Philippa Kaur

Molecular analyses
Results of molecular analyses
The sequences obtained are available in GenBank (Supplementary Information 1). Sequence alignments were 399 bp for COI and 587 bp for 28S including gaps.
Phylogenetic analysis
Our molecular analysis (Fig. 1) with both markers generated seven supported clusters, six of which were in agreement with the morphological determination (i.e. C. alazanicus, C. brunnicans, C. circumscriptus, C. furcillatus, C. nubeculous and C. pictipennis). However, one cluster (i.e. two species) corresponded to undistinguished C. clastrieri and C. festivipennis.
Figure 1

Block diagram of the study.

Full size image

In addition, the COI mtDNA tree shows that C. furcillatus is the sister of the “C. clastrieri/festivipennis” clade. Indeed, C. pictipennis is the sister species of C. brunnicans while C. circumscriptus is positioned between the two clades.
Moreover, the 28S rDNA tree shows that C. pictipennis is the sister of the “C. clastrieri/festivipennis” clade. The other species are positioned in several places without a clade.
Intra- and inter-specific comparison
The COI Genbank sequences show little intraspecific divergence in both C. clastrieri (0.1 ± 0.1%) and C. festivipennis (1.2 ± 0.4%). The interspecific difference between C. clastrieri and in C. festivipennis is 0.7 ± 0.2%.
Small intraspecific divergences with COI sequences were observed in our sample: C. alazanicus (1.2 ± 0.4%), C. brunnicans (0.7 ± 0.2%), C. circumscriptus (2.2 ± 0.5%), C. clastrieri (0.3 ± 0.1%), C. festivipennis (0.4 ± 0.1%), C. furcillatus (1.5 ± 0.4%), C. nubeculosus (0.2 ± 0.1%) and C. pictipennis (1.1 ± 0.3%).
Finally, C. festivipennis and C. clastrieri—grouped in the same main clade—showed small interspecific distances (0.4 ± 0.2%); these were not identified as separate species based on DNA barcodes. We therefore decided to create a new group (C. clastrieri/festivipennis clade) based on interspecific distance. The overall mean genetic distance (K2P) computed for the different species of Culicoides was found to be 16.6 ± 1.4%. Interspecific K2P values for different (Table 1) species and taxa ranged from 27.3% (between C. furcillatus and C. nubeculosus; between C. circumscriptus-and C. furcillatus) to 17.2 ± 2.1% (between C. circumscriptus and the C. clastrieri/festivipennis clade) for our samples. For the COI Genbank sequences, we observed approximatively the same proportion and the same species (Table 1). We remarked very little interspecific divergence between our sample of the C. clastrieri/festivipennis clade and the C. clastrieri/festivipennis Genbank clade (0.6 ± 0.4%).
Table 1 Estimation of pairwise distance (± SD) of the Culicoides species for the COI domain of the mtDNA and D1D2 region of the rDNA.
Full size table

Analysis from 28S rDNA sequences did not show any intraspecific divergence whatever the taxa (0.000) with the exception of C. nubeculosus (0.1 ± 0.1%) and C. festivipennis/C.clastrieri (0.1 ± 0%). The overall mean genetic distance (K2P) computed for the different species of Culicoides was found to be 2.1 ± 0.03%. Interspecific K2P values for different species (Table 1) and taxa ranged from 1.2% (between C. circumscriptus and C. furcillatus; C. furcillatus and C. brunnicans, the main C. clastrieri/festivipennis clade and C. furcillatus) to 5.3 ± 0.9% (between C. circumscriptus and C. nubeculosus).
Morphometric and morphological analyses
In all, 148 specimens identified as C. alazanicus (n = 10), C. brunnicans (n = 27), C. circumscriptus (n = 27), C. clastrieri (n = 21), C. festivipennis (n = 20), C. furcillatus (n = 14), C. nubeculosus (n = 19) and C. pictipennis (n = 20) were analysed with 11 wing landmarks/specimens (Fig. 2).
Figure 2

Trees obtained from nucleotide analysis of: (a) COI mtDNA; (b) 28S rDNA (with MP method) sequences of C. alazanicus, C. brunnicans, C. circumscriptus C. clastrieri, C. festivipennis, C. furcillatus, C. nubeculosus and C. pictipennis and bootstrap values are shown in nodes (1000 replicates).

Full size image

Principal component analyses
Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to observe possible grouping trends.
Firstly, we performed a first normed PCA using the “Wing landmarks” model. The first three axes accounted for 76%, 15% and 8% of the total variance, which suggests a weak structuration of the data. This was confirmed by a scatterplot of PCA axes 1 and 2 that was unable to separate the species (Fig. 3).
Figure 3

Principal component analysis (PCA): percentage of variance explained for each PCA dimension and results.

Full size image

Secondly, we performed a first normed PCA on the “Wing morphological characters” model. The various specimens of each species are represented by a single point suggesting a close correlation of wing morphological characters. This model, without variance, is not validated and does not permit species separation.
We studied the “Full wing (landmarks and morphological, characters)” model through a normed PCA on raw data. C. clastrieri could be clearly separated from C. festivipennis. The first five axes accounted for 40%, 25%, 12%, 10% and 5% of the total variance. The scatterplot separated unambiguously and without overlap C. clastrieri-C. festivipennis on the one hand and the six species on the other hand (Fig. 3).
Finally, we performed a first normed PCA on the “Full model” (Morphological characters—wing, head, abdomen, legs—and wing landmarks). The first nine axes accounted for 26%, 23%, 22%, 10%, 8%., 4%, 3%, 2% and 1% of the total variance, which reveals good structuration of the data. This was confirmed by a scatterplot of PCA axes 1 and 2 that presents the same topology as the wing morphological model (Fig. 3).
This supports discrimination according to the species’ wing pattern. Similarly, and some body pattern characters could be used to identify Culicoides from the clastrieri/festivipennis clade better and quicker. With that objective in mind, we performed analyses on three datasets: (1) “Wing landmarks” (11 landmarks); (2) “Full wing” (38 items) and (3) the “Full model” that includes 71 items.
Discriminant analyses
PLS-DA and sPLS-DA models were used in order to discriminate the extremes (i.e. the most sensitive and most robust groups) using the three datasets (species, models and components) as described. The accuracy and the balanced error rate (BER) for the two models were compared and are summarised in Supplementary Information 2 and Fig. 4.
Figure 4

Balanced error rate (BER) choosing the number of dimensions. Performance and ncomp selection.

Full size image

The tuning step of the number of components to select showed that 16 components were necessary to lower the BER (Fig. 4A,B) for the “Wing landmarks” data. The AUC values with 16 components are as follows: C. alazanicus (0.97, p  More

1.
Rockström, J. et al. Sustainable intensification of agriculture for human prosperity and global sustainability. Ambio 46, 4–17 (2017).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
García-Arenal, F. & McDonald, B. A. An analysis of the durability of resistance to plant viruses. Phytopathology 93, 941–952 (2003).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Anderson, P. K. et al. Emerging infectious diseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 535–544 (2004).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Landis, D. A., Wratten, S. D. & Gurr, G. M. Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45, 175–201 (2000).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Stukenbrock, E. H. & McDonald, B. A. The origins of plant pathogens in agro-ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 46, 75–100 (2008).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Biek, R. & Real, L. A. The landscape genetics of infectious disease emergence and spread. Mol. Ecol. 19, 3515–3531 (2010).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Meentemeyer, R. K., Haas, S. E. & Václavík, T. Landscape epidemiology of emerging infectious diseases in natural and human-altered ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 50, 379–402 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Boccardo, G. & Milne, R.G. Plant Reovirus Group. Description of Plant Viruses. No. 294. CM/AAB (1984).

9.
Dovas, C. I., Eythymiou, K. & Katis, N. I. First report of maize rough dwarf virus (MRDV) on maize crops in Greece. Plant Pathol. 53, 238–238 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Lenardon, S. L., March, G. J., Nome, S. F. & Ornaghi, J. A. Recent outbreak of “Mal de Rio Cuarto” virus on corn in Argentina. Plant Dis. 82, 448 (1998).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Zhang, H., Chen, J., Lei, J. & Adams, M. J. Sequence analysis shows that a dwarfing disease on rice, wheat and maize in China is caused by rice black-streaked dwarf virus. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 107, 563–567 (2001).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Hoang, A. T. et al. Identification, characterization, and distribution of southern rice black-streaked dwarf virus in Vietnam. Plant Dis. 95, 1063–1069 (2011).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13.
Achon, M. A., Serrano, L., Clemente-Orta, G. & Barcelo, A. The virome of maize rough dwarf disease: molecular genome diversification, phylogeny and selection. Ann Appl Biol. 176, 192–202 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Lovisolo, O. Maize Rough Dwarf Virus. Descriptions of Plant Viruses No. 72. Commonw. Mycol. Inst. Asso. Appl. Biol. (1971).

15.
Achon, M. A. & Sobrepere, M. Incidence of potyviruses in commercial maize fields and their seasonal cycles in Spain. JPDP 108, 399–406 (2001).
CAS  Google Scholar 

16.
Achon, M. A. & Alonso-Dueñas, N. Impact of 9 years of Bt-maize cultivation on the distribution of maize viruses. Transgenic Res. 18, 387–397 (2009).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

17.
Achon, M. A., Subira, J. & Sin, E. Seasonal occurrence of Laodelphax striatellus in Spain: effect on the incidence of Maize rough dwarf virus. Crop Prot. 47, 1–5 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Achon, M. A., Serrano, L., Sabate, J. & Porta, C. Understanding the epidemiological factors that intensify the incidence of maize rough dwarf disease in Spain. Ann. Appl. Biol. 166, 311–320 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
CABI, 2017. Laodelphax striatellus. Crop protection compendium, Wallingford, UK: CAB International. https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/10935 (2017).

20.
Milne, R. G. & Lovisolo, O. Maize rough dwarf and related viruses. Adv. Virus. Res. 21, 267–341 (1977).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

21.
Häni, A., Günthart, H. & Brunetti, R. Identifikation des Rauhverzwergungsvirus an Mais im Tessin. Landwirtschaft Schweiz 2, 131–136 (1989).
Google Scholar 

22.
Hibino, H. Biology and epidemiology of rice viruses. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 34, 249–274 (1996).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Bar-Tsur, A., Saadi, H. & Antignu, Y. Resistance of corn genotypes to maize rough darf virus. Maydica 33, 189–200 (1988).
Google Scholar 

24.
Rodriguez-Pardina, P. E., Gimenez-Pecci, M. P. & Laguna, I. G. Wheat: a new natural host for the Mal de rio cuarto virus in the endemic disease area, Rio Cuarto, Cordoba province, Argentina. Plant Dis. 82, 149–152 (1998).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Wang, H. D. et al. Recent rice stripe virus epidemics in Zhejiang province, China, and experiments on sowing date, disease–yield loss relationships, and seedling susceptibility. Plant Dis. 92, 1190–1196 (2008).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

26.
Wang, H. D. et al. Studies on the epidemiology and yield losses from rice black-streaked dwarf disease in a recent epidemic in Zhejiang province, China. Plant Pathol. 58, 815–825 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Cirilo, A. G. & Andrade, F. Sowing date and maize productivity: I. Crop growth and dry matter partitioning. Crop Sci. 34, 1039–1043 (1994).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Farnham, D. E. Row spacing, plant density, and hybrid effects on corn grain yield and moisture. Agron. J. 93, 1049–1053 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Kucharik, C. J. A multidecadal trend of earlier corn planting in the central USA. Agron. J. 98, 1544–1550 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Bruns, H. A. & Abbas, H. K. Planting date effects on Bt and non-Bt corn in the mid-south USA. Agron. J. 98, 100–106 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Achon, M. A. & Clemente, G. Nuevos retos en el control de las enfermedades virales del maíz. Vida rural 424, 44–50 (2017).
Google Scholar 

32.
Maresma, A., Ballesta, A., Santiveri, F. & Lloveras, J. Sowing date affects maize development and yield in irrigated Mediterranean Environments. Agriculture 9, 67 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. A meta-analysis of crop pest and natural enemy response to landscape complexity. Ecol. Lett. 14, 922–932 (2011).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

34.
Harpaz, I. Maize Rough Dwarf (Israel Universities Press, Jerusalem, 1972).
Google Scholar 

35.
Conti, M. Investigations on the epidemiology of maize rough dwarf virus. I. Overwintering of virus in its planthopper vector, Acta HI Congr. Un. Fitopat. Medit., Oeiras 22–28 Outubro 1972, 11. (1972).  

36.
Thresh, J. M. The origins and epidemiology of some important plant virus diseases. Appl. Biol. 5, 1–65 (1980).
Google Scholar 

37.
Grilli, M. P. The role of landscape structure on the abundance of a disease vector planthopper: a quantitative approach. Landsc. Ecol. 25, 383–394 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Conti, M. Investigations on the epidemiology of maize rough dwarf virus III. Field symptoms, incidence and control. Maydica 21, 165–175 (1976).
Google Scholar 

39.
Syobu, S. I., Otuka, A. & Matsumura, M. Trap catches of the small brown planthopper, Laodelphax striatellus (Fallén) (Hemiptera: Delphacidae), in northern Kyushu district, Japan in relation to weather conditions. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 46, 41–50 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Clemente-Orta, G., Albajes, R. & Achon, M. A. Early planting, management of edges and non-crop habitats reduce potyvirus infection in maize. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 40, 21 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Clemente-Orta, G. et al. Changes in landscape composition influence the abundance of insects on maize: the role of fruit orchards and alfalfa crops. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 291, 106805 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Grilli, M. P. & Bruno, M. Regional abundance of a planthopper pest: the effect of host match area and configuration. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 122, 133–143 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Grilli, M. P. & Gorla, D. E. The effect of agroecosystem management on the abundance of Delphacodes kuscheli (Homopteran: Delphacidae), vector of the maize rough dwarf virus, in central Argentina. Maydica 43, 77–82 (1998).
Google Scholar 

44.
MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O. Island Biogeography (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1967).
Google Scholar 

45.
Root, R. B. Organization of a plant-arthropod association in simple and diverse habitats: the fauna of collards (Brassica oleraceae). Ecol. Monogr. 43, 95–124 (1973).
Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Tscharntke, T. et al. Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes-eight hypotheses. Biol. Rev. 87, 661–685 (2012).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

47.
Trumper, E.V. Modelos de epidemiologia matemática aplicados al estudio de1 sistema Virus MRC-maiz-Delphacidae (“Ma1 de Rio Cuarto”). Tesis doctoral. Universidad National de Cordoba (1996).

48.
Cheng, J. A. Rice Planthoppers in the Past Half Century in China. Rice Planthoppers: Ecology, Management Social Economics and Policy 1–32 (Springer, Dordrecht, 2015).
Google Scholar 

49.
Liu, Z. et al. (2016) The effect of landscape composition on the abundance of Laodelphax striatellus Fallén in fragmented agricultural landscapes. Land 5, 36 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Clemente-Orta, G. & Álvarez, H. A. L. influencia del paisaje agrícola en el control biológico desde una perspectiva espacial. Revista Ecosistemas 28, 13–25 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Madeira, F. et al. Stable carbon and nitrogen isotope signatures to determine predator dispersal between alfalfa and maize. Biol. Control. 77, 66–75 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Cantero-Martínez, C. & Moncunill, J. Sistemas agrícolas de la Plana de Lleida: Descripción y evaluación de los sistemas de producción en el área del canal Segarra-Garrigues antes de su puesta en funcionamiento. (2012).

53.
Braun-Blanquet, J. Fitosociología. Bases para el estudio de las comunidades vegetales (Blume, Madrid, 1979).
Google Scholar 

54.
DePaulo, J. J. & Powell, C. A. Extraction of double-stranded RNA from plant tissues without the use of organic solvents. Plant Dis. 79, 246–248 (1995).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Albajes, R., Lumbierres, B., Pons, X. & Comas, J. Representative taxa in field trials for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified maize. Bull. Entomol. Res. 103, 724–733 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Ardanuy, A., Lee, M. S. & Albajes, R. Landscape context influences leafhopper and predatory Orius spp. abundances in maize fields. Agric. Forest. Entomol. 20, 81–92 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Holzinger, W. E., Kammerlander, I. & Nickel, H. The Auchenorrhyncha of Central Europe. In Fulgoromorpha, Cicadomorpha Excl-Cicadellidae Vol. 1 (ed. Brill) (Brill, Leiden-Boston, 2003).
Google Scholar 

58.
ESRI. ArcGIS Desktop Version 10.3.1 (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, 2015).
Google Scholar 

59.
Bartoń, K. (2018). Package “MuMIn” Title Multi-Model Inference. In: CRAN-R. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MuMIn/MuMIn.pdf

60.
Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Multimodel inference: understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol. Methods Res. 33, 261–304 (2004).
MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Paradis, E. Package “ape” Title Analyses of Phylogenetics and Evolution Depends R. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ape/ape.pdf (2019).

62.
Max, K. et al. Caret: Title Classification and Regression Training. R package version: 6.0-84. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/caret/caret.pdf (2018).

63.
Bates, D. et al. Lme4: Linear Mixed-Effects Models using ‘Eigen’ and S4. R package version 1.1-21. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/lme4.pdf (2019).

64.
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N. & Elphick, C. S. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1, 3–14 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

65.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ R version 3.6.2. (2019). More

1.
Keller, L. F. & Waller, D. M. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 230–241 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Boakes, E. H., Wang, J. & Amos, W. An investigation of inbreeding depression and purging in captive pedigreed populations. Heredity (Edinb). 98, 172–182 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Bozzuto, C., Biebach, I., Muff, S., Ives, A. R. & Keller, L. F. Inbreeding reduces long-term growth of Alpine ibex populations. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1359–1364 (2019).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Saccheri, I., Kuussaari, M., Kankare, M., Vikman, P. & Hanski, I. Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature 392, 491–494 (1998).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Kardos, M., Taylor, H. R., Ellegren, H., Luikart, G. & Allendorf, F. W. Genomics advances the study of inbreeding depression in the wild. Evol. Appl. 9, 1205–1218 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Allendorf, F. W., Luikart, G. & Aitken, S. N. Conservation and the genetics of populations. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2013).

7.
Johnson, H. E., Mills, L. S., Wehausen, J. D., Stephenson, T. R. & Luikart, G. Translating effects of inbreeding depression on component vital rates to overall population growth in endangered bighorn sheep. Conserv. Biol. 25, 1240–1249 (2011).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Frankham, R. Where are we in conservation genetics and where do we need to go?. Conserv. Genet. 11, 661–663 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Pierson, J. C. et al. Incorporating evolutionary processes into population viability models. Conserv. Biol. 29, 755–764 (2015).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Huisman, J., Kruuk, L. E. B., Ellisa, P. A., Clutton-Brock, T. & Pemberton, J. M. Inbreeding depression across the lifespan in a wild mammal population. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 113, 3585–3590 (2016).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Grueber, C. E., Laws, R. J., Nakagawa, S. & Jamieson, I. G. Inbreeding depression accumulation across life-history stages of the endangered takahe. Conserv. Biol. 24, 1617–1625 (2010).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Harrisson, K. A. et al. Lifetime fitness costs of inbreeding and being inbred in a critically endangered bird. Curr. Biol. 29, 2711-2717.e4 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Ralls, K., Ballou, J. D. & Templeton, A. Estimates of lethal equivalents and the cost of inbreeding in mammals. Conserv. Biol. 2, 185–192 (1988).
Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Hoeck, P. E. A., Wolak, M. E., Switzer, R. A., Kuehler, C. M. & Lieberman, A. A. Effects of inbreeding and parental incubation on captive breeding success in Hawaiian crows. Biol. Conserv. 184, 357–364 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Jimenez, J. A., Hughes, K. A., Alaks, G., Graham, L. & Lacy, R. C. An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science (80-. ). 266, 271–273 (1994).

16.
Van Oosterhout, C., Zijlstra, W. G., Van Heuven, M. K. & Brakefield, P. M. Inbreeding depression and genetic load in laboratory metapopulations of the butterfly Bicyclus anynana. Evolution (N. Y). 54, 218–225 (2000).

17.
Szulkin, M., Garant, D., Mccleery, R. H. & Sheldon, B. C. Inbreeding depression along a life-history continuum in the great tit. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 1531–1543 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Wolak, M. E., Arcese, P., Keller, L. F., Nietlisbach, P. & Reid, J. M. Sex-specific additive genetic variances and correlations for fitness in a song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) population subject to natural immigration and inbreeding. Evolution (N. Y). 72, 2057–2075 (2018).

19.
Kennedy, E. S., Grueber, C. E., Duncan, R. P. & Jamieson, I. G. Severe inbreeding depression and no evidence of purging in an extremely inbred wild species-the chatham island black robin. Evolution (N. Y). 68, 987–995 (2014).

20.
Jamieson, I. G., Tracy, L. N., Fletcher, D. & Armstrong, D. P. Moderate inbreeding depression in a reintroduced population of North Island robins. Anim. Conserv. 10, 95–102 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Norén, K., Godoy, E., Dalén, L., Meijer, T. & Angerbjörn, A. Inbreeding depression in a critically endangered carnivore. Mol. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13674 (2016).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

22.
Sæther, B. E. & Bakke, Ø. Avian life history variation and contribution of demographic traits to the population growth rate. Ecology 81, 642–653 (2000).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Beissinger, S. R. & McCullough, D. R. Population viability analysis. (University of Chicago Press, 2002).

24.
Lacy, R. C. Lessons from 30 years of population viability analysis of wildlife populations. Zoo Biol. 38, 67–77 (2019).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Traill, L. W., Bradshaw, C. J. A. & Brook, B. W. Minimum viable population size: A meta-analysis of 30 years of published estimates. Biol. Conserv. 139, 159–166 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
O’Grady, J. J. et al. Realistic levels of inbreeding depression strongly affect extinction risk in wild populations. Biol. Conserv. 133, 42–51 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Lacy, R. C., Miller, P. S. & Traylor-Holzer, K. Vortex 10 user’s manual. (2017).

28.
Ballou, J. D. & Lacy, R. C. in Population management for survival and recovery (eds. Ballou, J. D., Gilpin, M. & Foose, T. J.) 76–111 (Columbia University Press, 1995).

29.
Armbruster, P. & Reed, D. H. Inbreeding depression in benign and stressful environments. Heredity (Edinb). 95, 235–242 (2005).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Fox, C. W. & Reed, D. H. Inbreeding depression increases with environmental stress: an experimental study and meta-analysis. Evolution (N. Y). 65, 246–258 (2011).

31.
Baker, R. H. The avifauna of Micronesia, its origin, evolution and distribution. (University of Kansas Publications, 1951).

32.
Marshall, J. T. The endemic avifauna of Sapan, Tinian Guam and Palau. Condor 51, 200–221 (1949).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Wiles, G. J., Bart, J., Beck, R. E. & Aguon, C. F. Impacts of the brown tree snake: patterns of decline and species persistence in Guam’s avifauna. Conserv. Biol. 17, 1350–1360 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Savidge, J. A. Extinction of an island forest avifauna by an introduced snake. Ecology 68, 660–668 (1987).
Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Haig, S. M., Ballou, J. D. & Casna, N. J. Genetic identification of kin in Micronesian kingfishers. J. Hered. 86, 423–431 (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Lacy, R. C., Ballou, J. D. & Pollak, J. P. PMx: Software package for demographic and genetic analysis and management of pedigreed populations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 433–437 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Ferrie, G. Using molecular genetic and demographic tools to improve management of ex situ avian populations. (University of Central Florida, 2017). http://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/5709

38.
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N. & Elphick, C. S. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1, 3–14 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Burnham, K. . & Anderson, D. R. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. (Springer, 2002).

40.
Whittingham, M. J., Stephens, P. A., Bradbury, R. B. & Freckleton, R. P. Why do we still use stepwise modelling in ecology and behaviour?. J. Anim. Ecol. 75, 1182–1189 (2006).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Nietlisbach, P., Muff, S., Reid, J. M., Whitlock, M. C. & Keller, L. F. Nonequivalent lethal equivalents: Models and inbreeding metrics for unbiased estimation of inbreeding load. Evol. Appl. 12, 266–279 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Zou, G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am. J. Epidemiol. 159, 702–706 (2004).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M. & Walker, S. C. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

44.
R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (2019).

45.
Lacy, R. C. & Pollak, J. P. Vortex: A stochastic simulation of the extinction process. (2017).

46.
Hemmings, N. L., Slate, J. & Birkhead, T. R. Inbreeding causes early death in a passerine bird. Nat. Commun. 3, 1–4 (2012).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

47.
Tiira, K., Piironen, J. & Primmer, C. R. Evidence for reduced genetic variation in severely deformed juvenile salmonids. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63, 2700–2707 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Wang, J., Hill, W. G., Charlesworth, D. & Charlesworth, B. Dynamics of inbreeding depression due to deleterious mutations in small populations: mutation parameters and inbreeding rate. Genet. Res. 74, 165–178 (1999).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Husband, B. C. & Schemske, D. W. Evolution of the magnitude and timing of inbreeding depression in plants. Evolution (N. Y). 50, 54–70 (1996).

50.
de Boer, R. A., Eens, M. & Müller, W. Sex-specific effects of inbreeding on reproductive senescence. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 285, (2018).

51.
Keller, L. F., Reid, J. M. & Arcese, P. Testing evolutionary models of senescence in a natural population: Age and inbreeding effects on fitness components in song sparrows. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 275, 597–604 (2008).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Partridge, L. & Mangel, M. Messages from mortality: The evolution of death rates in the old. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 438–442 (1999).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Charlesworth, B. & Hughes, K. A. Age-specific inbreeding depression and components of genetic variance in relation to the evolution of senescence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 6140–6145 (1996).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Kristensen, T. N., Loeschcke, V. & Hoffmann, A. A. Linking inbreeding effects in captive populations with fitness in the wild: Release of replicated Drosophila melanogaster lines under different temperatures. Conserv. Biol. 22, 189–199 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Ryman, N. & Laikre, L. Effects of supportive breeding on the genetically effective population size. Conserv. Biol. 5, 325–329 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Hedrick, P. W. & Garcia-Dorado, A. Understanding inbreeding depression, purging, and genetic rescue. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 940–952 (2016).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Kalinowski, S. T., Hedrick, P. W. & Miller, P. S. Inbreeding Depression in the Speke’s Gazelle Captive Breeding Program. Conserv. Biol. 14, 1375–1384 (2000).
Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Gilligan, D. M. & Frankham, R. Dynamics of individual adaptation processes. Conserv. Genet. 4, 189–197 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Christie, M. R., Marine, M. L., French, R. A. & Blouin, M. S. Genetic adaptation to captivity can occur in a single generation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 109, 238–242 (2012).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Grueber, C. E., Waters, J. M. & Jamieson, I. G. The imprecision of heterozygosity-fitness correlations hinders the detection of inbreeding and inbreeding depression in a threatened species. Mol. Ecol. 20, 67–79 (2011).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Milligan, M. C., Wells, S. L. & McNew, L. B. A population viability analysis for sharp-tailed grouse to inform reintroductions. J. Fish Wildl. Manag. 9, 565–581 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Research needs & implications for population management. Moßbrucker, A. M., Imron, M. A., Pudtatmoko, S., Pratje, P. & Sumardi. Modelling the fate of Sumatran elephants in Bukit Tigapuluh, Indonesia. J. For. Sci. 10, 5–18 (2016).
Google Scholar 

63.
Sharpe, M. & Berggren, P. Indian Ocean humpback dolphin in the Menai Bay off the south coast of Zanzibar, East Africa is Critically Endangered. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 29, 2133–2146 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

64.
McQuillan, R. et al. Runs of homozygosity in European populations. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 83, 359–372 (2008).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Caballero, A., Bravo, I. & Wang, J. Inbreeding load and purging: Implications for the short-term survival and the conservation management of small populations. Heredity (Edinb). 118, 177–185 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Liao, W. & Reed, D. H. Inbreeding-environment interactions increase extinction risk. Anim. Conserv. 12, 54–61 (2009).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Melbourne, B. A. & Hastings, A. Extinction risk depends strongly on factors contributing to stochasticity. Nature 454, 100–103 (2008).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar  More

Monkey conflict data
We obtained social conflict data ofNorthern China Rhesus Monkeys from Hongshan Forest Zoo of Nanjing, China. Nanjing (31° 14′–32° 37′ N, 118° 22′–119° 14′ E) is located in the central region of the lower Yangtze River and southwest of Jiangsu Province. It is an important national gateway city for the development of the central and western regions in the Yangtze River Delta, with an area of 6587 km2 covering a population of more than 8 Million. Average annual temperature is about 15.4 °C. Annual precipitation is 1106 mm, 60% of which occurs from Jun to Sep.
There are about 90 monkeys in the Hongshan Zoo in 2017, about 35 adults, 20 sub-adults and 35 juveniles or new-borns. The round monkey park was located in the central part of the zoo, with an area of about 2000 m2. Although a thick and 3-m high glass wall has been built to prevent artificial feedings, visitors sometimes throw food into the monkey park, causing a social conflict due to the food competition. Usually the zookeeper feeds these monkeys twice a day at about 9:30 am and 3:30 pm respectively.
We established a monitoring camera web (Haikang DS-7104N-SN/P) covering the monkey park in September 2016 and video-recorded the whole population since then. We defined social conflicts of monkeys as aggressive or fighting behaviors between individuals, including chasing (one chases another until it escapes), wrestling (one grapples and wrestles with another, until one escapes or gives up), biting (one opens its mouth and bites or tries to bites another), scratching (One scratches or scrapes another using its hands), threating (One warns or threats another through calling or behavioural display), etc. The age of participants and the occurrence time were recorded for each aggression46. We considered a conflict ends if there is no continuation within 10 s after the aggression. Since these monkeys are inactive during the night, we only recorded their diurnal aggressive behaviors from 6:30 till 18:30 and then summed the fights as daily social conflicts. One-year round data were collected from Mar 2017 to Feb 2018.
Air Quality Index
We obtained Air Quality Index (AQI) data of Nanjing from the Data Centre of the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China (MEP, http://datacenter.mep.gov.cn/)17. Based on established criteria (GB3095-2012). AQI is calculated for six major air pollutants separately: particle matter  More

1.
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59 (2012).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 
2.
Hooper, D. U. et al. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity loss as a major driver of ecosystem change. Nature 486, 105 (2012).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Taylor-Brown, A. et al. The impact of human activities on Australian wildlife. PLoS ONE 14(1), e0206958 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Hunter, P. The human impact on biological diversity. How species adapt to urban challenges sheds light on evolution and provides clues about conservation. EMBO Rep. 8(4), 316–318 (2007).

5.
Woinarski, J. C. Z., Burbidge, A. A. & Harrison, P. L. Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna: Decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European settlement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112(15), 4531 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

6.
Cho, I. & Blaser, M. J. The human microbiome: At the interface of health and disease. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13(4), 260–270 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Cryan, J. F. & Dinan, T. G. Mind-altering microorganisms: The impact of the gut microbiota on brain and behaviour. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 13(10), 701–712 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

8.
Kau, A. L., Ahern, P. P., Griffin, N. W., Goodman, A. L. & Gordon, J. I. Human nutrition, the gut microbiome and the immune system. Nature 474(7351), 327–336 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Inserra, A. et al. Mice lacking Casp 1, Ifngr and Nos2 genes exhibit altered depressive- and anxiety-like behaviour, and gut microbiome composition. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 6456 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

10.
Kuti, D. et al. Gastrointestinal (non-systemic) antibiotic rifaximin differentially affects chronic stress-induced changes in colon microbiome and gut permeability without effect on behavior. Brain Behav. Immun. 84, 218–228 (2020).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

11.
Bharwani, A. et al. Structural & functional consequences of chronic psychosocial stress on the microbiome & host. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 63, 217–227 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

12.
Wasimuddin, Menke, S., Melzheimer, J., Thalwitzer, S., Heinrich, S., Wachter, B. et al. Gut microbiomes of free-ranging and captive Namibian cheetahs: Diversity, putative functions and occurrence of potential pathogens. Mol. Ecol. 26(20), 5515–5527 (2017).

13.
Sommer, F. et al. The gut microbiota modulates energy metabolism in the hibernating brown bear Ursus arctos. Cell Rep. 14(7), 1655–1661 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

14.
Ley, R. E. et al. Evolution of mammals and their gut microbes. Science (New York, NY). 320(5883), 1647–1651 (2008).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Wang, J. et al. Dietary history contributes to enterotype-like clustering and functional metagenomic content in the intestinal microbiome of wild mice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111(26), E2703–E2710 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Koch, H. & Schmid-Hempel, P. Socially transmitted gut microbiota protect bumble bees against an intestinal parasite. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108(48), 19288–19292 (2011).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Schmidt, E., Mykytczuk, N. & Schulte-Hostedde, A. I. Effects of the captive and wild environment on diversity of the gut microbiome of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus). ISME J. 13(5), 1293–1305 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Lahdenperä, M., Mar, K.U., Courtiol, A., Lummaa, V. Differences in age-specific mortality between wild-caught and captive-born Asian elephants. Nat. Commun. 9(1), 3023 (2018).

19.
Sun, C. H., Liu, H. Y., Liu, B., Yuan, B. D. & Lu, C. H. Analysis of the gut microbiome of wild and captive Pere David’s deer. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2331 (2019).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Ryser-Degiorgis, M.-P. Wildlife health investigations: Needs, challenges and recommendations. BMC Vet. Res. 9(1), 223 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Stallknecht, D. E. Impediments to wildlife disease surveillance, research, and diagnostics. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 315, 445–461 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

22.
Soulsbury, C. D. et al. The welfare and ethics of research involving wild animals: A primer. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11(10), 1164–1181 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Amato, K. R. et al. Using the gut microbiota as a novel tool for examining colobine primate GI health. Global Ecol. Conserv. 7, 225–237 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Gehrig, J.L., Venkatesh, S., Chang, H.W., Hibberd, M.C., Kung, V.L., Cheng, J. et al. Effects of microbiota-directed foods in gnotobiotic animals and undernourished children. Science (New York, NY). 365(6449) (2019).

25.
Choudhury, A., Lahiri Choudhury, D.K., Desai, A., Duckworth, J.W., Easa, P.S., Johnsingh, A.J.T. et al. Elephas maximus. The IUCN red list of threatened species. p. e.T7140A12828813 (2008).

26.
Zhang, C., Xu, B., Lu, T. & Huang, Z. Metagenomic analysis of the fecal microbiomes of wild asian elephants reveals microflora and enzymes that mainly digest hemicellulose. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 29(8), 1255–1265 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

27.
Ilmberger, N. et al. A comparative metagenome survey of the fecal microbiota of a breast- and a plant-fed Asian elephant reveals an unexpectedly high diversity of glycoside hydrolase family enzymes. PLoS ONE 9(9), e106707 (2014).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

28.
Songer, M., Aung, M., Allendorf, T. D., Calabrese, J. M. & Leimgruber, P. Drivers of change in Myanmar’s wild elephant distribution. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 9(4), 1940082916673749 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Crawley, J. A. H. et al. Investigating changes within the handling system of the largest semi-captive population of Asian elephants. PLoS ONE 14(1), e0209701 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Oo, Z. M. Health issues of captive Asian elephants in Myanmar. Gajah. 36, 21–22 (2012).
Google Scholar 

31.
Chel, H.M., Iwaki, T., Hmoon, M., Thaw, Y.N., Chan Soe, N., Win, S.Y., et al. Morphological and molecular identification of cyathostomine gastrointestinal nematodes of Murshidia and Quilonia species from Asian elephants in Myanmar. Int. J. Parasitol. Parasites Wildl. (2020).

32.
Sukumar, R., Santiapillai, C. Elephas maximus: Status and distribution. in The Proboscidea: Evolution and Palaeoecology of Elephants and their Relatives 327–331 (Oxford University Press, New York, 1996).

33.
Leimgruber, P. et al. Current status of Asian elephants in Myanmar. Gajah. 35, 76–86 (2011).
Google Scholar 

34.
Prakash, T.G.S.L., Indrajith, W.A.A.D.U., Aththanayaka, A.M.C.P., Karunarathna, S., Botejue, M., Nijman, V. et al. Illegal capture and internal trade of wild Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in Sri Lanka. Nat. Conserv. 42, 51–69 (2020).

35.
Clubb, R. & Mason, G. A Review of the Welfare of Zoo Elephants in Europe: A Report Commissioned by the RSPCA (Animal BehaviourResearch Group, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2002).
Google Scholar 

36.
Millspaugh, J.J., Burke, T., Van Dyk, G., Slotow, R., Washburn, B.E., Woods, R.J. Stress response of working African elephants to transportation and safari adventures. J. Wildl. Manag. 1257–1260 (2007).

37.
Clubb, R. et al. Compromised survivorship in zoo elephants. Science (New York, NY). 322(5908), 1649 (2008).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Easton, A.V., Quinones, M., Vujkovic-Cvijin, I., Oliveira, R.G., Kepha, S., Odiere, M.R. et al. The impact of anthelmintic treatment on human gut microbiota based on cross-sectional and pre- and postdeworming comparisons in western Kenya. mBio. 10(2) (2019).

39.
Martin, I. et al. Dynamic changes in human-gut microbiome in relation to a placebo-controlled anthelminthic trial in Indonesia. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 12(8), e0006620 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

40.
He, F. et al. Variations in gut microbiota and fecal metabolic phenotype associated with Fenbendazole and Ivermectin tablets by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and LC/MS-based metabolomics in Amur tiger. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 499(3), 447–453 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

41.
Kunz, I. G. Z. et al. Equine fecal microbiota changes associated with anthelmintic administration. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 77, 98–106 (2019).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

42.
Gagliardi, A. et al. Rebuilding the gut microbiota ecosystem. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 15(8), 1679 (2018).
PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

43.
Clayton, J. B. et al. Captivity humanizes the primate microbiome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113(37), 10376–10381 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
McKenzie, V. J. et al. The effects of captivity on the mammalian gut microbiome. Integr. Comp. Biol. 57(4), 690–704 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Monfort, S.L. “Mayday mayday mayday”, the millennium ark is sinking! in (Holt, W.V., Brown, J.L., Comizzoli, P. eds.) Reproductive Sciences in Animal Conservation: Progress and Prospects 15–31 (Springer, New York, 2014).

46.
Gerber, L. R. Conservation triage or injurious neglect in endangered species recovery. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113(13), 3563–3566 (2016).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Haworth, S.E., White, K.S., Côté, S.D., Shafer, A.B.A. Space, time and captivity: Quantifying the factors influencing the fecal microbiome of an alpine ungulate. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 95(7) (2019).

48.
Gibson, K. M. et al. Gut microbiome differences between wild and captive black rhinoceros—Implications for rhino health. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 7570 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

49.
Montonye, D. R. et al. Acclimation and institutionalization of the mouse microbiota following transportation. Front. Microbiol. 9, 1085 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Conour, L. A., Murray, K. A. & Brown, M. J. Preparation of animals for research–issues to consider for rodents and rabbits. ILAR J. 47(4), 283–293 (2006).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

51.
Obernier, J. A. & Baldwin, R. L. Establishing an appropriate period of acclimatization following transportation of laboratory animals. ILAR J. 47(4), 364–369 (2006).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

52.
Mir, R. A., Kleinhenz, M. D., Coetzee, J. F., Allen, H. K. & Kudva, I. T. Fecal microbiota changes associated with dehorning and castration stress primarily affects light-weight dairy calves. PLoS ONE 14(1), e0210203 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Abhijith, T.V., Ashokkumar, M., Dencin, R.T., George, C. Gastrointestinal parasites of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus L. 1798) in south Wayanad forest division, Kerala, India. J. Parasit. Dis. 42(3), 382–390 (2018).

54.
Bansiddhi, P., Brown, J.L., Thitaram, C., Punyapornwithaya, V., Somgird, C., Edwards, K.L. et al. Changing trends in elephant camp management in northern Thailand and implications for welfare. PeerJ. 6, e5996-e (2018).

55.
Leung, J. M. & Loke, P. N. A role for IL-22 in the relationship between intestinal helminths, gut microbiota and mucosal immunity. Int. J. Parasitol. 43(3–4), 253–257 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

56.
Kreisinger, J., Bastien, G., Hauffe, H.C., Marchesi, J., Perkins, S.E. Interactions between multiple helminths and the gut microbiota in wild rodents. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 370(1675) (2015).

57.
Lee, S. C. et al. Helminth colonization is associated with increased diversity of the gut microbiota. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 8(5), e2880 (2014).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Ditgen, D. et al. Harnessing the helminth secretome for therapeutic immunomodulators. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 964350 (2014).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

59.
Hewitson, J. P. et al. Proteomic analysis of secretory products from the model gastrointestinal nematode Heligmosomoides polygyrus reveals dominance of venom allergen-like (VAL) proteins. J. Proteom. 74(9), 1573–1594 (2011).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Chong, R. et al. Looking like the locals—Gut microbiome changes post-release in an endangered species. Anim. Microbiome. 1(1), 8 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Wienemann, T. et al. The bacterial microbiota in the ceca of Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) differs between wild and captive birds. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 34(7), 542–551 (2011).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

62.
Pilla, R. & Suchodolski, J. S. The role of the canine gut microbiome and metabolome in health and gastrointestinal disease. Front. Vet. Sci. 6, 498 (2019).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

63.
Hemarajata, P. & Versalovic, J. Effects of probiotics on gut microbiota: Mechanisms of intestinal immunomodulation and neuromodulation. Therap. Adv. Gastroenterol. 6(1), 39–51 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Pertoldi, C., Randi, E., Ruiz-González, A., Vergeer, P. & Ouborg, J. How can genomic tools contribute to the conservation of endangered organisms. Int. J. Genomics. 2016, 4712487 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

65.
Roth, T. L. et al. Reduced gut microbiome diversity and metabolome differences in Rhinoceros species at risk for iron overload disorder. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2291 (2019).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Youngblut, N. D. et al. Host diet and evolutionary history explain different aspects of gut microbiome diversity among vertebrate clades. Nat. Commun. 10(1), 2200 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

67.
Tatsika, S., Karamanoli, K., Karayanni, H. & Genitsaris, S. Metagenomic characterization of bacterial communities on ready-to-eat vegetables and effects of household washing on their diversity and composition. Pathogens. 8(1), 37 (2019).
CAS  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Allan, N., Knotts, T.A., Pesapane, R., Ramsey, J.J., Castle, S., Clifford, D. et al. Conservation implications of shifting gut microbiomes in captive-reared endangered voles intended for reintroduction into the wild. Microorganisms. 6(3) (2018).

69.
Amato, K. R. et al. The gut microbiota appears to compensate for seasonal diet variation in the wild black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra). Microb. Ecol. 69(2), 434–443 (2015).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

70.
Eid, H. M. et al. Significance of microbiota in obesity and metabolic diseases and the modulatory potential by medicinal plant and food ingredients. Front. Pharmacol. 8, 387 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

71.
Lay, C. et al. Design and validation of 16S rRNA probes to enumerate members of the Clostridium leptum subgroup in human faecal microbiota. Environ. Microbiol. 7(7), 933–946 (2005).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

72.
Kartzinel, T. R., Hsing, J. C., Musili, P. M., Brown, B. R. P. & Pringle, R. M. Covariation of diet and gut microbiome in African megafauna. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 116(47), 23588–23593 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

73.
Pope, P. B. et al. Metagenomics of the Svalbard reindeer rumen microbiome reveals abundance of polysaccharide utilization loci. PLoS ONE 7(6), e38571 (2012).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Warnecke, F. et al. Metagenomic and functional analysis of hindgut microbiota of a wood-feeding higher termite. Nature 450(7169), 560–565 (2007).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

75.
Evans, N. J. et al. Characterization of novel bovine gastrointestinal tract Treponema isolates and comparison with bovine digital dermatitis treponemes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77(1), 138 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

76.
Kay, G. L. et al. Differences in the faecal microbiome in Schistosoma haematobium infected children vs. uninfected children. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9(6), 0003861 (2015).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

77.
Trevelline, B. K., Fontaine, S. S., Hartup, B. K. & Kohl, K. D. Conservation biology needs a microbial renaissance: A call for the consideration of host-associated microbiota in wildlife management practices. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2019(286), 20182448 (1895).
Google Scholar 

78.
Borody, T. J., Paramsothy, S. & Agrawal, G. Fecal microbiota transplantation: Indications, methods, evidence, and future directions. Curr. Gastroenterol. Rep. 15(8), 337 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Blyton, M. D. J. et al. Faecal inoculations alter the gastrointestinal microbiome and allow dietary expansion in a wild specialist herbivore, the koala. Anim. Microbiome. 1(1), 6 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

80.
Guo, W. et al. Fecal microbiota transplantation provides new insight into wildlife conservation. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 24, e01234 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

81.
Bolyen, E. et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 37(8), 852–857 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

82.
Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 13(7), 581–583 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

83.
Anderson, M. J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral. Ecol. 26(1), 32–46 (2001).
Google Scholar 

84.
Vazquez-Baeza, Y., Pirrung, M., Gonzalez, A. & Knight, R. EMPeror: A tool for visualizing high-throughput microbial community data. GigaScience. 2(1), 16 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

85.
Bokulich, N. A. et al. Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with QIIME 2’s q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome. 6(1), 90 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

86.
Morton, J. T. et al. Balance trees reveal microbial niche differentiation. mSystems 2(1), e00162-00166 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

87.
Mandal, S. et al. Analysis of composition of microbiomes: A novel method for studying microbial composition. Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 26, 27663 (2015).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  More

1.
Stein, B. A., Kutner, L. S. & Adams, J. S. Precious Heritage: The Status of Biodiversity in the United States (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2000).
Google Scholar 
2.
Blair, R. B. Birds and Butterflies Along Urban Gradients in Two Ecoregions of the United States: Is Urbanization Creating a Homogeneous Fauna? In Biotic Homogenization (eds Lockwood, J. L. & McKinney, M. L.) 33–56 (Springer, Boston, MA, 2001).
Google Scholar 

3.
Clergeau, P., Croci, S., Jokimäki, J., Kaisanlahti-Jokimäki, M. L. & Dinetti, M. Avifauna homogenisation by urbanisation: analysis at different European latitudes. Biol. conserv. 127, 336–344 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
McKinney, M. L. Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol. Conserv. 127, 247–260 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Seto, K. C. & Shepherd, J. M. Global urban land-use trends and climate impacts. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sust. 1, 89–95 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Wilby, R. L. & Perry, G. L. Climate change, biodiversity and the urban environment: a critical review based on London, UK. Prog. Phys. Geog. 30, 73–98 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Chapman, R. & Jones, D. N. Just feeding the ducks: quantifying a common wildlife-human interaction. Sunbird: J. Qld. Ornithol. Soc. 39, 19 (2009).
Google Scholar 

8.
Partecke, J., Schwabl, I. & Gwinner, E. Stress and the city: urbanization and its effects on the stress physiology in European blackbirds. Ecology 87, 1945–1952 (2006).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Adams, L. W. Urban Wildlife Habitats: A Landscape Perspective Vol. 3 (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, USA, 1994).
Google Scholar 

10.
Gering, J. C. & Blair, R. B. Predation on artificial bird nests along an urban gradient: predatory risk or relaxation in urban environments?. Ecography 22, 532–541 (1999).
Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Baker, P. J., Bentley, A. J., Ansell, R. J. & Harris, S. Impact of predation by domestic cats Felis catus in an urban area. Mammal Rev. 35, 302–312 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Bateman, P. W. & Fleming, P. A. Big city life: carnivores in urban environments. J. Zool. 287, 1–23 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Brzeziński, M., Natorff, M., Zalewski, A. & Żmihorski, M. Numerical and behavioral responses of waterfowl to the invasive American mink: A conservation paradox. Biol. Conserv. 147, 68–78 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Luniak, M. Synurbization–adaptation of animal wildlife to urban development. In Proceedings 4th International Urban Wildlife Symposium, pp 50–55 (University of Arizona, Tucson, USA, 2004).

15.
Chace, J. F. & Walsh, J. J. Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 74, 46–69 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Møller, A. P. Successful city dwellers: a comparative study of the ecological characteristics of urban birds in the Western Palearctic. Oecologia 159, 849–858 (2009).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Chamberlain, D. E. et al. Avian productivity in urban landscapes: a review and meta-analysis. Ibis 151, 1–18 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Müller, J. C., Partecke, J., Hatchwell, B. J., Gaston, K. J. & Evans, K. L. Candidate gene polymorphisms for behavioural adaptations during urbanization in blackbirds. Mol. Ecol. 22, 3629–3637 (2013).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

19.
Watson, H., Videvall, E., Andersson, M. N. & Isaksson, C. Transcriptome analysis of a wild bird reveals physiological responses to the urban environment. Sci. Rep. 7, 44180 (2017).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Lowry, H., Lill, A. & Wong, B. B. Behavioural responses of wildlife to urban environments. Biol. Rev. 88, 537–549 (2013).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Møller, A. P. Flight distance of urban birds, predation, and selection for urban life. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63, 63 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Evans, J., Boudreau, K. & Hyman, J. Behavioural syndromes in urban and rural populations of song sparrows. Ethology 116, 588–595 (2010).
Google Scholar 

23.
Carrete, M. & Tella, J. L. High individual consistency in fear of humans throughout the adult lifespan of rural and urban burrowing owls. Sci. Rep. 3, 3524 (2013).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Díaz, M. et al. The geography of fear: a latitudinal gradient in anti-predator escape distances of birds across Europe. PLoS ONE 8, e64634 (2013).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

25.
McGiffin, A., Lill, A., Beckman, J. & Johnstone, C. P. Tolerance of human approaches by Common Mynas along an urban-rural gradient. EMU 113, 154–160 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Knight, R. L., Grout, D. J. & Temple, S. A. Nest-defense behavior of the American crow in urban and rural areas. Condor 89, 175–177 (1987).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Wang, Y., Huang, Q., Lan, S., Zhang, Q. & Chen, S. Common blackbirds Turdus merula use anthropogenic structures as nesting sites in an urbanized landscape. Curr. Zool. 61, 435–443 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Russ, A., Rüger, A. & Klenke, R. Seize the night: European Blackbirds (Turdus merula) extend their foraging activity under artificial illumination. J. Ornithol. 156, 123–131 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Schoech, S. J., Bowman, R., Bridge, E. S. & Boughton, R. K. Baseline and acute levels of corticosterone in Florida scrub-jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens): effects of food supplementation, suburban habitat, and year. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 154, 150–160 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Fokidis, H. B., Orchinik, M. & Deviche, P. Corticosterone and corticosteroid binding globulin in birds: relation to urbanization in a desert city. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 160, 259–270 (2009).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Minias, P. Successful colonization of a novel urban environment is associated with an urban behavioural syndrome in a reed-nesting waterbird. Ethology 121, 1178–1190 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Tryjanowski, P., Sparks, T. H., Kuźniak, S., Czechowski, P. & Jerzak, L. Bird migration advances more strongly in urban environments. PLoS ONE 8, e63482 (2013).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Latimer, C. E. & Zuckerberg, B. Habitat loss and thermal tolerances influence the sensitivity of resident bird populations to winter weather at regional scales. J. Anim. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13332 (2020).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

34.
Schatz, J. & Kucharik, C. J. Urban climate effects on extreme temperatures in Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 094024 (2015).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Price, T. D., Qvarnström, A. & Irwin, D. E. The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 270, 1433–1440 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Pigliucci, M., Murren, C. J. & Schlichting, C. D. Phenotypic plasticity and evolution by genetic assimilation. J. Exp. Biol. 209, 2362–2367 (2006).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Partecke, J. Mechanisms of phenotypic responses following colonization of urban areas: from plastic to genetic adaptation. In Avian Urban Ecology: Behavioural and Physiological Adaptations (eds Gil, D. & Brumm, H.) 131–142 (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2014).
Google Scholar 

38.
Baker, A. J. & Moeed, A. Rapid genetic differentiation and founder effect in colonizing populations of common mynas (Acridotheres tristis). Evolution 41, 525–538 (1987).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

39.
Sacchi, R., Gentilli, A., Razzetti, E. & Barbieri, F. Effects of building features on density and flock distribution of feral pigeons Columba livia var. domestica in an urban environment. Can. J. Zool. 80, 48–54 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Antonov, A. & Atanasova, D. Small-scale differences in the breeding ecology of urban and rural Magpies Pica pica. OrnisFenn. 80, 21–30 (2003).
Google Scholar 

41.
Carrete, M. & Tella, J. L. Individual consistency in flight initiation distances in burrowing owls: a new hypothesis on disturbance-induced habitat selection. Biol. Lett. 6, 167–170 (2010).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Meillère, A. et al. Growing in a city: consequences on body size and plumage quality in an urban dweller, the house sparrow (Passer domesticus). Landsc. Urban Plan. 160, 127–138 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Rodewald, A. D. & Shustack, D. P. Urban flight: understanding individual and population-level responses of nearctic-neotropical migratory birds to urbanization. J. Anim. Ecol. 77, 83–91 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Jokimäki, J. & Suhonen, J. Distribution and habitat selection of wintering birds in urban environments. Landsc. Urban Plan. 39, 253–263 (1998).
Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Végvári, Z., Barta, Z., Mustakallio, P. & Székely, T. Consistent avoidance of human disturbance over large geographical distances by a migratory bird. Biol. Lett. 7, 814–817 (2011).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Snow, D. W. & Perrins, C. M. The Birds of the Western Palearctic (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1998).
Google Scholar 

47.
Luniak, M., Kalbarczyk, W. & Pawłowski, W. Birds of Warsaw. ActaOrnithol. 8, 198–199 (1964).
Google Scholar 

48.
Janiszewski, T., Wojciechowski, Z. & Markowski, J. Atlas Ptaków Lęgowych Łodzi (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź, Poland, 2009).
Google Scholar 

49.
Griffiths, R., Double, M. C., Orr, K. & Dawson, R. J. A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol. ecol. 7, 1071–1075 (1998).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
European Environment Agency 2018. Corine Land Cover (CLC) 2018, Version 2020_20u1. https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc2018

51.
Kosztra, B., Büttner, G., Hazeu, G. & Arnold, S. Updated CLC Illustrated Nomenclature Guidelines 1–124 (European Environment Agency, Vienna, Austria, 2017).
Google Scholar 

52.
United States Geological Survey 2019. Earth Explorer. https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/

53.
Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 133–142 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Bartoń, K. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. R package ver. 1.43.17. CRAN: The Comprehensive R Archive Network, Berkeley, CA, USA. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn (2020).

55.
R Development Core Team R: a language and environment for statistical computing. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2013).

56.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv:1406.5823 (2014).

57.
Thys, B. et al. The female perspective of personality in a wild songbird: repeatable aggressiveness relates to exploration behaviour. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–10 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Hardman, S. I. & Dalesman, S. Repeatability and degree of territorial aggression differs among urban and rural great tits (Parus major). Sci. Rep. 8, 1–12 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Edelaar, P., Siepielski, A. M. & Clobert, J. Matching habitat choice causes directed gene flow: a neglected dimension in evolution and ecology. Evol. Int. J. Organic Evol. 62, 2462–2472 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Jaenike, J. & Holt, R. D. Genetic variation for habitat preference: evidence and explanations. Am. Nat. 137, S67–S90 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Davis, J. M. & Stamps, J. A. The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 411–416 (2004).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Minias, P., Włodarczyk, R., Minias, A. & Dziadek, J. How birds colonize cities: genetic evidence from a common waterbird, the Eurasian coot. J. Avian Biol. 48, 1095–1103 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Holtmann, B., Santos, E. S., Lara, C. E. & Nakagawa, S. Personality-matching habitat choice, rather than behavioural plasticity, is a likely driver of a phenotype–environment covariance. P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 284, 20170943 (2017).
Google Scholar 

64.
Sprau, P. & Dingemanse, N. J. An approach to distinguish between plasticity and non-random distributions of behavioral types along urban gradients in a wild passerine bird. Front. Ecol. Evol. 5, 92 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Skórka, P., Lenda, M. & Skórka, J. Supermarkets—a wintering habitat for house sparrow Passer domesticus. Pol. J. Ecol. 57, 597–603 (2009).
Google Scholar 

66.
Newton, I. Population Limitation in Birds (Academic Press, San Diego, USA, 1998).
Google Scholar 

67.
Ciach, M. & Fröhlich, A. Habitat type, food resources, noise and light pollution explain the species composition, abundance and stability of a winter bird assemblage in an urban environment. Urban Ecosyst. 20, 547–559 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Gauthreaux, S. A. The ecological significance of behavioral dominance. In Social Behaviour. Perspectives in Ethology Vol. 3 (eds Bateson, P. P. G. & Klopfer, P. H.) (Springer, Boston, MA, 1978).
Google Scholar 

69.
Lynch, J. F., Morton, E. S. & Van der Voort, M. E. Habitat segregation between the sexes of wintering Hooded Warblers (Wilsonia citrina). Auk 102, 714–721 (1985).
Google Scholar 

70.
Marra, P. P. The role of behavioral dominance in structuring patterns of habitat occupancy in a migrant bird during the nonbreeding season. Behav. Ecol. 11, 299–308 (2000).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Morton, E. S. Habitat segregation by sex in the hooded warbler: experiments on proximate causation and discussion of its evolution. Am. Nat. 135, 319–333 (1990).
Article  Google Scholar 

72.
del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A. & Sargatal, J. Handbook of the Birds of the World, vol. 3 Hoatzin to Auks ( Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain, 1996).
Google Scholar  More

1.
Orians, G. H. & Wittenberger, J. F. Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. Am. Nat. 137, S29–S49 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Doligez, B., Cadet, C., Danchin, E. & Boulinier, T. When to use public information for breeding habitat selection? The role of environmental predictability and density dependence. Anim. Behav. 66, 973–988 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Schmidt, K. A., Dall, S. R. X. & van Gils, J. A. The ecology of information: an overview on the ecological significance of making informed decisions. Oikos 119, 304–316 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Schlaepfer, M. A., Runge, M. C. & Sherman, P. W. Ecological and evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 474–480 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Fletcher, R. J., Orrock, J. L. & Robertson, B. A. How the type of anthropogenic change alters the consequences of ecological traps. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 2546–2552 (2012).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

6.
Robertson, B. A., Rehage, J. S. & Sih, A. Ecological novelty and the emergence of evolutionary traps. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 552–560 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. From evolution to behavior: evolutionary psychology as the missing link. In The Latest on the Best: Essays on Evolution and Optimality (ed. Dupré, J.) 227–306 (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1987).
Google Scholar 

8.
Sih, A., Trimmer, P. C. & Ehlman, S. M. A conceptual framework for understanding behavioural responses to HIREC. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 12, 109–114 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Trimmer, P. C., Barrett, B. J., McElreath, R. & Sih, A. Rapid environmental change in games: complications and counter-intuitive outcomes. Sci. Rep. 9, 7373 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

10.
Crowley, P. H. et al. Predicting habitat choice after rapid environmental change. Am. Nat. 193, 619–632 (2019).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Gomulkiewicz, R. & Holt, R. D. When does evolution by natural selection prevent extinction?. Evolution 49, 201–207 (1995).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Wong, B. B. M. & Candolin, U. Behavioral responses to changing environments. Behav. Ecol. 26, 665–673 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Kokko, H. & Sutherland, W. J. Ecological traps in changing environments: ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect. Evol. Ecol. Res. 3, 603–610 (2001).
Google Scholar 

14.
Greggor, A. L., Trimmer, P. C., Barrett, B. J. & Sih, A. Challenges of learning to escape evolutionary traps. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 408 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Fawcett, T. W. et al. The evolution of decision rules in complex environments. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18, 153–161 (2014).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Beletsky, L. D. & Orians, G. H. Effects of breeding experience and familiarity on site fidelity in female red-winged blackbirds. Ecology 72, 787–796 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Forero, M. G., Donázar, J. A., Blas, J. & Hiraldo, F. Causes and consequences of territory change and breeding dispersal distance in the black kite. Ecology 80, 1298–1310 (1999).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Schaub, M. & Hirschheydt, J. Effect of current reproduction on apparent survival, breeding dispersal, and future reproduction in barn swallows assessed by multistate capture-recapture models. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 625–635 (2009).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Switzer, P. V. Site fidelity in predictable and unpredictable habitats. Evol. Ecol. 7, 533–555 (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Beletsky, L. D. & Orians, G. H. Site fidelity and territorial movements of males in a rapidly declining population of yellow-headed blackbirds. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 34, 257–265 (1994).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Reed, J. M., Boulinier, T., Danchin, E. & Oring, L. W. Informed dispersal. Curr. Ornithol. 15, 189–259 (1999).
Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Delgado, M. M., Bartoń, K. A., Bonte, D. & Travis, J. M. J. Prospecting and dispersal: their eco-evolutionary dynamics and implications for population patterns. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20132851 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Delibes, M., Ferreras, P. & Gaona, P. Attractive sinks, or how individual behavioural decisions determine source-sink dynamics. Ecol. Lett 4, 401–403 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Vlug, J. J. Red-necked grebe. BWP Update 4, 139–179 (2002).
Google Scholar 

25.
Kloskowski, J. Consequences of the size structure of fish populations for their effects on a generalist avian predator. Oecologia 166, 517–530 (2011).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Kloskowski, J. Fish stocking creates an ecological trap for an avian predator via effects on prey availability. Oikos 121, 1567–1576 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Kloskowski, J. An avian equivalent of selective abortion: postlaying clutch reduction under resource limitation. Behav. Ecol. 30, 864–871 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Bellebaum, J., Szostek, K. L. & Kloskowski, J. Population dynamics and survival of the red-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena: results from a long-term study in eastern Poland. J. Ornithol. 159, 631–641 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Fretwell, S. D. & Lucas, H. L. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor. 19, 16–36 (1969).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Arlt, D. & Pärt, T. Nonideal breeding habitat selection: a mismatch between preference and fitness. Ecology 88, 792–801 (2007).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

31.
Kloskowski, J., Grela, P., Krogulec, J., Gąska, M. & Tchórzewski, M. Sexing red-necked grebes Podiceps grisegena by molecular techniques and morphology. Acta Ornithol. 41, 176–180 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Kloskowski, J. Temporal patterns of parental resource distribution in the red-necked grebe: equalizing the share of the survivors. Behaviour 138, 1355–1370 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Haas, C. A. Effects of prior nesting success on site fidelity and breeding dispersal: an experimental approach. Auk 115, 929–936 (1998).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Hakkarainen, H., Ilmonen, P., Koivunen, V. & Korpimäki, E. Experimental increase of predation risk induces breeding dispersal of Tengmalm’s owl. Oecologia 126, 355–359 (2001).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

35.
Schall, R. Estimation in generalized linear models with random effects. Biometrika 78, 719–727 (1991).
MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Piper, W. H., Tischler, K. B. & Klich, M. Territory acquisition in loons: the importance of take-over. Anim. Behav. 59, 385–394 (2000).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37.
Nocera, J. J., Forbes, G. J. & Giraldeau, L.-A. Inadvertent social information in breeding site selection of natal dispersing birds. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 349–355 (2006).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

38.
Ward, M. P. Habitat selection by dispersing yellow-headed blackbirds: evidence of prospecting and the use of public information. Oecologia 145, 650–657 (2005).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

39.
Pärt, T., Arlt, D., Doligez, B., Low, M. & Qvarnström, A. Prospectors combine social and environmental information to improve habitat selection and breeding success in the subsequent year. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 1227–1235 (2011).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

40.
Boulinier, T. & Danchin, E. The use of conspecific reproductive success for breeding patch selection in terrestrial migratory species. Evol. Ecol. 11, 505–517 (1997).
Article  Google Scholar 

41.
McNamara, J. M. & Dall, S. R. X. The evolution of unconditional strategies via the “multiplier effect”. Ecol. Lett. 14, 237–243 (2011).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

42.
Davis, J. M. & Stamps, J. A. The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 411–416 (2004).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

43.
Piper, W. H., Palmer, M. W., Banfield, N. & Meyer, M. W. Can settlement in natal-like habitat explain maladaptive habitat selection?. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20130979 (2013).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

44.
McParland, C. E., Paszkowski, C. A. & Newbrey, J. L. Trophic relationships of breeding Red-necked Grebes (Podiceps grisegena) on wetlands with and without fish in the Aspen Parkland. Can. J. Zool. 88, 186–194 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Mäntylä, E., Sirkiä, P. M., Klemola, T. & Laaksonen, T. An experimental test of whether pied flycatchers choose the best territory for rearing the young. Curr. Zool. 61, 604–613 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Gilroy, J. J. & Sutherland, W. J. Beyond ecological traps: perceptual errors and undervalued resources. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 351–356 (2007).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

47.
Patten, M. A. & Kelly, J. F. Habitat selection and the perceptual trap. Ecol. Appl. 20, 2148–2156 (2010).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

48.
Visser, M. E. Keeping up with a warming world; assessing the rate of adaptation to climate change. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 649–659 (2008).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

49.
Nudds, R. L. & Bryant, D. M. Consequences of load carrying by birds during short flights are found to be behavioral and not energetic. Am. J. Physiol. 283, R249–R256 (2002).
CAS  Google Scholar 

50.
Hutchinson, J. M. C. & Gigerenzer, G. Simple heuristics and rules of thumb: where psychologists and behavioural biologists might meet. Behav. Proc. 69, 97–124 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Hipfner, J. Matches and mismatches: ocean climate, prey phenology and breeding success in a zooplanktivorous seabird. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 368, 295–304 (2008).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Ponchon, A., Garnier, R., Grémillet, D. & Boulinier, T. Predicting population responses to environmental change: the importance of considering informed dispersal strategies in spatially structured population models. Divers. Distrib. 21, 88–100 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Bocedi, G., Heinonen, J. & Travis, J. M. J. Uncertainty and the role of information acquisition in the evolution of context-dependent emigration. Am. Nat. 179, 606–620 (2012).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Grosbois, V. & Tavecchia, G. Modeling dispersal with capture–recapture data: disentangling decisions of leaving and settlement. Ecology 84, 1225–1236 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Owen, M. A., Swaisgood, R. R. & Blumstein, D. T. Contextual influences on animal decision-making: significance for behavior-based wildlife conservation and management. Integr. Zool. 12, 32–48 (2017).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Grieco, F., van Noordwijk, A. J. & Visser, M. E. Evidence for the effect of learning on timing of reproduction in blue tits. Science 296, 136–138 (2002).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Stodola, K. W. & Ward, M. P. The emergent properties of conspecific attraction can limit a species’ ability to track environmental change. Am. Nat. 189, 726–733 (2017).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar  More

1.
Mellinger, D. K., Stafford, K. M., Moore, S. E., Dziak, R. P. & Matsumoto, H. An overview of fixed passive acoustic observation methods for cetaceans. Oceanography 20, 36–45 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Van Parijs, S. et al. Management and research applications of real-time and archival passive acoustic sensors over varying temporal and spatial scales. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 395, 21–36 (2009).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Sousa-Lima, R. S., Norris, T. F., Oswald, J. N. & Fernandes, D. P. A review and inventory of fixed autonomous recorders for passive acoustic monitoring of marine mammals. Aquat. Mamm. 39, (2013).

4.
Van Opzeeland, I. et al. Towards collective circum-Antarctic passive acoustic monitoring: The Southern Ocean Hydrophone Network (SOHN). Polarforschung 83, 47–61 (2013).
Google Scholar 

5.
Branch, T. A., Matsuoka, K. & Miyashita, T. Evidence for increases in Antarctic blue whales based on Bayesian modelling. Mar. Mammal Sci. 20, 726–754 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Branch, T. A. Abundance of Antarctic blue whales south of 60 S from three complete circumpolar sets of surveys. J. Cetacean Res. Manag. 9, 253–262 (2007).
Google Scholar 

7.
Rocha, R. C. Jr., Clapham, P. J. & Ivashchenko, Y. Emptying the oceans: A summary of industrial whaling catches in the 20th century. Mar. Fish. Rev. 76, 37–48 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Branch, T. A. & Butterworth, D. S. Estimates of abundance south of 60° S for cetacean species sighted frequently on the 1978/79 to 1997/98 IWC/IDCR-SOWER sighting surveys. J. Cetacean Res. Manag. 3, 251–270 (2001).
Google Scholar 

9.
Cooke, J. G. Balaenoptera musculus ssp. intermedia. IUCN Red List Threat. Species e.T41713A50226962 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T41713A50226962.en.

10.
Sears, R., Ramp, C., Douglas, A. & Calambokidis, J. Reproductive parameters of eastern North Pacific blue whales Balaenoptera musculus. Endanger. Species Res. 22, 23–31 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Rankin, S., Ljungblad, D. K., Clark, C. W. & Kato, H. Vocalisations of Antarctic blue whales, Balaenoptera musculus intermedia, recorded during the 2001/2002 and 2002/2003 IWC/SOWER circumpolar cruises, Area V Antarctica. J. Cetacean Res. Manag. 7, 13–20 (2005).
Google Scholar 

12.
Watkins, W. A., Tyack, P., Moore, K. E. & Bird, J. E. The 20-Hz signals of finback whales (Balaenoptera physalus). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 82, 1901–1912 (1987).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13.
McDonald, M. A., Mesnick, S. L. & Hildebrand, J. A. Biogeographic characterisation of blue whale song worldwide: using song to identify populations. J. Cetacean Res. Manag. 8, 55–65 (2006).
Google Scholar 

14.
Gavrilov, A. N., McCauley, R. D. & Gedamke, J. Steady inter and intra-annual decrease in the vocalization frequency of Antarctic blue whales. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 4476–4480 (2012).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

15.
Gedamke, J. Geographic variation in Southern Ocean fin whale song. Submitt. to Sci. Comm. Int. Whal. Comm. SC/61/SH16, 1–8 (2009).

16.
Shabangu, F. W., Yemane, D., Stafford, K. M., Ensor, P. & Findlay, K. P. Modelling the effects of environmental conditions on the acoustic occurrence and behaviour of Antarctic blue whales. PLoS ONE 12, e0172705 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

17.
Širović, A. et al. Seasonality of blue and fin whale calls and the influence of sea ice in the Western Antarctic Peninsula. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 51, 2327–2344 (2004).

18.
Širović, A., Hildebrand, J. A., Wiggins, S. M. & Thiele, D. Blue and fin whale acoustic presence around Antarctica during 2003 and 2004. Mar. Mammal Sci. 25, 125–136 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Thomisch, K. et al. Spatio-temporal patterns in acoustic presence and distribution of Antarctic blue whales Balaenoptera musculus intermedia in the Weddell Sea. Endanger. Species Res. 30, 239–253 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Tripovich, J. S. et al. Temporal segregation of the Australian and Antarctic blue whale call types (Balaenoptera musculus spp.). J. Mammal. 1–8 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyv065.

21.
Dréo, R., Bouffaut, L., Leroy, E., Barruol, G. & Samaran, F. Baleen whale distribution and seasonal occurrence revealed by an ocean bottom seismometer network in the Western Indian Ocean. Deep. Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 161, 132–144 (2019).

22.
Bouffaut, L., Madhusudhana, S., Labat, V., Boudraa, A.-O. & Klinck, H. A performance comparison of tonal detectors for low-frequency vocalizations of Antarctic blue whales. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 147, 260–266 (2020).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Bouffaut, L., Dréo, R., Labat, V., Boudraa, A.-O. & Barruol, G. Passive stochastic matched filter for Antarctic blue whale call detection. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 144, 955–965 (2018).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

24.
Gedamke, J. & Robinson, S. M. Acoustic survey for marine mammal occurrence and distribution off East Antarctica (30–80°E) in January-February 2006. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 57, 968–981 (2010).

25.
Gedamke, J., Gales, N., Hildebrand, J. A. & Wiggins, S. Seasonal occurrence of low frequency whale vocalisations across eastern Antarctic and southern Australian waters, February 2004 to February 2007. Rep. SC/59/SH5 Submitt. to Sci. Comm. Int. Whal. Comm. Anchorage, Alaska SC/59, 1–11 (2007).

26.
Leroy, E. C., Samaran, F., Bonnel, J. & Royer, J. Seasonal and diel vocalization patterns of Antarctic blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus intermedia) in the Southern Indian Ocean: a multi-year and multi-site study. PLoS ONE 11, e0163587 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

27.
Miller, B. S. et al. Validating the reliability of passive acoustic localisation: a novel method for encountering rare and remote Antarctic blue whales. Endanger. Species Res. 26, 257–269 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Miller, B. S. et al. Software for real-time localization of baleen whale calls using directional sonobuoys: A case study on Antarctic blue whales. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 139, EL83–EL89 (2016).

29.
Miller, B. S. et al. Circumpolar acoustic mapping of endangered Southern Ocean whales: Voyage report and preliminary results for the 2016/17 Antarctic Circumnavigation Expedition. Pap. SC/67a/SH03 Submitt. to Sci. Comm. 67a Int. Whal. Commision, Bled Slov. 18 (2017).

30.
Samaran, F. et al. Seasonal and geographic variation of Southern blue whale subspecies in the Indian Ocean. PLoS ONE 8, e71561 (2013).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Samaran, F., Adam, O. & Guinet, C. Discovery of a mid-latitude sympatric area for two Southern Hemisphere blue whale subspecies. Endanger. Species Res. 12, 157–165 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Stafford, K. M., Fox, C. G. & Clark, D. S. Long-range acoustic detection and localization of blue whale calls in the northeast Pacific Ocean. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104, 3616–3625 (1998).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

33.
Weirathmueller, M. J. et al. Spatial and temporal trends in fin whale vocalizations recorded in the NE Pacific Ocean between 2003–2013. PLoS ONE 12, 1–24 (2017).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

34.
Harris, D., Matias, L., Thomas, L., Harwood, J. & Geissler, W. H. Applying distance sampling to fin whale calls recorded by single seismic instruments in the northeast Atlantic. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, 3522–3535 (2013).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

35.
Morano, J. L. et al. Seasonal and geographical patterns of fin whale song in the western North Atlantic Ocean. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132, 1207–1212 (2012).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Socheleau, F.-X. et al. Automated detection of Antarctic blue whale calls. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 138, 3105–3117 (2015).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37.
Mellinger, D. K. & Clark, C. W. Recognizing transient low-frequency whale sounds by spectrogram correlation. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 3518–3529 (2000).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Mellinger, D. K. Ishmael 1.0 User’s Guide. (2001).

39.
Gillespie, D. et al. PAMGUARD: Semiautomated, open source software for real-time acoustic detection and localisation of cetaceans. Proc. Inst. Acoust. 30, 54–62 (2008).
Google Scholar 

40.
Figueroa, H. & Robbins, M. XBAT: an open-source extensible platform for bioacoustic research and monitoring. Comput. bioacoustics Assess. Biodivers. 143–155 (2008).

41.
Balcazar, N. E. et al. Calls reveal population structure of blue whales across the southeast Indian Ocean and southwest Pacific Ocean. J. Mammal. gyv126 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyv126.

42.
Buchan, S. J., Hucke-Gaete, R., Stafford, K. M. & Clark, C. W. Occasional acoustic presence of Antarctic blue whales on a feeding ground in southern Chile. Mar. Mammal Sci. 34, 220–228 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Harris, D. V., Miksis-Olds, J. L., Vernon, J. A. & Thomas, L. Fin whale density and distribution estimation using acoustic bearings derived from sparse arrays. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 143, (2018).

44.
Aulich, M. G., McCauley, R. D., Saunders, B. J. & Parsons, M. J. G. Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) migration in Australian waters using passive acoustic monitoring. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–12 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Balcazar, N. E. et al. Using calls as an indicator for Antarctic blue whale occurrence and distribution across the southwest Pacific and southeast Indian Oceans. Mar. Mammal Sci. 33, 172–186 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Helble, T. A. et al. Site specific probability of passive acoustic detection of humpback whale calls from single fixed hydrophones. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 134, 2556–2570 (2013).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

47.
McDonald, M. A., Hildebrand, J. A. & Mesnick, S. Worldwide decline in tonal frequencies of blue whale songs. Endanger. Species Res. 9, 13–21 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Leroy, E. C., Royer, J.-Y., Bonnel, J. & Samaran, F. Long-term and seasonal vhanges of large whale call frequency in the Southern Indian Ocean. J. Geophys. Res. Ocean. 1–13 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JC014352.

49.
Gavrilov, A. N., Mccauley, R. D., Salgado-kent, C., Tripovich, J. & Burton, C. L. K. Vocal characteristics of pygmy blue whales and their change over time. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 130, 3651–3660 (2011).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

50.
Miller, B. S., Leaper, R., Calderan, S. & Gedamke, J. Red shift blue shift: Doppler shifts and seasonal variation in the tonality of Antarctic blue whale song. PLoS ONE 9, e107740 (2014).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

51.
Širović, A., Oleson, E. M., Buccowich, J., Rice, A. & Bayless, A. R. Fin whale song variability in southern California and the Gulf of California. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–11 (2017).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

52.
Nieukirk, S. L. et al. Sounds from airguns and fin whales recorded in the mid-Atlantic Ocean, 1999–2009. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 1102–1112 (2012).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

53.
Širović, A. Variability in the performance of the spectrogram correlation detector for North-east Pacific blue whale calls. Bioacoustics 25, 145–160 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Roch, M. A., Stinner-Sloan, J., Baumann-Pickering, S. & Wiggins, S. M. Compensating for the effects of site and equipment variation on delphinid species identification from their echolocation clicks. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 137, 22–29 (2015).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

55.
Thomisch, K. et al. Effects of subsampling of passive acoustic recordings on acoustic metrics. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 138, 267–278 (2015).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

56.
Pawlowicz, R. M_Map: A mapping package for Matlab. Version 1.4k (2019).

57.
Center for conservation bioacoustics. raven pro: interactive sound analysis software. (2014).

58.
Širović, A., Williams, L. N., Kerosky, S. M., Wiggins, S. M. & Hildebrand, J. A. Temporal separation of two fin whale call types across the eastern North Pacific. Mar. Biol. 160, 47–57 (2013).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

59.
Ou, H., Au, W. W. L., Oleson, E. M. & Rankin, S. Discrimination of frequency-modulated Baleen whale downsweep calls with overlapping frequencies. 137, 1 (2016).

60.
Lurton, X. Underwater acoustic wave propagation. in An Introduction to Underwater Acoustics Principles and Applications 13–74 (Springer-Verlag, 2010).

61.
Dawe, R. L. Detection Threshold Modelling Explained. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA335337 (1997).

62.
Davis, J. & Goadrich, M. The relationship between precision-recall and ROC curves. Proc. 23rd Int. Conf. Mach. Learn.—ICML’06 233–240 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1145/1143844.1143874.

63.
Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R, Second Edition (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315370279.

64.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (2019).

65.
Leroy, E. C., Thomisch, K., Royer, J., Boebel, O. & Van Opzeeland, I. On the reliability of acoustic annotations and automatic detections of Antarctic blue whale calls under different acoustic conditions. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 144, 740–754 (2018).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

66.
Tsang-Hin-Sun, E., Royer, J.-Y. & Leroy, E. C. Low-frequency sound level in the Southern Indian Ocean. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 138, 3439–3446 (2015).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

67.
Samaran, F., Adam, O. & Guinet, C. Detection range modeling of blue whale calls in Southwestern Indian Ocean. Appl. Acoust. 71, 1099–1106 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Marques, T. A. et al. Estimating animal population density using passive acoustics. Biol. Rev. 88, 287–309 (2013).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

69.
Baumgartner, M. F. & Mussoline, S. E. A generalized baleen whale call detection and classification system. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 129, 2889–2902 (2011).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

70.
Mellinger, D. & Bradbury, J. Acoustic measurement of marine mammal sounds in noisy environments. in Proc. Second International Conference on Underwater Acoustic Measurements Technologies and Results 25–29 (2007).

71.
Urazghildiiev, I. R. & Clark, C. W. Acoustic detection of North Atlantic right whale contact calls using the generalized likelihood ratio test. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 120, 1956–1963 (2006).
ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

72.
Dugan, P. et al. Using high performance computing to explore large complex bioacoustic soundscapes: case study for right whale acoustics. Procedia Comput. Sci. 20, 156–162 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Shiu, Y. et al. Use of deep neural networks for automated detection of marine mammal species. 1–29 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57549-y.

74.
Miller, B. S. et al. An annotated library of underwater acoustic recordings for testing and training automated algorithms for detecting Antarctic blue and fin whale sounds. Dataset hosted by the Australian Antarctic Data Centre http://data.aad.gov.au/metadata/records/AcousticTrends_BlueFinLibrary (2020) doi:https://doi.org/10.26179/5e6056035c01b. More