Ecology

Gigantic trees occur in only a few regions on Earth. Some of the world’s largest eucalypts, for example, are on the island of Tasmania, off southeastern Australia. As wildfires increase in severity and frequency as a result of climate change, we urge the authorities to protect these trees by adopting measures similar to those applied to safeguard California’s redwood forests.
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests. More

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript. More

Sloan, R. E. in Essays on palaeontology in honour of Loris Shano Russell (ed C. S. Churcher) 134–155 (Royal Ontario Museum, 1976).Dodson, P. J. A faunal review of the Judith River (Oldman) Formation, Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta. Mosasaur 1, 89–118 (1983).
Google Scholar 
Clemens, W. A. in Dynamics of extinction (ed D. K. Elliott) 63–85 (John Wiley & Sons, 1986).Dodson, P. J. & Tatarinov, L. P. in The Dinosauria (eds D. B. Weishampel, P. J. Dodson, & H. Osmólska) 55–62 (University of California Press, 1990).Lehman, T. M. in Dinofest International (eds D. L. Wolberg, E. Stump, & G. D. Rosenberg) 223–240 (Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences, 1997).Lehman, T. M. in Mesozoic Vertebrate Life (eds D. H. Tanke & K. Carpenter) 310–328 (Indiana University Press, 2001).Sampson, S. D. et al. New horned dinosaurs from Utah provide evidence for intracontinental dinosaur endemism. PLoS ONE 5, e12292. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012292 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mannion, P. D., Upchurch, P., Carrano, M. T. & Barrett, P. M. Testing the effect of the rock record on diversity: a multidisciplinary approach to elucidating the generic richness of sauropodomorph dinosaurs through time. Biol. Rev. 86, 157–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00139.x (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Upchurch, P., Mannion, P. D., Benson, R. B. J., Butler, R. J. & Carrano, M. T. Geological and anthropogenic controls on the sampling of the terrestrial fossil record: a case study from the Dinosauria. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ 358, 209–240. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP358.14 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Haq, B. U. Cretaceous eustasy revisited. Glob. Planet. Change 113, 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2013.12.007 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Miller, K. G., Barrera, E., Olsson, R. K., Sugarman, P. J. & Savin, S. M. Does ice drive early Maastrichtian eustasy?. Geology 27, 783. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1999)027%3c0783:dideme%3e2.3.co;2 (1999).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Catuneanu, O., Sweet, A. R. & Miall, A. D. Reciprocal stratigraphy of the Campanian-Paleocene Western Interior of North America. Sediment. Geol. 134, 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0037-0738(00)00045-2 (2000).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, R. L. Ash flows. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 71, 795–841. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1960)71[795:af]2.0.co;2 (1960).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smedes, H. W. Geology and igneous petrology of the northern Elkhorn mountains. 116 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 510 1966).Rutland, C., Smedes, H. W., Tilling, R. I. & Greenwood, W. R. in Cordilleran volcanism, plutonism, and magma generation at various crustal levels, Montana and Idaho. 28th International Geological Congress, Field Trip Guidebook T337 (ed D. W. Hyndman) 16–31 (American Geophysical Union, 1989).Harlan, S. S. et al. 40Ar/39Ar and K-Ar Geochronology and Tectonic Significance of the Upper Cretaceous Adel Mountain Volcanics and Spatially Associated Tertiary Igneous Rocks, Northwestern Montana. 29 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1696, 2005).Breyer, J. A. et al. Evidence for late cretaceous volcanism in Trans-Pecos Texas. J. Geol. 115, 243–251. https://doi.org/10.1086/510640 (2007).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jennings, G. R., Lawton, T. E. & Clinkscales, C. A. Late cretaceous U-Pb tuff ages from the, Skunk Ranch Formation and their implications for age of Laramide deformation, Little Hatchet Mountains, southwestern New Mexico, USA. Cretac. Res. 43, 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2013.02.001 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, E. M. & Hendrix, M. S. Taphonomy of a petrified forest in the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian), northwest Montana: implications for palinspastic restoration of the Boulder batholith and Elkhorn Mountains Volcanics. Palaios 15, 476–482. https://doi.org/10.2307/3515516 (2000).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sewall, J. O. et al. Climate model boundary conditions for four Cretaceous time slices. Clim. Past. 3, 647–657. https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-3-647-2007 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bertog, J. Stratigraphy of the lower Pierre Shale (Campanian): implications for the tectonic and eustatic controls on facies distributions. J. Geol. Res. 2010, 910243. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/910243 (2010).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fricke, H. C., Foreman, B. Z. & Sewall, J. O. Integrated climate model-oxygen isotope evidence for a North American monsoon during the Late Cretaceous. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 289, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2009.10.018 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Obradovich, J. D. in Evolution of the Western Interior Basin (eds W. G. E. Caldwell & E. G. Kaufman) 379–396 (Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 39, 1993).Cobban, W. A., Walaszczyk, I., Obradovich, J. D. & McKinney, K. C. A USGS Zonal Table for the Upper Cretaceous Middle Cenomanian–Maastrichtian of the Western Interior of the United States Based on Ammonites, Inoceramids, and Radiometric Ages. (United States Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006–1250, 2006).Rogers, R. R., Swisher, C. C. & Horner, J. R. 40Ar/39Ar age and correlation of the nonmarine Two Medicine Formation (Upper Cretaceous), northwestern Montana, U.S.A. Can J Earth Sci 30, 1066–1075. https://doi.org/10.1139/e93-090 (1993).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Goodwin, M. B. & Deino, A. L. The first radiometric ages from the Judith River Formation (Upper Cretaceous), Hill County, Montana. Can. J. Earth Sci. 26, 1384–1391. https://doi.org/10.1139/e89-118 (1989).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Thomas, R. G., Eberth, D. A., Deino, A. L. & Robinson, D. Composition, radioisotopic ages, and potential significance of an altered volcanic ash (bentonite) from the Upper Cretaceous Judith River Formation, Dinosaur Provincial Park, southern Alberta, Canada. Cretac. Res. 11, 125–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0195-6671(05)80030-8 (1990).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, E. M., Deino, A. L. & Chan, M. A. 40Ar/39Ar age of the Kaiparowits Formation, southern Utah, and correlation of contemporaneous Campanian strata and vertebrate faunas along the margin of the Western Interior Basin. Cretac. Res. 26, 307–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2005.01.002 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fassett, J. E. & Steiner, M. B. in Mesozoic Geology and Paleontology of the Four Corners Region (eds O. Anderson, B. S. Kues, & S. G. Lucas) 239–247 (New Mexico Geological Society 48th Field Conference Guidebook, 1997).Sprain, C. J., Renne, P. R., Wilson, G. P. & Clemens, W. A. High-resolution chronostratigraphy of the terrestrial Cretaceous-Paleogene transition and recovery interval in the Hell Creek region, Montana. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 127, 393–409. https://doi.org/10.1130/B31076.1 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Clyde, W. C., Ramezani, J., Johnson, K. R., Bowring, S. A. & Jones, M. M. Direct high-precision U-Pb geochronology of the end-Cretaceous extinction and calibration of Paleocene astronomical timescales. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 452, 272–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2016.07.041 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, T. T. et al. High-precision U-Pb geochronologic constraints on the Late Cretaceous terrestrial cyclostratigraphy and geomagnetic polarity from the Songliao Basin, Northeast China. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 446, 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2016.04.007 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Blakey, R. C. Paleogeography and Paleotectonics of the Western Interior Seaway, Jurassic-Cretaceous of North America. (American Association of Petroleum Geologists Search and Discovery Article 30392, 2014).Archibald, J. D. Dinosaur Extinction and the End of an Era: What the Fossils Say 240 (Columbia University Press, London, 1996).
Google Scholar 
Currie, P. J. & Russell, D. A. in Dinosaur Provincial Park: A Spectacular Ancient Ecosystem Revealed (eds P. J. Currie & E. B. Koppelhus) 537–569 (Indiana University Press, 2005).Eberth, D. A. & Hamblin, A. P. Tectonic, stratigraphic, and sedimentologic significance of a regional discontinuity in the upper Judith River Group (Belly River Wedge) of southern Alberta, Saskatchewan, and northern Montana. Can. J. Earth Sci. 30, 174–200. https://doi.org/10.1139/e93-016 (1993).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eberth, D. A. in Dinosaur Provincial Park: A spectacular Ancient Ecosystem Revealed (eds P. J. Currie & E. B. Koppelhus) Ch. 3, 54–82 (Indiana University Press, 2005).Eberth, D. A. Origin and significance of mud-filled incised valleys (Upper Cretaceous) in southern Alberta, Canada. Sedimentology 43, 459–477. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3091.1996.d01-15.x (1996).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Russell, D. A. A new specimen of Stenonychosaurus from the Oldman Formation (Cretaceous) of Alberta. Can. J. Earth Sci. 6, 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1139/e69-059 (1969).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dodson, P. Sedimentology and taphonomy of Oldman formation (Campanian), Dinosaur-Provincial-Park, Alberta (Canada). Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 10, 21–000. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-0182(71)90044-7 (1971).Article 

Google Scholar 
Farlow, J. O. Consideration of trophic dynamics of a late cretaceous large dinosaur community (Oldman formation). Ecology 57, 841–857. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941052 (1976).Article 

Google Scholar 
Beland, P. & Russell, D. A. Paleoecology of Dinosaur-Provincial-Park (Cretaceous), Alberta, interpreted from distribution of articulated vertebrate remains. Can. J. Earth Sci. 15, 1012–1024. https://doi.org/10.1139/e78-109 (1978).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
MacDonald, M., Currie, P. J. & Spencer, W. A. in Dinosaur Provincial Park: A Spectacular Ancient Ecosystem Revealed (eds P. J. Currie & E. B. Koppelhus) 478–485 (Indiana University Press, 2005).Eberth, D. A., Brinkman, D. B. & Barkas, V. in New Perspectives on Horned Dinosaurs: The Royal Tyrrell Museum Ceratopsian Symposium (eds M. J. Ryan, B. J. Chinnery-Allgeier, & D. A. Eberth) 495–508 (Indiana University Press, 2010).Mallon, J. C., Evans, D. C., Ryan, M. J. & Anderson, J. S. Megaherbivorous dinosaur turnover in the Dinosaur Park Formation (upper Campanian) of Alberta, Canada. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 350, 124–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.06.024 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. M., Evans, D. C., Campione, N. E., O’Brien, L. J. & Eberth, D. A. Evidence for taphonomic size bias in the Dinosaur Park Formation (Campanian, Alberta), a model Mesozoic terrestrial alluvial-paralic system. Palaeogeogr Palaeocl 372, 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.06.027 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eberth, D. A. & Getty, M. A. in Dinosaur Provincial Park: A Spectacular Ancient Ecosystem Revealed (eds P. J. Currie & E. B. Koppelhus) 501–536 (Indiana University Press, 2005).Brown, C. M., Herridge-Berry, S., Chiba, K., Vitkus, A. & Eberth, D. A. High-resolution (centimetre-scale) GPS/GIS-based 3D mapping and spatial analysis of in situ fossils in two horned-dinosaur bonebeds in the Dinosaur Park Formation (Upper Cretaceous) at Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta, Canada. Can. J. Earth Sci. 58, 225–246. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2019-0183 (2021).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eberth, D. A., Braman, D. R. & Tokaryk, T. T. Stratigraphy, Sedimentology and vertebrate paleontology of the Judith River Formation (Campanian) near Muddy Lake, West-Central Saskatchewan. Bull. Can. Petrol. Geol. 38, 387–406 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Rogers, R. R. Sequence analysis of the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine and Judith River formations, Montana; nonmarine response to the Claggett and Bearpaw marine cycles. J. Sediment. Res. 68, 615–631. https://doi.org/10.2110/jsr.68.604 (1998).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rogers, R. R. Taphonomy of three dinosaur bone beds in the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine Formation of Northwestern Montana: evidence for drought-related mortality. Palaios 5, 394–413. https://doi.org/10.2307/3514834 (1990).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Falcon-Lang, H. J. Growth interruptions in silicified conifer woods from the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine Formation, Montana, USA: implications for palaeoclimate and dinosaur palaeoecology. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 199, 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-0182(03)00539-X (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Horner, J. R. & Makela, R. Nest of juveniles provides evidence of family-structure among dinosaurs. Nature 282, 296–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/282296a0 (1979).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Horner, J. R., Varricchio, D. J. & Goodwin, M. B. Marine transgressions and the evolution of Cretaceous dinosaurs. Nature 358, 59–61. https://doi.org/10.1038/358059a0 (1992).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sampson, S. D. Two new horned dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine Formation of Montana; With a phylogenetic analysis of the Centrosaurinae (Ornithischia:Ceratopsidae). J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 15, 743–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.1995.10011259 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Carr, T. D., Varricchio, D. J., Sedlmayr, J. C., Roberts, E. M. & Moore, J. R. A new tyrannosaur with evidence for anagenesis and crocodile-like facial sensory system. Sci. Rep. 7, 44942. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44942 (2017).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, J. P., Ryan, M. J. & Evans, D. C. A new, transitional centrosaurine ceratopsid from the Upper Cretaceous Two Medicine Formation of Montana and the evolution of the “Styracosaurus-line” dinosaurs. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7, 200284. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.200284 (2020).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Foreman, B. Z., Rogers, R. R., Deino, A. L., Wirth, K. R. & Thole, J. T. Geochemical characterization of bentonite beds in the Two Medicine Formation (Campanian, Montana), including a new 40Ar/39Ar age. Cretac. Res. 29, 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2007.07.001 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Varricchio, D. J. et al. in Large Meteorite Impacts and Planetary Evolution IV Vol. 465 (eds R. L. Gibson & W. U. Reimold) 269–299 (Geological Society of America Special Paper 465, 2010).Meek, F. B. & Hayden, F. V. Descriptions of new species of acephala and gasteropoda, from the tertiary formations of Nebraska Territory, with some general remarks on the geology of the country about the sources of the Missouri River. Ceratites Americanus. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 8, 111–126 (1856).
Google Scholar 
Hayden, F. V. Notes explanatory of a map and section illustrating the geologic structure of the country bordering the Missouri River from the mouth of the Platte River to Fort Benton. Proc. Acad. Natl. Sci. Phila. 9, 109–148 (1857).
Google Scholar 
Hayden, F. V. in [Fourth Annual] Preliminary Report of the United States Geological Survey of Wyoming and portions of contiguous Territories 85–98 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1871).Dawson, G. M. in Report on the Geology and Resources of the Region in the Vicinity of the Forty-Ninth Parallel, from the Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains 1–18 (British North American Boundary Commission, 1875).Stanton, T. W., Hatcher, J. B. & Knowlton, F. H. Geology and Paleontology of the Judith River Beds (United States Geological Survey Bulletin No. 257, 1905).Bowen, C. F. in Shorter Contributions to General Geology 1914 95–153 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 90, 1915).Waage, K. M. in The Cretaceous System in the Western Interior of North America: The Proceedings of an International Symposium Organized by the Geological Association of Canada, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, May 23–26, 1973 (ed W. G. E. Caldwell) 55–81 (Geological Association of Canada Special paper 13, 1975).Leidy, J. Notice of remains of extinct reptiles and fishes, discovered by Dr. FV Hayden in the Bad Lands of the Judith River, Nebraska Territory. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 8, 72–73. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1038128 (1856).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leidy, J. Extinct vertebrata from the Judith River and Great Lignite formations of Nebraska. Trans. Am. Philos. Soc. 11, 139–154. https://doi.org/10.2307/3231936 (1860).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cope, E. D. On some extinct reptiles and Batrachia from the Judith River and Fox Hills beds of Montana. Proc. Acad. Natl. Sci. Phila. 28, 340–359 (1876).
Google Scholar 
Sternberg, C. H. Notes on the fossil vertebrates collected on the Cope expedition to the Judith River and Cow Island beds, Montana, in 1876. Science 40, 134–135. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.40.1021.134 (1914).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sahni, A. The vertebrate fauna of the Judith River Formation, Montana. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 147, 325–412 (1972).
Google Scholar 
Tschudy, B. D. Palynology of the upper Campanian (Cretaceous) Judith River Formation, north-central Montana. 42 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 770, 1973).Case, G. R. A new Selachian Fauna from the Judith River formation (Campanian) of Montana. Palaeontogr. Abt. A Band A 160, 176–205 (1978).
Google Scholar 
Horner, J. R. A new hadrosaur (Reptilia, Ornithischia) from the Upper Cretaceous Judith River Formation of Montana. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 8, 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.1988.10011714 (1988).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fiorillo, A. R. & Currie, P. J. Theropod teeth from the Judith River formation (Upper Cretaceous) of south-central Montana. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 14, 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.1994.10011539 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Prieto-Marquez, A. New information on the cranium of Brachylophosaurus canadensis (Dinosauria, Hadrosauridae), with a revision of its phylogenetic position. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 25, 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1671/0272-4634(2005)025[0144:Niotco]2.0.Co;2 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fricke, H. C., Rogers, R. R., Backlund, R., Dwyer, C. N. & Echt, S. Preservation of primary stable isotope signals in dinosaur remains, and environmental gradients of the Late Cretaceous of Montana and Alberta. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 266, 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2008.03.030 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fricke, H. C., Rogers, R. R. & Gates, T. A. Hadrosaurid migration: inferences based on stable isotope comparisons among Late Cretaceous dinosaur localities. Paleobiology 35, 270–288. https://doi.org/10.1666/08025.1 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tweet, J. S., Chin, K., Braman, D. R. & Murphy, N. L. Probable gut contents within a specimen of Brachylophosaurus canadensis (Dinosauria: Hadrosauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous Judith River formation of Montana. Palaios 23, 624–635. https://doi.org/10.2110/palo.2007.p07-044r (2008).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ryan, M. J., Evans, D. C., Currie, P. J. & Loewen, M. A. A new chasmosaurine from northern Laramidia expands frill disparity in ceratopsid dinosaurs. Naturwissenschaften 101, 505–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-014-1183-1 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Arbour, V. M. & Evans, D. C. A new ankylosaurine dinosaur from the Judith River formation of Montana, USA, based on an exceptional skeleton with soft tissue preservation. R. Soc. Open Sci. 4, 161086. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.161086 (2017).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chiba, K., Ryan, M. J., Fanti, F., Loewen, M. A. & Evans, D. C. New material and systematic re-evaluation of Medusaceratops lokii (Dinosauria, Ceratopsidae) from the Judith River formation (Campanian, Montana). J. Paleontol. 92, 272–288. https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2017.62 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rogers, R. R. et al. Age, correlation, and lithostratigraphic revision of the Upper Cretaceous (Campanian) Judith River formation in its type area (north-central Montana), with a comparison of low- and high-accommodation alluvial records. J. Geol. 124, 99–135. https://doi.org/10.1086/684289 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lawton, T. F., Pollock, S. L. & Robinson, R. A. J. Integrating sandstone petrology and nonmarine sequence stratigraphy: application to the late cretaceous fluvial systems of southwestern Utah, USA. J. Sediment. Res. 73, 389–406. https://doi.org/10.1306/100702730389 (2003).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jinnah, Z. A. et al. New 40Ar/39Ar and detrital zircon U-Pb ages for the Upper Cretaceous Wahweap and Kaiparowits formations on the Kaiparowits Plateau, Utah: implications for regional correlation, provenance, and biostratigraphy. Cretac. Res. 30, 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2008.07.012 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Beveridge, T. L. et al. Refined geochronology and revised stratigraphic nomenclature of the Upper Cretaceous Wahweap Formation, Utah, U.S.A. and the age of early Campanian vertebrates from southern Laramidia. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 591, 110876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2022.110876 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jinnah, Z. A. & Roberts, E. M. Facies associations, paleoenvironment, and base-level changes in the Upper Cretaceous Wahweap Formation, Utah, USA. J. Sediment. Res. 81, 266–283. https://doi.org/10.2110/jsr.2011.22 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gregory, H. E. & Moore, R. C. The Kaiparowits region, a geographic and geologic reconnaissance of parts of Utah and Arizona. Report No. 164, 161 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 164, 1931).Lohrengel, C. F. II. Palynology of Kaiparowits Formation, Garfield County, Utah. AAPG Bull. 53, 729–729. https://doi.org/10.1306/5d25c75f-16c1-11d7-8645000102c1865d (1969).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, E. M. Facies architecture and depositional environments of the Upper Cretaceous Kaiparowits Formation, southern Utah. Sediment. Geol. 197, 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2006.10.001 (2007).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lawton, T. F. & Bradford, B. A. Correlation and provenance of Upper Cretaceous (Campanian) fluvial strata, Utah, USA, from Zircon U-Pb geochronology and petrography. J. Sediment. Res. 81, 495–512. https://doi.org/10.2110/jsr.2011.45 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Beveridge, T. L., Roberts, E. M. & Titus, A. L. Volcaniclastic member of the richly fossiliferous Kaiparowits Formation reveals new insights for regional correlation and tectonics in southern Utah during the latest Campanian. Cretac. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2020.104527 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Titus, A. L. et al. in Interior Western United States (ed C. M. Dehler) 1–28 (Geological Society of America Field Guide 6, 2005).Titus, A. L. & Loewen, M. A. At the Top of the Grand Staircase: The Late Cretaceous of Southern Utah (Indiana University Press, 2013).Cifelli, R. L. Cretaceous mammals of southern Utah. I. Marsupials from the Kaiparowits Formation (Judithian). J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 10, 295–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.1990.10011816 (1990).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eaton, J., Cifelli, R., Hutchison, J. H., Kirkland, J. & Parrish, J. in Vertebrate Paleontology in Utah (ed D. D. Gillette) 345–353 (Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication 99–1, 1999).Zanno, L. E. & Sampson, S. D. A new oviraptorosaur (Theropoda, Maniraptora) from the Late Cretaceous (Campanian) of Utah. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 25, 897–904. https://doi.org/10.1671/0272-4634(2005)025[0897:Anotmf]2.0.Co;2 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gates, T. A. & Sampson, S. D. A new species of Gryposaurus (Dinosauria : Hadrosauridae) from the late Campanian Kaiparowits Formation, southern Utah, USA. Zool J Linn Soc-Lond 151, 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2007.00349.x (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sampson, S. D., Lund, E. K., Loewen, M. A., Farke, A. A. & Clayton, K. E. A remarkable short-snouted horned dinosaur from the Late Cretaceous (late Campanian) of southern Laramidia. Proc. Biol. Sci. 280, 20131186. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.1186 (2013).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Carr, T. D., Williamson, T. E., Britt, B. B. & Stadtman, K. Evidence for high taxonomic and morphologic tyrannosauroid diversity in the Late Cretaceous (Late Campanian) of the American Southwest and a new short-skulled tyrannosaurid from the Kaiparowits formation of Utah. Naturwissenschaften 98, 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-011-0762-7 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zanno, L. E., Varricchio, D. J., O’Connor, P. M., Titus, A. L. & Knell, M. J. A new troodontid theropod, Talos sampsoni gen. et sp. Nov., from the Upper Cretaceous Western Interior Basin of North America. PLoS ONE 6, e24487. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024487 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Loewen, M. A., Irmis, R. B., Sertich, J. J., Currie, P. J. & Sampson, S. D. Tyrant dinosaur evolution tracks the rise and fall of Late Cretaceous oceans. PLoS ONE 8, e79420. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079420 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wiersma, J. P. & Irmis, R. B. A new southern Laramidian ankylosaurid, Akainacephalus johnsoni gen. et sp. Nov., from the upper Campanian Kaiparowits Formation of southern Utah, USA. Peerj 6, e5016. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5016 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Titus, A. L. et al. Geology and taphonomy of a unique tyrannosaurid bonebed from the upper Campanian Kaiparowits Formation of southern Utah: implications for tyrannosaurid gregariousness. PeerJ 9, e11013. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11013 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Roberts, E., Sampson, S., Deino, A., Bowring, S. & Buchwaldt, R. in At the Top of the Grand Staircase: The Late Cretaceous of Southern Utah (eds A. L. Titus & M. A. Loewen) 85–106 (Indiana University Press, 2013).Fassett, J. E. & Hinds, J. S. Geology and fuel resources of the Fruitland Formation and Kirtland Shale of the San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado. Report No. 676, 76 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 676, 1971).Fassett, J. E. in Geologic Assessment of Coal in the Colorado Plateau: Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah (eds M. A. Kirschbaum, L. N. R. Roberts, & L. Biewick) Q1-Q132 (U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1625–B, 2000).Flynn, A. G. et al. Early Paleocene magnetostratigraphy and revised biostratigraphy of the Ojo Alamo Sandstone and Lower Nacimiento Formation, San Juan Basin, New Mexico, USA. GSA Bull. 132, 2154–2174. https://doi.org/10.1130/b35481.1 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hay, O. P. On the habits and the pose of the Sauropodous dinosaurs, especially of Diplodocus. Am. Nat. 42, 672–681. https://doi.org/10.1086/278992 (1908).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gilmore, C. W. in Shorter Contributions to General Geology 1916 279–308 (United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 98-Q, 1916).Gilmore, C. W. On the Replilia of the Kirtland formation of New Mexico, with descriptions of new species of fossil turtles. Proc. U.S. Natl. Mus. 83, 159–188 (1935).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hunt, A. P. Integrated vertebrate, invertebrate and plant taphonomy of the Fossil Forest area (Fruitland and Kirtland formations: Late Cretaceous), San-Juan-County, New-Mexico, USA. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 88, 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-0182(91)90016-K (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hunt, A. P. & Lucas, S. G. in New Mexico Geological Society 43rd Field Conference Guidebook Vol. 43 (eds S. G. Lucas, B. S. Kues, T. E. Williamson, & A. P. Hunt) 217–239 (New Mexico Geological Society, 1992).Fassett, J. E. & Heizler, M. T. in The Geology of the Ouray-Silverton Area (eds K. E. Karlstrom et al.) 115–121 (68th New Mexico Geological Society Field Conference Guidebook, 2017).Folinsbee, R., Lipson, J. & Baadsgaard, H. Potassium-argon dates of upper cretaceous ash falls, Alberta, Canada. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 91, 352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1961.tb35475.x (1961).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lerbekmo, J. F. Petrology of the belly river formation, southern Alberta foothills. Sedimentology 2, 54–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1963.tb01200.x (1963).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Min, K. W., Renne, P. R. & Huff, W. D. 40Ar/39Ar dating of Ordovician K-bentonites in Laurentia and Baltoscandia. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 185, 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-821x(00)00365-4 (2001).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Steiger, R. H. & Jäger, E. Subcommission on geochronology: convention on the use of decay constants in geo- and cosmochronology. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 36, 359–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-821x(77)90060-7 (1977).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Samson, S. D. & Alexander, E. C. Calibration of the interlaboratory 40Ar-39Ar dating standard, Mmhb-1. Chem. Geol. 66, 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9622(87)90025-X (1987).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Deino, A. & Potts, R. Single-crystal 40Ar/39Ar dating of the Olorgesailie formation, Southern Kenya Rift. J. Geophys. Res. 95, 8453. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB095iB06p08453 (1990).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Renne, P. R. et al. Intercalibration of standards, absolute ages and uncertainties in 40Ar/39Ar dating. Chem Geol 145, 117–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0009-2541(97)00159-9 (1998).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuiper, K. F. et al. Synchronizing rock clocks of Earth history. Science 320, 500–504. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1154339 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Fowler, D. W. Revised geochronology, correlation, and dinosaur stratigraphic ranges of the Santonian-Maastrichtian (Late Cretaceous) formations of the Western Interior of North America. PLoS ONE 12, e0188426. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188426 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Turrin, B. D. et al. in American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting Vol. 2016 V23A–2969 (San Francisco, California, 2016).Phillips, D., Matchan, E. L., Dalton, H. & Kuiper, K. F. Revised astronomically calibrated 40Ar/39Ar ages for the Fish Canyon Tuff sanidine—closing the interlaboratory gap. Chem. Geol. 597, 120815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2022.120815 (2022).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eberth, D. A. & Kamo, S. L. High-precision U-Pb CA-ID-TIMS dating and chronostratigraphy of the dinosaur-rich Horseshoe Canyon Formation (Upper Cretaceous, Campanian-Maastrichtian), Red Deer River valley, Alberta, Canada. Can. J. Earth Sci. 57, 1220–1237. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2019-0019 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gale, A. S. et al. in Geologic Time Scale 2020 (eds F. M. Gradstein, J. G. Ogg, M. D. Schmitz, & G. M. Ogg) 1023–1086 (Elsevier, 2020).Condon, D. J., Schoene, B., McLean, N. M., Bowring, S. A. & Parrish, R. R. Metrology and traceability of U-Pb isotope dilution geochronology (EARTHTIME Tracer Calibration Part I). Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 164, 464–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2015.05.026 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mattinson, J. M. Zircon U-Pb chemical abrasion (“CA-TIMS”) method: combined annealing and multi-step partial dissolution analysis for improved precision and accuracy of zircon ages. Chem. Geol. 220, 47–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2005.03.011 (2005).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McLean, N. M., Condon, D. J., Schoene, B. & Bowring, S. A. Evaluating uncertainties in the calibration of isotopic reference materials and multi-element isotopic tracers (EARTHTIME Tracer Calibration Part II). Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 164, 481–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2015.02.040 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lu, J. et al. Volcanically driven lacustrine ecosystem changes during the Carnian Pluvial Episode (Late Triassic). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2109895118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2109895118 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jiang, B., Harlow, G. E., Wohletz, K., Zhou, Z. & Meng, J. New evidence suggests pyroclastic flows are responsible for the remarkable preservation of the Jehol biota. Nat. Commun. 5, 3151. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4151 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gates, T. A. et al. Biogeography of terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates from the late Cretaceous (Campanian) Western Interior of North America. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl. 291, 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2010.03.008 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eaton, J. G. in Stratigraphy, depositional environments; and sedimentary tectonics of the western margin, Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway (eds J. Dale Nations & J. G. Eaton) 47–63 (Geological Society of America Special Paper 260, 1991).Sankey, J. T. Late Campanian southern dinosaurs, Aguja Formation, Big Bend, Texas. J. Paleontol. 75, 208–215. https://doi.org/10.1666/0022-3360(2001)075%3c0208:Lcsdaf%3e2.0.Co;2 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sullivan, R. & Lucas, S. G. Vertebrate faunal succession in the Upper Cretaceous, San Juan Basin, New Mexico, with implications for correlations within the north American western interior. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 23, 102a–102a (2003).
Google Scholar 
Currie, P. J. in Dinosaur Provincial Park: A Spectacular Ancient Ecosystem Revealed (eds P. J. Currie & E. B. Koppelhus) 3–33 (Indiana University Press, 2005).Kirkland, J. I. & Deblieux, D. D. in New Perspectives on Horned Dinosaurs: The Royal Tyrrell Museum Ceratopsian Symposium (eds M. J. Ryan, B. J. Chinnery-Allgeier, & D. A. Eberth) 117–140 (Indiana University Press, 2010).Miller, I. M., Johnson, K., Kline, D. E., Nichols, D. J. & Barclay, R. in At the Top of the Grand Staircase: The Late Cretaceous of southern Utah (eds A. Titus & M. Loewen) 107–131 (Indiana University Press, 2013).Tapanila, L. & Roberts, E. in At the Top of the Grand Staircase: The Late Cretaceous of Southern Utah (eds A. L. Titus & M. A. Loewen) 132–152 (Indiana University Press, 2013).Schmitt, J. & Varricchio, D. J. Volcano-tectonic partitioning of Laramidia: Influence on Campanian terrestrial environments and ecosystems. Program and Abstracts. J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 31, 188. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724634.2011.10635174 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Burgener, L. et al. An extreme climate gradient-induced ecological regionalization in the Upper Cretaceous Western Interior Basin of North America. GSA Bull. https://doi.org/10.1130/b35904.1 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sullivan, R. M. Revision of the dinosaur Stegoceras Lambe (Ornithischia, Pachycephalosauridae). J. Vertebr. Paleontol. 23, 181–207. https://doi.org/10.1671/0272-4634(2003)23[181:ROTDSL]2.0.CO;2 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sullivan, R. & Lucas, S. The Kirtlandian land-vertebrate “age”-faunal composition, temporal position and biostratigraphic correlation in the nonmarine Upper Cretaceous of western North America. N. M. Mus. Nat. Hist. Sci. Bull. 35, 7–29 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Lucas, S. G., Sullivan, R. M., Lichtig, A., Dalman, S. & Jasinski, S. E. in Cretaceous Period: Biotic Diversity and Biogeography Vol. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 71 (eds S. G. Lucas & A. Khosla) 195–213 (2016).Dean, C. D., Chiarenza, A. A. & Maidment, S. C. R. Formation binning: a new method for increased temporal resolution in regional studies, applied to the Late Cretaceous dinosaur fossil record of North America. Palaeontology 63, 881–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/pala.12492 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Maidment, S. C. R., Dean, C. D., Mansergh, R. I. & Butler, R. J. Deep-time biodiversity patterns and the dinosaurian fossil record of the Late Cretaceous Western Interior, North America. Proc. Biol. Sci. 288, 20210692. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.0692 (2021).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Loughney, K. M. & Badgley, C. The influence of depositional environment and basin history on the taphonomy of mammalian assemblages from the Barstow Formation (middle Miocene), California. Palaios 35, 175–190. https://doi.org/10.2110/palo.2019.067 (2020).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sakamoto, M., Benton, M. J. & Venditti, C. Dinosaurs in decline tens of millions of years before their final extinction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 5036–5040. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1521478113 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Condamine, F. L., Guinot, G., Benton, M. J. & Currie, P. J. Dinosaur biodiversity declined well before the asteroid impact, influenced by ecological and environmental pressures. Nat. Commun. 12, 3833. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23754-0 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Therrien, F. O. & Fastovsky, D. E. Paleoenvironments of early theropods, Chinle Formation (Late Triassic), Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona. Palaios 15, 194–211. https://doi.org/10.1669/0883-1351(2000)015%3c0194:poetcf%3e2.0.co;2 (2000).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoke, G. D., Schmitz, M. D. & Bowring, S. A. An ultrasonic method for isolating nonclay components from clay-rich material. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 15, 492–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GC005125 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ramezani, J. et al. High-precision U-Pb zircon geochronology of the Late Triassic Chinle Formation, Petrified Forest National Park (Arizona, USA): temporal constraints on the early evolution of dinosaurs. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 123, 2142–2159. https://doi.org/10.1130/b30433.1 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Widmann, P., Davies, J. H. F. L. & Schaltegger, U. Calibrating chemical abrasion: its effects on zircon crystal structure, chemical composition and U-Pb age. Chem. Geol. 511, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2019.02.026 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Krogh, T. E. Low-contamination method for hydrothermal decomposition of zircon and extraction of U and Pb for isotopic age determinations. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 37, 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(73)90213-5 (1973).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gerstenberger, H. & Haase, G. A highly effective emitter substance for mass spectrometric Pb isotope ratio determinations. Chem. Geol. 136, 309–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2541(96)00033-2 (1997).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bowring, J. F., McLean, N. M. & Bowring, S. A. Engineering cyber infrastructure for U-Pb geochronology: Tripoli and U-Pb_Redux. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gc003479 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
McLean, N. M., Bowring, J. F. & Bowring, S. A. An algorithm for U-Pb isotope dilution data reduction and uncertainty propagation. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gc003478 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Machlus, M. L. et al. A strategy for cross-calibrating U-Pb chronology and astrochronology of sedimentary sequences: an example from the Green River Formation, Wyoming, USA. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 413, 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2014.12.009 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hiess, J., Condon, D. J., McLean, N. & Noble, S. R. 238U/235U systematics in terrestrial uranium-bearing minerals. Science 335, 1610–1614. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215507 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schoene, B., Crowley, J. L., Condon, D. J., Schmitz, M. D. & Bowring, S. A. Reassessing the uranium decay constants for geochronology using ID-TIMS U-Pb data. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 70, 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2005.09.007 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mattinson, J. M. Analysis of the relative decay constants of 235U and 238U by multi-step CA-TIMS measurements of closed-system natural zircon samples. Chem. Geol. 275, 186–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2010.05.007 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jaffey, A. H., Flynn, K. F., Glendenin, L. E., Bentley, W. C. & Essling, A. M. Precision measurement of half-lives and specific activities of 235U and 238U. Phys. Rev. C 4, 1889–1906. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.4.1889 (1971).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nasdala, L. et al. GZ7 and GZ8—two zircon reference materials for SIMS U-Pb geochronology. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 42, 431–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggr.12239 (2018).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Haslett, J. & Parnell, A. A simple monotone process with application to radiocarbon-dated depth chronologies. J. R. Stat. Soc. C Appl. Stat. 57, 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9876.2008.00623.x (2008).MathSciNet 
Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Parnell, A. C., Haslett, J., Allen, J. R. M., Buck, C. E. & Huntley, B. A flexible approach to assessing synchroneity of past events using Bayesian reconstructions of sedimentation history. Quat. Sci. Rev. 27, 1872–1885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2008.07.009 (2008).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Glass eels collection (Anguilla anguilla, L.)Three hundred European glass eels ( More

External datasetsWoody biomass carbon dataThe dataset by ref. 16 maps annual global woody biomass carbon densities for 2000–2019 at a spatial resolution of ~10 km. The annual estimates represent averages for the tropical regions and growing-season (April–October) averages for the extra-tropical regions. Ref. 16 analyse global trends of gains and losses in woody biomass carbon for 2000–2019. Overall, they find that grid cells with (significant) net gains of vegetation carbon are by a factor of 1.4 more abundant than grid cells with net losses of vegetation carbon, indicating that there is a global greening trend when only considering the areal extent of biomass gains and not the magnitude of carbon gains. Their regionally distinct analysis of trends shows that almost all regions, except for the tropical moist forests in South America and parts of Southeast Asia, experienced net gains in biomass carbon. On the country scale, the largest net increase in biomass carbon is shown in China, which is mainly attributed to the large-scale afforestation programs in the southern part of the country and increased carbon uptake of established forests. On the other hand, the largest vegetation carbon losses are shown for Brazil and Indonesia, which is partly attributed to deforestation, degradation, and drought events. All of the mentioned trends have been found to be significant16. The decreasing carbon sink in Brazil is in line with ref. 44, who, considering both natural and anthropogenic fluxes, show that the southeastern Amazon has even turned from a carbon sink to a carbon source, mainly owing to fire emissions from forest clearing. Isolating carbon fluxes in intact, old-growth Amazonian rainforests (i.e., SLAND,B), ref. 45 also find evidence for a significantly decreasing carbon sink due to the negative effects of increasing temperatures and droughts on carbon uptake since the 1990s.The dataset was remapped to the BLUE resolution of 0.25∘ through conservative remapping (i.e., area-weighted averaging).ERA-5 dataThe ERA-5 variables were downloaded from the Copernicus Climate Data Store (https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/home). Monthly air temperature (Ta) at 2 m height was averaged over each year, and annual precipitation was calculated by taking the sum of the monthly total precipitation (P). Both variables were regridded from the original resolution of ~0.1° to 0.25° resp. to the TRENDY resolution of 0.5° through conservative remapping.TRENDY dataWe used the TRENDY model ensemble version 8 (conducted for the 2019 GCB; ref. 8). We used net biome production (NBP) and annual vegetation carbon stocks (cVeg) for 2000–2018 from four different model setups (S2, S3, S5, and S6) and eight resp. 13 DGVMs (depending on the data available). The selection of DGVMs is done as in ref. 19 (Supplementary Tab. 3), but we included one additional model (ISAM) for the S2 simulations. The terrestrial biomass carbon sink (SLAND,B) was calculated for 13 DGVMs following the GCB 2020 approach, i.e., from the S2 simulation, which is the simulation without LULCC (i.e., fixed pre-industrial land cover) under transient environmental conditions (climate, nitrogen deposition, CO2 evolution). SLAND,B is the annual difference of cVeg and makes no statements about the further fate of biomass if cVeg decreases. SLAND,B, therefore, should not be interpreted as equivalent to the flux to/from the atmosphere, since parts of cVeg may be transferred to litter, dead wood, or soil. The same applies to our BLUE estimates of SLAND,B, ensuring comparability between our BLUE estimates and the TRENDY estimates. Increases (decreases) of cVeg between two years are a net uptake (release) of carbon from the terrestrial biosphere. The global sums of biomass carbon stocks under transient climate and CO2 were calculated from the S3 setup (LULCC under historical environmental conditions), whereas the S5 setup provides biomass carbon under constant present-day environmental forcing (closest to the classical bookkeeping approach). In line with the GCB, ELUC was calculated under historical environmental conditions as the difference in NBP between the S2 and S3 simulations (ELUC = NBP_S2 – NBP_S3). ELUC under constant present-day environmental forcing was calculated as the difference in NBP between the S6 (fixed pre-industrial land cover under present-day environmental forcing) and S5 simulations (ELUC = NBP_S6 – NBP_S5)19. All datasets were remapped to a common resolution of 0.5∘ through conservative remapping (area-weighted average) for the data analysis.Assimilation of observed woody biomass carbon in BLUEThe observed woody biomass carbon densities by ref. 16 are assimilated in BLUE in several steps.Carbon transfer in the default setup of BLUEThe BLUE simulation is started in AD 850. Biomass and soil vegetation carbon densities are based on ref. 17, which are converted to exponential time constants. A detailed explanation of the exponential model can be found in ref. 5.While in the default setup, changes are only due to LULCC, our assimilation approach now introduces environmental effects on woody vegetation carbon by assimilating the observed woody biomass carbon densities in BLUE from 2000 onward according to the methodological considerations explained below.Calculation of woody biomass carbon densities for different land cover types and PFTsWithin each 0.25° cell of the global grid, the (remapped) woody biomass carbon density from ref. 16 must be the sum of woody biomass carbon stored in all woody PFTs of all woody land cover types. The distribution of the woody biomass carbon across PFTs and land cover types is achieved by distributing the observed (i.e., actual) woody biomass carbon densities (ρBa) from ref. 16 across the two land cover types (j) and the eight PFTs (l) that can be woody vegetation (primary land, called virgin, “v” in BLUE and secondary, “s”, land) according to the fraction of total woody biomass carbon (fB) contained in each land cover type and each PFT (fB,j,l) as estimated by BLUE. fB,j,l varies for different PFTs and land cover types, depending on their history of LULCC and their potential for carbon uptake (i.e., the potential carbon densities).fB,j,l is extracted from the default simulations for the first year of the time series (i.e., 2000) and calculated for subsequent years from the BLUE simulations using the assimilated woody vegetation carbon densities for that year:$${f}_{B,j,l}(t)=frac{{C}_{B,j,l}(t)}{{C}_{B}(t)}$$
(1)
where CB is the woody biomass carbon stock.Consequently, the assimilated woody biomass carbon stock per cover type and PFT (CB_as,j,l) at each time step can be calculated as:$${C}_{B_as,j,l}(t)={rho }_{Ba}(t);*;A;*;{f}_{B,j,l}(t)$$
(2)
with j{v, s}; l{1. . 8}; t{2000. . 2019}. A is the area per grid cell.Thresholds for excluding inconsistent woody biomass carbon densitiesWe eliminate unrealistically large values for woody biomass carbon densities that our assimilation framework produces. Woody biomass carbon densities in BLUE that exceed the highest value (~374 t ha−1) of the original dataset indicate inconsistencies between the observed woody biomass carbon estimates and the fractional grid cell areas per PFT and land cover types that BLUE simulates. To account for uncertainties related to the criteria for exclusion of grid cells, multiple threshold approaches are applied and the results are compared. To maintain a temporally and spatially consistent time series of woody biomass carbon, grid cells that are excluded according to the chosen threshold approach are interpolated through linear barycentric interpolation. A first approach relies on a uniform upper threshold of More

We focused on the Northern High Latitudes (NHL, latitude > 50°N, excluding Greenland) due to their importance for carbon (CO2-C, the same hereafter)-climate feedbacks in the Earth system. To minimize the potential human influence on the CO2 cycle, we excluded areas under agricultural management (croplands, cropland/natural vegetation mosaic, and urban types), and considered only pixels of natural vegetation defined from the MODIS MCD12Q1 (v006) based IGBP land cover classification. Our main focus was the NHL permafrost region because permafrost plays a critical role in the ecology, environment, and society in the NHL. Permafrost, or permanently frozen ground, is defined as ground (soil, sediment, or rock) that remains at or below 0 °C for at least two consecutive years. The occurrence of permafrost is primarily controlled by temperature and has a strong effect on hydrology, soils, and vegetation composition and structure. Based on the categorical permafrost map from the International Permafrost Association58, the permafrost region (excluding permanent snow/ice and barren land), including sporadic (10–50%), discontinuous (50–90%), and continuous ( >90%) permafrost, encompasses about 15.7 × 106 km2, accounts for 57% of the NHL study dominion, and is dominated by tundra (shrubland and grass) and deciduous needleleaf (i.e., larch) forest that is regionally abundant in Siberia. The NHL non-permafrost region covers about 11.9 × 106 km2 and is dominated by mixed and evergreen needleleaf boreal forests (Fig. S1).Atmospheric CO2 inversions (ACIs)ACIs provide regionally-integrated estimates of surface-to-atmosphere net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEEACI) fluxes by utilizing atmospheric CO2 concentration measurements and atmospheric transport models59. ACIs differ from each other mainly in their underlying atmospheric observations, transport models, spatial and temporal flux resolutions, land surface models used to predict prior fluxes, observation uncertainty and prior error assignment, and inversion methods. We used an ensemble mean of six different ACI products, each providing monthly gridded NEEACI at 1-degree spatial resolution, including Carbon‐Tracker 2019B (2000-2019, CT2019)60, Carbon‐Tracker Europe 2020 (2000–2019, CTE2020)61, Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (1979–2019, CAMS)62, Jena CarboScope (versions s76_v4.2 1976–2017, and s85_v4.2 1985-2017)63,64, and JAMSTEC (1996–2017)65. The monthly gridded ensemble mean NEEACI at 1-degree spatial resolution was calculated using the available ACIs from 1980-2017. Monthly ACI ensemble mean NEEACI data were summed to seasonal and annual values, and used to calculate the spatial and temporal trends of net CO2 uptake, and to investigate its relationship to climate and environmental controls.Productivity datasetDirect observations of vegetation productivity do not exist at a circumpolar scale. We therefore used two long-term gridded satellite-based estimates of vegetation productivity, including gross primary production (GPP) derived using a light use efficiency (LUE) approach (LUE GPP, 1982–1985)21,66 and satellite observations of Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) from the Global Inventory Modeling and Mapping Studies (GIMMS NDVI, 1982–1985)67. LUE GPP (monthly, 0.5° spatial resolution, 1982–2015) is calculated from satellite observations of NDVI from the Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR; 1982 to 2015) combined with meteorological data, using the MOD17 LUE approach. LUE GPP has been extensively validated with a global array of eddy-flux tower sites68,69,70 and tends to provide better estimates in ecosystems with greater seasonal variability at high latitudes. Following66,71, we used the ensemble mean of GPP estimates from three of the most commonly used meteorological data sets: National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR) reanalysis; NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2); and European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF). GIMMS NDVI (bimonthly, 1/12 spatial resolution, 1982–2015) provides the longest satellite observations of vegetation “greenness”, and is widely used in studies of phenology, productivity, biomass, and disturbance monitoring as it has proven to be an effective surrogate of vegetation photosynthetic activity72.The gridded GPP data were resampled to 1-degree resolution at monthly time scales, to be consistent with NEEACI, and used to test (H1) whether greater temperature sensitivity of vegetation productivity explains the different trends in net CO2 uptake across the NHL. LUE GPP was also used to calculate monthly total ecosystem respiration (TER) as the difference between GPP and NEEACI (i.e., TERresidual =  GPP– NEEACI) from 1982-2015, as global observations of respiration do not exist. The NEEACI, GPP and TERresidual were used as observation-constrained top-down CO2 fluxes to investigate mechanisms underlying the seasonal CO2 dynamics in the structural equation modeling and additional decision tree-based analysis.Eddy Covariance (EC) measurements of bottom-up CO2 fluxesA total of 48 sites with at least three years of data representing the major NHL ecosystems were obtained from the FLUXNET2015 database (Table S1 and Fig. S1). EC measurements provide direct observations of net ecosystem CO2 exchange (NEE) and estimate the GPP and TER flux components of NEE using other climate variables. Daily GPP and TER were estimated as the mean value from both the nighttime partitioning method73 and the light response curve method74. More details on the flux partitioning and gap-filling methods used are provided by75. Daily fluxes were summed into seasonal and annual values and used to compare with trends from ACIs (Fig. S7), to estimate the climate and environmental controls on the CO2 cycle in the pathway analysis (Fig. 5), and to calculate the net CO2 uptake sensitivity to spring temperature (Fig. S14).Ensemble of dynamic global vegetation models (TRENDY simulations)The TRENDY intercomparison project compiles simulations from state-of-the-art dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) to evaluate terrestrial energy, water, and net CO2 exchanges76. The DGVMs provide a bottom-up approach to evaluate terrestrial CO2 fluxes (e.g., net biome production [NBP]) and allow deeper insight into the mechanisms driving changes in carbon stocks and fluxes. We used monthly NBP, GPP, and TER (autotrophic + heterotrophic respiration; Ra + Rh) from ten TRENDY v7 DGVMs76, including CABLE-POP, CLM5.0, OCN, ORCHIDEE, ORCHIDEE-CNP, VISIT, DLEM, LPJ, LPJ-GUESS, and LPX. We analyzed the “S3” simulations that include time-varying atmospheric CO2 concentrations, climate, and land use. All simulations were based on climate forcing from the CRU-NCEPv4 climate variables at 6-hour resolution. CO2 flux outputs were summarized monthly at 1-degree spatial resolution from 1980 to 2017. Monthly ensemble mean NBP, GPP, and TER were summed to seasonal and annual values, and then used to compare with observation-constrained ACI top-down CO2 fluxes (Figs. 4 and 5).Satellite data-driven carbon flux estimates (SMAP L4C)We also used a much finer spatio-temporal simulation of carbon fluxes from the NASA Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission Level 4 Carbon product (L4C) to quantify the temperature and moisture sensitivity of NHL CO2 exchange77. The SMAP L4C provides global operational daily estimates of NEE and component CO2 fluxes for GPP and TER at 9 km resolution since 2015; whereas, an offline version of the L4C model provides a similar Nature Run (NR) carbon flux record over a longer period (2000-present), but without the influence of SMAP observational inputs. The L4C model has been calibrated against FLUXNET tower CO2 flux measurements and shows favorable performance and accuracy in high latitude regions4,77. In this analysis, daily gridded CO2 fluxes at 9-km resolution from the L4C NR record were summed to seasonal and annual values, and used to calculate the sensitivity of net C uptake in response to spring temperature (Fig. S14).CO2 fluxes in this analysis are defined with respect to the biosphere so that a positive value indicates the biosphere is a net sink of CO2 absorbed from the atmosphere. The different data products described above use different terminology (e.g., NEE, NBP) with slightly different meanings; however, they all provide estimates of net land-atmosphere CO2 exchange78.Climate, tree cover, permafrost, and soil moisture dataMonthly gridded air temperatures at 0.5-degree spatial resolution from 1980 to 2017 were obtained from the Climate Research Unit (CRU TS v4.02) at the University of East Anglia79. Air temperature was summarized at seasonal and annual scales to calculate temperature sensitivities of net CO2 uptake and to investigate the mechanism underlying the seasonal CO2 dynamics.Percent tree cover (%TC) at 0.05-degree spatial resolution was averaged over a 35-year (1982-2016) period using annual %TC layers derived from the Advanced Very High-Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) (Fig. 1a)42. %TC was binned using 5% TC intervals to assess its relation to net CO2 uptake, or aggregated at a regional scale (e.g., TC  > 50% or TC  90%), discontinuous permafrost (DisconP, 10% < P  90%), discontinuous (DisconP, 10% < P  0.05 indicate a good fitting model), Bentler’s comparative fit index (CFI, where CFI ≈ 1 indicates a good fitting model), and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; where RMSEA ≤ 0.05 and p  > 0.1 indicate a good fitting model). The standardized regression coefficient can be interpreted as the relative influences of exogenous (independent) variables. The R2 indicates the total variation in an endogenous (dependent) variable explained by all exogenous (independent) variables.Direct and legacy effects of temperature on seasonal net CO2 uptakeBecause landscape thawing and snow conditions regulate the onset of vegetation growth and influence the seasonal and annual CO2 cycles in the NHL24,84, we also analyzed the legacy effects of spring (May–Jun) temperature on seasonal net CO2 uptake. We regressed seasonal and annual net CO2 uptake from the site-level EC observations, regional-level ACI ensemble, and the TRENDY NBP ensemble against spring (May-June) air temperature. For EC observations, net CO2 uptake (i.e., NEE) and air temperature were summarized from site-level measurements. For the ACIs and TRENDY ensemble, net CO2 uptake (i.e., NEEACI and NBP) was summarized as regional means from the ACIs and TRENDY ensemble outputs, and air temperature was summarized as regional means from CRU temperature. The slope of the regression line was interpreted as the spring temperature sensitivity of the CO2 cycle. Simple linear regression was used here mainly due to the strong influence of spring temperature on the seasonal and annual CO2 cycle in NHL ecosystems30. Temperature sensitivity (γ: g C m−2 day−1 K−1) is the change in net CO2 flux (g C m−2 day−1) in response to a 1-degree temperature change. The sensitivity of net CO2 uptake to warm spring anomalies was calculated for different seasons (EGS, LGS, and annual) and regions (i.e., permafrost and non-permafrost), and the T-test was used to test for the difference in γ among different regions, seasons, and datasets. Similarly, direct effects of temperature on net CO2 uptake were calculated using the same season data (Fig. S14).Observationally-constrained estimates (EC and ACIs) showed that the sensitivity of net CO2 uptake in the EGS to spring temperature is positive (γ  > 0) and not statistically different (p  > 0.05) between permafrost and non-permafrost regions (({gamma }_{{ACI}}^{{np}})=0.125 ± 0.020 gC m−2 d−1 K−1; ({gamma }_{{EC}}^{{np}}) = 0.052 ± 0.013 gC m−2 d−1 K−1). In contrast, the sensitivity of net CO2 uptake in LGS to spring temperature is negative (γ  More

Isbell, F. et al. High plant diversity is needed to maintain ecosystem services. Nature 477, 199–202 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van der Sande, M. T. et al. Biodiversity in species, traits, and structure determines carbon stocks and uptake in tropical forests. Biotropica 49, 593–603 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Grace, O. M. et al. Plant power: opportunities and challenges for meeting sustainable energy needs from the plant and fungal kingdoms. Plants People Planet 2, 446–462 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Howes, M. J. R. et al. Molecules from nature: reconciling biodiversity conservation and global healthcare imperatives for sustainable use of medicinal plants and fungi. Plants People Planet 2, 463–481 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ulian, T. et al. Unlocking plant resources to support food security and promote sustainable agriculture. Plants People Planet 2, 421–445 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brondizio, E., Diaz, S., Settele, J. & Ngo, H. T. (eds) Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3831673 (2019).Bennun, L. et al. The value of the IUCN Red List for business decision-making. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12353 (2018).Betts, J. et al. A framework for evaluating the impact of the IUCN Red List of threatened species. Conserv. Biol. 34, 632–643 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Maira, L. et al. Achieving international species conservation targets: closing the gap between top-down and bottom-up approaches. Conserv. Soc. 19, 25–33 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
IUCN Red List version 2022-2: Table 1a (IUCN, 2022); https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/summary-statistics#Figure2Rivers, M. The global tree assessment—red listing the world’s trees. BGjournal 14, 16–19 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Nic Lughadha, E. et al. Extinction risk and threats to plants and fungi. Plants People Planet 2, 389–408 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Silva, S. V. et al. Global estimation and mapping of the conservation status of tree species using artificial intelligence. Front. Plant Sci. 13, 839792 (2022).ThreatSearch Online Database (Botanic Gardens Conservation International, accessed 12 October 2021); https://tools.bgci.org/threat_search.phpBachman, S. P., Nic Lughadha, E. M. & Rivers, M. C. Quantifying progress toward a conservation assessment for all plants. Conserv. Biol. 32, 516–524 (2018).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rondinini, C., Di Marco, M., Visconti, P., Butchart, S. H. M. & Boitani, L. Update or outdate: long-term viability of the IUCN Red List. Conserv. Lett. 7, 126–130 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cazalis, V. et al. Bridging the research–implementation gap in IUCN Red List assessments. Trends Ecol. Evol. 37, 359–370 (2022).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dauby, G. et al. ConR: an R package to assist large-scale multispecies preliminary conservation assessments using distribution data. Ecol. Evol. 7, 11292–11303 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Stévart, T. et al. A third of the tropical African flora is potentially threatened with extinction. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax9444 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bland, L. M., Collen, B., Orme, C. D. L. & Bielby, J. Predicting the conservation status of data-deficient species. Conserv. Biol. 29, 250–259 (2015).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Darrah, S. E., Bland, L. M., Bachman, S. P., Clubbe, C. P. & Trias-Blasi, A. Using coarse-scale species distribution data to predict extinction risk in plants. Divers. Distrib. 23, 435–447 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pelletier, T. A., Carstens, B. C., Tank, D. C., Sullivan, J. & Espíndola, A. Predicting plant conservation priorities on a global scale. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 13027–13032 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zizka, A., Silvestro, D., Vitt, P. & Knight, T. M. Automated conservation assessment of the orchid family with deep learning. Conserv. Biol. 35, 897–908 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Walker, B. E., Leão, T. C. C., Bachman, S. P., Bolam, F. C. & Nic Lughadha, E. Caution needed when predicting species threat status for conservation prioritization on a global scale. Front. Plant Sci. 11, 520 (2020).Lughadha, E. N. et al. The use and misuse of herbarium specimens in evaluating plant extinction risks. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20170402 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Walker, B. E., Leão, T. C. C., Bachman, S. P., Lucas, E. & Nic Lughadha, E. M. Evidence-based guidelines for developing automated assessment methods. Preprint at https://ecoevorxiv.org/zxq6s/ (2021).Isaac, N. J. B., Turvey, S. T., Collen, B., Waterman, C. & Baillie, J. E. M. Mammals on the EDGE: conservation priorities based on threat and phylogeny. PLoS ONE 2, e296 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Grenié, M., Denelle, P., Tucker, C. M., Munoz, F. & Violle, C. funrar: an R package to characterize functional rarity. Divers. Distrib. 23, 1365–1371 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lindegren, M., Holt, B. G., MacKenzie, B. R. & Rahbek, C. A global mismatch in the protection of multiple marine biodiversity components and ecosystem services. Sci. Rep. 8, 4099 (2018).Pollock, L. J. et al. Protecting biodiversity (in all its complexity): new models and methods. Trends Ecol. Evol. 35, 1119–1128 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Arnan, X., Cerdá, X. & Retana, J. Relationships among taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic ant diversity across the biogeographic regions of Europe. Ecography 40, 448–457 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wong, J. S. Y. et al. Comparing patterns of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity in reef coral communities. Coral Reefs 37, 737–750 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Devictor, V. et al. Spatial mismatch and congruence between taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity: the need for integrative conservation strategies in a changing world. Ecol. Lett. 13, 1030–1040 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Brum, F. T. et al. Global priorities for conservation across multiple dimensions of mammalian diversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 7641–7646 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pollock, L. J., Thuiller, W. & Jetz, W. Large conservation gains possible for global biodiversity facets. Nature 546, 141–144 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Strassburg, B. B. N. et al. Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration. Nature 586, 724–729 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cámara-Leret, R. et al. Fundamental species traits explain provisioning services of tropical American palms. Nat. Plants 3, 16220 (2017).Saslis-Lagoudakis, C. H. et al. Phylogenies reveal predictive power of traditional,medicinein bioprospecting. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 15835–15840 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van Kleunen, M. et al. Economic use of plants is key to their naturalization success. Nat. Commun. 11, 3201 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Molina-Venegas, R., Rodríguez, M., Pardo-de-Santayana, M., Ronquillo, C. & Mabberley, D. J. Maximum levels of global phylogenetic diversity efficiently capture plant services for humankind. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 583–588 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Molina-Venegas, R. Conserving evolutionarily distinct species is critical to safeguard human well-being. Sci. Rep. 11, 24187 (2021).Zaman, W. et al. Predicting potential medicinal plants with phylogenetic topology: inspiration from the research of traditional Chinese medicine. J. Ethnopharmacol. 281, 114515 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cámara-Leret, R. et al. Climate change threatens New Guinea’s biocultural heritage. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaz1455 (2019).Lima, V. P. et al. Climate change threatens native potential agroforestry plant species in Brazil. Sci. Rep. 12, 2267 (2022).Johnson, D. V. Tropical Palms 2010 Revision Non-Wood Forest Products 10 (FAO, 2010).Johnson, D. V. & Sunderland, T. C. H. Rattan Glossary and Compendium Glossary with Emphasis on Africa Non-Wood Forest Products 16 (FAO, 2004).Ter Steege, H. et al. Hyperdominance in the Amazonian tree flora. Science 342, 1243092 (2013).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zona, S. & Henderson, A. A review of animal-mediated seed dispersal of palms. Selbyana 11, 6–21 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Kissling, W. D. et al. PalmTraits 1.0, a species-level functional trait database of palms worldwide. Sci. Data 6, 178 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tomlinson, P. B. The uniqueness of palms. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 151, 5–14 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Díaz, S. et al. The global spectrum of plant form and function. Nature 529, 167–171 (2016).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Muscarella, R. et al. The global abundance of tree palms. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1495–1514 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dransfield, J. et al. Genera Palmarum: The Evolution and Classification of Palms (Kew Publishing, 2008).Diazgranados, M. et al. World Checklist of Useful Plant Species (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, 2020).Couvreur, T. L. P. & Baker, W. J. Tropical rain forest evolution: palms as a model group. BMC Biol. 11, 2–5 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Faurby, S., Eiserhardt, W. L., Baker, W. J. & Svenning, J. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution: an all-evidence species-level supertree for the palms (Arecaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 100, 57–69 (2016).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species Version 2021-2 (IUCN, accessed 12 October 2021); https://www.iucnredlist.orgBaker, W. J. & Dransfield, J. Beyond genera Palmarum: progress and prospects in palm systematics. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 182, 207–233 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Henderson, A. A revision of Calamus (Arecaceae, Calamoideae, Calameae, Calaminae). Phytotaxa https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.445.1.1 (2020).Rakotoarinivo, M., Dransfield, J., Bachman, S. P., Moat, J. & Baker, W. J. Comprehensive red list assessment reveals exceptionally high extinction risk to Madagascar palms. PLoS ONE 9, e103684 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cosiaux, A. et al. Low extinction risk for an important plant resource: conservation assessments of continental African palms (Arecaceae/Palmae). Biol. Conserv. 221, 323–333 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, D. & UICN/SSC Palm Specialist Group (eds) Palms, Their Conservation and Sustained Utilization—Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan (Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature et de ses Ressources, 1996).Bachman, S., Walker, B. E., Barrios, S., Copeland, A. & Moat, J. Rapid least concern: towards automating red list assessments. Biodivers. Data J. 8, e47018 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Enquist, B. J. et al. The commonness of rarity: global and future distribution of rarity across land plants. Sci. Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz0414 (2019).Vieilledent, G. et al. Combining global tree cover loss data with historical national forest cover maps to look at six decades of deforestation and forest fragmentation in Madagascar. Biol. Conserv. 222, 189–197 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gaveau, D. L. A. et al. Rise and fall of forest loss and industrial plantations in Borneo (2000–2017). Conserv. Lett. 12, e12622 (2019).Gamoga, G., Turia, R., Abe, H., Haraguchi, M. & Iuda, O. The forest extent in 2015 and the drivers of forest change between 2000 and 2015 in Papua New Guinea: deforestation and forest degradation in Papua New Guinea. Case Stud. Environ. 5, 1442018 (2021).Cámara-Leret, R. & Bascompte, J. Language extinction triggers the loss of unique medicinal knowledge. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2103683118 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Henderson, A., Fischer, B., Scariot, A., Whitaker Pacheco, M. A. & Pardini, R. Flowering phenology of a palm community in a central Amazon forest. Brittonia 52, 149–159 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Olivares, I. & Galeano, G. Leaf and inflorescence production of the wine palm (Attalea butyracea) in the dry Magdalena river valley, Colombia. Caldasia 35, 37–48 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Voeks, R. A. Disturbance pharmacopoeias: medicine and myth from the humid tropics. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 94, 868–888 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Pironon, S. et al. Potential adaptive strategies for 29 sub-Saharan crops under future climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 758–763 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Govaerts, R., Dransfield, J., Zona, S. & Henderson, A. World Checklist of Arecaceae (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, accessed 1 March 2018); http://wcsp.science.kew.org/Chamberlain, S. et al. rgbif: Interface to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility API. R package version 3.6.0 (2021).Zizka, A. et al. CoordinateCleaner: standardized cleaning of occurrence records from biological collection databases. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 744–751 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Plants of the World Online (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, accessed 1 March 2018); http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/South, A. rworldmap v.1.3-6: Mapping global data (2016).Bivand, R. et al. maptools v.0.9-2: Tools for handling spatial objects (2017).Arel-Bundock, V., Enevoldsen, N. & Yetman, C. countrycode: an R package to convert country names and country codes. J. Open Source Softw. 3, 848 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Becker, R. A., Wilks, A. R., Brownrigg, R., Minka, T. P. & Deckmyn, A. maps v.3.3.0: Draw geographical maps (2018).Pebesma, E. et al. sp v.1.2-7: Classes and methods for spatial data (2018).Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the Tidyverse. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1686 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wickham, H., Hester, J. & Chang, W. devtools v.1.13.5: Tools to make developing R packages easier (2018).World Geographic Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions Standard (TDWG, 2001); http://www.tdwg.org/standards/109Brummitt, R. K. World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions (Hunt Institute for Botanical Documentation, 2001).Olson, D. M. et al. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. Bioscience 51, 933–938 (2001).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moat, J. & Bachman, S. P. rCAT v.0.1.6: Conservation assessment tools (2017).Dinerstein, E. et al. An ecoregion-based approach to protecting half the terrestrial realm. Bioscience 67, 534–545 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Plants of the World Online (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, accessed 10 June 2020); http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/Csárdi, G. & FitzJohn, R. progress v.1.2.2: Terminal progress bars (2019).Microsoft Corporation & Weston, S. doParallel: Foreach parallel adaptor for the ‘parallel’ package. R package version 1.0.16 (2020).Microsoft Corporation & Weston, S. foreach: Provides foreach looping construct. R package version 1.5.0 (2020).Ooms, J., Lang, D. T. & Hilaiel, L. jsonlite v.1.7.2: A simple and robust JSON parser and generator for R (2020).Wickham, H. httr v.1.4.2: Tools for working with URLs and HTTP (2020).Global Human Footprint (Geographic), v2 (1995 – 2004) (SEDAC, accessed 14 May 2018); https://doi.org/10.7927/H4M61H5FFick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 37, 4302–4315 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wickham, H. plyr v.1.8.6: Tools for splitting, applying and combining data (2021).Wickham, H. & RStudio. tidyr v.1.1.4: Tidy messy data (2021).Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L. & Müller, K. dplyr v.1.0.7: A grammar of data manipulation (2021).Bivand, R. et al. rgdal v.1.5-8: Bindings for the ‘geospatial’ data abstraction library (2020).Greenberg, J. A. & Mattiuzzi, M. gdalUtils v.2.0.3.2: Wrappers for the Geospatial data Abstraction Library (GDAL) utilities (2020).Hijmans, R. J. et al. raster v.3.1-5: Geographic data analysis and modeling (2020).The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN, accessed 22 March 2018); https://www.iucnredlist.org/ThreatSearch Online Database (Botanic Gardens Conservation International, accessed 1 March 2018); https://tools.bgci.org/threat_search.phpChamberlain, S., ROpenSci & Salmon, M. rredlist: ‘IUCN’ Red List client (2020).Wickham, H. stringr v.1.4.0: Simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations (2019).Gagolewski, M. & Tartanus, B. stringi v.1.7.5: Character string processing facilities (2021).Kuhn, M. caret: Classification and regression training. R package version 6.0-86 (2020).Torgo, L. Data Mining with R, Learning with Case Studies (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2010).Chawla, N. V., Bowyer, K. W., Hall, L. O. & Kegelmeyer, P. SMOTE: synthetic minority over-sampling technique. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 16, 321–357 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stokely, M. HistogramTools: Utility functions for R histograms. R package version 0.3.2 (2015).Sarkar, D. et al. lattice v.0.20-40: Trellis graphics for R (2020).Wickham, H. ggplot2 Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).Auguie, B. & Antonov, A. gridExtra v.2.3: Miscellaneous functions for ‘grid’ graphics (2017).Pruim, R., Kaplan, D. T. & Horton, N. J. mosaic v.1.6.0: Project MOSAIC statistics and mathematics teaching utilities (2020).Meyer, D. & Buchta, C. proxy v.0.4-23: Distance and similarity measures (2019).Wickham, H. & Seidel, D. scales v.1.1: Scale functions for visualization (2019).Branco, P., Ribeiro, R. & Torgo, L. UBL v.0.0.6: An implementation of re-sampling approaches to utility-based learning for both classification and regression tasks (2017).Liaw, A. & Wiener, M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2, 18–22 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Cohen, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 37–46 (1960).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ripley, B. & Venables, W. nnet v.7.3-13: Feed-forward neural networks and multinomial log-linear models (2020).Warnes, G. R. et al. gdata v.2.18.0: Various R programming tools for data manipulation (2017).Wright, M. N., Wager, S. & Probst, P. ranger v.0.12.1: A fast implementation of random forests (2020).Arya, S., Mount, D., Kemp, S. E. & Jefferis, G. RANN v.2.6.1: Fast nearest neighbour search (wraps ANN Library) using L2 metric (2019).Meyer, D. et al. e1071 v.1.7-3: Misc Functions of the Department of Statistics, Probability Theory Group (formerly: E1071), TU Wien (2019).Lundberg, S. M. & Lee, S.-I. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 30, 4765–4774 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Greenwell, B. fastshap v.0.0.7: Fast approximate Shapley values (2021).Greenwell, B. vip v.0.3.2: Variable importance plots (2020).Donoghoe, M. W. glm2 v.1.2.1: Fitting generalized linear models (2018).Wickham, H. reshape2 v.1.4.4: Flexibly reshape data: a reboot of the reshape package (2020).Robin, X. et al. pROC v.1.18.0: Display and analyze ROC curves (2020).Warnes, G. R. et al. gplots v.3.0.3: Various R programming tools for plotting data (2019).Müller, K. & Bryan, J. here v.1.0.1: A simpler way to find your files (2017).Wickham, H., Hester, J., Francois, R., Jylänki, J. & Jørgensen, M. readr v.1.3.1: Read rectangular text data (2018).Wickham, H. et al. readxl v.1.3.1: Read Excel files (2019).Henry, L. & Wickham, H. purrr v.0.3.4: Functional programming tools (2020).Lin Pedersen, T. ggforce v.0.3.1: Accelerating ‘ggplot2’ (2019).Lin Pedersen, T. patchwork v.1.0.0: The composer of plots (2019).Hester, J. glue v.1.3.1: Interpreted string literals (2019).Ooms, J. & McNamara, J. writexl v.1.2: Export data frames to Excel ‘xlsx’ format (2019).Horikoshi, M. et al. ggfortify v.0.4.8: Data visualization tools for statistical analysis results (2019).Liaw, A. randomForest v.4.6-14: Breiman and Cutler’s random forests for classification and regression (2018).Kassambara, A. ggpubr v.0.2.5: ‘ggplot2’ based publication ready plots (2020).Gruca, M., Blach-Overgaard, A. & Balslev, H. African palm ethno-medicine. J. Ethnopharmacol. 165, 227–237 (2015).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cámara–Leret, R. & Dennehy, Z. Indigenous knowledge of New Guinea’s useful plants: a review. Econ. Bot. 73, 405–415 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Macía, M. J. et al. Palm uses in Northwestern South America: a quantitative review. Bot. Rev. 77, 462–570 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Orme, D. et al. caper: Comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. R package version 1.0.1 https://cran.r-project.org/package=caper (2018).Kowarik, A. & Templ, M. Imputation with the R package VIM. J. Stat. Softw. 74, 1–16 (2016).Alfons, A. & Templ, M. Estimation of social exclusion indicators from complex surveys: the R package laeken. J. Stat. Softw. 54, 1–25 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Milliken, W., Walker, B. E., Howes, M. J. R., Forest, F. & Nic Lughadha, E. Plants used traditionally as antimalarials in Latin America: mining the tree of life for potential new medicines. J. Ethnopharmacol. 279, 114221 (2021).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fritz, S. A. & Purvis, A. Selectivity in mammalian extinction risk and threat types: a new measure of phylogenetic signal strength in binary traits. Conserv. Biol. 24, 1042–1051 (2010).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Suchard, M. A. et al. Bayesian phylogenetic and phylodynamic data integration using BEAST 1.10. Virus Evol. 4, vey016 (2018).Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. Ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Govaerts, R., Nic Lughadha, E., Black, N., Turner, R. & Paton, A. The World Checklist of Vascular Plants, a continuously updated resource for exploring global plant diversity. Sci. Data 8, 215 (2021).Yu, G. ggplotify v.0.0.4: Convert plot to ‘grob’ or ‘ggplot’ object (2019).Yu, G. aplot v.0.0.3: Decorate a ‘ggplot’ with associated information (2020).Slowikowski, K. et al. ggrepel v.0.8.1: Automatically position non-overlapping text labels with ‘ggplot2’ (2019).Schloerke, B. et al. GGally v.1.4.0: Extension to ‘ggplot2’ (2018).Rubis, B. et al. hrbrthemes v.0.6.0: Additional themes, theme components and utilities for ‘ggplot2’ (2019).Henry, L., Wickham, H. & Chang, W. ggstance v.0.3.3: Horizontal ‘ggplot2’ components (2019).Yu, G., Smith, D. K., Zhu, H., Guan, Y. & Lam, T. T. Y. Ggtree: an R package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 28–36 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. hash v.2.2.6.1: Full feature implementation of hash/associated arrays/dictionaries (2019).Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer-Verlag, 2016).R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020).RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R (RStudio, 2021).Bellot, S. et al. Workflow and code used to perform palm extinction risk and regional palm use resilience analyses. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6678122 (2022). More

Bellot, S. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01858-0 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eiserhardt, W. L. et al. Ann. Bot. 108, 1391–1416 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Muscarella, R. et al. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 29, 1495–1514 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cámara-Leret, R. et al. Nat. Plants 3, 16220 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN, 2018).BGCI ThreatSearch Online Database (BGCI, 2018).Carlos-Júnior, L. A. et al. Divers. Distrib. 25, 743–757 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pollock, L. J., Thuiller, W. & Jetz, W. Nature 546, 141–144 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rice, J. et al. The IPBES Regional Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for the Americas (IPBES, 2018).Coelho de Souza, F. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1754–1761 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More