Ecology

Peñuelas, J., Rutishauser, T. & Filella, I. Ecology. Phenology feedbacks on climate change. Science 324, 887–888 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, O. L. et al. Drought sensitivity of the Amazon rainforest. Science 323, 1344–1347 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Richardson, A. D. et al. Climate change, phenology, and phenological control of vegetation feedbacks to the climate system. Agric. Meteorol. 169, 156–173 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Wu, J. et al. Leaf development and demography explain photosynthetic seasonality in Amazon evergreen forests. Science 351, 972–976 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wright, J. S. et al. Rainforest-initiated wet season onset over the southern Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 8481–8486 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hilker, T. et al. Vegetation dynamics and rainfall sensitivity of the Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 16041–16046 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Girardin, C. A. J. et al. Seasonal trends of Amazonian rainforest phenology, net primary productivity, and carbon allocation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 30, 700–715 (2016).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Maeda, E. E. et al. Consistency of vegetation index seasonality across the Amazon rainforest. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 52, 42–53 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Saleska, S. R. et al. Dry-season greening of Amazon forests. Nature 531, E4–E5 (2016). vol.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chen, X. et al. Vapor pressure deficit and sunlight explain seasonality of leaf phenology and photosynthesis across amazonian evergreen broadleaved forest. Global Biogeochem. Cycles https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.5019.5520 (2021).Hashimoto, H. et al. New generation geostationary satellite observations support seasonality in greenness of the Amazon evergreen forests. Nat. Commun. 12, 684 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Brando, P. M. et al. Seasonal and interannual variability of climate and vegetation indices across the Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 14685–14690 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wu, J. et al. Seasonality of Central Amazon forest leaf flush using tower-mounted RGB camera. In AGU Fall Meeting https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.5019.5520 (2014).Huete, A. R. et al. Amazon rainforests green-up with sunlight in dry season. Geophys. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL025583 (2006).Restrepo-Coupe, N. et al. What drives the seasonality of photosynthesis across the Amazon basin? A cross-site analysis of eddy flux tower measurements from the Brasil flux network. Agric. Meteorol. 182-183, 128–144 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Manoli, G., Ivanov, V. Y. & Fatichi, S. Dry-season greening and water stress in Amazonia: the role of modeling leaf phenology. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 123, 1909–1926 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Guan, K. et al. Photosynthetic seasonality of global tropical forests constrained by hydroclimate. Nat. Geosci. 8, 284–289 (2015).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lopes, A. P. et al. Leaf flush drives dry season green-up of the Central Amazon. Remote Sens. Environ. 182, 90–98 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Smith, M. N. et al. Seasonal and drought-related changes in leaf area profiles depend on height and light environment in an Amazon forest. N. Phytol. 222, 1284–1297 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Mitchell Aide, T. Herbivory as a selective agent on the timing of leaf production in a tropical understory community. Nature 336, 574–575 (1988).
Google Scholar 
Myneni, R. B. et al. Large seasonal swings in leaf area of Amazon rainforests. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 4820–4823 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wu, J. et al. Partitioning controls on Amazon forest photosynthesis between environmental and biotic factors at hourly to interannual timescales. Glob. Chang. Biol. 23, 1240–1257 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Nunes, M. H. et al. Recovery of logged forest fragments in a human-modified tropical landscape during the 2015-16 El Niño. Nat. Commun. 12, 1526 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Vasconcelos, H. L. & Luizão, F. J. Litter production and litter nutrient concentrations in a fragmented Amazonian landscape. Ecol. Appl. 14, 884–892 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Laurance, W. F. et al. Rain forest fragmentation and the proliferation of successional trees. Ecology 87, 469–482 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Uriarte, M. et al. Impacts of climate variability on tree demography in second growth tropical forests: the importance of regional context for predicting successional trajectories. Biotropica 48, 780–797 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Ewers, R. M. & Banks-Leite, C. Fragmentation impairs the microclimate buffering effect of tropical forests. PLoS One 8, e58093 (2013).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Chave, J. et al. Regional and seasonal patterns of litterfall in tropical South America. Biogeosciences 7, 43–55 (2010).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Barros, F. et al. Hydraulic traits explain differential responses of Amazonian forests to the 2015 El Niño-induced drought. N. Phytol. 223, 1253–1266 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brum, M. et al. Hydrological niche segregation defines forest structure and drought tolerance strategies in a seasonal Amazon forest. J. Ecol. 107, 318–333 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Signori-Müller, C. et al. Non-structural carbohydrates mediate seasonal water stress across Amazon forests. Nat. Commun. 12, 2310 (2021).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Coelho de Souza, F. et al. Evolutionary heritage influences Amazon tree ecology. Proc. Biol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.1587 (2016).Hansen, M. C. et al. The fate of tropical forest fragments. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax8574 (2020).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Morton, D. C. et al. Amazon forests maintain consistent canopy structure and greenness during the dry season. Nature 506, 221–224 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Draper, F. C. et al. Amazon tree dominance across forest strata. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 757–767 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Calders, K. et al. Monitoring spring phenology with high temporal resolution terrestrial LiDAR measurements. Agric. Meteorol. 203, 158–168 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Disney, M. Terrestrial LiDAR: a three-dimensional revolution in how we look at trees. N. Phytol. 222, 1736–1741 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Tang, H. & Dubayah, R. Light-driven growth in Amazon evergreen forests explained by seasonal variations of vertical canopy structure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 2640–2644 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Laurance, W. F. et al. An Amazonian rainforest and its fragments as a laboratory of global change. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 93, 223–247 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Correction for Tang and Dubayah, Light-driven growth in Amazon evergreen forests explained by seasonal variations of vertical canopy structure. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 9137 (2019).Ma, L. et al. Characterizing the three-dimensional spatiotemporal variation of forest photosynthetically active radiation using terrestrial laser scanning data. Agric. Meteorol. 301-302, 108346 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Laurans, M., Hérault, B., Vieilledent, G. & Vincent, G. Vertical stratification reduces competition for light in dense tropical forests. Ecol. Manag. 329, 79–88 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Garcia, M. N. et al. Importance of hydraulic strategy trade-offs in structuring response of canopy trees to extreme drought in Central Amazon. Oecologia https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-021-04924-9 (2021).Giardina, F. et al. Tall Amazonian forests are less sensitive to precipitation variability. Nat. Geosci. 11, 405–409 (2018).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brando, P. Tree height matters. Nat. Geosci. 11, 390–391 (2018).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stark, S. C. et al. Amazon forest carbon dynamics predicted by profiles of canopy leaf area and light environment. Ecol. Lett. 15, 1406–1414 (2012).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Pyle, E. H. et al. Dynamics of carbon, biomass, and structure in two Amazonian forests. J. Geophys. Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000592 (2008).Gorgens, E. B. et al. Resource availability and disturbance shape maximum tree height across the Amazon. Glob. Chang. Biol. 27, 177–189 (2021).ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Oliveira, R. S. et al. Linking plant hydraulics and the fast-slow continuum to understand resilience to drought in tropical ecosystems. N. Phytol. 230, 904–923 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Falster, D. S. & Westoby, M. Leaf size and angle vary widely across species: what consequences for light interception? N. Phytol. 158, 509–525 (2003).
Google Scholar 
Chavana-Bryant, C. et al. Leaf aging of Amazonian canopy trees as revealed by spectral and physiochemical measurements. N. Phytol. 214, 1049–1063 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brando, P. M. et al. Drought effects on litterfall, wood production and belowground carbon cycling in an Amazon forest: results of a throughfall reduction experiment. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 363, 1839–1848 (2008).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Wang, D., Momo Takoudjou, S. & Casella, E. LeWoS: a universal leaf-wood classification method to facilitate the 3D modelling of large tropical trees using terrestrial LiDAR. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 376–389 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Grossiord, C. et al. Plant responses to rising vapor pressure deficit. N. Phytol. 226, 1550–1566 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Smith, M. N. et al. Empirical evidence for resilience of tropical forest photosynthesis in a warmer world. Nat. Plants 6, 1225–1230 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Aleixo, I. et al. Amazonian rainforest tree mortality driven by climate and functional traits. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 384–388 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Lohbeck, M. et al. Successional changes in functional composition contrast for dry and wet tropical forest. Ecology 94, 1211–1216 (2013).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lambers, H. & Oliveira, R. S. in Plant Physiological Ecology (eds. Lambers, H. & Oliveira, R. S.) 385–449 (Springer International Publishing, 2019).Reich, P. B. Key canopy traits drive forest productivity. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 2128–2134 (2012).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Albiero-Júnior, A., Venegas-González, A., Camargo, J. L. C., Roig, F. A. & Tomazello-Filho, M. Amazon forest fragmentation and edge effects temporarily favored understory and midstory tree growth. Trees https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-021-02172-1 (2021).Doughty, C. E. et al. Drought impact on forest carbon dynamics and fluxes in Amazonia. Nature 519, 78–82 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
San-José, M., Werden, L., Peterson, C. J., Oviedo-Brenes, F. & Zahawi, R. A. Large tree mortality leads to major aboveground biomass decline in a tropical forest reserve. Oecologia https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-021-05048-w (2021).Qin, Y. et al. Carbon loss from forest degradation exceeds that from deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Nat. Clim. Chang. 11, 442–448 (2021).Brinck, K. et al. High resolution analysis of tropical forest fragmentation and its impact on the global carbon cycle. Nat. Commun. 8, 14855 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Duffy, P. B., Brando, P., Asner, G. P. & Field, C. B. Projections of future meteorological drought and wet periods in the Amazon. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 13172–13177 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Silva Junior, C. H. L. et al. Persistent collapse of biomass in Amazonian forest edges following deforestation leads to unaccounted carbon losses. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz8360 (2020).Forrest, J. & Miller-Rushing, A. J. Toward a synthetic understanding of the role of phenology in ecology and evolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365, 3101–3112 (2010).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Park, J. Y. et al. Quantifying leaf phenology of individual trees and species in a tropical forest using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) images. Remote Sens. 11, 1534 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Dubayah, R. et al. The global ecosystem dynamics investigation: high-resolution laser ranging of the Earth’s forests and topography. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci. 1, 100002 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Coomes, D. A. et al. Area-based vs tree-centric approaches to mapping forest carbon in Southeast Asian forests from airborne laser scanning data. Remote Sens. Environ. 194, 77–88 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Calders, K. et al. Terrestrial laser scanning in forest ecology: expanding the horizon. Remote Sens. Environ. 251, 112102 (2020).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Nobre, C. A. et al. Land-use and climate change risks in the Amazon and the need of a novel sustainable development paradigm. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 10759–10768 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Almeida, D. R. A. et al. Persistent effects of fragmentation on tropical rainforest canopy structure after 20 yr of isolation. Ecol. Appl. 29, e01952 (2019).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wilkes, P. et al. Data acquisition considerations for terrestrial laser scanning of forest plots. Remote Sens. Environ. 196, 140–153 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Vincent, G. et al. Mapping plant area index of tropical evergreen forest by airborne laser scanning. A cross-validation study using LAI2200 optical sensor. Remote Sens. Environ. 198, 254–266 (2017).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Pimont, F., Allard, D., Soma, M. & Dupuy, J.-L. Estimators and confidence intervals for plant area density at voxel scale with T-LiDAR. Remote Sens. Environ. 215, 343–370 (2018).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Vincent, G., Pimont, F. & Verley, P. A note on PAD/LAD Estimators Implemented in AMAPVox 1.7.https://doi.org/10.23708/1AJNMP (2021)Ross, J. The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands (Springer, 1981).Béland, M., Widlowski, J.-L., Fournier, R. A., Côté, J.-F. & Verstraete, M. M. Estimating leaf area distribution in savanna trees from terrestrial LiDAR measurements. Agric. Meteorol. 151, 1252–1266 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Almeida, D. R. Ade et al. Optimizing the remote detection of tropical rainforest structure with airborne LiDAR: leaf area profile sensitivity to pulse density and spatial sampling. Remote Sens. 11, 92 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Qie, L. et al. Long-term carbon sink in Borneo’s forests halted by drought and vulnerable to edge effects. Nat. Commun. 8, 1966 (2017).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Росс, Ю. & Ross, J. The radiation regime and architecture of plant stands (Springer Science & Business Media, 1981).Berry, Z. C. & Goldsmith, G. R. Diffuse light and wetting differentially affect tropical tree leaf photosynthesis. N. Phytol. 225, 143–153 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mercado, L. M. et al. Impact of changes in diffuse radiation on the global land carbon sink. Nature 458, 1014–1017 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
USGS. LP DAAC—MCD18A1. https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mcd18a1v006/ (2008).Maeda, E. E. et al. Large-scale commodity agriculture exacerbates the climatic impacts of Amazonian deforestation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2023787118 (2021).Engelbrecht, B. M. J. et al. Drought sensitivity shapes species distribution patterns in tropical forests. Nature 447, 80–82 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zellweger, F. et al. Forest microclimate dynamics drive plant responses to warming. Science 368, 772–775 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wild, J. et al. Climate at ecologically relevant scales: a new temperature and soil moisture logger for long-term microclimate measurement. Agric. Meteorol. 268, 40–47 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Camargo, J. L. C. & Kapos, V. Complex edge effects on oil moisture and microclimate in Central Amazonian forest. J. Trop. Ecol. 11, 205–221 (1995).
Google Scholar 
Zuur, A., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A. & Smith, G. M. Mixed Effects Models and Extensions in Ecology with R (Springer Science & Business Media, 2009).Malhi, Y., Phillips, O. L. & Laurance, W. F. Forest-climate interactions in fragmented tropical landscapes. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 359, 345–352 (2004).
Google Scholar  More

Variability of N2O concentrations and fluxesAll sampled streams and rivers were supersaturated on all dates (117.9–242.5%, n = 342 samples from 114 site visits) in N2O with respect to the atmosphere. Dissolved N2O concentrations fluctuated between 10.2 and 18.9 nmol L−1 with an average of 12.4 ± 1.7 nmol L−1, which is one-third of the global average3 (37.5 nmol L−1; Supplementary Table 3). Significantly higher N2O concentrations were observed in spring (P  More

Theory of changeAt the heart of the of CBRLM’s theory of change is the assumption that improvements in the ecological sub-system provide a sustainable resource base for increased livestock production and marketing34. The ecological sub-system, however, depends on a functioning economic sub-system because herd owners must be able to destock quickly in response to adverse ecological circumstances. The theory holds that the most important constraint on the economic sub-system is unproductive herds and low-quality cattle because farmers are unwilling to sell their cattle when they command low market prices. Therefore, improvements in rangeland grazing management need to be complemented by improvements in information and access to livestock markets, herd structures, and animal husbandry practices.Crucially, changes to the ecological, economic, and livestock sub-systems rely on effective community governance and collective-action capacity in CBRLM communities. This is because rangeland grazing management practices can be easily undermined by non-participating herd owners inside or outside the GA. The theory therefore calls for investments at multiple levels of the social-ecological system to ensure that improvements in certain program areas are not undermined by failures in others34. The CBRLM implementers believed that previous rangeland development programs were undermined by a failure to account for the linkages among sub-systems, which motivated them to design a more holistic intervention34.Intervention componentsCBRLM was a multi-faceted package of administrative, educational, financial, and technical support. Implementation of the package was designed as an experimental treatment to assist in project assessment. To select study areas for evaluation, GOPA identified 38 RIAs with sufficiently low density of people, livestock, and bush cover to enable the implementation of new group-grazing plans, one of the core treatment components. The evaluation team randomly assigned 19 RIAs to treatment and 19 RIAs to control (see Randomization for details). GOPA implemented CBRLM in up to seven GAs within each treatment RIA.MobilizationGOPA conducted pre-mobilization meetings with TAs and other stakeholders in the second half of 2010 to identify GA communities most likely to participate in CBRLM34. Early mobilization efforts focused on soliciting community buy-in for the cornerstone principles of CBRLM, including community-planned grazing, combined herding of cattle, and efficient livestock management. There is also substantial evidence from qualitative surveys that some community members were motivated to participate in the CBRLM by prospects for water infrastructure development by GOPA34.While almost 100 GAs were initially mobilized for the project, by 2014 GOPA was targeting resources and support towards 58 GAs based on community receptivity and the discretion of CBRLM management. In each GA, GOPA worked principally with households owning 10 or more cattle, although other community members benefitted from participation in a “Small Stock Pass-on Scheme” and a variety of training activities, which are described below.Rangeland grazing managementThe core aim of CBRLM was to shift how communities approached livestock grazing, forage conservation, and risk management by encouraging two key practices: planned grazing and combined herding. Planned grazing entails rotating a community’s cattle to a new pasture on a regular basis in accordance with a written plan. The goal was to preserve grass for the dry season and allow grazed pastures more time to recover. Combined herding entails grouping many owners’ cattle into one large herd and herding them in a tight bunch. This practice is meant to concentrate animal impact on rangeland, minimize cattle losses, and increase the likelihood that cows are exposed to bulls, thus increasing the pregnancy and calving rates of the entire herd. The scientific and practical rationale behind these practices is reviewed in Supplementary Note 2.GOPA staff developed grazing plans with each participating community and taught them planned grazing and combined herding via field-based training sessions. These followed a “training of trainers” approach in which GOPA recruited field facilitators from each community, taught them the principles of CBRLM, and tasked them with training their fellow participating pastoralists.Livestock managementGOPA taught participants some best practices in animal husbandry, including structuring herds to maximize productivity (by increasing the proportion of bulls and reducing the proportion of oxen and cattle over the age of 10 years), providing vaccinations and supplements, and deworming34. Additionally, to support the introduction of more bulls into herds, the project implemented a “bull scheme” in which participating communities were given the opportunity to collectively buy certified breeding bulls at a subsidized price. Communities were meant to repay the cost of the bulls either with cash or in-kind trades of goats. Goats collected in this repayment process fed into the small stock pass-on scheme under which participating community members nominated households to receive goats from GOPA. GOPA requested that communities nominate households that owned few or no livestock and were led by youth and/or women. When GOPA received goats as payment for loaned bulls, they would pass them on to nominated households. The recipients were then expected to pass on the offspring of the goats they received to other disadvantaged households.Cattle marketingCBRLM also sought to increase participants’ marketing of cattle to generate revenue from livestock raising and encourage offtake of unproductive animals34. Community facilitators and project experts provided participating herd owners with information about market opportunities and ideal herd composition, and encouraged flexible offtake in response to forage shortages. In 2013, GOPA invested in the development of regional livestock cooperatives that held local auctions and helped farmers transport their animals to markets. Finally, GOPA invested in identifying international export opportunities for CBRLM farmers to Zimbabwe and Angola, although these were generally not successful31.Community developmentThe project sought to institutionalize community-level governance to organize and enforce collective activities like planned grazing, water point maintenance, and financing of livestock inputs. The central management unit of each GA was a new Grazing Area Committee consisting of five to 10 elected community members. The project encouraged participating communities to collectively cover operational expenses in their GA through a GA fund managed by the committee. Among these expenses were the payments to herders, costs of diesel for water pumps and maintenance of water infrastructure, financing collective livestock vaccination campaigns, and any other collective expenses that would support operation of the GA. CBRLM supported every GA fund with a 1:1 matched subsidy. The matched subsidy was limited by a ceiling amount determined by the estimated number of cattle in a GA. GOPA also instructed committees to maintain “GA record books” to track grazing plans, record meeting minutes, and keep logs of community members’ participation and financial contributions.Water infrastructureGOPA upgraded water infrastructure at a total of 84 sites throughout the NCAs to facilitate planned grazing and combined herding. Water infrastructure improvement included minor upgrades like water tanks and drinking troughs, and larger investments such as the installation of diesel and solar pump systems, the drilling and installation of boreholes, and the construction of pipelines, deep wells, and a large earthen dam31.Intervention timelineThe timeline for major components of the research process and CBRLM roll-out is illustrated in Supplementary Fig. 1. The research team conducted the random assignments and the implementation team began community mobilization in early 2010. Formal enrollment in CBRLM began in early 2011. The program implementer conducted mobilization in two waves: they mobilized 11 of 19 RIAs in 2010 and the remaining 8 RIAs in 2011. The evaluation team conducted qualitative data collection to inform the design of social and cattle surveys prior to project end 2014; social surveys in 2014 and 2016; rangeland surveys in the wet and dry seasons of 2016; a cattle survey in 2016; and a household economic survey in 2017.Cumulative GA-level implementation is illustrated in Supplementary Fig. 2. The project implementer first formally reported enrollment and field visits in April 2011. The implementer achieved nearly full targeted enrollment (50 GAs) by November 11, although some grazing areas were added or subtracted thereafter. Mobilization exceeded enrollment because some grazing area communities chose not to participate in the program and some enrolled in the program and then dropped out. The program averaged between 25 and 50 field visits per month over the project period. A field visit consisted of a week-long community meeting about grazing-plan development and implementation, animal husbandry and budget training, and marketing opportunities.RandomizationThe unit of randomization is the RIA, an intervention zone with a locally recognized boundary. Each RIA falls under the jurisdiction of a single local governing body, known as a Traditional Authority (TA). As noted above, RIAs contain five to 15 GAs where a community of producers share water and forage resources. Grazing areas do not have legally defined boundaries. A herd owner’s ability to move among GAs is variable.GOPA mapped 41 RIAs prior to randomization. Three contiguous RIAs in the north-central region, composed of two treatment RIAs and one control RIA, were omitted from the study post-randomization because reexamination of baseline density of bushland vegetation deemed them unviable for CBRLM implementation. These are the three RIAs without sampled GAs in Fig. 1. The other 38 RIAs were randomly assigned to either receive the CBRLM treatment (19 RIAs) or serve as controls (19 RIAs).The randomization was stratified by TA to ensure that at least one RIA was assigned to the treatment in each TA. The research team then re-randomized the sample units until seven variables were balanced (a p value of 0.33 or higher for an omnibus f test of all seven variables) between treatment and control: (1) Presence of forest; (2) number of households; (3) number of cattle; (4) cattle density per unit area; (5) quality of water sources; (6) presence of community-based organizations (CBOs); and (7) overlap with complementary interventions (see Supplementary Table 1). For future researchers, we recommend re-randomizing a set number of times and choosing the re-randomization with the highest balance35. These variables and indicator variables for TA are included as covariates in all analyses.Sample selectionIn the original sampling strategy, the project implementer was asked to predict the GAs where they would implement the project if the RIA were assigned to treatment. However, there was limited overlap between the GAs that the implementer predicted and the GAs where CBRLM was ultimately implemented. Therefore, the evaluation team devised a revised sampling strategy in 2013, which proceeded in four steps:

1.

Map GAs in sampled RIAs: The evaluation team traveled to all 38 RIAs and worked with TAs and Namibian Agricultural Extension (AE) officers to map all the GAs in each RIA. The team mapped 171 GAs in control RIAs and 213 GAs in treatment RIAs.

2.

Collect pre-program data on GAs: The evaluation team collected information on pre-program characteristics of each GA from interviews with TAs and AE staff, the Namibian national census36, and the Namibian Atlas37. The latter has a geo-referenced database on climate, ecology, and livestock for the nation.

3.

Predict CBRLM enrollment for treatment GAs: The researchers used these data in a logistic regression to predict the probability that each GA would enroll in CBRLM and would adopt the CBRLM interventions based on pre-program characteristics. For example, the model found that GAs with more existing water infrastructure, strong social cohesion, and adequate cell phone service were more likely to be enrolled in the program. The variables used to predict CBRLM adoption were: (1) Presence of water installations (yes/no); (2) carrying capacity of the land (above/below the regional median); (3) community’s readiness to change (high/very high); (4) community’s social cohesion (high/very high); (5) spillover effects from neighbors; (6) quality of herders and herder turnover; (7) presence of members of the Himba ethnic group; (8) the TA’s readiness to change; (9) cell phone coverage; and (10) primary housing material (mud, clay, or brick).

4.

Generate sample of GAs in treatment and control RIAs: The evaluation team applied the statistical model (above) to all GAs in the sample and set a cut-off point to separate GAs that were likely to adopt the CBRLM program vs. those that were unlikely to do so. In treatment RIAs, the model predicted 52 GAs, of which 37 were formally enrolled in CBRLM and 15 were not. In control RIAs, 71 GAs met or exceeded the cutoff; they offer the best counter-factual estimate of which GAs would have enrolled in the program had their RIA received treatment.

Data collectionThe names, survey questions, and variable constructions for all outcomes included in the analysis are available at the AEA RCT Registry (ID number: AEARCTR-0002723). See Supplementary Methods for a list of definitions of variables depicted in Fig. 2 and 3.Social surveysSocial surveys were intended to assess the effect of CBRLM on community behaviors, community dynamics, knowledge, and attitudes. All data were collected using electronic tablets with the SurveyCTO software38.The primary unit of analysis for household respondents is the manager of the cattle kraal (holding pen). Researchers conducted surveys with kraal managers, rather than heads of households, for three reasons. First, many kraals contain cattle owned by multiple households, and decisions about grazing practices, cattle treatment, and participation in grazing groups are generally made at the kraal level. Second, many cattle-owning households do not directly oversee the day-to-day activities of their cattle (many live outside the GA), and so would be unable to answer questions about key outcomes, such as livestock management behaviors and community dynamics39. Finally, enrollment in CBRLM occurred at the kraal, rather than household, level.In 2014, the research team worked with local headmen and other community members to generate a complete census of kraals in every sampled Grazing Area (GA) that contained 10 or more cattle at the start of the program (an eligibility requirement for enrollment in CBRLM). The research team randomly sampled up to 11 community members for participation in the 2014 kraal manager survey. Surveys were conducted in the manager’s local language and lasted ~45 min. Alongside the 2014 survey, teams of two surveyors visited all grazing areas where at least one respondent reported participating in a community grazing group or community combined herd to corroborate reported behaviors through direct observation.To assess the persistence of CBRLM’s effects on behaviors, community dynamics, knowledge, and attitudes, the research team conducted a follow-up survey of kraal managers in 2016, two years after program end. The survey team randomly sampled two additional kraals in each grazing area to account for the possibility of attrition. The 2016 survey lasted approximately one hour on average, and included an expanded list of questions about governance, social conflict, and collective action as well as new survey modules on cattle marketing, cattle movement, and livestock management. In 2017, the research team randomly sampled three kraals in each grazing area to conduct direct observation audits of key rangeland grazing-management behaviors.To assess the effects of CBRLM on economic outcomes, the research team conducted a household-level survey in 2017, three years after program end. The survey instrument asked detailed questions on topics that could not be answered by kraal managers, such as household consumption, income, food security, and savings. To select households for this survey, during the 2016 survey the research team asked kraal managers to list all households that owned cattle in the manager’s kraal, then randomly selected one household from each kraal. Alongside the 2017 survey, the research team conducted an in-depth survey with the local headman of all 123 GAs in the sample. The headman survey focused on historical background about the grazing area, as well as the headman’s perceptions of rangeland and livestock issues.Cattle dataThe cattle component was intended to assess effects of CBRLM on cattle numbers, body condition, and productivity. The variables of key interest involved the average liveweight and body condition, calving rates, and average market value of cattle, as well as overall herd structures.The data collection protocols closely followed standards from livestock assessments elsewhere in Sub-Saharan Africa40. The research team randomly selected up to six kraals in each GA to participate in the cattle survey. The survey team mobilized selected herds during multiple community visits to ensure all herds were accounted for. Herd owners were compensated for the costs of rounding up animals and weighed cattle received anti-parasite treatment (“dipping”)41. A total of 19,875 cattle from 669 herds were weighed.The data-collection process for each herd proceeded in six steps. First, surveyors worked with herd managers to round up all cattle that regularly stayed in the selected cattle kraal. Once cattle had been brought to the designated location for data collection, they were passed through a mobile crush pen and scale. As each animal passed through the crush pen, a survey team member recorded the animal type (i.e., bull, ox, cow, calf) and used a SurveyCTO randomizer to calculate whether the animal was randomly selected for assessment. The random number generator was set to randomly select approximately 30 cattle from each herd for weighing. If the animal was selected, the survey team kept the animal on the scale and recorded its weight and body condition. A semi-subjective 1–5 scale, commonly used by livestock buyers in the NCAs (see Supplementary Fig. 3), was adjusted to a 0–4 scale used to determine formal market pricing. The team then placed the animal in a neck clamp and estimated the animal’s age by dentition (but extremely young calves were aged visually). Each animal was marked as it moved through the crush pen to ensure that it was assessed only once. In addition to assessing randomly selected animals, the survey team weighed and aged all bulls in the herd. The cattle survey yielded average cattle weight, age, and body condition for 19,875 animals across all treatment and control GAs, as well as estimates of calving rates, ratios of bulls to cows, and ratios of productive to unproductive animals.Rangeland dataThe rangeland ecology research was intended to assess treatment effects on vegetation and soil surface conditions. Full research details, including field technician training protocols, are available elsewhere42. The data collection approach followed methods commonly used in Africa43,44. Extended definitions of variables depicted in Fig. 3 and Table 2 are available in the “Supplementary Methods” section.The rationale for how the ecological variables presented in Fig. 3 translate into assessments of rangeland condition or health is based on forage and soil characteristics from a livestock production perspective25. The highest quality forages for cattle on rangelands are perennial grasses, since annual grasses are more ephemeral in terms of nutritive value and productivity. Herbaceous forbs often have the poorest forage quality for large grazers because of their low fiber content and risks of containing toxic chemicals. When rangelands are degraded by over-grazing, perennial grasses are reduced and replaced by annual grasses and forbs. This trend reflects animal diet selectivity that favors consumption of the perennial plants. Reversing such trends via management interventions can be difficult. The main option is to reduce grazing pressure and hope that perennial grasses can outcompete annuals and become reestablished over time. Another option is to implement a grazing rotation that allows perennial grasses to recover after a grazing period.Increases in annual grasses are documented to occur as one outcome of chronic overgrazing in Namibia45,46. In 2016, annual grasses were 5-times more abundant than perennial grasses in our study area. When over-grazing occurs, most plant material is harvested and less is available for the pool of organic matter (OM) for the topsoil. Less OM (e.g., plant litter) on the soil surface means that more soil is also exposed to wind and rain, accelerating erosion. The GAs in our research occur on various soil types and landscapes, some of which are more susceptible to erosion than others. Silty soils on slopes are vulnerable to erosion, for example, while sandy soils on level sites are less vulnerable25.On-the-ground sampling was conducted in all 123 selected GAs along an 800-km zone running West to East. Elevations ranged from 750 to 1700 masl (West) and 1050 to 1120 masl (East). Within each sampled GA, up to 12 1-ha (square) sampling sites were initially chosen using coordinates generated randomly from latitude and longitude coordinates in a satellite image of the GA47. About 17% of sites were later removed from the sample based on their close proximity to landscape disturbances or inaccessibility by field technicians. Overall, 972 sites were analyzed in the wet season and 885 in the dry season of 2016, two years after the implementation phase of CBRLM had ended.The geographic center-point for a sampling site was generated using a spatially constrained random distribution algorithm applied to the satellite image, and the field team navigated to the center-point coordinates using GPS technology. The team took photographs and recorded descriptive information including elevation, slope, aspect, other landscape features, vegetation type, dominant plant species, soil type, soil erosion, and degree of grazing or browsing pressure, and proximity to high impact areas such as trails, water points, and villages.At the center point, the survey team then established two perpendicular transects, each 100 m in length and crossing at the middle. The resulting four, 50-m transect lines ran according to each cardinal direction (N, S, E, W) as determined with a compass. Technicians then placed 1-m notched sampling sticks at randomized locations along each transect line and recorded what plants or other materials (i.e., stone, wood, leaf litter, animal dung, etc.) were located under or above the notches of the sampling sticks. These data points were tabulated to calculate percent cover for various categories of vegetation; there were n = 200 data points per site based on 40 stick placements and 5 notches per stick. This method enabled precise calculation of cover values for herbaceous (i.e., grass, forb) and diminutive woody plants (i.e., small shrubs, seedlings, saplings, etc.). Tree cover was estimated from point data collected via a small adjustment in the approach42. Herbaceous species were identified in wet seasons but not in dry seasons due to senescence during the latter.Quadrat sampling supplemented the notched stick approach. Random placements of a 1-m2 quadrat frame within the sampling site allowed for 20 estimates of a soil surface condition score ranging from 1 (poor) to 2 (moderate) or 3 (good)42. Poor was indicated by smooth soil surfaces, absence of litter, having poor infiltration and signs of erosion such as rills, pedestals, or terracettes; good was indicated by rough soil surfaces, abundant litter, seedlings evident, and lack of evidence of erosion. Herbaceous biomass was estimated in the quadrats and weighed to estimate herbaceous biomass.StatisticsIndex creationIndex construction for socioeconomic variables was composed of several steps48. For each response variable we first signed all component variables such that a higher sign is a positive outcome, i.e., in line with CBRLM’s intended impacts. Then we standardized each component by subtracting its control group mean and dividing by its control group standard deviation. We computed the mean of the standardized components of the index and standardized the sum once again by the control group sum’s mean and standard deviation. When the value of one component in an index was missing, we computed the index average from the remaining components. See Tables 3–6 for index components.Calculation of average treatment effectsThe estimate of interest is the Average Treatment Effect (ATE), or the average change in an outcome generated by assignment to CBRLM. We estimate the ATE using standard Ordinary Least Squares regression and control for variables used in stratification. Regressions for rangeland outcome variables include a unique set of controls, including rainfall over the project period, rainfall in the year of data collection, grazing area cattle density, grazing area ecological zones, and a remote-sensing estimate of pre-project biomass. The core model takes the form:$$hat{Y}=alpha +{beta }_{1}T+{{{{{boldsymbol{beta }}}}}}{{{{{bf{X}}}}}}$$
(1)
where T represents treatment assignment and X represents pre-treatment covariates used to test for balance during re-randomizations. The results capture the intention-to-treat (ITT) effect rather than the effect of treatment-on-treated (TOT). ITT is more appropriate than TOT in this context for two principal reasons. First, it is more relevant for policymakers – the effect of policies should account for imperfect compliance. Second, “uptake” is not well-defined, and certainly not a binary concept, for CBRLM since many communities and community members complied partially, complied with some but not all components, and complied for some but not all of the time.Standard errors and p valuesWe report two-tailed p values for all analyses. For each outcome, we show the two-tailed p value from a standard Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression with standard errors clustered at the level of the RIA, the unit of randomization49. We also calculate two-tailed p values using Randomization Inference (RI). To calculate RI p values, we re-run the randomization procedure (described above) 10,000 times and generate an Average Treatment Effect (ATE) under each hypothetical randomization. The p value is the percent of re-randomizations that generate a treatment effect that is either equal to, or larger in absolute value than, the true ATE.Multiple hypotheses correctionWe calculate q values to account for families of outcome indices with multiple hypotheses50. The q value represents the minimum false discovery rate at which the null hypothesis would be rejected for a given test. We pre-specified five families of indices:

1.

Behavioral outcomes (all in 2014): Grazing planning, Grazing-plan adherence, Herding practices, and Herder management.

2.

Behavioral outcomes (all in 2016): Grazing planning, Grazing-plan adherence, Herding practices, and Herder management.

3.

Primary material outcomes: Cattle herd value (2016), Herd productivity (2016), Household income (2017), Household expenditures (2017), Household livestock wealth (2017).

4.

Secondary material outcomes: Time use (2017), Resilience (2017), Female empowerment (2017), Diet (2017), and Herd structure (2016).

5.

Mechanisms: Collective Action (2014, 2016), Community Governance (2014, 2016), Community disputes (2014, 2016), Trust (2014), Self and community efficacy (2014, 2017), and Knowledge (2016).

Heterogeneous treatment effects analysisWe are interested in whether the effect of CBRLM was impacted by lower rainfall in some grazing areas during the project period. We evaluated heterogeneous treatment effects by rainfall in grazing areas using a variety of measures of rainfall, including aggregate rainfall during the project period and deviation in aggregate rainfall from the ten-year mean during the project period.For simplicity, Supplementary Tables 5 and 6 present the results of analysis of the interaction between treatment and a binary indicator of low rainfall. To construct this indicator, for each GA we first compute the absolute difference between mean rainfall during the project and mean rainfall during the 10 years prior (2000–2010). We divide the absolute difference by mean rainfall during the 10 years prior to produce a relative (%) difference. We then determine the median relative difference over all GAs. For each GA, we assign the value 1 to the low rainfall indicator if the relative difference for the GA is less than the median relative difference over all GAs; we assign 0 otherwise. The results are consistent when we use alternative rainfall measures.Spillovers analysisBecause CBRLM grazing areas were more likely to experience external incursions by cattle herds from outside the community, we test for spillovers. Specifically, we are interested in whether control grazing areas near treatment areas were affected by having a treatment grazing area nearby. We conducted the spillovers analysis only on control group grazing areas. For each control group grazing area, we measured the distance to the border of the nearest treatment grazing area. We created a binary measure taking the value 1 if the distance between the control group grazing area and nearest treatment group grazing area is below the median distance, and 0 otherwise. We find no evidence of spillover effects. The results are presented in Supplementary Table 7.Ethical considerationsApproval for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Boards at Yale University (1103008148), Innovations for Poverty Action (253.11March-001), and Northwestern University (STU00205556-CR0001). The program was conceived, designed, and implemented by the Millennium Challenge Account compact between the Millennium Challenge Corporation and the Government of Namibia. The research team did not participate in program design or implementation. Communities and individual farmers were informed that they were free to withdraw from participation in evaluation activities at any time. The random assignment of the program was appropriate given the uncertainty around the program’s effect, and the Government of Namibia committed to implementing the program in control areas if the evaluation showed positive results.The research team took a number of steps to ensure the autonomy and well-being of study participants. First, we designed the survey and data collection protocols after considerable qualitative field work to ensure that questions about sensitive issues (e.g., cattle wealth, cattle losses, attitudes towards the Traditional Authority) were phrased appropriately and did not engender adverse emotional or social consequences. Second, all survey activities were reviewed and approved by the MCA compact, Regional Governors, and Traditional Authorities. Third, surveys were conducted with informed consent and in private to ensure that information remained private and respondents were as comfortable as possible during the survey. Finally, the research team disseminated findings on market prices and rangeland condition to communities and regional Agriculture Extension Officers.We received no negative reports about the community reception of the survey from surveyors during the evaluation. Two cows were injured during the cattle weighing exercise, and the owner was financially compensated in line with a compensation agreement made with all farmers prior to the cattle weighing exercise.Reporting summaryFurther information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article. More

Xin, F. et al. Large increases of paddy rice area, gross primary production, and grain production in Northeast China during 2000–2017. Sci. Total Environ. 711, 135–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135183 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Du, B. et al. Deep fertilizer placement improves rice growth and yield in zero tillage. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 16, 8045–8054. https://doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1606_80458054 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ni, B., Liu, M., Lü, S., Xie, L. & Wang, Y. Environmentally friendly slow-release nitrogen fertilizer. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59, 10169–10175. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf202131z (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhu, C. et al. Mechanized transplanting with side deep fertilization increases yield and nitrogen use efficiency of rice in Eastern China. Sci. Rep. 9, 5653. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-42039-7 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R. & Polasky, S. Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418, 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01014 (2002).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sharma, B. et al. Recycling of organic wastes in agriculture: An environmental perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. 13, 409–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-019-00175-y (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pan, S. et al. Benefits of mechanized deep placement of nitrogen fertilizer in direct-seeded rice in South China. Field Crops Res. 203, 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.011 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shahena, S., Rajan, M., Chandran, V. & Mathew, L. Conventional methods of fertilizer release. In Controlled Release Fertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture (eds Lewu, F. B. et al.) 1–24 (Academic Press, 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819555-0.00001-7.Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Wang, C. et al. Effects of different fertilization methods on ammonia volatilization from rice paddies. J. Clean. Prod. 295, 126299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126299 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu, Q. et al. Effects of different types of slow- and controlled-release fertilizers on rice yield. J. Integr. Agric. 20, 1503–1514. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(20)63406-2 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mahajan, G., Kumar, V. & Chauhan, B. S. Rice production in India. In Rice production worldwide (eds Chauhan, B. et al.) 53–91 (Springer International Publishing, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47516-5_3.Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Opoku-Kwanowaa, Y., Furaha, R. K., Yan, L. & Wei, D. Effects of planting field on groundwater and surface water pollution in China. Clean-Soil Air Water 48, 1900452. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201900452 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lin, W. et al. The effects of chemical and organic fertilizer usage on rhizosphere soil in tea orchards. PLoS ONE 14, e0217018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217018 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Sempeho, S. I., Kim, H. T., Mubofu, E. & Hilonga, A. Meticulous overview on the controlled release fertilizers. Adv. Chem. 1–16, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/363071 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Trenkel, M. E. Controlled-Release and Stabilized Fertilizers in Agriculture 1–156 (International Fertilizer Industry Association, 1997).
Google Scholar 
Lawrencia, D. et al. Controlled release fertilizers: A review on coating materials and mechanism of release. Plants 10, 238. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10020238 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Tang, S. et al. Studies on the mechanism of single basal application of controlled-release fertilizers for increasing yield of rice (Oryza safiva L.). Agric. Sci. China 6, 586–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1671-2927(07)60087-X (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zheng, Y. et al. Effects of mixed controlled release nitrogen fertilizer with rice straw biochar on rice yield and nitrogen balance in northeast china. Sci. Rep. 10, 9452. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66300-6 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Ransom, C. J., Jolley, V. D., Blair, T. A., Sutton, L. E. & Hopkins, B. G. Nitrogen release rates from slow- and controlled-release fertilizers influenced by placement and temperature. PLoS ONE 15, e0234544. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234544 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Soni, R., Kumar, V., Suyal, D. C., Jain, L. & Goel, R. Metagenomics of plant rhizosphere microbiome. In Understanding host-microbiome interactions—an omics approach (eds Singh, R. et al.) 193–205 (Springer, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5050-3_12.Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Kumar, A. Phosphate solubilizing bacteria in agriculture biotechnology: Diversity, mechanism and their role in plant growth and crop yield. Int. J. Adv. Res. 4, 116–124. https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/111 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Arjun, J. K. Metagenomic analysis of bacterial diversity in the rice rhizosphere soil microbiome. Biotechnol. Bioinf. Bioeng 1, 361–367 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Zhao, J. et al. Responses of bacterial communities in arable soils in a rice-wheat cropping system to different fertilizer regimes and sampling times. PLoS ONE 9, e85301. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085301 (2014).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Huang, M. et al. Soil bacterial communities in three rice-based cropping systems differing in productivity. Sci. Rep. 10, 9867. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66924-8 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Hayatsu, M. A novel function of controlled-release nitrogen fertilizers. Microbes Environ. 29, 121–122. https://doi.org/10.1264/jsme2.ME2902rh (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Aslam, Z., Yasir, M., Yoon, H. S., Jeon, C. O. & Chung, Y. R. Diversity of the bacterial community in the rice rhizosphere managed under conventional and no-tillage practices. J. Microbiol. 51, 747–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12275-013-2528-8 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Min, J. et al. Mechanical side-deep fertilization mitigates ammonia volatilization and nitrogen runoff and increases profitability in rice production independent of fertilizer type and split ratio. J. Clean. Prod. 316, 128370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128370 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ke, J. et al. Combined controlled-released nitrogen fertilizers and deep placement effects of N leaching, rice yield and N recovery in machine-transplanted rice. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 265, 402–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.06.023 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and ecosystems. Nature 443, 989–992. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05202 (2006).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303 (2010).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Li, P. et al. Different regulation of soil structure and resource chemistry under animal- and plant-derived organic fertilizers changed soil bacterial communities. Appl. Soil. Ecol. 165, 104020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.104020 (2021).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Gu, Y., Zhang, X., Tu, S. & Lindström, K. Soil microbial biomass, crop yields, and bacterial community structure as affected by long-term fertilizer treatments under wheat-rice cropping. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 45, 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2009.02.005 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Niu, J. et al. Insight into the effects of different cropping systems on soil bacterial community and tobacco bacterial wilt rate: Effects of different copping systems. J. Basic Microbiol. 57, 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.201600222 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Wu, T., Qin, Y. & Li, M. Intercropping of tea (Camellia sinensis L.) and Chinese chestnut: Variation in the structure of rhizosphere bacterial communities. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 21, 2178–2190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-021-00513-0 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Li, Y. C. et al. Variations of rhizosphere bacterial communities in tea (Camellia sinensis L.) continuous cropping soil by high-throughput pyrosequencing approach. J. Appl. Microbiol. 121, 787–799. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.13225 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bei, Q., Moser, G., Müller, C. & Liesack, W. Seasonality affects function and complexity but not diversity of the rhizosphere microbiome in European temperate grassland. Sci. Total Environ. 784, 147036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147036 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
You, J., Das, A., Dolan, E. M. & Hu, Z. Ammonia-oxidizing archaea involved in nitrogen removal. Water Res. 43, 1801–1809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2009.01.016 (2009).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Chuang, S. et al. Potential effects of Rhodococcus qingshengii strain djl-6 on the bioremediation of carbendazim-contaminated soil and the assembly of its microbiome. J. Hazard. Mater. 414, 125496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125496 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Luo, D. et al. The anaerobic oxidation of methane in paddy soil by ferric iron and nitrate, and the microbial communities involved. Sci. Total Environ. 788, 147773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147773 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Premnath, N. et al. A crucial review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons—Environmental occurrence and strategies for microbial degradation. Chemosphere 280, 130608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.130608 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Makino, A. Photosynthesis, grain yield, and nitrogen utilization in rice and wheat. Plant Physiol. 155, 125–129. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.165076 (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Sun, L., Lu, Y., Yu, F., Kronzucker, H. J. & Shi, W. Biological nitrification inhibition by rice root exudates and its relationship with nitrogen-use efficiency. New Phytol. 212, 646–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14057 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Coskun, D., Britto, D. T., Shi, W. & Kronzucker, H. J. How plant root exudates shape the nitrogen cycle. Trends Plant Sci. 22, 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2017.05.004 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Qiang, S. et al. Deep placement of mixed controlled-release and conventional urea improves grain yield, nitrogen use efficiency of rainfed spring maize. Arch. Agronomy Soil Sci. 67, 1848–1858. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2020.1817396 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hou, P. et al. Deep fertilization with controlled-release fertilizer for higher cereal yield and N utilization in paddies: The optimal fertilization depth. Agronomy J. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20772 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhu, S., Vivanco, J. M. & Manter, D. K. Nitrogen fertilizer rate affects root exudation, the rhizosphere microbiome and nitrogen-use-efficiency of maize. Appl. Soil. Ecol. 107, 324–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2016.07.009 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Morrongiello, J. R., Thresher, R. E. & Smith, D. C. Aquatic biochronologies and climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 849 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pracheil, B. M., Hogan, J. D., Lyons, J. & McIntyre, P. B. Using hard-part microchemistry to advance conservation and management of North American freshwater fishes. Fisheries 39, 451–465 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Starrs, D., Ebner, B. C. & Fulton, C. J. All in the ears: Unlocking the early life history biology and spatial ecology of fishes. Biol. Rev. 91, 86–105 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Limburg, K. E. Otolith strontium traces environmental history of subyearling American shad Alosa sapidissima. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 119, 25–35 (1995).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kennedy, B. P., Klaue, A., Blum, J. D., Folt, C. L. & Nislow, K. H. Reconstructing the lives of fish using Sr isotopes in otoliths. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 59, 925–929 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hogan, J. D., Blum, M. J., Gilliam, J. F., Bickford, N. & McIntyre, P. B. Consequences of alternative dispersal strategies in a putatively amphidromous fish. Ecology 95, 2397–2408 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Carlson, A. K., Phelps, Q. E. & Graeb, B. D. S. Chemistry to conservation: using otoliths to advance recreational and commercial fisheries management. J. Fish Biol. 90, 505–527 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Campana, S. E. Chemistry and composition of fish otoliths: pathways, mechanisms and applications. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 188, 263–297 (1999).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pracheil, B. M. et al. Sturgeon and paddlefish (Acipenseridae) sagittal otoliths are composed of the calcium carbonate polymorphs vaterite and calcite. J. Fish Biol. 90, 549–558 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pracheil, B. M., George, R. & Chakoumakos, B. C. Significance of otolith calcium carbonate crystal structure diversity to microchemistry studies. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 29, 569–588 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nehrke, G., Poigner, H., Wilhelms-Dick, D., Brey, T. & Abele, D. Coexistence of three calcium carbonate polymorphs in the shell of the Antarctic clam Laternula elliptica. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 13(5), 15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003996 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wassenburg, J. A. et al. Determination of aragonite trace element distribution coefficients from speleothem calcite–aragonite transitions. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 190, 347–367 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tzeng, W. N. et al. Misidentification of the migratory history of anguillid eels by Sr/Ca ratios of vaterite otoliths. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 348, 285–295 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gauldie, R. W. Effects of temperature and vaterite replacement on the chemistry of metal ions in the otoliths of Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53, 2015–2026 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Reimer, T. et al. Rapid growth causes abnormal vaterite formation in farmed fish otoliths. J. Exp. Biol. 220, 2965–2969 (2017).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Coll-Lladó, C., Giebichenstein, J., Webb, P. B. & Bridges, C. R. Ocean acidification promotes otolith growth and calcite deposition in gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) larvae. Sci. Rep. 8, 8384 (2018).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Loeppky, A. R. et al. Influence of ontogenetic development, temperature, and pCO2 on otolith calcium carbonate polymorph composition in sturgeons. Sci. Rep. 11(1), 1–10 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Melancon, S., Fryer, B. J., Ludsin, S. A., Gagnon, J. E. & Yang, Z. Effects of crystal structure on the uptake of metals by lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) otoliths. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 62, 2609–2619 (2005).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Veinott, G. I., Porter, T. R. & Nasdala, L. Using Mg as a proxy for crystal structure and Sr as an indicator of marine growth in vaterite and aragonite otoliths of aquaculture rainbow trout. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 138, 1157–1165 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Loeppky, A. R., Chakoumakos, B. C., Pracheil, B. M. & Anderson, W. G. Otoliths of sub-adult Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens contain aragonite and vaterite calcium carbonate polymorphs. J. Fish Biol. 94, 810–814 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vignon, M. When the presence of a vateritic otolith has morphological effect on its aragonitic partner: Trans-lateral compensation induces bias in microecological patterns in one-side-only vateritic otolith. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 77, 285–294 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Clarke, A. D., Telmer, K. H. & Mark Shrimpton, J. Elemental analysis of otoliths, fin rays and scales: A comparison of bony structures to provide population and life-history information for the Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus). Ecol. Freshw. Fish 16, 354–361 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Campana, S. E., Chouinard, G. A., Hanson, J. M., Frechet, A. & Brattey, J. Otolith elemental fingerprints as biological tracers of fish stocks. Fish. Res. 46, 343–357 (2000).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gauldie, R. W. Continuous and discontinuous growth in the otolith of Macruronus novaezelandiae (Merlucciidae: Teleostei). J. Morphol. 216(3), 271–294 (1993).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Long, J. M., Snow, R. A., Pracheil, B. M. & Chakoumakos, B. C. Morphology and composition of Goldeye (Hiodontidae; Hiodon alosoides) otoliths. J. Morphol. 282(4), 511–519 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chakoumakos, B. C., Pracheil, B. M., Koenigs, R. P., Bruch, R. M. & Feygenson, M. Empirically testing vaterite structural models using neutron diffraction and thermal analysis. Sci. Rep. 6, 36799 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
David, A. W., Grimes, C. B. & Isely, J. J. Vaterite sagittal otoliths in hatchery-reared juvenile red drums. Progres. Fish-Cult. 56(4), 301–303 (1994).Article 

Google Scholar 
Tomás, J. & Geffen, A. J. Morphometry and composition of aragonite and vaterite otoliths of deformed laboratory reared juvenile herring from two populations. J. Fish Biol. 63(6), 1383–1401 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kamhi, S. R. On the structure of vaterite CaCO3. Acta Crystallogr. A 16(8), 770–772 (1963).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kartnaller, V., Ribeiro, E. M., Venancio, F., Rosariob, F. & Cajaiba, J. Preferential incorporation of sulfate into calcite polymorphs during calcium carbonate precipitation: an experimental approach. CrystEngComm 20, 2241–2244 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Paquette, J. & Reeder, R. J. Relationship between surface structure, growth mechanism, and trace element incorporation in calcite. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 59(4), 735–749 (1995).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hüssy, K. & Mosegaard, H. Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) growth and otolith accretion characteristics modelled in a bioenergetics context. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 61(6), 1021–1031 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fablet, R. et al. Shedding light on fish otolith biomineralization using a bioenergetic approach. PLoS ONE 6(11), e27055 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Naslund, A. W., Davis, B. E., Hobbs, J. A., Fangue, N. A. & Todgham, A. E. Warming, not CO2-acidified seawater, alters otolith development of juvenile Antarctic emerald rockcod (Trematomus bernacchii). Polar Biol. 44(9), 1917–1923 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Coll-Lladó, C. et al. Pilot study to investigate the effect of long-term exposure to high pCO2 on adult cod (Gadus morhua) otolith morphology and calcium carbonate deposition. Fish Physiol. Biochem. 48, 1879–1891 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Söllner, C. et al. Control of crystal size and lattice formation by starmaker in otolith biomineralization. Science 302(5643), 282–286 (2003).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodriguez-Carvajal, J. FULLPROF: A program for Rietveld refinement and pattern matching analysis. In Satellite Meeting on Powder Diffraction of the XV Congress of the IUCr (Vol. 127) (1990).Roisnel, T. & Rodríquez-Carvajal, J. WinPLOTR: A windows tool for powder diffraction pattern analysis. Mater. Sci. 378(1), 118–123 (2001).
Google Scholar 
Momma, K. & Izumi, F. VESTA: A three-dimensional visualization system for electronic and structural analysis. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 41(3), 653–658 (2008).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Slater, J. C. Atomic radii in crystals. J. Chem. Phys. 41(10), 3199–3205 (1964).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

Aggregate size distributionAs hypothesized, the improved soil aggregation was observed under ICL, which is attributed to the presence of animals resulting in higher organic matter contents of total C and N fractions that can significantly enhance soil health over time32. Moreover, well-aggregated soils as observed under ICL ( > 4 mm) at site 1 and NE (2–4 mm) at site 2 have a greater potential of retaining their structure and may have higher macropores, which facilitate sustained root growth than soils with low aggregation such as under CNT (corn–soybean without grazing or CC) in this study. It also explains the significance of ICL systems with no-tillage and undisturbed grassland, where the formation of stable macroaggregates may occur as a result of incorporation of plant residues, stimulation of root exudates and increased biological activity. Furthermore, it was noticed that ICL system not only enhanced the macroaggregates but accentuated the presence of microaggregates due to persistent binding agents, which are critical in SOC protection against microbial decomposition. When integrating grazing livestock into crop rotation, soil aggregation is typically improved under moderate and controlled grazing than the high intensity grazing systems33. Compared to the long-term sites ( > 30 years), short-term site 4 did not result in discernible effects of grazing or CC on soil aggregation. However, within this short-term study, grazed pasture mix was able to enhance aggregation of 1–2 and 2–4 mm sized aggregates compared with oats, oats with CC, oats with CC and grazing. To observe the influence of CC and grazing on  > 4 mm or  4 mm) under ICL at site 1 resulted in 1.3–1.5 times significantly higher SOC concentration than NE and CNT. The greater concentration of SOC and N in ICL and NE is attributed to the lack of soil disturbance, crop residue retention, and rhizodeposition, which reduces macroaggregate turnover rate14. At site 3, NE enhanced aggregate-associated C and N concentrations and performed significantly better than both ICL and CNT treatments. The higher C and N accrual in the NE than ICL and CNT, especially at site 3, can be due to massive root systems, long-term establishment and absence of cultivation, which contributes to enhanced soil quality, while reducing nutrient vulnerability to loss by oxidation18,36. For short-term study at site 4, insignificant differences in aggregate-associated SOC suggested that longer study period of at least  > 5 years is required for SOC to respond to grazing and cover crop management. The higher total N under ICL and NE can also be due to the presence of legumes, and brassicas in CC, which are effective at recycling N and may have helped in scavenging N.An overall increase in C and N cycling under ICL and NE systems has been attributed to ingested pasture being converted into urine and manure. Under these systems, livestock catalyze nutrient cycling by breakdown of complex plant molecules, greater soil incorporation and decomposition of plant residues and soil organic matter, which can maintain or even improve soil fertility by production of organic acids such as fulvic and humic acids6,8,19. Moreover, grazing stimulates the carbohydrate exudation from grass roots, which is mostly composed of polysaccharides, a C-O alkyl source37. The enhanced C concentration under ICL and NE can also be associated with higher MWD. Integrated system cool-season pasture and winter CC had significantly higher total C and N than the non-integrated continuous corn in previous study6. The results from another integrated system study7 showed that soybean and oat-Italian ryegrass CC increased total C (1.16 Mg ha−1 yr−1) and N stocks (0.12 Mg ha−1 yr−1) under 7 year study period. It is previously reported that ICL system contains labile organic matter pools10,38, subsequently showing higher C stocks and greater root densities near soil-surface, which promotes aggregate-associated C stabilization18,39,40, higher infiltration rates, thus providing likely benefits to soil function linked to erosion control and soil water relations41.Soil microbial community compositionTotal bacterial biomass, AM fungi, and PLFA were enhanced under NE, which can be result of accumulation of organic residues and higher pasture root mass7,32, pasture being grazed can promote exudation of organic compounds by roots, serving as energy sources for microorganisms. The consistent increase in microbial population under NE can also be result of increased SOC and N, however, the same does not hold true for ICL system, where despite observing greater SOC and N, a significant decrease in the microbial population at site 2 was noticed. The enhanced total PLFA under NE system at site 2 is due to concomitant increase in AM fungi, gram (−), fungal/bacterial ratio, and total bacterial biomass compared to ICL. The fungal to bacterial ratio was reduced under ICL compared to NE at sites 1 and 2, pertaining to relatively low abundance of the fungal fatty acid 18:2ɷ6 in grazed system as compared to unmanaged grassland. This finding corroborates the notion that livestock-grazing systems contain bacterial-based decomposition channels and are mostly dominated by gram (+) bacteria and that the fungal population is comparatively more important in decomposer food-webs of native grasslands. These results coincide with previous studies42,43. Moreover, the increase in fungal to bacterial ratios under NE system in contrast to ICL at sites 1 and 2 can relate to modifications in soil health with C sequestration, as fungal populations incline towards higher C assimilation proficiencies and greater storage of metabolized C than bacterial populations9,44. The grazing intensity also plays a significant role in bacterial and fungal presence. It is previously reported that high grazing intensity had greater bacterial PLFA concentration than the low grazing counterparts in grassland systems45. It is considered that under heavily grazed sites in grasslands, bacteria-based energy channels of decomposition dominate other microbial communities, while fungi can successfully enable decomposition in both slightly grazed and non-grazed systems43. Grazed pasture mix at short-term study site 4 showed 12–21% higher total PLFA than the oats, oats with CC, oats with CC + grazing systems. It is also possible that this increased total PLFA at site 4 under grazed pasture mix contributed to enhancing the 1–2 and 2–4 mm sized aggregates compared to other treatments. It indicated that though physicochemical properties can take longer ( > 8–15 years) in significantly responding to changes in management systems, soil microbial community and structure may show a rapid response (~ 3 years), thus it can be used as an early indicator while assessing the variations in soil health18,46.Overall, NE exemplified the undisturbed grazed mixture with a greater microbial population at sites 1, 2, and 3, when compared to other agricultural systems. Our findings coincide with previous studies where pasture systems performed better than the agricultural soil, in terms of, showing greater microbial biomass and fatty acid signatures related to bacterial and fungal populations, which is mostly attributed to greater surface coverage and absence of tillage practices in pasture systems9,47,48. Lower soil microbial communities under ICL system than native Cerrado pasture have been found previously because of reduced soil porosity and macropore continuity resulting in restricted gas diffusion and water movement18.Although the AM fungi abundance was not significant for sites 3 and 4, and significantly lower for ICL system than NE at sites 1 and 2, it should be taken into consideration that FAME analysis cannot reflect species-level changes for fungi and/or bacteria and the variations in microbial community structure for ICL system can be due to changes in abundance and distribution among microbial groups. For example, in a previous study9, while increased bacterial population was observed for continuous cotton compared to the ICL system, however, pyrosequencing for bacterial diversity assessment demonstrated disparities between both systems, where greater Proteobacteria was seen under ICL system than continuous cotton. Numerous factors such as degree of disturbance, pH level, bulk density, porosity, soil water content, C and N distribution, and residue positioning regulate the amount of bacterial and fungal biomass in agroecosystems18,49. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi are responsible for formation of macroaggregates ( > 0.25 mm) by producing a glycoprotein called glomalin, which is present abundantly in natural and agricultural systems. However, increased grazing intensity, use of excess fertilizers and fungicides can directly or indirectly reduce mycorrhizal population by influencing soil organisms accountable for converting soil organic matter into plant nutrients38. Animals may also cause moderate soil compaction affecting the fungal biodiversity and soil pore space6,38.Relationship among measured soil propertiesBased on PCA, it is derived that integrated crop–livestock and natural ecosystem of native grassland can provide substrate for the microbial composition and enhance aggregate-associated C and N fractions. A positive correlation between SOC and microbial communities suggested the inclination of microbes to affect SOC and N turnover and vice-versa through interaction with crop–livestock grazing, vegetation, and soil properties. Fungi exhibited insignificant responses to changes in soil pH and bulk density than bacteria because chitinous cell walls make fungi more resistant and resilient to variations in soil conditions50,51. A reduction in gram (−) bacteria may indicate the presence of stressed soil conditions due to pH and increased bulk density, which has previously been observed in other studies52,53. A significant negative correlation between bulk density and SOC, N, gram (−), actinomycetes, total bacteria, and total PLFA indicated that the microorganisms influenced the soil compaction and related SOC and N. Moreover, positive correlation between SOC and microbial composition suggested that microbes can influence C sequestration in the soil via a shift in community structure. Microbial composition is influenced by soil C, whereas N is a critical biogenic element that improves microbial growth and their ability to utilize soil C54. More

Nanjappa, D., Kooistra, W. H. & Zingone, A. A reappraisal of the genus Leptocylindrus (B acillariophyta), with the addition of three species and the erection of Tenuicylindrus gen. nov. J. Phycol. 49, 917–936 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hasle, G. & Syvertsen, E. (Academic Press, 1997).Gómez, F., Simão, T. L., Utz, L. R. & Lopes, R. M. The nature of the diatom Leptocylindrus mediterraneus (Bacillariophyceae), host of the enigmatic symbiosis with the stramenopile Solenicola setigera. Phycologia 55, 265–273 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ivančić, I. et al. Survival mechanisms of phytoplankton in conditions of stratification-induced deprivation of orthophosphate: Northern Adriatic case study. Limnol. Oceanogr. https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2012.57.6.0000 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ivančić, I. et al. Alkaline phosphatase activity related to phosphorus stress of microphytoplankton in different trophic conditions. Prog. Oceanogr. 146, 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2016.07.003 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smodlaka, N. Primary production of the organic matter as an indicator of the eutrophication in the northern Adriatic sea. Sci. Total Environ. 56, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-9697(86)90325-6 (1986).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Degobbis, D. & Gilmartin, M. Nitrogen, phosphorus, and biogenic silicon budgets for the northern Adriatic Sea. Oceanol. Acta 13, 31–45 (1990).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zavatarelli, M., Raicich, F., Bregant, D., Russo, A. & Artegiani, A. Climatological biogeochemical characteristics of the Adriatic Sea. J. Mar. Syst. 18, 227–263 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Socal, G. et al. Hydrological and biogeochemical features of the Northern Adriatic Sea in the period 2003–2006. Mar. Ecol. 29, 449–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1439-0485.2008.00266.X (2008).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Giani, M. et al. Recent changes in the marine ecosystems of the northern Adriatic Sea. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 115, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2012.08.023 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Marić, D. et al. Phytoplankton response to climatic and anthropogenic influences in the north-eastern Adriatic during the last four decades. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 115, 98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Ecss.2012.02.003 (2012).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Smodlaka Tanković, M. et al. Insights into the life strategy of the common marine diatom Chaetoceros peruvianus Brightwell. PLoS ONE 13, e0203634 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marić Pfannkuchen, D. et al. The ecology of one cosmopolitan, one newly introduced and one occasionally advected species from the genus Skeletonema in a highly structured ecosystem, the northern Adriatic. Microb. Ecol. 75, 674–687 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Benitez-Nelson, C. R. The biogeochemical cycling of phosphorus in marine systems. Earth Sci. Rev. 51, 109–135 (2000).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Paytan, A. & McLaughlin, K. The oceanic phosphorus cycle. Chem. Rev. 107, 563–576 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Price, N. M. & Morel, F. M. Role of extracellular enzymatic reactions in natural waters. (1990).Hoppe, H.-G. Phosphatase activity in the sea. Hydrobiologia 493, 187–200 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fields, M. W. et al. Sources and resources: Importance of nutrients, resource allocation, and ecology in microalgal cultivation for lipid accumulation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98, 4805–4816 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Van Mooy, B. A. S. et al. Phytoplankton in the ocean use non-phosphorus lipids in response to phosphorus scarcity. Nature 458, 69–72 (2009).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gašparović, B. et al. Adaptation of marine plankton to environmental stress by glycolipid accumulation. Mar. Environ. Res. 92, 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Marenvres.2013.09.009 (2013).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Gašparović, B. et al. Factors influencing particulate lipid production in the East Atlantic Ocean. Deep Sea Res. Part 1 Oceanogr. Res. Pap. 89, 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2014.04.005 (2014).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Finenko, Z. & Krupatkina-Akinina, D. Effect of inorganic phosphorus on the growth rate of diatoms. Mar. Biol. 26, 193–201 (1974).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lombardi, A. & Wangersky, P. Influence of phosphorus and silicon on lipid class production by the marine diatom Chaetoceros gracilis grown in turbidostat cage cultures. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. Oldendorf 77, 39–47 (1991).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pan, Y., Subba Rao, D. V. & Mann, K. H. Changes in domoic acid production and cellular chemical composition of the toxigenic diatom Pseudo-nitzschia miltiseries under phosphate limitation. J. Phycol. 32, 371–381 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Liu, S., Guo, Z., Li, T., Huang, H. & Lin, S. Photosynthetic efficiency, cell volume, and elemental stoichiometric ratios in Thalassirosira weissflogii under phosphorus limitation. Chin. J. Oceanol. Limnol. 29, 1048 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Alipanah, L. et al. Molecular adaptations to phosphorus deprivation and comparison with nitrogen deprivation responses in the diatom Phaeodactylum tricornutum. PLoS ONE 13, e0193335 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Guillard, R. R. L. in Culture of Marine Invertebrate Animals (eds W.L. Smith & M.H. Chanley) 29–60 (Plenum Press, New York, USA, 1975).Utermöhl, H. Zur Vervollkommnung der quantitativen Phytoplankton-Methodik. Mitteilungen des Internationale Vereinigung für theoretische und angewandte Limnologie 9, 1–38 (1958).
Google Scholar 
Keller, M. D., Bellows, W. K. & Guillard, R. R. L. Microwave treatment for sterilization of phytoplankton culture media. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 117, 279–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(88)90063-9 (1988).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gračan, R., Mladineo, I., Kučinić, M., Lazar, B. & Lacković, G. Gastrointestinal helminth community of loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta in the Adriatic Sea. Dis. Aquat. Org. 99, 227–236 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Anonymous, X. Proposals for a standardization of diatom terminology and diagnoses. Nova Hedwig. Beih. 53, 323–354 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Ross, R. et al. An amended terminology for the siliceous components of the diatom cell. (1979).Hillebrand, H., Dürselen, C. D., Kirschtel, D., Pollingher, U. & Zohary, T. Biovolume calculation for pelagic and benthic microalgae. J. Phycol. 35, 403–424 (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alverson, A. J. Molecular systematics and the diatom species. Protist 159, 339 (2008).Article 

Google Scholar 
Macgillivary, M. & Kaczmarska, I. Survey of the Efficacy of a Short Fragment of the rbcL Gene as a Supplemental DNA Barcode for Diatoms. Vol. 58 (2011).Zimmermann, J., Jahn, R. & Gemeinholzer, B. Barcoding diatoms: Evaluation of the V4 subregion on the 18S rRNA gene, including new primers and protocols. Org. Divers. Evol. 11, 173–192 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kearse, M. et al. Geneious basic: An integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 28, 1647–1649. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts199 (2012).Article 

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

Google Scholar 
Clark, K., Karsch-Mizrachi, I., Lipman, D. J., Ostell, J. & Sayers, E. W. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, D67–D72 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Guindon, S. et al. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: Assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst. Biol. 59, 307–321 (2010).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ritz, C., Baty, F., Streibig, J. C. & Gerhard, D. Dose-response analysis using R. PLoS ONE 10, e0146021. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146021 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lomas, M. W., Swain, A., Shelton, R. & Ammerman, J. W. Taxonomic variability of phosphorus stress in Sargasso Sea phytoplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr. 49, 2303–2310 (2004).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yamaguchi, H., Yamaguchi, M. & Adachi, M. Specific-detection of alkaline phosphatase activity in individual species of marine phytoplankton. Plankon Benthos Res. 1, 2014–2217 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strickland, J. D. H. & Parsons, T. R. A Practical Handbook of Seawater Snalysis. (Fisheries Resrach Board of Canada, 1972).Bligh, E. G. & Dyer, W. J. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Can. J. Biochem. Phys. 37, 911–917 (1959).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gašparović, B., Kazazić, S. P., Cvitešić, A., Penezić, A. & Frka, S. Improved separation and analysis of glycolipids by Iatroscan thin-layer chromatography–flame ionization detection. J. Chromatogr. A 1409, 259–267 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gašparović, B., Kazazić, S. P., Cvitešić, A., Penezić, A. & Frka, S. Corrigendum to “Improved separation and analysis of glycolipids by Iatroscan thin-layer chromatography–flame ionization detection”[J. Chromatogr. A 1409 (2015) 259–267]. (2017).Fonda Umani, S. et al. Inter-annual variations of planktonic food webs in the northern Adriatic Sea. Sci. Total Environ. 353, 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.09.016 (2005).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2015).Sprouffske, K. & Wagner, A. Growthcurver: An R package for obtaining interpretable metrics from microbial growth curves. BMC Bioinform. 17, 172. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-016-1016-7 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schlitzer, R. Ocean Data View. http://odv.awi.de (2018).Smodlaka Tanković, M. et al. Experimental evidence for shaping and bloom inducing effects of decapod larvae of Xantho poressa (Olivi, 1792) on marine phytoplankton. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 98, 1881–1887 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dyhrman, S. T. et al. The transcriptome and proteome of the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana reveal a diverse phosphorus stress response. PLoS ONE 7, e33768 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Novak, T. et al. Global warming and oligotrophication lead to increased lipid production in marine phytoplankton. Sci Total Environ 668, 171–183 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Martin, P., Van Mooy, B. A., Heithoff, A. & Dyhrman, S. T. Phosphorus supply drives rapid turnover of membrane phospholipids in the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana. ISME J. 5, 1057–1060 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Abida, H. et al. Membrane glycerolipid remodeling triggered by nitrogen and phosphorus starvation in Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Plant Physiol. 167, 118–136 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ivančić, I. & Degobbis, D. Mechanisms of production and fate of organic phosphorus in the northern Adriatic Sea. Mar. Biol. 94, 117–125 (1987).
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hardin, G. The competitive exclusion principle. Science 131, 1292–1297 (1960).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hutchinson, G. E. The paradox of the plankton. Am Nat 95, 137–145 (1961).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Chapman, R. F. Chemoreception: The significance of receptor numbers. Adv. Insect Physiol. 16, 247–356 (1982).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Greenfield, M. D. Signalers and Receivers: Mechanisms and Evolution of Arthropod Communication (Oxford University Press, 2002).
Google Scholar 
Wyatt, T. D. Pheromones and Animal Behavior: Chemical Signals and Signatures (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Elgar, A. et al. Insect antennal morphology: The evolution of diverse solutions to odorant perception. Yale J. Biol. Med. 91, 457–469 (2018).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Dötterl, S. & Vereecken, N. J. The chemical ecology and evolution of bee-flower interactions: a review and perspectives. Can. J. Zool. 88, 668–697 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Leonard, A. S., Dornhaus, A. & Papaj, D. R. Why are floral signals complex, an outline of functional hypotheses. In Evolution of Plant-Pollinator Relationships (ed. Patiny, S.) (Cambridge University Press, USA, 2012).
Google Scholar 
Colazza, S., Peri, E., Salerno, G. & Conti, E. Host Searching by Egg Parasitoids: Exploitation of Host Chemical Cues. In Egg Parasitoids in Agroecosystems with Emphasis on Trichogramma (eds Consoli, F. L. et al.) 97–147 (Springer, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Kelber, A. et al. Light intensity limits the foraging activity in nocturnal and crepuscular bees. Behav. Ecol. 17, 63–72 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C., Jorge, A. & Ornosa, C. Antennal morphology and sensillar equipment vary with pollen diet specialization in Andrena bees. Arthropod Struct. Develop. 57, 100950 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Spaethe, J., Brockmann, A., Halbig, C. & Tautz, J. Size determines antennal sensitivity and behavioral threshold to odors in bumblebee workers. Naturwissenschaften. 94, 733–739 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J., Kelber, A., Wallén, R. & Wcislo, W. The physiological optics of ocelli in nocturnal and diurnal bees and wasps. Arthropod Struct. Dev. 35, 293–305 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Keesey, I. W. et al. Inverse resource allocation between vision and olfaction across the genus Drosophila. Nat. Commun. 10, 1162. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09087-z (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Keil, T. A. Morphology and Development of the Peripheral Olfactory Organs. In Insect Olfaction (ed. Hansson, B. S.) 5–47 (Springer, 1999).
Google Scholar 
Stöckl, A. et al. Differential investment in visual and olfactory brain areas reflects behavioural choices in hawk moths. Sci. Rep. 6, 26041. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep26041 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bulova, S., Purce, K., Khodak, P., Sulger, E. & O’Donnell, S. Into the black and back: The ecology of brain investment in Neotropical army ants (Formicidae: Dorylinae). Sci. Nat. 103, 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-016-1353-4 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Freelance, C. B. et al. The eyes have it: Dim-light activity is associated with the morphology of eyes but not antennae across insect orders. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 134, 303–315 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Barrett, M. et al. Neuroanatomical differentiation associated with alternative reproductive tactics in male arid land bees, Centris pallida and Amegilla dawsoni. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sens. Neural. Behav. Physiol. 207, 497–504 (2021).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Newland, P. Physiological properties of afferents from tactile hairs on the hindlegs of the locust. J. Exp. Biol. 155, 487–503 (1991).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Dahake, A., Stöckl, A., Foster, J., Sane, S. P. & Kelber, A. The roles of vision and antennal mechanoreception in hawkmoth flight control. eLife e37606 (2018).Sane, S. P., Dieudonné, A., Willis, M. A. & Daniel, T. L. Antennal mechanosensors mediate flight control in moths. Science 315, 863–866 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. Compound Eye Structure: Matching Eye to Environment. In Adaptive Mechanisms in the Ecology of Vision (eds Archer, S. et al.) 51–72 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998).
Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. Visual acuity in insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 42, 147–177 (1997).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Land, M. F. & Nilsson, D. E. Animal Eyes (Oxford University Press, 2003).
Google Scholar 
Jander, U. & Jander, R. Allometry and resolution of bee eyes (Apoidea). Arthropod Struct. Dev. 30, 179–193 (2002).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Berry, R., van Kleef, J. & Stange, G. The mapping of visual space by dragonfly lateral ocelli. J. Comp. Physiol. A 193, 495–513 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Hung, Y. S. & Ibbotson, M. R. Ocellar structure and neural innervation in the honeybee. Front. Neuroanat. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2014.00006 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Greiner, B. Visual adaptations in the night-active wasp Apoica pallens. J. Comp. Neurol. 495, 255–262 (2006).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Klotz, J. H., Reid, B. L. & Gordon, W. C. Variation of ommatidia number as a function of worker size in Camponotus pennsylvanicus (DeGeer) (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Insect Soc. 39, 233–236 (1992).
Google Scholar 
Narendra, A. et al. Caste-specific visual adaptations to distinct daily activity schedules in Australian Myrmecia ants. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1141–1149 (2011).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Piwczyński, M. et al. Molecular phylogeny of Miltogramminae (Diptera: Sarcophagidae): Implications for classification, systematics and evolution of larval feeding strategies. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 116, 49–60 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Spofford, M. G. & Kurczewski, F. E. Comparative larvipositional behaviors and cleptoparasitic frequencies of Nearctic species of Miltogrammini (Diptera, Sarcophagidae). J. Nat. Hist. 24, 731–755 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Alcock, J. The natural history of a miltogrammine fly, Miltogramma rectangularis (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 73, 208–219 (2000).
Google Scholar 
Newcomer, E. J. Notes on the habits of a digger wasp and its inquiline flies. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 23, 552–563 (1930).
Google Scholar 
Ristich, S. S. The host relationship of a miltogrammid fly Senotainia trilineata (VDW). Ohio J. Sci. 56, 271–274 (1956).
Google Scholar 
Giordani, G. Contributo alla conoscenza della Senotainia tricuspis Meig, dittero sarcofagide, endoparassita dell’ape domestica. Boll. Istit. Entomol. Univ. Bologna 21, 61–84 (1955).
Google Scholar 
Povolný, D. & Verves, Yu. G. The flesh-flies of Central Europe (Insecta, Diptera, Sarcophagidae). Spixiana (Supplement) 24, 1–260 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Evans, H. E. & O’Neill, K. M. The sand wasps: Natural history and behavior (Harvard University Press, 2007).
Google Scholar 
O’Neill, K. M. Solitary Wasps: Natural History and Behavior (Cornell University Press, 2001).
Google Scholar 
Pape, T. The Sarcophagidae (Diptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomol. Scand. 19, 1–203 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C., Ouadragou, M., Gadallah, N. & Andrietti, F. Potential role of evasive flights and nest closures in an African sand wasp, Bembix sp. near capensis Lepeletier 1845 (Hymenoptera Crabronidae), against a parasitic satellite fly. Trop. Zool. 22, 1–14 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Polidori, C. Interactions between the social digger wasp, Cerceris rubida, and its brood parasitic flies at a Mediterranean nest aggregation. J. Insect Behav. 30, 86–102 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Pape, T. A new species of Hoplacephala Macquart (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) from Namibia, with a discussion of generic monophyly. Zootaxa 1183, 57–68 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Haynie, J. L. & Bryant, P. J. Development of the eye-antenna imaginal disc and morphogenesis of the adult head in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Zool. 237, 293–308 (1986).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hódar, J. A. The use of regression equations for estimation of arthropod biomass in ecological studies. Acta Oecol. 17, 421–433 (1996).
Google Scholar 
Hogue, J. N. & Hawkins, C. P. Morphological variation in adult aquatic insects: Associations with developmental temperature and seasonal growth patterns. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 10, 309–321 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Seidl, R. & Kaiser, W. Visual field size, binocular domain and the ommatidial array of the compound eyes in worker honey bees. J. Comp. Physiol. A 143, 17–26 (1981).
Google Scholar 
Stuckenberg, B. R. Antennal evolution in the Brachycera (Diptera), with a reassessment of terminology relating to the flagellum. Stud. Dipterol. 6, 33–48 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Lemmon, A. R., Emme, S. A. & Lemmon, E. M. Anchored hybrid enrichment for massively high-throughput phylogenomics. Syst. Biol. 61, 727–744 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Young, A. D. et al. Anchored enrichment dataset for true flies (order Diptera) reveals insights into the phylogeny of flower flies (family Syrphidae). BMC Evol. Biol. 16, 1–13 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Gillung, J. P. et al. Anchored phylogenomics unravels the evolution of spider flies (Diptera, Acroceridae) and reveals discordance between nucleotides and amino acids. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 128, 233–245 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Buenaventura, E., Szpila, K., Cassel, B. K., Wiegmann, M. & Pape, T. An anchored hybrid enrichment-based dataset challenges the traditional classification of flesh flies (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Syst. Entomol. 45, 281–301 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Grzywacz, A. et al. Towards a new classification of Muscidae (Diptera): A comparison of hypotheses based on multiple molecular phylogenetic approaches. Syst. Entomol. 46, 508–525 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Misof, B. et al. Phylogenomics resolves the timing and pattern of insect evolution. Science 346, 763–767 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
ADS 

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

Google Scholar 
Yan, L. et al. A phylotranscriptomic framework for flesh fly evolution (Diptera, Calyptratae, Sarcophagidae). Cladistics https://doi.org/10.1111/cla.12449 (2020).Article 
PubMed 

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

Google Scholar 
Maddison, W. P. & Maddison, D. R. Mesquite: A Modular System for Evolutionary analysis. Version 3.61. http://www.mesquiteproject.org (2019).Hansen, T. F. Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation. Evolution 51, 1341–1351 (1997).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, T. F., Pienaar, J. & Orzack, S. H. A comparative method for studying adaptation to a randomly evolving environment. Evolution 62, 1965–1977 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Labra, A., Pienaar, J. & Hansen, T. F. Evolution of thermal physiology in Liolaemus lizards: Adaptation, phylogenetic inertia and niche tracking. Am. Nat. 174, 204–220 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, T. F. Use and Misuse of Comparative Methods in the Study of Adaptation. In Modern Phylogenetic Comparative Methods and Their Application in Evolutionary Biology: Concepts and Practice (ed. Garamszegi, L. Z.) 351–379 (Springer, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Greiner, B., Ribi, W. A. & Warrant, E. J. Retinal and optical adaptations for nocturnal vision in the halictid bee Megalopta genalis. Cell Tissue Res. 316, 377–390 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J. et al. Nocturnal vision and landmark orientation in a tropical halictid bee. Curr. Biol. 14, 1309–1318 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Somanathan, H., Kelber, A., Wallén, R., Borges, R. M. & Warrant, E. J. Visual ecology of Indian carpenter bees II: Visual adaptations to nocturnal and diurnal lifestyles. J. Comp. Physiol. A 195, 571–583 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Menzi, U. Visual adaptation in nocturnal and diurnal ants. J. Comp. Physiol. 160, 11–21 (1987).
Google Scholar 
Moser, J. C. et al. Eye size and behaviour of day and night-flying leafcutting ant alates. J. Zool. 264, 69–75 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Greiner, B. et al. Eye structure correlates with distinct foraging-bout timing in primitive ants. Curr. Biol. 17, R879–R880 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Warrant, E. J. Seeing in the dark: Vision and visual behaviour in nocturnal bees and wasps. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 1737–1746 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Leys, R. & Hogendoorn, K. Correlated evolution of mating behaviour and morphology in large carpenter bees (Xylocopa). Apidologie 39, 119–132 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Snyder, A. W. Physics of Vision in Compound Eyes. In Handbook of Sensory Physiology: Vision in Invertebrates (ed. Autrum, H. J.) (Springer, 1979).
Google Scholar 
McCorquodale, D. B. Digger wasp provisioning flights as a defense against a nest parasite, Senotainia trilineata. Can. J. Zool. 64, 1620–1627 (1986).
Google Scholar 
Gilbert, C. & Strausfeld, N. J. The functional organization of male-specific visual neurons in flies. J. Comp. Physiol. A 169, 395–411 (1991).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Trischler, C., Boeddeker, N. & Egelhaaf, M. Characterisation of a blowfly male-specific neuron using behaviourally generated visual stimuli. J. Comp. Physiol. A 193, 559–572 (2007).
Google Scholar 
Taylor, G. J. et al. The dual function of orchidbee ocelli as revealed by X-Ray microtomography. Curr. Biol. 26, 1319–1324 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Hengstenberg, R. Multisensory Control in Insect Oculomotor Systems. In Visual Motion and Its Role in the Stabilization of Gaze (eds Miles, F. A. & Wallmann, J.) (Elsevier, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Schuppe, H. & Hengstenberg, R. Optical properties of the ocelli of Calliphora erythrocephala and their role in the dorsal light response. J. Comp. Physiol. A 173, 143–149 (1993).
Google Scholar 
Crosskey, R. W. & Lane, R. P. Introduction to Diptera. In Medical Insects and Arachnids (eds Lane, R. P. & Crosskey, R. W.) (Chapman and Hall, 1993).
Google Scholar 
Abouzied, E. M. Antennal and maxillary palp sensillae of male and female Liosarcophaga babiyari Lehrer (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Bull. Ent. Soc. Egypt 85, 29–48 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Wasserman, S. L. & Itagaki, H. The olfactory responses of the antenna and maxillary palp of the fleshfly, Neobellieria bullata (Diptera: Sarcophagidae), and their sensitivity to blockage of nitric oxide synthase. J. Insect Physiol. 49, 271–280 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Khedre, A. M. Olfactory sensilla on the antennae and maxillary palps of the fleshfly Wohlfahrtia nuba (Wied.) (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Egypt Ger. Soc. Zool. 24, 171–193 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Pezzi, M. et al. Ultrastructural morphology of the antenna and maxillary palp of Sarcophaga tibialis (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). J. Med. Entomol. 53, 807–814 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Smallegange, R. C., Kelling, F. J. & Den Otter, C. J. Types and numbers of sensilla on antennae and maxillary palps of small and large houseflies, Musca domestica (Diptera, Muscidae). Microsc. Res. Tech. 71, 880–886 (2008).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, D., Wang, Q. K., Yang, Y. Z., Chen, Y. O. & Li, K. Sensory organs of the antenna of two Fannia species (Diptera: Fanniidae). Parasitol. Res. 112, 2177–2185 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Been, T. H., Schomaker, C. H. & Thomas, G. Olfactory sensilla on the antenna and maxillary palp of the sheep head fly, Hydrotaea irritans (Fallen) (Diptera: Muscidae). Int. J. Insect Morphol. Embryol. 17, 121–133 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Zacharuk, R. Y. & Antennal, S. Comparative Insect Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. In Pergamon Press (eds Kerkut, G. A. & Gilbert, L. I.) (1985).
Google Scholar 
Sukontason, K. et al. Antennal sensilla of some forensically important flies in families Calliphoridae Sarcophagidae and Muscidae. Micron 35, 671–679 (2004).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Mamiya, A., Straw, A. D., Tómasson, E. & Dickinson, M. H. Active and passive antennal movements during visually guided steering in flying Drosophila. J Neurosci 31, 6900–6914 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Fuller, S. B., Straw, A. D., Peek, M. Y., Murray, R. M. & Dickinson, M. H. Flying Drosophila stabilize their vision-based velocity controller by sensing wind with their antennae. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 111, E1182–E1191 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Nalbach, G. Extremely non-orthogonal axes in a sense organ for rotation: Behavioural analysis of the dipteran haltere system. Neuroscience 61, 149–163 (1994).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Rozanski, A. N. et al. Differential investment in visual and olfactory brain regions is linked to the sensory needs of a wasp social parasite and its host. J. Comp. Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.25242 (2021).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More