Ecology

Beniston, M., Diaz, H. F. & Bradley, R. S. Climatic change at high elevation sites: An overview. Clim. Change 36, 233–251 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chape, S., Spalding, M. & Jenkins, M. The world’s protected areas: Status, values, and prospects in the twenty-first century. Bioscience 59(7), 623–624 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Körner, C. Mountain biodiversity, its causes and function. Ambio 33, 11–17 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Körner, C. et al. A global inventory of mountains for bio-geographical applications. Alp. Bot. 127, 1–15 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Forero-Medina, G., Joppa, L. & Pimm, S. L. Constraints to species’ elevational range shifts as climate changes. Conserv. Biol. 25, 163–171 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Urban, M. C., Tewksbury, J. J. & Sheldon, K. S. On a collision course: Competition and dispersal differences create no-analogue communities and cause extinctions during climate change. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 2072–2080 (2012).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Freeman, B. G., Scholer, M. N., Ruiz-Gutierrez, V. & Fitzpatrick, J. W. Climate change causes upslope shifts and mountaintop extirpations in a tropical bird community. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, 11982–11987 (2018).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Chen, I. C., Hill, J. K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D. B. & Thomas, C. D. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333, 1024 (2011).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Lenoir, J. & Svenning, J. C. Climate-related range shifts: A global multidimensional synthesis and new research directions. Ecography 38, 15–28 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Parmesan, C. & Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421, 37–42 (2003).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Román-Palacios, C. & Wiens, J. J. Recent responses to climate change reveal the drivers of species extinction and survival. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 4211–4217 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Wiens, J. J. Climate-related local extinctions are already widespread among plant and animal species. PLoS Biol. 14, e200114 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Orians, G. H. & Milewski, A. V. Ecology of Australia: The effects of nutrient-poor soils and intense fires. Biol. Rev. 82, 393–423 (2007).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Laurance, W. F. et al. The 10 Australian ecosystems most vulnerable to tipping points. Biol. Cons. 144, 1472–1480 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rahbek, C. et al. Humboldt’s enigma: What causes global patterns of mountain biodiversity?. Science 365, 1108–1113 (2019).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Williams, S. E., Bolitho, E. E. & Fox, S. Climate change in Australian tropical rainforests: An impending environmental catastrophe. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 1887–1892 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mahony, M.J. The amphibians. in Remnants of Gondwana: A Natural and Social History of the Gondwana Rainforests of Australia. (eds. Kitching, R.L., Braithwaite, R., & Cavanaugh, J.) (Surrey Beatty & Sons, 2010).Kooyman, R. M., Watson, J. & Wilf, P. Protect Australia’s gondwana rainforests. Science 367, 1083–1083 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Narsey, S. et al. (2020). Impact of climate change on cloud forests in the Gondwana Rainforests of Australia World Heritage Area. Earth Systems and Climate Change Hub Report.Newell, D. An update on frog declines from the forests of subtropical eastern Australia in Status of Conservation and Decline of Amphibians: Australia, New Zealand, and Pacific Islands (eds. Heatwole H. and Rowley J. L.) 29–37 (CSIRO, 2018).DAWE. Bushfire Impacts Vol. 2021 (Commonwealth Department of Agriculture Water and Environment, 2020).
Google Scholar 
Collins, L. et al. The 2019/2020 mega-fires exposed Australian ecosystems to an unprecedented extent of high-severity fire. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 044029 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Filkov, A. I., Ngo, T., Matthews, S., Telfer, S. & Penman, T. D. Impact of Australia’s catastrophic 2019/20 bushfire season on communities and environment: Retrospective analysis and current trends. J. Saf. Sci. Resil. 1, 44–56 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Blunden, J. & Arndt, D. S. State of the climate in 2019. Bull. Am. Meteor. Soc. 101, S1–S429 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhongming, Z., Linong, L., Wangqiang, Z. & Wei, L. AR6 Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (Springer, 2021).
Google Scholar 
Laidlaw, M. J., McDonald, W. J. F., Hunter, R. J., Putland, D. A. & Kitching, R. L. The potential impacts of climate change on Australian subtropical rainforest. Aust. J. Bot. 59, 440–449 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Blaustein, A. R. et al. Direct and indirect effects of climate change on amphibian populations. Diversity 2, 281–313 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Li, Y., Cohen, J. M. & Rohr, J. R. Review and synthesis of the effects of climate change on amphibians. Integr. Zool. 8, 145–161 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Carey, C. & Alexander, M. A. Climate change and amphibian declines: Is there a link?. Divers. Distrib. 9, 111–121 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cohen, J. M., Civitello, D. J., Venesky, M. D., McMahon, T. A. & Rohr, J. R. An interaction between climate change and infectious disease drove widespread amphibian declines. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 927–937 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Geyle, H. M. et al. Red hot frogs: Identifying the Australian frogs most at risk of extinction. Pac. Conserv. Biol. 28, 211–223 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gillespie, G. R. et al. Status and priority conservation actions for Australian frog species. Biol. Conserv. 247, 108543 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Almeida, A. M. et al. Prediction scenarios of past, present, and future environmental suitability for the Mediterranean species Arbutus unedo L. Sci. Rep. 12, 1–15 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lima, V. P. et al. Climate change threatens native potential agroforestry plant species in Brazil. Sci. Rep. 12, 1–14 (2022).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Tiwari, S. et al. Modelling the potential risk zone of Lantana camara invasion and response to climate change in eastern India. Ecol. Process. 11(1), 1–13 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Elith, J. et al. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers. Distrib. 17, 43–57 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P. & Schapire, R. E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190, 231–259 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Galante, P. J. et al. The challenge of modeling niches and distributions for data-poor species: a comprehensive approach to model complexity. Ecography 41, 726–736 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Li, J. et al. Climate refugia of snow leopards in High Asia. Biol. Conserv. 203, 188–196 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Searcy, C. A. & Shaffer, B. H. Do ecological niche models accurately identify climatic determinants of species ranges?. Am. Nat. 187, 423–435 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Melo-Merino, S. M., Reyes-Bonilla, H. & Lira-Noriega, A. Ecological niche models and species distribution models in marine environments: A literature review and spatial analysis of evidence. Ecol. Model. 415, 108857 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Anstis, M. Tadpoles and Frogs of Australia (New Holland Publishers Pty Limited, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Knowles, R., Mahony, M., Armstrong, J. & Donnellan, S. Systematics of sphagnum frogs of the Genus Philoria (Anura: Myobatrachidae) in Eastern Australia, with the description of two new species. Rec. Aust. Mus. 56, 57–74 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mahony, M. J. et al. A new species of Philoria (Anura: Limnodynastidae) from the uplands of the Gondwana Rainforests world heritage area of eastern Australia. Zootaxa 5104, 209–241 (2022).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bolitho, L. J., Rowley, J. J. L., Hines, H. B. & Newell, D. Occupancy modelling reveals a highly restricted and fragmented distribution in a threatened montane frog (Philoria kundagungan) in subtropical Australian rainforests. Aust. J. Zool. 67, 231–240 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heard, G. et al. Post-fire impact assessment for priority frogs: northern Philoria. (NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub Project 8.1.3 report, Brisbane, 2021).Vanderwal, J. All Future Climate Layers for Australia: 1 km Resolution (James Cook University, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Torkkola, J. J., Chauvenet, A. L. M., Hines, H. & Oliver, P. M. Distributional modelling, megafires and data gaps highlight probable underestimation of climate change risk for two lizards from Australia’s montane rainforests. Austral Ecol. 47(2), 365–379 (2021).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Geoscience, A. Digital Elevation Model (DEM) 25 Metre Grid of Australia derived from LiDAR. (Geoscience Australia, 2015).Thuiller, W., Georges, D., Engler, R. & Breiner, F. (2014). biomod2: Ensemble platform for species distribution modeling. R package version 3.1-64. http://CRANR-project.org/package=biomod2. Accessed Feb 2021.Feng, X., Park, D. S., Liang, Y., Pandey, R. & Papeş, M. Collinearity in ecological niche modeling: Confusions and challenges. Ecol. Evol. 9, 10365–10376 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Thuiller, W. BIOMOD: Optimising predictions of species distributions and projecting potential future shifts under global change. Glob. Change Biol. 9, 1353–1362 (2003).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
MacKenzie, D. I., Nichols, J. D., Hines, J. E., Knutson, M. G. & Franklin, A. B. Estimating site occupancy, colonisation, and local extinction when a species is detected imperfectly. Ecology 84, 2200–2207 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schwalm, C. R., Glendon, S. & Duffy, P. B. RCP8.5 tracks cumulative CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 19656–19657 (2020).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Trisos, C. H., Merow, C. & Pigot, A. L. The projected timing of abrupt ecological disruption from climate change. Nature 580, 496–501 (2020).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Campos-Cerqueira, M. & Mitchell Aide, T. Lowland extirpation of anuran populations on a tropical mountain. PeerJ 2017, 1–10 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Pounds, J. A., Fogden, M. P. L. & Campbell, J. H. Biological response to climate change on a tropical mountain. Nature 398, 611–615 (1999).Article 
CAS 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Raxworthy, C. J. et al. Extinction vulnerability of tropical montane endemism from warming and upslope displacement: A preliminary appraisal for the highest massif in Madagascar. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 1703–1720 (2008).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Fordham, D. A. et al. Extinction debt from climate change for frogs in the wet tropics. Biol. Lett. 12, 20160236 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, E. P., Williams, K., Hipsey, M. R. & Mitchell, N. J. Drying microclimates threaten persistence of natural and translocated populations of threatened frogs. Biodivers. Conserv. 30(1), 15–34 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Scheele, B. C., Driscoll, D. A., Fischer, J. & Hunter, D. A. Decline of an endangered amphibian during an extreme climatic event. Ecosphere 3, 101 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Legge, S. et al. Rapid assessment of the biodiversity impacts of the 2019–2020 Australian megafires to guide urgent management intervention and recovery and lessons for other regions. Divers. Distrib. 28, 571–591 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Canadell, J. G. et al. Multi-decadal increase of forest burned area in Australia is linked to climate change. Nat. Commun. 12, 6921 (2021).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hisano, M., Searle, E. B. & Chen, H. Y. H. Biodiversity as a solution to mitigate climate change impacts on the functioning of forest ecosystems. Biol. Rev. 93, 439–456 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Holz, A., Wood, S. W., Veblen, T. T. & Bowman, D. M. J. S. Effects of high-severity fire drove the population collapse of the subalpine Tasmanian endemic conifer Athrotaxis cupressoides. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 445–458 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hutley, L. B., Doley, D., Yates, D. J. & Boonsaner, A. Water balance of an australian subtropical rainforest at altitude: The ecological and physiological significance of intercepted cloud and fog. Aust. J. Bot. 45, 311–329 (1997).Article 

Google Scholar 
Godfree, R. C. et al. Implications of the 2019–2020 megafires for the biogeography and conservation of Australian vegetation. Nat. Commun. 12, 1023 (2021).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hennessy, K. et al. Climate Change Impacts on Fire-Weather in South-East Australia (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Moriondo, M. et al. Potential impact of climate change on fire risk in the Mediterranean area. Clim. Res. 31, 85–95 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pitman, A. J., Narisma, G. T. & McAneney, J. The impact of climate change on the risk of forest and grassland fires in Australia. Clim. Change 84, 383–401 (2007).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Caughley, G. Directions in conservation biology. J. Anim. Ecol. 63, 215–244 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Scheele, B. C. et al. Conservation translocations for amphibian species threatened by chytrid fungus: A review, conceptual framework, and recommendations. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 3, e524 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Rudin-Bitterli, T. S., Evans, J. P. & Mitchell, N. J. Geographic variation in adult and embryonic desiccation tolerance in a terrestrial-breeding frog. Evolution 74, 1186–1199 (2020).Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ashcroft, M. B. Identifying refugia from climate change. J. Biogeogr. 37, 1407–1413 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Keppel, G. et al. Refugia: Identifying and understanding safe havens for biodiversity under climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 21, 393–404 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Selwood, K. E. & Zimmer, H. C. Refuges for biodiversity conservation: A review of the evidence. Biol. Conserv. 245, 108502 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Petronio, C. Les cervidés endémiques des îles méditerranéennes. Quaternaire 3–4, 259–264 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Liouville, M. Variabilité du Cerf élaphe (Cervus elaphus LINNE 1758) au cours du pléistocène moyen et supérieur en Europe occidentale : Approches morphométrique, paléoécologique et cynégétique (Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 2007).
Google Scholar 
van der Made, J., Stefaniak, K. & Marciszak, A. The polish fossil record of the wolf canis and the deer alces, capreolus, megaloceros, dama and cervus in an evolutionary perspective. Quatern. Int. 326–327, 406–430 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Guadelli, J.-L. Contribution à l’étude des zoocénoses préhistoriques en Aquitaine (Würm ancien et interstade würmiem. Universite de Bordeaux, Talence, 1987).
Google Scholar 
Guadelli, J.-L. Les cerfs du würm ancien en Aquitaine. Paléo 8, 99–108 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Defleur, A. et al. Le niveau moustérien de la grotte de l’Adaouste (Jouques, Bouches-du-Rhône): Approche culturelle et paléoenvironnements. Bull. Mus. anthropol. préhist. Monaco 37, 11–48 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Tournepiche, J.-F. Les grands mammifères pléistocènes de Poitou-Charente. Paléo 8, 109–141 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Delagnes, A. et al. Le gisement Pléistocène moyen et supérieur d’artenac (Saint-Mary, Charente): Premier bilan interdisciplinaire. Bull. Soc. Prehist. Fr. 96, 469–496 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Valensi, P., Psathi, E. & Lacombat, F. Le cerf élaphe dans les sites du Paléolithique moyen du Sud-Est de la France et de la Ligurie. Intérêts biostratigraphique, environnemental et taphonomique. In Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, Session 3: Paleoecology, General Sessions and Posters, 2–8 september 2001 97–105 (BAR International Series, 2004).Steele, T. E. Variation in mortality profiles of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in middle palaeolithic assemblages from western Europe. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 14, 307–320 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Croitor, R. A new form of wapiti cervus canadensis Erxleben, 1777 (Cervidae, Mammalia) from the late pleistocene of France. Palaeoworld 29, 789–806 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Meiri, M. et al. Subspecies dynamics in space and time: A study of the red deer complex using ancient and modern DNA and morphology. J. Biogeogr. 45, 367–380 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Queirós, J. et al. Red deer in Iberia: Molecular ecological studies in a southern refugium and inferences on European postglacial colonization history. PLoS ONE 14, e0210282 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Carranza, J., Salinas, M., de Andrés, D. & Pérez-González, J. Iberian red deer: paraphyletic nature at mtDNA but nuclear markers support its genetic identity. Ecol. Evol. 6, 905–922 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rey-Iglesia, A., Grandal-d’Anglade, A., Campos, P. F. & Hansen, A. J. Mitochondrial DNA of pre-last glacial maximum red deer from NW Spain suggests a more complex phylogeographical history for the species. Ecol. Evol. 7, 10690–10700 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Geist, V. Deer of the world: Their evolution, behaviour, and ecology (Stackpole Books, Pennsylvania, 1998).
Google Scholar 
Rivals, F. & Lister, A. M. Dietary flexibility and niche partitioning of large herbivores through the pleistocene of Britain. Quatern. Sci. Rev. 146, 116–133 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Berlioz, E. Ecologie alimentaire et paléoenvironnements des cervidés européens du Pleistocène inférieur: le message des texutures de micro-usure dentaire (University of Poitiers, Poitiers, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Saarinen, J., Eronen, J., Fortelius, M., Seppä, H. & Lister, A. M. Patterns of diet and body mass of large ungulates from the pleistocene of Western Europe, and their relation to vegetation. Palaeontol. Electron. 19.3.32A, 1–58 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Stefano, G. D., Pandolfi, L., Petronio, C. & Salari, L. The morphometry and the occurrence of cervus elaphus (Mammalia, Cervidae) from the late Pleistocene of the Italian peninsula. Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Stratigr. 121, 103–120 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Terada, C., Tatsuzawa, S. & Saitoh, T. Ecological correlates and determinants in the geographical variation of deer morphology. Oecologia 169, 981–994 (2012).PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sommer, R. S., Fahlke, J. M., Schmölcke, U., Benecke, N. & Zachos, F. E. Quaternary history of the European roe deer capreolus capreolus. Mammal Rev. 39, 1–16 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Lorenzini, R. et al. European Roe Deer Capreolus capreolus (Linnaeus, 1758). In Handbook of the Mammals of Europe (eds Hackländer, F. & Zachos, F. E.) 1–32 (Springer, Cham, 2022).
Google Scholar 
Lorenzini, R., Garofalo, L., Qin, X., Voloshina, I. & Lovari, S. Global phylogeography of the genus capreolus (Artiodactyla: Cervidae), a palaearctic meso-mammal. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 170, 209–221 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Tixier, H. & Duncan, P. Are European roe deer browsers? A review of variations in the composition of their diets. Rev. Ecol. 51, 3–17 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Merceron, G., Viriot, L. & Blondel, C. Tooth microwear pattern in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.) from Chizé (Western France) and relation to food composition. Small Rumin. Res. 53, 125–132 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Delibes, J. R. Ecología y comportamiento del corzo (Capreolus capreolus L. 1758) en la Sierra de Grazalema (Cádiz) (Universidad Complutense, Complutense, 1996).
Google Scholar 
Hewitt, G. M. The genetic legacy of the quaternary ice ages. Nature 405, 907–913 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Stewart, J. R., Lister, A. M., Barnes, I. & Dalén, L. Refugia revisited: Individualistic responses of species in space and time. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 277, 661–671 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Álvarez-Lao, D. J. & García, N. Geographical distribution of pleistocene cold-adapted large mammal faunas in the Iberian peninsula. Quatern. Int. 233, 159–170 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Lumley, H. de. Le Paléolithique inférieur et moyen du Midi méditerranéen dans son cadre géologique. Tome I. Ligurie—Provence. Gall. Préhist. 5, (1969).Texier, P.-J. L’industrie moustérienne de l’abri pié-lombard (Tourettes-sur-Loup, Alpes-Maritimes). Bull. Soc. Préhist. Fr. 71, 429–448 (1974).
Google Scholar 
Texier, P.-J. et al. L’abri pié lombard à tourrettes-sur-loup (Alpes-Maritimes): Anciennes fouilles (1971–1985), nouvelles données. Bull. Mus.Anthropol.e Préhistor. Monaco 51, 19–49 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Tomasso, A. Territoires, systèmes de mobilité et systèmes de production : La fin du Paléolithique supérieur dans l’arc liguro-provençal (University of Nice Sophia Antipolis Nice, and University of Pisa, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Pelletier, M., Desclaux, E., Brugal, J.-P. & Texier, P.-J. The exploitation of rabbits for food and pelts by last interglacial neandertals. Quatern. Sci. Rev. 224, 105972 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Valladas, H. et al. Datations par la thermoluminescence de gisements moustériens du sud de la France. L’Anthropologie 91, 211–226 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Yokoyama, Y. et al. ESR dating of stalagmites of the Caune de l’Arago, the Grotte du Lazaret, the Grotte du Vallonnet and the abri Pié Lombard : a comparison with the U-Th method. In Third Specialist Seminar on TL and ESR Dating (eds. Hackens, T., Mejdahl, V., Bowman, S. G. E., Wintle, A. G. & Aitken, M. J.) 381–389 (1983).Romero, A. J., Fernández-Lomana, J. C. D. & Brugal, J.-P. Aves de caza. Estudio tafonómico y zooarqueológico de los restos avianos de los niveles musterienses de pié lombard (Alpes-Maritimes, Francia). Munibe Antropol. Arkeol. 68, 73–84 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Lumley (de), M.-A. Les néandertaliens dans le midi méditerranéen. In La Préhistoire française vol. T. 1 (Editions du CNRS, 1976).Porraz, G. En marge du milieu alpin. Dynamiques de formation des ensembles lithiques et modes d’occupation des territoires au paléolithique moyen (Université de Provence, Marseille, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Porraz, G. Middle Paleolithic mobile toolkits in shor-tterm human occupations: Two case studies. Eur. Prehist. 6, 33–55 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Roussel, A., Gourichon, L., Valensi, P. & Brugal, J.-P. Homme, gibier et environnement au Paléolithique moyen. Regards sur la gestion territoriale de l’espace semi-montagnard du Midi de la France. In Biodiversités, environnements et sociétés depuis la Préhistoire : nouveaux marqueurs et approches intégrées 87–99 (Éditions APDCA, 2021).Renault-Miskovsky, J. & Texier, J. Intérêt de l’analyse pollinique détaillée dans les concrétions de grotte .Application à l’abri pié-lombard (Tourettes-sur-Loup, Alpes maritimes). Quaternaire 17, 129–134 (1980).
Google Scholar 
Rosell, J. et al. A resilient landscape at teixoneres cave (MIS 3; Moià, Barcelona, Spain): The Neanderthals as disrupting agent. Quatern. Int. 435, 195–210 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Rosell, J. et al. Mossegades i Levallois: les noves intervencionsa la cova de les teixoneres (Moià, Bages). Trib d’Arqueologia 29–43 (2008).Rosell, J. et al. Los ocupaciones en la Cova de les Teixoneres (Moià, Barcelona): relaciones espaciales y grado de competencia entre hienas, osos y neandertales durante el Pleistoceno Superior. In Actas de la 1a Reunión de Científicos sobre Cubiles de Hiena (y Otros Grandes Carnívoros) en los Yacimientos Arqueológicos de la Península Ibérica (392–402) (eds Arriaza, M. C. et al.) (Museo Arqueológico Regional, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Rosell, J. et al. A stop along the way: The role of Neanderthal groups at level III of teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain). Quaternaire 21, 139–154 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Rosell, J. et al. Cova del toll y cova de les Teixoneres (Moià, Barcelona). In Los cazadores recolectores del Pleistoceno y del Holoceno en Iberia y el estrecho de Gibraltar (eds. Sala, R., Carbonell, E., Bermudez de Castro, J. M. & Arsuaga, J. L.) 302–307 (2014).Zilio, L. et al. Examining Neanderthal and carnivore occupations of teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain) using archaeostratigraphic and intra-site spatial analysis. Sci. Rep. 11, 4339 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Tissoux, H. et al. Datation par les séries de l’uranium des occupations moustériennes de la grotte de teixoneres (Moia, Province de Barcelone, Espagne). Quaternaire 17, 27–33 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Talamo, S. et al. The radiocarbon approach to Neanderthals in a carnivore den site: A well-defined chronology for teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain). Radiocarbon 58, 247–265 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Álvarez-Lao, D. J., Rivals, F., Sánchez-Hernández, C., Blasco, R. & Rosell, J. Ungulates from teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain): Presence of cold-adapted elements in NE Iberia during the MIS 3. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 466, 287–302 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Rufà, A., Blasco, R., Rivals, F. & Rosell, J. Leporids as a potential resource for predators (hominins, mammalian carnivores, raptors): An example of mixed contribution from level III of teixoneres cave (MIS 3, Barcelona, Spain). C.R. Palevol. 13, 665–680 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Rufà, A., Blasco, R., Rivals, F. & Rosell, J. Who eats whom? Taphonomic analysis of the avian record from the middle paleolithic site of teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain). Quatern. Int. 421, 103–115 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Sánchez-Hernández, C., Rivals, F., Blasco, R. & Rosell, J. Short, but repeated Neanderthal visits to teixoneres cave (MIS 3, Barcelona, Spain): A combined analysis of tooth microwear patterns and seasonality. J. Archaeol. Sci. 49, 317–325 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Sánchez-Hernández, C., Rivals, F., Blasco, R. & Rosell, J. Tale of two timescales: Combining tooth wear methods with different temporal resolutions to detect seasonality of Palaeolithic hominin occupational patterns. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 6, 790–797 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Picin, A. et al. Neanderthal mobile toolkit in short-term occupations at teixoneres cave (Moia, Spain). J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 29, 102165 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Fernández-García, M. et al. New insights in Neanderthal palaeoecology using stable oxygen isotopes preserved in small mammals as palaeoclimatic tracers in teixoneres cave (Moià, northeastern Iberia). Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 14, 106 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Ochando, J. et al. Neanderthals in a highly diverse, mediterranean-Eurosiberian forest ecotone: The pleistocene pollen record of teixoneres cave, Northeastern Spain. Quatern. Sci. Rev. 241, 106429 (2020).
Google Scholar 
López-García, J. M. et al. A multidisciplinary approach to reconstructing the chronology and environment of Southwestern European Neanderthals: The contribution of teixoneres cave (Moià, Barcelona, Spain). Quatern. Sci. Rev. 43, 33–44 (2012).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sánchez-Hernández, C. et al. Dietary traits of ungulates in northeastern Iberian Peninsula: Did these Neanderthal preys show adaptive behaviour to local habitats during the middle palaeolithic?. Quatern. Int. 557, 47–62 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Fortelius, M. & Solounias, N. Functional characterization of ungulate molars using the abrasion-attrition wear gradient: A new method for reconstructing paleodiets. Am. Mus. Novit. 3301, 1–36 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Rivals, F., Solounias, N. & Mihlbachler, M. C. Evidence for geographic variation in the diets of late pleistocene and early holocene bison in North America, and differences from the diets of recent bison. Quatern. Res. 68, 338–346 (2007).ADS 

Google Scholar 
King, T., Andrews, P. & Boz, B. Effect of taphonomic processes on dental microwear. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 108, 359–373 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Uzunidis, A. et al. The impact of sediment abrasion on tooth microwear analysis: An experimental study. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 13, 134 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Kaiser, T. M. & Solounias, N. Extending the tooth mesowear method to extinct and extant equids. Geodiversitas 25, 321–345 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Xafis, A., Nagel, D. & Bastl, K. Which tooth to sample? A methodological study of the utility of premolar/non-carnassial teeth in the microwear analysis of mammals. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 487, 229–240 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Meadow, R. H. Early animal domestication in South Asia a first report of the faunal remains from mehrgarh Pakistan. In South Asian Archaeology (ed. Härtel, H.) 143–179 (Dietrich Reimer, Berlin, 1979).
Google Scholar 
Meadow, R. H. The use of size index scaling techniques for research on archaeozoological collections from the Middle East. In Historici Animalium ex. Ossibus Festschrift Angela Von Den Driesch Zum 65 Geburtstag (eds Becker, C. et al.) 285–300 (Verlag Marie Leidorf, Rahden, 1999).
Google Scholar 
Simpson, G. G. Large pleistocene felines of North America. Pleistocene felines North Am. 1136, 1–28 (1941).
Google Scholar 
Valli, A. M. F. & Guérin, C. L. gisement pléistocène supérieur de la grotte de Jaurens à Nespouls, Corrèze, France: Les cervidae (Mammalia, Artiodactyla). Publ. mus. Conflu. 1, 41–81 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Janis, C. M. The correlation between diet and dental wear in herbivorous mammals and its relationship to the determination of diets of extinct species. In Evolutionary Paleobiology of Behavior and Coevolution (ed. Boucot, A. J.) 241–259 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990).
Google Scholar 
Heintz, E. Les Cervidés villafranchiens de France et d’Espagne (Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Parise, 1970).
Google Scholar 
Magniez, P. Etude paléontologique des artiodactyles de la grotte Tournal (Bize-Minervois, Aude, France) étude taphonomique, archéozoologique et paléoécologique des grands Mammifères dans leur cadre biostratigraphique et paléoenvironnemental (Université de Perpignan, Perpignan, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Cucchi, T., Hulme-Beaman, A., Yuan, J. & Dobney, K. Early neolithic pig domestication at Jiahu, Henan Province, China: clues from molar shape analyses using geometric morphometric approaches. J. Archaeol. Sci. 38, 11–22 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Evin, A. et al. The long and winding road: Identifying pig domestication through molar size and shape. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 735–743 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Pelletier, M., Kotiaho, A., Niinimäki, S. & Salmi, A.-K. Identifying early stages of reindeer domestication in the archaeological record: A 3D morphological investigation on forelimb bones of modern populations from Fennoscandia. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 12, 169 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bignon, O., Baylac, M., Vigne, J.-D. & Eisenmann, V. Geometric morphometrics and the population diversity of late glacial horses in Western Europe (Equus caballus arcelini): Phylogeographic and anthropological implications. J. Archaeol. Sci. 32, 375–391 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Pelletier, M. Morphological diversity, evolution and biogeography of early pleistocene rabbits (Genus Oryctolagus). Palaeontology 64, 817–838 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Curran, S. C. Expanding ecomorphological methods: Geometric morphometric analysis of cervidae post-crania. J. Archaeol. Sci. 39, 1172–1182 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Curran, S. C. Exploring eucladoceros ecomorphology using geometric morphometrics. Anat. Rec. 298, 291–313 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Cucchi, T. et al. Taxonomic and phylogenetic signals in bovini cheek teeth: Towards new biosystematic markers to explore the history of wild and domestic cattle. J. Archaeol. Sci. 109, 104993 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Jeanjean, M. et al. Sorting the flock: Quantitative identification of sheep and goat from isolated third lower molars and mandibles through geometric morphometrics. J. Archaeol. Sci. 141, 105580 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Herrera, P. L. Différences entre les dents jugales deciduales du cerf elaphe (Cervus Elaphus L.) et du boeuf domestique (Bos Taurus L.). Rev. Paléobiol. 8, 77 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Pfeiffer, T. Die stellung von dama (Cervidae, Mammalia) im system plesiometacarpaler hirsche des pleistozäns. Phylogenetische reconstruktion-metrische analyse. Cour Forsch. Senckenberg. 211, 1–218 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Rohlf, F. J. TPSDig, version 2.17 (Stony Brook, NY: Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York, 2013).Bookstein, F. L. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).MATH 

Google Scholar 
Schlager, S. Morpho: Calculations and visualizations related to geometric morphometrics. (2013).Bookstein, F. L. Size and shape spaces for landmark data in two dimensions. Stat. Sci. 1, 181–222 (1986).MATH 

Google Scholar 
Kaiser, T. M. & Schulz, E. Tooth wear gradients in zebras as an environmental proxy—a pilot study. Mitt. Hambg. Zool. Mus. Inst. 103, 187–210 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Louys, J., Ditchfield, P., Meloro, C., Elton, S. & Bishop, L. C. Stable isotopes provide independent support for the use of mesowear variables for inferring diets in African antelopes. Proc. R. Soc. B. Biol. Sci. 279, 4441–4446 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Schulz, E. & Kaiser, T. M. Historical distribution, habitat requirements and feeding ecology of the genus equus (Perissodactyla). Mammal Rev. 43, 111–123 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ulbricht, A., Maul, L. C. & Schulz, E. Can mesowear analysis be applied to small mammals? A pilot-study on leporines and murines. Mamm. Biol. 80, 14–20 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Danowitz, M., Hou, S., Mihlbachler, M., Hastings, V. & Solounias, N. A combined-mesowear analysis of late miocene giraffids from North Chinese and Greek localities of the pikermian biome. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 449, 194–204 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Marom, N., Garfinkel, Y. & Bar-Oz, G. Times in between: A zooarchaeological analysis of ritual in Neolithic Sha’ar Hagolan. Quatern. Int. 464, 216–225 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Ackermans, N. L. et al. Mesowear represents a lifetime signal in sheep (Ovis aries) within a long-term feeding experiment. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 553, 109793 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Mihlbachler, M. C., Rivals, F., Solounias, N. & Semprebon, G. M. Dietary change and evolution of horses in North America. Science 331, 1178–1181 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Rivals, F., Rindel, D. & Belardi, J. B. Dietary ecology of extant guanaco (Lama guanicoe) from Southern Patagonia: Seasonal leaf browsing and its archaeological implications. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 2971–2980 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Rivals, F., Uzunidis, A., Sanz, M. & Daura, J. Faunal dietary response to the heinrich event 4 in southwestern Europe. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 473, 123–130 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Uzunidis, A., Rivals, F. & Brugal, J.-P. Relation between morphology and dietary traits in horse jugal upper teeth during the middle pleistocene in Southern France. Quat. Rev. Assoc. franc. l’étude Quat. 28, 303–312 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Uzunidis, A. Dental wear analyses of middle pleistocene site of Lunel-Viel (Hérault, France): Did equus and bos live in a wetland?. Quatern. Int. 557, 39–46 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Solounias, N. & Semprebon, G. Advances in the reconstruction of ungulate ecomorphology with application to early fossil equids. Am. Mus. Novit. 3366, 49 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Semprebon, G., Godfrey, L. R., Solounias, N., Sutherland, M. R. & Jungers, W. L. Can low-magnification stereomicroscopy reveal diet?. J. Hum. Evol. 47, 115–144 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Grine, F. E. Dental evidence for dietary differences in australopithecus and paranthropus: A quantitative analysis of permanent molar microwear. J. Hum. Evol. 15, 783–822 (1986).
Google Scholar 
Teaford, M. F. & Oyen, O. J. In vivo and in vitro turnover in dental microwear. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 80, 447–460 (1989).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Winkler, D. E. et al. The turnover of dental microwear texture: Testing the” last supper” effect in small mammals in a controlled feeding experiment. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 557, 109930 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Walker, A., Hoeck, H. N. & Perez, L. Microwear of mammalian teeth as an indicator of diet. Science 201, 908–910 (1978).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Janis, C. M. & Lister, A. M. The morphology of the lower fourth premolaras a taxonomic character in the ruminantia (Mammalia; Artiodactyla), and the systematic position of triceromeryx. J. Paleontol. 59, 405–410 (1985).
Google Scholar 
Croitor, R. Animal husbandry and hunting. Bone material use ineconomic activities. In Kravchenko, E. A. (eds.) From Bronze to Iron: Pale-oeconomy of the Habitants of the Inkerman Valley (According the Materialof Excavations in Uch-Bash and Saharnaya Golovka Settlements). 191–222 (Institute of Archaeology of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 2016).Geist, V. & Bayer, M. Sexual dimorphism in the cervidae and its relation to habitat. J. Zool. 214, 45–53 (1988).
Google Scholar 
Fichant, R. Le cerf: Biologie, comportement, gestion (Gerfaut Editions, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Arellano-Moullé, A. Les cervidés des niveaux moustériens de la grotte du Prince (Grimaldi, Vintimille, Italie) Etude paléontologique. Bull. Mus. Anthropol. Préhist. Monaco 39, 53–58 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Brugal, J. .-P. . La. faune des grands mammifères de l’abri des Canalettes – matériel 1980–1986. In L’abri des Canalettes Un habitat moustérien sur les grands Causses Nant Aveyron, 89–137 (ed. Meignen, L.) (CNRS Éditions, Paris, 1993).
Google Scholar 
La Gerber, J. P. faune des grands mammifères du Würm ancien dans le sud-est de la France (Université de Provence, Marseille, 1973).
Google Scholar 
Alonso, D. A. Analisis paleobiologico de los ungulados del pleistoceno superior de la meseta norte (Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, 2015).
Google Scholar 
Sanchez, B. La fauna de mamíferos del pleistoceno superior del Abric Romani (Capellades, Barcelona). Adas de Paleontol. 331–347 (1989).Clot, A. Le chevreuil, Capreolus capreolus (L.) (Ceervidae, Artiodactyla) dans le pléistocène de Ge$$rde (H.-P.) et des pyrénées. Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Toulouse 125, 83–86 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Vanpé, C. Mating systems and sexual selection in ungulates. New insights from a territorial species with low sexual size dimorphism: the European roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). (Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse III and Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2007).Horcajada-Sánchez, F. & Barja, I. Local ecotypes of roe deer populations (Capreolus capreolus L.) in relation to morphometric features and fur colouration in the centre of the Iberian Peninsula. Pol. J Ecol. 64, 113–124 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Semprebon, G. M., Sise, P. J. & Coombs, M. C. Potential bark and fruit browsing as revealed by Stereomicrowear analysis of the peculiar clawed herbivores known as Chalicotheres (Perissodactyla, Chalicotherioidea). J. Mammal. Evol. 18, 33–55 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Rivals, F. et al. Palaeoecology of the mammoth steppe fauna from the late pleistocene of the North Sea and Alaska: Separating species preferences from geographic influence in paleoecological dental wear analysis. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 286, 42–54 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Rivals, F., Takatsuki, S., Albert, R. M. & Macià, L. Bamboo feeding and tooth wear of three sika deer (Cervus nippon) populations from northern Japan. J. Mammal. 95, 1043–1053 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Lister, A. M. Evolutionary and ecological origins of British deer. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. Sect. B. Biol. Sci. 82, 205–229 (1984).
Google Scholar 
Coulson, T., Guinness, F., Pemberton, J. & Clutton-Brock, T. The demographic consequences of releasing a population of red deer from culling. Ecology 85, 411–422 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Nussey, D. H., Clutton-Brock, T. H., Elston, D. A., Albon, S. D. & Kruuk, L. E. B. Phenotypic plasticity in a maternal trait in red deer. J. Anim. Ecol. 74, 387–396 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Frevert, W. Rominten (BLV Bayerischer Landwirtschaftsverlag, 1977).
Google Scholar 
Clutton-Brock, T. H. & Albon, S. D. Winter mortality in red deer (Cervus elaphus). J. Zool. 198, 515–519 (1982).
Google Scholar 
Loison, A. & Langvatn, R. Short- and long-term effects of winter and spring weather on growth and survival of red deer in Norway. Oecologia 116, 489–500 (1998).PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Torres-Porras, J., Carranza, J. & Pérez-González, J. Combined effects of drought and density on body and antler size of male iberian red deer cervus elaphus hispanicus: Climate change implications. Wildl. Biol. 15, 213–221 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Bugalho, M. N., Milne, J. A. & Racey, P. A. The foraging ecology of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in a mediterranean environment: Is a larger body size advantageous?. J. Zool. 255, 285–289 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Köhler, M. Skeleton and habitat of recent and fossil ruminants (F. Pfeil, Germany, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Boessneck, J. Zur grosse des mitteleuropaischen Rehes Capreolus capreolus L. in alluvial-vorgeschichtlicher und friiher historischer zeit. Z. f. Siiugetierkunde 21, 121–131 (1958).
Google Scholar 
Jensen, P. Body size trends of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) from danish mesolithic sites. J. Dan. Archaeol. 10, 51–58 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Braza, F., San José, C., Aragon, S. & Delibes, J. R. El corzo andaluz. (Junta de Andalucía, 1994).Fandos, P. Skull biometry of spanish roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). Folia Zool. 43, 11–20 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Costa, L. First data on the size of north-Iberian roe bucks (Capreolus capreolus). Mammalia 59, 447–451 (1995).
Google Scholar 
Klein, D. R. & Strandgaard, H. Factors affecting growth and body size of roe deer. J. Wildl. Manag. 36, 64–79 (1972).
Google Scholar  More

Photosynthetic pigmentsBased on the analysis of variance, data of Photosynthetic pigments as presented in Table 1 indicate that photosynthetic pigments as chlorophyll a (Chl. a) had non-significant for three Canola genotypes AD201 (G1), Topaz (G2) and SemuDNK 234/84 (G3), but chlorophyll b (Chl. b) and chlorophyll a/b ratio (Chl. a/b) had significant difference for three genotypes. Chl. a, Chl. b and Chl. a/b were positively responded to different N application i.e. without nitrogen fertilization (control F0), 95 kg N ha−1 (F1), 120 kg N ha−1 (F2) and 142 kg N ha−1 (F3) (without yeast); and integrated between nitrogen fertilization and yeast extract (YE) treatments as follows: 95 kg N ha−1 + YE (F4), 120 kg N ha−1 + YE (F5) and 142 kg N ha−1 (F6) (with yeast), data indicated that F5 and F6 gave the highest values of Chl. a and Chl. a/b ratio and lowest values of Chl. b Table 1. Interaction data showed that three Canola genotypes that were fertilized with N without yeast or with yeast had a slight difference with statistically significant in chl. a. The highest values of Chl. an obtained by G2 under F5 treatment followed by G1 under F6 treatments. In respect to Chl. a/b ratio, statistical analysis showed that Interaction between Canola genotypes treated with N applications without or with yeast had a significant difference whereas the highest values were recorded when Canola genotypes G3 and G2 fertilized with F6 and F5 with slight differences. While the interaction was significant between N treatments and Canola genotypes for Chl. b. and Canola genotype (G1) gave the highest value when treated with F1. Generally, F6 and F5 improve the contents of chl. a and chl. a/b ratio for three Canola genotypes Table 1. Chl. contents were increased in plants grown under middle and high N conditions as compared with plants grown under low N conditions, which significantly affected photochemical processes20. N is a fundamental element for leaf plants, insufficient N supply lead to decreased photosynthetic rate in plants21, this occurs to many factors such as a decrease in pigment degradation22, reduction in stomatal conductance23 and a decline in the light and dark reaction of photosynthesis. Canola is a nitrophilous plant, wherein a high concentration of NO3 in the culture media results in higher Chl. contents in the plant leave compared with controls20. The Chl. a/b ratio can be a valuable indicator of N element within a leaf because this ratio must be positively related to the ratio of PSII cores to light-harvesting chlorophyll-protein complex (LHCII)24. LHCII contains the majority of Chl. b, consequently it has a lower Chl a/b ratio than other Chl. binding proteins associated with PSII25. Thus, Chl. a/b ratios should increase with decreasing N availability, especially under high light conditions26, the Chl. a/b ratio and the ratio of PSII to Chl. are independent of N availability for spinach27, and lower Chl. a/b ratios were noticed when plants were subjected to low N28, while Kitajima and Hogan29 revealed that the Chl. a/b ratio increased when Chl. content decreased in response to N restriction in photosynthetic cotyledons in leaves of seedlings of four tropical woody species in the Bignoniaceae, and Bungard et al.30 demonstrated that there is a tiny response in Chl. a/b ratios to light or N. The yeast includes bio-regulators i.e. plant growth regulators and endogenous plant hormones, which enhance photosynthesis, also it produces 5-Aminolevulinic acid which is vital to tetrapyrrole biosynthesis and biochemical processes in plants, including heme and Chl. biosynthesis25.Table 1 Photosynthetic pigments for the three Canola genotypes under different N applications without and with yeast extract.Full size tableYield and its attributesComparing of mean data through the Duncan Multiple Range Test in the probability level of 5%, data showed significant differences among the Canola genotypes for the highest plant (cm), branches number/plant, and pods number/plant. On contrary, there wasn’t a significant difference for seed number/pods, seed yield (t ha−1), biological yield (t ha−1), and harvest index, wherein G2 gave the highest value for the highest plant (cm). In the same trend, G2 gave the highest values of branches No./plant and pods No./plant followed by G3 for the previous two treats Table 2. All examined N without or with yeast caused a significant difference in yield and its attributes, wherein F6 positively affected on abovementioned traits and gave the highest values on the highest plant (cm), branches No./plant, pods No./plant, seed No./pods, seed yield (t ha−1), and harvest index. While the highest values of biological yield (t ha−1) were obtained with F3, F6, and F5, respectively Table 2.Table 2 Growth, yield and its attributes for the three Canola genotypes under different N applications without and with yeast extract.Full size tableThe interaction between the Canola genotype and different N rates without or with yeast extract as shown in Table 2, demonstrated a significant difference. Data showed that the highest values of plant height and pods No./plant were recorded by G2 under F6 and the highest values of branches No./plant, seed No./pods, and seed yield (t ha−1) got by G3 and G2 under F6. There was a slight difference with statistically significant biological yield (t ha−1) and highest values established by G1 under F3 and F6; and G2 and G3 under F3, F5, and F6 respectively; and the highest values of harvest index recorded by G1, G2 and G3. under F6. Generally, data proved that 142 kg N/ h−1 + YE (F6) was enhanced the yield and its components of three Canola genotypes i.e. AD201 (G1), Topaz (G2), and SemuDNK 234/84 (G3). Many researchers reported that there are significant differences among Canola varieties and growth and yield traits are significantly increased by increasing N rates11. Increasing N fertilizer rates significantly increased most of the yield and its components31, N enhances metabolites synthesized by the plant which leads to more transformation of photosynthesis to reproductive parts, and induces different physiological mechanisms to access the nutrient32. Yeast extract as bio-fertilizer had a significant and positive effect on plant height and yield traits of Canola. The role of bread yeast in increasing the growth and yield traits; may be due to the content of yeast to many important nutrients elements i.e. N, Mg, Ca, Zn, Cu, and Fe, and the production of some growth regulators such as Auxin and Gibberellin and cytokinin which is necessary for plant biological processers especially photosynthesis and cell division and elongation33. Also, Yeast extract had stimulatory effects on cell division and enlargement, protein and nucleic acid synthesis, and chlorophyll formation34, in addition to its content of cryoprotective agent, i.e. sugars, protein, amino acids, and also several vitamins35. Consequently, it improves growth, flowering, and fruit set and formation and increases yield34.Correlation of Canola seed yield and chlorophyll a/b ratioPartial correlation coefficients of Canola seed yield and Chl. a/b ratio is given in Fig. 1. This result showed that seed yield was positively correlated with Chl. a/b ratio when the amount of N applied without or with yeast extract is increased. Chl. a/b ratio can be an important indicator of N within a leaf, this ratio must be positively related to photosynthesis and biological processers which reflect on seed yield.Figure 1Correlation of Canola seed yield (t/h) and chlorophyll a/b ratio as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract.Full size imageCorrelation of Canola seed yield and its attributesCorrelations of seed yield and yield components of Canola are a function of the plant height, number of branches/plant, number of pods/plant, and number of seeds/pod as shown in Fig. 2a–d. These results proved that grain yield was strongly positively correlated with some of the abovementioned traits when N fertilization increased without or with yeast extract. Sufficient N contributes to enhance physiological processes, improves growth, flowering, seed formation, and the seed yield finally.Figure 2(a) Correlation of Canola seed yield (t/h) and plant height (cm) as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract, (b) Correlation of Canola seed yield (t/h) and branch No/plant as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract, (c) Correlation of Canola seed yield (t/h) and pods No/ plant as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract, and (d) Correlation of Canola seed yield (t/h) and seeds No/ pod as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract.Full size imageChemical propertiesRegarding results of the oil yield (t ha−1), seed oil %, protein %, N % in seed, and N% in straw as presented in Table 3, data showed significant differences among three Canola genotypes; AD201 (G1), Topaz (G2) and SemuDNK 234/84 (G3), excepted oil yield had non-significant difference. G1 was surpassed in oil %; G2, G3 surpassed in protein % and N % in seed, and G3 surpassed in N% in straw. Different N fertilization applies without or with yeast extract had a significant effect on the abovementioned traits, wherein F6 treatment gave the highest oil yield, protein %, N % in seed, and N% in straw, while seed oil % significantly increased with F1 and F4 treatments. There was significant interaction concerning with abovementioned traits, Table 3, as well as the highest values of seed oil yield (t ha−1), protein % in seeds, and nitrogen % in seeds were obtained with G1, G2, and G3 when treated with F6. Wherein the highest values of oil % were obtained by G1 under F1 and F4 treatments. Concerning N% in straw was increased by increasing the rate of N fertilizer application and the highest value was recorded by adding F6 to G336. Seed oil percentage was decreased by increasing nitrogen rates; the effect of interaction between Canola cultivars and nitrogen fertilization treatments was significant on seed oil. % High rates of N led to decreases in seed oil % and increase in protein concentrations in Canola seed37, the increase in seed protein % because N is an integral part of protein and the protein of Canola.Table 3 Effect of different N applications without and with yeast extract on oil yield, oil %, protein %, N % in seed and N% in straw for the three Canola genotypes.Full size tableCorrelation of Canola seed yield and seed oil percentageA strong negative correlation was detected between seed oil percentage as shown in Fig. 3. The result indicates that seed oil percentage decreases with increasing in different N fertilization rates without or with yeast extract. That’s a negative correlation between seed yield and seed oil %; it might be due to N application which results in delaying maturity leading to poor seed filling and a greater proportion of green seed38.Figure 3Correlation of Canola seed yield (t h−1) and oil % as affected by different nitrogen rates without and with yeast extract.Full size imagePhysico-chemical properties of Canola oilThe effects of different N application rates without or with yeast extract on Canola genotypes on physico-chemical properties i.e. Acid value (mg g−1), saponification number (mg g−1) and peroxide value (mg kg−1) were shown in Table 4. Data of chemical properties of Canola oil showed significant differences among Canola genotypes, the highest acid value and peroxide value were obtained from G2 followed by G1 and G3, respectively, while the highest saponification number was obtained by G3 followed by G1 and G2, respectively.Table 4 Oil properties for three Canola genotypes under different N applications without and with yeast extract.Full size tableData had significant differences among different N application rates without or with yeast extract, by increasing the N rated from F0 to F6 caused decreases in Acid value, Saponification number, and peroxide value. Also, data showed a significant interaction between Canola genotypes and different N application rates without or with yeast extract for all abovementioned traits, wherein the highest values of saponification number were obtained by G1 and G3 under F0 treatment. In addition, the highest values of peroxide value and the acid value were obtained by G2 with F0. The acid value is a physicochemical indicator38, wherein oils which have higher acid value posse poor quality39, on another hand, Low acid value of Canola genotype shows their higher oil quality. The peroxide value varied between 7.1 and 9.06 meq. O2/kg indicates that the tested vegetable oils are fresh, and the lowest initial peroxide value is suitable for consumption40. High saponification value indicated that Canola oil possesses normal triglycerides and may be useful in the production of liquid soap and shampoo41. Saponification number was significantly different among genotypes and a higher nitrogen rate resulted in an increase in the unsaponifiable matter and led to a decrease in oil acid value and saponification value42.Fatty acids composition percentages in Canola oilThe main values of fatty acids composition percentages in Canola oil were determined and calculated in the second season Table 5. Gas–liquid chromatographic analysis showed that, saturated fatty acids (Palmitic, 16:0, Stearic, 18:0, Arachidic, 20:0, and Behenic, 22:0) represent about 9.1 of the total fatty acids. Palmitic was the dominant acid among the saturated ones. In respect of unsaturated fatty acids i.e., Oleic acid (18:1), Linoleic (18:2), Linolenic (18:3), and Erucic (22:1), they all represent about 90.9% of total fatty acids. Therefore, Oleic acid (18:1) was the major fatty acid in Canola oil (59.43%) followed by Linoleic (20.80%) and Linolenic (9.02%). Erucic acid was less than 2%.Table 5 Saturated and unsaturated fatty acids (%) in seeds of the three Canola genotypes and different N applications without and with yeast extract.Full size tableData in Table 5, showed slight differences in saturated fatty acids between Canola varieties. AD201(G1) variety contained more amount of Palmitic (4.78%) and Stearic (1.52%) acids followed by Topaz (G2) for Palmitic and SemuDNK 234/84 (V3) for Stearic. However, Behenic acid (1.20%) was higher in G3 than G2 (1.17%), while G2 was the highest in Arachidic acid than G3 variety. These results are in line with those obtained by El Habbasha et al.43. They reported that AD 201, Silvo, and Topas (G2) were different in their oil contents of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids. Canola varieties were also slightly differed in their content of the unsaturated fatty acids Table 5, G3 variety contained more amounts of Oleic (60.36%) acid followed by the G2 variety. G1 recorded the lowest amount of Oleic acid (58.36%) in comparison with the other two varieties. On the other hand, G1 showed a high increment in Linoleic and Linolenic acids followed by G3 for Linoleic and Linolenic acids. The second oil quality breeding objective is to reduce the percentage of Linolenic acid from the percent 8–10% to less than 3% while maintaining or increasing the level of Linoleic acid44. Lower Linolenic acid is desired to improve the storage characteristics of the oil, while higher Linolenic acid content may be nutritionally desirable. Similar observations were reported by Ref.45. Topaz variety recorded the highest value for Erucic acid (1.77%) followed by AD201 variety, whereas Semu DNK gave the lowest value (1.45%). The increase in Erucic acid content in the Topaz variety may be due to the decrease in Oleic acid content46. Stated that the concentrations of Oleic and Erucic acids were negatively correlated and a high Oleic acid concentration ( > 50%) was always associated with a low Erucic acid concentration ( More

Changes of straw degradation characteristics at different culture stagesCorn straw degradation ratioCorn straw weight loss in M44 at F1 reached 35.90% at 15 ℃ for 21 days, which was greater than that at F5, F8, and F11 by 2.33%, 3.01%, and 3.35%, respectively. There were no significant differences between F8 and F11(Fig. 1).Figure 1Corn straw degradation ratio was measured at different culture stages. The same small letter means there was no significant difference, and different small letters indicate significant differences at p  More

Selection of environmental-biotic events to be studiedIn global warming events associated with mass extinctions, the current environmental changes are similar to those recorded during the end-Ordovician, end-Guadalupian, and end-Permian mass extinctions. Therefore, I analyzed global surface temperature anomalies, mercury pollution concentrations, and deforestation percentages in these three mass extinctions and in the current crisis. The asteroid impact at the K–Pg boundary and nuclear war cause the formation of stratospheric soot aerosols distributed globally, thus inducing sunlight reductions and global cooling (impact winter and nuclear winter). I also analyzed stratospheric soot aerosols as a possible cause of future extinctions.Most likely case and worst caseThe most likely case corresponds to the reduction of CO2 emissions resulting from human conduct, the protection of forests, and the introduction of anti-pollution measures in the future under the Paris Agreement on Climate change and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The worst case corresponds to the scenario in which humans fail to stop increasing global surface temperatures, pollution, and deforestation until 2100–2200 CE.I use the average of the RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 cases in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)8 as the most likely case of GHG emissions, representing the middle of the four potential GHG emissions cases (RCP2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5) in Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC8, approximately corresponding to the middle of SSP2-4.5 and SSP3-7.0 in Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC9. The timing of decreased global GHG emissions is 2060–2080 CE. Therefore, I use the average GHG emissions and global surface temperature anomalies of the RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 cases as the most likely values and those of the RCP8.5 case as the worst-case scenario, marked by stopping GHG emissions from 2090 to 2100 CE8,9, as this case corresponds to the highest GHG emissions8,9.Surface temperature anomaly, environment, and extinction magnitude dataData on surface temperature anomalies and extinction percentages are from Kaiho4. Changes in industrial GHG emissions and global surface temperature anomalies are sourced from the Fifth and Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC8,9.Pollution can be represented by mercury concentrations measured in sedimentary rocks recording mass extinctions8 and in recent sediments deposited in seas and lakes25,26 because mercury is toxic to plants and animals and because its sources include volcanic eruptions, meteorite impacts, and the combustion of fossil fuels10,33, which are common sources of pollutants, and because it can be commonly measured from sedimentary rocks recording mass extinctions33. The mercury concentration is related to the CO2 emission amount during global warming because of the common sources of mercury and CO2 (volcanism and fossil fuel combustion influencing global warming). Thus, the future mercury concentrations are estimated based on the CO2 emission amounts estimated by the IPCC8,9. Since mercury and the other pollutants mainly come from oil, coal, and vegetation33, the amount of mercury released should change in parallel with industrial CO2 emissions because there is a good correlation between mercury and CO2 emissions11.Deforestation occurs by the expansion of agricultural areas and urban areas, which are strongly related to human populations13,28. Thus, future deforestation percentages are estimated based on estimated future population data27 (Supplementary Table S2). The severity of deforestation in each event is expressed by the occupancy % of the deforested area in the pre-event forest area in (i) the Permian–Triassic transition marked by the largest mass extinction based on plant fossil records24 and (ii) 2005–2015 CE as a representative of the Anthropocene epoch12,13,28 based on the actual forest area relative to the pre-agriculture phase before 4000 BP. Deforestation is related to the human population because agriculture and urbanization have caused deforestation13,28. I estimate the past and future deforestation percentage using human population data in the past and future21 based on the parallel growth of the human population and deforestation13,28.Amount of stratospheric soot was calculated using a method of Kaiho and Oshima34 (Supplementary Table S1). I obtained global surface temperature anomaly caused by stratospheric soot using Fig. 5 of Kaiho and Oshima34.I then use those data to estimate the future extinction magnitude based on the assumption that the Earth and contemporary life at the time of each crisis are more or less mutually comparable throughout time and to the present day.I estimate the magnitude of the species animal extinction crisis between 2000 and 2500 CE using Figs. 1, 2 and Supplementary Tables S1 and S2 in each cause under the most likely case and worst case under three nuclear war scenarios (zero, minor, and major; Fig. 2d)15 in the PETM and mass extinction cases, respectively (Supplementary Tables S3, S4; Fig. 3). Finally, I estimate the magnitude of current animal extinction crisis by the four causes as an average of the species extinction magnitude by the four causes in Fig. 3. I use two different contribution rates of temperature anomalies, pollution, deforestation, and stratospheric soot by nuclear wars, 1:0.2:0.1:1 for marine animals and 1:0.5:1:1 for terrestrial tetrapods (different contribution case considering lower influence of pollution and deforestation to marine animals rather than terrestrial animals) and 1:1:1:1 for marine animals and 1:1:1:1 for terrestrial tetrapods (equal contribution case considering high influence of pollution and deforestation to marine animals via rain and soil erosion) (Supplementary Tables S5–S9). These contribution rates are estimated as end-members to show ranges of animal species extinction magnitude (%). More

Madhusudan Katti says ecology would benefit from including perspectives from all of Earth’s inhabitants.Credit: Marc Hall

Decolonizing science

Science is steeped in injustice and exploitation. Scientific insights from marginalized people have been erased, natural history specimens have been taken without consent and genetics data have been manipulated to back eugenics movements. Without acknowledgement and redress of this legacy, many people from minority ethnic groups have little trust in science and certainly don’t feel welcome in academia — an ongoing barrier to the levels of diversity that many universities claim to pursue.
In the next of a short series of articles about decolonizing the biosciences, Madhusudan Katti suggests five shifts that ecologists need to make to unravel the effects of colonization on their field. Katti, an evolutionary ecologist at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, would also like to see stronger inclusion of uncredentialed experts and Indigenous communities in research.

Last year, my colleagues and I wrote a paper highlighting five shifts that would help to decolonize ecology (C. H. Trisos et al. Nature Ecol. Evol. 5, 1205–1212; 2021). Ecologists need to improve how they incorporate varied perspectives, approaches and interpretations from the diverse peoples inhabiting Earth’s natural environments. The five shifts are: the individual need to decolonize one’s mind; understand the history of colonization and how it shaped Western ecology; facilitate access to and dissemination of data; recognize diverse scientific expertise; and establish inclusive research groups. Although it can be difficult to make reforms given how resistant institutions are to change, we are optimistic because we have received invitations to speak on these issues. People are ready for these conversations.
Decolonizing science toolkit
My colleagues and I developed a workshop around the five shifts. We have conducted the workshop at my institution, and at the annual conference of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology. For each of the shifts, I have participants brainstorm and write down challenges and solutions that might lead to progress in these areas for their own research departments or institutions. We address them, shuffle groups and suggest policy changes and future action.Some organizations are already moving forward with some low-hanging fruit, such as making data and published results more accessible. However, open-access publishing models put an even greater burden of publication costs on authors and perpetuate inequalities, because early-career researchers and those in the global south often can’t afford them.The most contentious area tends to be the reluctance of academia to accept non-credentialed expertise such as traditional knowledge. Universities are in the business of giving out credentials in the form of degrees. If academia no longer requires a PhD, that can be a challenge to that model. There are also few, if any, incentives or rewards to spend time working towards decolonizing academia, even though it takes time and effort away from furthering individual careers.As an Indian American, I would like to see institutions expand antiracism conversations rather than introduce new checklists of things to do. For example, at annual meetings, it would be great to see scientific societies make more connections with the Indigenous communities where we work and invite them to share their perspectives.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity. More

We used a hierarchical Bayesian modeling approach to evaluate the relationship between the spring phenology of tree and wildflower species and various climate drivers (see Methods). Following model selection, our final model structure included fixed effects of average spring (March–April) temperature and elevation, as well as species-level random effects. We show continental distributions of spring temperature values in Fig. 1b (means and standard deviations are listed in Table S2). We report estimates for spring temperature sensitivities from the final model structure in the main text. Parameter estimates for elevation sensitivities as well as the model performance of other potential drivers and combinations of drivers are reported in Tables S3 and S4. An extended discussion of model assumptions and limitations is included in the Supplementary Information.Sensitivity differences by strataTree leaf out phenology (LOD) was substantially more sensitive to average spring temperature in North America (mean = −3.62 days °C−1; 95% credible interval (CI) = [−3.76, −3.49]) than in Europe (mean = −2.79; CI = [−3.27, −2.30]) and Asia (mean = −2.62; CI = [−2.97, −2.26]; Fig. 2). These values are consistent with previously reported phenological sensitivities in North America7 (−5.5 to −3.3 days °C−1) and Europe8 (−4.1 to −3.0 days °C−1), as the credible intervals from our results overlap with the reported credible intervals of prior studies. However, the Asian LOD sensitivity was less sensitive than previously reported27 (−3.50 to −3.03 days °C−1), potentially owing to differences in species selection28 or model structure. Previously reported sensitivities were determined in separate studies using either observational data7,8 or long-term observation-based weather station data27. The general consistency between our findings suggests that phenology data from herbarium collections are good indicators of patterns in natural systems29,30,31, a point supported by a recent study of phenological sensitivity derived from herbaria and from observed citizen science data32. These herbarium-based results provide evidence that phenological sensitivity differs across the temperate forest biome (but see ref. 33 for evidence of differences in response to warming and chilling accumulation). To our knowledge, our study is the first to contrast overstory and understory phenology across multiple continents and, therefore, to find differences in phenological sensitivity between trees and forest wildflowers across continents. We recommend future studies explore these differences using alternative approaches and methodologies that focus on the physiological basis for and mechanisms that underlie these patterns.Fig. 2: Posterior estimated means and 95% credible intervals for spring temperature sensitivity.Shapes represent parameter estimates for wildflower First Flower Date (FFD, blue circles; n = 1418, 618, and 1060 for Asia, Europe, and North America, respectively) and canopy tree Leaf Out Date (LOD, yellow triangles; n = 899, 532, and 995, for Asia, Europe, and North America, respectively). Estimates are considered different from 0 if credible intervals do not overlap the dashed 0 line and are considered different from each other if credible intervals do not overlap.Full size imageIn contrast to trees, wildflower sensitivity to spring temperature was similar across all three continents and exhibited no strong differences (i.e., overlap in 95% Bayesian credible intervals) among continents (means and 95% credible intervals in brackets: North America = −3.14, [−3.28, −3.00]; Europe = −3.02, [−3.48, −2.56]; Asia = −3.12, [−3.36, −2.86]; Fig. 2). These values are also generally consistent with those reported elsewhere in the literature (i.e., 95% credible intervals overlap with those reported in other studies; −2.2, [−3.7, −0.76] days °C−1 in North America7 and −3.6, [−4.04, −3.18] days °C−1 in Europe9), although we are unaware of any studies that have estimated phenological sensitivity for Asian forest wildflowers in days °C−1. Ge et al.3 report herbaceous plant sensitivity of −5.71 days per decade in Asia (±7.90 standard deviation; based primarily on long-term observational data), which appears to be roughly consistent with our model results, but the difference in units makes this more speculative than the other comparisons. Discrepancies in mean responses between this study and others may be due in part to different types of data (herbarium specimens versus field observations) and to choice in focal taxa, as temperature sensitivity has been shown to vary widely across taxa28.Particularly noticeable in our results was that r2 coefficients of predicted versus observed phenology were much higher in North America (0.70 and 0.76 for wildflower and tree models, respectively) compared to Asian (0.40 and 0.44, respectively) and European models (0.41 and 0.25, respectively). This difference in model performance could be due to the higher interannual variability of spring temperatures in North America33, leading to greater selective pressure for strong sensitivity to spring temperatures in North American plants. This difference could explain why North American species exhibit higher correlation of phenology with average spring temperatures (Table S4). Alternatively, European and Asian species may have stronger phenological responses to alternative spring forcing windows, winter chilling temperatures, or photoperiod, relative to the March–April temperature period used in this study (see Methods). We think the latter explanation is unlikely, given the strong correlations of phenology with spring temperature across all continents (see Supplementary Information – Justification for March–April Temperature Window).Herbarium-based phenological models may be improved by accounting for spatial autocorrelation within the dataset. For example, Willems et al.9 found that including spatial autocorrelation significantly improved predictability of European herbaceous flowering phenology, even when accounting for multiple drivers of spring phenology. We followed a similar approach as their study and found similar improvements in model performance with the addition of spatial autocorrelation (Tables S3–S4) that had substantial positive effects on r2 values of Asian and European models. However, spatial distributions of specimens differed substantially among continents (see Figs. S2–S4), and these differences could lead to artifacts that make results unreliable to interpret (see Supplementary Information). Therefore, we focus here on results for models without spatial autocorrelation while acknowledging that spatial aggregation of herbarium specimens in Europe and Asia may be partially responsible for the relatively lower r2 values. We encourage other researchers to explore this question further both with our data set and other datasets.Climate change and spring light windowsThe relative difference between wildflower and tree sensitivity varied substantially among continents, with wildflowers being approximately equally as sensitive to spring temperature as trees in Asia and Europe but substantially less sensitive (i.e., 95% BCI do not overlap) than trees in North America (Fig. 2). Importantly, these differences were driven by changes in tree phenological sensitivities among continents and resulted in different expectations for spring light window duration (i.e., the difference in time between estimated wildflower flowering date and canopy tree leaf out date) on different continents under current climate conditions (Fig. 3), based on modeled leaf out and flowering under a climate scenario derived from average climate conditions from 2009–2018 (Fig. S5).Fig. 3: Current estimated phenological escape duration in northern temperate deciduous forests.Estimated mean difference between wildflower First Flower Date (FFD) and canopy tree Leaf Out Date (LOD) (in days) under current climate conditions (averaged from 2009–2018, see methods) in a Asia, b Europe, and c North America. Negative values indicate tree LOD is estimated to occur before wildflower FFD. Estimations were cropped by the estimated area of broadleaf and mixed-broadleaf forest (see methods). Dark gray regions indicate areas where the consensus land classification is More

Root morphological traitsThe wild-type parent ISR42-8 produced longer root length (RL) than the modern cultivar parent Golf and tested lines (Table S2, Fig. 1A.h,A.f [h = hydroponic; f = field]). The tested lines of the two evolving barley populations displayed significant variations under hydroponic conditions. Barley lines evolved under OCS had on average 3484 mm longer roots compared to CCS under hydroponic treatment (Fig. 1A.h, Table 2). Complementary results under field conditions show as well higher RL for the OCS lines, even though the variance was significantly less pronounced (Fig. 1A.f). In addition, a less evident variance was observed in the field within both groups compared to the hydroponic (Fig. 1A.d). Across both experimental setups, the observed range of RL was higher in the OCS lines [Standard deviation (SD)OCS = 883, SDCCS = 597] (Table 2).Figure 1Significantly variant root morphological phenotypes. Boxplots illustrate the overall distribution of observed data points for the parents Golf and ISR 42-8 as well as for the conventional (CCS) and organic (OCS) lines. Density plots highlight the overall distribution of organic and conventional adapted lines. (A)—Root length (RL)—the sum of all roots harvested in millimeters (mm), illustrated for all four groups. (A.h)—root length measured in the hydroponic experiment; (A.f)—field experiment; A.d—distribution histogram for root length in both field and hydroponic experiment for CCS and OCS adapted lines. (B)—the ratio of root length to volume (L/V). Data available for hydroponics (B.h), field (B.f), and distribution of the ratio of root length to volume illustrated in B.d. (C.f)—Root mass density (RMD) from the field; (D.f)—Root angle (RA) from the field, distribution of the root angle illustrated in (D.d); (E.f)—root tip per plant count from the field, corresponding histogram visualized in (E.d). (F.f)—root fork per plant count from the field.Full size imageTable 2 Comparison of organic and conventional population root phenotypes under field and hydroponic evaluation.Full size tableThe root length to volume (L/V) is an important indicator of the soil volume that can be explored by the roots. Under hydroponics conditions, variations were found for L/V between the parental genotypes as well as between the OCS and CCS populations (Tables 2 & S3). The organic lines were characterized by a significantly higher L/V, indicating a much more distinct exploration of the soil by these lines (Fig. 1B.h,B.f). In comparison to field, highest diversity in L/V was found under hydroponic experiments within both OCS and CCS populations (Fig. 1B.d).The root mass density (RMD) is the ratio of root volume for a given root mass and is a key indicator of root thickness. Although significant variations existed between ISR42-8 and Golf under hydroponics conditions, such significant variations were not found between the OCS and CCS groups (P = 0.09) (Fig. 1C.f and Tables 2 and S3).The root angle (RA) measurements were only performed under field conditions since plants grown under hydroponics conditions were placed in uniform growing vessels and the direction of root growth is restricted by tubes. Significant variation was observed for the RA between the two parental lines, which was also reflected in the CCS and OCS lines (Fig. 1D.f). ISR42-8 was characterized by an 11.5° average narrower RA than Golf (Table S3). The RA was 4.1° bigger in the OCS compared to the CCS population (P = 0.005) (Table 2). However, a higher diversity in RA was observed in the OCS compared to the CCS lines (Fig. 1D.d, Table 2).In addition to the RA, the number of root tips and forks was measured under field conditions only. Both tips and forks indicate a similar pattern, where the OCS lines produced on average more for both PForks = 0.014, PTips = 0.0041 (Fig. 1E.f,F.f). After applying a P-adjustment, the number of forks count was no longer significantly different between OCS and CCS (PForks = 0.07, Table 2). Complementary, ISR 42-8 was observed to produce more tips and forks than Golf, which remained highly significant even after probability adjustment (Fig. 1E.f,F.f, Table S3). The distribution and the standard deviation of observed phenotypes highlight once more the fact that the OCS lines tend to have a higher variation (Fig. 1E.d, Table 2). Similarly, a significant increasing trend was recorded in root surface area (RSA) and root average diameter (RAD) by ISR42-8 as compared to Golf under hydroponics (Table S3). Contrasting to the parental genotypes, no variation was observed between OCS and CCS lines for RSA (Table 2).Root anatomical traitsWithin the observed anatomical traits, four were considered due to their relevance and variation between the systems. In both hydroponic and field experiments, significant variations were observed for the late metaxylem number (LMXN) between the parental lines as well as OCS and CCS lines (Tables 2 & S3, Fig. 2A.h,A.f). An increased LMXN for ISR 42-8 compared to Golf was observed (Fig. 2A.h). Regarding the CCS and OCS lines, a heterogenic scenario was presented over both experimental setups. While the median LMXN under CCS was identical with ISR 42-8 in the seedling stages of plant development (Fig. 2A.h), it was much lower in flowering stages under field conditions (Fig. 1A.f). Additionally, the LMXN was significantly higher in the CCS lines in the seedling stage compared to OCS lines, vice-versa LMXN was observed at the flowering time point (Fig. 2A.d).Figure 2Significantly variant root anatomical traits. Boxplots illustrate the overall distribution of observed data points for the parents Golf and ISR 42-8 as well as for the conventional (CCS) and organic (OCS) lines. (A) –Late metaxylem number (LMN)—the sum of all roots harvested and expressed by plant−1, illustrated for all four groups. A.h—Late metaxylem number measured in the hydroponic experiment; A.f—field experiment; A.d—distribution histogram for late metaxylem number in both field and hydroponic experiment for CCS and OCS adapted lines. (B)—Aerenchyma area (AA). Data available for hydroponics (B.h), field (B.f), and distribution of the aerenchyma area illustrated in (B.d). (C.f)—Total cortical area (TCA) from the field; (D.f)—Root cross-section area (RA) from the field, distribution of the total cortical area and root cross-section area illustrated in C.d and D.d, respectively.Full size imageThe intercellular space, represented by the aerenchyma area (AA), was observed to be significantly more pronounced in the tested CCS compared to OCS lines in both environments (Fig. 2B.h,B.f). Furthermore, the OCS population did not show significant differences to both parents under hydroponics conditions, however, when grown under field conditions, it was noted that Golf had a significantly higher AA mean value as compared to the OCS population (Table S3). As illustrated by the values, the AA expended from early to late stages by a magnitude of 10-folds (Fig. 2B.d). In general, although the two parents did not indicate phenotypic variations, OCS and CCS lines showed significant variations (Table S4).A 0.12 mm2 decreased average total cortical area (TCA) was recorded in the OCS compared to the CCS population under field conditions (P = 0.003, Fig. 2C.f), although substantial variations for TCA was observed within OCS and CCS populations (Fig. 2C.d). The root cross-section area (RXA) is a two-dimensional axis of the root which is an important indicator of root thickness. In the hydroponic examination of the seedling stage, significant variations existed between the CCS and ISR42-8 as well as OCS population (Tables 2 and S3). The complementary study under field conditions observed a noticeable variation for OCS from both parental genotypes and the CCS (Table S3). About 0.13 mm2 increased average value for RXA was identified for CCS (Fig. 2D.f), while consistent significant variations were also observed between the populations in the under field experiment, where 0.13 mm2 increased average value for RXA was identified for CCS (Fig. 2D.f). Analog (Fig. 2D.d). Analogue to the AA, the RXA indicates a lower root extension in the OCS compared to the CCS population. For the stele area (SA), significant variations were only observed at the flowering stage, where ISR42-8 generally had the highest SA and varies significantly between Golf and its progeny lines (Tables 2 and S3).Shoot-related traitsBeyond the root-related phenotypic observations, above-ground characteristics were also recorded to assess the root-borne shoot dynamics (Figs. 3 and S2). Among the OCS and CCS populations and the parents, ISR42-8 had the longest duration of emergence. While CCS-adapted lines took on average 5.8 days of emergence (DE), OCS-adapted lines emerged 1.8 days later (7.6 days) (Fig. S2). No variation was observed for the tiller number (TN) throughout all tested groups, while ISR 42-8 tends to produce much more leaf number (LN), accompanied by a lower plant height (PH) and higher shoot dry weight (SDW) (Table S4, Fig. S2). The OCS and CCS plants significantly differed in PH as well as SDW (Fig. 3B,C). The LN was marginally above the probability threshold of 0.05 (p = 0.058, Fig. 3A), with a clear tendency of increased variability in phenotypic variation (Fig. 3D). Similar trend was recorded for the SDW (Fig. 3F).Figure 3Above-ground plant characteristics. Boxplots illustrate the overall distribution of observed data points for the parents Golf and ISR 42-8 as well as for the conventional (CCS) and organic (OCS) lines under the hydroponic experiment. (A)—Leaf number (LN) expressed by; (B)—Plant height (PH) and C-Shoot dry weight (SDW). The data distribution of the leaf number, plant height and shoot dry weight is illustrated in (D,E,F), respectively.Full size imageInterconnection of root-shoot traitsWe performed inter-trait correlation analysis to unravel association among root traits and in between root and shoot phenotypes (Fig. 4). Pearson correlation coefficient revealed significant correlations among root-shoot traits. LN, PH and SDW had strong positive associations with all root architectural traits under hydroponic conditions (P  0.30) in both CCS and OCS, while DE has negative association with all shoot traits (r = −0.17 to −0.48) (Fig. 4A.h,B.h). A consistent negative relationship was observed for L/V with shoot traits such as LN, PH and SDW and root morphological traits such as RL, RSA and RAD in both CCS and OSC populations (Fig. 4A.h,B.h). A strong negative association existed between RL and all shoot morphological, root architectural and anatomical traits in both populations, except for L/V where a weak negative (r = −0.09) association was displayed only in the OCS. Likewise, all above-ground traits and all root architectural traits exhibited significant positive associations with all root anatomical features in both groups with an exception for the AA (Fig. 4A.h,B.h). Moreover, correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships in both groups of SDW and root dry weight (RDW) to all above-ground traits, below-ground traits including, RL, SA, and RAD, as well as in all root anatomical traits (Fig. 4A.h,B.h). This means that the growth of tissue and organ is proportional to the increase in total dry biomass. More importantly, we observed a significant positive correlation among most of the root morphological, architectural, and anatomical traits in both OCS and CCS adapted populations, with few exceptions such as L/V (Fig. 4A.h,B.h).Figure 4Correlation matrix for shoot morphological (only in hydroponic conditions; A.h and B.h), root architectural and anatomical traits in two groups of barley populations and their parental lines grown across two growing conditions. (A)—conventional and (B)—organic cropping systems. (A.h)—conventional under hydroponic, (B.h)—organic under hydroponic, (A.f)—conventional under field, and B.f—organic under field conditions. The color scale represents Spearman’s ranked correlation coefficient. A larger circle size indicates a smaller p-value; blank cells represent that correlation was non-significant at P  −0.90) and RDW (r =   > −0.80) (Fig. 4A.f,B.f) for CCS and OCS populations respectively, which means that narrower the angle of the nodal roots, the longer was the root system. The two root branching traits, the number of tips and number of roots forks which were known to be associated and dependent on the RL have a strong positive correlation reflected by r = 0.81 and 0.90 in CCS and r = 0.74 and 0.84 in OCS developed lines, respectively, while they have a significant negative correlation with RA (r = −0.72 to −0.77) in both barley groups. In addition, RA had also strong negative relationship to RDW contributing architectural traits including, RMD (r = −0.81 to −0.84) and L/V (r = −0.34 to −0.44). However, no positive associations were observed for RA and all root anatomical traits in both OCS and CCS populations (Fig. 4A.f,B.f).Allometry analysisThe correlation analysis identified interconnection among root and shoot-related traits. Therefore, we checked if these correlations can be explained by allometric relations (Tables 3 and 4).Table 3 Summary of allometric analysis of root-shoot system traits under hydroponic condition.Full size tableTable 4 Summary of allometric analysis of root-shoot system traits under field condition.Full size tableIn the hydroponic environment, we observed a total of ten allometric relations, from which six were annotated to the PH. The PH was allometrically related to the SDW, the RSA, the RV, the RDW, the SRL, and the RMD (Table 3). Besides, the SDW was allometrically associated with the RSD. Furthermore, the TCA was related to the RXA. Finally, an allometry relationship was detected between the LMXN and AA (Table 3).In the field experimental setup, we detected in total ten allometric relations (P  More