Ecology

Climate models need to capture a full spectrum of data from forests such as the Brazilian Amazon.Credit: Florence Goisnard/AFP/Getty

Humanity’s understanding of how forests are responding to climate change is disconcertingly fragile. Take carbon fertilization, for example — the phenomenon by which plants absorb more carbon dioxide as its concentration in the atmosphere increases. This is one of the principal mechanisms by which nature has so far saved us from the worst of climate change, but there’s little understanding of its future trajectory. In fact, researchers don’t fully understand how climate change interacts with a multitude of forest processes. Complex, unsolved questions include how climate warming affects forest health; how it affects the performance of forests as a carbon sink; and whether it alters the ecosystem services that forests provide. Forests are our life-support system, and we should be more serious about taking their pulse.Six papers in this week’s Nature provide important insights into those questions. They also underline some of the challenges that must be overcome if we are to fully understand forests’ potential in the fight against climate change. These challenges are not only in the science itself, but also relate to how forest scientists collaborate, how they are funded (especially where data collection is concerned) and how they are trained.Forest science is an amalgam of disciplines. Ecologists and plant scientists measure tree growth, soil nutrients and other parameters in thousands of forest plots around the world. Physical scientists monitor factors such as forest height and above-ground forest biomass using remote-sensing data from drones or satellites. Experimental scientists investigate how forests might behave in a warming world by artificially altering factors such as temperature or carbon dioxide levels in experimental plots. Some of the data they generate are absorbed by yet another community: the modellers, who have created dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs). These simulate how carbon and water cycles change with climate and, in turn, inform broader earth-system and climate models of the type that feed into policymaking.Different DGVMs make different predictions about how long forests will continue to absorb anthropogenic CO2. One reason for these differences is that models are sensitive to assumptions made about the processes in forests. There are many influences — including temperature, moisture, fire and nutrients — that are generally studied in isolation. Yet they interact with each other.Not all DGVMs account for the dampening effect that a lack of soil phosphorus can have on carbon fertilization, for example. Much of central and eastern Amazonia is poor in phosphorus, and research has shown that introducing phosphorus limitation into DGVMs can cut the carbon-fertilization effect1. This week, Hellen Fernanda Viana Cunha at the National Institute for Amazonian Research in Manaus, Brazil, and her colleagues report2 a powerful experimental demonstration of how the soil’s poor phosphorus content limits carbon absorption in an old-growth Amazonian forest.Models simulating the northward spread of boreal forest as temperatures rise are also missing key drivers3, according to Roman Dial at Alaska Pacific University in Anchorage and his colleagues. They report today that a white-spruce population has migrated surprisingly far north into the Arctic tundra. To explain this, it is necessary to take into account winter winds (which facilitate long-distance dispersal) along with the availability of deep snow and soil nutrients (which promote plant growth).Models are often based on a small number of ‘functional tree types’ — for example, ‘evergreen broadleaf’ or ‘evergreen needle leaf’. These are chosen as a proxy for the behaviour of the planet’s more than 60,000 known tree species. Yet ecologists are discovering that the biology of individual species matters when it comes to a tree’s response to climate change.David Bauman at the Environmental Change Institute at the University of Oxford, UK, and his co-workers reported in May that tree mortality on 24 moist tropical plots in northern Australia has doubled in the past 35 years (and life expectancy has halved), apparently owing to the increasing dryness of the air4. But that was an average of the 81 dominant tree species: mortality rates varied substantially between species, a variation that seemed to be related to the density of their wood.Peter Reich at the Institute for Global Change Biology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and his colleagues now report that modest alterations in temperature and rainfall led to varying rates of growth and survival5 for different species in southern boreal-forest trees. The species that prospered were rare.Failure to examine multiple factors simultaneously means that scientists are making findings that challenge the assumptions in models. Spring is coming earlier for temperate forests and most models assume that, by prolonging the growing season, this increases woody-stem biomass. However, observational work carried out in temperate deciduous forests by Kristina Anderson-Teixeira at the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute in Front Royal, Virginia, and her colleagues found no sign of this happening6.Modellers are all too aware of the need to incorporate more complexity into their models, and of the potential that increasing amounts of computing power have to assist them in this endeavour. But they need more data.Continuity problemTo obtain comprehensive, valuable data for the models, continuous, long-term observations need to be made, and that depends on the availability of long-term funding. Achieving such continuity is a problem for both remote-sensing and ground-based operations. The former can cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but the value of its long-term data sets is immense, as demonstrated by a team led by Giovanni Forzieri at the University of Florence in Italy. The authors used 20 years of satellite data to show that nearly one-quarter of the world’s intact forests have already reached their critical threshold for abrupt decline7. But even field-based data collection, which costs a pittance by comparison, struggles to achieve financial security.Important ground-based operations include the Forest Global Earth Observatory (ForestGEO), part of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, which is headquartered in Washington DC. This monitors 7.5 million individual trees in plots around the world. The amount of work that goes into this monitoring is formidable. For example, at present, ForestGEO is conducting the eighth five-yearly census of a plot in Peninsular Malaysia. This involves determining the species for each of the 350,000 trees (there are some 800 species growing there) and measuring the circumference of each trunk. It will take 16 skilled people a year to measure all the trees. Delays in the provision of funding to ForestGEO have held up similar censuses at plots in countries including Papua New Guinea, Vietnam, Brunei and Ecuador.

A ForestGEO researcher making tree measurements at a forest plot in Barro Colorado Island, Panama.Credit: Jorge Aleman, STRI

The future of the plots in North Queensland, which supplied Bauman with a rare 49 years’ worth of continuous data, is uncertain. They have been monitored since the mid-1970s by the Australian public research-funding agency CSIRO — initially every two years, then, more recently, every five years. In 2019, monitoring of the plots was switched to every 50 years because of funding shortages at CSIRO, leaving scientists searching for new sources of funding.Without continuity of funding, organizations such as ForestGEO can’t equip researchers with the requisite skills or collect data over periods longer than an individual’s time in a specific post or a funder’s cycle. “We have trained people and then lost them due to job insecurity,” says Stuart Davies, who leads ForestGEO.Different groups of forest researchers are trying to address these problems. ForestGEO is coordinating the Alliance for Tropical Forest Science in an effort to make it easier to share data, and to bolster the morale and careers of the skilled technicians and scientists — many of whom live in low- and middle-income countries — who do the bulk of the data collection.But we also need more-imaginative funding mechanisms that lift long-term observational plots out of three- to five-year funding cycles. Space agencies that fund remote-sensing satellites could collaborate with other funding agencies, for example, so that earth-observation missions include a fully funded component for ground-based data collection — which is, after all, crucial for calibrating their results. Journals, too, could do more to value and incentivise the production of long-term data sets.And there is a need for more interdisciplinarity. The US Department of Energy is funding a project called NGEE–Tropics (Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments–Tropics) in which modellers will work with empirical researchers, both observational and experimental, who study tropical forests to create a full, process-rich model of such forests. This is encouraging, and the idea could be pushed further. What is needed is an initiative that pulls the disciplines together towards a goal of building a better understanding of forest processes. Among other things, such an initiative would encourage researchers in different disciplines to take each other’s data needs into account when planning their projects.For this to work, we need to remember that the edifice of forest science relies on the long-term data that scientists wring from forests over decades. Our chances of overcoming climate change are small, but they will diminish further if we forget the basics of monitoring our home planet. More

Shotgun sequencing and generation of metagenome-assembled genomesIn our previous study, 78 Holstein Friesian dairy cows were sampled for rumen content, metagenomic shotgun sequencing was carried out, and raw Illumina sequencing reads were assembled into contigs using megahit assembler using default settings [7]. We used a pooled assembly of the original 78 samples to increase the quality of the metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) with the syntax: megahit [14] -t 60 -m 0.5 −1 [Illumina R1 files] −2 [Illumina R2 files]. Next, the assembled contigs were indexed using BBMap [15]: bbmap.sh threads = 60 ref = [contigs filename]. Thereafter, reads from each sample were mapped to the assembled contigs using BBTools’ bbwrap.sh script. In order to determine the depth (coverage) of each contig within each sample, the gi_summarize_bam_contig_depths tool was applied with the parameters: gi_summarize_bam_contig_depths –outputDepth depth.txt –pairedContigs paired.txt *.bam –outputDepth depth.txt –pairedContigs paired.txt.Using the depth information, metabat2 [16] was executed to bind genes together into reconstructed genomes, with parameters: metabat2 -t40 -a depth.txt.To evaluate genomic bin quality, we used the CheckM [17] tool, with parameters: checkm lineage_wf [in directory] [out directory] -x faa –genes -t10.Preparing proteomic search libraryWe generated 93 unique high-quality MAGs, and further increased our MAG database by including phyla that were not represented in our set of MAGs. In order to do so, we used the published compendium of 4,941 rumen metagenome-assembled genomes [18] and dereplicated those MAGs using dRep [19]. We then selected MAGs from phylum Spirochaetes, Actinomycetota, Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Elusimicrobia, Bacillota, Fibrobacteres and Fusobacteria, which had the highest mean coverage in our samples as calculated using BBMap and gi_summarize_bam_contig_depths as described above [15]. This strategy minimized the false discovery rate (FDR), that would have been obtained if larger and unspecific databases would have been employed [20] and allowed the addition of 14 MAGs to our database.In order to create the proteomic search library, genes were identified along the 107 MAGs using the Prodigal tool [21], with parameters: prodigal meta and translated in silico into proteins, using the same tool. Replicates sequences were removed. Protein sequences from the hosting animal (Bos taurus) and common contaminant protein sequences (64,701 in total) were added to the proteomic search library in order to avoid erroneous target protein identification originating from the host or common contaminants. Finally, in order to subsequently assess the percentage of false-positive identifications within the proteomic search [22], the proteomic search library sequences were reversed in order and served as a decoy database.Proteomic analysisThe bacterial fraction from rumen fluid of the 12 selected animals selected from extreme feed efficiency phenotypes, were obtained at the same time as the samples analyzed for metagenomics and stored at −20 °C until extraction. To extract total proteins, a modified protocol from Deusch and Seifert was used [23]. Briefly, cell pellets were resuspended in 100 µl in 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5; 0.1 mg/ml chloramphenicol; 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF)) and incubated for 10 min at 60 °C and 1200 rpm in a thermo-mixer after addition of 150 µl 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5; 2% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)). After the addition of 500 µl DNAse buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.5; 0.1 mg/ml MgCl2, 1 mM PMSF, 1 μg/ml DNAse I), the cells were lysed by ultra-sonication (amplitude 51–60%; cycle 0.5; 4 × 2 min) on ice, incubated in the thermo-mixer (10 min at 37 °C and 1,200 rpm) and centrifuged at 10,000 × g for 10 min at 4 °C. The supernatant was collected and centrifuged again. The proteins in the supernatant were precipitated by adding 20% pre-cooled trichloroacetic acid (TCA; 20% v/v). After centrifugation (12,000 × g; 30 min; 4 °C), the protein pellets were washed twice in pre-cooled (−20 °C) acetone (2 × 10 min; 12,000 × g; 4 °C) and dried by vacuum centrifugation. The protein pellet was resuspended in 2× SDS sample buffer (4% SDS (w/v); 20% glycerin (w/v); 100 mM Tris-HCl pH 6.8; a pinch of bromophenol blue, 3.6% 2‑mercaptoethanol (v/v)) by 5 min sonication bath and vortexing. Samples were incubated for 5 min at 95 °C and separated by 1D SDS-PAGE (Criterion TG 4-20% Precast Midi Gel, BIO-RAD Laboratories, Inc., USA).As previously described, after fixation and staining, each gel line was cut into 10 pieces, destained, desiccated, and rehydrated in trypsin [24]. The in-gel digest was performed by incubation overnight at 37 °C. Peptides were eluted with Aq. dest. by sonication for 15 min The sample volume was reduced in a vacuum centrifuge.Before MS analysis, the tryptic peptide mixture was loaded on an Easy-nLC II or Easy-nLC 1000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA) system equipped with an in-house built 20 cm column (inner diameter 100 µm; outer diameter 360 µm) filled with ReproSil-Pur 120 C18-AQ reversed-phase material (3 µm particles, Dr. Maisch GmbH, Germany). Peptides were eluted with a nonlinear 156 min gradient from 1 to 99% solvent B (95% acetonitrile (v/v); 0.1% acetic acid (v/v)) in solvent A (0.1% acetic acid (v/v)) with a flow rate of 300 ml/min and injected online into an LTQ Orbitrap Velos or Orbitrap Velos Pro (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). Overview scan at a resolution of 30,000 in the Orbitrap in a range of 300-2,000 m/z was followed by 20 MS/MS fragment scans of the 20 most abundant precursor ions. Ions without detected charge state as well as singly charged ions were excluded from MS/MS analysis. Original raw spectra files were converted into the common mzXML format, in order to further process it in downstream analysis. The spectra file from each proteomic run of a given sample was searched against the protein search library, using the Comet [25] search engine with default settings.The TPP pipeline (Trans Proteomic Pipeline) [26] was used to further process the Comet [25, 27] search results and produce a protein abundance table for each sample. In detail, PeptideProphet [28] was applied to validate peptide assignments, with filtering criteria set to probability of 0.001, accurate mass binning, non-parametric errors model (decoy model) and decoy hits reporting. In addition, iProphet [28, 29] was applied to refine peptide identifications coming from PeptideProphet. Finally, ProteinProphet [28,29,30] was applied to statistically validate peptide identifications at the protein level. This was carried out using the command: xinteract -N[my_sample_nick].pep.xml -THREADS = 40 -p0.001 -l6 -PPM -OAPd -dREVERSE_ -ip [file1].pep.xml [file2].pep.xml.. [fileN].pep.xml  > xinteract.out 2  > xinteract.err. Then, TPP GUI was used in order to produce a protein table from the resulting ProtXML files (extension ipro.prot.xml).Subsequently, proteins that had an identification probability < 0.9 were also removed as well as proteins supported with less than 2 unique peptides (see Supplementary Table 1).Quantifying metagenomic presence of MAGsA reference database containing all 107 MAGs’ contigs was created (bbmap.sh command, default settings). Then, the paired-end short reads from each sample (FASTQ files) were mapped into the reference database (bbwrap.sh, default settings), producing alignment (SAM) files, which were converted into BAM format. Subsequently, a contig depth (coverage) table was produced using the command jgi_summarize_bam_contig_depths --outputDepth depth.txt --pairedContigs paired.txt *.bam. As each of the MAGs span on more than one contig, MAG depth in each sample was calculated as contig length weighted by the average depth. Finally, to account for unequal sequencing depth, each MAG depth was normalized to the number of short sequencing reads within the given sample.Correlating metagenomic and proteomic structuresIn order to compare metagenomic and proteomic structures, we first calculated the mean coding gene abundance and mean production levels of each of the 1629 detected core proteins over all 12 cows. Both mean gene abundance and mean production level were translated into ranks using the R rank function. The produced proteins were ranked in descending order and the coding genes in the gene abundance vector were reordered accordingly. The two reordered ranked vectors then plotted using the R pheatmap function, and colored using the same color scale.Selection of proteins for downstream analysisAs our goal was to analyze plasticity in microbial protein production in varying environments, e.g., as a function of host state, only MAGs that were identified in all of the 12 proteomic samples were kept for further analysis. Consequently, only proteins that were identified in at least half of the proteomic samples (e.g., in at least six samples) were selected. This last step aimed to reduce spurious correlation results. These filtering steps retained 79 MAGs coding for a total of 1,629 measurable proteins.Feed efficiency state prediction and ordinationIn order to calculate the accuracy in predicting host feed efficiency state based on the different data layers available (16S rRNA (Supplementary Table 2), metagenomics, metaproteomics), the principal component analysis (PCA) axes for all the samples based on the microbial protein production profiles were calculated. Then, twelve cycles of model building and prediction were made. Each time, the two first PCs of each of five cows along with their phenotype (efficiency state) were used to build a Support Vector Machine (SVM) [R caret package] prediction model and one sample was left out. The model was then used to perform subsequent prediction of the left-out animal phenotype (feed efficiency) by feeding the model with that animal’s first two PCs. This leave-one-out methodology was then repeated over all the samples. Finally, the prediction accuracy was determined as the percent of the cases where the correct label was assigned to the left-out sample. For the proteomics data, this procedure was applied on both the raw protein counts, and the protein production normalized based on MAG abundance, which enabled us to compare the prediction accuracies of the microbial protein production to that of the raw protein counts.Identification proteins associated with a specific host stateIn order to split the proteomics dataset into microbial proteins that tend to be produced differently as a function of the host feed efficiency states, each microbial protein profile was correlated to the sample’s host feed efficiency measure (as calculated by RFI) using the Spearman correlation (R function cor), disregarding the p value. Proteins that had a positive correlation to RFI were grouped as inefficiency associated proteins. In contrast, proteins that presented a negative correlation to RFI were grouped as efficiency associated proteins. To test for equal sizes of these two protein groups, a binomial test was performed (R function binom.test) to examine the probability to get a low number of feed efficient proteins from the overall proteins under examination, when the expected probability was set to 0.5.Functional assignment of proteinsProtein functions were assigned based on the KEGG (Kegg Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) [31] database. The entire KEGG genes database was compiled into a Diamond [32] search library. Then, the selected microbial proteins were searched against the database using the Diamond search tool. Significant hits (evalue < 5e-5) were further analyzed to identify the corresponding KO (KEGG Ortholog number). Annotations of glycoside hydrolases were performed using dbcan2 [33].Protein level checkerboard distribution across the feed efficiency groupsThe checkerboard distribution in protein production profiles was estimated separately within the feed efficient and inefficient animal groups. To enable the comparison between the two groups’ checkerboardness level, we chose a standardized C-score estimate (Standardized Effect Size C-score - S.E.S C-Score), based on the comparison of the observed C-score to a null-model distribution derived from simulations. The S.E.S C-score was estimated using the oecosimu function from R vegan package with 100,000 simulated null-model communities.Calculating functional redundancyThe functional redundancy within a given group of proteins was measured as the mean number of times a given KO occurred within a given group, while neglecting proteins that have not been assigned a KO level functional annotation.In order to test whether a given group of proteins exhibits more or less functional redundancy than would have been expected, a null distribution for functional redundancy was created, based on the number of proteins in the given group. A random group of proteins was drawn from the entire set, keeping the same sample size as in the tested group, and the process was repeated 100 times. Then, the functional redundancy for each random protein group was calculated. Thereafter, the null distribution was used to obtain a p value to measure the likelihood of obtaining such a value under the null.Examining functional divergenceExamining the functional divergence between the two groups of proteins, e.g. the feed efficiency and inefficiency associated proteins, was done by first counting the amount of shared functional annotations, in terms of KOs between the two groups. Thereafter, a null distribution for the expected count of KOs was built by randomly splitting in an iterative manner the proteins into groups of the same sizes and calculating the number of shared KOs. A p value for the actual count of shared proteins was obtained by ranking the actual count over the null distribution.Calculating average nearest neighbor ratio (ANN ratio)ANN Ratio analysis was carried out independently for each protein function (KO), containing more than 14 proteins with at least 5 proteins within each feed efficiency group. Initially, all proteins assigned to a given KO were split into two sets, in accordance to their feed efficiency affiliation group. Thereafter, proteins within each set were independently projected into two-dimensional space by PCA applied directly to Sequence Matrix [34]. Average nearest neighbor ratio within each set was then calculated within the minimum enclosing rectangle defined by principal component axes PC1 and PC2, as defined by Clark and Evans [35].MAG feed efficiency score calculationMicroorganism feed efficiency score was calculated for each MAG individually by first ranking each protein being produced by the given microbe along the 12 animals, based on the normalized protein production levels. Thereafter, a representative production value for the microbe in each animal was calculated as the average of the ranked (normalized) protein production levels in that animal (using R rank function). This ranking allowed us to alleviate the potential skewing effect of highly expressed proteins. The microorganism’s Feed Efficiency Score was calculated as the difference between its mean representative production value within feed efficient animals to that within feed inefficient animals. Values close to zero will reflect similar distribution between the two animal groups, positive values will indicate higher expression among efficient animals, and negative values will indicate higher expression among inefficient animals. To calculate significance, the actual feed efficiency score was compared to values in a distribution derived from a permutation based null model. Each of the permuted Feed Efficiency Scores (10,000 for each microbe) was obtained by independently shuffling each of the proteins produced by the MAG between the animals, prior to calculating the actual microorganism feed efficiency score. By positioning the absolute score value over its distribution under permuted assumptions (absolute values), we obtained a significance p value.MAG phylogenetic tree construction and phylogenetic signal estimationIn order to assess the link between phylogenetic similarity between the MAGs and their association with feed efficiency, phylogenetic tree estimating evolutionary relationships between the MAGs was constructed using the PhyloPhlAn pipeline [36]. The phylogenetic signal for Microorganism Feed Efficiency Score was estimated by providing the phylogSignal function from R phylosignal [37] package with MAGs phylogenetic tree and respective values. Pagel’s Lambda statistics was chosen for the analysis, owing to its robustness [38].Plot generationAll bar plots, scatter plots and other point plots were generated with R package ggplot2. Heatmaps were produced by either ggplot2 [39] or pheatmap [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pheatmap/index.html] R packages. KEGG map was produced using the online KEGG Mapper tool [40]. Phylocorrelogram was produced with phyloCorrelogram function from R package phylosignal [37].MAG differential production analysisMAGs that contain a minimal number of proteins (50 functions) were selected for differential protein production analysis, in order to have sufficient data to perform statistical tests. For each MAG, the relative production was used in order to calculate the Jaccard pairwise dissimilarity for core protein production between feed efficient and inefficient cows using the R vegan package. Analysis of similarity between efficiency and inefficiency associated proteins for each MAG (ANOSIM) values and p values were then calculated using the same package.Predicting animal feed efficiency state according to GH family countsUsing all GH annotated proteins, a feature table that sums the count of each GH family within each sample was produced. Thereafter a leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) [R caret package] was performed, each time building a Random Forest (RF) prediction model from the GH family counts and efficiency state of 11 samples, leaving one sample outside. Each one of the RF models, in its turn, was applied on the left-out animal to predict its efficiency state. Model accuracy and AUC curve were calculated based on the LOOCV performance. More

Given Caprinae life history and plausible combinations of mean recruitment and adult female survivorship, we evaluated population persistence and estimated population MVP. The values describing adult female survivorship and recruitment, plus the variability we employed match values found in other populations of Caprinae. We do not pool data across different Caprinae populations or species. Our approach and results directly inform the conservation and management of many Caprinae, especially those for which the acquisition of demographic data remains beyond reach.Our work embodies the characteristics of a high-quality PVA: clear objectives, appropriate demographic data, model structure matching species life histories, stochasticity, examination of extinction probability, appropriate time interval, use of mean values and associated variability6. As with most ecological models, the quest for more data remains problematic, not debilitating, and is addressed by creatively and aptly using existing information to generate meaningful results3.Wildlife agencies generate lamb:adult female ratios from Caprinae surveys, recognizing that yearlings can be mistaken for adult females, causing miscounts. Excluding yearlings from the ratio’s denominator assumes that no miscounts are occurring, yet an unknown and inconsistent number of yearlings remain in the adult female category across survey events. For these reasons, surveyors of other species, like Dall’s sheep and caribou, pool counts of yearlings and adult females, generating lamb:“adult female-like” ratios instead15,23,24,25.Managers of Caprinae populations can follow these precedents and produce lamb:(adult female + yearling) ratios. Consistency would help standardize methods for building comparisons and meta-analyses across populations of Caprinae, while reducing variability across surveys due to differing techniques.Typically, metrics like elasticity (proportional) and sensitivity (additive) describe the influences of demographic parameters on population growth13,14,22,26. For Caprinae, when adult female survivorship is 0.90 and recruitment 0.30, the elasticity in survivorship and recruitment are 0.61 (90% CIs 0.40–0.75) and 0.24 (90% CIs 0.13–0.40) respectively (elasticity in young adult survivorship is 0.16 (90% CIs 0.12–0.21). For ungulates in general, the elasticity values for survival tend to be higher than those for recruitment27. Our results match this pattern, as the elasticity results indicate that a change in adult survival has a 2.5 times greater effect on λ than an equivalent change in recruitment. Relatedly, other theoretical work reports that demographic parameters with more temporal variability have lower elasticities, indicating less impact on population fitness (e.g.28,29).Our work centers on applications. Since most management actions affect these demographic parameters simultaneously, at issue is the practicality (e.g. feasibility and affordability) of management to increase these parameters, and understanding how such changes could impact λ. For example, imagine a population with mean recruitment of 0.30 and adult survival 0.85, with a biologist interested in increasing recruitment or adult female survival to acquire λ ≥ 1. The answer is to increase either value by 0.02 (Fig. 1, Supplementary Data S1). Similarly, one can set a λ target and determine the amount of recruitment and adult female survival necessary for acquiring it (Fig. 1, Supplementary Data S1).Minimum abundance targetA minimum population of 50 adult females meets the persistence criteria, given intermediate levels of recruitment and survival producing λ ~ 1 (Table 2). The risk of population collapse wanes as populations increase above the minimum threshold (Table 2; Fig. 1). For example, a population of ~ 100 adult females always meets persistence criteria (Table 2). Populations of adult females should be somewhat larger than 50 when modest declines (λ ~ 0.97) are suspected, providing a cushion to address the causes of decline, and mitigate further reductions.Translocation of 5 adult females during each of 5 years, or 10 in each of 3 years, requires a starting abundance of 70 adult females for the population to maintain the persistence criteria, never reach a lower confidence interval of 0, and for the population to return to the starting population size within 30 years. If managers mistakenly target a population having  More

Zelezniak A, Andrejev S, Ponomarova O, Mende DR, Bork P, Patil KR. Metabolic dependencies drive species co-occurrence in diverse microbial communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2015;112:6449–54.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
D’Souza G, Shitut S, Preussger D, Yousif G, Waschina S, Kost C. Ecology and evolution of metabolic cross-feeding interactions in bacteria. Natural Product Reports. 2018;35:455–88.Article 

Google Scholar 
Garcia SL, Buck M, McMahon KD, Grossart H-P, Eiler A, Warnecke F. Auxotrophy and intrapopulation complementary in the ‘interactome’ of a cultivated freshwater model community. Mol Ecology. 2015;24:4449–59.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson WM, Alexander H, Bier RL, Miller DR, Muscarella ME, Pitz KJ, et al. Auxotrophic interactions: A stabilizing attribute of aquatic microbial communities? FEMS Microbiol Ecology. 2020;96:1–14.D’Souza G, Waschina S, Pande S, Bohl K, Kaleta C, Kost C. Less is more: Selective advantages can explain the prevalent loss of biosynthetic genes in bacteria. Evolution. 2014;68:2559–70.Article 

Google Scholar 
Oliveira NM, Niehus R, Foster KR. Evolutionary limits to cooperation in microbial communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111:17941–6.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pande S, Kost C. Bacterial unculturability and the formation of intercellular metabolic networks. Trends Microbiol. 2017;25:349–61.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Douglas AE. The microbial exometabolome: ecological resource and architect of microbial communities. Philos Trans R Soc B: Biological Sci. 2020;375:20190250.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Paczia N, Nilgen A, Lehmann T, Gätgens J, Wiechert W, Noack S. Extensive exometabolome analysis reveals extended overflow metabolism in various microorganisms. Microbial Cell Factories. 2012;11:122.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sokolovskaya OM, Shelton AN, Taga ME. Sharing vitamins: Cobamides unveil microbial interactions. Science. 2020;369:eaba0165.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zomorrodi AR, Segrè D. Genome-driven evolutionary game theory helps understand the rise of metabolic interdependencies in microbial communities. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1563.Article 

Google Scholar 
D’Souza G, Kost C. Experimental evolution of metabolic dependency in bacteria. PLoS Genetics. 2016;12:e1006364.Article 

Google Scholar 
Giri S, Oña L, Waschina S, Shitut S, Yousif G, Kaleta C, et al. Metabolic dissimilarity determines the establishment of cross-feeding interactions in bacteria. Curr Biology. 2021;31:5547–57.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jiang X, Zerfaß C, Feng S, Eichmann R, Asally M, Schäfer P, et al. Impact of spatial organization on a novel auxotrophic interaction among soil microbes. ISME J. 2018;12:1443–56.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Konstantinidis D, Pereira F, Geissen E-M, Grkovska K, Kafkia E, Jouhten P, et al. Adaptive laboratory evolution of microbial co-cultures for improved metabolite secretion. Mol Syst Biology. 2021;17:e10189.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Harcombe WR, Chacón JM, Adamowicz EM, Chubiz LM, Marx CJ. Evolution of bidirectional costly mutualism from byproduct consumption. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2018;115:12000–4.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Giri S, Waschina S, Kaleta C, Kost C. Defining division of labor in microbial communities. J Mol Biol. 2019;431:4712–31.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sanchez A, Gore J. Feedback between population and evolutionary dynamics determines the fate of social microbial populations. PLOS Biology. 2013;11:e1001547.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Preussger D, Giri S, Muhsal LK, Oña L, Kost C. Reciprocal fitness feedbacks promote the evolution of mutualistic cooperation. Curr Biology. 2020;30:3580–3590.e7.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McNally CP, Borenstein E. Metabolic model-based analysis of the emergence of bacterial cross-feeding via extensive gene loss. BMC Syst Biology. 2018;12:69.Article 

Google Scholar 
Estrela S, Morris JJ, Kerr B. Private benefits and metabolic conflicts shape the emergence of microbial interdependencies. Environ Microbiol. 2016;18:1415–27.Article 

Google Scholar 
Libby E, Hébert-Dufresne L, Hosseini S-R, Wagner A. Syntrophy emerges spontaneously in complex metabolic systems. PLOS Comput Biology. 2019;15:e1007169.Article 

Google Scholar 
Rabbers I, Gottstein W, Feist A, Teusink B, Bruggeman FJ, Bachmann H Selection for cell yield does not reduce overflow metabolism in E. coli. bioRxiv. 2021:2021.05.24.445453.Pacheco AR, Moel M, Segrè D. Costless metabolic secretions as drivers of interspecies interactions in microbial ecosystems. Nat Commun. 2019;10:103.Article 

Google Scholar 
Gude S, Pherribo GJ, Taga ME. Emergence of metabolite provisioning as a by-product of evolved biological functions. mSystems. 2020;5:e00259–20.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Campbell K, Herrera-Dominguez L, Correia-Melo C, Zelezniak A, Ralser M. Biochemical principles enabling metabolic cooperativity and phenotypic heterogeneity at the single cell level. Current Opinion in. Syst Biology. 2018;8:97–108.
Google Scholar 
Morris JJ. Black Queen evolution: the role of leakiness in structuring microbial communities. Trends Genetics. 2015;31:475–82.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van Tatenhove-Pel RJ, Rijavec T, Lapanje A, van Swam I, Zwering E, Hernandez-Valdes JA, et al. Microbial competition reduces metabolic interaction distances to the low µm-range. ISME J. 2021;15:688–701.Article 

Google Scholar 
Shitut S, Ahsendorf T, Pande S, Egbert M, Kost C. Nanotube-mediated cross-feeding couples the metabolism of interacting bacterial cells. Environ Microbiol. 2019;21:1306–20.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Klee SM, Sinn JP, Finley M, Allman EL, Smith PB, Aimufua O, et al. Erwinia amylovora auxotrophic mutant exometabolomics and virulence on apples. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2019;85:e00935–19.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hibbing ME, Fuqua C, Parsek MR, Peterson SB. Bacterial competition: surviving and thriving in the microbial jungle. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:15–25.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wienhausen G, Noriega-Ortega BE, Niggemann J, Dittmar T, Simon M The exometabolome of two model strains of the Roseobacter group: A marketplace of microbial metabolites. Front Microbiol. 2017;8.Pinu FR, Granucci N, Daniell J, Han T-L, Carneiro S, Rocha I, et al. Metabolite secretion in microorganisms: the theory of metabolic overflow put to the test. Metabolomics. 2018;14:43.Article 

Google Scholar 
Shiio I, Ôtsuka S-I, Takahashi M. Effect of biotin on the bacterial formation of glutamic acid: I. Glutamate formation and cellular permeability of amino acids. J Biochem. 1962;51:56–62.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Konings WN, Poolman B, Driessen AJM. Can the excretion of metabolites by bacteria be manipulated? FEMS Microbiol Rev. 1992;8:93–108.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zampieri M, Hörl M, Hotz F, Müller NF, Sauer U. Regulatory mechanisms underlying coordination of amino acid and glucose catabolism in Escherichia coli. Nat Commun. 2019;10:3354.Article 

Google Scholar 
Kochanowski K, Okano H, Patsalo V, Williamson J, Sauer U, Hwa T. Global coordination of metabolic pathways in Escherichia coli by active and passive regulation. Mol Syst Biology. 2021;17:e10064.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ogata H, Goto S, Sato K, Fujibuchi W, Bono H, Kanehisa M. KEGG: Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 1999;27:29–34.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Baba T, Ara T, Hasegawa M, Takai Y, Okumura Y, Baba M, et al. Construction of Escherichia coli K-12 in-frame, single-gene knockout mutants: the Keio collection. Mol Syst Biology. 2006;2:2006.0008.Article 

Google Scholar 
Thomason LC, Costantino N, Court DL E. coli genome manipulation by P1 transduction. Curr Protocols Mol Biology. 2007;79:1.17.1-1.8.Pande S, Shitut S, Freund L, Westermann M, Bertels F, Colesie C, et al. Metabolic cross-feeding via intercellular nanotubes among bacteria. Nat Commun. 2015;6:6238.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Oña L, Giri S, Avermann N, Kreienbaum M, Thormann KM, Kost C. Obligate cross-feeding expands the metabolic niche of bacteria. Nat Ecology Evolut. 2021;5:1224–32.Article 

Google Scholar 
Choi K-H, Gaynor JB, White KG, Lopez C, Bosio CM, Karkhoff-Schweizer RR, et al. A Tn7-based broad-range bacterial cloning and expression system. Nat Methods. 2005;2:443–8.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vanstockem M, Michiels K, Vanderleyden J, Van Gool AP. Transposon Mutagenesis of Azospirillum brasilense and Azospirillum lipoferum: Physical analysis of Tn5 and Tn5-Mob insertion mutants. Appl Environ Microbiology. 1987;53:410–5.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Gregg T. M., Mead L., Burns J. H., Takabayashi M. Puka mai he ko ‘a: the significance of corals in Hawaiian culture. In: Ethnobiology of Corals and Coral Reefs). (Springer, 2015).Chevin, L.-M., Lande, R. & Mace, G. M. Adaptation, plasticity, and extinction in a changing environment: towards a predictive theory. PLoS Biol. 8, e1000357 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hochachka P. W., Somero G. N. Biochemical adaptation: mechanism and process in physiological evolution. (Oxford university press, 2002).Munday, P. L., Warner, R. R., Monro, K., Pandolfi, J. M. & Marshall, D. J. Predicting evolutionary responses to climate change in the sea. Ecol. Lett. 16, 1488–1500 (2013).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Seebacher, F., White, C. R. & Franklin, C. E. Physiological plasticity increases resilience of ectothermic animals to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 61–66 (2015).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Coles, S. L., Jokiel, P. L. & Lewis, C. R. Thermal tolerance in tropical versus subtropical Pacific reef corals. Pac. Sci. 30, 159–166 (1976).
Google Scholar 
Pandolfi, J. M. et al. Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reef ecosystems. Science 301, 955–958 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoegh-Guldberg, O. et al. Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification. Science 318, 1737–1742 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
LaJeunesse, T. C. et al. Systematic Revision of Symbiodiniaceae Highlights the Antiquity and Diversity of Coral Endosymbionts. Curr. Biol. 28, 2570–2580 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Glynn, P. W. Coral reef bleaching: ecological perspectives. Coral Reefs 12, 1–17 (1993).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hughes, T. P. et al. Coral reefs in the Anthropocene. Nature 546, 82–90 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Van Hooidonk, R. et al. Local-scale projections of coral reef futures and implications of the Paris Agreement. Sci. Rep. 6, 1–8 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Palumbi, S. R., Barshis, D. J., Traylor-Knowles, N. & Bay, R. A. Mechanisms of reef coral resistance to future climate change. Science 344, 895–898 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Ziegler, M. et al. Coral bacterial community structure responds to environmental change in a host-specific manner. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–11 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rivera, H. E. et al. A framework for understanding gene expression plasticity and its influence on stress tolerance. Mol. Ecol. 30, 1381–1397 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drury C. & Lirman D. Genotype by environment interactions in coral bleaching. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 288, 20210177 (2021).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, e0174000 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Todd, P. A. Morphological plasticity in scleractinian corals. Biol. Rev. 83, 315–337 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eirin-Lopez J. M. & Putnam H. M. Marine environmental epigenetics. Annual review of marine science 11, 335–368 (2019).Putnam, H. M., Davidson, J. M. & Gates, R. D. Ocean acidification influences host DNA methylation and phenotypic plasticity in environmentally susceptible corals. Evolut. Appl. 9, 1165–1178 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dixon, G., Liao, Y., Bay, L. K. & Matz, M. V. Role of gene body methylation in acclimatization and adaptation in a basal metazoan. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 115, 13342–13346 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodriguez‐Casariego, J. A., Cunning, R., Baker, A. C. & Eirin‐Lopez, J. M. Symbiont shuffling induces differential DNA methylation responses to thermal stress in the coral Montastraea cavernosa. Mol. Ecol. 31, 588–602 (2022).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Meyer, E., Aglyamova, G. & Matz, M. 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 
Barshis, D. J. et al. Genomic basis for coral resilience to climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 110, 1387–1392 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Dixon, G., Abbott, E. & Matz, M. Meta‐analysis of the coral environmental stress response: Acropora corals show opposing responses depending on stress intensity. Mol. Ecol. 29, 2855–2870 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Majerová, E., Carey, F. C., Drury, C. & Gates, R. D. Preconditioning improves bleaching tolerance in the reef‐building coral Pocillopora acuta through modulations in the programmed cell death pathways. Mol. Ecol. 30, 3560–3574 (2021).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Vidal-Dupiol, J. et al. Thermal stress triggers broad Pocillopora damicornis transcriptomic remodeling, while Vibrio coralliilyticus infection induces a more targeted immuno-suppression response. PLoS ONE 9, e107672 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Middlebrook, R., Hoegh-Guldberg, O. & Leggat, W. The effect of thermal history on the susceptibility of reef-building corals to thermal stress. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 1050–1056 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bellantuono, A. J., Granados-Cifuentes, C., Miller, D. J., Hoegh-Guldberg, O. & Rodriguez-Lanetty, M. Coral thermal tolerance: tuning gene expression to resist thermal stress. PLoS ONE 7, e50685 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bay, R. A. & Palumbi, S. R. Rapid acclimation ability mediated by transcriptome changes in reef-building corals. Genome Biol. Evol. 7, 1602–1612 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ainsworth, T. D. et al. Climate change disables coral bleaching protection on the Great Barrier Reef. Science 352, 338–342 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
National Academies of Sciences E, and Medicine. A Research Review of Interventions to Increase the Persistence and Resilience of Coral Reefs. (The National Academies Press, 2019).Kellett M., Hoffmann A. A., Mckechnie S. W. Hardening capacity in the Drosophila melanogaster species group is constrained by basal thermotolerance. Funct. Ecol. 19, 853–858 (2005).Gerken, A. R., Eller, O. C., Hahn, D. A. & Morgan, T. J. Constraints, independence, and evolution of thermal plasticity: probing genetic architecture of long-and short-term thermal acclimation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 112, 4399–4404 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Calosi, P., Bilton, D. T. & Spicer, J. I. Thermal tolerance, acclimatory capacity and vulnerability to global climate change. Biol. Lett. 4, 99–102 (2008).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nyamukondiwa, C., Terblanche, J. S., Marshall, K. & Sinclair, B. Basal cold but not heat tolerance constrains plasticity among Drosophila species (Diptera: Drosophilidae). J. Evolut. Biol. 24, 1927–1938 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bellantuono, A. J., Hoegh-Guldberg, O. & Rodriguez-Lanetty, M. Resistance to thermal stress in corals without changes in symbiont composition. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 279, 1100–1107 (2011).
Google Scholar 
DeMerlis, A. et al. Pre-exposure to a variable temperature treatment improves the response of Acropora cervicornis to acute thermal stress. Coral Reefs, 41, 1–11 (2022).Oliver, T. & Palumbi, S. Do fluctuating temperature environments elevate coral thermal tolerance? Coral Reefs 30, 429–440 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Klepac, C. & Barshis, D. Reduced thermal tolerance of massive coral species in a highly variable environment. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20201379 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bahr, K. D., Jokiel, P. L. & Rodgers, K. S. The 2014 coral bleaching and freshwater flood events in Kāneʻohe Bay, Hawaiʻi. PeerJ 3, e1136 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cunning, R., Ritson-Williams, R. & Gates, R. D. Patterns of bleaching and recovery of Montipora capitata in Kāne’ohe Bay, Hawai’i, USA. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 551, 131–139 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Innis, T., Cunning, R., Ritson-Williams, R., Wall, C. & Gates, R. Coral color and depth drive symbiosis ecology of Montipora capitata in Kāne’ohe Bay, O’ahu, Hawai’i. Coral Reefs 37, 423–430 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wall C. B., Ritson-Williams R., Popp B. N., Gates R. D. Spatial variation in the biochemical and isotopic composition of corals during bleaching and recovery. Limnol. Oceanogr. 64, 2011–2028 (2019).Ritson-Williams, R. & Gates, R. D. Coral community resilience to successive years of bleaching in Kane ‘ohe Bay, Hawai ‘i. Coral Reefs 10, 757–769 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Drury, C. et al. Intrapopulation adaptive variance supports thermal tolerance in a reef-building coral. Commun. Biol. 5, 1–10 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dilworth J., Caruso C., Kahkejian V. A., Baker A. C., Drury C. Host genotype and stable differences in algal symbiont communities explain patterns of thermal stress response of Montipora capitata following thermal pre-exposure and across multiple bleaching events. Coral Reefs 40, 151–163 (2020).Pinzón, J. H. et al. Whole transcriptome analysis reveals changes in expression of immune-related genes during and after bleaching in a reef-building coral. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 140214 (2015).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Thomas, L. & Palumbi, S. R. The genomics of recovery from coral bleaching. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 284, 20171790 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Bertucci, A., Foret, S., Ball, E. & Miller, D. J. Transcriptomic differences between day and night in Acropora millepora provide new insights into metabolite exchange and light‐enhanced calcification in corals. Mol. Ecol. 24, 4489–4504 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drury, C. Resilience in reef-building corals: the ecological and evolutionary importance of the host response to thermal stress. Mol. Ecol. 00, 1–18 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Whitehead, A. & Crawford, D. L. Neutral and adaptive variation in gene expression. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 103, 5425–5430 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kenkel, C. D. & Matz, M. V. Gene expression plasticity as a mechanism of coral adaptation to a variable environment. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1–6 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Cunning, R. & Baker, A. C. Thermotolerant coral symbionts modulate heat stress‐responsive genes in their hosts. Mol. Ecol. 29, 2940–2950 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
van Heerwaarden, B. & Kellermann, V. Does plasticity trade off with basal heat tolerance? Trends Ecol. Evol. 35, 874–885 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sasaki, M. C. & Dam, H. G. Negative relationship between thermal tolerance and plasticity in tolerance emerges during experimental evolution in a widespread marine invertebrate. Evolut. Appl. 14, 2114–2123 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roach T.N., Dilworth J., Jones A.D., Quinn R.A., Drury C. Metabolomic signatures of coral bleaching history. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1–9 (2021).Snider, J., Thibault, G. & Houry, W. A. The AAA+ superfamily of functionally diverse proteins. Genome Biol. 9, 1–8 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moon, S. Y. & Zheng, Y. Rho GTPase-activating proteins in cell regulation. Trends Cell Biol. 13, 13–22 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hobbs, G. A., Zhou, B., Cox, A. D. & Campbell, S. L. Rho GTPases, oxidation, and cell redox control. Small GTPases 5, e28579 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Majerová E., Drury C. A BI-1 mediated cascade improves redox homeostasis during thermal stress and prevents oxidative damage in a preconditioned reef-building coral. bioRxiv, (2021).Coleman, M. & Olson, M. Rho GTPase signalling pathways in the morphological changes associated with apoptosis. Cell Death Differ. 9, 493–504 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Opalińska, M. & Jańska, H. AAA proteases: guardians of mitochondrial function and homeostasis. Cells 7, 163 (2018).PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Matsuda, S. et al. Coral bleaching susceptibility is predictive of subsequent mortality within but not between coral species. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8, 1–14 (2020).Barott, K. L. et al. Coral bleaching response is unaltered following acclimatization to reefs with distinct environmental conditions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 118, 1–8 (2021).Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 17, 10–12 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Patro, R., Duggal, G., Love, M. I., Irizarry, R. A. & Kingsford, C. Salmon provides fast and bias-aware quantification of transcript expression. Nat. Methods 14, 417–419 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Williams, A. et al. Multi-omic characterization of the thermal stress phenome in the stony coral Montipora capitata. PeerJ 9, e12335 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

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

Google Scholar 
Shumaker, A. et al. Genome analysis of the rice coral Montipora capitata. Sci. Rep. 9, 2571 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fu, L., Niu, B., Zhu, Z., Wu, S. & Li, W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 28, 3150–3152 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kriventseva, E. V. et al. OrthoDB v10: sampling the diversity of animal, plant, fungal, protist, bacterial and viral genomes for evolutionary and functional annotations of orthologs. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D807–D811 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hunter, S. et al. InterPro: the integrative protein signature database. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, D211–D215 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bateman, A. et al. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, D138–D141 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Leggat, W., Heron, S. F., Fordyce, A., Suggett, D. J. & Ainsworth, T. D. Experiment Degree Heating Week (eDHW) as a novel metric to reconcile and validate past and future global coral bleaching studies. J. Environ. Manag. 301, 113919 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritz, C., Baty, F., Streibig, J. C. & Gerhard, D. Dose-response analysis using R. PloS ONE 10, e0146021 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 1–21 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Philip, D. VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. Journal of Vegetation Science 14, 927–930 (2003).Wright, R. M. et al. Positive genetic associations among fitness traits support evolvability of a reef-building coral under multiple stressors. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 3294–3304 (2019).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Drury C., Dilworth J., Majerová E., Caruso C., Greer J. B. Expression plasticity regulates intraspecific variation in the acclimatization potential of a reef-building coral [dataset]. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6877825 (2022). More

Tittensor, D. P. et al. A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346, 241–243 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
IPBES Secretariat Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science—Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019).Bruner, A. G., Gullison, R. E., Rice, R. E. & Fonseca, G. A. Bda Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291, 125–128 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J., Joppa, L. N. & Burgess, N. D. Mapping change in human pressure globally on land and within protected areas. Conserv. Biol. 28, 1604–1616 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Laurance, W. F. et al. Averting biodiversity collapse in tropical forest protected areas. Nature 489, 290–293 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Conference of the Parties, The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, COP-10 Decision X/2 (CBD, 2010).Protected Planet Report 2018 (UNEP-WCMC IUCN & NGS, 2018).Craigie, I. D. et al. Large mammal population declines in Africa’s protected areas. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2221–2228 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Joppa, L. N., Bailie, J. E. M. & Robinson, J. G. Protected Areas: Are They Safeguarding Biodiversity?. (Wiley Blackwell, 2016).Book 

Google Scholar 
Rada, S. et al. Protected areas do not mitigate biodiversity declines: a case study on butterflies. Divers. Distrib. 25, 217–224 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jetz, W., McPherson, J. M. & Guralnick, R. P. Integrating biodiversity distribution knowledge: toward a global map of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 151–159 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J. et al. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines. Biol. Conserv. 161, 230–238 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kindsvater, H. K. et al. Overcoming the data crisis in biodiversity conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 676–688 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sutherland, W. J., Pullin, A. S., Dolman, P. M. & Knight, T. M. The need for evidence-based conservation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 305–308 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferraro, P. J. & Pattanayak, S. K. Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biol. 4, 482–488 (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Polaina, E., González-Suárez, M. & Revilla, E. Socioeconomic correlates of global mammalian conservation status. Ecosphere 6, 1–34. (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ferraro, P. J. & Pressey, R. L. Measuring the difference made by conservation initiatives: protected areas and their environmental and social impacts. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Biol. Sci. 370, 20140270 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J., Manica, A., Burgess, N. D., Coad, L. & Balmford, A. A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 23209–23215 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McGinnis, M. D. & Ostrom, E. Social-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecol. Soc. 19, 30 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Barnes, M. D. et al. Wildlife population trends in protected areas predicted by national socio-economic metrics and body size. Nat. Commun. 7, 12747 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Palomo, I. et al. Incorporating the social-ecological approach in protected areas in the anthropocene. BioScience 64, 181–191 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Poteete, A. R., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice (Princeton Univ. Press, 2010).Wilson, D. S., Ostrom, E. & Cox, M. E. Generalizing the core design principles for the efficacy of groups. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 90, S21–S32 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tebet, G., Trimble, M. & Pereira Medeiros, R. Using Ostrom’s principles to assess institutional dynamics of conservation: lessons from a marine protected area in Brazil. Mar. Policy 88, 174–181 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ban, N. C. et al. Social and ecological effectiveness of large marine protected areas. Glob. Environ. Change 43, 82–91 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fleischman, F. D. et al. Governing large-scale social-ecological systems: lessons from five cases. Int. J. Commons 8, 428–456 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Faff, R., Ho, Y. K., Lin, W. & Yap, C. M. Diminishing marginal returns from R&D investment: evidence from manufacturing firms. Appl. Econ. 45, 611–622 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gill, D. A. et al. Capacity shortfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally. Nature 543, 665–669 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bowles, S. & Polanía-Reyes, S. Economic incentives and social preferences: substitutes or complements? J. Econ. Lit. 50, 368–425 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Irwin, K., Mulder, L. & Simpson, B. The detrimental effects of sanctions on intragroup trust: comparing punishments and rewards. Soc. Psychol. Q. 77, 253–272 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pacifici, M. et al. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 215–225. (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Urban, M. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science 348, 571–573 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lovett, G. M. et al. Effects of air pollution on ecosystems and biological diversity in the eastern United States. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1162, 99–135 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Backhaus, T., Snape, J. & Lazorchak, J. The impact of chemical pollution on biodiversity and ecosystem services: the need for an improved understanding. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 8, 575–576 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Benítez-López, A. et al. The impact of hunting on tropical mammal and bird populations. Science 356, 180–183 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Calabrese, A. et al. Conservation status of Asian elephants: the influence of habitat and governance. Biodivers. Conserv. 26, 2067–2081 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shaffer, L. J., Khadka, K. K., Van Den Hoek, J. & Naithani, K. J. Human–elephant conflict: a review of current management strategies and future directions. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 235 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Klaassen, R. H. G. et al. When and where does mortality occur in migratory birds? Direct evidence from long-term satellite tracking of raptors. J. Anim. Ecol. 83, 176–184 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Güneralp, P. & Seto, K. C. Futures of global urban expansion: uncertainties and implications for biodiversity conservation. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 014025 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sherry, T.W., Johnson, M.D. & Strong, A. in Birds of Two Worlds. The Ecology and Evolution of Migration (eds Greenberg, R. & Marra, P. P.) 414–425 (The John Hopkins Univ. Press, 2005).Sanderson, F. J., Donald, P. F., Pain, D. J., Burfield, I. J. & Van Bommel, F. P. Long-term population declines in Afro-Palearctic migrant birds. Biol. Conserv. 131, 93–105 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Runge, C. A. et al. Protected areas and global conservation of migratory birds. Science 350, 1255–1258 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Balme, G. A., Slotow, R. & Hunter, L. T. B. Edge effects and the impact of non-protected areas in carnivore conservation: leopards in the Phinda-Mkhuze Complex, South Africa. Anim. Conserv. 13, 315–323 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chase, J. M., Blowes, S. A., Knight, T. M., Gerstner, K. & May, F. Ecosystem decay exacerbates biodiversity loss with habitat loss. Nature 584, 238–243 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990).Lacroix, K. & Richards, G. An alternative policy evaluation of the British Columbia carbon tax: broadening the application of Elinor Ostrom’s design principles for managing common-pool resources. Ecol. Soc. 20, 38 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bennett, N. J. et al. Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation. Conserv. Biol. 31, 56–66 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dasgupta, P. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review (HM Treasury, 2021).Resasco, J. Meta-analysis on a decade of testing corridor efficacy: what new have we learned? Curr. Landsc. Ecol. Rep. 4, 61–69 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Andrade, G. S. M. & Rhodes, J. R. Protected areas and local communities: an inevitable partnership toward successful conservation strategies? Ecol. Soc. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05216-170414 (2012).Morell, V. Massive wolf kill disrupts long-running Yellowstone Park study. Science 375, 482–482 (2022).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Post, G. & Geldmann, J. Exceptional responders in conservation. Conserv. Biol. 32, 576–583 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wauchope, H. S. et al. Protected areas have a mixed impact on waterbirds, but management helps. Nature 605, 103–107 (2022).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ostrom, E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social–ecological systems. Science 325, 419–422 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kline, M. A., Waring, T. M. & Salerno, J. D. Designing cultural multilevel selection research for sustainability science. Sustainability Sci. 13, 9–19 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lindsey, P. A. et al. The performance of African protected areas for lions and their prey. Biol. Conserv. 209, 137–149 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) (IUCN & UNEP‐WCMC, 2018); https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/search-areas?geo_type=country&filters%5Bdb_type%5D%5B%5D=wdpaCoad, L. et al. Measuring impact of protected area management interventions: current and future use of the global database of protected area management effectiveness. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370, 20140281 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Geldmann, J. et al. A global analysis of management capacity and ecological outcomes in terrestrial protected areas. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12434 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Living Planet Database (LPD) (Zoological Society of London, 2018); http://www.livingplanetindex.orgKühl, H., Williamson, L., Sanz, C. M., Morgan, D. & Boesch, C. Launch of A.P.E.S. database. Gorilla Journal 34, 20–21 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Koerner, S. E., Poulsen, J. R., Blanchard, E. J., Okouyi, J. & Clark, C. J. Vertebrate community composition and diversity declines along a defaunation gradient radiating from rural villages in Gabon. J. Appl. Ecol. 54, 805–814 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bauer, H. et al. Lion (Panthera leo) populations are declining rapidly across Africa, except in intensively managed areas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 14894–14899 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C. & Tily, H. J. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: keep it maximal. J. Mem. Lang. 68, 1–43 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Schielzeth, H. & Forstmeier, W. Conclusions beyond support: overconfident estimates in mixed models. Behav. Ecol. 20, 416–420 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
McElreath, R. in Statistical Rethinking: A Bayesian Course with Examples in R and Stan (CRC Press, 2016).Bürkner, P. C. (2017). brms: an R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. J. Stat. Software https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01 (2017).Schielzeth, H. Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1, 103–113 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019).Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B. B., Stern, H. S. S. & Rubin, D. B. B. Bayesian Data Analysis (CRC Press, 2014).Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) (UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, 2019); www.protectedplanet.netChamberlain, S. rphylopic: Get ‘Silhouettes’ of ‘Organisms’ from ‘Phylopic’. R version 0.3.3.91 https://github.com/sckott/rphylopic (2022). More

Worden, A. Z. et al. Rethinking the marine carbon cycle: factoring in the multifarious lifestyles of microbes. Science 347, 1257594 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bjorbækmo, M. F. M., Evenstad, A., Røsæg, L. L., Krabberød, A. K. & Logares, R. The planktonic protist interactome: where do we stand after a century of research? ISME J. 14, 544–559 (2020).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pandolfi, J. M., Staples, T. L. & Kiessling, W. Increased extinction in the emergence of novel ecological communities. Science 370, 220–222 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jürgens, K. & Massana, R. in Microbial Ecology of the Oceans (ed. Kirchman, D. L.) 383–441 (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).Archibald, J. M. Endosymbiosis and eukaryotic cell evolution. Curr. Biol. 25, R911–R921 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McCutcheon, J. P. & Moran, N. A. Extreme genome reduction in symbiotic bacteria. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10, 13–26 (2011).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Drew, G. C., Stevens, E. J. & King, K. C. Microbial evolution and transitions along the parasite–mutualist continuum. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 19, 623–638 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Buck, K. R., Chavez, F. P. & Thomsen, H. A. Choanoflagellates of the central California waters: abundance and distribution. Ophelia 33, 179–186 (1991).Article 

Google Scholar 
Leadbeater, B. S. C. The Choanoflagellates: Evolution, Biology and Ecology (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2015).de Vargas, C. et al. Eukaryotic plankton diversity in the sunlit ocean. Science 348, 1261605 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Alegado, R. A. et al. A bacterial sulfonolipid triggers multicellular development in the closest living relatives of animals. eLife 1, e00013 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Woznica, A. et al. Bacterial lipids activate, synergize, and inhibit a developmental switch in choanoflagellates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 7894–7899 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Woznica, A., Gerdt, J. P., Hulett, R. E., Clardy, J. & King, N. Mating in the closest living relatives of animals is induced by a bacterial chondroitinase. Cell 170, 1175–1183.e11 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Needham, D. M. et al. A distinct lineage of giant viruses brings a rhodopsin photosystem to unicellular marine predators. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 20574–20583 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Needham, D. M. et al. Targeted metagenomic recovery of four divergent viruses reveals shared and distinctive characteristics of giant viruses of marine eukaryotes. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 374, 20190086 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Frank, N., Helge Abuldhauge, T. & Daniel, J. R. Bridging the gap between morphological species and molecular barcodes – exemplified by loricate choanoflagellates. Eur. J. Protistol. 57, 26–37 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Logares, R. et al. Disentangling the mechanisms shaping the surface ocean microbiota. Microbiome 8, 55 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eldin, C. et al. From Q fever to Coxiella burnetii infection: a paradigm change. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 30, 115–190 (2017).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Parks, D. H. et al. A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 996–1004 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lenski, R. E. in Advances in Microbial Ecology (ed. Marshall, K. C.) 1–44 (Springer, 1988).Zimmerman, A. E. et al. Metabolic and biogeochemical consequences of viral infection in aquatic ecosystems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 21–34 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vincent, F., Sheyn, U., Porat, Z., Schatz, D. & Vardi, A. Visualizing active viral infection reveals diverse cell fates in synchronized algal bloom demise. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2021586118 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mruwat, N. et al. A single-cell polony method reveals low levels of infected Prochlorococcus in oligotrophic waters despite high cyanophage abundances. ISME J 15, 41–54 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Canbäck, B., Tamas, I. & Andersson, S. G. E. A phylogenomic study of endosymbiotic bacteria. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 1110–1122 (2004).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Giovannoni, S. J. SAR11 bacteria: the most abundant plankton in the oceans. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 9, 231–255 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
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, 1043–1055 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pachiadaki, M. G. et al. Charting the complexity of the marine microbiome through single-cell genomics. Cell 179, 1623–1635.e11 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cordero, O. X. & Polz, M. F. Explaining microbial genomic diversity in light of evolutionary ecology. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 12, 263–273 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delmont, T. O. et al. Single-amino acid variants reveal evolutionary processes that shape the biogeography of a global SAR11 subclade. eLife 8, e46497 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kashtan, N. et al. Single-cell genomics reveals hundreds of coexisting subpopulations in wild. Prochlorococcus. Science 344, 416–420 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Toft, C. & Andersson, S. G. E. Evolutionary microbial genomics: insights into bacterial host adaptation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 465–475 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Qiu, J. & Luo, Z.-Q. Legionella and Coxiella effectors: strength in diversity and activity. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 15, 591–605 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Husnik, F. et al. Bacterial and archaeal symbioses with protists. Curr. Biol. 31, R862–R877 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Boamah, D. K., Zhou, G., Ensminger, A. W. & O’Connor, T. J. From many hosts, one accidental pathogen: the diverse protozoan hosts of Legionella. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 7, 477 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Graf, J. S. et al. Anaerobic endosymbiont generates energy for ciliate host by denitrification. Nature 591, 445–450 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pinhassi, J., DeLong, E. F., Béjà, O., González, J. M. & Pedrós-Alió, C. Marine bacterial and archaeal ion-pumping rhodopsins: genetic diversity, physiology, and ecology. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 80, 929–954 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Brunet, T. et al. Light-regulated collective contractility in a multicellular choanoflagellate. Science 366, 326–334 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmitz-Esser, S. et al. ATP/ADP translocases: a common feature of obligate intracellular amoebal symbionts related to Chlamydiae and Rickettsiae. J. Bacteriol. 186, 683–691 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
George, E. E. et al. Highly reduced genomes of protist endosymbionts show evolutionary convergence. Curr. Biol. 30, 925–933.e3 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Deeg, C. M. et al. Chromulinavorax destructans, a pathogen of microzooplankton that provides a window into the enigmatic candidate phylum Dependentiae. PLoS Pathog. 15, e1007801–e1007801 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Major, P., Embley, T. M. & Williams, T. A. Phylogenetic diversity of NTT nucleotide transport proteins in free-living and parasitic bacteria and eukaryotes. Genome Biol. Evol. 9, 480–487 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Trentmann, O., Decker, C., Winkler, H. H. & Neuhaus, H. E. Charged amino-acid residues in transmembrane domains of the plastidic ATP/ADP transporter from Arabidopsis are important for transport efficiency, substrate specificity, and counter exchange properties. Eur. J. Biochem. 267, 4098–4105 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, G., Meredith, T. C. & Kahne, D. On the essentiality of lipopolysaccharide to Gram-negative bacteria. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 16, 779–785 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bertani, B. & Ruiz, N. Function and biogenesis of lipopolysaccharides. EcoSal Plus 8, ESP-0001–2018 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Russell, D. G., Vanderven, B. C., Glennie, S., Mwandumba, H. & Heyderman, R. S. The macrophage marches on its phagosome: dynamic assays of phagosome function. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 9, 594–600 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sañudo-Wilhelmy, S. A., Gómez-Consarnau, L., Suffridge, C. & Webb, E. A. The role of B vitamins in marine biogeochemistry. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 6, 339–367 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Omsland, A. & Heinzen, R. A. Life on the outside: the rescue of Coxiella burnetii from its host cell. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 65, 111–128 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Weeks, A. R., Turelli, M., Harcombe, W. R., Reynolds, K. T. & Hoffmann, A. A. From parasite to mutualist: rapid evolution of Wolbachia in natural populations of Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 5, e114 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Oliver, K. M., Campos, J., Moran, N. A. & Hunter, M. S. Population dynamics of defensive symbionts in aphids. Proc. Biol. Sci. 275, 293–299 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schulz, F. & Horn, M. Intranuclear bacteria: inside the cellular control center of eukaryotes. Trends Cell Biol. 25, 339–346 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hamann, E. et al. Environmental Breviatea harbour mutualistic Arcobacter epibionts. Nature 534, 254–258 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Seah, B. K. B. et al. Sulfur-oxidizing symbionts without canonical genes for autotrophic CO2 fixation. mBio 10, e01112-19 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Salonen, I. S., Chronopoulou, P.-M., Bird, C., Reichart, G.-J. & Koho, K. A. Enrichment of intracellular sulphur cycle-associated bacteria in intertidal benthic foraminifera revealed by 16S and aprA gene analysis. Sci. Rep. 9, 11692 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vallesi, A. et al. A new species of the γ-Proteobacterium Francisella, F. adeliensis sp. nov., endocytobiont in an Antarctic marine ciliate and potential evolutionary forerunner of pathogenic species. Microb. Ecol. 77, 587–596 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tashyreva, D. et al. Life cycle, ultrastructure, and phylogeny of new diplonemids and their endosymbiotic bacteria. mBio 9, e02447-17 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Foster, R. A. & Zehr, J. P. Diversity, genomics, and distribution of phytoplankton-cyanobacterium single-cell symbiotic associations. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 73, 435–456 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, Y.-C. et al. Distribution patterns and phylogeny of marine stramenopiles in the North Pacific Ocean. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 78, 3387–3399 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kim, E. et al. Newly identified and diverse plastid-bearing branch on the eukaryotic tree of life. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 1496–1500 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wylezich, C., Karpov, S. A., Mylnikov, A. P., Anderson, R. & Jürgens, K. Ecologically relevant choanoflagellates collected from hypoxic water masses of the Baltic Sea have untypical mitochondrial cristae. BMC Microbiol. 12, 271 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, A. C. C. & Duncan, R. P. Signatures of host/symbiont genome coevolution in insect nutritional endosymbioses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 10255–10261 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Douglas, A. E. Multiorganismal insects: diversity and function of resident microorganisms. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 60, 17–34 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Newton, H. J. et al. Sel1 repeat protein LpnE is a Legionella pneumophila virulence determinant that influences vacuolar trafficking. Infect. Immun. 75, 5575–5585 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Boch, J., Bonas, U. & Lahaye, T. TAL effectors–pathogen strategies and plant resistance engineering. New Phytol. 204, 823–832 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmitz-Esser, S. et al. The genome of the amoeba symbiont ‘Candidatus Amoebophilus asiaticus’ reveals common mechanisms for host cell interaction among amoeba-associated bacteria. J. Bacteriol. 192, 1045–1057 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Abby, S. S. et al. Identification of protein secretion systems in bacterial genomes. Sci. Rep. 6, 23080 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bratanis, E., Andersson, T., Lood, R. & Bukowska-Faniband, E. Biotechnological potential of Bdellovibrio and like organisms and their secreted enzymes. Front. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00662 (2020).Rose, J., Caron, D., Sieracki, M. & Poulton, N. Counting heterotrophic nanoplanktonic protists in cultures and aquatic communities by flow cytometry. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 34, 263–277 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Caporaso, J. G. et al. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 4516–4522 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Stoeck, T. et al. Multiple marker parallel tag environmental DNA sequencing reveals a highly complex eukaryotic community in marine anoxic water. Mol. Ecol. 19, 21–31 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bolyen, E. et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 852–857 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J 17, 10–12 (2011).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Quast, C. et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D590–D596 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W. & Lipman, D. J. Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403–410 (1990).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nelson, M. C., Morrison, H. G., Benjamino, J., Grim, S. L. & Graf, J. Analysis, optimization and verification of illumina-generated 16S rRNA gene amplicon surveys. PLoS ONE 9, e94249 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bankevich, A. et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J. Comput. Biol. 19, 455–477 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eren, A. M. et al. Anvi’o: an advanced analysis and visualization platform for ‘omics data. PeerJ 3, e1319 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jain, C., Rodriguez-R, L. M., Phillippy, A. M., Konstantinidis, K. T. & Aluru, S. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat. Commun. 9, 5114 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Darling, A. E., Mau, B. & Perna, N. T. progressiveMauve: multiple genome alignment with gene gain, loss and rearrangement. PLoS ONE 5, e11147 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

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

Google Scholar 
Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gao, F. & Zhang, C.-T. Ori-Finder: a web-based system for finding oriCs in unannotated bacterial genomes. BMC Bioinformatics 9, 79 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Delcher, A. L., Phillippy, A., Carlton, J. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast algorithms for large-scale genome alignment and comparison. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 2478–2483 (2002).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Li, H. A statistical framework for SNP calling, mutation discovery, association mapping and population genetical parameter estimation from sequencing data. Bioinformatics 27, 2987–2993 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Laslett, D. & Canback, B. ARAGORN, a program to detect tRNA genes and tmRNA genes in nucleotide sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 11–16 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hyatt, D. et al. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 11, 119 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Huerta-Cepas, J. et al. Fast genome-wide functional annotation through orthology assignment by eggNOG-Mapper. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 2115–2122 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Huerta-Cepas, J. et al. eggNOG 5.0: a hierarchical, functionally and phylogenetically annotated orthology resource based on 5090 organisms and 2502 viruses. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D309–D314 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eddy, S. R. Profile hidden Markov models. Bioinformatics 14, 755–763 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Finn, R. D. et al. Pfam: the protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, D222–D230 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Arkin, A. P. et al. KBase: The United States Department of Energy Systems Biology Knowledgebase. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 566 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Aziz, R. K. et al. The RAST Server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics 9, 75 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Karp, P. D. et al. Pathway Tools version 19.0 update: software for pathway/genome informatics and systems biology. Brief. Bioinform. 17, 877–890 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Käll, L., Krogh, A. & Sonnhammer, E. L. L. Advantages of combined transmembrane topology and signal peptide prediction–the Phobius web server. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, W429–W432 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Elbourne, L. D. H., Tetu, S. G., Hassan, K. A. & Paulsen, I. T. TransportDB 2.0: a database for exploring membrane transporters in sequenced genomes from all domains of life. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D320–D324 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sandoz, K. M. et al. Transcriptional profiling of Coxiella burnetii reveals extensive cell wall remodeling in the small cell variant developmental form. PLoS ONE 11, e0149957 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rekha, S. et al. Complete genome sequence of the Q-fever pathogen Coxiella burnetii. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 5455–5460 (2003).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bushnell, B. BBMap Short Read Aligner (Univ. California, Berkeley, 2016); http://sourceforge.net/projects/bbmapAnders, S., Pyl, P. T. & Huber, W. HTSeq—a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166–169 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chen, I.-M. A. et al. IMG/M v.5.0: an integrated data management and comparative analysis system for microbial genomes and microbiomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D666–D677 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Delmont, T. O. et al. Nitrogen-fixing populations of Planctomycetes and Proteobacteria are abundant in surface ocean metagenomes. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 804–813 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Aylward, F. O. & Santoro, A. E. Heterotrophic Thaumarchaea with small genomes are widespread in the dark ocean. mSystems 5, e00415–20 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodriguez-R, L. M. & Konstantinidis, K. T. The enveomics collection: a toolbox for specialized analyses of microbial genomes and metagenomes. Preprint at PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.1900v1 (2016).Konstantinidis, K. T. & Tiedje, J. M. Towards a genome-based taxonomy for prokaryotes. J. Bacteriol. 187, 6258–6264 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yoon, S.-H., Ha, S.-M., Lim, J., Kwon, S. & Chun, J. A large-scale evaluation of algorithms to calculate average nucleotide identity. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 110, 1281–1286 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee, I., Ouk Kim, Y., Park, S.-C. & Chun, J. OrthoANI: an improved algorithm and software for calculating average nucleotide identity. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 66, 1100–1103 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee, M. D. GToTree: a user-friendly workflow for phylogenomics. Bioinformatics 35, 4162–4164 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 772–780 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Capella-Gutiérrez, S., Silla-Martínez, J. M. & Gabaldón, T. trimAl: a tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics 25, 1972–1973 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S. & Arkin, A. P. FastTree 2 – approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS ONE 5, e9490 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Letunic, I. & Bork, P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v3: an online tool for the display and annotation of phylogenetic and other trees. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W242–W245 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Nguyen, L.-T., Schmidt, H. A., von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 268–274 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Seemann, T. barrnap 0.9: Rapid Ribosomal RNA Prediction (2018); https://github.com/tseemann/barrnapFu, L., Niu, B., Zhu, Z., Wu, S. & Li, W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 28, 3150–3152 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Ronquist, F. et al. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539–542 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Warren, D. L., Geneva, A. J. & Lanfear, R. RWTY (R We There Yet): an R package for examining convergence of Bayesian phylogenetic analyses. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 1016–1020 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bi, D. et al. SecReT4: a web-based bacterial type IV secretion system resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D660–D665 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Darriba, D., Taboada, G. L., Doallo, R. & Posada, D. ProtTest 3: fast selection of best-fit models of protein evolution. Bioinformatics 27, 1164–1165 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunagawa, S. et al. Structure and function of the global ocean microbiome. Science 348, 1261359 (2015).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tully, B. J., Graham, E. D. & Heidelberg, J. F. The reconstruction of 2,631 draft metagenome-assembled genomes from the global oceans. Sci. Data 5, 170203 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Olson, D. K., Yoshizawa, S., Boeuf, D., Iwasaki, W. & DeLong, E. F. Proteorhodopsin variability and distribution in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre. ISME J. 12, 1047–1060 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Philosof, A. & Béjà, O. Bacterial, archaeal and viral-like rhodopsins from the Red Sea. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 5, 475–482 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Boeuf, D., Audic, S., Brillet-Guéguen, L., Caron, C. & Jeanthon, C. MicRhoDE: a curated database for the analysis of microbial rhodopsin diversity and evolution. Database 2015, bav080 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Robert, X. & Gouet, P. Deciphering key features in protein structures with the new ENDscript server. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, W320–W324 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Demir-Hilton, E. et al. Global distribution patterns of distinct clades of the photosynthetic picoeukaryote Ostreococcus. ISME J. 5, 1095–1107 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Parada, A. E., Needham, D. M. & Fuhrman, J. A. Every base matters: assessing small subunit rRNA primers for marine microbiomes with mock communities, time-series and global field samples. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 1403–1414 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Barbera, P. et al. EPA-ng: massively parallel evolutionary placement of genetic sequences. Syst. Biol. 68, 365–369 (2019).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Amaral-Zettler, L. A., McCliment, E. A., Ducklow, H. W. & Huse, S. M. A method for studying protistan diversity using massively parallel sequencing of V9 hypervariable regions of small-subunit ribosomal RNA genes. PLoS ONE 4, e6372 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Needham, D. M. & Fuhrman, J. A. Pronounced daily succession of phytoplankton, archaea and bacteria following a spring bloom. Nat. Microbiol. 1, 16005 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xia, L. C. et al. Extended local similarity analysis (eLSA) of microbial community and other time series data with replicates. BMC. Syst. Biol. 5, S15 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Choi, H. M. T. et al. Third-generation in situ hybridization chain reaction: multiplexed, quantitative, sensitive, versatile, robust. Development 145, dev165753 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Schramm, A., Fuchs, B. M., Nielsen, J. L., Tonolla, M. & Stahl, D. A. Fluorescence in situ hybridization of 16S rRNA gene clones (Clone-FISH) for probe validation and screening of clone libraries. Environ. Microbiol. 4, 713–720 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Weiss, S. et al. Correlation detection strategies in microbial data sets vary widely in sensitivity and precision. ISME J. 10, 1669–1681 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Darling, A. C. E., Mau, B., Blattner, F. R. & Perna, N. T. Mauve: multiple alignment of conserved genomic sequence with rearrangements. Genome Res. 14, 1394–1403 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Nuclear weapons obliterate targets. The soot ejected into the stratosphere spreads, changing global weather patterns. When weapons are especially high yielding, the resultant soot could trigger global famine.About 66 million years ago, roughly three-quarters of all species on Earth died when a 10–15-km-diameter asteroid travelling at 72,000 km h−1 struck at Chicxulub, Mexico1. Sulfates and soot lofted high in the atmosphere, cutting off sunlight. The Earth cooled, weather changed and primary productivity crashed. While the best-known victims of the asteroid impact were dinosaurs, the resultant food scarcity impacted the entire Earth; those not affected immediately by the impact eventually died from starvation. Any mechanism that can loft massive quantities of aerosols high into the atmosphere, such as massive volcanic explosions2 or nuclear wars3, can interfere with the weather globally and change world food security. More