More stories

  • in

    Microbiota mediated plasticity promotes thermal adaptation in the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis

    Huxley, J. Evolution. The Modern Synthesis (Allen & Unwin, 1942).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 

    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).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bang, C. et al. Metaorganisms in extreme environments: do microbes play a role in organismal adaptation? Zoology 127, 1–19 (2018).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Fraune, S., Forêt, S. & Reitzel, A. M. Using Nematostella vectensis to study the interactions between genome, epigenome, and bacteria in a changing environment. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 1–8 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Kolodny, O. & Schulenburg, H. Opinion piece Microbiome-mediated plasticity directs host evolution along several distinct time scales. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 375, 20190589 (2020).Reshef, L., Koren, O., Loya, Y., Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. The coral probiotic hypothesis. Environ. Microbiol. 8, 2068–2073 (2006).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Webster, N. S. & Reusch, T. B. H. Microbial contributions to the persistence of coral reefs. ISME J. 11, 2167–2174 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Totton, A. K. The British sea anemones. Nature 135, 977–978 (1935).
    Google Scholar 
    Hand, C. & Uhlinger, K. R. The unique, widely distributed, estuarine sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis Stephenson: a review, new facts, and questions. Estuaries 17, 501–501 (1994).
    Google Scholar 
    Darling, J. A., Reitzel, A. M. & Finnerty, J. R. Regional population structure of a widely introduced estuarine invertebrate: Nematostella vectensis Stephenson in New England. Mol. Ecol. 13, 2969–2981 (2004).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Darling, J. A. et al. Rising starlet: the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. BioEssays 27, 211–221 (2005).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Hand, C. & Uhlinger, K. R. The culture, sexual and asexual reproduction, and growth of the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Biol. Bull. 182, 169–176 (1992).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Pearson, C. V. M., Rogers, A. D. & Sheader, M. The genetic structure of the rare lagoonal sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis Stephenson (Cnidaria; Anthozoa) in the United Kingdom based on RAPD analysis. Mol. Ecol. 11, 2285–2293 (2002).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Reitzel, A. M., Darling, J. A., Sullivan, J. C. & Finnerty, J. R. Global population genetic structure of the starlet anemone Nematostella vectensis: multiple introductions and implications for conservation policy. Biol. Invasions 10, 1197–1213 (2008).
    Google Scholar 
    Stefanik, D. J., Friedman, L. E. & Finnerty, J. R. Collecting, rearing, spawning and inducing regeneration of the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. Nat. Protoc. 8, 916–923 (2013).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Fritzenwanker, J. H. & Technau, U. Induction of gametogenesis in the basal cnidarian Nematostella vectensis (Anthozoa). Dev. Genes Evol. 212, 99–103 (2002).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Mortzfeld, B. M. et al. Response of bacterial colonization in Nematostella vectensis to development, environment, and biogeography. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 1764–1781 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Baldassarre, L. et al. Contribution of maternal and paternal transmission to bacterial colonization in Nematostella vectensis. Front. Microbiol. 12, 2892 (2021).
    Google Scholar 
    Domin, H. et al. Predicted bacterial interactions affect in vivo microbial colonization dynamics in Nematostella. Front. Microbiol. 9, 728 (2018).Guest, J. J. R. et al. Contrasting patterns of coral bleaching susceptibility in 2010 suggest an adaptive response to thermal stress. PLoS ONE 7, e33353–e33353 (2012).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Puisay, A., Pilon, R., Goiran, C. & Hédouin, L. Thermal resistances and acclimation potential during coral larval ontogeny in Acropora pulchra. Mar. Environ. Res. 135, 1–10 (2018).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Van Oppen, M. J. H., Oliver, J. K., Putnam, H. M. & Gates, R. D. Building coral reef resilience through assisted evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2313 (2015).
    Google Scholar 
    Torda, G. et al. Rapid adaptive responses to climate change in corals. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 627–636 (2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Yu, Xiaopeng et al. Thermal acclimation increases heat tolerance of the scleractinian coral Acropora pruinosa,. Sci. Total Environ. 733, 139319–139319 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Jury, C. P. & Toonen, R. J. Adaptive responses and local stressor mitigation drive coral resilience in warmer, more acidic oceans. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, 20190614–20190614 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Sully, S., Burkepile, D. E., Donovan, M. K., Hodgson, G. & van Woesik, R. A global analysis of coral bleaching over the past two decades. Nat. Commun. 10, 5 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Thomas, L. et al. Mechanisms of thermal tolerance in reef-building corals across a fine-grained environmental mosaic: lessons from Ofu,. Am. Samoa. Front. Mar. Sci. 4, 434 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Oliver, T. A. & Palumbi, S. R. Many corals host thermally resistant symbionts in high-temperature habitat. Coral Reefs 30, 241–250 (2011).
    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, 14 (2017).Barker, V. Exceptional thermal tolerance of coral reefs in American Samoa a review. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 4, 427 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Bourne, D., Iida, Y., Uthicke, S. & Smith-Keune, C. Changes in coral-associated microbial communities during a bleaching event. ISME J. 2, 350–63 (2008).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Carrier, T. J. & Reitzel, A. M. The hologenome across environments and the implications of a host-associated microbial repertoire. Front. Microbiol. 8, 802 (2017).Koren, O. & Rosenberg, E. Bacteria associated with mucus and tissues of the coral Oculina patagonica in summer and winter. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72, 5254–5259 (2006).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Littman, R., Willis, B. L. & Bourne, D. G. Metagenomic analysis of the coral holobiont during a natural bleaching event on the Great Barrier Reef. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 3, 651–60 (2011).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ziegler, M., Seneca, F. O., Yum, L. K., Palumbi, S. R. & Voolstra, C. R. Bacterial community dynamics are linked to patterns of coral heat tolerance. Nat. Commun. 8, 14213–14213 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Thurber, R. V. et al. Metagenomic analysis of stressed coral holobionts. Environ. Microbiol. 11, 2148–2163 (2009).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    van Oppen, M. J. H. & Blackall, L. L. Coral microbiome dynamics, functions and design in a changing world. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 557–567 (2019).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Moran, N. A. & Yun, Y. Experimental replacement of an obligate insect symbiont. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2093–2096 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ainsworth, T. D. T. et al. The coral core microbiome identifies rare bacterial taxa as ubiquitous endosymbionts. ISME J. 9, 2261–2274 (2015).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Hester, E. R., Barott, K. L., Nulton, J., Vermeij, M. J. A. & Rohwer, F. L. Stable and sporadic symbiotic communities of coral and algal holobionts. ISME J. 10, 1157–1169 (2016).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bourne, D. G., Morrow, K. M. & Webster, N. S. Insights into the coral microbiome: underpinning the health and resilience of reef ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 70, 340 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Pollock, F. J. et al. Reduced diversity and stability of coral-associated bacterial communities and suppressed immune function precedes disease onset in corals. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6, 31312497 (2019).Zilber-Rosenberg, I. & Rosenberg, E. Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: the hologenome theory of evolution. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 32, 723–735 (2008).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Elena, S. F. & Lenski, R. E. Evolution experiments with microorganisms: the dynamics and genetic bases of adaptation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4, 457–469 (2003).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Hehemann, J. H. et al. Transfer of carbohydrate-active enzymes from marine bacteria to Japanese gut microbiota. Nature 464, 908–912 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bourne, D. G. Microbiological assessment of a disease outbreak on corals from Magnetic Island (Great Barrier Reef, Australia). Coral Reefs 24, 304–312 (2005).
    Google Scholar 
    Leach, W. B., Carrier, T. J. & Reitzel, A. M. Diel patterning in the bacterial community associated with the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Ecol. Evol. 9, 9935–9947 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Pootakham, W. et al. Heat-induced shift in coral microbiome reveals several members of the Rhodobacteraceae family as indicator species for thermal stress in Porites lutea. MicrobiologyOpen 8, e935 (2019).Webster, N. Host-associated coral reef microbes respond to the cumulative pressures of ocean warming and ocean acidification. Sci. Rep. 6, 19324 (2016).Van, K. L., Ae, A., Schupp, P. & Slattery, M. The distribution of dimethylsulfoniopropionate in tropical Pacific coral reef invertebrates. Coral Reefs 25, 321–327 (2006).
    Google Scholar 
    Rypien, K. L., Ward, J. R. & Azam, F. Antagonistic interactions among coral-associated bacteria. Environ. Microbiol. 12, 28–39 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Blazejak, A., Erséus, C., Amann, R. & Dubilier, N. Coexistence of bacterial sulfide oxidizers, sulfate reducers, and spirochetes in a gutless worm (oligochaeta) from the Peru margin. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71, 1553–1561 (2005).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Dubilier, N. et al. Phylogenetic diversity of bacterial endosymbionts in the gutless marine oligochete Olavius loisae (Annelida). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 178, 271–280 (1999).
    Google Scholar 
    Rincón-Rosales, R., Lloret, L., Ponce, E. & Martínez-Romero, E. Erratum: Rhizobia with different symbiotic efficiencies nodulate Acaciella angustissima in Mexico, including Sinorhizobium chiapanecum sp. nov. which has common symbiotic genes with Sinorhizobium mexicanum (FEMS Microbiology Ecology (2009) 67 (103-117)). FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 68, 255–255 (2009).
    Google Scholar 
    Rosenberg, E. & DeLong, E. F., Stackebrandt, E., Lory, S., Thompson, F. The Prokaryotes—Prokaryotic Biology and Symbiotic Associations. (Springer, 2013).Kimura, H., Higashide, Y. & Naganuma, T. Endosymbiotic microflora of the Vestimentiferan Tubeworm (Lamellibrachia sp.) from a Bathyal Cold Seep. Mar. Biotechnol. 5, 593–603 (2003).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Melillo, A. A., Bakshi, C. S. & Melendez, J. A. Francisella tularensis antioxidants harness reactive oxygen species to restrict macrophage signaling and cytokine production. J. Biol. Chem. 285, 27553–27560 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rabadi, S. M. et al. Antioxidant defenses of Francisella tularensis modulate macrophage function and production of proinflammatory cytokines. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 5009–5021 (2016).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    McBride, M. J. in The Prokaryotes: Other Major Lineages of Bacteria and The Archaea. Vol. 9783642389542, 643–676 (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2014).Augustin, R., Fraune, S. & Bosch, T. C. G. How Hydra senses and destroys microbes. Semin. Immunol. 22, 54–58 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Augustin, R. et al. A secreted antibacterial neuropeptide shapes the microbiome of Hydra. Nat. Commun. 8, 698 (2017).Franzenburg, S. et al. Distinct antimicrobial peptide expression determines host species-specific bacterial associations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, E3730–E3738 (2013).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Fraune, S., Abe, Y. & Bosch, T. C. G. G. Disturbing epithelial homeostasis in the metazoan Hydra leads to drastic changes in associated microbiota. Environ. Microbiol. 11, 2361–9 (2009).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Brennan, J. J. et al. Sea anemone model has a single Toll-like receptor that can function in pathogen detection, NF-κB signal transduction, and development. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E10122–E10131 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Sullivan, J. C. et al. Two alleles of NF-κB in the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis are widely dispersed in nature and encode proteins with distinct activities. PLoS ONE 4, e7311 (2009).Wolenski, F. S. et al. Characterization of the core elements of the NF-B signaling pathway of the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Mol. Cell. Biol. 31, 1076–1087 (2011).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Gáliková, M., Klepsatel, P., Senti, G. & Flatt, T. Steroid hormone regulation of C. elegans and Drosophila aging and life history. Exp. Gerontol. 46, 141–147 (2011).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Taubenheim, J., Kortmann, C. & Fraune, S. Function and evolution of nuclear receptors in environmental-dependent postembryonic development. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 9, 653792 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Becker, P. B. & Workman, J. L. Nucleosome remodeling and epigenetics. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 5, a017905–a017905 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Barno, A. R., Villela, H. D. M., Aranda, M., Thomas, T. & Peixoto, R. S. Host under epigenetic control: a novel perspective on the interaction between microorganisms and corals. BioEssays 43, 2100068.Reitzel, A. M. et al. Physiological and developmental responses to temperature by the sea anemone Nematostella vectensis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 484, 115–130 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Chua, C. M., Leggat, W., Moya, A. & Baird, A. H. Temperature affects the early life history stages of corals more than near future ocean acidification. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 475, 85–92 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Ericson, J. A. et al. Combined effects of two ocean change stressors, warming and acidification, on fertilization and early development of the Antarctic echinoid Sterechinus neumayeri. Polar Biol. 35, 1027–1034 (2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Sheppard Brennand, H., Soars, N., Dworjanyn, S. A., Davis, A. R. & Byrne, M. Impact of ocean warming and ocean acidification on larval development and calcification in the sea urchin Tripneustes gratilla. PLoS ONE 5, e11372 (2010).Bernal, M. A. et al. Phenotypic and molecular consequences of stepwise temperature increase across generations in a coral reef fish. Mol. Ecol. 27, 4516–4528 (2018).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Clark, M. S. et al. Molecular mechanisms underpinning transgenerational plasticity in the green sea urchin Psammechinus miliaris. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–12 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Donelson, J. et al. Rapid transgenerational acclimation of a tropical reef fish to climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 30–32 (2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Miller, G. M., Watson, S. A., Donelson, J. M., McCormick, M. I. & Munday, P. L. Parental environment mediates impacts of increased carbon dioxide on a coral reef fish. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 858–861 (2012).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Munday, P. L. Transgenerational acclimation of fishes to climate change and ocean acidification. F1000Prime Rep. 6, 99–99 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ryu, T. et al. An epigenetic signature for within-generational plasticity of a reef fish to ocean warming. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 284 (2020).Veilleux, H. et al. Molecular processes of transgenerational acclimation to a warming ocean. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 1074–1078 (2015).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhao, C. et al. Transgenerational effects of ocean warming on the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus intermedius. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 151, 212–219 (2018).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Eirin-Lopez, J. M. & Putnam, H. M. Marine Environmental Epigenetics. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 11, 335–368 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Fallet, M., Luquet, E., David, P. & Cosseau, C. Epigenetic inheritance and intergenerational effects in mollusks. Gene 729, 144166–144166 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Putnam, H. M. & Gates, R. D. Preconditioning in the reef-building coral Pocillopora damicornis and the potential for trans-generational acclimatization in coral larvae under future climate change conditions. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 2365–2372 (2015).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Daxinger, L. & Whitelaw, E. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: more questions than answers. Genome Res. 20, 1623–1628 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ptashne, M. Epigenetics: core misconcept. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 7101–7103 (2013).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rivera, H. E., Chen, C.-Y., Gibson, M. C. & Tarrant, A. M. Plasticity in parental effects confers rapid larval thermal tolerance in the estuarine anemone Nematostella vectensis. J. Exp. Biol. 224, jeb236745 (2021).Hirose, E. & Fukuda, T. Vertical transmission of photosymbionts in the colonial ascidian Didemnum molle: The larval tunic prevents symbionts from attaching to the anterior part of larvae. Zool. Sci. 23, 669–674 (2006).
    Google Scholar 
    Padilla-Gamiño, J. L., Pochon, X., Bird, C., Concepcion, G. T. & Gates, R. D. From parent to gamete: vertical transmission of Symbiodinium (Dinophyceae) ITS2 sequence assemblages in the reef building coral Montipora capitata. PLoS ONE 7, e38440–e38440 (2012).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Sharp, K. H., Eam, B., John Faulkner, D. & Haygood, M. G. Vertical transmission of diverse microbes in the tropical sponge Corticium sp. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 622–629 (2007).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Sipkema, D. et al. Similar sponge-associated bacteria can be acquired via both vertical and horizontal transmission. Environ. Microbiol. 17, 3807–3821 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Apprill, A., Marlow, H. Q., Martindale, M. Q. & Rappé, M. S. The onset of microbial associations in the coral Pocillopora meandrina. ISME J. 3, 685–699 (2009).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Sharp, K. H., Distel, D. & Paul, V. J. Diversity and dynamics of bacterial communities in early life stages of the Caribbean coral Porites astreoides. ISME J. 6, 790–801 (2012).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Lesser, M. P., Stat, M. & Gates, R. D. The endosymbiotic dinoflagellates (Symbiodinium sp.) of corals are parasites and mutualists. Coral Reefs 32, 603–611 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Ceh, J., Raina, J. B., Soo, R. M., van Keulen, M. & Bourne, D. G. Coral-bacterial communities before and after a coral mass spawning event on Ningaloo Reef. PLoS ONE 7, e36920 (2012).Ricardo, G. F., Jones, R. J., Negri, A. P. & Stocker, R. That sinking feeling: suspended sediments can prevent the ascent of coral egg bundles. Sci. Rep. 6, 21567 (2016).Leite, D. C. A. D. et al. Broadcast spawning coral Mussismilia Hispida can vertically transfer its associated bacterial core. Front. Microbiol. 8, 176–176 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Epstein, H. E. et al. Microbiome engineering: enhancing climate resilience in corals. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17, 108 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Peixoto, R. S. et al. Beneficial microorganisms for corals (BMC) Proposed mechanisms for coral health and resilience. Front. Microbiol. 8, 341 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Chakravarti, L. J., Beltran, V. H. & van Oppen, M. J. H. Rapid thermal adaptation in photosymbionts of reef-building corals. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 4675–4688 (2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Damjanovic, K., Blackall, L. L., Webster, N. S. & van Oppen, M. J. H. H. The contribution of microbial biotechnology to mitigating coral reef degradation. Microb. Biotechnol. 10, 1236–1243 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Damjanovic, K., Van Oppen, M. J. H., Menéndez, P. & Blackall, L. L. Experimental inoculation of coral recruits with marine bacteria indicates scope for microbiome manipulation in Acropora tenuis and Platygyra daedalea. Front. Microbiol. 10, 1702 (2019).Rosado, P. M. et al. Marine probiotics: increasing coral resistance to bleaching through microbiome manipulation. ISME J. 13, 921–936 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Fraune, S. et al. Bacteria-bacteria interactions within the microbiota of the ancestral metazoan Hydra contribute to fungal resistance. ISME J. 9, 1543–1556 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Fadrosh, D. W. et al. An improved dual-indexing approach for multiplexed 16 S rRNA gene sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform. Microbiome 2, 6 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rausch, P. et al. Analysis of factors contributing to variation in the C57BL/6 J fecal microbiota across German animal facilities. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 306, 343–355 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Faith, J. J. et al. The long-term stability of the human gut microbiota. Science 341, 1237439–1237439 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Segata, N. et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 12, R60–R60 (2011).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Andrews, S. FastQC: A Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data [Online]. Available online at: http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/ (2010).Bolger, A. M., Lohse, M. & Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30, 2114–2120 (2014).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Kim, D., Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods 12, 357–360 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Pertea, M. et al. StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA-seq reads. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 290–295 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Shao, M. & Kingsford, C. accurate assembly of transcripts through phase-preserving graph decomposition. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 1167–1169 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Niknafs, Y. S., Pandian, B., Iyer, H. K., Chinnaiyan, A. M. & Iyer, M. K. TACO produces robust multisample transcriptome assemblies from RNA-seq. Nat. Methods 14, 68–70 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Pertea, M. & Pertea, G. GFF Utilities: GffRead and GffCompare. F1000Research 9, 304–304 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Manni, M., Berkeley, M. R., Seppey, M., Simão, F. A. & Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO update: novel and streamlined workflows along with broader and deeper phylogenetic coverage for scoring of eukaryotic, prokaryotic, and viral genomes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 4647–4654 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. & Shi, W. FeatureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30, 923–930 (2014).CAS 
    PubMed 

    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, 550–550 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Law, C. W., Chen, Y., Shi, W. & Smyth, G. K. Voom: Precision weights unlock linear model analysis tools for RNA-seq read counts. Genome Biol. 15, R29–R29 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Found: hideout of some of the last primordial pigeons

    RESEARCH HIGHLIGHT
    01 July 2022

    Rock doves on some Scottish islands show almost no sign of having interbred with domestic pigeons.

    The relatively long, slender bill of this rock dove from the Outer Hebridean islands of Scotland are characteristic of feral pigeons’ ancestors. Credit: W. J. Smith et al./iScience

    .readcube-buybox { display: none !important;}
    Charles Darwin developed his theory of natural selection in part by studying a form of artificial selection: the nineteenth-century rage for pigeon breeding, which created a wealth of fantastical varieties of pigeon (Columba livia). So widespread was pigeon fancying that it seeded the world with escaped domestic birds and their feral descendants, which then hybridized with their wild ancestors, the rock doves.

    Access options

    /* style specs start */
    style{display:none!important}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 *{align-content:stretch;align-items:stretch;align-self:auto;animation-delay:0s;animation-direction:normal;animation-duration:0s;animation-fill-mode:none;animation-iteration-count:1;animation-name:none;animation-play-state:running;animation-timing-function:ease;azimuth:center;backface-visibility:visible;background-attachment:scroll;background-blend-mode:normal;background-clip:borderBox;background-color:transparent;background-image:none;background-origin:paddingBox;background-position:0 0;background-repeat:repeat;background-size:auto auto;block-size:auto;border-block-end-color:currentcolor;border-block-end-style:none;border-block-end-width:medium;border-block-start-color:currentcolor;border-block-start-style:none;border-block-start-width:medium;border-bottom-color:currentcolor;border-bottom-left-radius:0;border-bottom-right-radius:0;border-bottom-style:none;border-bottom-width:medium;border-collapse:separate;border-image-outset:0s;border-image-repeat:stretch;border-image-slice:100%;border-image-source:none;border-image-width:1;border-inline-end-color:currentcolor;border-inline-end-style:none;border-inline-end-width:medium;border-inline-start-color:currentcolor;border-inline-start-style:none;border-inline-start-width:medium;border-left-color:currentcolor;border-left-style:none;border-left-width:medium;border-right-color:currentcolor;border-right-style:none;border-right-width:medium;border-spacing:0;border-top-color:currentcolor;border-top-left-radius:0;border-top-right-radius:0;border-top-style:none;border-top-width:medium;bottom:auto;box-decoration-break:slice;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;break-after:auto;break-before:auto;break-inside:auto;caption-side:top;caret-color:auto;clear:none;clip:auto;clip-path:none;color:initial;column-count:auto;column-fill:balance;column-gap:normal;column-rule-color:currentcolor;column-rule-style:none;column-rule-width:medium;column-span:none;column-width:auto;content:normal;counter-increment:none;counter-reset:none;cursor:auto;display:inline;empty-cells:show;filter:none;flex-basis:auto;flex-direction:row;flex-grow:0;flex-shrink:1;flex-wrap:nowrap;float:none;font-family:initial;font-feature-settings:normal;font-kerning:auto;font-language-override:normal;font-size:medium;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal;font-style:normal;font-synthesis:weight style;font-variant:normal;font-variant-alternates:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-position:normal;font-weight:400;grid-auto-columns:auto;grid-auto-flow:row;grid-auto-rows:auto;grid-column-end:auto;grid-column-gap:0;grid-column-start:auto;grid-row-end:auto;grid-row-gap:0;grid-row-start:auto;grid-template-areas:none;grid-template-columns:none;grid-template-rows:none;height:auto;hyphens:manual;image-orientation:0deg;image-rendering:auto;image-resolution:1dppx;ime-mode:auto;inline-size:auto;isolation:auto;justify-content:flexStart;left:auto;letter-spacing:normal;line-break:auto;line-height:normal;list-style-image:none;list-style-position:outside;list-style-type:disc;margin-block-end:0;margin-block-start:0;margin-bottom:0;margin-inline-end:0;margin-inline-start:0;margin-left:0;margin-right:0;margin-top:0;mask-clip:borderBox;mask-composite:add;mask-image:none;mask-mode:matchSource;mask-origin:borderBox;mask-position:0 0;mask-repeat:repeat;mask-size:auto;mask-type:luminance;max-height:none;max-width:none;min-block-size:0;min-height:0;min-inline-size:0;min-width:0;mix-blend-mode:normal;object-fit:fill;object-position:50% 50%;offset-block-end:auto;offset-block-start:auto;offset-inline-end:auto;offset-inline-start:auto;opacity:1;order:0;orphans:2;outline-color:initial;outline-offset:0;outline-style:none;outline-width:medium;overflow:visible;overflow-wrap:normal;overflow-x:visible;overflow-y:visible;padding-block-end:0;padding-block-start:0;padding-bottom:0;padding-inline-end:0;padding-inline-start:0;padding-left:0;padding-right:0;padding-top:0;page-break-after:auto;page-break-before:auto;page-break-inside:auto;perspective:none;perspective-origin:50% 50%;pointer-events:auto;position:static;quotes:initial;resize:none;right:auto;ruby-align:spaceAround;ruby-merge:separate;ruby-position:over;scroll-behavior:auto;scroll-snap-coordinate:none;scroll-snap-destination:0 0;scroll-snap-points-x:none;scroll-snap-points-y:none;scroll-snap-type:none;shape-image-threshold:0;shape-margin:0;shape-outside:none;tab-size:8;table-layout:auto;text-align:initial;text-align-last:auto;text-combine-upright:none;text-decoration-color:currentcolor;text-decoration-line:none;text-decoration-style:solid;text-emphasis-color:currentcolor;text-emphasis-position:over right;text-emphasis-style:none;text-indent:0;text-justify:auto;text-orientation:mixed;text-overflow:clip;text-rendering:auto;text-shadow:none;text-transform:none;text-underline-position:auto;top:auto;touch-action:auto;transform:none;transform-box:borderBox;transform-origin:50% 50%0;transform-style:flat;transition-delay:0s;transition-duration:0s;transition-property:all;transition-timing-function:ease;vertical-align:baseline;visibility:visible;white-space:normal;widows:2;width:auto;will-change:auto;word-break:normal;word-spacing:normal;word-wrap:normal;writing-mode:horizontalTb;z-index:auto;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;-ms-appearance:none;appearance:none;margin:0}.LiveAreaSection-193358632{width:100%}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .login-option-buybox{display:block;width:100%;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-access-options{display:block;font-weight:700;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child)::before{transform:translateY(-50%);content:””;height:1rem;position:absolute;top:50%;left:0;border-left:2px solid #999}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child){padding-left:10px}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li{display:inline-block;position:relative;vertical-align:middle;padding-right:10px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;flex:1;flex-direction:row-reverse;margin:-30px -15px 0}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .box-inner{width:100%;height:100%}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:1;flex-basis:255px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .subscribe-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:4;flex-basis:300px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .subscribe-buybox-nature-plus{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:4;flex-basis:100%;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:29%;margin-left:29%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .asia-link{color:#069;cursor:pointer;text-decoration:none;font-size:1.05em;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:1.05em6}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:10%;margin-left:10%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:30%;margin-left:30%;font-size:14px;color:#222;opacity:.8px;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .usps-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:30%;margin-left:30%;font-size:14px;color:#222;opacity:.8px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-buybox{display:block;font-size:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;padding-top:30px;text-align:center}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-from{font-size:14px;padding-right:10px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .issue-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;text-align:center;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:19px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .no-price-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;line-height:18px;text-align:center;padding-right:10%;padding-left:10%;padding-bottom:20px;padding-top:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .vat-buybox{display:block;margin-top:5px;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:11px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;padding-bottom:15px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:17px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container{display:flex;padding-right:20px;padding-left:20px;justify-content:center}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container >*{flex:1px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container >a:hover,.Button-505204839:hover,.Button-1078489254:hover,.Button-2808614501:hover{text-decoration:none}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-button{background:#fff;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-asia{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;margin-top:75px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-label-asia,.ButtonLabel-3869432492,.ButtonLabel-3296148077,.ButtonLabel-1566022830{display:block;color:#fff;font-size:17px;line-height:20px;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;cursor:pointer}.Button-505204839,.Button-1078489254,.Button-2808614501{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;max-width:320px;margin-top:10px}.Button-505204839 .readcube-label,.Button-1078489254 .readcube-label,.Button-2808614501 .readcube-label{color:#069}
    /* style specs end */Subscribe to Nature+Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals$29.99monthlySubscribe to JournalGet full journal access for 1 year$199.00only $3.90 per issueAll prices are NET prices.VAT will be added later in the checkout.Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.Buy articleGet time limited or full article access on ReadCube.$32.00All prices are NET prices.

    Additional access options:

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01780-2

    References

    Subjects

    Conservation biology

    Subjects

    Conservation biology More

  • in

    Leaf bacterial microbiota response to flooding is controlled by plant phenology in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

    Hassani, M. A., Durán, P. & Hacquard, S. Microbial interactions within the plant holobiont. Microbiome 6(1), 58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0445-0 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Sapp, M., Ploch, S., Fiore-Donno, A. M., Bonkowski, M. & Rose, L. E. Protists are an integral part of the Arabidopsis thaliana microbiome. Environ Microbiol 20(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13941 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Herrera Paredes, S. & Lebeis, S. L. Giving back to the community: Microbial mechanisms of plant–soil interactions. Funct. Ecol. 30(7), 1043–1052. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12684 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Nath, A. & Sundaram, S. Microbiome community interactions with social forestry and agroforestry. In Microbial services in restoration ecology (eds Singh, J. S. & Vimal, S. R.) 71–82 (Elsevier, 2020).Chapter 

    Google Scholar 
    Rodriguez, P. A. et al. Systems biology of plant–microbiome interactions. Mol. Plant 12(6), 804–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2019.05.006 (2019).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Guttman, D. S., McHardy, A. C. & Schulze-Lefert, P. Microbial genome-enabled insights into plant–microorganism interactions. Nat. Rev. Genet. 15(12), 797–813. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3748 (2014).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Lewin, S., Francioli, D., Ulrich, A. & Kolb, S. Crop host signatures reflected by co-association patterns of keystone bacteria in the rhizosphere microbiota. Environ. Microb. 16(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-021-00387-w (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Trivedi, P., Leach, J. E., Tringe, S. G., Sa, T. & Singh, B. K. Plant–microbiome interactions: From community assembly to plant health. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18(11), 607–621. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-020-0412-1 (2020).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bardelli, T. et al. Effects of slope exposure on soil physico-chemical and microbiological properties along an altitudinal climosequence in the Italian Alps. Sci. Total Environ. 575, 1041–1055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.176 (2017).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Francioli, D., van Ruijven, J., Bakker, L. & Mommer, L. Drivers of total and pathogenic soil-borne fungal communities in grassland plant species. Fungal Ecol. 48, 100987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2020.100987 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hamonts, K. et al. Field study reveals core plant microbiota and relative importance of their drivers. Environ. Microbiol. 20(1), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.14031 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Trivedi, P., Batista, B. D., Bazany, K. E. & Singh, B. K. Plant–microbiome interactions under a changing world: Responses, consequences and perspectives. New Phytol. 234(6), 1951–1959. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.18016 (2022).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Hawkes, C. V. et al. Extension of plant phenotypes by the foliar microbiome. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 72(1), 823–846. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-080620-114342 (2021).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Hunter, P. The revival of the extended phenotype: After more than 30 years, Dawkins’ extended phenotype hypothesis is enriching evolutionary biology and inspiring potential applications. EMBO Rep. 19(7), e46477. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201846477 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Thapa, S. & Prasanna, R. Prospecting the characteristics and significance of the phyllosphere microbiome. Ann. Microbiol. 68(5), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-018-1331-5 (2018).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Vacher, C. et al. The phyllosphere: Microbial jungle at the plant-climate interface. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 47(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-121415-032238 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Copeland, J. K., Yuan, L., Layeghifard, M., Wang, P. W. & Guttman, D. S. Seasonal community succession of the phyllosphere microbiome. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 28(3), 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1094/mpmi-10-14-0331-fi (2015).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Pérez-Bueno, M. L., Pineda, M., Díaz-Casado, E. & Barón, M. Spatial and temporal dynamics of primary and secondary metabolism in Phaseolus vulgaris challenged by Pseudomonas syringae. Physiol. Plant. 153(1), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12237 (2015).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bodenhausen, N., Bortfeld-Miller, M., Ackermann, M. & Vorholt, J. A. A Synthetic community approach reveals plant genotypes affecting the phyllosphere microbiota. PLoS Genet. 10(4), e1004283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1004283 (2014).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Giauque, H. & Hawkes, C. V. Climate affects symbiotic fungal endophyte diversity and performance. Am. J. Bot. 100(7), 1435–1444. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1200568 (2013).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Rodriguez, R. J. et al. Stress tolerance in plants via habitat-adapted symbiosis. ISME J. 2(4), 404–416. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2007.106 (2008).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Trivedi, P., Mattupalli, C., Eversole, K. & Leach, J. E. Enabling sustainable agriculture through understanding and enhancement of microbiomes. New Phytol. 230(6), 2129–2147. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17319 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Delmotte, N. et al. Community proteogenomics reveals insights into the physiology of phyllosphere bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106(38), 16428–16433. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905240106%JProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences (2009).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Vorholt, J. A. Microbial life in the phyllosphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10(12), 828–840. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2910 (2012).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Kembel, S. W. et al. Relationships between phyllosphere bacterial communities and plant functional traits in a neotropical forest. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111(38), 13715–13720. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1216057111 (2014).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Whipps, J. M., Hand, P., Pink, D. & Bending, G. D. Phyllosphere microbiology with special reference to diversity and plant genotype. J. Appl. Microbiol. 105(6), 1744–1755. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2008.03906.x (2008).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bai, Y. et al. Functional overlap of the Arabidopsis leaf and root microbiota. Nature 528(7582), 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16192 (2015).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Laforest-Lapointe, I., Messier, C. & Kembel, S. W. Host species identity, site and time drive temperate tree phyllosphere bacterial community structure. Microbiome 4(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-016-0174-1 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Sapkota, R., Knorr, K., Jørgensen, L. N., O’Hanlon, K. A. & Nicolaisen, M. Host genotype is an important determinant of the cereal phyllosphere mycobiome. New Phytol. 207(4), 1134–1144. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13418 (2015).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Grady, K. L., Sorensen, J. W., Stopnisek, N., Guittar, J. & Shade, A. Assembly and seasonality of core phyllosphere microbiota on perennial biofuel crops. Nat. Commun. 10(1), 4135. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11974-4 (2019).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Latz, M. A. C. et al. Succession of the fungal endophytic microbiome of wheat is dependent on tissue-specific interactions between host genotype and environment. Sci. Total Environ. 759, 143804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143804 (2021).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Rastogi, G. et al. Leaf microbiota in an agroecosystem: Spatiotemporal variation in bacterial community composition on field-grown lettuce. ISME J. 6(10), 1812–1822. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.32 (2012).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Bao, L. et al. Seasonal variation of epiphytic bacteria in the phyllosphere of Gingko biloba, Pinus bungeana and Sabina chinensis. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 96, 3. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiaa017 (2020).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ding, T. & Melcher, U. Influences of plant species, season and location on leaf endophytic bacterial communities of non-cultivated plants. PLoS ONE 11(3), e0150895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150895 (2016).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Perreault, R. & Laforest-Lapointe, I. Plant-microbe interactions in the phyllosphere: Facing challenges of the anthropocene. ISME J. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-021-01109-3 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Redford, A. J. & Fierer, N. Bacterial succession on the leaf surface: A novel system for studying successional dynamics. Microb. Ecol. 58(1), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-009-9495-y (2009).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Campisano, A. et al. Temperature drives the assembly of endophytic communities’ seasonal succession. Environ. Microbiol. 19(8), 3353–3364. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13843 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ren, G. et al. Response of soil, leaf endosphere and phyllosphere bacterial communities to elevated CO2 and soil temperature in a rice paddy. Plant Soil 392(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2503-8 (2015).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Konapala, G., Mishra, A. K., Wada, Y. & Mann, M. E. Climate change will affect global water availability through compounding changes in seasonal precipitation and evaporation. Nat. Commun. 11(1), 3044. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16757-w (2020).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Parmesan, C. & Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421(6918), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01286 (2003).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Donn, S., Kirkegaard, J. A., Perera, G., Richardson, A. E. & Watt, M. Evolution of bacterial communities in the wheat crop rhizosphere. Environ. Microbiol. 17(3), 610–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12452 (2015).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Francioli, D., Schulz, E., Buscot, F. & Reitz, T. Dynamics of soil bacterial communities over a vegetation season relate to both soil nutrient status and plant growth phenology. Microb. Ecol. 75(1), 216–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-017-1012-0 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Breitkreuz, C., Buscot, F., Tarkka, M. & Reitz, T. Shifts between and among populations of wheat rhizosphere Pseudomonas, Streptomyces and Phyllobacterium suggest consistent phosphate mobilization at different wheat growth stages under abiotic stress. Front. Microbiol. 10, 3109–3109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.03109 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Na, X. et al. Plant stage, not drought stress, determines the effect of cultivars on bacterial community diversity in the rhizosphere of broomcorn millet (Panicum miliaceum L.). Front. Microbiol. 10, 828. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.00828 (2019).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ad-hoc-AG-Boden. Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung 438 (Schweizerbart, 2005).
    Google Scholar 
    Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T. & Konzak, C. F. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res. 14(6), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.1974.tb01084.x (1974).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Cannell, R. Q., Belford, R. K., Gales, K., Dennis, C. W. & Prew, R. D. Effects of waterlogging at different stages of development on the growth and yield of winter wheat. J. Sci. Food Agric. 31(2), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740310203 (1980).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Drew, M. C. Soil aeration and plant root metabolism. Soil Sci. 154(4), 259–268 (1992).ADS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Meyer, W. et al. Effect of irrigation on soil oxygen status and root and shoot growth of wheat in a clay soil. Aust. J. Agric. Res. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9850171 (1985).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Riehm, H. Bestimmung der laktatlöslichen Phosphorsäure in karbonathaltigen Böden. Phosphorsäure 1, 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.19420260107 (1943).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Murphy, J., & Riley, J. P. A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Anal. Chim. Acta 27, 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-2670(00)88444-5 (1962).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Francioli, D., Lentendu, G., Lewin, S. & Kolb, S. DNA metabarcoding for the characterization of terrestrial microbiota—pitfalls and solutions. Microorganisms 9(2), 361 (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chelius, M. K. & Triplett, E. W. The diversity of archaea and bacteria in association with the roots of Zea mays L. Microb. Ecol. 41(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002480000087 (2001).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Redford, A. J., Bowers, R. M., Knight, R., Linhart, Y. & Fierer, N. The ecology of the phyllosphere: Geographic and phylogenetic variability in the distribution of bacteria on tree leaves. Environ. Microbiol. 12(11), 2885–2893. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2010.02258.x (2010).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 17, 1. https://doi.org/10.14806/ej.17.1.200 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods 13(7), 581. https://doi.org/10.1038/Nmeth.3869 (2016).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Francioli, D. et al. Flooding causes dramatic compositional shifts and depletion of putative beneficial bacteria on the spring wheat microbiota. Front. Microbiol. 12, 3371. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.773116 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Anderson, M. J. Permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA). In Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online 1–15 (Wiley, 2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Dray, S., Legendre, P. & Blanchet, G. Packfor: Forward Selection with Permutation. R package version 0.0‐8/r100 ed. (2011).Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.5-2. ed. (2018).Segata, N. et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 12(6), R60. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-6-r60 (2011).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Lahti, L. & Sudarshan, S. Tools for Microbiome Analysis in R. Version 2.1.28. ed. (2020).R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Chen, S. et al. Root-associated microbiomes of wheat under the combined effect of plant development and nitrogen fertilization. Microbiome 7(1), 136. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-019-0750-2 (2019).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Wang, J. et al. Wheat and rice growth stages and fertilization regimes alter soil bacterial community structure, but not diversity. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1207. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01207 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Comby, M., Lacoste, S., Baillieul, F., Profizi, C. & Dupont, J. Spatial and temporal variation of cultivable communities of co-occurring endophytes and pathogens in wheat. Front. Microbiol. 7, 403. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.00403 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Robinson, R. J. et al. Endophytic bacterial community composition in wheat (Triticum aestivum) is determined by plant tissue type, developmental stage and soil nutrient availability. Plant Soil 405(1), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2495-4 (2016).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Sapkota, R., Jørgensen, L. N. & Nicolaisen, M. Spatiotemporal variation and networks in the mycobiome of the wheat canopy. Front. Plant Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01357 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Chaudhry, V. et al. Shaping the leaf microbiota: Plant–microbe–microbe interactions. J. Exp. Bot. 72(1), 36–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eraa417 (2020).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Liu, Z., Cheng, R., Xiao, W., Guo, Q. & Wang, N. Effect of off-season flooding on growth, photosynthesis, carbohydrate partitioning, and nutrient uptake in Distylium chinense. PLoS ONE 9(9), e107636. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107636 (2014).ADS 
    CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rosa, M. et al. Soluble sugars. Plant Signal. Behav. 4(5), 388–393. https://doi.org/10.4161/psb.4.5.8294 (2009).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, H., Qualls, R. G. & Blank, R. R. Effect of soil flooding on photosynthesis, carbohydrate partitioning and nutrient uptake in the invasive exotic Lepidium latifolium. Aquat. Bot. 82(4), 250–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2005.02.013 (2005).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bacanamwo, M. & Purcell, L. C. Soybean dry matter and N accumulation responses to flooding stress, N sources and hypoxia. J. Exp. Bot. 50(334), 689–696. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/50.334.689 (1999).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Boem, F. H. G., Lavado, R. S. & Porcelli, C. A. Note on the effects of winter and spring waterlogging on growth, chemical composition and yield of rapeseed. Field Crop. Res. 47(2), 175–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(96)00025-1 (1996).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kozlowski, T. T. Plant responses to flooding of soil. Bioscience 34(3), 162–167. https://doi.org/10.2307/1309751 (1984).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Topa, M. A. & Cheeseman, J. M. 32P uptake and transport to shoots in Pinuus serotina seedlings under aerobic and hypoxic growth conditions. Physiol. Plant. 87(2), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1993.tb00134.x (1993).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Colmer, T. D. & Flowers, T. J. Flooding tolerance in halophytes. New Phytol. 179(4), 964–974. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02483.x (2008).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Gibbs, J. & Greenway, H. Mechanisms of anoxia tolerance in plants. I. Growth, survival and anaerobic catabolism. Funct. Plant Biol. 30(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1071/PP98095 (2003).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Board, J. E. Waterlogging effects on plant nutrient concentrations in soybean. J. Plant Nutr. 31(5), 828–838. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904160802043122 (2008).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smethurst, C. F., Garnett, T. & Shabala, S. Nutritional and chlorophyll fluorescence responses of lucerne (Medicago sativa) to waterlogging and subsequent recovery. Plant Soil 270(1), 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-004-1082-x (2005).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Thomson, C. J., Atwell, B. J. & Greenway, H. Response of wheat seedlings to low O2 concentrations in nutrient solution: II. K+/Na+ selectivity of root tissues. J. Exp. Bot. 40(9), 993–999. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/40.9.993 (1989).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Barrett-Lennard, E. G. The interaction between waterlogging and salinity in higher plants: Causes, consequences and implications. Plant Soil 253(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024574622669 (2003).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Granzow, S. et al. The effects of cropping regimes on fungal and bacterial communities of wheat and faba bean in a greenhouse pot experiment differ between plant species and compartment. Front. Microbiol. 8, 902. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00902 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Gdanetz, K. & Trail, F. The wheat microbiome under four management strategies, and potential for endophytes in disease protection. Phytobiomes J. 1(3), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1094/PBIOMES-05-17-0023-R (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Shade, A., McManus, P. S., Handelsman, J. & Zhou, J. Unexpected diversity during community succession in the apple flower microbiome. MBio 4(2), e00602-00612. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00602-12 (2013).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Guo, J. et al. Seed-borne, endospheric and rhizospheric core microbiota as predictors of plant functional traits across rice cultivars are dominated by deterministic processes. New. Phytol. 230(5), 2047–2060. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17297 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Allwood, J. W. et al. Profiling of spatial metabolite distributions in wheat leaves under normal and nitrate limiting conditions. Phytochemistry 115, 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2015.01.007 (2015).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Li, Y. et al. Plant phenotypic traits eventually shape its microbiota: A common garden test. Front. Microbiol. 9, 2479. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02479 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Xiong, C. et al. Plant developmental stage drives the differentiation in ecological role of the maize microbiome. Microbiome 9(1), 171. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-021-01118-6 (2021).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Schlechter, R. O., Miebach, M. & Remus-Emsermann, M. N. P. Driving factors of epiphytic bacterial communities: A review. J. Adv. Res. 19, 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.003 (2019).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Mathur, P., Mehtani, P. & Sharma, C. (2021). Leaf Endophytes and Their Bioactive Compounds. In Symbiotic Soil Microorganisms: Biology and Applications, (eds Shrivastava, N. et al.) 147–159 (Cham, Springer International Publishing, 2021).Aquino, J., Junior, F. L. A., Figueiredo, M., De Alcântara Neto, F. & Araujo, A. Plant growth-promoting endophytic bacteria on maize and sorghum1. Pesq. Agrop. Trop. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632019v4956241 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gamalero, E. et al. Screening of bacterial endophytes able to promote plant growth and increase salinity tolerance. Appl. Sci. 10(17), 5767 (2020).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Borah, A. & Thakur, D. Phylogenetic and functional characterization of culturable endophytic actinobacteria associated with Camellia spp. for growth promotion in commercial tea cultivars. Front. Microbiol. 11, 318. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00318 (2020).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Haidar, B. et al. Population diversity of bacterial endophytes from jute (Corchorus olitorius) and evaluation of their potential role as bioinoculants. Microbiol. Res. 208, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2018.01.008 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bind, M. & Nema, S. Isolation and molecular characterization of endophytic bacteria from pigeon pea along with antimicrobial evaluation against Fusarium udum. J. Appl. Microbiol. Open Access 5, 163 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    de Almeida Lopes, K. B. et al. Screening of bacterial endophytes as potential biocontrol agents against soybean diseases. J. Appl. Microbiol. 125(5), 1466–1481. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14041 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Müller, T. & Behrendt, U. Exploiting the biocontrol potential of plant-associated pseudomonads: A step towards pesticide-free agriculture?. Biol. Control 155, 104538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2021.104538 (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Safin, R. I. et al. Features of seeds microbiome for spring wheat varieties from different regions of Eurasia. In: International Scientific and Practical Conference “AgroSMART: Smart Solutions for Agriculture”, 766–770 (Atlantis Press).Adler, P. B. & Drake, J. Environmental variation, stochastic extinction, and competitive coexistence. Am. Nat. 172(5), E186–E195. https://doi.org/10.1086/591678 (2008).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gilbert, B. & Levine, J. M. Ecological drift and the distribution of species diversity. Proc. R. Soc. B 284(1855), 20170507. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0507 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Fitzpatrick, C. R. et al. Assembly and ecological function of the root microbiome across angiosperm plant species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115(6), E1157–E1165. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717617115 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Freschet, G. T. et al. Root traits as drivers of plant and ecosystem functioning: Current understanding, pitfalls and future research needs. New Phytol. 232(3), 1123–1158. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17072 (2021).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Kembel, S. W. & Mueller, R. C. Plant traits and taxonomy drive host associations in tropical phyllosphere fungal communities. Botany 92(4), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2013-0194 (2014).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Leff, J. W. et al. Predicting the structure of soil communities from plant community taxonomy, phylogeny, and traits. ISME J. 12(7), 1794–1805. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-018-0089-x (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ulbrich, T. C., Friesen, M. L., Roley, S. S., Tiemann, L. K. & Evans, S. E. Intraspecific variability in root traits and edaphic conditions influence soil microbiomes across 12 switchgrass cultivars. Phytobiom. J. 5(1), 108–120. https://doi.org/10.1094/pbiomes-12-19-0069-fi (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Arduini, I., Orlandi, C., Pampana, S. & Masoni, A. Waterlogging at tillering affects spike and spikelet formation in wheat. Crop Pasture Sci. 67(7), 703–711. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP15417 (2016).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ding, J. et al. Effects of waterlogging on grain yield and associated traits of historic wheat cultivars in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, China. Field Crops Res. 246, 107695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107695 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Malik, I., Colmer, T., Lambers, H. & Schortemeyer, M. Changes in physiological and morphological traits of roots and shoots of wheat in response to different depths of waterlogging. Austral. J. Plant Physiol. 28, 1121–1131. https://doi.org/10.1071/PP01089 (2001).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pampana, S., Masoni, A. & Arduini, I. Grain yield of durum wheat as affected by waterlogging at tillering. Cereal Res. Commun. 44(4), 706–716. https://doi.org/10.1556/0806.44.2016.026 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Xu, L. et al. Drought delays development of the sorghum root microbiome and enriches for monoderm bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115(18), E4284–E4293. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1717308115%JProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciences (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Angel, R. et al. The root-associated microbial community of the world’s highest growing vascular plants. Microb. Ecol. 72(2), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-016-0779-8 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Edwards, J. A. et al. Compositional shifts in root-associated bacterial and archaeal microbiota track the plant life cycle in field-grown rice. PLoS Biol. 16(2), e2003862. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003862 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Kuźniar, A. et al. Culture-independent analysis of an endophytic core microbiome in two species of wheat: Triticum aestivum L. (cv. ‘Hondia’) and the first report of microbiota in Triticum spelta L. (cv. ‘Rokosz’). Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 43(1), 126025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2019.126025 (2020).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Soldan, R. et al. Bacterial endophytes of mangrove propagules elicit early establishment of the natural host and promote growth of cereal crops under salt stress. Microbiol. Res. 223–225, 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2019.03.008 (2019).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Truyens, S., Weyens, N., Cuypers, A. & Vangronsveld, J. Bacterial seed endophytes: Genera, vertical transmission and interaction with plants. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 7(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-2229.12181 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chimwamurombe, P. M., Grönemeyer, J. L. & Reinhold-Hurek, B. Isolation and characterization of culturable seed-associated bacterial endophytes from gnotobiotically grown Marama bean seedlings. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 92, 6. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiw083 (2016).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Eid, A. M. et al. Harnessing bacterial endophytes for promotion of plant growth and biotechnological applications: An overview. Plants 10(5), 935 (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mareque, C. et al. The endophytic bacterial microbiota associated with sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) is modulated by the application of chemical N fertilizer to the field. Int. J. Genom. 2018, 7403670. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7403670 (2018).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Francioli, D. et al. Mineral vs organic amendments: Microbial community structure, activity and abundance of agriculturally relevant microbes are driven by long-term fertilization strategies. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1446. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01446 (2016).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Schrey, S. D. & Tarkka, M. T. Friends and foes: Streptomycetes as modulators of plant disease and symbiosis. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 94(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-008-9241-3 (2008).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Patel, J. K., Madaan, S. & Archana, G. Antibiotic producing endophytic Streptomyces spp. colonize above-ground plant parts and promote shoot growth in multiple healthy and pathogen-challenged cereal crops. Microbiol. Res. 215, 36–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2018.06.003 (2018).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Yi, Y.-S. et al. Antifungal activity of Streptomyces sp. against Puccinia recondita causing wheat leaf rust. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 14(2), 422–425 (2004).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Sperdouli, I. & Moustakas, M. Leaf developmental stage modulates metabolite accumulation and photosynthesis contributing to acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to water deficit. J. Plant. Res. 127(4), 481–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-014-0635-1 (2014).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Microbial community structure is stratified at the millimeter-scale across the soil–water interface

    McClain ME, Boyer EW, Dent CL, Gergel SE, Grimm NB, Groffman PM, et al. Biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments at the interface of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Ecosystems. 2003;6:301–12.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Borch T, Kretzschmar R, Kappler A, Van Cappellen P, Ginder-Vogel M, Voegelin A, et al. Biogeochemical redox processes and their impact on contaminant dynamics. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44:15–23.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stegen JC, Lin XJ, Konopka AE, Fredrickson JK. Stochastic and deterministic assembly processes in subsurface microbial communities. ISME J. 2012;6:1653–64.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Dini-Andreote F, Stegen JC, van Elsas JD, Salles JF. Disentangling mechanisms that mediate the balance between stochastic and deterministic processes in microbial succession. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:E1326–32.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Behrendt L, Larkum AWD, Trampe E, Norman A, Sorensen SJ, Kuhl M. Microbial diversity of biofilm communities in microniches associated with the didemnid ascidian Lissoclinum patella. ISME J. 2012;6:1222–37.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Becker KW, Elling FJ, Schroder JM, Lipp JS, Goldhammer T, Zabel M, et al. Isoprenoid quinones resolve the stratification of redox processes in a biogeochemical continuum from the photic zone to deep anoxic sediments of the Black Sea. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2018;84:e02736–17.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Locey KJ, Muscarella ME, Larsen ML, Bray SR, Jones SE, Lennon JT. Dormancy dampens the microbial distance-decay relationship. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2020;375:20190243.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Blagodatskaya E, Kuzyakov Y. Active microorganisms in soil: critical review of estimation criteria and approaches. Soil Biol Biochem. 2013;67:192–211.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Meyer KM, Memiaghe H, Korte L, Kenfack D, Alonso A, Bohannan BJM. Why do microbes exhibit weak biogeographic patterns? ISME J. 2018;12:1404–13.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Xue R, Zhao KK, Yu XL, Stirling E, Liu S, Ye SD, et al. Deciphering sample size effect on microbial biogeographic patterns and community assembly processes at centimeter scale. Soil Biol Biochem. 2021;156:108218.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Morriss A, Meyer K, Bohannan B. Linking microbial communities to ecosystem functions: what we can learn from genotype-phenotype mapping in organisms. Phil Trans R Soc B. 2020;375:20190244.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Armitage DW, Jones SE. How sample heterogeneity can obscure the signal of microbial interactions. ISME J. 2019;13:2639–46.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Dini-Andreote F, Kowalchuk GA, Prosser JI, Raaijmakers JM. Towards meaningful scales in ecosystem microbiome research. Environ Microbiol. 2021;23:1–4.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Meyerhof MS, Wilson JM, Dawson MN, Beman JM. Microbial community diversity, structure and assembly across oxygen gradients in meromictic marine lakes, Palau. Environ Microbiol. 2016;18:4907–19.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhou ZC, Meng H, Liu Y, Gu JD, Li M. Stratified bacterial and archaeal community in mangrove and intertidal wetland mudflats revealed by high throughput 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:02148.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gutierrez-Preciado A, Saghai A, Moreira D, Zivanovic Y, Deschamps P, Lopez-Garcia P. Functional shifts in microbial mats recapitulate early Earth metabolic transitions. Nat Ecol Evol. 2018;2:1700–8.Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Louca S, Parfrey LW, Doebeli M. Decoupling function and taxonomy in the global ocean microbiome. Science. 2016;353:1272–7.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Murase J, Frenzel P. A methane-driven microbial food web in a wetland rice soil. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9:3025–34.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Reim A, Lüke C, Krause S, Pratscher J, Frenzel P. One millimetre makes the difference: high-resolution analysis of methane-oxidizing bacteria and their specific activity at the oxic-anoxic interface in a flooded paddy soil. ISME J. 2012;6:2128–39.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Peiffer S, Kappler A, Haderlein SB, Schmidt C, Byrne JM, Kleindienst S, et al. A biogeochemical–hydrological framework for the role of redox-active compounds in aquatic systems. Nat Geosci. 2021;14:264–72.CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    eDNA metabarcoding as a promising conservation tool to monitor fish diversity in Beijing water systems compared with ground cages

    Zou, K. et al. eDNA metabarcoding as a promising conservation tool for monitoring fish diversity in a coastal wetland of the Pearl River Estuary compared to bottom trawling. Sci. Total Environ. 702, 134704 (2020).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Almond, R., Grooten, M. & Peterson, T. Living Planet Report 2020-Bending the Curve of Biodiversity Loss (World Wildlife Fund, 2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Beverton, R. Fish resources; threats and protection. Neth. J. Zool. 42, 139–175 (1991).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jackson, S. & Head, L. Australia’s mass fish kills as a crisis of modern water: Understanding hydrosocial change in the Murray-Darling Basin. Geoforum 109, 44–56 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rees, H. C. et al. REVIEW: The detection of aquatic animal species using environmental DNA—a review of eDNA as a survey tool in ecology. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 1450–1459 (2014).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Rees, H. C. et al. The application of eDNA for monitoring of the Great Crested Newt in the UK. Ecol. Evol. 4, 4023–4032 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wang, C. et al. Research on the biodiversity of Qinhuai River based on environmental DNA metabacroding. Acta Ecol. Sin. 42, 611–624 (2022).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Deiner, K., Walser, J.-C., Mächler, E. & Altermatt, F. Choice of capture and extraction methods affect detection of freshwater biodiversity from environmental DNA. Biol. Cons. 183, 53–63 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Thomsen, P. F. et al. Monitoring endangered freshwater biodiversity using environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. 21, 2565–2573 (2012).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Miralles, L., Parrondo, M., Hernandez de Rojas, A., Garcia-Vazquez, E. & Borrell, Y. J. Development and validation of eDNA markers for the detection of Crepidula fornicata in environmental samples. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 146, 827–830 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Takahara, T., Minamoto, T., Yamanaka, H., Doi, H. & Kawabata, Z. Estimation of fish biomass using environmental DNA. PLoS ONE 7, e35868 (2012).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Aglieri, G. et al. Environmental DNA effectively captures functional diversity of coastal fish communities. Mol. Ecol. 30, 3127–3139 (2020).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yang, H. et al. Effectiveness assessment of using riverine water eDNA to simultaneously monitor the riverine and riparian biodiversity information. Sci. Rep. 11, 24241 (2021).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Altermatt, F. et al. Uncovering the complete biodiversity structure in spatial networks: the example of riverine systems. Oikos 129, 607–618 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Stat, M. et al. Combined use of eDNA metabarcoding and video surveillance for the assessment of fish biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 33, 196–205 (2019).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hallam, J., Clare, E. L., Jones, J. I. & Day, J. J. Biodiversity assessment across a dynamic riverine system: A comparison of eDNA metabarcoding versus traditional fish surveying methods. Environ. DNA 3, 1247–1266 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gao, W. Beijing Vertebrate Key (Beijing Publishing House, 1994).
    Google Scholar 
    Wang, H. Beijing Fish and Amphibians and Reptiles (Beijing Publishing House, 1994).
    Google Scholar 
    Chen, W., Hu, D. & Fu, B. Research on Biodiversity of Beijing Wetland (Science Press, 2007).
    Google Scholar 
    Zhang, C. et al. Fish species diversity and conservation in Beijing and adjacent areas. Biodivers. Sci. 19, 597–604 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yamamoto, S. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding reveals local fish communities in a species-rich coastal sea. Sci. Rep. 7, 40368 (2017).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Shaw, J. L. A. et al. Comparison of environmental DNA metabarcoding and conventional fish survey methods in a river system. Biol. Cons. 197, 131–138 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fu, M., Xiao, N., Zhao, Z., Gao, X. & Li, J. Effects of Urbanization on Ecosystem Services in Beijing. Res. Soil Water Conserv. 23, 235–239 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Hao, L. & Sun, G. Impacts of urbanization on watershed ecohydrological processes: progresses and perspectives. Acta Ecol. Sin. 41, 13–26 (2021).
    Google Scholar 
    Su, G. et al. Human impacts on global freshwater fish biodiversity. Science 371, 835–838 (2021).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yan, B. et al. Effects of urban development on soil microbial functional diversity in Beijing. Res. Environ. Sci. 29, 1325–1335 (2016).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Xiao, N., Gao, X., Li, J. & Bai, J. Evaluation and Conservation Measures of Beijing Biodiversity (China Forestry Publishing House, 2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Xu, S., Wang, Z., Liang, J. & Zhang, S. Use of different sampling tools for comparison of fish-aggregating effects along horizontal transect at two artificial reef sites in Shengsi. J. Fish. China 40, 820–831 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Miya, M. et al. MiFish, a set of universal PCR primers for metabarcoding environmental DNA from fishes: detection of more than 230 subtropical marine species. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2, 150088 (2015).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhang, J., Kobert, K., Flouri, T. & Stamatakis, A. PEAR: a fast and accurate Illumina Paired-End reAd mergeR. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 30, 614–620 (2014).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, S., Zhou, Y., Chen, Y. & Gu, J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 34, 884–890 (2018).Article 
    CAS 

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

    Google Scholar 
    Callahan, B. J., McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. P. Exact sequence variants should replace operational taxonomic units in marker-gene data analysis. ISME J. 11, 2639–2643 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Iwasaki, W. et al. MitoFish and MitoAnnotator: A mitochondrial genome database of fish with an accurate and automatic annotation pipeline. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2531–2540 (2013).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wang, H. Beijing Fish Records (Beijing Publishing House, 1984).
    Google Scholar 
    Du, L. et al. Fish community characteristics and spatial pattern in major rivers of Beijing City. Res. Environ. Sci. 32, 447–457 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Shen, W. & Ren, H. TaxonKit: A practical and efficient NCBI taxonomy toolkit. J. Genet. Genomics 48, 844–850 (2021).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Karr, J. R. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6, 21–27 (1981).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhang, C. & Zhao, Y. Fishes in Beijing and Adjacent Areas (China. Science Press, 2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Wu, H. & Zhong, J. Fauna Sinica, Osteichthyes, Perciformess(Five),Gobioidei (Science Press, 2008).
    Google Scholar 
    Di, Y. et al. Distribution of fish communities and its influencing factors in the Nansha and Beijing sub-center reaches of the Beiyun River. Acta Sci. Circumst. 41, 156–163 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Walters, D. M., Freeman, M. C., Leigh, D. S., Freeman, B. J. & Pringle, C. M. in Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems Vol. 47 American Fisheries Society Symposium 69–85 (2005).Hu, X., Zuo, D., Liu, B., Huang, Z. & Xu, Z. Quantitative analysis of the correlation between macrobenthos community and water environmental factors and aquatic ecosystem health assessment in the North Canal River Basin of Beijing. Environ. Sci. 43, 247–255 (2022).
    Google Scholar 
    Kadye, W. T., Magadza, C. H. D., Moyo, N. A. G. & Kativu, S. Stream fish assemblages in relation to environmental factors on a montane plateau (Nyika Plateau, Malawi). Environ. Biol. Fishes 83, 417–428 (2008).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, T. A. & Kraft, C. E. Stream fish assemblages in relation to landscape position and local habitat variables. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 134, 430–440 (2005).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Blabolil, P. et al. Environmental DNA metabarcoding uncovers environmental correlates of fish communities in spatially heterogeneous freshwater habitats. Ecol. Ind. 126, 107698 (2021).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Xie, R. et al. eDNA metabarcoding revealed differential structures of aquatic communities in a dynamic freshwater ecosystem shaped by habitat heterogeneity. Environ. Res. 201, 111602 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Qu, C. et al. Comparing fish prey diversity for a critically endangered aquatic mammal in a reserve and the wild using eDNA metabarcoding. Sci. Rep. 10, 16715 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pont, D. et al. Environmental DNA reveals quantitative patterns of fish biodiversity in large rivers despite its downstream transportation. Sci. Rep. 8, 10361 (2018).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Doble, C. J. et al. Testing the performance of environmental DNA metabarcoding for surveying highly diverse tropical fish communities: A case study from Lake Tanganyika. Environ. DNA 2, 24–41 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Xu, N. et al. Monitoring seasonal distribution of an endangered anadromous sturgeon in a large river using environmental DNA. Sci. Nat. 105, 62 (2018).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Laramie, M. B., Pilliod, D. S. & Goldberg, C. S. Characterizing the distribution of an endangered salmonid using environmental DNA analysis. Biol. Cons. 183, 29–37 (2015).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Harper, L. R. et al. Development and application of environmental DNA surveillance for the threatened crucian carp (Carassius carassius). Freshw. Biol. 64, 93–107 (2019).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ushio, M. et al. Quantitative monitoring of multispecies fish environmental DNA using high-throughput sequencing. Metabarcoding Metagenomics 2, e2329 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Evans, N. T. et al. Quantification of mesocosm fish and amphibian species diversity via environmental DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 16, 29–41 (2015).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    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 
    Harrison, J. B., Sunday, J. M. & Rogers, S. M. Predicting the fate of eDNA in the environment and implications for studying biodiversity. Proc. Biol. Sci. 286, 20191409 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Kelly, R. P., Shelton, A. O. & Gallego, R. Understanding PCR processes to draw meaningful conclusions from environmental DNA studies. Sci. Rep. 9, 12133 (2019).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Civade, R. et al. Spatial representativeness of environmental DNA metabarcoding signal for fish biodiversity assessment in a natural freshwater system. PLoS ONE 11, e0157366 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Barnes, M. A. et al. Environmental conditions influence eDNA persistence in aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 1819–1827 (2014).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Shogren, A. J. et al. Water flow and biofilm cover influence environmental DNA detection in recirculating streams. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 8530–8537 (2018).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Zhao, B., van Bodegom, P. M. & Trimbos, K. The particle size distribution of environmental DNA varies with species and degradation. Sci. Total Environ. 797, 149175 (2021).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    American dog ticks along their expanding range edge in Ontario, Canada

    Sonenshine, D. E. Insects of Virginia No. 13. Ticks of Virginia (Acari: Metastigmata). Res. Div. Bull. 139, 1–44 (1979).
    Google Scholar 
    Lindquist, E. E. et al. A Handbook to the Ticks of Canada (Ixodida: Ixodidae, Argasidae) (Biological Survey of Canada, 2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Campbell, A. & MacKay, P. R. Distribution of the American dog tick, Dermacentor variabilis (Say), and its small-mammal hosts in relation to vegetation types in a study area in Nova Scotia. Can. J. Zool. 57, 1950–1959 (1979).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Barker, I. K. et al. Distribution of the Lyme disease vector, Ixodes dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) and isolation of Borrelia burgdorferi in Ontario, Canada. J. Med. Entomol. 29, 1011–1022 (1992).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Morshed, M. G., Scott, J. D., Fernando, K., Mann, R. B. & Durden, L. A. Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi endemic at epicenter in Rondeau Provincial Park, Ontario. J. Med. Entomol. 40, 91–94 (2003).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Nelder, M. P. et al. Population-based passive tick surveillance and detection of expanding foci of blacklegged ticks Ixodes scapularis and the Lyme disease agent Borrelia burgdorferi in Ontario, Canada. PLoS ONE 9, e105358 (2014).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Clow, K. M. et al. Distribution of ticks and the risk of Lyme disease and other tick-borne pathogens of public health significance in Ontario, Canada. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 16, 215–222 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, K. A. et al. Tick infestations of wildlife and companion animals in Ontario, Canada, with detection of human pathogens in Ixodes scapularis ticks. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 10, 72–76 (2019).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Scott, J. D. et al. Extensive distribution of the Lyme disease bacterium, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, in multiple tick species parasitizing avian and mammalian hosts across Canada. Healthcare 6, 131 (2018).PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    James, A. M., Burdett, C., McCool, M. J., Fox, A. & Riggs, P. The geographic distribution and ecological preferences of the American dog tick, Dermacentor variabilis (Say), in the USA. Med. Vet. Entomol. 29, 178–188 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Blouin, E. F., Kocan, A. A., Glenn, B. L., Kocan, K. M. & Hair, J. A. Transmission of Cytauxzoon felis Kier, 1979 from bobcats, Felis rufus (Schreber), to domestic cats by Dermacentor variabilis (Say). J. Wildl. Dis. 20, 241–242 (1984).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Yunik, M. E., Galloway, T. D. & Lindsay, L. R. Active surveillance of Anaplasma marginale in populations of arthropod vectors (Acari: Ixodidae; Diptera: Tabanidae) during and after an outbreak of bovine anaplasmosis in southern Manitoba, Canada. Can. J. Vet. Res. 80, 171–174 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Trumpp, K. M., Parsley, A. L., Lewis, M. J., Camp, J. W. Jr. & Taylor, S. D. Presumptive tick paralysis in 2 American miniature horses in the United States. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 33, 1784–1788 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Léger, E., Vourc’h, G., Vial, L., Chevillon, C. & McCoy, K. D. Changing distributions of ticks: Causes and consequences. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 59, 219–244 (2013).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ogden, N. H., Mechai, S. & Margos, G. Changing geographic ranges of ticks and tick-borne pathogens: Drivers, mechanisms and consequences for pathogen diversity. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 3, 46 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Bouchard, C. et al. Increased risk of tick-borne diseases with climate and environmental changes. Can. Commun. Dis. Rep. 45, 83–89 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Artsob, H. et al. Isolation of Francisella tularensis and Powassan virus from ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) in Ontario, Canada. J. Med. Entomol. 21, 165–168 (1984).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Gregson, J. D. The Ixodoidea of Canada. Canadian Department of Agriculture Publication 930 (Canadian Department of Agriculture, 1956).
    Google Scholar 
    Scholten, T. Human tick infestations in Ontario: Findings at the Toronto Public Health Laboratory, 1967–1977. Can. J. Public Health 68, 494–496 (1977).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Jarvis, D. The Acarina, with a host index to the species found in Ontario. 48th Ann. Rept. Ent. Soc. Ontario 1909 36, 82–109 (1910).Dergousoff, S. J., Galloway, T. D., Lindsay, L. R., Curry, P. S. & Chilton, N. B. Range expansion of Dermacentor variabilis and Dermacentor andersoni (Acari: Ixodidae) near their northern distributional limits. J. Med. Entomol. 50, 510–520 (2013).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Forest resources of Ontario 2016 (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 2018).Crins, W. J., Gray, P. A., Uhlig, P. W. C. & Wester, M. C. The ecosystems of Ontario, Part 1: Ecozones and ecoregions. (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 2009).Nelder, M. P. et al. Human pathogens associated with the blacklegged tick Ixodes scapularis: A systematic review. Parasit. Vectors 9, 265 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    University of Toronto. FSA land area file. https://mdl.library.utoronto.ca/collections/numeric-data/census-canada/2016/geo (2018).Lehane, A. et al. Reported county-level distribution of the American dog tick (Acari: Ixodidae) in the contiguous United States. J. Med. Entomol. 57, 131–155 (2020).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Dennis, D. T., Nekomoto, T. S., Victor, J. C., Paul, W. S. & Piesman, J. Reported distribution of Ixodes scapularis and Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae) in the United States. J. Med. Entomol. 35, 629–638 (1998).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Springer, Y. P., Eisen, L., Beati, L., James, A. M. & Eisen, R. J. Spatial distribution of counties in the continental United States with records of occurrence of Amblyomma americanum (Ixodida: Ixodidae). J. Med. Entomol. 51, 342–351 (2014).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Eisen, R. J., Eisen, L. & Beard, C. B. County-scale distribution of Ixodes scapularis and Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae) in the continental United States. J. Med. Entomol. 53, 349–386 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Clow, K. M. et al. Northward range expansion of Ixodes scapularis evident over a short timescale in Ontario, Canada. PLoS ONE 12, e0189393 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rand, P. W. et al. Passive surveillance in Maine, an area emergent for tick-borne diseases. J. Med. Entomol. 44, 1118–1129 (2007).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Baldwin, D., Desloges, J. & Band, L. Physical geography of Ontario in Ecology of a managed terrestrial landscape: patterns and processes of forest landscapes in Ontario (eds. Perera, A. H., Euler, D. L. & Thompson, I. D.) 12–29 (UBC Press, 2000).Minigan, J. N., Hager, H. A., Peregrine, A. S. & Newman, J. A. Current and potential future distribution of the American dog tick (Dermacentor variabilis, Say) in North America. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 9, 354–362 (2018).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Wilkinson, P. R. The distribution of Dermacentor ticks in Canada in relation to bioclimatic zones. Can. J. Zool. 45, 517–537 (1967).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Bishopp, F. C. & Trembley, T. H. Distribution and hosts of certain North American ticks. J. Parasitol. 31, 1–54 (1945).
    Google Scholar 
    Walker, E. D. et al. Geographic distribution of ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) in Michigan, with emphasis on Ixodes scapularis and Borrelia burgdorferi. J. Med. Entomol. 35, 872–882 (1998).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Harlan, H. J. Observations of host seeking behaviour in American dog ticks, Dermacentor variabilis (Say) (Acari: Ixodidae) in Ohio. Med. Entomol. 4, 23–33 (2003).
    Google Scholar 
    Dodds, D. G., Martell, A. M. & Yescott, R. E. Ecology of the American dog tick, Dermacentor variabilis (Say) Nova Scotia. Can. J. Zool. 47, 171–181 (1969).
    Google Scholar 
    Judd, W. W. Recent records of ticks, Ixodes cookei Packard and Dermacentor variabilis (Say) (Acarina: Ixodoidea) in southwestern Ontario. Entomol. News 86, 157–159 (1975).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Snetsinger, R., Jacobs, S. B., Kim, K. C. & Tavris, D. Extension of the range of Dermacentor variabilis (Acari: Ixodidae) in Pennsylvania. J. Med. Entomol. 30, 795–798 (1993).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Saura, S., Bodin, Ö. & Fortin, M.-J. Stepping stones are crucial for species’ long-distance dispersal and range expansion through habitat networks. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 171–182 (2014).
    Google Scholar 
    Sagurova, I. et al. Predicted northward expansion of the geographic range of the tick vector Amblyomma americanum in North America under future climate conditions. Environ. Health Perspect. 127, 107014 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Mierzejewska, E. J., Estrada-Peña, A., Alsarraf, M., Kowalec, M. & Bajer, A. Mapping of Dermacentor reticulatus expansion in Poland in 2012–2014. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 7, 94–106 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Gray, J. S., Dautel, H., Estrada-Peña, A., Kahl, O. & Lindgren, E. Effects of climate change on ticks and tick-borne diseases in Europe. Interdiscip. Perspect. Infect. Dis. 2009, 593232 (2009).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Gasmi, S. et al. Evidence for increasing densities and geographic ranges of tick species of public health significance other than Ixodes scapularis in Quebec, Canada. PLoS ONE 13, e0201924 (2018).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Pak, D., Jacobs, S. B. & Sakamoto, J. M. A 117-year retrospective analysis of Pennsylvania tick community dynamics. Parasit. Vectors 12, 189 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Garvie, M. B., McKiel, J. A., Sonenshine, D. E. & Campbell, A. Seasonal dynamics of American dog tick, Dermacentor variabilis (Say), populations in southwestern Nova Scotia. Can. J. Zool. 56, 28–39 (1978).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Burg, J. G. Seasonal activity and spatial distribution of host-seeking adults of the tick Dermacentor variabilis. Med. Vet. Entomol. 15, 413–421 (2001).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Newhouse, V. F. Variations in population density, movement, and rickettsial infection rates in a local population of Dermacentor variabilis (Acarina: Ixodidae) ticks in the Piedmont of Georgia. Environ. Entomol. 12, 1737–1746 (1983).
    Google Scholar 
    Mackenzie, A. M. R., Rossier, E., Polley, J. R. & Corber, S. J. Rocky Mountain spotted fever—Ontario. Can. Dis. Wkly. Rep. 5, 130–132 (1979).
    Google Scholar 
    Gary, A. T., Webb, J. A., Hegarty, B. C. & Breitschwerdt, E. B. The low seroprevalence of tick-transmitted agents of disease in dogs from southern Ontario and Quebec. Can. Vet. J. 47, 1194–1200 (2006).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Walker, W. J. & Moore, C. A. Tularemia: Experience in the Hamilton area. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 105, 390–396 (1971).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion (Public Health Ontario). 2019 tularemia data at a glance. https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/diseases-and-conditions/infectious-diseases/vector-borne-zoonotic-diseases/tularemia (2020).Wood, H. & Artsob, H. Spotted fever group rickettsiae: a brief review and a Canadian perspective. Zoonoses Public Health 59(Suppl 2), 65–79 (2012).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Wood, H., Dillon, L., Patel, S. N. & Ralevski, F. Prevalence of Rickettsia species in Dermacentor variabilis ticks from Ontario, Canada. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 7, 1044–1046 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Kaufman, E. L. et al. Range-wide genetic analysis of Dermacentor variabilis and its Francisella-like endosymbionts demonstrates phylogeographic concordance between both taxa. Parasit. Vectors 11, 306 (2018).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Statistics Canada. Census profile. 2016 Census. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (2017).Statistics Canada. Land use, census of agriculture historical data. Table: 32–10–0153–01. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (2022). More

  • in

    Simulation-based evaluation of two insect trapping grids for delimitation surveys

    Key delimitation trapping survey performance factorsTrap attractivenessThe performance of the current Medfly design was unexpectedly inferior to that of the leek moth even with a more vagile target insect, 2.8 times greater trap density in the core, and a grid size over three times larger. Despite all those factors, p(capture) for the leek moth grid with 1/λ = 20 m was 15 percentage points greater than that for Medfly at 30 days duration. Thus, trap attractiveness was the key determinant for delimiting survey performance, as it was for detection13.One straightforward way to improve p(capture) and the accuracy of boundary setting, while also cutting costs, would be to develop more attractive traps. Poorly attractive traps include food-based attractants48 and traps based solely on visual stimuli36. But developing better traps is difficult. Pheromone-based attractants generally perform best49, but these are unavailable for many insects. For instance, scientists have searched for decades for effective pheromones for Anastrepha suspensa (Loew) and A. ludens (Loew) without success50. Common issues include the complexity of components, costs of synthesis, and chemical stability.Trap densitiesAll else being equal, increasing the trap density will generally improve p(capture) for any survey grid, and intuitively this can help compensate for using less attractive traps. However, the impact of increasing density is limited when attractiveness is low13,47, and large surveys or grids with many traps can become prohibitively expensive51. The Medfly grid designers likely understood that the available trap and lure was not highly attractive, and used higher densities in inner bands to try to reach some desired (non-quantitative) survey performance level. By contrast, the designers of the leek moth grid used a (constant) density three times smaller, likely because the trap and lure were known to be relatively strong. Here, for both species, marginal ROI decreased as densities increased (Tables 2, 3). Hence, increasing densities has limited benefit, but may be useful when better lures are unavailable13.In that context, the use of variable densities in the Medfly grid is understandable. At its standard size, the survey grid would require 8,100 traps if the core trap density were constant (Table 1). The designers likely intuited that lower densities could be used in outer bands because captures there were less likely. However, doing so reduces the likelihood of detection in outer bands and could increase the possibility of undetected egress, especially with longer survey durations. As far as we know, natural egress has not been raised as a concern following the numerous Medfly quarantines that have used this survey grid over the years, in Southern California in particular52.Generally, however, we think the variable Medfly grid densities run counter to delimitation goals. Greater core and Band 2 densities have proportionally more impact on p(capture), but only a few detections in the core are necessary to confirm the presence of the population (Goal 1), and inner area detections probably contribute little to boundary setting (see below). Therefore, lower or intermediate densities (at most) may be optimal for the core when considering ROI. For the outer bands, increasing densities might improve boundary setting (Goal 2) and help mitigate potential egress, but the sizes of those bands already limit cost efficiency (Table 2), making greater densities less advisable. Our simulation results can help elucidate how to balance these interests to achieve delimitation goals while minimizing costs47.Grid size considerationsThe simulation results indicated that the standard survey sizes for these two pests were excessive. We have verified that empirically for Medfly using trapping detections data53. A 14.5-km grid has been widely used for many other insects in the CDFA (2013) guidelines10, such as Mexfly and OFF, and the same analysis indicated that those are also oversized for use in short-term delimitation surveys53. From the same analysis, the predicted survey radius for leek moth, with D = 500 m2 per day, would be 2,382 m, or a diameter of nearly 4.8 km, which matches the results here. Similarly, Dominiak and Fanson45 analyzed trapping data for Qfly and found that the recommended quarantine area distance of 15 km could be reduced to 3 to 4 km.Grids with radii larger than 4.8-km only seem necessary for highly vagile insects, those with D ≥ 50,000 m2 per day47. This should not be surprising. Small insect populations are unlikely to move very far31,54, especially if hosts are available20,39,55. The (proposed) short duration of a delimitation survey would also limit dispersal potential (see below). Many delimiting survey plans may be oversized, because they were developed before much dispersal research had been done37, thus uncertainty was high. Our dispersal distance analysis included species with a wide range of dispersal abilities, so it can be used generally to choose smaller survey grid radii53.Reducing grid sizes down to about 4.8-km diameters may have little impact on p(capture), since detections in bands outside that distance contributed little to overall performance. The cores of both the leek moth and Medfly grids accounted for 86 percent or more of overall p(capture). While core area detections will confirm the presence of the population, they are less useful for defining spatial extent. The furthest detections from the presumed source are usually used to delimit the incursion46,56 (although in our experience formal boundary setting exercises seem rare). Delimiting surveys may often yield few captures anyway, because adventive populations can be very small and subject to high mortality31. Because size reductions eliminate traps in proportionally larger outer areas, the impact on survey costs is substantial. Removing just the outermost bands of each grid would directly reduce costs by $11,200 for leek moth (400 traps) and by $7,488 for Medfly (288 traps; Table 1).Another reason for the large size of the standard Medfly grid may be that it was designed for monitoring and management in addition to delimitation57. Medfly quarantines end after at least three generations without a detection, so the surveys may last for months. The grid size was reportedly originally determined by multiplying the estimated dispersal distance by three (PPQ, personal communication), to account for uncertainty. This implies that the estimated distance was about 2,400 m per 30 days. Thus, the design may not have been built for the 30-d duration used here, but our recommended design is valid if a shorter delimitation activity without further monitoring is appropriate.Although it seemed too large for leek moth, an 8-km grid for delimitation could be appropriate for some other moths. For example, the delimiting survey plans for Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) and S. exempta Walker use this size9. S. littoralis is described as dispersing “many miles”, and S. exempta can travel hundreds of miles9, which clearly exceeds the described dispersal ability of leek moth. On the other hand, the survey plan for summer fruit tortrix moth (Adoxophyes orana Fischer von Röeslerstamm) also specifies an 8-km grid for delimitation but contains little information on dispersal, suggesting only that most movement is local8. Like leek moth, a 4.8-km grid for that species seems likely to be more appropriate.Limiting egress potential is probably the main consideration when setting survey size, but uncertainty about the source population location may also be a factor. Survey grids placed over the earliest insect detection may sometimes be off center from the location of the source population54. However, so far as we know for our agency, most adventive populations have been localized, based on post-discovery detections (PPQ, personal communication). Likewise, we have found53 and other researchers have found that dispersal distances for different species in outbreaks and mark-recapture studies are often less than 1 km58,59,60. That may often be the case for detection networks of traps (e.g., for high risk fruit flies), which increase the likelihood of capture before the population has had much time to grow and disperse. Here, we focused explicitly on localized populations, but allowed for uncertainty in the simulations by varying outbreak locations over one mile in the central part of the grid. If the outbreak population is very large and has extensively spread out (e.g., spotted lanternfly, Lycorma delicatula (White) in 201461), delimitation will not be localized, but “area-wide”2. The results here do not apply to area-wide outbreaks, and we are currently studying how to effectively delimit them.Optimizing delimitation surveysMany trapping survey designs in use were based not on “hard” science but on local experience62. Scientists have recognized the need for more cost-effective surveillance strategies63,64. Quantitatively assessing p(capture) in different designs for the same target pest allows us to determine grid sizes and densities that lower costs while maintaining performance. Results here demonstrated that the sizes and densities of these two survey grids could be optimized to save up to $20,244 per survey for the leek moth and $38,168 per survey for the Medfly. In practical terms, that means more than five leek moth surveys could be run for the cost of one standard design survey. Additionally, over seven Medfly delimitation surveys could be funded by the budget of one standard plan. The magnitudes of reduction seen here may be typical, since about 90 percent of the costs in trapping surveys are for transportation and maintenance related to traps65.Quantifying survey performance was not possible until very recently, so it has been little discussed in the literature5,66, and no standard thresholds exist. We think 0.5 may be a reasonable minimum threshold for the choice of p(capture), to try to ensure that population detection is “more likely than not”. Designs that aim to maximize p(capture) could be realistic with high attractiveness traps, but those designs seem very likely to have lower ROIs (e.g., Table 2). Even for the most serious insect pests, we think targeting near-perfect population detection during delimitation is likely not justified. Designs achieving p(capture) from 0.6 to 0.75 could be highly effective in terms of both costs and performance.Another potential area of improvement is grid shape. Circular grids perform as well as square grids but use fewer traps and less service area to achieve equivalent p(capture)47. Moreover, detections in the corners of a square grid are evidence that insects could have traveled beyond the square along the axes, resulting in uncertain boundary setting. Most published survey grids are square10,46, but many field managers tend to use approximately circular trapping grids in the field (PPQ, personal communication). The conversion to a circular grid with a radius of half the square side length reduces the area and number of traps by around 21 percent47. Our findings were consistent with that value.This new quantification ability also indicates that some delimiting survey designs in the U.S.A. may not be performing as well as expected47. For instance, the delimiting survey design for Mexfly uses approximately 31 traps per km2 in the core of a 14.5 km square grid11, but the traps are only weakly attractive (1/λ ≈ 5 m). In this scenario, p(capture) was only around 0.23 with a 30-d survey duration47. A much greater density ( > 80 traps per km2) could be used in the core to achieve p(capture) ≥ 0.5, but this may not be feasible depending on the survey budget.Technical and modeling considerationsExamining diffusion-based movement for these two insects in TrapGrid can give insight into why simulations indicated that smaller grids may be adequate47. The value of σ for Medfly after 30 days is only about 1,550 m. In a normal distribution, σ = 1,550 m gives a 95th percentile distance of 2,550 m, which is similar to the estimated distance above of 2,400 m. Over 90 days, σ = 2,700 m for Medfly, which gives a 95th percentile distance of 4,441 m, still much shorter than the grid radius of 7,250 m. A 95th percentile of 7,250 m requires σ ≈ 4,408 m, which equals t = 253 days. In addition, the maximum total distance (up to 39 days after detection) we observed in trapping detections data for Medfly in Florida was about 4,800 m53.The same calculations for leek moth give σ ≈ 490 m for 30 days, with a 95th percentile distance of only 806 m. That is half the length of the recommended shortened radius above of 2.4 km, and nearly five times shorter than the radius of the standard 8-km grid. A 95th percentile of 4,000 m requires σ = 2,432 m, which implies t = 740 days, which is about two years. Therefore, the leek moth grid is arguably even more oversized than the Medfly grid.The default capture probability calculation in the current version (Ver. 2019-12-11) of TrapGrid is not sensitive to population size32 and does not consider the effects of ambient factors (e.g., wind speed and direction, rainfall, temperature). Many other factors can also impact trapping survey outcomes, such as topography of the environment, availability of host plants, seasonality of pest, and population dynamics. These factors are not considered in the current version of TrapGrid. More

  • in

    Milk microbiomes of three great ape species vary among host species and over time

    Kim, S. Y. & Yi, D. Y. Components of human breast milk: From macronutrient to microbiome and microRNA. Clin. Exp. Pediatr. 63(8), 301 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Power, M. L. & Schulkin, J. Maternal regulation of offspring development in mammals is an ancient adaptation tied to lactation. Appl. Transl. Genomics. 2, 55–63 (2013).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Pannaraj, P. S. et al. Association between breast milk bacterial communities and establishment and development of the infant gut microbiome. JAMA Pediatr. 171(7), 647–654 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Lyons, K. E., Ryan, C. A., Dempsey, E. M., Ross, R. P. & Stanton, C. Breast milk, a source of beneficial microbes and associated benefits for infant health. Nutrients 12(4), 1039 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fehr, K. et al. Breastmilk feeding practices are associated with the co-occurrence of bacteria in mothers’ milk and the infant gut: The CHILD cohort study. Cell Host Microbe. 28(2), 285–297 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Moossavi, S. & Azad, M. B. Origins of human milk microbiota: New evidence and arising questions. Gut Microbes. 12(1), 1667722. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2019.1667722 (2020).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Groer, M. W., Morgan, K. H., Louis-Jacques, A. & Miller, E. M. A scoping review of research on the human milk microbiome. J. Hum. Lact. 36(4), 628–643 (2020).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gopalakrishna, K. P. & Hand, T. W. Influence of maternal milk on the neonatal intestinal microbiome. Nutrients 12(3), 823 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ayoub Moubareck, C., Lootah, M., Tahlak, M. & Venema, K. Profiles of human milk oligosaccharides and their relations to the milk microbiota of breastfeeding mothers in Dubai. Nutrients 12(6), 1727 (2020).PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Henrick, B. M. et al. Bifidobacteria-mediated immune system imprinting early in life. Cell 184, 3884–3898 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Walker, W. A. & Iyengar, R. S. Breast milk, microbiota, and intestinal immune homeostasis. Pediatr. Res. 77(1), 220–228 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Petrullo, L. et al. The early life microbiota mediates maternal effects on offspring growth in a nonhuman primate. Iscience. 25(3), 103948 (2022).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bowen, W. D., Boness, D. J. & Oftedal, O. T. Mass transfer from mother to pup and subsequent mass loss by the weaned pup in the hooded seal, Cystophora cristata. Can. J. Zool. 65(1), 1–8 (1987).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Smith, T. M., Austin, C., Hinde, K., Vogel, E. R. & Arora, M. Cyclical nursing patterns in wild orangutans. Sci. Adv. 3(5), e1601517 (2017).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Park, Y. W. & Haenlein, G. F. W. Handbook of Milk of Non-Bovine Mammals (Wiley, 2008).
    Google Scholar 
    Oftedal, O. T. Use of maternal reserves as a lactation strategy in large mammals. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 59(1), 99–106 (2000).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hinde, K. & Milligan, L. A. Primate milk: Proximate mechanisms and ultimate perspectives. Evol. Anthropol. Issues News Rev. 20(1), 9–23 (2011).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Osthoff, G., Hugo, A., De Wit, M., Nguyen, T. P. M. & Seier, J. Milk composition of captive vervet monkey (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) and rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) with observations on gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and white handed gibbon (Hylobates lar). Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part B Biochem. Mol. Biol. 152(4), 332–338 (2009).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Power, M. L., Oftedal, O. T. & Tardif, S. D. Does the milk of callitrichid monkeys differ from that of larger anthropoids?. Am. J. Primatol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Primatol. 56(2), 117–127 (2002).
    Google Scholar 
    Power, M. L. et al. Patterns of milk macronutrients and bioactive molecules across lactation in a western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla) and a Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii). Am. J. Primatol. 79(3), e22609 (2017).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Garcia, M., Power, M. L. & Moyes, K. M. Immunoglobulin A and nutrients in milk from great apes throughout lactation. Am. J. Primatol. 79(3), e22614 (2017).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Muletz-Wolz, C. R. et al. Diversity and temporal dynamics of primate milk microbiomes. Am. J. Primatol. 81(10–11), e22994 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Rodríguez, J. M. The origin of human milk bacteria: Is there a bacterial entero-mammary pathway during late pregnancy and lactation?. Adv. Nutr. 5(6), 779–784 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    LaTuga MS, Stuebe A, Seed PC. A review of the source and function of microbiota in breast milk. In Seminars in Reproductive Medicine, Vol 32, 68–73 (Thieme Medical Publishers, 2014).Chen, W. et al. Lactation stage-dependency of the sow milk microbiota. Front. Microbiol. 9, 945 (2018).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    McInnis, E. A., Kalanetra, K. M., Mills, D. A. & Maga, E. A. Analysis of raw goat milk microbiota: Impact of stage of lactation and lysozyme on microbial diversity. Food Microbiol. 46, 121–131 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gonzalez, E. et al. Distinct changes occur in the human breast milk microbiome between early and established lactation in breastfeeding Guatemalan mothers. Front. Microbiol. 12, 194 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ge, Y. et al. The maternal milk microbiome in mammals of different types and its potential role in the neonatal gut microbiota composition. Animals 11(12), 3349 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Kordy, K. et al. Contributions to human breast milk microbiome and enteromammary transfer of Bifidobacterium breve. PLoS ONE 15(1), e0219633 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jost, T., Lacroix, C., Braegger, C. & Chassard, C. Impact of human milk bacteria and oligosaccharides on neonatal gut microbiota establishment and gut health. Nutr. Rev. 73(7), 426–437 (2015).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Fernández, L. et al. The human milk microbiota: Origin and potential roles in health and disease. Pharmacol. Res. 69(1), 1–10 (2013).PubMed 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Cabrera-Rubio, R. et al. The human milk microbiome changes over lactation and is shaped by maternal weight and mode of delivery. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 96(3), 544–551 (2012).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Gomez-Gallego, C., Garcia-Mantrana, I., Salminen, S. & Collado, M. C. The human milk microbiome and factors influencing its composition and activity. In Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine. Vol 21, 400–405 (Elsevier, 2016).Khodayar-Pardo, P., Mira-Pascual, L., Collado, M. C. & Martínez-Costa, C. Impact of lactation stage, gestational age and mode of delivery on breast milk microbiota. J. Perinatol. 34(8), 599–605 (2014).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Wan, Y. et al. Human milk microbiota development during lactation and its relation to maternal geographic location and gestational hypertensive status. Gut Microbes. 11(5), 1438–1449 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hunt, K. M. et al. Characterization of the diversity and temporal stability of bacterial communities in human milk. PLoS ONE 6(6), e21313 (2011).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Petrullo, L., Jorgensen, M. J., Snyder-Mackler, N. & Lu, A. Composition and stability of the vervet monkey milk microbiome. Am. J. Primatol. 81(10–11), e22982 (2019).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Mittermeier, R. A. et al. Primates in peril: The world’s 25 most endangered primates 2008–2010. Primate Conserv. 24(1), 1–57 (2009).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Williams, J. E. et al. Human milk microbial community structure is relatively stable and related to variations in macronutrient and micronutrient intakes in healthy lactating women. J. Nutr. 147(9), 1739–1748 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Kumar, H. et al. Distinct patterns in human milk microbiota and fatty acid profiles across specific geographic locations. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1619 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Keady, M. et al. Clinical health issues, reproductive hormones, and metabolic hormones associated with gut microbiome structure in African and Asian elephants. Anim. Microbiome. 3, 1–19 (2021).Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. http://www.rstudio.com/ (2020).Bolyen, E. et al. QIIME 2: Reproducible, Interactive, Scalable, and Extensible Microbiome Data Science. PeerJ Preprints (2018).Callahan, B. J. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat. Methods. 13(7), 581 (2016).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Cole, J. R. et al. Ribosomal Database Project: Data and tools for high throughput rRNA analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 42(D1), D633–D642 (2014).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

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

    Google Scholar 
    McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. phyloseq: An R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8(4), e61217 (2013).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Beule, L. & Karlovsky, P. Improved normalization of species count data in ecology by scaling with ranked subsampling (SRS): Application to microbial communities. PeerJ 8, e9593 (2020).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 
    Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. https://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan (2020).Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 57, 289–300 (1995).MathSciNet 
    MATH 

    Google Scholar 
    Kumbhare, S. V., Patangia, D. V., Patil, R. H., Shouche, Y. S. & Patil, N. P. Factors influencing the gut microbiome in children: From infancy to childhood. J. Biosci. 44(2), 1–19 (2019).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Amato, K. R. et al. Phylogenetic and ecological factors impact the gut microbiota of two Neotropical primate species. Oecologia 180(3), 717–733 (2016).ADS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Mulligan, M. E. et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: A consensus review of the microbiology, pathogenesis, and epidemiology with implications for prevention and management. Am. J. Med. 94(3), 313–328 (1993).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ruegg, P. L. A 100-Year Review: Mastitis detection, management, and prevention. J. Dairy Sci. 100(12), 10381–10397 (2017).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Clarridge, J. E. III. Impact of 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis for identification of bacteria on clinical microbiology and infectious diseases. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 17(4), 840–862 (2004).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Martín, V., Mediano, P., Del Campo, R., Rodríguez, J. M. & Marín, M. Streptococcal diversity of human milk and comparison of different methods for the taxonomic identification of streptococci. J. Hum. Lact. 32(4), NP84–NP94 (2016).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Ghebremedhin, B., Layer, F., Konig, W. & Konig, B. Genetic classification and distinguishing of Staphylococcus species based on different partial gap, 16S rRNA, hsp60, rpoB, sodA, and tuf gene sequences. J. Clin. Microbiol. 46(3), 1019–1025 (2008).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Chen, Q. et al. Quantification of human oral and fecal Streptococcus parasanguinis by use of quantitative real-time PCR targeting the groEL gene. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2910 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Plows, J. F. et al. Longitudinal changes in human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs) over the course of 24 months of lactation. J. Nutr. 151(4), 876–882 (2021).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Boehm, G. & Stahl, B. Oligosaccharides from milk. J. Nutr. 137(3), 847S-849S (2007).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    van Leeuwen, S. S. et al. Goat milk oligosaccharides: Their diversity, quantity, and functional properties in comparison to human milk oligosaccharides. J. Agric. Food Chem. 68(47), 13469–13485 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Tao, N. et al. Evolutionary glycomics: Characterization of milk oligosaccharides in primates. J. Proteome Res. 10(4), 1548–1557 (2011).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Yu, Z.-T., Chen, C. & Newburg, D. S. Utilization of major fucosylated and sialylated human milk oligosaccharides by isolated human gut microbes. Glycobiology 23(11), 1281–1292 (2013).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bolotin, A. et al. Complete sequence and comparative genome analysis of the dairy bacterium Streptococcus thermophilus. Nat. Biotechnol. 22(12), 1554–1558 (2004).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Schwab, C. & Gänzle, M. Lactic acid bacteria fermentation of human milk oligosaccharide components, human milk oligosaccharides and galactooligosaccharides. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 315(2), 141–148 (2011).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Marcobal, A. et al. Consumption of human milk oligosaccharides by gut-related microbes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58(9), 5334–5340 (2010).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Uriot, O. et al. Streptococcus thermophilus: From yogurt starter to a new promising probiotic candidate?. J. Funct. Foods. 37, 74–89 (2017).CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Duar, R. M., Henrick, B. M., Casaburi, G. & Frese, S. A. Integrating the ecosystem services framework to define dysbiosis of the breastfed infant gut: The role of B. infantis and human milk oligosaccharides. Front. Nutr. 7, 33 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    Article 
    CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Singh, R. P., Niharika, J., Kondepudi, K. K., Bishnoi, M. & Tingirikari, J. M. R. Recent understanding of human milk oligosaccharides in establishing infant gut microbiome and roles in immune system. Food Res. Int. 151, 110884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110884 (2022).CAS 
    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ximenez, C. & Torres, J. Development of microbiota in infants and its role in maturation of gut mucosa and immune system. Arch. Med. Res. 48(8), 666–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcmed.2017.11.007 (2017).Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Meehan, C. L. et al. Social networks, cooperative breeding, and the human milk microbiome. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 30(4), e23131 (2018).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bornbusch, S. L. et al. Stable and transient structural variation in lemur vaginal, labial and axillary microbiomes: Patterns by species, body site, ovarian hormones and forest access. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 96(6), fiaa090 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Bornbusch, S. L. & Drea, C. M. Antibiotic resistance genes in lemur gut and soil microbiota along a gradient of anthropogenic disturbance. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.704070 (2021).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Grieneisen, L. E. et al. Genes, geology and germs: Gut microbiota across a primate hybrid zone are explained by site soil properties, not host species. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2019(286), 20190431 (1901).
    Google Scholar 
    Ellison, S. et al. The influence of habitat and phylogeny on the skin microbiome of amphibians in Guatemala and Mexico. Microb. Ecol. 78(1), 257–267 (2019).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Phillips, C. D. et al. Microbiome analysis among bats describes influences of host phylogeny, life history, physiology and geography. Mol. Ecol. 21(11), 2617–2627 (2012).PubMed 
    Article 

    Google Scholar  More