Ecology

Study area and dateIn the north-west of France, the macrotidal Bourgneuf Bay (1°-2° W, 46°-47° N; total area ~340 km2; Fig. 1) has an intertidal zone largely dominated by mudflats (exposed surface area ~100 km2). Bourgneuf Bay is situated south of the Loire estuary and is open to the sea along 12 km from the west to the north-west. C. gigas aquaculture here is of national importance and wild C. gigas reefs can account for over double the biomass of their farmed conspecifics65. Analysis of satellite observations covering 30 years of MPB biomass in the bay confirmed the co-occurrence of high MPB biomass with wild oyster reefs and cultivated stocks16 (Supplementary Methods: Wider Situation of the Reefs). Two small (each  > 750 m2) wild C. gigas reefs and their immediate surroundings (10–100 m) in the north of Bourgneuf Bay were deemed suitable for experimental manipulation (yellow and orange regions in Fig. 1). Méléder et al.18 described MPB biomass as mostly concentrating around the 2 m isobath, the Falleron river channel (closest point ~400 m NNE from the eastern reef), and oyster farms. Covering this isobath, we superimposed a 350 * 350 m grid (12.25 hectares) to cover the two wild oyster reefs, orientated so that the ‘Y’ axis runs parallel to the slope of bathymetry (Fig. 1). The grid was split regularly into 49 ‘grand-cells’ of 50 * 50 m (i.e., n = 49) and each of those split into 25 cells of 10 * 10 m (i.e., n = 1225; Fig. 1). Four cells per grand-cell were chosen randomly for the sampling of meiofauna, granulometry, OM (see Table 3 for specific methodology), and macrofauna. Of these cells, only every second cell was processed for meiofauna because of time constraints in assessing their abundance.Table 3 Summary of study variables and their sampling methodologies.Full size tableAlthough there were only two oyster reef complexes (‘reefs’, hereon) in this study, multiple sampling cells fell on, or in close proximity to, each reef, so that each reef had many potential (though not independent) distance decay transects running from it capturing natural variation in spatial structure66. Comparing the ecological change following the experimental burning of oyster reefs (described below) against ecological change occurring at these two reefs over the previous 25 years16 also allowed us greater confidence to disentangle the treatment effects from typical variation. Through the centres of five grand-cells to the south of the extent, a transect forming an ‘L’ shape (Fig. 1) was sampled every 10 m for in situ MPB pigment composition and biomass. We used these data to complete the remote sensing approach for MPB biomass estimation (see below, Microphytobenthos). The western reef was slightly larger than the eastern reef and contained a large rock, ‘Roche Bonnet’, rising 0.5–1 m from the sediment. Outside the grid, another larger (200 * 80 m) wild oyster reef lies WSW at ~260 m distance from the western reef. The grid was sampled for the variables listed in Table 3 during the winter MPB low and early autumn peak seasons (see also ground-truthing in16), on the dates 18-19th September 2013 and 17-18th March 2014, before treatment, and on 7-8th October 2014 after treatment.MicrophytobenthosWe mapped MPB biomass by satellite remote sensing, following the method described in detail in Echappé et al. (2018). We used the same long-term record of high-resolution satellite images to analyse the spatial distribution of the normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI), a proxy of MPB chlorophyll a concentration at the sediment’s surface18,67, before and after treatment (individual image details in captions of Fig. 2 and Supplementary Figs. S4–S7). After atmospheric correction (FLASH and US40 aerosol model), the satellite-derived NDVI was validated against associated field measurements (r2 = 0.85, root-mean-square deviation, RMSE = 0.04, n = 57, P 20°) was limited (Supplementary Results: Additional MPB Images). An optimal image was chosen as representative of MPB biomass patterns per season16. The study area would ideally be tidally uncovered for ~2 h before the image was taken, whereupon MPB biomass is concentrated at the sediment surface. The optimal images met this condition (i.e., Fig. 2).To complete NDVI maps, in situ MPB pigment composition and biomass were retrieved by HPLC analysis from the 25 triplicates of sediment. These had been sampled using contact-cores to freeze the top 2 mm of sediment in situ with liquid nitrogen, with a metal surface 56 mm in diameter. Biomass was expressed by Chl a concentration (mg m−2), and dominance of MPB taxa was broadly assessed by ratio of pigment sources to Chl a: Fucoxanthin (Fuco), Diadinoxanthin (DD), Diatoxanthin (DT) and Chl c for diatoms. The ratio of unknown carotenoids (interpreted as by-products due to the low resolution of their absorption spectra) to Chl a was also analysed for ecological purposes (dominant taxa), whereas grazing pressure was investigated using the ratio of pheophorbid a to Chl a (methodological discussion in28).Sediment variablesFor laser granulometry, we sampled two depths, 0–5 cm and 5–10 cm, in triplicate at each cell. Each of the triplicate samples was put in a vial with water and sonicated. The particle size distribution was determined on a Mastersizer 3000 with a reporting range 50 nm to 3 mm. We also determined sediment percentage OM at two depths by mass loss on ignition in comparison to the oven-dried original (procedure as described for Macrofauna, also Table 3).MacrofaunaWe sampled macrofauna by a single 200 * 200 mm (depth * diameter) core per cell. Contents were placed into labelled buckets and sieved onshore (1 mm mesh). Soft-bodied polychaetes were picked out with forceps and preserved in buffered formalin during sieving. All material left on the sieve was bagged and preserved in formalin at the laboratory. Individuals were counted and measured by the longest axis (accuracy 0.1 mm, calipers); the deep-burrowing polychaete Diopatra biscayensis was counted by the presence of visible tubes above the sediment. Calibration curves from length to mass per species per season were built by identifying size classes by Sturges rule. Multiple individuals per size class (ideally n = 100) were measured to estimate mean organic mass per individual of each size class. Shell matter was physically separated from tissue, before both being dried in aluminium foil cups for 48 h at 60 °C and weighed (g) for tissue dry mass using a mass balance. Dry mass was then incinerated for four hours at 450 °C and reweighed (g; decrease in mass of the aluminium cup was also accounted for), the difference giving the organic matter mass (including residue in the shell matter), or ash free dry weight (AFDW). This number was divided by number of individuals. Calibration curves per species used first order polynomial curves for bivalves, unless numbers of size classes and individuals were small (1% of the total abundance. All mapping and analyses were performed in the statistical computing environment R (v4.0.2)73.Reporting summaryFurther information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article. More

Xu, L., Saatchi, S.S., Yang, Y., Yu, Y., Pongratz, J., Bloom, A.A., Bowman, K., Worden, J., Liu, J., Yin, Y. & Domke, G. Changes in global terrestrial live biomass over the 21st century. Sci. Adv. 7(27), p.eabe9829 (2001).Hoecker, T. J., Higuera, P. E., Kelly, R. & Hu, F. S. Arctic & boreal paleofire records reveal drivers of fire activity & departures from Holocene variability. Ecology 101(9), e03096 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bradshaw, C. J. & Warkentin, I. G. Global estimates of boreal forest carbon stocks & flux. Global Planet. Change 128, 24–30 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kuhry, P. & Turunen, J. The postglacial development of boreal and subarctic peatlands in Boreal Peatland Ecosystems, 25–46 (Springer, 2006).Walker, X. J. et al. Increasing wildfires threaten historic carbon sink of boreal forest soils. Nature 572(7770), 520–523 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gauthier, S., Bernier, P., Kuuluvainen, T., Shvidenko, A. Z. & Schepaschenko, D. G. Boreal forest health & global change. Science 349(6250), 819–822 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Walker, X. J. et al. Cross-scale controls on carbon emissions from boreal forest megafires. Global Change Biol. 24(9), 4251–4265 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Flannigan, M. D., Logan, K. A., Amiro, B. D., Skinner, W. R. & Stocks, B. J. Future area burned in Canada. Clim. Change 72(1), 1–16 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Balshi, M. S. et al. Assessing the response of area burned to changing climate in western boreal North America using a Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS) approach. Global Change Biol. 15(3), 578–600 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnstone, J. F. & Chapin, F. S. Fire interval effects on successional trajectory in boreal forests of northwest Canada. Ecosystems 9(2), 268–277 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Viereck, L.A. & Little, E.L. Alaska trees & shrubs. US Forest Service 410, (1972).Paine, R. T., Tegner, M. J. & Johnson, E. A. Compounded perturbations yield ecological surprises. Ecosystems 1(6), 535–545 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Buma, B. Disturbance interactions: characterization, prediction, & the potential for cascading effects. Ecosphere 6(4), 1–15 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Burton, P. J., Jentsch, A. & Walker, L. R. The ecology of disturbance interactions. Bioscience 70(10), 854–870 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, C. D. & Johnstone, J. F. Once burned, twice shy: Repeat fires reduce seed availability & alter substrate constraints on Picea mariana regeneration. Forest Ecol. Manage. 266, 34–41 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Buma, B., Brown, C. D., Donato, D. C., Fontaine, J. B. & Johnstone, J. F. The impacts of changing disturbance regimes on serotinous plant populations & communities. Bioscience 63(11), 866–876 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Coop, J. D. et al. Wildfire-driven forest conversion in western North American landscapes. Bioscience 70(8), 659–673 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Enright, N. J., Fontaine, J. B., Bowman, D. M., Bradstock, R. A. & Williams, R. J. Interval squeeze: altered fire regimes & demographic responses interact to threaten woody species persistence as climate changes. Front. Ecol. Enviro 13(5), 265–272 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Burns, R.M., & Honkala B.H. Silvics of North America US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Ag. Handbook 654, (1990).Hayes, K. & Buma, B. Effects of short-interval disturbances continue to accumulate, overwhelming variability in local resilience. Ecosphere 12(3), 03379 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mack, M. C. et al. Carbon loss from boreal forest wildfires offset by increased dominance of deciduous trees. Science 372(6539), 280–283 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Viereck, L. A., Dyrness, C. T. & Foote, M. J. An overview of the vegetation & soils of the floodplain ecosystems of the Tanana River, interior Alaska. Can. J. For. Res. 23(5), 889–898 (1993).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoy, E. E., Turetsky, M. R. & Kasischke, E. S. More frequent burning increases vulnerability of Alaskan boreal black spruce forests. Enviro. Res. Lett. 11(9), 095001 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whitman, E., Parisien, M. A., Thompson, D. K. & Flannigan, M. D. Short-interval wildfire & drought overwhelm boreal forest resilience. Sci. Rep. 9(1), 1–12 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Greene, D. F. et al. The reduction of organic-layer depth by wildfire in the North American boreal forest & its effect on tree recruitment by seed. Can. J. For. Res. 37(6), 1012–1023 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Héon, J., Arseneault, D. & Parisien, M. A. Resistance of the boreal forest to high burn rates. PNAS 111(38), 13888–13893 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Buma, B., Weiss, S., Hayes, K. & Lucash, M. Wildland fire reburning trends across the US West suggest only short-term negative feedback & differing climatic effects. Enviro. Res. Lett. 15(3), 034026 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thompson, D. K. et al. Fuel accumulation in a high-frequency boreal wildfire regime: from wetland to upland. Can. J. For. Res. 47(7), 957–964 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kasischke, E. S. et al. Alaska’s changing fire regime—implications for the vulnerability of its boreal forests. Can. J. For. Res. 40(7), 1313–1324 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kelly, R. et al. Recent burning of boreal forests exceeds fire regime limits of the past 10,000 years. PNAS 110(32), 13055–13060 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gaboriau, D. M. et al. Temperature & fuel availability control fire size/severity in the boreal forest of central Northwest Territories, Canada. Quat. Sci. Rev. 250, 106697 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnstone, J. F., Rupp, T. S., Olson, M. & Verbyla, D. Modeling impacts of fire severity on successional trajectories & future fire behavior in Alaskan boreal forests. Landscape Ecol. 26(4), 487–500 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hess, K. A. et al. Satellite-based assessment of grassland conversion & related fire disturbance in the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska. Rem. Sens. 11(3), 283 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hollingsworth, T. N., Breen, A. L., Hewitt, R. E. & Mack, M. C. Does fire always accelerate shrub expansion in Arctic tundra? Examining a novel grass-dominated successional trajectory on the Seward Peninsula. A. A. A. Res. 53(1), 93–109 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Turner, M. G., Romme, W. H. & Tinker, D. B. Surprises & lessons from the 1988 Yellowstone fires. Frontiers Ecol. Environ. 1(7), 351–358 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shvidenko, A. Z. et al. Impact of wildfire in Russia between 1998–2010 on ecosystems & the global carbon budget. Dokl. Earth Sci. 441(2), 1678–1682 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Alaska Fire Service 2021. Alaska Interagency Coordination Center, Bureau of L& Management, Alaska Fire Service. https://fire.ak.blm.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Map&FeatureServices/FireHistory/MapServer/1French, N. H. et al. Using Landsat data to assess fire & burn severity in the North American boreal forest region: an overview and summary of results. Int. J. Wildland Fire 17(4), 443–462 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Morimoto, M. & Juday, G. Perspectives on Sustainable Forest Management in Interior Alaska Boreal Forest: Recent History and Challenges. Forests 10(6), 484 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
NASA/METI/AIST/Japan Spacesystems, & U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team. ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V003. distributed by NASA EOSDIS L& Processes DAAC, https://doi.org/10.5067/ASTER/ASTGTM.003 (2018)Fick, S. E. & Hijmans, R. J. WorldClim 2: New 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Clim 37(12), 4302–4315 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
US Environmental Protection Agency, Level III Ecoregions of the Continental United States, Corvallis, Oregon: U.S. EPA— National Health & Environmental Effects Research Laboratory https://epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-&-ivecoregions-continental-united-states (2013)Wang, J.A., et al. ABoVE: Landsat-derived Annual Dominant Land Cover Across ABoVE Core Domain, 1984-2014. ORNL DAAC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA (2019).. https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/1691Debeer, D. & Strobl, C. Conditional permutation importance revisited. BMC Bioinform. 21(1), 1–30 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strobl, C., Boulesteix, A. L., Kneib, T., Augustin, T. & Zeileis, A. Conditional variable importance for r&om forests. BMC Bioinform. 9(1), 1–11 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moisen, G. & Frescino, T. Comparing five modelling techniques for predicting forest characteristics. Ecol. Mod. 157, 209–225 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team R: A language & environment for statistical computing (2021).Pebesma, E.J. & Bivand, R.S. Classes and methods for spatial data in R. R News 5 (2), https://cran.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/. (2005)Hijmans, R.J. raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. R package version 3.4–5. (2020) https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rasterStrobl, C., Boulesteix, A.-L., Kneib, T., Augustin, T. & Zeileis, A. Conditional variable importance for random forests. BMC Bioinform. 9, 307 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Debeer, D., Hothorn, T. & Strobl, C permimp: Conditional Permutation Importance. R package version 1.0–1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=permimp (2021)Schneider, G., Chicken, E., & Becvarik, R. NSM3:Functions and Datasets to Accompany Hollander, Wolfe, and Chicken – Nonparametric Statistical Methods, Third Edition. R package version 1.16. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=NSM3 (2021) More

.readcube-buybox { display: none !important;}

Ancient trees thrive where humans don’t: on the remote, rocky slopes of high mountains. So shows an analysis of tens of thousands of trees1.

Access options

Access through your institution

Change institution

Buy or subscribe

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

Additional access options:

Log in

Learn about institutional subscriptions

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00832-x

ReferencesLiu, J. et al. Conserv. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13907 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Download references

Subjects

Conservation biology

Jobs

Research Associate in Joint Sensing and Communications for Next Generation Wireless Networks

Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust (SnT), University of Luxembourg
Luxembourg, Luxembourg

Research Associate / PhD Position (m/f/x)

Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden)
01069 Dresden, Germany

Research Associate / PhD Student (m/f/x)

Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden)
01069 Dresden, Germany

Research Technician

Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (OMRF)
Oklahoma City, United States More

Siver et al.19 identified three categories of fossil Mallomonas species uncovered in the extensive Giraffe Pipe locality. One group of species had scales with morphological characteristics similar to, and difficult to separate from, modern congeners. Based on a morphological species concept, these could be viewed as representing the same species. A second group had morphologically different scales, but ones that could be linked to one or more modern species. The third group possessed scales that could not be directly linked to any modern species. The majority of the species contained in the latter group lacked a V-rib and well developed dome, and were considered as stem organisms within the broad section Planae. Siver et al.19 further reported that the mean size of scales in the group containing the extinct stem taxa was larger than those fossil taxa grouped with modern congeners.The current study adds additional modern and fossil species to the database used by Siver et al.19, including the oldest known taxon from the Cretaceous Wombat locality, and provides the first attempt to reconstruct cell size for fossil Mallomonas species. Based on the expanded database, several trends with respect to the evolution of scale and cell size of Mallomonas taxa can be made. First, there is a strong relationship between scale width and scale length that was similar for both fossil and modern forms. Second, as a group, fossil taxa had scales that are significantly larger than those produced by modern species, especially with respect to surface area. The five species with the largest scales belong to extinct fossil species, four of which belong to the group of stem taxa within section Planae. These scales are massive compared with modern forms, and support the concept of scale gigantism for early members of the Mallomonas clade containing species with scales that lack a V-rib and dome (Fig. 1; subclade A2). Third, assuming the model relating scale and cell size can be applied to the geologic record, fossil species produced significantly larger cells than modern forms.Because the models relating scale length to scale width were similar for modern and fossil species, the assumption is that the models developed relating scale size to cell size are appropriate for fossil taxa. In addition, the precise overlapping pattern of scales comprising the cell covering on modern species has recently been documented for Eocene fossil species22, indicating that this architectural design was well evolved by at least the early Eocene. Thus, making the assumption that other fossil taxa had similarly constructed cell coverings is reasonable, and further supports the application of the models relating scale and cell size to these fossil forms.Based on the model estimates, the mean cell size of the fossil species is approximately twice as large as the average cell produced by modern organisms. This doubling of cell size was also observed for the smallest species. The mean size of the five smallest modern species (M. canina, M. mangofera, M. dickii, M. madagascariensis, and M. gutata) was 9.3 × 5 µm, compared to the mean cell size estimated for the five smallest fossil taxa (M. pseudohamata, M. preisigii, M. dispar, M. bakeri and M. GP4) of 18 × 8.7 µm. The cell size discrepancy is even greater for fossil species that lack modern congeners, and especially for the extinct stem species within section Planae that possessed an average cell size of 69.2 × 20.8 µm, with a maximum cell size of 81.7 × 22.7 µm for M. GP13. The scales produced by these large fossil cells were not only massive in size, but also robust and heavily silicified. It is likely that these large cells covered with large, heavy and cumbersome scales would have been slow swimmers that expended significantly more energy to maintain their position in the water column than modern species. Perhaps these cells were also more prone to predation by larger zooplankton, and a combination of decreased motility and greater predation provided the evolutionary pressure for smaller and faster cells with less dense siliceous components, and ultimately caused the demise of the large-celled fossil species. In contrast, it is also possible that the stimulus initially resulting in the evolution of the larger species was the fact that they were too big to be preyed upon by smaller invertebrates.Several points regarding the models used to estimate cell size are warranted. First, it is important to note that because the scale sizes used to estimate cell sizes for the larger fossil taxa are at the end of the range used to produce the model, caution needs to be exercised. The assumption is being made that the linear relationship of the model holds for the larger scales, and that the linear relationship does not begin to flatten and reach a maximum cell size. However, there is no indication that the relationship is reaching an asymptote, nor reason to assume that the model would not hold for organisms that produce larger siliceous components. Second, the scale and cell size data used to produce the models consisted of the midpoint values of the ranges given in the literature. Thus, the cell sizes inferred from the models represent a midpoint estimate of the range for each species, and not an upper size limit. Third, there is more data available in the literature documenting scale size than there is for cell size for most modern Mallomonas species. Additional data on cell size, especially inclusion of mean values, may help to further fine-tune the models. Lastly, the formula of an ellipse was used to estimate scale surface area for the few species with “square-shaped” scales. Although this may slightly underestimate the surface area, using a formula for a square or rectangle would have resulted in an overestimation. Because the few species with square-shaped scales were primarily the extinct fossil taxa lacking modern congeners, their cell size may actually have been slightly larger than estimated in this study.Interestingly, fossil scales that have morphologically similar (identical) modern counterparts were not significantly different in size from each other, implying that their corresponding cells were also of similar size. These taxa have significantly smaller scales compared to those species with gigantic scales, and closer to the mean of modern species. Perhaps, this is why the lineages of these morphologically-identical species have survived for tens of millions of years. Despite maintaining virtually identical scale types, the degree of genetic difference from a physiological or reproductive perspective between taxa with virtually identical siliceous components remains unknown19,23.The extinct scale types are not only significantly larger than those of species with modern congeners, but some have a tendency of being more rectangular to square-shaped. In contrast, fossil scale types that can be linked to modern species, along with their contemporary counterparts, tend to have elliptical-shaped scales. This is especially true of body scales15,16,19. Although a few smaller species of Mallomonas form spherical cells, the vast majority of species produce ellipsoidal-shaped cells, and this is especially true of species forming larger cells15,16. Smaller elliptical-shaped scales would be more efficient in covering a curving ellipsoidal cell surface than larger and square-shaped scales, and allow for a closer fitting cell covering. Jadrná et al.26 recently reported that scales of the closely related synurophyte genus, Synura, have also become smaller and more elongate over geologic time, complementing the observations for Mallomonas. Taken together, these findings support the idea that the evolutionary trend for synurophyte organisms has been towards smaller, elliptical scales.Cyanobacteria, a prokaryotic group of organisms estimated to have evolved by 3.5–3.4 Ga, represent one of the earliest known and smallest life forms on Earth27. Since the evolution of these early prokaryotes, Smith et al.28 estimated that the maximum body size of subsequent life forms has increased approximately 18-fold, with large jumps occurring with the evolution of eukaryote cells, and another concurrent with the advent of multicellularity. In contrast, shifts in the sizes of siliceous scales and corresponding cells of Mallomonas species are small in comparison, within an order of magnitude, and similar to changes observed for prokaryote organisms and other unicellular protists over the Geozoic28,29.Despite the overall lack of historical information on cell size for the majority of unicellular eukaryote lineages, there are data for some organisms that build resistant cell walls or coverings that are taxonomically diagnostic and become incorporated into the fossil record. Diatoms produce a siliceous cell wall known as the frustule, a structure composed of top and bottom pieces called valves that are held together with additional structures called girdle bands. Frustules, or their valve components, can be uncovered from the fossil record and used to provide a direct measure of cell size. Using this technique, Finkel et al.29 reported that the size of planktic marine diatoms declined over the Cenozoic, and correlated the shift with abiotic forcing factors, including a rise in sea surface temperature and water column stratification. Foraminifera are heterotrophic marine protists that build shells out of calcium carbonate, the latter of which can also become part of the fossil record. Changes in the size of foraminifera shells over the Cenozoic have also been correlated with shifts in the intensity of water column stratification30. At this time, it is not known if the decline in cell size for Mallomonas species in the section Planae lineage recorded in the current study was the result of abiotic variables (e.g. energy expenditure or temperature), biotic factors (e.g. predation), or a combination of forcing variables.The current study has provided a means to link scale size to cell size for Mallomonas that, in turn, can be used to trace shifts in cell size over geologic time. As additional scales of Mallomonas species are uncovered from the fossil record, the scale-to-cell size model will be a valuable tool for continuing to unravel the evolutionary history of cell size for this important photosynthetic organism. Other groups of unicellular protists, including euglyphids, heliozoids and rotosphaerids, are similar to synurophytes in that they build cell coverings using numerous overlapping siliceous scales or plates that can become fossilize. Perhaps the same technique of relating scale size to cell size could be used to develop models for these protist organisms, and similarly applied to the fossil record.It is interesting to note that most modern Mallomonas species with large body scales are found in warm tropical regions, including M. bronchartiana Compère, M. pseudobronchartiana Gusev, Siver & Shin, M. velari Gusev, Siver & Shin31, M. vietnamica Gusev, Kezlya & Trans32, M. gusakovii33 and several varieties of M. matvienkoae16. In addition, the modern tropical taxa M. neoampla Gusev & Siver and M. vietnamica share several rare features of their scales and bristles with fossil species recorded from the Giraffe locality, suggesting a possible link between the modern tropical and fossil floras. During the early to middle Eocene, the Earth experienced warm greenhouse conditions and lacked a cryosphere34. The Giraffe locality, positioned near the Arctic Circle, had an estimated mean annual temperature 17 °C warmer, and a mean annual precipitation over four times higher, than present conditions35. In fact, the assemblage of plants and animals in the Eocene Arctic has been described as analogous to those found today in eastern Asia36. Perhaps tropical regions, especially in southeastern Asia, offered refugia for some of the ancient Mallomonas lineages.In summary, multiple extinct fossil species of the diverse and common synurophyte genus, Mallomonas, are reported here to have possessed gigantic scales that are significantly larger than those found on modern species. Based on a model relating scale to cell size, cells of fossil Mallomonas species were estimated to be, on average, twice as large as modern species. A combination of larger cells with heavy siliceous scales that fit less effectively around the cell may have resulted in slower cells more prone to predation, heavier cells requiring more energy resources to maintain their position in the water column, and ultimately their demise. Additional fossil species, especially representing other localities and time periods, will ultimately strengthen our understanding of the evolution of scale and cell size in synurophyte algae. More

A combined DNA metabarcoding/in-situ macro photography approach to reliably analyse carnivorous plant prey spectraResults indicate that DNA metabarcoding allows for reliable analysis of prey spectra composition in carnivorous plants at a taxonomic resolution and level of completeness unachievable by traditional morphology-based approaches (as performed, for example, by4,5,6,7,9,10,11). Even in remote tropical northern Western Australia, where many (if not most) arthropod species have not yet been accessioned into the BOLD or GenBank barcode reference libraries, this method identified over 90% of obtained OTUs from our sample set; most of them at family-level, but 41% to genus-level, and 17% even down to species rank (Supplementary Data S1). Lekesyte et al.27 were able to identify 80% of the analysed prey items found on D. rotundifolia in England to species-level. However, their sampling was performed in western Europe, whose entomofauna is comparatively well studied taxonomically and has an excellent coverage in the BOLD reference library of DNA barcodes41. New insect barcodes are regularly added to the BOLD library through large-scale initiatives such as the international Barcode of Life Project (iBOL; https://ibol.org/) and its Australian node Australian Barcode of Life Network (ABOLN), hence accuracy of future metabarcoding research performed in Australia can be expected to increase to similar levels soon.In-situ macro photography was found to provide a valuable plausibility control tool for the prey taxa identified by metabarcoding. While many of the smaller prey taxa detected by metabarcoding were impossible to identify in the in-situ macro photographs due to their tendency to quickly degenerate after digestion into small, shapeless “crumbs”8, this control method considerably reduced the amount of prey taxa detected which were not actually present as prey in the Drosera samples. This flaw of metabarcoding is most commonly a consequence of procedural errors resulting in cross-contamination within the DNA extraction procedure27, usually resulting in low read numbers. However, in-situ macro photographs may also fail to detect species if prey captured by the sundew escaped from the trap33,42, or was stolen by larger animals. In both cases, a DNA imprint left on the Drosera leaves as excretions, detached scales, hairs or, frequently, as autotomised (shedded) body parts42 could have been detected by metabarcoding. Additionally, some barcoding-detected taxa may not constitute prey if they were associated with another captured prey taxon (either as part of its diet, or as a parasite). The latter may explain some barcode hits for taxa not immediately apparent from the in-situ macro photographs, as they are (endo)parasites of captured prey taxa. This was likely the case in the detected Strepsiptera (stylops) which are frequently contained as larvae and adult females in their hymenopteran and orthopteran hosts43. However, insect endoparasites and other non-obvious prey taxa were by default not excluded by the very conservative approach of pictorial plausibility control. Additionally, in the case of endoparasites, these organisms would also contribute to plant nutrition as “bycatch” after being digested together with their host, despite not having been actively attracted to the carnivorous traps. Finally, the control method tested in this study showed that even heavily digested prey items in the samples had sufficient amounts of intact (mitochondrial) DNA present to be detected by metabarcoding, as we found no instance of any prey item being clearly identifiable in the macro photographs but not present in the barcoding data.Prey spectra composition of the studied Drosera speciesThe analysed prey spectra of the three studied species from D. sect. Arachnopus most commonly contained flying insects (especially of the orders Diptera and Hemiptera, both present in 100% of the samples; Fig. 3), thus confirming earlier in-situ macro photography-based studies of closely-related D. sect. Arachnopus species by Krueger et al.8. All members of D. sect. Arachnopus are characterised by a large, erect growth habit and thread-like aerial leaves which usually do not contact the ground8,32, thereby excluding most ground-dwelling arthropods as prey. This result is also similar to other prey spectra studies of erect-leaved Drosera from different geographic areas, where flying insects (particularly Diptera) unanimously comprised almost the entire recorded prey5,11,44. Furthermore, this study confirmed the result of Krueger et al.8 that Hemiptera—and within this order especially the Cicadellidae—are exceptionally common in the prey spectra of D. sect. Arachnopus compared with all other, previously studied Drosera. A possible explanation for this may be the relatively high abundance of Cicadellidae in tropical habitats45 compared to subtropical or temperate habitats where the above-mentioned previous Drosera prey spectra studies were conducted.Of the five most commonly detected orders, Lepidoptera generally comprised the largest prey items in terms of body size or wingspan, respectively. This prey order was exceptionally common in D. finlaysoniana, being present in 100% of samples and also visually conspicuous in the in-situ photographs. Since this Drosera species had by far the largest trapping leaves among the three species studied with an average leaf length of 10.4 ± 0.6 cm (Suppl Appendix S7), and exhibits the largest leaves in D. section Arachnopus32, this may represent an example of large prey items being more easily captured by species with larger trapping leaves33. Additionally, the sampled population of D. finlaysoniana was huge and dense (see Supplementary Figure S1), probably attracting larger prey and enabling capture of larger prey items by “collective” trapping46. Alternatively, Fleischmann30 suggested that captured Lepidoptera themselves could attract further individuals of the same species by pheromone release, potentially explaining the very high numbers of this insect order observed in D. finlaysoniana.Differences among observed prey spectraComparison of prey spectra between the three studied Drosera species revealed significant differences at arthropod family-level but not at the higher level of arthropod orders, indicating that at a coarse taxonomic resolution, the same five arthropod orders (Diptera, Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera and Thysanoptera) generally comprise most of the prey in D. sect. Arachnopus, regardless of given Drosera species or habitat. However, as strong differences were discovered in the ANOSIM comparison at family-level, it can be concluded that differences might likely increase with finer taxonomic resolution of prey taxa, a conclusion also reached by the carnivorous plant prey spectra meta-analysis of Ellison & Gotelli47. While these differences may be partially attributed to different morphological traits of the three species such as leaf scent8,30 or eglandular appendages31, the very high ANOSIM R-values returned and the large number of prey families contributing nearly equally to dissimilarity (Table 2) indicate that the most likely explanation is very different available prey spectra at the three study sites. Indeed, significant differences among different study sites, even within the same species, were previously reported for Drosera rotundifolia by Lekesyte et al.27 and for four species from D. sect. Arachnopus by Krueger et al.8. Notably, the three study sites feature different habitat types and climate regimes (Supplementary Fig. S1).Analyses indicate that there is likely little specialisation in prey capture by the three studied Drosera species. For example, the relatively high detection rate of Lepidoptera in the samples of D. finlaysoniana and D. hartmeyerorum compared to D. margaritacea may be explained by the lake margin habitats of the former two species, while the latter species was found in a completely dry drainage channel lacking any nearby waterbodies (Supplementary Fig. S1). Lepidoptera are likely to occur in much higher concentrations near water sources, especially during the dry season (May to November) when the surrounding areas are lacking other water sources (G. Bourke in Fleischmann30).Estimating prey quantityIn addition to providing a plausibility control for the compositional prey analysis by metabarcoding, the in-situ macro photography method facilitated an estimation of prey quantity per sample. Metabarcoding by itself is currently not a reliable tool for prey quantification due to the lack of a linear relationship between the number of sequence reads and organism biomass26,27.In contrast to Krueger et al.8, who generally found more prey items on larger trapping leaves in species of D. sect. Arachnopus (even when values were compared as per cm of trapping leaf length), the species with the largest leaves studied here (D. finlaysoniana) captured significantly less prey items than the smaller-leaved species D. margaritacea and D. hartmeyerorum (Fig. 4). However, while Krueger et al.8 was able to compare sympatric species (thus minimising any potential effects of the habitat or region on prey spectra), the three species in this study were studied at three different, geographically distant sites. While it is possible that overall prey abundance in the habitat was much lower at the D. finlaysoniana study site (Site 1), it can be hypothesised that the low total prey capture observed in this species may be due to the very large and extremely dense population resulting in strong intraspecific competition for prey (see Supplementary Fig. S1). This effect of population structure on prey capture has also been observed by Gibson48 and Tagawa and Watanabe46 who found a significant negative correlation between total prey capture and population density in different species of Drosera.Conclusions and outlookOur study is the first to employ a DNA metabarcoding approach supported by controls for species presence to analyse carnivorous plant prey spectra. When combined with in-situ macro photography, this method is clearly superior in terms of taxonomic resolution and completeness for analysis of environmental bulk samples (containing different organisms in highly variable states of preservation), as used here for the reconstruction of prey spectra of carnivorous plants. The capability of this method increases with new reference barcodes being regularly added to DNA barcode libraries (such as BOLD and NCBI GenBank) and it thus has the potential to become the standard methodology for future carnivorous plant prey spectra research.Additional studies are needed to test this method for other carnivorous plant species and genera, especially those possessing different trap types. Within Western Australia, three additional trap types occur: snap traps (Aldrovanda), suction traps (Utricularia) and pitfall traps (Cephalotus). In particular, it might be expected that in-situ macro photography will not work as well for the extremely small, typically submerged traps of Aldrovanda and Utricularia (which also completely enclose their captured, microscopic prey items49), potentially necessitating usage of alternative control methods for metabarcoding data. Furthermore, even within Drosera (adhesive traps) some species may require adjustments to the methodology presented here as they accumulate captured prey in a central point via tentacle movement (e.g., many climbing tuberous Drosera) or their leaves may be very difficult to place on paper sheets with the sticky side facing upwards (e.g., all pygmy Drosera). The latter problem may be solved by using reverse action forceps and photographing the leaves while held in place by the forceps.Extensive sampling of sites with co-occurring species from D. sect. Arachnopus is clearly required to better understand the ecological role of trap scent and eglandular appendages in this section. For example, manipulation experiments involving the removal of all yellow blackberry-shaped appendages of D. hartmeyerorum (which have been hypothesised to function as visual prey attractants31) and subsequent metabarcoding prey spectra comparisons of mutilated plants lacking emergences with control plants are proposed. Potential effects of population density on prey spectra (as hypothesised here for D. finlaysoniana) could be studied by comparing prey spectra of individual plants from within mass populations with more exposed-growing individuals of the same population. More

Morey, D. F. Burying key evidence: The social bond between dogs and people. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33, 158–175 (2006).
Google Scholar 
de Garcia, R. C. M., Calderón, N. & Ferreira, F. Consolidação de diretrizes internacionais de manejo de populações caninas em áreas urbanas e proposta de indicadores para seu gerenciamento. Rev. Panam. Salud Pública 32, 140–144 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Willis, C. M. et al. Olfactory detection of human bladder cancer by dogs: Proof of principle study. BMJ 329, 712 (2004).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Beck, A. M. The Ecology of Stray Dogs: A Study of Free-Ranging Urban Animals (Purdue University Press, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Jackman, J. & Rowan, A. N. Free-roaming dogs in developing countries: The benefits of capture, neuter, and return programs (2007).Borhani, M. et al. Echinococcoses in Iran, Turkey, and Pakistan: Old diseases in the new millennium. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 34, e00290-e320 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Otranto, D. et al. Zoonotic parasites of sheltered and stray dogs in the era of the global economic and political crisis. Trends Parasitol. 33, 813–825 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Quinnell, R. J. & Courtenay, O. Transmission, reservoir hosts and control of zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis. Parasitology 136, 1915–1934 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zain, S. N. M., Rahman, R. & Lewis, J. W. Stray animal and human defecation as sources of soil-transmitted helminth eggs in playgrounds of Peninsular Malaysia. J. Helminthol. 89, 740–747 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Garcia, R., Amaku, M., Biondo, A. W. & Ferreira, F. Dog and cat population dynamics in an urban area: Evaluation of a birth control strategy. Pesqui. Veterinária Bras. 38, 511–518 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Smith, L. M. et al. The effectiveness of dog population management: A systematic review. Animals 9, 1020 (2019).PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tenzin, T. et al. Comparison of mark-resight methods to estimate abundance and rabies vaccination coverage of free-roaming dogs in two urban areas of south Bhutan. Prev. Vet. Med. 118, 436–448 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hiby, E. et al. Scoping review of indicators and methods of measurement used to evaluate the impact of dog population management interventions. BMC Vet. Res. 13, 1–20 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Chidumayo, N. N. System dynamics modelling approach to explore the effect of dog demography on rabies vaccination coverage in Africa. PLoS One 13, e0205884 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Home, C., Bhatnagar, Y. V. & Vanak, A. T. Canine Conundrum: Domestic dogs as an invasive species and their impacts on wildlife in India. Anim. Conserv. 21, 275–282 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Humane Dog Population Management 2019 Update—ICAM. https://www.icam-coalition.org/download/humane-dog-population-management-guidance/http://www.icam-coalition.org/abhay-sankalp-a-sustainable-solution-to-human-dog-conflict-for-improved-human-dog-relationships/.Belo, V. S., Werneck, G. L., da Silva, E. S., Barbosa, D. S. & Struchiner, C. J. Population estimation methods for free-ranging dogs: A systematic review. PLoS One 10, e0144830 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Font, E. Spacing and social organization: Urban stray dogs revisited. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 17, 319–328 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Patronek, G. J., Beck, A. M. & Glickman, L. T. Dynamics of dog and cat populations in a community. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 210, 637–642 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kato, M., Yamamoto, H., Inukai, Y. & Kira, S. Survey of the stray dog population and the health education program on the prevention of dog bites and dog-acquired infections: A comparative study in Nepal and Okayama Prefecture, Japan. Acta Med. Okayama 57, 261–266 (2003).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tiwari, H. K., Vanak, A. T., O’Dea, M., Gogoi-Tiwari, J. & Robertson, I. D. A comparative study of enumeration techniques for Free-roaming dogs in rural Baramati, District Pune, India. Front. Vet. Sci. 5, 104 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hiby, L. R. et al. A mark-resight survey method to estimate the roaming dog population in three cities in Rajasthan, India. BMC Vet. Res. 7, 1–10 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Childs, J. E. et al. Density estimates of rural dog populations and an assessment of marking methods during a rabies vaccination campaign in the Philippines. Prev. Vet. Med. 33, 207–218 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tiwari, H. K., Robertson, I. D., O’Dea, M. & Vanak, A. T. Demographic characteristics of free-roaming dogs (FRD) in rural and urban India following a photographic sight-resight survey. Sci. Rep. 9, 16562 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Punjabi, G. A., Athreya, V. & Linnell, J. D. C. Using natural marks to estimate free-ranging dog Canis familiaris abundance in a MARK-RESIGHT framework in suburban Mumbai, India. Trop. Conserv. Sci. 5, 510–520 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Cleaton, J. M. et al. Use of photography to identify free-roaming dogs during sight-resight surveys: Impacts on estimates of population size and vaccination coverage, Haiti 2016. Vaccine X 2, 100025 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rockwood, L. L. Introduction to Population Ecology (Wiley, 2015).
Google Scholar 
Baquero, O. S., Marconcin, S., Rocha, A. & de Garcia, R. C. M. Companion animal demography and population management in Pinhais, Brazil. Prev. Vet. Med. 158, 169–177 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Totton, S. C. et al. Stray dog population demographics in Jodhpur, India following a population control/rabies vaccination program. Prev. Vet. Med. 97, 51–57 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Høgåsen, H. R., Er, C., Di Nardo, A. & Dalla Villa, P. Free-roaming dog populations: A cost-benefit model for different management options, applied to Abruzzo, Italy. Prev. Vet. Med. 112, 401–413 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Kisiel, L. M. et al. Modeling the effect of surgical sterilization on owned dog population size in Villa de Tezontepec, Hidalgo, Mexico, using an individual-based computer simulation model. PLoS One 13, e0198209 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Yoak, A. J., Reece, J. F., Gehrt, S. D. & Hamilton, I. M. Optimizing free-roaming dog control programs using agent-based models. Ecol. Model. 341, 53–61 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Belsare, A. & Vanak, A. T. Modelling the challenges of managing free-ranging dog populations. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–12 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Harandi, M. F. et al. Sonographical and serological survey of human cystic echinococcosis and analysis of risk factors associated with seroconversion in rural communities of Kerman, Iran. Zoonoses Public Health 58, 582–588 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Abedi, M., Doosti-Irani, A., Jahanbakhsh, F. & Sahebkar, A. Epidemiology of animal bite in Iran during a 20-year period (1993–2013): A meta-analysis. Trop. Med. Health 47, 1–13 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Kartal, T. & Rowan, A. N. Stray dog population management. F. Man. Small Anim. Med. 15–28 (2018).Amaral, A. C., Ward, M. P. & da Costa Freitas, J. Estimation of roaming dog populations in Timor Leste. Prev. Vet. Med. 113, 608–613 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
de Melo, S. N. et al. Effects of gender, sterilization, and environment on the spatial distribution of free-roaming dogs: An intervention study in an urban setting. Front. Vet. Sci. 7, 289 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Conan, A. et al. Population dynamics of owned, free-roaming dogs: Implications for rabies control. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9, e0004177 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Belsare, A. V. & Gompper, M. E. Assessing demographic and epidemiologic parameters of rural dog populations in India during mass vaccination campaigns. Prev. Vet. Med. 111, 139–146 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mustiana, A. et al. Owned and unowned dog population estimation, dog management and dog bites to inform rabies prevention and response on Lombok Island, Indonesia. PLoS One 10, e0124092 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hossain, M. et al. A survey of the dog population in rural Bangladesh. Prev. Vet. Med. 111, 134–138 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Acosta-Jamett, G., Cleaveland, S., Cunningham, A. A. & de Bronsvoort, B. M. C. Demography of domestic dogs in rural and urban areas of the Coquimbo region of Chile and implications for disease transmission. Prev. Vet. Med. 94, 272–281 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Massei, G. et al. Free-roaming dogs in Nepal: Demographics, health and public knowledge, attitudes and practices. Zoonoses Public Health 64, 29–40 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rinzin, K. The epidemiology of the free-roaming dog and cat population in the Wellington Region of the New Zealand Palmerston North, New Zealand: Massey University. Master’s thesis (2007).Arief, R. A. et al. Determinants of vaccination coverage and consequences for rabies control in Bali, Indonesia. Front. Vet. Sci. 3, 123 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Morters, M. K. et al. The demography of free-roaming dog populations and applications to disease and population control. J. Appl. Ecol. 51, 1096–1106 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pal, S. K. Population ecology of free-ranging urban dogs in West Bengal, India. Acta Theriol. (Warsz) 46, 69–78 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Rinzin, K., Tenzin, T. & Robertson, I. Size and demography pattern of the domestic dog population in Bhutan: Implications for dog population management and disease control. Prev. Vet. Med. 126, 39–47 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hoffman, J. M., O’Neill, D. G., Creevy, K. E. & Austad, S. N. Do female dogs age differently than male dogs?. J. Gerontol. Ser. A 73, 150–156 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Dürr, S., Dhand, N. K., Bombara, C., Molloy, S. & Ward, M. P. What influences the home range size of free-roaming domestic dogs?. Epidemiol. Infect. 145, 1339–1350 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Aiyedun, J. O. & Olugasa, B. O. Use of aerial photograph to enhance dog population census in Ilorin, Nigeria. Sokoto J. Vet. Sci. 10, 22–27 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Butler, J. R. A. & Bingham, J. Demography and dog-human relationships of the dog population in Zimbabwean communal lands. Vet. Rec. 147, 442–446 (2000).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Raymond, T. N. et al. Do open garbage dumps play a role in canine rabies transmission in Biyem-Assi health district in Cameroon?. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 5, 26055 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wright, N., Subedi, D., Pantha, S., Acharya, K. P. & Nel, L. H. The role of waste management in control of rabies: A neglected issue. Viruses 13, 225 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 

Krystosik, A. et al. Solid wastes provide breeding sites, burrows, and food for biological disease vectors, and urban zoonotic reservoirs: A call to action for solutions-based research. Front. Public Health 7, 405 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tantanee, S. & Hantrakul, S. Municipal Waste Management Challenge of Urbanization: Lesson Learned From Phitsanulok, Thailand. Geogr. Tech. 14 (2019).Desa, U. World urbanization prospects 2018. United Nations Dep. Econ. Soc. Affairs (2018).
https://www.icam-coalition.org/cnvr-in-dehradun-female-dog-focused-cnvr-implemented-with-community-engagement/
Bacon, H., Vancia, V., Walters, H. & Waran, N. Canine trap-neuter-return: A critical review of potential welfare issues. Anim. Welf. 26, 281–292 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Bacon, H., Walters, H., Vancia, V., Connelly, L. & Waran, N. Development of a robust canine welfare assessment protocol for use in dog (Canis familiaris) catch-neuter-return (CNR) programmes. Animals 9, 564 (2019).PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
ICAM Coalition. Are we making a difference? A guide to monitoring and evaluating dog population management interventions 2015 (2015).World Society for the Protection of Animals. Surveying roaming dog populations: Guidelines on methodology, 1–20 (2008).Acharya, M. & Dhakal, S. Survey on street dog population in Pokhara valley of Nepal, Bangladesh. J. Vet. Med. 13, 65–70 (2015).
Google Scholar 

http://www.icam-coalition.org/tool/dog-body-condition-scoring-training/
Tenzin, T., Ahmed, R., Debnath, N. C., Ahmed, G. & Yamage, M. Free-roaming dog population estimation and status of the dog population management and rabies control program in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9, e0003784 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Toole, T. M. A project management causal loop diagram. in Arcom Conference 5–7 (2005).Amaku, M., Dias, R. A. & Ferreira, F. Dynamics and control of stray dog populations. Math. Popul. Stud. 17, 69–78 (2010).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Kitala, P. M., McDERMOTT, J. J., Coleman, P. G. & Dye, C. Comparison of vaccination strategies for the control of dog rabies in Machakos District, Kenya. Epidemiol. Infect. 129, 215–222 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dahabreh, I. J. et al. A review of validation and calibration methods for health care modeling and simulation. Model. Simul. Context Heal. Technol. Assess. Rev. Exist. Guid. Futur. Res. Needs, Validity Assess. [Internet] (2017).Knobel, D. L. et al. Re-evaluating the burden of rabies in Africa and Asia. Bull. World Health Organ. 83, 360–368 (2005).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Özen, D., Böhning, D. & Gürcan, İS. Estimation of stray dog and cat populations in metropolitan Ankara, Turkey. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 40, 7–12 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Cortez-Aguirre, G. R., Jiménez-Coello, M., Gutiérrez-Blanco, E. & Ortega-Pacheco, A. Stray dog population in a city of Southern Mexico and its impact on the contamination of public areas. Vet. Med. Int. 2018 (2018). More

Avital, E. & Jablonka, E. Animal Traditions: Behavioural Inheritance in Evolution. (Cambridge University Press, 2000).Bonduriansky, R. & Day, T. Nongenetic inheritance and its evolutionary implications. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40, 103–125 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Mousseau, T. A. & Fox, C. W. Maternal Effects as Adaptations. (Oxford University Press, 1998).Mousseau, T. A. & Fox, C. W. The adaptive significance of maternal effects. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 403–407 (1998b).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jablonka, E. & Lamb, M. J. Evolution in four dimensions. Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life. Revised Edition. (MIT Press, 2014).Uller, T. Developmental plasticity and the evolution of parental effects. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 432–438 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Bell, A. M. & Hellmann, J. K. An integrative framework for understanding the mechanisms and multigenerational consequences of transgenerational plasticity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 50, 97–118 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Marshall, D. J. & Uller, T. When is a maternal effect adaptive? Oikos 116, 1957–1963 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Yin, J., Zhou, M., Lin, Z., Li, Q. Q. & Zhang, Y.-Y. Transgenerational effects benefit offspring across diverse environments: a meta-analysis in plants and animals. Ecol. Lett. 22, 1976–1986 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wolf, J. B. & Wade, M. J. What are maternal effects (and what are they not)? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, e1115 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Kilner, R. M. et al. Parental effects alter the adaptive value of an adult behavioural trait. eLife 4, e07340 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
McNamara, J. M., Dall, S. R. X., Hammerstein, P. & Leimar, O. Detection vs. selection: integration of genetic, epigenetic and environmental cues in fluctuating environments. Ecol. Lett. 19, 1267–1276 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Deas, J. B., Blondel, L. & Extavour, C. G. Ancestral and offspring nutrition interact to affect life-history traits in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. B 286, 20182778 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Stamps, J. A. & Bell, A. M. Combining information from parental and personal experiences: simple processes generate diverse outcomes. PLoS ONE 16, e0250540 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Agrawal, A. A., Laforsch, C. & Tollrian, R. Transgenerational induction of defences in animals and plants. Nature 401, 60–63 (1999).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Remy, J. J. Stable inheritance of an acquired behavior in Caenorhabditis elegans. Curr. Biol. 20, R877–R878 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shama, L. N. S. & Wegner, K. M. Grandparental effects in marine sticklebacks: transgenerational plasticity across multiple generations. J. Evol. Biol. 27, 2297–2307 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Crocker, K. C. & Hunter, M. D. Environmental causes and transgenerational consequences of ecdysteroid hormone provisioning in Acheta domesticus. J. Insect Physiol. 109, 69–78 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sarker, G. & Peleg-Raibstein, D. Maternal overnutrition induces long-term cognitive deficits across several generations. Nutrients 11, 7 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hellmann, J. K., Carlsson, E. R. & Bell, A. M. Sex-specific plasticity across generations II: grandpaternal effects are lineage specific and sex specific. J. Anim. Ecol. 89, 2800–2819 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mahaq, O. The effects of dietary edible bird nest supplementation on learning and memory functions of multigenerational mice. Brain Behav. 10, e01817 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ranade, S. C. et al. Different types of nutritional deficiencies affect different domains of spatial memory function checked in a radial arm maze. Neuroscience 152, 859–866 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
De Souza, A. S., Fernandes, F. S., do Carmo, T. & das Gracas, M. Effects of maternal malnutrition and postnatal nutritional rehabilitation on brain fatty acids, learning, and memory. Nutr. Rev. 69, 132–144 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Munch, K. L. et al. Maternal effects impact decision-making in a viviparous lizard. Biol. Lett. 14, 20170556 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Li, C. et al. The learning ability and memory retention of broiler breeders: 2 transgenerational effects of reduced balanced protein diet on reward-based learning. Animal 13, 1260–1268 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Boogert, N. J., Zimmer, C. & Spencer, K. A. Pre- and post-natal stress have opposing effects on social information use. Biol. Lett. 9, 20121088 (2013).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Xia, S.-Z., Liu, L., Feng, C.-H. & Guo, A.-K. Nutritional effects on operant visual learning in Drosophila melanogaster. Physiol. Behav. 62, 263–271 (1997).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Eaton, L., Edmonds, E. J., Henry, T. B., Snellgrove, D. L. & Sloman, K. A. Mild maternal stress disrupts associative learning and increases aggression in offspring. Horm. Behav. 71, 10–15 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Costa, C. P. et al. Care-giver identity impacts offspring development and performance in an annually social bumble bee. BMC Ecol. Evol. 21, 20 (2021).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Roche, D. P., McGhee, K. E. & Bell, A. M. Maternal predator-exposure has lifelong consequences for offspring learning in three-spined sticklebacks. Biol. Lett. 8, 932–935 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Feng, S., McGhee, K. E. & Bell, A. M. Effect of maternal predator exposure on the ability of stickleback offspring to generalize a learned colour-reward association. Anim. Behav. 107, 61–69 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ghio, S. C., Leblanc, A. B., Audet, C. & Aubin-Horth, N. Effects of maternal stress and cortisol exposure at the egg stage on learning, boldness and neophobia in brook trout. Behaviour 153, 1639–1663 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Tariel, J., Plenet, S. & Luquet, E. How do developmental and parental exposures to predation affect personality and immediate behavioural plasticity in the snail Physa acuta? Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20201761 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dinh, H. et al. Transgenerational effects of parental diet on offspring development and disease resistance in flies. Front. Ecol. Evol. 9, 606993 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Bilkó, A., Altbäcker, V. & Hudson, R. Transmission of food preference in the rabbit: The means of information transfer. Physiol. Behav. 56, 907–912 (1994).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Oostindjer, M., Bolhuis, J. E., van den Brand, H., Roura, E. & Kemp, B. Prenatal flavor exposure affects growth, health and behavior of newly weaned piglets. Physiol. Behav. 99, 579–586 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wells, D. L. & Hepper, P. G. Prenatal olfactory learning in the domestic dog. Anim. Behav. 72, 681–686 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Hepper, P. G. Fetal memory: does it exist? What does it do? Acta Paediatr. 85, 16–20 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Gowri, V., Dion, E., Viswanath, A., Monteiro Piel, F. & Monteiro, A. Transgenerational inheritance of learned preferences for novel host plant odors in Bicyclus anynana butterflies. Evolution 73, 2401–2414 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Peralta-Quesada, P. C. & Schausberger, P. Prenatal chemosensory learning by the predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus. PLoS ONE 7, e53229 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nieberding, C. M., van Dyck, H. & Chittka, L. Adaptive learning in non-social insects: from theory to field work, and back. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 27, 75–81 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Momen, F. M. & El Saway, S. A. Biology and fee18lopemenviour of the predatory mite Amblyseius swirskii (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Acarologia 33, 199–204 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Wimmer, D., Hoffmann, D. & Schausberger, P. Prey suitability of Western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis, and onion thrips, Thrips tabaci, for the predatory mite Amblyseius swirskii. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 18, 533–542 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Vangansbeke, D. et al. Supplemental food for Amblyseius swirskii in the control of thrips: feeding friend or foe? Pest Manag. Sci. 72, 466–473 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Delisle, J. F., Brodeur, J. & Shipp, L. Evaluation of various types of supplemental food for two species of predatory mites, Amblyseius swirskii and Neoseiulus cucumeris (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 65, 483–494 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Christiansen, I. C., Szin, S. & Schausberger, P. Benefit-cost trade-offs of early learning in foraging predatory mites Amblyseius swirskii. Sci. Rep. 6, 23571 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Schausberger, P., Davaasambuu, U., Saussure, S. & Christiansen, I. C. Categorizing experience-based foraging plasticity in mites: age dependency, primacy effects and memory persistence. R. Soc. Open Sci. 5, 172110 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Seiter, M. & Schausberger, P. Constitutive and operational variation of learning in foraging predatory mites. PLoS ONE 11, e0166334 (2016).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Schausberger, P., Seiter, M. & Raspotnig, G. Innate and learned responses of foraging predatory mites to polar and non-polar fractions of thrips’ chemical cues. Biol. Control 151, 104371 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Seiter, M. & Schausberger, P. Maternal intraguild predation risk affects offspring anti-predator behavior and learning in mites. Sci. Rep. 5, 15046 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Williams, Z. M. Transgenerational influence of sensorimotor training on offspring behavior and its neural basis in Drosophila. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 131, 166–175 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jahanbazi, M., Sedaratian-Jahromi, A. & Ghane-Jahromi, M. Comparative study of predation, preference and switching behaviors of two predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus and Amblyseius swirskii (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Int. J. Pest Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2021.1944699 (2021).Margulies, C., Tully, T. & Dubnau, J. Deconstructing memory in Drosophila. Curr. Biol. 15, R700–R713 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mery, F. & Kawecki, T. J. A cost of long-term memory in Drosophila. Science 308, 1148 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Schausberger, P., Walzer, A., Hoffmann, D. & Rahmani, H. Food imprinting revisited: early learning in foraging predatory mites. Behaviour 147, 883–897 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Schausberger, P. & Peneder, S. Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites. BMC Ecol. 17, 2 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Stephens, D. W. & Krebs, J. R. Foraging Theory. (Princeton University Press, 1986).Mendel, D. & Schausberger, P. Diet-dependent intraguild predation between the predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Neoseiulus cucumeris. J. Appl. Entomol. 135, 311–319 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Somer, R. A. & Thummel, C. S. Epigenetic inheritance of metabolic state. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 27, 43–47 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bonduriansky, R. & Crean, A. J. What are condition-transfer effects and how can they be detected? Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 450–456 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Engqvist, L. & Reinhold, K. Adaptive parental effects and how to estimate them: a comment to Bonduriansky and Crean. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 457–459 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Melis, R. et al. Effect of freezing and drying processes on the molecular traits of edible yellow mealworm. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 48, 138–149 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Singh, Y., Cullere, M., Kovitvadhi, A., Chundang, P. & Dalle Zotte, A. Effect of different killing methods on physicochemical traits, nutritional characteristics, in vitro human digestibility and oxidative stability during storage of the house cricket (Acheta domesticus L.). Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 65, 102444 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Grafen, A. On the uses of data on lifetime reproductive success. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 363, 1635–1645 (1988).
Google Scholar 
Monaghan, P. Early growth conditions, phenotypic development and environmental change. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 363, 1635–1645 (2008).
Google Scholar 
English, S., Fawcett, T. W., Higginson, A. D., Trimmer, P. C. & Uller, T. Adaptive use of information during growth can explain long-term effects of early life experiences. Am. Nat. 187, 620–632 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Miller, R. R. & Polack, C. W. Sources of maladaptive behavior in ‘normal’ organisms. Behav. Process. 154, 4–12 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Schausberger, P. Inter-and intraspecific predation on immatures by adult females in Euseius finlandicus, Typhlodromus pyri and Kampimodromus aberrans (Acari, Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 21, 131–150 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Walzer, A. & Schausberger, P. Non-consumptive effects of predatory mites on thrips and its host plant. Oikos 118, 934–940 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Walzer, A., Paulus, H. & Schausberger, P. Ontogenetic shifts in intraguild predation on thrips by phytoseiid mites: the relevance of body size and diet specialization. Bull. Entomol. Res. 94, 577–588 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Vangansbeke, D., Duarte, M. V. A. & De Clercq, P. Cold-born killers: exploiting temperature-size rule enhances predation capacity of a predatory mite. Pest Manag. Sci. 76, 1841–1846 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Krantz, G. W. & Walter, D. E. A Manual of Acarology 3rd edn (Texas Tech University Press, 2008).Croft, B. A., Luh, H.-K. & Schausberger, P. Larval size relative to larval feeding, cannibalism of larvae, egg or adult female size and larval–adult setal patterns among 13 phytoseiid mite species. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 23, 599–610 (1999).
Google Scholar  More

Jamieson, A. J., Fujii, T., Mayor, D. J., Solan, M. & Priede, I. G. Hadal trenches: the ecology of the deepest places on Earth. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 190–197 (2010).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Stewart, H. A. & Jamieson, A. J. Habitat heterogeneity of hadal trenches: considerations and implications for future studies. Prog. Oceanogr. 161, 47–65 (2018).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Zhu, G. et al. Along-strike variation in slab geometry at the southern Mariana subduction zone revealed by seismicity through ocean bottom seismic experiments. Geophys. J. Int. 218, 2122–2135 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bao, R. et al. Tectonically-triggered sediment and carbon export to the Hadal zone. Nat. Commun. 9, 121 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kioka, A. et al. Megathrust earthquake drives drastic organic carbon supply to the hadal trench. Sci. Rep. 9, 1553 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Luo, M., Gieskes, J., Chen, L. Y., Shi, X. F. & Chen, D. F. Provenances, distribution, and accumulation of organic matter in the southern Mariana Trench rim and slope: implication for carbon cycle and burial in hadal trenches. Mar. Geol. 386, 98–106 (2017).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Glud, R. N. et al. High rates of microbial carbon turnover in sediments in the deepest oceanic trench on Earth. Nat. Geosci. 6, 284–288 (2013).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Liu, S. & Peng, X. Organic matter diagenesis in hadal setting: insights from the pore-water geochemistry of the Mariana Trench sediments. Deep Sea Res. I 147, 22–31 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nunoura, T. et al. Microbial diversity in sediments from the bottom of the Challenger Deep, the Mariana Trench. Microbes Environ. 33, 186–194 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Y. et al. Genomics insights into ecotype formation of ammonia-oxidizing archaea in the deep ocean. Environ. Microbiol. 21, 716–729 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nunoura, T. et al. Molecular biological and isotopic biogeochemical prognoses of the nitrification-driven dynamic microbial nitrogen cycle in hadopelagic sediments. Environ. Microbiol. 15, 3087–3107 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mason, E. et al. Volatile metal emissions from volcanic degassing and lava–seawater interactions at Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai’i. Commun. Earth Environ. 2, 79 (2021).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Sun, R. et al. Methylmercury produced in upper oceans accumulates in deep Mariana Trench fauna. Nat. Commun. 11, 3389 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kalia, K. & Khambholja, D. B. in Handbook of Arsenic Toxicology (ed. Flora, S. J. S.) Ch. 28 (Elsevier, 2015).Welty, C. J., Sousa, M. L., Dunnivant, F. M. & Yancey, P. H. High-density element concentrations in fish from subtidal to hadal zones of the Pacific Ocean. Heliyon 4, e00840 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Oremland, R. S. & Stolz, J. F. The ecology of arsenic. Science 300, 939–944 (2003).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Popowich, A., Zhang, Q. & Le, X. C. Arsenobetaine: the ongoing mystery. Natl Sci. Rev. 3, 451–458 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, T. et al. Arsenobetaine: an ecophysiologically important organoarsenical confers cytoprotection against osmotic stress and growth temperature extremes. Environ. Microbiol. 20, 305–323 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Steinbauer, M. J. et al. Topography-driven isolation, speciation and a global increase of endemism with elevation. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 25, 1097–1107 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Hoffmann, A. A. & Hercus, M. J. Environmental stress as an evolutionary force. Bioscience 50, 217–226 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Cui, G., Li, J., Gao, Z. & Wang, Y. Spatial variations of microbial communities in abyssal and hadal sediments across the Challenger Deep. PeerJ 7, e6961 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hiraoka, S. et al. Microbial community and geochemical analyses of trans-trench sediments for understanding the roles of hadal environments. ISME J. 14, 740–756 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Morono, Y. et al. Aerobic microbial life persists in oxic marine sediment as old as 101.5 million years. Nat. Commun. 11, 3626 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, X. et al. Metagenomics reveals microbial diversity and metabolic potentials of seawater and surface sediment from a hadal biosphere at the Yap Trench. Front. Microbiol. 9, 2402 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Logares, R. et al. Metagenomic 16S rDNA Illumina tags are a powerful alternative to amplicon sequencing to explore diversity and structure of microbial communities. Environ. Microbiol. 16, 2659–2671 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhou, Z. et al. Genome- and community-level interaction insights into carbon utilization and element cycling functions of Hydrothermarchaeota in hydrothermal sediment. mSystems 5, e00795-00719 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Dombrowski, N., Teske, A. P. & Baker, B. J. Expansive microbial metabolic versatility and biodiversity in dynamic Guaymas Basin hydrothermal sediments. Nat. Commun. 9, 4999 (2018).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dong, X. et al. Metabolic potential of uncultured bacteria and archaea associated with petroleum seepage in deep-sea sediments. Nat. Commun. 10, 1816 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Laso-Pérez, R. et al. Anaerobic degradation of non-methane alkanes by “Candidatus Methanoliparia” in hydrocarbon seeps of the Gulf of Mexico. mBio 10, e01814–e01819 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gao, Z. M. et al. In situ meta-omic insights into the community compositions and ecological roles of hadal microbes in the Mariana Trench. Environ. Microbiol. 21, 4092–4108 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Varliero, G., Bienhold, C., Schmid, F., Boetius, A. & Molari, M. Microbial diversity and connectivity in deep-sea sediments of the South Atlantic polar front. Front. Microbiol. 10, 665 (2019).Su, X. et al. Identifying and predicting novelty in microbiome studies. mBio 9, e02099-02018 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Jing, G. et al. Microbiome Search Engine 2: a platform for taxonomic and functional search of global microbiomes on the whole-microbiome level. mSystems 6, e00943-00920 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Baltar, F., Zhao, Z. H. & Herndl, G. J. Potential and expression of carbohydrate untilization by marine fungi in the global ocean. Microbiome 9, 106 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Quemener, M. et al. Meta-omics highlights the diversity, activity and adaptations of fungi in deep oceanic crust. Environ. Microbiol. 22, 3950–3967 (2020).CAS 

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

Google Scholar 
Almeida, A. et al. A new genomic blueprint of the human gut microbiota. Nature 568, 499–504 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Giovannoni, S. J., Cameron Thrash, J. & Temperton, B. Implications of streamlining theory for microbial ecology. ISME J. 8, 1553–1565 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bobay, L. M. & Ochman, H. The evolution of bacterial genome architecture. Front. Genet. 8, 72 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Huang, L. et al. dbCAN-seq: a database of carbohydrate-active enzyme (CAZyme) sequence and annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, D516–D521 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Xu, Y., Ge, H. & Fang, J. Biogeochemistry of hadal trenches: Recent developments and future perspectives. Deep Sea Res. II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 155, 19–26 (2018).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jørgensen, B. B. & Boetius, A. Feast and famine — microbial life in the deep-sea bed. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 5, 770–781 (2007).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pérez Castro, S. et al. Degradation of biological macromolecules supports uncultured microbial populations in Guaymas Basin hydrothermal sediments. ISME J. 15, 3480–3497 (2021).Rastelli, E. et al. Drivers of bacterial α- and β-diversity patterns and functioning in subsurface hadal sediments. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2609 (2019).Vetter, Y. A. & Deming, J. W. Extracellular enzyme-activity in the Arctic northeast water polynya. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 114, 23–34 (1994).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Li, J. et al. Recycling and metabolic flexibility dictate life in the lower oceanic crust. Nature 579, 250–255 (2020).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kikuchi, G., Motokawa, Y., Yoshida, T. & Hiraga, K. Glycine cleavage system: reaction mechanism, physiological significance, and hyperglycinemia. Proc. Jpn. Acad. 84, 246–263 (2008).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Chakraborty, A. et al. Hydrocarbon seepage in the deep seabed links subsurface and seafloor biospheres. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 11029–11037 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Liu, J. et al. Proliferation of hydrocarbon-degrading microbes at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. Microbiome 7, 47 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Xue, C.-X. et al. Insights into the vertical stratification of microbial ecological roles across the deepest seawater column on Earth. Microorganisms 8, 1309 (2020).CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Thamdrup, B. et al. Anammox bacteria drive fixed nitrogen loss in hadal trench sediments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2104529118 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wu, J. et al. Unexpectedly high diversity of anammox bacteria detected in deep-sea surface sediments of the South China Sea. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 95, fiz013 (2019).Kartal, B. et al. Molecular mechanism of anaerobic ammonium oxidation. Nature 479, 127–130 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Maalcke, W. J. et al. Characterization of anammox hydrazine dehydrogenase, a key N2-producing enzyme in the global nitrogen cycle. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 17077–17092 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kartal, B. et al. How to make a living from anaerobic ammonium oxidation. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 37, 428–461 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Oshiki, M., Ali, M., Shinyako-Hata, K., Satoh, H. & Okabe, S. Hydroxylamine-dependent anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) by “Candidatus Brocadia sinica”. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 3133–3143 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mateos, L. M. et al. in Advances in Applied Microbiology (eds Sariaslani, S. & Gadd, G. M.) Ch. 4 (Academic Press, 2017).Ben Fekih, I. et al. Distribution of arsenic resistance genes in prokaryotes. Front. Microbiol. 9, 2473 (2018).Wang, P. P., Sun, G. X. & Zhu, Y. G. Identification and characterization of arsenite methyltransferase from an archaeon, methanosarcina acetivorans C2A. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 12706–12713 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Masuda, H., Yoshinishi, H., Fuchida, S., Toki, T. & Even, E. Vertical profiles of arsenic and arsenic species transformations in deep-sea sediment, Nankai Trough, offshore Japan. Prog. Earth Planet Sci. 6, 28 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Dunivin, T. K., Yeh, S. Y. & Shade, A. A global survey of arsenic-related genes in soil microbiomes. BMC Biol. 17, 45 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Teske, A. et al. The Guaymas Basin hiking guide to hydrothermal mounds, chimneys, and microbial mats: complex seafloor expressions of subsurface hydrothermal circulation. Front. Microbiol. 7, 75 (2016).O’Day, P. A., Vlassopoulos, D., Root, R. & Rivera, N. The influence of sulfur and iron on dissolved arsenic concentrations in the shallow subsurface under changing redox conditions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 13703–13708 (2004).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Galinski, E. A. Osmoadaptation in bacteria. Adv. Microb. Physiol. 37, 273–328 (1995).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Papini, C. M., Pandharipande, P. P., Royer, C. A. & Makhatadze, G. I. Putting the piezolyte hypothesis under pressure. Biophys. J. 113, 974–977 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Caumette, G., Koch, I. & Reimer, K. J. Arsenobetaine formation in plankton: a review of studies at the base of the aquatic food chain. J. Environ. Monit. 14, 2841–2853 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Whaley-Martin, K. J., Koch, I., Moriarty, M. & Reimer, K. J. Arsenic speciation in blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) along a highly contaminated arsenic gradient. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 3110–3118 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Oremland, R. S. et al. Anaerobic oxidation of arsenite in Mono Lake water and by a facultative, arsenite-oxidizing chemoautotroph, strain MLHE-1. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68, 4795–4802 (2002).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Rhine, E. D., Phelps, C. D. & Young, L. Y. Anaerobic arsenite oxidation by novel denitrifying isolates. Environ. Microbiol. 8, 899–908 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rhine et al. LY. The arsenite oxidase genes (aroAB) in novel chemoautotrophic arsenite oxidizers. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 354, 662–667 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Saunders, J. K., Fuchsman, C. A., Mckay, C. & Rocap, G. Complete arsenic-based respiratory cycle in the marine microbial communities of pelagic oxygen-deficient zones. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 9925–9930 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Couture, R. M., Sekowska, A., Fang, G. & Danchin, A. Linking selenium biogeochemistry to the sulfur‐dependent biological detoxification of arsenic. Environ. Microbiol. 14, 1612–1623 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, Y. & Gladyshev, V. N. Trends in selenium utilization in marine microbial world revealed through the analysis of the Global Ocean Sampling (GOS) project. PLoS Genet. 4, e1000095 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Peng, T., Lin, J., Xu, Y.-Z. & Zhang, Y. Comparative genomics reveals new evolutionary and ecological patterns of selenium utilization in bacteria. ISME J. 10, 2048–2059 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Labunskyy, V. M., Hatfield, D. L. & Gladyshev, V. N. Selenoproteins: molecular pathways and physiological roles. Physiol. Rev. 94, 739–777 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Yin, K., Wang, Q., Lv, M. & Chen, L. Microorganism remediation strategies towards heavy metals. Chem. Eng. J. 360, 1553–1563 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Day, P. A., Vlassopoulos, D., Root, R. & Rivera, N. The influence of sulfur and iron on dissolved arsenic concentrations in the shallow subsurface under changing redox conditions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 13703–13708 (2004).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chen, S. F., Zhou, Y. Q., Chen, Y. R. & Gu, J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics 34, 884–890 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Salter, S. J. et al. Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses. BMC Biol. 12, 87 (2014).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat. Methods 9, 357–359 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kopylova, E., Noé, L. & Touzet, H. SortMeRNA: fast and accurate filtering of ribosomal RNAs in metatranscriptomic data. Bioinformatics 28, 3211–3217 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Huang, Y., Gilna, P. & Li, W. Z. Identification of ribosomal RNA genes in metagenomic fragments. Bioinformatics 25, 1338–1340 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Eddy, S. R. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7, e1002195 (2011).ADS 
MathSciNet 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zhou, Y. Microbiomes in the Challenger Deep slope and bottom-axis sediments. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6061243 (2022).Bolyen, E. et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 852–857 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Jing, G. C. et al. Parallel-META 3: comprehensive taxonomical and functional analysis platform for efficient comparison of microbial communities. Sci. Rep. 7, 40371 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wu, Y. W., Simmons, B. A. & Singer, S. W. MaxBin 2.0: an automated binning algorithm to recover genomes from multiple metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics 32, 605–607 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Alneberg, J. et al. Binning metagenomic contigs by coverage and composition. Nat. Methods 11, 1144–1146 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Uritskiy, G. V., DiRuggiero, J. & Taylor, J. MetaWRAP-a flexible pipeline for genome-resolved metagenomic data analysis. Microbiome 6, 158 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Parks, D. H., Imelfort, M., Skennerton, C. T., Hugenholtz, P. & Tyson, G. W. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res. 25, 1043–1055 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Olm, M. R., Brown, C. T., Brooks, B. & Banfield, J. F. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J. 11, 2864–2868 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chaumeil, P. A., Mussig, A. J., Hugenholtz, P. & Parks, D. H. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Bioinformatics 36, 1925–1927 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Mende, D. R., Sunagawa, S., Zeller, G. & Bork, P. Accurate and universal delineation of prokaryotic species. Nat. Methods 10, 881–887 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Yamada, K. D., Tomii, K. & Katoh, K. Application of the MAFFT sequence alignment program to large data-reexamination of the usefulness of chained guide trees. Bioinformatics 32, 3246–3251 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

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

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

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

Google Scholar 
Letunic, I. & Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, W256–W259 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pachiadaki, M. G. et al. Major role of nitrite-oxidizing bacteria in dark ocean carbon fixation. Science 358, 1046–1051 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Li, H. et al. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Perry, M. heatmaps: flexible heatmaps for functional genomics and sequence features. R package version 1.14.0 (Bioconductor, 2020).Buchfink, B., Xie, C. & Huson, D. H. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat. Methods 12, 59–60 (2015).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

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

Google Scholar 
Aramaki, T. et al. KofamKOALA: KEGG ortholog assignment based on profile HMM and adaptive score threshold. Bioinformatics 36, 2251–2252 (2019).PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kanehisa, M., Sato, Y. & Morishima, K. BlastKOALA and GhostKOALA: KEGG tools for functional characterization of genome and metagenome sequences. J. Mol. Biol. 428, 726–731 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Zhou, Y. Microbiomes in the Challenger Deep slope and bottom-axis sediments. Figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m6089.figshare.12979709 (2022). More