Ecology

The coefficient of variation of phytoplankton ((CV_P)) varies with the changes in environmental factors, namely, light, temperature and salinity and many more. The focus of our discussion will be on the variation of (CV_P) of phytoplankton.Case 1: (CV_P < 1) Measured (CV_P) values are 0.32, 0.37, 0.78 at the depth of 10 m, 50 m, 50 m of Region 3, Region 4 and Region 2 respectively. From Fig. 1c, we observe that for Region 3, concentrated mean of phytoplankton has escalated over a larger domain along the horizontal axis, while spread of phytoplankton is comparatively very low and constant for all times, whereas for Region 2 and Region 4 (Fig. 1,b,e), spread of phytoplankton is comparatively high, but, quantity of concentrated biomass is higher at Region 4 than Region 2, which is also supported by higher phytoplankton productivity at Region 4 than Region 2.Nature of spread of phytoplankton is obtained from the dynamics of normalized variance x of phytoplankton, which depends on (beta). At a fixed depth, x increases with increasing (beta) (Fig. 5b). For all regions where (CV_P1). Therefore, spread x remains comparatively low (Fig. 7b), whereas (p_0) is close to 1 (Fig. 7a), which causes (CV_P) to be less than 1 (Fig. 7c) at this zone.From above discussion we observe that when (varepsilon) belongs to (0.035, 0.1) and due to this range of (varepsilon), domain of (beta) reduces for a location, then (CV_P) remains less than 1 at that zone. These domains of (varepsilon , beta) are determined from nature of phytoplankton productivity at a location during the period of observation and nature of the spread of dominating class. It has been observed that in case of Region 3, during early summer season (May), the existing phytoplankton communities are Skeletonema Costatum, Navicula species and Pyraminonas Grossii36, for Region 4, the existing phytoplankton communities in Sep are diatom Skeletonema Costatum, Dinoflagellates, Raphidophytes and others35, whereas for Region 2, the existing classes in May are diatom Skeletonema Costatum, Raphidophytes and others35. But, for all three regions during corresponding time periods, most of the phytoplankton biomass is dominated by the diatom class, Skeletonema Costatum35,36. Spread of this phytoplankton class has a peculiar nature, which is influenced by its measure of stickiness (alpha), where (alpha in (0,,0.98))43. Now, during the period of observation, since the dominating class Skeletonema Costatum coexists with some other phytoplankton classes at all three regions, therefore range of its measure of stickiness (alpha) should belong to (0.02, 0.25) for these regions and depending on (alpha), scatteredness of Skeletonema Costatum has varied for these zones, that is, when (alpha) is high, scatteredness of Skeletonema Costatum reduces and when (alpha) is low, this scatteredness increases. In field observation, we have seen that, at Region 3, scatteredness of Skeletonema Costatum is very low in May 2011, whereas for Region 4 and Region 2, it is slightly higher in Sep 2007 and May 2011. For all three zones, (alpha) belongs to ((0.02,,0.25)) but its value has varied differently for each zone. If we consider (alpha) to be high for Region 3 in May 2011, then Skeletonema Costatum will be more sticky for that zone during that time period which will hinder the scatteredness. If we assume (alpha) to be slightly high for Region 2, Region 4 for corresponding time periods, then Skeletonema Costatum will be less sticky than Region 3 and scatteredness will be slightly higher for these zones by that time.In the model, spread due to scatteredness is controlled by low (beta) value. Therefore, ecologically it might be considered that during early summer at Region 3, (alpha) value was close to 0.25, which has caused Skeletonema Costatum to remain more sticky at that zone, as a result, spread was very low which represents low (beta) value. Similar ecological assumptions can be drawn in case of Region 2, Region 4, but the only difference is probably, for these two zones in summer and early spring season respectively, (alpha) was slightly low than Region 3. As a result, the dominating class Skeletonema Costatum was less sticky than Region 3 and spread due to scatteredness was slightly higher than Region 3 (Fig. S4b). Hence, differences in the nature of total biomass of a system, nature of productivity and finally nature of stickiness of dominating phytoplankton species cause high irregularity in phytoplankton distribution and produce low (CV_P) values for Region 2, Region 3 (Fig. 7c, Fig. S4c) and Region 4 (Fig. 8c, Fig. S4c). Case 2: (CV_P > 1)
In case of Region 4, at the depth of 50 m, (CV_P) remains 1.61 and 1.36 in Dec 2006 and Feb 2008 respectively. In Dec 2006, Feb 2008, due to very low productivity, range of (varepsilon) remains (0.35, 1.0) at Region 4, which generates larger domain of (beta) (considering total biomass and half saturation constant remain the same at Region 4 during both time periods Dec 2006 and Feb 2008). Since total biomass A is conserved, large value of (beta) indicates larger value of B, which ecologically implies spread of all fluctuating components of nutrient and phytoplankton remains higher. Therefore, in Dec 2006 and Feb 2008, spread of phytoplankton remains higher, whereas due to very low productivity, most of the total biomass A is dominated by nutrient biomass (n_0) and phytoplankton biomass (p_0) remains very low, that is, (p_0 More

Experimental design and crop managementThe study was conducted during 2019 in a field experiment on an arable soil (classified as Luvisols) in the deep root experimental facility at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark (Supplementary Table S4). The experiment was conducted with two diverse perennial deep-rooted species: the tap-rooted forage legume lucerne (Medicago sativa L. (cv. Creno); Family: Fabaceae) with the capacity to fix N2 and the intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium; Family: Poaceae) kernza developed by the Land Institute (Salina, Kansas, USA). Kernza was initially sown on April 11th, 2015 and lucerne on September 9th, 2016 with a seeding density of 20 kg seeds ha−1. Every year, kernza was fertilized with NPK fertilizer (21:7:3; NH4:NO3 = 1.28) as a single dose in early spring (before the onset of plant growth). Kernza was harvested every year in August using a combine harvester and lucerne three times per year in June, August, and October. Plants were rainfed with a subsurface drain installed at both 1 and 2 m depth running between the plots.For each species, fixed frames of 0.75 m2 were inserted in the soil (ca. 5 cm) within each field plot. Specifically, three field plots of lucerne (with observable root nodulation) and kernza were used where each of the three kernza field plots contained two subplots of N fertilized kernza at 100 kg N ha−1 (K100) (i.e., the standard fertilization within this field) and N fertilized kernza at 200 kg N ha−1 (K200) (i.e., within the range of standard fertilization practices for kernza). Before the onset of plant growth, all plots received 15N (as 15NH4Cl; 98 atom%) in trace amounts (corresponding to 1 kg N ha−1) to trace N allocation from the surface to deeper layers.
13C/14C-CO2-labelingWithin each fixed frame, the 13C/14C-CO2-labeling was conducted using an atmospheric labeling chamber41. Labeling with C-tracers was done with multiple-pulse labeling (three times per week) over two months until first harvest (May 2nd to June 20th 2019). Glass beakers containing 13C labeled bicarbonate (0.1 g mL−1 labeling solution; 99 atom%), and 14C labeled bicarbonate (11 kBq mL−1 labeling solution) within a solution of NaOH (1 M) were added within each of the labeling chambers. Once chambers were sealed, hydrochloric acid (HCl; 2 M) was added to the labeling solution (in equivalent amounts) via a syringe promoting 14CO2/13CO2 evolution. Chambers remained sealed for one to three hours (between 9 am and 12 pm) depending on weather conditions (i.e., the duration and intensity of sunshine). The amount of added labeling solution sequentially increased with increasing plant growth (i.e., 5 mL per 20 cm increase in plant height) reaching a plant height of 100–120 cm at the termination of the labeling.Shoot, root, and soil samplingThe labeling plots (0.75 m2) were harvested on June 20th, 2019 to obtain the aboveground biomass of lucerne and kernza (K100 and K200). The aboveground biomass in addition to samples obtained from unlabeled parts of the field was directly stored at − 20 °C until drying at 105 °C for two days. For each plot and unlabeled samples, the plant biomass was homogenized and ball-milled for subsequent isotopic analyses.Soil cores to 1.5 m depth were taken inside all labeling plots, and cores were subdivided into four depth intervals: 0–25, 25–50, 50–100, and 100–150 cm. The soil coring was conducted in 25 cm intervals using a soil auger (6 cm inner diameter). Specifically, per depth three soil samples were taken and stored at 4–5 °C (ca. two days) and then immediately processed and stored at -20 °C until analyses. Roots, bulk soil and rhizosphere soil (adhering to the roots), were separated by sequential sieving of the soil with finer mesh sizes to 1 mm as described by Peixoto, et al.26. A subsample of the bulk soil (ca. 150 g) from each depth in all labeling plots was washed on a 250 µm sieve to recover root fragments for subsequent isotopic determination in unrecovered root fragments. Soil samples (and associated roots) from unlabeled parts of the larger field plots were used to determine natural abundance of 13C/14C/15N with depth. The collection of plant material complied with relevant institutional guidelines and seeds were gifted by University of Copenhagen.Determination of 13C/14C/15N enrichment, and C and N quantityFor each defined depth, samples of roots and soil were homogenized, freeze-dried (except PLFA samples that were stored at − 20 °C), and ground in a ball-mill for the determination of total C and N, 13C, 15N, and 14C activity. Total C, N, 13C, and 15N were measured with a FLASH 2000 CHNS/O Elemental Analyzer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Cambridge, UK) combined to a Delta V Advantage isotope ratio mass spectrometer via a ConFlo III interface (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bremen, Germany) at the Centre for Stable Isotope Research and Analysis (Georg August University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany).All δ13C values are standardized to the Vienna PeeDee Belemnite international isotope standard and δ15N values standardized to the δ15N values of atmospheric N2. 13C and 15N enrichment is expressed as atom% excess as calculated by the atom% difference between the respective labeled and unlabeled samples. The 14C activity was determined by combustion in a Hidex 600 OX Oxidizer (Hidex, Turku, Finland) and counted on a liquid scintillation counter (Tri-Carb 3180TR/SL, PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA). 14C enrichment is determined by the difference in the 14C activity (Bq g−1) between the respective labeled and unlabeled samples.Calculation of root C and net rhizodepositionThe amount of root C (mg C kg−1 soil) was calculated based on the root dry matter and C concentration divided by the quantity of soil sampled38. For the determination of net rhizodeposition, 14C was used due to lower detection limits in deeper soil layers42. A modified tracer mass balance approach described by Rasmussen, et al.43 with adjusted unrecovered root fragments41 was used to determine the net rhizodeposition based on the following equations where the %ClvR is the relative proportion of rhizodeposition expressed as the percent C lost via rhizodeposition:$${text{%ClvR}} = frac{{^{{{14}}} {text{C Soil (rhizosphere + adjusted bulk)}}}}{{^{{{14}}} {text{C bulk soil }} + ,^{{{14}}} {text{C rhizosphere soil}} + ,^{{{14}}} {text{C Root}}}} times 100.$$$${text{Net rhizodeposition}} = frac{{{text{%ClvR }} times {text{ root C content}}}}{{left( {100 – % {text{ClvR}}} right)}}$$The 14C soil content was the sum of the adjusted bulk soil 14C and rhizosphere 14C content for each soil sample. The 14C rhizosphere and bulk soil content for each soil sample were determined by multiplying the total quantity of C by the 14C enrichment of the soil. The adjusted bulk soil 14C content was calculated as the difference between the bulk 14C soil content by the 14C root washed content as determined by the multiplication of 14C enrichment in root fragments recovered from a subsample of soil by the total C content within the entire soil volume sampled. The 14C root content was determined by multiplying the total quantify of C in roots by the 14C enrichment. Similar equations were used to calculate the net rhizodeposition of N based on 15N enrichment within the soil and roots.Biomarker analysesPhospholipid fatty acid (PLFA)The analysis of PLFAs was done according to a modified protocol by Frostegård, et al.44 with a detailed description of the modifications provided by Gunina, et al.45. In brief, 25 μL of 1,2-Dinonadecanoyl-sn-Glycero-3-Phosphatidylcholine (C19:0) (1 mg mL–1) were added to each of the samples and used in the quantification of recovery of the phospholipids. The lipid fraction from 5–6 g of rhizosphere soil was extracted twice using a one-phase Bligh-Dyer extractant46 of chloroform, methanol (MeOH), and citrate buffer (pH 4) (1:2:0.8, v/v/v). To isolate the phospholipid fraction, a solid-phase extraction with activated silica gel and methanol elution was conducted. The derivatization into fatty acid methyl esters occurred via a sequential hydrolyzation with 0.5 mL sodium hydroxide (NaOH) (0.5 M) in MeOH for 10 min at 100 °C and methylation with 0.75 mL of boron trifluoride (BF3) (1.3 M) in MeOH for 15 min at 80 °C. An external standard stock solution containing 28 individual fatty acids (ca. 1 mg mL–1 per fatty acid) used in the quantification of PLFA content was simultaneously derivatized with the samples. The residues were dissolved in 185 μL of toluene, and 15 μL of the internal standard 2, tridecanoic acid methyl ester (C13:0) (1 mg mL–1) were added to each sample prior to measurement using an Agilent 7820A GC coupled to an Agilent 5977 quadrupole mass spectrometer (Agilent, Waldbronn, Germany). The sum of all PLFAs was used as a proxy of the living microbial biomass based on the direct relation between PLFAs and microbial biomass.Amino sugars (AS)Amino sugars were extracted according to a modified protocol by Zhang and Amelung47 with a detailed description of the procedure by Peixoto, et al.26. In brief, 0.8–1.5 g of freeze-dried rhizosphere soil were hydrolyzed with the addition of 11 mL of 6 M HCl for 8 h at 105 °C. Following hydrolysis, soil samples were filtered and HCl was removed via rotary evaporation at 45 °C to dry the filtrate. Prior to derivatization both iron precipitates and salts were removed from the filtrate and 25 μL of the internal standard 1, methylglucamine (MeGlcN) (1 mg mL–1) was added and used for quantification of recovery. The derivatization into aldononitrile acetates was conducted as described by Zhang and Amelung47. For the quantification of AS, an external standard stock solution containing the AS: N-acetylglucosamine (GlcN) (2 mg mL–1), N-acetylgalactosamine (GalN) (2 mg mL–1), N-acetylmuramic acid (MurN) (1 mg mL–1), mannosamine (ManN) (2 mg mL–1), and MeGlcN (1 mg mL–1) was derivatized and analyzed with the samples. The residues were dissolved in 185 μL of ethyl acetate-hexane (1:1, v/v), and 15 μL of the internal standard 2, tridecanoic acid methyl ester (1 mg mL–1), were added to the samples for measurement using an Agilent 7890A GC coupled to Agilent 7000A triple quadrupole mass spectrometer (Agilent, Waldbronn, Germany). Total amino sugars content was calculated as the summation of the four detected amino sugars: GlcN, MurN, GalN, and ManN.Amino acids (AA)Amino acids were extracted from both freeze-dried rhizosphere soil and root samples according to the protocol by Enggrob, et al.48. In brief, 0.8–3 g of rhizosphere soil and 0.02 g of root were hydrolyzed with the addition of 2 mL of 6 M HCl for 20 h at 110 °C to break the peptide bonds. Samples were subsequently purified via the removal of lipophilic and solid compounds by the addition of 4 mL n-hexane/dichloromethane (6:5, v/v) to the soil and root samples. Following centrifugation, the aqueous phase was filtered through glass wool and rinsed with 2 × 0.5 mL 0.1 M HCl into new glass tubes with the addition of 300 μL of the internal standard, norleucine (2.5 mM). The samples were freeze-dried and the residues dissolved in 1 mL 0.01 M HCl prior to the separation of amino acids and amino sugars (i.e., N containing compounds) on a polypropylene column with a cation exchange resin. The amino acids were eluted with a 2.5 M ammonium hydroxide solution and freeze-dried prior to derivatization of the amino acids as described by Enggrob, et al.48. For the quantification of AA, an external standard stock solution containing 14 AA was derivatized and analyzed with the samples. The amino acids were measured using a trace GC Ultra mounted with a TriPlus autosampler (Thermo Scientific, Hvidovre, Denmark) coupled via a combustion reactor (GC IsoLink, Thermo Scientific) to an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Delta V Plus IRMS, Thermo Scientific). The total AA content of the rhizosphere soil and roots was based on the summation of the AA: alanine, Asx (asparagine and aspartate), Glx (glutamine and glutamate), glycine, isoleucine, lysine, phenylalanine, Pro/Thr (proline and threonine), serine, tyrosine, and valine.Compound-specific stable isotope probingTo determine the 13C enrichment of biomarkers, all raw δ13C were measured individually for AS and PLFA using a Delta V Advantage isotope ratio mass spectrometer via a ConFlo III interface (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Bremen, Germany). For AA, all raw δ13C were measured using a trace GC Ultra mounted with a TriPlus autosampler (Thermo Scientific, Hvidovre, Denmark) coupled via a combustion reactor (GC IsoLink, Thermo Scientific) to an isotope ratio mass spectrometer (Delta V Plus IRMS, Thermo Scientific). For each sample, chromatogram peaks identified based on retention times specific for the measured amino sugars, PLFA, and AA were integrated using Isodat v. 3.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific). All raw δ13C values were corrected for dilution by additional C atoms added during the derivatization, amount dependence, offset, and drift (for PLFA samples)49,50,51. To determine the 13C incorporation into each biomarker, the 13C excess for each biomarker as determined by the difference between the 13C of the labeled and unlabeled biomarker was multiplied by the C content of the specific biomarker.Relative microbial stabilization (RMS)The relative microbial stabilization is based on the relation of rhizodeposited 13C in the PLFA and amino sugar pools as described in detail by Peixoto, et al.26. The underlying assumption is that 13C incorporation into the amino sugar pool indicates the transformation of rhizodeposited C into necromass52,53, and the 13C incorporation into the PLFA pool (i.e., the living microbial biomass) represents a temporary C pool as PLFAs are immediately exposed to degradation following cell lysis54. The relative microbial stabilization (RMS) is calculated as follows:$${text{Relative microbial stabilization}} = {text{log}}frac{{{text{Average weighted atom% }},^{{{13}}} {text{C excess AS}}}}{{{text{Average weighted atom% }},^{{{13}}} {text{C excess PLFA}}}}$$where the average weighted atom% 13C excess is determined by the total 13C incorporation divided by the total C content of the respective PLFA or amino sugar pools. Accordingly RMS  0 is indicative of higher stabilization of C based on the dominant entry of C into the microbial necromass. However, the RMS indicator does not imply the absolute stability of rhizodeposited C, but rather signifies the potential for microbial stabilization among contrasting experimental variables (i.e., depth and plant species).Molecular analysisDNA extractionFrom each sample, 0.5 g of freeze-dried rhizosphere soil was used for DNA extraction using the Fast DNA Spin kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals, Solon, OH, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocol with a single modification. Following, the addition of Binding Matrix, the suspension was washed with 5.5 M Guanidine Thiocyanate (protocol from MP Biomedicals) to remove humic acids that could inhibit preceding polymerase chain reaction (PCR) steps. The DNA was eluted in DNase free water and purified using the NucleoSpin gDNA Clean-up kit following the manufacturer’s protocol (Macherey–Nagel, Düren, Germany). The purity and concentration of DNA were checked on Nanodrop and Qubit, respectively.Amplicon sequencingExtracted DNA was sent to Novogene Europe (Cambridge, United Kingdom) for library preparation and amplicon sequencing. For 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing of the V3-V4 regions, the primer pair 341 F and 806 R were used (Supplementary Table S5). To identify the fungal communities, we targeted the Internal Transcribed Spacer (ITS) Region 1, using the primer pair ITS1 and ITS2 (Supplementary Table S5). The constructed libraries were sequenced using a Novaseq 6000 platform producing 2 × 250 bp paired-end reads. Raw sequences were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (Bioproject number PRJNA736561).Quantitative PCRCopy numbers of the 16S rRNA gene were determined by quantitative PCR (qPCR) using the primers 341F and 805R (Supplementary Table S5) on an AriaMX Real-Time PCR System (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). An external plasmid standard curve was made based on the pCR 2.1 TOPO vector (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) with a 16S rRNA gene insert amplified from bulk soil. The PCR reaction was performed in 20 µl reactions containing: 1 × Brilliant III Ultra-Fast SYBR green low ROX qPCR Master Mix (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA), 0.05 µg/µl BSA (New England Biolabs Inc., Ipswich, MA, USA), 0.4 µM of each primer and 2 μl of template DNA. The thermal cycling conditions were 3 min at 95 °C followed by 40 cycles of 20 s at 95 °C and 30 s at 58 °C, and a final extension for 1 min at 95 °C. A melting curve was included according to the default settings of the AriaMx qPCR software (Agilent Technologies). The reaction efficiencies were between 97 and 102%. Fungal quantification was done by qPCR amplification of the Internal Transcribed Spacer 1 (ITS1) using the primers ITS1-F and ITS2 (Supplementary Table S5). A plasmid standard curve was made using the pCR 2.1 TOPO vector containing an ITS1 region from Penicillium aculeatum. Reaction mixture and cycling conditions were as described above for the 16S rRNA gene (Supplementary Table S5). The reaction efficiency was 84%.Quantification of functional genes involved in N cyclingThe five bacterial genes amoA, nirK, nirS, nosZ, and nifH coding for enzymes involved in N-cycling were quantified by qPCR on an AriaMx Real-Time PCR System (Agilent Technologies). Reaction mixtures and cycling conditions were as described above for the 16S rRNA gene (Supplementary Table S5). The standard curves were prepared as described in Garcia-Lemos, et al.55. The reaction efficiencies were in the range 87%-105%.Sequence processingRaw reads were treated using DADA2 version 1.14.156. In brief, reads were quality checked and primers were removed using Cutadapt v. 1.1557. We followed the protocol DADA2 using default parameters, with a few modifications. For 16S rRNA sequences, the forward and reverse reads were trimmed to 222 and 219 bp, respectively, while the maxEE was set to 2 and 5 for forward and reverse reads, respectively. Detection of amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) was done using the pseudo-pool option and forward and reverse reads were merged with a minimum overlap of 10 bp. Merged reads in the range of 395–439 bp were kept, as reads outside this range are considered too long or too short for the sequenced region. Taxonomy was assigned using the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) classifier58 with the Silva database v.13859. For ITS region 1, quality filtered reads shorter than 50 bp were removed prior to merging the forward and the reverse reads, with maxEE set to two for both forward and reverse reads. During merging, the minimum overlap was set to 20 (default). Taxonomy was assigned with the RDP classifier using the Unite v. 8.2 database60 after removal of chimeras.As ITS region 1 has a variable length, reads can be lost during merging. Hence, to validate our dataset we ran only the forward reads through the DADA2 pipeline and compared the overall community structure with the dataset from the merging using a Mantel test. No significant changes were observed in the community structures between the two datasets (r = 0.99; p = 0.0001). To obtain the highest taxonomic resolution, the dataset based on the merged reads was used. Further analysis was done using the phyloseq v. 1.30.0 R package61.Statistical analysisAnalyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to examine the effects of N fertilized kernza at 100 kg N ha−1 (K100) and kernza at 200 kg N ha−1 (K200) as well as to test the effect of the deep-rooted plant species: kernza and lucerne, and soil depth on each of the dependent variables. An average across the two subplots within each of the three kernza field plots was used when measured variables did not significantly differ between K100 and K200. Subsequent pairwise comparisons of the means was conducted using the TukeyHSD post-hoc test. Homogeneity of variance and normality were confirmed (data log-transformed when required) for all comparisons using the Fligner-Killeen test of homogeneity of variances62 and the Shapiro–Wilk test of normality63. A permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) using the Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrix with the adonis function in the vegan R package was used to test the effect of K100 and K200, lucerne across both K100 and K200, and depth on the bacterial and fungal communities. The multivariate homogeneity of group dispersions or variances were confirmed for all comparisons using the function betadisper in vegan. The bacterial and fungal communities in response to the ascribed variables were visually represented as ordination plots with a Principle Coordinates Analysis (PCoA). Unique ASVs were defined for each depth and between K100, K200, and lucerne as ASVs only present in those samples belonging to a specific depth and treatment. Significance testing was conducted at p  More

Shackleton, N. J., Sánchez-Goñi, M. F., Pailler, D. & Lancelot, Y. Marine isotope substage 5e and the eemian interglacial. Glob. Planet. Change 36, 151–155 (2003).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Shackleton, N. J., Chapman, M., Sánchez-Goñi, M. F., Pailler, D. & Lancelot, Y. The classic marine isotope substage 5e. Quat. Res. 58, 14–16 (2002).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hofreiter, M. & Stewart, J. Ecological change, range fluctuations and population dynamics during the pleistocene. Curr. Biol. 19, R584–R594 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hewitt, G. M. Post-glacial re-colonization of European biota. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 68, 87–112 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Petit, R. J. et al. Glacial refugia: hotspots but not melting pots of genetic diversity. Science 300, 1563–1565 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Magri, D., Di Rita, F., Aranbarri, J., Fletcher, W. & González-Sampériz, P. Quaternary disappearance of tree taxa from Southern Europe: timing and trends. Quat. Sci. Rev. 163, 23–55 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Calatayud, J. et al. Pleistocene climate change and the formation of regional species pools. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, 20190291 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Ebdon, S. et al. The Pleistocene species pump past its prime: evidence from European butterfly sister species. Mol. Ecol. 30, 3575–3589 (2021).Záveská, E. et al. Multiple auto- and allopolyploidisations marked the Pleistocene history of the widespread Eurasian steppe plant Astragalus onobrychis (Fabaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 139, 106572 (2019).Wesche, K. et al. The Palaearctic steppe biome: a new synthesis. Biodivers. Conserv. 25, 2197–2231 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Walter, H. & Breckle, S. Ökologie der Erde, Band 1. (Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 1991).Braun-Blanquet, J. Die inneralpine Trockenvegetation: von der Provence bis zur Steiermark. (Gustav Fischer, 1961).Hurka, H. et al. The Eurasian steppe belt: Status quo, origin and evolutionary history. Turczaninowia 22, 5–71 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Jännicke, W. Die Sandflora von Mainz, ein Relict aus der Steppenzeit. (Gebrueder Knauer, 1892).Allen, J. R. M. et al. Rapid environmental changes in southern Europe during the last glacial period. Nature 400, 740–743 (1999).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Reille, M. & de Beaulieu, J. L. Pollen analysis of a long upper Pleistocene continental sequence in a Velay maar (Massif Central, France). Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 80, 35–48 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Sadori, L. et al. Pollen-based paleoenvironmental and paleoclimatic change at Lake Ohrid (south-eastern Europe) during the past 500 ka. Biogeosciences 13, 1423–1437 (2016).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ellenberg, H. & Leuschner, C. Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen: in ökologischer, dynamischer und historischer Sicht. (Stuttgart: Verlag Eugen Ulmer, 2010).Kirschner, P. et al. Long-term isolation of European steppe outposts boosts the biomes conservation value. Nat. Commun. 11, 1968 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fonseca, E. M., Colli, G. R., Werneck, F. P. & Carstens, B. C. Phylogeographic model selection using convolutional neural networks. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 21, 2661–2675 (2021).Beaumont, M. A., Zhang, W. & Balding, D. J. Approximate Bayesian computation in population genetics. Genetics 162, 2025–2035 (2002).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Csilléry, K., Blum, M. G. B., Gaggiotti, O. E. & François, O. Approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) in practice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 410–418 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Flagel, L., Brandvain, Y. & Schrider, D. R. The unreasonable effectiveness of convolutional neural networks in population genetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 36, 220–238 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Robert, C. P., Cornuet, J.-M., Marin, J.-M. & Pillai, N. S. Lack of confidence in approximate Bayesian computation model choice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 15112–15117 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sanchez, T., Cury, J., Charpiat, G. & Jay, F. Deep learning for population size history inference: design, comparison and combination with approximate Bayesian computation. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 21, 2645–2660 (2021).Liu, X. & Fu, Y.-X. Stairway Plot 2: demographic history inference with folded SNP frequency spectra. Genome Biol. 21, 280 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Liu, X. & Fu, Y.-X. Exploring population size changes using SNP frequency spectra. Nat. Genet. 47, 555–559 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Magri, D. et al. A new scenario for the quaternary history of European beech populations: palaeobotanical evidence and genetic consequences. New Phytol. 171, 199–221 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pironon, S. et al. Geographic variation in genetic and demographic performance: new insights from an old biogeographical paradigm. Biol. Rev. 92, 1877–1909 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Arenas, M., Ray, N., Currat, M. & Excoffier, L. Consequences of range contractions and range shifts on molecular diversity. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29, 207–218 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Excoffier, L., Foll, M. & Petit, R. J. Genetic consequences of range expansions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40, 481–501 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Mona, S., Ray, N., Arenas, M. & Excoffier, L. Genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation during a range expansion. Heredity 112, 291–299 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Szűcs, M., Melbourne, B. A., Tuff, T. & Hufbauer, R. A. The roles of demography and genetics in the early stages of colonization. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 281, 20141073 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Loog, L. Sometimes hidden but always there: the assumptions underlying genetic inference of demographic histories. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 376, 20190719 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Narbona, E., Arista, M. & Ortiz, P. L. Explosive seed dispersal in two perennial Mediterranean Euphorbia species (Euphorbiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 92, 510–516 (2005).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Stevens, V. M. et al. A comparative analysis of dispersal syndromes in terrestrial and semi-terrestrial animals. Ecol. Lett. 17, 1039–1052 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Flouri, T., Jiao, X., Rannala, B. & Yang, Z. Species tree inference with BPP using genomic sequences and the multispecies coalescent. Mol. Biol. Evol. 35, 2585–2593 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Willeit, M., Ganopolski, A., Calov, R. & Brovkin, V. Mid-Pleistocene transition in glacial cycles explained by declining CO2 and regolith removal. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav7337 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, J., Sato, M., Russell, G. & Kharecha, P. Climate sensitivity, sea level and atmospheric carbon dioxide. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 371, 20120294 (2013).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Martinson, D. G. et al. Age dating and the orbital theory of the ice ages: Development of a high-resolution 0 to 300,000-year chronostratigraphy. Quat. Res. 27, 1–29 (1987).CAS 

Google Scholar 
OConnell, K. A. et al. Impacts of the Toba eruption and montane forest expansion on diversification in Sumatran parachuting frogs (Rhacophorus). Mol. Ecol. 29, 2994–3009 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Theodoridis, S. et al. How do cold-adapted plants respond to climatic cycles? Interglacial expansion explains current distribution and genomic diversity in Primula farinosa L. Syst. Biol. 66, 715–736 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Williams, M. The More

Good, S. P., Noone, D. & Bowen, G. Hydrologic connectivity constrains partitioning of global terrestrial water fluxes. Science 349, 175–177 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Masson-Delmotte, V. et al. Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. contribution of working group I to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel of climate change. Global warming of 1.5 C. An IPCC Special Report (2021).Milly, P. C. D., Dunne, K. A. & Vecchia, A. V. Global pattern of trends in streamflow and water availability in a changing climate. Nature 438, 347–350 (2005).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

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, 3044 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Miralles, D. G., Gentine, P., Seneviratne, S. I. & Teuling, A. J. Land-atmospheric feedbacks during droughts and heatwaves: state of the science and current challenges. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1436, 19–35 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schwalm, C. R. et al. Global patterns of drought recovery. Nature 548, 202–205 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sippel, S. et al. Drought, heat, and the carbon cycle: a review. Curr. Clim. Change Rep. 4, 266–286 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Peterson, T. J., Saft, M., Peel, M. C. & John, A. Watersheds may not recover from drought. Science 372, 745–749 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Vicente-Serrano, S. M., Beguería, S. & L`ópez-Moreno, J. I. A multiscalar drought index sensitive to global warming: the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index. J. Clim. 23, 1696–1718 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Anderson, M. C. et al. The evaporative stress index as an indicator of agricultural drought in brazil: an assessment based on crop yield impacts. Remote Sens. Environ. 174, 82–99 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Fisher, J. B. et al. The future of evapotranspiration: global requirements for ecosystem functioning, carbon and climate feedbacks, agricultural management, and water resources. Water Resour. Res. 53, 2618–2626 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Kalma, J. D., McVicar, T. R. & McCabe, M. F. Estimating land surface evaporation: a review of methods using remotely sensed surface temperature data. Surv. Geophys. 29, 421–469 (2008).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Melton, F. S. et al. Openet: Filling a critical data gap in water management for the western united states. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association (2021). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1752-1688.12956. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1752-1688.12956.Lawrence, D. M. et al. The community land model version 5: Description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty. J. Adv. Modeling Earth Syst. 11, 4245–4287 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Niu, G.-Y. et al. The community noah land surface model with multiparameterization options (noah-mp): 1. model description and evaluation with local-scale measurements. J. Geophys. Res.: Atmosph. 116 (2011). https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2010JD015139.Miralles, D. G. et al. Global land-surface evaporation estimated from satellite-based observations. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 453–469 (2011).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Fisher, J. B., Tu, K. P. & Baldocchi, D. D. Global estimates of the land-atmosphere water flux based on monthly avhrr and islscp-ii data, validated at 16 fluxnet sites. Remote Sens. Environ. 112, 901–919 (2008).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mu, Q., Zhao, M. & Running, S. W. Improvements to a modis global terrestrial evapotranspiration algorithm. Remote Sens. Environ. 115, 1781–1800 (2011).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Mueller, B. & Seneviratne, S. I. Systematic land climate and evapotranspiration biases in cmip5 simulations. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 128–134 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Koppa, A., Alam, S., Miralles, D. G. & Gebremichael, M. Budyko-based long-term water and energy balance closure in global watersheds from earth observations. Water Resour. Res. 57, e2020WR028658 (2021).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fisher, J. B. et al. The future of evapotranspiration: global requirements for ecosystem functioning, carbon and climate feedbacks, agricultural management, and water resources. Water Resour. Res. 53, 2618–2626 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Penman, H. L. & Keen, B. A. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A. Math. Phys. Sci. 193, 120–145 (1948).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Priestley, C. H. B. & Taylor, R. J. On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large-scale parameters. Monthly Weather Rev. 100, 81–92 (1972).
Google Scholar 
Maes, W. H., Gentine, P., Verhoest, N. E. C. & Miralles, D. G. Potential evaporation at eddy-covariance sites across the globe. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23, 925–948 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Zhao, W. L. et al. Physics-constrained machine learning of evapotranspiration. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 14496–14507 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Miralles, D. G. et al. The wacmos-et project – part 2: Evaluation of global terrestrial evaporation data sets. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 20, 823–842 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Green, J. K., Berry, J., Ciais, P., Zhang, Y. & Gentine, P. Amazon rainforest photosynthesis increases in response to atmospheric dryness. Sci. Adv. 6 (2020). https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/47/eabb7232. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/47/eabb7232.full.pdf.Verhoef, A. & Egea, G. Modeling plant transpiration under limited soil water: Comparison of different plant and soil hydraulic parameterizations and preliminary implications for their use in land surface models. Agric. For. Meteorol. 191, 22–32 (2014).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Powell, T. L. et al. Confronting model predictions of carbon fluxes with measurements of amazon forests subjected to experimental drought. N. Phytologist 200, 350–365 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Wu, X. et al. Parameterization of the water stress reduction function based on soil–plant water relations. Irrig. Sci. 39, 101–122 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Zhang, J., Liu, P., Zhang, F. & Song, Q. Cloudnet: Ground-based cloud classification with deep convolutional neural network. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 8665–8672 (2018).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Hengl, T. et al. Soilgrids250m: global gridded soil information based on machine learning. PLoS ONE 12, 1–40 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jung, M. et al. The fluxcom ensemble of global land-atmosphere energy fluxes. Sci. Data 6, 74 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
McGovern, A. et al. Using artificial intelligence to improve real-time decision-making for high-impact weather. Bull. Am. Meteorological Soc. 98, 2073–2090 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Kratzert, F. et al. Toward improved predictions in ungauged basins: exploiting the power of machine learning. Water Resour. Res. 55, 11344–11354 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Reichstein, M. et al. Deep learning and process understanding for data-driven earth system science. Nature 566, 195–204 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rasp, S., Pritchard, M. S. & Gentine, P. Deep learning to represent subgrid processes in climate models. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9684–9689 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
de Bézenac, E., Pajot, A. & Gallinari, P. Deep learning for physical processes: incorporating prior scientific knowledge. J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. 2019, 124009 (2019).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Kraft, B., Jung, M., Körner, M. & Reichstein, M. Hybrid modeling: Fusion of a deep learning approach and a physics-based model for global hydrological modeling. Int. Arch. Photogramm., Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. XLIII-B2-2020, 1537–1544 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Chen, H., Huang, J. J., Dash, S. S., Wei, Y. & Li, H. A hybrid deep learning framework with physical process description for simulation of evapotranspiration. J. Hydrol. 606, 127422 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Martens, B. et al. Gleam v3: satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture. Geoscientific Model Dev. 10, 1903–1925 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Gash, J. H. C. An analytical model of rainfall interception by forests. Q. J. R. Meteorological Soc. 105, 43–55 (1979).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Grossiord, C. et al. Plant responses to rising vapor pressure deficit. N. Phytologist 226, 1550–1566 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Urban, J., Ingwers, M., McGuire, M. A. & Teskey, R. O. Stomatal conductance increases with rising temperature. Plant Signal. Behav. 12, e1356534 (2017). PMID: 28786730.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Matthews, J. S. A., Vialet-Chabrand, S. & Lawson, T. Role of blue and red light in stomatal dynamic behaviour. J. Exp. Bot. 71, 2253–2269 (2019).PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Xu, Z., Jiang, Y., Jia, B. & Zhou, G. Elevated-co2 response of stomata and its dependence on environmental factors. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 657 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jung, M. et al. Recent decline in the global land evapotranspiration trend due to limited moisture supply. Nature 467, 951–954 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Peng, Y., Bloomfield, K. J., Cernusak, L. A., Domingues, T. F. & Colin Prentice, I. Global climate and nutrient controls of photosynthetic capacity. Commun. Biol. 4, 462 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Knoben, W. J. M., Freer, J. E. & Woods, R. A. Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? comparing nash–sutcliffe and kling–gupta efficiency scores. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23, 4323–4331 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Pagán, B. R., Maes, W. H., Gentine, P., Martens, B. & Miralles, D. G. Exploring the potential of satellite solar-induced fluorescence to constrain global transpiration estimates. Remote Sens. 11 (2019). https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/11/4/413.Jonard, F. et al. Value of sun-induced chlorophyll fluorescence for quantifying hydrological states and fluxes: current status and challenges. Agric. For. Meteorol. 291, 108088 (2020).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bauer, P. et al. The digital revolution of earth-system science. Nat. Comput. Sci. 1, 104–113 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Bonan, G. B. Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science 320, 1444–1449 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pastorello, G. et al. The fluxnet2015 dataset and the oneflux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data. Sci. Data 7, 225 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wei, Z. et al. Revisiting the contribution of transpiration to global terrestrial evapotranspiration. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 2792–2801 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Stoy, P. C. et al. Reviews and syntheses: turning the challenges of partitioning ecosystem evaporation and transpiration into opportunities. Biogeosciences 16, 3747–3775 (2019).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Poyatos, R. et al. Global transpiration data from sap flow measurements: the sapfluxnet database. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 13, 2607–2649 (2021).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Falster, D. S. et al. Baad: a biomass and allometry database for woody plants. Ecology 96, 1445–1445 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Granier, A. & Loustau, D. Measuring and modelling the transpiration of a maritime pine canopy from sap-flow data. Agric. For. Meteorol. 71, 61–81 (1994).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Aumann, H. et al. Airs/amsu/hsb on the aqua mission: design, science objectives, data products, and processing systems. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 41, 253–264 (2003).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Wielicki, B. A. et al. Clouds and the earth’s radiant energy system (ceres): an earth observing system experiment. Bull. Am. Meteorological Soc. 77, 853–868 (1996).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Moesinger, L. et al. The global long-term microwave vegetation optical depth climate archive (vodca). Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 177–196 (2020).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Abadi, M. et al. TensorFlow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems (2015). https://www.tensorflow.org/. Software available from tensorflow.org.Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K. & Martinez, G. F. Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: implications for improving hydrological modelling. J. Hydrol. 377, 80–91 (2009).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Yu, L., Wen, J., Chang, C. Y., Frankenberg, C. & Sun, Y. High-resolution global contiguous sif of oco-2. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 1449–1458 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Koppa, A., Rains, D., Hulsman, P., Poyatos, R. & Miralles, D. G. A Deep learning-based hybrid model of global terrestrial evaporation (2022). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5886608.Koppa, A., Rains, D., Hulsman, P., Poyatos, R. & Miralles, D. G. A Deep learning-based hybrid model of global terrestrial evaporation (2022). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6343005. More

Goergen, G., Kumar, P. L., Sankung, S. B., Togola, A. & Tamo, M. First Report of Outbreaks of the Fall Armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J E Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a New Alien Invasive Pest in West and Central Africa. PLoS ONE 11, e0165632 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cock, M. J. W., Beseh, P. K., Buddie, A. G., Cafa, G. & Crozier, J. Molecular methods to detect Spodoptera frugiperda in Ghana, and implications for monitoring the spread of invasive species in developing countries. Sci. Rep. 7, 4103 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Comparative molecular analyses of invasive fall armyworm in Togo reveal strong similarities to populations from the eastern United States and the Greater Antilles. PLoS ONE 12, e0181982 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jacobs, A., van Vuuren, A. & Rong, I. H. Characterisation of the fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from South Africa. Afr. Entomol. 26, 45–49 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Otim, M. H. et al. Detection of sister-species in invasive populations of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from Uganda. PLoS ONE 13, e0194571 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
FAO. Briefing note on FAO actions on fall armyworm in Africa, (2018).FAO. Briefing note on FAO actions on fall armyworm, (2019).Ganiger, P. C. et al. Occurrence of the new invasive pest, fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in the maize fields of Karnataka, India. Curr. Sci. India 115, 621–623 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sharanabasappa, D. et al. First report of the fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J E Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) an Alien invasive pest on Maize in India. Pest Manag. Horticultural Ecosyst. 24, 23–29 (2018).
Google Scholar 
FAO. in FAO Regional Conference for Asia and the Pacific, 35th Session 7 (Thimphu, Bhutan, 2019).EPPO. First report of Spodoptera frugiperda in Thailand. (2019).Tay, W. T. & Gordon, K. H. J. Going global – genomic insights into insect invasions. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 31, 123–130 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, L. et al. Molecular identification of invasive fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda in Yunnan Province. Plant Prot. 45, 19–24 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Wu, Q., Jian, Y. & K, W. Analysis of migration routes of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) form Myanmar to China. Plant Prot. 45, 1–6 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
USDA. Fall armyworm damages corn and threatens other crops in Vietnam. United States Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Report Number: VM2019-0017 (2019).FAO. Report of first detection of fall armyworm (FAW) in the Republic of the Philippines. Report No. PHL-02/1, (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Plant Protection Convention, 2019).Navasero, M. V. et al. Detection of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) using larval mrophological characters, and observations on its current local distribution in the Philippines. Philipp. Ent 33, 171–184 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Vennila, S. et al. in International Workshop on Facilitating International Research Collaboration on Transboundary Plant Pests. (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan, 2019).FAO. First detection of fall armyworm in China. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Plant Protection Convention, 2019).Silver, A. Caterpillar’s devastating march across China spurs hunt for native predator. Nature 570, 286–287 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Song, X. P. et al. Intrusion of Fall Armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) in Sugarcane and Its Control by Drone in China. Sugar Tech. 22, 734–737 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Czepak, C. et al. Especial Spodoptera: Migração acelerada. Cultivar Gd. Culturas 244, 26–29 (2019).
Google Scholar 
FAO. First detection of Fall armyworm in Torres Strait of Australia. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Plant Protection Convention, 2020).Queensland Government, D. o. A. a. F. First mainland detection of fall armyworm, accessed 13 March 2020 (2020).Wild, S. Invasive pest hits Africa. Nature 543, 13–14 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Porter, J. E. & Hughes, J. H. Insect eggs transported on the outer surface of airplanes. J. Economic Entomol. 43, 555–557 (1950).
Google Scholar 
Jeger, M. et al. Pest categorisation of Spodoptera frugiperda. Efsa J. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4927 (2017).Early, R., Gonzalez-Moreno, P., Murphy, S. T. & Day, R. Forecasting the global extent of invasion of the cereal pest Spodoptera frugiperda, the fall armyworm. Neobiota https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.40.28165 (2018).FAO. Fall armyworm likely to spread from India to other parts of Asia with South East Asia and South China most at risk. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation, 2018).Gouin, A. et al. Two genomes of highly polyphagous lepidopteran pests (Spodoptera frugiperda, Noctuidae) with different host-plant ranges. Sci. Rep. 7, 11816 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, L. et al. Genetic structure and insecticide resistance characteristics of fall armyworm populations invading China. Mol. Ecol. Resour. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13219 (2020).Westbrook, J., Fleischer, S., Jairam, S., Meagher, R. & Nagoshi, R. Multigenerational migration of fall armyworm, a pest insect. Ecosphere 10, e02919 (2019).
Google Scholar 
du Plessis, H., van den Berg, J., Ota, N. & Kriticos, D. J. Spodoptera frugiperda (Fall Armyworm). in CSIRO-InSTePP Pest Geography. June, 2018 (2018).FAO. First detection report of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepdioptera: Noctuidae) on maize in Myanmar. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Plant Protection Convention, 2019).Sun, X.-X. et al. Case study on the first immigration of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda invading into China. J. Integr. Agriculture 18, 2–10 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Day, R. et al. Fall armyworm: impacts and implications for Africa. Outlooks Pest Manag. 28, 196–201 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Assefa, F. & Ayalew, D. Status and control measures of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) infestations in maize fields in Ethiopia: a review. Cogent Food Agr. 5, 1641902 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Hurska, A. J. Fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) management by smallholders. CAB Rev. 14, 11 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Firake, D. M. & Behere, G. T. Natural mortality of invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in maize agroecosystems of northeast India. Biol. Control 148, 104303 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Guan, F. et al. Whole-genome sequencing to detect mutations associated with resistance to insecticides and Bt proteins in Spodoptera frugiperda. Insect Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.12838 (2020).Dumas, P. et al. Phylogenetic molecular species delimitations unravel potential new species in the pest genus Spodoptera Guenee, 1852 (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). PLoS ONE 10, e0122407 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dumas, P. et al. Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) host-plant variants: two host strains or two distinct species? Genetica 143, 305–316 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Genetic characterization of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) in Ecuador and comparisons with regional populations identify likely migratory relationships. PLoS ONE 14, e0222332 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jing, D. P. et al. Initial detections and spread of invasive Spodoptera frugiperda in China and comparisons with other noctuid larvae in cornfields using molecular techniques. Insect Sci. 27, 780–790 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Southeastern Asia fall armyworms are closely related to populations in Africa and India, consistent with common origin and recent migration. Sci. Rep. 10, 1421 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mahadeva, S. H. M. et al. Prevalence of “R” strain and molecular diversity of fall army worm Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in India. Indian J. Entomol. 80, 544–553 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Murua, M. G. et al. Demonstration using field collections that Argentina fall armyworm populations exhibit strain-specific host plant preferences. J. Econ. Entomol. 108, 2305–2315 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. The fall armyworm triose phosphate isomerase (Tpi) gene as a marker of strain identity and interstrain mating. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 103, 283–292 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N., Goergen, G., Plessis, H. D., van den Berg, J. & Meagher, R. Jr. Genetic comparisons of fall armyworm populations from 11 countries spanning sub-Saharan Africa provide insights into strain composition and migratory behaviors. Sci. Rep. 9, 8311 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Czepak, C., Albernaz, C., Vivan, L. M., Guimarães, H. O. & Carvalhais, T. First reported occurrence of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Brazil. Pesq. Agropec. Trop., Goia.̂nia 43, 110–113 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Arnemann, J. A. et al. Multiple incursion pathways for Helicoverpa armigera in Brazil show its genetic diversity spreading in a connected world. Sci. Rep. 9, 19380 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tay, W. T. et al. A brave new world for an old world pest: Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Brazil. PLoS ONE 8, e80134 (2013).Tay, W. T. et al. Mitochondrial DNA and trade data support multiple origins of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) in Brazil. Sci. Rep. 7, 45302 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Behere, G. T. et al. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of field populations of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and of its relationship to H. zea. BMC Evol. Biol. 7, 117 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pearce, S. L. et al. Erratum to: Genomic innovations, transcriptional plasticity and gene loss underlying the evolution and divergence of two highly polyphagous and invasive Helicoverpa pest species. BMC Biol. 15, 69 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pearce, S. L. et al. Genomic innovations, transcriptional plasticity and gene loss underlying the evolution and divergence of two highly polyphagous and invasive Helicoverpa pest species. BMC Biol. 15, 63 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Guillemaud, T., Ciosi, M., Lombaert, E. & Estoup, A. Biological invasions in agricultural settings: insights from evolutionary biology and population genetics. Cr Biol. 334, 237–246 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Elfekih, S. et al. Genome-wide analyses of the Bemisia tabaci species complex reveal contrasting patterns of admixture and complex demographic histories. PLoS ONE 13, e0190555 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Anderson, C. J., Tay, W. T., McGaughran, A., Gordon, K. & Walsh, T. K. Population structure and gene flow in the global pest, Helicoverpa armigera. Mol. Ecol. 25, 5296–5311 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Anderson, C. J. et al. Hybridization and gene flow in the mega-pest lineage of moth, Helicoverpa. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 5034–5039 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N., Meagher, R. L. & Hay-Roe, M. Inferring the annual migration patterns of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the United States from mitochondrial haplotypes. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1458–1467 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wright, S. The interpretation of population-structure by F-statistics with special regard to systems of mating. Evolution 19, 395–420 (1965).
Google Scholar 
Luikart, G. & Cornuet, J. M. Empirical evaluation of a test for identifying recently bottlenecked populations from allele frequency data. Conserv. Biol. 12, 228–237 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Genetic characterization of fall armyworm infesting South Africa and India indicate recent introduction from a common source population. PLoS ONE 14, e0217755 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Analysis of strain distribution, migratory potential, and invasion history of fall armyworm populations in northern Sub-Saharan Africa. Sci. Rep.-Uk 8, 3710 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Arias, O. et al. Population genetic structure and demographic history of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): implications for insect resistance management programs. Pest Manag. Sci. 75, 2948–2957 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nguyen, T. K. O. & Vu, T. P. Checklist of turfgrass insect pests, morphology, biology and population fluctuation of Herpetograma phaeopteralis (Guenee) (Lepidopera: Pyralidae) in Ha Noi, in Spring-Summer 2008. in The 3rd National Conference of Ecology and Natural Resources, Ha Noi. 1490–1498.Pham, V. L. On time to recognise first potential Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Vietnam and its Vietnamese name. in Plant Protection Magazine No. 4/2019 (Plant Protection Research Institute of Vietnam, July, 2019).Vu, T. P. Insect pests of turf grass, biology, ecology and the control of Herpetogramma phaeoptralis (Guenée) in Hà Nội in Spring Summer 2008 MSc. Thesis, Hà Nội Agriculture University, Vietnam (2008).Nguyen, V. D., Ha, Q. H. & Nguyen, T. T. C. in Vietnam Insects and Pests. (ed. V. L. Pham) (2012).Gilligan, T. M. & Passoa, S. C. LepIntercept, An identification resource for intercepted Lepidoptera larvae. Identification Technology Program (ITP), (2014).Gui, F. R. et al. Genomic and transcriptomic analysis unveils population evolution and development of pesticide resistance in fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda. Protein Cell https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-020-00795-7 (2020).Stokstad, E. FOOD SECURITY New crop pest takes Africa at lightning speed. Science 356, 473–474 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Baloch, M. N., Fan, J. Y., Haseeb, M. & Zhang, R. Z. Mapping potential distribution of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Central Asia. Insects 11, 172 (2020).PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Juarez, M. L. et al. Population structure of Spodoptera frugiperda maize and rice host forms in South America: are they host strains? Entomol. Exp. Appl. 152, 182–199 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Groot, A. T. et al. Evolution of reproductive isolation of Spodoptera frugiperda. Pheromone Communication in Moths: Evolution, Behavior, and Application, 291–300 (2016).Nagoshi, R. N., Meagher, R. L., Nuessly, G. & Hall, D. G. Effects of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) interstrain mating in wild populations. Environ. Entomol. 35, 561–568 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Haenniger, S. et al. Sexual communication of Spodoptera frugiperda from West Africa: adaptation of an invasive species and implications for pest management. Sci. Rep. 10, 2892 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Orsucci, M. et al. Transcriptional plasticity evolution in two strains of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) feeding on alternative host-plants. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/263186 (2018).Lopes-da-Silva, M., Sanches, M. M., Stancioli, A. R., Alves, G. & Sugayama, R. The role of natural and human-mediated pathways for invasive agricultural pests: a historical analysis of cases from Brazil. Agric. Sci. 5, 634–646 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Nagoshi, R. N. et al. Haplotype profile comparisons between Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) populations from Mexico with those from Puerto Rico, South America, and the United States and their implications to migratory behavior. J. Economic Entomol. 108, 135–144 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tembrock, L. R., Timm, A. E., Zink, F. A. & Gilligan, T. M. Phylogeography of the recent expansion of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in South America and the Caribbean basin. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 112, 388–401 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lombaert, E. et al. Bridgehead effect in the worldwide invasion of the biocontrol harlequin ladybird. PLoS ONE 5, e9743 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Desneux, N., Luna, M. G., Guillemaud, T. & Urbaneja, A. The invasive South American tomato pinworm, Tuta absoluta, continues to spread in Afro-Eurasia and beyond: the new threat to tomato world production. J. Pest Sci. 84, 403–408 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Valencia-Montoya, W. A. et al. Adaptive introgression across semipermeable species boundaries between local Helicoverpa zea and invasive Helicoverpa armigera moths. Mol. Biol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa108 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Walsh, T. K. et al. Multiple recombination events between two cytochrome P450 loci contribute to global pyrethroid resistance in Helicoverpa armigera. PLoS ONE 13, e0197760 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Liu, X. et al. Risks of biological invasion on the belt and road. Curr. Biol. 29, 499–505.e494 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gimenez, S. et al. Adaptation by copy number variation increases insecticide resistance in the fall armyworm. Preprint at Commun Biol. 664, https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01382-6 (2020).Yainna, S. et al. Genomic balancing selection is key to the invasive success of the fall armyworm. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.17.154880 (2020).Tay, W. T. et al. Novel molecular approach to define pest species status and tritrophic interactions from historical Bemisia specimens. Sci. Rep.-Uk 7, ARTN 429 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Walsh, T. K. et al. Mitochondrial DNA genomes of five major Helicoverpa pest species from the Old and New Worlds (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Ecol. Evol. 9, 2933–2944 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bernt, M. et al. MITOS: improved de novo metazoan mitochondrial genome annotation. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 69, 313–319 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Villesen, P. FaBox: an online toolbox for FASTA sequences. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 965–968 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Katoh, K., Misawa, K., Kuma, K. & Miyata, T. MAFFT: a novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 3059–3066 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Katoh, K. & Standley, D. M. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 772–780 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nam, K. et al. Divergent selection causes whole genome differentiation without physical linkage among the targets in Spodoptera frugiperda (Noctuidae). Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/452870 (2018).Liu, H. et al. Chromosome level draft genomes of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), an alien invasive pest in China. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/671560 (2019).Xiao, H. et al. The genetic adaptations of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda facilitated its rapid global dispersal and invasion. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 20, 1050–1068 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
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 
Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3997 (2013).Bushnell, B. BBMap: A Fast, Accurate, Splice-Aware Aligner. (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. 2014).Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 559–575 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Trifinopoulos, J., Nguyen, L. T., von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. W-IQ-TREE: a fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W232–W235 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Lewis, P. O. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst. Biol. 50, 913–925 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Minh, B. Q., Nguyen, M. A. & von Haeseler, A. Ultrafast approximation for phylogenetic bootstrap. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 1188–1195 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Huson, D. H. & Scornavacca, C. Dendroscope 3: an interactive tool for rooted phylogenetic trees and networks. Syst. Biol. 61, 1061–1067 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hellenthal, G. et al. A genetic atlas of human admixture history. Science 343, 747–751 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Catchen, J., Hohenlohe, P. A., Bassham, S., Amores, A. & Cresko, W. A. Stacks: an analysis tool set for population genomics. Mol. Ecol. 22, 3124–3140 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
Jombart, T. & Ahmed, I. adegenet 1.3-1: new tools for the analysis of genome-wide SNP data. Bioinformatics 27, 3070–3071 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chang, C. C. et al. Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets. Gigascience 4, 7 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Danecek, P. et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27, 2156–2158 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tajima, F. Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123, 585–595 (1989).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fu, Y. X. & Li, W. H. Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations. Genetics 133, 693–709 (1993).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pfeifer, B., Wittelsburger, U., Ramos-Onsins, S. E. & Lercher, M. J. PopGenome: an efficient Swiss army knife for population genomic analyses in R. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 1929–1936 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wright, S. The genetical structure of populations. Ann. Eugen. 15, 323–354 (1951).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, M. & Rousset, F. Genepop (Version-1.2) – population-genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J. Hered. 86, 248–249 (1995).
Google Scholar 
Alexander, D. H., Novembre, J. & Lange, K. Fast model-based estimation of ancestry in unrelated individuals. Genome Res. 19, 1655–1664 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Neuditschko, M., Khatkar, M. S. & Raadsma, H. W. NetView: a high-definition network-visualization approach to detect fine-scale population structures from genome-wide patterns of variation. PLoS ONE 7, e48375 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Steinig, E. J., Neuditschko, M., Khatkar, M. S., Raadsma, H. W. & Zenger, K. R. netview p: a network visualization tool to unravel complex population structure using genome-wide SNPs. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 16, 216–227 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Keenan, K., McGinnity, P., Cross, T. F., Crozier, W. W. & Prodohl, P. A. diveRsity: An R package for the estimation and exploration of population genetics parameters and their associated errors. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 782–788 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Sundqvist, L., Keenan, K., Zackrisson, M., Prodohl, P. & Kleinhans, D. Directional genetic differentiation and relative migration. Ecol. Evol. 6, 3461–3475 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bastian, M., Heymann, S. & Jacomy, M. in International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2009).Tay, T. et al. Global FAW population genomic signature supports complex introduction events across the Old World. v1. CSIRO. Data Collection. https://doi.org/10.25919/y3nd-2903 (2021).Nei, M. Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 70, 3321–3323 (1973).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nei, M. & Chesser, R. K. Estimation of fixation indices and gene diversities. Ann. Hum. Genet. 47, 253–259 (1983).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

ColoniesColony setup occurred prior to initiation of the study, between March and May 2017, in Mississippi, USA. Using established methods, queenless colony divisions, obtained from a large commercial beekeeping operation, were equalised to an average calculated population size of ~ 7000 workers112, and housed in 10-frame Langstroth hives (Table S1). After acclimatisation for 24–48 h, they each received an imminently emerging queen cell, containing a queen from one of two stocks, added to the same worker baseline. The stocks used consisted of an Italian ‘Commercial’ stock, propagated from collaborator established breeder queens, and thus representative of the industry standard, and the Varroa-resistant ‘Pol-line’ stock54. To ensure consistency, all queens were reared in the same ‘cell builder’ colonies, based at the USDA Honey Bee Breeding, Genetics and Physiology Laboratory, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA. Colonies from each stock were held in independent apiaries, 80 km apart to maintain physical isolation; and to control genetic fidelity, virgin queens were open mated to drones of the same stock via drone saturation. Fourteen days after queen emergence, colonies were inspected, and mated queens were marked with paint on the thorax, to assist with identification, with white corresponding to Commercial, and blue to Pol-line. Colonies were allowed to acclimatise for six weeks before sampling began, and those that failed to achieve mating success, or had unacceptably high [≥ 3.0 ‘mites per hundred bees’ (MPHB)] Varroa levels, were removed, normalising the average between-stock Varroa difference to  More

IPCC Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).Sindelar, A. J. et al. Winter oilseed production for biofuel in the US Corn Belt: opportunities and limitations. GCB Bioenergy 9, 508–524 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stöckle, C. O. et al. Evaluating opportunities for an increased role of winter crops as adaptation to climate change in dryland cropping systems of the U.S. Inland Pacific Northwest. Clim. Change 146, 247–261 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Williams, C. M., Henry, H. A. L. & Sinclair, B. J. Cold truths: how winter drives responses of terrestrial organisms to climate change. Biol. Rev. 90, 214–235 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Seifert, C. A., Azzari, G. & Lobell, D. B. Satellite detection of cover crops and their effects on crop yield in the Midwestern United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 064033 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Marcillo, G. S. & Miguez, F. E. Corn yield response to winter cover crops: an updated meta-analysis. J. Soil Water Conserv. 72, 226–239 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Zhu, L., Ives, A. R., Zhang, C., Guo, Y. & Radeloff, V. C. Climate change causes functionally colder winters for snow cover-dependent organisms. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 886–893 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Mankin, J. S. & Diffenbaugh, N. S. Influence of temperature and precipitation variability on near-term snow trends. Clim. Dynam. 45, 1099–1116 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Zhu, L., Radeloff, V. C. & Ives, A. R. Characterizing global patterns of frozen ground with and without snow cover using microwave and MODIS satellite data products. Remote Sens. Environ. 191, 168–178 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Huning, L. S. & AghaKouchak, A. Global snow drought hot spots and characteristics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 19753–19759 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Qin, Y. et al. Agricultural risks from changing snowmelt. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 459–465 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Trnka, M. et al. Adverse weather conditions for European wheat production will become more frequent with climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 637–643 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Li, D., Wrzesien, M. L., Durand, M., Adam, J. & Lettenmaier, D. P. How much runoff originates as snow in the western United States, and how will that change in the future? Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 6163–6172 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Biemans, H. et al. Importance of snow and glacier meltwater for agriculture on the Indo-Gangetic Plain. Nat. Sustain. 2, 594–601 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Acevedo, E., Silva, P. & Silva, H. in Bread Wheat: Improvement and Production (eds Curtis, B. C. et al.) 39–70 (FAO Plant Production and Protection, 2002).Baker, J. T., Pinter, P. J., Reginato, R. J. & Kanemasu, E. T. Effects of temperature on leaf appearance in spring and winter wheat cultivars. Agron. J. 78, 605–613 (1986).
Google Scholar 
Tack, J., Barkley, A. & Nalley, L. L. Effect of warming temperatures on US wheat yields. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6931–6936 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Müller, C. et al. Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications. Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 1403–1422 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Talukder, A. S. M. H. M., McDonald, G. K. & Gill, G. S. Effect of short-term heat stress prior to flowering and early grain set on the grain yield of wheat. Field Crops Res. 160, 54–63 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Farooq, M., Bramley, H., Palta, J. A. & Siddique, K. H. M. Heat stress in wheat during reproductive and grain-filling phases. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 30, 491–507 (2011).Cuadra, S. V., Kimball, B. A., Boote, K. J., Suyker, A. E. & Pickering, N. Energy balance in the DSSAT-CSM-CROPGRO model. Agric. For. Meteorol. 297, 108241 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Harder, P., Helgason, W. D. & Pomeroy, J. W. Modeling the snowpack energy balance during melt under exposed crop stubble. J. Hydrometeorol. 19, 1191–1214 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Barlow, K. M., Christy, B. P., O’Leary, G. J., Riffkin, P. A. & Nuttall, J. G. Simulating the impact of extreme heat and frost events on wheat crop production: a review. Field Crops Res. 171, 109–119 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Wang, W. et al. Evaluation of air–soil temperature relationships simulated by land surface models during winter across the permafrost region. Cryosphere 10, 1721–1737 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Seifert, C. A. & Lobell, D. B. Response of double cropping suitability to climate change in the United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 024002 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Pullens, J. W. M. et al. Risk factors for European winter oilseed rape production under climate change. Agric. For. Meteorol. 272–273, 30–39 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Chopra, R. et al. Identification and stacking of crucial traits required for the domestication of pennycress. Nat. Food 1, 84–91 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Crews, T. E., Carton, W. & Olsson, L. Is the future of agriculture perennial? Imperatives and opportunities to reinvent agriculture by shifting from annual monocultures to perennial polycultures. Glob. Sustain. 1, e11 (2018).Harkness, C. et al. Adverse weather conditions for UK wheat production under climate change. Agric. Meteorol. 282–283, 107862 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Schierhorn, F., Hofmann, M., Gagalyuk, T., Ostapchuk, I. & Müller, D. Machine learning reveals complex effects of climatic means and weather extremes on wheat yields during different plant developmental stages. Clim. Change 169, 39 (2021).Michel, S. et al. Improving and maintaining winter hardiness and frost tolerance in bread wheat by genomic selection. Front. Plant Sci. 10, 1195 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Mahfoozi, S., Limin, A. E. & Fowler, D. B. Influence of vernalization and photoperiod responses on cold hardiness in winter cereals. Crop Sci. 41, 1006–1011 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Dutra, E. et al. An improved snow scheme for the ECMWF land surface model: description and offline validation. J. Hydrometeorol. 11, 899–916 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Ge, Y. & Gong, G. Land surface insulation response to snow depth variability. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 115, 8107 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Hunt, J. R. et al. Early sowing systems can boost Australian wheat yields despite recent climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 244–247 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Sloat, L. L. et al. Climate adaptation by crop migration. Nat. Commun. 11, 1243 (2020) .Ainsworth, E. A. & Long, S. P. 30 years of free-air carbon dioxide enrichment (FACE): what have we learned about future crop productivity and its potential for adaptation? Glob. Change Biol. 27, 27–49 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Shimoda, S. et al. Effects of snow compaction ‘yuki-fumi’ on soil frost depth and volunteer potato control in potato–wheat rotation system in Hokkaido. Plant Prod. Sci. 24, 186–197 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Luojus, K. et al. GlobSnow v3.0 Northern Hemisphere snow water equivalent dataset. Sci. Data 8, 163 (2021)..IMS Daily Northern Hemisphere Snow and Ice Analysis at 1 km, 4 km, and 24 km Resolutions Version 1 (NSIDC, 2008).Jing, Q. et al. Assessing the options to improve regional wheat yield in Eastern Canada using the CSM–CERES–wheat model. Agron. J. 109, 510–523 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Vogel, F. A. & Bange, G. A. Understanding USDA Crop Forecasts (USDA, 1999).Daly, C. et al. Physiographically sensitive mapping of climatological temperature and precipitation across the conterminous United States. Int. J. Climatol. 28, 2031–2064 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Brown, R. D. & Brasnett, B. Daily Snow Depth Analysis Data Version 1 (Canadian Meteorological Centre, 2010).Brasnett, B. A global analysis of snow depth for numerical weather prediction. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 38, 726–740 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Toure, A. M., Reichle, R. H., Forman, B. A., Getirana, A. & De Lannoy, G. J. M. Assimilation of MODIS snow cover fraction observations into the NASA catchment land surface model. Remote Sens. 10, 316 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Snauffer, A. M., Hsieh, W. W. & Cannon, A. J. Comparison of gridded snow water equivalent products with in situ measurements in British Columbia, Canada. J. Hydrol. 541, 714–726 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Census of Agriculture (USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017).Skinner, D. Z. & Mackey, B. Freezing tolerance of winter wheat plants frozen in saturated soil. Field Crops Res. 113, 335–341 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Lollato, R. P. et al. Climate-risk assessment for winter wheat using long-term weather data. Agron. J. 112, 2132–2151 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Siebers, M. H. et al. Heat waves imposed during early pod development in soybean (Glycine max) cause significant yield loss despite a rapid recovery from oxidative stress. Glob. Change Biol. 21, 3114–3125 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Çakir, R. Effect of water stress at different development stages on vegetative and reproductive growth of corn. Field Crops Res. 89, 1–16 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Lobell, D. B. et al. The critical role of extreme heat for maize production in the United States. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 497–501 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Chen, M., Griffis, T. J., Baker, J., Wood, J. D. & Xiao, K. Simulating crop phenology in the Community Land Model and its impact on energy and carbon fluxes. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 120, 310–325 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Larson, K. M. & Small, E. E. Daily Snow Depth and SWE from GPS Signal-to-Noise Ratios Version 1 (NSIDC, 2017).Sturm, M. et al. Estimating snow water equivalent using snow depth data and climate classes. J. Hydrometeorol. 11, 1380–1394 (2010).
Google Scholar 
McCabe, G. J. & Wolock, D. M. Recent declines in western U.S. snowpack in the context of twentieth-century climate variability. Earth Interact. 13, 1–15 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Wu, X. et al. Uneven winter snow influence on tree growth across temperate China. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 144–154 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Qiao, S. et al. Robust negative impacts of climate change on African agriculture. Environ. Res. Lett. 5, 014010 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Lobell, D. B., Schlenker, W. & Costa-Roberts, J. Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science 333, 616–620 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xie, Y., Gibbs, H. K. & Lark, T. J. Landsat-based Irrigation Dataset (LANID): 30 m resolution maps of irrigation distribution, frequency, and change for the US, 1997–2017. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 13, 5689–5710 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Mueller, N. D. et al. Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management. Nature 490, 254–257 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Friedman, J., Hastie, T. & Tibshirani, R. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–22 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Elliott, J. et al. The global gridded crop model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev. 8, 261–277 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Li, X., Shen, Z., Harri, A. & Coble, K. H. Comparing survey-based and programme-based yield data: implications for the U.S. Agricultural Risk Coverage-County programme. Geneva Pap. Risk Insur. Issues Pract. 45, 184–202 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Hawkins, E., Osborne, T. M., Ho, C. K. & Challinor, A. J. Calibration and bias correction of climate projections for crop modelling: an idealised case study over Europe. Agric. Meteorol. 170, 19–31 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Ho, C. K., Stephenson, D. B., Collins, M., Ferro, C. A. T. & Brown, S. J. Calibration strategies: a source of additional uncertainty in climate change projections. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 21–26 (2012).
Google Scholar  More

Zhang, N. et al. Members of the Fusarium solani species complex that cause infections in both humans and plants are common in the environment. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44, 2186–2190 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, K. et al. Molecular Phylogenetic Diversity, Multilocus Haplotype Nomenclature, and In Vitro antifungal resistance within the Fusarium solani species complex. J. Clin. Microbiol. 46, 2477–2490 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Schroers, H. J. et al. Epitypification of Fusisporium (Fusarium) solani and its assignment to a common phylogenetic species in the Fusarium solani species complex. Mycologia 108, 806–819 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, K. Molecular phylogeny of the Nectria haematococca-Fusarium solani species complex. Mycologia 92, 919–938 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Gleason, F., Allerstorfer, M. & Lilje, O. Newly emerging diseases of marine turtles, especially sea turtle egg fusariosis (SEFT), caused by species in the Fusarium solani complex (FSSC). Mycology 11, 184–194 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fernando, N. et al. Fatal Fusarium solani species complex infections in elasmobranchs: the first case report for black spotted stingray (Taeniura melanopsila) and a literature review. Mycoses 58, 422–431 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sarmiento-Ramírez, J. M. et al. Global distribution of two fungal pathogens threatening endangered Sea Turtles. PLoS ONE 9, e85853 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mayayo, E., Pujol, I. & Guarro, J. Experimental pathogenicity of four opportunist Fusarium species in a murine model. J. Med. Microbiol. 48, 363–366 (1999).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Muhvich, A. G., Reimschuessel, R., Lipsky, M. M. & Bennett, R. O. Fusarium solani isolated from newborn bonnethead sharks, Sphyrna tiburo (L.). J. Fish Dis. 12, 57–62 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Crow, G. L., Brock, J. A. & Kaiser, S. Fusarium solani fungal infection of the lateral line canal system in captive scalloped hammerhead sharks (Sphyrna lewini) in Hawaii. J. Wildl. Dis. 31, 562–565 (1995).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cabañes, F. J. et al. Cutaneous hyalohyphomycosis caused by Fusarium solani in a loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta L.). J. Clin. Microbiol. 35, 3343–3345 (1997).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Cafarchia, C. et al. Fusarium spp. in Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta): From Colonization to Infection. Vet. Pathol. 57, 139–146 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Garcia-Hartmann, M., Hennequin, C., Catteau, S., Béatini, C. & Blanc, V. Cas groupés d’infection à Fusarium solani chez de jeunes tortues marines Caretta caretta nées en captivité. J. Mycol. Med. 28, 113–118 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Orós, J., Delgado, C., Fernández, L. & Jensen, H. E. Pulmonary hyalohyphomycosis caused by Fusarium spp in a Kemp’s ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempi): An immunohistochemical study. N. Z. Vet. J. 52, 150–152 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Candan, A. Y., Katılmış, Y. & Ergin, Ç. First report of Fusarium species occurrence in loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests and hatchling success in Iztuzu Beach, Turkey. Biologia (Bratisl). https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-020-00553-4 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sarmiento-Ramirez, J. M., van der Voort, M., Raaijmakers, J. M. & Diéguez-Uribeondo, J. Unravelling the Microbiome of eggs of the endangered Sea Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata identifies bacteria with activity against the emerging pathogen Fusarium falciforme. PLoS ONE 9, e95206 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sarmiento-Ramírez, J. M. et al. Fusarium solani is responsible for mass mortalities in nests of loggerhead sea turtle, Caretta caretta, in Boavista, Cape Verde. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 312, 192–200 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sarmiento-Ramirez, J. M., Sim, J., Van West, P. & Dieguez-Uribeondo, J. Isolation of fungal pathogens from eggs of the endangered sea turtle species Chelonia mydas in Ascension Island. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 97, 661–667 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hoh, D., Lin, Y., Liu, W., Sidique, S. & Tsai, I. Nest microbiota and pathogen abundance in sea turtle hatcheries. Fungal Ecol. 47, 100964 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Güçlü, Ö., Bıyık, H. & Şahiner, A. Mycoflora identified from loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) egg shells and nest sand at Fethiye beach, Turkey. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 4, 408–413 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Gambino, D. et al. First data on microflora of loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests from the coastlines of Sicily. Biol. Open 9, bio045252 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bailey, J. B., Lamb, M., Walker, M., Weed, C. & Craven, K. S. Detection of potential fungal pathogens Fusarium falciforme and F. keratoplasticum in unhatched loggerhead turtle eggs using a molecular approach. Endanger. Species Res. 36, 111–119 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Summerbell, R. C. & Schroers, H.-J. Analysis of Phylogenetic Relationship of Cylindrocarpon lichenicola and Acremonium falciforme to the Fusarium solani Species Complex and a Review of similarities in the spectrum of opportunistic infections caused by these fungi. J. Clin. Microbiol. 40, 2866–2875 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nel, R., Punt, A. E. & Hughes, G. R. Are coastal protected areas always effective in achieving population recovery for nesting sea turtles?. PLoS ONE 8, e63525 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Branch, G. & Branch, M. Living Shores. (Pippa Parker, 2018).Fuller, M. S., Fowles, B. E. & Mclaughlin, D. J. Isolation and pure culture study of marine phycomycetes. Mycologia 56, 745–756 (1964).
Google Scholar 
Greeff, M. R., Christison, K. W. & Macey, B. M. Development and preliminary evaluation of a real-time PCR assay for Halioticida noduliformans in abalone tissues. Dis. Aquat. Organ. 99, 103–117 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sandoval-Denis, M., Lombard, L. & Crous, P. W. Back to the roots: a reappraisal of Neocosmospora. Persoonia Mol. Phylogeny Evol. Fungi 43, 90–185 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, K., Cigelnik, E. & Nirenberg, H. I. Molecular systematics and phylogeography of the Gibberella fujikuroi species complex. Mycologia 90, 465–493 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Geiser, D. M. et al. FUSARIUM-ID v. 1. 0: A DNA sequence database for identifying Fusarium. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 110, 473–479 (2004).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, K. et al. Phylogenetic diversity of insecticolous fusaria inferred from multilocus DNA sequence data and their molecular identification via FUSARIUM-ID and FUSARIUM MLST. Mycologia 104, 427–445 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chehri, K., Salleh, B. & Zakaria, L. Morphological and phylogenetic analysis of Fusarium solani species complex in Malaysia. Microb. Ecol. 69, 457–471 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lanfear, R., Frandsen, P., Wright, A., Senfeld, T. & Calcott, B. PartionFinder 2: new methods for selecting partioned models of evolution for molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses. Mol. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw260 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ronquist, F. et al. Efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model selection across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 61, 539–542 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Leslie, J. F. & Summerell, B. A. The Fusarium Laboratory manual (Blackwell Publishing, Hoboken, 2006).
Google Scholar 
Fisher, N. L., Burgess, L. W., Toussoun, T. A. & Nelson, P. E. Carnation leaves as a substrate and for preserving cultures of Fusarium species. Phytopathology 72, 151 (1982).
Google Scholar 
Smyth, C. W. et al. Unraveling the ecology and epidemiology of an emerging fungal disease, sea turtle egg fusariosis (STEF). PLOS Pathog. 15, e1007682 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rachowicz, L. J. et al. The novel and endemic pathogen hypotheses: Competing explanations for the origin of emerging infectious diseases of wildlife. Conserv. Biol. 19, 1441–1448 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Lombard, L., Sandoval-Denis, M., Cai, L. & Crous, P. W. Changing the game: resolving systematic issues in key Fusarium species complexes. Persoonia Mol. Phylogeny Evol. Fungi 43, i–ii (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Short, D. P. G., Donnell, K. O., Zhang, N., Juba, J. H. & Geiser, D. M. Widespread occurrence of diverse human pathogenic types of the fungus Fusarium detected in plumbing drains. J. Clin. Microbiol. 49, 4264–4272 (2011).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
White, T. J., Burns, T., Lee, S. & Taylor, J. Amplification and direct identification of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In PCR Protocols: a guide to methods and applications (eds Innis, M. A. et al.) 315–322 (Academic Press, San Diego, 1990).
Google Scholar 
Sekimoto, S., Hatai, K. & Honda, D. Molecular phylogeny of an unidentified Haliphthoros-like marine oomycete and Haliphthoros milfordensis inferred from nuclear-encoded small- and large-subunit rRNA genes and mitochondrial-encoded cox2 gene. Mycoscience 48, 212–221 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Petersen, A. B. & Rosendahl, S. Ø. Phylogeny of the Peronosporomycetes (Oomycota) based on partial sequences of the large ribosomal subunit (LSU rDNA). Mycol. Res. 104, 1295–1303 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Donnell, K. et al. Phylogenetic diversity and microsphere array-based genotyping of human pathogenic fusaria, including isolates from the multistate contact lens-associated U.S. keratitis outbreaks of 2005 and 2006. J. Clin. Microbiol. 45, 2235–2248 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Migheli, Q. et al. Molecular Phylogenetic diversity of dermatologic and other human pathogenic fusarial isolates from hospitals in Northern and Central Italy. J. Clin. Microbiol. 48, 1076–1084 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More