More stories

  • in

    Dynamics of entomopathogenic nematode foraging and infectivity in microgravity

    Rearing EPNs
    Steinernema feltiae (SN strain) IJs were obtained from the International Entomopathogenic Nematode Collection (USDA-ARS, Byron Georgia USA). The nematodes were cultured in the laboratory using the White trap method41. Galleria mellonella (Vanderhorst Wholesale Inc. St. Marys, OH) were exposed to 100 IJs per larva. Infected G. mellonella larvae were incubated for 4 days at RT (20 ± 1 °C) and insect cadavers were transferred to White traps for IJ collection.
    Why Steinernema feltiae was chosen
    S. feltiae is a widely studied nematode and commercially used as a biocontrol agent in diverse systems. We selected S. feltiae for two reasons. (1) The dispersal behavior at the expected ISS temperature was the main factor in our decision. S. feltiae disperses without a quiescent period at temperatures from 15 °C to 30 °C. Some other EPNs such as S. carpocapsae IJs disperse normally at or above 25 °C, but at 20 °C and below, the nematodes have a quiescent period where IJs stay stand still for period of 40 min to 24h14. ISS ambient temperature is between 21 and 23 °C. We did not want to take chance with potential failure due to a temperature fluctuation so we chose S. feltiae, which is known to be active at the temperatures42 of the ISS. (2) S. feltiae is an intermediate forager thus incorporating behaviors of both foraging extremes43.
    NASA safety certification, flight configuration, and safety experiments
    The NASA safety certification was conducted by an implementation partner, NanoRacks, LLC (Houston, TX). The safety certification included filling out safety and experimental plan documents, submitting a bill of materials, and providing material safety sheets for the materials that would be flown to the ISS, their MSDS, and conducting safety and flight configuration experiments. To determine the risk of freezing tubes with moist sand on the ISS cold stowage, we sent three 15 ml conical tubes filled with 10% moist sand to NanoRacks for NASA safety testing. Briefly, play sand (Quikrete, Atlanta, GA) was washed three times in tap water and rinsed three times with MILLIQ water (MILLIPORE, Burlington, MA) using a gold pan (Garrett’s gravity trap, Garland, TX) then dried at 60 °C in the oven for 3 days or until all the moisture was evaporated. In a separate dish, dry sand was moistened with 10% MILLIQ water (w/v). Twelve ml moist sand was placed in 15 ml conical tubes that were rinsed three times with MILLIQ water and dried prior to use. We sent three tubes with moist sand to NanoRacks to be tested at NASA for safety. Next, we moved forward with flight configuration experiments for Specimens 2–6, prepared as shown in Fig. 5. Specimens 2–6 each with two replications were conducted once at 23 ± 2 °C and once at 15 ± 1 °C to determine whether nematodes can emerge and go through in the sand, infect the bait insects and reproduce within a month in a horizontal position. At the same time, we examined whether the tubes for Specimens 2–6 developed any discoloration or warp due to the byproducts produced during infection and decomposition of the cadavers for a month. Later, the flight configuration experiment was extended to six months in case return to Earth would be delayed due to lack of space in the resupply capsule. The lower temperature (15 °C) was tested as a precaution to determine whether nematodes still infect if the temperature fluctuated unexpectedly at ISS. We did one last safety test for Specimen 6 (insect only) to determine whether gasses released by decomposing insects could discolor or warp the tubes, causing a hazard on the ISS. For this experiment, two G. mellonella prepared in Fig. 5c were first placed in −80 °C overnight to kill insect larvae humanely and then the tubes incubated at 23 ± 2 °C. Two replications with a total four insect larvae were monitored monthly for over 6 months for discoloration and warping due to decomposing insect larvae. No warping or discoloration was observed, fulfilling safety requirements to move forward with the experiments.
    Fig. 5: Experimental design of specimens for microgravity and their Earth control.

    b Specimens 1–4. One end of the tube, designated as 1, had either two infected insect hosts for providing infective juvenile nematodes (Steinernema feltiae) or 2000 IJs in 0.5 ml of polyacrylamide gel. The other end of the tube, designated as 2, had either two healthy bait insects or infected insect. bS. feltiae IJs in gel. 4000 IJs/ml of polyacrylamide gel. c Two healthy Galleria mellonella larvae with wood shavings as shown.

    Full size image

    Preparing IJs for the microgravity experiments
    S. feltiae IJs were removed from the White trap 4 days after the beginning of emergence and rinsed three times in deionized water to remove residual cadaver-derived metabolites and pheromones (Supplementary Table 1) as described by Kaplan et al.14. Rinsed IJs were resuspended to infect the Galleria mellonella larvae for Specimens 1, 2, and 3 and used to prepare IJs in polyacrylamide gel (75 ml of water 1 g of a polyacrylamide gel (Soil Moist, JRM Chemical, Cleveland OH) with a density of 4000 IJs/ml for Specimens 4 and 5 as shown in Fig. 5a for both microgravity experiments and their corresponding Earth controls.
    Six concurrent experiments in microgravity for emergence, infection and reproduction and space flight
    We designed multiple concurrent experiments that were conducted at the International Space Station U.S. National Laboratory (ISS) with controls conducted on Earth. The experiments were designated as Specimens 1–6 (Fig. 5). The concurrent experiments were conducted to capture the maximum amount of information about the EPN infection process and life cycle in microgravity and make sure that usable data was returned even if microgravity interrupted part of the EPN life cycle. The space limitations of conducting an experiment on the ISS also had to be considered. Microgravity causes changes in many variables (not just gravity), which may impact a multistep infection requiring the cooperation of two organisms (nematode and its mutualistic bacteria). Furthermore, some of the facilities on the ISS, such as cold stowage (−80 °C), have limited capacity and high demand. A timeline of the experiments (Specimens) is presented in Fig. 2 and Supplementary Table 1.
    We used a modified sand column assay44,45 shown in Fig. 5. The experimental units consisted of 15 ml conical tubes (Fig. 5) filled with S. feltiae infected G. mellonella larvae or 2000 S. feltiae IJs in 0.5 ml of polyacrylamide gel were placed in one end of the tube and the healthy larvae were placed on the other end of the tube (CELLTREAT scientific products, San Diego, CA). Based on preliminary evidence, the set-up allows a 3-day time delay for the nematodes to move through the sand and infect the bait larvae. However, we did not know what delay there would be under microgravity when setting up the experiment.
    Specimen 1 was prepared as shown in Fig. 5a to determine whether nematodes reproduce, form the IJ stage, emerge, disperse, travel 10 cm in moist sandy soil, find a bait insect and infect/invade the host in microgravity (Fig. 1a–d). If the infection failed, this specimen was also designed to determine whether it was due to insect host-immune response. Specimen 1 was placed in cold stowage (−80 °C) 7 days after the launch at ISS, which was after the anticipated time of IJ invasion. A corresponding Earth control was prepared for both IJ invasion and insect host immunity response. Since we did not know how freezing or a month in −80 °C storage would affect hemocyte counts, we prepared additional Earth controls to be analyzed on the day the Earth Specimen 1 controls were placed in −80 °C (Supplementary Table 1). Three replicates were prepared for each treatment; microgravity, corresponding Earth control and additional Earth control for hemocyte counts. A total of 18 insects in nine individual tubes were analyzed for IJ invasion, to determine the IJ developmental stage and hemocyte counts for both Space and Earth specimens. The hemocyte counts were done for the additional Earth control (no freezing) on the day the other set was placed in the −80 °C freezer. Mean hemocyte count for the additional Earth control (no freezing) was 2.8 ± 1.7 from three replicates.
    Specimen 2 was prepared in the same manner as Specimen 1 except that the tubes were not frozen to allow IJs to develop and emerge from the bait insect. Unfortunately, they died upon return to Earth. Three replicates were prepared for each treatment; microgravity and Earth control with a total of six tubes analyzed.
    Specimen 3 was prepared the same as Specimen 1 except that it did not include a bait insect and the location of the infected insect was on the opposite side (Fig. 5). This specimen was designed to determine whether nematodes can continue their development and reproduction during the flight and emerge in microgravity. Since we did not know whether IJs could emerged from consumed cadavers under microgravity, we prepared Specimen 3. Sand was included to make sure that the emerged nematodes have a place to live until the experiment was returned to Earth and to make a good comparison to Specimen 1. Furthermore, Specimen 3 was kept at ambient temperature to test IJs dispersal after returning to Earth. Again, three replicate tubes for each treatment (microgravity and Earth control) were prepared with a total of six replicate tubes.
    Specimen 4 was prepared the same as specimen 1 except that it had 2000 IJs in 0.5 ml of polyacrylamide gel instead of an infected insect (Fig. 5a). This was a backup experiment just in case Specimens 1 and 2 failed to emerge in microgravity to infect bait insects. The column contained sand in the middle (causing a time delay) so the infection event would occur in space not on Earth. The experiment had to be delivered to NASA 36 h before the rocket launch. The sand provided enough time delay (2–3 days) that IJs would only find the bait insects when they reached the ISS or when the Dragon Capsule was in space. This experiment had an Earth control like the other experiments and one additional Earth control was included to determine whether the bait insects were infected before the rocket launch. Three replicates were prepared for each treatment; microgravity and two sets of Earth controls with a total of nine tubes analyzed.
    The rocket launch was delayed 1 day from December 4 to 5. The IJs had 2 days, 21 h and 20 min to go through 10 cm sand to reach the bait insect as opposed to 1 day 21 h and 20 min as planned launch day December 4. This was very concerning. At the earliest time (1 and ½ h) after the rocket launch, we analyzed the additional Earth control (three replicates) for insect invasion in two steps. First, we placed the IJs in a petri dish and added water to rinse the IJs off the surface of the insects. Each replicate was analyzed on a separate petri dish. The bait insects were alive and in all three replicates had IJs on them. Next, we washed all the insects to remove all the IJs from their surface and looked inside the insects to determine whether any of the IJs were inside the insects. No IJs were found inside the bait insects suggesting that none of the insects were infected while they were on Earth.
    Specimen 5 contained S. feltiae IJs in polyacrylamide gel with a density of 4000 IJ/ml (Fig. 5b). A total volume of 10 ml of IJ acrylamide suspension was placed in each of three 15 ml conical tubes. This specimen was prepared to determine how 33 days of space flight would affect IJ adjustment (movement) and infectivity after returning to Earth. Upon return to Earth at the earliest time (3 days after returning), IJ movement was compared to an Earth control and 10 days later, IJ infectivity was tested. This was also a backup experiment in case nematodes died due to the effect of sand because IJs were known to safely travel on Earth in polyacrylamide gel43. Like the other experiments, three replicate tubes (120,000 IJs) for each treatment (microgravity and Earth control) were prepared with a total of six replicate tubes (240,000 IJs).
    Specimen 6 had two G. mellonella last instar larvae in 15 ml conical tubes in wood shaving (Fig. 5c). This was to determine if the infection failed in Specimen 1 due negative effects on the insect host. At the end of the space flight, insects in both microgravity and Earth control were dead at different developmental stages. Several insect stages were observed in the various tubes (larvae, pupae and adult), all of which died. A total of 12 insect larvae in six replicate tubes were analyzed.
    All Specimens, except for Specimen 1, were kept at ambient temperature on the ISS, during the flight back to Earth, and for 3 days while being shipped to our laboratory for further analysis on nematode IJ fitness and infectivity.
    Handing over the experiments to NanoRacks for delivery to NASA for launch
    Specimens 1–4 and 6 in Fig. 5 were assembled at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Space Station Processing Facility (SSPF) on December 2 (Supplementary Table 1). Specimen 5 in Fig. 5b was prepared on Nov 29 at the Shapiro lab in Byron, GA, and kept at 5 °C until December 2. After all of the specimens were prepared (Supplementary Fig. 1), Specimen 1 replications were placed in a sealed bag and Specimens 2–6 were placed in a separate sealed bag. They are weighed and placed in Nanotracks’ NanoLab in a Horizontal form (Supplementary Fig. 1). The Nanolab lid was sealed with Velcro. After that, the Nanolab was delivered to NASA and placed in the Dragon Capsule on SpaceX Falcon9 rocket for CRS-19 on the same day (Supplementary Table 1). The experiments in the Nanolab were placed in a horizontal position and kept 20 °C for 2 days, 21 h and 20 min in the Dragon capsule until the launch on December 5, 2019. Experiments were kept in a horizontal position during the launch, in microgravity in Space, and at ISS at ambient temperature until returned to Earth.
    Earth controls: Specimen 1 for Earth control was kept in a sealed plastic bag and Specimens 2–6 were placed in a separate sealed plastic bag at ambient temperature at the KSC SSPF until launch on December 5. Specimen 1 Earth controls were taken to the Shapiro Lab by car and kept at RT until December 11. Specimens 2–6 were shipped by FedEx at ambient temperature using cool packs for maintenance of the temperature to the Pheronym R&D laboratory, Davis, CA
    In orbit and return to Earth
    Specimen 1 (the three 15 ml conical tubes) was transferred to cold storage on December 12 at 346/14:30 (8:30am CST) by European Space Agency Astronaut Luca Parmitano (https://blogs.nasa.gov/stationreport/2019/12/12/). Specimens 2–6 were kept in the NanoLab on the Dragon Capsule which returned to Earth on January 7, 2020 and was retrieved from the Pacific Ocean by Space X. NanoRacks received the samples on Jan 9, 2020, in their facility in Houston, TX and shipped Specimen 1 (kept frozen) in dry ice overnight by FedEx to the Shapiro Lab in Byron, GA. The Shapiro Lab in Byron GA placed the samples in −80 °C until analysis. On the same day (Jan 9), NanoRacks shipped Specimens 2–6 at RT overnight by FedEx to Pheronym, Davis, CA. On January 10, 2020 at 10 AM, Specimens 2–6 were received by Pheronym Lab, and were inspected immediately for dead, alive sluggish or active nematodes, pictures were taken, and videos recorded before removing the Teflon seals. Pictures were taken using a Nikon D60 (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan). Videos were taken with a hand-held USB Celestron microscope (Celestron, Torrance, CA) and/or iPhone 6 S (Apple, Cupertino, CA).
    Immune response assessment of Specimen 1
    The primary immune defense in insects against multicellular parasites including EPNs is encapsulation. Immune cells (hemocytes) bind to the nematode and one another to form a multicellular envelope; we therefore assessed immune response based on hemocyte activity and encapsulation46. G. mellonella larvae were dissected longitudinally. The presence of hemocytes adhering to the nematode body was confirmed at 400–600X. The number of nematodes showing hemocyte activity was compared between treatments.
    Assessing the IJs after returning to Earth
    When Specimen 2, 3, 4, and 5 were received, S. feltiae IJs were observed visually to assess whether they were alive, sluggish, or dead before removing the seals. Microgravity and corresponding Earth controls were inspected at the same time. There were several IJs visible prior to opening the tubes. Subsequently, we unsealed the tubes for Specimen 2, 3, and 4, removed half of the sand to a 10 cm petri dish and harvested the IJs by washing the sand three times with water. The IJs were then rinsed with MILLIQ water to test for dispersal behavior at Pheronym and sent to the Shapiro-Ilan’s lab for assessing symbiotic bacteria load. In case we missed any live IJs in Specimens 2, 3, and 4, we baited the other half of the sand with two G. mellonella larvae and incubated them at 22 ± 1 °C for three days before inspecting for dead or live insects. After that the samples were shipped to the Shapiro-Ilan’s lab for a second inspection and analysis of the bait insects for IJ presence.
    Specimen 5 was in polyacrylamide gel which was transparent, making visually scoring easy dead or alive and taking videos (Supplementary Video 1 and 2). After inspection, three ml of IJs with a density of 4000 IJs/ml were shipped in gel at ambient temperature overnight by FedEx to the Shapiro-Ilan lab to conduct infectivity experiments.
    Dispersal assays of Specimens 2 and 3
    Dispersal assays were conducted as described by Kaplan et al.14,15 with a few differences. Petri dishes (6 cm) containing 0.9% agar with a gel strength: ≥900 g/cm2 (Caisson Agar, Type I, Smithfield, UT) were used for the assays. Briefly, IJs from Specimens 2 and 3 were tested for dispersal immediately by rinsing three times with MILLIQ water after the harvest from sand. The assays were conducted in the afternoon between 2 and 3 PM. Approximately ~26–55 IJs (due to a limited number of IJs) in 10 µL of water were placed in the center of an agar plate with 6 cm diameter Petri dishes and counted. The assays were run for 30 min during which IJs were free to move on agar plates. After 30 min, IJs inside and outside the 1.3 cm ring were counted. IJs remaining inside the 1.3 cm ring were considered non-dispersed, and those outside were considered to have dispersed. Percentage dispersal was calculated as the number dispersed relative to the total number of IJs on the plate. Three replications for Specimens 2 (proxy Earth control) and Specimen 3 (treatment, microgravity), a total of six plates were analyzed.
    Infectivity after 33-day space flight, Specimen 5
    Infectivity was assessed based on procedures describe by Mbata et al.46. IJs were extracted from gel by dilution and centrifuged at 582g to concentrate them. A total of 960 IJs per replication were pipetted onto filter paper (Whatman No. 1) in a 0.35 mm Petri dish. A single greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella (L.) larva was added to each Petri dish. Insects were incubated in the dark for at 25 °C for 72 h and then dissected under a stereomicroscope to determine the number of invading IJs. There were five insects per replicate of Specimen 5 (total six replicates microgravity and Earth controls) and insect only (no IJs) control. A total of 35 insects were analyzed.
    Comparison of symbiotic bacterial load per nematode in Specimens 2 and 3
    Methods to compare symbiotic nematode bacteria load among treatments were based on those described by Kaya and Stock1,5. IJs were surface sterilized with 0.5% NaClO and then washed three times with sterile distilled water (centrifuging at 582g for 2 min between each wash). The final pellet was suspended in 0.5 ml. Single IJs were homogenized for 60 s with a sterile motor-driven polypropylene pestle and then transferred onto 60 mm nutrient agar plates. The plates were incubated at 25 °C. The number of bacterial colonies per IJ was assessed at 3 and 7 days.
    Statistical analysis
    For comparisons of infectivity, dispersal behavior, symbiotic bacteria load, and immune response the treatments effects (from space) were compared to Earth controls using Student’s t tests (SAS version 9.4, SAS 2002). Based on the inspection of residual plots, numerical data were log transformed prior to analysis47 (SAS, 2002).
    Ethics statement
    We use the invertebrate model system Steinernema feltiae and Galleria mellonella for this study, in accordance, the study was exempt from ethics committee approval.
    Reporting summary
    Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article. More

  • in

    Unique inducible filamentous motility identified in pathogenic Bacillus cereus group species

    Isolation of an environmental contaminant with preferential expansion on C. jejuni cell lawns
    We observed a contaminant colony that paradoxically grew preferentially on small, spot-plated lawns of C. jejuni cells on Mueller Hinton (MH) agar (1.5% w/v). The MH plate had previously been inoculated with C. jejuni cells spotted and incubated microaerobically at 38 °C overnight before being stored for several days aerobically at room temperature. Transfer of contaminant cells onto new, similarly prepared spot-plated lawns of C. jejuni resulted in the contaminant again growing preferentially atop the C. jejuni lawns, with minimal growth on the rich agar in between spots of C. jejuni lawns (Fig. 1a). The contaminant was isolated for further study and the strain named ML-A2C4.
    Fig. 1: Identification of the filamentous motile environmental isolate as Bacillus mobilis ML-A2C4.

    a ML-A2C4 filamentous growth on C. jejuni lawn spots (small circles). b ML-A2C4 growth on a control 1.5% agar MH plate (left) and on a MH plate spread with a full confluent C. jejuni lawn (center) after 48 h aerobic incubation at 30 °C. The red box shows a close-up view of the filaments at the growth edge (right). c Quantification of the visible growth diameter on control MH plates (black bars) and plates with C. jejuni lawns (red bars) over time (n = 5) with error bars indicating standard deviation (SD). Statistical analysis was performed for growth diameter on C. jejuni lawn plates versus control plates using the Student’s t test with Welch’s correction, and for 48 vs. 24 h using repeated measures one-way ANOVA, with ****p  More

  • in

    The first evidence for Late Pleistocene dogs in Italy

    1.
    Larson, G. et al. Rethinking dog domestication by integrating genetics, archaeology, and biogeography. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.109, 8878–8883 (2012).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 
    2.
    Shannon, L. M. Genetic structure in village dogs reveals a Central Asian domestication origin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.112, 13639–13644 (2015).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    3.
    Skoglund, P., Ersmark, E., Palkopoulou, E. & Dalén, L. Ancient wolf genome reveals an early divergence of domestic dog ancestors and admixture into high-latitude breeds. Curr. Biol.25, 1–5 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    4.
    Thalmann, O. et al. Complete mitochondrial genomes of ancient canids suggest a European origin of domestic dogs. Science342, 871–874 (2013).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    5.
    Frantz, L. A. et al. Genomic and archaeological evidence suggests a dual origin of domestic dogs. Science352, 1228–1231 (2016).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    6.
    Germonpré, M. et al. Fossil dogs and wolves from Palaeolithic sites in Belgium, the Ukraine and Russia: osteometry, ancient DNA and stable isotopes. J. Archaeol. Sci.36, 473–490 (2009).
    Google Scholar 

    7.
    Germonpré, M. et al. Palaeolithic dogs and the early domestication of the wolf: a reply to the comments of Crockford and Kuzmin (2012). J. Archaeol. Sci.40, 786–792 (2013).
    Google Scholar 

    8.
    Gremonpré, M. et al. Palaeolithic dogs and Pleistocene wolves revisited: a reply to Morey (2014). J. Archaeol. Sci.54, 210–216 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    9.
    Germonpré, M. et al. Palaeolithic and prehistoric dogs and Pleistocene wolves from Yakutia: identification of isolated skulls. J. Archaeol. Sci.78, 1–19 (2017).
    Google Scholar 

    10.
    Crockford, S. J. & Kuzmin, Y. V. Comments on Germonpré et al. (2012) Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 2009 “Fossil dogs and wolves from Palaeolithic sites in Belgium, the Ukraine and Russia: osteometry, ancient DNA and stable isotopes”, and Germonpré, Lázki cková-Galetová, and Sablin, Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 2012 “Palaeolithic dog skulls at the Gravettian Predmostí site, the Czech Republic”. J. Archaeol. Sci.39, 2797–2801 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    11.
    Morey, D. F. In search of Paleolithic dogs: a quest with mixed results. J. Archaeol. Sci.52, 300–307 (2014).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    12.
    Botigué, L. R. et al. Ancient European dog genomes reveal continuity since the Early Neolithic. Nat. Commun.8, 16082 (2017).
    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    13.
    Camarós, E., Münzel, S. C., Cueto, M., Rivals, F. & Conard, N. J. The evolution of Paleolithic hominin–carnivore interaction written in teeth: stories from the Swabian Jura (Germany). J. Archaeol. Sci.6, 798–809 (2016).
    Google Scholar 

    14.
    Ovodov, N. D. et al. A 33,000-year-old incipient dog from the Altai Mountains of Siberia: evidence of the earliest domestication disrupted by the Last Glacial Maximum. PLoS ONE6, e22821 (2011).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    15.
    Sablin, M. & Khlopachev, G. The earliest Ice Age dogs: evidence from Eliseevichi. Curr. Anthropol.43, 795–799 (2002).
    Google Scholar 

    16.
    Boudadi-Maligne, M. & Escarguel, G. A biometric re-evaluation of recent claims for Early Upper Palaeolithic wolf domestication in Eurasia. J. Archaeol. Sci.45, 80–89 (2014).
    Google Scholar 

    17.
    Drake, A. G., Coquerelle, M. & Colombeau, G. 3D morphometric analysis of fossil canid skulls contradicts the suggested domestication of dogs during the late Paleolithic. Sci. Rep.5, 8299 (2015).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    18.
    Morey, D. F. & Jeger, R. Paleolithic dogs: why sustained domestication then?. J. Archaeol. Sci.3, 420–428 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    19.
    Napierala, H. & Uerpmann, H. P. A ‘new’ palaeolithic dog from central Europe. Intl. J. Osteoarchaeol.22, 127–137 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    20.
    Perri, A. R. A wolf in dog’s clothing: initial dog domestication and Pleistocene wolf variation. J. Archaeol. Sci.68, 1–4 (2016).
    Google Scholar 

    21.
    Janssens, L. et al. A new look at an old dog: Bonn-Oberkassel reconsidered. J. Archaeol. Sci.92, 126–138 (2018).
    Google Scholar 

    22.
    Pionnier-Capitan, M. et al. New evidence for Upper Palaeolithic small domestic dogs in South-Western Europe. J. Archaeol. Sci.38, 2123–2140 (2011).
    Google Scholar 

    23.
    Boudadi-Maligne, M., Mallye, J. B., Langlais, M. & Barshay-Szdmit, C. Des restes de chiens magdaléniens à l’abri du Morin (Gironde, France) Implications socio-économiques d’une innovation zootechnique. Paleo23, 39–54 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    24.
    Thalmann, O. & Perri, A. R. Paleogenomics 273–306 (Springer, Cham, 2018).
    Google Scholar 

    25.
    Mariotti Lippi, M., Foggi, B., Aranguren, B., Ronchitelli, A. & Revedin, A. Multistep food plant processing at Grotta Paglicci (Southern Italy) around 32,600 cal B.P.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.112, 12075–12080 (2015).
    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    26.
    Mezzena, F. & Palma di Cesnola, A. Industria acheulena “in situ” nei depositi esterni della Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico – Foggia). Riv. Sci. Preist.26, 3–30 (1971).
    Google Scholar 

    27.
    Crezzini, J. et al. A spotted hyaena den in the Middle Palaeolithic of Grotta Paglicci (Gargano promontory, Apulia, Southern Italy). Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci.8, 227–240 (2016).
    Google Scholar 

    28.
    Palma di Cesnola, A. L’Aurignacien et le Gravettien ancien de la grotte Paglicci au Mont Gargano. L’Anthropologie110, 355–370 (2006).
    Google Scholar 

    29.
    PalmadiCesnola, A. Le Paléolithique supérieur en Italie (Jérôme Millon, Grenoble, 2001).
    Google Scholar 

    30.
    Berto, C., Boscato, P., Boschin, F., Luzi, E. & Ronchitelli, A. Paleoenvironmental and paleoclimatic context during the Upper Paleolithic (late Upper Pleistocene) in the Italian Peninsula. The small mammal record from Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia, Southern Italy). Quat. Sci. Rev.168, 30–41 (2017).
    ADS  Google Scholar 

    31.
    Boschin, F. et al. The palaeoecological meaning of macromammal remains from archaeological sites exemplified by the case study of Grotta Paglicci (Upper Palaeolithic, southern Italy). Quat. Res.90, 470–482 (2018).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    32.
    Borgia, V., Boschin, F. & Ronchitelli, A. Bone and antler working at Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia, southern Italy). Quat. Int.403, 23–39 (2016).
    Google Scholar 

    33.
    Condemi, S. et al. I resti umani rinvenuti a Paglicci (Rignano Garganico – FG): nota preliminare. Annali dell’Uiversità di Ferrara, Museologia Scientifica e Naturalistica10(2), 233–238 (2014).
    Google Scholar 

    34.
    Arrighi, S., Borgia, V., d’Errico, F. & Ronchitelli, A. I ciottoli decorati di Paglicci: raffigurazioni e utilizzo. Riv. Sci. Preist.58, 39–58 (2008).
    Google Scholar 

    35.
    Arrighi, S., Borgia, V., d’Errico, F., Ricci, S. & Ronchitelli, A. Manifestazioni d’arte inedite e analisi tecnologica dell’arte mobiliare di Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico – Foggia). Preist. Alpina46, 49–58 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    36.
    Arrighi, S. et al. Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia): analisi sulle materie coloranti. Preist. Alpina46, 91–92 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    37.
    Ronchitelli, A. et al. When technology joins symbolic behaviour: the gravettian burials at Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico – Foggia – southern Italy). Quat. Int.359–360, 423–441 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    38.
    Cassoli, P. F., Fiore, I. & Tagliacozzo, A. Butchering and exploitation of large mammals in the Epigravettian levels of Grotta Romanelli (Apulia, Italy). Anthropozoologica25–26, 309–318 (1997).
    Google Scholar 

    39.
    Sardella, R. et al. Grotta Romanelli (southern Italy, Apulia): legacies and issues in excavating a key site for the Pleistocene of the Mediterranean. Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Strat.124, 247–264 (2018).
    Google Scholar 

    40.
    Sardella, R. et al. Grotta Romanelli (Lecce, Southern Italy) between past and future: new studies and perspectives for an archaeo-geosite symbol of the Palaeolithic in Europe. Geoheritage11, 1413–1432 (2019).
    Google Scholar 

    41.
    Calcagnile, L. et al. New radiocarbon dating results from the Upper Paleolithic–Mesolithic levels in Grotta Romanelli (Apulia, southern Italy). Radiocarbon61, 1211–1220 (2019).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    42.
    Cassoli, P.F., Gala, M. & Tagliacozzo, A. In Grotta Romanelli nel centenario della sua scoperta (1900–2000). Conference Proceedings (eds Fabbri, P.F., Ingravallo, E., Mangia, A.) 91–111 (Congedo Editore, Galatina, 2003).

    43.
    Tagliacozzo, A. Grotta Romanelli nel centenario della sua scoperta (1900–2000). Conference Proceedings (eds Fabbri, P.F., Ingravallo, E., Mangia, A.) 169–216 (Congedo Editore, Galatina, 2003).

    44.
    Boschin, F., Bernardini, F., Zanolli, C. & Tuniz, C. MicroCT imaging of red fox talus: a non-invasive approach to evaluate age at death. Archaeometry57, 194–211 (2015).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    45.
    Boschin, F., Zanolli, C., Bernardini, F., Princivalle, F. & Tuniz, C. A Look from the inside: MicroCT analysis of burned bones. Ethnobiol. Lett.6, 41–49 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    46.
    Geiger, M. et al. Unaltered sequence of dental, skeletal, and sexual maturity in domestic dogs compared to the wolf. Zool. Lett.2, 16 (2016).
    Google Scholar 

    47.
    Payne, S. & Bull, G. Components of variation in measurements of pig bones and teeth, and the use of measurements to distinguish wild from domestic pig remains. Archaeozoologia2, 27–66 (1988).
    Google Scholar 

    48.
    Zanolli, C. et al. Inner tooth morphology of Homo erectus from Zhoukoudian. New evidence from an old collection housed at Uppsala University, Sweden. J. Hum. Evol.116, 1–13 (2018).
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    49.
    Zanolli, C. et al. Evidence for increased hominid diversity in the Early to Middle Pleistocene of Indonesia. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0860-z (2019).
    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    50.
    Maricic, T., Whitten, M. & Pääbo, S. Multiplexed DNA sequence capture of mitochondrial genomes using PCR products. PLoS ONE5, e14004 (2010).
    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    51.
    Hefner, R. & Geffen, E. Group size and home range of the Arabian wolf (Canis lupus) in Southern Israel. J. Mammal.80, 611–619 (1999).
    Google Scholar 

    52.
    Gaubert, P. et al. Reviving the African Wolf Canis lupus lupaster in North and West Africa: a mitochondrial lineage ranging more than 6,000 km wide. PLoS ONE7, e42740 (2012).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    53.
    Prothero, D. R. et al. Size and shape stasis in late Pleistocene mammals and birds from Rancho La Brea during the Last Glacial-Interglacial cycle. Quat. Sci. Rev.56, 1–10 (2012).
    ADS  Google Scholar 

    54.
    Payne, S. Paleolithic site of Douara Cave and Paleogeography of Palmyra Basin in Syria, part III: animal bones and further analysis of archeological materials 1–108 (University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1983).
    Google Scholar 

    55.
    Mecozzi, B. & Lucenti, S. B. The Late Pleistocene Canis lupus (Canidae, Mammalia) from Avetrana (Apulia, Italy): reappraisal and new insights on the European glacial wolves, I. J. Geosci.137, 138–150 (2018).
    Google Scholar 

    56.
    Rustioni, M., Ferretti, M. P., Mazza, P., Pavia, M. & Varola, A. The vertebrate fauna from Cardamone (Apulia, southern Italy): an example of Mediterranean mammoth fauna. Deinsea9, 395–404 (2003).
    Google Scholar 

    57.
    Sardella, R. et al. The wolf from Grotta Romanelli (Apulia, Italy) and its implications in the evolutionary history of Canis lupus in the Late Pleistocene of Southern Italy. Quat. Int.328–329, 179–195 (2014).
    Google Scholar 

    58.
    Trut, L. N. The Genetics of the Dog 15–42 (CABI Publishing, New York, 2001).
    Google Scholar 

    59.
    Hare, B., Wobber, V. & Wrangham, R. The self-domestication hypothesis: evolution of bonobo psychology is due to selection against aggression. Anim. Behav.83, 573–585 (2012).
    Google Scholar 

    60.
    Lord, K. A., Larson, G., Coppinger, R. P. & Karlsson, E. The history of farm foxes undermines the animal domestication syndrome. Trends Ecol.35, 125–136 (2020).
    Google Scholar 

    61.
    Marshall-Pescini, S., Cafazzo, S., Virány, Z. & Range, F. Integrating social ecology in explanation of wolf-dog behavioural differences. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci.16, 80–86 (2017).
    Google Scholar 

    62.
    Leonard, J. A., Vilà, C., Fox-Dobbs, K., Koch, P. L. & Wayne, R. K. Megafaunal extinctions and the disappearance of a specialized wolf ecomorph. Curr. Biol.17, 1146–1150 (2007).
    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    63.
    Hare, B., Brown, M., Williamson, C. & Tommasello, M. The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science298, 1634–1636 (2002).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    64.
    Wobber, V. et al. Breed differences in domestic dogs’ (Canis familiaris) comprehension of human communicative signals. Interact. Stud.10, 206–224 (2009).
    Google Scholar 

    65.
    Riedel, A. I resti animali della grotta delle Ossa (Škocjan). Atti del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Trieste30, 125–208 (1977).
    Google Scholar 

    66.
    Detry, C. & Cardoso, J. L. On some remains of dog (Canis familiaris) from the Mesolithic shell-middens of Muge, Portugal. J. Archaeol. Sci.37, 2762–2774 (2010).
    Google Scholar 

    67.
    von den Driesch, A. A guide to measurement of animal bones from archaeological sites. Peabody Mus. Bull.1, 1–148 (1976).
    Google Scholar 

    68.
    Tuniz, C. et al. The ICTP-Elettra X-ray laboratory for cultural heritage and archaeology. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A711, 106–110 (2013).
    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

    69.
    Fajardo, R. J., Ryan, T. M. & Kappelman, J. Assessing the accuracy of high resolution X-ray computed tomography of primate trabecular bone by comparisons with histological sections. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.118, 1–10 (2002).
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    70.
    Coleman, M. N. & Colbert, M. W. CT thresholding protocols for taking measurements on three-dimensional models. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.133, 723–725 (2007).
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    71.
    Bouxsein, M. et al. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J. Bone Miner. Res.25, 1468–1486 (2010).
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    72.
    Shipman, P., Foster, G. & Schoeninger, M. Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of color, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage. J. Archaeol. Sci.11, 307–325 (1984).
    Google Scholar 

    73.
    Ghezzo, E. & Rook, L. Cuon alpinus (Pallas, 1811) (Mammalia, Carnivora) from Equi (Late Pleistocene, Massa-Carrara, Italy): anatomical analysis and palaeoethological contextualisation. Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei25, 492–504 (2014).
    Google Scholar 

    74.
    Gunz, P. & Mitteroecker, P. Semilandmarks: a method for quantifying curves and surfaces. Hystrix24, 103–109 (2013).
    Google Scholar 

    75.
    Adams, D.C., Collyer, D.L., Kaliontzopoulou, A. & Sherratt, E. Geomorph: software for geometric morphometric analyses. R package version 3.0.5. https://cran.r-project.org/package=geomorph (2017).

    76.
    Schlager, S. Statistical Shape and Deformation Analysis 217–256 (Academic Press, London, 2017).
    Google Scholar 

    77.
    Mitteroecker, P. & Bookstein, F. L. Linear discrimination, ordination, and the visualization of selection gradients in modern morphometrics. Evol. Biol.38, 100–114 (2011).
    Google Scholar 

    78.
    Dray, S. & Dufour, A. B. The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. J. Stat. Softw.22, 1–20 (2007).
    Google Scholar 

    79.
    Bookstein, F. L. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991).
    Google Scholar 

    80.
    Dabney, J. et al. Complete mitochondrial genome sequence of a Middle Pleistocene cave bear reconstructed from ultrashort DNA fragments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.110, 15758–15763 (2013).
    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    81.
    Meyer, M. & Kircher, M. Illumina sequencing library preparation for highly multiplexed target capture and sequencing. Cold Spring Harb. Protoc. https://doi.org/10.1101/pdb.prot5448 (2010).
    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    82.
    Peltzer, G. et al. EAGER: efficient ancient genome reconstruction. Genome Biol.17, 60 (2016).
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    83.
    Kim, K. S., Lee, S. E., Jeong, H. W. & Ha, J. H. The complete nucleotide sequence of the domestic dog (Canis familiaris) mitochondrial genome. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.10, 210–220 (1998).
    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    84.
    Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics25, 1754–1760 (2009).
    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    85.
    Schubert, M. et al. Improving ancient DNA read mapping against modern reference genomes. BMC Genom.13, 178 (2012).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    86.
    Li, H. et al. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics25, 2078–2079 (2009).
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    87.
    Jonsson, H., Ginolhac, A., Schubert, M., Johnson, P. L. & Orlando, L. mapDamage2.0: fast approximate Bayesian estimates of ancient DNA damage parameters. Bioinformatics29, 1682–1684 (2013).
    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    88.
    Loog, L. et al. Ancient DNA suggests modern wolves trace their origin to a Late Pleistocene expansion from Beringia. Mol Ecol.00, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15329 (2019).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    89.
    Kumar, S., Stecher, G. & Tamura, K. MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol.33, 1870–1874 (2016).
    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

    90.
    Edgar, C. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res.32, 1792–1797 (2004).
    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    91.
    Bouckaert, R. et al. BEAST 2: a software platform for Bayesian evolutionary analysis. PLoS Comput. Biol.10, e1003537 (2014).
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    92.
    Rambaut, A., Suchard, M.A., Xie, D. & Drummond, A.J. Tracer v1.6. https://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/tracer (2014)

    93.
    Bronk Ramsey, C. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon51, 337–360 (2009).
    Google Scholar 

    94.
    Reimer, P. J. et al. IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0–50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon55, 1869–1887 (2013).
    CAS  Google Scholar 

    95.
    Street, M., Napierala, H. & Janssens, L. The late Palaeolithic dog from Bonn-Oberkassel in context. Rheinische Ausgrabungen72, 253–274 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    96.
    Bronk Ramsey, C., Higham, T., Bowles, A. & Hedges, R. Improvements to the pretreatment of bones at Oxford. Radiocarbon46(1), 155–163 (2004).
    Google Scholar 

    97.
    Fedi, M. E., Cartocci, A., Manetti, M., Taccetti, F. & Mandò, P. A. The 14C AMS facility at LABEC, Florence. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B259, 18–22 (2007).
    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

    98.
    Boschin, F. Exploitation of carnivores, lagomorphs and rodents at Grotta Paglicci during the Epigravettian: the dawn of a new subsistence strategy?. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep.26, 101871 (2019).
    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    A large-scale assessment of lakes reveals a pervasive signal of land use on bacterial communities

    1.
    Adrian R, O’Reilly CM, Zagarese H, Baines SB, Hessen DO, Keller W, et al. Lakes as sentinels of climate change. Limnol Oceanogr. 2009;54:2283–97.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 
    2.
    Tranvik LJ, Downing JA, Cotner JB, Loiselle SA, Striegl RG, Ballatore TJ, et al. Lakes and reservoirs as regulators of carbon cycling and climate. Limnol Oceanogr. 2009;54:2298–314.
    Google Scholar 

    3.
    Arbuckle KE, Downing JA. The influence of watershed land use on lake N: P in a predominantly agricultural landscape. Limnol Oceanogr. 2001;46:970–5.
    Google Scholar 

    4.
    Taranu ZE, Gregory-Eaves I. Quantifying relationships among phosphorus, agriculture, and lake depth at an inter-regional scale. Ecosystems. 2008;11:715–25.
    Google Scholar 

    5.
    Heisler J, Glibert PM, Burkholder JM, Anderson DM, Cochlan W, Dennison WC, et al. Eutrophication and harmful algal blooms: a scientific consensus. Harmful Algae. 2008;8:3–13.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    6.
    Scavia D, David Allan J, Arend KK, Bartell S, Beletsky D, Bosch NS, et al. Assessing and addressing the re-eutrophication of Lake Erie: Central basin hypoxia. J Gt Lakes Res. 2014;40:226–46.
    Google Scholar 

    7.
    Bastviken D, Cole J, Pace M, Tranvik L. Methane emissions from lakes: dependence of lake characteristics, two regional assessments, and a global estimate. Glob Biogeochem Cycles. 2004;18:1–12.
    Google Scholar 

    8.
    Novotny EV, Murphy D, Stefan HG. Increase of urban lake salinity by road deicing salt. Sci Total Environ. 2008;406:131–44.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    9.
    Dugan HA, Bartlett SL, Burke SM, Doubek JP, Krivak-Tetley FE, Skaff NK, et al. Salting our freshwater lakes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:4453–8.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    10.
    Hobbie SE, Finlay JC, Janke BD, Nidzgorski DA, Millet DB, Baker LA. Contrasting nitrogen and phosphorus budgets in urban watersheds and implications for managing urban water pollution. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2017;114:4177–82.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    11.
    Shade A, Kent AD, Jones SE, Newton RJ, Triplett EW, McMahon KD. Interannual dynamics and phenology of bacterial communities in a eutrophic lake. Limnol Oceanogr. 2007;52:487–94.
    Google Scholar 

    12.
    Kara EL, Hanson PC, Hu YH, Winslow L, McMahon KD. A decade of seasonal dynamics and co-occurrences within freshwater bacterioplankton communities from eutrophic Lake Mendota, WI, USA. ISME J. 2013;7:680–4.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    13.
    Marmen S, Blank L, Al-Ashhab A, Malik A, Ganzert L, Lalzar M, et al. The role of land use types and water chemical properties in structuring the microbiome of a connected lake system. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:1–16.
    Google Scholar 

    14.
    Environment Canada Whole organism responses and intersex severity in rainbow darter (Etheostoma caeruleum) following exposures to municipal wastewater in the Grand River basin, ON, Canada. Part A, Municipal Water Use Rep. 2011;159:2011–301.
    Google Scholar 

    15.
    Huot Y, Brown CA, Potvin G, Antoniades D, Baulch HM, Beisner BE, et al. The NSERC Canadian Lake Pulse Network: a national assessment of lake health providing science for water management in a changing climate. Sci Total Environ. 2019;695:133668.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    16.
    Lu Y, Wang R, Zhang Y, Su H, Wang P, Jenkins A, et al. Ecosystem health towards sustainability. Ecosyst Heal Sustain. 2015;1:1–15.
    Google Scholar 

    17.
    Hering D, Borja A, Carvalho L, Feld CK. Assessment and recovery of European water bodies: Key messages from the WISER project. Hydrobiologia 2013;704:1–9.
    Google Scholar 

    18.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Lake Assessment: a collaborative survey of the Nation’s Lakes. Washington, DC: EPA 841-R-09-001; 2009.

    19.
    Ecological Stratification Working Group. A national ecological framework for Canada. Urbana-Champaign, Illinois: Ecological Stratification Working Group; 1996.

    20.
    Glaz P, Gagné JP, Archambault P, Sirois P, Nozais C. Impact of forest harvesting on water quality and fluorescence characteristics of dissolved organic matter in eastern Canadian Boreal Shield lakes in summer. Biogeosciences. 2015;12:6999–7011.
    Google Scholar 

    21.
    Patton C, Kryskalla J. Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—evaluation of alakline digestion as an alternative to kjedahl digestion for determination of total and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorous. Denver, Colorado: Water-Resources Investigations Report 03; 2003.

    22.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Method 200.7: determination of metals and trace elements in water and wastes by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. Cincinatti, Ohio: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1994.

    23.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Method 300.1: determination of inorganic anions in drinking water by ion chromatography. Cincinatti, Ohio; 1997.

    24.
    Wu Y. Barcode Demultiplex for Illumina I1, R1, R2 fastq.gz files. 2014.

    25.
    Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17:10.
    Google Scholar 

    26.
    Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJA, Holmes SP. DADA2: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016;13:581–3.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    27.
    Rohwer RR, Hamilton JJ, Newton RJ, McMahon KD. TaxAss: leveraging a custom freshwater database achieves fine-scale taxonomic resolution. mSphere. 2018;3:1–14.
    Google Scholar 

    28.
    Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: Improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:590–6.
    Google Scholar 

    29.
    McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. Phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e61217.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    30.
    Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. FastTree 2—approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e9490.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    31.
    Dray S, Dufour A-B. The ade4 Package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. J Stat Softw. 2007;22:1–20.
    Google Scholar 

    32.
    Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, Mcglinn D, et al. Vegan: community ecology package. 2016. https://cran.r-project.org; https://github.com/vegandevs/vegan.

    33.
    Hair J, Tatham R, Anderson R, Black W. Multivariate data analysis. 5th ed. London: Prentice-Hall; 1998.
    Google Scholar 

    34.
    R Development Core Team T. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2009.
    Google Scholar 

    35.
    Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Development Core Team T. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effect models. R package version. 3.1-141; 2019.

    36.
    Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–51.
    Google Scholar 

    37.
    Rosseel Y. Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Softw. 2012;48:1–37.
    Google Scholar 

    38.
    Albanese D, Filosi M, Visintainer R, Riccadonna S, Jurman G, Furlanello C. Minerva and minepy: a C engine for the MINE suite and its R, Python and MATLAB wrappers. Bioinformatics. 2013;29:407–8.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    39.
    Kurtz ZD, Müller CL, Miraldi ER, Littman DR, Blaser MJ, Bonneau RA. Sparse and compositionally robust inference of microbial ecological networks. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11:e1004226.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    40.
    Banerjee S, Walder F, Büchi L, Meyer M, Held AY, Gattinger A, et al. Agricultural intensification reduces microbial network complexity and the abundance of keystone taxa in roots. ISME J. 2019;13:1722–36.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    41.
    Barberán A, Bates ST, Casamayor EO, Fierer N. Using network analysis to explore co-occurrence patterns in soil microbial communities. ISME J. 2012;6:343–51.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    42.
    Stegen JC, Lin X, Fredrickson JK, Chen X, Kennedy DW, Murray CJ, et al. Quantifying community assembly processes and identifying features that impose them. ISME J. 2013;7:2069–79.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    43.
    Benlloch S, López-López A, Casamayor EO, Øvreås L, Goddard V, Daae FL, et al. Prokaryotic genetic diversity throughout the salinity gradient of a coastal solar saltern. Environ Microbiol. 2002;4:349–60.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    44.
    Abed RMM, Kohls K, De Beer D. Effect of salinity changes on the bacterial diversity, photosynthesis and oxygen consumption of cyanobacterial mats from an intertidal flat of the Arabian Gulf. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9:1384–92.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    45.
    Lozupone CA, Knight R. Global patterns in bacterial diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:11436–40.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    46.
    Wu QL, Zwart G, Schauer M, Kamst-Van Agterveld MP, Hahn MW. Bacterioplankton community composition along a salinity gradient of sixteen high-mountain lakes located on the Tibetan Plateau, China. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:5478–85.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    47.
    Wang J, Yang D, Zhang Y, Shen J, van der Gast C, Hahn MW, et al. Do patterns of bacterial diversity along salinity gradients differ from those observed for macroorganisms? PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e27597.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    48.
    Kelly VR, Lovett GM, Weathers KC, Findlay SEG, Strayer DL, Burns DJ, et al. Long-term sodium chloride retention in a rural watershed: legacy effects of road salt on streamwater concentration. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42:410–5.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    49.
    Corsi SR, Graczyk DJ, Geis SW, Booth NL, Richards KD. A fresh look at road salt: aquatic toxicity and water-quality impacts on local, regional, and national scales. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44:7376–82.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    50.
    Levine SN, Schindler DW. Influence of nitrogen to phosphorus supply ratios and physicochemical conditions on cyanobacteria and phytoplankton species composition in the Experimental Lakes Area, Canada. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 1999;56:451–66.
    Google Scholar 

    51.
    Stockner JG, Shortreed KS. Response of Anabaena and Synechococcus to manipulation of nitrogen: phosphorus ratios in a lake fertilization experiment. Limnol Oceanogr. 1988;33:1348–61.
    Google Scholar 

    52.
    Thad Scott J, McCarthys MJ. Nitrogen fixation may not balance the nitrogen pool in lakes over timescales relevant to eutrophication management. Limnol Oceanogr. 2010;55:1265–70.
    Google Scholar 

    53.
    Håkanson L, Blenckner T, Bryhn AC, Hellström SS. The influence of calcium on the chlorophyll-phosphorus relationship and lake Secchi depths. Hydrobiologia. 2005;537:111–23.
    Google Scholar 

    54.
    Eiler A, Heinrich F, Bertilsson S. Coherent dynamics and association networks among lake bacterioplankton taxa. ISME J. 2012;6:330–42.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    55.
    Peura S, Bertilsson S, Jones RI, Eiler A. Resistant microbial cooccurrence patterns inferred by network topology. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:2090–7.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    56.
    Logares R, Tesson SVM, Canbäck B, Pontarp M, Hedlund K, Rengefors K. Contrasting prevalence of selection and drift in the community structuring of bacteria and microbial eukaryotes. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:2231–40.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    57.
    Lindström ES, Kamst-Van Agterveld MP, Zwart G. Distribution of typical freshwater bacterial groups is associated with pH, temperature, and lake water retention time. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:8201–6.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    58.
    Lauber CL, Hamady M, Knight R, Fierer N. Pyrosequencing-based assessment of soil pH as a predictor of soil bacterial community structure at the continental scale. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75:5111–20.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    59.
    Xiong J, Liu Y, Lin X, Zhang H, Zeng J, Hou J, et al. Geographic distance and pH drive bacterial distribution in alkaline lake sediments across Tibetan Plateau. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:2457–66.
    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    60.
    Findlay DL, Kasian SEM. Phytoplankton community responses to acidification of lake 223, experimental lakes area, northwestern Ontario. Water Air Soil Pollut. 1986;30:719–26.
    Google Scholar 

    61.
    Findlay DL, Kasian SEM. The effect of incremental pH recovery on the Lake 223 phytoplankton community. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 1996;53:856–64.
    Google Scholar 

    62.
    Maberly SC. Diel, episodic and seasonal changes in pH and concentrations of inorganic carbon in a productive lake. Freshw Biol. 2008;35:579–98.
    Google Scholar 

    63.
    Tong Y, Lin G, Ke X, Liu F, Zhu G, Gao G, et al. Comparison of microbial community between two shallow freshwater lakes in middle Yangtze basin, East China. Chemosphere. 2005;60:85–92.
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    64.
    Romina Schiaffino M, Unrein F, Gasol JM, Massana R, Balagué V, Izaguirre I. Bacterial community structure in a latitudinal gradient of lakes: the roles of spatial versus environmental factors. Freshw Biol. 2011;56:1973–91.
    Google Scholar 

    65.
    Zeng J, Yang L, Li J, Liang Y, Xiao L, Jiang L, et al. Vertical distribution of bacterial community structure in the sediments of two eutrophic lakes revealed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) and multivariate analysis techniques. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;25:225–33.
    Google Scholar 

    66.
    Canfield DE, Bachmann RW. Prediction of total phosphorus concentrations, chlorophyll a, and Secchi depths in natural and artificial lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 1981;38:414–23.
    Google Scholar 

    67.
    Meeuwig JJ, Peters RH. Circumventing phosphorus in lake management: a comparison of chlorophyll a predictions from land-use and phosphorus-loading models. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 1996;53:1795–806.
    Google Scholar 

    68.
    Yang L, Lei K, Meng W, Fu G, Yan W. Temporal and spatial changes in nutrients and chlorophyll-α in a shallow lake, Lake Chaohu, China: an 11-year investigation. J Environ Sci (China). 2013;25:1117–23.
    Google Scholar 

    69.
    Kraemer SA, Soucy JPR, Kassen R. Antagonistic interactions of soil pseudomonads are structured in time. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2017;93:1–9.
    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Why deforestation and extinctions make pandemics more likely

    NEWS
    07 August 2020

    Researchers are redoubling efforts to understand links between species loss and emerging diseases — and use that information to predict and stop future outbreaks.

    Jeff Tollefson

    Search for this author in:

    Controlling deforestation (shown here, in a tropical rainforest in the Congo Basin) could decrease the risk of future pandemics, experts say.Credit: Patrick Landmann/Science Photo Library

    As humans diminish biodiversity by cutting down forests and building more infrastructure, they’re increasing the risk of disease pandemics such as COVID-19. Many ecologists have long suspected this, but a new study helps to reveal why: while some species are going extinct, those that tend to survive and thrive — rats and bats, for instance — are more likely to host potentially dangerous pathogens that can make the jump to humans.
    The analysis of around 6,800 ecological communities on 6 continents adds to a growing body of evidence that connects trends in human development and biodiversity loss to disease outbreaks — but stops short of projecting where new disease outbreaks might occur.
    “We’ve been warning about this for decades,” says Kate Jones, an ecological modeller at University College London and an author on the study, published on 5 August in Nature1. “Nobody paid any attention.”
    Jones is one of a cadre of researchers that has long been delving into relationships among biodiversity, land use and emerging infectious diseases. Their work has mostly flown below the radar, but now, as the world reels from the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts to map risks in communities across the globe and to project where diseases are most likely to emerge are taking centre stage.

    Last week, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) hosted an online workshop on the nexus between biodiversity loss and emerging diseases. The organization’s goal now is to produce an expert assessment of the science underlying that connection ahead of a United Nations summit in New York that’s planned for September, where governments are expected to make new commitments to preserve biodiversity.
    Others are calling for a more wide-ranging course of action. On 24 July, an interdisciplinary group of scientists, including virologists, economists and ecologists, published an essay in Science2, arguing that governments can help reduce the risk of future pandemics by controlling deforestation and curbing the wildlife trade, which involves the sale and consumption of wild — and often rare — animals that can host dangerous pathogens.
    Most efforts to prevent the spread of new diseases tend to focus on vaccine development, early diagnosis and containment, but that’s like treating the symptoms without addressing the underlying cause, says Peter Daszak, a zoologist at the non-governmental organization EcoHealth Alliance in New York, who chaired the IPBES workshop. He says COVID-19 has helped to clarify the need to investigate biodiversity’s role in pathogen transmission.
    The latest work by Jones’s team bolsters the case for action, Daszak says. “We’re looking for ways to shift behaviour that would directly benefit biodiversity and reduce health risks.”
    Concentrating risk
    Previous research has shown that outbreaks of diseases such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and bird influenza that cross over from animals to humans have increased in the past few decades3,4. This phenomenon is likely to be the direct result of increased contact between humans, wildlife and livestock, as people move into undeveloped areas. These interactions happen more frequently on the frontier of human expansion because of changes to the natural landscape and increased encounters with animals. A study published in April by researchers at Stanford University in California found that deforestation and habitat fragmentation in Uganda increased direct encounters between primates and people, as primates ventured out of the forest to raid crops and people ventured in to collect wood5.
    But a key question over the past decade has been whether the decline in biodiversity that inevitably accompanies human expansion on the rural frontier increases the pool of pathogens that can make the jump from animals to humans. Work by Jones and others6 suggests that the answer in many cases is yes, because a loss in biodiversity usually results in a few species replacing many — and these species tend to be the ones hosting pathogens that can spread to humans.
    For their latest analysis, Jones and her team compiled more than 3.2 million records from several hundred ecological studies at sites around the world, ranging from native forests to cropland to cities. They found that the populations of species known to host diseases transmissible to humans — including 143 mammals such as bats, rodents and various primates — increased as the landscape changed from natural to urban, and as biodiversity generally decreased.

    The next step for Jones’s team is to examine the likelihood of disease transmission to the human population. The group has already made this type of evaluation for Ebola virus outbreaks in Africa, creating risk maps based on development trends, the presence of probable host species, and socio-economic factors that determine the pace at which a virus might spread once it enters the human population7. The group’s risk maps accurately captured where outbreaks occurred in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in the past few years, suggesting that it is possible to understand and project risks on the basis of relationships between factors such as land use, ecology, climate and biodiversity.
    Some researchers urge caution when communicating that biodiversity hotspots are where outbreaks are likely to occur. “My worry, frankly, is that people are going to cut down the forests more if this is where they think the next pandemic is going to come from,” says Dan Nepstad, a tropical ecologist and founder of the Earth Innovation Institute based in San Francisco, California, a non-profit organization that campaigns for sustainable development. Efforts to preserve biodiversity will only work, he says, if they address the economic and cultural factors that drive deforestation and the rural poor’s dependency on hunting and trading wild animals.
    Ibrahima Socé Fall, an epidemiologist and head of the World Health Organization’s emergency operations in Africa, agrees that understanding the ecology — as well as the social and economic trends — of the rural frontier will be crucial to projecting the risk of future disease outbreaks. “Sustainable development is crucial,” he says. “If we continue to have this level of deforestation, disorganized mining and unplanned development, we are going to have more outbreaks.”
    Coordinating efforts
    One message that the IPBES’s upcoming report is likely to deliver is that scientists and policymakers need to treat the rural frontier more holistically, addressing issues of public health, the environment and sustainable development in tandem. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many scientists and conservationists have emphasized curbing the wildlife trade — an industry worth an estimated US$20 billion annually in China, where the first coronavirus infections appeared. China has temporarily suspended its trade. But Daszak says the industry is just one piece in a larger puzzle that involves hunting, livestock, land use and ecology.

    Wildlife markets like this one in Bali, Indonesia, sustain the livelihoods of many people. But they are also under scrutiny as hotspots for pathogen transmission.Credit: Amilia Roso/The Sydney Morning Herald via Getty

    “Ecologists should be working with infectious-disease researchers, public-health workers and medics to track environmental change, assess the risk of pathogens crossing over and reduce risky human activities,” he says.
    Daszak was an author of last month’s essay in Science, which argued that governments could substantially reduce the risk of future pandemics such as COVID-19 by investing in efforts to curb deforestation and the wildlife trade, as well as in efforts to monitor, prevent and control new virus outbreaks from wildlife and livestock. The team estimated that the cost of these actions would ring in at $22 billion to $33 billion annually, including $19.4 billion for ending trade in wild meat in China — a step that not all experts think is desirable or necessary — and up to $9.6 billion to help curb tropical deforestation. The total investment would be two orders of magnitude less than the $5.6-trillion price tag estimated for the COVID-19 pandemic, the team estimates.

    Fall says the key is to align efforts by government and international agencies focused on public health, animal health, the environment and sustainable development. The latest Ebola outbreak in the DRC, which began in 2018 and ended last month, had its roots not just in disease but also in deforestation, mining, political instability and the movement of people. The goal must be to focus resources on the riskiest areas and manage interactions between people and animals, both wild and domestic, Fall says.
    With the right collaboration between human health, animal health and environmental authorities, Fall says, “you have some mechanisms for early warnings”.

    doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-02341-1

    References

    1.
    Gibb, R. et al. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2562-8 (2020).

    2.
    Dobson, A. P. et al. Science 369, 379–381 (2020).

    3.
    Jones, K. E. et al. Nature 451, 990–993 (2008).

    4.
    Smith, K. F. et al. J. R. Soc. Interface 11, 20140950 (2014).

    5.
    Bloomfield, L. S. P., McIntosh, T. L. & Lambin, E. Landscape Ecol. 35, 985–1000 (2020).

    6.
    Faust, C. L. et al. Ecol. Lett. 21, 471–483 (2018).

    7.
    Redding, D. W. et al. Nature Commun. 10, 4531 (2019).

    Download references

    Latest on:

    An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

    Related Articles More

  • in

    Satellites find penguins by following the poo

    A space-based sensor has detected new colonies of emperor penguins on Antarctic sea ice. Credit: Christopher Walton

    Ecology
    07 August 2020

    Images from space bolster the population count, but the birds remain vulnerable to climate change.

    From their vantage point high above Antarctica, sharp-eyed satellites have spotted eight previously unknown colonies of emperor penguins. The discovery boosts emperor penguin numbers by 5–10%.
    The iconic birds breed and raise their young on sea ice frozen to Antarctica’s shoreline. These habitats are threatened by climate change, so scientists have been working to get a complete census of emperor penguins (Aptenodytes forsteri) to assess how the bird’s populations might change.
    Peter Fretwell and Philip Trathan at the British Antarctic Survey in Cambridge, UK, used the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-2 satellites to search for dark smudges of guano-stained ice. They identified eight newfound penguin colonies located around the rim of the continent; one was on sea ice frozen around icebergs grounded far offshore. Using the images, the authors also pinpointed three colonies that had been reported in the 1960s and 1980s but not confirmed since.
    The findings bring the total number of emperor penguin colonies to 61. Many are in areas vulnerable to climate change. More

  • in

    Bacterial mock communities as standards for reproducible cytometric microbiome analysis

    1.
    Müller, S. & Nebe-von-Caron, G. Functional single-cell analyses: flow cytometry and cell sorting of microbial populations and communities. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 34, 554–587 (2010).
    Article  Google Scholar 
    2.
    Günther, S. et al. Species-sorting and mass-transfer paradigms control managed natural metacommunities. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 4862–4877 (2016).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    3.
    Props, R., Monsieurs, P., Mysara, M., Clement, L. & Boon, N. Measuring the biodiversity of microbial communities by flow cytometry. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1376–1385 (2016).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    4.
    Liu, Z. et al. Ecological stability properties of microbial communities assessed by flow cytometry. mSphere 3, e00564–17 (2018).
    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

    5.
    Liu, Z. et al. Neutral mechanisms and niche differentiation in steady-state insular microbial communities revealed by single cell analysis. Environ. Microbiol. 21, 164–181 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    6.
    De Vrieze, J., Boon, N. & Verstrate, W. Taking the technical microbiome into the next decade. Environ. Microbiol. 20, 1991–2000 (2018).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    7.
    Koch, C. et al. Cytometric fingerprinting for analyzing microbial intracommunity structure variation and identifying subcommunity function. Nat. Protoc. 8, 190–202 (2013).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    8.
    Mage, L. M. et al. Shape-based separation of synthetic microparticles. Nat. Mater. 18, 82–89 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    9.
    Müller, S. Modes of cytometric bacterial DNA pattern: a tool for pursuing growth. Cell Prolif. 40, 621–639 (2007).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    10.
    Ludwig, J., Höner zu Siederdissen, C., Liu, Z., Stadler, P. F. & Müller, S. flowEMMi: an automated model-based clustering tool for microbial cytometric data. BMC Bioinforma. 20, 643 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    11.
    Koch, C., Fetzer, I., Harms, H. & Müller, S. CHIC-an automated approach for the detection of dynamic variations in complex microbial communities. Cytom. A 83, 561–567 (2013).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    12.
    Liu, Z. & Müller, S. Bacterial community diversity dynamics highlight degrees of nestedness and turnover patterns. Cytom. Part A https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cyto.a.23965 (2020)

    13.
    Aghaeepour, N. et al. Critical assessment of automated flow cytometry data analysis techniques. Nat. Methods 10, 228–238 (2013).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    14.
    Peters, J. M. & Ansari, M. Q. Multiparameter flow cytometry in the diagnosis and management of acute leukemia. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 135, 44–54 (2011).
    PubMed  Google Scholar 

    15.
    Bendall, S. C. et al. Single-cell mass cytometry of differential immune and drug responses across a human hematopoietic continuum. Science 332, 687–696 (2011).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    16.
    Spitzer, H. M. & Nolan, G. P. Mass cytometry: single cells, many features. Cell 165, 780–791 (2016).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    17.
    Overmann, J., Abt, B. & Sikorski, J. Present and future of culturing bacteria. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 8, 711–730 (2017).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    18.
    Nayfach, S., Shi, Z. J., Seshadri, R., Pollard, K. S. & Kyrpides, N. C. New insights from uncultivated genomes of the global human gut microbiome. Nature 568, 505–510 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    19.
    Roesch, L. F. et al. Pyrosequencing enumerates and contrasts soil microbial diversity. ISME J. 1, 283–290 (2007).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    20.
    Singer, E. et al. Next generation sequencing data of a defined microbial mock community. Sci. Data 3, 160081 (2016).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    21.
    Hallmaier-Wacker, L. K., Lueert, S., Roos, C. & Knauf, S. The impact of storage buffer, DNA extraction method, and polymerase on microbial analysis. Sci. Rep. 8, 6292 (2018).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    22.
    Hardwick, S. A. et al. Synthetic microbe communities provide internal reference standards for metagenome sequencing and analysis. Nat. Commun. 9, 3096 (2018).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    23.
    Hornung, B. V. H., Zwittink, R. D. & Kuijper, E. J. Issues and current standards of controls in microbiome research. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 95, fiz045 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    24.
    Sze, M. A. & Schloss, P. D. The impact of DNA polymerase and number of rounds of amplification in PCR on 16S rRNA gene sequence data. mSphere 4, e00163–19 (2019).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    25.
    Clingenpeel, S., Clum, A., Schwientel, P., Rinke, C. & Woyke, T. Reconstructing each cell’s genome within complex communities—dream or reality? Front. Microbiol. 8, 771 (2015).
    Google Scholar 

    26.
    Stepanauskas, R. et al. Improved genome recovery and intergrated cell-size analyses of individual uncultured microbial cells and viral particles. Nat. Commun. 8, 84 (2017).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    27.
    De Bruin, O. M. & Birnboim, H. C. A method for assessing efficiency of bacterial cell disruption and DNA release. BMC Microbiol. 16, 197 (2016).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    28.
    Mie, G. Beiträge zur optik trüber medien, speziell kolloidaler metallösungen. Ann. Phys. 25, 377–445 (1908).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    29.
    Woyke, T., Doud, D. F. R. & Schulz, F. The trajectory of microbial single-cell sequencing. Nat. Methods 14, 1045–1054 (2017).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    30.
    Jahn, M. et al. Subpopulation-proteomics in prokaryotic populations. Curr. Opin. Biotech. 24, 79–87 (2013).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    31.
    Schloss, P. D. et al. Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75, 7537–7541 (2009).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    32.
    Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C. & Knight, R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27, 2194–2200 (2011).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

    33.
    Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).

    34.
    Lane, D. J. in Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics (eds. Stackebrandt, E. & Goodfellow, M.) 115–175 (Wiley, 1991).

    35.
    Lambrecht, J. et al. Flow cytometric quantification, sorting and sequencing of methanogenic archaea based on F420 autofluorescence. Microb. Cell Fact. 16, 180 (2017).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    36.
    Besmer, M. D. et al. The feasibility of automated online flow cytometry for in-situ monitoring of microbial dynamics in aquatic ecosystems. Front. Microbiol 5, 265 (2014).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    37.
    Takahashi, S., Tomita, J., Nishioka, K., Hisada, T. & Nishijima, M. Development of a prokaryotic universal primer for simultaneous analysis of bacteria and archaea using next-generation sequencing. PLoS ONE 9, e105592 (2014).
    Article  Google Scholar 

    38.
    Herlemann, D. P. et al. Transitions in bacterial communities along the 2000 km salinity gradient of the Baltic Sea. ISME J. 5, 1571–1579 (2011).
    CAS  Article  Google Scholar  More