More stories

  • in

    Crop–livestock integration enhanced soil aggregate-associated carbon and nitrogen, and phospholipid fatty acid

    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

  • in

    Morpho-physiological adaptations of Leptocylindrus aporus and L. hargravesii to phosphate limitation in the northern Adriatic

    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

  • in

    Host-trailing satellite flight behaviour is associated with greater investment in peripheral visual sensory system in miltogrammine flies

    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

  • in

    Tropical forest restoration under future climate change

    Tropical forest restoration areaTo determine the geographic distribution of land available for tropical forest restoration, we used a widely applied global forest restoration map2. This dataset limits potential restoration area to regions that are biogeophysically suitable for forest, and excludes croplands. To define the tropics, we masked the potential restoration map with the following three ecoregions from the Ecoregions2017 vegetation map34: ‘Tropical and Subtropical Moist Broadleaf Forests’, ‘Tropical and Subtropical Dry Broadleaf Forests’, and ‘Tropical and Subtropical Coniferous Forests’. The resulting restoration mask includes all tropical and subtropical forest ecoregions with some that are outside the tropical latitudes, but excludes wetlands and high mountain areas (Extended Data Fig. 4). The restoration mask was converted from a presence–absence raster at its native ~350 m resolution to a 0.5° geographical grid by aggregating to the fraction of each 0.5° grid cell available for restoration. Any uncertainties in the allocation of restorable area, distinguishing crop and pasture, and forest to non-forest classification from the original forest restoration map were also implicitly included in our restoration extent. While the resulting restoration area is relatively small, its spatial distribution is representative for most of the humid tropics.To prioritize for carbon uptake capacity, we selected all grid cells with restoration area greater than 1 ha and ranked these by carbon storage density (above ground and below ground; g m−2) at 2100 under the default scenario. We then selected the top n grid cells with greatest carbon density until cumulatively 64 Mha of restored area was reached. Similarly, for cost we calculated the restoration cost for each grid cell following ref. 27 and sorted the grid cells by their cost, beginning with the lowest value, until 64 Mha were reached. To consider the combined impact of carbon uptake and restoration costs, we divided our restoration cost layer by the total carbon uptake per grid cell from restoration and ranked the cost per carbon uptake from cheapest to most expensive, selecting the n grid cells with the lowest values until 64 Mha were reached. We then used the selected grid cells to mask carbon uptake under the various climate change and CO2 fertilization scenarios. To factor in climate change in the prioritization process, we used the same restoration cost layer but used the carbon density and total carbon uptake layers with climate change impacts in CO22014 for the year 2100.Vegetation modelWe used the LPJ-LMfire DGVM19, a version of the Lund-Potsdam-Jena DGVM (LPJ)35. LPJ-LMfire is driven by gridded fields of climate, soil texture and topography at 0.5° resolution, and with a time series of atmospheric CO2 concentrations (see Supplementary Information). To simulate land use, LPJ-LMfire separates grid cells into fractional tiles of ‘unmanaged’ land that has never been under land use, ‘managed’ land, and areas ‘recovering’ from land use36. Restoration removes land from the ‘managed’ tile and transfers it to the ‘recovering’ tile; land is never reallocated to the ‘unmanaged’ tile. The tiles are treated differently with respect to wildfire: on the ‘unmanaged’ and ‘recovering’ tiles, lightning-ignited wildfires are not suppressed, while fire is excluded from ‘managed’ tiles. For our analysis of total carbon (above and below ground), we only used the ‘recovering’ tile.Climate dataClimate forcing used to drive LPJ-LMfire comes from the output of 13 GCMs in simulations produced for the CMIP6 Supplementary Table 2 (refs. 37,38). For each GCM, we obtained simulations for the historical period (1850–2014) and four future SSPs (SSP1-26, SSP2-45, SSP3-70 and SSP5-85 covering 2015–2100). We used only GCMs that archived all seven climate variables needed to run LPJ-LMfire: 2 m temperature (tas, K), precipitation (pr, kg m−2 s−1), convective precipitation (prc, kg m−2 s−1), cloud cover (clt, %), minimum and maximum daily temperature (tmin, tmax, K), and 10 m surface wind speed (sfcWind, m s−1) (Supplementary Fig. 2). For each model, we concatenated the historical simulation with a future scenario, calculated anomalies with respect to 1971–1990 and added those to observed 30 year climatologies to create bias-corrected monthly climate time series covering 1850–2100 (see Supplementary Information). Where multiple ensemble members were available from a GCM, we chose the first simulation.Simulation protocolWe drove LPJ-LMfire with the GCM simulations described in the previous section, and the same atmospheric CO2 concentrations and land use boundary conditions as those used in the CMIP6 simulations. All forcings cover the historical period (1850–2014) and the individual future SSPs (2015–2100). Each LPJ-LMfire simulation was initialized for 1,020 years with 1850 atmospheric CO2 and land use, and the 1850s climatology of each CMIP6 GCM. This was followed by simulations with transient climate from 1850 to 2100 for each CMIP6 GCM under each of the four SSPs. For each the 13 CMIP6 GCMs running each of the SSP scenarios, we conducted two CO2 experiments (CO22014 and CO2free) and two fire experiments. In total, we ran 221 vegetation model simulations covering the range of future climate, CO2 and fire scenarios.Atmospheric CO2 in these simulations either followed the CMIP6 historical and SSP trajectory for the entire 1850–2100 run (CO2free), or followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, and was then fixed at 2014 concentrations for the remainder of the simulation (CO22014). This allowed us to test the vegetation response to future climate change in the absence of additional CO2 fertilization of photosynthesis. Our simulations ended with the standard SSP projections in 2100, 80 years after restoration begins. We therefore could not assess the fate of restored carbon beyond that point. On the basis of the trends in the multi-model mean carbon uptake rates, we estimated that only under severe climate change will carbon storage be reduced shortly after 2100 in CO22014.In control simulations, land use followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, after which it was fixed under 2014 conditions until 2100. Land use after 2014 was fixed at 2014 levels because it is the last year with common land use between all scenarios, which allowed us to identify future climate change impacts on restoration permanence and avoid influences from land abandonment and expansion prescribed in the different SSP scenarios.In the restoration experiments, land use also followed the historical CMIP6 trajectory until 2014, but then diverged: cropland extent remained at 2014 levels until 2100, while pasture (or non-cropland land use) remained constant from 2014 to 2020 and was then linearly reduced by the restoration area from 2020 to 2030. From 2030, land use remained constant at that lower level until 2100. The amount of restoration in a grid cell was limited by the pasture area, that is, once all of the available pasture area had been restored, no additional restoration took place. Because it is highly unlikely to be practical to restore the entire target area of tropical forest at once, we linearly increased the restoration area from 2020 to 2030, which caused an expansion-driven increase in carbon uptake over the 11 year period (Extended Data Fig. 1). This means that two factors controlled carbon uptake over time in our experimental design: first the expansion of the restoration area, accounting for approximately 19.7 Pg C, and second the long-term effect of carbon accumulation (Extended Data Fig. 5).Primary climate change impacts, such as drought and heat stress that reduce carbon uptake, were implicitly included in the climate forcing data, while secondary climate change impacts from wildfire were simulated by LPJ-LMfire on the basis of climate. To quantify the contribution of wildfire on the carbon storage from restoration, we repeated the simulations described above with fires turned off in LPJ-LMfire.Restoration opportunity indexWe created a restoration opportunity index to evaluate the suitability of locations for restoration on the basis of the ability for restoration to result in net carbon uptake over 2020–2100 and to store this carbon without episodes of major loss. For each of the 13 realizations of the four SSPs in the CO22014 experiment, we identified all restoration grid cells (1) that had a net carbon uptake by 2100 relative to 2030, and (2) where temporal reductions in total carbon storage over 2030–2100 were More

  • in

    Standardised bioassays reveal that mosquitoes learn to avoid compounds used in chemical vector control after a single sub-lethal exposure

    Webb, B. Cognition in insects. Philos. Trans. R. Soc B 367, 2715–2722 (2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Lorenz, K. The Foundations of Ethology 347–352 (Springer, 1981).
    Google Scholar 
    Davis, R. L. Olfactory memory formation in Drosophila: From molecular to systems neuroscience. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 28, 275–302 (2005).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Prokopy, R. J., Averill, A. L., Cooley, S. S. & Roitberg, C. A. Associative learning in egglaying site selection by apple maggot flies. Science 218, 76–77 (1982).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Tempel, B. L., Bonini, N., Dawson, D. R. & Quinn, W. G. Reward learning in normal and mutant Drosophila. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 80, 1482–1486 (1983).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Cook, D. F. Influence of previous mating experience on future mating success in maleLucilia cuprina (Diptera: Calliphoridae). J. Insect Behav. 8, 207–217 (1994).
    Google Scholar 
    Raubenheimer, D. & Tucker, D. Associative learning by locusts: Pairing of visual cues with consumption of protein and carbohydrate. Anim. Behav. 54, 1449–1459 (1997).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Harari, A. R. & Landolt, P. J. Feeding experience enhances attraction of female Diaprepes abbreviatus (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) to food plant odors. 8. J. Insect Behav. 12, 415–422 (1999).
    Google Scholar 
    Menzel, R. Memory dynamics in the honeybee. J. Comp. Physiol. A 185, 323–340 (1999).ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    McCall, P. J. & Kelly, D. W. Learning and memory in disease vectors. Trends Parasitol. 18, 429–433 (2002).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Alonso, W. J. & Schuck-Paim, C. The ‘ghosts’ that pester studies on learning in mosquitoes: Guidelines to chase them off. Med. Vet. Entomol. 20, 157–165 (2006).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    WHO. Global Vector Control Response 20217–22030 (World Health Organization, 2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Rocklöv, J. & Dubrow, R. Climate change: An enduring challenge for vector-borne disease prevention and control. Nat. Immunol. 21, 479–483 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Bhatt, S. et al. The effect of malaria control on Plasmodium falciparum in Africa between 2000 and 2015. Nature 526, 207–211 (2015).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Hemingway, J. et al. Averting a malaria disaster: Will insecticide resistance derail malaria control?. The Lancet 387, 1785–1788 (2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Martinez-Torres, D. et al. Molecular characterization of pyrethroid knockdown resistance (kdr) in the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae ss. Insect Mol. Biol. 7, 179–184 (1998).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Chandre, F. et al. Current distribution of a pyrethroid resistance gene (kdr) in Anopheles gambiae complex from West Africa and further evidence for reproductive isolation of the Mopti form. Parassitologia 41, 319–322 (1999).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Weill, M. et al. The unique mutation in ace-1 giving high insecticide resistance is easily detectable in mosquito vectors. Insect Mol. Biol. 13, 1–7 (2004).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Du, W. et al. Independent mutations in the Rdl locus confer dieldrin resistance to Anopheles gambiae and An. arabiensis. Insect Mol. Biol. 14, 179–183 (2005).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Hemingway, J. & Ranson, H. Insecticide resistance in insect vectors of human disease. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45, 371–391 (2000).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ranson, H. et al. Pyrethroid resistance in African anopheline mosquitoes: What are the implications for malaria control?. Trends Parasitol. 27, 91–98 (2011).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Liu, N. Insecticide resistance in mosquitoes: Impact, mechanisms, and research directions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 60, 537–559 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Wood, O., Hanrahan, S., Coetzee, M., Koekemoer, L. & Brooke, B. Cuticle thickening associated with pyrethroid resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles funestus. Parasit Vectors 3, 67 (2010).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Balabanidou, V. et al. Cytochrome P450 associated with insecticide resistance catalyzes cuticular hydrocarbon production in Anopheles gambiae. PNAS 113, 9268–9273 (2016).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Balabanidou, V. et al. Mosquitoes cloak their legs to resist insecticides. Proc Biol. Sci. 286, 20191091 (2019).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Muirhead-Thomson, R. C. The significance of irritability, behaviouristic avoidance and allied phenomena in malaria eradication. Bull. World Health Organ. 22, 721–734 (1960).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Georghiou, G. P. The evolution of resistance to pesticides. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3, 133–168 (1972).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Grieco, J. P. et al. A new classification system for the actions of IRS chemicals traditionally used for malaria control. PLoS ONE 2, e716 (2007).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Chareonviriyaphap, T. et al. Review of insecticide resistance and behavioral avoidance of vectors of human diseases in Thailand. Parasit Vectors 6, 280 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Chilaka, N., Perkins, E. & Tripet, F. Visual and olfactory associative learning in the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto. Malar. J. 11, 27 (2012).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Vinauger, C., Lahondère, C., Cohuet, A., Lazzari, C. R. & Riffell, J. A. Learning and memory in disease vector insects. Trends Parasitol. 32, 761–771 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Carrasco, D. et al. Behavioural adaptations of mosquito vectors to insecticide control. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 34, 48–54 (2019).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Tomberlin, J. K., Rains, G. C., Allan, S. A., Sanford, M. R. & Lewis, W. J. Associative learning of odor with food- or blood-meal by Culex quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae). Naturwissenschaften 93, 551–556 (2006).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Menda, G. et al. Associative learning in the dengue vector mosquito, Aedes aegypti: Avoidance of a previously attractive odor or surface color that is paired with an aversive stimulus. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 218–223 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Vinauger, C., Lutz, E. K. & Riffell, J. A. Olfactory learning and memory in the disease vector mosquito Aedes aegypti. J. Exp. Biol. 217, 2321–2330 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    WHO. Guidelines for laboratory and field-testing of long-lasting insecticidal nets (World Health Organization, 2013).
    Google Scholar 
    WHO. Test procedures for insecticide resistance monitoring in malaria vector mosquitoes 2nd edn. (World Health Organization, 2016).
    Google Scholar 
    Rivero, A., Vézilier, J., Weill, M., Read, A. F. & Gandon, S. Insecticide control of vector-borne diseases: When is insecticide resistance a problem?. PLoS Pathog. 6, e1001000 (2010).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Maciel-de-Freitas, R. et al. Undesirable consequences of insecticide resistance following Aedes aegypti control activities due to a dengue outbreak. PLoS ONE 9, e92424 (2014).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Sherrard-Smith, E. et al. Systematic review of indoor residual spray efficacy and effectiveness against Plasmodium falciparum in Africa. Nat. Commun. 9, 4982 (2018).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Dusfour, I. et al. Management of insecticide resistance in the major Aedes vectors of arboviruses: Advances and challenges. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 13, e0007615 (2019).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Perrin, A. et al. Variation in the susceptibility of urban Aedes mosquitoes infected with a densovirus. Sci. Rep. 10, 18654 (2020).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Wilson, A. L. et al. The importance of vector control for the control and elimination of vector-borne diseases. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 14, e0007831 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Wills, A. B. et al. Physical durability of PermaNet 2.0 long-lasting insecticidal nets over three to 32 months of use in Ethiopia. Malar. J. 12, 242 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Gnanguenon, V., Azondekon, R., Oke-Agbo, F., Beach, R. & Akogbeto, M. Durability assessment results suggest a serviceable life of two, rather than three, years for the current long-lasting insecticidal (mosquito) net (LLIN) intervention in Benin. BMC Infect. Dis. 14, 69 (2014).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Boussougou-Sambe, S. T. et al. Physical integrity and residual bio-efficacy of used LLINs in three cities of the South-West region of Cameroon 4 years after the first national mass-distribution campaign. Malar. J. 16, 31 (2017).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Janko, M. M., Churcher, T. S., Emch, M. E. & Meshnick, S. R. Strengthening long-lasting insecticidal nets effectiveness monitoring using retrospective analysis of cross-sectional, population-based surveys across sub-Saharan Africa. Sci. Rep. 8, 17110 (2018).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Djènontin, A. et al. The residual life of bendiocarb on different substrates under laboratory and field conditions in Benin, Western Africa. BMC Res Notes 6, 458 (2013).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Mugenyi, L. et al. Estimating the optimal interval between rounds of indoor residual spraying of insecticide using malaria incidence data from cohort studies. PLoS ONE 15, e0241033 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Kreppel, K. S. et al. Emergence of behavioural avoidance strategies of malaria vectors in areas of high LLIN coverage in Tanzania. Sci. Rep. 10, 14527 (2020).ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Parker, J. E. A. et al. Infrared video tracking of Anopheles gambiae at insecticide-treated bed nets reveals rapid decisive impact after brief localised net contact. Sci. Rep. 5, 13392 (2015).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Spitzen, J., Koelewijn, T., Mukabana, W. R. & Takken, W. Visualization of house-entry behaviour of malaria mosquitoes. Malar. J. 15, 233 (2016).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Spitzen, J. & Takken, W. Keeping track of mosquitoes: A review of tools to track, record and analyse mosquito flight. Parasit. Vectors https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-018-2735-6 (2018).Article 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Jones, J., Murray, G. & McCall, P. J. A minimal 3D model of mosquito flight behavior around the human baited bed net. Malar. J. 20, (2021)Sougoufara, S., Ottih, E. C. & Tripet, F. The need for new vector control approaches targeting outdoor biting anopheline malaria vector communities. Parasit. Vectors 13, 295 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Okumu, F. O. & Moore, S. J. Combining indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated nets for malaria control in Africa: A review of possible outcomes and an outline of suggestions for the future. Malar. J. 10, 208 (2011).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Deletre, E. et al. Repellent, irritant and toxic effects of 20 plant extracts on adults of the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae Mosquito. PLoS One 8, e82103 (2013).ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Automating insect monitoring using unsupervised near-infrared sensors

    Stork, N. E. How many species of insects and other terrestrial arthropods are there on earth? (2017). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-020117.Scudder, G. Insect Biodiversity: Science and Society—Google Books (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009).
    Google Scholar 
    Lami, F., Boscutti, F., Masin, R., Sigura, M. & Marini, L. Seed predation intensity and stability in agro-ecosystems: Role of predator diversity and soil disturbance. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 288, 106720 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Gallai, N., Salles, J. M., Settele, J. & Vaissière, B. E. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol. Econ. 68, 810–821 (2009).
    Google Scholar 
    Consoli, F. L., Parra, J. R. P. & Zucchi, R. A. Egg Parasitoids in Agroecosystems with Emphasis on Trichogramma (Springer Science, 2010).
    Google Scholar 
    Sánchez-Guillén, R. A., Córdoba-Aguilar, A., Hansson, B., Ott, J. & Wellenreuther, M. Evolutionary consequences of climate-induced range shifts in insects. Biol. Rev. 91, 1050–1064 (2016).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Zalucki, M. P. et al. Estimating the economic cost of one of the world’s major insect pests, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae): Just how long is a piece of string?. J. Econ. Entomol. 105, 1115–1129 (2012).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Dornelas, M. & Daskalova, G. N. Nuanced changes in insect abundance. Science (80-). 368, 368–369 (2020).CAS 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Didham, R. K. et al. Interpreting insect declines: Seven challenges and a way forward. Insect Conserv. Divers. 13, 103–114 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Greenwood, B. M., Bojang, K. & Whitty, C. J. M. Malaria. Lancet 365, 98 (2005).
    Google Scholar 
    Dangles, O. & Casas, J. Ecosystem services provided by insects for achieving sustainable development goals. Ecosyst. Serv. 35, 109–115 (2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Burkholder, W. E. & Ma, M. Pheromones for monitoring and control of stored-product insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 30, 257–272 (1985).CAS 

    Google Scholar 
    Morris, R. F. Sampling insect populations. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 5, 243–264 (1960).
    Google Scholar 
    Strickland, A. H. Sampling crop pests and their hosts. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 6, 201–220 (1961).
    Google Scholar 
    Bannerman, J. A., Costamagna, A. C., McCornack, B. P. & Ragsdale, D. W. Comparison of relative bias, precision, and efficiency of sampling methods for natural enemies of soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J. Econ. Entomol. 108, 1381–1397 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Osborne, J. L. et al. Harmonic radar: A new technique for investigating bumblebee and honey bee foraging flight. VII Int. Symp. Pollinat. 437, 159–164 (1996).
    Google Scholar 
    Zink, A. G. & Rosenheim, J. A. State-dependent sampling bias in insects: Implications for monitoring western tarnished plant bugs. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 113, 117–123 (2004).
    Google Scholar 
    Rancourt, B., Vincent, C. & De Oliveira, A. D. Circadian activity of Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera: Miridae) and effectiveness of sampling techniques in strawberry fields. J. Econ. Entomol 93, 1160–1166 (2000).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Binns, M. R. & Nyrop, J. P. Sampling insect populations for the purpose of IPM decision making. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37, 427–453. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.37.1.427 (1992).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Portman, Z. M., Bruninga-Socolar, B. & Cariveau, D. P. The state of bee monitoring in the United States: A call to refocus away from bowl traps and towards more effective methods. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 113, 337–342 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Montgomery, G. A., Belitz, M. W., Guralnick, R. P. & Tingley, M. W. Standards and best practices for monitoring and benchmarking insects. Front. Ecol. Evolut. 8, 579193 (2021).
    Google Scholar 
    Bick, E., Dryden, D. M., Nguyen, H. D. & Kim, H. A novel CO2-based insect sampling device and associated field method evaluated in a strawberry agroecosystem. J. Econ. Entomol. 113, 1037–1042 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Wen, C. & Guyer, D. Image-based orchard insect automated identification and classification method. Comput. Electron. Agric. 89, 110–115 (2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Chen, Y., Why, A., Batista, G., Mafra-Neto, A. & Keogh, E. Flying insect classification with inexpensive sensors. J. Insect Behav. 27, 657–677 (2014).
    Google Scholar 
    Potamitis, I. & Rigakis, I. Novel noise-robust optoacoustic sensors to identify insects through wingbeats. IEEE Sens. J. 15, 4621–4631 (2015).CAS 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Eliopoulos, P. A., Potamitis, I., Kontodimas, D. C. & Givropoulou, E. G. Detection of adult beetles inside the stored wheat mass based on their acoustic emissions. J. Econ. Entomol. 108, 2808–2814 (2015).CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Ärje, J. et al. Automatic image-based identification and biomass estimation of invertebrates. Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 922–931 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Hobbs, S. E. & Hodges, G. An optical method for automatic classification and recording of a suction trap catch. Bull. Entomol. Res. 83, 47–51 (1993).
    Google Scholar 
    O’Neill, M. A., Gauld, I. D., Gaston, K. J. & Weeks, P. Daisy: An automated invertebrate identification system using holistic vision techniques. in Proceedings of the Inaugural Meeting BioNET-INTERNATIONAL Group for Computer-Aided Taxonomy (BIGCAT) 13–22 (1997).Chesmore, E. D. Methodologies for automating the identification of species. in First BioNet-International Work. Gr. Autom. Taxon. 3–12 (2000).Martineau, M. et al. A survey on image-based insect classification. Pattern Recognit. 65, 273–284 (2017).ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Silva, D. F., De Souza, V. M. A., Batista Geapa, K. E. & Ellis, D. P. W. Applying machine learning and audio analysis techniques to insect recognition in intelligent traps. in Proceedings—2013 12th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications, ICMLA 2013. (2013).Capinera, J. L. & Walmsley, M. R. Visual responses of some sugarbeet insects to sticky traps and water pan traps of various colors. J. Econ. Entomol., 71(6), 926–927 (1978).
    Google Scholar 
    Moore, A., Miller, J. R., Tabashnik, B. E. & Gage, S. H. Automated identification of flying insects by analysis of wingbeat frequencies. J. Econ. Entomol. 79, 1703–1706 (1986).
    Google Scholar 
    Riley, J. R. Angular and temporal variations in the radar cross-sections of insects. Proc. Inst. Electr. Eng. (IET) 120, 1229–1232 (1973).
    Google Scholar 
    Reed, S. C., Williams, C. M. & Chadwick, L. E. Frequency of wing-beat as a character for separating species races and geographic varieties of Drosophila. Genetics 27, 349 (1942).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Mankin, R. W., Hagstrum, D. W., Smith, M. T., Roda, A. L. & Kairo, M. T. K. Perspective and promise: a century of insect acoustic detection and monitoring. Am. Entomol. 57(1), 30–44 (2011).
    Google Scholar 
    Drake, V. A. & Reynolds, D. R. Radar Entomology: Observing Insect Flight and Migration (Cabi, 2012).
    Google Scholar 
    Long, T. et al. Entomological radar overview: System and signal processing. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 35, 20–32 (2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Drake, V. A., Hatty, S., Symons, C. & Wang, H. Insect monitoring radar: Maximizing performance and utility. Remote Sens. 12, 596 (2020).ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Brydegaard, M. & Jansson, S. Advances in entomological laser radar. IET Int. Radar Conf. https://doi.org/10.1049/joe.2019.0598 (2018).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Jansson, S. Entomological Lidar: Target Characterization and Field Applications (Department of Physics, Lund University, 2020).
    Google Scholar 
    Malmqvist, E. From Fauna to Flames: Remote Sensing with Scheimpflug-Lidar (Department of Physics, Lund University, 2019).
    Google Scholar 
    Mankin, R. W., Hagstrum, D. W., Smith, M. T., Roda, A. L. & Kairo, M. T. K. Perspective and promise: A century of insect acoustic detection and monitoring. Am. Entomol. 57, 30–44 (2011).
    Google Scholar 
    Miller-Struttmann, N. E., Heise, D., Schul, J., Geib, J. C. & Galen, C. Flight of the bumble bee: Buzzes predict pollination services. PLoS ONE 12, 1–14 (2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Li, Y. et al. Mosquito detection with low-cost smartphones: Data acquisition for malaria research. arXiv:1711.06346 [stat.ML] (2017).Mukundarajan, H., Hol, F. J. H., Castillo, E. A., Newby, C. & Prakash, M. Using mobile phones as acoustic sensors for high-throughput mosquito surveillance. Elife 6, 1–26 (2017).
    Google Scholar 
    Osborne, J. L. et al. A landscape-scale study of bumble bee foraging range and constancy, using harmonic radar. J. Appl. Ecol. 36, 519–533 (1999).
    Google Scholar 
    Smith, A. D., Riley, J. R. & Gregory, R. D. A method for routine monitoring of the aerial migration of insects by using a vertical-looking radar. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 340, 393–404 (1993).
    Google Scholar 
    Chapman, J. W., Smith, A. D., Woiwod, I. P., Reynolds, D. R. & Riley, J. R. Development of vertical-looking radar technology for monitoring insect migration. Comput. Electron. Agric. 35(2–3), 95–110 (2002).
    Google Scholar 
    Schaefer, G. W. & Bent, G. A. An infra-red remote sensing system for the active detection and automatic determination of insect flight trajectories (IRADIT). Bull. Entomol. Res. 74, 261–278 (1984).
    Google Scholar 
    Farmery, M. J. Optical studies of insect flight at low altitude. (Doctoral dissertation, University of York, 1981).Farmery, M. J. The effect of air temperature on wingbeat frequency of naturally flying armyworm moth (Spodoptera exempta). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 32, 193–194 (1982).
    Google Scholar 
    Malmqvist, E. & Brydegaard, M. Applications of KHZ-CW lidar in ecological entomology. EPJ Web Conf. 119, 25016. https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/2016I11925016 (2016).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Brydegaard, M. et al. Lidar reveals activity anomaly of malaria vectors during pan-African eclipse. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay5487 (2020).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Malmqvist, E. et al. The bat–bird–bug battle: Daily flight activity of insects and their predators over a rice field revealed by high-resolution Scheimpflug Lidar. Roy. Soc. Open Sci. 5(4), 172303 (2018).ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Fristrup, K. M., Shaw, J. A. & Tauc, M. J. Development of a wing-beat-modulation scanning lidar system for insect studies. Lidar Remote Sens. Environ. Monit. 2017, 15. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2274656 (2017).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Hoffman, D. S., Nehrir, A. R., Repasky, K. S., Shaw, J. A. & Carlsten, J. L. Range-resolved optical detection of honeybees by use of wing-beat modulation of scattered light for locating land mines. Appl. Opt. 46, 3007–3012 (2007).PubMed 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Jansson, S., Malmqvist, E. & Mlacha, Y. Real-time dispersal of malaria vectors in rural Africa monitored with lidar. Plos one. 16(3), e0247803 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Jansson, S. & Brydegaard, M. Passive kHz lidar for the quantification of insect activity and dispersal. Anim. Biotelemet. 6, 6 (2018).
    Google Scholar 
    Jansson, S. P. & Sørensen, M. B. An optical remote sensing system for detection of aerial and aquatic fauna. U.S. Patent Application No. 16/346,322 (2019).Malmqvist, E., Jansson, S., Török, S. & Brydegaard, M. Effective parameterization of laser radar observations of atmospheric fauna. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant. Electron. 22, 1 (2015).
    Google Scholar 
    Drake, V. A., Wang, H. K. & Harman, I. T. Insect Monitoring Radar: Remote and network operation. Comput. Electron. Agric. 35, 77–94 (2002).
    Google Scholar 
    Kirkeby, C. et al. Advances in automatic identification of flying insects using optical sensors and machine learning. Sci. Rep. 11, 1555 (2021).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar 
    Jacques, S. L. Erratum: Optical properties of biological tissues: A review (Physics in Medicine and Biology (2013) 58). Phys. Med. Biol. 58, 5007–5008 (2013).
    Google Scholar 
    Li, M. et al. Bark beetles as lidar targets and prospects of photonic surveillance. J. Biophoton. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbio.202000420 (2020).Article 

    Google Scholar 
    Brydegaard, M. Advantages of shortwave infrared LIDAR entomology. in Laser Applications to Chemical, Security and Environmental Analysis LW2D-6 (Optical Society of America, 2014).
    Google Scholar 
    Brydegaard, M., Jansson, S., Schulz, M. & Runemark, A. Can the narrow red bands of dragonflies be used to perceive wing interference patterns? Ecol. Evol. 8(11), 5369–5384 (2018).PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Gebru, A. et al. Multiband modulation spectroscopy for the determination of sex and species of mosquitoes in flight. J. Biophotonics 11(8), e201800014 (2018).PubMed 

    Google Scholar 
    Potamitis, I. Classifying insects on the fly. Ecol. Inform. 21, 40–49 (2014).
    Google Scholar 
    Heathcote, G. D. The comparison of yellow cylindrical, flat and water traps, and of Johnson suction traps, for sampling aphids. Ann. Appl. Biol. 45, 133–139 (1957).
    Google Scholar 
    Vaishampayan, S. M., Kogan, M., Waldbauer, G. P. & Woolley, J. Spectral specific responses in the visual behavior of the greenhouse whitefly, Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 18, 344–356 (1975).
    Google Scholar 
    Mound, L. A. Studies on the olfaction and colour sensitivity of Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Homoptera, Aleyrodidae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 5, 99–104 (1962).
    Google Scholar 
    Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat. Methods 17, 261–272 (2020).CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar 
    Van Der Kooi, C. J., Stavenga, D. G., Arikawa, K., Belušič, G. & Kelber, A. Evolution of insect color vision: From spectral sensitivity to visual ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 66, 435–461 (2021).PubMed 

    Google Scholar  More

  • in

    Effect of contrasting phosphorus levels on nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide emissions from temperate grassland soils

    Site descriptionThis experiment was conducted in two long-term P-trial grassland sites (Site A and Site B) situated in proximity (~ 350 m) to each other in the dairy farm at Johnstown Castle, Wexford, Co. Wexford, Ireland (6°49′ W, 52°29′ N). The sites were grazed permanent grasslands before establishment. When the experiment was established in 1995, 16 (10 m × 2 m) plots were formed in each site in a fully randomised block design with four replicates. The two sites established were selected to represent different soil types and drainage classes. Site A is a moderately drained brown earth and site B is an imperfectly drained gley soil31. Each year in February, each plot received one of the four phosphorous (P) fertilization rates (16% P superphosphate): 0 (P0), 15 (P15), 30 (P30), and 45 (P45) kg P ha−1 year−1. All plots were initially sown with Lolium perenne and reseeded in 2016 with the same species. However, plant species such as Poa trivialis, Agropyron repens, Trifolium repens were present to a lesser extent. Above-ground biomass is harvested each month between February and August followed by 40 kg N ha−1 fertilizer applications. In the year (2019) of this experiment and the years before, SulCAN as a solid was applied at the first or second week of each month during February-August and potassium (K) as muriate of potash (KCl) was applied in February at a rate of 125 kg K ha−1. SulCAN contains 26.7% N in the form of nitric and ammoniacal nitrogen and 5% water soluble Sulphur. For this study plots receiving P0, P15 and P45 at the two field sites were set up to carry out this experiment. The two sites were selected as they had slightly different soil properties and thus there was an opportunity to consider a soil × treatment effect in the experiment.Experimental designFertilizer N and substrate C were applied on 8 May and 12 June in the experiment undertaken between May and July 2019, which represents the main growing season in Ireland. Within each plot, an area of 1 m × 1 m was selected. Following N fertilizer application (40 kg N ha−1) to all plots, carbon substrate [mixture of glucose (40%), sodium acetate (30%) and methanol (30%)] was applied once within the selected area using a sprayer watering can. Labile C available in animal excreta usually contains carbohydrates, volatile fatty acids, and alcohols32; as such different carbon substrates were applied to mimic this. Our review of the literature also indicated that C source types could differentially affect denitrifying communities and consequently denitrification rate. Thus, a mixture of three C sources was used to decrease bias of one microbial group over another as a result of single substrate use. Carbon was supplied to alleviate C-limitations of denitrification and nitrification processes as observed by O’Neill et al.29 in soils from this trial and to ensure equal substrate availability across all soil P levels. Equivalent C input rate of 0.63 g C m−2 day−1 was added to represent a daily rate of plant carbon input from Lolium perenne dominated ecosystem33. Soil samples were collected on eight occasions throughout the experimental period. Soil was sampled from across each selected area to a depth of 10 cm, sieved through 4 mm sieve and analysed for soil mineral N and microbial biomass.Soil properties, plant biomass and climate parametersPhysico-chemical soil properties were characterized by taking samples from 10 cm depth from each plot in the two sites before the commencement of the experiment. Soil pH was measured in water (2:1, water volume:soil mass) using Sally pH Auto analyser Dilution System (Gilson 215, Gilson, Dunstable, England). Soil organic matter (SOM) content was determined from mass loss on ignition at 550 °C for 7 h. Total C and total N concentrations were measured using a TrueSpec C/N analyser (TruSpec, LECO Corporation, Michigan, USA). Plant available P, potassium (K), and magnesium (Mg) were estimated using Morgan’s extraction34 and analysed using a Lachat QuickChem 8500 Series 2 Flow injection Analyzer (Lachat, QuickChem, 5600 Loveland, Colorado, USA). Particle size analysis was performed using the Pipette method35, where 2 mm sieved dry soil (20 g) was pre-treated with 6% H2O2, 3% NH4OH, and 5% sodium hexametaphosphate before separating soil aliquots into particle sizes. Water Holding Capacity (WHC) was determined from the mass difference between water-saturated and then overnight dried (105 °C) soil. Bulk density was determined by dividing weight of oven-dried soil by the total soil volume.To determine the mineral N concentrations, ten gram fresh soil was extracted with 50 mL 2 M KCl (5:1 solution to soil ratio). The supernatant was filtered through Whatman No. 1 filter paper and filtrates were stored in a cold room at 4 °C for about a week until analysis. Ammonium (NH4+) and nitrate (NO3−) concentrations in the extracts were analysed by the Aquakem 600 discrete analyser.Above-ground plant biomass from each plot of both sites was harvested twice during the experiment period (June 10 and July 11, 2019) to a height of ~ 5 cm using a Haldrup plot harvester. The total harvested biomass weight from each plot was recorded and a 100 g sub-sample was taken for dry matter (DM) analysis. Each fresh herbage sub-sample was weighed and placed in an oven at 70 °C for 3 days, and dry weight of the biomass was determined after re-weighing.Rainfall records for the experiment period were obtained from a Met Éireann weather observing station located in Teagasc dairy farm in Johnstown Castle, Co. Wexford., situated within a 100 m distance from the experimental sites. Volumetric soil moisture content and temperature was measured to 5 cm depth on individual plots on each gas sampling occasion using a handheld theta probe (WET-2 WET Sensor, Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, England). Water-filled pore space (WFPS) were calculated from the soil moisture values, bulk density of the soils, and soil particle density (2.65 g cm−3).Microbial biomass, glomalin-related soil protein and potential denitrification activitySoils were analysed for microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN), phosphorus (MBP) and carbon (MBC) using the fumigation extraction method as described respectively in (Brooks et al.36,37, and Vance et al.38). Five gram fumigated (24 h) and non-fumigated soil samples were extracted with 100 mL 0.5 M NaHCO3 and analysed for P colorimetrically using an Aquakem 600 discrete analyser (Thermo Electron OY, Vantaa, Finland). In order to avoid the spike readings by the instrument due to the effervescent nature of NaHCO3, one millilitre of 10% HCl was added to 10 mL extracts and diluted to 50 mL using distilled water. Microbial P was calculated by subtracting the P concentration of non-fumigated samples from fumigated samples, and dividing the result by an extraction factor of 0.437.Microbial biomass C and N were determined similarly using chloroform fumigation method with extraction period of 48 h with 0.5 M K2SO438. The extracts of the fumigated and non-fumigated samples were analysed for total C and N using a TOC-L CPH/CPN analyser (Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan), and the differences, divided by correction factors of 0.45 and 0.54, were used to estimate the microbial biomass C and N, respectively.Glomalin is a glycoprotein produced by AMF and can be used as an indicator of mycorrhizal colonization in the plant root-soil interface39. Total glomalin-related soil protein (GRPS) was extracted by 90 min of autoclaving (121 °C) of 1 g air-dried soil in 8 mL of 50 mM sodium citrate adjusted to pH 8.0 with HCl40. Three additional sequential extractions were performed with the sodium citrate solution by autoclaving for 60 min until no red-brown color was visible in the last supernatant. After autoclaving, the samples were centrifuged at 10,000 revolutions per minute (rpm) for 5 min. The amounts of glomalin in the extracts were quantified using the Bradford dye-binding assay with bovine serum albumin (BSA) as the standard (2 mg mL−1). In a 96-well plate, replicated 200 µL of standard or extracts and 50 µL of dye reagent were added in each well and mixed using a microplate mixer. The Bradford-reactive substance was determined by measuring absorbance at 600 nm using Microplate Reader (Modulus Microplate Multimode Reader, Turner BioSystems, Sunnyvale, California, USA). Sample concentrations were determined using the standard curve. Potential denitrification activity (PDA) was determined using the acetylene inhibition method, modified from Pell et al.41. Briefly, replicated 20 g fresh soils were added into two identical flasks from a sample of soil. The flasks were then sealed with a rubber stopper and flushed and filled with helium after evacuating the headspace air. In one of the replicas, 10% of the headspaces were removed and replaced by acetylene. All flasks were incubated at 15 °C on an orbital shaker at 175 rpm for 30 min followed by the addition of a nutrient solution containing 75 mmol L−1 KNO3, 37.5 mmol L−1 Na-succinate, 25 mmol L−1 glucose, and 75 mM Na-acetate. Gas samples were taken from the headspace every 1 h for 5 h. N2O concentrations were determined using a gas chromatograph (Bruker, Scion 456-GC, Livingston, Scotland), and PDA was calculated from the rate of change of N2O concentrations over time from acetylene amended flasks.N2O and CO2 flux measurementsGas samples (N2O and CO2 fluxes) were measured before and after the application of N fertilizer and C substrates, with a daily sampling for 10 days directly after C + N additions and 3–4 times a week in the third and fourth week and 2–3 times a week in the subsequent weeks. A rectangular (40 × 40 cm) static collar, made of stainless steel (opaque), was anchored 5 cm deep into the soil within the marked area of 1 m × 1 m in each of the selected plots. During gas sampling, a 10 cm tall chamber lid fitted with two septa on top was placed on the collar lined with neoprene rubber band. To ensure hermetic sealing of the headspace during sampling, the ring area of the collar was half-filled with water, and a 10 kg weight was placed on the top of the lid to compress the seal. Gas samples were collected between 09:30 and 11:30 local time using a 10 mL Luer lock syringe fitted with a hypodermic needle via one of the septa at 0, 20, and 40 min after chamber closure. Prior to transferring the final sample into a pre-evacuated 7 mL glass vial, air in the chamber headspace was mixed by flushing the syringe three times. Gas samples were analysed using a gas chromatograph (Bruker, Scion 456-GC, Livingston, Scotland) fitted with an electron capture detector to analyse for N2O concentrations and a thermal conductivity detector to analyse for CO2 concentrations. Daily Fluxes (F) were calculated for each plot using the following equation:$$ F = left( {frac{Delta C}{{Delta t}}} right) times left( {frac{M times P}{{T times R}}} right) times left( frac{V}{A} right) $$where ∆C is the change in gas concentration in the chamber headspace during chamber enclosure period in ppbv, ∆t is chamber closing period in minutes, so ∆C/∆t is the slope of the gas concentration with time. M is the molar mass of N2O-N (28 g mol−1) and CO2-C (12 g mol−1), P and T are the atmospheric pressure (Pa) and temperature (K). Atmospheric pressure values were obtained from the nearby weather station whereas for T, wet sensor values were used. V is the headspace volume of the closed chamber (m3) and A is surface are of the chamber (m3). R is the ideal gas constant (8.314 J K−1 mol−1). Daily flux for each treatment is reported as the average of the replicates.Cumulative N2O and CO2 emissions were calculated over each application period by multiplying the daily N2O and CO2 fluxes by the number of days between two consecutive measurements. A summation of the cumulative flux of each application period is reported as the total cumulative flux.Statistical analysisANOVAs with repeated measures were used to test for the C + N addition effect on N2O and CO2 emissions, MBC, MBN, MBP, NO3−, and NH4+ with P treatment, site, and day of measurement as fixed effects, and individual plots as a random effect. Two-way ANOVA was applied to test for main and interaction effects of P treatment and site on cumulative N2O and CO2 emissions, soil property parameters (Table 1), plant biomass, and GRSP. Prior to analysis, response variables were checked for normality (sphericity for repeated ANOVA) and homogeneity of variance, and log transformed when required. Tukey’s HSD post-hoc tests were conducted to identify pair-wise comparisons of significant effects at P  More

  • in

    The Black Death devastated parts of Europe — but spared others

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

    The fourteenth-century pandemic known as the Black Death might not have been as devastating as was previously thought, an analysis of ancient pollen suggests1.

    Access options

    Access through your institution

    Change institution

    Buy or subscribe

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

    Additional access options:

    Log in

    Learn about institutional subscriptions

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00435-6

    ReferencesIzdebski, A. et al. Nature Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01652-4 (2022).
    Google Scholar 
    Download references

    Subjects

    Ecology

    Latest on:

    Ecology

    Brazil opens highly protected caves to mining, risking fauna
    Correspondence 15 FEB 22

    Richard Leakey (1944–2022)
    Obituary 28 JAN 22

    Emphasizing declining populations in the Living Planet Report
    Matters Arising 26 JAN 22

    Jobs

    Director of Microscopy Operations

    St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital (St. Jude)
    Memphis, TN, United States

    POSTDOCTORAL POSITIONS IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING

    KU Leuven
    Leuven, Belgium

    MRC Postdoctoral Research Scientist

    Medical Research Council
    London, United Kingdom

    Postdoctoral fellow in X-ray multibeam ptychographic imaging at PETRA III/MAX IV

    German Electron Synchrotron (DESY)
    Hamburg, Germany More