More stories

  • in

    A database of seed plants on taxonomy, geography and ecology in the Qinling-Daba Mountains and adjacent areas

    Each of the 23 key variables can be used for analysis. To validate the dataset, we used five plant-related variables (diversity of order, family, genus, species and species endemic to China) to demonstrate the process of using the dataset for analysis as follows:(1) For the four variables of plant taxa “order”, “family”, “genus” and “species”, the similarity and difference in spatial distribution pattern of diversity of different taxa in the Qinling-Daba Mountains climate transition zone were analyzed. The spatial distribution pattern of the diversity of the four taxa is shown in Fig. 3, which is increasingly lower from south (low latitude) to north (high latitude). This result is consistent with the classical latitudinal gradient model of plant diversity. The boundary between higher diversity in the south and lower diversity in the north is roughly located in the area of Funiu Mountains in the eastern Qinling-Daba Mountains, Taibai Mountains in the central Qinling-Daba Mountains and Baishui River in the western Qinling-Daba Mountains. However, with the reduction in taxon scale, the spatial distribution pattern of diversity tends to be complex. Orders (Fig. 3a) and families (Fig. 3b) can be divided by lines, while genera (Fig. 3c) need thicker lines, and species (Fig. 3d) can only be divided by polygons. Figure 3 shows that the taxonomic groups of families are more clearly divided, while species can only be divided by staggered bands. Therefore, when dividing the north–south boundary, the family taxon scale is appropriate, whereas the species scale is more appropriate when studying the north–south transition zone.Fig. 3Spatial distribution of diversity of orders, families, genera and species. (a) The blue dotted line is basically the dividing line of the order diversity of 50 species. The order diversity to the north of the blue dotted line is lower than 50 species, and the order diversity to the south of the blue dotted line is higher than 50 species. (b) The blue dotted line is basically the dividing line of the family diversity of 150 species. The family diversity to the north of the blue dotted line is lower than 150 species, and the family diversity to the south of the blue dotted line is higher than 150 species. (c) The thicker blue dotted line is basically the dividing line of genus diversity of 578–681 species. The genus diversity to the north of the blue dotted line is lower than 578 species, and the genus diversity to the south of the blue dotted line is higher than 681 species. (d) The blue area is basically the dividing line of species diversity of 1385–1618 species. The species diversity to the north of the blue dotted line is lower than 1385 species, and the species diversity to the south of the blue dotted line is higher than 1618 species.Full size imageThe dataset can also count the orders, families and genera that appear in 58 nature reserves, indicating that these orders, families and genera are widely distributed in this area, while the orders, families and genera that only appear in a single nature reserve indicate that these taxa are unique to this nature reserve in this area, reflecting their locality and uniqueness, which is helpful to understanding the specific distribution of plants in detail. The relevant statistics are as follows:
    There are 28 orders present in every nature reserve:
    Liliales, Dipsacales, Lamiales, Fabales, Ericales, Poales, Saxifragales, Malpighiales, Malvales, Asterales, Fagales, Gentianales, Geraniales, Ranunculales, Rosales, Solanales, Apiales, Cornales, Brassicales, Caryophyllales, Dioscoreales, Santalales, Myrtales, Asparagales, Celastrales, Sapindales, Alismatales, and Boraginales.The order that only appears in one nature reserve is Petrosaviales, which appears in the Dabashan Nature Reserve in Chongqing.
    There are 51 families present in every nature reserve:
    Liliaceae, Primulaceae, Plantaginaceae, Lamiaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Cannabaceae, Juncaceae, Fabaceae, Poaceae, Elaeagnaceae, Betulaceae, Apocynaceae, Violaceae, Malvaceae, Crassulaceae, Campanulaceae, Asteraceae, Orchidaceae, Polygonaceae, Orobanchaceae, Onagraceae, Gentianaceae, Geraniaceae, Ranunculaceae, Rubiaceae, Rosaceae, Caprifoliaceae, Thymelaeaceae, Apiaceae, Cyperaceae, Cornaceae, Paeoniaceae, Brassicaceae, Amaryllidaceae, Caryophyllaceae, Rhamnaceae, Santalaceae, Asparagaceae, Celastraceae, Sapindaceae, Adoxaceae, Araliaceae, Berberidaceae, Hydrangeaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Convolvulaceae, Urticaceae, Salicaceae, Papaveraceae, Iridaceae, and Boraginaceae.There are 15 families that only appear in one nature reserve, as shown in Table 2.Table 2 Endemic families of the nature reserves in the Qinling-Daba Mountains and surrounding areas.Full size table
    There are 54 genera present in every nature reserve:
    Patrinia, Polygonum, Sanicula, Plantago, Allium, Delphinium, Euphorbia, Juncus, Cynanchum, Trigonotis, Artemisia, Sorbus, Polygonatum, Scutellaria, Cirsium, Viburnum, Ajuga, Viola, Galium, Geranium, Salix, Epilobium, Gentiana, Ranunculus, Malus, Acer, Rubia, Rosa, Torilis, Lonicera, Adenophora, Philadelphus, Cornus, Paeonia, Rhamnus, Rumex, Carex, Thalictrum, Asparagus, Carpesium, Clematis, Potentilla, Euonymus, Eleutherococcus, Berberis, Spiraea, Rubus, Populus, Vicia, Silene, Iris, Poa, Aster, and Buddleja.There were 225 genera that only appeared in one nature reserve, as shown in Figshare file 269.(2) For the “species endemic to China” variable of plants, we can see from the diversity distribution pattern of species endemic to China in this region (Fig. 4) that the number of endemic species in the Qinling-Daba Mountains is higher than that of species outside of the region, which reflects the strong transition zone in the Qinling-Daba Mountains. The variables of species endemic to China obtained from the Qinling-Daba Mountains and their surroundings were clustered by the Bray–Curtis dissimilarity measure70 and Ward’s minimum variance (the clustering method recommended for plant cluster analysis). The clustering results are shown in Fig. 5a. At the same time, the clustering results are displayed in space. Figure 5b shows that category 3 extends from the east outside the Qinling-Daba Mountains to the Baishuijiang Nature Reserve inside the western Qinling-Daba Mountains, which is consistent with the fact that the Qinling-Daba Mountains are an important ecogeographical “corridor” connecting the east and the west.Fig. 4Spatial distribution of diversity of species endemic to China in the Qinling-Daba Mountains and adjacent areas.Full size imageFig. 5(a) Clustering results of Ward’s connection aggregation of species endemic to China in 58 nature reserves. (b) Spatial distribution of clustering results of species endemic to China; the larger the dot and the darker the color, the earlier it is merged into this category, and the smaller the dot and the lighter the color, the later it is merged into this category.Full size image More

  • in

    Radiation dose and gene expression analysis of wild boar 10 years after the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant accident

    SamplesThe intestine and muscle samples from 22 wild boars were collected between September 4 and March 2, 2020, in Namie town in Fukushima prefecture. Furthermore, control intestine samples were collected from three wild boars in Hyogo prefecture. Each location is depicted in Fig. 1. In each case, after the licensed hunters slaughtered the wild boar to be exterminated, only the tissue was transferred to the study.Measurement of radioactivityRadioactivity in the muscle samples was determined by gamma-ray spectrometry using high-purity germanium (HPGe) detectors (Ortec Co., Oak Ridge, TN, USA), as described in our previous report3. Gamma rays from 137Cs were observed.Exposure dose estimationIn order to estimate internal and external dose rates of the wild boars according to the ICRP publication 10826, we supposed the shapes of wild boars as prolate spheroids whose long axis was to be their body lengths. The short axis was given from their weight assuming their specific gravities were the same
    as water. The dose rates were calculated from the contribution of 137Cs, not including
    natural radionuclides. The energy deposition to the spheroids by beta and gamma rays from radionuclides were calculated by the numerical simulation with the use of the Particle and Heavy Ion Transport code System (PHITS)27. For the sake of simplicity, we supposed the spheroids consisted of only muscle, which would give overestimated values because muscle contains more radio cesium than other organs. The external exposure dose was calculated from the air dose rates which were observed from the monitoring post near the boars captured place. The average values of the air dose rates were obtained from fitting observed data of two years with decay curve. The background due to the natural radionuclides was estimated to be 0.05 µGy/h which was observed before the Fukushima Daiichi accident, and was removed before the fittings. The half-lives of the air dose rates were 2000–3000 days depending on the environment. Assuming the external exposure dose was ascribed to the 137Cs included in the surface of the ground. The amount of the 137Cs was calculated so as to reproduce the observed air does rates. Since the maximum range of the beta ray from 137Cs is a few millimeters, almost all of the beta ray from inside the body should be absorbed in the boar’s body, but the beta ray from outside the body would stop in its fur. The beta rays contribute 100% to internal exposure dose but 0% to external one. Since the linear attenuation coefficient for gamma rays from 137Cs is 0.084 cm−1 = (12 cm)−1, some of the gamma rays cannot stop in the body depending on the size of the body. The numerical simulation suggested that 65–90 percent of the gamma rays from 137Cs inside the body would go out, and 40–65 percent of the gamma rays from 137Cs outside would go through the body.Pathological analysisA piece of the small intestine was fixed in 10% neutral formalin at 4 °C for 24–48 h. Then, paraffin blocks were prepared for pathomorphological examination using hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining.Gene expression analysisTotal RNA was extracted from the whole tissue of the intestine using TRIzol Reagent (Life Technologies, Inc., Frederic, MD, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. RNA concentration was measured using a NanoDrop spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, DE, USA), and cDNA was synthesized using random primers and SuperScript II (Life Technologies, Inc.). Real-time PCR for IFN-γ, TLR3, and CyclinG1 was performed using Brilliant SYBR Green QPCR Master Mix III (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA, USA) with an AriaMx system (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Primer sequences were designed using Primer-BLAST with sequences obtained from GenBank as described in the previous report4. Amplification conditions were 95 °C for 3 min, 40 cycles at 95 °C for 5 s, and 60 °C for 20 s. Fluorescence signals measured during the amplification were analyzed. Ribosomal RNA primers were used as an internal control, and all data were normalized to constitutive rRNA values. Quantitative differences between the groups were analyzed using the AriaMx software (Agilent Technologies).Statistical analysisAll data are presented as mean ± standard error (SE) for each treatment group. Differences in mRNA expression among the groups were determined using the unpaired t-test with Welch’s correction. (Prism: GraphPad Software Inc., La Jolla, CA, USA). Differences were considered to be statistically significant at a P value of  More

  • in

    Mountain- and brown hare genetic polymorphisms to survey local adaptations and conservation status of the heath hare (Lepus timidus sylvaticus, Nilsson 1831)

    Angerbjörn, A. & Flux, J. E. C. Lepus timidus. Mamm. Species 1–11, https://doi.org/10.2307/3504302 (1995).Bergengren, A. On genetics, evolution and history of distribution of the heath-hare, a distinct population of the Arctic hare, Lepus timidus Lin. Swed. Wildl. (Viltrevy) 6, 381–460 (1969).
    Google Scholar 
    Thulin, C.-G. The distribution of mountain hares Lepus timidus in Europe: a challenge from brown hares L. europaeus? Mamm. Rev. 33, 29–42 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mills, L. S. et al. Camouflage mismatch in seasonal coat color due to decreased snow duration. Proc. Nat.Acad. Sci. 110, 7360–7365 (2013).Article 
    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Zimova, M. et al. Lack of phenological shift leads to increased camouflage mismatch in mountain hares. Proc.Royal Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 287, 20201786 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Levänen, R., Kunnasranta, M. & Pohjoismäki, J. Mitochondrial DNA introgression at the northern edge of the brown hare (Lepus europaeus) range. Ann Zool Fennici 55, 15–24 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Thulin, C.-G., Winiger, A., Tallian, A. G. & Kindberg, J. Hunting harvest data in Sweden indicate precipitous decline in the native mountain hare subspecies Lepus timidus sylvaticus (heath hare). J. Nat. Conserv. 64, 126069 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Thulin, C.-G., Jaarola, M. & Tegelström, H. The occurrence of mountain hare mitochondrial DNA in wild brown hares. Mol. Ecol. 6, 463–467 (1997).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Pohjoismäki, J. L. O., Michell, C., Levänen, R. & Smith, S. Hybridization with mountain hares increases the functional allelic repertoire in brown hares. Sci. Rep. 11, 15771 (2021).Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Hoekstra, H. E. Genetics, development and evolution of adaptive pigmentation in vertebrates. Heredity (Edinb) 97, 222–234 (2006).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Hamill, R. M., Doyle, D. & Duke, E. J. Spatial patterns of genetic diversity across European subspecies of the mountain hare, Lepus timidus L. Heredity (Edinb) 97, 355–365 (2006).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Leach, K., Montgomery, W. I. & Reid, N. Biogeography, macroecology and species’ traits mediate competitive interactions in the order Lagomorpha. Mamm. Rev. 45, 88–102 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marques, J. P. et al. Data Descriptor: Mountain hare transcriptome and diagnostic markers as resources to monitor hybridization with European hares. Sci. Data 4, 1–11 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    NCBI Sequence Read Archive https://identifiers.org/insdc.sra:SRP358660 (2022).Andrews, S. FastQC: a quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. Babraham Bioinformatics. Preprint at http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc (2010).Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet.journal 17, 10–12 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marques, J. P. et al. An annotated draft genome of the mountain hare (Lepus timidus). Genome Biol. Evol. 12, 3656–3662 (2020).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Li, H. & Durbin, R. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25, 1754–1760 (2009).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Broad Institute. Picard toolkit. Broad Institute, GitHub repository. Preprint at https://broadinstitute.github.io/picard/ (2019).Garrison, E. & Marth, G. Haplotype-based variant detection from short-read sequencing. arXiv 1207.3907 (2012).Danecek, P. et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27, 2156–2158 (2011).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Browning, S. R. & Browning, B. L. Rapid and accurate haplotype phasing and missing-data inference for whole-genome association studies by use of localized haplotype clustering. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 1084–1097 (2007).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Michell, C. T., Pohjoismäki, J. L. O., Spong, G. & Thulin, C.-G. Mountain- and brown hare genetic polymorphisms to survey local adaptations and conservation status of the heath hare (Lepus timidus sylvaticus, Nilsson 1831), Dryad, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3bk3j9kmp (2022).Khan, A. & Mathelier, A. Intervene: a tool for intersection and visualization of multiple gene or genomic region sets. BMC Bioinformatics 18, 287 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/.Jombart, T. & Ahmed, I. adegenet 1.3-1: new tools for the analysis of genome-wide SNP data. Bioinformatics 27, 3070–3071 (2011).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Jombart, T. adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24, 1403–1405 (2008).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Dierckxsens, N., Mardulyn, P. & Smits, G. NOVOPlasty: De novo assembly of organelle genomes from whole genome data. Nucleic Acids Res. 45 (2017).Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30 (2013).Trifinopoulos, J., Nguyen, L. T., von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. W-IQ-TREE: a fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 44 (2016).Kalyaanamoorthy, S., Minh, B. Q., Wong, T. K. F., von Haeseler, A. & Jermiin, L. S. ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat. Methods 14, 587–589 (2017).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Stamatakis, A. RaxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30, 1312–1313 (2014).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ewels, P., Magnusson, M., Lundin, S. & Käller, M. MultiQC: summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report. Bioinformatics 32, 3047–3048 (2016).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

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

    Google Scholar 
    Li, H. Minimap2: Pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34, 3094–3100 (2018).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Levänen, R., Thulin, C.-G., Spong, G. & Pohjoismäki, J. L. O. Widespread introgression of mountain hare genes into Fennoscandian brown hare populations. PloS One 13, e0191790 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Giska, I. et al. The evolutionary pathways for local adaptation in mountain hares. Mol. Ecol. 31, 1487–1503 (2022).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Thulin, C.-G., Isaksson, M. & Tegelström, H. The origin of Scandinavian mountain hares (Lepus timidus). Gibier Faune Savage/Game and Wildlife 14, 463–475 (1997).
    Google Scholar 
    Ferreira, M. S. et al. The legacy of recurrent introgression during the radiation of hares. Syst. Biol. 70, 593–607 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Effects of different pioneer and exotic species on the changes of degraded soils

    Sacristán, D., Peñarroya, B., Recatalá, L. Increasing the Knowledge on the Management of Cu-Contaminated Agricultural Soils by Cropping Tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.). Land Degrad. Dev. 26, 587–595 (2015).FAO. Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands. Manual for Local Level Assessment of Land Degradation and Sustainable Land Management. Part 1: Planning and Methodological Approach, Analysis and Reporting. https://www.fao.org/3/i6362e/i6362e.pdf (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2011).Vlachodimos, K., Papatheodorou, E. M., Diamantopoulos, J. & Monokrousos, N. Assessment of Robinia pseudoacacia cultivations as a restoration strategy for reclaimed mine spoil heaps. Environ Monit. Assess. 185, 6921–6932 (2013).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Misano, G. & Di Pietro, R. Habitat 9250 “Quercus trojana woods” in Italy. Fitosociologia 44, 235–238 (2007).
    Google Scholar 
    Biondi, E. et al. A contribution towards the knowledge of semideciduous and evergreen woods of Apulia (south-eastern Italy). Fitosociologia 41(1), 3–28 (2004).MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar 
    Brunetti, G. et al. Remediation of a heavy metals contaminated soil using mycorrhized and non-mycorrhized Helichrysum italicum (Roth) Don. Land Degrad. Dev. 29, 91–104 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Poblador, S. et al. The influence of the invasive alien nitrogen-fixing Robinia pseudoacacia L. on soil nitrogen availability in a mixed Mediterranean riparian forest. Eur. J. For. Res. 138, 1083–1093 (2019).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Vítková, M., Müllerová, J., Sádlo, J., Pergl, J. & Pyšek, P. Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) beloved and despised: A story of an invasive tree in Central Europe. For. Ecol. Manag. 384, 287–302 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Doran, J.W., Parkin, T.B. Quantitative indicators of soil quality: a minimum data set. in Methods for Assessing Soil Quality (eds. Doran, J.W., Jones, A.J.). 25–37 (Soil Science Society of America, 1996).Gil-Sotres, F., Trasar-Cepeda, C., Leirós, M. C. & Seoane, S. Different approaches to evaluating soil quality using biochemical properties. Soil Biol. Biochem. 37, 877–887 (2005).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Andriani, G. F. & Walsh, N. An example of the effects of anthropogenic changes on natural environment in the Apulian karst (southern Italy). Environ. Geol. 58, 313–325 (2009).Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Bisantino, T., Pizzo, V., Polemio, M. & Gentile, F. Analysis of the flooding event of October 22–23, 2005 in a small basin in the province of Bari (Southern Italy). J. Agric. Eng. 531, 197–204 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Soil Survey Staff. Keys to Soil Taxonomy 12th edn. (USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2014).
    Google Scholar 
    Tartarino, P. Inventario dei Boschi Spontanei e dei Rimboschimenti delle Provincie BAT e Bari e Stima del Loro Volume Legnoso e della sua Frazione Prelevabile nel Prossimo Ventennio. (Rapporto Tecnico Scientifico, 2011).Ismail, A. et al. Chemical composition and biological activities of Tunisian Cupressus arizonica Greene essential oils. Chem. Biodivers. 11, 150–160 (2014).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Navarro, A. et al. Feasibility of SRC Species for growing in Mediterranean conditions. Bioenerg. Res. 9, 208–223 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Perrino, E. V., Brunetti, G. & Farrag, K. Plant communities in multi-metal contaminated soils: A case study in the National Park of Alta Murgia (Apulia Region-Southern Italy). Int. J. Phytoremediat. 16, 871–888 (2014).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    VV AA Perizia Studi per il Riequilibrio Socio-Economico dell’area Interessata dall’invaso sul Torrente Locone. Consorzio Di Bonifica Apulo Lucano (1986).Lavarra, P. et al. Il Sistema Carta della Natura della Regione Puglia. (ISPRA, Serie Rapporti 204, 2014).Sparks, D. L. et al. Method of Soil Analysis: Part 3 (American Society of Agronomy Inc, 1996).Book 

    Google Scholar 
    Brink, R. H. Jr., Dubach, P. & Lynch, D. L. Measurement of carbohydrates in soil hydrolyzates with anthrone. Soil Sci. 89, 157–166 (1960).Article 
    ADS 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L. & Randall, R. J. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem. 193, 265–275 (1951).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    García, C., Hernandez, T. & Costa, F. Potential use of dehydrogenase activity as an index of microbial activity in degraded soils. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 28, 123–134 (1997).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Vance, E. D., Brookes, P. C. & Jenkinson, D. S. An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19, 703–707 (1987).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Gregorich, E. G., Wen, G., Voroney, R. P. & Kachanoski, R. G. Calibration of a rapid direct chloroform extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol. Biochem. 22, 1009–1011 (1990).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Nannipieri, P., Ceccanti, B., Cervelli, S. & Matarese, E. Extraction of phosphatase, urease, protease, organic carbon and nitrogen from soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44, 1011–1016 (1980).Article 
    ADS 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Tabatabai, M.A. (1994) Soil enzymes. in Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Microbiological and Biochemical Properties (eds. Weaver, R.W. et al.). 775–833 (Soil Science Society of America, Inc., 1996)Traversa, A., Said-Pullicino, D., D’Orazio, V., Gigliotti, G., & Senesi, N. Properties of humic acids in Mediterranean forest soils (Southern Italy): Influence of different plant covering. Eur. J. For. Res. 130, 1045–1054 (2011)De Marco, A. et al. Decomposition of black locust and black pine leaf litter in two coeval forest stands on Mount Vesuvius and dynamics of organic components assessed through proximate analysis and NMR spectroscopy. Soil Biol. Biochem. 51, 1–15 (2012).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Wei, G. et al. Invasive Robinia pseudoacacia in China is nodulated by Mesorhizobium and Sinorhizobium species that share similar nodulation genes with native American symbionts. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 68, 320–328 (2009).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Schulze, E. D., Gebauer, G., Ziegler, H. & Lange, O. L. Estimates of nitrogen fixation by trees on an aridity gradient in Namibia. Oecologia 88, 451–455 (1991).Article 
    ADS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Zahran, H. H. Rhizobium-legume symbiosis and nitrogen fixation under severe conditions and in an arid climate. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 63, 968–989 (1999).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Veste, M. & Kriebitzsch, W. U. Influence of drought stress on photosynthesis, transpiration, and growth of juvenile black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.). Forstarchiv 84, 35–42 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Nicolescu, V. N. et al. Ecology, growth and management of black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.), a non-native species integrated into European forests. J. For. Res. 31, 1081–1101 (2020).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Sposito, G. The Chemistry of Soil (Oxford University Press, 2008).
    Google Scholar 
    Margalef, O. et al. Global patterns of phosphatase activity in natural soils. Sci. Rep. 7, 1337. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01418-8 (2017).Prescott, C. E. & Grayston, S. J. Tree species influence on microbial communities in litter and soil: Current knowledge and research needs. For. Ecol. Manag. 309, 19–27 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Frankenberger, W. T. & Dick, W. A. Relationships between enzyme, activities and microbial growth and activity indices in soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 47, 945–951 (1983).Article 
    ADS 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Frankenberger, W.T., Tabatabai, M.A. Amidase activity in soils III. Stability and distribution. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45, 333–338 (1981).Nannipieri, P., Trasar-Cepeda, C. & Dick, R. P. Soil enzyme activity: A brief history and biochemistry as a basis for appropriate interpretations and meta-analysis. Biol. Fertil. Soils 54, 11–19 (2018).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Pascual, J. A., Garcia, C., Hernandez, T., Moreno, J. L. & Ros, M. Soil microbial activity as a biomarker of degradation and remediation processes. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1877–1883 (2000).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    García-Gil, J. C., Plaza, C., Solker-Rovira, P. & Polo, A. Long-term effects of municipal solid waste compost application on soil enzyme activities and microbial biomass. Soil Biol. Biochem. 32, 1907–1913 (2000).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Insam, H. & Domsch, K. H. Relationship between soil organic carbon and microbial biomass on chronosequences of reclamation sites. Microb. Ecol. 15, 177–188 (1988).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Acosta-Martinez, V. & Tabatabai, M. Enzyme activities in a limed agricultural soil. Biol. Fertil. Soils 31, 85–91 (2000).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Uselman, S. M., Qualls, R. G. & Thomas, R. B. A test of a potential short cut in the nitrogen cycle: the role of exudation of symbiotically fixed nitrogen from the roots of a N-fixing tree and the effects of increased atmospheric CO2 and temperature. Plant Soil 210, 21–32 (1999).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    De Marco, A., Esposito, F., Berg, B., Zarrelli, A. & Virzo De Santo, A. Litter inhibitory effects on soil microbial biomass activity, and catabolic diversity in two paired stands of Robinia pseudoacacia L. and Pinus nigra Arn. Forest 9, 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9120766 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Haghverdi, K. & Kooch, Y. Effects of diversity of tree species on nutrient cycling and soil-related processes. CATENA 178, 335–344 (2019).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Anderson, H. T. Microbial eco-physiological indicators to assess soil quality. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 98, 285–293 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jenkinson, D.S., Ladd, J.N. Microbial biomass in soil: Measurement and turnover. in Soil Biochemistry (eds. Paul, E.A., Ladd, J.N.). 415–471 (Marcel Dekker Inc., 1981) More

  • in

    Sampling from four geographically divergent young female populations demonstrates forensic geolocation potential in microbiomes

    Cohort demographicsA total of 206 female participants were enrolled in the study and passed our quality control standards. All participants were required to be between the ages of 18–26 years old (22.5 ± 2.1) and to be born and at the time living in one of four geographically distinct regions of the world: Barbados; Santiago, Chile; Pretoria, S. Africa; and Bangkok, Thailand. The regions do, however, differ by an order of magnitude in their geographic spread as the intra-distance separating the residence neighborhood of participants ranged from 34 (Barbados) to 681 km (Pretoria, S. Africa) (Fig. S2). The Chilean and the South African datasets are further divided into two contiguous sub-regions, or neighborhoods, to allow for a micro-geographic analysis. The study population is largely dominated by individuals with self-identified Thai heritage (33%), followed by Black African (16%), Afro-Caribbean (14%) and white (14%) descent, although 19% of the Chilean population did not report ethnicity.Study participants, despite the divergent geographies, mostly have similar dietary and lifestyle habits (Table S1). Over half the study population (62%) have a normal BMI, with the mean BMI in this range (22.6 ± 5.5). The diets of the different cohorts are also similar as of the total cohort, 78% consume a starch heavy diet (≥ 4 days a week) of rice, bread and pasta, followed by 66% who frequently consume (≥ 4 days a week) vegetables and fruit and 49% who frequently consume dairy products. The study population is split by level of tobacco exposure, with 51% of the population having never smoked, and 43% being exposed to second-hand smoke through living with a smoker. Over half (56%) of the study population own one or more pets.Stool microbiomeThe OTUs identified using the UPARSE pipeline17 were used to compute the alpha diversity of the microbial communities using the Chao1 (species richness) and Shannon (species evenness) indices. The mean Shannon indices reveal that the microbiota diversity is only significant between Thailand-Chile with FDR  More

  • in

    Improving quantitative synthesis to achieve generality in ecology

    Houlahan, J. E., McKinney, S. T., Anderson, T. M. & McGill, B. J. The priority of prediction in ecological understanding. Oikos 126, 1–7 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lawton, J. H. Are there general laws in ecology? Oikos 84, 177–192 (1999).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Elliott-Graves, A. Generality and causal interdependence in ecology. Philos. Sci. 85, 1102–1114 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fox, J. W. The many roads to generality in ecology. Philos. Top. 9, 83–104 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    McGill, B. J. et al. Species abundance distributions: moving beyond single prediction theories to integration within an ecological framework. Ecol. Lett. 10, 995–1015 (2007).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    MacArthur, R. H. & Wilson, E. O. An equilibrium theory of insular zoogeography. Evolution 17, 373–387 (1963).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gurevitch, J., Fox, G. A., Wardle, G. M., Inderjit & Taub, D. Emergent insights from the synthesis of conceptual frameworks for biological invasions. Ecol. Lett. 14, 407–418 (2011).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Borer, E. T. et al. Finding generality in ecology: a model for globally distributed experiments. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 65–73 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S. & Stewart, G. Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature 555, 175–182 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Anderson, S. C. et al. Trends in ecology and conservation over eight decades. Front. Ecol. Environ. 19, 274–282 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kneale, D., Thomas, J., O’Mara-Eves, A. & Wiggins, R. How can additional secondary data analysis of observational data enhance the generalisability of meta-analytic evidence for local public health decision making? Res. Synth. Methods 10, 44–56 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Aguinis, H., Pierce, C. A., Bosco, F. A., Dalton, D. R. & Dalton, C. M. Debunking myths and urban legends about meta-analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 14, 306–331 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 47, 1451–1458 (2010).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Cardinale, B. J., Gonzalez, A., Allington, G. R. H. & Loreau, M. Is local biodiversity declining or not? A summary of the debate over analysis of species richness time trends. Biol. Conserv. 219, 175–183 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lundberg, I., Johnson, R. & Stewart, B. M. What is your estimand? Defining the target quantity connects statistical evidence to theory. Am. Sociol. Rev. 86, 532–565 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lawrance, R. et al. What is an estimand & how does it relate to quantifying the effect of treatment on patient-reported quality of life outcomes in clinical trials? J. Patient-Rep. Outcomes 4, 68 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Findley, M. G., Kikuta, K. & Denly, M. External validity. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 24, 365–393 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pearl, J. & Bareinboim, E. External validity: from do-calculus to transportability across populations. Stat. Sci. 29, 579–595 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Westreich, D., Edwards, J. K., Lesko, C. R., Cole, S. R. & Stuart, E. A. Target validity and the hierarchy of study designs. Am. J. Epidemiol. 188, 438–443 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Carpenter, C. J. Meta-analyzing apples and oranges: how to make applesauce instead of fruit salad. Hum. Commun. Res. 46, 322–333 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rohrer, J. M. & Arslan, R. C. Precise answers to vague questions: issues with interactions. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 4, 1–19 (2021).
    Google Scholar 
    Breslow, N. E. & Clayton, D. G. Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 88, 9–25 (1993).
    Google Scholar 
    Koricheva, J. & Gurevitch, J. Uses and misuses of meta-analysis in plant ecology. J. Ecol. 102, 828–844 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gonzalez, A. et al. Estimating local biodiversity change: a critique of papers claiming no net loss of local diversity. Ecology 97, 1949–1960 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Konno, K. et al. Ignoring non-English-language studies may bias ecological meta-analyses. Ecol. Evol. 10, 6373–6384 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Nakagawa, S. et al. Methods for testing publication bias in ecological and evolutionary meta-analyses. Methods Ecol. Evol. 13, 4–21 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rosenthal, R. The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychol. Bull. 86, 638–641 (1979).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Leung, B. et al. Clustered versus catastrophic global vertebrate declines. Nature 588, 267–271 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Rothman, K. J., Gallacher, J. E. J. & Hatch, E. E. Why representativeness should be avoided. Int. J. Epidemiol. 42, 1012–1014 (2013).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Spake, R. et al. Implications of scale dependence for cross-study syntheses of biodiversity differences. Ecol. Lett. 24, 374–390 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Spake, R. & Doncaster, C. P. Use of meta-analysis in forest biodiversity research: key challenges and considerations. For. Ecol. Manag. 400, 429–437 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Christie, A. P. et al. Simple study designs in ecology produce inaccurate estimates of biodiversity responses. J. Appl. Ecol. 56, 2742–2754 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nakagawa, S., Noble, D. W. A., Senior, A. M. & Lagisz, M. Meta-evaluation of meta-analysis: ten appraisal questions for biologists. BMC Biol. 15, 18 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Higgins, J. P. T. & Thompson, S. G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat. Med. 21, 1539–1558 (2002).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Schielzeth, H. & Nakagawa, S. Conditional repeatability and the variance explained by reaction norm variation in random slope models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 13, 1214–1223 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nakagawa, S. et al. The orchard plot: cultivating a forest plot for use in ecology, evolution, and beyond. Res. Synth. Methods 12, 4–12 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Lorah, J. Effect size measures for multilevel models: definition, interpretation, and TIMSS example. Large-Scale Assess. Educ. 6, 8 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    O’Connor, M. I. et al. A general biodiversity–function relationship is mediated by trophic level. Oikos 126, 18–31 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ojha, M., Naidu, D. G. T. & Bagchi, S. Meta-analysis of induced anti-herbivore defence traits in plants from 647 manipulative experiments with natural and simulated herbivory. J. Ecol. 110, 799–816 (2022).Dodds, K. C. et al. Material type influences the abundance but not richness of colonising organisms on marine structures. J. Environ. Manag. 307, 114549 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Dornelas, M. et al. Assemblage time series reveal biodiversity change but not systematic loss. Science 344, 296–299 (2014).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Senior, A. M. et al. Heterogeneity in ecological and evolutionary meta- analyses: its magnitude and implications. Ecology 97, 3293–3299 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Blowes, S. A. et al. The geography of biodiversity change in marine and terrestrial assemblages. Science 366, 339–345 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Nakagawa, S. & Cuthill, I. C. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Rev. 82, 591–605 (2007).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Glass, G. V. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ. Res. 5, 3–8 (1976).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Glass, G. V. Meta‐analysis at 25: a personal history. Education in Two Worlds https://ed2worlds.blogspot.com/2022/07/meta-analysis-at-25-personal-history.html (2000).Cooper, H. M. Organizing knowledge syntheses: a taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowl. Soc. 1, 104–126 (1988).
    Google Scholar 
    Soranno, P. A. et al. Cross-scale interactions: quantifying multi-scaled cause-effect relationships in macrosystems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12, 65–73 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gerstner, K. et al. Will your paper be used in a meta-analysis? Make the reach of your research broader and longer lasting. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 777–784 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hortal, J. et al. Seven shortfalls that beset large-scale knowledge of biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 46, 523–549 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Simons, D. J., Shoda, Y. & Lindsay, D. S. Constraints on Generality (CoG): a proposed addition to all empirical papers. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12, 1123–1128 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Yarkoni, T. The generalizability crisis. Behav. Brain Sci. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X20001685 (2020).Lopez, P. M., Subramanian, S. V. & Schooling, C. M. Effect measure modification conceptualized using selection diagrams as mediation by mechanisms of varying population-level relevance. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 113, 123–128 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Campbell, D. T. in Advances in QuasiExperimental Design and Analysis (ed. Trochim, W.) 67–77 (Jossey-Bass, 1986).Spake, R. et al. Meta‐analysis of management effects on biodiversity in plantation and secondary forests of Japan. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 1, e14 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Forest Ecosystem Diversity Basic Survey (in Japanese) (Forestry Agency of Japan, 2019); https://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/keikaku/tayouseichousa/index.htmlIto, S., Ishigamia, S., Mizoue, N. & Buckley, G. P. Maintaining plant species composition and diversity of understory vegetation under strip-clearcutting forestry in conifer plantations in Kyushu, southern Japan. For. Ecol. Manag. 231, 234–241 (2006).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Utsugi, E. et al. Hardwood recruitment into conifer plantations in Japan: effects of thinning and distance from neighboring hardwood forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 237, 15–28 (2006).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kominami, Y. et al. Classification of bird-dispersed plants by fruiting phenology, fruit size, and growth form in a primary lucidophyllous forest: an analysis, with implications for the conservation of fruit–bird interactions. Ornthological Sci. 2, 3–23 (2003).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Tsujino, R. & Matsui, K. Forest regeneration inhibition in a mixed broadleaf-conifer forest under sika deer pressure. J. For. Res. 27, 230–235 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Spake, R., Soga, M., Catford, J. A. & Eigenbrod, F. Applying the stress-gradient hypothesis to curb the spread of invasive bamboo. J. Appl. Ecol. 58, 1993–2003 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mize, T. D. Best practices for estimating, interpreting, and presenting nonlinear interaction effects. Sociol. Sci. 6, 81–117 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Karaca-Mandic, P., Norton, E. C. & Dowd, B. Interaction terms in nonlinear models. Health Serv. Res. 47, 255–274 (2012).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Spake, R. et al. Forest damage by deer depends on cross-scale interactions between climate, deer density and landscape structure. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 1376–1390 (2020).McCabe, C. J., Kim, D. S. & King, K. M. Improving present practices in the visual display of interactions. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 1, 147–165 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Shackelford, G. E. et al. Dynamic meta-analysis: a method of using global evidence for local decision making. BMC Biol. 19, 33 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Christie, A. P. et al. Innovation and forward‐thinking are needed to improve traditional synthesis methods: a response to Pescott and Stewart. J. Appl. Ecol. 59, 1191–1197 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Haddaway, N. R. et al. EviAtlas: a tool for visualising evidence synthesis databases. Environ. Evid. 8, 22 (2019).Delory, B. M., Li, M., Topp, C. N. & Lobet, G. archiDART v3.0: a new data analysis pipeline allowing the topological analysis of plant root systems. F1000Research 7, 22 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Perkel, J. M. The future of scientific figures. Nature 554, 133–134 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Weaver, S. & Gleeson, M. P. The importance of the domain of applicability in QSAR modeling. J. Mol. Graph. Model. 26, 1315–1326 (2008).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Sutton, C. et al. Identifying domains of applicability of machine learning models for materials science. Nat. Commun. 11, 4428 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Meyer, H. & Pebesma, E. Predicting into unknown space? Estimating the area of applicability of spatial prediction models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 12, 1620–1633 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pearl, J. & Bareinboim, E. Transportability of causal and statistical relations: a formal approach. In 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDMW.2011.169 (IEEE, 2011).Munthe-Kaas, H., Nøkleby, H. & Nguyen, L. Systematic mapping of checklists for assessing transferability. Syst. Rev. 8, 22 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Dekkers, O. M., von Elm, E., Algra, A., Romijn, J. A. & Vandenbroucke, J. P. How to assess the external validity of therapeutic trials: a conceptual approach. Int. J. Epidemiol. 39, 89–94 (2010).Article 
    PubMed 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Schloemer, T. & Schröder-Bäck, P. Criteria for evaluating transferability of health interventions: a systematic review and thematic synthesis. Implement. Sci. 13, 88 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Fernandez-Hermida, J. R., Calafat, A., Becoña, E., Tsertsvadze, A. & Foxcroft, D. R. Assessment of generalizability, applicability and predictability (GAP) for evaluating external validity in studies of universal family-based prevention of alcohol misuse in young people: systematic methodological review of randomized controlled trials. Addiction 107, 1570–1579 (2012).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Avellar, S. A. et al. External validity: the next step for systematic reviews? Eval. Rev. 41, 283–325 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bareinboim, E. & Pearl, J. A general algorithm for deciding transportability of experimental results. J. Causal Inference 1, 107–134 (2013).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Degtiar, I. & Rose, S. A review of generalizability and transportability. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2102.11904 (2021).Bareinboim, E. & Pearl, J. Meta-transportability of causal effects: a formal approach. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 31, 135–143 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Jamieson, D. Scientific uncertainty: how do we know when to communicate research findings to the public? Sci. Total Environ. 184, 103–107 (1996).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Burchett, H. E. D., Mayhew, S. H., Lavis, J. N. & Dobrow, M. J. When can research from one setting be useful in another? Understanding perceptions of the applicability and transferability of research. Health Promot. Int. 28, 418–430 (2013).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Forscher, P. et al. Build up big-team science. Nature 601, 505–507 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Whalen, M. A. et al. Climate drives the geography of marine consumption by changing predator communities. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 28160–28166 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Moshontz, H. et al. The Psychological Science Accelerator: advancing psychology through a distributed collaborative network. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 1, 501–515 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Marschner, I. C. A general framework for the analysis of adaptive experiments. Stat. Sci. 36, 465–492 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Clark, M. Shrinkage in Mixed Effects Models https://m-clark.github.io/posts/2019-05-14-shrinkage-in-mixed-models/ (2019).Gurevitch, J. & Hedges, L. V. Statistical issues in ecological meta-analyses. Ecology 80, 1142–1149 (1999).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mengersen, K., Gurevitch, J. & Schmid, C. H. in Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution (eds Koricheva, U. et al.) 300–312 (Princeton Univ. Press, 2013).Hudson, L. N. et al. The database of the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) project. Ecol. Evol. 7, 145–188 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Dornelas, M. et al. BioTIME: a database of biodiversity time series for the Anthropocene. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 27, 760–786 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Salguero-Gómez, R. et al. The COMPADRE Plant Matrix Database: an open online repository for plant demography. J. Ecol. 103, 202–218 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Salguero-Gómez, R. et al. COMADRE: a global data base of animal demography. J. Anim. Ecol. 85, 371–384 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Pastor, D. A. & Lazowski, R. A. On the multilevel nature of meta-analysis: a tutorial, comparison of software programs, and discussion of analytic choices. Multivar. Behav. Res. 53, 74–89 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Mixotrophy in depth

    Rippka, R. et al. J. Gen. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-111-1-1 (1979).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Muñoz-Marín, M. C. et al. ISME J. 14, 1065–1073 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Yelton, A. P. et al. ISME J. 10, 2946–2957 (2016).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ward, B. A. & Follows, M. J. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2958–2963 (2016).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Wu, Z. et al. Nat. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-022-01250-5 (2022).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Flombaum, P. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9824–9829 (2013).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Zubkov, M. et al. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69, 1299–1304 (2003).Article 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Vila-Costa, M. et al. Science 314, 652–654 (2006).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Muñoz-Marín, M. C. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 8597–8602 (2013).Article 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Gómez-Baena, G. et al. PLoS ONE 3, e3416 (2008).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Coe, A. et al. Limnol. Oceanogr. 71, 1375–1388 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Muñoz-Marín, M. C. et al. Microbiol. Spectr. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.10.04.462702 (2022).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Zebras of all stripes repel biting flies at close range

    The evolutionary origins of zebra stripes have been investigated—and debated—for centuries. The trait is rare, conspicuous, and intensely expressed, and thus appears to beg an adaptationist explanation. However, the utility of a complete coat of densely packed, starkly contrasting black-and-white stripes is not immediately apparent. Unlike many conspicuous visual traits, striped pelage is expressed with comparable intensity in both sexes and is thus unlikely to have arisen through sexual selection alone (although in plains zebras, Equus quagga, males have stripes closer to true black than females). Stripes are clearly not aposematic warning signals, nor do they provide camouflage in either the woodland or savannah habitats common across zebra ranges1,2. So, striping presents an ideal evolutionary puzzle: a trait so refined it seems it must be “for” something, but one that confers no clear advantage upon its bearers and imposes apparent costs (conspicuousness) that cannot be explained in Zahavian terms.Scientists have proposed and investigated several possible explanations for the evolution of zebra stripes (reviewed in3). The hypotheses suggest various ways in which stripes may provide a social function (species or individual recognition or social cohesion1,4), a temperature-regulation benefit5,6, an anti-predator effect7,8, or an anti-parasite effect9,10. There is continued debate over both the merits of individual hypotheses and the likelihood of stripes having arisen via a single driver vs. a confluence or alternation of multiple selective pressures6,11.The present study addresses the hypothesis that has thus far received the most empirical support: the anti-parasite hypothesis (also known as the ectoparasite hypothesis12). Zebras, like most ungulates, are harassed by tabanid, glossinid and Stomoxys species of biting flies, which can inflict significant blood loss, transmit disease, and weaken hosts when fly-avoidance behaviors reduce the host’s feeding rate9,13,14. Yet zebras are attacked far less than sympatric ungulates across their African range15,16, and also less than other equids9,17. Zebras also produce odors that may augment their anti-fly defenses18, but so do other sympatric ungulate species18,19, and a host of observations and experiments have demonstrated that black-and-white stripes alone are unattractive, or actively repellent to tabanid, glossinid, and Stomoxys flies17,20,21,22,23.Though the effect of stripes on flies is well-established, the source of the effect remains unexplained. Since Waage’s foundational studies in the 1970s and 1980s9,24 most hypotheses have suggested ways that stripes might interfere with the visual and navigational systems of flies, making it harder for them to locate, identify, or successfully land on striped targets. These hypothetical mechanisms can be roughly grouped by the distance (and the attendant phase of a fly’s orientation and landing behavior) at which they would likely operate:

    From afar: stripes might make it harder for flies to locate and distinguish zebras from background vegetation, perhaps by breaking up their outline9 or varying the way they polarize or reflect light17,31 especially from distances at which composite eyes support only low-resolution vision and cannot resolve zebra stripes as clear bands of alternating color on a single host (estimated at  > 2.0 m22,  > 4.4 m24, and even  > 20 m25).

    At close range (estimates range from 0.5 to 4.0 m26): stripes might interfere with orientation or landing behavior via any of several disruptive or ‘dazzle’-related visual effects27. For example, stripes might affect ‘optic flow’, or the fly’s perceived relative motion to its target as it approaches, by creating an illusion of false direction or speed of motion (e.g., via variants of the ‘barber pole’ or ‘wagon wheel’ effects28). Alternatively, relative motion to a striped pattern within the visual field may create the perception of self-rotation, inducing the fly’s involuntary ‘optomotor response’ and resulting in an avoidance turn in an effort to stay on a straight course29.

    Finally, stripes might cause confusion in the transition between long- and short-distance orientation. If zebras appear as blurred gray from a distance and then, at closer range, suddenly resolve into a sequence of floating black and white bars, this abrupt ‘visual transformation’26 might disrupt the behavioral sequence that facilitates landing.

    Within these categories, hypotheses have proliferated faster than experimental tests of many of the proposed mechanisms. The very active literature on this question has grown in somewhat haphazard fashion, as curious researchers test new possibilities without eliminating old ones6. Importantly, few experiments have controlled the distance from which flies are first able to view potential landing sites (but see23). While growing evidence supports a mechanism operating at close range22,26, failing to restrict the starting distance of the fly means that the full set of possible mechanisms outlined above all remain plausible contributors to most previous results.Additionally, while many studies have, appropriately, used artificial stimuli to isolate basic effects of color, pattern, brightness, and light polarization of (usually flat) test surfaces, possible contributions of several aspects of natural zebra pelage remain untested. Controlled experiments have used various landing substrates, including striped and solid oil tray traps, sticky plastic, smooth plastic17, cloth (Experiment 2 in22), horse blankets or sheets26, and paint on live animals30. These have all clearly demonstrated a broadly replicable visual effect: stripes, and some other juxtapositions of black and white (e.g., checkerboard patterns26), repel flies. However, insofar as specific features of zebra pelage factor into proposed mechanisms of fly repellence—the reflective properties of “smooth, shiny” coats31; the orientation of the stripes17,32; the light-polarizing effects of black and white hair vs. background vegetation25; and the complex structure of hair25—there is a need for more experiments that present natural targets to wild flies (but see22,33). Similarly, most experiments have compared landing preferences between black-and-white striped, solid black, solid white, and occasionally solid grey substrates, which have served as important controls for determining that light polarization, rather than a combination of polarization and brightness, is sufficient to induce the effect of stripe avoidance17. However, it is now time to refocus on the original question by presenting flies with more realistic choices. Since biting flies seeking a bloodmeal on the African savannah seldom encounter solid black hosts, and even more rarely solid white hosts, landing choices should be compared between zebra stripes and common coat colors of sympatric mammals, namely various shades of brown. Further, tabanid, glossinid, and Stomoxys flies all avoid landing on stripes that are the same width or narrower than the widest zebra stripes 17,23, and there is some evidence that narrower stripes are even more repellent to tabanids17. This pattern is potentially significant in the application of the anti-parasite hypothesis to an adaptive explanation for the striking variation in stripe width across zebra species and between the different areas of the body on individual zebras22, but must first be confirmed with experiments using real zebra pelage.Here, we present a simple experiment designed to address each of these gaps in the literature on the anti-fly benefits of zebra stripes. In this field experiment, the landing choices of flies were tested entirely within the range at which all estimates agree flies should be able to perceive the presented stripes ( More