais. In Ecologia de peixes de riachos (eds Caramaschi, E. P., Mazzoni, R., & Peres-Neto, P. R.) Série Oecologia Brasiliensis volume VI, PPGE-UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, 139–155 (1999).52.Mojica, J. I., Castellanos, C. & Lobón-Cerviá, J. High temporal species turnover enhances the complexity of fish assemblages in Amazonian Terra firme streams. Ecol. Freshw. Fish 18, 518–526 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
53.de Oliveira, R. R., Rocha, M. M., Anjos, M. B., Zuanon, J. & Rapp Py-Daniel, L. H. Fish fauna of small streams of the Catua-Ipixuna Extractive Reserve, State of Amazonas, Brazil. Check List 5, 154–172 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Caramaschi E., Mazzoni, P. R., Bizerril, C. R. S. F. & Peres-Neto, P. R. Ecologia de Peixes de Riachos: Estado Atual e Perspectivas. Oecologia Brasiliensis, v. VI, Rio de Janeiro (1999).55.Anjos, M. B. & Zuanon, J. Sampling effort and fish species richness in small Terra firme forest streams of central Amazonia, Brazil. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 5, 45–52 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Mojica, J. I., Lobón-Cerviá, J. & Castellanos, C. Quantifying fish species richness and abundance in Amazonian streams: Assessment of a multiple gear method suitable for Terra firme stream fish assemblages. Fish. Manag. Ecol. 21, 220–233 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Barros, D. F. et al. The fish fauna of streams in the Madeira-Purus interfluvial region, Brazilian Amazon. Check List 7, 768–773 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Escobar-Camacho, D., Barriga, R. & Ron, S. R. Discovering hidden diversity of characins (Teleostei: Characiformes) in Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park. PLoS ONE 10, e0135569 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Ramirez, J. L. et al. Revealing hidden diversity of the underestimated neotropical ichthyofauna: DNA barcoding in the recently described genus Megaleporinus (Characiformes: Anostomidae). Front. Genet. 8, 149 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
60.Crampton, W. G. R., de Santana, C. D., Waddell, J. C. & Lovejoy, N. R. The Neotropical electric fish genus Brachyhypopomus (Ostariophysi: Gymnotiformes: Hypopomidae): taxonomy and biology, with descriptions of 15 new species. Neotrop. Ichthyol. 14, 639–790 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Abel, R. Conservation biology for the biodiversity crisis: A freshwater follow-up. Conserv. Biol. 5, 1435–1437 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Dudgeon, D. Prospects for sustaining freshwater biodiversity in the 21st century: Linking ecosystem structure and function. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5, 422–430 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Jenkins, M. Prospects for biodiversity. Science 302, 1175–1177 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Bunn, S. E. et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561 (2010).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
65.Albert, J. S. et al. Scientists’ warning to humanity on the freshwater biodiversity crisis. Ambio 50, 85–94 (2020).PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
66.Gilbert, M. T. P. et al. The isolation of nucleic acids from fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues–which methods are useful when?. PLoS ONE 2, e537 (2007).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
67.Campos, P. F. & Gilbert, T. M. DNA extraction from formalin-fixed material. In Ancient DNA 81–85 (Humana Press, 2012).68.Hykin, S. M., Bi, K. & McGuire, J. A. Fixing formalin: A method to recover genomic-scale DNA sequence data from formalin-fixed museum specimens using high-throughput sequencing. PLoS ONE 10, e0141579 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
69.Hagedorn, M. M. et al. Cryopreservation of fish spermatogonial cells: The future of natural history collections. Sci. Rep. 8, 6149 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
70.Albert, J. & Reis, R. E. Historical Biogeography of Neotropical Freshwater Fishes (University of California Press, 2011).Book 

Google Scholar 
71.Sabaj Pérez, M. H. Where the Xingu bends and will soon break. Am. Sci. 103, 395–403 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
72.Amigo, I. When will the Amazon hit a tipping point?. Nature 578, 505–507 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Murienne, J. et al. Aquatic DNA for monitoring French Guiana biodiversity. Biodivers. Data J. 7, 37518 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
74.McDevitt, A. D. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding as an effective and rapid tool for fish monitoring in canals. J. Fish Biol. 95, 679–682 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
75.Fernandes, G. W. et al. Dismantling Brazil’s science threatens global biodiversity heritage. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 15, 239–243 (2017).
Google Scholar 
76.Alves, R. J. V. et al. Brazilian legislation on genetic heritage harms Biodiversity Convention goals and threatens basic biology research and education. An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 90, 1279–1284 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
77.Overbeck, G. E. et al. Global biodiversity threatened by science budget cuts in Brazil. Bioscience 68, 11–12 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
78.Miya, M. et al. Use of a filter cartridge for filtration of water samples and extraction of environmental DNA. J. Vis. Exp. 117, 54741 (2016).
Google Scholar 
79.Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
80.Callahan, B. J., McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. P. Exact sequence variants should replace operational taxonomic units in marker-gene data analysis. ISME J. 11, 2639–2643 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
81.Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 772–780 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
82.Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. MEGA7: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1870–1874 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
83.Kimura, M. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16, 111–120 (1980).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
84.Darriba, D., Taboada, G. L., Doallo, R. & Posada, D. jModelTest 2: More models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nat. Methods 9, 772 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
85.Ronquist, F. et al. MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539–542 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
86.Miller, M. A. et al. A RESTful API for access to phylogenetic tools via the CIPRES science gateway. Evol. Bioinf. 11, 43–48 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
87.Ciccarelli, F. D. et al. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science 311, 1283–1287 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
88.R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020). https://www.Rproject.org/.89.Wickham, H. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar 
90.Oksanen, J., Kindt, R. & O’Hara, B. Package VEGAN. Community Ecology Package, Version 2 (2013).91.Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. An R Companion to Applied Regression 3rd edn. (Sage, 2019).
Google Scholar 
92.Adler D., Nenadic, O. & Zucchini, W. rgl: 3D visualization device system (OpenGL). R package version 0.93.945. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rgl (2013).93.Gu, Z. Circlize implements and enhances circular visualization in R. Bioinformatics 30, 2811–2812 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
94.Schiettekatte, N. M. D., Brandl, S. J. & Casey, J. M. Fishualize: Color Palettes Based On Fish Species. CRAN version 0.2.0 (2019).95.Chao, A. Estimating population size for sparse data in capture-recapture experiments. Biometrics 45, 427 (1989).MathSciNet 
MATH 
Article 

Google Scholar 
96.Hsieh T. C., Ma, K. H. & Chao, A. iNEXT: Interpolation and Extrapolation for Species Diversity. R package version 2.0.20 (2020).97.Chao, A., Chazdon, R. L., Colwell, R. K. & Shen, T.-J. A new statistical approach for assessing compositional similarity based on incidence and abundance data. Ecol. Lett. 8, 148–215 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
98.Olds, B. P. et al. Estimating species richness using environmental DNA. Ecol. Evol. 6, 4214–4226 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
99.Chao A., Ma, K. H., Hsieh, T. C. & Chiu, C. H. SpadeR (Species-richness Prediction and Diversity Estimation in R): An R package in CRAN. Program and User’s Guide also published at http://chao.stat.nthu.edu.tw/wordpress/software_download/ (2016). More