Ecology

Climate change is affecting arctic ecosystems through temperature increase1, hydrological changes2, earlier snowmelt3,4, and the associated increase in growing season length5. Annual arctic air temperature has been increasing at more than double the magnitude of the global mean air temperature increase1, and terrestrial snow cover in June has decreased by 15.2% per decade from 1981 to 20194. Warming is the main driver of the earlier start of the growing season, and the greening of the Arctic6,7,8. Arctic greening is associated with enhanced vegetation height, biomass, cover, and abundance9. However, the complexity of arctic systems reveals an intricate patchwork of landscape greening and browning8,10,11, with browning linked to a variety of stresses to vegetation8 including water stress12,13. The interconnected changes in temperature, soil moisture, snowmelt timing, etc. can have important effects on the carbon sequestered by arctic ecosystems14. The reservoir of carbon in arctic soil and vegetation depends on the interaction of two main processes: (1) changes in net CO2 uptake by vegetation; and (2) increased net loss of CO2 (from vegetation and soil) to the atmosphere via respiration. Therefore, defining the response of both plant productivity and ecosystem respiration to environmental changes is needed to predict the sensitivity of the net CO2 fluxes of arctic systems to climate change.An earlier snowmelt, and a longer growing season, do not necessarily translate into more carbon sequestered by high latitude ecosystems5. There is a large disagreement on the response of plant productivity and the net CO2 uptake to early snowmelt in tundra ecosystems15,16,17,18,19. A warmer and longer growing season might not result in more net CO2 uptake if CO2 loss from respiration increases16, particularly later in the season, and surpasses the CO2 sequestered by enhanced plant productivity in northern ecosystems16,20. Moreover, snowmelt timing and the growing season length greatly affect hydrologic conditions of arctic soils21, as well as plant productivity22. Longer non-frozen periods earlier in the year23 and earlier vegetation greening can increase evapotranspiration (ET), resulting in lower summer soil moisture24,25,26. The complexity in the hydrology of tundra systems arises from the tight link between the water drainage and the presence and depth of permafrost. The presence of permafrost reduces vertical water losses, preventing soil drainage in northern wetlands during most of the summer despite low precipitation input27. Increasing rainfall28 and increased permafrost degradation can increase soil wetness in continuous permafrost regions2. Further permafrost degradation (e.g. ice-wedge melting) can increase hydrologic connectivity leading to increased lateral drainage of the landscape and subsequent soil drying2,29.Given the importance of soil moisture in affecting the carbon balance of arctic ecosystems, and its links with snowmelt timing, in this study, we investigated the correlation between summer fluxes of CO2 (i.e., net ecosystem exchange (NEE), gross primary productivity (GPP) ecosystem respiration (ER)), ET, and environmental drivers such as soil moisture and snowmelt timing, while controlling for the other most important drivers of photosynthesis and respiration (i.e. solar radiation and air temperature). We expected earlier snowmelt to be correlated with larger ET and lower soil moisture, particularly during peak and late season, consistent with drying associated with a longer growing season. The lower soil moisture with earlier snowmelt should result in a negative correlation between snowmelt timing and GPP, particularly during the peak and late season (when we expect the most water stress), and in a positive correlation between snowmelt timing and ER during the entire growing season. This soil moisture limitation to plant productivity should result in lower net cumulative CO2 sequestration during the entire summer, because of lower plant productivity if these ecosystems are water-limited due to lower soil moisture with earlier snowmelt.Testing the impact of snowmelt timing on the carbon dynamics and hydrology of tundra ecosystemsThe 11 sites were selected as among the longest-running tower sites in the circumpolar Arctic (including 6 to 19 years of fluxes per site and a total of 119 site-years of summer (June to August) eddy covariance CO2 flux data, Table S1). All sites lie in the zone of continuous permafrost. The sites are representative of dominant tundra vegetation classes (wetland, graminoids, and shrub tundra), together accounting for 31% of all tundra vegetation types (Fig. 130 and Supplementary Information). Given the complex interactions among different variables (many covarying together), we used a variety of statistical analyses to identify the association between standardized anomalies of NEE, GPP, ER, and ET, and standardized anomalies of the main environmental controls during different periods of the summer corresponding to various stages in seasonal phenology (early season: June, peak season: July, and late season: August). We used a partial correlation analysis to identify if the timing of the snowmelt associates with anomalies of ET, soil moisture, NEE, GPP, ER, atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD), or the Bowen ratio (the ratio between Sensible Heat (H) and Latent Heat (LE)) while statistically controlling for the main meteorological forcing such as air temperature and solar radiation (Methods). Identifying the correlation between ET (and the Bowen ratio) and snowmelt timing is a way to assess water limitation to ecosystems (in addition to testing their response to soil moisture changes), as H, and therefore, the Bowen ratio, are expected to increase with surface drying31,32. To identify the association between snowmelt timing, the main environmental variables (i.e., air temperature and solar radiation), and NEE, GPP, ER, and ET over time, we performed a maximum covariance analysis (MCA) on the monthly median standardized anomalies from 2004 to 2019 (a time period when data for most of the sites were available). MCA allowed us to find patterns in two space–time datasets that are highly correlated using a cross-covariance matrix26. We retained sites as the unit of variation (i.e., by estimating the standardized anomalies by site for each of the indicated variables, see “Methods”), hence the results of the MCA integrated the site level relationships between each of the variables over time). The goal of this analysis was to identify the most important environmental drivers associated with NEE, GPP, and ER across all the sites over time. MCA is particularly appropriate for this study as it can handle data with gaps and unequal lengths in the datasets. We also tested the relative importance of the abovementioned environmental drivers on the monthly median GPP, ER, and NEE using a linear mixed effect model, including site as a random effect to account for the site-to-site variability. The MCA and the mixed model analyses were conducted to test the relative importance of snowmelt and other variables at different times of the season. Finally, to evaluate the water balance at different times of the season, we estimated the difference between Potential Evapotranspiration (PET) and the actual ET, and the difference between precipitation (PPT) and ET for each of the sites, years, and months (e.g. June, July, and August). This study did not attempt to describe the long-term temporal changes in the anomalies of snowmelt and carbon fluxes, given the short data record available for some of the sites (i.e. less than 10 years, Table S1), but instead focused on understanding the association between environmental variables and the carbon balance at different times of the season. More details of these analyses are included in the Methods.Figure 1Study sites. Locations of the 11 eddy covariance flux tower sites used in this study. Light blue regions delineate the total Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map (CAVM), green regions delineate the subset of CAVM vegetation types represented in this study (including all the vegetation types listed in Table S1). This map was created using QGIS.org, 2020, QGIS 3.10. Geographic Information System User Guide. QGIS Association: https://docs.qgis.org/3.10/en/docs/user_manual/index.html. The dataset used in the map was the CAVM map: CAVM Team. 2003. Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map. (1:7,500,000 scale), Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Map No. 1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. ISBN: 0-9767525-0-6, ISBN-13: 978-0-9767525-0-9.Full size imageInfluence of snowmelt timing on NEE, GPP, ER, and hydrological status of tundra ecosystemsOnce statistically controlling for solar radiation and air temperature (in the partial correlation analysis, see “Methods”), we observed a significant positive relationship between the snowmelt timing anomalies and NEE anomalies (i.e. earlier snowmelt was associated with a higher net CO2 sequestration) in June and July, but a negative correlation in August (Fig. 2a, Table 1). A significant relationship was also found between snowmelt date anomalies and GPP anomalies, with more positive GPP anomalies (i.e. higher plant productivity) with earlier snowmelt in June and July, and more negative GPP anomalies with earlier snowmelt in August (Fig. 2b, Table 1). Earlier snowmelt was associated with significantly higher ER in both June and July, but there was no significant relationship in August (Fig. 2c, Table 1), suggesting that the late-season correlation between NEE and snowmelt timing was mostly driven by the lower GPP and with earlier snowmelt in August. The MCA analysis showed that the anomalies in snowmelt timing had the highest squared covariance fraction (SCF) with the monthly median anomalies of GPP, NEE, and ER in June and July, and the lowest in August over the 2004–2019 period (Fig. 3). A similar result was observed in the linear mixed effect model, which showed a significant relationship between snowmelt date and GPP, and NEE, in all summer months, higher ({R}_{m}^{2}) between the snowmelt date and GPP in June and July, and no significant relationship between snowmelt date and ER in August (Table S3). In late season, other environmental variables had a higher covariance with the GPP, NEE, and ER anomalies than the snowmelt timing (Fig. 3, Table S3).Figure 2Relationships between the indicated median monthly anomalies using partial correlation analysis accounting for solar radiation and air temperature anomalies (retaining site as the unit of variation). Given that the interaction term between “month” and snowmelt timing was significant, we included the correlation coefficients and P of the regressions for each of the indicated months separately in each panel (also included in Table 1). Negative values indicate CO2 uptake and positive values CO2 release into the atmosphere, and shaded areas are 95% confidence intervals.Full size imageTable 1 Significance (P) and Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) of the relationships between the indicated monthly median standardized anomalies for June, July, and August retaining site as a unit of variation.Full size tableFigure 3Squared covariance fraction (SCF) of each couple of the indicated variables for the maximum covariance analysis (MCA) of the monthly median anomalies of GPP, ER, and NEE in June, July, and August. The first pair of singular vectors are the phase-space directions when projected that have the largest possible cross-covariance. The singular vectors describe the patterns in the anomalies that are linearly correlated. A higher SCF indicates a stronger association over time between the indicated variables.Full size imageOur results are consistent with the discrepancy between the observed increase in the maxNDVI over the last four decades and the time-integrated (TI) NDVI which instead has plateaued in the last two decades and even decreased over the last 10 years in several northern arctic ecosystems33. TI-NDVI considers the length of the growing season and phenological variations34 and, therefore, better integrates vegetation development during the entire growing season. Moisture was shown to be important for the NDVI trends33,35. Given the potential water limitation to summer carbon uptake in northern ecosystems12,23,24,25, we tested if an earlier snowmelt was associated with a decrease in soil moisture, which would affect GPP and NEE. We only observed a significant correlation between soil moisture anomalies and snowmelt date anomalies in June (i.e. higher soil moisture with earlier snowmelt, Fig. S1a, Table S2), but no significant correlation in July and August (Fig. S1a, Table S2). The higher soil moisture with earlier snowmelt in June is consistent with surface inundation after snowmelt36,37 and earlier soil thawing resulting in higher soil moisture (i.e., soil moisture is low while soils are frozen). A similar result was observed for the ET anomalies. Higher ET with earlier snowmelt in June (Fig. S1b) could be the result of surface inundation after snowmelt32. The standardized NEE anomalies were significantly correlated with the soil moisture anomalies in each of the summer months (Fig. S1d, Table S2). However, the relationship between the GPP (and ER anomalies) and soil moisture anomalies was only significant in June (Fig. S1e,f, Table S2) suggesting an earlier activation of the vegetation with earlier soil thaw (and the associated higher soil moisture). A higher water loss from ET in early season (Fig. S1b) could have resulted in the drying of the surface moss layer with the progression of the summer, which would have been consistent with the observed lower GPP and the lower net CO2 sequestration with earlier snowmelt observed in August (Fig. 2a,b, Table 1). A potential moisture limitation to plant productivity might have been consistent also with the higher SCF of NEE, or GPP and VPD anomalies in August than in June and July (Fig. 3). However, no significant relationship between ET (or soil moisture) and snowmelt date anomalies was observed in July and August (Fig. S1a,b) contrary to what would be expected if drying occurred following earlier snowmelt. No significant relationship was found between VPD anomalies and snowmelt date anomalies in any of the summer months (P = 0.14 in a partial correlation considering air temperature and solar radiation anomalies). Finally, surface drying should result in an increase in the Bowen ratio anomalies with the progression of the summer, given that H increases with a decrease in water table and surface drying32,38. However, the Bowen ratio showed no correlation with the standardized snowmelt date anomalies in any of the summer months (Fig. S1c, Table S2), and presented similar values in all the summer months (Fig. S2a). The lack of correlation between the soil moisture, VPD, Bowen ratio, and snowmelt date anomalies suggests that an earlier snowmelt did not result in significant surface drying in the sites of this study. The median PET-ET and PPT-ET for all years and sites included in this analysis (Fig.S2 b,c) was slightly higher in August, similar to reports by others for the Russian arctic tundra38,39, further supporting a lack of soil moisture limitation in late season. Although these analyses do not consider runoff, which can be significant21,26, overall our results do not suggest that an earlier snowmelt resulted in a water stress that significantly limited plant productivity in these arctic ecosystems over continuous permafrost.The correlation between the anomalies in the August GPP and snowmelt timing is consistent with earlier senescence in northern plant species (e.g. Eriophorum vaginatum, a dominant species across these tundra types) compared to southern species growing in the same location in a common garden experiment40. The phenotypic variation was shown to be persisting for decades41, and ecotypes may be unable to extend their effective growth period or take advantage of a longer growing season40. Several studies across different plant functional types have shown that once plant growth is initiated after the snowmelt in northern ecosystems, it continues only for a fixed number of days until the occurrence of senescence42,43,44. Therefore, the lower GPP in August with earlier snowmelt might not be linked to water limitation on photosynthesis later in the season, but rather to an earlier senescence arising from the endogenous rhythms of growth and senescence, that plant functional types living in these extreme conditions have developed over decades. On a broader scale, earlier senescence with an earlier start of the growing season after snowmelt in northern ecosystems is also consistent with an earlier spring zero-crossing date and an earlier autumn zero-crossing date of the mean detrended seasonal CO2 variations at Barrow, AK, USA (NOAA ESRL: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/obspack/) during 2013–2017 compared to 1980–19845. The spring and autumn zero-crossing date is the time when the detrended seasonal CO2 variations intersect the zero line in spring and autumn respectively and can be used as an indicator for the start and end of the net CO2 uptake by vegetation45,46. On the other hand, NDVI measurements show both an earlier start of the season and a later end of season for 2008–2012 compared to 1982–19865. The disagreement between the detrended seasonal atmospheric CO2 concentration showing an earlier autumn zero-crossing date and the NDVI measurements showing a later end of the season has been explained by the increase in respiration in the fall20. The disagreement between atmospheric CO2 concentration trends (showing an earlier autumn zero-crossing date), and NDVI (showing a later end of the season,5 may also be explained by the challenges in using NDVI as a proxy for plant productivity in these arctic systems. The relationship between NDVI and CO2 flux and plant productivity is highly variable and non-linear in arctic ecosystems47. While some arctic ecosystems have shown that NDVI was strongly correlated with GPP (explaining 75% of the variation in GPP48, other studies showed that NDVI was either not significantly correlated with GPP and NEE49 or was only able to explain a minor fraction (maximum of 25%) of the variation in NEE and GPP in some arctic tundra ecosystems after accounting for the seasonal variation50,51.In conclusion, earlier snowmelt was associated with greater net CO2 uptake and higher GPP in early and peak seasons, but with less net CO2 uptake and lower GPP later in the summer, in the studied arctic tundra ecosystems. We did not find evidence of a late-season water limitation to GPP with earlier snowmelt. Although several hypotheses can be forwarded to explain the link between snowmelt and late season declines in plant productivity and carbon uptake, the current literature does not provide a definitive explanation (schematic Fig. 4). Future studies should investigate the potential interaction of different processes explaining the response of the carbon dynamics in the Arctic to earlier snowmelt and reconstruct the temporal changes in the carbon balance from these systems. The link between the long-term changes in the CO2 fluxes and NDVI in tundra ecosystems needs closer examination. Studies should investigate if higher NDVI is definitively associated with higher net CO2 uptake. Greening of the Arctic might not necessarily translate into more net CO2 uptake, as early and peak season carbon gains might be offset by a late-season CO2 loss, and respiration might counterbalance the increase in plant productivity. A better understanding of the processes driving these temporal changes is a fundamental step in advancing our prediction of the response of the arctic CO2 balance to changing climate.Figure 4Schematic of the effect of earlier snowmelt on NEE, GPP, and ER at different times of the season. Earlier snowmelt results in an earlier activation of the vegetation, higher plant productivity, and higher net carbon uptake in June and July. This earlier activation could result in more carbon loss and lower plant productivity with earlier snowmelt in August, potentially related to either environmental stress, or to earlier senescence. Photo credit: Donatella Zona.Full size image More

Akins JR, Aubry KB, Sacks BN (2018) Genetic integrity, diversity, and population structure of the Cascade red fox. Conserv Genet 19:969–980
Google Scholar 
Allen SH, Sargeant AB (1993) Dispersal patterns of red foxes relative to population density. J Wildlife Manag 57(3):526–533Arbogast BS, Schumacher KI, Kerhoulas NJ, Bidlack AL, Cook JA, Kenagy GJ (2017) Genetic data reveal a cryptic species of New World flying squirrel: Glaucomys oregonensis. J Mammal 98(4):1027–41
Google Scholar 
Ashbrook FG (1928) Silver-Fox Farming. US Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C.Aubry KB (1984) The recent history and present distribution of the red fox in Washington. Northwest Sci 58(1):69–79
Google Scholar 
Aubry KB, Statham MJ, Sacks BN, Perrine JD, Wisely SM (2009) Phylogeography of the North American red fox: vicariance in Pleistocene forest refugia. Mol Ecol 18(12):2668–2686CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bailey V (1936a) The red fox in America. Nature 28:269–272
Google Scholar 
Bailey V (1936b) The Mammals and Life Zones of Oregon. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C
Google Scholar 
Ball MC, Finnegan L, Manseau M, Wilson P (2010) Integrating multiple analytical approaches to spatially delineate and characterize genetic population structure: an application to boreal caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in central Canada. Conserv Genet 11(6):2131–2143
Google Scholar 
Barrowclough GF, Groth JG, Mertz LA, Gutiérrez RJ (2004) Phylogeographic structure, gene flow and species status in blue grouse (Dendragapus obscurus). Mol Ecol 13(7):1911–22CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bell DA, Robinson ZL, Funk WC, Fitzpatrick SW, Allendorf FW, Tallmon DA et al. (2019) The exciting potential and remaining uncertainties of genetic rescue. Trends Ecol Evol 34(12):1070–1079PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Black KL, Petty SK, Radeloff VC, Pauli JN (2018) The Great Lakes Region is a melting pot for vicariant red fox (Vulpes vulpes) populations. J Mammal 99(5):1229–1236
Google Scholar 
Champagnon J, Elmberg J, Guillemain M, Gauthier-Clerc M, Lebreton JD (2012) Conspecifics can be aliens too: a review of effects of restocking practices in vertebrates. J Nat Conserv 20(4):231–41
Google Scholar 
Chen C, Durand E, Forbes F, François O (2007) Bayesian clustering algorithms ascertaining spatial population structure: a new computer program and a comparison study. Mol Ecol Notes 7(5):747–756
Google Scholar 
Cross PR, Sacks BN, Luikart G, Schwartz MK, Van Etten KW, Crabtree RL (2018) Red Fox Ancestry and Connectivity Assessments Reveal Minimal Fur Farm Introgression in Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. J Fish Wildl Manag 9(2):519–530
Google Scholar 
Dalquest, WW (1948) Mammals of Washington, Vol II. University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History, Lawrence, KansasDevenish-Nelson ES, Harris S, Soulsbury CD, Richards SA, Stephens PA (2013) Demography of a carnivore, the red fox, Vulpes vulpes: what have we learnt from 70 years of published studies? Oikos 122(5):705–16
Google Scholar 
Do C, Waples RS, Peel D, Macbeth G, Tillett BJ, Ovenden JR (2014) NeEstimator v2: re-implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data. Mol Ecol Resour 14(1):209–214CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Durand E, Jay F, Gaggiotti OE, François O (2009) Spatial inference of admixture proportions and secondary contact zones. Mol Biol Evol 26(9):1963–1973CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Earl DA, vonHoldt BM (2012) Structure Harvester: a website and program for visualizing Structure output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4(2):359–361
Google Scholar 
Edmands S (2007) Between a rock and a hard place: evaluating the relative risks of inbreeding and outbreeding for conservation and management. Mol Ecol 6(3):463–75
Google Scholar 
Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard JK (2003) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164(4):1567–1587CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fichter E, Williams R (1967) Distribution and status of the red fox in Idaho. J Mammal 48(2):219–230
Google Scholar 
Fitzpatrick SW, Bradburd GS, Kremer CT, Salerno PE, Angeloni LM, Funk WC (2020) Genomic and fitness consequences of genetic rescue in wild populations. Curr Biol 30(3):517–22CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Frankham R (1996) Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conserv Biol 10(6):1500–8
Google Scholar 
Frankham R (2015) Genetic rescue of small inbred populations: Meta-analysis reveals large and consistent benefits of gene flow. Mol Ecol 24(11):2610–2618PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Frankham R, Ballou JD, Eldridge MD, Lacy RC, Ralls K, Dudash MR, Fenster CB (2011) Predicting the probability of outbreeding depression. Conserv Biol 25(3):465–75PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Frankham R, Ballou JD, Ralls K, Eldridge MD, Dudash MR, Fenster CB et al. (2017) Genetic management of fragmented animal and plant populations. Oxford University Press, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Fuhrmann RT (1998) Distribution, Morphology, and Habitat Use of the Red Fox in the Northern Yellowstone Ecosystem. MSc Thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman, MontanaGortázar C, Travaini A, Delibes M (2000) Habitat-related microgeographic body size variation in two Mediterranean populations of red fox (Vulpes vulpes). J Zool Lond 250:335–338
Google Scholar 
Gosselink TE, Piccolo KA, Van Deelen TR, Warner RE, Mankin PC (2010) Natal dispersal and philopatry of red foxes in urban and agricultural areas of Illinois. J Wildl Manag 74(6):1204–17
Google Scholar 
Goudet J (2005) Hierfstat, a package for R to compute and test hierarchical F-statistics. Mol Ecol Notes 5(1):184–186
Google Scholar 
Green GA, Sacks BN, Erickson LJ, Aubry KB (2017) Genetic characteristics of red foxes in northeastern Oregon. Northwest Naturalist 98(2):73–81
Google Scholar 
Grinnell J, Dixon JS, Linsdale JM (1937) Fur-Bearing Mammals of California, Vol II. University of California Press, Berkeley, California
Google Scholar 
Hall E, Kelson KR (1959) The Mammals of North America. 2 Vols. Ronald Press, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Hampe A, Petit RJ (2005) Conserving biodiversity under climate change: the rear edge matters. Ecol Lett 8(5):461–7PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Harris K, Zhang Y, Nielsen R (2019) Genetic rescue and the maintenance of native ancestry. Conserv Genet 20(1):59–64
Google Scholar 
Hedrick PW, Peterson RO, Vucetich LM, Adams JR, Vucetich JA (2014) Genetic rescue in Isle Royale wolves: genetic analysis and the collapse of the population. Conserv Genet 15(5):1111–21
Google Scholar 
Hiller TL, McFadden-Hiller JE, Sacks BN (2015) Genetic and photographic detections document Sierra Nevada red fox in the Northern Cascades of Oregon. Northwest Sci 89(4):409–13
Google Scholar 
Hoffmann M, Sillero-Zubiri C (2021) Vulpes vulpes (amended version of 2016 assessment). IUCN Red List Threatened Species 2021:e.T23062A193903628. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2021-1.RLTS.T23062A193903628.en. Accessed 23 September 2021Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoffmann RS, Wright PL, Newby FE (1969) The distribution of some mammals in Montana I. Mammals other than bats. J Mammal 50(3):579–604
Google Scholar 
Hope AG, Malaney JL, Bell KC, Salazar-Miralles F, Chavez AS, Barber BR et al. (2016) Revision of widespread red squirrels (genus: Tamiasciurus) highlights the complexity of speciation within North American forests. Mol Phylogenet Evol 100:170–82PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA (2007) CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23(14):1801–1806CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jombart T (2008) adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24(11):1403–1405CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jombart T, Devillard S, Balloux F (2010) Discriminant analysis of principal components: a new method for the analysis of genetically structured populations. BMC Genet 11(1):94PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Kamler JF, Ballard WB (2002) A review of native and nonnative red foxes in North America. Wildlife Soc Bullet 30(2):370–379Kamler JF, Ballard WB (2003) Range expansion of red foxes in eastern Nevada and western Utah. J Arizona-Nevada Acad Sci 36(1):18–20Kardos M, Taylor HR, Ellegren H, Luikart G, Allendorf FW (2016) Genomics advances the study of inbreeding depression in the wild. Evolut Appl 9(10):1205–18
Google Scholar 
Kasprowicz AE, Statham MJ, Sacks BN (2016) Fate of the other redcoat: remnants of colonial British foxes in the eastern United States. J Mammal 97(1):298–309
Google Scholar 
Kuchler A (1964) Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States. Am Geogr Soc Spec Publ 36:1–116Kyriazis CC, Wayne RK, Lohmueller KE (2021) Strongly deleterious mutations are a primary determinant of extinction risk due to inbreeding depression. Evol Lett 5(1):33–47PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Laikre L, Schwartz MK, Waples RS, Ryman N, Group GW (2010) Compromising genetic diversity in the wild: unmonitored large-scale release of plants and animals. Trends Ecol Evol 25(9):520–529PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Larivière S, Pasitschniak-Arts M (1996) Vulpes vulpes. Mamm Species 537:1–11
Google Scholar 
Laut AC (1921) The fur trade of America. Macmillan Company, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Leigh JW, Bryant D (2015) Popart: full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods Ecol Evol 6(9):1110–6
Google Scholar 
Lesica P, Allendorf FW (1995) When are peripheral populations valuable for conservation? Conserv Biol 9(4):753–60
Google Scholar 
Lewis JC, Sallee KL, Golightly Jr RT (1999) Introduction and range expansion of nonnative red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in California. Am Midland Naturalist 142(2):372–381Long J (2003) Introduced mammals of the world: their history, distribution and influence. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, Australia
Google Scholar 
Lord KA, Larson G, Coppinger RP, Karlsson EK (2020) The history of farm foxes undermines the animal domestication syndrome. Trends Ecol Evol 35(2):125–136PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Love Stowell SM, Pinzone CA, Martin AP (2017) Overcoming barriers to active interventions for genetic diversity. Biodivers Conserv 26(8):1753–65
Google Scholar 
Lounsberry ZT, Quinn CB, Statham MJ, Angulo CL, Kalani TJ, Tiller E et al. (2017) Investigating genetic introgression from farmed red foxes into the wild population in Newfoundland, Canada. Conserv Genet 18(2):383–392
Google Scholar 
Mace RU (1970). Oregon’s Furbearing Animals. Oregon State Game Commission, Corvallis, OregonManthey JD, Klicka J, Spellman GM (2012) Is gene flow promoting the reversal of Pleistocene divergence in the Mountain Chickadee (Poecile gambeli)? PLOS ONE 7(11):e49218CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Merson C, Statham MJ, Janecka JE, Lopez RR, Silvy NJ, Sacks BN (2017) Distribution of native and nonnative ancestry in red foxes along an elevational gradient in central Colorado. J Mammal 98(2):365–377
Google Scholar 
Miller JM, Cullingham CI, Peery RM (2020) The influence of a priori grouping on inference of genetic clusters: simulation study and literature review of the DAPC method. Heredity 125(5):269–280PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Moore M, Brown SK, Sacks BN (2010) Thirty-one short red fox (Vulpes vulpes) microsatellite markers. Mol Ecol Resour 10:404–8PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Moritz C (1994) Applications of mitochondrial DNA analysis in conservation: a critical review. Mol Ecol 3(4):401–11CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moritz C (2002) Strategies to protect biological diversity and the evolutionary processes that sustain it. Syst Biol 51(2):238–254PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Neel MC, McKelvey K, Ryman N, Lloyd MW, Bull RS, Allendorf FW et al. (2013) Estimation of effective population size in continuously distributed populations: there goes the neighborhood. Heredity 111(3):189–99CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Nei M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Pebesma EJ (2004) Multivariable geostatistics in S: the gstat package. Comput Geosci 30(7):683–691
Google Scholar 
Paradis E (2010) pegas: an R package for population genetics with an integrated–modular approach. Bioinformatics 26(3):419–20CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Perrine JD, Campbell LA, Green GA (2010) Sierra Nevada red fox (Vulpes vulpes necator): a conservation assessment. US Department of Agriculture, Vallejo, CaliforniaPerrine JD, Pollinger JP, Sacks BN, Barrett RH, Wayne RK (2007) Genetic evidence for the persistence of the critically endangered Sierra Nevada red fox in California. Conserv Genet 8(5):1083–1095
Google Scholar 
Petersen M (1914) The fur traders and fur bearing animals. Hammond Press, Buffalo, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Petkova D, Novembre J, Stephens M (2016) Visualizing spatial population structure with estimated effective migration surfaces. Nat Genet 48(1):94–100CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Petkova (2020) reemsplots2: Generate plots to inspect and visualize the results of EEMS. R package version 0.1.0. https://github.com/dipetkov/eemsPritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155(2):945–959CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pritchard JK, Wen W, Falush D (2003) Documentation for STRUCTURE Software: Version 2. https://web.stanford.edu/group/pritchardlab/software/readme_structure2.pdf Accessed 3 Dec 2020Quinn CB, Alden PB, Sacks BN (2019) Noninvasive sampling reveals short-term genetic rescue in an insular red fox population. J Heredity 110(5):559–576
Google Scholar 
Ralls K, Ballou JD, Dudash MR, Eldridge MD, Fenster CB, Lacy RC et al. (2018) Call for a paradigm shift in the genetic management of fragmented populations. Conserv Lett 11(2):e12412
Google Scholar 
Ralls K, Sunnucks P, Lacy RC, Frankham R (2020) Genetic rescue: a critique of the evidence supports maximizing genetic diversity rather than minimizing the introduction of putatively harmful genetic variation. Biol Conserv 251:108784
Google Scholar 
Rando HM, Stutchman JT, Bastounes ER, Johnson JL, Driscoll CA, Barr CS et al. (2017) Y-chromosome Markers for the Red Fox. J Heredity 108(6):678–685CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 27(1):83–109
Google Scholar 
Roest AI (1977) Taxonomic status of the red fox in California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CaliforniaRoux C, Fraisse C, Romiguier J, Anciaux Y, Galtier N, Bierne N (2016) Shedding light on the grey zone of speciation along a continuum of genomic divergence. PLOS Biol 14(12):e2000234PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sacks BN, Brazeal JL, Lewis JC (2016) Landscape genetics of the nonnative red fox of California. Ecol Evol 6(14):4775–4791PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sacks B, Lounsberry Z, Rando H, Kluepfel K, Fain S, Brown S et al. (2021) Sequencing red fox Y chromosome fragments to develop phylogenetically informative SNP markers and glimpse male-specific trans-Pacific phylogeography. Genes 12(1):97CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sacks BN, Moore M, Statham MJ, Wittmer HU (2011) A restricted hybrid zone between native and introduced red fox (Vulpes vulpes) populations suggests reproductive barriers and competitive exclusion. Mol Ecol 20(2):326–341PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sacks BN, Statham MJ, Perrine JD, Wisely SM, Aubry KB (2010) North American montane red foxes: expansion, fragmentation, and the origin of the Sacramento Valley red fox. Conserv Genet 11(4):1523–1539
Google Scholar 
Saunders G, Coman B, Kinnear J, Braysher M (1995) Managing vertebrate pests: foxes. Bureau of Resource Science and Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra
Google Scholar 
Sierra Nevada Red Fox Conservation Advisory Team [SCAT] (2022) A Conservation Strategy for the Sierra Nevada Red Fox. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, USA, In pressSeton E (1929) Lives of Game Animals. Doubleday, Doran and Co, New York, NY
Google Scholar 
Shaffer ML, Stein BA (2000) Safeguarding our precious heritage. In: Stein BA, Kutner LS, Adams JS (eds) Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 301–322
Google Scholar 
Shirk A, Cushman S (2011) sGD: software for estimating spatially explicit indices of genetic diversity. Mol Ecol Resour 11(5):922–934CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sikes RS, Gannon WL, Animal Care and Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists (2011) Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J Mammal 92:235–253
Google Scholar 
Statham MJ, Murdoch J, Janecka J, Aubry KB, Edwards CJ, Soulsbury CD et al. (2014) Range-wide multilocus phylogeography of the red fox reveals ancient continental divergence, minimal genomic exchange and distinct demographic histories. Mol Ecol 23(19):4813–4830PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Statham MJ, Sacks BN, Aubry KB, Perrine JD, Wisely SM (2012) The origin of recently established red fox populations in the United States: translocations or natural range expansions? J Mammal 93(1):52–65
Google Scholar 
Statham MJ, Trut LN, Sacks BN, Kharlamova AV, Oskina IN, Gulevich RG et al. (2011) On the origin of a domesticated species: identifying the parent population of Russian silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Biol J Linn Soc 103(1):168–175
Google Scholar 
Szuma E (2008) Evolutionary and climatic factors affecting tooth size in the red fox Vulpes vulpes in the Holarctic. Mammal Res 53(4):289–332
Google Scholar 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2015) Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 12-month finding on a petition to list Sierra Nevada red fox as an endangered or threatened species. Fed Reg 80:60989–61028
Google Scholar 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2021) Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; endangered status for the Sierra Nevada Distinct Population Segment of the Sierra Nevada red fox. Fed Reg 86:41743–41758
Google Scholar 
van der Valk T, de Manuel M, Marques-Bonet T, Guschanski K (2021) Estimates of genetic load suggest frequent purging of deleterious alleles in small populations. bioRxiv:696831Verts B, Carraway LN (1998) Land Mammals of Oregon. University of California Press, Berkeley
Google Scholar 
Volkmann LA, Statham MJ, Mooers AØ, Sacks BN (2015) Genetic distinctiveness of red foxes in the Intermountain West as revealed through expanded mitochondrial sequencing. J Mammal 96(2):297–307
Google Scholar 
Waples RS (2006) A bias correction for estimates of effective population size based on linkage disequilibrium at unlinked gene loci. Conserv Genet 7(2):167–184
Google Scholar 
Waples RS, Antao T, Luikart G (2014) Effects of overlapping generations on linkage disequilibrium estimates of effective population size. Genetics 197(2):769–780PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Waples RS, Do C (2008) LDNE: a program for estimating effective population size from data on linkage disequilibrium. Mol Ecol Resour 8(4):753–756PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Waples RS, Do C (2010) Linkage disequilibrium estimates of contemporary Ne using highly variable genetic markers: a largely untapped resource for applied conservation and evolution. Evolut Appl 3(3):244–262
Google Scholar 
Waples RS, England PR (2011) Estimating contemporary effective population size on the basis of linkage disequilibrium in the face of migration. Genetics 189(2):633–644PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) Washington’s State Wildlife Action Plan: 2015 Update. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, USA
Google Scholar 
Wei W, Ayub Q, Xue Y, Tyler-Smith C (2013) A comparison of Y-chromosomal lineage dating using either resequencing or Y-SNP plus Y-STR genotyping. Forensic Sci Int- Genet 7:568–572CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Weir BS, Cockerham CC (1984) Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 36:1358–1370Whiteley AR, Fitzpatrick SW, Funk WC, Tallmon DA (2015) Genetic rescue to the rescue. Trends Ecol Evol 30(1):42–49PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wilder AP, Navarro AY, King SN, Miller WB, Thomas SM, Steiner CC et al. (2020) Fitness costs associated with ancestry to isolated populations of an endangered species. Conserv Genet 21(3):589–601CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wright S (1946) Isolation by distance under diverse systems of mating. Genetics 31(1):39CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Zabel CJ, Taggart SJ (1989) Shift in red fox, Vulpes vulpes, mating system associated with El Niño in the Bering Sea. Anim Behav 38(5):830–838
Google Scholar  More

United Nations. (Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, 2019).Tucker, M. A. et al. Moving in the Anthropocene: Global reductions in terrestrial mammalian movements. Science 359, 466–469. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam9712 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Tablado, Z. & Jenni, L. Determinants of uncertainty in wildlife responses to human disturbance. Biol. Rev. 92, 216–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12224 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
IUCN. IUCN Programme 2017–2020. (2016).IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2021–3. (2021).Balmford, A. et al. Walk on the wild side: estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLoS Biol. 13, 6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Balmford, A. et al. A global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biol. 7, 6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000144 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Seto, K. C., Guneralp, B. & Hutyra, L. R. Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 109, 16083–16088. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211658109 (2012).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chen, G. Z. et al. Global projections of future urban land expansion under shared socioeconomic pathways. Nat. Commun. 11, 12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14386-x (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Larson, C. L., Reed, S. E., Merenlender, A. M. & Crooks, K. R. Effects of recreation on animals revealed as widespread through a global systematic review. PLoS ONE 11, 21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167259 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Frid, A. & Dill, L. Human-caused disturbance stimuli as a form of predation risk. Conserv. Ecol. 6, 16 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Moen, G. K., Stoen, O. G., Sahlen, V. & Swenson, J. E. Behaviour of solitary adult scandinavian brown bears (Ursus arctos) when approached by humans on foot. PLoS ONE 7, 7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031699 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Le Grand, L. et al. Behavioral and physiological responses of scandinavian brown bears (ursus arctos) to dog hunts and human encounters. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.00134 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Johnson, D. H. The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecol. (Washington D C) 61, 65–71. https://doi.org/10.2307/1937156 (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zimmermann, B., Nelson, L., Wabakken, P., Sand, H. & Liberg, O. Behavioral responses of wolves to roads: scale-dependent ambivalence. Behav. Ecol. 25, 1353–1364. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/aru134 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Heinemeyer, K. et al. Wolverines in winter: indirect habitat loss and functional responses to backcountry recreation. Ecosphere https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2611 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ladle, A. et al. Grizzly bear response to spatio-temporal variability in human recreational activity. J. Appl. Ecol. 56, 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13277 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Coppes, J., Burghardt, F., Hagen, R., Suchant, R. & Braunisch, V. Human recreation affects spatio-temporal habitat use patterns in red deer (Cervus elaphus). PLoS ONE 12, 19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175134 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kautz, T. M. et al. Large carnivore response to human road use suggests a landscape of coexistence. Global Ecol. Conserv. 30, e01772 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chapron, G. et al. Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346, 1517–1519. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1257553 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ordiz, A., Bischof, R. & Swenson, J. E. Saving large carnivores, but losing the apex predator?. Biol. Conserv. 168, 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.09.024 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Estes, J. A. et al. Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science 333, 301–306. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1205106 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Ordiz, A. et al. Habituation, sensitization, or consistent behavioral responses? Brown bear responses after repeated approaches by humans on foot. Biol. Conserv. 232, 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.016 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith, T. S., Oyster, J., Partridge, S. D., Martin, I. E. & Sisson, A. Assessing American black bear response to human activity at Kenai Fjords National Park, Alaska. Ursus 23, 179–191. https://doi.org/10.2192/ursus-d-11-00020.1 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wam, H. K., Eldegard, K. & Hjeljord, O. Minor habituation to repeated experimental approaches in Scandinavian wolves. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 60, 839–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-014-0841-0 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sweanor, L. L., Logan, K. A. & Hornocker, M. G. Puma responses to close approaches by researchers. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 33, 905–913. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33[905:Prtcab]2.0.Co;2 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Coppes, J., Ehrlacher, J., Thiel, D., Suchant, R. & Braunisch, V. Outdoor recreation causes effective habitat reduction in capercaillie Tetrao urogallus: a major threat for geographically restricted populations. J. Avian Biol. 48, 1583–1594. https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.01239 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Coppes, J. et al. Habitat suitability modulates the response of wildlife to human recreation. Biol. Conserv. 227, 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.08.018 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gundersen, V., Vistad, O. I., Panzacchi, M., Strand, O. & van Moorter, B. Large-scale segregation of tourists and wild reindeer in three Norwegian national parks: Management implications. Tourism Manage. 75, 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.04.017 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Filla, M. et al. Habitat selection by Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) is primarily driven by avoidance of human activity during day and prey availability during night. Ecol. Evol. 7, 6367–6381. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3204 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Andersen, O., Gundersen, V., Wold, L. C. & Stange, E. Monitoring visitors to natural areas in wintertime: issues in counter accuracy. J. Sustain. Tour. 22, 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.839693 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marion, S. et al. A systematic review of methods for studying the impacts of outdoor recreation on terrestrial wildlife. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 22, e00917 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Corradini, A. et al. Effects of cumulated outdoor activity on wildlife habitat use. Biol. Conserv. 253, 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108818 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jager, H., Schirpke, U. & Tappeiner, U. Assessing conflicts between winter recreational activities and grouse species. J. Environ. Manage. 276, 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111194 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Linnell, J. D. C., Broseth, H., Odden, J. & Nilsen, E. B. Sustainably harvesting a large Carnivore? Development of Eurasian Lynx populations in Norway during 160 years of shifting policy. Environ. Manage. 45, 1142–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9455-9 (2010).ADS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Andren, H. et al. Survival rates and causes of mortality in Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in multi-use landscapes. Biol. Conserv. 131, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.01.025 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Manly, B., McDonald, L., Thomas, D., McDonald, T. & Erickson, W. Resource Selection by Animals (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002).Odden, J., Linnell, J. D. C. & Andersen, R. Diet of Eurasian lynx, Lynx lynx, in the boreal forest of southeastern Norway: the relative importance of livestock and hares at low roe deer density. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 52, 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-006-0052-4 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gervasi, V., Nilsen, E. B., Odden, J., Bouyer, Y. & Linnell, J. D. C. The spatio-temporal distribution of wild and domestic ungulates modulates lynx kill rates in a multi-use landscape. J. Zool. 292, 175–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12088 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Arnemo, J. M. & Evans, A. Biomedical protocols for free-ranging brown bears, wolves, wolverines and lynx (Hedmark University College Evenstad, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Padgham, M., Lovelace, R., Salmon, M. & Rudis, B. osmdata. J. Open Source Softw. 2, 305 (2017).
ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. (2020).Northrup, J. M., Hooten, M. B., Anderson, C. R. & Wittemyer, G. Practical guidance on characterizing availability in resource selection functions under a use-availability design. Ecology 94, 1456–1463. https://doi.org/10.1890/12-1688.1 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Horne, J. S., Garton, E. O., Krone, S. M. & Lewis, J. S. Analyzing animal movements using Brownian bridges. Ecology 88, 2354–2363. https://doi.org/10.1890/06-0957.1 (2007).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Calenge, C. The package “adehabitat” for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol. Model. 197, 516–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.03.017 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Therneau, T. A Package for Survival Analysis in R. R package version 3.2–7. (2020).Fay, M. P., Graubard, B. I., Freedman, L. S. & Midthune, D. N. Conditional logistic regression with sandwich estimators: Application to a meta-analysis. Biometrics 54, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.2307/2534007 (1998).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Prima, M.-C., Duchesne, T. & Fortin, D. Robust inference from conditional logistic regression applied to movement and habitat selection analysis. PLoS ONE 12, e0169779 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Basille, M. et al. Selecting habitat to survive: the impact of road density on survival in a large carnivore. PLoS ONE 8, 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065493 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Basille, M. et al. What shapes Eurasian lynx distribution in human dominated landscapes: selecting prey or avoiding people?. Ecography 32, 683–691. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05712.x (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bouyer, Y. et al. Eurasian lynx habitat selection in human-modified landscape in Norway: effects of different human habitat modifications and behavioral states. Biol. Conserv. 191, 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.007 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heggem, E. S. F., Mathisen, H. & Frydenlund, J. J. N. R. AR50–Arealressurskart i målestokk 1: 50 000. Et heldekkende arealressurskart for jord-og skogbruk. (2019).Hijmans, R. J. raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. R package version 3.4–5. (2020).Bivand, R. & Lewin-Koh, N. maptools: Tools for Handling Spatial Objects. R package version 1.1–1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=maptools. (2021).Akaike, H. in IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control Vol. 19 716–723 (1974).Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. Model selection and multimodel inference—a practical information-theoretic approach.2nd edn. Springer, New York (2002).Hastie, T. J. & Tibshirani, R. J. Generalized additive models. Vol. 43 (CRC press, 1990).Wood, S. N. Stable and efficient multiple smoothing parameter estimation for generalized additive models. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 99, 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000000980 (2004).MathSciNet 
Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Vazquez, C., Rowcliffe, J. M., Spoelstra, K. & Jansen, P. A. Comparing diel activity patterns of wildlife across latitudes and seasons: Time transformations using day length. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 2057–2066. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.13290 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rowcliffe, M. activity: Animal Activity Statistics. R package version 1.3.1. (2021).Olson, L. E., Squires, J. R., Roberts, E. K., Ivan, J. S. & Hebblewhite, M. Sharing the same slope: behavioral responses of a threatened mesocarnivore to motorized and nonmotorized winter recreation. Ecol. Evol. 8, 8555–8572. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4382 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Squires, J. R., Olson, L. E., Roberts, E. K., Ivan, J. S. & Hebblewhite, M. Winter recreation and Canada lynx: reducing conflict through niche partitioning. Ecosphere 10, 22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2876 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Belotti, E., Mayer, K., Kreisinger, J., Heurich, M. & Bufka, L. Recreational activities affect resting site selection and foraging time of Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx). Hystrix 29, 181–189. https://doi.org/10.4404/hystrix-00053-2018 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunde, P., Stener, S. O. & Kvam, T. Tolerance to humans of resting lynxes Lynx lynx in a hunted population. Wildlife Biol. 4, 177–183 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Heurich, M. et al. Activity patterns of Eurasian Lynx are modulated by light regime and individual traits over a wide latitudinal range. PLoS ONE 9, 20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114143 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bischof, R., Gjevestad, J. G. O., Ordiz, A., Eldegard, K. & Milleret, C. High frequency GPS bursts and path-level analysis reveal linear feature tracking by red foxes. Sci. Rep. 9, 13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45150-x (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bouyer, Y. et al. Tolerance to anthropogenic disturbance by a large carnivore: the case of Eurasian lynx in south-eastern Norway. Anim. Conserv. 18, 271–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12168 (2015).MathSciNet 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Venter, Z. S., Barton, D. N., Gundersen, V., Figari, H. & Nowell, M. Urban nature in a time of crisis: recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abb396 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sun, Y. R., Du, Y. Y., Wang, Y. & Zhuang, L. Y. Examining associations of environmental characteristics with recreational cycling behaviour by street-level strava data. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14, 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14060644 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Griffin, G. P. & Jiao, J. Where does bicycling for health happen? analysing volunteered geographic information through place and plexus. J. Transp. Health 2, 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.12.001 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Conrow, L., Wentz, E., Nelson, T. & Pettit, C. Comparing spatial patterns of crowdsourced and conventional bicycling datasets. Appl. Geogr. 92, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.01.009 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar  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

Of which at the third instar, the external morphology of larvae is quite similar; thus, the morphological identification used to differentiate between its genera or species, generally includes cephalophalyngeal skeleton, anterior spiracle, and posterior spiracles. The morphology of the posterior spiracle is one of the important characteristics for identification. A typical morphology of the posterior spiracle of third stage larvae was shown in Fig. 2. Based on studying under light microscopy, the posterior spiracle of M. domestica was clearly distinguished from the others. On the other hand, the morphology of the posterior spiracle of C. megacephala and A. rufifacies was quite similar. For C. megacephala and C. rufifacies, the peritreme, a structure encircling the three spiracular openings (slits), was incomplete and slits were straight as shown Fig. 2A,B, respectively. The complete peritreme encircling three slits was found in L. cuprina and M. domestica as shown in Fig. 2C,D, respectively. However, only the slits of M. domestica were sinuous like the M-letter (Fig. 2D). Their morphological characteristics found in this study were like the descriptions in the previous reports23,24,25.Figure 2Morphology of posterior spiracles of four different fly species after inverting the image colors; (A) Chrysomya (Achoetandrus) ruffifacies, (B) Chrysomya megacephala, (C) Lucilia cuprina, (D) Musca domestica.Full size imageFor model training, four of the CNN models used for species-level identification of fly maggots provided 100% accuracy rates and 0% loss. Number of parameter (#Params), model speed, model size, macro precision, macro recall, f1-score, and support value were also presented in Table 1. The result demonstrated that the AlexNet model provided the best performance in all indicators when compared among four models. The AlexNet model used the least number of parameters while the Resnet101 model used the most. For model speed, the AlexNet model provided the fastest speed, while the Densenet161 model provided the slowest speed. For the model size, the AlexNet model was the smallest, while the Resnet101 model was the largest which corresponded to the number of parameters used. Macro precision, macro recall, f1-score and support value of all models were the same.Table 1 Comparison of model size, speed, and performances of each studied model (The text in bold indicates the best value in each category).Full size tableAs the training results presented in the supplementary data (Fig. S1), all models provided 100% accuracy and 0% loss in the early stage of training ( More

Hill, L. et al. The£ 15 billion cost of ash dieback in Britain. Curr. Biol. 29(9), R315–R316 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pliûra, A. & Heuertz, M. EUFORGEN Technical Guidelines for Genetic Conservation and Use for Common Ash (Fraxinus excelsior) (Bioversity International, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Dufour, S. & Piégay, H. Geomorphological controls of Fraxinus excelsior growth and regeneration in floodplain forests. Ecology 89(1), 205–215 (2008).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mitchell, R. J. et al. Ash dieback in the UK: a review of the ecological and conservation implications and potential management options. Biol. Conserv. 175, 95–109 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Przybył, K. Fungi associated with necrotic apical parts of Fraxinus excelsior shoots. For. Pathol. 32(6), 387–394 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Vasaitis, R., & Enderle, R. Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.)-consequences and guidelines for sustainable management. Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.). Report on COST Action FP1103 FRAXBACK. ISBN978-91-576-8696-1. (SLU Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).Børja, I. et al. Ash dieback in Norway-current situation. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 166–175 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Ghelardini, L. et al. From the Alps to the Apennines: Possible spread of ash dieback in Mediterranean areas. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 140–149 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Marçais, B., Husson, C., Godart, L. & Cael, O. Influence of site and stand factors on Hymenoscyphus fraxineus-induced basal lesions. Plant. Pathol. 65(9), 1452–1461 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Queloz, V., Hopf, S., Schoebel, C. N., Rigling, D. & Gross, A. Ash dieback in Switzerland: History and scientific achievements. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 68–78 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Orton, E. S. et al. Population structure of the ash dieback pathogen, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, in relation to its mode of arrival in the UK. Plant. Pathol. 67(2), 255–264 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Enderle, R., Stenlid, J. & Vasaitis, R. An overview of ash (Fraxinus spp.) and the ash dieback disease in Europe. CAB Rev. 14, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Heinze, B., Tiefenbacher, H., Litschauer, R. & Kirisits, T. Ash dieback in Austria: History, current situation and outlook. in Dieback of European Ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management, 33–52 (2017).Coker, T. L. et al. Estimating mortality rates of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior) under the ash dieback (Hymenoscyphus fraxineus) epidemic. Plants People Planet 1(1), 48–58 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Cleary, M., Nguyen, D., Stener, L. G., Stenlid, J., & Skovsgaard, J. P. Ash and ash dieback in Sweden: A review of disease history, current status, pathogen and host dynamics, host tolerance and management options in forests and landscapes. Dieback of European Ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management, 195–208 (2017).Stocks, J. J., Buggs, R. J. & Lee, S. J. A first assessment of Fraxinus excelsior (common ash) susceptibility to Hymenoscyphus fraxineus (ash dieback) throughout the British Isles. Sci. Rep. 7(1), 1–7 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Díaz-Yáñez, O. et al. The invasive forest pathogen Hymenoscyphus fraxineus boosts mortality and triggers niche replacement of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior). Sci. Rep. 10(1), 1–10 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Enderle, R., Metzler, B., Riemer, U. & Kändler, G. Ash dieback on sample points of the national forest inventory in south-western Germany. Forests 9(1), 25 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Klesse, S. et al. Spread and severity of ash dieback in Switzerland: Tree characteristics and landscape features explain varying mortality probability. Front. For. Glob. Change 4, 18 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Timmermann, V., Potočić, N., Ognjenović, M. & Kirchner, T. Tree crown condition in 2020. In Forest Condition in Europe: The 2021 Assessment ICP Forests Technical Report under the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (Air Convention) (eds Michel, A. et al.) (Thünen Institute, 2021).
Google Scholar 
Chumanová, E. et al. Predicting ash dieback severity and environmental suitability for the disease in forest stands. Scand. J. For. Res. 34(4), 254–266 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Solheim, H. & Hietala, A. M. Spread of ash dieback in Norway. Balt. For. 23(1), 1–6 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Kjær, E. D. et al. Genetics of ash dieback resistance in a restoration context: Experiences from Denmark. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 106–114 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Madsen, C. L. et al. Combined progress in symptoms caused by Hymenoscyphus fraxineus and Armillaria species, and corresponding mortality in young and old ash trees. For. Ecol. Manage. 491, 119177 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Trapiello, E., Schoebel, C. N. & Rigling, D. Fungal community in symptomatic ash leaves in Spain. Balt. For. 23(1), 68–73 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Grosdidier, M., Ioos, R. & Marçais, B. Do higher summer temperatures restrict the dissemination of Hymenoscyphus fraxineus in France?. For. Pathol. 48(4), e12426. https://doi.org/10.1111/efp.12426 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Stroheker, S., Queloz, V. & Nemesio-Gorriz, M. First report of Hymenoscyphus fraxineus causing ash dieback in Spain. New Dis. Rep. 44(2), e12054 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Chandelier, A., Gerarts, F., San Martin, G., Herman, M. & Delahaye, L. Temporal evolution of collar lesions associated with ash dieback and the occurrence of Armillaria in Belgian forests. For. Pathol. 46(4), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/efp.12258 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gross, A., Holdenrieder, O., Pautasso, M., Queloz, V. & Sieber, T. N. H ymenoscyphus pseudoalbidus, the causal agent of E uropean ash dieback. Mol. Plant Pathol. 15(1), 5–21 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Clark, J. & Webber, J. The ash resource and the response to ash dieback in Great Britain. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 228–237 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Dandy, N., Marzano, M., Porth, E. F., Urquhart, J. & Potter, C. Who has a stake in ash dieback? A conceptual framework for the identification and categorisation of tree health stakeholders. In Dieback of European ash (Fraxinus spp.): Consequences and Guidelines for Sustainable Management (eds Vasaitis, R. & Enderle, R.) 15–26 (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2017).
Google Scholar 
Kjær, E. D., McKinney, L. V., Nielsen, L. R., Hansen, L. N. & Hansen, J. K. Adaptive potential of ash (Fraxinus excelsior) populations against the novel emerging pathogen Hymenoscyphus pseudoalbidus. Evol. Appl. 5(3), 219–228 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Plumb, W. J. et al. The viability of a breeding programme for ash in the British Isles in the face of ash dieback. Plants People Planet 2(1), 29–40 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Evans, M. R. Will natural resistance result in populations of ash trees remaining in British woodlands after a century of ash dieback disease?. R. Soc. Open Sci. 6(8), 190908 (2019).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Buggs, R. J. A. Changing perceptions of tree resistance research. Plants People Planet 2, 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10089 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tomlinson, I. & Potter, C. ‘Too little, too late’? Science, policy and Dutch Elm Disease in the UK. J. Hist. Geogr. 36(2), 121–131 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Kelly, L. J. et al. Convergent molecular evolution among ash species resistant to the emerald ash borer. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1116–1128. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1209-3 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sollars, E. S. et al. Genome sequence and genetic diversity of European ash trees. Nature 541(7636), 212–216 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Stocks, J. J. et al. Genomic basis of European ash tree resistance to ash dieback fungus. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3(12), 1686–1696 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Volkovitsh, M. G., Bieńkowski, A. O. & Orlova-Bienkowskaja, M. J. Emerald ash borer approaches the borders of the european union and kazakhstan and is confirmed to infest European ash. Forests 12(6), 691 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Eichhorn, J. et al. Part IV: Visual Assessment of Crown Condition and Damaging Agents. in Manual on Methods and Criteria for Harmonized Sampling, Assessment, Monitoring and Analysis of the Effects of Air Pollution on Forests. (Thünen Institute of Forest Ecosystems, 2016). Annex http://www.icp-forests.org/manual.htm.Koontz, M. J., Latimer, A. M., Mortenson, L. A., Fettig, C. J. & North, M. P. Cross-scale interaction of host tree size and climatic water deficit governs bark beetle-induced tree mortality. Nat. Commun. 12(1), 1–13 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Taccoen, A. et al. Climate change impact on tree mortality differs with tree social status. For. Ecol. Manage. 489, 119048 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Therneau, T. A Package for Survival Analysis in R. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survival/vignettes/survival.pdf. Accessed 26 May 2021Godaert, L. et al. Prognostic factors of inhospital death in elderly patients: A time-to-event analysis of a cohort study in Martinique (French West Indies). BMJ Open 8(1), e018838 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sargeran, K., Murtomaa, H., Safavi, S. M. R., Vehkalahti, M. M. & Teronen, O. Survival after diagnosis of cancer of the oral cavity. Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 46(3), 187–191 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cox, D. R. Regression models and life-tables. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 34(2), 187–202 (1972).MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Aalen, O. O. A linear regression model for the analysis of life times. Stat. Med. 8(8), 907–925 (1989).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Therneau, T. M., & Grambsch, P. M. The cox model. In Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model, pp. 39–77. (Springer, 2000).Neumann, M., Mues, V., Moreno, A., Hasenauer, H. & Seidl, R. Climate variability drives recent tree mortality in Europe. Glob. Change Biol. 23(11), 4788–4797 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Senf, C., Buras, A., Zang, C. S., Rammig, A. & Seidl, R. Excess forest mortality is consistently linked to drought across Europe. Nat. Commun. 11(1), 1–8 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Haylock, M. R. et al. A European daily high-resolution gridded data set of surface temperature and precipitation for 1950–2006. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 113, D20 (2008).
Google Scholar 
R Development Core Team. RStudio, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Development Core Team, 2017).Holt, C. C. Forecasting Trends and Season-Als by Exponentially Weighted Averages. (Carnegie Institute of Technology, Pittsburgh ONR memorandum no. 52, 1957)Hyndman, R. J. & Khandakar, Y. Automatic time series forecasting: the forecast package for R. J. Stat. Softw. 27(3), 1–22 (2008).
Google Scholar  More

Van Gossum, H., Sherratt, T. N., Cordero-Rivera, A. & Córdoba-Aguilar, A. The evolution of sex-limited colour polymorphism. In Dragonflies and Damselflies: Model Organisms for Ecological and Evolutionary Research (ed. Córdoba-Aguilar, A.) 219–231 (Oxford University Press, 2008).
Google Scholar 
Hughes, J. M. & Jones, M. P. Shell colour polymorphism in a mangrove snail Littorina sp. (Prosobranchia: Littorinidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 25, 365–378 (1985).
Google Scholar 
Sinervo, B., Bleay, C. & Adamopoulou, C. Social causes of correlational selection and the resolution of a heritable throat color polymorphism in a lizard. Evolution 55, 2040–2052 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Westerman, E. L. et al. Does male preference play a role in maintaining female limited polymorphism in a Batesian mimetic butterfly? Behav. Process. 150, 47–58 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Vane-Wright, R. I. An integrated classification for polymorphism and sexual dimorphism in butterflies. J. Zool. 177, 329–337 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Timmermans, M. J., Srivathsan, A., Collins, S., Meier, R. & Vogler, A. P. Mimicry diversification in Papilio dardanus via a genomic inversion in the regulatory region of engrailed–invected. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20200443 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Brodie, E. D. III. & Janzen, F. J. Experimental studies of coral snake mimicry: Generalized avoidance of ringed snake patterns by free-ranging avian predators. Funct. Ecol. 9, 186–190 (1995).
Google Scholar 
Banci, K. R., Eterovic, A., Marinho, P. S. & Marques, O. A. Being a bright snake: Testing aposematism and mimicry in a neotropical forest. Biotropica 52, 1229–1241 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Wüster, W. et al. Do aposematism and Batesian mimicry require bright colours? A test, using European viper markings. Proc. R. Soc. B 271, 2495–2499 (2004).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Valkonen, J. K. & Mappes, J. Resembling a viper: Implications of mimicry for conservation of the endangered smooth snake. Conserv. Biol. 28, 1568–1574 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sinervo, B. & Lively, C. M. The rock–paper–scissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies. Nature 380, 240–243 (1996).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Moon, R. M. & Kamath, A. Re-examining escape behaviour and habitat use as correlates of dorsal pattern variation in female brown anole lizards, Anolis sagrei (Squamata: Dactyloidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 126, 783–795 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Le Rouzic, A., Hansen, T. F., Gosden, T. P. & Svensson, E. I. Evolutionary time-series analysis reveals the signature of frequency-dependent selection on a female mating polymorphism. Am. Nat. 185, E182–E196 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Udyawer, V. et al. Future directions in the research and management of marine snakes. Front. Mar. Sci. 5, 399 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Goiran, C., Bustamante, P. & Shine, R. Industrial melanism in the seasnake Emydocephalus annulatus. Curr. Biol. 27, 2510–2513 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Goiran, C., Brown, G. P. & Shine, R. Niche partitioning within a population of sea snakes is constrained by ambient thermal homogeneity and small prey size. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 129, 644–651 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Shine, R., Shine, T. & Shine, B. Intraspecific habitat partitioning by the sea snake Emydocephalus annulatus (Serpentes, Hydrophiidae): The effects of sex, body size, and colour pattern. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 80, 1–10 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Udyawer, V., Goiran, C. & Shine, R. Peaceful coexistence between people and deadly wildlife: why are recreational users of the ocean so rarely bitten by sea snakes? People Nat. 3, 335–346 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Heatwole, H. Sea Snakes 2nd edn. (Krieger Publishing, 1999).
Google Scholar 
Shine, R., Shine, T. G., Brown, G. P. & Goiran, C. Life history traits of the sea snake Emydocephalus annulatus, based on a 17-yr study. Coral Reefs 39, 1407–1414 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Goiran, C., Dubey, S. & Shine, R. Effects of season, sex and body size on the feeding ecology of turtle-headed sea snakes (Emydocephalus annulatus) on IndoPacific inshore coral reefs. Coral Reefs 32, 527–538 (2013).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Olsson, M., Stuart-Fox, D. & Ballen, C. Genetics and evolution of colour patterns in reptiles. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 24, 529–541 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Shine, R., Brischoux, F. & Pile, A. J. A seasnake’s colour affects its susceptibility to algal fouling. Proc. R. Soc. B 277, 2459–2464 (2010).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
White, G. C. & Burnham, K. P. Program MARK: Survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46, S120–S139 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Packard, G. C. & Boardman, T. J. The misuse of ratios, indices, and percentages in ecophysiological research. Physiol. Zool. 61, 1–9 (1988).
Google Scholar 
Lukoschek, V. & Shine, R. Sea snakes rarely venture far from home. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1113–1121 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Shine, R. All at sea: Aquatic life modifies mate-recognition modalities in sea snakes (Emydocephalus annulatus, Hydrophiidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 57, 591–598 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Shine, R., Shine, T. G., Brown, G. P. & Goiran, C. Population dynamics of the sea snake Emydocephalus annulatus (Elapidae, Hydrophiinae). Sci. Rep. 11, 20701 (2021).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Rancurel, P. & Intes, A. Le requin tigre, Galeocerdo cuvieri Lacepede, des eaux neocaledoniennes examen des contenus stomacaux. Tethys 10, 195–199 (1982).
Google Scholar 
Heatwole, H. Predation on sea snakes. In The Biology of Sea Snakes (ed. Dunson, W. A.) 233–250 (University Park Press, 1975).
Google Scholar 
Ineich, I. & Laboute, P. Les serpents marins de Nouvelle-Calédonie (IRD éditions, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Kerford, M. R., Wirsing, A. J., Heithaus, M. R. & Dill, L. M. Danger on the rise: diurnal tidal state mediates an exchange of food for safety by the bar-bellied sea snake Hydrophis elegans. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 358, 289–294 (2008).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Masunaga, G., Kosuge, T., Asai, N. & Ota, H. Shark predation of sea snakes (Reptilia: Elapidae) in the shallow waters around the Yaeyama Islands of the southern Ryukyus, Japan. Mar. Biodivers. Rec. 1, e96 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Wirsing, A. J. & Heithaus, M. R. Olive-headed sea snakes Disteria major shift seagrass microhabitats to avoid shark predation. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 387, 287–293 (2009).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Goiran, C. & Shine, R. The ability of damselfish to distinguish between dangerous and harmless sea snakes. Sci. Rep. 10, 1377 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Norman, M. D., Finn, J. & Tregenza, T. Dynamic mimicry in an Indo-Malayan octopus. Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 1755–1758 (2001).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Pernetta, J. C. Observations on the habits and morphology of the sea snake Laticauda colubrina (Schneider) in Fiji. Can. J. Zool. 55, 1612–1619 (1977).
Google Scholar 
Randall, J. E. A review of mimicry in marine fishes. Zool. Stud. 44, 299–328 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Dudgeon, C. L. & White, W. T. First record of potential Batesian mimicry in an elasmobranch: Juvenile zebra sharks mimic banded sea snakes? Mar. Freshw. Res. 63, 545–551 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Sullivan Caldwell, G. & Wolff Rubinoff, R. Avoidance of venomous sea snakes by naive herons and egrets. Auk 100, 195–198 (1983).
Google Scholar 
Sanders, K. L., Malhotra, A. & Thorpe, R. S. Evidence for a Müllerian mimetic radiation in Asian pitvipers. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 1135–1141 (2006).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Raveendran, D. K., Deepak, V., Smith, E. N. & Smart, U. A new colour morph of Calliophis bibroni (Squamata: Elapidae) and evidence for Müllerian mimicry in Tropical Indian coral snakes. Herpetol. Notes 10, 209–217 (2017).
Google Scholar  More

Chemicals and materialsAnalytical standard ( > 99% purity) of spiromesifen, BSN2060-enol, and chromafenozide were purchased from AB Solution Co., Ltd., Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea. HPLC grade water and acetonitrile were supplied by Merck, Darmstadt, Germany. QuEChERS kit (4.0 g magnesium sulfate, 1.0 g sodium chloride, 1.0 g sodium citrate tribasic dihydrate, 0.5 g disodium citrate sesquihydrate) were obtained from Phenomenex, California, USA. Individual stock solutions of the target compounds were prepared in acetonitrile and stored at − 20 °C before use.Field experimentsThe trials were carried out in a greenhouse farm during the season 2018 at two different sites (with approximately 24 km distance between both sites) located in Chuncheon and Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-do, Republic of Korea following the method described by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)38. The field test of lettuce (Latuca sativa L.) crop was conducted in Chuncheon city, and perilla (Perilla frutescens (L.) Britton) crop in Hongcheon city. The area of each field was divided into two plots (treatment and control). The treatment plots were further divided into three replicates (subplots 33 m2). The control plot was separated by a buffer zone of 3 m2 from the treated site. To minimize spray overlap, buffer zones (1 m) were set up between subplots. The commercial products of spiromesifen 20% SC diluted 2000 times and chromafenozide 5% EC diluted 1000 times were sprayed twice at 7-days intervals using an automatic sprayer. After the second spray samples (lettuce and perilla leaves) were collected from each subplot at 0 (2 h after spraying), 1, 3, 5, and 7 days according to the Korean RDA23 method. Thirty samples 1.0 kg each from the collected crop were placed in polyethylene bag and labeled. After collection, the samples were transported to the laboratory, where they were chopped and homogenized. The homogenized samples were kept frozen at − 20 °C until analysis.We confirm all plant samples used in the current work comply with the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.Samples pretreatmentA QuEChERS method was used for the extraction of the targeted compounds from lettuce and perilla leaves. A 10 g of previously homogenized samples were weighed into a 50 mL polypropylene centrifuge tube and mixed with 10 mL of water followed by 10 mL of acetonitrile. The samples were shaken at 1500 rpm in a shaker machine for 10 min. Then commercial QuEChERS kit was added, and the mixtures were shaken vigorously for 2 min in a shaker. Subsequently, the samples were centrifuged at 3584 g-force for 10 min. After centrifugation, the supernatant was filtered with a 0.22 μm membrane filter and transferred into the glass vial for instrumental analysis.LC-MS/MS analysisQuantitative determination of the tested compounds was carried out by using HPLC system Dionex Ultimate 3000 (Thermo Science, USA) coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) (TSQ Quantum Access Max (Thermo Science, USA). Water (solvent A) and acetonitrile (solvent B) containing 0.1% formic acid and 5 mM ammonium format were used as mobile phase at a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min and injection volume 1.0 µL. To obtain desirable chromatographic peaks, two different instrumental conditions were used. The chromatographic separation of spiromesifen was separated by Capcell core-C18 (2.1 mm I.D. × 150 mm × 2.7 μm, Shiseido Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) and BSN2060-enol was performed by C18 column (Poroshell 120 SB-Ag, 2.1 mm I.D. × 100 mm × 2.7-μm, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, California, USA) with a gradient elution as follows (mobile phase B%): 0.0 min, 5.0%; 2.0 min 5%; 2.5 min, 95%; 6.0 min, 95%; 6.5 min, 5.0%; 10 min, 5.0%. Likewise, chromafenozide was separated by C18 column (Imtakt Unison UK-C18, 2.0 mm I.D. × 100 mm × 3.0-μm, Imtakt, Portland, USA) with a gradient elution as follows (mobile phase B%): 0.0 min, 5%; 1.0 min, 5.0%; 1.5 min, 90%; 5.0 min, 90%; 7.0 min, 5.0%; 10 min, 5.0%. An MS/MS system (TSQ quantum ultra, Thermo Science, USA) equipped with an electrospray ionization source operating in positive mode (ESI+) was used. The MS/MS parameters and selected product ions are shown in supplementary Tables S2 and S3.The calculation of spiromesifen total residuesThe total residues in lettuce and perilla samples were calculated using Eq. (1)23.Total residues of spiromesifen (mg/kg) = spiromesifen + (BSN2060 residue × 1.36). The conversion factor was calculated as follow;$${1}.{36},{text{(conversion}},{text{factor)}} = frac{{370.49left( {{text{spiromesifen}},{text{MW}}} right)}}{{272.34{ }left( {{text{BSN}}2060,{text{MW}}} right)}}$$
(1)
where MW molecular weight.Initial deposition calculationThe initial residues of spiromesifen and chromafenozide deposition in lettuce and perilla leaves were calculated from 0-day according to Eq. (2) described by Kang et al.12 as follow;$${text{A }},({text{mg}}/{text{kg}}) = {text{B(mg}}/{text{kg)}} times frac{100}{{{text{C}}({text{% }})}} times frac{1}{{text{E}}} times 1000$$
(2)
A: Initial residue (mg/kg), B: Residues (mg/kg) on 0 day, C: active ingredients, E: dilution factor.Method validationThe analytical method was validated in terms of different performance criteria such as linearity, accuracy, precision, and method limit of quantitation (MLOQ). Matrix-matched standards were used to construct the calibration curve by evaporating (0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 0.7 and 1.0 mg/kg) working solution (1 mL) and re-dissolved in the extract of control sample. The linearity of the matrix-matched calibration curve was evaluated by the values of the correlation coefficient (R2). The accuracy and precision were obtained in terms of recovery (70–120%) and repeatability (n = 3). The recoveries were determined by spiking the analytes at two concentrations levels (0.1 mg/L) and (0.5 mg/L) in 10 g control samples and were quantified by comparing the response of analytes in samples with response in calibration standard solutions prepared in matrix. The repeatability expressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD) of the analyzed samples was calculated from three repetitions. The MLOQ was calculated by Eq. (3) taking into consideration the following factors: the instrument limit of detection, volume of extraction solvent, injection volume, dilution factor, and sample amount39,40.$${text{MLOQ}},{text{(mg}}/{text{kg)}} = {text{A(ng)}} times frac{{text{B(mL)}}}{{{text{C(}}upmu {text{L)}}}} times frac{{text{D}}}{{text{E(g)}}}$$
(3)
where A: instrument limit of detection, B: volume of extraction solvent, C: injection volume, D: dilution factor, E: sample amount.Half-life calculationThe dissipation patterns of spiromesifen and chromafenozide in lettuce and perilla leaves over time were found following the first-order kinetics model28. The half-life was determined by the following equation:$${text{C}}_{{text{t}}} = {text{C}}_{0} times {text{e}}^{{ – {text{kt}}}} ,{text{DT}}_{{{5}0}} = {text{ln2}}/{text{k}}$$where Ct is the concentration of the insecticide, C0 represents the initial residue concentration of insecticide, t is the time (days) after insecticide application, and k is the constant rate.Safety assessmentIn this study, the safety assessments (percent acceptable daily intake; %ADI) of the target insecticides that are consumed with lettuce and perilla leaves were calculated by the ratio of estimated daily intake (EDI) to acceptable daily intake (ADI). The EDI was calculated using insecticide concentration and average consumption of food commodities per person per day. In addition, the theoretical maximum daily intakes (TMDIs) of both insecticides were calculated using the maximum residue limits (MRLs) and average body weight (60 kg) of adults in Republic of Korea. TMDIs were calculated following the equation described by Kim et al.41.$$begin{aligned} & {text{ADI (mg}}/{text{person}}/{text{day)}} = {text{ADI}},({text{mg}}/{text{kg}}/{text{body weight}}/{text{day}}),{text{of target insecticide}} times {text{6}}0,({text{average body weight}}) \ & {text{EDI (mg}}/{text{kg}}/{text{person)}} = {text{concentration of target insecticide (mg}}/{text{kg)}} times {text{ daily food intake (g)}} \ & % {text{ADI}} = {text{EDI}}/{text{ADI}} times {text{1}}00 \ & {text{TMDI}}% = sum % {text{ADI of all registered crops}} \ end{aligned}$$ More