Philippa Kaur

1.
Hartmann, N. B. et al. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 1039–1047 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 
2.
Horton, A. A., Walton, A., Spurgeon, D. J., Lahive, E. & Svendsen, C. Microplastics in freshwater and terrestrial environments: evaluating the current understanding to identify the knowledge gaps and future research priorities. Sci. Total Environ. 586, 127–141 (2017).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

3.
Cole, M., Lindeque, P., Halsband, C. & Galloway, T. S. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 2588–2597 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

4.
Ballent, A., Corcoran, P. L., Madden, O., Helm, P. A. & Longstaffe, F. J. Sources and sinks of microplastics in Canadian Lake Ontario nearshore, tributary and beach sediments. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 110, 383–395 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

5.
Wagner, M. & Lambert, S. Freshwater Microplastics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018).
Google Scholar 

6.
Lechner, A. et al. The Danube so colourful: a potpourri of plastic litter outnumbers fish larvae in Europe’s second largest river. Environ. Pollut. 188, 177–181 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

7.
Miller, R. Z., Watts, A. J. R., Winslow, B. O., Galloway, T. S. & Barrows, A. P. W. Mountains to the sea: river study of plastic and non-plastic microfiber pollution in the northeast USA. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 124, 245–251 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

8.
Mani, T., Hauk, A., Walter, U. & Burkhardt-Holm, P. Microplastics profile along the Rhine River. Sci. Rep. 5, 1–7 (2015).
Google Scholar 

9.
Castañeda, R. A., Avlijas, S., Simard, M. A. & Ricciardi, A. Microplastic pollution in St. Lawrence River sediments. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 71, 1767–1771 (2014).
Google Scholar 

10.
Pomeroy, C., Haggart, O., Vermaire, J. C., Herczegh, S. M. & Murphy, M. Microplastic abundance and distribution in the open water and sediment of the Ottawa River, Canada, and its tributaries. Facets 2, 301–314 (2017).
Google Scholar 

11.
Klein, S., Worch, E. & Knepper, T. P. Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in river shore sediments of the rhine-main area in Germany. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 6070–6076 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

12.
Hurley, R., Woodward, J. & Rothwell, J. J. Microplastic contamination of river beds significantly reduced by catchment-wide flooding. Nat. Geosci. 11, 251–257 (2018).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

13.
Tan, Z. et al. Microplastics in the surface sediments from the Beijiang River littoral zone: composition, abundance, surface textures and interaction with heavy metals. Chemosphere 171, 248–258 (2016).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

14.
Leslie, H. A., Brandsma, S. H., van Velzen, M. J. M. & Vethaak, A. D. Microplastics en route: field measurements in the Dutch river delta and Amsterdam canals, wastewater treatment plants, North Sea sediments and biota. Environ. Int. 101, 133–142 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

15.
Mani, T. et al. Repeated detection of polystyrene microbeads in the lower Rhine River. Environ. Pollut. 245, 634–641 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

16.
Wilson, S. et al. Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 77, 177–182 (2013).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

17.
McCormick, A., Hoellein, T. J., Mason, S. A., Schluep, J. & Kelly, J. J. Microplastic is an abundant and distinct microbial habitat in an urban river. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 11863–11871 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

18.
Windsor, F. M., Tilley, R. M., Tyler, C. R. & Ormerod, S. J. Microplastic ingestion by riverine macroinvertebrates. Sci. Total Environ. 646, 68–74 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

19.
Sanchez, W., Bender, C. & Porcher, J. M. Wild gudgeons (Gobio gobio) from French rivers are contaminated by microplastics: preliminary study and first evidence. Environ. Res. 128, 98–100 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

20.
Kuśmierek, N. & Popiołek, M. Microplastics in freshwater fish from Central European lowland river (Widawa R, SW Poland). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27, 11438–11442 (2020).
Google Scholar 

21.
Wagner, M. et al. Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: what we know and what we need to know. Environ. Sci. Eur. 26, 58 (2014).
Google Scholar 

22.
Scherer, C., Brennholt, N., Reifferscheid, G. & Wagner, M. Feeding type and development drive the ingestion of microplastics by freshwater invertebrates. Sci. Rep. 7, 17006 (2017).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Aljaibachi, R. & Callaghan, A. Impact of polystyrene microplastics on Daphnia magna mortality and reproduction in relation to food availability. PeerJ 6, e4601 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

24.
Bruck, S. & Ford, A. T. Chronic ingestion of polystyrene microparticles in low doses has no effect on food consumption and growth to the intertidal amphipod Echinogammarus marinus?. Environ. Pollut. 233, 1125–1130 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

25.
Mateos-Cárdenas, A. et al. Polyethylene microplastics adhere to Lemna minor (L.), yet have no effects on plant growth or feeding by Gammarus duebeni (Lillj.). Sci. Total Environ. 689, 413–421 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

26.
Rehse, S., Kloas, W. & Zar, C. Short-term exposure with high concentrations of pristine microplastic particles leads to immobilisation of Daphnia magna. Chemosphere 153, 91–99 (2016).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

27.
Jemec, A., Horvat, P., Kunej, U., Bele, M. & Kr, A. Uptake and effects of microplastic textile fibers on freshwater crustacean Daphnia magna. Environ. Pollut. 219, 201–209 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

28.
Weber, A., Scherer, C., Brennholt, N., Reifferscheid, G. & Wagner, M. PET microplastics do not negatively affect the survival, development, metabolism and feeding activity of the freshwater invertebrate Gammarus pulex. Environ. Pollut. 234, 181–189 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

29.
Jambeck, J. R. et al. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347, 768–771 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

30.
Geyer, R., Jambeck, J. & Law, K. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci. Adv. 3, 25–29 (2017).
Google Scholar 

31.
Van Sebille, E. et al. A global inventory of small floating plastic debris. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 124006 (2015).
ADS  Google Scholar 

32.
Dawson, A. L. et al. Turning microplastics into nanoplastics through digestive fragmentation by Antarctic krill. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–8 (2018).
Google Scholar 

33.
Jang, M., Shim, W. J., Han, G. M., Song, Y. K. & Hong, S. H. Formation of microplastics by polychaetes (Marphysa sanguinea) inhabiting expanded polystyrene marine debris. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 131, 365–369 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

34.
Alimi, O. S., Farner Budarz, J., Hernandez, L. M. & Tufenkji, N. Microplastics and nanoplastics in aquatic environments: aggregation, deposition, and enhanced contaminant transport. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 1704–1724 (2018).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

35.
Consolandi, G., Ford, A. T. & Bloor, M. C. Feeding behavioural studies with freshwater Gammarus spp.: the importance of a standardised methodology. In Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 1–41 (2019).

36.
Wright, S. L., Thompson, R. C. & Galloway, T. S. The physical impacts of microplastics on marine organisms: a review. Environ. Pollut. 178, 483–492 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

37.
Redondo-Hasselerharm, P. E., Falahudin, D., Peeters, E. T. H. M. & Koelmans, A. A. Microplastic effect thresholds for freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2278–2286 (2018).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

38.
Blarer, P. & Burkhardt-holm, P. Microplastics affect assimilation efficiency in the freshwater amphipod Gammarus fossarum. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23, 23522–23532 (2016).
CAS  Google Scholar 

39.
Straub, S., Hirsch, P. E. & Burkhardt-Holm, P. Biodegradable and petroleum-based microplastics do not differ in their ingestion and excretion but in their biological effects in a freshwater invertebrate Gammarus fossarum. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14, 774 (2017).
PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

40.
Catarino, A. I., Frutos, A. & Henry, T. B. Use of fluorescent-labelled nanoplastics (NPs) to demonstrate NP absorption is inconclusive without adequate controls. Sci. Total Environ. 670, 915–920 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

41.
Schür, C. et al. When fluorescence is not a particle: the tissue translocation of microplastics in daphnia magna seems an artifact. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 38, 1495–1503 (2019).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

42.
Luo, H. et al. Leaching behavior of fluorescent additives from microplastics and the toxicity of leachate to Chlorella vulgaris. Sci. Total Environ. 678, 1–9 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

43.
Gewert, B., Plassmann, M. M. & Macleod, M. Pathways for degradation of plastic polymers floating in the marine environment. Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 17, 1513–1521 (2015).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

44.
ter Halle, A. et al. Understanding the fragmentation pattern of marine plastic debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 5668–5675 (2016).
ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

45.
Weinstein, J. E., Crocker, B. K. & Gray, A. D. From macroplastic to microplastic: degradation of high-density polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene in a salt marsh habitat. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35, 1632–1640 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

46.
Zhu, L., Zhao, S., Bittar, T. B., Stubbins, A. & Li, D. Photochemical dissolution of buoyant microplastics to dissolved organic carbon: Rates and microbial impacts. J. Hazard. Mater. 383, 121065 (2020).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

47.
Song, Y. K. et al. Combined effects of UV exposure duration and mechanical abrasion on microplastic fragmentation by polymer type. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 4368–4376 (2017).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

48.
Hakkarainen, M. & Albertsson, A. C. Environmental degradation of polyethylene. Adv. Polym. Sci. 169, 177–199 (2004).
CAS  Google Scholar 

49.
Andrady, A. L., Pegram, J. E. & Song, Y. Studies on enhanced degradable plastics. II. Weathering of enhanced photodegradable polyethylenes under marine and freshwater floating exposure. J. Environ. Polym. Degrad. 1, 117–126 (1993).
CAS  Google Scholar 

50.
Porter, A., Smith, K. E. & Lewis, C. The sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus as a bioeroder of plastic. Sci. Total Environ. 693, 133621 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

51.
Cau, A. et al. Benthic crustacean digestion can modulate environmental fate of microplastics in the deep sea. Environ. Sci. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b07705 (2020).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

52.
Macneil, C., Dick, J. T. A. & Elwood, R. W. The trophic ecology of freshwater Gammarus spp. (Crustacea: Amphipoda): problems and perspectives concerning the functional feeding group concept. Biol. Rev. 72, 349–364 (1997).
Google Scholar 

53.
Willoughby, L. G. & Sutcliffe, D. W. Experiments on feeding and growth of the amphipod Gammarus pulex (L.) related to its distribution in the River Duddon. Freshw. Biol. 6, 577–586 (1976).
CAS  Google Scholar 

54.
Agrawal, V. P. Feeding appendages and the digestive system of Gammarus pulex. Acta Zool. 46, 67–81 (1965).
CAS  Google Scholar 

55.
Watling, L. Functional morphology of the amphipod mandible. J. Nat. Hist. 27, 837–849 (1993).
Google Scholar 

56.
Steele, D. H. & Steele, V. J. Biting mechanism of the amphipod anonyx (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Lysianassoidea). J. Nat. Hist. 27, 851–860 (1993).
Google Scholar 

57.
Mayer, G., Maier, G., Maas, A. & Waloszek, D. Mouthpart morphology of Gammarus roeselii compared to a successful invader, Dikerogammarus villosus (Amphipoda). J. Crustac. Biol. 29, 161–174 (2009).
Google Scholar 

58.
Mekhanikova, I. V. Morphology of mandible and lateralia in six endemic amphipods (Amphipoda, Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, in relation to feeding. Crustaceana 83, 865–887 (2010).
Google Scholar 

59.
Cassone, B. J., Grove, H. C., Elebute, O., Villanueva, S. M. P. & LeMoine, C. M. R. Role of the intestinal microbiome in low-density polyethylene degradation by caterpillar larvae of the greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 287, 20200112 (2020).
Google Scholar 

60.
Besseling, E. et al. Nanoplastic affects growth of S. obliquus and reproduction of D. magna. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 12336–12343 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

61.
Bhattacharya, P., Lin, S., Turner, J. P. & Ke, P. C. Physical adsorption of charged plastic nanoparticles affects algal photosynthesis. J. Phys. Chem. 114, 16556–16561 (2010).
CAS  Google Scholar 

62.
Sendra, M., Staf, E., Pilar, M. & Moreno-Garrido, I. Are the primary characteristics of polystyrene nanoplastics responsible for toxicity and ad/absorption in the marine diatom Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Environ. Pollut. 249, 610–619 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

63.
van Weert, S., Redondo-Hasselerharm, P. E., Diepens, N. J. & Koelmans, A. A. Effects of nanoplastics and microplastics on the growth of sediment-rooted macrophytes. Sci. Total Environ. 654, 1040–1047 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

64.
Lian, J. et al. Impact of polystyrene nanoplastics (PSNPs) on seed germination and seedling growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J. Hazard. Mater. 385, 121620 (2020).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

65.
Bosker, T., Bouwman, L. J., Brun, N. R., Behrens, P. & Vijver, M. G. Microplastics accumulate on pores in seed capsule and delay germination and root growth of the terrestrial vascular plant Lepidium sativum. Chemosphere 226, 774–781 (2019).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

66.
Cui, R., Kim, S. W. & An, Y. J. Polystyrene nanoplastics inhibit reproduction and induce abnormal embryonic development in the freshwater crustacean Daphnia galeata. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–10 (2017).
Google Scholar 

67.
Rist, S., Baun, A., Almeda, R. & Hartmann, N. B. Ingestion and effects of micro- and nanoplastics in blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) larvae. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 140, 423–430 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

68.
Hardesty, B. D. et al. Using numerical model simulations to improve the understanding of micro-plastic distribution and pathways in the marine environment. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 1–9 (2017).
Google Scholar 

69.
Kalčíková, G., Alič, B., Skalar, T., Bundschuh, M. & Gotvajn, A. Ž. Wastewater treatment plant effluents as source of cosmetic polyethylene microbeads to freshwater. Chemosphere 188, 25–31 (2017).
ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

70.
Fendall, L. S. & Sewell, M. A. Contributing to marine pollution by washing your face: microplastics in facial cleansers. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 58, 1225–1228 (2009).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

71.
Schmitz, E. H. & Scherrey, P. M. Digestive anatomy of Hyalella azteca (Crustacea, Amphipoda). J. Morphol. 100, 91–100 (1983).
Google Scholar 

72.
Monk, D. C. The digestion of cellulose and other dietary components, and pH of the gut in the amphipod Gammarus pulex (L.). Freshw. Biol. 7, 431–440 (1977).
CAS  Google Scholar  More

1.
Popper, A. N., Ramcharitar, J. & Campana, S. E. Why otoliths? Insights from inner ear physiology and fisheries biology. Mar. Freshw. Res. 56, 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF04267 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Starrs, D., Ebner, B. C. & Fulton, C. J. All in the ears: Unlocking the early life history biology and spatial ecology of fishes. Biol. Rev. 91, 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12162 (2016).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

3.
Schulz-Mirbach, T., Ladich, F., Plath, M. & Heß, M. Enigmatic ear stones: what we know about the functional role and evolution of fish otoliths. Biol. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12463 (2018).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

4.
Campana, S. E. Photographic Atlas of Fish Otoliths of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Vol. 133 (NRC Research Press, Ottawa, 2004).
Google Scholar 

5.
Tuset, V. M., Lombarte, A., González, J. A., Pertusa, J. F. & Lorente, M. J. Comparative morphology of the sagittal otolith in Serranus spp. J. Fish Biol. 63, 1491–1504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2003.00262.x (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Tuset, V. M. et al. Otolith patterns of rockfishes from the northeastern pacific. J. Morphol. 276, 458–469. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.20353 (2015).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

7.
Campana, S. E. & Casselman, J. M. Stock discrimination using otolith shape analysis. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50, 1062–1083. https://doi.org/10.1139/f93-123 (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Bose, A. P. H., Adragna, J. B. & Balshine, S. Otolith morphology varies between populations, sexes and male alternative reproductive tactics in a vocal toadfish Porichthys notatus. J. Fish Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.13187 (2016).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

9.
Mille, T., Mahe, K., Villanueva, M. C., De Pontual, H. & Ernande, B. Sagittal otolith morphogenesis asymmetry in marine fishes. J. Fish Biol. 87, 646–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.12746 (2015).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

10.
Bose, A. P. H., Mccallum, E. S., Raymond, K., Marentette, J. R. & Balshine, S. Growth and otolith morphology vary with alternative reproductive tactics and contaminant exposure in the round goby Neogobius melanostomus. J. Fish Biol. 93, 674–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.13756 (2018).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

11.
Lombarte, A. & Castellón, A. Interspecific and intraspecific otolith variability in the genus Merluccius as determined by image analysis. Can. J. Zool. 69, 2442–2449. https://doi.org/10.1139/z91-343 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Vignon, M. & Morat, F. Environmental and genetic determinant of otolith shape revealed by a non-indigenous tropical fish. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 411, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08651 (2010).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Gagliano, M. & McCormick, M. I. Feeding history influences otolith shape in tropical fish. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 278, 291–296. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps278291 (2004).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Hoff, G. R. & Fuiman, L. A. Morphometry and composition of red drum otoliths: Changes associated with temperature, somatic growth rate, and age. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 106, 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-9629(93)90502-U (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Tuset, V. M. et al. Otolith shape lends support to the sensory drive hypothesis in rockfishes. J. Evol. Biol. 29, 2083–2097. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.12932 (2016).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

16.
Gauldie, R. W. Function, form and time-keeping properties of fish otoliths. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 91, 395–402 (1988).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Popper, A. N., Fay, R. R., Platt, C. & Sand, O. Sound detection mechanisms and capabilities of teleost fishes. In Sensory Processing in Aquatic Environments (eds Collin, S. P. & Marshall, N. J.) 3–38 (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003).
Google Scholar 

18.
Krysl, P., Hawkins, A. D., Schilt, C. & Cranford, T. W. Angular oscillation of solid scatterers in response to progressive planar acoustic waves: Do fish otoliths rock?. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042591 (2012).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

19.
Duftner, N. et al. Distinct population structure in a phenotypically homogeneous rock-dwelling cichlid fish from Lake Tanganyika. Mol. Ecol. 15, 2381–2395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02949.x (2006).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

20.
Koblmüller, S., Sefc, K. M., Duftner, N., Warum, M. & Sturmbauer, C. Genetic population structure as indirect measure of dispersal ability in a Lake Tanganyika cichlid. Genetica 130, 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-006-0027-0 (2007).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

21.
Sefc, K. M., Baric, S., Salzburger, W. & Sturmbauer, C. Species-specific population structure in rock-specialized sympatric cichlid species in Lake Tanganyika. East Afr. J. Mol. Evol. 64, 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-006-0011-4 (2007).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Wagner, C. E. & McCune, A. R. Contrasting patterns of spatial genetic structure in sympatric rock-dwelling cichlid fishes. Evolution 63, 1312–1326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00612.x (2009).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

23.
Sefc, K. M. et al. Shifting barriers and phenotypic diversification by hybridisation. Ecol. Lett. 20, 651–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12766 (2017).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

24.
Koblmüller, S. et al. Separated by sand, fused by dropping water: Habitat barriers and fluctuating water levels steer the evolution of rock-dwelling cichlid populations in Lake Tanganyika. Mol. Ecol. 20, 2272–2290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05088.x (2011).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

25.
Kohda, M. et al. Geographical colour variation in cichlid fishes at the southern end of Lake Tanganyika. Environ. Biol. Fishes 45, 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00003091 (1996).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Widmer, L. et al. Point-Combination Transect (PCT): Incorporation of small underwater cameras to study fish communities. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 891–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13163 (2019).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

27.
McGlue, M. M. et al. Seismic records of late Pleistocene aridity in Lake Tanganyika, tropical East Africa. J. Paleolimnol. 40, 635–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10933-007-9187-x (2008).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Duftner, N. et al. Parallel evolution of facial stripe patterns in the Neolamprologus brichardi/pulcher species complex endemic to Lake Tanganyika. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 45, 706–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.08.001 (2007).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

29.
Sefc, K. M., Mattersdorfer, K., Hermann, C. M. & Koblmüller, S. Past lake shore dynamics explain present pattern of unidirectional introgression across a habitat barrier. Hydrobiologia 791, 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2791-x (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Winkelmann, K., Rüber, L. & Genner, M. J. Lake level fluctuations and divergence of cichlid fish ecomorphs in Lake Tanganyika. Hydrobiologia 791, 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2839-y (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Koblmüller, S. et al. Phylogeny and phylogeography of Altolamprologus: Ancient introgression and recent divergence in a rock-dwelling Lake Tanganyika cichlid genus. Hydrobiologia 791, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2896-2 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Balshine, S. et al. Correlates of group size in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50, 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650100343 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Heg, D., Bachar, Z. & Taborsky, M. Cooperative breeding and group structure in the Lake Tanganyika cichlid Neolamprologus savoryi. Ethology 111, 1017–1043. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2005.01135.x (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Bose, A. P. H., Zimmermann, H., Henshaw, J. M., Fritzsche, K. & Sefc, K. M. Brood—tending males in a biparental fish suffer high paternity losses but rarely cuckold. Mol. Ecol. 27, 4309–4321. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14857 (2018).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

35.
Schaedelin, F. C., Van Dongen, W. F. D. & Wagner, R. H. Mate choice and genetic monogamy in a biparental, colonial fish. Behav. Ecol. 26, 782–788. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv011 (2015).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Konings, A. Tanganyika Cichlids in Their Natural Habitat 4th edn. (Hollywood Import & Export Inc., Gainesville, 2019).
Google Scholar 

37.
Ota, K., Hori, M. & Kohda, M. Testes investment along a vertical depth gradient in an herbivorous fish. Ethology 118, 683–693. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012.02056.x (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Sturmbauer, C. et al. Abundance, distribution, and territory areas of rock-dwelling Lake Tanganyika cichlid fish species. Hydrobiologia 615, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9582-5_5 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Heg, D., Brouwer, L., Bachar, Z. & Taborsky, M. Large group size yields group stability in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Behaviour 1, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853905774831891 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Spinks, R. K., Muschick, M., Salzburger, W. & Gante, H. F. Singing above the chorus: Cooperative Princess cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher) has high pitch. Hydrobiologia 791, 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2921-5 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Bigirimana, C. Neolamprologus pulcher. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2006: e.T60604A12382292. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2006.RLTS.T60604A12382292.en (2006). Accessed 8 March 2020.

42.
Bigirimana, C. Neolamprologus caudopunctatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2006: e.T60591A12373751. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2006.RLTS.T60591A12373751.en (2006). Accessed 8 March 2020.

43.
Bigirimana, C. Neolamprologus savoryi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2006: e.T60605A12382585. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2006.RLTS.T60605A12382585.en (2006). Accessed 8 March 2020.

44.
Bigirimana, C. Neolamprologus moorii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2006: e.T60613A12384127. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2006.RLTS.T60613A12384127.en (2006). Accessed 8 March 2020.

45.
Iwata, H. & Ukai, Y. SHAPE: A computer program package for quantitative evaluation of biological shapes based on elliptic Fourier descriptors. J. Hered. 93, 384–385. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/93.5.384 (2002).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

46.
Crampton, J. S. Elliptic Fourier shape analysis of fossil bivalves: Some practical considerations. Lethaia 28, 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3931.1995.tb01611.x (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Jackson, D. A. Stopping rules in principal component analysis: A comparison of heuristical and statistical approaches. Ecology 74, 2204–2214. https://doi.org/10.2307/1939574 (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Bolles, K. L. & Begg, G. A. Distinction between silver hake (Merluccius bilinearis) stocks in US waters of the northwest Atlantic based on whole otolith morphometrics. Fish. Bull. 98, 451–462 (2000).
Google Scholar 

49.
Lenth, R. emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.4.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans (2020).

50.
Richlen, M. L. & Barber, P. H. A technique for the rapid extraction of microalgal DNA from single live and preserved cells. Mol. Ecol. Notes 5, 688–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01032.x (2005).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
McCusker, M. R. & Bentzen, P. Positive relationships between genetic diversity and abundance in fishes. Mol. Ecol. 19, 4852–4862. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04822.x (2010).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

52.
Karl, S. A., Toonen, R. J., Grant, W. S. & Bowen, B. W. Common misconceptions in molecular ecology: Echoes of the modern synthesis. Mol. Ecol. 21, 4171–4189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05576.x (2012).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

53.
Excoffier, L., Laval, G. & Schneider, S. Arlequin (version 3.0): An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol. Bioinform. Online 1, 47–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/117693430500100003 (2005).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Excoffier, L., Smouse, P. E. & Quattro, J. M. Analysis of molecular variance inferred from metric distances among DNA haplotypes: Application to human mitochondrial DNA restriction data. Genetics 131, 497–591 (1992).
Google Scholar 

55.
Leigh, J. W. & Bryant, D. POPART: Full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 1110–1116. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12410 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Templeton, A. R., Crandall, K. A. & Sing, C. F. A cladistic analysis of phenotypic associations with haplotypes inferred from restriction endonuclease mapping and DNA sequence data. III. Cladogram estimation. Genetics 132, 619–633 (1992).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

57.
Sefc, K. M., Payne, R. B. & Sorenson, M. D. Genetic differentiation after founder events: An evaluation of FST estimators with empirical and simulated data. Evol. Ecol. Res. 9, 21–39 (2007).
Google Scholar 

58.
Sturmbauer, C., Salzburger, W., Duftner, N., Schelly, R. & Koblmüller, S. Evolutionary history of the Lake Tanganyika cichlid tribe Lamprologini (Teleostei: Perciformes) derived from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 57, 266–284 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Chung, Y., Rabe-Hesketh, S., Dorie, V., Gelman, A. & Liu, J. A nondegenerate penalized likelihood estimator for variance parameters in multilevel models. Psychometrika 78, 685–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-013-9328-2 (2013).
MathSciNet  Article  PubMed  MATH  Google Scholar 

60.
Solt, F. & Hu, Y. dotwhisker: Dot-and-whisker plots of regression results. R package version 0.5.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dotwhisker (2018).

61.
Wilson, R. R. Jr. Depth-related changes in sagitta morphology in six Macrourid fishes of the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Copeia 4, 1011–1017. https://doi.org/10.2307/1445256 (1985).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Lombarte, A. & Lleonart, J. Otolith size changes related with body growth, habitat depth and temperature. Environ. Biol. Fishes 37, 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00004637 (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Mérigot, B., Letourneur, Y. & Lecomte-Finiger, R. Characterization of local populations of the common sole Solea solea (Pisces, Soleidae) in the NW Mediterranean through otolith morphometrics and shape analysis. Mar. Biol. 151, 997–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-006-0549-0 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Hüssy, K. Otolith shape in juvenile cod (Gadus morhua): Ontogenetic and environmental effects. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 364, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2008.06.026 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Volpedo, A. V. & Fuchs, D. V. Ecomorphological patterns of the lapilli of Paranoplatense Siluriforms (South America). Fish. Res. 102, 160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2009.11.007 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Vignon, M. Disentangling and quantifying sources of otolith shape variation across multiple scales using a new hierarchical partitioning approach. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 534, 163–177. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11376 (2015).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Sand, O. & Michelsen, A. Vibration measurements of the perch saccular otolith. J. Comp. Physiol. A 123, 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00657346 (1978).
Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Schulz-Mirbach, T. et al. In-situ visualization of sound-induced otolith motion using hard X-ray phase contrast imaging. Sci. Rep. 8, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-21367-0 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

69.
Castonguay, M., Simard, P. & Gagnon, P. Usefulness of Fourier analysis of otolith shape for Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) stock discrimination. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 48, 296–302. https://doi.org/10.1139/f91-041 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Friedland, K. D. & Reddin, D. G. Use of otolith morphology in stock discriminations of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1139/f94-011 (1994).
Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Turan, C. Otolith shape and meristic analysis of herring (Clupea harengus) in the North-East Atlantic. Arch. Fish. Mar. Res. 48, 283–295 (2000).
Google Scholar 

72.
Reichenbacher, B., Feulner, G. R. & Schulz-Mirbach, T. Geographic variation in otolith morphology among freshwater populations of Aphanius dispar (Teleostei, Cyprinodontiformes) from the southeastern Arabian Peninsula. J. Morphol. 484, 469–484. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.10702 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Libungan, L. A., Slotte, A., Huseb, Å & Godiksen, J. A. Latitudinal gradient in otolith shape among local populations of Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus L.) in Norway. PLoS ONE 10, e0130847. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130847 (2015).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

74.
Hedrick, P. W. Sex: Differences in mutation, recombination, selection, gene flow, and genetic drift. Evolution 61, 2750–2771. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00250.x (2007).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

75.
Cardinale, M., Doering-Arjes, P., Kastowsky, M. & Mosegaard, H. Effects of sex, stock, and environment on the shape of known-age Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) otoliths. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 61, 158–167. https://doi.org/10.1139/f03-151 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Parmentier, E., Boistel, R., Bahri, M. A., Plenevaux, A. & Schwarzhans, W. Sexual dimorphism in the sonic system and otolith morphology of Neobythites gilli (Ophidiiformes). J. Morphol. 4, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12561 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

77.
Sopinka, N. M. et al. Liver size reveals social status in the African cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. J. Fish Biol. 75, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02234.x (2009).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

78.
Irisarri, I. et al. Phylogenomics uncovers early hybridization and adaptive loci shaping the radiation of Lake Tanganyika cichlid fishes. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05479-9 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Breheny, P. & Burchett, W. Visualization of regression models using visreg. R. J. 9, 56–71 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar  More

1.
Poulter, B. et al. Contribution of semi-arid ecosystems to interannual variability of the global carbon cycle. Nature509, 600–603 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 
2.
Ahlstrom, A. et al. The dominant role of semi-arid ecosystems in the trend and variability of the land CO2 sink. Science348, 895–899 (2015).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

3.
Legates, D. R. & Willmott, C. J. Mean seasonal and spatial variability in gauge-corrected, global precipitation. Int. J. Clim.10, 111–127 (1990).
Google Scholar 

4.
Rotenberg, E. & Yakir, D. Contribution of semi-arid forests to the climate system. Science327, 451–454 (2010).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

5.
Huxman, T. E. et al. Convergence across biomes to a common rain-use efficiency. Nature429, 651–654 (2004).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

6.
Lal, R. Carbon sequestration in dryland ecosystems. Environ. Manag.33, 528–544 (2004).
Google Scholar 

7.
Arzai, A. H. & Aliyu, B. S. Fruit tree and vine sprayer calibration based on canopy size and length of row: unit canopy row method. Bayero J. Pure Appl. Sci.3, 260–263 (2010).
Google Scholar 

8.
Hartmann, H. Will a 385 million year-struggle for light become a struggle for water and for carbon?–How trees may cope with more frequent climate change-type drought events. Glob. Change Biol.17, 642–655 (2011).
Google Scholar 

9.
Sitch, S. et al. Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model. Glob. Change Bio.9, 161–185 (2003).
Google Scholar 

10.
Zaehle, S., Sitch, S., Smith, B. & Hatterman, F. Effects of parameter uncertainties on the modeling of terrestrial biosphere dynamics. Global Biogeochem. Cy. 19, GB3020 (2005).

11.
Collins, W. D. et al. The Community Climate System Model Version 3 (CCSM3). J. Clim.19, 2122–2143 (2006).
Google Scholar 

12.
Levis, S., Bonan, G., Vertenstein, M. & Oleson, K. The Community Land Model’s Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (CLM-DGVM): technical description and user’s guide. NCAR Tech. Note459, 1–50 (2004).
Google Scholar 

13.
Zaehle, S. & Friend, A. D. Carbon and nitrogen cycle dynamics in the O-CN land surface model, I: model description, site-scale evaluation and sensitivity to parameter estimates. Global Biogeochem. Cy.24, GB1005 (2010).

14.
Krinner, G. et al. A dynamic global vegetation model for studies of the coupled atmosphere-biosphere system. Glob. Biogeochem. Cy.19, GB1015 (2005).
Google Scholar 

15.
Haverd, V. et al. A new version of the CABLE land surface model (Subversion revision r4601) incorporating land use and land cover change, woody vegetation demography, and a novel optimisation-based approach to plant coordination of photosynthesis. Geosci. Model. Dev.11, 2995–3026 (2018).
CAS  Google Scholar 

16.
Friend, A. D., Stevens, A. K., Knox, R. G. & Cannell, M. G. R. A process-based, terrestrial biosphere model of ecosystem dynamics (Hybrid v3.0). Ecol. Model.95, 0–287 (1997).
CAS  Google Scholar 

17.
Levy, P. E., Cannell, M. G. R. & Friend, A. D. Modelling the impact of future changes in climate, CO2 concentration and land use on natural ecosystems and the terrestrial carbon sink. Glob. Environ. Change14, 0–30 (2004).
CAS  Google Scholar 

18.
Zeng, X., Li, F. & Song, X. Development of the IAP dynamic global vegetation model. Adv. Atmos. Sci.31, 505–514 (2014).
Google Scholar 

19.
Smith, B. et al. Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model. Biogeosciences11, 2027–2054 (2014).
Google Scholar 

20.
Sato, H., Itoh, A. & Kohyama, T. SEIB-DGVM: a new dynamic global vegetation model using a spatially explicit individual-based approach. Ecol. Model.200, 279–307 (2007).
Google Scholar 

21.
Zhou, R. et al. Estimation of DBH at forest stand level based on multi-parameters and generalized regression neural network. Forests10, 778–796 (2019).
Google Scholar 

22.
Franceschini, T. & Schneider, R. Influence of shade tolerance and development stage on the allometry of ten temperate tree species. Oecologia176, 739–749 (2014).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

23.
Tao, S., Guo, Q., Li, C., Wang, Z. & Fang, J. Global patterns and determinants of forest canopy height. Ecology12, 3265–3270 (2016).
Google Scholar 

24.
Zimmermann, M. H. Hydraulic architecture of some diffuse-porous trees. Can. J. Bot.-Rev. Canadienne De. Botanique56, 2286–2295 (1978).
Google Scholar 

25.
Koch, G. W., Sillett, S. C., Jennings, G. M. & Davis, S. D. The limits to tree height. letters to nature. Nature428, 851–854 (2004).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

26.
Sterck, F. J., Bongers, F. & Newbery, D. M. Tree architecture in a Bornean lowland rain forest: intraspecific and interspecific patterns. Plant Ecol.153, 279–292 (2001).
Google Scholar 

27.
Stark, S. C. et al. Amazon forest carbon dynamics predicted by profiles of canopy leaf area and light environment. Ecol. Lett.15, 1406–1414 (2012).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

28.
McDowell, N. et al. Mechanisms of plant survival and mortality during drought: why do some plants survive while others succumb to drought? N. Phytol.178, 719–739 (2008).
Google Scholar 

29.
Risto, S., Christophe, G., Theodore, M. D. & Eero, N. Functional–structural plant models: a growing paradigm for plant studies. Ann. Bot.-Lond.114, 599–603 (2014).
Google Scholar 

30.
Kevin, L., Paul, T., Michael, W., Benoît, S. & Martin, F. LiDAR remote sensing of forest structure. Prog. Phys. Geog.27, 88–106 (2003).
Google Scholar 

31.
Watt, P. J. & Donoghue, D. N. M. Measuring forest structure with terrestrial laser scanning. Int. J. Remote Sens.26, 1437–1446 (2005).
Google Scholar 

32.
Fernández-Sarríaa, A., Velázquez-Martíb, B., Sajdakb, M., Martíneza, L. & Estornella, J. Residual biomass calculation from individual tree architecture using terrestrial laser scanner and ground-level measurements. Comput. Electron. Agr.93, 90–97 (2013).
Google Scholar 

33.
Bayer, D., Seifert, S. & Pretzsch, H. Structural crown properties of Norway spruce (Picea abies L. Karst.) and European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) in mixed versus pure stands revealed by terrestrial laser scanning. Trees27, 1035–1047 (2013).
Google Scholar 

34.
Hackenberg, J., Wassenberg, M., Spiecker, H. & Sun, D. Non-destructive method for biomass prediction combining TLS derived tree volume and wood density. Forests6, 1274–1300 (2015).
Google Scholar 

35.
Metz, J. et al. Crown modeling by terrestrial laser scanning as an approach to assess the effect of aboveground intra- and interspecific competition on tree growth. For. Ecol. Manag.310, 275–288 (2013).
Google Scholar 

36.
Disney, M. Terrestrial LiDAR: a 3D revolution in how we look at trees. N. Phytol.222, 1736–1741 (2018).
Google Scholar 

37.
Zeide, B. Primary unit of the tree crown. Ecology74, 1598–1602 (1993).
Google Scholar 

38.
Tyree, M. T. & Sperry, J. S. Vulnerability of xylem to cavitation and embolism. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.40, 19–38 (2003).
Google Scholar 

39.
Schepper, V. D., Dusschoten, D., Copini, P., Jahnke, S. & Steppe, K. MRI links stem water content to stem diameter variations in transpiring trees. J. Exp. Bot.63, 2645–2653 (2012).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

40.
Pivovaroff, A. L. et al. Multiple strategies for drought survival among woody plant species. Func. Ecol.30, 517–526 (2016).
Google Scholar 

41.
Walcroft, A. S. et al. Radiative transfer and carbon assimilation in relation to canopy architecture, foliage area distribution and clumping in a mature temperate rainforest canopy in New Zealand. Agr. For. Meteorol.135, 326–339 (2005).
Google Scholar 

42.
Smith, J. M. B. Scrubland. https://www.britannica.com/science/scrubland (2009).

43.
Archibald, S. & Bond, W. J. Growing tall vs growing wide: tree architecture and allometry of Acacia karroo in forest, savanna, and arid environments. Oikos102, 3–14 (2003).
Google Scholar 

44.
Erdős, L. et al. The edge of two worlds: a new review and synthesis on Eurasian forest-steppes. Appl. Veg. Sci.21, 345–362 (2018).
Google Scholar 

45.
Jackson, T. et al. An architectural understanding of natural sway frequencies in trees. J. R. Soc. Interface16, 20190116 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

46.
Anav, A. et al. Spatiotemporal patterns of terrestrial gross primary production: a review. Rev. Geophys.53, 785–818 (2015).
Google Scholar 

47.
Winkler, A. J., Myneni, R. B., Alexandrov, G. A. & Brovkin, V. Earth system models underestimate carbon fixation by plants in the high latitudes. Nat. Commun.10, 885–893 (2019).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

48.
Parazoo, N. et al. Optimal estimates of global terrestrial gross primary production from satellite fluorescence and DGVMs. 5th Int. Workshop Remote Sens. Vegetation Fluorescence1, 1–12 (2014).
Google Scholar 

49.
Xu, X., Wang, Z., Rahbek, C., Sanders, N. J. & Fang, J. Geographical variation in the importance of water and energy for oak diversity. J. Biogeogr.43, 279–288 (2016).
Google Scholar 

50.
Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. (2017) Worldclim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2016).

51.
Fleck, S. et al. Terrestrial lidar measurements for analysing canopy structure in an old-growth forest. In Proc. ISPRS Workshop on Laser Scanning 2007 and SilviLaser 2007 (2007).

52.
Taubin, G. Estimation of planar curves, surfaces, and nonplanar space-curves defined by implicit equations with applications to edge and range image segmentation. IEEE T. Pattern Anal.13, 1115–1138 (1991).
Google Scholar 

53.
Ohashi, Y. Machine vision methods and articles of manufacture for determination of convex hull and convex hull angle. U.S. Patent No. 5,801,966. 1 Sep. (1998).

54.
Li, Y. et al. Derivation, validation, and sensitivity analysis of terrestrial laser scanning-based leaf area index. Can. J. Remote Sens.42, 719–729 (2016).
Google Scholar 

55.
Grossiord, C. et al. Effect of climate change on reference evapotrature, drives functional responses of trees in semi-arid ecosystems. J. Ecol.105, 163–175 (2017).
Google Scholar 

56.
Feldpausch, T. R. et al. Height-diameter allometry of tropical forest trees. Biogeosciences8, 1081–1106 (2011).
Google Scholar 

57.
Solargis Database. http://solargis.cn/imaps. Accessed 21 Nov 2018 (2018).

58.
Dai, A. & National Center for Atmospheric Research Staff (eds). Last modified 18 Jul 2017. “The Climate Data Guide: Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI).” https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/palmer-drought-severity-index-pdsi. Accessed 5 June 2018 (2017).

59.
Zomer, R. J. et al. Climate change mitigation: a spatial analysis of global land suitability for clean development mechanism afforestation and reforestation. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ.126, 67–80 (2008).
Google Scholar 

60.
Geographic Data Sharing Infrastructure. College of Urban and Environmental Science, Peking University. http://geodata.pku.edu.cn. Accessed 25 Feb 2020 (2020).

61.
Fang, J., Wang, Z. & Tang, Z. Atlas of Woody Plants in China. (China Higher Education Press, 2009). More

Department of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
Lea Heidrich, Soyeon Bae, Sebastian Seibold, Simon Thorn & Jörg Müller

CSIRO Land and Water, Winnellie, Northern Territory, Australia
Shaun Levick

Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
Sebastian Seibold, Wolfgang Weisser & Inken Doerfler

Department of Geoinformatics, Munich University of Applied Sciences, München, Germany
Peter Krzystek & Alla Serebryanyk

Forest Inventory and Remote Sensing, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
Paul Magdon

Faculty of Geography, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
Thomas Nauss & Stephan Wöllauer

Silviculture and Forest Ecology of the Temperate Zones, Faculty of Forest Sciences and Forest Ecology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
Peter Schall & Christian Ammer

Bavarian Forest National Park, Grafenau, Germany
Claus Bässler, Marco Heurich & Jörg Müller

Institute for Ecology, Evolution and Diversity, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
Claus Bässler

Institute of Biology and Environmental Science, Vegetation Science & Nature Conservation, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
Inken Doerfler

Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
Markus Fischer

Forest Entomology, Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland
Martin M. Gossner

Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Wildlife Management, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
Marco Heurich

Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
Torsten Hothorn

Evolutionary Ecology and Conservation Genomics, University Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Kirsten Jung

Biodiversity, Macroecology & Biogeography, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany
Holger Kreft

Centre of Biodiversity and Sustainable Land Use, University of Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany
Holger Kreft

Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena, Germany
Ernst-Detlef Schulze

Ecological Networks, Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany
Nadja Simons More

While it is widely known that certain environmental trade-offs may have to be made in order to reduce carbon emissions and combat climate change, one major site of renewable energy development — solar power facilities in deserts — may have unexpected consequences for vulnerable plants in an understudied ecosystem.

Credit: Bloomberg / Contributor / Bloomberg / Getty

Stephen Grodsky and Rebecca Hernandez at the University of California, Davis, studied 35 plant species in the Mojave Desert, including scrub plants, cacti and Mojave yucca, in the area around one of the world’s largest concentrated solar plants in Ivanpah, California. Native plants in the area provide services not only for the ecosystem but also for indigenous peoples in the area who rely on the plants for food and cultural purposes.

However, Grodsky and Hernandez found that solar plant development negatively affected the richness and evenness of the native scrub and perennial species; the treatment of the ground caused by installation of the solar infrastructure also destroyed biological soil crusts, which seems to allow invasive grasses to spread more widely than they would otherwise. As deserts are home to some of the most vulnerable species and the poorest peoples who rely on that ecosystem, these trade-offs must be further researched and mitigated.

Author information

Affiliations

Nature Plants
Ryan Scarrow

Authors
Ryan Scarrow

Corresponding author
Correspondence to Ryan Scarrow.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article
Scarrow, R. Solar plants versus desert plants. Nat. Plants (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-020-00753-5
Download citation More

1.
Mèndez-Fernandez, P. et al. Foraging ecology of five toothed whale species in the Northwest Iberian Peninsula, inferred using carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 413, 150–158 (2012).
Google Scholar 
2.
Browning, N. E., Cockcroft, V. G. & Worthy, G. A. J. Resource partitioning among South African delphinids. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 457, 15–21 (2014).
Google Scholar 

3.
Loizaga de Castro, R., Saporiti, F., Vales, D. G., Cardona, L. & Crespo, E. A. Using stable isotopes to assess whether two sympatric dolphin species share trophic resources. Mar. Mammal Sci. 33, 1235–1244 (2017).
Google Scholar 

4.
Franco-Trecu, V., Drago, M., Costa, P., Dimitriadis, C. & Passadore, C. Trophic relationships in apex predators in an estuary system: a multiple-method approximation. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 486, 230–236 (2017).
Google Scholar 

5.
Newsome, S. D., Clementz, M. T. & Koch, P. L. Using stable isotope biogeochemistry to study marine mammal ecology. Mar. Mammal Sci. 26, 509–572 (2010).
CAS  Google Scholar 

6.
DeNiro, M. J. & Epstein, S. Influence of diet on the distribution of carbon isotopes in animals. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 42, 495–506 (1978).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

7.
DeNiro, M. J. & Epstein, S. Influence of diet on the distribution of nitrogen isotopes in animals. Geo-Marine Lett. 45, 341–351 (1981).
CAS  Google Scholar 

8.
Minagawa, M. & Wada, E. Stepwise enrichment of 15N along food chains: Further evidence and the relation between δ15N and animal age. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 48, 1135–1140 (1984).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

9.
Post, D. M. Using stable isotopes to estimate trophic position: models, methods, and assumptions. Ecology 83, 703–718 (2002).
Google Scholar 

10.
McCutchan, J. H., Lewis, W. M., Kendall, C. & Mcgrath, C. C. Variation in trophic shift for stable isotope ratios of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur. OIKOS 102, 378–390 (2003).
CAS  Google Scholar 

11.
Vanderklift, M. A. & Ponsard, S. Sources of variation in consumer-diet δ15N enrichment: A meta-analysis. Oecologia 136, 169–182, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1270-z (2003).
ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

12.
Fry, B. Stable Isotope Ecology (Springer, Berlin, 2006).
Google Scholar 

13.
Bearhop, S. et al. Determining trophic niche width: a novel approach using stable isotope analysis. J. Anim. Ecol. 73, 1007–1012 (2004).
Google Scholar 

14.
Newsome, S. D., Martinez del Rio, C., Bearhop, S. & Phillips, D. L. A niche for isotopic ecology. Front Ecol Env. 5, 429–436 (2007).

15.
Hutchinson, G. E. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 22, 415–427 (1957).
Google Scholar 

16.
Layman, C. A., Arrington, D. A., Montana, C. G. & Post, D. M. Can stable isotope ratio provide for community-wide measures of trophic structure?. Ecology 88, 42–48 (2007).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

17.
Ryan, C. et al. Stable isotope analysis of baleen reveals resource partitioning among sympatric rorquals and population structure in fin whales. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 479, 251–261 (2013).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

18.
Staudinger, M. D., McAlarney, R. J., McLellan, W. A. & Ann Pabst, D. Foraging ecology and niche overlap in pygmy (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf (Kogia sima) sperm whales from waters of the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast. Mar. Mammal Sci. 30, 626–655 (2014).

19.
Gallagher, A. J., Shiffman, D. S., Byrnes, E. E., Hammerschlag-Peyer, C. M. & Hammerschlag, N. Patterns of resource use and isotopic niche overlap among three species of sharks occurring within a protected subtropical estuary. Aquat. Ecol. 51, 435–448 (2017).
CAS  Google Scholar 

20.
Graham, B. S., Koch, P. L., Newsome, S. D., Mcmahon, K. W. & Aurioles, D. Isoscapes. in (ed. J.B.West) 299–318 (Springer Science, London 2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3354-3

21.
Jaeger, A., Lecomte, V. J., Weimerskirch, H., Richard, P. & Cherel, Y. Seabird satellite tracking validates the use of latitudinal isoscapes to depict predators ’ foraging areas in the Southern Ocean. RAPID Commun. MASS Spectrom. 24, 3456–3460 (2010).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

22.
McMahon, K. W., Hamady, L. L. & Thorrold, S. R. A review of ecogeochemistry approaches to estimating movements of marine animals. Limnol. Ocean. 58, 697–714 (2013).
CAS  Google Scholar 

23.
Brault, E. K., Koch, P. L., Mcmahon, K. W. & Broach, K. H. Carbon and nitrogen zooplankton isoscapes in West Antarctica reflect oceanographic transitions. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 593, 29–45 (2018).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

24.
Troina, C. G. et al. Deep-sea research part I Zooplankton-based δ13C and δ15N isoscapes from the outer continental shelf and slope in the subtropical western South Atlantic. Deep. Res. Part I https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2020.103235 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Montoya, J. P. Abundance as indicators of forest nitrogen status and soil carbon dynamics stable isotopes in ecology and environmental science. In Stable Isotopes in Ecology and Environmental Science, 176–201 (ed. Lajtha, R. M. K.) (Blackwell Publishing, London, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470691854.ch3.
Google Scholar 

26.
Sigman, D. M., Karsh, K. L. & Casciotti, K. L. Ocean Process Tracers: Nitrogen Isotopes in the Ocean. in Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences (ed. Steele, J.H., Turekian, K.K., Thorpe, S. A.) 4138–4153 (Elsevier Ltd, 2009).

27.
Laws, E. A., Popp, B. N., Bidigare, J. R. R., Kennicutt, M. C. & Macko, S. A. Dependence of phytoplankton carbon isotopic composition on growth rate and [CO2]aq: Theoretical considerations and experimental results. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 59, 1131–1138 (1995).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

28.
Trueman, C. N. & St John Glew, K. Chapter 6—Isotopic Tracking of Marine Animal Movement Tracking Animal Migration with Stable Isotopes (Elsevier Inc., London, 2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814723-8.00006-4.
Google Scholar 

29.
France, R. L. Carbon-13 enrichment in benthic compared to planktonic algae: foodweb implications. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 124, 307–312 (1995).
ADS  Google Scholar 

30.
Mayer, M., Joye, B. & Aller, C. Importance of suspended participates in riverine delivery of bioavailable nitrogen to coastal zones. Glob. Biochem. Cycles 12, 573–579 (1998).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

31.
Druffel, E. R. M., Bauer, J. E. & Griffin, S. Input of particulate organic and dissolved inorganic carbon from the Amazon to the Atlantic Ocean. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst 6, 1–7 (2005).
Google Scholar 

32.
Weber, S. C. et al. Amazon River influence on nitrogen fixation and export production in the western tropical North Atlantic. Limnol. Ocean. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10448 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Cai, D. L. & Edmond, J. M. Sources and transport of particulate organic carbon in the Amazon River and Estuary. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 26, 1–14 (1988).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

34.
Weber, S. C. et al. Habitat delineation in highly variable marine environments. Front. Mar. Sci. 6, 1–16 (2019).
ADS  Google Scholar 

35.
De Menezes, M. P. M., Berger, U. & Mehlig, U. Mangrove vegetation in Amazonia: a review of studies from the coast of Pará and Maranhão States, north Brazil. Acta Amaz. 38, 403–420 (2008).
Google Scholar 

36.
Hayashi, S. N., Souza-filho, P. W. M., Nascimento, W. R. Jr. & Fernandes, M. E. B. The effect of anthropogenic drivers on spatial patterns of mangrove land use on the Amazon coast. PLoS ONE 14, 1–20 (2019).
Google Scholar 

37.
Barthem, R. B. Ocorrência, distribuição e biologia dos peixes da Baía de Marajó, Estuário Amazônico. Bol. do Mus. Para. Emílio Goeldi. Série Zool. 2, 49–69 (1985).

38.
Camargo, M. & Isaac, V. Os peixes estuarinos da região Norte do Brasil: Lista de espécie e consideração sobre sua distribuição geográfica. Bol. do Mus. Para. Emílio Goeldi, Ser. Zool. 17, 135 – 147 (2002).

39.
Siciliano, S. et al. Revisão do conhecimento sobre os mamíferos aquáticos da costa norte do Brasil. Arq. do Mus. Nac. 66, 381–401 (2008).
Google Scholar 

40.
Meirelles, A. C. O. et al. Cetacean strandings on the coast of Ceará, north-eastern Brazil (1992–2005). J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 89, 1–8 (2009).
Google Scholar 

41.
Emin-Lima, R. et al. Os mamíferos aquáticos associados aos manguezais da costa norte brasileira. in Mamíferos de Restingas e Manguezais do Brasil 45–57 (Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologia, 2010).

42.
Siciliano, S. et al. New genetic data extend the range of river dolphins Inia in the Amazon Delta. Hydrobiologia 777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2794-7 (2016).

43.
Siciliano, S. et al. Confirmed sightings of the Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus) on the coast of Ilha de Marajó, northern Brazilian coast. JMBA Glob. Mar. Environ. 34–35 (2007).

44.
Alves, M. D. et al. First abundance estimate of the Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus) in Brazil by aerial survey. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315415000855 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Monteiro-Neto, C. et al. Impact of fisheries on the tucuxi (Sotalia fluviatilis) and rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis) populations off Ceará state, northeastern Brazil. Aquat. Mamm. 26, 49–56 (2000).
Google Scholar 

46.
Barreto, A. S. et al. Plano de Ação nacional para Conservação dos Mamíferos Aquáticos – Pequenos Cetáceos. (2010).

47.
Moura, J. F., Hauser-Davis, R. A., Lemos, L., Emin-Lima, R. & Siciliano, S. Guiana Dolphins (Sotalia guianensis) as marine ecosystem sentinels: ecotoxicology and emerging diseases. in Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, Vol. 228 (ed Whitacre, D. M.) 1–29, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6260-7 (2014).

48.
Costa, A. F. et al. Stranding survey as a framework to investigate rare cetacean records of the north and north-eastern Brazilian coasts. Zookeys https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.688.12636 (2017).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

49.
Domning, D. P. Distribution and Status of manatees Trichechus spp. near the mouth of the Amazon River, Brazil. Biol. Conserv. 19, 85–97 (1981).
Google Scholar 

50.
Siciliano, S. et al. Going back to my roots: Confirmed sightings of the Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus) on the coast of Ilha de Marajó, northern Brazilian coast. JMBA Glob. Mar. Environ. 1, 34–35 (2007).
Google Scholar 

51.
Cunha, H. A., da Silva, V. M. F. & Solé-Cava, A. M. Molecular Ecology and Systematics of Sotalia Dolphins. in Biology, Evolution and Conservation of Rivers Dolphins within South America and Asia (eds. Ruiz-Garcia, M. & Shostell, J.) 261–283 (Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2010).

52.
Hrbek, T. et al. A new species of river dolphin from Brazil or: how little do we know our biodiversity. PLoS ONE 9, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083623 (2014).

53.
Niño-Torres, C. A., Gallo-Reynoso, J. P., Galván-Magaña, F., Escobar-Briones, E. & Macko, S. A. Isotopic analysis of δ13C, δ15N, and δ34S ‘a feeding tale’ in teeth of the longbeaked common dolphin, Delphinus capensis. Mar. Mammal Sci. 22, 831–846, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2006.00065.x (2006).
Google Scholar 

54.
Pinela, A. M., Borrell, A., Cardona, L. & Aguilar, A. Stable isotope analysis reveals habitat partitioning among marine mammals off the NW African coast and unique trophic niches for two globally threatened species. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 416, 295–306, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08790 (2010).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Walker, J. L. & Macko, S. A. Dietary studies of marine mammals using stable carbon and nitrogen isotopic ratios of teeth. Mar. Mammal Sci. 15, 314–334 (1999).
Google Scholar 

56.
Riccialdelli, L., Newsome, S. D., Fogel, M. L. & Goodall, R. N. P. Isotopic assessment of prey and habitat preferences of a cetacean community in the southwestern South Atlantic Ocean. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 418, 235–248 (2010).
ADS  Google Scholar 

57.
Vighi, M. et al. Stable isotopes indicate population structuring in the Southwest Atlantic population of right whales (Eubalaena australis). PLoS ONE 9, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090489 (2014).

58.
Junk, W. J. et al. A classification of major naturally-occurring amazonian lowland wetlands. Wetlands 31, 623–640 (2011).
Google Scholar 

59.
Rosário, R. P., Borba, T. A. C., Santos, A. S. & Rollnic, M. Variability of Salinity in Pará River Estuary: 2D Analysis with Flexible Mesh Model. J. Coast. Res. 75, 128–132 (2016).
Google Scholar 

60.
Bezerra, M. O. & Rollnic, M. Physical oceanographic behavior at the Guamá/Acará-Moju and the Paracauari river mouths, Amazon Coast (Brazil). in Journal of Coastal Research 1448–1452 (Proceedings of The 11th International Coastal Synposium, 2011).

61.
Rosário, R. P. & Santos, A. S. Contribution to understanding the surface seawater intrusion in the Pará River estuary during low discharge. Proceedings of the 17th Physics of Estuaries and Coastal Seas (PECS) (2014).

62.
Nittrouer, C. a. & DeMaster, D. J. The Amazon shelf setting: tropical, energetic, and influenced by a large river. Cont. Shelf Res. 16, 553–573 (1996).

63.
Moreira, A. M. & Mavigner, D. S. Conhecendo história e geografia do Piauí. (Gráfica Ferraz, 2007).

64.
Szczygielski, A. et al. Evolution of the Parnaíba Delta (NE Brazil) during the late Holocene. Geo-Marine Lett. 35. 105–117, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-014-0395-x (2014).
ADS  Google Scholar 

65.
Foote, A. D. et al. Tracking niche variation over millennial timescales in sympatric killer whale lineages. Proc. Biol. Sci. 280, 2–9 (2013).
Google Scholar 

66.
Newsome, S. D., Koch, P. L., Etnier, M. A. & Aurioles-Gamboa, D. Using Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Values To Investigate Maternal Strategies in Northeast Pacific Otariids. Mar. Mammal Sci. 22, 556–572 (2006).
Google Scholar 

67.
Jackson, A. L., Inger, R., Parnell, A. C. & Bearhop, S. Comparing isotopic niche widths among and within communities: SIBER – Stable Isotope Bayesian Ellipses in R. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 595–602 (2011).
PubMed  Google Scholar 

68.
Bisi, T. L. et al. Trophic relationships and habitat preferences of Delphinids from the Southeastern Brazilian Coast determined by carbon and nitrogen stable isotope composition. PLoS ONE 8, e82205 (2013).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

69.
Botta, S., Hohn, A. A., Macko, S. A. & Secchi, E. R. Isotopic variation in delphinids from the subtropical western South Atlantic. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315411000610 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Medeiros, P. et al. Fate of the Amazon River dissolved organic matter in the tropical Atlantic Ocean. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 677–690 (2015).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

71.
Moura, R. L. et al. An extensive reef system at the Amazon River mouth. Sci. Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1501252 (2016).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

72.
Loick-Wilde, N. et al. Nitrogen sources and net growth efficiency of zooplankton in three Amazon River plume food webs. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 460–481 (2016).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

73.
Fernández, R. et al. Stable isotope analysis in two sympatric populations of bottlenose dolphins Tursiops truncatus: Evidence of resource partitioning?. Mar. Biol. 158, 1043–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-011-1629-3 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Riccialdelli, L. & Goodall, N. Intra-specific trophic variation in false killer whales (Pseudorca crassidens) from the southwestern South Atlantic Ocean through stable isotopes analysis. Mamm. Biol. 80, 298–302 (2015).
Google Scholar 

75.
Haro, D., Riccialdelli, L., Blank, O., Matus, R. & Sabat, P. Estimating the isotopic niche of males and females of false killer whales (Pseudorca crassidens) from Magellan Strait. Chile. Mar. Mammal Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12564 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Bastida, R., Rodríguez, D. & Secchi, E. Mamiferos Acuaticos de Sudamerica y Antartida. (Vázquez Manzini Editores, 2007).

77.
Cardoso, J., Francisco, A., de Souza, S. P. & Siciliano, S. Rough-toothed dolphins (Steno bredanensis) Along Southeastern Brazil: report of an anomalous pigmented juvenile and description of social and feeding behaviors. Aquat. Mamm. 45, 30–36 (2019).
Google Scholar 

78.
Johns, W. E. et al. Annual cycle and variability of the North Brazil current. J. Phys. Oceanogr. 28, 103–128 (1998).
ADS  Google Scholar 

79.
Gross, A., Kiszka, J., Canneyt, O. V., Richard, P. & Ridoux, V. A preliminary study of habitat and resource partitioning among co-occurring tropical dolphins around Mayotte, southwest Indian Ocean. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 84, 367–374 (2009).
ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

80.
Trites, A. W. W. Marine mammal trophic levels and interactions. In Encyclopedia of Ocean Sciences (eds Steele, J. H. et al.) 1628–1633 (Academic Press, Berlin, 2001). https://doi.org/10.1029/2002EO000342.
Google Scholar 

81.
Ruiz-Cooley, R. I., Engelhaupt, D. T. & Ortega-Ortiz, J. G. Contrasting C and N isotope ratios from sperm whale skin and squid between the Gulf of Mexico and Gulf of California: Effect of habitat. Mar. Biol. 159, 151–164 (2012).
CAS  Google Scholar 

82.
Goes, J. I. et al. Influence of the Amazon River discharge on the biogeography of phytoplankton communities in the western tropical north Atlantic. Prog. Oceanogr. 120, 29–40 (2014).
ADS  Google Scholar 

83.
Montoya, J. P., Landrum, J. P. & Weber, S. C. Amazon River influence on nitrogen fixation in the western tropical North Atlantic. J. Mar. Res. 77, 191–213 (2019).
Google Scholar 

84.
Beltrán-Pedreros, S. & Pantoja, T. M. A. Feeding habits of Sotalia fluviatilis in the Amazonian Estuary. Acta Sci. – Biol. Sci. 28, 389–393 (2006).
Google Scholar 

85.
Giarrizzo, T., Schwamborn, R. & Saint-Paul, U. Utilization of carbon sources in a northern Brazilian mangrove ecosystem. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 95, 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2011.10.018 (2011).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

86.
Crema, L. C., da Silva, V. M. F., Botta, S., Trumbore, S. & Piedade, M. T. F. Does water type influence diet composition in Amazonian manatee (Trichechus inunguis)? A case study comparing black and clearwater rivers. Hydrobiologia https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-019-3900-4 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

87.
Lins, A. L. F. A., Gurgel, E. S. C., Bastos, M. N. C., Sousa, M. E. M. & Emin-Lima, R. Which aquatic plants of the intertidal zone do manatees of the Amazon estuary eat? Sirenews 11–12 (2014).

88.
Ciotti, L. L., Luna, F. O. & Secchi, E. Intra- and interindividual variation in D13C and D15N composition in the Antillean manatee Trichechus manatus manatus from northeastern Brazil. Mar. Mammal Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12102 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

89.
Sousa, M. E. M., Martins, B. M. L. & Fernandes, M. E. B. Meeting the giants: the need for local ecological knowledge (LEK) as a tool for the participative management of manatees on Marajó Island, Brazilian Amazonian coast. Ocean Coast. Manag. 86, 53–60 (2013).
Google Scholar 

90.
Best, R. C. & Da Silva, V. M. F. Inia geoffrensis. Mamm. Species 1–8 (1993).

91.
Costa, A. F. et al. How far does it go along the coast? Distribution and first genetic analyses of the boto (Inia geoffrensis) along the coast of Pará, Amazon, Brazil. In 2013 SC65a Meeting of The International Whaling Commission 1–12 (IWC/Scientific Commitee, Jeju Island, South Korea, Small Cetaceans, Cambridge, 2013).

92.
Martin, A. R. R. & Da Silva, V. M. F. River dolphins and flooded forest: seasonal habitat use and sexual segregation of botos (Inia geoffrensis) in an extreme cetacean environment. J. Zool. Lond. 263, 295–305 (2004).

93.
Da Silva, V. M. F., Goulding, M. & Barthem, R. Golfinhos da Amazônia. (INPA, 2008).

94.
Di Beneditto, A. P. M. & Ramos, R. M. A. Biology of the marine tucuxi dolphin (Sotalia fluviatilis) in south-eastern Brazil. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 84, 1245–1250 (2004).
Google Scholar 

95.
Pansard, K. C. A., Gurgel, H. D. C. B., Andrade, L. C. D. A. & Yamamoto, M. E. Feeding ecology of the estuarine dolphin (Sotalia guianensis) on the coast of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil. Mar. Mammal Sci. 27, 673–687 (2011).
Google Scholar 

96.
Smith, T. D. & Burrows, A. M. Mobility of the axial regions in a captive Amazon river dolphin (Inia geoffrensis). in Biology, Evolution, and Conservation of river dolphins within South America and Asia (eds. Ruiz-Garcia, M. & Shostell, J. M.) 71–81 (Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2009).

97.
Ramos, R. M. A. et al. Morphology of the Guiana dolphin (Sotalia guianensis) off southeastern Brazil: growth and geographic variation. Lat. Am. J. Aquat. Mamm. 8, 137–149 (2010).
Google Scholar 

98.
Emin-Lima, R. Preenchendo Lacunas em Saúde de Ecossistemas: Estudo Morfológico e de Contaminantes nos Botos-cinza (Sotalia guianensis) da Costa Norte do Brasil. (Tese de Doutorado. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Saúde Pública e Meio Ambiente. Escola Nacional e Saúde Pública, FIOCRUZ, 147p., 2012).

99.
Arcoverde, D. L. et al. Evaluation of periotic–timpanic bone complex of Sotalia guianensis (Cetacea: Delphinidae) as tool in identification of geographic variations. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 94, 1127–1132. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315413001689 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

100.
Botta, S. Caracterização do uso do habitat e identificação de Unidades Populacionais de pequenos cetáceos do Atlântico Sul-Ocidental através de métodos químicos. (Tese de Doutorado. PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM OCEANOGRAFIA BIOLÓGICA. UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE – FURG, 238p., 2011).

101.
Camargo, M. & Isaac, V. Os peixes estuarinos da região norte do Brasil: lista de espécies e considerações sobre sua distribuição geográfica. Bol. do Mus. Para. Emílio Goeldi, série Antropol. 17, 133–157 (2002).

102.
Vieira, J. O. Diferenças alimentares em populações de boto-cinza Sotalia guianensis (Van Benédén, 1864) (Cetacea, Delphinidae) nas costas Norte e Nordeste brasileira. (Dissertação de Mestrado. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Zoologia. Universidade Federal do Pará, 2014). More

1.
Canchaya C, Proux C, Fournous G, Bruttin A, Brussow H. Prophage genomics. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003;67:238–76.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 
2.
Lu MJ, Henning U. Superinfection exclusion by T-even-type coliphages. Trends Microbiol. 1994;2:137–9.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

3.
Susskind MA, Wright A, Botstein D. Superinfection exclusion by P22 prophage in lysogens of Salmonella typhimurium. IV. genetics and physiology of sieB exclusion. Virology. 1974;62:367–84.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

4.
Asadulghani M, Ogura Y, Ooka T, Itoh T, Sawaguchi A, Iguchi A, et al. The defective prophage pool of Escherichia coli O157: prophage-prophage interactions potentiate horizontal transfer of virulence determinants. PLoS Pathog. 2009;5:e1000408.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

5.
Matos RC, Lapaque N, Rigottier-Gois L, Debarbieux L, Meylheuc T, Gonzalez-Zorn B, et al. Enterococcus faecalis prophage dynamics and contributions to pathogenic traits. PLoS Genet. 2013;9:e1003539.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

6.
Touchon M, Bobay LM, Rocha EP. The chromosomal accommodation and domestication of mobile genetic elements. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2014a;22:22–9.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

7.
Nakayama K, Takashima K, Ishihara H, Shinomiya T, Kageyama M, Kanaya S, et al. The R-type pyocin of Pseudomonas aeruginosa is related to P2 phage, and the F-type is related to lambda phage. Mol Microbiol. 2000;38:213–31.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

8.
Winstanley C, Langille MG, Fothergill JL, Kukavica-Ibrulj I, Paradis-Bleau C, Sanschagrin F, et al. Newly introduced genomic prophage islands are critical determinants of in vivo competitiveness in the Liverpool Epidemic Strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Genome Res. 2009;19:12–23.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

9.
Bossi L, Fuentes JA, Mora G, Figueroa-Bossi N. Prophage contribution to bacterial population dynamics. J Bacteriol. 2003;185:6467–71.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

10.
Fortier LC, Sekulovic O. Importance of prophages to evolution and virulence of bacterial pathogens. Virulence. 2013;4:354–65.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

11.
Nanda AM, Thormann K, Frunzke J. Impact of spontaneous prophage induction on the fitness of bacterial populations and host-microbe interactions. J Bacteriol. 2015;197:410–9.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

12.
Brown SP, Le Chat L, De Paepe M, Taddei F. Ecology of microbial invasions: amplification allows virus carriers to invade more rapidly when rare. Curr Biol. 2006;16:2048–52.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

13.
Sousa JAM, Rocha EPC. Environmental structure drives resistance to phages and antibiotics during phage therapy and to invading lysogens during colonisation. Sci Rep. 2019;9:3149.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

14.
Roux S, Hallam SJ, Woyke T, Sullivan MB. Viral dark matter and virus-host interactions resolved from publicly available microbial genomes. Elife. 2015;4:e08490.
PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

15.
Touchon M, Bernheim A, Rocha EP. Genetic and life-history traits associated with the distribution of prophages in bacteria. ISME J. 2016;10:2744–54.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

16.
Bobay LM, Rocha EP, Touchon M. The adaptation of temperate bacteriophages to their host genomes. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30:737–51.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

17.
Wagner PL, Waldor MK. Bacteriophage control of bacterial virulence. Infect Immun. 2002;70:3985–93.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

18.
Chen J, Quiles-Puchalt N, Chiang YN, Bacigalupe R, Fillol-Salom A, Chee MSJ, et al. Genome hypermobility by lateral transduction. Science. 2018;362:207–12.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

19.
Touchon M, Moura de Sousa JA, Rocha EP. Embracing the enemy: the diversification of microbial gene repertoires by phage-mediated horizontal gene transfer. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2017;38:66–73.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

20.
Haaber J, Leisner JJ, Cohn MT, Catalan-Moreno A, Nielsen JB, Westh H, et al. Bacterial viruses enable their host to acquire antibiotic resistance genes from neighbouring cells. Nat Commun. 2016;7:13333.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

21.
Brisse S, Grimont F, Grimont PAD. The genus Klebsiella. The Prokaryotes. New York, USA: Springer; 2006. p. 159–96.
Google Scholar 

22.
Lee CR, Lee JH, Park KS, Jeon JH, Kim YB, Cha CJ, et al. Antimicrobial resistance of hypervirulent Klebsiella pneumoniae: epidemiology, hypervirulence-associated determinants, and resistance mechanisms. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2017;7:483.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Navon-Venezia S, Kondratyeva K, Carattoli A. Klebsiella pneumoniae: a major worldwide source and shuttle for antibiotic resistance. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2017;41:252–75.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

24.
Blin C, Passet V, Touchon M, Rocha EPC, Brisse S. Metabolic diversity of the emerging pathogenic lineages of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19:1881–98.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

25.
Wyres KL, Wick RR, Judd LM, Froumine R, Tokolyi A, Gorrie CL, et al. Distinct evolutionary dynamics of horizontal gene transfer in drug resistant and virulent clones of Klebsiella pneumoniae. PLoS Genet. 2019;15:e1008114.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

26.
Holt KE, Wertheim H, Zadoks RN, Baker S, Whitehouse CA, Dance D, et al. Genomic analysis of diversity, population structure, virulence, and antimicrobial resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae, an urgent threat to public health. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:E3574–81.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

27.
Mori M, Ohta M, Agata N, Kido N, Arakawa Y, Ito H, et al. Identification of species and capsular types of Klebsiella clinical isolates, with special reference to Klebsiella planticola. Microbiol Immunol. 1989;33:887–95.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

28.
Wyres KL, Wick RR, Gorrie C, Jenney A, Follador R, Thomson NR, et al. Identification of Klebsiella capsule synthesis loci from whole genome data. Micro Genom. 2016;2:e000102.
Google Scholar 

29.
Pan YJ, Lin TL, Chen CT, Chen YY, Hsieh PF, Hsu CR, et al. Genetic analysis of capsular polysaccharide synthesis gene clusters in 79 capsular types of Klebsiella spp. Sci Rep. 2015;5:15573.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

30.
Favre-Bonte S, Licht TR, Forestier C, Krogfelt KA. Klebsiella pneumoniae capsule expression is necessary for colonization of large intestines of streptomycin-treated mice. Infect Immun. 1999;67:6152–6.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

31.
Alvarez D, Merino S, Tomas JM, Benedi VJ, Alberti S. Capsular polysaccharide is a major complement resistance factor in lipopolysaccharide O side chain-deficient Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates. Infect Immun. 2000;68:953–5.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

32.
Campos MA, Vargas MA, Regueiro V, Llompart CM, Alberti S, Bengoechea JA. Capsule polysaccharide mediates bacterial resistance to antimicrobial peptides. Infect Immun. 2004;72:7107–14.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

33.
Doorduijn DJ, Rooijakkers SHM, van Schaik W, Bardoel BW. Complement resistance mechanisms of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Immunobiology. 2016;221:1102–9.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

34.
Rendueles O, Garcia-Garcera M, Neron B, Touchon M, Rocha EPC. Abundance and co-occurrence of extracellular capsules increase environmental breadth: Implications for the emergence of pathogens. PLoS Pathog. 2017;13:e1006525.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

35.
Rendueles O, de Sousa JAM, Bernheim A, Touchon M, Rocha EPC. Genetic exchanges are more frequent in bacteria encoding capsules. PLoS Genet. 2018;14:e1007862.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Chewapreecha C, Harris SR, Croucher NJ, Turner C, Marttinen P, Cheng L, et al. Dense genomic sampling identifies highways of pneumococcal recombination. Nat Genet. 2014;46:305–9.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37.
Moller AG, Lindsay JA, Read TD. Determinants of phage host range in Staphylococcus species. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019;85:e00209–19.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

38.
Negus D, Burton J, Sweed A, Gryko R, Taylor PW. Poly-gamma-(D)-glutamic acid capsule interferes with lytic infection of Bacillus anthracis by B. anthracis-specific bacteriophages. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013;79:714–7.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

39.
Scholl D, Adhya S, Merril C. Escherichia coli K1’s capsule is a barrier to bacteriophage T7. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:4872–4.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

40.
Niemann H, Frank N, Stirm S. Klebsiella serotype-13 capsular polysaccharide: primary structure and depolymerization by a bacteriophage-borne glycanase. Carbohydr Res. 1977a;59:165–77.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

41.
Niemann H, Kwiatkowski B, Westphal U, Stirm S. Klebsiella serotype 25 capsular polysaccharide: primary structure and depolymerization by a bacteriophage-borne glycanase. J Bacteriol. 1977b;130:366–74.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

42.
Pan YJ, Lin TL, Chen CC, Tsai YT, Cheng YH, Chen YY, et al. Klebsiella phage PhiK64-1 encodes multiple depolymerases for multiple host capsular types. J Virol. 2017;91:e02457–02416.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

43.
Bessler W, Freund-Molbert E, Knufermann H, Rduolph C, Thurow H, Stirm S. A bacteriophage-induced depolymerase active on Klebsiella K11 capsular polysaccharide. Virology. 1973;56:134–51.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

44.
Thurow H, Niemann H, Rudolph C, Stirm S. Host capsule depolymerase activity of bacteriophage particles active on Klebsiella K20 and K24 strains. Virology. 1974;58:306–9.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

45.
Latka A, Maciejewska B, Majkowska-Skrobek G, Briers Y, Drulis-Kawa Z. Bacteriophage-encoded virion-associated enzymes to overcome the carbohydrate barriers during the infection process. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017;101:3103–19.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

46.
Scholl D, Rogers S, Adhya S, Merril CR. Bacteriophage K1-5 encodes two different tail fiber proteins, allowing it to infect and replicate on both K1 and K5 strains of Escherichia coli. J Virol. 2001;75:2509–15.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

47.
Lin TL, Hsieh PF, Huang YT, Lee WC, Tsai YT, Su PA, et al. Isolation of a bacteriophage and its depolymerase specific for K1 capsule of Klebsiella pneumoniae: implication in typing and treatment. J Infect Dis. 2014;210:1734–44.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

48.
Pan YJ, Lin TL, Chen YY, Lai PH, Tsai YT, Hsu CR, et al. Identification of three podoviruses infecting Klebsiella encoding capsule depolymerases that digest specific capsular types. Micro Biotechnol. 2019;12:472–86.
CAS  Google Scholar 

49.
Bertozzi Silva J, Storms Z, Sauvageau D. Host receptors for bacteriophage adsorption. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2016;363:fnw002.
PubMed  Google Scholar 

50.
Arndt D, Grant JR, Marcu A, Sajed T, Pon A, Liang Y, et al. PHASTER: a better, faster version of the PHAST phage search tool. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:W16–21.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

51.
Daubin V, Lerat E, Perriere G. The source of laterally transferred genes in bacterial genomes. Genome Biol. 2003;4:R57.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

52.
Rocha EP, Danchin A. Base composition bias might result from competition for metabolic resources. Trends Genet. 2002;18:291–4.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

53.
Bobay LM, Touchon M, Rocha EP. Pervasive domestication of defective prophages by bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:12127–32.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

54.
Casjens SR, Gilcrease EB, Huang WM, Bunny KL, Pedulla ML, Ford ME, et al. The pKO2 linear plasmid prophage of Klebsiella oxytoca. J Bacteriol. 2004;186:1818–32.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

55.
Leclercq S, Cordaux R. Do phages efficiently shuttle transposable elements among prokaryotes? Evolution. 2011;65:3327–31.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

56.
Ghazaryan L, Tonoyan L, Ashhab AA, Soares MI, Gillor O. The role of stress in colicin regulation. Arch Microbiol. 2014;196:753–64.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

57.
Labrie SJ, Samson JE, Moineau S. Bacteriophage resistance mechanisms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:317–27.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

58.
Samson JE, Magadan AH, Sabri M, Moineau S. Revenge of the phages: defeating bacterial defences. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2013;11:675–87.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

59.
Wyres KL, Gorrie C, Edwards DJ, Wertheim HF, Hsu LY, Van Kinh N, et al. Extensive capsule locus variation and large-scale genomic recombination within the Klebsiella pneumoniae clonal group 258. Genome Biol Evol. 2015;7:1267–79.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

60.
Tan D, Zhang Y, Qin J, Le S, Gu J, Chen LK et al. A frameshift mutation in wcaJ associated with phage resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae. Microorganisms. 2020;8:378.
CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

61.
Buffet A, Rocha EPC, Rendueles O. Selection for the bacterial capsule in the absence of biotic and abiotic aggressions depends on growth conditions. BioRxiv. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.27.059774.

62.
Julianelle LA. Bacterial variation in cultures of Friedlander’s Bacillus. J Exp Med. 1928;47:889–902.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

63.
Randall WA. Colony and antigenic variation in Klebsiella pneumoniae types A, B and C. J Bacteriol. 1939;38:461–77.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

64.
Flores CO, Meyer JR, Valverde S, Farr L, Weitz JS. Statistical structure of host-phage interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:E288–97.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

65.
Mathieu A, Dion M, Deng L, Tremblay D, Moncaut E, Shah SA, et al. Virulent coliphages in 1-year-old children fecal samples are fewer, but more infectious than temperate coliphages. Nat Commun. 2020;11:385.
Google Scholar 

66.
Weitz JS, Poisot T, Meyer JR, Flores CO, Valverde S, Sullivan MB, et al. Phage-bacteria infection networks. Trends Microbiol. 2013;21:82–91.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

67.
Brueggemann AB, Harrold CL, Rezaei Javan R, van Tonder AJ, McDonnell AJ, Edwards BA. Pneumococcal prophages are diverse, but not without structure or history. Sci Rep. 2017;7:42976.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

68.
Castillo D, Kauffman K, Hussain F, Kalatzis P, Rorbo N, Polz MF, et al. Widespread distribution of prophage-encoded virulence factors in marine Vibrio communities. Sci Rep. 2018;8:9973.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

69.
Allen HK, Looft T, Bayles DO, Humphrey S, Levine UY, Alt D, et al. Antibiotics in feed induce prophages in swine fecal microbiomes. mBio. 2011;2:e00260–11.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

70.
Otsuji N, Sekiguchi M, Iijima T, Takagi Y. Induction of phage formation in the lysogenic Escherichia coli K-12 by mitomycin C. Nature. 1959;184:1079–80.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

71.
Comeau AM, Tetart F, Trojet SN, Prere MF, Krisch HM. Phage-antibiotic synergy (PAS): beta-lactam and quinolone antibiotics stimulate virulent phage growth. PLoS One. 2007;2:e799.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

72.
Kim M, Jo Y, Hwang YJ, Hong HW, Hong SS, Park K et al. Phage-antibiotic synergy via delayed lysis. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2018;84:e02085–18.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

73.
De Paepe M, Tournier L, Moncaut E, Son O, Langella P, Petit MA. Carriage of lambda latent virus is costly for its bacterial host due to frequent reactivation in monoxenic mouse intestine. PLoS Genet. 2016;12:e1005861.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

74.
Phanphak S, Georgiades P, Li R, King J, Roberts IS, Waigh TA. Super-resolution fluorescence microscopy study of the production of K1 capsules by Escherichia coli: evidence for the differential distribution of the capsule at the poles and the equator of the cell. Langmuir. 2019;35:5635–46.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

75.
Krinos CM, Coyne MJ, Weinacht KG, Tzianabos AO, Kasper DL, Comstock LE. Extensive surface diversity of a commensal microorganism by multiple DNA inversions. Nature. 2001;414:555–8.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

76.
Tzeng YL, Thomas J, Stephens DS. Regulation of capsule in Neisseria meningitidis. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2016;42:759–72.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

77.
Bondy-Denomy J, Qian J, Westra ER, Buckling A, Guttman DS, Davidson AR, et al. Prophages mediate defense against phage infection through diverse mechanisms. ISME J. 2016;10:2854–66.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

78.
Zhang YF, LeJeune JT. Transduction of bla(CMY-2), tet(A), and tet(B) from Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Heidelberg to S-Typhimurium. Vet Microbiol. 2008;129:418–25.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

79.
Brussow H, Kutter E. Phage ecology. Bacteriophages: biology and application. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press; 2005. p. 129–64.
Google Scholar 

80.
Calef E, Marchelli C, Guerrini F. The formation of superinfection-double lysogens of phage lambda in Escherichia coli K-12. Virology. 1965;27:1–10.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

81.
Scott JR, West BW, Laping JL. Superinfection immunity and prophage repression in phage P1. IV. The c1 repressor bypass function and the role of c4 repressor in immunity. Virology. 1978;85:587–600.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

82.
Bakk A, Metzler R. Nonspecific binding of the OR repressors CI and Cro of bacteriophage lambda. J Theor Biol. 2004;231:525–33.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

83.
Casjens S. Prophages and bacterial genomics: what have we learned so far? Mol Microbiol. 2003;49:277–300.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

84.
Hendrix RW, Smith MCM, Burns RN, Ford ME, Hatfull GF. Evolutionary relationships among diverse bacteriophages and prophages: All the world’s a phage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96:2192–7.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

85.
Ramisetty BCM, Sudhakari PA. Bacterial ‘Grounded’ Prophages: hotspots for genetic renovation and innovation. Front Genet. 2019;10:65.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

86.
Venturini C, Ben Zakour N, Bowring B, Morales S, Cole R, Kovach Z et al. K. pneumoniae ST258 genomic variability and bacteriophage susceptibility. bioRxiv. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1101/628339.

87.
Hsieh PF, Lin HH, Lin TL, Chen YY, Wang JT. Two T7-like bacteriophages, K5-2 and K5-4, each encodes two capsule depolymerases: isolation and functional characterization. Sci Rep. 2017;7:4624.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

88.
Majkowska-Skrobek G, Latka A, Berisio R, Squeglia F, Maciejewska B, Briers Y, et al. Phage-borne depolymerases decrease Klebsiella pneumoniae resistance to innate defense mechanisms. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:00209–19.
Google Scholar 

89.
Paczosa MK, Mecsas J. Klebsiella pneumoniae: going on the offense with a strong defense. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2016;80:629–61.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

90.
Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:2068–9.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

91.
Grazziotin AL, Koonin EV, Kristensen DM. Prokaryotic virus orthologous groups (pVOGs): a resource for comparative genomics and protein family annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:D491–D498.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

92.
Eddy SR. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1002195.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

93.
Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J, Bealer K, et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinforma. 2009;10:421.
Google Scholar 

94.
Siguier P, Perochon J, Lestrade L, Mahillon J, Chandler M. ISfinder: the reference centre for bacterial insertion sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34:D32–6.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

95.
Touchon M, Cury J, Yoon EJ, Krizova L, Cerqueira GC, Murphy C, et al. The genomic diversification of the whole Acinetobacter genus: origins, mechanisms, and consequences. Genome Biol Evol. 2014b;6:2866–82.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

96.
Steinegger M, Soding J. MMseqs2 enables sensitive protein sequence searching for the analysis of massive data sets. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35:1026–8.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

97.
van Heel AJ, de Jong A, Song C, Viel JH, Kok J, Kuipers OP. BAGEL4: a user-friendly web server to thoroughly mine RiPPs and bacteriocins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:W278–81.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

98.
Pires DP, Oliveira H, Melo LD, Sillankorva S, Azeredo J. Bacteriophage-encoded depolymerases: their diversity and biotechnological applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2016;100:2141–51.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

99.
Couvin D, Bernheim A, Toffano-Nioche C, Touchon M, Michalik J, Neron B, et al. CRISPRCasFinder, an update of CRISRFinder, includes a portable version, enhanced performance and integrates search for Cas proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:W246–51.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

100.
Oliveira PH, Touchon M, Rocha EP. Regulation of genetic flux between bacteria by restriction-modification systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113:5658–63.
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

101.
Mucke M, Kruger DH, Reuter M. Diversity of Type II restriction endonucleases that require two DNA recognition sites. Nucleic Acids Res. 2003;31:6079–84.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

102.
Ferrieres L, Hemery G, Nham T, Guerout AM, Mazel D, Beloin C, et al. Silent mischief: bacteriophage Mu insertions contaminate products of Escherichia coli random mutagenesis performed using suicidal transposon delivery plasmids mobilized by broad-host-range RP4 conjugative machinery. J Bacteriol. 2010;192:6418–27.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

103.
Guy L, Kultima JR, Andersson SG. genoPlotR: comparative gene and genome visualization in R. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:2334–5.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  More

Affiliations

International Cotton Advisory Committee, Washington D.C., WA, USA
K. R. Kranthi

Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA
Glenn Davis Stone

Authors
K. R. Kranthi

Glenn Davis Stone

Corresponding author
Correspondence to Glenn Davis Stone. More