Ecology

1.Hughes TP, Kerry J, Álvarez-Noriega M, Álvarez-Romero J, Anderson K, Baird A, et al. Global warming and recurrent mass bleaching of corals. Nature. 2017;543:373–7.CAS 

Google Scholar 
2.Hoegh-Guldberg O. Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs. Mar Freshw Res. 1999;50:839–66.
Google Scholar 
3.Patten NL, Harrison PL, Mitchell JG. Prevalence of virus-like particles within a staghorn scleractinian coral (Acropora muricata) from the Great Barrier Reef. Coral Reefs. 2008;27:569–80.
Google Scholar 
4.Leruste A, Bouvier T, Bettarel Y. Enumerating viruses in coral mucus. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012;78:6377–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Nguyen-kim H, Bouvier T, Bouvier C, Bui VN, Le-lan H, Bettarel Y. Viral and bacterial epibionts in thermally-stressed corals. J Mar Sci Eng. 2015;3:1272–86.
Google Scholar 
6.Vega Thurber R, Payet JP, Thurber AR, Correa AMS. Virus–host interactions and their roles in coral reef health and disease. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2017;15:205–16.
Google Scholar 
7.Sweet M, Bythell J. The role of viruses in coral health and disease. J Invertebr Pathol. 2017;147:136–44.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.Wilson WH, Francis I, Ryan K, Davy SK. Temperature induction of viruses in symbiotic dinoflagellates. Aquat Micro Ecol. 2001;25:99–102.
Google Scholar 
9.Lohr J, Munn CB, Wilson WH. Characterization of a latent virus-like infection of symbiotic zooxanthellae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73:2976–81.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
10.Lawrence SA, Wilson WH, Davy JE, Davy SK. Latent virus-like infections are present in a diverse range of Symbiodinium spp. (Dinophyta). J Phycol. 2014;50:984–97.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
11.Messyasz A, Rosales SM, Mueller RS, Sawyer T, Correa AMS, Thurber AR, et al. Coral bleaching phenotypes associated with differential abundances of nucleocytoplasmic large DNA viruses. Front Mar Sci. 2020;7:555474.
Google Scholar 
12.Marhaver KL, Edwards RA, Rohwer F. Viral communities associated with healthy and bleaching corals. Environ Microbiol. 2008;10:2277–86.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
13.Correa AMS, Ainsworth TD, Rosales SM, Thurber AR, Butler CR, Vega Thurber RL. Viral outbreak in corals associated with an in situ bleaching event: atypical herpes-like viruses and a new megavirus infecting Symbiodinium. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:127.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
14.Bettarel Y, Thuy NT, Huy TQ, Hoang PK, Bouvier T. Observation of virus-like particles in thin sections of the bleaching scleractinian coral Acropora cytherea. J Mar Biol Assoc U K. 2013;93:909–12.
Google Scholar 
15.Lesser MP, Bythell JC, Gates RD, Johnstone RW, Hoegh-Guldberg O. Are infectious diseases really killing corals? Alternative interpretations of the experimental and ecological data. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 2007;346:36–44.
Google Scholar 
16.Soffer N, Brandt ME, Correa AMS, Smith TB, Thurber RV. Potential role of viruses in white plague coral disease. ISME J. 2014;8:271–83.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
17.Lawrence SA, Davy JE, Aeby GS, Wilson WH, Davy SK. Quantification of virus-like particles suggests viral infection in corals affected by Porites tissue loss. Coral Reefs. 2014;33:687–91.
Google Scholar 
18.Lawrence SA, Davy JE, Wilson WH, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Davy SK. Porites white patch syndrome: associated viruses and disease physiology. Coral Reefs. 2015;34:249–57.
Google Scholar 
19.Pollock FJ, M. Wood-Charlson E, Van Oppen MJH, Bourne DG, Willis BL, Weynberg KD. Abundance and morphology of virus-like particles associated with the coral Acropora hyacinthus differ between healthy and white syndrome-infected states. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2014;510:39–43.
Google Scholar 
20.Vega Thurber RL, Correa AMS. Viruses of reef-building scleractinian corals. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 2011;408:102–13.
Google Scholar 
21.Weynberg KD, Voolstra CR, Neave MJ, Buerger P, Van Oppen MJH. From cholera to corals: viruses as drivers of virulence in a major coral bacterial pathogen. Sci Rep. 2015;5:17889.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
22.Quistad SD, Grasis JA, Barr JJ, Rohwer FL. Viruses and the origin of microbiome selection and immunity. ISME J. 2017;11:835–40.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Oppen MJHV, Leong J, Gates RD. Coral-virus interactions: a double-edged sword? SYMBIOSIS. 2009;47:1–8.
Google Scholar 
24.Correa AMS, Howard-Varona C, Coy SR, Buchan A, Sullvian MB, Weitz JS. The virus-microbe infection continuum: revisiting the viral rules of life. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2021;19:501–13.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Correa AMS, Welsh RM, Vega Thurber RL. Unique nucleocytoplasmic dsDNA and +ssRNA viruses are associated with the dinoflagellate endosymbionts of corals. ISME J. 2013;7:13–27.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
26.Lawrence SA, Floge SA, Davy JE, Davy SK, Wilson WH. Exploratory analysis of Symbiodinium transcriptomes reveals potential latent infection by large dsDNA viruses. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19:3909–19.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
27.Levin RA, Voolstra CR, Weynberg KD, Van Oppen M. Evidence for a role of viruses in the thermal sensitivity of coral photosymbionts. ISME J. 2017;11:808–12.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
28.Knowles B, Bonachela JA, Behrenfeld MJ, Bondoc KG, Cael BB, Carlson CA, et al. Temperate infection in a virus–host system previously known for virulent dynamics. Nat Commun. 2020;11:1–13.
Google Scholar 
29.Montalvo-Proaño J, Buerger P, Weynberg KD, Van Oppen MJH. A PCR-based assay targeting the major capsid protein gene of a dinorna-like ssRNA virus that infects coral photosymbionts. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1665.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
30.Tomaru Y, Katanozaka N, Nishida K, Shirai Y, Tarutani K, Yamaguchi M, et al. Isolation and characterization of two distinct types of HcRNAV, a single-stranded RNA virus infecting the bivalve-killing microalga Heterocapsa circularisquama. Aquat Micro Ecol. 2004;34:207–18.
Google Scholar 
31.Miller JL, Chen S, Nagasaki K, Roseman A, Wepf R, Sewell T, et al. Three-dimensional reconstruction of Heterocapsa circularisquama RNA virus by electron cryo-microscopy. J Gen Virol. 2011;92:1960–70.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Shi M, Lin XD, Tian J-H, Chen L-J, Chen X, Li C-IU, et al. Redefining the invertebrate RNA virosphere. Nature. 2016;540:539–43.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Domingo E, Sheldon J, Perales C. Viral quasispecies evolution. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2012;76:159–216.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.Sanjuán R, Domingo-Calap P. Mechanisms of viral mutation. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2016;73:4433–48.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
35.Vlok M, Lang AS, Suttle CA. Marine RNA virus quasispecies are distributed throughout the oceans. mSphere. 2019;4:1–18.
Google Scholar 
36.Domingo E, Martinez-salas E, Sobrino F, de la Torre JC, Portela A, Ortin J, et al. The quasispecies (extremely heterogeneous) nature of viral RNA genome populations: biological relevance—a review. Gene. 1985;40:1–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Vignuzzi M, Stone JK, Arnold JJ, Cameron CE, Andino R. Quasispecies diversity determines pathogenesis through cooperative interactions in a viral population. Nature. 2006;439:344–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
38.Holland J, Spindler K, Horodyski F, Grabau E, Nichol S, VandePol S. Rapid evolution of RNA genomes. Science. 1982;215:1577–85.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
39.Gélin P, Postaire B, Fauvelot C, Magalon H. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution reevaluating species number, distribution and endemism of the coral genus Pocillopora Lamarck, 1816 using species delimitation methods and microsatellites. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2017;109:430–46.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
40.Pratchett MS, McCowan D, Maynard JA, Heron SF. Changes in bleaching susceptibility among corals subject to ocean warming and recurrent bleaching in Moorea, French Polynesia. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:1–10.
Google Scholar 
41.Donovan MK, Adam TC, Shantz AA, Speare KE, Munsterman KS, Rice MM, et al. Nitrogen pollution interacts with heat stress to increase coral bleaching across the seascape. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2020;117:5351–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
42.Siebeck UE, Marshall NJ, Kluter A, Hoegh-Guldberg O. Monitoring coral bleaching using a colour reference card. Coral Reefs. 2006;25:453–60.
Google Scholar 
43.Winters G, Holzman R, Blekhman A, Beer S, Loya Y. Photographic assessment of coral chlorophyll contents: Implications for ecophysiological studies and coral monitoring. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 2009;380:25–35.CAS 

Google Scholar 
44.Turnham KE, Wham DC, Sampayo E, LaJeunesse TC. Mutualistic microalgae co-diversify with reef corals that acquire symbionts during egg development. ISME J. 2021;15:3271–85.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Pinzón JH, Lajeunesse TC. Species delimitation of common reef corals in the genus Pocillopora using nucleotide sequence phylogenies, population genetics and symbiosis ecology. Mol Ecol. 2011;20:311–25.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Flot JF, Tillier S. The mitochondrial genome of Pocillopora (Cnidaria: Scleractinia) contains two variable regions: the putative D-loop and a novel ORF of unknown function. Gene. 2007;401:80–87.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
47.Pinzón JH, Sampayo E, Cox E, Chauka LJ, Chen CA, Voolstra CR, et al. Blind to morphology: genetics identifies several widespread ecologically common species and few endemics among Indo-Pacific cauliflower corals (Pocillopora, Scleractinia). J Biogeogr. 2013;40:1595–608.
Google Scholar 
48.Johnston EC, Forsman ZH, Flot JF, Schmidt-Roach S, Pinzón JH, Knapp ISS, et al. A genomic glance through the fog of plasticity and diversification in Pocillopora. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5991.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
49.Wham DC, Carmichael M, LaJeunesse TC. Microsatellite loci for Symbiodinium goreaui and other Clade C Symbiodinium. Coservation Genet Resour. 2014;6:127–9.
Google Scholar 
50.Bay LK, Ulstrup KE, Nielsen HB, Jarmer H, Goffard N, Willis BL, et al. Microarray analysis reveals transcriptional plasticity in the reef building coral Acropora millepora. Mol Ecol. 2009;18:3062–75.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Veglia AJ, Vicéns RER, Grupstra CGB, Howe-Kerr LI, Correa AMS. vAMPirus: an automated, comprehensive virus amplicon sequencing analysis program. 2021: available at https://zenodo.org/record/4549851 (accessed February 17, 2021).52.Edgar RC. UNOISE2: improved error-correction for Illumina 16S and ITS amplicon sequencing. bioRxiv 2016;81257: available at https://doi.org/10.1101/081257.53.Rognes T, Flouri T, Nichols B, Quince C, Mahé F. VSEARCH: a versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ. 2016;2016:1–22.
Google Scholar 
54.Edgar RC. MUSCLE: a multiple sequence alignment method with reduced time and space complexity. BMC Bioinforma. 2004;5:1–19.
Google Scholar 
55.Buchfink B, Xie C, Huson DH. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat Methods. 2014;12:59–60.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.Darriba D, Posada D, Kozlov AM, Stamatakis A, Morel B, Flouri T. ModelTest-NG: a new and scalable tool for the selection of DNA and protein evolutionary models. Mol Biol Evol. 2020;37:291–4.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
57.Oksanen J, Blanchet G, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.4-6. R Package Version 25-6 2019.58.Anderson MJ, Walsh DCI. PERMANOVA, ANOSIM, and the Mantel test in the face of heterogeneous dispersions: what null hypothesis are you testing? Ecol Monogr. 2013;83:557–74.
Google Scholar 
59.Bates DM, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R. R Package Version 11-7 HttpCRANR-Proj 2014.60.Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 2014;15:550–550.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
61.Bankevich A, Nurk S, Antipov D, Gurevich AA, Dvorkin M, Kulikov AS, et al. SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing. J Comput Biol. 2012;19:455–77.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
62.Goodacre N, Aljanahi A, Nandakumar S, Mikailov M, Khan AS. A reference viral database (RVDB) to enhance bioinformatics analysis of high-throughput sequencing for novel virus detection. mSphere. 2018;3:e00069–18.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
63.Rädecker N, Pogoreutz C, Gegner HM, Cárdenas A, Roth F. Heat stress destabilizes symbiotic nutrient cycling in corals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2021;118:e2022653118.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Biebricher CK, Eigen M. What Is a Quasispecies? In: Domingo E (ed). Quasispecies: concept and implications for virology. 2006. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1–31.65.Gelbart M, Harari S, Ben-ari Y, Kustin T, Wolf D, Mandelboim M, et al. Drivers of within-host genetic diversity in acute infections of viruses. PLoS Pathog. 2020;16:e1009029.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
66.Breitbart M, Bonnain C, Malki K, Sawaya NA. Phage puppet masters of the marine microbial realm. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:754–66.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
67.Mann NH, Cook A, Millard A, Bailey S, Clokie M. Bacterial photosynthesis genes in a virus. Nature. 2003;424:741.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Marquez LM, Redman RS, Rodriguez RJ, Roossinck MJ. A virus in a fungus in a plant: three-way symbiosis required for thermal tolerance. Science. 2007;315:513–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
69.Holmes EC. The RNA virus quasispecies: fact or fiction? J Mol Biol. 2010;400:271–3.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
70.Pybus OG, Rambaut A, Belshaw R, Freckleton RP, Drummond AJ, Holmes EC. Phylogenetic evidence for deleterious mutation load in RNA viruses and its contribution to viral evolution. Mol Biol Evol. 2007;24:845–52.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
71.Holmes EC. Patterns of intra- and interhost nonsynonymous variation reveal strong purifying selection in dengue virus. J Virol. 2003;77:11296–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
72.Edwards CTT, Holmes EC, Pybus OG, Wilson DJ, Viscidi RP, Abrams EJ, et al. Evolution of the human immunodeficiency virus envelope gene is dominated by purifying selection. Genetics. 2006;174:1441–53.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
73.Roux S, Hawley AK, Beltran MT, Scofield M, Schwientek P, Stepanauskas R, et al. Ecology and evolution of viruses infecting uncultivated SUP05 bacteria as revealed by single-cell- and meta-genomics. eLIFE. 2014;3:e03125.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
74.Labonté JM, Swan BK, Poulos B, Luo H, Koren S, Hallam SJ, et al. Single-cell genomics-based analysis of virus-host interactions in marine surface bacterioplankton. ISME J. 2015;9:2386–99.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
75.Munson-mcgee JH, Peng S, Dewerff S, Stepanauskas R, Whitaker RJ, Weitz JS, et al. A virus or more in (nearly) every cell: ubiquitous networks of virus–host interactions in extreme environments. ISME J. 2018;12:1706–14.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
76.Díaz-Muñoz SL. Viral coinfection is shaped by host ecology and virus-virus interactions across diverse microbial taxa and environments. Virus Evol. 2017;3:1–14.
Google Scholar 
77.Wang L, Wu S, Liu T, Sun J, Chi S, Liu C, et al. Endogenous viral elements in algal genomes. Acta Oceano Sin. 2014;33:102–7.CAS 

Google Scholar 
78.Moniruzzaman M, Weinheimer AR, Martinez-Gutierrez CA, Aylward FO. Widespread endogenization of giant viruses shapes genomes of green algae. Nature. 2020;588:141–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
79.Koonin EV, Dolja VV, Krupovic M, Varsani A, Wolf YI, Yutin N, et al. Global organization and proposed megataxonomy of the virus world. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2020;84:e00061–19.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
80.Holmes EC. The evolution of endogenous viral elements. Cell Host Microbe. 2011;10:368–77.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
81.Ripp S, Miller RV. The role of pseudolysogeny in bacteriophage-host interactions in a natural freshwater environment. Microbiology. 1997;143:2065–70.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
82.Onodera S, Olkkonen VM, Gottlieb P, Strassman J, Qiao XY, Bamford DH, et al. Construction of a transducing virus from double-stranded RNA bacteriophage phi6: establishment of carrier states in host cells. J Virol. 1992;66:190–6.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
83.de la Higuera I, Kasun GW, Torrance EL, Pratt AA, Maluenda A, Colombet J, et al. Unveiling crucivirus diversity by mining metagenomic data. mBio. 2020;11:e01410–20.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
84.Ku C, Sheyn U, Sebé-Pedrós A, Ben-Dor S, Schatz D, Tanay A, et al. A single-cell view on alga-virus interactions reveals sequential transcriptional programs and infection states. Sci Adv. 2020;6:eaba4137.85.Deng L, Ignacio-espinoza JC, Gregory AC, Poulos BT, Weitz JS, Hugenholtz P, et al. Viral tagging reveals discrete populations in Synechococcus viral genome sequence space. Nature. 2014;513:242–6.CAS 

Google Scholar 
86.Jonge PAD, Costa AR, Franklin L, Brouns SJJ, Jonge PAD, Meijenfeldt FABV, et al. Adsorption sequencing as a rapid method to link environmental bacteriophages to hosts. ISCIENCE. 2020;23:101439.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
87.Jiang SC, Paul JH. Seasonal and diel abundance of viruses and occurrence of lysogeny/bacteriocinogeny in the marine environment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 1994;104:163–72.
Google Scholar 
88.Brum JR, Hurwitz BL, Schofield O, Ducklow HW, Sullivan MB. Seasonal time bombs: dominant temperate viruses affect Southern Ocean microbial dynamics. ISME J. 2016;10:437–49.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
89.Winter C, Bouvier T, Weinbauer MG, Thingstad TF. Trade-offs between competition and defense specialists among unicellular planktonic organisms: the “killing the winner” hypothesis revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2010;74:42–57.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
90.Thingstad TF, Våge S, Storesund JE, Sandaa R, Giske J. A theoretical analysis of how strain-specific viruses can control microbial species diversity. PNAS. 2014;111:7813–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
91.Thingstad TF. Elements of a theory for the mechanisms controlling abundance, diversity, and biogeochemical role of lytic bacterial viruses in aquatic systems. Limnol Oceanogr. 2000;45:1320–8.
Google Scholar 
92.Tomaru Y, Hata N, Masuda T, Tsuji M, Igata K, Masuda Y, et al. Ecological dynamics of the bivalve-killing dinoflagellate Heterocapsa circularisquama and its infectious viruses in different locations of western Japan. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9:1376–83.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
93.Sadeghi M, Tomaru Y, Ahola T. RNA viruses in aquatic unicellular eukaryotes. Viruses 2021.94.Randall RE, Griffin DE. Within host RNA virus persistence: mechanisms and consequences. Curr Opin Virol. 2017;23:35–42.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
95.Roossinck MJ. Lifestyles of plant viruses. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2010;365:1899–905.
Google Scholar 
96.Honjo MN, Emura N, Kawagoe T, Sugisaka J, Kamitani M, Nagano AJ, et al. Seasonality of interactions between a plant virus and its host during persistent infection in a natural environment. ISME J. 2020;14:506–18.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
97.Kim Y, Kim YJ, Paek K-H. Temperature-specific vsiRNA confers RNAi-mediated viral resistance at elevated temperature in Capsicum annuum. J Exp Bot. 2020;72:1432–48.
Google Scholar 
98.Jones RAC. Chapter three – future scenarios for plant virus pathogens as climate change progresses. In: Kielian M, Maramorosch K, Mettenleiter TC (eds).2016. Academic Press, pp 87–147.99.Brüwer JD, Agrawal S, Liew YJ, Aranda M, Voolstra CR. Association of coral algal symbionts with a diverse viral community responsive to heat shock. BMC Microbiol. 2017;17:1–11.
Google Scholar 
100.Cevallos RC, Sarnow P. Temperature protects insect cells from infection by cricket paralysis virus. J Virol. 2010;84:1652–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
101.Edgar RS, Lielausis I. Temperature-sensitive mutants of bacteriophage T4D: their isolation and genetic characterization. Genetics. 1964;49:649–62.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
102.Vega Thurber RL, Barott KL, Hall D, Liu H, Rodriguez-Mueller B, Desnues C, et al. Metagenomic analysis indicates that stressors induce production of herpes-like viruses in the coral Porites compressa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:18413–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
103.Seifert M, van Nies P, Papini FS, Arnold JJ, Poranen MM, Cameron CE, et al. Temperature controlled high-throughput magnetic tweezers show striking difference in activation energies of replicating viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerases. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48:5591–602.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
104.Wooldridge SA. Differential thermal bleaching susceptibilities amongst coral taxa: re-posing the role of the host. Coral Reefs. 2014;33:15–27.
Google Scholar 
105.Hédouin L, Rouzé H, Berthe C, Perez-Rosales G, Martinez E, Chancerelle Y, et al. Contrasting patterns of mortality in Polynesian coral reefs following the third global coral bleaching event in 2016. Coral Reefs. 2020;39:939–52.
Google Scholar 
106.Tonk L, Sampayo EM, Weeks S, Magno-Canto M, Hoegh-Guldberg O. Host-Specific interactions with environmental factors shape the distribution of Symbiodinium across the Great Barrier Reef. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e68533–e68533.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
107.Serrano X, Baums IB, O’Reilly K, Smith TB, Jones RJ, Shearer TL, et al. Geographic differences in vertical connectivity in the Caribbean coral Montastraea cavernosa despite high levels of horizontal connectivity at shallow depths. Mol Ecol. 2014;23:4226–40.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More

1.McKenney EA, Koelle K, Dunn RR, Yoder AD. The ecosystem services of animal microbiomes. Mol Ecol. 2018;27:2164–72.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Miller ET, Svanbäck R, Bohannan BJM. Microbiomes as metacommunities: understanding host-associated microbes through metacommunity ecology. Trends Ecol Evol. 2018;33:926–35.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Johnson AJ, Vangay P, Al-Ghalith GA, Hillmann BM, Ward TL, Shields-Cutler RR, et al. Daily sampling reveals personalized diet-microbiome associations in humans. Cell Host Microbe. 2019;25:789–802.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Björk JR, Dasari M, Grieneisen L, Archie EA. Primate microbiomes over time: Longitudinal answers to standing questions in microbiome research. Am J Primatol. 2019;81:1–23.
Google Scholar 
5.Sun B, Wang X, Bernstein S, Huffman MA, Xia DP, Gu Z, et al. Marked variation between winter and spring gut microbiota in free-ranging Tibetan Macaques (Macaca thibetana). Sci Rep. 2016;6:1–8.
Google Scholar 
6.Wu Q, Wang X, Ding Y, Hu Y, Nie Y, Wei W, et al. Seasonal variation in nutrient utilization shapes gut microbiome structure and function in wild giant pandas. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2017;284:20170955.7.Maurice CF, Knowles SCL, Ladau J, Pollard KS, Fenton A, Pedersen AB, et al. Marked seasonal variation in the wild mouse gut microbiota. ISME J. 2015;9:2423–34.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
8.Amato KR, Leigh SR, Kent A, Mackie RI, Yeoman CJ, Stumpf RM, et al. The gut microbiota appears to compensate for seasonal diet variation in the wild black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra). Microb Ecol. 2014;69:434–43.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Orkin JD, Campos FA, Myers MS, Cheves Hernandez SE, Guadamuz A, Melin AD. Seasonality of the gut microbiota of free-ranging white-faced capuchins in a tropical dry forest. ISME J. 2019;13:183–96. 22.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Springer A, Fichtel C, Al-Ghalith GA, Koch F, Amato KR, Clayton JB, et al. Patterns of seasonality and group membership characterize the gut microbiota in a longitudinal study of wild Verreaux’s sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi). Ecol Evol. 2017;7:5732–45.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
11.Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh AO, Alderman A, Giordano SH, Buchholz TA, et al. Seasonal cycling in the gut microbiome of the Hadza Hunter-Gatherers of Tanzania. Science. 2017;357:802–6.
Google Scholar 
12.Hicks AL, Lee KJ, Couto-Rodriguez M, Patel J, Sinha R, Guo C, et al. Gut microbiomes of wild great apes fluctuate seasonally in response to diet. Nat Commun. 2018;9:1786.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
13.Baniel A, Amato KR, Beehner JC, Bergman TJ, Mercer A, Perlman RF, et al. Seasonal shifts in the gut microbiome indicate plastic responses to diet in wild geladas. Microbiome. 2021;9:1–20.
Google Scholar 
14.Ren T, Grieneisen LE, Alberts SC, Archie EA, Wu M. Development, diet and dynamism: longitudinal and cross-sectional predictors of gut microbial communities in wild baboons. Environ Microbiol. 2016;18:1312–25.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Větrovský T, Baldrian P. The variability of the 16S rRNA gene in bacterial genomes and its consequences for bacterial community analyses. PLoS One. 2013;8:e57923.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
16.De Vrieze J, Pinto AJ, Sloan WT, Ijaz UZ. The active microbial community more accurately reflects the anaerobic digestion process: 16S rRNA (gene) sequencing as a predictive tool. Microbiome. 2018;6:63.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Kappeler PM, Fichtel C. A 15-year perspective on the social organization and life history of sifaka in Kirindy Forest. In: Long-term field studies of primates. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2012. p. 101–21.18.Peckre LR, Defolie C, Kappeler PM, Fichtel C. Potential self-medication using millipede secretions in red-fronted lemurs: combining anointment and ingestion for a joint action against gastrointestinal parasites? Primates. 2018;59:483–94.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Ostner J. Social thermoregulation in redfronted lemurs (Eulemur fulvus rufus). Folia Primatol. 2002;73:175–80.
Google Scholar 
20.Amoroso CR, Kappeler PM, Fichtel C, Nunn CL. Water availability impacts habitat use by red-fronted lemurs (Eulemur rufifrons): An experimental and observational study. Int J Primatol. 2020;41:61–80.
Google Scholar 
21.Koch F, Ganzhorn JU, Rothman JM, Chapman CA, Fichtel C. Sex and seasonal differences in diet and nutrient intake in Verreaux’s sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi). Am J Primatol. 2017;79:1–10.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
22.Clough D. Gastro-intestinal parasites of red-fronted lemurs in Kirindy Forest, western Madagascar. J Parasitol. 2010;96:245–51.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Gogarten JF, Calvignac-Spencer S, Nunn CL, Ulrich M, Saiepour N, Nielsen HV, et al. Metabarcoding of eukaryotic parasite communities describes diverse parasite assemblages spanning the primate phylogeny. Mol Ecol Resour. 2020;20:204–15.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Lai GC, Tan TG, Pavelka N. The mammalian mycobiome: A complex system in a dynamic relationship with the host. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2019;11:e1438.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Mann AE, Mazel F, Lemay MA, Morien E, Billy V, Kowalewski M, et al. Biodiversity of protists and nematodes in the wild nonhuman primate gut. ISME J. 2020;14:609–22.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
26.Grieneisen LE, Livermore J, Alberts S, Tung J, Archie EA. Group living and male dispersal predict the core gut microbiome in wild baboons. Integr Comp Biol. 2017;57:770–85.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
27.Klindworth A, Pruesse E, Schweer T, Peplies J, Quast C, Horn M, et al. Evaluation of general 16S ribosomal RNA gene PCR primers for classical and next-generation sequencing-based diversity studies. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:1–11.
Google Scholar 
28.Toju H, Tanabe AS, Yamamoto S, Sato H. High-coverage ITS primers for the DNA-based identification of ascomycetes and basidiomycetes in environmental samples. PLoS One. 2012;7:e40863.29.Porat I, Vishnivetskaya TA, Mosher JJ, Brandt CC, Yang ZK, Brooks SC, et al. Characterization of archaeal community in contaminated and uncontaminated surface stream sediments. Microb Ecol. 2010;60:784–95.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
30.Gantner S, Andersson AF, Alonso-Sáez L, Bertilsson S. Novel primers for 16S rRNA-based archaeal community analyses in environmental samples. J Microbiol Methods. 2011;84:12–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
31.Stoeck T, Bass D, Nebel M, Christen R, Jones MDM, Breiner H-W, et al. Multiple marker parallel tag environmental DNA sequencing reveals a highly complex eukaryotic community in marine anoxic water. Mol Ecol. 2010;19:21–31.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Bahram M, Anslan S, Hildebrand F, Bork P, Tedersoo L. Newly designed 16S rRNA metabarcoding primers amplify diverse and novel archaeal taxa from the environment. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2019;11:487–94.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Berkelmann D, Schneider D, Hennings N, Meryandini A, Daniel R. Soil bacterial community structures in relation to different oil palm management practices. Sci Data. 2020;7:1–7.
Google Scholar 
34.Chen S, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Gu J. Fastp: An ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics. 2018;34:i884–90.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
35.Zhang J, Kobert K, Flouri T, Stamatakis A. PEAR: A fast and accurate Illumina paired-end read mergeR. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:614–20.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
36.Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17:10–2.
Google Scholar 
37.Rognes T, Flouri T, Nichols B, Quince C, Mahé F. VSEARCH: A versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ. 2016;2016:1–22.
Google Scholar 
38.Edgar RC UNOISE2: improved error-correction for Illumina 16S and ITS amplicon sequencing. bioRxiv. 2016;081257.39.Edgar RC UCHIME2: improved chimera prediction for amplicon sequencing. bioRxiv. 2016;074252.40.Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215:403–10.CAS 

Google Scholar 
41.Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: Improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:590–6.
Google Scholar 
42.Guillou L, Bachar D, Audic S, Bass D, Berney C, Bittner L, et al. The protist ribosomal reference database (PR2): A catalog of unicellular eukaryote small sub-unit rRNA sequences with curated taxonomy. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:597–604.
Google Scholar 
43.Nilsson RH, Larsson KH, Taylor AFS, Bengtsson-Palme J, Jeppesen TS, Schigel D, et al. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: Handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47:D259–64.CAS 

Google Scholar 
44.Yarza P, Yilmaz P, Pruesse E, Glöckner FO, Ludwig W, Schleifer KH, et al. Uniting the classification of cultured and uncultured bacteria and archaea using 16S rRNA gene sequences. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2014;12:635–45.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Louca S, Parfrey LW, Doebeli M. Decoupling function and taxonomy in the global ocean microbiome. Science. 2016;353:1272–7.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Team Rc. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2020. Available from: https://www.r-project.org.47.Team Rs. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. Boston, MA: RStudio; 2019.48.Andersen KS, Kirkegaard RH, Albertsen M ampvis2: an R package to analyse and visualise 16S rRNA amplicon data. bioRxiv. 2018;10–1.49.Paradis E, Claude J, Strimmer K. APE: Analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics. 2004;20:289–90.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
50.Wickham H, Rstudio. stringr: Simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations. 2019. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=stringr.51.Wickham H. Reshaping data with the reshape package. J Stat Softw. 2007;21:1–20.
Google Scholar 
52.Dowle M, Srinivasan A, Gorecki J, Chirico M, Stetsenko P, Short T, et al. data.table: Extension of “data.frame”. 2019. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=data.table.53.Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, et al. Welcome to the Tidyverse. J Open Source Softw. 2019;4:1686.
Google Scholar 
54.Wickham H ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Spinger-Verlag New York; 2016.55.Chen L, Reeve J, Zhang L, Huang S, Wang X, Chen J. GMPR: A robust normalization method for zero-inflated count data with application to microbiome sequencing data. PeerJ. 2018;2018:1–20.
Google Scholar 
56.Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30:772–80.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
57.Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. FastTree 2—Approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLoS One. 2010;5:e9490.58.Rambaut A. FigTree—tree figure drawing tool. Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburg; 2020. Available from: http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree.59.Kembel SW, Cowan PD, Helmus MR, Cornwell WK, Morlon H, Ackerly DD, et al. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:1463–4.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
60.Marzano V, Mancinelli L, Bracaglia G, Del Chierico F, Vernocchi P, Di Girolamo F, et al. “Omic” investigations of protozoa and worms for a deeper understanding of the human gut “parasitome.”. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11:e0005916.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
61.Mandal S, Van Treuren W, White RA, Eggesbø M, Knight R, Peddada SD. Analysis of composition of microbiomes: a novel method for studying microbial composition. Microb Ecol Heal Dis. 2015;26:27663.62.Hothorn T, Hornik K exactRankTests: exact distributions for rank and permutation tests. 2019. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=exactRankTests.63.Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, Core Team R nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. 2020. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=nlme.64.van den Boogaart G, Tolosana R compositions: an R package for compositional data analysis. 2020. Available from: http://www.stat.boogaart.de/compositions/.65.Wickham H, Francois R, Core Team R, Rstudio, Jylänki J, Jorgensen M readr: Read rectangular text data. 2018. Available from: http://readr.tidyverse.org.66.Oksanen J, Blanchet G, Friendly M, Kindt R, Legendre P, McGlinn D, et al. vegan: Community ecology package. 2019. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan.67.Lozupone C, Lladser ME, Knights D, Stombaugh J, Knight R. UniFrac: An effective distance metric for microbial community comparison. ISME J. 2011;5:169–72.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw. 2015;67:1–48.
Google Scholar 
69.Reitmeier S, Hitch TCA, Treichel N, Fikas N, Hausmann B, Ramer-Tait AE, et al. Handling of spurious sequences affects the outcome of high-throughput 16S rRNA gene amplicon profiling. ISME COMMUN. 2021;1:31.
Google Scholar 
70.Sweeny AR, Lemon H, Ibrahim A, Nussey DH, Free A, McNally L. A mixed model approach for estimating drivers of microbiota community composition and differential taxonomic abundance (preprint). bioRxiv. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.24.395715.71.Barr DJ, Levy R, Scheepers C, Tily HJ. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. J Mem Lang. 2013;68:255–78.
Google Scholar 
72.Matuschek H, Kliegl R, Vasishth S, Baayen H, Bates D. Balancing type I error and power in linear mixed models. J Mem Lang. 2017;94:305–15.
Google Scholar 
73.Fox J, Weisberg S. An R companion to applied regression. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publishing; 2019.74.Bolker BM. Ecological models and data in R. New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press; 2008.75.Adams DC, Anthony CD. Using randomization techniques to analyse behavioural data. Anim Behav. 1996;51:733–8.
Google Scholar 
76.Baayen RH. Analyzing linguistic data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008.77.Bartón K MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. 2020. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=MuMIn.78.Lüdecke D. sjPlot: Data Visualization for Statistics in Social Science. 2021. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=sjPlot.79.Edgar RC. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1792–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
80.Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. MEGA X: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol Biol Evol. 2018;35:1547–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
81.NCBI Resource Coordinators. Database resources of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46:D8–13.
Google Scholar 
82.Nilsson RH, Anslan S, Bahram M, Wurzbacher C, Baldrian P, Tedersoo L. Mycobiome diversity: high-throughput sequencing and identification of fungi. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2019;17:95–109. 15.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
83.Koskinen K, Pausan MR, Perras AK, Beck M, Bang C, Mora M, et al. First insights into the diverse human archaeome: specific detection of archaea in the gastrointestinal tract, lung, and nose and on skin. MBio. 2017;8:1–17.
Google Scholar 
84.Raymann K, Moeller AH, Goodman AL, Ochman H. Unexplored archaeal diversity in the great ape gut microbiome. mSphere. 2017;2:1–12.
Google Scholar 
85.Ley RE. Prevotella in the gut: choose carefully. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;13:69–70.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
86.Manara S, Asnicar F, Beghini F, Bazzani D, Cumbo F, Zolfo M, et al. Microbial genomes from non-human primate gut metagenomes expand the primate-associated bacterial tree of life with over 1000 novel species. Genome Biol. 2019;20:299.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
87.Umanets A, de Winter I, IJdema F, Ramiro-Garcia J, van Hooft P, Heitkönig IMA, et al. Occupancy strongly influences faecal microbial composition of wild lemurs. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2018;94:1–13.
Google Scholar 
88.Greene LK, Clayton JB, Rothman RS, Semel BP, Semel MA, Gillespie TR, et al. Local habitat, not phylogenetic relatedness, predicts gut microbiota better within folivorous than frugivorous lemur lineages. Biol Lett. 2019;15:5–11.
Google Scholar 
89.Daniel H, Gholami AM, Berry D, Desmarchelier C, Hahne H, Loh G, et al. High-fat diet alters gut microbiota physiology in mice. ISME J. 2014;8:295–308.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
90.Hiippala K, Kainulainen V, Kalliomäki M, Arkkila P, Satokari R. Mucosal prevalence and interactions with the epithelium indicate commensalism of Sutterella spp. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1–13.
Google Scholar 
91.Heintz-Buschart A, Wilmes P. Human gut microbiome: Function matters. Trends Microbiol. 2018;26:563–74.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
92.Ricaboni D, Mailhe M, Cadoret F, Vitton V, Fournier PE, Raoult D. ‘Colidextribacter massiliensis’ gen. nov., sp. nov., isolated from human right colon. New Microbes New Infect. 2017;17:27–9.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
93.Qin P, Zou Y, Dai Y, Luo G, Zhang X, Xiao L. Characterization a novel butyric acid-producing bacterium Collinsella aerofaciens subsp. shenzhenensis subsp. nov. Microorganisms. 2019;7:78.94.Sizova MV, Muller PA, Stancyk D, Panikov NS, Mandalakis M, Hazen A, et al. Oribacterium parvum sp. nov. and Oribacterium asaccharolyticum sp. nov., obligately anaerobic bacteria from the human oral cavity, and emended description of the genus Oribacterium. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2014;64:2642–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
95.Amato KR, Garber PA. Nutrition and foraging strategies of the black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) in Palenque National Park, Mexico. Am J Primatol. 2014;76:774–87.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
96.White TCR. The significance of unripe seeds and animal tissues in the protein nutrition of herbivores. Biol Rev. 2011;86:217–24.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
97.Ortmann S, Bradley BJ, Stolter C, Ganzhorn JU. Estimating the quality and composition of wild animal diets—a critical survey of methods. In: Hohmann G, Robbins M, Boesch C, editors. Feeding ecology in apes and other primates ecological, physical, and behavioral aspects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 395–418.98.Hippe H, Hagelstein A, Kramer I, Swiderski J, Stackebrandt E. Phylogenetic analysis of Formivibrio citricus, Propionivibrio dicarboxylicus, Anaerobiospirillum thomasii, Succinirnonas amylolytica and Succinivibrio dextrinosolvens and proposal of Succinivibrionaceae fam. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 1999;49:779–82.
Google Scholar 
99.Privé F, Kaderbhai NN, Girdwood S, Worgan HJ, Pinloche E, Scollan ND, et al. Identification and characterization of three novel lipases belonging to families II and V from Anaerovibrio lipolyticus 5ST. PLoS One. 2013;8:e69076.100.Flaiz M, Baur T, Brahner S, Poehlein A, Daniel R, Bengelsdorf FR. Caproicibacter fermentans gen. nov., sp. nov., a new caproate-producing bacterium and emended description of the genus Caproiciproducens. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2020;70:4269–79.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
101.Watanabe Y, Nagai F, Morotomi M. Characterization of Phascolarctobacterium succinatutens sp. Nov., an asaccharolytic, succinate-utilizing bacterium isolated from human feces. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2012;78:511–8.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
102.Clough D, Heistermann M, Kappeler PM. Host intrinsic determinants and potential consequences of parasite infection in free-ranging red-fronted lemurs (Eulemur fulvus rufus). Am J Phys Anthropol. 2010;142:441–52.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
103.Sarkar A, Harty S, Johnson KVA, Moeller AH, Archie EA, Schell LD, et al. Microbial transmission in animal social networks and the social microbiome. Nat Ecol Evol. 2020;4:1020–35.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
104.van Vliet DM, Lin Y, Bale NJ, Koenen M, Villanueva L, Stams AJM, et al. Pontiella desulfatans gen. nov., sp. nov., and Pontiella sulfatireligans sp. nov., two marine anaerobes of the Pontiellaceae fam. nov. producing sulfated glycosaminoglycan-like exopolymers. Microorganisms. 2020;8:920. 18.PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

Nature Video
19 January 2022

Tiny feather wing beetle reveals new way to fly

How a novel flying technique copes with the weird physics of miniature flight

Adam Levy

Adam Levy

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Twitter

Facebook

Email

Flying is a tricky business, but when you are less than a millimetre long, things get even tougher. At such tiny scales the physics of flight changes, and yet insects have evolved strategies to fly in miniature. In this Nature video, we zoom in on new research which is revealing the never-before-seen flight tactics of a species of feather wing beetle.Research Article: Novel flight style and light wings boost flight performance of tiny beetles

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00144-0

Related Articles

The mystery of mosquito flight

Birds gliding through bubbles reveal aerodynamic trick

High-jumping beetle inspires agile robots

Subjects

Ecology

Evolution

Engineering

Latest on:

Ecology

Biodiversity faces its make-or-break year, and research will be key
Editorial 19 JAN 22

Portugal leads with Europe’s largest marine reserve
Correspondence 18 JAN 22

Wind power versus wildlife: root mitigation in evidence
Correspondence 11 JAN 22

Evolution

Novel flight style and light wings boost flight performance of tiny beetles
Article 19 JAN 22

Thwarted vaccines, strange metals — the week in infographics
News 18 JAN 22

How rich countries skew the fossil record
News 13 JAN 22

Engineering

Robots rise to meet the challenge of caring for old people
Outlook 19 JAN 22

Novel flight style and light wings boost flight performance of tiny beetles
Article 19 JAN 22

A crossbar array of magnetoresistive memory devices for in-memory computing
Article 12 JAN 22

Jobs

Enrollment is open for the International PhD Program in Biology, Shenzhen University School of Medicine

Shenzhen University Health Science Center
Shenzhen, China

Research Associate (Postdoc) on software testing

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

Research Associate (PostDoc) in Software Engineering On Software Testing and Automated Debugging

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

Doctoral (PhD) student position in mitochondrial metabolism

Karolinska Institutet, doctoral positions
Solna, Sweden More

1.Stork, N. E. How many species of insects and other terrestrial arthropods are there on Earth? Annu. Rev. Entomol. 63, 31–45 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Seibold, S. et al. Arthropod decline in grasslands and forests is associated with landscape-level drivers. Nature 574, 671–674 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Wagner, D. L., Fox, R., Salcido, D. M. & Dyer, L. A. A window to the world of global insect declines: Moth biodiversity trends are complex and heterogeneous. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2002549117, 1–8 (2021).
Google Scholar 
4.Kulakowski, D. et al. A walk on the wild side: Disturbance dynamics and the conservation and management of European mountain forest ecosystems. Ecol. Manag. 388, 120–131 (2017).
Google Scholar 
5.Allen, C. D., Breshears, D. D. & McDowell, N. G. On underestimation of global vulnerability to tree mortality and forest die-off from hotter drought in the Anthropocene. Ecosphere 6, 129, 1–55 (2015).
Google Scholar 
6.Senf, C., Buras, A., Zang, C. S., Rammig, A. & Seidl, R. Excess forest mortality is consistently linked to drought across Europe. Nat. Commun. 11, 6200, 1–8 (2020).
Google Scholar 
7.Brodribb, T. J., Powers, J., Cochard, H. & Choat, B. Hanging by a thread? Forests and drought. Science 368, 261–266 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.Samaniego, L. et al. Anthropogenic warming exacerbates European soil moisture droughts. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 421–426 (2018).
Google Scholar 
9.Sallé, A. et al. Forest decline differentially affects trophic guilds of canopy-dwelling beetles. Ann. For. Sci. 77, 86 (2020).
Google Scholar 
10.Beudert, B. et al. Bark beetles increase biodiversity while maintaining drinking water quality. Conserv. Lett. 8, 272–281 (2015).
Google Scholar 
11.Evans, P. M. et al. Testing the relative sensitivity of 102 ecological variables as indicators of woodland condition in the New Forest, UK. Ecol. Indic. 107, 105575, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 
12.Seidl, R. et al. Forest disturbances under climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 395–402 (2017).
Google Scholar 
13.Thorn, S. et al. Impacts of salvage logging on biodiversity: a meta-analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 55, 279–289 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Thom, D. & Seidl, R. Natural disturbance impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity in temperate and boreal forests. Biol. Rev. 91, 760–781 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Moretti, M., Obrist, M. K. & Duelli, P. Arthropod biodiversity after forest fires: winners and losers in the winter fire regime of the southern Alps. Ecography 27, 173–186 (2004).
Google Scholar 
16.Dainese, M. et al. A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0121, 1–13 (2019).
Google Scholar 
17.Larsen, S., Chase, J. M., Durance, I. & Ormerod, S. J. Lifting the veil: Richness measurements fail to detect systematic biodiversity change over three decades. Ecology 99, 1316–1326 (2018).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
18.Cardoso, P. The seven impediments in invertebrate conservation and how to overcome them. Biol. Conserv. 144, 2647–2655 (2011).
Google Scholar 
19.Morinière, J. et al. A DNA barcode library for 5,200 German flies and midges (Insecta: Diptera) and its implications for metabarcoding‐based biomonitoring. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19, 900–928 (2019).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
20.Hebert, P. D. N., Cywinska, A., Ball, S. L. & deWaard, J. R. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. Biol. Sci. 270, 313–321 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
21.Ratnasingham, S. & Hebert, P. D. N. A DNA-based registry for all animal species: The Barcode Index Number (BIN) system. PLoS ONE 8, e66213, 1–16 (2013).
Google Scholar 
22.Wang, C. et al. The ecological impact of pest-induced tree dieback on insect biodiversity in Yunnan pine plantations, China. Ecol. Manag. 491, 119173, 1–11 (2021).
Google Scholar 
23.Roland, J. & Taylor, P. D. Insect parasitoid species respond to forest structure at different spatial scales. Nature 386, 710–713 (1997).CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Nguyen, L.-T.-H. et al. Bottom-up effect of water stress on the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi. Entomol. Gen. 38, 15–27 (2018).
Google Scholar 
25.Lebourgeois, F., Rathgeber, C. B. K. & Ulrich, E. Sensitivity of French temperate coniferous forests to climate variability and extreme events (Abies alba, Picea abies and Pinus sylvestris). J. Veg. Sci. 21, 364–376 (2010).
Google Scholar 
26.Camarero, J. J., Bigler, C., Linares, J. C. & Gil-Pelegrín, E. Synergistic effects of past historical logging and drought on the decline of Pyrenean silver fir forests. Ecol. Manag. 262, 759–769 (2011).
Google Scholar 
27.Ratnasingham, S. & Hebert, P. D. N. BOLD: The Barcode of Life Data system. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 355–364 (2007).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Hui, C. & McGeoch, M. A. Zeta diversity as a concept and metric that unifies incidence-based biodiversity patterns. Am. Nat. 184, 684–694 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
29.McGeoch, M. A. et al. Measuring continuous compositional change using decline and decay in zeta diversity. Ecology 100, e02832, 1–18 (2019).
Google Scholar 
30.Latombe, G., McGeoch, M., Nipperess, D. & Hui, C. zetadiv: Functions to compute compositional turnover using zeta diversity (version 1.2.0) [software] https://github.com/GLatombe/zetadiv (2020).31.Brown, A. M. et al. The fourth-corner solution—using predictive models to understand how species traits interact with the environment. Methods Ecol. Evol. 5, 344–352 (2014).
Google Scholar 
32.Hartop, E., Srivathsan, A., Ronquist, F. & Meier, R. Large-scale Integrative Taxonomy (LIT): resolving the data conundrum for dark taxa. Preprint at BioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.13.439467 (2021).33.Kortmann, M. et al. Ecology versus society: impacts of bark beetle infestations on biodiversity and restorativeness in protected areas of Central Europe. Biol. Conserv. 254, 10893, 1–9 (2021).
Google Scholar 
34.Thorn, S. et al. Rare species, functional groups, and evolutionary lineages drive successional trajectories in disturbed forests. Ecology 101, e02949, 1–8 (2020).
Google Scholar 
35.Müller, J., Noss, R. F., Bussler, H. & Brandl, R. Learning from a “benign neglect strategy” in a national park: response of saproxylic beetles to dead wood accumulation. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2559–2569 (2010).
Google Scholar 
36.Cours, J. et al. Contrasting responses of habitat conditions and insect biodiversity to pest- or climate-induced dieback in coniferous mountain forests. Ecol. Manag. 482, 11881, 1–14 (2021).
Google Scholar 
37.Herrault, P.-A. et al. Combined effects of area, connectivity, history and structural heterogeneity of woodlands on the species richness of hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae). Landsc. Ecol. 31, 877–893 (2016).
Google Scholar 
38.Leather, S. R. “Ecological Armageddon”—more evidence for the drastic decline in insect numbers. Ann. Appl. Biol. 172, 1–3 (2018).
Google Scholar 
39.Fleishman, E., Noss, R. & Noon, B. Utility and limitations of species richness metrics for conservation planning. Ecol. Indic. 6, 543–553 (2006).
Google Scholar 
40.Borges, P. A. V., Rigal, F., Ros-Prieto, A. & Cardoso, P. Increase of insular exotic arthropod diversity is a fundamental dimension of the current biodiversity crisis. Insect Conserv. Divers. 13, 508–518 (2020).
Google Scholar 
41.Ienco, A., Dapporto, L., Greco, S., Infusino, M. & Scalercio, S. β-diversity partitioning of moth communities within and between different forest types. Sci. Nat. 107, 8, 1–11 (2020).
Google Scholar 
42.Thorn, S. et al. The living dead: acknowledging life after tree death to stop forest degradation. Front. Ecol. Environ. 18, 505–512 (2020).
Google Scholar 
43.Arnan, X., Bosch, J., Comas, L., Gracia, M. & Retana, J. Habitat determinants of abundance, structure and composition of flying Hymenoptera communities in mountain old-growth forests. Insect Conserv. Divers. 4, 200–211 (2011).
Google Scholar 
44.Säterberg, T., Jonsson, T., Yearsley, J., Berg, S. & Ebenman, B. A potential role for rare species in ecosystem dynamics. Sci. Rep. 9, 11107, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 
45.Jain, M. et al. The importance of rare species: a trait-based assessment of rare species contributions to functional diversity and possible ecosystem function in tall-grass prairies. Ecol. Evol. 4, 104–112 (2014).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Soliveres, S. et al. Locally rare species influence grassland ecosystem multifunctionality. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 371, 20150269, 1–10 (2016).
Google Scholar 
47.Heidrich, L. et al. Heterogeneity–diversity relationships differ between and within trophic levels in temperate forests. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1204–1212 (2020).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
48.Larrieu, L. et al. Tree related microhabitats in temperate and Mediterranean European forests: a hierarchical typology for inventory standardization. Ecol. Indic. 84, 194–207 (2018).
Google Scholar 
49.Seibold, S. et al. Microclimate and habitat heterogeneity as the major drivers of beetle diversity in dead wood. J. Appl. Ecol. 53, 934–943 (2016).
Google Scholar 
50.Ji, Y. et al. SPIKEPIPE: a metagenomic pipeline for the accurate quantification of eukaryotic species occurrences and intraspecific abundance change using DNA barcodes or mitogenomes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 20, 256–267 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Sire, L. et al. The challenge of DNA barcoding saproxylic beetles in natural history collections—exploring the potential of parallel multiplex sequencing with Illumina MiSeq. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 495, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 
52.Morinière, J. et al. Species identification in Malaise trap samples by DNA barcoding based on NGS technologies and a scoring matrix. PLoS ONE 11, e0155497, 1–14 (2016).
Google Scholar 
53.Ashfaq, M. et al. Insect diversity in the Saharo-Arabian region: revealing a little-studied fauna by DNA barcoding. PLoS ONE 13, e0199965, 1–16 (2018).
Google Scholar 
54.Karlsson, D., Hartop, E., Forshage, M., Jaschhof, M. & Ronquist, F. The Swedish Malaise trap project: a 15 year retrospective on a countrywide insect inventory. Biodivers. Data J. 8, e47255, 1–35 (2020).
Google Scholar 
55.Russo, L., Stehouwer, R., Heberling, J. M. & Shea, K. The composite insect trap: an innovative combination trap for biologically diverse sampling. PLoS ONE 6, e21079, 1–7 (2011).
Google Scholar 
56.Lambert, J., Drenou, C., Denux, J.-P., Balent, G. & Cheret, V. Monitoring forest decline through remote sensing time series analysis. GIScience Remote Sens 50, 437–457 (2013).
Google Scholar 
57.Lemmon, P. E. A spherical densiometer for estimating forest overstory density. For. Sci. 2, 314–320 (1956).
Google Scholar 
58.Larrieu, L. & Gonin, P. L’indice de biodiversité potentielle (ibp): une méthode simple et rapide pour évaluer la biodiversité potentielle des peuplements forestiers. Rev. For. Fr. 6, 727–748 (2008).
Google Scholar 
59.Larsson, T.-B. in Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management at the Forest Management Unit Level (eds. Franc, A., Laroussinie, O. & Karjalainen, T.) Vol. 38, 75–81 (European Forest Institute Proceeding, 2001).60.Gosselin, F. & Larrieu, L. Developing and using statistical tools to estimate observer effect for ordered class data: the case of the IBP (Index of Biodiversity Potential). Ecol. Indic. 110, 105884, 1–10 (2020).
Google Scholar 
61.Elbrecht, V., Peinert, B. & Leese, F. Sorting things out: Assessing effects of unequal specimen biomass on DNA metabarcoding. Ecol. Evol. 7, 6918–6926 (2017).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
62.Leray, M., Haenel, Q. & Bourlat, S. J. in Marine Genomics (ed. Bourlat, S. J.) Vol. 1452, 209–218 (Springer New York, 2016).63.Leray, M. et al. A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents. Front. Zool. 10, 34, 1–14 (2013).
Google Scholar 
64.Geller, J., Meyer, C., Parker, M. & Hawk, H. Redesign of PCR primers for mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I for marine invertebrates and application in all-taxa biotic surveys. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 13, 851–861 (2013).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
65.Fadrosh, D. W. et al. An improved dual-indexing approach for multiplexed 16S rRNA gene sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform. Microbiome 2, 6, 1–7 (2014).
Google Scholar 
66.Illumina. Illumina two-channel SBS sequencing technology. Pub. No. 770-2013-054. https://www.well.ox.ac.uk/ogc/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/techspotlight_two-channel_sbs.pdf (2016).67.Knittel, T. & Picard, D. PCR with degenerate primers 9 containing deoxyinosine fails with PFU DNA polumerase. Genome Res. 2, 346–347 (1993).CAS 

Google Scholar 
68.Alberdi, A., Aizpurua, O., Gilbert, M. T. P. & Bohmann, K. Scrutinizing key steps for reliable metabarcoding of environmental samples. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 134–147 (2018).
Google Scholar 
69.Camacho, C. et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinforma. 10, 421, 1–10 (2009).
Google Scholar 
70.Schubert, M., Lindgreen, S. & Orlando, L. AdapterRemoval v2: rapid adapter trimming, identification, and read merging. BMC Res. Notes 9, 88, 1–7 (2016).
Google Scholar 
71.Joshi, N. A. & Fass, J. N. Sickle: a sliding-window, adaptive, quality-based trimming tool for FastQ files (version 1.33) [software]. https://github.com/najoshi/sickle (2011).72.Nurk, S. et al. in RECOMB 2013: Research in Computational Molecular Biology (eds. Deng, M., Jiang, R., Sun, F. & Zhang, X.) Vol. 7821, 158–170 (Springer International Publishing, 2013).73.Masella, A. P., Bartram, A. K., Truszkowski, J. M., Brown, D. G. & Neufeld, J. D. PANDAseq: paired-end assembler for Illumina sequences. BMC Bioinforma. 13, 31, 1–7 (2012).
Google Scholar 
74.Zepeda-Mendoza, M. L., Bohmann, K., Carmona Baez, A. & Gilbert, M. T. P. DAMe: a toolkit for the initial processing of datasets with PCR replicates of double-tagged amplicons for DNA metabarcoding analyses. BMC Res. Notes 9, 255, 1–13 (2016).
Google Scholar 
75.R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2017).76.Renkonen, O. Statistisch-ökologische Untersuchungen über die terrestische Käferwelt der finnischen Bruchmoore. Ann. Bot. Soc. Zool.-Bot. Fenn. Vanamo 6, 1–231 (1938).
Google Scholar 
77.Rognes, T., Flouri, T., Nichols, B., Quince, C. & Mahé, F. VSEARCH: a versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ 4, e2584, 1–22 (2016).
Google Scholar 
78.Hebert, P. D. N., Ratnasingham, S. & de Waard, J. R. Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 270, S96–S99 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
79.Boyer, F. et al. OBITOOLS: a UNIX-inspired software package for DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 16, 176–182 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
80.Frøslev, T. G. et al. Algorithm for post-clustering curation of DNA amplicon data yields reliable biodiversity estimates. Nat. Commun. 8, 1188, 1–11 (2017).
Google Scholar 
81.Chamberlain, S. bold: Interface to BOLD systems API. (version 1.1.0) [software] https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=bold (2020).82.Godfray, C. H. J. Parasitoids: Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology 472 pp (Princeton University Press, 1994).83.Bouget, C., Brustel, H. & Zagatti, P. The French Information System on Saproxylic BEetle Ecology (FRISBEE): an ecological and taxonomical database to help with the assessment of forest conservation status. Rev. D’Ecologie Terre Vie Société Natl. Prot. Nat. 63, 33–36 (2008).84.Schmidt-Kloiber, A. & Hering, D. An online tool that unifies, standardises and codifies more than 20,000 European freshwater organisms and their ecological preferences. Ecol. Indic. 53, 271–282 (2015).
Google Scholar 
85.Liu, M., Clarke, L. J., Baker, S. C., Jordan, G. J. & Burridge, C. P. A practical guide to DNA metabarcoding for entomological ecologists. Ecol. Entomol. 45, 373–385 (2020).
Google Scholar 
86.Hsieh, T. C., Ma, K. H. & Chao, iNEXT: iNterpolation and EXTrapolation for species diversity (version 2.0.20) [software] http://chao.stat.nthu.edu.tw/wordpress/software-download/ (2020).87.Oksanen, J. et al. vegan: Community ecology package (version 2.5-6) [software] https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan (2020).88.Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. An R Companion to Applied Regression (SAGE Publications, 2019).89.Wang, Y., Naumann, U., Eddelbuettel, D., Wilshire, J. & Warton, D. mvabund: Statistical methods for analysing multivariate abundance data (version 4.3.1) [software] https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=mvabund (2020).90.Popovic, G. C., Warton, D. I., Thomson, F. J., Hui, F. K. C. & Moles, A. T. Untangling direct species associations from indirect mediator species effects with graphical models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 1571–1583 (2019).
Google Scholar 
91.De Cáceres, M., Legendre, P. & Moretti, M. Improving indicator species analysis by combining groups of sites. Oikos 119, 1674–1684 (2010).
Google Scholar 
92.Gaston, K. J. in Rarity Vol. 13, 1–21 (Springer, 1994).93.McMurdie, P. J. & Holmes, S. phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE 8, e61217, 1–11 (2013).
Google Scholar 
94.Akaike, H. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. in Second International Symposium on Information Theory 267–281 (1973).95.Ferrier, S., Manion, G., Elith, J. & Richardson, K. Using generalized dissimilarity modelling to analyse and predict patterns of beta diversity in regional biodiversity assessment. Divers. Distrib. 13, 252–264 (2007).
Google Scholar 
96.Sire, L. et al. Climate-induced forest dieback drives compositional changes in insect communities that are more pronounced for rare species. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5653307 (2021).97.Sire, L. et al. Supplementary Data—Climate-induced forest dieback drives compositional changes in insect communities that are more pronounced for rare species. figshare. Dataset https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.16975636.v1 (2021). More

Aarhus University, SORALO and KWT digitized bomas, fences and agriculture in a systematic manner using available satellite imagery (see methods). All digitization was re-checked by supervisors, to ensure that no data had been missed, and was adjusted following quality control where and when required. All data were then manually checked by conservation practitioners knowledgeable of the study area. Both the spatial resolution and temporal sampling of the data may present limitations to its accuracy and usage.Spatial resolutionFor both the KWT and SORALO datasets collected using Google Earth, we used the latest Google Earth imagery. Additionally, for KWT’s dataset, we also used the latest Bing maps imagery. However, the spatial resolution of this Google Earth and Bing maps data varies. Resolution can be as high as ~0.5 m, while a few remaining areas still rely on Landsat Imagery with a resolution of 30 m. However, the quality of the Google Earth and Bing maps imagery was generally high enough across the study area to accurately delineate bomas, fencelines and agricultural land. Figures 3 and 4 provide examples of areas that would be digitized, with the boundaries of the boma and fence lines clearly visible.The fencing data collected by Aarhus University used Landsat Imagery at 30 m resolution and smaller fences may be missing from the dataset as they are harder to distinguish. This is also true for wire fence (the predominant type of fencing around the Maasai Mara; Fig. 3C). Vegetation differences used to identify these fence lines may take some time to develop. Therefore, there may be an underestimate of the fences mapped, especially in those regions with high usage of wire fences.It must be noted that images from Google Earth have an overall positional root mean squared error of 39.7 m, which may impact the interpretation of this dataset23. We believe that these errors are acceptable for our first attempt at collecting landscape-scale data, and will be refined over time with improved imagery and ground-truthing. Landsat data has a root mean squared error usually below the size of a pixel, with 90% of pixels having less than 12 m deviation (1 https://www.usgs.gov/media/videos/landsat-collections-rmse).Temporal variationThe most likely discrepancies in data quality will arise from temporal variation in fencing placement, boma usage and placement, and agricultural change. Google Earth data were used for SORALO, using data available up to February 2020. Google Earth and Bing maps data were used for KWT, with data up to 2017. The weighted mean imagery date for SORALO (weighted by the area covered) was the 9th of September 2016 and ranged from 15th of December 2000 to 12th of February 2020 (Fig. 5). Where possible we have added a date-time stamp to the boma, agriculture and fencing dataset to best match the date the satellite imagery was acquired, or when it was collected on the ground. However, KWT and some SORALO data lack date attribute, the latter because no date stamp was found in Google Earth, and the former because no date was recorded for any data. The Aarhus University fencing data are from a Landsat Image from January 2016, and the MEP data are from on-the-ground collection. Our database is built so that as new or updated data become available, from both new satellite imagery and ground-based identification, the data layer can be adjusted (see below).Livestock enclosure validationWe used data on the location of SORALO livestock enclosures from the Magadi region24 (collected using handheld GPS devices), to estimate the accuracy of our data collection. The SORALO ground-truthed database contains 668 bomas, which have been occupied at least once during 2014–2017. In the same area, our boma points database contains 573 bomas (85%) of which 41.2% (n = 275) are within 100 m of ground-truthed points and 87.7% (n = 586) are within 500 m of the ground-truthed points. These ground-truthed points may have inaccuracies from their data collection. Also, many livestock enclosures distant from ground-truthed points are newer than the ground-truthing dataset.Agricultural land validationWe compared our agricultural data layer to a commonly used global open source data layer, the 2015 GFSAD30AFCE 30-m for Africa: Cropland Extent Product (www.croplands.org). Our layer agreed with the Cropland Extent Product across 856 km2 of cropland. However, our layer demarcated 455 km2 (34.4% of the total extent) more agricultural land than was found in the 30 m Cropland Extent Product, because many small areas of subsistence farming had not been detected by this global layer. Additionally, the Cropland Extent Product contained 468 km2 (35.3% of the Cropland Extent Product) of agricultural extent not captured in our layer. Much of this was on the periphery of large continuous agricultural areas and appears inaccurately mapped by the global product.Continual validation and improvement of databaseOngoing ground-truthing exercises by the Mara Elephant Project and other partners will improve the quality of the database over time, particularly the datasets on wire fencing in the Mara region. To do so the TerraChart app combined with a QuickCapture app (to validate fence lines and boma locations using aerial reconnaissance) are integrated into the ArcGIS online framework, and following validation both manually and using automated Python script, can be used to update the features collection database.Additionally, any data currently held in the private domain can be easily integrated into this database, and made available to the public domain with approval. Linking these features using a parent ID allows for not only the addition of new features, but improved spatial accuracy of old features, and temporal changes to features to be captured.This database will be continually improved over time. For example, current efforts from conservation partners in the region have resulted in large scale acquisition of high resolution, up-to-date, satellite imagery which will be further used to refine this database. More

1.Steidinger BS, Crowther TW, Liang J, Van Nuland ME, Werner GD, Reich PB, et al. Climatic controls of decomposition drive the global biogeography of forest-tree symbioses. Nature. 2019;569:404–8.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Finlay RD. Ecological aspects of mycorrhizal symbiosis: with special emphasis on the functional diversity of interactions involving the extraradical mycelium. J Exp Bot. 2008;59:1115–26.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Smith SE, Read D. Nitrogen mobilization and nutrition in ectomycorrhizal plants. Mycorrhizal Symbiosis. 2008;321–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012370526-6.50011-8.4.Osonubi O, Mulongoy K, Awotoye OO, Atayese MO, Okali DUU. Effects of ectomycorrhizal and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on drought tolerance of four leguminous woody seedlings. Plant Soil. 1991;136:131–43.
Google Scholar 
5.Mayerhofer W, Schintlmeister A, Dietrich M, Gorka S, Wiesenbauer J, Martin V, et al. Ectomycorrhizal fungi induce systemic resistance against insects on a nonmycorrhizal plant in a CERK1-dependent manner. N Phytol. 2020;228:728–40.
Google Scholar 
6.Mayerhofer W, Schintlmeister A, Dietrich M, Gorka S, Wiesenbauer J, Martin V, et al. Mycorrhizal networks: mechanisms, ecology and modelling. Fungal Biol Rev. 2012;26:39–60.
Google Scholar 
7.Molina R, Horton TR. Mycorrhiza specificity: its role in the development and function of common mycelial networks. Mycorrhizal Netw. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7395-9_1.8.Van der Heijden MGA, Martin FM, Selosse MA, Sanders IR. Mycorrhizal ecology and evolution: the past, the present, and the future. N Phytol. 2015;205:1406–23.
Google Scholar 
9.Brundrett MC. Coevolution of roots and mycorrhizas of land plants. N Phytol. 2002;154:275–304.
Google Scholar 
10.Linkies A, Graeber K, Knight C, Leubner-Metzger G. The evolution of seeds. N Phytol. 2010;186:817–31.CAS 

Google Scholar 
11.Nara K. Ectomycorrhizal networks and seedling establishment during early primary succession. N Phytol. 2006;169:169–78.CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Horton TR, Molina R, Hood K. Douglas-fir ectomycorrhizae in 40- and 400-year-old stands: mycobiont availability to late successional western hemlock. Mycorrhiza. 2005;15:393–403.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Teste FP, Simard SW, Durall DM, Guy RD, Jones MD, Schoonmaker AL. Access to mycorrhizal networks and roots of trees: importance for seedling survival and resource transfer. Ecology. 2009;90:2808–22.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Teste FP, Simard SW. Mycorrhizal networks and distance from mature trees alter patterns of competition and facilitation in dry Douglas-fir forests. Oecologia. 2008;158:193–203.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Egerton-Warburton LM, Querejeta JI, Allen MF. Common mycorrhizal networks provide a potential pathway for the transfer of hydraulically lifted water between plants. J Exp Bot. 2007;58:1473–83.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Wallander H, Ekblad A. The Importance of ectomycorrhizal networks for nutrient retention and carbon sequestration in forest ecosystems. Mycorrhizal Netw. 2015;69–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7395-9_3.17.Song YY, Simard SW, Carroll A, Mohn WW, Zeng RS. Defoliation of interior Douglas-fir elicits carbon transfer and stress signalling to ponderosa pine neighbors through ectomycorrhizal networks. Sci Rep. 2015;5:1–9.CAS 

Google Scholar 
18.Selosse MA, Richard F, He X, Simard SW. Mycorrhizal networks: des liaisons dangereuses? Trends Ecol Evol. 2006;21:621–8.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Robinson D, Fitter A. The magnitude and control of carbon transfer between plants linked by a common mycorrhizal network. J Exp Bot. 1999;50:9–13.CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Hoeksema JD. Experimentally testing effects of mycorrhizal networks on plant-plant interactions and distinguishing among mechanisms. Mycorrhizal Netw. 2015;255–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7395-9_9.21.Teste FP, Karst J, Jones MD, Simard SW, Durall DM. Methods to control ectomycorrhizal colonization: effectiveness of chemical and physical barriers. Mycorrhiza. 2006;17:51–65.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
22.Graves JD, Watkins NK, Fitter AH, Robinson D, Scrimgeour C. Intraspecific transfer of carbon between plants linked by a common mycorrhizal network. Plant Soil. 1997;192:153–9.CAS 

Google Scholar 
23.Wu B, Nara K, Hogetsu T. Can 14C-labeled photosynthetic products move between Pinus densiflora seedlings linked by ectomycorrhizal mycelia? N Phytol. 2001;149:137–46.CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Bever JD, Dickie IA, Facelli E, Facelli JM, Klironomos J, Moora M, et al. Rooting theories of plant community ecology in microbial interactions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25:468–78.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
25.Scheublin TR, Van Logtestijn RSP, Van Der Heijden MGA. Presence and identity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi influence competitive interactions between plant species. J Ecol. 2007;95:631–8.CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Epron D, Bahn M, Derrien D, Lattanzi FA, Pumpanen J, Gessler A, et al. Pulse-labelling trees to study carbon allocation dynamics: a review of methods, current knowledge and future prospects. Tree Physiol. 2012;32:776–98.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
27.Whiteside MD, Werner GD, Caldas VE, Padje A, Dupin SE, Elbers B, et al. Mycorrhizal fungi respond to resource inequality by moving phosphorus from rich to poor patches across networks. Curr Biol. 2019;29:2043–50.e8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Gorka S, Dietrich M, Mayerhofer W, Gabriel R, Wiesenbauer J, Martin V, et al. Rapid transfer of plant photosynthates to soil bacteria via ectomycorrhizal hyphae and its interaction with nitrogen availability. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:1–20.
Google Scholar 
29.Leake JR, Donnelly DP, Saunders EM, Boddy L, Read DJ. Rates and quantities of carbon flux to ectomycorrhizal mycelium following 14C pulse labeling of Pinus sylvestris seedlings: effects of litter patches and interaction a wood-decomposer fungus. Tree Physiol. 2001;21:71–82.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
30.Kiers ET, Duhamel M, Beesetty Y, Mensah JA, Franken O, Verbruggen E, et al. Reciprocal rewards stabilize cooperation in the mycorrhizal symbiosis. Science. 2011;333:880–2.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
31.Simard SW, Perry DA, Jones MD, Myrold DD, Durall DM, Molina R. Net transfer of carbon between ectomycorrhizal tree species in the field. Nature. 1997;388:579–82.CAS 

Google Scholar 
32.Klein T, Siegwolf RTW, Körner C. Belowground carbon trade among tall trees in a temperate forest. Science 2016;1500:15–8.
Google Scholar 
33.Rog I, Rosenstock NP, Körner C, Klein T. Share the wealth: trees with greater ectomycorrhizal species overlap share more carbon. Mol Ecol. 2020;29:2321–33.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.Pickles BJ, Wilhelm R, Asay AK, Hahn AS, Simard SW, Mohn WW. Transfer of 13C between paired Douglas-fir seedlings reveals plant kinship effects and uptake of exudates by ectomycorrhizas. N Phytol. 2017;214:400–11.CAS 

Google Scholar 
35.Lu Y, Conrad R. In situ stable isotope probing of methanogenic Archaea in the rice rhizosphere. Science. 2005;309:1088–90.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
36.Haichar Z, Heulin T, Guyonnet JP, Achouak W. Science direct stable isotope probing of carbon flow in the plant holobiont. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016;41:9–13.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Sietiö OM, Tuomivirta T, Santalahti M, Kiheri H, Timonen S, Sun H, et al. Ericoid plant species and Pinus sylvestris shape fungal communities in their roots and surrounding soil. N Phytol. 2018;218:738–51.
Google Scholar 
38.Sapes G, Demaree P, Lekberg Y, Sala A. Plant carbohydrate depletion impairs water relations and spreads via ectomycorrhizal networks. N Phytol. 2021;229:3172–83.CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Sheffer E. A review of the development of Mediterranean pine-oak ecosystems after land abandonment and afforestation: are they novel ecosystems? Ann Sci. 2012;69:429–43.
Google Scholar 
40.Ajbilou R, Marañón T, Arroyo J. Ecological and biogeographical analyses of Mediterranean forests of northern Morocco. Acta Oecologica. 2006;29:104–13.
Google Scholar 
41.Loudermilk E, Hiers J, Pokswinski S, O’Brien JJ, Barnett A, Mitchell RJ. The path back: Oaks (Quercus spp.) facilitate longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) seedling establishment in xeric sites. Ecosphere. 2016;7:1–14.
Google Scholar 
42.Hynes MM, Smith ME, Zasoski RJ, Bledsoe CS. A molecular survey of ectomycorrhizal hyphae in a California Quercus-Pinus woodland. Mycorrhiza. 2010;20:265–74.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
43.Rog I, Jakoby G, Klein T. Forest ecology and management carbon allocation dynamics in conifers and broadleaved tree species revealed by pulse labeling and mass balance. Ecol Manag. 2021;493:119258.
Google Scholar 
44.Jia Z, Cao W, Herna M. DNA-Based stable isotope probing. Springer. 2019;2046:17–29.CAS 

Google Scholar 
45.Neufeld JD, Vohra J, Dumont MG, Lueders T, Manefield M, Friedrich MW, et al. DNA stable-isotope probing. Nat Protoc. 2007;2:860–6.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Taylor DL, Walters WA, Lennon NJ, Bochicchio J, Krohn A, Caporaso JG, et al. Accurate estimation of fungal diversity and abundance through improved lineage-specific primers optimized for Illumina amplicon sequencing. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82:7217–26.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
47.Blecher-Gonen R, Barnett-Itzhaki Z, Jaitin D, Amann-Zalcenstein D, Lara-Astiaso D, Amit I. High-throughput chromatin immunoprecipitation for genome-wide mapping of in vivo protein-DNA interactions and epigenomic states. Nat Protoc. 2013;8:539–54.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
48.Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJA, Holmes SP. DADA2: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016;13:581–3.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
49.Buckley DH, Barnett SE, Youngblut ND. Data analysis for DNA stable isotope probing experiments using multiple window high-resolution SIP Chapter 9. Springer. 2019;2046:44–5.
Google Scholar 
50.Martin BD, Witten D, Willis AD. Modeling microbial abundances and dysbiosis with beta-binomial regression. Ann Appl Stat. 2020;14:94–115.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
51.Kuzyakov Y, Gavrichkova O. time lag between photosynthesis and carbon dioxide efflux from soil: a review of mechanisms and controls. Glob Chang Biol. 2010;16:3386–406.
Google Scholar 
52.Hagedorn F, Joseph J, Peter M, Luster J, Pritsch K, Geppert U, et al. Recovery of trees from drought depends on belowground sink control. Nat Plants. 2016;2:1–5.
Google Scholar 
53.Moreno-Arroyo B, Infante F, Pulido E, Gómez J. The biogeography and taxonomy of Tuber oligospermum (Tul. and C. Tul.) Trappe (Ascomycota). Cryptogam Mycol. 2000;21:147–52.
Google Scholar 
54.Buscardo E, Rodríguez-Echeverría S, Martín MP, De Angelis P, Pereira JS, Freitas H. Impact of wildfire return interval on the ectomycorrhizal resistant propagules communities of a Mediterranean open forest. Fungal Biol. 2010;114:628–36.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
55.Louro R, Santos-Silva C, Nobre T. What is in a name? Terfezia classification revisited. Fungal Biol. 2019;123:267–73.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.Tedersoo L, Arnold AE, Hansen K. Novel aspects in the life cycle and biotrophic interactions in Pezizomycetes (Ascomycota, Fungi). Mol Ecol. 2013;22:1488–93.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
57.Tedersoo L, Smith ME. Lineages of ectomycorrhizal fungi revisited: Foraging strategies and novel lineages revealed by sequences from belowground. Fungal Biol Rev. 2013;27:83–99.
Google Scholar 
58.Agerer R. Fungal relationships and structural identity of their ectomycorrhizae. Mycol Prog. 2006;5:67–107.
Google Scholar 
59.Tedersoo L, May TW, Smith ME. Ectomycorrhizal lifestyle in fungi: global diversity, distribution, and evolution of phylogenetic lineages. Mycorrhiza. 2010;20:217–63.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
60.Miyauchi S, Kiss E, Kuo A, Drula E, Kohler A, Sánchez-García M, et al. Large-scale genome sequencing of mycorrhizal fungi provides insights into the early evolution of symbiotic traits. Nat Commun. 2020;11:1–17.
Google Scholar 
61.Bruns TD, Bidartondo MI, Taylor DL. Host specificity in ectomycorrhizal communities: what do the exceptions tell us? Integr Comp Biol. 2002;42:352–9.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
62.Pumpanen JS, Heinonsalo J, Rasilo T, Hurme KR, Ilvesniemi H. Carbon balance and allocation of assimilated CO2 in Scots pine, Norway spruce, and Silver birch seedlings determined with gas exchange measurements and 14C pulse labelling. Trees Struct Funct. 2009;23:611–21.CAS 

Google Scholar 
63.Heinonsalo J, Pumpanen J, Rasilo T, Hurme KR, Ilvesniemi H. Carbon partitioning in ectomycorrhizal Scots pine seedlings. Soil Biol Biochem. 2010;42:1614–23.CAS 

Google Scholar 
64.Wallander H, Göransson H, Rosengren U. Production, standing biomass and natural abundance of 15N and 13C in ectomycorrhizal mycelia collected at different soil depths in two forest types. Oecologia. 2004;139:89–97.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
65.Wilhelm R, Szeitz A, Klassen TL, Mohn WW. Sensitive, efficient quantitation of 13C-enriched nucleic acids via ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for applications in stable isotope probing. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014;80:7206–11. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02223-14.CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
66.Schildkraut CL, Marmur J, Doty P. Determination of the base composition of deoxyribonucleic acid from its buoyant density in CsCl. J Mol Biol. 1962;4:430–43.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
67.Jakoby G, Rog I, Megidish S, Klein T. Enhanced root exudation of mature broadleaf and conifer trees in a Mediterranean forest during the dry season. Tree Physiol. 2020;40:1595–605.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Meier IC, Pritchard SG, Brzostek ER, Mccormack ML, Phillips RP. The rhizosphere and hyphosphere differ in their impacts on carbon and nitrogen cycling in forests exposed to elevated CO2. N Phytol. 2015;205:1164–74.CAS 

Google Scholar 
69.Ranjard L, Dequiedt S, Prévost-Bouré NC, Thioulouse J, Saby NPA, Lelievre M, et al. Turnover of soil bacterial diversity driven by wide-scale environmental heterogeneity. Nat. Commun. 2013;4:1–10.
Google Scholar 
70.Carmi I, Yakir D, Yechieli Y, Kronfield J, Stiller M. Variations in the isotopic composition of dissolved inorganic carbon in the unsaturated zone of a semi-arid region. Radiocarbon. 2015;57:397–406.CAS 

Google Scholar 
71.Klein T, Hoch G. Tree carbon allocation dynamics determined using a carbon mass balance approach. N Phytol. 2015;205:147–59.CAS 

Google Scholar 
72.Mayerhofer W, Schintlmeister A, Dietrich M, Gorka S, Wiesenbauer J, Martin V. et al. Recently photoassimilated carbon and fungus-delivered nitrogen are spatially correlated in the ectomycorrhizal tissue of Fagus sylvatica. N Phytol. 2021;232:2457–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.17591.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Fraser EC, Lieffers VJ, Landhäusser SM. Carbohydrate transfer through root grafts to support shaded trees. Tree Physiol. 2006;26:1019–23.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
74.Van Der Heijden MGA, Horton TR. Socialism in soil? the importance of mycorrhizal fungal networks for facilitation in natural ecosystems. J Ecol. 2009;97:1139–50.
Google Scholar  More

SamplingEnvironmental samplingSamples were collected from the littoral marine zone at Canoe Cove, Nahant, Massachusetts, USA, on 22 August (ordinal day 222), 18 September (261) and 13 October (286) 2010, during the course of the three month Nahant Collection Time Series sampling11.Bacterial isolation and characterizationBacterial isolationBacterial strains were isolated from water samples using a fractionation-based approach7 as previously described19,20. In brief, seawater was passed first through a 63um plankton net and then sequentially through 5um (Whatman 111113 or Sterlitech PCT5047100), 1um (Whatman 111110 or Sterlitech PCT1047100), and 0.2um (Whatman 111106) hydrophilic polycarbonate filters; material recovered on the filters was resuspended by shaking for 20 min; dilution series of resuspended cells were filtered onto 0.2um polyethersulfone filters (Pall 66234) in a carrier solution of artificial seawater (40 g Sigma Sea Salts, S9883; 0.2um filtered), and filters placed directly onto Vibrio-selective MTCBS plates (BD Difco TCBS Agar 265020, supplemented with with 10 g NaCl per liter to 2% final w/v). Colonies (96) from each of three replicates of each size fraction were selected from the dilution plates with the fewest numbers of colonies (1,152 isolates per isolation day). Colonies were purified by serial passage, first onto TSB-II (Difco Tryptic Soy Broth, 1.5% BD Difco Bacto Agar 214010, amended with 15 g NaCl to 2% w/v), second onto MTCBS, finally onto TSB-II again. Colonies were inoculated into 1 ml of 2216 Marine Broth (BD Difco 279110) in 96-well 2 ml culture blocks and allowed to grow, shaking at room temperature, for 48 h. Glycerol stocks were prepared by combining 100 ul of culture with 100 ul of 50% glycerol (BDH 1172-4LP) in 96-well microtiter plates and sealed with adhesive aluminum foil for preservation at −80 °C.Bacterial hsp60 gene sequencingTo obtain hsp60 gene sequences for isolates, Lyse and Go (LNG) (Pierce, Thermo Scientific 78882) treatments of subsamples of the same overnights cultures used in the bait assay (described below) were used directly as template in PCR amplification reactions. PCR reactions were prepared in 30 ul volumes, as follows: 1 ul LNG template, 3 ul 10x buffer, 3 ul 2 mM dNTPs, 3 ul 2um hsp60-F primer, 3 ul 2um hsp60-R primer, 0.3 ul NEB Taq, 16.7 ul PCR-grade HOH; with hsp60-F (H279) primer sequence: 5′-GAA TTC GAI III GCI GGI GAY GGI ACI ACI AC-3′, and hsp60-R (H280) primer sequence: 5′-CGC GGG ATC CYK IYK ITC ICC RAA ICC IGG IGC YTT-3′61 (Supplementary Table 1). PCR thermocycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 2 min; 35 cycles of 94 °C for 1 min, 37 C for 1 min, 72 °C for 1 min; final annealing at 72 °C for 6 min; hold at 10 °C. PCR products were cleaned up by isopropyl alcohol (IPA) precipitation, as follows: addition of 100 ul 75% IPA to 30 ul PCR reaction product, gentle inversion mixing followed by 25 min incubation at RT, 30 min centrifugation at 2800 rcf, addition of 50 ul 70% IPA with gentle inversion wash, centrifugation at 2000 rcf, inversion on paper towels to remove IPA, 10 min centrifugation at 700 rcf, air drying in PCR hood for 30 min, resuspension in 30 ul PCR HOH. PCR products were Sanger sequenced (Genewiz, Inc.) using hsp60-R primer, as follows: 5 ul of 5 um hsp60-R primer, 7 ul nuclease free water, 3 ul DNA template. For a subset of strains hsp60 sequences were obtained from subsequently determined whole-genome sequences. Hsp60 sequences were aligned to the hsp60 sequence previously published for Vibrio 1S_84 and trimmed to 422 bases using Geneious (https://www.geneious.com/). Accession numbers for these 1287 strains are provided in Supplementary Data 1, where they are identified as baxSet1287.Bacterial hsp60 phylogeniesA phylogenetic tree of relationships among bacterial isolates screened in the bait assay (described below) was produced based on a 422 bp fragment of the hsp60 gene, derived either from Sanger or whole genome sequences; with E. coli K12 serving as the outgroup. Sequences from each of the three days of isolation were aligned using muscle v.3.8.3162 with default settings (muscle -in $seqsALL -out $seqsALL.muscleAln), and a single tree including all 1287 sequences from all the days was generated using FastTree v.2.1.863 (FastTree -gtr -gamma -nt -spr 4 -slow  $seqsALL.muscleAln.fasttree). For presentation in Fig. 1 three sub-trees including only nodes from each day were produced using PareTree v.1.0.264 (java -jar PareTree1.0.2.jar -t O -del notDay222.txt -f $seqsALL.$round.muscleAln.fasttree.DAY222). Trees were visualized using iTOL65 and painted with metadata for each of the strains, including: sensitivity to killing in agar overlay by co-occurring phage predators collected on the same day and, for the subset of strains that were genome sequenced and also included in the host range matrix, the bacterial species, based on concatenated ribosomal protein analysis using RiboTree66 as described below. Isolation days for each of the strains included in these analyses are provided in Supplementary Data 1, where these strains are identified as baxSet1287.Bacterial genome sequencing and assignment to populationsTo assign genome-sequenced bacterial isolates used in the host range assay to species, we use the RiboTree tool66 to produce a phylogeny based on concatenated single copy ribosomal proteins as in23. We include strains of previously described Vibrionaceae in preliminary analyses as reference strains and assign species names to new isolates based on clustering with named representatives, as well as provide placeholder names for newly identified clades with no previously described representatives. Trees were visualized using iTOL65 and the representation including only those strains included in the host range assay is shown in Supplementary Fig. 1; population assignments and accession numbers for this set of 294 genomes, which also includes a small number of previously isolated bacterial strains that were included in the host range assay (described below), are provided in Supplementary Data 1, where they are identified as baxSet294.Viral isolation and characterizationWe have previously described features of the viruses of the Nahant Collection20, as well as approaches used for the standardization of their genome assemblies19, additional details are provided below.Viral sample collectionThe iron chloride flocculation approach was used to generate 1000-fold concentrated viral samples from 0.2 um-filtered seawater, as follows. For each isolation day, triplicate 4 L seawater samples were filtered through 0.2 um polyethersulfone cartridge filters (Millipore, Sterivex, SVGP0150) into collection bottles, spiked with 400 uL of FeCl3 solution (10 gL−1 Fe; as 4.83 g FeCl3•6H2O (Mallinckrodt 5029) into 100 ml H2O), and allowed to incubate at room temperature for at least 1 h. Virus-containing flocs were then recovered from the sample by filtration onto 90 mm 0.2 um polycarbonate filters (Millipore, Isopore, GTTP09030) under gentle vacuum in a 90 mm glass cup-frit system (e.g Kontes funnel 953755-0090, fritted base 953752-0090, and clamp 953753-0090); once liquid was fully passed, the funnel was removed and, with the vacuum pump left on, the filters were folded into quarters, removed from the fritted base, and inserted into a 7 ml borosilicate glass vial. A volume of 4 ml of oxalate-EDTA solution (prepared from stock solution as 10 ml 2 M Mg2EDTA (J.T. Baker, JTL701-5), 10 ml 2.5 M Tris-HCl (Promega PAH5123), 25 ml 1 M oxalic acid (Mallinckrodt 2752); adjusted to pH 6 with 10 M NaOH (J.T. Baker, 3722-01); final volume 100 ml; used within 7 days of preparation and maintained at room temperature in the dark) was added to the vial and the sample allowed to dissolve at room temperature for at least 30 min before transfer to storage at 4 °C. A reagent used in this original formulation (JT-Baker 7501 Mg2EDTA) is no longer available and an updated recipe is provided elsewhere67.Bait assay and associated viral plaque archivalIn order to obtain estimates of co-occurring phage predator loads at bacterial strain level resolution, and generate plaques from which to isolate phages, we exposed 1440 purified bacterial isolates to phage concentrates from their same day of isolation (1334 yielded lawns sufficient to evaluate for plaques, and hsp60 sequences could be determined for 1287 of these). Bacterial strains screened included 480 isolates from each ordinal day, representing 120 strains from each of 4 size-fractionation classes (0.2 um, 1.0 um, 5.0 um, 63 um) details of isolation origin are provided for each strain in Supplementary Data 1, and description of naming conventions is as previously described19. For the bait assay each strain was mixed in agar overlay with seawater concentrates containing viruses (15 ul concentrate, equivalent to 15 ml unconcentrated seawater assuming 100% recovery efficiency; derived from pooling of three replicate virus concentrates from each day). We note that recoveries were not tested for individual samples and that previous tests14 of recovery efficiency have shown that resuspension of iron flocculates in oxalate solution yields initial recoveries of approximately 50% (49 ± 3% and 55 ± 11% for a marine sipho- and myo-virus respectively, at 24 h post re-suspension) and shows low decay rate over time (47 ± 5% and 73 ± 16% for a marine sipho- and myo-virus respectively, at 38 days post re-suspension). All of our assays were performed approximately 8–9 months post-sampling from oxalate concentrates stored at 4 °C. Agar overlays were performed based on the previously described Tube-free method13, as follows. Bacterial strains were prepared for agar overlay plating by streaking out from glycerol stocks onto 2216MB agar plates with 1.5% agar (Difco, BD Bacto, 214010), and allowed to grow for 2 days at room temperature. Strains were then inoculated into 1 ml 2216MB in a 96-well culture block and incubated 24 h at room temperature shaking at 275 rpm on a VWR DS500E orbital shaker. Immediately prior to use in direct plating the OD600 was measured in 96-well microtiter plates and subsamples were taken for Lyse and Go (LNG) processing for DNA (10 ul culture, 10 ul LNG). Phage concentrates were prepared for plating by pooling 1.2 ml from each of the concentrate replicates into a 7 ml borosilicate scintillation vial. Cultures were transferred from overnight culture blocks to 96-well PCR plates in 100 ul volume and 15 ul of pooled phage concentrate was added to cultures one row at a time, with each row plated in agar overlay before adding phage concentrate to the next row of bacterial cultures. Mixed samples of 100 ul bacterial overnight culture and 15 ul pooled phage concentrate were transferred to the surface of bottom agar plates (2216MB, 1% agar, 5% glycerol, 125 ml L−1 of chitin supplement [40 g L−1 coarsely ground chitin, autoclaved, 0.2 um filtered]). A 2.5 ml volume of 52 °C molten top agar (2216MB, 0.4% agar, 5% glycerol BDH 1172-4LP) was added to the surface of the bottom agar and swirled around to incorporate and evenly disperse the mixed bacterial and phage sample into an agar overlay lawn. Agar overlay lawns were held at room temperature for 14–16 days and observed for plaque formation. Glycerol was incorporated into this assay to facilitate detection of plaques68. Chitin supplement was incorporated into this assay to facilitate detection of phages interacting with receptors upregulated in response to chitin degradation products. A variety of preliminary tests exploring potential optimizations to agar compositions for direct plating indicated that the addition of chitin did not negatively impact recovery of plaques with control phage strains tested. After approximately 2 weeks, plaques on agar overlay lawns were cataloged and described with respect to plaque morphology and plaques were picked for storage based on the previously described Archiving Plaques method13, as follows. All plaques were archived from plates containing less than 25 plaques, on plates with larger numbers of plaques a random subsample of plaques from each distinct morphology were archived. A polypropylene 96-well PCR plate was filled with 200 ul aliquots of 0.2 um filtered 2216MB, agar plugs were collected from plates using a 1 ml barrier pipette tip and ejected into the 2216MB, skipping one well between each sample to minimize potential for cross-contamination, for a final count of 48 phage plugs per plate. Plaque plugs were soaked at 4 °C for several hours to allow elution of phage particles into the media. After soaking, 96-well plates were centrifuged at 2,000 rcf for 3 min before proceeding to the next step. Plug soaks were then processed for two independent storage treatments. For storage at 4 °C, plates were processed by transferring 150 ul of eluate from each well to a 0.2 um filtration plate (Millipore, Multiscreen HTS GV 0.22um Filter Plate MSGVS22) and gently filtered under vacuum to remove bacteria, the cell-free filtrates containing eluted phage particles from each plaque plug were stored at 4 °C. For storage at −20 °C, 50 ul of 50% glycerol was added to the residual ~50 ul of the plug elution, often still containing the agar plug. In this way all plaques were characterized and many plaques from each strain were archived in two independent sets of conditions. Total plaque counts for all strains included in the bait assay are represented in Fig. 1, and provided in Supplementary Data 1, where they are identified as baxSet1287. Notes on limitations to the assay: Water temperatures on each of the three isolations days were 13.8 °C, 16.3 °C, and 14.2 °C, for days 222, 261, and 286; as bait assays were performed at room temperature (approximately 22 °C) some phages requiring lower temperatures may not have yielded plaques. The majority of plates were evaluated for plaque formation twice, on day 1 and day 13, thus any plaques appearing after day 1 and disappearing before day 13 – for example as a result of overgrowth of lysogens—are likely to have been missed in these assays.Viral purificationA subset of plaques archived during the bait assay was selected for phage purification, genome sequencing, and host range characterization. This subset included single randomly-selected representatives from each plaque-positive bacterial strain. Minor details of the purification and lysate preparation varied across samples but were largely as follows. Phages were purified from inocula derived primarily from −20 °C plaque archives, and secondarily from 4 °C archives when primary attempts with −20 °C stocks failed to produce plaques. Three serial passages were performed using Molten Streaking for Singles13 method. Agar overlay lawns for passages were prepared by aliquoting 100 ul of host overnight culture (4 ml 2216MB, colony inoculum from streak on 2216MB with 1.5% Bacto Agar, shaken overnight at RT at 250 rpm on VWR DS500E orbital shaker) onto a standard size bottom agar plate and adding 2.5 ml of molten 52 °C top agar as in the bait assay, swirling to disperse the host into the top agar and form a lawn, and streaking-in phage with a toothpick either from the plaque archive or directly from well-separated plaques in overlays from the previous step in serial purification. Following plaque formation on the third serial passage plate plaque plugs were picked using barrier tip 1 ml pipettes and ejected into 250 ul of 2216MB to elute overnight at 4 °C. Plaque eluates were spiked with 20 ul of host culture and grown with shaking for several hours to generate a primary small-scale lysate. Small scale primary lysates were centrifuged to pellet cells and titered by drop spot assay to estimate optimal inoculum volume to achieve confluent lysis in a 150 mm agar overlay plate lysate. Plate lysates were generated by mixing 250 ul of overnight host culture with primary lysate and plating in 7.5 ml agar overlay. After development of confluent lysis of lawns as compared against negative control without phage addition, the lysates were harvested by addition of 25 ml of 2216MB, shredding of the agar overlay with a dowel, and collection of the broth and top agar. Freshly harvested lysates were stored at 4 °C overnight for elution of phage particles, the following day lysates were centrifuged at 5,000 rcf for 20 min and the supernatant filtered through a 0.2 um Sterivex filter into a 50 ml tube and stored at 4 °C.Viral genome sequencingSequencing of Nahant Collection viruses was described in previous work19, and was performed as follows. For DNA extraction approximately 18 ml of phage lysate was concentrated using a 30 kD centrifugal filtration device (Millipore, Amicon Ultra Centrifugal Filters, Ultracel 30 K, UFC903024) and washed with 1:100 2216MB to reduce salt concentrations inhibitory to downstream nuclease treatments. Concentrates were brought to approximately 500 ul using 1:100 diluted 2216MB and then treated with DNase I and RNase A (Qiagen RNase A 100 mg mL−1) for 65 min at 37 °C to digest unencapsidated nucleic acids. Nuclease treated concentrates were extracted using an SDS, KOAc, phenol-chloroform extraction and resuspended in EB Buffer (Qiagen 19086) for storage at 20 °C. Phage genomic DNA was sheared by sonication in preparation for genome library preparation. DNA concentrations of extracts were determined using PicoGreen (Invitrogen, Quant-iT PicoGreen dsDNA Reagent and Kits P7589) in a 96-well format and samples brought to 5 ug in 100 ul final volume of PCR-grade water diluent for sonication. Samples were sonicated in batches of 6 for 6 cycles of 5 min each, at an interval of 30 s on/off on the Low Intensity setting of the Biogenode Bioruptor to enrich for a fragment size of ~300 bp. Illumina constructs were prepared from sheared DNA as follows: end repair of sheared DNA (NEB, Quick Blunting Kit, E1201L), 0.72×/0.21× dSPRI (AMPure XP SPRI Beads) size selection to enrich for ~300 bp sized fragments, ligation (NEB, Quick Ligation Kit, M2200L) of Illumina adapters and unique pairs of forward and reverse barcodes for each sample, SPRI (AMPure XP SPRI Beads) clean up, nick translation (NEB, Bst DNA polymerase, M0275L), and final SPRI (AMPure XP SPRI Beads) clean up (Rodrigue et al., 2010). Constructs were enriched by PCR using PE primers following qPCR-based normalization of template concentrations. Enrichment PCRs were prepared in octuplicate 25 ul volumes, with the recipe: 1 ul Illumina construct template, 5 ul 5x Phusion polymerase buffer (NEB, 5X Phusion HF Reaction Buffer, B0518S), 0.5 ul 10 mM dNTPs (NEB, dNTP Mix (1 mM; 0.5 ml), N1201AA), 0.25 ul 40 uM IGA-PCR-PE-F primer, 0.25 ul 40 uM IGA-PCR-PE-R primer, 0.25 ul Phusion polymerase (NEB, Phusion High Fidelity DNA Pol, M0530L), 17.75 ul PCR-grade water. PCR thermocycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 98 °C for 20 sec; batch dependent number of cycles (range of 12–28) of 98 °C for 15 sec, 60 °C for 20 see, 72 °C for 20 sec; final annealing at 72 °C for 5 min; hold at 10 °C. For each sample 8 replicate enrichment PCR reactions were pooled and purified by 0.8x SPRI beads (AMPure XP) clean up. Each sample was then checked by Bioanalyzer (2100 expert High Sensitivity DNA Assay) to confirm the presence of a unimodal distribution of fragments with a peak between 350–500 bp. Sequencing of phage genomes was distributed over 4 paired-end sequencing runs as follows: HiSeq library of 18 samples pooled with 18 external samples, 3 MiSeq libraries each containing ~100 multiplexed phage genomes. Accession numbers for all sequenced phage genomes are provided in Supplementary Data 1, where they are identified as phageSet283; the subset of phages used in the majority of analyses in this work are identified as phageSet248 and exclude non-independent isolates derived from the same plaque, as well as well as identical phages isolated from multiple independent plaques from the same host strain in the bait assay.Viral protein clusteringTo characterize and annotate groups of proteins in assembled viral genomes in the Nahant Collection19, proteins were clustered using MMseqs2 v. 2.2339469 with default parameter settings, the 21,937 proteins reported in the GenBank files associated with each of the 283 Nahant Collection phage genomes were clustered into 5,929 clusters including 2,978 singletons. MMseqs2 cluster assignments for each protein sequence are provided in Supplementary Data 6.Viral protein cluster annotationAll proteins were annotated using InterProScan70 v.5.39–77.0; eggNOG-mapper71,72 v.2 using both automated and viral HMM selection options; Meta-iPVP73; and with best matches to 9518 Viral Orthologous Groups74 HMM profiles (obtained at http://dmk-brain.ecn.uiowa.edu/pVOGs/downloads.html); search was performed with hmmer, requiring a bitscore of 50 or greater (highest e-value 5.80E-13), as follows: hmmsearch -o $out_dir/$hmm_group.$hmmfile.$prots_short_name.hmm.out -tblout $out_dir/$hmm_group.$hmmfile.$prots_short_name.hmm.tbl.out -noali -T 50 $hmmfile $prots_dir/$prots_file. Annotations for viral protein clusters are provided in Supplementary Data 6.Receptor binding proteins (RBPs) were annotated as follows. RBPs were defined here to include both globular and fibrous host interacting proteins and general protein annotations were reviewed for similarity to known phage receptor binding proteins and supplemented with Phyre275, HHpred, and literature review76. Annotated RBPs were mapped onto phage genome diagrams and additional RBPs were annotated based on gene order conservation with phages in the same genus for which RBPs were already identified; annotated RBPs were then used to iteratively search against all Nahant Collection phage proteins using the jackhmmer search tool in the HMMER77 v.3.2.1 package (jackhmmer -cpu 16 -N 3 -E 0.00001 -incE 0.01 -incdomE 0.01 -o $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.iters-$iters.out -tblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.iters-$iters.tbl.out -domtblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.iters-$iters.dom.tbl.out $queryFASTAS $subjectFASTAS) and new hits were manually reviewed. All annotations were performed on a protein-cluster level and annotations of proteins and protein clusters as “adsorption – RBP” are indicated in Supplementary Data 6.Recombinases were annotated as follows: Homologs of single strand annealing protein recombinases in the Rad52, Rad51 and Gp2.5 superfamilies in the Nahant Collection phages were identified as described below. First, iterative HMM searches were performed against the Nahant Collection phage proteins using as seeds 194 recombinases identified in Lopes et al.44 (excluding RecET fusion protein YP_512292.1; http://biodev.extra.cea.fr/virfam/table.aspx), these represent 6 families of SSAP recombinases (UvsX, Sak4, Sak, RedB, ERF, and Gp2.5); searches were performed using the jackhmmer function of HMMER v.3.1.2 (jackhmmer -cpu 16 -N 5 -E 0.00001 -incE 0.01 -incdomE 0.01 -o $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.out -tblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.tbl.out -domtblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.dom.tbl.out $queryFASTAS $subjectFASTAS) – this yielded 156 proteins. Second, all hits were plotted onto genome diagrams for all phages in the collection and additional candidate recombinases identified based on gene neighborhood comparisons (Supplementary Data 9) – this step identified 4 additional protein clusters (mmseqs 297, 149, 2211, and 600), totaling 224 proteins. Third, all proteins clusters were curated by manual review of annotations made using InterProScan70, EggNOG-mapper71, and Phyre275 (annotations provided in Supplementary Data 6) to identify potential false positives (none identified), and references to recombinases in annotations. Where these annotation methods did not provide additional support, sequences were evaluated for additional support using HHpred78 (hhsearch -cpu 8 -i../results/full.a3m -d /cluster/toolkit/production/databases/hh-suite/mmcif70/pdb70 -o../results/2058109.hhr -oa3m../results/2058109.a3m -p 20 -Z 250 -loc -z 1 -b 1 -B 250 -ssm 2 -sc 1 -seq 1 -dbstrlen 10000 -norealign -maxres 32000 -contxt /cluster/toolkit/production/bioprogs/tools/hh-suite-build-new/data/context_data.crf) as implemented on the MPI Bioinformatics Toolkit webserver (mmseq 2896 and 5138 both gave >99% probability hits to DNA repair protein Rad52 with PDB ID 5JRB_G), or JackHMMER (-E 1 -domE 1 -incE 0.01 -incdomE 0.03 -mx BLOSUM62 -pextend 0.4 -popen 0.02 -seqdb uniprotkb) as implemented on the EMBL-EBI webserver (mmseq 2990 showed hits to diverse RedB family RecT-like sequences at e-value ≤1e-05). Following this third step, there were 3 protein clusters for which support was limited, these were included in the final dataset as putative SSAP recombinases but are highlighted here. Protein cluster mmseq 297 (present in 21 phages in 6 genera): was always encoded by genes adjacent to genes in protein cluster mmseq 3923, which was itself a recombinase associated exonuclease that was found either adjacent to mmseq 297 or to the well-supported putative SSAP recombinase mmseq 3721 (sometimes separated by one gene from mmseq 3721). Protein cluster mmseq 600 (present in 2 phages in 2 genera): was encoded adjacent to a protein cluster annotated as a recombination associated exonuclease; iterative HHMER searches of a mmseq 600 cluster representative (AUR82881.1) against Viruses in UniProtKB using jackhmmer yielded hits to proteins in mmseq 297 in iteration 3. Protein cluster mmseq 2990 (present in 1 phage): was encoded adjacent to two small proteins encoding putative recombination associated exonucleases and was in the same genomic position relative to neighboring genes as putative recombinases in related phages in the genus. Finally, all putative SSAP recombinase genes were assigned to a recombinase family by clustering based on 2 iterations of all-by-all HMM jackhmmer sequence similarity searches of all candidates and the reference seed set of Lopes44 (jackhmmer -cpu 16 -N 2 -E 0.00001 -incE 0.01 -incdomE 0.01 -o $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.out -tblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.tbl.out -domtblout $run.$1.vs.$2.jackhmmer.dom.tbl.out $queryFASTAS $subjectFASTAS); similarities were were visualized using Cytoscape v.3.3.0 using the “Edge-weighted Spring Embedded Layout” based on jackhmmer score, clusters were identified using the ClusterMaker2 v.1.2.1 Cytoscape plugin with the MCL cluster option and all settings at default and Granularity=2.5. Proteins in 3 mmseq clusters (149, 297, 600) did not fall into MCL clusters with recombinases from the annotated seed set and therefore are described as “unknown” rather than being assigned to a family of recombinases. All final assignments of genes to a recombinase superfamily and family, as well as all associated annotations, are provided in Supplementary Data 6 (sheet A.prots_overview column anno_Recombinase_manual). Additional details regarding seed sequences and MCL cluster assignments associated with recombinase analyses are provided in Supplementary Data 7 which contains a main descriptor sheet (00.readme), an overview of the 224 Nahant phages with recombinases (sheet 01.NahantPhageRecombinases_224), a table of InterPro domains associated with each of the reference and Nahant recombinases, with specific mmseqs and MCL clusters (sheet 02.IPR_annos_Lopes+Nahant), a list of all references used (sheet 03.List1_LOPES_ALL.noETfusion), the output of the iterative jackhmmer search with seeds against all Nahant Collection proteins (sheet 04.List1_vs_NahantProts), the output of the all-by-all jackhmmer search for 194 references and 224 putative Nahant recombinases (sheet 05.Lopes+Nahant224_v_self2iter), and information on the assignment of all Nahant and reference proteins to MCL clusters as shown in Fig. 6 (06.Recombinase_assign_by_MCL).All proteins were assigned to one of three broad categories – structural, other (non-structural), or no prediction – based on manual review of annotations derived from: NCBI product ID, Virfam21, PhANNs79, pVOGs74, eggNOG-mapper72, Phyre275, the MPI Bioinformatics implementation of HHpred78, and targeted annotations of predicted receptor binding proteins and recombinases (see descriptions for targeted annotations in Methods, above). Protein clusters (mmseq groups) were reviewed for conflicting calls and ultimately all proteins within each protein cluster (mmseqsID) were assigned to a single category. All assignments, and annotations on which they were based, are provided in Supplementary Data 6.The approach for assigning annotations to these broad categories was as follows: Step 1) All genes identified as putative recombinases through targeted annotations were assigned as “other”. Step 2) All genes identified as putative receptor binding proteins through targeted annotations were assigned as “structural”. Step 3) Genes not assigned to a category in steps 1 and 2, and which were identified by Virfam as “head-neck-tail” associated were assigned as follows: Genes annotated by Virfam as a terminase (TerL) were assigned as “other”; genes annotated by Virfam as a major capsid protein (MCP), portal (portal), adaptor (Ad1, Ad2, Ad3), head-closure (Hc1, Hc2, Hc3), tail completion (Tc1, Tc2), major tail protein (MTP), neck (Ne), or sheath (sheath) were assigned as “structural”. Step 4) Genes not assigned to a category in steps 1–3, were assigned as “structural” or “other” (non-structural) if identified as such by PhANNs with a confidence of ≥95%. Cases where conflicting annotations were observed between PhANNs and other annotations were flagged for review in subsequent steps. Step 5) Genes with annotations of VOG0263 (DNA transfer protein); terminal protein, any reference to internal virion protein, DNA circularization protein, and MuF-like proteins were assigned as “other”; in the case of conflict the Step 5 annotation superseded the prior annotations. Step 6) Genes with annotation as a terminase (large subunit, small subunit, and unspecified) by any of the tools (requiring ≥ 90% confidence if based on Phyre2) were assigned as “other”. Step 7) All genes lacking support across annotations were assigned as “no prediction”, high confidence Phyre2 predictions qualitatively judged as inappropriate were disregarded. Step 8) Genes flagged in Step 4 were reviewed and assigned as “structural” when containing any structural related genes (i.e. those listed in Step 3 and any others identifiable as structural based on words in the annotations and consensus across tools, e.g. containing the word baseplate, capsid, coat, head, spike, tail, whisker, fibritin). Additional targeted annotation by HHpred was used to facilitate assignment to “structural” (known structural proteins as described for Step 3 and in the aforementioned list), “other” (non-structural), “no prediction” (e.g. no assignable function based on available annotations and a PhANNs confidence of More

Analysis of the roof failure characteristics of coal seamBefore mining, fracturing was conducted on a portion of gritstone in the lower section of the Naoro Formation and then entered the mining stage. Figure 9 shows the influence law of coal roof rupture under different periodic pressures. With mining of the #2 coal seam working face, the direct roof of the coal seam partially broke and collapsed, forming gangue in the goaf. There is a clear separation between the direct and basic roof. When the working face advanced to 228.2 mm, the old roof ruptured, and the working face started to enter the periodic pressure-bearing stage. As the working face advanced to 592.9 mm, the roof exhibited the fourth periodic pressure. The overlying layer roof in the excavation area was affected by the upper bearing arch pressure, leading to the collapsed rock to not completely contact the upper roof. With the increasing distance of coal seam mining, the roof developed significant subsidence, and the influence range of the bedrock boundary caused by the mining was still in the isolation layer fracturing zone. The bedrock influence boundary angle reached 73.57°, and the rock fracture angle was 56.95°. When the working face advanced to 726.5 mm, the fifth periodic pressure on the roof occurred. The bedrock layer in the upper right of the workings was near the right boundary of the first isolated coal seam rupture. Then, coal mining was suspended, and a second isolated seam fracturing process was conducted. The bedrock influence boundary angle reached 73.57°, and the rock rupture angle was 56.95°.Figure 9Influence law of coal roof rupture during different periodic pressure.Full size imageWhen the processing was advanced to 798.4 mm, the bedrock layer in the upper right of the processed area became close to the right boundary of the second isolated seam fracturing. After the third isolated layer fracturing process, the rock impact boundary angle reached 75.33°, and the rock fracture angle was 50.39°. Proceeding to 1031.6 mm, eighth periodic pressure was generated on the roof. The falling gangue in the mined-out area was in contact with the roof, with the bedrock impact boundary angle reaching 74.77° and the rock fracture angle reaching 57.06°. Thereafter, the bedrock layer of the roof gradually entered the full-scale mining stage. As the working face continues to advance, the bedrock impact boundary caused by coal seam mining should be in isolated coal seam fractures. When the bedrock layer at the working face is close to the right boundary of the isolation layer fracturing, the next isolation layer fracturing should be performed.Analysis of roof stress evolution lawFigure 10 illustrates the change law of the roof support pressure when mining of the working face, in which the roof support pressure curve is the stress change minus the initial value of the sensor before mining. After the excavation of the working face, the surrounding rock will exhibit stress redistribution. The increase in tangential stress in front of the working face or on both sides is called the support pressure. The peak value of the support pressure generally occurs on the front of the working face. As the working face advanced to 228.2 mm, the direct roof gradually broke and collapsed with mining. Due to the redistribution of surrounding rock stress, the stress fluctuation at the open cut was clear. In front of the working face, the overlying rock stress was redistributed due to mining, and the vertical pressure peak area appeared, with a stress increment of 0.03 MPa. When the working face advanced to 360.8 mm, the first cycle pressure on the roof occurred. The falling gangue in the mine-out area gradually approached its upper strata, and the peak support pressure increments reached 0.05 MPa. During the advancement of the working face to 592.9 mm, the direct roof continued to collapse. The gangue at the cuttings was gradually compacted with the roof, and the stresses gradually restored to stability. Coal seam mining led to the decompression of the floor, and the vertical stress maximum reduction at the working face was 0.045 MPa. The peak vertical pressure in front of the working face shifted to the right as mining progressed. When degradation reached 726.5 mm, the fifth periodic pressure on the roof occurred. Figure 10b shows that the fracture of the isolation layer had no apparent effect on the change in roof stress. Within 560 mm from the open excavation, the mine-out area gangue gradually compacted with the roof. Vertical pressure changes between the fourth and fifth periodic pressures are slight and practically nonsignificant.Figure 10Vertical pressure variation law with coal mining. (a) First pressure and First periodic pressure difference. (b) Fourth and First periodic pressure difference. (c) Eighth and Ninth periodic pressure difference. (d) Eleventh and Twelfth periodic pressure difference. (e) Variation laws of vertical pressure with mining.Full size imageWhen the mining reached 1031.6 mm, the directly caving gangue completely filled the goaf and was compacted with the roof. The upper roof of the caving rock was supported again, and the compaction range of the mining area extended to 821 mm. As the working face advanced to 1338.9 mm, the peak vertical pressure appeared at 1400 mm, with a maximum increment of 0.375 MPa. The compaction range of the mining area extends to 1200 mm. Then, the fractured isolation layer can be grouted. The subsequent working face advances until the end of mining, and the rock movement above the mine-out zone will exhibit a periodic “falling-filling-cutting-compaction” process. Fracture grouting of the flexible isolation layer has no significant effect on the vertical stress changes, and the stress unloading area and the peak vertical pressure will continue to change with mining. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to the adequacy of the gangue falling from the roof for isolation layer grouting.Roof displacement and development pattern of water-conducting fracture zoneFigure 11 shows the development law of the roof water-conducting fissures in the roof of the coal seam during different pressure periods, where the illustration shows the von Mises equivalent strain. Figure 12 shows the development trend of the water-conducting fracture zone height. From the whole observation, although the isolation layer is treated by fracturing before back mining, it has less influence on the displacement and deformation of the overlying rock layer because it is restricted by the surrounding rock of the model. When the working face was mined to 228.2 mm, the upper roof of the mining face collapsed, and the first periodic pressure occurred on the roof. The roof displacement reached the Yan’an Group mudstone layer, and the roof collapse height was only 104.3 mm. As the mining advanced, the roof fractures in the mining-out area continued to develop upwards. When the working face was mined to 360.8 mm, the first cycle pressure on the roof occurred, and the roof collapse height extended upwards to the siltstone of the Yan’an Formation, with a collapse range of 117.6 mm. At this point, only a small displacement change occurred around the direct roof, and the flexible isolation layer was basically not affected by any impact.Figure 11Development regularity of roof water-conducting fissures during different period pressure.Full size imageFigure 12Development height curve of water-conducting fracture zone.Full size imageFrom the second cycle pressure onwards, the development trend accelerated significantly, and the collapsed height rose rapidly to 210.9 mm. When the working face advanced to 537.1 mm, the third cycle pressure occurred on the roof. The collapsed Yan’an Formation mudstone layer was further pressurized by its upper layers and collapsed to a height of 344.7 mm. The roof displacement had spread to the coarse sandstone of the Naoro Formation, but the height of the water-conducting fracture zone had not reached the bottom of the isolation layer. When the workings reached 592.9 mm, the roof collapsed again, showing the fourth periodic pressure. The water-conducting fissure zone continues to develop upwards to 355.3 mm, which passes through the fissure isolation layer and reaches the gritstone at the top of the isolation layer. The fractured isolation layer is in an “activated” state.When the working face reached 1031.6 mm, fallen gangue completely filled the mining-out area and compacted with the roof, and eighth periodic pressure occurred on the roof. The height of the water-conducting fracture zone developed to 496.8 mm, which was lower than the height of the water-conducting fracture zone of 565.8 mm at the seventh periodic pressure. After that, the old roof collapsed as a cantilevered beam. The development height of the water-conducting fracture zone was allegedly less than 565.8 mm. Afterwards, the roof fracturing direction was consistent with the direction of working face advancement, from left to right. Displacement and fracture of the overlying rock layer were mainly caused by the overall downwards sliding of the upper rock seam due to the collapse of the bottom rock seam. At different heights of the coal seam roof, the degree of displacement damage decreased with increasing height.When the working face reached 1178.7 mm, the roof covering the open cut stabilized. The fractured isolation layers in the 1st ~ 13th groups were grouted, and then the coal was mined only after the slurry had completely solidified and reached a certain strength. The eleventh periodic pressure occurred on the roof, with a water-conducting fracture height of 367.6 mm at this time. When the working face was advanced to 1471.9 mm and 1645.2 mm, the roof had twelfth and fourteenth periodic pressures, and the heights of the water-conducting fracture zone were 332.0 mm and 416.0 mm, respectively. Then, the 14th ~ 15th and 16th ~ 17th group isolation layers of the upper coal seam were grouted while fracturing the right isolation layer. However, the disruption of displacement towards the extent of the development had a relatively small impact, mainly on the roof rock layer above the mining face. Table 2 indicates the development height of the water-conducting fracture zone and the fracture and grouting sequence of the isolated layer.Table 2 Development pattern of water-conducting fracture zone and fracture and grouting sequence of isolated layer.Full size tableDuring the mining process, damage to the water-conducting fissure zone was always a major factor in the displacement of the roof slab. Nonetheless, after fracturing and grouting measures, the effects of the damage were significantly reduced such that the damage to the roof rock was contained within the flexible isolation layer. After grouting, the enhanced strength of the isolation layer ensured that mining was carried out normally. During the mining period, four grouting reforms were made, and the isolation layer was fractured six times, with the maximum development height of the water-conducting fracture zone located at the seventh periodic pressure, reaching 565.8 mm.Analysis of water flow evolution law of overburden roofTo analyse the seepage law of the overburden roof, seven water flow monitoring lines were arranged from the top of the flexible isolation layer to the direct roof of the coal seam. The No. 1 water flow monitoring line was placed in the position of the third group of the isolation layer, which is initially located outside the deformation range of bedrock disturbed by mining and outside the stop line. The flow line was mainly used to monitor the influence of the rock disturbance boundary above the open cut on isolated seam fracturing and grouting. No 2–3 water flow monitoring lines were placed at the isolation layer positions of Group 12 and Group 14, which were initially located near the maximum height of the water-conducting fracture zone and were mainly used to monitor the change laws of the water-conducting fracture zone with mining impact. Monitoring Lines 4–6 were placed in isolation layers No. 17, No. 22 and No. 26 to study the impact of water flow changes with mining disturbance and the advanced influence scope. Water flow monitoring line No. 7 was placed in the thirtieth group of isolated layers, which was originally outside the cut-off line. As shown in Fig. 13, white arrows are water flow vectors in mL/min. Fracturing the 1–18 isolation layers before mining, the water tank hot water was injected into the flexible isolation layer such that the iodized salt in the flexible isolation layer was completely dissolved, and the infrared monitor showed the yellow area in the image. At this point, the water flow monitoring Lines 1–3 and 5–7 show yellow status, indicating that after the fracturing of the isolation layer, the aquifer water flows downwards along the fracture. The lower part of monitoring Line 4 was compacted at the top of the coal seam, indicating that the cracks between the roof and the aquifer had not been communicated. Therefore, the water flow rate was 0 mL/min until the sixth periodic pressure. Mining was then undertaken on the working face. The No. 1 monitoring line was therefore less affected by mining due to its layout outside the stop line, and there was no significant change in water flow before the first grouting.Figure 13Water flow evolution of the overburden roof with coal mining.Full size imageAs shown in Fig. 13, when the working face progressed to second periodic pressure, with the collapse of the coal seam, the stress of the surrounding rock was redistributed, the height of the water flowing fractured zone of the roof increased, and the water flow of the No. 2 monitoring line increased from the initial 9.1 mL/min to 14.0 mL/min. As the working face was advanced above the No. 2 monitoring line, the fifth periodic of pressure were generated in the roof. The development height of the roof water flowing fractured zone reached 504.4 mm. The roof was separated and collapsed, the cracks in the monitoring line communicated with each other, and the rock stress was released. The water flow in the No. 2 monitoring line increased significantly. Monitoring line No. 3 was affected by advanced mining, resulting in the coal seam roof’s increased rock fissures, the water flow path and resistance were reduced, and the water flow reached 48.3 mL/min. At the same time, the influence range of working face bedrock was close to the boundary of the first fracturing of the flexible isolation layer, and Groups 20–22 of isolation lays had been fractured.When mining started at the sixth periodic pressure, the roof water-conducting fracture zone gradually reached the maximum height and penetrated the fractured isolation layer, and the fracture of the roof rock increased. Lines No. 2 and No. 3 reached 44.4 mL/min and 85.6 mL/min, respectively. In fact, the encounter may indicate that the confined water of the gritstone aquifer was released, and the water flow of the working face increased. Then, the working face progressed, and the collapsed gangue above the mining-out area was compacted into the bedrock roof. The stress in the goaf did not change significantly, and the cracks in the strata decreased. The No. 2 and No. 3 water flows of the monitoring line gradually dropped. During this period, the change law of monitoring Lines 4–7 was similar to that of No. 2 and No. 3. During coal seam mining, the roof underwent a process of fracture, collapse, compaction and full mining, and the water flow monitoring line also went through a process of rising and then falling.When the working face was advanced to the eleventh periodic pressure, the grouting transformation of isolation layers 1–12 was conducted. The slurry was injected into the flexible isolation layer by hand pressure pump along the grouting pipe. After the slurry solidified, the colour of the No. 1 and No. 2 monitoring lines gradually became shallow, and the water flow gradually decreased under infrared observation. As the extraction of the coal seam progressed and the flexible insulation layer was broken and grouted, the colour of observation Lines 1–4 turned black in the infrared observation until the fourth grouting of insulation layer 18–19, and the water flow rate all showed 0 mL/min. However, the lower strata of the flexible isolation layer were not yet stabilized, so monitoring Lines 5–7 did not undergo any grouting transformation and still had a large water flow until the end of mining. Flow metre and infrared observations show that the destruction and grouting of the flexible isolation layer had a noticeable effect on the seepage characteristics of the overburden. In particular, after the grouting of the isolation layer, the slurry filled and solidified rapidly, the water flow decreased rapidly, and the water plugging effect of flexible isolation layer grouting was remarkable.Discussion and analysisDuring coal seam mining, the fracturing of the flexible isolation layer should be based on the premining overtopping influence range; that is, when the boundary line of bedrock influence extends to the range of the flexible isolation layer reached by the fracturing area of the flexible isolation layer, the next fracturing should continue. The average boundary angle range of the bedrock was 76.7°, and the field angle should not be less than 73.57°. The grouting of the flexible isolation layer considers the full mining degree of the coal seam. When there is no significant change in stress in the mined area, grouting of the flexible isolation layer at the top of the goaf is conducted. According to the simulation experiment in this paper, the full mining distance of the working face is 1338.9 mm, and the actual distance on site is 187.446 m. It is calculated that the distance between the fracture of the flexible isolation layer should be no less than 854.8 mm away from the working face, and the actual distance on site is 119.672 m. After the working face enters full mining, the shortest distance between the fracturing grouting range of the flexible isolation layer and the working face is not less than 242.6 mm, and the actual distance on site is 33.964 m.As seen from the previous analysis, with the advancement of the working face, the bedrock influence boundary angle of the coal seam does not change significantly, which only plays a guiding role in the fracturing sequence of the flexible isolation layer. The fracturing of the flexible isolation layer had an clear influence on the seepage of water-rich bedrock at the bottom of the Zhiluo Formation. The water-flowing fractured zone formed in the process of coal seam mining promoted the release of fractured water in the water-rich bedrock at the bottom of the Zhiluo Formation. The higher the height of the water-flowing fractured zone is, the greater the seepage of the water-rich bedrock. Coal seam mining had little effect on the seepage characteristics of the water-rich bedrock layer at the bottom of the Zhiluo Formation in the range of not disturbed by mining and advanced influence.In accordance with the stress sensor data, when the working face passed a certain distance, the bottom plate of the extraction area was compacted by the falling gangue, and the sensor pressure data did not change with the mining face. At this time, the grouting of the fracturing area of the flexible isolation layer corresponding to the above goaf was not affected by the mining face. For example, the stress in the goaf of 1200 mm had no clear change. Therefore, the first grouting was conducted in the fracturing area. After the solidification of the grouting slurry, the water flow of monitoring lines No. 1 and No. 2 decreased significantly. This minimized the impact on the original geological environment and at the same time reduced the goaf water drainage of the working face. The sealing effect of the isolation layer has an important influence on promoting water-retaining coal mining.The experimental application of the flexible isolation layer has realized its feasibility from the physical simulation test method in this paper. The realization of a flexible isolation layer requires premining fracturing and postmining isolation grouting. At present, premining fracturing can be achieved by directional drilling technology. There are also examples of roof separation grouting for postmining flexible isolation layer grouting28,29. Therefore, there is no technical bottleneck in field applications. Moreover, there is still a certain distance from the specific engineering application. According to the results of this study, it is predicted that the implementation of a flexible isolation layer will have great significance for water conservation coal mining in western China, which can reduce soil erosion and protect surface ecology. More