Ecology

In the version of this article initially published, there were errors in equations and notations in the Methods “Model development” subsection which arose during manuscript preparation; the errors affect presentation of the study but not the analysis, results, or code provided with the article. Clarifications to text and equations follow.In Equation (1), “N” replaces “Normal”; in Equations (2), (3), (7) and in text directly below Equations (3), (5) and (7), “ys,i,z” now replaces “Δxs,t1, t2.” In the two paragraphs below Equation (2), “t2 = 2016” and “t1 = 2001” now replace “2016” and “2001” in five instances. Further, Equations (5)–(7) have been revised as follows:$$begin{array}{ll}fleft( {x_{s,t}} right) = {{{mathrm{exp}}}} & left( {beta _0 + mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} beta _{1,i} x_{s,i,t} + mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} mathop {sum }limits_{k = i}^{K = 5} beta _{2,i,k}x_{s,i,t}x_{k,s,t}}right. \ & quad quad left. {+ mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} mathop {sum }limits_{k = 1, k neq i}^{K = 5} beta _{3,i,k}x_{s,i,t}x_{k,s,t}} right)end{array} {rm{Revised}} {rm{Eq}}. (5)$$$$begin{array}{ll}fleft( {x_{s,t}} right) \ = expleft( {beta _0 + mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} mathop {sum }limits_{j = 1}^{J = 2} beta _{0,i,j,}x_{i,s,t}^j + mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} mathop {sum }limits_{k = i + 1}^{K = 6} beta _{1,i,k}x_{i,s,t}x_{k,s,t}} right) {mathrm{Original}} {rm{Eq}}. (5)end{array}$$$$y_{s,i,z} = left{ {begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {y_{s,i,1} = left| {Delta x_{s,i}} right|,} hfill & {y_{s,i,2} = 0,} hfill & {{{{mathrm{if}}}},Delta x_{s,i} < 0} hfill \ {y_{s,i,1} = 0,} hfill & {y_{s,i,2} = Delta x_{s,i}} hfill & {{{{mathrm{otherwise}}}}} hfill end{array}} right. {rm{Revised}} {rm{Eq}}. (6)$$$$x_{i,s,} = left{ {begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {x_{1,i,s} = left| {Delta x_{i,s}} right|,} hfill & {x_{2,i,s} = 0,} hfill & {if,Delta x_{i,s} < 0} hfill \ {x_{1,i,s} = 0,} hfill & {x_{2,i,s} = Delta x_{i,s},} hfill & {otherwise} hfill end{array}} right. {rm{Original}} {rm{Eq}}. (6)$$$$omega left( {y_{s,i,z};gamma } right) = {{{mathrm{exp}}}}left( {mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} mathop {sum }limits_{z = 1}^{Z = 2} - gamma _{i,z} y_{s,i,z}} right) {rm{Revised}} {rm{Eq}}. (7)$$$$omega left( {Delta x_{s,t_1,t_2};gamma } right) = expleft( {mathop {sum }limits_{i = 1}^{I = 5} - gamma _{i,z}Delta x_{z,s,i}} right) {rm{Original}} {rm{Eq}}. (7)$$All changes have been made in the HTML and PDF versions of the article. More

Knowlton, N. et al. in Life in the World’s Oceans 65–78 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010).Fisher, R. et al. Species richness on coral reefs and the pursuit of convergent global estimates. Curr. Biol. 25, 500–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.12.022 (2015).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Brandl, S. J., Goatley, C. H. R., Bellwood, D. R. & Tornabene, L. The hidden half: Ecology and evolution of cryptobenthic fishes on coral reefs. Biol. Rev. 93, 1846–1873. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12423 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Appeltans, W. et al. The magnitude of global marine species diversity. Curr. Biol. 22, 2189–2202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.09.036 (2012).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Carvalho, S. et al. Beyond the visual: Using metabarcoding to characterize the hidden reef cryptobiome. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.2697 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kramer, M. J., Bellwood, O., Fulton, C. J. & Bellwood, D. R. Refining the invertivore: Diversity and specialisation in fish predation on coral reef crustaceans. Mar. Biol. 162, 1779–1786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-015-2710-0 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brandl, S. J. et al. Demographic dynamics of the smallest marine vertebrates fuel coral reef ecosystem functioning. Science 364, 1189–1192. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav3384 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kramer, M. J., Bellwood, D. R. & Bellwood, O. Cryptofauna of the epilithic algal matrix on an inshore coral reef, Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 31, 1007–1015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-012-0924-x (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rocha, L. A. et al. Specimen collection: An essential tool. Science 344, 814–815. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.344.6186.814 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Berumen, M. L. et al. The status of coral reef ecology research in the Red Sea. Coral Reefs 32, 737–748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-013-1055-8 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Paknia, O., Sh, H. R. & Koch, A. Lack of well-maintained natural history collections and taxonomists in megadiverse developing countries hampers global biodiversity exploration. Org. Divers. Evol. 15, 619–629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-015-0202-1 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Knowlton, N. & Leray, M. Censusing marine life in the twentyfirst Century. Genome 58, 238–238 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Yu, D. W. et al. Biodiversity soup: Metabarcoding of arthropods for rapid biodiversity assessment and biomonitoring. Methods Ecol. Evol. 3, 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00198.x (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ransome, E. et al. The importance of standardization for biodiversity comparisons: A case study using autonomous reef monitoring structures (ARMS) and metabarcoding to measure cryptic diversity on Mo’orea coral reefs, French Polynesia. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175066 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Coker, D. J., DiBattista, J. D., Sinclair-Taylor, T. H. & Berumen, M. L. Spatial patterns of cryptobenthic coral-reef fishes in the Red Sea. Coral Reefs 37, 193–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-017-1647-9 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pearman, J. K. et al. Cross-shelf investigation of coral reef cryptic benthic organisms reveals diversity patterns of the hidden majority. Sci. Rep. 8, 8090. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26332-5 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pearman, J. K. et al. Disentangling the complex microbial community of coral reefs using standardized Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures (ARMS). Mol. Ecol. 28, 3496–3507. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15167 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Selkoe, K. A. et al. The DNA of coral reef biodiversity: Predicting and protecting genetic diversity of reef assemblages. Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.0354 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
DiBattista, J. D. et al. Digging for DNA at depth: Rapid universal metabarcoding surveys (RUMS) as a tool to detect coral reef biodiversity across a depth gradient. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6379 (2019).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
DiBattista, J. D. et al. Assessing the utility of eDNA as a tool to survey reef-fish communities in the Red Sea. Coral Reefs 36, 1245–1252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-017-1618-1 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nester, G. M. et al. Development and evaluation of fish eDNA metabarcoding assays facilitate the detection of cryptic seahorse taxa (family: Syngnathidae). Environ. DNA 2, 614–626 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
West, K. M. et al. eDNA metabarcoding survey reveals fine-scale coral reef community variation across a remote, tropical island ecosystem. Mol. Ecol. 29, 1069–1086. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15382 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
DiBattista, J. D. et al. Environmental DNA can act as a biodiversity barometer of anthropogenic pressures in coastal ecosystems. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64858-9 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Worm, B. et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 314, 787–790. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1132294 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Spalding, M. et al. Mapping the global value and distribution of coral reef tourism. Mar. Policy 82, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.014 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thomsen, P. F. & Willerslev, E. Environmental DNA – An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity. Biol. Cons. 183, 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P. et al. Spatial and temporal patterns of mass bleaching of corals in the Anthropocene. Science 359, 80–83. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan8048 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Monroe, A. A. et al. In situ observations of coral bleaching in the central Saudi Arabian Red Sea during the 2015/2016 global coral bleaching event. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195814 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Roth, F. et al. Coral reef degradation affects the potential for reef recovery after disturbance. Mar. Environ. Res. 142, 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2018.09.022 (2018).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Foster, T. & Gilmour, J. P. Seeing red: Coral larvae are attracted to healthy-looking reefs. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 559, 65–71. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps11902 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Karcher, D. B. et al. Nitrogen eutrophication particularly promotes turf algae in coral reefs of the central Red Sea. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8737 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pancrazi, I., Ahmed, H., Cerrano, C. & Montefalcone, M. Synergic effect of global thermal anomalies and local dredging activities on coral reefs of the Maldives. Marine Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111585 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vercelloni, J. et al. Forecasting intensifying disturbance effects on coral reefs. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 2785–2797. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15059 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
González-Barrios, F. J., Cabral-Tena, R. A. & Alvarez-Filip, L. Recovery disparity between coral cover and the physical functionality of reefs with impaired coral assemblages. Glob. Change Biol. 27, 640–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15431 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rice, M. M., Ezzat, L. & Burkepile, D. E. Corallivory in the anthropocene: Interactive effects of anthropogenic stressors and corallivory on coral reefs. Front. Marine Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00525 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, Y.-J. et al. Long-term ecological changes in fishes and macro-invertebrates in the world’s warmest coral reefs. Sci. Total Environ. 750, 142254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142254 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Loreau, M. & de Mazancourt, C. Biodiversity and ecosystem stability: A synthesis of underlying mechanisms. Ecol. Lett. 16, 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12073 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11148 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Handley, L. L. How will the “molecular revolution’ contribute to biological recording?. Biol. J. Lin. Soc. 115, 750–766. https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12516 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ducklow, H. W., Doney, S. C. & Steinberg, D. K. Contributions of long-term research and time-series observations to marine ecology and biogeochemistry. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 1, 279–302. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163801 (2009).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, B. B. et al. Long-term studies contribute disproportionately to ecology and policy. Bioscience 67, 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw185 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kraft, N. J. B. et al. Community assembly, coexistence and the environmental filtering metaphor. Funct. Ecol. 29, 592–599. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12345 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leibold, M. A. et al. The metacommunity concept: A framework for multi-scale community ecology. Ecol. Lett. 7, 601–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00608.x (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vellend, M. The Theory of Ecological Communities (MPB-57). (Princeton University Press, 2016).Condon, R. H. et al. Recurrent jellyfish blooms are a consequence of global oscillations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 1000–1005. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1210920110 (2013).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Boero, F., Kraberg, A. C., Krause, G. & Wiltshire, K. H. Time is an affliction: Why ecology cannot be as predictive as physics and why it needs time series. J. Sea Res. 101, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seares.2014.07.008 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pearman, J. K., Anlauf, H., Irigoien, X. & Carvalho, S. Please mind the gap – Visual census and cryptic biodiversity assessment at central Red Sea coral reefs. Mar. Environ. Res. 118, 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.04.011 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
David, R. et al. Lessons from photo analyses of autonomous reef monitoring structures as tools to detect (bio-)geographical, spatial, and environmental effects. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 141, 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.02.066 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pennesi, C. & Danovaro, R. Assessing marine environmental status through microphytobenthos assemblages colonizing the autonomous reef monitoring structures (ARMS) and their potential in coastal marine restoration. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 125, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.08.001 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chang, J. J. M., Ip, Y. C. A., Bauman, A. G. & Huang, D. MinION-in-ARMS: Nanopore sequencing to expedite barcoding of specimen-rich macrofaunal samples from Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures. Front. Marine Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00448 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hazeri, G. et al. Latitudinal species diversity and density of cryptic crustacean (Brachyura and Anomura) in micro-habitat Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures across Kepulauan Seribu, Indonesia. Biodivers. J. Biol. Divers. 20 (2019).Al-Rshaidat, M. M. D. et al. Deep COI sequencing of standardized benthic samples unveils overlooked diversity of Jordanian coral reefs in the northern Red Sea. Genome 59, 724–737. https://doi.org/10.1139/gen-2015-0208 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pearman, J. K. et al. Pan-regional marine benthic cryptobiome biodiversity patterns revealed by metabarcoding Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures. Mol. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15692 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Leray, M. & Knowlton, N. DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 2076–2081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1424997112 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Obst, M. et al. A marine biodiversity observation network for genetic monitoring of hard-bottom communities (ARMS-MBON). Front. Marine Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.572680 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P. et al. Ecological memory modifies the cumulative impact of recurrent climate extremes. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 40–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0351-2 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P., Kerry, J. T. & Simpson, T. Large-scale bleaching of corals on the Great Barrier Reef. Ecology 99, 501–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2092 (2018).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Furby, K. A., Bouwmeester, J. & Berumen, M. L. Susceptibility of central Red Sea corals during a major bleaching event. Coral Reefs 32, 505–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-012-0998-5 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Froehlich, C. Y. M., Klanten, O. S., Hing, M. L., Dowton, M. & Wong, M. Y. L. Uneven declines between corals and cryptobenthic fish symbionts from multiple disturbances. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95778-x (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bellwood, D. R. et al. Coral recovery may not herald the return of fishes on damaged coral reefs. Oecologia 170, 567–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-012-2306-z (2012).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Archana, A. & Baker, D. M. Multifunctionality of an urbanized coastal marine ecosystem. Front. Marine Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.557145 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Servis, J. A., Reid, B. N., Timmers, M. A., Stergioula, V. & Naro-Maciel, E. Characterizing coral reef biodiversity: Genetic species delimitation in brachyuran crabs of Palmyra Atoll Central Pacific. Mitochondrial DNA Part A 31, 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701394.2020.1769087 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chaves-Fonnegra, A. et al. Bleaching events regulate shifts from corals to excavating sponges in algae-dominated reefs. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 773–785. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13962 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Perry, C. T. & Morgan, K. M. Post-bleaching coral community change on southern Maldivian reefs: Is there potential for rapid recovery?. Coral Reefs 36, 1189–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-017-1610-9 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
DeCarlo, T. M. The past century of coral bleaching in the Saudi Arabian central Red Sea. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10200 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cortés, J. et al. in Coral Reefs of the Eastern Tropical Pacific: Persistence and Loss in a Dynamic Environment (eds Peter W. Glynn, Derek P. Manzello, & Ian C. Enochs) 203–250 (Springer Netherlands, 2017).Enochs, I. C. & Manzello, D. P. Species richness of motile cryptofauna across a gradient of reef framework erosion. Coral Reefs 31, 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-012-0886-z (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Timmers, M. A. et al. Biodiversity of coral reef cryptobiota shuffles but does not decline under the combined stressors of ocean warming and acidification. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118, e2103275118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2103275118 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Khalil, M. T., Bouwmeester, J. & Berumen, M. L. Spatial variation in coral reef fish and benthic communities in the central Saudi Arabian Red Sea. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3410 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Roik, A. et al. Year-long monitoring of physico-chemical and biological variables provide a comparative baseline of coral reef functioning in the central Red Sea. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163939 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Largier, J. L. Considerations in estimating larval dispersal distances from oceanographic data. Ecol. Appl. 13, S71–S89 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Volkov, I., Banavar, J. R., Hubbell, S. P. & Maritan, A. Patterns of relative species abundance in rainforests and coral reefs. Nature 450, 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06197 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Alsaffar, Z., Cúrdia, J., Borja, A., Irigoien, X. & Carvalho, S. Consistent variability in beta-diversity patterns contrasts with changes in alpha-diversity along an onshore to offshore environmental gradient: The case of Red Sea soft-bottom macrobenthos. Mar. Biodivers. 49, 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-017-0791-3 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alsaffar, Z. et al. The role of seagrass vegetation and local environmental conditions in shaping benthic bacterial and macroinvertebrate communities in a tropical coastal lagoon. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-70318-1 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rocha, L. A. et al. Mesophotic coral ecosystems are threatened and ecologically distinct from shallow water reefs. Science 361, 281–284. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaq1614 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Soininen, J., Lennon, J. J. & Hillebrand, H. A multivariate analysis of beta diversity across organisms and environments. Ecology 88, 2830–2838. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-1730.1 (2007).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chust, G. et al. Dispersal similarly shapes both population genetics and community patterns in the marine realm. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28730 (2016).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gianuca, A. T., Declerck, S. A. J., Lemmens, P. & De Meester, L. Effects of dispersal and environmental heterogeneity on the replacement and nestedness components of beta-diversity. Ecology 98, 525–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.1666 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Enochs, I. C., Toth, L. T., Brandtneris, V. W., Afflerbach, J. C. & Manzello, D. P. Environmental determinants of motile cryptofauna on an eastern Pacific coral reef. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 438, 105-U127. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09259 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P. et al. Coral reefs in the anthropocene. Nature 546, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22901 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fabricius, K. E. Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs: Review and synthesis. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 50, 125–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.11.028 (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chaidez, V., Dreano, D., Agusti, S., Duarte, C. M. & Hoteit, I. Decadal trends in Red Sea maximum surface temperature. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25731-y (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hubbell, S. P. in Monographs in Population Biology. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography Vol. 32 Monographs in Population Biology i-xiv, 1–375 (2001).Dornelas, M., Connolly, S. R. & Hughes, T. P. Coral reef diversity refutes the neutral theory of biodiversity. Nature 440, 80–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04534 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Baselga, A. Partitioning the turnover and nestedness components of beta diversity. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 19, 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2009.00490.x (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Legendre, P. Interpreting the replacement and richness difference components of beta diversity. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 23, 1324–1334. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12207 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hollander, M. & Wolfe, D. A. Nonparametric statistical methods. Ergonomics 18, 701–702 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Kohler, K. E. & Gill, S. M. Coral point count with excel extensions (CPCe): A visual basic program for the determination of coral and substrate coverage using random point count methodology. Comput. Geosci. 32, 1259–1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2005.11.009 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Geller, J., Meyer, C., Parker, M. & Hawk, H. Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all-taxa biotic surveys. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 13, 851–861. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12138 (2013).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hao, X., Jiang, R. & Chen, T. Clustering 16S rRNA for OTU prediction: A method of unsupervised Bayesian clustering. Bioinformatics 27, 611–618. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq725 (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 13, 581. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3869 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020).Ranwez, V., Harispe, S., Delsuc, F. & Douzery, E. J. P. MACSE: Multiple alignment of coding SEquences accounting for frameshifts and stop codons. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022594 (2011).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Machida, R. J., Leray, M., Ho, S. L. & Knowlton, N. Data Descriptor: Metazoan mitochondrial gene sequence reference datasets for taxonomic assignment of environmental samples. Sci. Data https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.27 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Q., Garrity, G. M., Tiedje, J. M. & Cole, J. R. Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 5261–5267. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.00062-07 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Generate High-Resolution Venn and Euler Plots v. 1.6.20 (2018).Ginestet, C. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. Stat. Soc. 174, 245–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2010.00676_9.x (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. phyloseq: An R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061217 (2013).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Anderson, M. J. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecol. 26, 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2001.01070.pp.x (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hervé, M. Testing and plotting procedures for biostatistics v. 0.9-79. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/RVAideMemoire/index.html (2021).De Caceres, M. & Legendre, P. Associations between species and groups of sites: Indices and statistical inference. Ecology 90, 3566–3574. https://doi.org/10.1890/08-1823.1 (2009).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Legendre, P. & Anderson, M. J. Distance-based redundancy analysis: Testing multispecies responses in multifactorial ecological experiments. Ecol. Monogr. 69, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0001:dbratm]2.0.co;2 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, D. Ordination and multivariate analysis for ecology v. 2.0-1. Retrieved from http://ecology.msu.montana.edu/labdsv/R (2019).Dray, S., Bauman, D., Blanchet, G., Borcard, D., Clappe, S., Guenard, G. & Wagner, H. Adespatial: Multivariate multiscale spatial analysis v. 0.3-13. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=adespatial (2021). More

Overview of U.S. domestic migration flowsThe most recent ACS county-to-county flow dataset26 reports that about 45.6 million people migrated to the U.S. per year during the period 2015–2019, which corresponds to 14.2% of the U.S. population27. Approximately 43.5 million annual moves corresponded to domestic migration (moves within the U.S.28), while 2.1 million accounted for inflows of individuals from other countries (viz. international immigration).With respect to domestic migration, 25.7 million people per year migrated within the same county, thus showing that the highest share of domestic flows (59%) is intra-county. Annually, about 10.4 people moved between different counties within the same state, thus intra-state flows account for 24% of the domestic migration (Supplementary Fig. 1), mainly driven by the search for more affordable housing, better jobs, and for family reasons such as change in marital status29. Long distance moves, captured by inter-state flows, represent the remaining 17% of domestic flows, which comprises about 7.5 million moves per year. Here, we will refer to these domestic migration flows as inflows or outflows, and netflows (inflows-outflows).The United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB) classifies counties as metropolitan, micropolitan, or neither30. A metropolitan statistical area contains a core urban area of at least 50,000 population. A metro area represents a functional delineation of an urban area with a network of strong socioeconomic ties, and provision of infrastructure services31,32,33. A micropolitan statistical area contains an urban core of at lest 10,000 but less than 50,000 inhabitants. There are over 380 metropolitan statistical areas in the U.S., each composed of one or more counties, accounting for about 86% of the total U.S. population and comprising approximately 28% of the land area of the country. For this reason, our analysis focuses on the growth dynamics of MSA counties. Supplementary Fig. 2 shows the 3141 counties (administrative subdivisions of the states) in the U.S., comprising about 321 million inhabitants in the starting year of the ACS 5-Year survey period (2015–2019) of our analysis26.Population growth has two components, namely natural growth and migration. Natural growth accounts for births minus deaths, and migration comprises domestic and international migration. With recent trends showing that births and natural increase have declined in the U.S. and in recent years contribute less to overall city population growth34,35, migration patterns become more relevant to the study of city population growth. Because the ACS flow files contain international inflows only, the relative importance of migrations on population growth is here addressed by x = ∣Inflows−Outflows∣/∣Births−Deaths∣ (Supplementary Figs. 3, 4), which is the ratio between domestic netflows and natural growth. The statistical distribution of this quantity computed for all U.S. counties is well fitted by a lognormal distribution, and shows that x≥1 for 76.5% of counties. For most counties, domestic migration dominates population growth, and understanding the spatial structure of domestic netflows (and their distribution within a city) is crucial to the comprehension of the mechanisms behind the heterogeneity of city population growth.At this spatial granularity, we observe a strong heterogeneity among the U.S. counties (Supplementary Fig. 2) for the period 2015 − 2019, along with examples of specific MSAs. In particular, the relative dispersion of counties relative growth due to netflows is higher than one for about 85% of the metro areas, indicating a large heterogeneity within the same city and pointing towards the spatial structure of domestic migration. The observed difference in the netflows stresses the relevance of our approach: counties belonging to the same city may have specific growth rates due to population flow patterns, thus indicating preferential flow destinations and pinpointing the direction in which the city has expanded.Heterogeneity of inter- and intra-city flowsInter-city flows represent the major component of the total flows (~55%), while intra-city flows represent ~25%. Flows between metro and micro areas, and between metro and non-statistical areas are the smallest components, with ~13% and ~7%, respectively. Given that about 80% of the domestic migration are composed of intra- and inter-city flows, we will focus our attention on describing the structure of intra- and inter-city flows, but in the Supplementary Information we offer a brief analysis of flows between metro and micro areas, and between metro and non-statistical areas.Inter-city flows are not uniform across the U.S. cities. The most intense annual netflows ( >2000 people per year), accounting for approximately 17% of the entire inter-city U.S. netflows, are mainly from New York and Chicago to California and Florida (Fig. 2), and from Los Angeles to neighboring cities. Notably, netflows among the Midwestern cities are mostly negative and below the threshold we set. These flows are mainly responsible for increasing or decreasing the population of a given city. Intra-city flow patterns, illustrated with the 7 most populous U.S. cities with more than 5 counties, are also non-uniform.Fig. 2: Heterogeneity of inter- and intra-city netflows.The map (A) suggests that the domestic redistribution of people between different U.S. metro areas are non-uniform: the black arrows, indicating the direction of the most intense inter-city netflows (higher than 2000 people per year), reveal migration trends from northern and eastern cities to western and southern regions. Cities (composed of one or more counties) are colored according to the relative growth (viz. population growth adjusted by population) of the whole MSA during the 2015–2019 period, and the black intensity and the thickness of the arrows are proportional to the netflows. Alaska and Hawaii are not shown. Panels (B–H), which are close-up of New York (B), Chicago (C), Dallas (D), Houston (E), Washington D.C. (F), Philadelphia (G), Atlanta (H), suggest that the most intense intra-city netflows are oriented radially outwards: people are moving from core to external counties. Here, counties are colored according to their relative growth in the 2015–2019 period and the width of the arrows is proportional to the netflows between origin and destination counties.Full size imageOur analysis reveals that city centers (defined as the core county with the highest population density) are more likely to have negative netflows, indicating that people are leaving the central regions of cities. The arrows in Fig. 2 indicate the direction of the most intense netflows, supporting this finding and highlighting that there is a trend of people moving from internal to external regions, contributing to population growth and spatial expansion of U.S. cities. In fact, we found no correlation between relative population growth (viz. population growth by county size) and distance from the core county (Supplementary Fig. 5A) for the 46 cities with more than 5 counties, with relative growth about 0.03 ± 0.05. On the other hand, we found that relative natural growth (Supplementary Fig. 5B) is negatively correlated with the distance to core county, thus natural growth is less relevant as a component of growth in the outer regions of cities. Consequently, our results show that not only the contribution of each component of growth changes with distance to core county, but also that the internal redistribution of people is an important mechanism of growth, mainly in the external counties.We also examined variability in inter- and intra-city flows within the 50 states (Supplementary Fig. 6). Total flows within a state increase, as expected, with the state population. Two special cases are, however, of interest: (1) two states (Vermont and Rhode Island) with small populations have only one MSA, in which case within-state inter-city flows are zero; and (2) nearly 40%, or 149, of MSAs have only one county, in which case intra-city flows could not be estimated. For all other cases, we observe on average an equal split between inter- and intra-city flows, but with considerable variability among the states, with a mean about 0.5 and standard deviation about 0.2. A generalization of the intra- and inter-city migratory patterns for all 46 cities with more than 5 counties shows that the percentage of migrants from intra- and inter-city flows are of the same order of magnitude (Fig. 3).Fig. 3: Roles of intra- and inter-city flows in driving the heterogeneous population growth of cities.We define the core county as the one with the highest population density, and we plot the percentage of inflows due to intra- (A) and inter-city flows (B) of each county within a city as a function of its distance to the core county. The percentage of outflows due to intra- and inter-city flows are shown in (C) and (D), respectively. The positive correlation of the relative growth with distance due to intra-city flows in (E), along with the lack of correlation due to inter-city flows in (F), indicates that intra-city flows are mainly responsible for increasing the population in the external regions of cities. The sizes of red circles and blue squares are proportional to the city population. The range of distances is split into equally spaced bins. The number of counties n within each bin, from left to right, is 46, 1, 4, 7, 7, 17, 21, 31, 36, 38, 34, 31, 31, 30, 20, 20, 21, 14, 17, 9, 9, 6, 4, 2, 5, 5, 2, 1. The black dots and the error bars indicate the mean and the 90% interval, respectively, of the counties within the corresponding bin. We also show the Pearson correlation coefficient R and the p-value associated with the two-sided test of the null hypothesis of non-correlation.Full size imageApart from the core county, flows from the same city correspond to about 50% of the inflow of people in the counties, presenting a slightly positive correlation with their distance from the city center (Fig. 3A). The low percentage for the core county indicates that it is not the major destination of flows from the same city. The percentage of inflows from other cities is higher in the core county and decays as we move towards the suburbs (Fig. 3B). The moderate negative correlation of this percentage with the distance reveals that inflows from other cities are more likely to concentrate in the core regions of a city.The percentage of outflows directed from the core county to other counties within the same city has a slightly negative correlation with the distance of the origin county to the city center, so it is more likely to find intra-city flows with outflows from internal regions (Fig. 3C). The core county is an exception again, suggesting that it is less likely that someone leaving the core county will move to another county within the same city. The slightly negative correlation of the percentage of outflows directed to other cities suggests that there is a trend of people leaving the core county and the central regions to move to other cities (Fig. 3D). The high percentage of inflows (Fig. 3B) and outflows (Fig. 3D) in the central region due to inter-city flows implies that the central regions of cities are more dynamic and diverse and that people tend to move to counties with similar levels of urbanization. The same pattern is observed for flows between metro and micro areas, and for metro and non-statistical areas, allowing us to conclude that people moving from rural areas are more likely to move to the external regions of a city (Supplementary Fig. 7).The positive correlation of the relative growth with the distance due to intra-city flows (Fig. 3E) shows that the resulting intra-city redistribution of people, given by the difference between inflows and outflows, is such that there is a trend from core county to the external counties (viz. suburbs). When compared to the relative growth due to inter-city flows (Fig. 3F), which do not show any trend and that have negative values for the most distant counties, it becomes clear that intra-city flows play a major role in the population increase observed in outer regions of cities. Interestingly, large circle and square dots in Fig. 3E and F suggest that the loss of people due to inter-city netflows is more intense than the gain of people due to intra-city netflows in some external counties of the largest metro areas, thus explaining the population decline in some outer regions of New York and Chicago (as shown in Fig. 2B and C).The population growth due to intra-city flows is also depicted in Fig. 4. The concentration of flows below the diagonal captures the heterogeneity and the preferential destination of intra-city netflows. We observe that people are more likely to move to lower population density counties when moving from one place to another within the same city, as exemplified by 7 cities in panel A. Panel B summarizes this analysis for the 46 cities with more than 5 counties by showing the fraction ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) of intra-city netflows to lower density counties. We note that more than 93% of the cities have ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}} > 0.5) and that there is a positive correlation of ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) with the city population, and C shows the rank of cities according to the fraction of intra-city netflows to lower density counties.Fig. 4: People are moving to counties with lower population density.A The population density of the origin (ρo) and destination (ρd) counties of intra-city netflows for New York, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Atlanta, reveal that the majority of the flows occur from high to low-density counties. The size of the symbols are proportional to the intensity of the netflow, and the black line corresponds to y = x. B The fraction of netflows to lower density counties ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) has a positive correlation with city population when we consider the 46 MSAs with more than 5 counties, suggesting that intra-city netflows to lower density counties are more frequent as the city size increases. We also show the Pearson correlation coefficient R and the p-value associated with the two-sided test of the null hypothesis of non-correlation. C The ranking of the cities according to ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}).Full size imagePopulation density does not seem to play a major role in driving flows between counties of different cities. The fraction of inter-city netflows to lower density counties is about 57% when we consider all the 384 MSAs. The heterogeneity in the inter-city netflow pattern can be assessed by analyzing ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) versus the population of the destination city (Fig. 5A, B) and ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) versus the population of the origin city (Fig. 5C, D). The negative correlation of ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) with the population of the destination city in panel A indicates that inflows are more likely to come from lower density counties as the destination city size increases. The positive correlation of ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) with the population of the origin city in panel C reveals that outflows tend to be directed to lower density counties as the origin city size increases. The trends observed in panels A and C reveal that inter-city flows are more likely between counties with different population densities rather than between counties with similar population densities. Panels B and D show the rank order of cities according to a function of the destination city size and the origin city size, respectively.Fig. 5: Inter-city flow patterns depend on the population size of the origin and destination cities.Each point corresponds to a particular city. A Fraction ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) of netflows going to lower density counties versus the population of the destination city. Inflows to counties of large cities (with population greater than 106, dashed line) usually comes from counties with lower population densities. B Rank of cities according to the share of inflows from lower density counties. C Fraction ({{{{{{{mathcal{F}}}}}}}}) versus the population of the origin city. Outflows from counties of large cities usually go to cities with lower density counties. D The rank of cities according to the share of inter-city netflows to lower density counties is presented. The dots are colored according to the city population density (darker red means higher density). We also show the Pearson correlation coefficient R and the p-value associated with the two-sided test of the null hypothesis of non-correlation.Full size imageWe would expect that there might be preferential locations within a given city to which people move due to various factors such as lower costs of housing and employment opportunities. However, it seems that house prices have little to no effect on intra-city netflows (Supplementary Fig. 8). While the fraction of intra-city netflows to counties with less expensive houses is about 0.8 for cities like New York, Chicago and Washington, this fraction is about 0.2 for cities like Dallas, Houston and Philadelphia. The lack of a clear national pattern highlights the specificity of each city and the heterogeneity of the regional housing market in the U.S.36,37. On the other hand, the fraction of intra-city netflows to counties with lower unemployment rates is higher than 0.5 for about 2/3 of the cities (Supplementary Fig. 9), thus showing that people are more likely to move to counties with lower unemployment rates.Statistical structure of inter-city flowsIntra-city flows capture the internal redistribution of population, without altering the total city population. In this context, we focus on inter-city flows to investigate whether or not extreme flows play an important role in shaping the growth of counties as observed at the city level5. For cities, Verbavatz and Barthelemy5 introduce a stochastic equation to describe population growth, composed of two terms. The first term accounts for out-of-system growth, which includes natural growth and international migration, and the second term accounts for the growth due to domestic netflows. They find that total netflows adjusted by population size can be well approximated by a Lévy distribution, and this heavy-tailed distribution indicates that rare and extreme inter-city flows (viz. migratory shocks) dominate city population growth.Here, we find that, for counties, the distribution of total netflows adjusted by population size, which is represented by ζi and captures the intensity of inter-city migratory flows (see the section “Methods” for details), can be approximated by a Gaussian distribution (Fig. 6). The lack of a heavy tail in the empirical distribution of ζi suggests the absence of extreme flows at the county level, thus indicating that the growth of counties can be described by smoother migratory process than cities. Given that cities do experience migratory shocks5, our findings indicate that cities redistribute inflows among its different counties, leading to a spill-over effect that dampens flow shocks at the county level.Fig. 6: Extreme shocks are dissipated at the county level.The distribution of ζi, which is the sum of the netflows of a county i adjusted by its population, suggests that migratory events are exponentially bounded at the county level since ζi is well described by a Gaussian distribution. The distribution of ζi is computed here for all the counties with at least 50.000 inhabitants. We also show the result of the two-sided KS test under the null hypothesis that ζi follows a Gaussian distribution.Full size imageHeterogeneity of international inflowsThe highest share of international inflows is concentrated in large cities. About 40% of the international inflows are destined to the top 10 (~2.6%) largest metro areas of the U.S. New York is the first with 8.5% of international inflows, followed by Los Angeles and Miami with 5.4% and 5.0%, respectively. Indeed, international inflows Yk scale superlinearly with the population Sk of the metro area k (Fig. 7A), thus larger cities have more immigrants per capita than smaller cities.Fig. 7: International inflow scales superlinearly with city size.Panel (A) shows the number of international immigrants as a function of the city size S for the 384 U.S. metro areas. The performance of the model Y = Y0Sθ, in which θ = 1.19 (95% CI [1.13, 1.24]) and Y0 = 4.10−4 is a normalization constant, is assessed by the coefficient of determination R2. Note that the spread of empirical data around the model narrows as the size of the city increases. Panel (B) shows the rank of the metro areas and the residues, which captures the deviation from the null model thus highligthing cities receiving more/less than expected international inflows. Names of the cities are followed by two-letter state abbreviations.Full size imageInterestingly, this gain with scale is also observed in socioeconomic city metrics as crime, GDP, innovation and wealth creation due to the manifestation of nonlinear agglomeration phenomena38,39,40. Using Y = Y0Sθ as a null model, we can compute deviations from the average behavior by means of residuals given by (log ({Y}_{k}/{Y}_{0}{S}_{k}^{theta }))38. The rank of the residues (Fig. 7B) shows that college towns are among the top metro areas receiving more international inflows than expected, while large cities as Los Angeles, New York, Atlanta, and Chicago are among the metro areas receiving less international inflows than expected.The spatial distribution of international inflows within cities is shown in Supplementary Fig. 10. The highest share of inflows is concentrated at core counties, and the percentage of inflows decreases dramatically with the distance from the core county. This result suggests that inflow of international migrants is an important component of population growth, particularly at the core regions of large cities.Robustness of our findingsPatterns of population redistribution change from time to time in the U.S., and are affected by several factors. For instance, in the 1960s non-metropolitan counties lost about 3 million people due to outflows to metropolitan counties, while the reverse trend was observed in the 1970s when non-metropolitan counties experienced net inflows of about 2.6 million people41. Wardwell and Brown in41 indicate that three factors might be among the main reasons of such change, namely economic decentralization, preference for rural living, and modernization of rural life. The temporal influence of factors as socioeconomic conditions, transportation infrastructure, natural amenities, and land use and development on population growth in rural and suburban areas is explored in42. Changes in rural migration patterns are also studied in43, where age-specific rural migration patterns from 1950 to 1995 are analyzed. In44, the authors explore redistribution trends across U.S. counties from 1980 to 1995 split into three five year periods (1980–1985, 1985–1990, 1990–1995), and45 analyzes changes in age-specific nationwide migration patterns from 1950 to 2010.The spatial structure of migration patterns may indeed change from time to time; our results correspond to the current intra- and inter-city redistribution trends, based on the most recent ACS migration flow files. We present a thorough empirical and statistical analysis of domestic migration flows among U.S. cities ans counties. Our study also introduces a framework that can be used for analyzing and comparing internal redistribution of people across different time periods. Indeed, we extended our analysis for two other time periods, 2005–2009 and 2010–2014. With respect to the spatial distribution of intra- and inter-city flows, similar trends are observed in both periods (Supplementary Figs. 12, 13), namely inter-city flows are responsible for the highest share of inflows to core counties, and intra-city flows are responsible for the highest share of inflows to external counties. We also explored the role of population density in driving netflows between counties within the same metro area in 2005–2009 and 2010–2014. The results (Supplementary Figs. 14 and 15) indicate that 95.7% of cities were dominated by intra-city moves to lower density counties in 2005–2009, and this percentage dropped to 76.1% in 2010–2014. Our findings indicate that the trends we report here are taking place since 2005 but with different intensities.The robustness of our findings is checked with additional migration data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which reports the year-to-year address changes on individual tax returns filled with the IRS46. The results obtained with the analysis of IRS datasets from periods 2015–2016, 2016–2017, 2017–2018, 2018–2019 (Supplementary Figs. 16, 17, 18, 19), reveal similar trends to those we found using ACS data. Particularly, we observe that, for all periods considered, the correlation between intra-city netflow/S and distance to core county is stronger than we found with ACS data, thus highlighting the role of intra-city flows in driving population to external regions of cities. The main difference between both datasets is in the percentage of intra- and inter-city inflows and outflows: while ACS data indicates that both flows have approximately the same contribution to the total flows, the IRS data indicates that, besides the core county, intra-city flows are responsible for about 80% of inflows and outflows of metro areas. More

We analyzed a total of 2196 morbidity reports received in Israel between November 2018 and October 2021 (Fig. 1A). The majority of these were for adult bats 1,783 (81.2%), of which 1432 (80.3%) were from urban areas (settlements populated by 30,000 or more people) and the remaining 351 (19.7%) were from rural areas, including small villages, nature reserves, and army bases. Out of all these adult cases, the animal’s sex was identified in only 295 cases (16.6%), with 171 (58%) being females and 124 (42%) being males. 413 (18.8% of all cases) were pups, up to 4 months old, from throughout the country, without sex identification.We found a dramatic and significant increase in adult bat morbidity during winter (see Fig. 1B) (p  More

Data collectionBetween June 27 and August 25, 2016, 6600 km of simultaneous visual and passive acoustic line transect surveys were completed on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ship Henry B. Bigelow5. Survey effort was distributed along saw tooth track lines spanning the continental slope from Virginia (US) to the southern tip of Nova Scotia (Canada) (36–42 N) and on several larger track lines over the abyssal plain. Two teams of visual observers independently recorded sightings of marine mammals using high-powered Fujinon binoculars (25 × 150; Fujifilm, Valhalla, NY) as well as environmental conditions (e.g. sea state) every 30 min.The speed of sound in water was collected three times each day (morning, noon, evening) by measuring conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) at specific intervals in the water column. The sound speed closest to the depth of the towed hydrophone array was extracted. On alternating survey days, Simrad EK60 single beam scientific echosounders operating at frequencies of 18, 38, 70, 120 and 200 kHz were used to collect active acoustic data.When possible during daylight hours (06:00–18:00 ET), passive acoustic data were collected continuously using a custom-built linear array composed of eight hydrophone elements and a depth sensor (Keller America Inc. PA7FLE, Newport News, VA) within two oil-filled modular sections separated by 30 m of cable (Fig. 1). The array was towed 300 m behind the vessel at approximately 5–10 m depth while the vessel was in waters more than 100 m deep and underway at speeds of 16–20 km/h. For more details see DeAngelis et al.31, with the only change being that two APC hydrophones and one Reson hydrophone in the aft section were replaced with HTI-96-Min hydrophones (High Tech, Inc., Long Beach, MS). The HTI’s had a flat frequency response from 1 to 30 kHz (− 167 dB re V/uPa ± 1.5 dB). Recordings were made using the acoustical software PAMGuard (v.1.15.02)34. This analysis used the data recorded by the last two 192 kHz sampled hydrophones in the array (MF5 and MF6).Figure 1The linear towed array included eight hydrophone elements and a depth sensor within two oil-filled modular sections separated by 30 m of cable. Six hydrophones sampled at 192 kHz (MF1–MF6) and two sampled at 500 kHz. The hydrophones were connected to two National Instruments sound cards (NI-USB-6356). A high pass filter of 1 kHz was applied by the recording system to reduce the amount of vessel noise in the recordings. This analysis used the passive acoustic data from MF5 and MF6. The schematic is not to scale.Full size imageClick detection and 2D event localizationThe passive acoustic data were filtered using a Butterworth band pass filter (4th order) between 2 and 20 kHz and decimated to 96 kHz to improve sperm whale click resolution. Clicks were automatically detected using the PAMGuard (v.2.01.03) general sperm whale click detector with a trigger threshold of 12 dB.Using PAMGuard’s bearing time display, all detections were reviewed to classify click types and mark click trains as “events” based on consistent changes in bearing, audible sound, ICI and spectral characteristics. Each event was marked to an individual level, tracking a whale from the first to the last detected click15,35. All events containing usual clicks were localized with PAMGuard’s Target Motion Analysis (TMA) module’s 2D simplex optimization algorithm. For further analysis, events were truncated at a slant range of 6500 m (Supplementary Fig. S1).Echosounder analysisA regression analysis was run using the R package MASS36. To account for overdispersion, a negative binomial generalized linear model (GLM) with a log link function was applied to a dataset of the daily acoustic detections33. Echosounder state (active versus passive), month (June, July, August), and habitat type (slope or abyssal) were included as covariates, with the total number of daily detections as the response variable. The track line distance covered per day was used as an offset for effort. The best fitting model was selected based on backwards stepwise selection using Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) and the single-term deletion method using Chi-squared goodness-of-fit tests37.3D localizationExtracting a .wav clip for each click and attributing metadataAn automated process was developed using the R package PAMpal38 (v. 0.14.0) to extract the time of each click in the marked events from PAMGuard databases, generate a .wav clip for each click, and attribute all metadata (e.g., event 2D localization, array depth, radial distance, sea state, and sound speed) necessary for estimating the click depth.Slant delayUsing the methods established by DeAngelis et al.31 and custom Matlab R2021a (MathWorks Inc., Natick, NA) scripts, the multipath arrival of clicks and surface reflected echoes were used to mathematically convert the linear array into a 2D planar array and estimate 3D localizations. Using the .wav clips exported from PAMPal, the time delay between the click and the corresponding surface reflected echo, known as the slant delay, was measured via autocorrelation. Within the autocorrelation solution’s envelope of correlation values, the optimal slant delay was measured using the peak with the highest correlation value above a threshold of 0.02 and within an expected time window after the direct click of 0.0005–0.015 s. Although theoretically a surface reflected echo could have arrived less than a millisecond ( 5 min) were categorized as U shaped, and as shallow ( 1600 m) based on the maximum click depth (Fig. 3).Figure 3Example of click depths (m) over time (min) for events categorized as (a) U shaped and shallow ( 1600 m).Full size imageClick depths were then binned at 400 m intervals to account for an animal’s unknown horizontal movement over time as well as uncertainty in the estimated click depths, and the total time an animal spent within each depth bin was calculated. For each event with a U shaped click depth pattern, the depth bin in which the bottom phase occurred6 was determined. Finally, to assess if a whale was diving in the water column or close to the seafloor, the depth bin in which the 90th percentile of the click depths was recorded was compared to the bin including the seafloor depth. If the whale was more than 400 m above the seafloor, it was determined to be diving in the water column.Distance samplingDepth-corrected average horizontal perpendicular distancesFor each event, a depth-corrected average horizontal perpendicular distance was calculated using the TMA derived perpendicular slant range and the average depth or an assumed depth in the Pythagorean theorem19,31. The weighted mean, first quartile, and third quartile of the average depths were tested as assumed depths for events excluded from 3D localization. If depth was greater than or equal to the slant range the perpendicular distance was coerced to 0, indicating the whale was diving directly below the track line. The resulting distribution of depth-corrected perpendicular distances that aligned most with distance sampling theory was used in the final distance analysis.Acoustic density and abundance estimationThe R package Distance41,42 (v.1.0.4) was used to estimate two separate detection functions based on the uncorrected slant ranges and the depth-corrected perpendicular distances. Half-normal, uniform, and hazard rate key functions were tested with cosine, simple polynomial, and Hermite polynomial adjustment terms. The best fitting models were selected based on the AIC, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) test, the Cramer-von Mises (CvM) test, quantile–quantile plots, and visual review of the fitted models43. The probability of detection, abundance, and effective strip half width (ESW) were then estimated for foraging sperm whales.Permitting authorityData used in this manuscript were collected during surveys that were completed under U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act permit numbers 17355 and 21371 issued to the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. More

Cavicchioli, R. et al. Scientists’ warning to humanity: microorganisms and climate change. Nature Reviews Microbiology 17, 569–586 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Azam, F. et al. The ecological role of water-column microbes in the sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 10, 257–263 (1983).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jiao, N. et al. Microbial production of recalcitrant dissolved organic matter: long-term carbon storage in the global ocean. Nature Reviews Microbiology 8, 593–599 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, C. et al. Evolving paradigms in biological carbon cycling in the ocean. National Science Review 5, 481–499 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mestre, M. et al. Sinking particles promote vertical connectivity in the ocean microbiome. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, E6799–E6807 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Baumas, C. M. J. et al. Mesopelagic microbial carbon production correlates with diversity across different marine particle fractions. The ISME Journal 15, 1695–1708 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ortega-Retuerta, E., Joux, F., Jeffrey, W. H. & Ghiglione, J. F. Spatial variability of particle-attached and free-living bacterial diversity in surface waters from the Mackenzie River to the beaufort sea (canadian arctic). Biogeosciences 10, 2747–2759 (2013). BG.ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ganesh, S., Parris, D. J., DeLong, E. F. & Stewart, F. J. Metagenomic analysis of size-fractionated picoplankton in a marine oxygen minimum zone. The ISME Journal 8, 187–211 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, S. et al. Interactions between marine group ii archaea and phytoplankton revealed by population correlations in the northern coast of south china sea. Frontiers in Microbiology 12 (2022).Eloe, E. A. et al. Compositional differences in particle-associated and free-living microbial assemblages from an extreme deep-ocean environment. Environmental Microbiology Reports 3, 449–458 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Salazar, G. et al. Particle-association lifestyle is a phylogenetically conserved trait in bathypelagic prokaryotes. Mol Ecol 24, 5692–706 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Karner, M. & Herndl, G. J. Extracellular enzymatic activity and secondary production in free-living and marine-snow-associated bacteria. Marine Biology 113, 341–347 (1992).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Grossart, H.-P., Tang, K. W., Kiørboe, T. & Ploug, H. Comparison of cell-specific activity between free-living and attached bacteria using isolates and natural assemblages. FEMS Microbiology Letters 266, 194–200 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fierer, N. et al. Comparative metagenomic, phylogenetic and physiological analyses of soil microbial communities across nitrogen gradients. The ISME Journal 6, 1007–1017 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Leff, J. W. et al. Consistent responses of soil microbial communities to elevated nutrient inputs in grasslands across the globe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 10967–10972 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, Y. et al. Large amounts of easily decomposable carbon stored in subtropical forest subsoil are associated with r-strategy-dominated soil microbes. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 95, 233–242 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hou, S. et al. Benefit from decline: the primary transcriptome of Alteromonas macleodii str. Te101 during Trichodesmium demise. The ISME Journal 12, 981–996 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cleveland, C. C., Nemergut, D. R., Schmidt, S. K. & Townsend, A. R. Increases in soil respiration following labile carbon additions linked to rapid shifts in soil microbial community composition. Biogeochemistry 82, 229–240 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ho, A., Di Lonardo, D. P. & Bodelier, P. L. E. Revisiting life strategy concepts in environmental microbial ecology. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 93 (2017).Xing, J. et al. Fluxes, seasonal patterns and sources of various nutrient species (nitrogen, phosphorus and silicon) in atmospheric wet deposition and their ecological effects on Jiaozhou Bay, North China. Sci Total Environ 576, 617–627 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, L., Xiong, L., Li, J. & Huang, X. Long-term changes of nutrients and biocenoses indicating the anthropogenic influences on ecosystem in Jiaozhou Bay and Daya Bay, China. Mar Pollut Bull 168, 112406 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, X. et al. Effects of organic nitrogen components from terrestrial input on the phytoplankton community in Jiaozhou Bay. Marine Pollution Bulletin 174, 113316 (2022).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sharp, J. et al. Final dissolved organic carbon broad community intercalibration and preliminary use of DOC reference materials. Marine Chemistry 77 (2002).Walters, W. et al. Improved bacterial 16S rrna gene (V4 and V4-5) and fungal internal transcribed spacer marker gene primers for microbial community surveys. mSystems 1 (2016).Bolyen, E. et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nature Biotechnology 37, 852–857 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Li, D. et al. MEGAHIT v1.0: A fast and scalable metagenome assembler driven by advanced methodologies and community practices. Methods 102, 3–11 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mikheenko, A., Saveliev, V. & Gurevich, A. MetaQUAST: evaluation of metagenome assemblies. Bioinformatics 32, 1088–90 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yu, K. et al. Recovery of high-qualitied genomes from a deep-inland salt lake using BASALT. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.434042 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kang, D. D. et al. MetaBAT 2: an adaptive binning algorithm for robust and efficient genome reconstruction from metagenome assemblies. PeerJ 7, e7359 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu, Y. W., Simmons, B. A. & Singer, S. W. MaxBin 2.0: an automated binning algorithm to recover genomes from multiple metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics 32, 605–7 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Alneberg, J. et al. Binning metagenomic contigs by coverage and composition. Nat Methods 11, 1144–6 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nayfach, S. et al. New insights from uncultivated genomes of the global human gut microbiome. Nature 568 (2019).Parks, D. H., Imelfort, M., Skennerton, C. T., Hugenholtz, P. & Tyson, G. W. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 25, 1043–55 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Olm, M. R, Brown, C. T. & Banfield, J. F. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. The ISME Journal 5 (2017).Albanese, D. & Donati, C. Large-scale quality assessment of prokaryotic genomes with metashot/prok-quality. F1000Research 10 (2021).Bowers, R. M. et al. Minimum information about a single amplified genome (misag) and a metagenome-assembled genome (mimag) of bacteria and archaea. Nature Biotechnology 35, 725–731 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Parks, D. H. et al. A complete domain-to-species taxonomy for bacteria and archaea. Nat Biotechnol 38, 1079–1086 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chaumeil, P. A., Mussig, A. J., Hugenholtz, P. & Parks, D. H. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics (2019).Edgar, R. C. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res 32, 1792–7 (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Capella-Gutierrez, S., Silla-Martinez, J. M. & Gabaldon, T. trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics 25, 1972–3 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S. & Arkin, A. P. FastTree 2–approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PloS one 25, e9490–e9490 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
NCBI Sequence Read Archive https://identifiers.org/ncbi/insdc.sra:SRP367774 (2022).NCBI Sequence Read Archive https://identifiers.org/ncbi/insdc.sra:SRP367809 (2022).Tao, J. Jiaozhou bay 16S rDNA & metagenome dataset. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.19690459.v6 (2022). More

Amundsen, T. In Animal Signals: Signalling and Signal Design in Animal Communication (eds. Espmark, Y., Amundsen, T. & Rosenqvist, G.) 133–154 (Tapir Academic Press, 2000).Amundsen, T. Why are female birds ornamented? Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 149–155 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lande, R. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34, 292–305 (1980).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Poissant, J., Wilson, A. J. & Coltman, D. W. Sex-specific genetic variance and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism: a systematic review of cross-sex genetic correlations. Evolution 64, 97–107 (2009).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nordeide, J. T., Kekäläinen, J., Janhunen, M. & Kortet, R. Female ornaments revisited—are they correlated with offspring quality? J. Anim. Ecol. 82, 26–38 (2013).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Prum, R. O. The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World and Us (Doubleday, 2017).Clark, C. J. & Rankin, D. Subtle, pervasive genetic correlation between the sexes in the evolution of dimorphic hummingbird tail ornaments. Evolution 74, 528–543 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
LeBas, N. R. Female finery is not for males. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 170–173 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kraaijeveld, K., Kraaijeveld-Smit, F. J. L. & Komdeur, J. The evolution of mutual ornamentation. Anim. Behav. 74, 657–677 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tobias, J. A., Montgomerie, R. & Lyon, B. E. The evolution of female ornaments and weaponry: social selection, sexual selection and ecological competition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 2274–2293 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hare, R. M. & Simmons, L. W. Sexual selection and its evolutionary consequences in female animals. Biol. Rev. 94, 1464–7931 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hernández, A., Martínez-Gómez, M., Beamonte-Barrientos, R. & Montoya, B. Colourful traits in female birds relate to individual condition, reproductive performance and male-mate preferences: a meta-analytic approach. Biol. Lett. 17, 20210283 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tsuboi, M., Gonzalez-Voyer, A., Höglund, J. & Kolm, N. Ecology and mating competition influence sexual dimorphism in Tanganyikan cichlids. Evol. Ecol. 26, 171–185 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Andersson, M. Sexual Selection (Princeton Univ. Press, 1994).Doutrelant, C., Fargevieille, A. & Grégoire, A. Evolution of female coloration: what have we learned from birds in general and blue tits in particular. Adv. Study Behav. 52, 123–202 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dunn, P. O., Armenta, J. K. & Whittingham, L. A. Natural and sexual selection act on different axes of variation in avian plumage color. Sci. Adv. 1, e1400155 (2015).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cotton, S., Fowler, K. & Pomiankowski, A. Do sexual ornaments demonstrate heightened condition-dependent expression as predicted by the handicap hypothesis? Proc. Biol. Sci. 271, 771–783 (2004).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bonduriansky, R. & Rowe, L. Sexual selection, genetic architecture, and the condition dependence of body shape in the sexually dimorphic fly Prochyliza xanthostoma (Piophilidae). Evolution 59, 138–151 (2005).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnstone, R. A., Rands, S. A. & Evans, M. R. Sexual selection and condition-dependence. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 2387–2394 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cotton, S., Fowler, K. & Pomiankowski, A. Heightened condition dependence is not a general feature of male eyespan in stalk-eyed flies (Diptera: Diopsidae). J. Evol. Biol. 17, 1310–1316 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
David, P. et al. Male sexual ornament size but not asymmetry reflects condition in stalk-eyed flies. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 2211–2216 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bolund, E., Schielzeth, H. & Forstmeier, W. No heightened condition dependence of zebra finch ornaments—a quantitative genetic approach. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 586–597 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zahavi, A. Mate selection-a selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53, 205–214 (1975).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Meunier, J., Figueiredo Pinto, S., Burri, R. & Roulin, A. Eumelanin-based coloration and fitness parameters in birds: a meta-analysis. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 65, 559–567 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Weaver, R. J., Santos, E. S. A., Tucker, A. M., Wilson, A. E. & Hill, G. E. Carotenoid metabolism strengthens the link between feather coloration and individual quality. Nat. Commun. 9, 73 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
White, T. E. Structural colours reflect individual quality: a meta-analysis. Biol. Lett. 16, 20200001 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Taylor & Francis Inc., 1988)Andersson, M. Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 17, 375–393 (1982).Article 

Google Scholar 
Walther, B. A. & Clayton, D. H. Elaborate ornaments are costly to maintain: evidence for high maintenance handicaps. Behav. Ecol. 16, 89–95 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Folstad, I. & Karter, A. K. Parasites, bright males and the immunocompetence handicap. Am. Nat. 139, 603–622 (1992).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alonso-Alvarez, C., Bertrand, S., Faivre, B., Chastel, O. & Sorci, G. Testosterone and oxidative stress: the oxidation handicap hypothesis. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274, 819–825 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Weaver, R. J., Koch, R. E. & Hill, G. E. What maintains signal honesty in animal colour displays used in mate choice? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 372, 20160343 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Emlen, D. J., Warren, I. A., Johns, A., Dworkin, I. & Lavine, L. C. A mechanism of extreme growth and reliable signaling in sexually selected ornaments and weapons. Science 337, 860–864 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Huhta, E. Plumage brightness of prey increases predation risk: an among-species comparison. Ecology 84, 1793–1799 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tibbetts, E. A. & Dale, J. A socially enforced signal of quality in a paper wasp. Nature 432, 18–222 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Webster, M. S., Ligon, R. A. & Leighton, G. M. Social costs are an underappreciated force for honest signalling in animal aggregations. Anim. Behav. 143, 167–176 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sheldon, B. C. Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 397–402 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnstone, R. A., Reynolds, J. D. & Deutsch, J. C. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50, 1382–1391 (1996).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Promislow, D. E. L., Montgomerie, R. & Martin, T. E. Mortality costs of sexual dimorphism in birds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 250, 143–150 (1992).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guindre-Parker, S. & Love, O. P. Revisiting the condition-dependence of melanin-based plumage. J. Avian Biol. 45, 29–33 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roulin, A. & Dijkstra, C. Genetic and environmental components of variation in eumelanin and phaeomelanin sex-traits in the barn owl. Heredity 90, 359–364 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jawor, J. M. & Breitwisch, R. Melanin ornaments, honesty, and sexual selection. Auk 120, 249–265 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gunderson, A. R., Frame, A. M., Swaddle, J. P. & Forsyth, M. H. Resistance of melanized feathers to bacterial degradation: is it really so black and white? J. Avian Biol. 39, 539–545 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ruiz-de-Castañeda, R., Burtt, E. H. Jr., González-Braojos, S. & Moreno, J. Bacterial degradability of an intrafeather unmelanized ornament: a role for feather-degrading bacteria in sexual selection? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 105, 409–419 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tazzyman, S. J., Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. Signaling efficacy drives the evolution of larger sexual ornaments by sexual selection. Evolution 68, 216–229 (2014).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dale, J., Dey, C. J., Delhey, K., Kempenaers, B. & Valcu, M. The effects of life history and sexual selection on male and female plumage colouration. Nature 527, 367–370 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guilford, T. & Dawkins, M. S. Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim. Behav. 42, 1–14 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tazzyman, S. J., Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. The handicap process favors exaggerated, rather than reduced, sexual ornaments. Evolution 68, 2534–2549 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Peters, J. L. et al. Assessing publication bias in meta-analyses in the presence of between-study heterogeneity. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. A. 173, 575–591 (2010).MathSciNet 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dumbacher, J. P. & Fleischer, R. C. Phylogenetic evidence for colour pattern convergence in toxic pitohuis: Müllerian mimicry in birds? Proc. Biol. Sci. 268, 1971–1976 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jønsson, K. A., Delhey, K., Sangster, G., Ericson, P. G. P. & Irestedt, M. The evolution of mimicry of friarbirds by orioles (Aves: Passeriformes) in Australo-Pacific archipelagos. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. B 283, 20160409 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ord, T. J. & Stuart-Fox, D. Ornament evolution in dragon lizards: multiple gains and widespread losses reveal a complex history of evolutionary change. J. Evol. Biol. 19, 797–808 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. & PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6, e1000097 (2009).O’Dea, R. E. et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension. Biol. Rev. 96, 1695–1722 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
LeBas, N. R., Hockham, L. R. & Ritchie, M. G. Nonlinear and correlational sexual selection on ‘honest’ female ornamentation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 2159–2165 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z. & Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 5, 210 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rohatgi, A. WebPlotDigitizer. Software version 4.5. https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer (2000).Sidney, S. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (McGraw-Hill,1956).Friedman, H. Simplified determination of statistical power, magnitude of effect and research sample sizes. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 42, 521–526 (1982).Article 

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).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Verhulst, S. & Nilsson, J. A. The timing of birds’ breeding seasons: a review of experiments that manipulated timing of breeding. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 363, 399–410 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, M. E. In Current Ornithology (eds. Nolan, V. & Ketterson, E. D.) 67–135 (Plenum Press, 1996).Labocha, M. K. & Hayes, J. P. Morphometric indices of body condition in birds: a review. J. Ornithol. 153, 1–22 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sánchez, C. A. et al. On the relationship between body condition and parasite infection in wildlife: a review and meta-analysis. Ecol. Lett. 20, 1869–1884 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Arnholt, A. T. & Evans, B. BSDA: Basic statistics and data analysis. R package version 1.2.0. https://cran.r-project.org/package=BSDA (2017).Jackson, D., White, I. R., Price, M., Copas, J. & Riley, R. D. Borrowing of strength and study weights in multivariate and network meta-analysis. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 26, 2853–2868 (2017).MathSciNet 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hadfield, J. D. MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R Package. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–22 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Hartmann, K. & Mooers, A. O. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature 491, 444–448 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nakagawa, S. & De Villemereuil, P. A general method for simultaneously accounting for phylogenetic and species sampling uncertainty via Rubin’s rules in comparative analysis. Syst. Biol. 68, 632–641 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cinar, O., Nakagawa, S. & Viechtbauer, W. Phylogenetic multilevel meta-analysis: a simulation study on the importance of modeling the phylogeny. Methods Ecol. Evol. 13, 383–395 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Viechtbauer, W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. 36, 1–48 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Egger, M., Davey Smith, G., Schneider, M. & Minder, C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315, 629–634 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Duval, S. & Tweedie, R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 56, 455–463 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
MATH 
Article 

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 
Nakagawa, S. & Santos, E. S. A. Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis. Evol. Ecol. 26, 1253–1274 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Billerman, S. M., Keeney, B. K., Rodewald, P. G. & Schulenberg, T. S. Birds of the World (Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, 2000). More

Pörtner, H. O. et al. IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Cimate (2019).Genevier, L. G. C., Jamil, T., Raitsos, D. E., Krokos, G. & Hoteit, I. Marine heatwaves reveal coral reef zones susceptible to bleaching in the Red Sea. Glob. Chang. Biol. 25, 2338–2351 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P. et al. Spatial and temporal patterns of mass bleaching of corals in the Anthropocene. Science (80-.) 359, 80–83 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Morris, L. A., Voolstra, C. R., Quigley, K. M., Bourne, D. G. & Bay, L. K. Nutrient availability and metabolism affect the stability of coral–symbiodiniaceae symbioses. Trends Microbiol. 27, 678–689 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Suggett, D. J. & Smith, D. J. Coral bleaching patterns are the outcome of complex biological and environmental networking. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 68–79 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Baker, A. C., Glynn, P. W. & Riegl, B. Climate change and coral reef bleaching: an ecological assessment of long-term impacts, recovery trends and future outlook. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 80, 435–471 (2008).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, B. E., Dunne, R. P., Scoffin, T. P. & Le Tissier, M. D. A. Solar damage in intertidal corals. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 105, 219–230 (1994).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Suggett, D. J. & Smith, D. J. Interpreting the sign of coral bleaching as friend vs. foe. Glob. Chang. Biol. 17, 45–55 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Maynard, J. A., Anthony, K. R. N., Marshall, P. A. & Masiri, I. Major bleaching events can lead to increased thermal tolerance in corals. Mar. Biol. 155, 173–182 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Weis, V. M. The susceptibility and resilience of corals to thermal stress: adaptation, acclimatization or both?: NEWS and VIEWS. Mol. Ecol. 19, 1515–1517 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Meyer, E., Aglyamova, G. V. & Matz, M. V. Profiling gene expression responses of coral larvae (Acropora millepora) to elevated temperature and settlement inducers using a novel RNA-Seq procedure. Mol. Ecol. 20, 3599–3616 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dixon, G. B. et al. Genomic determinants of coral heat tolerance across latitudes. Science (80-.) 348, 1460–1462 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Grottoli, A. G. et al. Increasing comparability among coral bleaching experiments. Ecol. Appl. 31, 1–17 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Evensen, N. et al. Empirically derived thermal thresholds of four coral species along the Red Sea using a portable and standardized experimental approach. Coral Reefs 41, 239–252 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Song, M. et al. The impact of acute thermal stress on the metabolome of the black rockfish (Sebastes schlegelii). PLoS ONE 14, 1–23 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kim, K. S. et al. Physiological responses to short-term thermal stress in mayfly (Neocloeon triangulifer) larvae in relation to upper thermal limits. J. Exp. Biol. 220, 2598–2605 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Juárez, O. E. et al. Transcriptomic and metabolic response to chronic and acute thermal exposure of juvenile geoduck clams Panopea globosa. Mar. Genomics 42, 1–13 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pallarés, S., Arribas, P., Céspedes, V., Millán, A. & Velasco, J. Lethal and sublethal behavioural responses of saline water beetles to acute heat and osmotic stress. Ecol. Entomol. 37, 508–520 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Qin, G. et al. Temperature-induced physiological stress and reproductive characteristics of the migratory seahorse Hippocampus erectus during a thermal stress simulation. Biol. Open 7, 1–7 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zanuzzo, F. S., Bailey, J. A., Garber, A. F. & Gamperl, A. K. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A The acute and incremental thermal tolerance of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) families under normoxia and mild hypoxia ☆. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A 233, 30–38 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cunning, R. et al. Census of heat tolerance among Florida ’ s threatened staghorn corals finds resilient individuals throughout existing nursery populations. (2021).Evensen, N. R., Fine, M., Perna, G., Voolstra, C. R. & Barshis, D. J. Remarkably high and consistent tolerance of a Red Sea coral to acute and chronic thermal stress exposures. Limnol. Oceanogr. https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.11715 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Morikawa, M. K. & Palumbi, S. R. Using naturally occurring climate resilient corals to construct bleaching-resistant nurseries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 116, 10586–10591 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rose, N. H., Bay, R. A., Morikawa, M. K. & Palumbi, S. R. Polygenic evolution drives species divergence and climate adaptation in corals. Evolution (N. Y.) 72, 82–94 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Thomas, L. et al. Mechanisms of thermal tolerance in reef-building corals across a fine-grained environmental mosaic: lessons from Ofu, American Samoa. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 1–14 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Voolstra, C. R. et al. Standardized short-term acute heat stress assays resolve historical differences in coral thermotolerance across microhabitat reef sites. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 4328–4343 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Klepac, C. N. & Barshis, D. J. High-resolution in situ thermal metrics coupled with acute heat stress experiments reveal differential coral bleaching susceptibility. Coral Reefs https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-022-02276-1 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gardner, S. G. et al. A multi-trait systems approach reveals a response cascade to bleaching in corals. BMC Biol. 15, 117 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Madin, J. S. et al. A trait-based approach to advance coral reef science. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31, 419–428 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Suggett, D. J. et al. Toward bio-optical phenotyping of reef-forming corals using light-induced fluorescence transient-fast repetition rate fluorometry. Limnol. Oceanogr. Methods https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10479 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krueger, T. et al. Differential coral bleaching-contrasting the activity and response of enzymatic antioxidants in symbiotic partners under thermal stress. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 190, 15–25 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Leggat, W. et al. Differential responses of the coral host and their algal symbiont to thermal stress. PLoS ONE 6, e26687 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nitschke, M. R. et al. Utility of photochemical traits as diagnostics of thermal tolerance amongst great barrier reef corals. Front. Mar. Sci. 5, 1–18 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Warner, M. E., Fittt, W. K. & Schmidt, G. W. Damage to photosystem II in symbiotic dinoflagellates: a determinant of coral bleaching. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96, 8007–8012 (1999).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fitt, W. K., Brown, B. E., Warner, M. E. & Dunne, R. P. Coral bleaching: Interpretation of thermal tolerance limits and thermal thresholds in tropical corals. Coral Reefs 20, 51–65 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tolosa, I., Treignier, C., Grover, R. & Ferrier-Pagès, C. Impact of feeding and short-term temperature stress on the content and isotopic signature of fatty acids, sterols, and alcohols in the scleractinian coral Turbinaria reniformis. Coral Reefs 30, 763–774 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Grottoli, A. G. et al. Coral physiology and microbiome dynamics under combined warming and ocean acidification. PLoS ONE 13, e0191156 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chow, M. H., Tsang, R. H. L., Lam, E. K. Y. & Ang, P. Quantifying the degree of coral bleaching using digital photographic technique. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 479, 60–68 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nielsen, J. J. V. et al. Physiological effects of heat and cold exposure in the common reef coral Acropora millepora. Coral Reefs 39, 259–269 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
McLachlan, R. H., Price, J. T., Solomon, S. L. & Grottoli, A. G. Thirty years of coral heat-stress experiments: a review of methods. Coral Reefs 39, 885–902 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Edmunds, P. J. & Burgess, S. C. Correction: Size-dependent physiological responses of the branching coral Pocillopora verrucosa to elevated temperature and PCO2 (J. Exp. Biol. (2016) 219 (3896-3906) doi: 10.1242/jeb.146381). J. Exp. Biol. 221, 3896–3906 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Madin, J. S., Baird, A. H., Dornelas, M. & Connolly, S. R. Mechanical vulnerability explains size-dependent mortality of reef corals. Ecol. Lett. 17, 1008–1015 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pausch, R. E., Williams, D. E. & Miller, M. W. Impacts of fragment genotype, habitat, and size on outplanted elkhorn coral success under thermal stress. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 592, 109–117 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shenkar, N., Fine, M. & Loya, Y. Size matters: bleaching dynamics of the coral Oculina patagonica. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 294, 181–188 (2005).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Middlebrook, R., Anthony, K. R. N., Hoegh-Guldberg, O. & Dove, S. Heating rate and symbiont productivity are key factors determining thermal stress in the reef-building coral Acropora formosa. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 1026–1034 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoey, A. et al. Recent advances in understanding the effects of climate change on coral reefs. Diversity 8, 12 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marhoefer, S. R. et al. Signatures of adaptation and acclimatization to reef flat and slope habitats in the coral pocillopora damicornis. Front. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.704709 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cornwell, B. et al. Widespread variation in heat tolerance and symbiont load are associated with growth tradeoffs in the coral acropora hyacinthus in palau. Elife 10, 1–15 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
McClanahan, T. R. et al. Large geographic variability in the resistance of corals to thermal stress. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 2229–2247 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Magozzi, S. & Calosi, P. Integrating metabolic performance, thermal tolerance, and plasticity enables for more accurate predictions on species vulnerability to acute and chronic effects of global warming. Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 181–194 (2015).ADS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drury, C., Manzello, D. & Lirman, D. Genotype and local environment dynamically influence growth, disturbance response and survivorship in the threatened coral, Acropora cervicornis. PLoS ONE 12, 1–21 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
McLachlan, R. H., Dobson, K. L., Schmeltzer, E. R., Thurber, R. V. & Grottoli, A. G. A review of coral bleaching specimen collection, preservation, and laboratory processing methods. PeerJ 9, 1–21 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Okubo, N., Motokawa, T. & Omori, M. When fragmented coral spawn? Effect of size and timing on survivorship and fecundity of fragmentation in Acropora formosa. Mar. Biol. 151, 353–363 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bruno, J. F. Fragmentation in Madracis mirabilis (Duchassaing and Michelotti): How common is size-specific fragment survivorship in corals?. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 230, 169–181 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Suggett, D. J. et al. Optimizing return-on-effort for coral nursery and outplanting practices to aid restoration of the Great Barrier Reef. Restor. Ecol. 27, 683–693 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Howlett, L., Camp, E. F., Edmondson, J., Henderson, N. & Suggett, D. J. Coral growth, survivorship and return-on-effort within nurseries at high-value sites on the Great Barrier Reef. PLoS ONE 16, 1–15 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Veal, C. J., Carmi, M., Fine, M. & Hoegh-Guldberg, O. Increasing the accuracy of surface area estimation using single wax dipping of coral fragments. Coral Reefs 29, 893–897 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Voolstra, C. R. et al. Contrasting heat stress response patterns of coral holobionts across the Red Sea suggest distinct mechanisms of thermal tolerance. Mol. Ecol. 30, 4466–4480 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dove, S. et al. Response of holosymbiont pigments from the scleractinian coral Montipora monasteriata to short-term heat stress. Limnol. Oceanogr. 51, 1149–1158 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Traylor-Knowles, N., Rose, N. H., Sheets, E. A. & Palumb, S. Early tracriptional responses during heat stress in the coral Acropora hyacinthus. Biol. Bull. 232, 91–100 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schuback, N. et al. Single-turnover variable chlorophyll fluorescence as a tool for assessing phytoplankton photosynthesis and primary productivity: opportunities, caveats and recommendations. Front. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.690607 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Macadam, A., Nowell, C. J. & Quigley, K. Machine learning for the fast and accurate assessment of fitness in coral early life history. Remote Sens. 13, 1–17 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Teague, J., Willans, J., Allen, M. J., Scott, T. B. & Day, J. C. C. Applied marine hyperspectral imaging; coral bleaching from a spectral viewpoint. Spectrosc. Eur. 31, 13–17 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Davies, S. W., Ries, J. B., Marchetti, A. & Castillo, K. D. Symbiodinium functional diversity in the Coral Siderastrea siderea Is influenced by thermal stress and reef environment, but not ocean acidification. Front. Mar. Sci. 5, 1–14 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tang, J. et al. Increased ammonium assimilation activity in the scleractinian coral pocillopora damicornis but not its symbiont after acute heat stress. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 1–10 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sweet, M. et al. Species-specific variations in the metabolomic profiles of Acropora hyacinthus and Acropora millepora mask acute temperature stress effects in adult coral colonies. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 1–15 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Newton, J. R., Smith-Keune, C. & Jerry, D. R. Thermal tolerance varies in tropical and sub-tropical populations of barramundi (Lates calcarifer) consistent with local adaptation. Aquaculture 308, S128–S132 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Waltham, N. J. & Sheaves, M. Acute thermal tolerance of tropical estuarine fish occupying a man-made tidal lake, and increased exposure risk with climate change. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 196, 173–181 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Iwabuchi, B. L. & Gosselin, L. A. Implications of acute temperature and salinity tolerance thresholds for the persistence of intertidal invertebrate populations experiencing climate change. Ecol. Evol. 10, 7739–7754 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cox, J., Schubert, A. M., Travisano, M. & Putonti, C. Adaptive evolution and inherent tolerance to extreme thermal environments. BMC Evol. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-10-75 (2010).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Quigley, K. M., Bay, L. K. & Willis, B. L. Temperature and water quality-related patterns in sediment-associated Symbiodinium communities impact symbiont uptake and fitness of juveniles in the genus Acropora. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 1–17 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Voolstra, C. R. et al. Extending the natural adaptive capacity of coral holobionts. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-021-00214-3 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cocciardi, J. M. et al. Adjustable temperature array for characterizing ecological and evolutionary effects on thermal physiology. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2019, 1339–1346 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, G. & Spillman, C. New high-resolution sea surface temperature forecasts for coral reef management on the Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs 38, 1039–1056 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bainbridge, S. J. Temperature and light patterns at four reefs along the Great Barrier Reef during the 2015–2016 austral summer: understanding patterns of observed coral bleaching. J. Oper. Oceanogr. 10, 16–29 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Siebeck, U. E., Marshall, N. J., Klüter, A. & Hoegh-Guldberg, O. Monitoring coral bleaching using a colour reference card. Coral Reefs 25, 453–460 (2006).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Palumbi, S. R., Barshis, D. J., Traylor-Knowles, N. & Bay, R. A. Mechanisms of reef coral resistance to future climate change. Science (80-.) 344, 895–899 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Saxby, T., Dennison, W. C. & Hoegh-Guldberg, O. Photosynthetic responses of the coral Montipora digitata to cold temperature stress. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 248, 85–97 (2003).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Deschaseaux, E. S. M., Deseo, M. A., Shepherd, K. M., Jones, G. B. & Harrison, P. L. Air blasting as the optimal approach for the extraction of antioxidants in coral tissue. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 448, 146–148 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Holmes, G., Ortiz, J., Kaniewska, P. & Johnstone, R. Using three-dimensional surface area to compare the growth of two Pocilloporid coral species. Mar. Biol. 155, 421–427 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Naumann, M. S., Niggl, W., Laforsch, C., Glaser, C. & Wild, C. Coral surface area quantification-evaluation of established techniques by comparison with computer tomography. Coral Reefs 28, 109–117 (2009).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritchie, R. J. Consistent sets of spectrophotometric chlorophyll equations for acetone, methanol and ethanol solvents. Photosynth. Res. 89, 27–41 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Licthenthaler, H. K. Chlorophylls and carotenoids – pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. Methods Enzymol. 148, 350–382 (1987).Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. (2020).Hartig, F. & Lohse, L. Package ‘DHARMa’ residual diangonstics for hierarchical (multi-level/mixed) regression models (2021).Brooks, M. E. et al. glmmTMB balances speed and flexibility among packaages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modelling. R Journal 9, 378–400 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harrison, X. A. et al. A brief introduction to mixed effects modelling and multi-model inference in ecology. PeerJ 2018, 1–32 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 133–142 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Oksanen, J. et al. Vegan (2020).Sarkar, D. Lattice: Multivariate Data Visualization with R (Springer, 2008).MATH 
Book 

Google Scholar  More