Ecology

Loarie, S. R. et al. The velocity of climate change. Nature 462, 1052–1055 (2009).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yoshida, T., Jones, L. E., Ellner, S. P., Fussmann, G. F. & Hairston, N. G. Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a predator–prey system. Nature 424, 303–306 (2003).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
terHorst, C. P., Miller, T. E. & Levitan, D. R. Evolution of prey in ecological time reduces the effect size of predators in experimental microcosms. Ecology 91, 629–636 (2010).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Duffy, M. A. & Sivars-Becker, L. Rapid evolution and ecological host-parasite dynamics. Ecol. Lett. 10, 44–53 (2007).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Diamond, S. E., Chick, L. D., Perez, A., Strickler, S. A. & Martin, R. A. Evolution of thermal tolerance and its fitness consequences: parallel and non-parallel responses to urban heat islands across three cities. Proc. Biol. Sci. 285, 20180036 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Franks, S. J., Sim, S. & Weis, A. E. Rapid evolution of flowering time by an annual plant in response to a climate fluctuation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 1278–1282 (2007).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
terHorst, C. P., Lennon, J. T. & Lau, J. A. The relative importance of rapid evolution for plant-microbe interactions depends on ecological context. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 281, 20140028 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bradshaw, W. E. & Holzapfel, C. M. Evolutionary response to rapid climate change. Science https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127000 (2006).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gonzalez, A., Ronce, O., Ferriere, R. & Hochberg, M. E. Evolutionary rescue: an emerging focus at the intersection between ecology and evolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 368, 20120404 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Carlson, S. M., Cunningham, C. J. & Westley, P. A. H. Evolutionary rescue in a changing world. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 521–530 (2014).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lau, J. A. & terHorst, C. P. Evolutionary responses to global change in species-rich communities. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1476, 43–58 (2020).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lau, J. A., Shaw, R. G., Reich, P. B. & Tiffin, P. Indirect effects drive evolutionary responses to global change. New Phytol. 201, 335–343 (2014).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tseng, M. & O’Connor, M. I. Predators modify the evolutionary response of prey to temperature change. Biol. Lett. 11, 20150798 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
terHorst, C. P. et al. Evolution in a community context: Trait responses to multiple species interactions. Am. Nat. 191, 368–380 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hussa, E. A. & Goodrich-Blair, H. It takes a village: Ecological and fitness impacts of multipartite mutualism. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 67, 161–178 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hoegh-Guldberg, O. Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs. Mar. Freshw. Res. 50, 839–866 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Death, G., Fabricius, K. E., Sweatman, H. & Puotinen, M. The 27–year decline of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef and its causes. PNAS 109, 17995–17999 (2012).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Heron, S. F., Maynard, J. A., van Hooidonk, R. & Eakin, C. M. Warming trends and bleaching stress of the world’s coral reefs 1985–2012. Sci. Rep. 6, 38402 (2016).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
van Hooidonk, R. et al. Local-scale projections of coral reef futures and implications of the Paris Agreement. Sci Rep 6, 39666 (2016).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Oliver, J. K., Berkelmans, R. & Eakin, C. M. Coral bleaching in space and time. In Coral Bleaching: Patterns, Processes, Causes and Consequences (eds. van Oppen, M. J. H. & Lough, J. M.) 27–49 (Springer, 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69775-6_3.Hughes, T. P. et al. Spatial and temporal patterns of mass bleaching of corals in the Anthropocene. Science 359, 80–83 (2018).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Impacts of 1.5°C global warming on natural and human systems. In Global Warming of 1.5°C: IPCC Special Report on Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C above Pre-industrial Levels in Context of Strengthening Response to Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty (ed. IPCC) 175–312 (Cambridge University Press, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.005.Glynn, P. W. & D’Croz, L. Experimental evidence for high temperature stress as the cause of El Niño-coincident coral mortality. Coral Reefs 8, 181–191 (1990).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Eakin, C. M. et al. Caribbean corals in crisis: Record thermal stress, bleaching, and mortality in 2005. PLoS ONE 5, e13969 (2010).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Eakin, C. M., Sweatman, H. P. A. & Brainard, R. E. The 2014–2017 global-scale coral bleaching event: insights and impacts. Coral Reefs 38, 539–545 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Baker, A. C., Starger, C. J., McClanahan, T. R. & Glynn, P. W. Corals’ adaptive response to climate change. Nature 430, 741–741 (2004).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mieog, J. C., Van Oppen, M. J. H., Berkelmans, R., Stam, W. T. & Olsen, J. L. Quantification of algal endosymbionts (Symbiodinium) in coral tissue using real-time PCR. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 9, 74–82 (2009).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Silverstein, R. N., Correa, A. M. S. & Baker, A. C. Specificity is rarely absolute in coral–algal symbiosis: Implications for coral response to climate change. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 279, 2609–2618 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoadley, K. D. et al. Host–symbiont combinations dictate the photo-physiological response of reef-building corals to thermal stress. Sci. Rep. 9, 9985 (2019).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Parkinson, J. E. & Baums, I. B. The extended phenotypes of marine symbioses: ecological and evolutionary consequences of intraspecific genetic diversity in coral-algal associations. Front. Microbiol. 5, 445 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Karim, W., Nakaema, S. & Hidaka, M. Temperature effects on the growth rates and photosynthetic activities of symbiodinium cells. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 3, 368–381 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grégoire, V., Schmacka, F., Coffroth, M. A. & Karsten, U. Photophysiological and thermal tolerance of various genotypes of the coral endosymbiont Symbiodinium sp. (Dinophyceae). J. Appl. Phycol. 29, 1893 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Díaz-Almeyda, E. M. et al. Intraspecific and interspecific variation in thermotolerance and photoacclimation in Symbiodinium dinoflagellates. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 284, 20171767 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bayliss, S. L. J., Scott, Z. R., Coffroth, M. A. & terHorst, C. P. Genetic variation in Breviolum antillogorgium, a coral reef symbiont, in response to temperature and nutrients. Ecol. Evol. 9, 2803–2813 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pelosi, J., Eaton, K. M., Mychajliw, S., terHorst, C. P. & Coffroth, M. A. Thermally tolerant symbionts may explain Caribbean octocoral resilience to heat stress. Coral Reefs 40, 1113–1125 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: The hologenome theory of evolution. Fems Microbiol. Rev. 32, 723–735 (2008).Article 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Chakravarti, L. J., Beltran, V. H. & van Oppen, M. J. H. Rapid thermal adaptation in photosymbionts of reef-building corals. Glob. Chang. Biol. 23, 4675–4688 (2017).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chakravarti, L. J. & van Oppen, M. J. H. Experimental evolution in coral photosymbionts as a tool to increase thermal tolerance. Front. Mar. Sci. 5, 227 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Buerger, P. et al. Heat-evolved microalgal symbionts increase coral bleaching tolerance. Sci. Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba2498 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hofmann, D. K. & Kremer, B. P. Carbon metabolism and strobilation in Cassiopea andromedea (Cnidaria: Scyphozoa): Significance of endosymbiotic dinoflagellates. Mar. Boil. 65, 25 (1981).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Freeman, C. J., Stoner, E. W., Easson, C. G., Matterson, K. O. & Baker, D. M. Symbiont carbon and nitrogen assimilation in the Cassiopea-Symbiodinium mutualism. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11605 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bigelow, R. P. The Anatomy and Development of Cassiopea xamachana. 1–72 (Pub. by the Boston Society of Natural History, 1900). https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.31420.Colley, N. J. & Trench, R. K. Selectivity in phagocytosis and persistence of symbiotic algae in the scyphistoma stage of the jellyfish Cassiopeia xamachana. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 219, 61–82 (1983).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hofmann, D. K., Fitt, W. K. & Fleck, J. Checkpoints in the life-cycle of Cassiopea spp.: Control of metagenesis and metamorphosis in a tropical jellyfish. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 40, 331–338 (1996).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Stat, M. & Gates, R. D. Clade D symbiodinium in scleractinian corals: A “Nugget” of hope, a selfish opportunist, an ominous sign, or all of the above?. J. Mar. Biol. 2011, e730715 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Correa, A. M. S. & Baker, A. C. Disaster taxa in microbially mediated metazoans: how endosymbionts and environmental catastrophes influence the adaptive capacity of reef corals. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 68–75 (2011).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Silverstein, R. N., Cunning, R. & Baker, A. C. Change in algal symbiont communities after bleaching, not prior heat exposure, increases heat tolerance of reef corals. Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 236–249 (2015).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Leal, M. C. et al. Symbiont type influences trophic plasticity of a model cnidarian-dinoflagellate symbiosis. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 858–863 (2015).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Klein, S. G. et al. Symbiodinium mitigate the combined effects of hypoxia and acidification on a noncalcifying cnidarian. Glob. Chang. Biol. 23, 3690–3703 (2017).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cziesielski, M. J. et al. Multi-omics analysis of thermal stress response in a zooxanthellate cnidarian reveals the importance of associating with thermotolerant symbionts. Proc. R. Soc. B. 285, 20172654 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cunning, R. & Baker, A. C. Thermotolerant coral symbionts modulate heat stress-responsive genes in their hosts. Mol. Ecol. 29, 2940–2950 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Newkirk, C. R., Frazer, T. K., Martindale, M. Q. & Schnitzler, C. E. Adaptation to bleaching: Are thermotolerant symbiodiniaceae strains more successful than other strains under elevated temperatures in a model symbiotic cnidarian?. Front. Microbiol. 11, 822 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Trench, R. K. MICROALGAL-INVERTEBRATESYMBIOSES: A REVIEW. Cell Res. 41 (1993).Yellowlees, D., Rees, T. A. V. & Leggat, W. Metabolic interactions between algal symbionts and invertebrate hosts. Plant Cell Environ. 31, 679–694 (2008).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Swain, T. D., Chandler, J., Backman, V. & Marcelino, L. Consensus thermotolerance ranking for 110 Symbiodinium phylotypes: an exemplar utilization of a novel iterative partial-rank aggregation tool with broad application potential. Funct. Ecol. 31, 172–183 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Klueter, A., Trapani, J., Archer, F. I., McIlroy, S. E. & Coffroth, M. A. Comparative growth rates of cultured marine dinoflagellates in the genus Symbiodinium and the effects of temperature and light. PLoS ONE 12, e0187707 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chen, B. et al. Dispersal, genetic variation, and symbiont interaction network of heat-tolerant endosymbiont Durusdinium trenchii: Insights into the adaptive potential of coral to climate change. Sci. Total Environ. 723, 138026 (2020).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
van Oppen, M. J. H., Souter, P., Howells, E. J., Heyward, A. & Berkelmans, R. Novel genetic diversity through somatic mutations: Fuel for adaptation of reef corals?. Diversity 3, 405–423 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
van Oppen, M. J. H., Oliver, J. K., Putnam, H. M. & Gates, R. D. Building coral reef resilience through assisted evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2307–2313 (2015).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ohdera, A. H. et al. Upside-down but headed in the right direction: Review of the highly versatile Cassiopea xamachana system. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 35 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fitt, W. K. & Costley, K. The role of temperature in survival of the polyp stage of the tropical rhizostome jellyfish Cassiopea xamachana. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 222, 79–91 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Aljbour, S. M., Zimmer, M. & Kunzmann, A. Cellular respiration, oxygen consumption, and trade-offs of the jellyfish Cassiopea sp. in response to temperature change. Journal of Sea Research 128, 92–97 (2017).Rahat, M. & Adar, O. Effect of symbiotic zooxanthellae and temperature on budding and strobiliation in Cassiopeia andromeda (Eschscholz). Biol. Bull. 159, 394–401 (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cole, L. C. The population consequences of life history phenomena. Q. Rev. Biol. 29, 103–137 (1954).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Brommer, J. E., Merilä, J. & Kokko, H. Reproductive timing and individual fitness. Ecol. Lett. 5, 802–810 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hofmann, D. K., Neumann, R. & Henne, K. Strobilation, budding and initiation of scyphistoma morphogenesis in the rhizostome Cassiopea andromeda (Cnidaria: Scyphozoa). Mar. Biol. 47, 161–176 (1978).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thornhill, D. J., LaJeunesse, T. C., Kemp, D. W., Fitt, W. K. & Schmidt, G. W. Multi-year, seasonal genotypic surveys of coral-algal symbioses reveal prevalent stability or post-bleaching reversion. Mar. Biol. 148, 711–722 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mellas, R. E., McIlroy, S. E., Fitt, W. K. & Coffroth, M. A. Variation in symbiont uptake in the early ontogeny of the upside-down jellyfish, Cassiopea spp.. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 459, 38–44 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fransolet, D., Roberty, S. & Plumier, J.-C. Establishment of endosymbiosis: The case of cnidarians and Symbiodinium. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 420–421, 1–7 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jones, A. M., Berkelmans, R., van Oppen, M. J. H., Mieog, J. C. & Sinclair, W. A community change in the algal endosymbionts of a scleractinian coral following a natural bleaching event: field evidence of acclimatization. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 275, 1359–1365 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Baskett, M. L., Gaines, S. D. & Nisbet, R. M. Symbiont diversity may help coral reefs survive moderate climate change. Ecol. Appl. 19, 3–17 (2009).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Baker, A. C. Reef corals bleach to survive change. Nature 411, 765–766 (2001).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Berkelmans, R. & van Oppen, M. J. H. The role of zooxanthellae in the thermal tolerance of corals: a ‘nugget of hope’ for coral reefs in an era of climate change. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 273, 2305–2312 (2006).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Wolfowicz, I. et al. Aiptasia sp. larvae as a model to reveal mechanisms of symbiont selection in cnidarians. Sci. Rep. 6, 32366 (2016).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Little, A. F., van Oppen, M. J. H. & Willis, B. L. Flexibility in algal endosymbioses shapes growth in reef corals. Science https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1095733 (2004).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jones, A. & Berkelmans, R. Potential costs of acclimatization to a warmer climate: Growth of a reef coral with heat tolerant vs sensitive symbiont types. PLOS ONE 5, e10437 (2010).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ortiz, J. C., González-Rivero, M. & Mumby, P. J. Can a thermally tolerant symbiont improve the future of Caribbean coral reefs?. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 273–281 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sprouffske, K. & Wagner, A. Growthcurver: An R package for obtaining interpretable metrics from microbial growth curves. BMC Bioinform. 17, 172 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Jeanthon C. Molecular ecology of hydrothermal vent microbial communities. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2000;77:117–33.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nercessian O, Reysenbach A-L, Prieur D, Jeanthon C. Archaeal diversity associated with in situ samplers deployed on hydrothermal vents on the East Pacific Rise (13oN). Environ Microbiol. 2003;5:492–502.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa S, Takai K, Inagaki F, Hirayama H, Nunoura T, Horikoshi K, et al. Distribution, phylogenetic diversity and physiological characteristics of epsilon-Proteobacteria in a deep-sea hydrothermal field. Environ Microbiol. 2005;7:1619–32.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Brazelton WJ, Schrenk MO, Kelley DS, Baross JA. Methane- and sulfur-metabolizing microbial communities dominate the Lost City hydrothermal field ecosystem. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:6257–70.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Takai K, Nakagawa S, Reysenbach A-L, Hoek J. Microbial ecology of mid-ocean ridges and back-arc basins. In: Christie DM, Fisher CR, Lee S-M, Givens S, editors. Geophysical Monograph Series. 2006. Washington, D. C.: American Geophysical Union; 2006. pp. 185–213.Nakagawa S, Takai K. Deep-sea vent chemoautotrophs: diversity, biochemistry and ecological significance. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2008;65:1–14.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jørgensen BB, Boetius A. Feast and famine—microbial life in the deep-sea bed. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2007;5:770–81.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Campbell BJ, Engel AS, Porter ML, Takai K. The versatile ε-proteobacteria: key players in sulphidic habitats. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006;4:458–68.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Oren A, Garrity GM. Valid publication of the names of forty-two phyla of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2021;71:005056.Article 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa S, Takaki Y. Nonpathogenic Epsilonproteobacteria. Encyclopedia of Life Sciences (eLS). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2009.Nakagawa S, Takaki Y, Shimamura S, Reysenbach A-L, Takai K, Horikoshi K. Deep-sea vent ε-proteobacterial genomes provide insights into emergence of pathogens. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:12146–50.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Porcelli I, Reuter M, Pearson BM, Wilhelm T, van Vliet AH. Parallel evolution of genome structure and transcriptional landscape in the Epsilonproteobacteria. BMC Genom. 2013;14:616.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zhang Y, Sievert SM. Pan-genome analyses identify lineage- and niche-specific markers of evolution and adaptation in Epsilonproteobacteria. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:110.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Vorwerk H, Huber C, Mohr J, Bunk B, Bhuju S, Wensel O, et al. A transferable plasticity region in Campylobacter coli allows isolates of an otherwise non-glycolytic food-borne pathogen to catabolize glucose. Mol Microbiol. 2015;98:809–30.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jiang SC, Kellogg CA, Paul JH. Characterization of marine temperate phage-host systems isolated from Mamala Bay, Oahu, Hawaii. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1998;64:535–42.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Paul JH. Prophages in marine bacteria: dangerous molecular time bombs or the key to survival in the seas? ISME J. 2008;2:579–89.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Harrison E, Brockhurst MA. Ecological and evolutionary benefits of temperate phage: what does or doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. BioEssays. 2017;39:1700112.Article 

Google Scholar 
Fouts DE, Mongodin EF, Mandrell RE, Miller WG, Rasko DA, Ravel J, et al. Major structural differences and novel potential virulence mechanisms from the genomes of multiple Campylobacter species. PLoS Biol. 2005;3:e15.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zhang M, He L, Li Q, Sun H, Gu Y, You Y, et al. Genomic characterization of the Guillain-Barre syndrome-associated Campylobacter jejuni ICDCCJ07001 isolate. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e15060.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Miller WG, Yee E, Chapman MH, Smith TPL, Bono JL, Huynh S, et al. Comparative genomics of the Campylobacter lari group. Genome Biol Evol. 2014;6:3252–66.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Parker CT, Quiñones B, Miller WG, Horn ST, Mandrell RE. Comparative genomic analysis of Campylobacter jejuni strains reveals diversity due to genomic elements similar to those present in C. jejuni strain RM1221. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44:4125–35.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Clark CG, Ng L-K. Sequence variability of Campylobacter temperate bacteriophages. BMC Microbiol. 2008;8:49.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Quiñones B, Guilhabert MR, Miller WG, Mandrell RE, Lastovica AJ, Parker CT. Comparative genomic analysis of clinical strains of Campylobacter jejuni from South Africa. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e2015.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Clark CG, Chen C, Berry C, Walker M, McCorrister SJ, Chong PM, et al. Comparison of genomes and proteomes of four whole genome-sequenced Campylobacter jejuni from different phylogenetic backgrounds. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0190836.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Clark CG, Grant CC, Pollari F, Marshall B, Moses J, Tracz DM, et al. Effects of the Campylobacter jejuni CJIE1 prophage homologs on adherence and invasion in culture, patient symptoms, and source of infection. BMC Microbiol. 2012;12:269.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gaasbeek EJ, Wagenaar JA, Guilhabert MR, Wösten MMSM, van Putten JPM, van der Graaf-van Bloois L, et al. A DNase encoded by integrated element CJIE1 inhibits natural transformation of Campylobacter jejuni. J Bacteriol. 2009;191:2296–306.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gaasbeek EJ, Wagenaar JA, Guilhabert MR, van Putten JPM, Parker CT, van der Wal FJ. Nucleases encoded by the integrated elements CJIE2 and CJIE4 inhibit natural transformation of Campylobacter jejuni. J Bacteriol. 2010;192:936–41.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yoshida-Takashima Y, Takaki Y, Shimamura S, Nunoura T, Takai K. Genome sequence of a novel deep-sea vent epsilonproteobacterial phage provides new insight into the co-evolution of Epsilonproteobacteria and their phages. Extremophiles. 2013;17:405–19.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Glasby GP, Notsu K. Submarine hydrothermal mineralization in the Okinawa Trough, SW of Japan: an overview. Ore Geol Rev. 2003;23:299–339.Article 

Google Scholar 
Yoshida-Takashima Y, Nunoura T, Kazama H, Noguchi T, Inoue K, Akashi H, et al. Spatial distribution of viruses associated with planktonic and attached microbial communities in hydrothermal environments. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012;78:1311–20.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Takai K, Inagaki F, Nakagawa S, Hirayama H, Nunoura T, Sako Y, et al. Isolation and phylogenetic diversity of members of previously uncultivated ε-Proteobacteria in deep-sea hydrothermal fields. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2003;217:167–74.
Google Scholar 
Sako Y, Takai K, Ishida Y, Uchida A, Katayama Y. Rhodothemus obamensis sp. nov., a modern lineage of extremely thermophilic marine bacteria. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1996;46:1099–104.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yoshida M, Yoshida-Takashima Y, Nunoura T, Takai K. Genomic characterization of a temperate phage of the psychrotolerant deep-sea bacterium Aurantimonas sp. Extremophiles. 2015;19:49–58.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yoshida T, Takashima Y, Tomaru Y, Shirai Y, Takao Y, Hiroishi S, et al. Isolation and characterization of a cyanophage infecting the toxic cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:1239–47.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:2114–20.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Leggett RM, Clavijo BJ, Clissold L, Clark MD, Caccamo M. NextClip: an analysis and read preparation tool for Nextera long mate pair libraries. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:566–8.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Boetzer M, Henkel CV, Jansen HJ, Butler D, Pirovano W. Scaffolding pre-assembled contigs using SSPACE. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:578–9.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Corkill JE, Graham R, Hart CA, Stubbs S. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of degradation-sensitive DNAs from Clostridium difficile PCR ribotype 1 strains. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:2791–2.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Besemer J. GeneMarkS: a self-training method for prediction of gene starts in microbial genomes. Implications for finding sequence motifs in regulatory regions. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001;29:2607–18.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Delcher A. Improved microbial gene identification with GLIMMER. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:4636–41.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Punta M, Coggill PC, Eberhardt RY, Mistry J, Tate J, Boursnell C, et al. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:D290–301.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Quevillon E, Silventoinen V, Pillai S, Harte N, Mulder N, Apweiler R, et al. InterProScan: protein domains identifier. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:W116–20.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Marchler-Bauer A, Lu S, Anderson JB, Chitsaz F, Derbyshire MK, DeWeese-Scott C, et al. CDD: a Conserved Domain Database for the functional annotation of proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:D225–9.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Krogh A, Larsson B, von Heijne G, Sonnhammer ELL. Predicting transmembrane protein topology with a hidden markov model: application to complete genomes. J Mol Biol. 2001;305:567–80.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Almagro Armenteros JJ, Tsirigos KD, Sønderby CK, Petersen TN, Winther O, Brunak S, et al. SignalP 5.0 improves signal peptide predictions using deep neural networks. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37:420–3.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Huang S, Wang K, Jiao N, Chen F. Genome sequences of siphoviruses infecting marine Synechococcus unveil a diverse cyanophage group and extensive phage-host genetic exchanges. Environ Microbiol. 2012;14:540–58.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T, Edwards RA, et al. The RAST Server: Rapid Annotations using Subsystems Technology. BMC Genomics. 2008;9:75.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R, Oliver Glöckner F, Peplies J. JSpeciesWS: a web server for prokaryotic species circumscription based on pairwise genome comparison. Bioinformatics. 2016;32:929–31.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
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.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Roberts RJ, Vincze T, Posfai J, Macelis D. REBASE—a database for DNA restriction and modification: enzymes, genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43:D298–9.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Couvin D, Bernheim A, Toffano-Nioche C, Touchon M, Michalik J, Néron 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.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol Biol Evol. 2021;38:3022–7.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Meier-Kolthoff JP, Göker M. VICTOR: genome-based phylogeny and classification of prokaryotic viruses. Bioinformatics. 2017;33:3396–404.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa S, Takai K, Inagaki F, Horikoshi K, Sako Y. Nitratiruptor tergarcus gen. nov., sp. nov. and Nitratifractor salsuginis gen. nov., sp. nov., nitrate-reducing chemolithoautotrophs of the ε-Proteobacteria isolated from a deep-sea hydrothermal system in the Mid-Okinawa Trough. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2005;55:925–33.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Richter M, Rosselló-Móra R. Shifting the genomic gold standard for the prokaryotic species definition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:19126–31.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pedulla ML, Ford ME, Houtz JM, Karthikeyan T, Wadsworth C, Lewis JA, et al. Origins of highly mosaic mycobacteriophage genomes. Cell. 2003;113:171–82.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mercier C, Lossouarn J, Nesbø CL, Haverkamp THA, Baudoux AC, Jebbar M, et al. Two viruses, MCV1 and MCV2, which infect Marinitoga bacteria isolated from deep-sea hydrothermal vents: functional and genomic analysis. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:577–87.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Meyer JL, Huber JA. Strain-level genomic variation in natural populations of Lebetimonas from an erupting deep-sea volcano. ISME J. 2014;8:867–80.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Frost LS, Leplae R, Summers AO, Toussaint A. Mobile genetic elements: the agents of open source evolution. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005;3:722–32.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

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

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

Google Scholar 
Piel D, Bruto M, Labreuche Y, Blanquart F, Goudenège D, Barcia-Cruz R, et al. Phage–host coevolution in natural populations. Nat Microbiol. 2022;7:1075–86.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lynch KH, Stothard P, Dennis JJ. Genomic analysis and relatedness of P2-like phages of the Burkholderia cepacia complex. BMC Genomics. 2010;11:599.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Godde JS, Bickerton A. The repetitive DNA elements called CRISPRs and their associated genes: evidence of horizontal transfer among prokaryotes. J Mol Evol. 2006;62:718–29.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nobrega FL, Walinga H, Dutilh BE, Brouns SJJ. Prophages are associated with extensive CRISPR–Cas auto-immunity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48:12074–84.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Yi H, Huang L, Yang B, Gomez J, Zhang H, Yin Y. AcrFinder: genome mining anti-CRISPR operons in prokaryotes and their viruses. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48:W358–65.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Maier L-K, Lange SJ, Stoll B, Haas KA, Fischer SM, Fischer E, et al. Essential requirements for the detection and degradation of invaders by the Haloferax volcanii CRISPR/Cas system I-B. RNA Biol. 2013;10:865–74.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Boudry P, Semenova E, Monot M, Datsenko KA, Lopatina A, Sekulovic O, et al. Function of the CRISPR-Cas system of the human pathogen Clostridium difficile. mBio. 2015;6:e01112–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Barrangou R, Fremaux C, Deveau H, Richards M, Boyaval P, Moineau S, et al. CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science. 2007;315:1709–12.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Deveau H, Barrangou R, Garneau JE, Labonté J, Fremaux C, Boyaval P, et al. Phage response to CRISPR-encoded resistance in Streptococcus thermophilus. J Bacteriol. 2008;190:1390–400.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nozawa T, Furukawa N, Aikawa C, Watanabe T, Haobam B, Kurokawa K, et al. CRISPR inhibition of prophage acquisition in Streptococcus pyogenes. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e19543.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Makarova KS, Wolf YI, Iranzo J, Shmakov SA, Alkhnbashi OS, Brouns SJJ, et al. Evolutionary classification of CRISPR–Cas systems: a burst of class 2 and derived variants. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2020;18:67–83.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

COVID variant family expandsSince the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 emerged in late 2021, it has spawned a series of subvariants that have sparked global waves of infection. In the past few months, scientists have identified more than a dozen extra subvariants to watch. There are so many that they’re being called a swarm, or ‘variant soup’. BQ.1.1 (a descendant of BQ.1) and XBB seem to be rising to the top, possibly because they have many mutations in a key region of the viral spike protein called the receptor binding domain, which is required to infect cells.

Source: NextStrain

The variants near youIn Europe and North America, SARS-CoV-2 variants in the BQ.1 family are rising quickly and are likely to drive infection waves as these regions enter winter. They are also a common ingredient of the variant soup in South Africa, Nigeria and elsewhere in Africa. XBB, by contrast, looks likely to dominate infections in Asia; it recently drove a wave of infections in Singapore.

Source: Moritz Gerstung, Cov-Spectrum.org and GISAID

Money worries for science studentsEighty-five per cent of graduate students who responded to a Nature survey are worried about the increasing cost of living, and 25% are concerned about their growing student debt. Forty-five per cent said that rising inflation could cause them to reconsider whether to continue their science studies. The survey involved more than 3,200 self-selected PhD and master’s students from around the world.

How species suffer in heatwavesEven a small temperature rise has a severe effect on animal mortality, and understanding this relationship is important for predicting the effects of heatwaves caused by climate change. A paper in Nature used published data to examine how changes in temperature affect the rate of biological processes, such as movement or metabolism, at permissive temperatures — those at which species function normally. They also looked at how higher, stressful temperatures affect the rate of heat failure (irreversible heat injuries that result in death). This graph shows that rising temperatures drive a very rapid increase in heat-failure rates in frogs and molluscs. These high sensitivities suggest that when there is no way to escape hot conditions, species can quickly succumb. More

Rocchini, D. et al. Measuring β-diversity by remote sensing: A challenge for biodiversity monitoring. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9(8), 1787–1798 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pettorelli, N. et al. Satellite remote sensing of ecosystem functions: Opportunities, challenges and way forward. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 4(2), 71–93 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Corbane, C. et al. Remote sensing for mapping natural habitats and their conservation status–New opportunities and challenges. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 37, 7–16 (2015).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Miu, I. V. et al. Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key commitments. PeerJ 8, e10067 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
De Klerk, H., Burgess, N. & Visser, V. Probabilistic description of vegetation ecotones using remote sensing. Eco. Inform. 46, 125–132 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Minasny, B. et al. Digital mapping of peatlands–A critical review. Earth Sci. Rev. 196, 102870 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zellweger, F. et al. Advances in microclimate ecology arising from remote sensing. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34(4), 327–341 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, X. et al. New research methods for vegetation information extraction based on visible light remote sensing images from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 78, 215–226 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Ullerud, H. A. et al. Consistency in land-cover mapping: Influence of field workers, spatial scale and classification system. Appl. Veg. Sci. 21(2), 278–288 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhu, Y. et al. Effects of data temporal resolution on phenology extractions from the alpine grasslands of the Tibetan Plateau. Ecol. Ind. 104, 365–377 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Huylenbroeck, L. et al. Using remote sensing to characterize riparian vegetation: A review of available tools and perspectives for managers. J. Environ. Manage. 267, 110652 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fagan, M. E. et al. Mapping species composition of forests and tree plantations in Northeastern Costa Rica with an integration of hyperspectral and multitemporal Landsat imagery. Remote Sensing 7(5), 5660–5696 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Waśniewski, A. et al. Assessment of Sentinel-2 satellite images and random forest classifier for rainforest mapping in Gabon. Forests 11(9), 941 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Drusch, M. et al. Sentinel-2: ESA’s optical high-resolution mission for GMES operational services. Remote Sens. Environ. 120, 25–36 (2012).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Chytrý, M. et al. European Vegetation Archive (EVA): An integrated database of European vegetation plots. Appl. Veg. Sci. 19(1), 173–180 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chytrý, M. et al. EUNIS Habitat Classification: Expert system, characteristic species combinations and distribution maps of European habitats. Appl. Veg. Sci. 23(4), 648–675 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Šibík, J. Slovak vegetation database. In Dengler J., Oldeland, J., Jansen, F., Chytrý, M., Ewald, J., Finckh, M., Glöckle, RF, Lopez-Gonzalez, G., Peet, R. K. & Schaminée, J. H. J. (eds), Vegetation databases for the 21st century. Biodiversity & Ecology, 2012: p. 429–429.Jarolímek, I., et al. A list of vegetation units of Slovakia. Diagnostic, constant and dominant species of the higher vegetation units of Slovakia. Veda, Bratislava, 2008: p. 295–329.Stanová, V. & Valachovič, M. Katalóg biotopov Slovenska [A catalogue of biotopes of Slovakia] (DAPHNE-Institút aplikovanej ekológie, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Viceníková, A. & Polák, P. Európsky významné biotopy na Slovensku (Štátna ochrana prírody SR v spolupráci s DAPHNE-Inštitút aplikovanej ekológie, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Dymond, C. C., Mladenoff, D. J. & Radeloff, V. C. Phenological differences in Tasseled Cap indices improve deciduous forest classification. Remote Sens. Environ. 80(3), 460–472 (2002).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mickelson, J. G., Civco, D. L. & Silander, J. Delineating forest canopy species in the northeastern United States using multi-temporal TM imagery. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 64, 891–904 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Nitze, I., Barrett, B. & Cawkwell, F. Temporal optimisation of image acquisition for land cover classification with Random Forest and MODIS time-series. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 34, 136–146 (2015).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Prishchepov, A. V. et al. The effect of Landsat ETM/ETM+ image acquisition dates on the detection of agricultural land abandonment in Eastern Europe. Remote Sens. Environ. 126, 195–209 (2012).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Saini, M. et al. Hyperspectral data dimensionality reduction and the impact of multi-seasonal Hyperion EO-1 imagery on classification accuracies of tropical forest species. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 80(8), 773–784 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, L., Silván-Cárdenas, J. L. & Sousa, W. P. Neural network classification of mangrove species from multi-seasonal Ikonos imagery. Photogramm. Eng. Remote. Sens. 74(7), 921–927 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dong, J. et al. Mapping tropical forests and rubber plantations in complex landscapes by integrating PALSAR and MODIS imagery. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote. Sens. 74, 20–33 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fan, H. et al. Phenology-based vegetation index differencing for mapping of rubber plantations using Landsat OLI data. Remote Sens. 7(5), 6041–6058 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Li, Z. & Fox, J. M. Mapping rubber tree growth in mainland Southeast Asia using time-series MODIS 250 m NDVI and statistical data. Appl. Geogr. 32(2), 420–432 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Senf, C. et al. Mapping rubber plantations and natural forests in Xishuangbanna (Southwest China) using multi-spectral phenological metrics from MODIS time series. Remote Sens. 5(6), 2795–2812 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mikula, K. et al. NaturaSat—A software tool for identification, monitoring and evaluation of habitats by remote sensing techniques. Remote Sens. 13(17), 3381 (2021).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mikula, K. et al. Semi-automatic segmentation of NATURA 2000 habitats in Sentinel-2 satellite images by evolving open curves. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. S 14(3), 1033 (2021).Article 
MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Mikula, K. et al. An automated segmentation of NATURA 2000 habitats from Sentinel-2 optical data. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. S 14(3), 1017 (2021).Article 
MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Klinec, A., Geologická mapa Slovenského rudohoria a Nízkych Tatier (1: 50 000). GÚDŠ, Bratislava, 1976.Lapin, M., et al., Klimatické oblasti [Climatic regions]. Atlas krajiny Slovenskej republiky, 2002. 95.Slamova, M. et al. Historical terraces—Current situation and future perspectives for optimal land use management: The case study of Čierny Balog. Annales 29(1), 85–100 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Geoportal, 2021. https://www.geoportal.sk/sk/geoportal.html. Accessed 22 Feb 2021.Directive, H. Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Off. J. Eur. Union 206, 7–50 (1992).
Google Scholar 
Barkman, J. J., Doing, H. & Segal, S. Kritische bemerkungen und vorschläge zur quantitativen vegetationsanalyse. Acta Bot. Neerland. 13(3), 394–419 (1964).Article 

Google Scholar 
Braun-Blanquet, J. & Pflanzensoziologie, G.d.V. (Springer, Wien, New York, 1964).Westhoff, V. & van der Maarel, E. The Braun-Blanquet approach. In Classification of Plant Communities (ed. Whittaker, R. H.) (Springer, 1973).
Google Scholar 
Hennekens, S. M. & Schaminée, J. H. TURBOVEG, a comprehensive data base management system for vegetation data. J. Veg. Sci. 12(4), 589–591 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tichý, L. JUICE, software for vegetation classification. J. Veg. Sci. 13(3), 451–453 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marhold, K., et al., A list of lower and higher plants of Slovakia. Vydavateľstvo akadémie vied, Bratislava, 1998.Ambroz, M., Kollár, M., & Mikula, K. Semi-implicit scheme for semi-automatic segmentation in Naturasat software. In Proceedings of ALGORITMY (2020).LGIS, 2020. LGIS Lesnícky geografický informačný system (2020). http://gis.nlcsk.org/lgis/. Accessed 1 Sept 2020.Hill, M. TWINSPAN-a FORTRAN program for multivariate data in an ordered two-way table by classification of the individuals and attributes. Ecol. System. (1979).Team, R.C., A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2014. www.r-project.org. Accessed 14 Feb 2019, 2020.Hausdorff, F., Grundzüge der mengenlehre. Vol. 7. 1914: von Veit.Waghmare, B. & Suryawanshi, M. A review-remote sensing. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl 7(06), 52–54 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Wagner, M. P. & Oppelt, N. Extracting agricultural fields from remote sensing imagery using graph-based growing contours. Remote Sens. 12(7), 1205 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Reinermann, S., Asam, S. & Kuenzer, C. Remote sensing of grassland production and management—A review. Remote Sens. 12(12), 1949 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Lu, M. et al. Forest types classification based on multi-source data fusion. Remote Sens. 9(11), 1153 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Zwiggelaar, R. A review of spectral properties of plants and their potential use for crop/weed discrimination in row-crops. Crop Prot. 17(3), 189–206 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lamb, D. & Brown, R. B. Pa—precision agriculture: Remote-sensing and mapping of weeds in crops. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 78(2), 117–125 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moran, M. S., Inoue, Y. & Barnes, E. Opportunities and limitations for image-based remote sensing in precision crop management. Remote Sens. Environ. 61(3), 319–346 (1997).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Senf, C., Seidl, R. & Hostert, P. Remote sensing of forest insect disturbances: Current state and future directions. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 60, 49–60 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Avtar, R. et al. Assessing sustainable development prospects through remote sensing: A review. Remote Sens. Appl. Soc. Environ. 20, 100402 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Borre, J. V. et al. Integrating remote sensing in Natura 2000 habitat monitoring: Prospects on the way forward. J. Nat. Conserv. 19(2), 116–125 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Woodcock, C. E. et al. Transitioning from change detection to monitoring with remote sensing: A paradigm shift. Remote Sens. Environ. 238, 111558 (2020).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Foody, G. Fuzzy modelling of vegetation from remotely sensed imagery. Ecol. Model. 85(1), 3–12 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nagendra, H. Using remote sensing to assess biodiversity. Int. J. Remote Sens. 22(12), 2377–2400 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zlinszky, A. et al. Mapping Natura 2000 habitat conservation status in a pannonic salt steppe with airborne laser scanning. Remote Sens. 7(3), 2991–3019 (2015).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Feilhauer, H. et al. Mapping the local variability of Natura 2000 habitats with remote sensing. Appl. Veg. Sci. 17(4), 765–779 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thanh Noi, P. & Kappas, M. Comparison of random forest, k-nearest neighbor, and support vector machine classifiers for land cover classification using Sentinel-2 imagery. Sensors 18(1), 18 (2017).Article 
ADS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Da Ponte, E. et al. Assessing forest cover dynamics and forest perception in the Atlantic Forest of Paraguay, combining remote sensing and household level data. Forests 8(10), 389 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cheng, K. & Wang, J. Forest type classification based on integrated spectral-spatial-temporal features and random forest algorithm—A case study in the qinling mountains. Forests 10(7), 559 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Laurin, G. V. et al. Discrimination of tropical forest types, dominant species, and mapping of functional guilds by hyperspectral and simulated multispectral Sentinel-2 data. Remote Sens. Environ. 176, 163–176 (2016).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Erinjery, J. J., Singh, M. & Kent, R. Mapping and assessment of vegetation types in the tropical rainforests of the Western Ghats using multispectral Sentinel-2 and SAR Sentinel-1 satellite imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 216, 345–354 (2018).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Navarro, J. A. et al. Integration of UAV, Sentinel-1, and Sentinel-2 data for mangrove plantation aboveground biomass monitoring in Senegal. Remote Sens. 11(1), 77 (2019).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sothe, C. et al. Evaluating Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 data to map sucessional forest stages in a subtropical forest in Southern Brazil. Remote Sens. 9(8), 838 (2017).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mikula, K., et al., Natural Numerical Networks for Natura 2000 habitats classification by satellite images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.04327, 2021.Bruelheide, H. et al. sPlot—A new tool for global vegetation analyses. J. Veg. Sci. 30(2), 161–186 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More

GPP dataAs our primary productivity product we used the GOSIF GPP dataset21 which utilizes the linear relationship between GPP and remotely-sensed SIF34. GOSIF GPP is available globally at 0.05° spatial resolution for the period 2000–2021, with the period 2001–2015 selected here (for a short summary of all datasets used in this study see Supplementary Table 3). GOSIF GPP is based on a gridded SIF product (GOSIF)34 which uses MODIS enhanced vegetation index and meteorological data for spatial scaling and is trained with millions of SIF observations from the coarser-resolution Orbiting Carbon Observatory-235. The global coverage of GOSIF and the close relationship between SIF and GPP allow for an independent assessment of how land cover changes affect GPP in different regions around the world. For instance, SIF has been shown to capture the high GPP in the US Corn Belt derived from flux towers, while ecosystem models underestimated it36. While GPP can thus be empirically estimated from satellite SIF observations relatively reliably (even though some assumptions like the linear GPP–SIF relationship and its universality across biomes are still debated20,37,38,39), the calculation of NPP needs additional assumptions of autotrophic respiration. Therefore, we focused our study on GPP, but we included an NPP product in our uncertainty analysis. In addition to that, to account for the challenges and uncertainties in global GPP estimates we included four alternative GPP products in our sensitivity analysis (see below).Land cover mappingGridded land cover was derived from ESA-CCI22, a global land cover product designed for climate science. ESA-CCI is available at 300 m spatial resolution for the 1992–2020 period (https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/). We first classified ESA-CCI land covers to forests, grasslands, and croplands according to IPCC classification: classes 50–100, 160, 170 forests (2,022,283 grid cells); classes 110 and 130 grasslands (509,297 grid cells); classes 10–40 croplands (950,025 grid cells). We focus on these three major land cover types to facilitate our analysis. We then converted the resulting map to 0.05° resolution by determining the prevalent (i.e., mode) land cover for each grid cell using the aggregate function from the raster package40 and only included grid cells in our training data in which the prevalent land cover was constant over the period 2001–2015. Other classes (e.g., cropland/natural vegetation mosaics) and grid cells where the land cover changed over the 2001–2015 period were not used for the RF training.Random forestsRF is a popular and efficient supervised machine learning technique which can be applied for classification and regression problems41. While complex, it is still easier to interpret compared to other machine learning methods such as Artificial Neural Networks. It has recently been applied to a wide range of ecological research questions, including the prediction of food42 and bioenergy43 crop yields, potential natural vegetation31, forest aboveground biomass44, soil respiration45, and soil carbon emissions from land-use change5 and is thus well suited for our approach. The “Forests” refer to a number of individual decision trees. For each tree, a random sample of the training data is selected and split multiple times based on a random subset of variables from which the one minimizing the weighted variance is selected by the algorithm. Model performance is computed directly on out-of-bag (OOB) data which is randomly omitted from the training data (36.8% of all grid cells). When RF is applied to new data, a weighted prediction of each individual decision tree contributes to the overall prediction. Variance in the individual trees, e.g., by selecting random subsets of the observations and random variables at each node improves the overall RF predictive skill. Model training and prediction were done using the R ranger package46. After initial testing (see Supplementary Fig. S11) we decided to set the number of individual decision trees to 800 and the number of variables to possibly split at in each node to 10. As the good evaluation measures of RF algorithms can be related to spatial autocorrelation24 we also tested a coordinate-only model and performed a leave-one-out cross validation including spatial buffers (Supplementary Discussion 2, Supplementary Fig. S3). Due to the large computational effort we reduced the number of decision trees to 100 for the buffered leave-one-out cross validation.Predictor variablesWe predicted forest, grassland, and cropland potential GPP using the following 20 predictor variables in our RF algorithm: mean annual surface temperature (Tmean), mean diurnal temperature range (Tdiurnal), temperature seasonality (Tseason; standard deviation), minimum temperature of the coldest month (Tmin), annual temperature range (Tannual), mean temperature of the warmest quarter (Twarmest), mean annual precipitation (Pmean), precipitation seasonality (Pseason; coefficient of variation), precipitation of the wettest quarter (Pwettest), precipitation of the driest quarter (Pdriest), precipitation of the warmest quarter (Pwarmest), mean annual solar radiation (SR), growing degree days (GDD), relative humidity (RH), soil clay content (Clay), elevation (EL), nitrogen deposition (Ndep), nitrogen fertilization (NF), pesticide application (Pest), and gross domestic product (GDP; a proxy for agricultural management input other than NF and Pest). Overall Tmean, Tannual, and Pmean were the most important predictor variables (see Supplementary Discussion 3 and Fig. S12). We also tested other predictors (including additional bioclimatic variables, soil pH, irrigation, or phosphate fertilization) but found only negligible improvements in RF evaluation metrics and hence decided to restrict our analysis to the 20 predictors mentioned above.Climate variables were taken from the CHELSA dataset47,48, remapped to 0.05° spatial resolution using the aggregate function from the raster package40. To only include years overlapping with our GPP data we used the CHELSA time-series data for the 2001–2013 period if available and 1979–2013 climatologies elsewise. Clay was derived from the Regridded Harmonized World Soil Database v1.249. Ndep was taken from ISIMIP2b50, bilinear remapped from 0.5° to 0.05° spatial resolution using Climate Data Operators33. Elevation was obtained from WorldClim51. NF and Pest were derived from country-specific FAO data (e.g., https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/pesticide-use-per-hectare-of-cropland), i.e., we used the same value for all grid cells in a country. GDP was obtained from ref.52.Suitable areaFor the comparison of potential forest, grassland, and cropland GPP in Fig. 1g–i we only included grid cells suitable for all three land cover types. For forests, we assumed forest cover possible if the grid cell is currently forested (e.g., all grid cells of our forest training data) or if the potential natural forest cover exceeds 36.3%. This threshold represents the 5th percentile of all currently forested grid cells. Potential natural forest cover was derived from a potential natural vegetation map, available for 20 biomes at 0.00833° spatial resolution31. To convert these biomes into potential natural forest cover we assumed 100% forest cover for the ten forest biomes and 30% forest cover for tropical savannah. Other biomes were not considered. We then aggregated the map to 0.05° spatial resolution by computing the mean of 36 grid cells using the aggregate function form the raster package40 (see Supplementary Fig. S5 for the resulting map). For grasslands and croplands, we computed the 5th percentile of Tmean and Pmean in the training data (− 9.9 °C and 165 mm for grasslands and 2.7 °C and 295 mm for croplands, respectively) and removed all grid cells below those thresholds, assuming these areas to be too cold or too dry for the respective land cover type. Finally, we calculated the land cover with the highest potential GPP for all overlapping grid cells.Sensitivity analysisTo explore the sensitivity and uncertainty of our RF approach we repeated our prediction using different input datasets, potential forest cover, and machine-learning approaches. The importance of the underlying potential forest map was estimated by replacing our potential forest map (Supplementary Fig. S5) by the LUH2 potential forest map (Supplementary Fig. S13)23. To explore the dependency on the land cover product we repeated our RF prediction using the spatially aggregated MODIS land cover map (MCD12C1; IGBP scheme), available at 0.05° spatial resolution53. We classified grid cells of classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, (all forests), 8 (woody savannahs) and 9 (savannahs) as forest. Classes 8 and 9 were included in forest because otherwise forest cover would be underestimated in the temperate and boreal zone. Class 10 was classified as grassland and class 12 as cropland. A comparison of ESA-CCI with MODIS reveals a substantially larger cropland area in ECA-CCI but a smaller grassland area (Supplementary Fig. S14).The sensitivity to the climate product was tested by repeating our analysis using predictor variables from the WorldClim climatologies (1970–2000)51, aggregated from 30 s to 0.05° spatial resolution using the aggregate function from the raster package40. In contrast to CHELSA, growing degree days and relative humidity were not available from WorldClim but we included water vapour pressure as additional predictor.We also tested four alternative global GPP products. The vegetation photosynthesis model (VPM) product, available for the period of interest at 0.05° spatial resolution, is based on improved light use efficiency theory and is driven by remotely sensed datasets and reanalysis climate data and land cover classification which also distinguishes C3 vs. C4 photosynthesis pathways54. The second product is derived from remote sensing considering radiation and canopy conductance limitations on GPP and is available at 0.05° resolution for the 2001–2012 period55. Land cover is not an input variable. The third product, FLUXCOM, uses machine learning to scale FLUXNET site GPP to the globe56,57. FLUXCOM is available at 0.0833° resolution and was conservative remapped to 0.05° using Climate Data Operators33 meaning that the GPP of different land cover types might be mixed in regions with heterogeneous land cover patterns. The forth product is the MODIS MOD17A3 GPP product58, available for the 2001–2013 period and aggregated to 0.05° resolution using the raster package40. It is derived from meteorological data, fraction of absorbed photosynthetic active radiation/leaf area index, and land cover. As there is also a MOD17A3 NPP product available we additionally conducted a prediction for potential NPP. The MOD17A3 NPP product is calculated as GPP minus maintenance and growth respiration estimated from allometric relationships linking daily biomass and annual growth of plant tissues to leaf area index58. This leads to additional uncertainty compared to the MOD17A3 GPP product.To test the effect of an alternative RF algorithm we repeated our prediction with the RF algorithm from the Python scikit-learn library59 using the same number of decision trees (800). Additionally, we tested another machine-learning technique, a deep neural network (DNN), using the PyTorch library60. We selected 10 linear layers with 5 times alternating 128 and 256 nodes and a sigmoid output function. All layers were connected using the rectified linear unit activation function. We used the adamW optimizer with 0.0003 learning rate and 2000 epochs of training. To prevent overfitting, we included a 10% dropout after the 7th layer. Lastly, we included a very simple estimate of the most productive land cover based on the nearest neighbour using scikit-learn’s BallTree implementation together with the Haversine formula. For each grid cell we searched for the nearest forest, grassland, and cropland grid cell and assigned the respective GPP also to this grid cell. We thus assumed that environmental conditions are more or less identical in these grid cells, which might be a reasonable assumption for many locations but less reliable in complex terrain or in large homogeneous regions like the central Amazon rainforest where the nearest cropland/grassland grid cell might be located far away.Land-use change scenariosTo estimate the effects of historical and potential future land cover changes on global GPP we applied LUH2 scenarios23 which also serve as input data for ESMs participating in CMIP6. Land-use changes over the historical period are based on the HYDE reconstruction3, while future projections were developed by different Integrated Assessment Models combining various assumptions of socio-economic behaviour (SSPs) with climate mitigation targets (RCPs). Annual fractions for the two land cover classes cropland (sum of 5 crop types) and managed grassland (sum of pasture and rangeland) were available for each scenario at 0.25° resolution (https://luh.umd.edu/). We converted to 0.05° resolution assuming the same land cover fractions for all 25 grid cells around the LUH2 grid cells. We considered the following land cover transitions: forest to managed grassland, forest to cropland, and natural grassland to cropland (and reverse transitions for future scenarios). Transitions in areas suitable for only two land cover types were also included. Conversions of natural grasslands to managed grasslands were assumed not to affect productivity. We assumed the original land cover of a grid cell to be either forest (i.e., potential forest cover  > 36.3%) or natural grassland and accordingly multiplied the converted areas by the differences in potential GPP derived from our RF approach. Our broad forest definition including open tree cover (see above) and the fact that we assumed a change from 100 to 0% forest area in deforested grid cells results in a total historical deforestation area substantially larger than estimated in a recent study (2.4 Mkm2 vs. 1.6 Mkm2)61. These assumptions, however, do not impair our GPP estimate as our approach implicitly accounts for gradients in forest productivity (open forests tend to have lower GPP than closed forests). To test the sensitivity of the resulting GPP reduction we also applied the potential GPP maps from our uncertainty analysis to historical land-use changes (Supplementary Fig. S6). For future land cover changes we investigated changes over the 2015–2100 period for all available LUH2 scenarios: SSP1-1.9, SSP2-2.6, SSP4-3.4, SSP5-3.4, SSP2-4.5, SSP4-6.0, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5. Land-use activities in these scenarios range from large-scale deforestation (e.g., SSP3-7.0) to reforestation (e.g., SSP1-1.9) (Supplementary Fig. S7).Earth System ModelsWe compared the potential GPP estimated by our RF algorithm to simulations of eight ESMs participating in CMIP6 (CESM2-CLM562, CNRM-ESM2.1-Surfex 8.0c63, EC-Earth3-Veg-LPJ-GUESSv464, GFDL-ESM4-GFDL-LM4.165, IPSL-CM6A-LR-ORCHIDEEv2.066, MIROC-ES2L-MATSIRO6.0 + VISIT-e ver.1.067, MPI-ESM1-2-LR-JSBACH3.2068, UKESM1-0-LL-JULES-ES-1.069) with an explicit representation of natural vegetation and at least one agricultural land cover class (cropland or managed grassland) in their vegetation sub-model. We selected these ESMs so that all vegetation models implemented in more than one ESM were represented only once (e.g., the JSBACH vegetation model is a component of both MPI-ESM1-2-LR and AWI-ESM). For each ESM, the variable gppLut was downloaded from the CMIP6 archive (https://esgf-data.dkrz.de/search/cmip6-dkrz/) for the historical simulations. These files contain simulated GPP for natural vegetation, pasture, and cropland for which we calculated the 2001–2014 mean (2014 is the last year of the historical period). ESMs use fractional land covers for each grid cell, meaning that climatic drivers are inherently the same for all land cover types within a grid cell and simulated productivities can therefore be directly compared. As ESMs differ in their spatial resolution we bilinear remapped all output to 0.05° resolution using Climate Data Operators33 to allow for a fair comparison across models. To assess the sensitivity of our results to the interpolation method we also tested conservative remapping which results in slightly different maps (Supplementary Fig. S15) and usually larger model biases (Supplementary Table 2). In addition, ESMs differ in where they simulate forests in natural vegetation areas, and therefore we removed all grid cells from the comparison where at least one ESM simulated no tree productivity/cover/biomass in order to avoid comparing the GPP of natural grasslands to managed grasslands. We provide maps based on the original output for each ESM in Supplementary Fig. S10.FLUXNET dataWe compared our predictions of potential GPP to FLUXNET Tier 1 eddy covariance measurements (Supplementary Fig. S16)70. We included all forest, woody savannah (classified as forest), grassland and cropland sites21 which were located in suitable areas for the respective land cover. Mean GPP was calculated as the mean of the GPP estimates based on the night-time (GPP_NT_VUT_REF) and day-time (GPP_DT_VUT_REF) partitioning method. As some sites only had a few years of data, all available years were considered (i.e., site mean GPP was calculated for a different time period than 2001–2015). Comparisons were made with the potential GPP in the respective grid cell in which the site was located (i.e., not calibrated to site conditions). More

Woolhouse MEJ, Gowtage-Sequeria S. Host range and emerging and reemerging pathogens. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:1842–7.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Allen T, Murray KA, Zambrana-Torrelio C, Morse SS, Rondinini C, Di Marco M, et al. Global hotspots and correlates of emerging zoonotic diseases. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1–10.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Van Kerkhove MD, Ly S, Holl D, Guitian J, Mangtani P, Ghani AC, et al. Frequency and patterns of contact with domestic poultry and potential risk of H5N1 transmission to humans living in rural Cambodia. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2008;2:155–63.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gaythorpe KAM, Hamlet A, Cibrelus L, Garske T, Ferguson NM. The effect of climate change on yellow fever disease burden in Africa. eLife. 2020;9:1–27.Article 

Google Scholar 
Faust CL, McCallum HI, Bloomfield LSP, Gottdenker NL, Gillespie TR, Torney CJ, et al. Pathogen spillover during land conversion. Ecol Lett. 2018;21:471–83.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gog J, Woodroffe R, Swinton J. Disease in endangered metapopulations: The importance of alternative hosts. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2002;269:671–6.Article 

Google Scholar 
Jones BA, Grace D, Kock R, Alonso S, Rushton J, Said MY, et al. Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:8399–404.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
White LA, Forester JD, Craft ME. Disease outbreak thresholds emerge from interactions between movement behavior, landscape structure, and epidemiology. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115:7374–9.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Altizer S, Bartel R, Han BA. Animal migration and infectious disease risk. Science. 2011;331:296–302.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ludwig SC, Roos S, Bubb D, Baines D. Long-term trends in abundance and breeding success of red grouse and hen harriers in relation to changing management of a Scottish grouse moor. Wildl Biol. 2017;2017:wlb.00246.Article 

Google Scholar 
Newton I. Weather-related mass-mortality events in migrants. Ibis. 2007;149:453–67.Article 

Google Scholar 
Ropert-Coudert Y, Kato A, Meyer X, Pellé M, MacIntosh AJJ, Angelier F, et al. A complete breeding failure in an Adélie penguin colony correlates with unusual and extreme environmental events. Ecography. 2015;38:111–3.Article 

Google Scholar 
Newmark WD, Stanley TR. Habitat fragmentation reduces nest survival in an Afrotropical bird community in a biodiversity hotspot. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:11488–93.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tuyttens FaM, Macdonald DW, Rogers LM, Cheeseman CL, Roddam AW. Comparative study on the consequences of culling badgers (Meles meles) on biometrics, population dynamics and movement. J Anim Ecol. 2000;69:567–80.Article 

Google Scholar 
Frafjord K. Influence of reproductive status: Home range size in water voles (Arvicola amphibius). PLoS ONE. 2016;11:1–13.Article 

Google Scholar 
Begg CM, Begg KS, Du Toit JT, Mills MGL. Spatial organization of the honey badger Mellivora capensis in the southern Kalahari: Home-range size and movement patterns. J Zool. 2005;265:23–35.Article 

Google Scholar 
Bronikowski AM, Cords M, Alberts SC, Altmann J, Brockman DK, Fedigan LM, et al. Female and male life tables for seven wild primate species. Sci Data. 2016;3:1–8.Article 

Google Scholar 
Mitchell GW, Woodworth BK, Taylor PD, Norris DR. Automated telemetry reveals age specific differences in flight duration and speed are driven by wind conditions in a migratory songbird. Mov Ecol. 2015;3:1–13.Article 

Google Scholar 
Frankish CK, Manica A, Phillips RA. Effects of age on foraging behavior in two closely related albatross species. Mov Ecol. 2020;8:1–17.Article 

Google Scholar 
Tirpak JM, Giuliano WM, Allen TJ, Bittner S, Edwards JW, Friedhof S, et al. Ruffed grouse-habitat preference in the central and southern Appalachians. Ecol Manag. 2010;260:1525–38.Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhu WW, Garber PA, Bezanson M, Qi XG, Li BG. Age- and sex-based patterns of positional behavior and substrate utilization in the golden snub-nosed monkey (Rhinopithecus roxellana). Am J Primatol. 2015;77:98–108.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tian H, Yu P, Bjørnstad ON, Cazelles B, Yang J, Tan H, et al. Anthropogenically driven environmental changes shift the ecological dynamics of hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome. PLOS Pathog. 2017;13:e1006198.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
George DB, Webb CT, Farnsworth ML, O’Shea TJ, Bowen RA, Smith DL, et al. Host and viral ecology determine bat rabies seasonality and maintenance. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:10208–13.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
van Dijk JG, Verhagen JH, Wille M, Waldenström J. Host and virus ecology as determinants of influenza A virus transmission in wild birds. Curr Opin Virol. 2018;28:26–36.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chong R, Shi M, Grueber CE, Holmes EC, Hogg CJ, Belov K, et al. Fecal Viral Diversity of Captive and Wild Tasmanian Devils Characterized Using Virion-Enriched Metagenomics and Metatranscriptomics. J Virol. 2019;93:e00205–19.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
François S, Pybus OG. Towards an understanding of the avian virome. J Gen Virol. 2020;101:785–90.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Springer A, Fichtel C, Al-Ghalith GA, Koch F, Amato KR, Clayton JB, et al. Patterns of seasonality and group membership characterize the gut microbiota in a longitudinal study of wild Verreaux’s sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi). Ecol Evol. 2017;7:5732–45.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Aivelo T, Laakkonen J, Jernvall J. Population-and individual-level dynamics of the intestinal microbiota of a small primate. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82:3537–45.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
van Dongen WFD, White J, Brandl HB, Moodley Y, Merkling T, Leclaire S, et al. Age-related differences in the cloacal microbiota of a wild bird species. BMC Ecol. 2013;13:11.Cleaveland S, Laurenson MK, Taylor LH. Diseases of humans and their domestic mammals: Pathogen characteristics, host range and the risk of emergence. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2001;356:991–9.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wille M, Shi M, Hurt AC, Klaassen M, Holmes EC. RNA virome abundance and diversity is associated with host age in a bird species. Virology. 2021;561:98–106.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Negrey JD, Thompson ME, Langergraber KE, Machanda ZP, Mitani JC, Muller MN, et al. Demography, life-history trade-offs, and the gastrointestinal virome of wild chimpanzees. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2020;375:20190613.Article 

Google Scholar 
Hill SC, Manvell RJ, Schulenburg B, Shell W, Wikramaratna PS, Perrins C, et al. Antibody responses to avian influenza viruses in wild birds broaden with age. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2016;283:20162159.Article 

Google Scholar 
Perrins CM, Ogilvie MA. A study of the Abbotsbury mute swans (Cygnus olor). Wildfowl. 1981;32:35–47.
Google Scholar 
Perrins CM, McCleery RH, Ogilvie MA. A study of the breeding Mute Swans Cygnus olor at Abbotsbury. Wildfowl. 1994;45:1–14.
Google Scholar 
Perrins C. Survival rates of young mute swans Cygnus olor. Wildfowl Suppl. 1991;45:95–103.
Google Scholar 
McCleery RH, Perrins C, Wheeler D, Groves S. Population structure, survival rates and productivity of mute swans breeding in a colony at Abbotsbury, Dorset, England. Waterbirds Waterbird Soc. 2002;25:201.
Google Scholar 
Matrozis R A 30-year (1988–2017) study of Mute Swans Cygnus olor in Riga, Latvia. Wildfowl. 2019;14:164–77.Charmantier A, Perrins C, McCleery RH, Sheldon BC. Quantitative genetics of age at reproduction in wild swans: Support for antagonistic pleiotropy models of senescence. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:6587–92.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hill SC, Hansen R, Watson S, Coward V, Russell C, Cooper J, et al. Comparative micro-epidemiology of pathogenic avian influenza virus outbreaks in a wild bird population. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20180259.Cotten M, Oude Munnink B, Canuti M, Deijs M, Watson SJ, Kellam P, et al. Full genome virus detection in fecal samples using sensitive nucleic acid preparation, deep sequencing, and a novel iterative sequence classification algorithm. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e93269.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Boom R, Sol CJA, Salimans MMM, Janses CL, Wertheim Van Dillen PME, Van Der Noordaa J. Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids R. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28:495–503.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Endoh D, Mizutani T, Kirisawa R, Maki Y, Saito H, Kon Y, et al. Species-independent detection of RNA virus by representational difference analysis using non-ribosomal hexanucleotides for reverse transcription. Nucleic Acids Res. 2005;33:1–11.Article 

Google Scholar 
Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMB. 2011;17:10–12.
Google Scholar 
Zerbino DR, Birney E. Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. Genome Res. 2008;18:821–9.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Buchfink B, Xie C, Huson DH. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat Methods. 2014;12:59–60.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215:403–10.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Langmead B Aligning short sequencing reads with Bowtie. Curr Protoc Bioinforma. 2010; Chapter 11: Unit 11.7.Kearse M, Moir R, Wilson A, Stones-Havas S, Cheung M, Sturrock S, et al. Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinforma Oxf Engl. 2012;28:1647–9.Article 

Google Scholar 
Katoh K, Misawa K, Kuma K, Miyata T. MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:3059–66.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30:772–80.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1792–7.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Muhire BM, Varsani A, Martin DP SDT: A virus classification tool based on pairwise sequence alignment and identity calculation. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e108277.Darriba D, Taboada GL, Doallo R, Posada D. ProtTest 3: fast selection of best-fit models of protein evolution. Bioinforma Oxf Engl. 2011;27:1164–5.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:1312–3.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kapoor A, Simmonds P, Lipkin WI, Zaidi S, Delwart E. Use of nucleotide composition analysis to infer hosts for three novel picorna-like viruses. J Virol. 2010;84:10322–8.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wood DE, Salzberg SL Kraken: Ultrafast metagenomic sequence classification using exact alignments. Genome Biol. 2014;15:R46.Lu J, Breitwieser FP, Thielen P, Salzberg SL. Bracken: estimating species abundance in metagenomics data. PeerJ Comput Sci. 2017;3:e104.Article 

Google Scholar 
Cole JR, Wang Q, Fish JA, Chai B, McGarrell DM, Sun Y, et al. Ribosomal Database Project: Data and tools for high throughput rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:633–42.Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2019. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. 2015. Boston, MA, USA.Dixon P. VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. J Veg Sci. 2003;14:927–30.Article 

Google Scholar 
Anderson MJ. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol. 2001;26:32–46.
Google Scholar 
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1995;57:289–300.
Google Scholar 
Benjamini Y, Yekutieli D. The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Ann Stat. 2001;29:1165–88.Article 

Google Scholar 
Oakley BB, Lillehoj HS, Kogut MH, Kim WK, Maurer JJ, Pedroso A, et al. The chicken gastrointestinal microbiome. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2014;360:100–12.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Waite DW, Taylor MW. Characterizing the avian gut microbiota: Membership, driving influences, and potential function. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:1–12.Article 

Google Scholar 
Waite DW, Taylor MW. Exploring the avian gut microbiota: Current trends and future directions. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1–12.Article 

Google Scholar 
Zell R, Delwart E, Gorbalenya AE, Hovi T, King AMQ, Knowles NJ, et al. ICTV virus taxonomy profile: Picornaviridae. J Gen Virol. 2017;98:2421–2.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cotmore SF, Agbandje-McKenna M, Canuti M, Chiorini JA, Eis-Hubinger AM, Hughes J, et al. ICTV virus taxonomy profile: Parvoviridae. J Gen Virol. 2019;100:367–8.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bosch A, Guix S, Krishna N, Méndez E, Monroe SS, Pantin-Jackwood M, et al. Astroviridae. In: King A, Adams M, Carstens E, Lefkowitz E (eds). Virus taxonomy. Classification and nomenclature of viruses: ninth report of the International Committee on the Taxonomy of Viruses. 2011. Elsevier, London, pp 953-9.Risely A. Applying the core microbiome to understand host–microbe systems. J Anim Ecol. 2020;89:1549–58.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Piepenbring AK, Enderlein D, Herzog S, Kaleta EF, Heffels-Redmann U, Ressmeyer S, et al. Pathogenesis of avian bornavirus in experimentally infected Cockatiels. Emerg Infect Dis. 2012;18:234–41.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Anzil AP, Blinzinger K, Mayr A. Persistent Borna virus infection in adult hamsters. Arch Für Gesamt Virusforsch. 1973;40:52–57.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Heffels-Redmann U, Enderlein D, Herzog S, Piepenbring A, Bürkle M, Neumann D, et al. Follow-Up Investigations on Different Courses of Natural Avian Bornavirus Infections in Psittacines. Avian Dis. 2012;56:153–9.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rubbenstroth D, Brosinski K, Rinder M, Olbert M, Kaspers B, Korbel R, et al. No contact transmission of avian bornavirus in experimentally infected cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) and domestic canaries (Serinus canaria forma domestica). Vet Microbiol. 2014;172:146–56.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Olsen I The Family Fusobacteriaceae. In: Rosenberg E, Delong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (eds). The Prokaryotes: Firmicutes and Tenericutes, 4th ed. 2014. pp 109-32.Imhoff JF The Family Chlorobiaceae. In: Rosenberg E, Delong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (eds). The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea, 4th ed. 2014. pp 501-14.Cho JC The Family Lentisphaeraceae. In: Rosenberg E, Delong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (eds). The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea, 4th ed. 2014. pp 705-10.Karami A, Sarshar M, Ranjbar R, Zanjani RS The Phylum Spirochaetaceae. In: Rosenberg E, Delong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (eds). The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea, 4th ed. 2014. pp 915-29.McBride MJ The Family Flavobacteriaceae. In: Rosenberg E, Delong EF, Lory S, Stackebrandt E, Thompson F (eds). The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea, 4th ed. 2014. pp 643-76.Van Dijk JGB, Hoye BJ, Verhagen JH, Nolet BA, Fouchier RAM, Klaassen M. Juveniles and migrants as drivers for seasonal epizootics of avian influenza virus. J Anim Ecol. 2014;83:266–75.Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chevalier V, Marsot M, Molia S, Rasamoelina H, Rakotondravao R, Pedrono M, et al. Serological evidence of West Nile and Usutu viruses circulation in domestic and wild birds in wetlands of Mali and Madagascar in 2008. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:1998.Guy, JS Turkey Viral Hepatitis. Diseases of Poultry, 12th Edition. 2008. Wiley Blackwell, pp 426-30.Davies ZG, Fuller RA, Dallimer M, Loram A, Gaston KJ. Household factors influencing participation in bird feeding activity: a national scale analysis. PLOS ONE. 2012;7:e39692.Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Shutt JD, Trivedi UH, Nicholls JA. Faecal metabarcoding reveals pervasive long-distance impacts of garden bird feeding. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2021;288:20210480.Article 

Google Scholar 
Minich JJ, Sanders JG, Amir A, Humphrey G, Gilbert JA, Knight R. Quantifying and understanding well-to-well contamination in microbiome research. mSystems. 2019;4:e00186–19.Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

Vegetation is the main component of terrestrial ecosystems and as an indicator of ecosystem changes. In the world’s land area, forest land accounts for about 30%, grassland accounts for 26%, and cultivated land accounts for about 12%1. China has the second largest grassland area in the world. The total grassland is 392 million hectares in China, which is about 12% of the world’s grassland area and about 41% of China’s national territorial area, which is about twice of China’s arable land2. In China, the type of grassland ranks first in the world, mainly including northern grasslands, southern grassy hills and slopes, coastal beaches, wetlands, and natural grasslands in agricultural areas. It includes 18 major categories, 38 subcategories, and more than 1,000 types. The grassland resources also contain extremely rich biodiversity, with more than 7,000 pastures and thousands of animals, making it as the largest biological gene pool in Asia and also the world.
Grassland plays an important role in ecological environment protection and animal husbandry development. Like the grasslands in Europe, China’s land use forms, management objectives, and use systems are becoming increasingly diversified3. Grassland has not only made great contributions to preventing soil erosion, purifying chemical fertilizers and pesticides, regulating groundwater, and promoting biodiversity, but also as a basic nutrient for herbivores and ruminants, providing environmental benefits for ensuring the health of grassland animal products. In addition, grassland has aesthetic and entertainment functions, and it can provide functions that other agricultural land use types do not have. In addition, grassland also has an important ecological function of regulating climate4,5,6, for example, grasslands can significantly contribute to climate mitigation while providing substantial additional ecosystem services7. Grassland is the only land use type that can accomplish so many tasks and meet so many requirements.Grasslands are highly vulnerable to climate change or human activities8, the research on the relationship between grassland coverage change and its human influencing factors can reflect the scope and degree of influence of natural conditions and human activities on grassland coverage change and has a reference significance for balancing economic development and environmental protection. Grassland is not only an important material basis and means of production for the development of animal husbandry but also an important natural barrier to economic development in southeast china. Zhejiang province is located in the Yangtze River Delta, the transportation is quite convenient, the economic foundation is very well and the economy develops very rapid9. Meanwhile, with the rapid development of industrialization and urbanization, the change in land use form has been breathtaking, and human activities have improved the degree of land exploitation and utilization. The natural grassland area in Zhejiang Province is 3 million hm2, about 30% of the total land area of the province, of which the available grassland area is 600,000 hm2, for about 20% of the total area of natural grassland. Accordingly, there is enormous potential for developing the grassland industry in Zhejiang province10.There are three ways to calculate the grassland coverage, (1) field measurement method, (2) remote sensing estimation method, and (3) integrated measurement method of field measurement and remote sensing estimation11. The field measurement method is not suitable for large-scale measurement and measuring alone in various applications, because the measurement range of this method is limited, it is only suitable for the selected field plot. For remote sensing estimation method does not depend on field measurement data, and can reduce the workload and save time, so it is suitable for large-scale grass coverage estimation. At the same time, the field measurement method is an indispensable auxiliary and verification method for modern measurement methods such as remote sensing. Therefore, the comprehensive measurement method of field measurement and remote sensing can obtain more reliable data.With the rapid development of aerospace science and technology, more and more remote sensing data can be used to monitor land use form12. Currently, the most commonly used remote sensing images include Landsat MSS/TM/ETM+, NOAA/AVHRR, and EOS-MODIS. In recent years, satellite SAR, SPOT, CBERS, and other images have also been widely used in research. For global or state-scale land research, NOAA/AVHRR and MODIS data are mainly used. For regional scale, as long as Landsat TM/ETM+ and other high-resolution data are applied.The change of grassland coverage in Zhejiang Province and its effect factors are of great significance to the development of animal husbandry, the rational development and utilization of land, and the balanced development of the economy and environment. However, there are few studies have been done about this. Therefore, we present the following questions: (1) How did the grassland coverage change in Zhejiang Province from 1980 to 2018? (2) What are the main factors that affect the change in grassland coverage? This study aims to make clear grassland coverage Change and quantitative assessment of its effect factors. Meanwhile, the result of this study will provide a more comprehensive knowledge of the grassland of Zhejiang Province as well as useful suggestions for grassland resource management and sustainable development. More

Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: The hologenome theory of evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 32, 723–735 (2008).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Archie, E. A. & Theis, K. R. Animal behaviour meets microbial ecology. Anim. Behav. 82, 425–436 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
McFall-Ngai, M. et al. Animals in a bacterial world, a new imperative for the life sciences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 3229–3236 (2013).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cresci, G. A. & Bawden, E. Gut microbiome: What we do and don’t know. Nutr. Clin. Pract. Off. Publ. Am. Soc. Parenter. Enter. Nutr. 30, 734–746 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Martin, C. R., Osadchiy, V., Kalani, A. & Mayer, E. A. The brain–gut–microbiome axis. Cell. Mol. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 6, 133–148 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Davidson, G. L., Raulo, A. & Knowles, S. C. Identifying microbiome-mediated behaviour in wild vertebrates. Trends Ecol. Evol. 35, 972–980 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ushida, K., Kock, R. & Sundset, M. A. Wildlife microbiology. Microorganisms 9, 1968 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ezenwa, V. O., Gerardo, N. M., Inouye, D. W., Medina, M. & Xavier, J. B. Animal behavior and the microbiome. Science 338, 198–199 (2012).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ezenwa, V. O. & Williams, A. E. Microbes and animal olfactory communication: Where do we go from here?. BioEssays 36, 847–854 (2014).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Carthey, A. J. R., Gillings, M. R. & Blumstein, D. T. The extended genotype: Microbially mediated olfactory communication. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 885–894 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Maraci, Ö., Engel, K. & Caspers, B. A. Olfactory communication via microbiota: What is known in birds?. Genes 9, 387 (2018).Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hird, S. M. Evolutionary biology needs wild microbiomes. Front. Microbiol. 8, 725 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Alberdi, A., Martin Bideguren, G. & Aizpurua, O. Diversity and compositional changes in the gut microbiota of wild and captive vertebrates: A meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 11, 22660 (2021).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Leclaire, S., Nielsen, J. F. & Drea, C. M. Bacterial communities in meerkat anal scent secretions vary with host sex, age, and group membership. Behav. Ecol. 25, 996–1004 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Theis, K. R., Schmidt, T. M. & Holekamp, K. E. Evidence for a bacterial mechanism for group-specific social odors among hyenas. Sci. Rep. 2, 615 (2012).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Theis, K. R. et al. Symbiotic bacteria appear to mediate hyena social odors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 1983219837 (2013).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Gassett, J. W., Dasher, K. A., Miller, K. V., Osborn, D. A. & Russell, S. M. White-tailed deer tarsal glands: Sex and age-related variation in microbial flora. Mammalia 64, 371–377 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sin, Y. W., Buesching, C. D., Burke, T. & Macdonald, D. W. Molecular characterization of the microbial communities in the subcaudal gland secretion of the European badger (Meles meles). FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 81, 648–659 (2012).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Albone, E. S., Eglinton, G., Walker, J. M. & Ware, G. C. The anal sac secretion of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes); its chemistry and microbiology. A comparison with the anal sac secretion of the lion (Panthera leo). Life Sci. 14, 387–400 (1974).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Greene, L. K. et al. The importance of scale in comparative microbiome research: New insights from the gut and glands of captive and wild lemurs. Am. J. Primatol. 81, e22974 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Leclaire, S., Jacob, S., Greene, L. K., Dubay, G. R. & Drea, C. M. Social odours covary with bacterial community in the anal secretions of wild meerkats. Sci. Rep. 7, 3240 (2017).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Grieves, L. A., Gloor, G. B., Kelly, T. R., Bernards, M. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. Preen gland microbiota of songbirds differ across populations but not sexes. J. Anim. Ecol. 90, 2202–2212 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Whittaker, D. J. et al. Social environment has a primary influence on the microbial and odor profiles of a chemically signaling songbird. Front. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1–15 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grieves, L. A., Gloor, G. B., Bernards, M. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. Preen gland microbiota covary with major histocompatibility complex genotype in a songbird. R. Soc. Open Sci. 8, 210936 (2021).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Whittaker, D. J. et al. Experimental evidence that symbiotic bacteria produce chemical cues in a songbird. J. Exp. Biol. 222, jeb202978 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Martín-Vivaldi, M. et al. Antimicrobial chemicals in hoopoe preen secretions are produced by symbiotic bacteria. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 277, 123–130 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whittaker, D. J. et al. Intraspecific preen oil odor preferences in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav. Ecol. 22, 1256–1263 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grieves, L. A., Bernards, M. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. Behavioural responses of songbirds to preen oil odour cues of sex and species. Anim. Behav. 156, 57–65 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grieves, L. A., Gloor, G. B., Bernards, M. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. Songbirds show odour-based discrimination of similarity and diversity at the major histocompatibility complex. Anim. Behav. 158, 131–138 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pearce, D. S., Hoover, B. A., Jennings, S., Nevitt, G. A. & Docherty, K. M. Morphological and genetic factors shape the microbiome of a seabird species (Oceanodroma leucorhoa) more than environmental and social factors. Microbiome 5, 146 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Leclaire, S. et al. Plumage microbiota covaries with the major histocompatibility complex in blue petrels. Mol. Ecol. 28, 833–846 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bisson, I.-A., Marra, P. P., Burtt, E. H. Jr., Sikaroodi, M. & Gillevet, P. M. Variation in plumage microbiota depends on season and migration. Microb. Ecol. 58, 212 (2009).Article 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Arcese, P., Sogge, M. K., Marr, A. B. & Patten, M. A. Song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (ed. Rodewald, P. G.) (Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Breton, J. et al. Ecotoxicology inside the gut: Impact of heavy metals on the mouse microbiome. BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol. 14, 62 (2013).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ruan, Y. et al. High doses of copper and mercury changed cecal microbiota in female mice. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 189, 134–144 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lin, X. et al. Acute oral methylmercury exposure perturbs the gut microbiome and alters gut-brain axis related metabolites in rats. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 190, 110130 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Grieves, L. A. et al. Food stress, but not experimental exposure to mercury, affects songbird preen oil composition. Ecotoxicology 29, 275–285 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Christian, V. J., Miller, K. R. & Martindale, R. G. Food insecurity, malnutrition, and the microbiome. Curr. Nutr. Rep. 9, 356–360 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Genton, L., Cani, P. D. & Schrenzel, J. Alterations of gut barrier and gut microbiota in food restriction, food deprivation and protein-energy wasting. Clin. Nutr. 34, 341–349 (2015).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Noguera, J. C., Aira, M., Pérez-Losada, M., Domínguez, J. & Velando, A. Glucocorticoids modulate gastrointestinal microbiome in a wild bird. R. Soc. Open Sci. 5, 171743 (2018).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
Salgado-Flores, A., Tveit, A. T., Wright, A.-D., Pope, P. B. & Sundset, M. A. Characterization of the cecum microbiome from wild and captive rock ptarmigans indigenous to Arctic Norway. PLoS One 14, e0213503 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hird, S. M., Sánchez, C., Carstens, B. C. & Brumfield, R. T. Comparative gut microbiota of 59 neotropical bird species. Front. Microbiol. 6, 1403 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Thomas, R. H. et al. Use of TLC-FID and GC-MS⁄FID to examine the effects of migratory state, diet and captivity on preen wax composition in White-throated Sparrows Zonotrichia albicollis. Ibis 152, 782–792 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Xie, Y. et al. Effects of captivity and artificial breeding on microbiota in feces of the red-crowned crane (Grus japonensis). Sci. Rep. 6, 33350 (2016).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
San Juan, P. A., Castro, I. & Dhami, M. K. Captivity reduces diversity and shifts composition of the Brown Kiwi microbiome. Anim. Microbiome 3, 48 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wu, H., Wu, F.-T., Zhou, Q.-H. & Zhao, D.-P. Comparative analysis of gut microbiota in captive and wild oriental white storks: Implications for conservation biology. Front. Microbiol. 12, 649466 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rodríguez-Ruano, S. M. et al. The hoopoe’s uropygial gland hosts a bacterial community influenced by the living conditions of the bird. PLoS One 10, e0139734 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Xenoulis, P. G. et al. Molecular characterization of the cloacal microbiota of wild and captive parrots. Vet. Microbiol. 146, 320–325 (2010).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kelly, T. R., Vinson, A. E., King, G. M. & Lattin, C. R. No guts about it: Captivity, but not neophobia phenotype, influences the cloacal microbiome of house sparrows (Passer domesticus). Integr. Org. Biol. 4, obac010 (2022).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Grond, K., Sandercock, B. K., Jumpponen, A. & Zeglin, L. H. The avian gut microbiota: Community, physiology and function in wild birds. J. Avian Biol. 49, e01788 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Videvall, E., Strandh, M., Engelbrecht, A., Cloete, S. & Cornwallis, C. K. Measuring the gut microbiome in birds: Comparison of faecal and cloacal sampling. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 18, 424–434 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Kohl, K. D., Skopec, M. M. & Dearing, M. D. Captivity results in disparate loss of gut microbial diversity in closely related hosts. Conserv. Physiol. 2, cou009 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Martínez-Mota, R., Kohl, K. D., Orr, T. J. & Denise Dearing, M. Natural diets promote retention of the native gut microbiota in captive rodents. ISME J. 14, 67–78 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chatelain, M., Frantz, A., Gasparini, J. & Leclaire, S. Experimental exposure to trace metals affects plumage bacterial community in the feral pigeon. J. Avian Biol. 47, 521–529 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jacob, S. et al. Uropygial gland size and composition varies according to experimentally modified microbiome in great tits. BMC Evol. Biol. 14, 134 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jacob, J. & Ziswiler, V. The uropygial gland. In Avian Biology Vol. 6 (eds Farner, D. S. et al.) 199–324 (Academic Press, 1982).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Byrd, A. L., Belkaid, Y. & Segre, J. A. The human skin microbiome. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 16, 143 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Egert, M. & Simmering, R. The microbiota of the human skin. Microbiota Hum. Body 902, 61–81 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grice, E. A. et al. A diversity profile of the human skin microbiota. Genome Res. 18, 1043–1050 (2008).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Xu, B. et al. Molecular and biochemical characterization of a novel xylanase from Massilia sp. RBM26 isolated from the feces of Rhinopithecus bieti. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 26, 9–19 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rosenberg, E. The Prokaryotes (Springer, 2014).Book 

Google Scholar 
Tang, J., Huang, J., Qiao, Z., Wang, R. & Wang, G. Mucilaginibacter pedocola sp. Nov., isolated from a heavy-metal-contaminated paddy field. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 66, 4033–4038 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Vasconcelos, A. L. et al. Mucilaginibacter sp. strain metal (loid) and antibiotic resistance isolated from estuarine soil contaminated mine tailing from the Fundão dam. Genes 13, 174 (2022).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dewi, G. & Kollanoor Johny, A. Lactobacillus in food animal production—A forerunner for clean label prospects in animal-derived products. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 6, 831195 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dworkin, M. The Prokaryotes Proteobacteria: Alpha and Beta Subclasses (Springer Science & Business Media, 2006).Book 

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

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

Google Scholar 
Sherwin, E., Bordenstein, S. R., Quinn, J. L., Dinan, T. G. & Cryan, J. F. Microbiota and the social brain. Science 366, eaar2016 (2019).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bottini, C. L., MacDougall-Shackleton, S. A., Branfireun, B. A. & Hobson, K. A. Feathers accurately reflect blood mercury at time of feather growth in a songbird. Sci. Total Environ. 775, 145739 (2021).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kelly, T. R., Bonner, S. J., MacDougall-Shackleton, S. A. & MacDougall-Shackleton, E. A. Exposing migratory sparrows to Plasmodium suggests costs of resistance, not necessarily of infection itself. J. Exp. Zool. Part Ecol. Integr. Physiol. 329, 5–14 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whittaker, D. J. & Hagelin, J. C. Female-based patterns and social function in avian chemical communication. J. Chem. Ecol. 47, 53–62 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Griffiths, R., Double, M. C., Orr, K. & Dawson, R. J. A DNA test to sex most birds. Mol. Ecol. 7, 1071–1075 (1998).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). Three Rs | Trois R :: About the Three Rs. https://3rs.ccac.ca/.Lane, D. J. et al. Rapid determination of 16S ribosomal RNA sequences for phylogenetic analyses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 82, 6955–6959 (1985).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Caporaso, J. G. et al. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108, 4516–4522 (2011).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gloor, G. B. et al. Microbiome profiling by Illumina sequencing of combinatorial sequence-tagged PCR products. PLoS One 5, e15406 (2010).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
Bian, G. et al. The gut microbiota of healthy aged Chinese is similar to that of the healthy young. Msphere 2, e00327-e417 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Q., Garrity, G. M., Tiedje, J. M. & Cole, J. R. Naïve Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 5261–5267 (2007).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Stoler, N. & Nekrutenko, A. Sequencing error profiles of Illumina sequencing instruments. NAR Genom. Bioinform. 3, lqab019 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bokulich, N. A. et al. Quality-filtering vastly improves diversity estimates from Illumina amplicon sequencing. Nat. Methods 10, 57–59 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gloor, G. B., Macklaim, J. M., Pawlowsky-Glahn, V. & Egozcue, J. J. Microbiome datasets are compositional: And this is not optional. Front. Microbiol. 8, 2224 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Aitchison, J. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data (Chapman and Hall, 1986).Book 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Gloor, G. B. & Reid, G. Compositional analysis: A valid approach to analyze microbiome high-throughput sequencing data. Can. J. Microbiol. 62, 692–703 (2016).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Quinn, T. P., Erb, I., Richardson, M. F. & Crowley, T. M. Understanding sequencing data as compositions: An outlook and review. Bioinformatics 34, 2870–2878 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Palarea-Albaladejo, J. & Martin-Fernandez, J. zCompositions—R package for multivariate imputation of left-censored data under a compositional approach. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 143, 85–96 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fernandes, A. D. et al. Unifying the analysis of high-throughput sequencing datasets: Characterizing RNA-seq, 16S rRNA gene sequencing and selective growth experiments by compositional data analysis. Microbiome 2, 15 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Aitchison, J. & Greenacre, M. Biplots of compositional data. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. C Appl. Stat. 51, 375–392 (2002).Article 
MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Davis, N. M., Proctor, D. M., Holmes, S. P., Relman, D. A. & Callahan, B. J. Simple statistical identification and removal of contaminant sequences in marker-gene and metagenomics data. Microbiome 6, 1–14 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dixon, P. & Palmer, M. W. VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. J. Veg. Sci. 14, 927–930 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fernandes, A. D., Macklaim, J. M., Linn, T. G., Reid, G. & Gloor, G. B. ANOVA-like differential expression (ALDEx) analysis for mixed population RNA-Seq. PLoS One 8, e67019 (2013).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nearing, J. T. et al. Microbiome differential abundance methods produce different results across 38 datasets. Nat. Commun. 13, 342 (2022).Article 
ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Halsey, L. G., Curran-Everett, D., Vowler, S. L. & Drummond, G. B. The fickle P value generates irreproducible results. Nat. Methods 12, 179–185 (2015).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More