Philippa Kaur

Hung, K.-L.J., Kingston, J. M., Albrecht, M., Holway, D. A. & Kohn, J. R. The worldwide importance of honey bees as pollinators in natural habitats. Proc. R. Soc. B 285, 20172140 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Klein, A.-M. et al. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 274, 303–313 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mashilingi, S. K., Zhang, H., Garibaldi, L. A. & An, J. Honeybees are far too insufficient to supply optimum pollination services in agricultural systems worldwide. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 335, 108003 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stein, K. et al. Bee pollination increases yield quantity and quality of cash crops in Burkina Faso West Africa. Sci. Rep. 7, 17691 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Neumann, P. & Carreck, N. L. Honey bee colony losses. J. Apic. Res. 49, 1–6 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pettis, J. S. & Delaplane, K. S. Coordinated responses to honey bee decline in the USA. Apidologie 41, 256–263 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Potts, S. G. et al. Declines of managed honey bees and beekeepers in Europe. J. Apic. Res. 49, 15–22 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moritz, R. F. A. & Erler, S. Lost colonies found in a data mine: Global honey trade but not pests or pesticides as a major cause of regional honeybee colony declines. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 216, 44–50 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Osterman, J. et al. Global trends in the number and diversity of managed pollinator species. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 322, 107653 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Requier, F. et al. Trends in beekeeping and honey bee colony losses in Latin America. J. Apic. Res. 57, 657–662 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vandame, R. & Palacio, M. A. Preserved honey bee health in Latin America: a fragile equilibrium due to low-intensity agriculture and beekeeping?. Apidologie 41, 243–255 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Antúnez, K., Invernizzi, C., Mendoza, Y., vanEngelsdorp, D. & Zunino, P. Honeybee colony losses in Uruguay during 2013–2014. Apidologie 48, 364–370 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Castilhos, D., Bergamo, G. C. & Kastelic, J. P. Honey bee colony losses in Brazil in 2018–2019 / Perdas de colônias de abelhas no Brasil em 2018–2019. Braz. J. Anim. Environ. Res. 4, 5017–5041 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Castilhos, D., Bergamo, G. C., Gramacho, K. P. & Gonçalves, L. S. Bee colony losses in Brazil: a 5-year online survey. Apidologie 50, 263–272 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Maggi, M. et al. Honeybee health in South America. Apidologie 47, 835–854 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
SIAP. Sistema de Información Agroalimentaria de Consulta. http://www.agricultura.gob.mx/datos-abiertos/siap (2019).Namdar-Irani, M., Sotomayor, O. & Rodrigues, M. Tendencias estructurales en la agricultura de América Latina: desafíos para las políticas públicas. 45 (2020).Torres-Ruiz, A., Jones, R. W. & Barajas, R. A. Present and Potential use of Bees as Managed Pollinators in Mexico1. Southwestern entomologist (2013).Brodschneider, R. et al. Multi-country loss rates of honey bee colonies during winter 2016/2017 from the COLOSS survey. J. Apic. Res. 57, 452–457 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gray, A. et al. Loss rates of honey bee colonies during winter 2017/18 in 36 countries participating in the COLOSS survey, including effects of forage sources. J. Apic. Res. 58, 479–485 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Medina-Flores, C. A. et al. Pérdida de colonias de abejas melíferas y factores asociados en el centro-occidente de México en los inviernos del 2016 al 2019. Revista Bio Ciencias 8, 11 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
vanEngelsdorp, D. & Meixner, M. D. A historical review of managed honey bee populations in Europe and the United States and the factors that may affect them. J. Invert. Pathol. 103(Supplement), S80–S95 (2010).Hristov, P., Shumkova, R., Palova, N. & Neov, B. Honey bee colony losses: Why are honey bees disappearing?. Sociobiology 68, e5851–e5851 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shanahan, M. Honey bees and industrial agriculture: What researchers are missing, and why it’s a problem. J. Insect Sci. 22, 14 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nearman, A. & vanEngelsdorp, D. Water provisioning increases caged worker bee lifespan and caged worker bees are living half as long as observed 50 years ago. Sci. Rep. 12, 18660. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21401-2 (2022).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ellis, J. D., Evans, J. D. & Pettis, J. Colony losses, managed colony population decline, and Colony Collapse Disorder in the United States. J. Apic. Res. 49, 134–136 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guzmán-Novoa, E., Benítez, A. C., Montaño, L. G. E. & Novoa, G. G. Colonization, impact and control of Africanized honey bees in Mexico. Veterinaria México OA 42, (2011).Becerra-Guzmán, F., Guzmán-Novoa, E., Correa-Benítez, A. & Zozaya-Rubio, A. Length of life, age at first foraging and foraging life of Africanized and European honey bee (Apis mellifera) workers, during conditions of resource abundance. J. Apic. Res. 44, 151–156 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guzman-Novoa, E. & Uribe-Rubio, J. L. Honey production by European, Africanized and hybrid honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies in Mexico. American bee journal (2004).Guzman-Novoa, E. et al. The Process and Outcome of the Africanization of Honey Bees in Mexico: Lessons and Future Directions. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, (2020).Goulson, D., Nicholls, E., Botías, C. & Rotheray, E. L. Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science 347, 1255957 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Otto, C. R. V., Roth, C. L., Carlson, B. L. & Smart, M. D. Land-use change reduces habitat suitability for supporting managed honey bee colonies in the Northern Great Plains. PNAS 113, 10430–10435 (2016).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Outhwaite, C. L., McCann, P. & Newbold, T. Agriculture and climate change are reshaping insect biodiversity worldwide. Nature 605, 97–102 (2022).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hegland, S. J., Nielsen, A., Lázaro, A., Bjerknes, A.-L. & Totland, Ø. How does climate warming affect plant-pollinator interactions?. Ecol. Lett. 12, 184–195 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cooper, P. D., Schaffer, W. M. & Buchmann, S. L. Temperature Regulation of Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera) Foraging in the Sonoran Desert. J. Exp. Biol. 114, 1–15 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stalidzans, E. et al. Dynamics of weight change and temperature of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Colonies in a wintering building with controlled temperature. J. Econ. Entomol. 110, 13–23 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Qu, M., Wan, J. & Hao, X. Analysis of diurnal air temperature range change in the continental United States. Weather Clim. Extremes 4, 86–95 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Braganza, K., Karoly, D. J. & Arblaster, J. M. Diurnal temperature range as an index of global climate change during the twentieth century. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, (2004).Halsch, C. A. et al. Insects and recent climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118, e2002543117 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Abou-Shaara, H. F. The foraging behaviour of honey bees, Apis mellifera: A review. Vet. Med. 59, 1–10 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Joshi, N. & Joshi, P. Foraging Behaviour of Apis Spp. on Apple Flowers in a Subtropical Environment. New York Sci. J. 3, (2010).Gounari, S., Proutsos, N. & Goras, G. How does weather impact on beehive productivity in a Mediterranean island? Ital. J. Agrometeorol. 65–81. https://doi.org/10.36253/ijam-1195 (2022).Delgado, D. L., Pérez, M. E., Galindo-Cardona, A., Giray, T. & Restrepo, C. Forecasting the Influence of Climate Change on Agroecosystem Services: Potential Impacts on Honey Yields in a Small-Island Developing State. Psyche J. Entomol. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/psyche/2012/951215/. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/951215 (2012).Alves, L. H. S., Cassino, P. C. R. & Prezoto, F. Effects of abiotic factors on the foraging activity of Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758 in inflorescences of Vernonia polyanthes Less (Asteraceae). Acta Sci. Anim. Sci. 37, 405–409 (2015).Abou-Shaara, H. Expectations about the potential impacts of climate change on Honey Bee Colonies in Egypt. J. Apicult. 31, 157–164 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Donkersley, P., Rhodes, G., Pickup, R. W., Jones, K. C. & Wilson, K. Honeybee nutrition is linked to landscape composition. Ecol. Evol. 4, 4195–4206 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Michel-Cuello, C. & Aguilar-Rivera, N. Climate change effects on agricultural production systems in México. in Handbook of Climate Change Across the Food Supply Chain (eds. Leal Filho, W., Djekic, I., Smetana, S. & Kovaleva, M.) 335–353 (Springer International Publishing, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87934-1_19.LaFevor, M. C. Spatial and temporal changes in crop species production diversity in Mexico (1980–2020). Agriculture 12, 985 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smart, M. D., Otto, C. R. V. & Lundgren, J. G. Nutritional status of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) workers across an agricultural land-use gradient. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–10 (2019).Alaux, C., Ducloz, F., Crauser, D. & Conte, Y. L. Diet effects on honeybee immunocompetence. Biol. Lett. rsbl20090986. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0986 (2010).Dolezal, A. G., Carrillo-Tripp, J., Miller, W. A., Bonning, B. C. & Toth, A. L. Intensively Cultivated Landscape and Varroa Mite Infestation Are Associated with Reduced Honey Bee Nutritional State. PLoS One 11, (2016).Pasquale, G. D. et al. Variations in the Availability of Pollen Resources Affect Honey Bee Health. PLoS ONE 11, e0162818 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kaluza, B. F. et al. Social bees are fitter in more biodiverse environments. Sci Rep 8, 1–10 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ricigliano, V. A. et al. Honey bee colony performance and health are enhanced by apiary proximity to US Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands. Sci. Rep. 9, 4894 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Clermont, A., Eickermann, M., Kraus, F., Hoffmann, L. & Beyer, M. Correlations between land covers and honey bee colony losses in a country with industrialized and rural regions. Sci. Total Environ. 532, 1–13 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kuchling, S. et al. Investigating the role of landscape composition on honey bee colony winter mortality: A long-term analysis. Sci. Rep. 8, 1 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dixon, D. J., Zheng, H. & Otto, C. R. V. Land conversion and pesticide use degrade forage areas for honey bees in America’s beekeeping epicenter. PLoS ONE 16, e0251043 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mendoza-Ponce, A., Corona-Núñez, R. O., Galicia, L. & Kraxner, F. Identifying hotspots of land use cover change under socioeconomic and climate change scenarios in Mexico. Ambio 48, 336–349 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Magaña, M. et al. Productividad de la apicultura en México y su impacto sobre la rentabilidad. Revista mexicana de ciencias agrícolas 7, 1103–1115 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mitchell, E. a. D. et al. A worldwide survey of neonicotinoids in honey. Science 358, 109–111 (2017).Pacheco, A. P. Identificación de residuos tóxicos en miel de diferentes procedencias en la zona centro del Estado de Veracruz / Identification of toxic residues in honey from different sources in the central zone of the State of Veracruz. CIBA Revista Iberoamericana de las Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias 1, 1–42 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ruiz-Toledo, J. et al. Organochlorine Pesticides in Honey and Pollen Samples from Managed Colonies of the Honey Bee Apis mellifera Linnaeus and the Stingless Bee Scaptotrigona mexicana Guérin from Southern Mexico. Insects 9, 54 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Valdovinos-Flores, C., Alcantar-Rosales, V. M., Gaspar-Ramírez, O., Saldaña-Loza, L. M. & Dorantes-Ugalde, J. A. Agricultural pesticide residues in honey and wax combs from Southeastern, Central and Northeastern Mexico. J. Apic. Res. 56, 667–679 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gómez-Escobar, E. et al. Effect of GF-120 (Spinosad) aerial sprays on colonies of the stingless Bee Scaptotrigona mexicana (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and the Honey Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 111, 1711–1715 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sánchez, D., Solórzano, E. D. J., Liedo, P. & Vandame, R. Effect of the natural pesticide Spinosad (GF-120 Formulation) on the Foraging behavior of Plebeia moureana (Hymenoptera: Apidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 105, 1234–1237 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cabrera-Marín, N. V., Liedo, P. & Sánchez, D. The Effect of Application Rate of GF-120 (Spinosad) and Malathion on the Mortality of Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Foragers. J. Econ. Entomol. 109, 515–519 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Valdovinos-Núñez, G. R. et al. Comparative toxicity of pesticides to stingless bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae: Meliponini). J. Econ. Entomol. 102, 1737–1742 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
ANADA. Atlas Nacional de las Abejas y Derivados Apícolas. https://atlas-abejas.agricultura.gob.mx/cap2.html#212_Enfermedades_y_Plagas_de_las_Colmenas (2021).Potts, S. G. et al. Global pollinator declines: Trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 345–353 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Daberkow, S., Korb, P. & Hoff, F. Structure of the U.S. beekeeping industry: 1982–2002. J. Econ. Entomol. 102, 868–886 (2009).Saunders, S. P. et al. Unraveling a century of global change impacts on winter bird distributions in the eastern United States. Glob. Change Biol. 28, 2221–2235 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
CICESE. Base de datos climatológica nacional (Sistema CLICOM). http://clicom-mex.cicese.mx/ (2018).CONEVAL. Metodología para la medición de pobreza en México | CONEVAL. https://www.coneval.org.mx/Medicion/MP/Paginas/Metodologia.aspx.Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R, Second Edition. (CRC Press, 2017).Zuur, A., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A. & Smith, G. M. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R. (Springer-Verlag, 2009).Team, R. C. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/ (2016).Lichstein, J. W., Simons, T. R., Shriner, S. A. & Franzreb, K. E. Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 72, 445–463 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Döke, M. A., Frazier, M. & Grozinger, C. M. Overwintering honey bees: biology and management. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 10, 185–193 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lüdecke, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Patil, I., Waggoner, P. & Makowski, D. Performance: An R package for assessment, comparison and testing of statistical models. J. Open Sour. Softw. 6, 3139 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Simpson, G. L. Modelling palaeoecological time series using generalised additive models. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Furrer, R., Nychka, D., Sain, S. & Nychka, M. D. Title Tools for spatial data. (2012). More

Research areaThe YREB covers Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Anhui, Jiangxi, Hubei, Hunan, Chongqing, Sichuan, Guizhou, and Yunnan. It includes the Yangtze River Delta urban agglomerations (YRDUA), Yangtze River midstream urban agglomeration (YRMUA), and Chengdu-Chongqing urban agglomeration (CCUA). With a regional area of 2.05 million km2, the YREB runs through the eastern, central and western regions in China32. In 2019, the total GDP of YREB is 45.8 trillion yuan, accounting for 46.2% of the national GDP. The YREB plays a pivotal strategic support and leading role in the overall situation of stable economic growth in China33. At the same time, the contradiction between the shortage of land resources and economic growth in the YREB is very prominent. Therefore, this paper selects 107 cities in YREB as the research sample. The specific geographic locations are shown in Fig. 2. This article uses ARCGIS 10.2 version to draw the map. The URL link is http://demo.domain.com:6080/arcgis/services.Figure 2The geographic location of the YREB in China.Full size imageResearch methodsGlobal Malmquist–Luenberger indexUGLUE refers to the effective utilization degree of land elements under certain input of other elements. The green utilization of urban land mainly comes from three aspects: first, improve the utilization intensity of the existing actual input land, that is, increase the input intensity of other elements of the unit land area. Second, reduce the input of land in the production process to avoid excessive waste of land. Third, promote the optimal allocation of land elements among production units. Technical efficiency refers to the maximum degree that all factor inputs need to expand or shrink in equal proportion when all production units reach the production frontier. However, for production units with high technical efficiency, the factor allocation structure may not be reasonable. The land factors may still have the problem of under-input or over-input, resulting in the reduction of UGLUE.Pastor and Lovell34 proposed a global index, which uses all the inspection periods of each decision-making unit as a benchmark to construct the production frontier. According to the current benchmark construction period t, the production possibility set reference set is defined as follows:$$P_{C}^{t} (x^{t} ) = left{ {left. {(y^{t} ,b^{t} )} right|x^{t} {kern 1pt} can{kern 1pt} , produce{kern 1pt} , b^{t} ,y^{t} } right}$$
(1)
The global benchmark is defined as: (P_{G} = P_{C}^{1} , cup ,P_{C}^{2} , cup , cdots ,P_{C}^{t}), The subscripts C and G represent the current benchmark and the global benchmark respectively. The ML index of decision-making unit i is calculated based on the current reference benchmark:$$ML^{S} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} ,x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} ) = frac{{1 + D_{C}^{S} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} )}}{{1 + D_{C}^{S} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} )}}$$
(2)
Among them, the superscript S indicates two adjacent periods, t period and t + 1 period. The subscript C indicates the current benchmark, which is a simplified directional distance function. (ML^{s} > 1), indicates that the productivity increases. (ML^{s} < 1), indicates that the productivity decreases.According to Hofmann et al.35, the GMLI is defined as follows:$$GMLI^{t,t + 1} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} ,x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} ) = frac{{1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} )}}{{1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} )}}$$ (3) Among them, (D_{G}^{T} (x,y,b) = max left{ {alpha |(y - alpha y,b - alpha b) in P_{G} (x)} right}). (GMLI^{t,t + 1} > 1) indicates that the productivity has increased. (GMLI^{t,t + 1} < 1) indicates that the productivity decreases. The GMLI is further broken down as follows:$$begin{aligned} & GMLI^{t,t + 1} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} ,x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} ) = frac{{1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} )}}{{1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} )}} \ & quad = frac{{1 + D_{G}^{t} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} )}}{{1 + D_{G}^{t + 1} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} )}} times left[ {frac{{(1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} ))/(1 + D_{C}^{T} (x^{t} ,y^{t} ,b^{t} ))}}{{(1 + D_{G}^{T} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} ))/(1 + D_{C}^{T} (x^{t + 1} ,y^{t + 1} ,b^{t + 1} ))}}} right] \ & quad = frac{{TE^{t + 1} }}{{TE^{t} }} times left( {frac{{BPG_{t + 1}^{t + 1} }}{{BPG_{t}^{t + 1} }}} right) = EC_{t}^{t + 1} times BPC_{t}^{t + 1} \ end{aligned}$$ (4) Among them, TE is the change of technological progress. EC is the change of technological efficiency. The change of technological progress reflects the change of the highest technical level. The improvement of the highest technical level often requires the introduction and innovation of advanced technology, which often requires a large amount of investment. The change of technical efficiency reflects the gap with the highest technical level. Narrowing the gap with the highest technical level often requires improvements in internal management and governance structures. (BPG_{t}^{t + 1}) is the “best practitioner gap” between the current period and overall technological frontier. (BPC_{t}^{t + 1}) measures the changes in the “best practitioner gap” between two periods (technological changes). (BPC_{t}^{t + 1} , > , 1 ,) indicates technological progress. (BPC_{t}^{t + 1} < 1) indicates technology regress.Econometric techniques of industrial agglomeration on UGLUEIn recent years, many scholars used the traditional SPM for empirical analysis, which is a basic measurement model suitable for panel data. Therefore, this article firstly uses the traditional SPM to analyze the impact of industrial agglomeration on UGLUE. The formula is:$$begin{aligned} ln UGLUE_{it} & = alpha_{0} + alpha_{1} ln RZI_{it} + alpha_{2} ln RZI_{it} *ln RZI_{it} + alpha_{3} ln RDI_{it} + alpha_{4} ln EC_{it} \ & quad + alpha_{5} ln GDP_{it} + alpha_{6} ln TEC_{it} + alpha_{7} ln ROAD_{it} + alpha_{8} ln GOV_{it} + varepsilon_{it} \ end{aligned}$$ (5) Among them, ε is the disturbance term. i represents the city, i in this paper involves 107 cities in YREB. t represents the time, and the range of t in this paper is from 2007 to 2016. UGLUE is the explained variable, which represents the UGLUE. RZI and RDI are explanatory variables, representing industrial specialization agglomeration and industrial diversification agglomeration. EC is the industrial structure. GDP is the level of economic development. TEC is the level of technology. ROAD is the level of infrastructure. GOV is the degree of government intervention. (alpha_{1}) to (alpha_{8}) is the coefficient of each variable.Formula (5) assumes that the UGLUE changes with the changes of various influencing factors in the current period. That is, there is no time lag effect. But in reality, land use often has a time lag effect. The previous level has a non-negligible impact on the current results. Therefore, this paper selects the dynamic panel model for empirical analysis. However, there is often a two-way causal relationship between industrial agglomeration and UGLUE, which may cause endogenous bias. For example, cities with higher UGLUE levels tend to have higher levels of economic development, which promotes industrial agglomeration in this city. Therefore, this paper adopts the method of system GMM for regression analysis of dynamic panel model. Compared with mixed OLS, system GMM can make full use of sample information, select appropriate lag terms as instrumental variables36. It can effectively solve the endogeneity problem between industrial agglomeration and UGLUE. Based on the above analysis, this paper introduces the first-order lag term of UGLUE on the basis of formula (5). The DPM is as follows:$$begin{aligned} ln UGLUE_{it} & = beta_{0} + tau ln UGLUE_{i(t - 1)} + beta_{1} ln RZI_{it} + beta_{2} ln RZI_{it} times ln RZI_{it} + beta_{3} ln RDI_{it} \ & quad + beta_{4} ln EC_{it} + beta_{5} ln GDP_{it} + beta_{6} ln TEC_{it} + beta_{7} ln ROAD_{it} + beta_{8} ln GOV_{it} + varepsilon_{{{text{it}}}} \ end{aligned}$$ (6) Among them, (tau) is the first-order lag coefficient of UGLUE, reflecting the time lag effect of UGLUE.Variable descriptionExplained variableThe GMLI is used to measure the UGLUE of 107 cities in YREB. According to existing research37, the following core evaluation index of UGLUE are selected (see Table 1). Regarding input indicators, we mainly choose land element input M, labor element input L, and capital element input K as input indicators. Regarding output indicators, we choose the added value of the secondary and tertiary industries in the municipal area as the expected output, and use the GDP deflator to convert it into a comparable value. At the same time, pollution indicators such as industrial wastewater emissions, industrial sulfur dioxide emissions, and industrial smoke (dust) emissions are selected as undesired output. Since the GMLI reflects the growth rate of UGLUE, this paper assumes that the GMLI in 2006 is 1, and then multiplies the calculated GMLI year by year to obtain the development level of UGLUE in each city from 2007 to 2016.Table 1 Input and output index.Full size tableExplanatory variablesIndustrial specialization index ZI is usually used to measure the specialization level of urban industries. The specialization index is represented by the share of the employment of the industry in the total employment of the city:$$ZI_{i} = Max_{j} (S_{ij} )$$ (7) Nextly, we use the relative specialization index to make a horizontal comparison of the specialization level between different cities:$$RZI_{i} = Max(S_{ij} /S_{j} )$$ (8) The most common measure of the level of industrial diversification is the Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI). For city i, the HHI is the sum of the square sum of employment shares of all industries in the city. The diversification index is the reciprocal of the HHI:$$DZ_{i} = frac{1}{{sumlimits_{j} {S_{ij}^{2} } }}$$ (9) The expression of relative diversification index is as follows:$$RDI_{i} = {1 mathord{left/ {vphantom {1 {sumlimits_{j} {left| {S_{ij} - S_{j} } right|} }}} right. kern-0pt} {sumlimits_{j} {left| {S_{ij} - S_{j} } right|} }}$$ (10) Among them, Sij is the employment proportion of j industry in city i, and Sj is the proportion of the total employment of the national j industry. The greater value of RZI and RDI, the higher level of industrial specialization and diversification.Control variablesRegarding control variables, we choose the following variables as control variables.Industrial structure (EC): The continuous optimization of industrial structure promotes the improvement of UGLUE through three aspects: saving land, increasing land income and promoting the optimal allocation of land resources. This paper selects the added value of the tertiary industry as a percentage of GDP (take the logarithm) to express.Technological level (TEC): The higher the technological innovation level of a city is, the more it promotes the use of input elements and the transformation of innovation results, thereby improving the UGLUE. This paper selects the proportion of science and technology expenditure to fiscal expenditure (take the logarithm) to represent.Economic development level (GDP): The continuous economic development promote the rational allocation of various production factors and increase the level of urban land output, thereby improving the UGLUE. This paper selects GDP per capita (take the logarithm) to express.Road infrastructure level (ROAD): The continuous improvement of infrastructure reduces transportation costs and transaction costs, and promotes communication externalities between producers, consumers, and between producers and consumers. This paper selects the average road area per capita (take the logarithm) to express.Government behavior (GOV): Fiscal expenditure is an important means for the government to carry out macro-control. Appropriate fiscal expenditure makes up for market shortages, improves factor flow and resource allocation efficiency, and realizes positive economic externalities. This paper selects the proportion of fiscal expenditure to GDP (take the logarithm) to express. We can see the meaning of specific variables from Table 2.Table 2 The descriptive statistics of variables.Full size tableData sourceThe object of this thesis is the 107 cities in YREB from 2007 to 2016. The urban construction land area data comes from the "China Urban Construction Statistical Yearbook", and the rest of the index data all come from the "China City Statistical Yearbook". The URL link is https://www.cnki.net/. In order to maintain the integrity of the data, this article uses the average method to fill in the missing values. In addition, because Chaohu City began to be under the jurisdiction of Hefei City in 2011, Bijie City and Tongren City in Guizhou Province only became prefecture-level cities in 2011. The three cities and Pu'er City are taken from the sample to maintain the continuity of data. More

Possingham, H. P., Wilson, K. A., Andelman, S. J. & Vynne, C. H. Protected areas. Goals, limitations, and design. In Principles of Conservation Biology (eds Groom, M. J. et al.) 507–549 (Sinauer Associates Inc, 2006).
Google Scholar 
Marquet, P. A., Lessmann, J. & Shaw, M. R. Protected-area management and climate change. In Biodiversity and Climate Change: Transforming the Biosphere (eds Lovejoy, T. E. & Hannah, L.) 283–293 (Yale University Press, 2019).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J., Manica, A., Burgess, N. D., Coad, L. & Balmford, A. A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. PNAS https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908221116 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Potapov, P. et al. The last frontiers of wilderness: Tracking loss of intact forest landscapes from 2000 to 2013. Sci. Adv. 3, e1600821 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Cazalis, V. et al. Effectiveness of protected areas in conserving tropical forest birds. Nat. Commun. 11, 4461 (2020).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dudley, N., Mansourian, S., Stolton, S. & Suksuwan, S. Do protected areas contribute to poverty reduction?. Biodiversity 11, 5–7 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dudley, N. & Stolton, S. Arguments for Protected Areas (Earthscan, 2010).Book 

Google Scholar 
CBD. Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020, Including Aichi Biodiversity Targets. http://www.cbd.int/sp/ and http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=12268 (2010).UNEP-WCMC & IUCN. Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). www.protectedplanet.net. Accessed October 2022 (2022).Watson, J. E. M. et al. Persistent disparities between recent rates of habitat conversion and protection and implications for future global conservation targets. Conserv. Lett. 9, 413–421 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Díaz, S. et al. Summary for Policymakers of the IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. (2019).Barnes, M. D., Glew, L., Wyborn, C. & Craigie, I. D. Prevent perverse outcomes from global protected area policy. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 759–762 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Visconti, P. et al. Protected area targets post-2020. Science 364, 239–241 (2019).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kukkala, A. S. & Moilanen, A. Core concepts of spatial prioritisation in systematic conservation planning. Biol. Rev. 88, 443–464 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Joppa, L. N. & Pfaff, A. High and Far: Biases in the location of protected areas. PLoS ONE 4, e8273 (2009).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Maxwell, S. L. et al. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586, 217–227 (2020).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
CBD. CoP 7 Decision VII/30. Strategic Plan: Future Evaluation of progress. 12 https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-07/cop-07-dec-30-en.pdf (2004).Venter, O. et al. Bias in protected-area location and its effects on long-term aspirations of biodiversity conventions. Conserv. Biol. 32, 127–134 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuempel, C. D., Chauvenet, A. L. M. & Possingham, H. P. Equitable representation of ecoregions is slowly improving despite strategic planning shortfalls. Conserv. Lett. 9, 422–428 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barr, L. M., Watson, J. E. M., Possingham, H. P., Iwamura, T. & Fuller, R. A. Progress in improving the protection of species and habitats in Australia. Biol. Conserv. 200, 184–191 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, S., Irl, S. D. H. & Beierkuhnlein, C. Predicted climate shifts within terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–10 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hannah, L. Protected areas and climate change. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1134, 201–212 (2008).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Thomas, C. D. & Gillingham, P. K. The performance of protected areas for biodiversity under climate change. Biol. J. Lin. Soc. 115, 718–730 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ramirez-Villegas, J. et al. Using species distributions models for designing conservation strategies of Tropical Andean biodiversity under climate change. J. Nat. Conserv. 22, 391–404 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bax, V. & Francesconi, W. Conservation gaps and priorities in the Tropical Andes biodiversity hotspot: Implications for the expansion of protected areas. J. Environ. Manage. 232, 387–396 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jenkins, C. N., Pimm, S. L. & Joppa, L. N. Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. PNAS 110, E2602–E2610 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rodrigues, A. S. L. et al. Global gap analysis: Priority regions for expanding the global protected-area network. Bioscience 54, 1092–1100 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thuiller, W., Georges, D., Engler, R. & Breiner, F. biomod2: Ensemble Platform for Species Distribution Modeling. (2015).Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Friedman, J. H. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Ann. Stat. 29, 1189–1232 (2001).Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P., Dudík, M., Schapire, R. E. & Blair, M. E. Opening the black box: An open-source release of Maxent. Ecography 40, 887–893 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. (2017).Gotelli, N. J. & Graves, G. R. Null Models in Ecology. (1996).Araújo, M. B. & Pearson, R. G. Equilibrium of species’ distributions with climate. Ecography 28, 693–695 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Watson, J. E. M., Grantham, H. S., Wilson, K. A. & Possingham, H. P. Systematic conservation planning: Past, present and future. In Conservation Biogeography (eds Ladle, R. J. & Whittaker, R. J.) (Wiley, 2011).
Google Scholar 
Bevilacqua, M. Áreas protegidas y conservación de la diversidad biológica. Biodivers. Venezuela 2, 922–943 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Franco, P., Saavedra-Rodríguez, C. A. & Kattan, G. H. Bird species diversity captured by protected areas in the Andes of Colombia: A gap analysis. Oryx 41, 57–63 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barzetti, V. Parks and Progress: Protected Areas and Economic Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. (1993).Schulman, L. et al. Amazonian biodiversity and protected areas: Do they meet?. Biodivers. Conserv. 16, 3011–3051 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dourojeanni, M. J. Áreas naturales protegidas e investigación científica en el Perú. Rev. For. Perú 33, 91–101 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Rodriguez, L. & Young, K. Biological diversity of peru: Determining priority areas for conservation. Ambio 29, 329–337 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ministerio del Ambiente & SERNANP. Plan Director de las Áreas Naturales Protegidas (Estrategia Nacional) (2009).Cuesta-Camacho, F. et al. Identificación de Vacíos y Prioridades de Conservación Para la Biodiversidad Terrestre en el Ecuador Continental. http://protectedareas.info/upload/document/ecuador_terrestrial_gap_analysis.pdf (2006).Naveda, J. A. Evaluación del grado de representatividad ecológica y geográfica del sistema de parques nacionales de Venezuela al norte del Orinoco: Anteproyecto. Rev. Geog. Venez. 38, 193–208 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Araujo, N., Müller, R., Nowicki, C. & Ibisch, P. L. Prioridades de conservación de la biodiversidad de Bolivia (editorial FAN, 2010)Arango, N. et al. Vacíos de Conservación del Sistema de Parques Nacionales Naturales de Colombia desde una Perspectiva Ecorregional. https://wwflac.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/vacios_de_conservacion.pdf (2003).Margules, C. R. & Pressey, R. L. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405, 243–253 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sarkar, S., Sánchez-Cordero, V., Londoño, M. C. & Fuller, T. Systematic conservation assessment for the Mesoamerica, Chocó, and Tropical Andes biodiversity hotspots: A preliminary analysis. Biodivers. Conserv. 18, 1793–1828 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lessmann, J., Muñoz, J. & Bonaccorso, E. Maximizing species conservation in continental Ecuador: A case of systematic conservation planning for biodiverse regions. Ecol. Evol. 4, 2410–2422 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Young, B. E. et al. Using spatial models to predict areas of endemism and gaps in the protection of Andean slope birds. Auk 126, 554–565 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fajardo, J., Lessmann, J., Bonaccorso, E., Devenish, C. & Muñoz, J. Combined use of systematic conservation planning, species distribution modelling, and connectivity analysis reveals severe conservation gaps in a megadiverse country (Peru). PLoS ONE 9, 1–23 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Butchart, S. H. M. et al. Shortfalls and solutions for meeting national and global conservation area targets. Conserv. Lett. 8, 329–337 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pimm, S. L. et al. The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science 344, 6187 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Swenson, J. J. et al. Plant and animal endemism in the eastern Andean slope: Challenges to conservation. BMC Ecol. 12, 1 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lessmann, J., Fajardo, J., Bonaccorso, E. & Bruner, A. Cost-effective protection of biodiversity in the western Amazon. Biol. Conserv. 235, 250–259 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodrigues, A. S. L. & Gaston, K. J. How large do reserve networks need to be?. Ecol. Lett. 4, 602–609 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Reyes-Puig, C. Diversity, threat, and conservation of reptiles from continental Ecuador. Amphib. Reptile Conserv. 11, 8 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Shanee, S. et al. Protected area coverage of threatened vertebrates and ecoregions in Peru: Comparison of communal, private and state reserves. J. Environ. Manage. 202, 12–20 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kujala, H., Moilanen, A., Araújo, M. B. & Cabeza, M. Conservation planning with uncertain climate change projections. PLoS ONE 8, e53315 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hannah, L. et al. 30% land conservation and climate action reduces tropical extinction risk by more than 50%. Ecography 43, 1–11 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Velásquez-Tibatá, J., Salaman, P. & Graham, C. H. Effects of climate change on species distribution, community structure, and conservation of birds in protected areas in Colombia. Reg. Environ. Change 13, 235–248 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
del Avalos, V. R. & Hernández, J. Projected distribution shifts and protected area coverage of range-restricted Andean birds under climate change. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 4, 459–469 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Warren, R. et al. Quantifying the benefit of early climate change mitigation in avoiding biodiversity loss. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 678–682 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Golden Kroner, R. et al. COVID-era policies and economic recovery plans: Are governments building back better for protected and conserved areas?. PARKS 27, 135–148 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
IPCC Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) (Cambridge University Press, 2013).
Google Scholar 
Chevalier, M., Zarzo-Arias, A., Guélat, J., Mateo, R. G. & Guisan, A. Accounting for niche truncation to improve spatial and temporal predictions of species distributions. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2022.944116 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Watson, J. E. M. et al. Bolder science needed now for protected areas. Conserv. Biol. 30, 243–248 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
CBD. Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, Draft Decision Submitted by the PRESIDENT. (2022). CBD/COP/15/L.25. https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/e6d3/cd1d/daf663719a03902a9b116c34/cop-15-l-25-en.pdfCBD. Report of the Expert Workshop on the Monitoring Framework for the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (CBD, 2022).
Google Scholar 
Chaplin-Kramer, R. et al. Mapping the planet’s critical natural assets. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01934-5 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Watson, J. E. M. et al. The exceptional value of intact forest ecosystems. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 599–610 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Elbers, J. Las Áreas Protegidas de América Latina: Situación Actual y Perspectivas PARA el Futuro (2011).Miller, D. C. & Nakamura, K. S. Protected areas and the sustainable governance of forest resources. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 32, 96–103 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guisan, A. & Zimmermann, N. E. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol. Model. 135, 147–186 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G. & Jarvis, A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 1965–1978 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
van Proosdij, A. S. J., Sosef, M. S. M., Wieringa, J. J. & Raes, N. Minimum required number of specimen records to develop accurate species distribution models. Ecography 39, 542–552 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Breiner, F. T., Guisan, A., Bergamini, A. & Nobis, M. P. Overcoming limitations of modelling rare species by using ensembles of small models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 1210–1218 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, S. J. et al. Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: Implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol. Appl. 19, 181–197 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thornhill, A. H. et al. Spatial phylogenetics of the native California flora. BMC Biol 15, 96 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Radosavljevic, A. & Anderson, R. P. Making better Maxent models of species distributions: Complexity, overfitting and evaluation. J. Biogeogr. 41, 629–643 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kershaw, F. et al. Informing conservation units: Barriers to dispersal for the yellow anaconda. Divers. Distrib. 19, 1164–1174 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Venter, O. et al. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001891 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gaston, K. J. The Structure and Dynamics of Geographic Ranges (Oxford University Press, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Yin, L., Fu, R., Shevliakova, E. & Dickinson, R. E. How well can CMIP5 simulate precipitation and its controlling processes over tropical South America?. Clim. Dyn. 41, 3127–3143 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Dulvy, N. K., Sadovy, Y. & Reynolds, J. D. Extinction vulnerability in marine populations. Fish Fish. 4, 25–64 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fowler S. L. et al. Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras: The Status of the Chondrichthyan Fishes. IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK (2005).Dulvy, N. K. et al. Extinction risk and conservation of the world’s sharks and rays. Elife 3, e00590 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lack M. & Sant G. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Shark Catch: A review of current knowledge and action. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and TRAFFIC, Canberra http://www.traffic.org/fish/ (2008).Rose D.A. An Overview of World Trade in Sharks and Other Cartilaginous Fishes. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK (1996).Lam, V. Y. & Sadovy, M. Y. The sharks of South East Asia–unknown, unmonitored and unmanaged. Fish Fish 12, 51–74 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kessel S.T. Investigation into the behaviour and population dynamics of the lemon shark (Negaprion brevirostris). Cardiff University (United Kingdom) (2010).Morrissey, J. F. & Gruber, S. H. Habitat selection by juvenile lemon sharks Negaprion brevirostris. Environ. Biol. Fishes 38, 311–319 (1993).Article 

Google Scholar 
Filmalter, J. D., Dagorn, L. & Cowley, P. D. Spatial behaviour and site fidelity of the sicklefin lemon shark Negaprion acutidens in a remote Indian Ocean atoll. Mari. Biol. 160, 2425–2436 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
DiBattista, J. D. et al. A genetic assessment of polyandry and breeding site fidelity in lemon sharks. Mol. Ecol. 17, 3337–3351 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wetherbee, B. M., Gruber, S. H. & Rosa, R. S. Movement patterns of juvenile lemon sharks Negaprion brevirostris within Atol das Rocas, Brazil: A nursery characterized by tidal extremes. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Seri. 343, 283–293 (2007).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Feldheim, K. A. et al. Two decades of genetic profiling yields first evidence of natal philopatry and long-term fidelity to parturition sites in sharks. Mol. Ecol. 23, 110–117 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stevens J. D. et al. Diversity, abundance and habitat utilisation of sharks and rays: Final report to West Australian Marine Science Institute. CSIRO, editor. Hobart (2009).Schultz, J. K. et al. Global phylogeography and seascape genetics of the lemon sharks (genus Negaprion). Mol. Ecol. 17, 5336–5348 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mourier, J., Buray, N., Schultz, J. K., Clua, E. & Planes, S. Genetic network and breeding patterns of a sicklefin lemon shark (Negaprion acutidens) population in the Society Islands, French Polynesia. PLoS ONE 8, e73899 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Speed, C. W. et al. Reef shark movements relative to a coastal marine protected area. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 3, 58–66 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Huang, Z. Marine Species and Their Distribution in China’s Seas (Krieger Publishing Company, 2001).
Google Scholar 
Chang, C. W., Huang, C. S. & Wang, S. I. Species composition and sizes of fish in the lagoon of dongsha island (Pratas Island), Dongsha Atoll of the South China sea. Platax 2012, 25–32 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Pillans, R. D. et al. Long-term acoustic monitoring reveals site fidelity, reproductive migrations, and sex specific differences in habitat use and migratory timing in a large coastal shark (Negaprion acutidens). Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 616633 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Daly-Engel, T. S. et al. Global phylogeography with mixed-marker analysis reveals male-mediated dispersal in the endangered scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini). PLoS ONE 7, e29986 (2012).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Félix-López, D. G. et al. Possible female philopatry of the smooth hammerhead shark Sphyrna zygaena revealed by genetic structure patterns. J. Fish Biol. 94, 671–679 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nosal, A. P., Caillat, A., Kisfaludy, E. K., Royer, M. A. & Wegner, N. C. Aggregation behavior and seasonal philopatry in male and female leopard sharks Triakis semifasciata along the open coast of southern California, USA. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 499, 157–175 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Jirik, K. E. & Lowe, C. G. An elasmobranch maternity ward: Female round stingrays Urobatis halleri use warm, restored estuarine habitat during gestation. J. Fish. Biol. 80(5), 1227–1245 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jacoby, D. M., Croft, D. P. & Sims, D. W. Social behaviour in sharks and rays: Analysis, patterns and implications for conservation. Fish Fish 13(4), 399–417 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Su, S. H., Liu, S. Y. V., Liu, K. M. & Tsai, W. P. Development and characterization of novel microsatellite loci for an endangered hammerhead shark Sphyrna lewini by using shotgun sequencing. Taiwania 65(2), 261–263 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Dieringer, D. & Schlötterer, C. Microsatellite analyser (MSA): A platform independent analysis tool for large microsatellite data sets. Mol. Ecol. Notes 3, 167–169 (2003).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Van Oosterhout, C., Hutchinson, W. F., Wills, D. P. & Shipley, P. Micro-checker: Software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4, 535–538 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M. & Donnelly, P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Falush, D., Stephens, M. & Pritchard, J. K. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: Dominant markers and null alleles. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 574–578 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Earl, D. A. & VonHoldt, B. M. Structure harvester: A website and program for visualizing structure output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv. Genet. Resour. 4, 359–361 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jakobsson, M. & Rosenberg, N. A. CLUMPP: A cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23(14), 1801–1806 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Peakall, R. & Smouse, P. E. GenAlEx 6.5: Genetic analysis in excel population genetic software for teaching and research–an update. Bioinformatics 28, 2537–2539 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kamvar, Z. N., Tabima, J. F. & Grünwald, N. J. POPPR: An R package for genetic analysis of populations with clonal, partially clonal, and/or sexual reproduction. PeerJ 2, e281 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kalinowski, S. T., Wagner, A. P. & Taper, M. L. ML-Relate: A computer program for maximum likelihood estimation of relatedness and relationship. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 6, 576–579 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Do, C. et al. NeEstimator v2: Re-implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 14, 209–214 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Oh, B. Z. et al. Contrasting patterns of residency and space use of coastal sharks within a communal shark nursery. Mar. Freshw. Res. 68, 1501–1517 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
McClelland J. Genetic Assessment of Breeding Patterns and Population Size of the Sicklefin Lemon Shark Negaprion acutidens in a Tropical Marine Protected Area: Implications for Conservation and Management (Doctoral dissertation, University of York) (2020).Compagno L. J .V. FAO species catalogue Sharks of the world: An annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. FAO Fish. Synop. No. 125 Rome 4, 1–655 (1984).Stevens, J. D. Life-history and ecology of sharks at aldabra Atoll. Indian Ocean. Proc R Soc. B 222, 79–106 (1984).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Kool, J. T., Moilanen, A. & Treml, E. A. Population connectivity: Recent advances and new perspectives. Landsc. Ecol. 28, 165–185 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ruzzante, D. E. et al. Effective number of breeders, effective population size and their relationship with census size in an iteroparous species Salvelinus fontinalis. Proc. R Soc. B 283, 20152601 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Van Wyngaarden, M. et al. Identifying patterns of dispersal, connectivity and selection in the sea scallop, Placopecten magellanicus, using RADseq-derived SNPs. Evol. Appl. 10, 102–117 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Frankham, R., Bradshaw, C. J. A. & Brook, B. W. Genetics in conservation management: Revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red list criteria and population viability analyses. Biol. Conserv. 170, 56–63 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pazmiño, D. A., Maes, G. E., Simpfendorfer, C. A., Salinas-de-León, P. & van Herwerden, L. Genome-wide SNPs reveal low effective population size within confined management units of the highly vagile Galapagos shark (Carcharhinus galapagensis). Conserv. Genet. 18, 1151–1163 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Waples, R. S. & Do, C. Linkage disequilibrium estimates of contemporary Ne using highly variable genetic markers: A largely untapped resource for applied conservation and evolution. Evol. Appl. 3, 244–262 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dudgeon, C. L. & Ovenden, J. R. The relationship between abundance and genetic effective population size in elasmobranchs: An example from the globally threatened zebra shark Stegostoma fasciatum within its protected range. Conserv. Genet. 16, 1443–1454 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Feldheim, K. A., Gruber, S. H. & Ashley, M. V. Population genetic structure of the lemon shark (Negaprion brevirostris) in the western Atlantic: DNA microsatellite variation. Mol. Ecol. 10, 295–303 (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Feldheim, K. A., Gruber, S. H. & Ashley, M. V. The breeding biology of lemon sharks at a tropical nursery lagoon. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1471–2954 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Portnoy, D., McDowell, J. R., Thompson, K., Musick, J. A. & Graves, J. E. Isolation and characterization of five dinucleotide microsatellite loci in the sandbar shark, Carcharhinus plumbeus. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6, 431–433 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar  More

Steffen, W. Introducing the Anthropocene: The human epoch. Ambio 50, 1784–1787 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Keys, P. W. et al. Anthropocene risk. Nat. Sustain. 2, 667–673 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bell, G. Evolutionary rescue and the limits of adaptation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 368, 20120080 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Byrne, M. & Przeslawski, R. Multistressor impacts of warming and acidification of the ocean on marine invertebrates’ life histories. Integr. Comp. Biol. 53, 582–596 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Feely, R. A. et al. Impact of anthropogenic CO2 on the CaCO3 system in the oceans. Science 305, 362–366 (2004).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Doney, S. C., Fabry, V. J., Feely, R. A. & Kleypas, J. A. Ocean acidification: the other CO2 problem. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 1, 169–192 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hill, T. S. & Hoogenboom, M. O. The indirect effects of ocean acidification on corals and coral communities. Coral Reefs https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-022-02286-z (2022).Biagi, E. et al. Patterns in microbiome composition differ with ocean acidification in anatomic compartments of the Mediterranean coral Astroides calycularis living at CO2 vents. Sci. Total Environ. 724, 138048 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Chen, B. et al. Microbiome community and complexity indicate environmental gradient acclimatisation and potential microbial interaction of endemic coral holobionts in the South China Sea. Sci. Total Environ. 765, 142690 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Palumbi, S. R., Barshis, D. J., Traylor-Knowles, N. & Bay, R. A. Mechanisms of reef coral resistance to future climate change. Science 344, 895–898 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wood, R. The ecological evolution of reefs. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29, 179–206 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Drake, J. L. et al. How corals made rocks through the ages. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 31–53 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stanley, G. D. Photosymbiosis and the evolution of modern coral reefs. Science 312, 857–858 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kitahara, M. V., Cairns, S. D., Stolarski, J., Blair, D. & Miller, D. J. A comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of the scleractinia (Cnidaria, Anthozoa) based on mitochondrial CO1 sequence data. PLoS One. 5, e11490 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dubinsky, Z. & Jokiel, P. Ratio of energy and nutrient fluxes regulates symbiosis between zooxanthellae and corals. Pac. Sci. 48, 313–324 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Falkowski, P. G., Dubinsky, Z., Muscatine, L. & Porter, J. W. Light and the bioenergetics of a symbiotic coral. Bioscience 34, 705–709 (1984).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Frankowiak, K., Roniewicz, E. & Stolarski, J. Photosymbiosis in Late Triassic scleractinian corals from the Italian Dolomites. PeerJ 9, e11062 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Davy, S. K., Allemand, D. & Weis, V. M. Cell biology of cnidarian-dinoflagellate symbiosis. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 76, 229–261 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kremer, P. Ingestion and elemental budgets for Linuche unguiculata, a scyphomedusa with zooxanthellae. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK. 85, 613–625 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Welsh, D. T., Dunn, R. J. K. & Meziane, T. Oxygen and nutrient dynamics of the upside down jellyfish (Cassiopea sp.) and its influence on benthic nutrient exchanges and primary production. Hydrobiologia 635, 351–362 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Muscatine, L., McCloskey, L. R. & Marian, R. E. Estimating the daily contribution of carbon from zooxanthellae to coral animal respiration. Limnol. Oceanogr. 26, 601–611 (1981).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ferrier‐Pagès, C. & Leal, M. C. Stable isotopes as tracers of trophic interactions in marine mutualistic symbioses. Ecol. Evol. 9, 723–740 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Teixidó, N. et al. Ocean acidification causes variable trait shifts in a coral species. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 6813–6830 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fantazzini, P. et al. Gains and losses of coral skeletal porosity changes with ocean acidification acclimation. Nat. Commun. 6, 7785 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Prada, F. et al. Coral micro- and macro-morphological skeletal properties in response to life-long acclimatization at CO2 vents in Papua New Guinea. Sci. Rep. 11, 19927 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kerrison, P., Hall-Spencer, J. M., Suggett, D. J., Hepburn, L. J. & Steinke, M. Assessment of pH variability at a coastal CO2 vent for ocean acidification studies. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 94, 129–137 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, V. R., Russell, B. D., Fabricius, K. E., Brownlee, C. & Hall-Spencer, J. M. Temperate and tropical brown macroalgae thrive, despite decalcification, along natural CO2 gradients. Glob. Chang. Biol. 18, 2792–2803 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Caroselli, E. et al. Low and variable pH decreases recruitment efficiency in populations of a temperate coral naturally present at a CO2 vent. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 1059–1069 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
González-Delgado, S. & Hernández, J. C. The importance of natural acidified systems in the study of ocean acidification: what have we learned? Adv. Mar. Biol. 80, 57–99 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Capaccioni, B., Tassi, F., Vaselli, O., Tedesco, D. & Poreda, R. Submarine gas burst at Panarea Island (southern Italy) on 3 November 2002: A magmatic versus hydrothermal episode. J. Geophys. Res. 112, B05201 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Reggi, M. et al. Biomineralization in mediterranean corals: The role of the intraskeletal organic matrix. Cryst. Growth Des. 14, 4310–4320 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Prada, F. et al. Ocean warming and acidification synergistically increase coral mortality. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–10 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Goffredo, S. et al. Biomineralization control related to population density under ocean acidification. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 593–597 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wall, M. et al. Linking internal carbonate chemistry regulation and calcification in corals growing at a Mediterranean CO2 vent. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 699 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zohary, T., Erez, J., Gophen, M., Berman-Frank, I. & Stiller, M. Seasonality of stable carbon isotopes within the pelagic food web of Lake Kinneret. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39, 1030–1043 (1994).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, S. et al. Spatial variations in the trophic status of Favia palauensis corals in the South China Sea: Insights into their different adaptabilities under contrasting environmental conditions. Sci. China Earth Sci. 64, 839–852 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Horwitz, R., Borell, E. M., Yam, R., Shemesh, A. & Fine, M. Natural high pCO2 increases autotrophy in Anemonia viridis (Anthozoa) as revealed from stable isotope (C, N) analysis. Sci. Rep. 5, 1–9 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, B., Zou, D., Zhu, M. & Yang, Y. Effects of CO2 levels and light intensities on growth and amino acid contents in red seaweed Gracilaria lemaneiformis. Aquac. Res. 48, 2683–2690 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Winters, G., Beer, S., Zvi, B., Brickner, I. & Loya, Y. Spatial and temporal photoacclimation of Stylophora pistillata: zooxanthella size, pigmentation, location and clade. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 384, 107–119 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fitt, W. K., McFarland, F. K., Warner, M. E. & Chilcoat, G. C. Seasonal patterns of tissue biomass and densities of symbiotic dinoflagellates in reef corals and relation to coral bleaching. Limnol. Oceanogr. 45, 677–685 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wangpraseurt, D., Larkum, A. W. D., Ralph, P. J. & Kühl, M. Light gradients and optical microniches in coral tissues. Front. Microbiol. 3, 1–9 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krief, S. et al. Physiological and isotopic responses of scleractinian corals to ocean acidification. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta. 74, 4988–5001 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Scucchia, F., Malik, A., Zaslansky, P., Putnam, H. M. & Mass, T. Combined responses of primary coral polyps and their algal endosymbionts to decreasing seawater pH. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 288, 20210328 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Anthony, K. R. N., Connolly, S. R. & Willis, B. L. Comparative analysis of energy allocation to tissue and skeletal growth in corals. Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 1417–1429 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
LaJeunesse, T. C. et al. Systematic revision of Symbiodiniaceae highlights the antiquity and diversity of coral endosymbionts. Curr. Biol. 28, 2570–2580.e6 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Howells, E. J. et al. Coral thermal tolerance shaped by local adaptation of photosymbionts. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2, 116–120 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brading, P. et al. Differential effects of ocean acidification on growth and photosynthesis among phylotypes of Symbiodinium (Dinophyceae). Limnol. Oceanogr. 56, 927–938 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Takahashi, T., Broecker, W. S. & Langer, S. Redfield ratio based on chemical data from isopycnal surfaces. J. Geophys. Res. 90, 6907 (1985).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, Z. et al. Changes of carbon to nitrogen ratio in particulate organic matter in the marine mesopelagic zone: A case from the South China Sea. Mar. Chem. 231, 103930 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Crawford, D. W. et al. Low particulate carbon to nitrogen ratios in marine surface waters of the Arctic. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles. 29, 2021–2033 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kikumoto, R. et al. Nitrogen isotope chemostratigraphy of the Ediacaran and Early Cambrian platform sequence at Three Gorges, South China. Gondwana Res. 25, 1057–1069 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
DeNiro, M. J. & Epstein, S. Influence of diet on the distribution of carbon isotopes in animals. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 42, 495–506 (1978).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Benavides, M., Bednarz, V. N. & Ferrier-Pagès, C. Diazotrophs: Overlooked key players within the coral symbiosis and tropical reef ecosystems? Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 10 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wannicke, N., Frey, C., Law, C. S. & Voss, M. The response of the marine nitrogen cycle to ocean acidification. Glob. Chang. Biol. 24, 5031–5043 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bourne, D. G., Morrow, K. M. & Webster, N. S. Insights into the coral microbiome: underpinning the health and resilience of reef ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 70, 317–340 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Palladino, G. et al. Metagenomic shifts in mucus, tissue and skeleton of the coral Balanophyllia europaea living along a natural CO2 gradient. ISME Commun. 2, 65 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Muscatine, L. et al. Stable isotopes (δ13C and δ15N) of organic matrix from coral skeleton. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 102, 1525–1530 (2005).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lesser, M. P. et al. Nitrogen fixation by symbiotic cyanobacteria provides a source of nitrogen for the scleractinian coral Montastraea cavernosa. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 346, 143–152 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Alamaru, A., Loya, Y., Brokovich, E., Yam, R. & Shemesh, A. Carbon and nitrogen utilization in two species of Red Sea corals along a depth gradient: Insights from stable isotope analysis of total organic material and lipids. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta. 73, 5333–5342 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lesser, M. P., Mazel, C. H., Gorbunov, M. Y. & Falkowski, P. G. Discovery of symbiotic nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria in corals. Science 305, 997–1000 (2004).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lesser, M. P., Morrow, K. M., Pankey, S. M. & Noonan, S. H. C. Diazotroph diversity and nitrogen fixation in the coral Stylophora pistillata from the Great Barrier Reef. ISME J. 12, 813–824 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Marcelino, V. R., Morrow, K. M., Oppen, M. J. H., Bourne, D. G. & Verbruggen, H. Diversity and stability of coral endolithic microbial communities at a naturally high pCO2 reef. Mol. Ecol. 26, 5344–5357 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rädecker, N., Pogoreutz, C., Voolstra, C. R., Wiedenmann, J. & Wild, C. Nitrogen cycling in corals: the key to understanding holobiont functioning? Trends Microbiol. 23, 490–497 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Santos, H. F. et al. Climate change affects key nitrogen-fixing bacterial populations on coral reefs. ISME J. 8, 2272–2279 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Olson, N. D., Ainsworth, T. D., Gates, R. D. & Takabayashi, M. Diazotrophic bacteria associated with Hawaiian Montipora corals: Diversity and abundance in correlation with symbiotic dinoflagellates. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 371, 140–146 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zheng, X. et al. Effects of ocean acidification on carbon and nitrogen fixation in the hermatypic coral Galaxea fascicularis. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 644965 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lewis, E. & Wallace, D. Program developed for CO2 system calculations. Ornl/Cdiac-105 1–21 (1998).Dickson, A. G. & Millero, F. J. A comparison of the equilibrium constants for the dissociation of carbonic acid in seawater media. Deep Sea Res. Part A. Oceanogr. Res. Pap. 34, 1733–1743 (1987).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dickson, A. G. Thermodynamics of the dissociation of boric acid in potassium chloride solutions from 273.15 to 318.15 K. J. Chem. Eng. Data. 35, 253–257 (1990).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mehrbach, C., Culberson, C. H., Hawley, J. E. & Pytkowicx, R. M. Measurement of the apparent dissociation constants of carbonic acid in seawater at atmospheric pressure. Limnol. Oceanogr. 18, 897–907 (1973).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ivancic, I. & Degobbis, D. An optimal manual procedure for ammonia analysis in natural waters by the indophenol blue method. Water Res. 18, 1143–1147 (1984).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Parson, T. R., Maita, Y. & Llli, C. M. A manual of chemical & biological methods for seawater analysis. (Elsevier, 1984). https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-07774-5Schreiber, U. Pulse-Amplitude-Modulation (PAM) fluorometry and saturation pulse method: an overview. in Chlorophyll a Fluorescence 1367, 279–319 (Springer Netherlands, 2004).Grover, R., Maguer, J. F., Reynaud-Vaganay, S. & Ferrier-Pagès, C. Uptake of ammonium by the scleractinian coral Stylophora pistillata: Effect of feeding, light, and ammonium concentrations. Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 782–790 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tremblay, P., Grover, R., Maguer, J. F., Hoogenboom, M. & Ferrier-Pagès, C. Carbon translocation from symbiont to host depends on irradiance and food availability in the tropical coral Stylophora pistillata. Coral Reefs. 33, 1–13 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pupier, C. A. et al. Productivity and carbon fluxes depend on species and symbiont density in soft coral symbioses. Sci. Rep. 9, 17819 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritchie, R. J. Universal chlorophyll equations for estimating chlorophylls a, b, c, and d and total chlorophylls in natural assemblages of photosynthetic organisms using acetone, methanol, or ethanol solvents. Photosynthetica 46, 115–126 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Goffredo, S., Arnone, S. & Zaccanti, F. Sexual reproduction in the Mediterranean solitary coral Balanophyllia europaea (Scleractinia, Dendrophylliidae). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 229, 83–94 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barshis, D. J. et al. Genomic basis for coral resilience to climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 110, 1387–1392 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moore, R. B. Highly organized structure in the non-coding region of the psbA minicircle from clade C Symbiodinium. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 53, 1725–1734 (2003).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
LaJeunesse, T. C. & Thornhill, D. J. Improved resolution of reef-coral endosymbiont (Symbiodinium) species diversity, ecology, and evolution through psbA non-coding region genotyping. PLoS One. 6, e29013 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
LaJeunesse, T. C. et al. Revival of Philozoon Geddes for host-specialized dinoflagellates, ‘zooxanthellae’, in animals from coastal temperate zones of northern and southern hemispheres. Eur. J. Phycol. 57, 166–180 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Anderson, M. J. PERMANOVA: a FORTRAN computer program for permutational multivariate analysis of variance. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online (2005). More

Chapman, A. It’s okay to call them drones. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 2, iii–v (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chabot, D., Hodgson, A. J., Hodgson, J. C. & Anderson, K. ‘Drone’: Technically correct, popularly accepted, socially acceptable. Drone Syst. Appl. 10, 399–405 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chabot, D. & Bird, D. M. Wildlife research and management methods in the 21st century: Where do unmanned aircraft fit in?. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 3, 137–155 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Christie, K. S., Gilbert, S. L., Brown, C. L., Hatfield, M. & Hanson, L. Unmanned aircraft systems in wildlife research: Current and future applications of a transformative technology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14, 241–251 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whitehead, K. & Hugenholtz, C. H. Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), part 1: A review of progress and challenges. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 2, 69–85 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barnas, A. et al. Evaluating behavioral responses of nesting lesser snow geese to unmanned aircraft surveys. Ecol. Evol. 8, 1328–1338 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mulero-Pázmány, M. et al. Unmanned aircraft systems as a new source of disturbance for wildlife: A systematic review. PLoS ONE 12, e0178448 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Linchant, J., Lisein, J., Semeki, J., Lejeune, P. & Vermeulen, C. Are unmanned aircraft systems (UAS s) the future of wildlife monitoring? A review of accomplishments and challenges. Mammal Rev. 45, 239–252 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whitehead, K. et al. Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), part 2: Scientific and commercial applications. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 2, 86–102 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barasona, J. A. et al. Unmanned aircraft systems for studying spatial abundance of ungulates: Relevance to spatial epidemiology. PLoS ONE 9, e115608 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Chrétien, L. P., Théau, J. & Ménard, P. Wildlife multispecies remote sensing using visible and thermal infrared imagery acquired from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 40, 241 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guo, X. et al. Application of UAV remote sensing for a population census of large wild herbivores—Taking the headwater region of the yellow river as an example. Remote Sens. 10, 1041 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hu, J., Wu, X. & Dai, M. Estimating the population size of migrating Tibetan antelopes Pantholops hodgsonii with unmanned aerial vehicles. Oryx 54, 101–109 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mulero-Pázmány, M., Stolper, R., Van Essen, L. D., Negro, J. J. & Sassen, T. Remotely piloted aircraft systems as a rhinoceros anti-poaching tool in Africa. PLoS ONE 9, e83873 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Rey, N., Volpi, M., Joost, S. & Tuia, D. Detecting animals in African Savanna with UAVs and the crowds. Remote Sens. Environ. 200, 341–351 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Schroeder, N. M., Panebianco, A., Gonzalez Musso, R. & Carmanchahi, P. An experimental approach to evaluate the potential of drones in terrestrial mammal research: A gregarious ungulate as a study model. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7, 191482 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Su, X. et al. Using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to study wild yak in the highest desert in the world. Int. J. Remote Sens. 39, 5490–5503 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vermeulen, C., Lejeune, P., Lisein, J., Sawadogo, P. & Bouché, P. Unmanned aerial survey of elephants. PLoS ONE 8, e54700 (2013).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mallory, M. L. et al. Financial costs of conducting science in the Arctic: Examples from seabird research. Arct. Sci. 4, 624–633 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sasse, D. B. Job-related mortality of wildlife workers in the United States, 1937–2000. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 31, 1015–1020 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Loarie, S. R., Joppa, L. N. & Pimm, S. L. Satellites miss environmental priorities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 630–632 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species https://www.iucnredlist.org/en (2021).Mech, L. D. & Barber, S. M. A critique of wildlife radio-tracking and its use in National Parks: a report to the National Park Service. (2002).Patterson, C., Koski, W., Pace, P., McLuckie, B. & Bird, D. M. Evaluation of an unmanned aircraft system for detecting surrogate caribou targets in Labrador. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 4, 53–69 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hodgson, J. C. et al. Drones count wildlife more accurately and precisely than humans. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 1160–1167 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Seymour, A. C., Dale, J., Hammill, M., Halpin, P. N. & Johnston, D. W. Automated detection and enumeration of marine wildlife using unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and thermal imagery. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–10 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
COSEWIC. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the caribou (Rangifer tarandus) eastern migratory population, Torngat mountain population in Canada. (COSEWIC, Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, 2017).Albawi, S., Mohammed, T. A. & Al-Zawi, S. Understanding of a convolutional neural network. in 2017 international conference on engineering and technology (ICET) 1–6 (IEEE, 2017).Gu, J. et al. Recent advances in convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognit. 77, 354–377 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Teuwen, J. & Moriakov, N. Convolutional neural networks. in Handbook of medical image computing and computer assisted intervention 481–501 (Elsevier, 2020).Corcoran, E., Winsen, M., Sudholz, A. & Hamilton, G. Automated detection of wildlife using drones: Synthesis, opportunities and constraints. Methods Ecol. Evol. 12, 1103–1114 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Corcoran, E., Denman, S., Hanger, J., Wilson, B. & Hamilton, G. Automated detection of koalas using low-level aerial surveillance and machine learning. Sci. Rep. 9, 3208 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Gray, P. C. et al. Drones and convolutional neural networks facilitate automated and accurate cetacean species identification and photogrammetry. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1490–1500 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gray, P. C. et al. A convolutional neural network for detecting sea turtles in drone imagery. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 345–355 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Peng, J. et al. Wild animal survey using UAS imagery and deep learning: modified Faster R-CNN for kiang detection in Tibetan Plateau. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 169, 364–376 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Borowicz, A. et al. Multi-modal survey of Adélie penguin mega-colonies reveals the Danger Islands as a seabird hotspot. Sci. Rep. 8, 3926 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Francis, R. J., Lyons, M. B., Kingsford, R. T. & Brandis, K. J. Counting mixed breeding aggregations of animal species using drones: Lessons from waterbirds on semi-automation. Remote Sens. 12, 1185 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Santangeli, A. et al. Integrating drone-borne thermal imaging with artificial intelligence to locate bird nests on agricultural land. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–8 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bowley, C., Mattingly, M., Barnas, A., Ellis-Felege, S. & Desell, T. An analysis of altitude, citizen science and a convolutional neural network feedback loop on object detection in unmanned aerial systems. J. Comput. Sci. 34, 102–116 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bowley, C., Mattingly, M., Barnas, A., Ellis-Felege, S. & Desell, T. Detecting wildlife in unmanned aerial systems imagery using convolutional neural networks trained with an automated feedback loop. in International Conference on Computational Science 69–82 (Springer, 2018).Delplanque, A., Foucher, S., Lejeune, P., Linchant, J. & Théau, J. Multispecies detection and identification of African mammals in aerial imagery using convolutional neural networks. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 8, 166–179 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eikelboom, J. A. J. et al. Improving the precision and accuracy of animal population estimates with aerial image object detection. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1875–1887 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kellenberger, B., Marcos, D. & Tuia, D. Detecting mammals in UAV images: Best practices to address a substantially imbalanced dataset with deep learning. Remote Sens. Environ. 216, 139–153 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hooge, I. T. C., Niehorster, D. C., Nyström, M., Andersson, R. & Hessels, R. S. Is human classification by experienced untrained observers a gold standard in fixation detection?. Behav. Res. Methods 50, 1864–1881 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barnas, A. F., Darby, B. J., Vandeberg, G. S., Rockwell, R. F. & Ellis-Felege, S. N. A comparison of drone imagery and ground-based methods for estimating the extent of habitat destruction by lesser snow geese (Anser caerulescens caerulescens) in La Pérouse Bay. PLoS ONE 14, e0217049 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brook, R. K. & Kenkel, N. C. A multivariate approach to vegetation mapping of Manitoba’s Hudson Bay Lowlands. Int. J. Remote Sens. 23, 4761–4776 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shilts, W. W., Aylsworth, J. M., Kaszycki, C. A., Klassen, R. A. & Graf, W. L. Canadian shield. in Geomorphic Systems of North America vol. 2 119–161 (Geological Society of America Boulder, Colorado, 1987).Barnas, A. F., Felege, C. J., Rockwell, R. F. & Ellis-Felege, S. N. A pilot (less) study on the use of an unmanned aircraft system for studying polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Polar Biol. 41, 1055–1062 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ellis-Felege, S. N. et al. Nesting common eiders (Somateria mollissima) show little behavioral response to fixed-wing drone surveys. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 10, 1–4 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Barnas, A. F. et al. A standardized protocol for reporting methods when using drones for wildlife research. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 8, 89–98 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ren, S., He, K., Girshick, R. & Sun, J. Faster R-CNN: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 28, 91–99 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Chen, T., Xu, B., Zhang, C. & Guestrin, C. Training Deep Nets with Sublinear Memory Cost. ArXiv160406174 Cs (2016).Pinckaers, H. & Litjens, G. Training convolutional neural networks with megapixel images. ArXiv180405712 Cs (2018).Abadi, M. et al. TensorFlow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems. (2015).Janocha, K. & Czarnecki, W. M. On loss functions for deep neural networks in classification. ArXiv Prepr. ArXiv170205659. (2017).Murata, N., Yoshizawa, S. & Amari, S. Learning curves, model selection and complexity of neural networks. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 5, 607–614 (1992).
Google Scholar 
Hänsch, R. & Hellwich, O. The truth about ground truth: Label noise in human-generated reference data. in IGARSS 2019–2019 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium 5594–5597 (IEEE, 2019).Bowler, E., Fretwell, P. T., French, G. & Mackiewicz, M. Using deep learning to count albatrosses from space: Assessing results in light of ground truth uncertainty. Remote Sens. 12, 2026 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Brack, I. V., Kindel, A. & Oliveira, L. F. B. Detection errors in wildlife abundance estimates from Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) surveys: Synthesis, solutions, and challenges. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 1864–1873 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jagielski, P. M. et al. The utility of drones for studying polar bear behaviour in the Canadian Arctic: Opportunities and recommendations. Drone Syst. Appl. 10, 97–110 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Williams, P. J., Hooten, M. B., Womble, J. N. & Bower, M. R. Estimating occupancy and abundance using aerial images with imperfect detection. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 1679–1689 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Link, W. A., Schofield, M. R., Barker, R. J. & Sauer, J. R. On the robustness of N-mixture models. Ecology 99, 1547–1551 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Horvitz, D. G. & Thompson, D. J. A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite universe. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 47, 663–685 (1952).Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Corcoran, E., Denman, S. & Hamilton, G. New technologies in the mix: Assessing N-mixture models for abundance estimation using automated detection data from drone surveys. Ecol. Evol. 10, 8176–8185 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lunga, D., Arndt, J., Gerrand, J. & Stewart, R. ReSFlow: A remote sensing imagery data-flow for improved model generalization. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 14, 10468–10483 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Fromm, M., Schubert, M., Castilla, G., Linke, J. & McDermid, G. Automated detection of conifer seedlings in drone imagery using convolutional neural networks. Remote Sens. 11, 2585 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Velumani, K. et al. Estimates of maize plant density from UAV RGB images using Faster-RCNN detection model: Impact of the spatial resolution. Plant Phenomics 2021, 9824843 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hodgson, A., Peel, D. & Kelly, N. Unmanned aerial vehicles for surveying marine fauna: Assessing detection probability. Ecol. Appl. 27, 1253–1267 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferguson, M. C. et al. Performance of manned and unmanned aerial surveys to collect visual data and imagery for estimating arctic cetacean density and associated uncertainty. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 6, 128–154 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zmarz, A. et al. Application of UAV BVLOS remote sensing data for multi-faceted analysis of Antarctic ecosystem. Remote Sens. Environ. 217, 375–388 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Lyons, M. B. et al. Monitoring large and complex wildlife aggregations with drones. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1024–1035 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Battin, T. J. et al. The boundless carbon cycle. Nat. Geosci. 2, 598–600 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, P. A. et al. Global carbon dioxide emissions from inland waters. Nature 503, 355–359 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hotchkiss, E. R. et al. Sources of and processes controlling CO2 emissions change with the size of streams and rivers. Nat. Geosci. 8, 696–699 (2015). Important study conceptualizing (on the basis of a data synthesis) how the sources and magnitude of CO2 evasion flux change along a stream–river continuum.Ciais, P. et al. in Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) Ch. 6 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).Friedlingstein, P. et al. Global carbon budget 2021. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14, 1917–2005 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cole, J. J. et al. Plumbing the global carbon cycle: integrating inland waters into the terrestrial carbon budget. Ecosystems 10, 172–185 (2007). A pioneering study showing the role of inland waters for large-scale carbon fluxes and highlighting them as ‘reactors’ rather than ‘passive pipes’.Article 

Google Scholar 
Drake, T. W., Raymond, P. A. & Spencer, R. G. M. Terrestrial carbon inputs to inland waters: a current synthesis of estimates and uncertainty. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 3, 132–142 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Odum, H. T. Primary production in flowing waters. Limnol. Oceanogr. 1, 102–117 (1956).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bernhardt, E. S. et al. The metabolic regimes of flowing waters. Limnol. Oceanogr. 63, 99–118 (2018). A synthesis of the predominant drivers and constraints on metabolic regimes of stream and river ecosystems.Article 

Google Scholar 
Barnes, A. D. et al. Energy flux: the link between multitrophic biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 186–197 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Costanza, R. & Mageau, M. What is a healthy ecosystem? Aquat. Ecol. 33, 105–115 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blöschl, G. et al. Changing climate both increases and decreases European river floods. Nature 573, 108–111 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gudmundsson, L. et al. Globally observed trends in mean and extreme river flow attributed to climate change. Science 371, 1159–1162 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yang, X., Pavelsky, T. M. & Allen, G. H. The past and future of global river ice. Nature 577, 69–73 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Grill, G. et al. Mapping the world’s free-flowing rivers. Nature 569, 215–221 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Belletti, B. et al. More than one million barriers fragment Europe’s rivers. Nature 588, 436–441 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pekel, J.-F., Cottam, A., Gorelick, N. & Belward, A. S. High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes. Nature 540, 418–422 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cooley, S. W., Ryan, J. C. & Smith, L. C. Human alteration of global surface water storage variability. Nature 591, 78–81 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jaramillo, F. & Destouni, G. Local flow regulation and irrigation raise global human water consumption and footprint. Science 350, 1248–1251 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Quinton, J. N., Govers, G., Oost, K. V. & Bardgett, R. D. The impact of agricultural soil erosion on biogeochemical cycling. Nat. Geosci. 3, 311–314 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. Global anthropogenic phosphorus loads to freshwater and associated grey water footprints and water pollution levels: a high‐resolution global study. Water Resour. Res. 54, 345–358 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Regnier, P. et al. Anthropogenic perturbation of the carbon fluxes from land to ocean. Nat. Geosci. 6, 597–607 (2013). The first study showing the extent to which human activities have altered the magnitude of contemporary lateral carbon fluxes from land to ocean.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rüegg, J. et al. Thinking like a consumer: linking aquatic basal metabolism and consumer dynamics. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 6, 1–17 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fernández-Martínez, M. et al. Global trends in carbon sinks and their relationships with CO2 and temperature. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 73–79 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Behrenfeld, M. J. et al. Climate-driven trends in contemporary ocean productivity. Nature 444, 752–755 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, J. S. Time‐varying responses of lake metabolism to light and temperature. Limnol. Oceanogr. 65, 652–666 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Uehlinger, U. Annual cycle and inter‐annual variability of gross primary production and ecosystem respiration in a floodprone river during a 15‐year period. Freshw. Biol. 51, 938–950 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Uehlinger, U. & Naegeli, M. W. Ecosystem metabolism, disturbance, and stability in a prealpine gravel bed river. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 17, 165–178 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mulholland, P. J. et al. Inter-biome comparison of factors controlling stream metabolism. Freshw. Biol. 46, 1503–1517 (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, B. J., Mulholland, P. J. & Hill, W. R. Multiple scales of temporal variability in ecosystem metabolism rates: results from 2 years of continuous monitoring in a forested headwater stream. Ecosystems 10, 588–606 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Appling, A. P., Hall, R. O., Yackulic, C. B. & Arroita, M. Overcoming equifinality: leveraging long time series for stream metabolism estimation. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 123, 624–645 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Appling, A. P. et al. The metabolic regimes of 356 rivers in the United States. Sci. Data 5, 180292 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Canadell, M. B. et al. Regimes of primary production and their drivers in Alpine streams. Freshw. Biol. 66, 1449–1463 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Myrstener, M., Gómez‐Gener, L., Rocher‐Ros, G., Giesler, R. & Sponseller, R. A. Nutrients influence seasonal metabolic patterns and total productivity of Arctic streams. Limnol. Oceanogr. 66, S182–S196 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Savoy, P. et al. Metabolic rhythms in flowing waters: an approach for classifying river productivity regimes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 1835–1851 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kirk, L., Hensley, R. T., Savoy, P., Heffernan, J. B. & Cohen, M. J. Estimating benthic light regimes improves predictions of primary production and constrains light-use efficiency in streams and rivers. Ecosystems 24, 825–839 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bernhardt, E. S. et al. Light and flow regimes regulate the metabolism of rivers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2121976119 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Savoy, P. & Harvey, J. W. Predicting light regime controls on primary productivity across CONUS river networks. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2020GL092149 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Julian, J. P., Stanley, E. H. & Doyle, M. W. Basin-scale consequences of agricultural land use on benthic light availability and primary production along a sixth-order temperate river. Ecosystems 11, 1091–1105 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hall, R. O. et al. Turbidity, light, temperature, and hydropeaking control primary productivity in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon. Limnol. Oceanogr. 60, 512–526 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hosen, J. D. et al. Enhancement of primary production during drought in a temperate watershed is greater in larger rivers than headwater streams. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 1458–1472 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Allen, A. P., Gillooly, J. F. & Brown, J. H. Linking the global carbon cycle to individual metabolism. Funct. Ecol. 19, 202–213 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Demars, B. O. L. et al. Temperature and the metabolic balance of streams. Freshw. Biol. 56, 1106–1121 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Song, C. et al. Continental-scale decrease in net primary productivity in streams due to climate warming. Nat. Geosci. 11, 415–420 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hood, J. M. et al. Increased resource use efficiency amplifies positive response of aquatic primary production to experimental warming. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 1069–1084 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schindler, D. E., Carpenter, S. R., Cole, J. J., Kitchell, J. F. & Pace, M. L. Influence of food web structure on carbon exchange between lakes and the atmosphere. Science 277, 248–251 (1997).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Iannucci, F. M., Beneš, J., Medvedeff, A. & Bowden, W. B. Biogeochemical responses over 37 years to manipulation of phosphorus concentrations in an Arctic river: The Upper Kuparuk River Experiment. Hydrol. Process. 35, e14075 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rosemond, A. D. et al. Experimental nutrient additions accelerate terrestrial carbon loss from stream ecosystems. Science 347, 1142–1145 (2015). A key study explaining how nutrient excess can accelerate terrestrial carbon loss from stream ecosystems.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Arroita, M., Elosegi, A. & Hall, R. O. Jr Twenty years of daily metabolism show riverine recovery following sewage abatement. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 77–92 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Battin, T. J. et al. Biophysical controls on organic carbon fluxes in fluvial networks. Nat. Geosci. 1, 95–100 (2008). An important article conceptualizing how physical and biological processes combine to shape metabolic dynamics and carbon fluxes in fluvial networks.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hoellein, T. J., Bruesewitz, D. A. & Richardson, D. C. Revisiting Odum (1956): a synthesis of aquatic ecosystem metabolism. Limnol. Oceanogr. 58, 2089–2100 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Marzolf, N. S. & Ardón, M. Ecosystem metabolism in tropical streams and rivers: a review and synthesis. Limnol. Oceanogr. 66, 1627–1638 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gounand, I., Little, C. J., Harvey, E. & Altermatt, F. Cross-ecosystem carbon flows connecting ecosystems worldwide. Nat. Commun. 9, 4825 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ciais, P. et al. Empirical estimates of regional carbon budgets imply reduced global soil heterotrophic respiration. Natl Sci. Rev. 8, nwaa145 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bauer, J. E. et al. The changing carbon cycle of the coastal ocean. Nature 504, 61–70 (2013). Important review on the sources, exchange and fates of carbon in the coastal ocean and how human activities have altered the coastal carbon cycle.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Reichert, P., Uehlinger, U. & Acuña, V. Estimating stream metabolism from oxygen concentrations: effect of spatial heterogeneity. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 114, G03016 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Koenig, L. E. et al. Emergent productivity regimes of river networks. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 4, 173–181 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodríguez-Castillo, T., Estévez, E., González-Ferreras, A. M. & Barquín, J. Estimating ecosystem metabolism to entire river networks. Ecosystems 22, 892–911 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Segatto, P. L., Battin, T. J. & Bertuzzo, E. The metabolic regimes at the scale of an entire stream network unveiled through sensor data and machine learning. Ecosystems 24, 1792–1809 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M., Mouquet, N. & Holt, R. D. Meta‐ecosystems: a theoretical framework for a spatial ecosystem ecology. Ecol. Lett. 6, 673–679 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mastrandrea, M. D. et al. Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2010).Tank, S. E., Fellman, J. B., Hood, E. & Kritzberg, E. S. Beyond respiration: controls on lateral carbon fluxes across the terrestrial‐aquatic interface. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 3, 76–88 (2018). Important synthesis on the mechanisms and controls of organic and inorganic carbon flows across terrestrial–aquatic interfaces.Article 

Google Scholar 
Aitkenhead, J. A. & McDowell, W. H. Soil C:N ratio as a predictor of annual riverine DOC flux at local and global scales. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 14, 127–138 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Regnier, P., Resplandy, L., Najjar, R. G. & Ciais, P. The land-to-ocean loops of the global carbon cycle. Nature 603, 401–410 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
van Hoek, W. J. et al. Exploring spatially explicit changes in carbon budgets of global river basins during the 20th century. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 16757–16769 (2021). A global quantitative assessment of river carbon fluxes in the twentieth century, highlighting the combined influence of environmental and anthropogenic controls on the long-term patterns of global carbon export.Article 

Google Scholar 
Abril, G. & Borges, A. V. Ideas and perspectives: carbon leaks from flooded land: do we need to replumb the inland water active pipe? Biogeosciences 16, 769–784 (2019). Important review emphasizing the role of flooding for inland water carbon cycling at the global scale.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lauerwald, R., Regnier, P., Guenet, B., Friedlingstein, P. & Ciais, P. How simulations of the land carbon sink are biased by ignoring fluvial carbon transfers: a case study for the Amazon Basin. One Earth 3, 226–236 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, P. A., Saiers, J. E. & Sobczak, W. V. Hydrological and biogeochemical controls on watershed dissolved organic matter transport: pulse‐shunt concept. Ecology 97, 5–16 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Catalán, N., Marcé, R., Kothawala, D. N. & Tranvik, L. J. Organic carbon decomposition rates controlled by water retention time across inland waters. Nat. Geosci. 9, 501–504 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Maavara, T., Lauerwald, R., Regnier, P. & Cappellen, P. V. Global perturbation of organic carbon cycling by river damming. Nat. Commun. 8, 15347 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mendonça, R. et al. Organic carbon burial in global lakes and reservoirs. Nat. Commun. 8, 1694–1697 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Downing, J. A. et al. Sediment organic carbon burial in agriculturally eutrophic impoundments over the last century. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB1018 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deemer, B. R. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions from reservoir water surfaces: a new global synthesis. Bioscience 66, 949–964 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Abril, G. et al. Amazon River carbon dioxide outgassing fuelled by wetlands. Nature 505, 395–398 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dodds, W. K. et al. Abiotic controls and temporal variability of river metabolism: multiyear analyses of Mississippi and Chattahoochee River data. Freshw. Sci. 32, 1073–1087 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ros, G. R., Sponseller, R. A., Bergström, A. K., Myrstener, M. & Giesler, R. Stream metabolism controls diel patterns and evasion of CO2 in Arctic streams. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 1400–1413 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rasilo, T., Hutchins, R. H. S., Ruiz-González, C. & Del Giorgio, P. A. Transport and transformation of soil-derived CO2, CH4 and DOC sustain CO2 supersaturation in small boreal streams. Sci. Total Environ. 579, 902–912 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Aho, K. S., Hosen, J. D., Logozzo, L. A., McGillis, W. R. & Raymond, P. A. Highest rates of gross primary productivity maintained despite CO2 depletion in a temperate river network. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 6, 200–206 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wehrli, B. Conduits of the carbon cycle. Nature 503, 346–347 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sarmiento, J. L. & Sundquist, E. T. Revised budget for the oceanic uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Nature 356, 589–593 (1992).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lacroix, F., Ilyina, T., Laruelle, G. G. & Regnier, P. Reconstructing the preindustrial coastal carbon cycle through a global ocean circulation model: was the global continental shelf already both autotrophic and a CO2 sink? Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 35, e2020GB006603 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jacobson, A. R., Fletcher, S. E. M., Gruber, N., Sarmiento, J. L. & Gloor, M. A joint atmosphere‐ocean inversion for surface fluxes of carbon dioxide: 1. Methods and global‐scale fluxes. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 21, GB1019 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Resplandy, L. et al. Revision of global carbon fluxes based on a reassessment of oceanic and riverine carbon transport. Nat. Geosci. 11, 504–509 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lee, L.-C. et al. Unusual roles of discharge, slope and SOC in DOC transport in small mountainous rivers, Taiwan. Sci. Rep. 9, 1574 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Reddy, S. K. K. et al. Export of particulate organic carbon by the mountainous tropical rivers of Western Ghats, India: variations and controls. Sci. Total Environ. 751, 142115 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, X., Tarpley, D. & Sullivan, J. T. Diverse responses of vegetation phenology to a warming climate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L19405 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pan, Y. et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333, 988–993 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Heathcote, A. J., Anderson, N. J., Prairie, Y. T., Engstrom, D. R. & del Giorgio, P. A. Large increases in carbon burial in northern lakes during the Anthropocene. Nat. Commun. 6, 10016 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Guillemette, F., Berggren, M., Giorgio, P. Adel. & Lapierre, J.-F. Increases in terrestrially derived carbon stimulate organic carbon processing and CO2 emissions in boreal aquatic ecosystems. Nat. Commun. 4, 2972 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hastie, A., Lauerwald, R., Ciais, P., Papa, F. & Regnier, P. Historical and future contributions of inland waters to the Congo Basin carbon balance. Earth Syst. Dyn. 12, 37–62 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nakhavali, M. et al. Leaching of dissolved organic carbon from mineral soils plays a significant role in the terrestrial carbon balance. Glob. Change Biol. 27, 1083–1096 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tian, H. et al. Global patterns and controls of soil organic carbon dynamics as simulated by multiple terrestrial biosphere models: current status and future directions. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 775–792 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Öquist, M. G. et al. The full annual carbon balance of boreal forests is highly sensitive to precipitation. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 1, 315–319 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jones, J. B.Jr, Stanley, E. H. & Mulholland, P. J. Long‐term decline in carbon dioxide supersaturation in rivers across the contiguous United States. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, 1495 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, P. A. & Oh, N.-H. Long term changes of chemical weathering products in rivers heavily impacted from acid mine drainage: insights on the impact of coal mining on regional and global carbon and sulfur budgets. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 284, 50–56 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ran, L. et al. Substantial decrease in CO2 emissions from Chinese inland waters due to global change. Nat. Commun. 12, 1730 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zarnetske, J. P., Bouda, M., Geophysical, B. A., Saiers, J. & Raymond, P. Generality of hydrologic transport limitation of watershed organic carbon flux across ecoregions of the United States. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 11,702–11,711 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Liu, S. et al. The importance of hydrology in routing terrestrial carbon to the atmosphere via global streams and rivers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2106322119 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nydahl, A. C., Wallin, M. B. & Weyhenmeyer, G. A. No long‐term trends in pCO2 despite increasing organic carbon concentrations in boreal lakes, streams, and rivers. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 31, 985–995 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, P. A. & Hamilton, S. K. Anthropogenic influences on riverine fluxes of dissolved inorganic carbon to the oceans. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 3, 143–155 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ulseth, A. J., Bertuzzo, E., Singer, G. A., Schelker, J. & Battin, T. J. Climate-induced changes in spring snowmelt impact ecosystem metabolism and carbon fluxes in an Alpine stream network. Ecosystems 21, 373–390 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Berghuijs, W. R., Woods, R. A. & Hrachowitz, M. A precipitation shift from snow towards rain leads to a decrease in streamflow. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 583–586 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Drake, T. W. et al. Mobilization of aged and biolabile soil carbon by tropical deforestation. Nat. Geosci. 12, 541–546 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wit, F. et al. The impact of disturbed peatlands on river outgassing in Southeast Asia. Nat. Commun. 6, 10155 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moore, S., Gauci, V., Evans, C. D. & Page, S. E. Fluvial organic carbon losses from a Bornean blackwater river. Biogeosciences 8, 901–909 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Masese, F. O., Salcedo-Borda, J. S., Gettel, G. M., Irvine, K. & McClain, M. E. Influence of catchment land use and seasonality on dissolved organic matter composition and ecosystem metabolism in headwater streams of a Kenyan river. Biogeochemistry 132, 1–22 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bernot, M. J. et al. Inter‐regional comparison of land‐use effects on stream metabolism. Freshw. Biol. 55, 1874–1890 (2010). Among the first studies showing how land use alters ecosystem metabolism across geographic regions.Article 

Google Scholar 
Griffiths, N. A. et al. Agricultural land use alters the seasonality and magnitude of stream metabolism. Limnol. Oceanogr. 58, 1513–1529 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sweeney, B. W. et al. Riparian deforestation, stream narrowing, and loss of stream ecosystem services. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 101, 14132–14137 (2004).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Roley, S. S., Tank, J. L., Griffiths, N. A., Hall, R. O. Jr & Davis, R. T. The influence of floodplain restoration on whole-stream metabolism in an agricultural stream: insights from a 5-year continuous data set. Freshw. Sci. 33, 1043–1059 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Crawford, J. T., Stanley, E. H., Dornblaser, M. M. & Striegl, R. G. CO2 time series patterns in contrasting headwater streams of North America. Aquat. Sci. 79, 473–486 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blackburn, S. R. & Stanley, E. H. Floods increase carbon dioxide and methane fluxes in agricultural streams. Freshw. Biol. 66, 62–77 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Robertson, G. P., Paul, E. A. & Harwood, R. R. Greenhouse gases in intensive agriculture: contributions of individual gases to the radiative forcing of the atmosphere. Science 289, 1922–1925 (2000).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Min, S.-K., Zhang, X., Zwiers, F. W. & Hegerl, G. C. Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes. Nature 470, 378–381 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yin, J. et al. Large increase in global storm runoff extremes driven by climate and anthropogenic changes. Nat. Commun. 9, 4389 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Myhre, G. et al. Sensible heat has significantly affected the global hydrological cycle over the historical period. Nat. Commun. 9, 1922 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Messager, M. L. et al. Global prevalence of non-perennial rivers and streams. Nature 594, 391–397 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ward, A. S., Wondzell, S. M., Schmadel, N. M. & Herzog, S. P. Climate change causes river network contraction and disconnection in the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, Oregon, USA. Front. Water 2, 7 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sabater, S., Timoner, X., Borrego, C. & Acuña, V. Stream biofilm responses to flow intermittency: from cells to ecosystems. Front. Environ. Sci. 4, 14 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gómez-Gener, L., Lupon, A., Laudon, H. & Sponseller, R. A. Drought alters the biogeochemistry of boreal stream networks. Nat. Commun. 11, 1795 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marcé, R. et al. Emissions from dry inland waters are a blind spot in the global carbon cycle. Earth Sci. Rev. 188, 240–248 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blaszczak, J. R., Delesantro, J. M., Urban, D. L., Doyle, M. W. & Bernhardt, E. S. Scoured or suffocated: urban stream ecosystems oscillate between hydrologic and dissolved oxygen extremes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 877–894 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Reisinger, A. J. et al. Recovery and resilience of urban stream metabolism following Superstorm Sandy and other floods. Ecosphere 8, e01776 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, B. & Hotchkiss, E. R. Coupling concentration‐ and process‐discharge relationships integrates water chemistry and metabolism in streams. Water Resour. Res. 55, 10179–10190 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thellman, A. et al. The ecology of river ice. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 126, e2021JG006275 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Maavara, T. et al. River dam impacts on biogeochemical cycling. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 103–116 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rosentreter, J. A. et al. Half of global methane emissions come from highly variable aquatic ecosystem sources. Nat. Geosci. 14, 225–230 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Barros, N. et al. Carbon emission from hydroelectric reservoirs linked to reservoir age and latitude. Nat. Geosci. 4, 593–596 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Keller, P. S., Marcé, R., Obrador, B. & Koschorreck, M. Global carbon budget of reservoirs is overturned by the quantification of drawdown areas. Nat. Geosci. 14, 402–408 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Calamita, E. et al. Unaccounted CO2 leaks downstream of a large tropical hydroelectric reservoir. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2026004118 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Park, J.-H. et al. Reviews and syntheses: anthropogenic perturbations to carbon fluxes in Asian river systems – concepts, emerging trends, and research challenges. Biogeosciences 15, 3049–3069 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rosamond, M. S., Thuss, S. J. & Schiff, S. L. Dependence of riverine nitrous oxide emissions on dissolved oxygen levels. Nat. Geosci. 5, 715–718 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stanley, E. H. et al. The ecology of methane in streams and rivers: patterns, controls, and global significance. Ecol. Monogr. 86, 146–171 (2016). Key paper highlighting the role of streams and rivers for methane production and emissions and developing a conceptual framework on the environmental drivers of methane dynamics in fluvial ecosystems.Article 

Google Scholar 
Breitburg, D. et al. Declining oxygen in the global ocean and coastal waters. Science 359, eaam7240 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jane, S. F. et al. Widespread deoxygenation of temperate lakes. Nature 594, 66–70 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Triska, F. J., Kennedy, V. C., Avanzino, R. J., Zellweger, G. W. & Bencala, K. E. Retention and transport of nutrients in a third‐order stream in northwestern California: hyporheic processes. Ecology 70, 1893–1905 (1989).Article 

Google Scholar 
Carter, A. M., Blaszczak, J. R., Heffernan, J. B. & Bernhardt, E. S. Hypoxia dynamics and spatial distribution in a low gradient river. Limnol. Oceanogr. 66, 2251–2265 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kadygrov, N. et al. On the potential of the ICOS atmospheric CO2 measurement network for estimating the biogenic CO2 budget of Europe. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 15, 12765–12787 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hanson, P. C., Weathers, K. C. & Kratz, T. K. Networked lake science: how the Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network (GLEON) works to understand, predict, and communicate lake ecosystem response to global change. Inland Waters 6, 543–554 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Claustre, H., Johnson, K. S. & Takeshita, Y. Observing the global ocean with biogeochemical-Argo. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 12, 23–48 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jankowski, K. J., Mejia, F. H., Blaszczak, J. R. & Holtgrieve, G. W. Aquatic ecosystem metabolism as a tool in environmental management. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 8, e1521 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mao, F. et al. Moving beyond the technology: a socio-technical roadmap for low-cost water sensor network applications. Environ. Sci. Technol. 54, 9145–9158 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Park, J., Kim, K. T. & Lee, W. H. Recent advances in information and communications technology (ICT) and sensor technology for monitoring water quality. Water 12, 510 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yamazaki, D. et al. MERIT Hydro: a high‐resolution global hydrography map based on latest topography dataset. Water Resour. Res. 55, 5053–5073 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, P., Pan, M., Wood, E. F., Yamazaki, D. & Allen, G. H. A new vector-based global river network dataset accounting for variable drainage density. Sci. Data 8, 28 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Allen, G. H. & Pavelsky, T. M. Global extent of rivers and streams. Science 361, 585–587 (2018).Article 
CAS 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Durand, M. et al. An intercomparison of remote sensing river discharge estimation algorithms from measurements of river height, width, and slope. Water Resour. Res. 52, 4527–4549 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Frasson, R. P. M. et al. Exploring the factors controlling the error characteristics of the surface water and ocean topography mission discharge estimates. Water Resour. Res. 57, e2020WR028519 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dethier, E. N., Renshaw, C. E. & Magilligan, F. J. Rapid changes to global river suspended sediment flux by humans. Science 376, 1447–1452 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Campbell, A. D. et al. A review of carbon monitoring in wet carbon systems using remote sensing. Environ. Res. Lett. 17, 025009 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Allen, G. H. et al. Similarity of stream width distributions across headwater systems. Nat. Commun. 9, 610 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. & Rinaldo, A. Fractal River Basins: Chance and Self-organization (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001). Game-changing oeuvre formalizing the structure and function of river networks.Bertuzzo, E., Helton, A. M., Hall, Robert, O. & Battin, T. J. Scaling of dissolved organic carbon removal in river networks. Adv. Water Resour. 110, 136–146 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Marzadri, A., Dee, M. M., Tonina, D., Bellin, A. & Tank, J. L. Role of surface and subsurface processes in scaling N2O emissions along riverine networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 4330–4335 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Marzadri, A. et al. Global riverine nitrous oxide emissions: the role of small streams and large rivers. Sci. Total Environ. 776, 145148 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Botter, G. & Durighetto, N. The stream length duration curve: a tool for characterizing the time variability of the flowing stream length. Water Resour. Res. 56, e2020WR027282 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wollheim, W. M. et al. River network saturation concept: factors influencing the balance of biogeochemical supply and demand of river networks. Biogeochemistry 141, 503–521 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Durighetto, N., Vingiani, F., Bertassello, L. E., Camporese, M. & Botter, G. Intraseasonal drainage network dynamics in a headwater catchment of the Italian Alps. Water Resour. Res. 56, e2019WR02556 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Montgomery, D. R. & Dietrich, W. E. Source areas, drainage density, and channel initiation. Water Resour. Res. 25, 1907–1918 (1989).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fatichi, S., Ivanov, V. Y. & Caporali, E. A mechanistic ecohydrological model to investigate complex interactions in cold and warm water‐controlled environments: 1. Theoretical framework and plot‐scale analysis. J. Adv. Model. Earth. Syst. 4, M05002 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Ulseth, A. J. et al. Distinct air–water gas exchange regimes in low- and high-energy streams. Nat. Geosci. 12, 259–263 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hall, R. O. in Streams and Ecosystems in a Changing Environment (eds. Jones, J. J. & Stanley, E. H.) 151–180 (Academic, 2016).Butman, D. & Raymond, P. A. Significant efflux of carbon dioxide from streams and rivers in the United States. Nat. Geosci. 4, 839–842 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Duvert, C., Butman, D. E., Marx, A., Ribolzi, O. & Hutley, L. B. CO2 evasion along streams driven by groundwater inputs and geomorphic controls. Nat. Geosci. 11, 813–818 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, L. et al. Significant methane ebullition from alpine permafrost rivers on the East Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Nat. Geosci. 13, 349–354 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Stroeve, J. & Notz, D. Changing state of Arctic sea ice across all seasons. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 103001 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Polyakov, I. V. et al. Borealization of the Arctic Ocean in response to anomalous advection from sub-Arctic seas. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 983–992 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lannuzel, D. et al. The future of Arctic sea-ice biogeochemistry and ice-associated ecosystems. Nat. Clim. Change. 10, 983–992 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Macias-Fauria, M. & Post, E. Effects of sea ice on Arctic biota: An emerging crisis discipline. Biol. Lett. 14, 20170702 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kohlbach, D. et al. The importance of ice algae-produced carbon in the central Arctic Ocean ecosystem: Food web relationships revealed by lipid and stable isotope analyses. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 2027–2044 (2016).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Søreide, J. E. et al. Sympagic-pelagic-benthic coupling in Arctic and Atlantic waters around Svalbard revealed by stable isotopic and fatty acid tracers. Mar. Biol. Res. 9, 831–850 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Slagstad, D., Wassmann, P. F. J. & Ellingsen, I. Physical constrains and productivity in the future Arctic Ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 2015, 2 (2015).
Google Scholar 
FISCAO. Final Report of the Fifth Meeting of Scientific Experts on Fish Stocks in the Central Arctic Ocean. https://apps-afsc.fisheries.noaa.gov/documents/Arctic_fish_stocks_fifth_meeting/508_Documents/508_Final_report_of_the_505th_FiSCAO_meeting.pdf (2018).David, C. et al. Under-ice distribution of polar cod Boreogadus saida in the central Arctic Ocean and their association with sea-ice habitat properties. Polar Biol. 39, 981–994 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gradinger, R. Vertical fine structure of the biomass and composition of algal communities in Arctic pack ice. Mar. Biol. 133, 745–754 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kosobokova, K. N., Hopcroft, R. R. & Hirche, H.-J. Patterns of zooplankton diversity through the depths of the Arctic’s central basins. Mar Biodivers. 41, 29–50 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mumm, N. et al. Breaking the ice: Large-scale distribution of mesozooplankton after a decade of Arctic and transpolar cruises. Polar Biol. 20, 189–197 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Snoeijs-Leijonmalm, P. et al. Unexpected fish and squid in the central Arctic deep scattering layer. Sci. Adv. 8, 7536 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
David, C., Lange, B., Rabe, B. & Flores, H. Community structure of under-ice fauna in the Eurasian central Arctic Ocean in relation to environmental properties of sea-ice habitats. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 522, 15–32 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Gosselin, M., Levasseur, M., Wheeler, P. A., Horner, R. A. & Booth, B. C. New measurements of phytoplankton and ice algal production in the Arctic Ocean. Deep-Sea Res. Part II(44), 1623–1644 (1997).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Ardyna, M. & Arrigo, K. R. Phytoplankton dynamics in a changing Arctic Ocean. Nat. Clim. Change. 10, 892–903 (2020).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hays, G. C. In Migrations and Dispersal of Marine Organisms. (eds Jones, M. B. et al.) 163–170 (Springer).Irigoien, X. et al. Large mesopelagic fishes biomass and trophic efficiency in the open ocean. Nat. Commun. 5, 3271 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Geoffroy, M. et al. Mesopelagic sound scattering layers of the high arctic: Seasonal variations in biomass, species assemblage, and trophic relationships. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Gjøsæter, H., Wiebe, P. H., Knutsen, T. & Ingvaldsen, R. B. Evidence of Diel vertical migration of mesopelagic sound-scattering organisms in the Arctic. Front. Mar. Sci. 2017, 4 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Knutsen, T., Wiebe, P. H., Gjøsæter, H., Ingvaldsen, R. B. & Lien, G. High latitude epipelagic and mesopelagic scattering layers—a reference for future arctic ecosystem change. Front. Mar. Sci. 2017, 4 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Priou, P. et al. Dense mesopelagic sound scattering layer and vertical segregation of pelagic organisms at the Arctic-Atlantic gateway during the midnight sun. Prog. Oceanogr. 196, 102611 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Snoeijs-Leijonmalm, P. et al. A deep scattering layer under the North Pole pack ice. Prog. Oceanogr. 194, 102560 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
St-John, M. A. et al. A dark hole in our understanding of marine ecosystems and their services: Perspectives from the mesopelagic community. Front. Mar. Sci. 2016, 3 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Fransson, A. et al. Joint cruise 2-2 2021: Cruise report. The Nansen Legacy Report Series, 30/2022. https://doi.org/10.7557/nlrs.6413 (2022).Rudels, B. et al. Observations of water masses and circulation with focus on the Eurasian Basin of the Arctic Ocean from the 1990s to the late 2000s. Ocean Sci. 9, 147–169 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Krumpen, T. et al. Arctic warming interrupts the Transpolar Drift and affects long-range transport of sea ice and ice-rafted matter. Sci. Rep. 9, 5459 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Aagaard, K. A synthesis of the Arctic Ocean circulation. Rapp. P.-V. Rcun. Cons. int. Explor. Mer. 188, 11–22 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Perez-Hernandez, M. D. et al. The Atlantic Water boundary current north of Svalbard in late summer. J. Geophys. Res. 122, 2269–2290 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Våge, K. et al. The Atlantic Water boundary current in the Nansen Basin: Transport and mechanisms of lateral exchange. J. Geophys. Res. 121, 6946–6960 (2016).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Crews, L., Sundfjord, A., Albretsen, J. & Hattermann, T. Mesoscale Eddy Activity and Transport in the Atlantic Water Inflow Region North of Svalbard. J. Geophys. Res. 123, 201–215 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Kolås, E. H., Koenig, Z., Fer, I., Nilsen, F. & Marnela, M. Structure and Transport of Atlantic Water North of Svalbard From Observations in Summer and Fall 2018. J. Geophys. Res. 125, 6174 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Basedow, S. L. et al. Seasonal variation in transport of zooplankton into the arctic basin through the atlantic gateway. Fram Strait. Front. Mar. Sci. 2018, 5 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Vernet, M., Carstensen, J., Reigstad, M. & Svensen, C. Editorial: Carbon bridge to the Arctic. Front. Mar. Sci. 2020, 7 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Wassmann, P. et al. The contiguous domains of Arctic Ocean advection: Trails of life and death. Prog. Oceanogr. 139, 42–65 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Wassmann, P., Slagstad, D. & Ellingsen, I. Advection of mesozooplankton into the northern svalbard shelf region. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Auel, H. Egg size and reproductive adaptations among Arctic deep-sea copepods (Calanoida, Paraeuchaeta). Helgol. Mar. Res. 58, 147–153 (2004).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Gluchowska, M. et al. Zooplankton in Svalbard fjords on the Atlantic-Arctic boundary. Polar Biol. 39, 1785–1802 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Y.-G., Tseng, L.-C., Lin, M. & Hwang, J.-S. Vertical and geographic distribution of copepod communities at late summer in the Amerasian Basin. Arctic Ocean. Plos One. 14, e0219319 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gislason, A. & Silva, T. Abundance, composition, and development of zooplankton in the Subarctic Iceland Sea in 2006, 2007, and 2008. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 69, 1263–1276 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhukova, N. G., Nesterova, V. N., Prokopchuk, I. P. & Rudneva, G. B. Winter distribution of euphausiids (Euphausiacea) in the Barents Sea (2000–2005). Deep-Sea Res. Part II(56), 1959–1967 (2009).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Dalpadado, P. & Skjoldal, H. R. Abundance, maturity and growth of the krill species Thysanoessa inermis and T. longicaudata in the Barents Sea. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 144, 175–183 (1996).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Koszteyn, J., Timofeev, S., Węsławski, J. M. & Malinga, B. Size structure of Themisto abyssorum Boeck and Themisto libellula (Mandt) populations in European Arctic seas. Polar Biol. 15, 85–92 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dalpadado, P., Borkner, N., Bogstad, B. & Mehl, S. Distribution of Themisto (Amphipoda) spp. in the Barents Sea and predator-prey interactions. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 58, 876–895 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Macnaughton, M. O., Thormar, J. & Berge, J. Sympagic amphipods in the Arctic pack ice: Redescriptions of Eusirus holmii Hansen, 1887 and Pleusymtes karstensi (Barnard, 1959). Polar Biol. 30, 1013–1025 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kraft, A., Graeve, M., Janssen, D., Greenacre, M. & Falk-Petersen, S. Arctic pelagic amphipods: Lipid dynamics and life strategy. J. Plankton Res. 37, 790–807 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kreibich, T., Hagen, W. & Saborowski, R. Food utilization of two pelagic crustaceans in the Greenland Sea: Meganyctiphanes norvegica (Euphausiacea) and Hymenodora glacialis (Decapoda, Caridea). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 413, 105–115 (2010).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Geoffroy, M. et al. Increased occurrence of the jellyfish Periphylla periphylla in the European high Arctic. Polar Biol. 41, 2615–2619 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grigor, J. J., Søreide, J. E. & Varpe, Ø. Seasonal ecology and life-history strategy of the high-latitude predatory zooplankter Parasagitta elegans. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 499, 77–88 (2014).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Maclennan, D. N., Fernandes, P. G. & Dalen, J. A consistent approach to definitions and symbols in fisheries acoustics. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 59, 365–369 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gjøsæter, H. & Ushakov, N. G. Acoustic estimates of the Barents Sea Arctic cod Stock (Boreogadus saida). Forage Fishes in Marine Ecosystems. Alaska Sea Grant Collage Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks 97:01, 485–504 (1997).Raskoff, K. A., Hopcroft, R. R., Kosobokova, K. N., Purcell, J. E. & Youngbluth, M. Jellies under ice: ROV observations from the Arctic 2005 hidden ocean expedition. Deep-Sea Res. Part II(57), 111–126 (2010).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bluhm, B. A. et al. The Pan-Arctic continental slope: Sharp gradients of physical processes affect pelagic and benthic ecosystems. Front. Mar. Sci. 2020, 7 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Hop, H. et al. Pelagic ecosystem characteristics across the atlantic water boundary current from Rijpfjorden, Svalbard, to the Arctic Ocean During Summer (2010–2014). Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Mumm, N. Composition and distribution of mesozooplankton in the Nansen Basin, Arctic Ocean, during summer. Polar Biol. 13, 451–461 (1993).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ona, E. & Nielsen, J. Acoustic detection of the Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus) using multifrequency split beam echosounder in Svalbard waters. Prog. Oceanogr. 206, 102842 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gjøsæter, H., Ingvaldsen, R. & Christiansen, J. S. Acoustic scattering layers reveal a faunal connection across the Fram Strait. Prog. Oceanogr. 185, 102348 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ingvaldsen, R. B., Gjosaeter, H., Ona, E. & Michalsen, K. Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) feeding over deep water in the high Arctic. Polar Biol. 40, 2105–2111 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chawarski, J., Klevjer, T. A., Coté, D. & Geoffroy, M. Evidence of temperature control on mesopelagic fish and zooplankton communities at high latitudes. Front. Mar. Sci. 2022, 9 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Chernova, N. V. Catching of Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides (Pleuronectidae) on the shelf edge of the Laptev and East Siberian Seas. J. Ichthyol. 57, 219–227 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Benzik, A. N., Budanova, L. K. & Orlov, A. M. Hard life in cold waters: Size distribution and gonads show that Greenland halibut temporarily inhabit the Siberian Arctic. Water Biol. Secur. 1, 100037 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Olsen, L. M. et al. A red tide in the pack ice of the Arctic Ocean. Sci. Rep. 9, 9536 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Assmy, P. et al. Leads in Arctic pack ice enable early phytoplankton blooms below snow-covered sea ice. Sci. Rep. 7, 40850 (2017).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Leu, E., Søreide, J. E., Hessen, D. O., Falk-Petersen, S. & Berge, J. Consequences of changing sea-ice cover for primary and secondary producers in the European Arctic shelf seas: Timing, quantity, and quality. Prog. Oceanogr. 90, 18–32 (2011).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Drivdal, M. et al. Connections to the deep: Deep vertical migrations, an important part of the life cycle of Apherusa glacialis, an arctic ice-associated amphipod. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Scoulding, B., Chu, D., Ona, E. & Fernandes, P. G. Target strengths of two abundant mesopelagic fish species. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 137, 989–1000 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Popova, E. E., Yool, A., Aksenov, Y. & Coward, A. C. Role of advection in Arctic Ocean lower trophic dynamics: A modeling perspective. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 1571–1586 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Saunders, R. A., Ingvarsdóttir, A., Rasmussen, J., Hay, S. J. & Brierley, A. S. Regional variation in distribution pattern, population structure and growth rates of Meganyctiphanes norvegica and Thysanoessa longicaudata in the Irminger Sea, North Atlantic. Prog. Oceanogr. 72, 313–342 (2007).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Tarling, G. A. et al. Can a key boreal Calanus copepod species now complete its life-cycle in the Arctic? Evidence and implications for Arctic food-webs. Ambio 51, 333–344 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Purcell, J. E., Juhl, A. R., Manko, M. K. & Aumack, C. F. Overwintering of gelatinous zooplankton in the coastal Arctic Ocean. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 591, 281–286 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Purcell, J. E., Hopcroft, R. R., Kosobokova, K. N. & Whitledge, T. E. Distribution, abundance, and predation effects of epipelagic ctenophores and jellyfish in the western Arctic Ocean. Deep-Sea Res. Part II(57), 127–135 (2010).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Solvang, H. K. et al. Distribution of rorquals and Atlantic cod in relation to their prey in the Norwegian high Arctic. Polar Biol. 44, 761–782 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ingvaldsen, R. B. et al. Physical manifestations and ecological implications of Arctic Atlantification. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2, 874–889 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Flores, H. et al. Macrofauna under sea ice and in the open surface layer of the Lazarev Sea, Southern Ocean. Deep-Sea Res. Part II(58), 1948–1961 (2011).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Godø, O. R., Valdemarsen, J. W. & Engås, A. Comparison of efficiency of standard and experimental juvenile gadoid sampling trawls. ICES Mar. Sci. Symp. 196, 196–201 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Klevjer, T. et al. Micronekton biomass distribution, improved estimates across four north Atlantic basins. Deep-Sea Res. Part II. 180, 104691 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krafft, B. A. et al. Distribution and demography of Antarctic krill in the Southeast Atlantic sector of the Southern Ocean during the austral summer 2008. Polar Biol. 33, 957–968 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Foote, K. G. Maintaining precision calibrations with optimal copper spheres. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73, 1054–1063 (1983).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Korneliussen, R. J. et al. Acoustic identification of marine species using a feature library. Methods Oceanogr. 17, 187–205 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lavergne, T. et al. Version 2 of the EUMETSAT OSI SAF and ESA CCI sea-ice concentration climate data records. Cryosphere. 13, 49–78 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Firing, E., Ramada, J. & Caldwell, P. Processing ADCP Data with the CODAS Software System Version 3.1. Joint Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research University of Hawaii. http://currents.soest.hawaii.edu/docs/adcp_doc/index.html (1995).Padman, L. & Erofeeva, S. A barotropic inverse tidal model for the Arctic Ocean. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, 256 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar  More