Ecology

1.Piao, S. et al. Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 14–27 (2020).
Google Scholar 
2.Forrest, J. & Miller-Rushing, A. Toward a synthetic understanding of the role of phenology in ecology and evolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 3101–3112 (2010).
Google Scholar 
3.Lane, J. E., Kruuk, L., Charmantier, A., Murie, J. O. & Dobson, F. S. Delayed phenology and reduced fitness associated with climate change in a wild hibernator. Nature 489, 554–557 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
4.Richardson, A. D. et al. Ecosystem warming extends vegetation activity but heightens vulnerability to cold temperatures. Nature 560, 368–371 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Abramoff, R. Z. & Finzi, A. C. Are above- and below-ground phenology in sync? New Phytol. 205, 1054–1061 (2015).
Google Scholar 
6.Piao, S. et al. Plant phenology and global climate change: current progresses and challenges. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 1922–1940 (2019).
Google Scholar 
7.Smithwick, E., Lucash, M. S., Mccormack, M. L. & Sivandran, G. Improving the representation of roots in terrestrial models. Ecol. Model. 291, 193–204 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
8.Warren, J. M. et al. Root structural and functional dynamics in terrestrial biosphere models – evaluation and recommendations. New Phytol. 205, 59–78 (2015).
Google Scholar 
9.Ma, H., Mo, L., Crowther, T. W., Maynard, D. S. & Zohner, C. M. The global distribution and environmental drivers of aboveground versus belowground plant biomass. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1110–1122 (2021).
Google Scholar 
10.Neumann, R. B. & Cardon, Z. G. The magnitude of hydraulic redistribution by plant roots: a review and synthesis of empirical and modeling studies. New Phytol. 194, 337–352 (2012).
Google Scholar 
11.Lucas, M., Schlueter, S., Vogel, H.-J. & Vetterlein, D. Roots compact the surrounding soil depending on the structures they encounter. Sci. Rep. 9, 16236 (2019).
Google Scholar 
12.Oades, J. M. The role of biology in the formation, stabilization and degradation of soil structure. Geoderma 56, 377–400 (1993).
Google Scholar 
13.Thackeray, S. J. et al. Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels. Nature 535, 241–245 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
14.Roslin, T., Anto, L., Hllfors, M., Meyke, E. & Ovaskainen, O. Phenological shifts of abiotic events, producers and consumers across a continent. Nat. Clim. Change 11, 241–248 (2021).
Google Scholar 
15.Radville, L., McCormack, M. L., Post, E. & Eissenstat, D. M. Root phenology in a changing climate. J. Exp. Bot. 67, 3617–3628 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
16.Blume-Werry, G., Jansson, R. & Milbau, A. Root phenology unresponsive to earlier snowmelt despite advanced above‐ground phenology in two subarctic plant communities. Funct. Ecol. 31, 1493–1502 (2017).
Google Scholar 
17.Wilson, J. B. A review of evidence on the control of shoot:root ratio, in relation to models. Ann. Bot. 61, 433–449 (1988).
Google Scholar 
18.Schwieger, S., Kreyling, J., Milbau, A. & Blume-Werry, G. Autumnal warming does not change root phenology in two contrasting vegetation types of subarctic tundra. Plant Soil 424, 145–156 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
19.Liu, H., Lu, C., Wang, S., Ren, F. & Wang, H. Climate warming extends growing season but not reproductive phase of terrestrial plants. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 30, 950–960 (2021).
Google Scholar 
20.Steinaker, D. F., Wilson, S. D. & Peltzer, D. A. Asynchronicity in root and shoot phenology in grasses and woody plants. Glob. Change Biol. 16, 2241–2251 (2010).
Google Scholar 
21.Keenan, T. F. et al. Net carbon uptake has increased through warming-induced changes in temperate forest phenology. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 598–604 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
22.Thakur, M. P. Climate warming and trophic mismatches in terrestrial ecosystems: the green–brown imbalance hypothesis. Biol. Lett. 16, 20190770 (2020).
Google Scholar 
23.Wang, H. et al. Alpine grassland plants grow earlier and faster but biomass remains unchanged over 35 years of climate change. Ecol. Lett. 23, 701–710 (2020).
Google Scholar 
24.Chuine, I. A united model for budburst of trees. J. Theor. Biol. 2007, 337–347 (2000).
Google Scholar 
25.Lim, P. O., Kim, H. J. & Gil Nam, H. Leaf senescence. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 58, 115–136 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Reich, P. B., Walters, M. & Ellsworth, D. Leaf life-span in relation to leaf, plant, and stand characteristics among diverse ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 62, 365–392 (1992).
Google Scholar 
27.Körner, C. & Basler, D. Phenology under global warming. Science 327, 1461–1462 (2010).
Google Scholar 
28.Fu, Y. H. et al. Declining global warming effects on the phenology of spring leaf unfolding. Nature 526, 104–107 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
29.Wolkovich, E. M. et al. Warming experiments underpredict plant phenological responses to climate change. Nature 485, 494–497 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
30.López-Bucio, J., Cruz-Ramírez, A. & Herrera-Estrella, L. The role of nutrient availability in regulating root architecture. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 6, 280–287 (2003).
Google Scholar 
31.Friedl, M. A. et al. Global land cover mapping from MODIS: algorithms and early results. Remote Sens. Environ. 83, 287–302 (2002).
Google Scholar 
32.Lian, X. et al. Summer soil drying exacerbated by earlier spring greening of northern vegetation. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax0255 (2020).
Google Scholar 
33.Hollister, R. D., Webber, P. J. & Bay, C. Plant response to temperature in northern Alaska: implications for predicting vegetation change. Ecology 86, 1562–1570 (2005).
Google Scholar 
34.Song, J. et al. A meta-analysis of 1,119 manipulative experiments on terrestrial carbon-cycling responses to global change. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1309–1320 (2019).
Google Scholar 
35.Collins, C. G. et al. Experimental warming differentially affects vegetative and reproductive phenology of tundra plants. Nat. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23841-2 (2021).36.Reyes-Fox, M. et al. Elevated CO2 further lengthens growing season under warming conditions. Nature 510, 259–267 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
37.Richardson, A. D. et al. Influence of spring and autumn phenological transitions on forest ecosystem productivity. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 3227–3246 (2010).
Google Scholar 
38.Wingler, A. & Hennessy, D. Limitation of grassland productivity by low temperature and seasonality of growth. Front. Plant Sci. 7, 1130 (2016).
Google Scholar 
39.Schenk, H. J. & Jackson, R. B. Rooting depths, lateral root spreads and below-ground/above-ground allometries of plants in water-limited ecosystems. J. Ecol. 90, 480–494 (2002).
Google Scholar 
40.Wang, P., Huang, K. & Hu, S. Distinct fine-root responses to precipitation changes in herbaceous and woody plants: a meta-analysis. New Phytol. 225, 1491–1499 (2020).
Google Scholar 
41.Arft, A. et al. Responses of tundra plants to experimental warming: meta-analysis of the international tundra experiment. Ecol. Monogr. 69, 491–511 (1999).
Google Scholar 
42.Fu, Y. S. et al. Variation in leaf flushing date influences autumnal senescence and next year’s flushing date in two temperate tree species. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7355–7360 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
43.Seastedt, T. & Knapp, A. Consequences of nonequilibrium resource availability across multiple time scales: the transient maxima hypothesis. Am. Nat. 141, 621–633 (1993).CAS 

Google Scholar 
44.Bai, E. et al. A meta-analysis of experimental warming effects on terrestrial nitrogen pools and dynamics. New Phytol. 199, 441–451 (2013).
Google Scholar 
45.Sakai, A. & Larcher, W. Frost Survival of Plants: Responses and Adaptation to Freezing Stress (Springer‐Verlag, 1987).46.Zani, D., Crowther, T. W., Mo, L., Renner, S. S. & Zohner, C. M. Increased growing-season productivity drives earlier autumn leaf senescence in temperate trees. Science 370, 1066–1071 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
47.Luo, Y. Terrestrial carbon-cycle feedback to climate warming. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38, 683–712 (2007).
Google Scholar 
48.Hijmans, R. J., Ca Meron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G. & Jarvis, A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 1965–1978 (2010).
Google Scholar 
49.Sloan, V. L., Fletcher, B. J. & Phoenix, G. K. Contrasting synchrony in root and leaf phenology across multiple sub‐Arctic plant communities. J. Ecol. 104, 239–248 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Kou, L. et al. Nitrogen deposition increases root production and turnover but slows root decomposition in Pinus elliottii plantations. New Phytol. 218, 1450–1461 (2018).
Google Scholar 
51.Adams, D. C., Gurevitch, J. & Rosenberg, M. S. Resampling tests for meta-analysis of ecological data. Ecology 78, 1277–1283 (1997).
Google Scholar 
52.Viechtbauer, W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Soft. 36, 1–48 (2010).
Google Scholar 
53.Kattge, J. et al. TRY plant trait database-enhanced coverage and open access. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 119–188 (2020).
Google Scholar 
54.De Martonne, E. Une nouvelle fonction climatologique: l’indice d’aridité. La MétéOrol. 2, 449–458 (1926).
Google Scholar 
55.Breiman, L. Classification and Regression Trees (Routledge, 2017).56.Liaw, A. & Wiener, M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News 2/3, 18–22 (2002).
Google Scholar 
57.Terrer, C. et al. Nitrogen and phosphorus constrain the CO2 fertilization of global plant biomass. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 696–697 (2020).
Google Scholar 
58.Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer-Verlag, 2016).59.Liu, H. et al. Supporting data for ‘Phenological mismatches between above- and belowground plant responses to climate warming’. Figshare https://figshare.com/s/1f086364114021cd80d9 (2021). More

1.Yang, W. Y. et al. Soil properties and geography shape arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal communities in black land of China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 167, 104109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.104109 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Li, H. Y. et al. Effects of different slopes and fertilizer types on the grey water footprint of maize production in the black soil region of China. J. Clean. Prod. 246, 119077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119077 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Li, X. Y., Wang, D. Y., Ren, Y. X., Wang, Z. M. & Zhou, Y. H. Soil quality assessment of croplands in the black soil zone of Jilin Province, China: Establishing a minimum data set model. Ecol. Indic. 107, 105251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.03.028 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Mao, L. G. et al. Flame soil disinfestation: A novel, promising, non-chemical method to control soilborne nematodes, fungal and bacterial pathogens in China. Crop. Prot. 83, 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2016.02.002 (2016).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Rasool, M. et al. Role of biochar, compost and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in the management of tomato early blight disease. Sci. Rep. 11, 6092. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85633-4 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
6.Solorzano, C. D. & Malvick, D. K. Effects of fungicide seed treatments on germination, population, and yield of maize grown from seed infected with fungal pathogens. Field. Crop. Res. 122(3), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.02.011 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.An-le, H. E. et al. Soil application of Trichoderma asperellum GDFS1009 granules promotes growth and resistance to Fusarium graminearum in maize. J. Integr. Agric. 18(3), 599–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(18)62089-1 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Xu, X. G. et al. Isolation and characterization of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens MQ01, a bifunctional biocontrol bacterium with antagonistic activity against Fusarium graminearum and biodegradation capacity of zearalenone. Food Control 130, 108259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108259 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Bonanomi, G., Antignani, V. & Scala, C. P. Suppression of soilborne fungal diseases with organic amendments. J. Plant. Pathol. 89(3), 311–324 (2007).
Google Scholar 
10.Shafique, H. A., Sultana, V., Ehteshamul-Haque, S. & Athar, M. Management of soil-borne diseases of organic vegetables. J. Plan. Protect. Res. https://doi.org/10.1515/jppr-2016-0043 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Li, H. et al. Evaluation on the production of food crop straw in China from 2006 to 2014. Bioenerg. Res. 10, 949–957. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-017-9845-4 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Zhang, P., Wei, T., Jia, Z. K., Han, Q. F. & Ren, X. L. Soil aggregate and crop yield changes with different rates of straw incorporation in semiarid areas of northwest China. Geoderma 230–231, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.04.007 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Yang, H. S. et al. The impacts of ditch-buried straw layers on the interface soil physicochemical and microbial properties in a rice-wheat rotation system. Soil. Till. Res. 202, 146656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104656 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Song, X. Y. et al. Stable isotopes reveal the formation diversity of humic substances derived from different cotton straw-based materials. Sci. Total. Environ. 740, 140202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140202 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Mi, Y. Z. et al. Changes in soil quality, bacterial community and anti-pepper Phytophthora disease ability after combined application of straw and multifunctional composite bacterial strains. Eur. J. Soil. Biol. 105, 103329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2021.103329 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Guo, X. X., Liu, H. T. & Wu, S. B. Humic substances developed during organic waste composting: Formation mechanisms, structural properties, and agronomic functions. Sci. Total. Environ. 662, 501–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.137 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
17.Baldock, J. A. & Skjemstad, J. O. Role of the soil matrix and minerals in protecting natural organic materials against biological attack. Org. Geochem. 31(7–8), 697–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6380(00)00049-8 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Chaparro, J. M. et al. Manipulating the soil microbiome to increase soil health and plant fertility. Biol. Fert. Soils. 48(5), 489–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-012-0691-4 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Hu, Y. et al. Integrated biocontrol of tobacco bacterial wilt by antagonistic bacteria and marigold. Sci. Rep. 11, 16360. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95741-w (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
20.Hyder, S. et al. Characterization of native plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and their anti-oomycete potential against Phytophthora capsici affecting chilli pepper (Capsicum annum L.). Sci. Rep. 10, 13859. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69410-3 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
21.Paterson, E., Sim, A., Osborne, S. & Murray, P. J. Long-term exclusion of plant-inputs to soil reduces the functional capacity of microbial communities to mineralise recalcitrant root-derived carbon sources. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 43(9), 1873–1880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.05.006 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Wang, H., Guo, Q., Li, X., Li, X. & Zhang, C. Effects of long-term no-tillage with different straw mulching frequencies on soil microbial community and the abundances of two soil-borne pathogens. Appl. Soil. Ecol. 148, 103488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.103488 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Ndzelu, B. S., Dou, S. & Zhang, X. W. Changes in soil humus composition and humic acid structural characteristics under different corn straw returning modes. Soil. Res. 58, 452–460. https://doi.org/10.1071/SR20025 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.De Corato, U. Agricultural waste recycling in horticultural intensive farming systems by on-farm composting and compost-based tea application improves soil quality and plant health: A review under the perspective of a circular economy. Sci. Total. Environ. 738, 139840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139840 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Wong, M. & Swift, R. S. Role of organic matter in alleviating soil acidity. in Handbook of Soil Acidity. http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:191317 (2003).26.Xie, W. J. et al. Coastal saline soil aggregate formation and salt distribution are affected by straw and nitrogen application: A 4-year field study. Soil. Till. Res. 198, 104535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.104535 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Cathal, N. et al. Soil aggregates formed in vitro by saprotrophic Trichocomaceae have transient water-stability. Soil. Biol. Biochem. 48, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.01.010 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Lou, Y. L., Xu, M. G., Wang, W., Sun, X. L. & Zhao, K. Return rate of straw residue affects soil organic C sequestration by chemical fertilization. Soil. Till. Res. 113(1), 70–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.01.007 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Loffredo, E., Berloco, M. & Senesi, N. The role of humic fractions from soil and compost in controlling the growth in vitro of phytopathogenic and antagonistic soil-borne fungi. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 69(3), 350–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2007.11.005 (2008).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
30.Bhatia, A. et al. Diversity of bacterial isolates during full scale rotary drum composting. Waste Manag. 33(7), 1595–1601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.03.019 (2013).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
31.Dou, S., Zhang, J. J. & Li, K. Effect of organic matter applications on 13C-NMR spectra of humic acids of soil. Eur. J. Soil. Sci. 59(3), 532–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2007.01012.x (2008).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
32.De, V. et al. Soil bacterial networks are less stable under drought than fungal networks. Nat. Commun. 9(1), 3033. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05516-7 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Sanaullah, M. et al. How do microbial communities in top and subsoil respond to root litter addition under field conditions?. Soil Biol. Biochem. 103, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.07.017 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Song, Y. et al. Identification of the produced volatile organic compounds and the involved soil bacteria during decomposition of watermelon plant residues in a Fusarium-infested soil. Geoderma 315, 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.11.021 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
35.Vida, C., Cazorla, F. M. & Vicente, A. D. Characterization of biocontrol bacterial strains isolated from a suppressiveness-induced soil after amendment with composted almond shells. Res. Microbiol. 168(6), 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resmic.2017.03.007 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
36.Liu, J. G., Li, X. G., Jia, Z. J., Zhang, T. L. & Wang, X. X. Effect of benzoic acid on soil microbial communities associated with soilborne peanut diseases. Appl. Soil. Ecol. 110, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2016.11.001 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Zhao, S. C. et al. Ciampitti dynamic of fungal community composition during maize residue decomposition process in north-central China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 167, 104057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2021.104057 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Zhang, J., Xu, Y., Liang, S., Ma, X. & Sun, F. Synergistic effect of klebsiella sp. fh-1 and arthrobacter sp. nj-1 on the growth of the microbiota in the black soil of northeast china. Ecotox. Environ. Safe 190, 110079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.110079 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Wang, X. W. et al. Diversity and taxonomy of Chaetomium and chaetomium-like fungi from indoor environments. Stud. Mycol. 84, 145–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simyco.2016.11.005 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
40.Chen, W. H. et al. High-throughput sequencing analysis of endophytic fungal diversity in cynanchum sp.. S. Afr. J. Bot. 134, 349–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2020.04.010 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
41.Voriskova, J. & Baldrain, P. Fungal community on decomposing leaf litter undergoes rapid successional changes. ISME J. 7(3), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2012.116 (2013).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
42.Kerdraon, L., Laval, V. & Suffert, F. Microbiomes and pathogen survival in crop residues, an ecotone between plant and soil. Phytobiomes J. 3, 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1094/pbiomes-02-19-0010-rvw (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Rahman, S. F. S. A. et al. Emerging microbial biocontrol strategies for plant pathogens. Plant Sci. 267, 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2017.11.012 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Wachowska, U., Irzykowski, W., Jedryczka, M., Stasiulewicz-Paluch, A. D. & Glowacka, K. Biological control of winter wheat pathogens with the use of antagonistic Sphingomonas bacteria under greenhouse conditions. Biocontrol. Sci. Technol. 23, 1110–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2013.812185 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Liu, J. J. et al. Soil carbon content drives the biogeographical distribution of fungal communities in the black soil zone of northeast China. Soil Biol. Biochem. 83(0038–0017), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2015.01.009 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Xiong, W. et al. Distinct roles for soil fungal and bacterial communities associated with the suppression of vanilla Fusarium wilt disease. Soil Biol. Biochem. 107, 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2017.01.010 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
47.Raaijmakers, J. M. & Mazzola, M. Diversity and natural functions of antibiotics produced by beneficial and plant pathogenic bacteria. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 50, 403–424. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-phyto-081211-172908 (2012).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
48.Deng, X. H. et al. Rhizosphere bacteria assembly derived from fumigation and organic amendment triggers the direct and indirect suppression of tomato bacterial wilt disease. Appl. Soil Ecol. 147, 103364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.103364 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Li, C. N. et al. Microbial inoculation influences bacterial community succession and physicochemical characteristics during pig manure composting with corn straw. Bioresour. Technol. 289, 121653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121653 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
50.Lydia, S., Tymon, P. M., Gundersen, B. & Inglis, D. A. Potential of endophytic fungi collected from Cucurbita pepo roots grown under three different agricultural mulches as antagonistic endophytes to Verticillium dahliae in western Washington. Microbiol. Res. 240, 126535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2020.126535 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Mehmood, M. A. et al. Sclerotia of a phytopathogenic fungus restrict microbial diversity and improve soil health by suppressing other pathogens and enriching beneficial microorganisms. J. Environ. Manag. 259, 109857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109857 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Ding, J. L. et al. Influence of inorganic fertilizer and organic manure application on fungal communities in a long-term field experiment of Chinese Mollisols. Appl. Soil. Ecol. 111, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2016.12.003 (2017).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Zhao, Y. Y. et al. Characterization of Lysobacter spp. strains and their potential use as biocontrol agents against pear anthracnose. Microbiol. Res. 242, 126624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2020.126624 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
54.Liu, X. S. et al. Organic amendment improves rhizosphere environment and shapes soil bacterial community in black and red soil under lead stress. J. Hazard. Mater. 416, 125805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125805 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
55.Qiao, J. Q., Tian, D. W., Huo, R., Wu, H. J. & Gao, X. W. Functional analysis and application of the cryptic plasmid pBSG3 harboring the RapQ–PhrQ system in Bacillus amyloliquefaciens B3. Plasmid 65(2), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plasmid.2010.11.008 (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.Coutte, F. et al. Effect of pps disruption and constitutive expression of srfa on surfactin productivity, spreading and antagonistic properties of Bacillus subtilis 168 derivatives. J. Appl. Microbiol. 109(2), 480–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04683.x (2010).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
57.Leclere, V. et al. Mycosubtilin overproduction by Bacillus subtilis bbg100 enhances the organism’s antagonistic and biocontrol activities. Appl. Environ. Microb. 71(8), 4577. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.71.8.4577-4584.2005 (2005).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Choi, S. K., Jeong, H., Kloepper, J. W. & Ryu, C. M. Genome sequence of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens GB03, an active ingredient of the first commercial biological control product. Genome Announc. 2(5), 1092–1106. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.01092-14 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
59.Kim, S. Y., Lee, S. Y., Weon, H. Y., Sang, M. K. & Song, J. Complete genome sequence of Bacillus velezensis M75, a biocontrol agent against fungal plant pathogens, isolated from cotton waste. J. Biotechnol. 241, 112–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2016.11.023 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
60.Abbasi, S. et al. Streptomyces strains modulate dynamics of soil bacterial communities and their efficacy in disease suppression caused by Phytophthora capsici. Sci. Rep. 11, 9317. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88495-y (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
61.Saravanakumar, K. et al. Effect of Trichoderma harzianum on maize rhizosphere microbiome and biocontrol of Fusarium stalk rot. Sci. Rep. 7, 1771. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01680-w (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
62.Yan, F., Li, C., Ye, X., Lian, Y. & Wang, X. Antifungal activity of lipopeptides from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens mg3 against colletotrichum gloeosporioides in loquat fruits. Biol. Control 146, 104281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2020.104281 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Qi, Y., Liu, H., Wang, J. & Wang, Y. Effects of different straw biochar combined with microbial inoculants on soil environment of ginseng. Sci. Rep. 11, 14685. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-189319/v1 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Wang, Y. et al. Evaluation and spatial variability of paddy soil fertility in typical county of northeast China. J. Plant Nutr. Fertil. 26(2), 256–266. https://doi.org/10.11674/zwyf.19128 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Cambardella, C. A. & Elliott, E. T. Carbon and nitrogen distribution in aggregates from cultivated and native grassland soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57(4), 1071–1076. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1993.03615995005700040032x (1993).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Zhang, X., Dou, S., Ndzelu, B. S., Guan, X. W. & Bai, Y. Effects of different corn straw amendments on humus composition and structural characteristics of humic acid in black soil. Commun. Soil. Sci. Plan. 51(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2019.1695827 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Edgar, R. C. Uparse: Highly accurate OTU sequences from microbial amplicon reads. Nat. Methods. 10(10), 996. https://doi.org/10.1038/NMETH.2604 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Amato, K. R. et al. Habitat degradation impacts black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) gastrointestinal microbiomes. ISME J. 7, 1344–1353. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej (2013).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
69.Lourenço, K. S. et al. Resilience of the resident soil microbiome to organic and inorganic amendment disturbances and to temporary bacterial invasion. Microbiome 6, 142. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0525-1 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

Plant height (cm)Plant height of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages is reported in Table 1. Both concentrations of moringa leaf extract significantly affected plant height of black cumin. All growth stages also showed statistically significant results. Mean comparison of control vs treatments and water spray vs rest were also found significant for plant height (cm) of black cumin. Whereas, interaction of moringa leaf extract concentrations and growth stages remained non-significant. With increase in interval of spraying moringa leaf extract, plant height enhanced and thus taller plants (68.15 cm) were recorded when moringa leaf extract was sprayed at stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (65.15 cm) stage-4 (40 + 80 days after sowing), while lower plants height (47.45 cm) was recorded in stage-3 (120 days after sowing). The use of moringa leaf extract during critical vegetative development phases increased the black cumin crop’s plant height. Similar results were recorded by Abbas et al.14 that moringa leaf extract enhanced plant height and improved fresh and dried weight of wheat root when compared to control. Taller (62.2 cm) plants were recorded in 20% moringa leaf extract sprayed plots followed by (55.8 cm) 10% moringa leaf extract. Spraying moringa leaf extract on a variety of field crops can boost plants and increase vegetative development15.Table 1 Plant height (cm), number of branches plant−1 fixed oil content (% vw−1) and essential oil content (% vw−1) of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size tableBranches plant−1
Branches plant−1 of black cumin were significantly influenced by moringa leaf extract concentrations, stage of application as well as their interaction (Table 1). The planned mean comparison of control vs rest and water spray vs rest were also found significant for branches plant−1. The unsprayed against sprayed treatments of moringa leaf extract showed that in unsprayed plots number of branches plant−1 (39) were less than plants sprayed with moringa leaf extract (61.19). Highest number of branches plant−1 (62.19) were observed 20% moringa leaf extract treated plots. These results are in agreement with Mahmood16 who found that foliar application of MLE contains an adequate amount of stimulating substances that promote cell division and enlargement at a faster rate. Zeatin, a growth hormone found in moringa leaf extract, encourages the growth of lateral buds, which leads to an increase in the number of branches. After pounding 100 g of Moringa leaves in 8 L of water, foliar spray of moringa leaf extract enhanced branches plant−1 in okra17. More number of branches plant−1 (70.66) were attained in plots sprayed with moringa leaf extract at growth stage 7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by growth stage 4 (40 + 80 days after sowing). The effect of the application of MLE at the rate of 20% at 40 days’ interval increased the number of branches and this may be because of the abundant supply of macro and micronutrients and growth hormones. The result of yield parameters revealed that the yield increased as the frequency of moringa leaf extract increased. This is because hormone enhances formation and development of flowers and ripening of fruits. Hormones also enhance growth and yield by altering photosynthetic distributive pattern within the plants. The findings were also in line with that of Manzoor et al.18 who found that an aqueous extract of moringa significantly influence yield and yield components such as number of branches, number of fruits per plant and fruit weight of tomato. The significant interaction of MLE and growth stages is presented in Fig. 1. Applying moringa leaf extract @ 20% at all growth stages enhanced branches plant−1. Maximum branches plant−1 was observed when moringa leaf extract was sprayed @ 20% at growth stage 7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing) whereas, minimum branches plant−1 was recorded in plants sprayed with 10% moringa leaf extract at growth stage-3 (120 days after sowing). Moringa leaf extract (MLE) increased number of branches. Similar results were recorded by Jain et al.19), who reported MLE positively enhanced plant growth attributes of wheat. He also stated that with increasing MLE concentration and application intervals, the growth parameters such as branches plant−1 were increased in arithmetic order. Plant growth regulators are essential for controlling growth and development of plants20. These plant growth regulators increased yield by changing the dry matter distribution pattern or controlling the growth characteristics in crop plants, depending on the dosage and time of application21. In comparison to control, foliar application of moringa leaf extract resulted in a markedly higher branches plant−1. The increased number of branches plant−1 might be due to Zeatin present in moringa leaf extract, which is very effective in delaying the abscission response10.Figure 1Number of branches plant−1 of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size imageFixed oil content (% vw−1)Data concerning fixed oil content (% vw−1) in response to moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages is given in Table 1 and Fig. 2. Statistical analysis of data indicated that foliar application of various concentrations of moringa leaf extract, their stage of application and interaction of concentrations and growth stages had significantly affected fixed oil content (% vw−1) of black cumin crop. The planned mean comparison of control vs rest and water spray vs rest had significant effect on fixed oil content (% vw−1). Highest fixed oil percentage (35.39%) was recorded when moringa leaf extract was sprayed @ 20%, followed by (34.06%) 10% moringa leaf extract, whereas, control (31.48%) showed lowest fixed oil %. Sakr et al.22 indicated that foliar applications of MLE significantly improved the oil percentage and yield plant−1 and feddan of geranium plants. Application of MLE at growth stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing) showed maximum fixed oil content percentage (37.08%) as compared to all other growth stages. Minimum fixed oil percentage was recorded in growth stage-1 (40 days after sowing). Concerning the interaction of moringa leaf extract vs application stage, highest fix oil (37.45%) was observed when moringa leaf extract @ 20% was applied as foliar spray at growth stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (36.71%) moringa leaf extract @ 10% applied at growth stage-7. Lowest fixed oil percentage (31.83%) was observed in plants sprayed with 10% moringa leaf extract at stage 1 (40 days after sowing). According to Rady et al.23, biosynthesis of cytokinins promotes the movement of stem reserves to new shoots, resulting in stable plant development, the prevention of premature leaf senescence, and the preservation of more leaf area for photosynthetic action.Figure 2Fixed oil content (%) of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size imageEssential oil content (% vw−1)Essential oil content (% vw−1) is a vital oil component of black cumin. Moringa leaf extract concentrations and stage of their application had significant effect on essential oil content of black cumin while the interaction remained non-significant (Table 1). Application of MLE at 20% resulted in higher essential oil yield (0.38%) followed by 10% moringa leaf extract (0.37) sprayed plots. Control plots resulted in lower essential oil (0.33%) content of black cumin. Many research ventures around the world are currently focusing on increasing the biomass yield and volatile oil output of aromatic plants. Moringa leaf extract has been discovered to be an excellent bio-stimulant for enhancing not only crop growth but also yield24,25. According to Aslam et al.26, Plant treated with MLE had major impacts, including an average rise in oil concentrations. Interestingly, MLE treatment not only increased the coriander fruit yield but also improved the fruits volatile oil suggesting that MLE could be a promise plant growth promoter that improved the content of volatile oil in coriander. MLE application also positively affected the volatile oil constituents (Table 2). Increasing the volatile oil in coriander by MLE could be due to the MLE components including amino acids, nutrient elements and phytohoromes that motivate the accumulation of secondary metabolites27. The phytohormones affect the pathway of terpenoids through motivating the responsible physiological and biochemical processes28. Concerning the application stages of moringa leaf extract, higher essential oil content % of black cumin (0.42%) was observed in growth stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (0.39%) growth stage-4 (40 + 80 days after sowing), whereas, lower essential oil content % (0.36%) of black cumin was observed in growth stage-1 (40 days after sowing). Plant growth regulators are essential for controlling the amount, type, and direction of plant growth, development, and yield20. These plant growth regulators increased yield by changing the dry matter distribution pattern or controlling the growth characteristics in crop plants, depending on the dosage and time of application21. Exogenous application of MLE resulted in higher yield and quality29.Table 2 Peroxidase value (meq kg−1) and Iodine value (g of I2/100 g) of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size tablePeroxidase value (meq kg−1)The response of MLE and stage of MLE application recorded for peroxidase value is stated in Table 2. The data depicted that moringa leaf extract concentrations, stage of application and their interaction had significant (P ≤ 0.05) variation in peroxidase value of black cumin. Similarly, when means were compared, that of control vs treatments and water spray check vs treatments were found significant for peroxidase value (%). Mean value of data indicated that highest peroxidase value (6.32%) was recorded in 20% moringa leaf extract treated plots, followed by (6.03%) 10% moringa leaf extract. While in case of application stages, highest peroxidase value (6.42%) was recorded when moringa leaf extract was applied at stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (6.39%) stage-6 (80 + 120 days after sowing). Whereas lowest peroxidase value (5.73%) was recorded in plots treated with moringa leaf extract at stage-3 (120 days after sowing). Interaction of moringa leaf extract concentrations and stage of application in Fig. 3 showed that increasing moringa leaf extract concentration from 10 to 20% applied at growth stage-7 increased peroxidase value of black cumin crop. However, application of moringa leaf extract @ 10% applied at growth stage-3 (120 days after sowing) showed lowest peroxidase value. The phytohormones affect the pathway of terpenoids through motivating the responsible physiological and biochemical processes28. Our results are in agreement with the reports of Ali et al.27 in geranium and Abdel-Rahman and Abdel-Kader30 in fennel who observed that MLE application improves both the volatile oil yield and its components. The fact that MLE application improved black cumin growth and quality characters suorts the study’s hypothesis that MLE is an important plant growth enhancer. In agreement with our results, Rady and Mohamed28 concluded that MLE is considered one of the important plant bio stimulants because it contains antioxidants, phenols, basic nutrients, ascorbates, and phytohormones. Furthermore, foliar application of moringa leaf extract may have a positive effect on endogenous phytohormone concentrations, resulting in improved plant growth and quality10,37.Figure 3Peroxidase value (meq kg−1) of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size imageIodine value (g of I2/100 g)Data concerning iodine value of black cumin oil in response to various concentrations of MLE applied at various growth stages is given in Table 2 and Fig. 4. Statistical analysis of data indicated that both the concentrations of moringa leaf extract, stage of application as well as their interaction had significant effect on iodine value of black cumin oil. The planned mean comparison of control vs rest and water spray vs rest treatments had significant effect on iodine value. Highest iodine value (85.3) was recorded with application of moringa leaf extract @ 20% whereas, lowest (78.28) was observed in control. Regarding the stage of application, highest iodine value (87.35) was observed in plots sprayed with moringa leaf extract at stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (85.61) plots sprayed with moringa leaf extract at growth stage-6 (80 + 120 days after sowing). Concerning the interaction of MLE concentrations and stage of application of MLE, highest iodine value (6.49) was observed with 20% moringa leaf extract sprayed at stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing) whereas, lowest iodine value was observed in plants sprayed with moringa leaf extract @ 20% applied at stage-3 (120 days after sowing). The use of plant growth regulators is very specific and depends to achieve specific results like for example; enhanced plant growth, betterment in yield and yield related attributes, and to modify the fruit and plant bio-constituents. Several previous studies reveled that MLE are enriched with many phtyo-hormones especially zeatin31. In addition to that MLEs are embedded with many essential amino acids, vitamins (A, B1, B2, B3, C and E), minerals as well as several antioxidants like phenolic32,33. This unique biochemical composition of MLE showed that they can be utilized as bio stimulant which have the potential to promote crop growth, productivity as well as quality which in return depends on its application time34.Figure 4Iodine value (meq kg−1) of black cumin as affected by moringa leaf extract applied at various growth stages.Full size imageTotal free amino acidsThe data presented in Table 2 revealed that moringa leaf extract concentrations and application stages had significantly affected total free amino acid content of black cumin crop during rabi 2019-20 under agro-climatic conditions of Haripur whereas, their interaction remained non-significant. The planned mean comparison of control vs rest and water spray vs rest had significant effect on total free amino acids of black cumin. Highest amino acids (336.3) were observed with the application of moringa leaf extract @ 20%, followed by application of moringa leaf extract @ 10%. Regarding application stages, highest total free amino acids (364.2) were observed with the application of moringa leaf extract at 40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing, followed by (355.9) application of MLE at 40 + 80 days after sowing. Lowest total free amino acids (290.3) were recorded with moringa leaf extract sprayed at 40 days after sowing. Several investigations have demonstrated that MLE can alter both primary and secondary metabolism, resulting in an increase in antioxidant molecule concentrations35,36. The content of phenolic antioxidants, total soluble proteins, and total free amino acids increased in spinach plants treated with synthetic growth regulators and MLE26. MLE can also increase fruit quality metrics in ‘Kinnow’ mandarins, such as soluble solid contents, vitamin C, sugars, total antioxidant, phenolic contents, and superoxide dismutase and catalase enzyme activities, when treated at various growth stages37.Total phenolicPhenolic have acquired much importance because of their properties of disease preventing and health promoting. The effect of moringa leaf extract concentrations, stage of application and their interaction is presented in Table 2. Analysis of variance revealed that moringa leaf extract concentrations and stage of application of moringa leaf extract had significant effect on total phenolic content of black cumin while their interaction remained non-significant. Our results depict that all MLE levels enhanced the total phenolic content of black cumin leaves relative to the control. Highest phenolic content (71.59 mg g−1) was observed with application of moringa leaf extract at the rate of 20%, followed by (68.72 mg g−1) moringa leaf extract application at the rate of 10%. Regarding application stages, highest phenolic content (81.23 mg g−1) was observed with the application of moringa leaf extract at growth stage-7 (40 + 80 + 120 days after sowing), followed by (76.66 mg g−1) stage-6 (80 + 120 days after sowing), whereas, lowest phenolic content (55.25 mg g−1) was observed in crop sprayed with moringa leaf extract at stage-3 (120 days after sowing). In the medicinal, biological, and agricultural areas, phenolic and their derivatives gained scientists attention. Recent studies had focused on their potential as antioxidant-rich natural chemicals38. The increased content of phenolics, flavonoids, and phytohormones in moringa leaves, which may have contributed to the enhanced total phenolic content in black cumin leaves, can be linked to the higher content of phenolics, flavonoids, and phytohormones in MLE treated plants26. Furthermore, the proper concentrations of minerals, vitamins, and -carotene found in moringa leaves may have influenced metabolic processes in a way that increased the internal phenolic content in black cumin leaves, either directly or indirectly39. Therefore, these aspects assist MLE to serve as growth enhancer and natural antioxidant40. Our results supported by the previous report of Nasir et al.37 who revealed that the total phenolic content was enhanced as a result of MLE application at critical stages of plant growth. More

1.Roselló-Mora R, Amann R. The species concept for prokaryotes. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2001;25:39–67.
Google Scholar 
2.Certini G, Campbell CD, Edwards AC. Rock fragments in soil support a different microbial community from the fine earth. Soil Biol Biochem. 2004;36:1119–28.CAS 

Google Scholar 
3.Carson JK, Rooney D, Gleeson DB, Clipson N. Altering the mineral composition of soil causes a shift in microbial community structure. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2007;61:414–23.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Uroz S, Kelly LC, Turpault M, Lepleux C, Frey-Klett P. The mineralosphere concept: mineralogical control of the distribution and function of mineral-associated bacterial communities. Trends Microbiol. 2015;23:751–62.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
5.Ahmed E, Hugerth LW, Logue JB, Brüchert V, Andersson AF, Holmström SJ. Mineral type structures soil microbial communities. Geomicrobiol J 2017;34:538–45.CAS 

Google Scholar 
6.Whitman T, Neurath R, Perera A, Chu-Jacoby I, Ning D, Zhou J, et al. Microbial community assembly differs across minerals in a rhizosphere microcosm. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:4444–60.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
7.Kandeler E, Gebala A, Boeddinghaus RS, Müller K, Rennert T, Soares M, et al. The mineralosphere—succession and physiology of bacteria and fungi colonising pristine minerals in grassland soils under different land-use intensities. Soil Biol Biochem. 2019;136:107534.CAS 

Google Scholar 
8.Hassink J, Bouwman LA, Zwart KB, Bloem J, Brussaard L. Relationships between soil texture, physical protection of organic-matter, soil biota, and C-mineralization and N-mineralization in grassland soils. Geoderma 1993;57:105–28.CAS 

Google Scholar 
9.Mayer LM, Schick LL, Hardy KR, Wagai R, McCarthy J. Organic matter in small mesopores in sediments and soils. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2004;68:3868–72.
Google Scholar 
10.Chenu C, Stotzky G. Interaction between microorganisms and soil particles: an overview. In: Huang PM, Bollag JM, Senesi N, editors. Interactions between soil particles and microorganism: impact on the terrestrial ecosystem. New York: Wiley; 2002. p. 3–40.11.Hemkemeyer M, Pronk GJ, Heister K, Kögel-Knabner I, Martens R, Tebbe CC. Artificial soil studies reveal domain-specific preferences of microorganisms for the colonisation of different soil minerals and particle size fractions. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2014;90:770–82.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Six J, Elliott ET, Paustian K. Soil macroaggregate turnover and microaggregate formation: a mechanism for C sequestration under no-tillage agriculture. Soil Biol Biochem. 2000;32:2099–103.CAS 

Google Scholar 
13.Totsche KU, Amelung W, Gerzabek MH, Guggenberger G, Klumpp E, Knief C, et al. Microaggregates in soils. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci. 2018;181:104–36.CAS 

Google Scholar 
14.Rasmussen C, Southard RJ, Horwath WR. Litter type and soil minerals control temperate forest soil carbon response to climate change. Glob Change Biol 2008;14:2064–80.
Google Scholar 
15.Hemingway JD, Rothman DH, Grant KE, Rosengard SZ, Eglinton TI, Derry LA, et al. Mineral protection regulates long-term global preservation of natural organic carbon. Nature 2019;570:228–31.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Ranjard L, Richaume A. Quantitative and qualitative microscale distribution of bacteria in soil. Res Microbiol. 2001;152:707–16.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
17.Poll C, Thiede A, Wermbter N, Sessitsch A, Kandeler E. Micro-scale distribution of microorganisms and microbial enzyme activities in a soil with long-term organic amendment. Eur J Soil Sci. 2003;54:715–24.
Google Scholar 
18.Neumann D, Heuer A, Hemkemeyer M, Martens R, Tebbe CC. Response of microbial communities to long-term fertilization depends on their microhabitat. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2013;86:71–84.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Nie M, Pendall E, Bell C, Wallenstein MD. Soil aggregate size distribution mediates microbial climate change feedbacks. Soil Biol Biochem. 2014;68:357–365.CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Chenu C, Hassink J, Bloem J. Short-term changes in the spatial distribution of microorganisms in soil aggregates as affected by glucose addition. Biol Fertil Soils. 2001;34:349–56.CAS 

Google Scholar 
21.Saidy AR, Smernik RJ, Baldock JA, Kaiser K, Sanderman J. The sorption of organic carbon onto differing clay minerals in the presence and absence of hydrous iron oxide. Geoderma. 2013;209:15–21.
Google Scholar 
22.Mikutta R, Kleber M, Torn MS, Jahn R. Stabilization of soil organic matter: association with minerals or chemical recalcitrance? Biogeochemistry 2006;77:25–56.CAS 

Google Scholar 
23.Gadd GM. Metals, minerals and microbes: geomicrobiology and bioremediation. Microbiology. 2010;156:609–43.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Lehmann J, Kleber M. The contentious nature of soil organic matter. Nature 2015;528:60–68.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Sokol NW, Sanderman J, Bradford MA. Pathways of mineral‐associated soil organic matter formation: integrating the role of plant carbon source, chemistry, and point of entry. Glob Change Biol. 2019;25:12–24.
Google Scholar 
26.Skjemstad JO, Janik LJ, Head MJ, McClure SG. High energy ultraviolet photo‐oxidation: a novel technique for studying physically protected organic matter in clay‐and silt‐sized aggregates. J Soil Sci. 1993;44:485–99.CAS 

Google Scholar 
27.Goldfarb KC, Karaoz U, Hanson CA, Santee CA, Bradford MA, Treseder KK, et al. Differential growth responses of soil bacterial taxa to carbon substrates of varying chemical recalcitrance. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:1–10.
Google Scholar 
28.Kleber M, Sollins P, Sutton R. A conceptual model of organo-mineral interactions in soils: self-assembly of organic molecular fragments into zonal structures on mineral surfaces. Biogeochemistry 2007;85:9–24.
Google Scholar 
29.Torn MS, Trumbore SE, Chadwick OA, Vitousek PM, Hendricks DM. Mineral control of soil organic carbon storage and turnover content. Nature 1997;389:3601–3.
Google Scholar 
30.Dahlgren RA, Saigusa M, Ugolini FC. The nature, properties and management of volcanic soils. Adv Agron. 2004;82:113–82.CAS 

Google Scholar 
31.Mikutta R, Kleber M, Jahn R. Poorly crystalline minerals protect organic carbon in clay subfractions from acid subsoil horizons. Geoderma 2005;128:106–15.CAS 

Google Scholar 
32.Keiluweit M, Bougoure JJ, Nico PS, Pett-Ridge J, Weber PK, Kleber M. Mineral protection of soil carbon counteracted by root exudates. Nat Clim Change. 2015;5:588–95.CAS 

Google Scholar 
33.Rasmussen C, Throckmorton H, Liles G, Heckman K, Meding S, Horwath WR. Controls on soil organic carbon partitioning and stabilization in the California Sierra Nevada. Soil Syst. 2018;2:1–18.
Google Scholar 
34.Zhou Z, Wang C, Luo Y. Meta-analysis of the impacts of global change factors on soil microbial diversity and functionality. Nat Comm. 2020;11:1–10.CAS 

Google Scholar 
35.Hungate BA, Mau RL, Schwartz E, Caporaso JG, Dijkstra P, van Gestel N, et al. Quantitative microbial ecology through stable isotope probing. Appl Environ Microb. 2015;81:7570–81.CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Hayer M, Schwartz E, Marks JC, Koch BJ, Morrissey EM, Schuettenberg AA, et al. Identification of growing bacteria during litter decomposition in freshwater through H218O quantitative stable isotope probing. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2016;8:975–82.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
37.Papp K, Hungate BA, Schwartz E. Microbial rRNA synthesis and growth compared through quantitative stable isotope probing with H218O. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2018;84:1–17.
Google Scholar 
38.Finley BK, Dijkstra P, Rasmussen C, Schwartz E, Liu XA, van Gestel N, et al. Soil mineral assemblage and substrate quality effects on microbial priming. Geoderma2018;322:38–47.CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Rasmussen C, Southard RJ, Horwath WR. Mineral control of organic carbon mineralization in a range of temperate conifer forest soils. Glob Change Biol. 2006;12:834–47.
Google Scholar 
40.Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Walters WA, Berg-Lyons D, Huntley J, Fierer N, et al. Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms. ISME J. 2012;6:1621–4.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
41.Rohland N, Reich D. Cost-effective, high-throughput DNA sequencing libraries for multiplexed target capture. Genome Res. 2012;22:939–46.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
42.Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, Bokulich NA, Abnet CC, Al-Ghalith GA, et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using QIIME 2. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37:852–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
43.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 
44.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 
45.Morrissey EM, Mau RL, Schwartz E, McHugh TA, Dijkstra P, Koch BJ, et al. Bacterial carbon use plasticity, phylogenetic diversity and the priming of soil organic matter. ISME J. 2017;11:1890–9.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
46.R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computiong. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021. https://www.R-project.org/.47.Dowle M, Srinivasan A. data.table: Extensions of ‘data.frame’. R package version 1.13.6. 2020.48.Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’hara RB, Simpson GL, et al. Vegan: community ecology package. R package version 1.17-4. 2010. http://cran.r-project.org.49.Morrissey EM, Mau RL, Hayer M, Liu XJ, Schwartz E, Dijkstra P, et al. Evolutionary history constrains microbial traits across environmental variation. Nat Ecol Evol. 2019;3:1064–9.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
50.Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D. R Core Team. nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R package version 3. 1–137, 2018. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme .51.Paradis E, Schliep K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 2018;35:526–8.
Google Scholar 
52.Barter RL, Yu B. Superheat: an R package for creating beautiful and extendable heatmaps for visualizing complex data. J Comput Graph Stat. 2018;27:910–22.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
53.Demoling F, Figueroa D, Bååth E. Comparison of factors limiting bacterial growth in different soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 2007;39:2485–95.CAS 

Google Scholar 
54.Kaiser K, Zech W. Sorption of dissolved organic nitrogen by acid subsoil horizons and individual mineral phases. Eur J Soil Sci. 2000;51:403–11.CAS 

Google Scholar 
55.Barnhisel RI, Bertsch PM. Chlorites and hydroxy-interlayered vermiculite and smectite. In: Dixon JB, Weed SB editors. Minerals in soils environments, 2nd edn. Madison: Soil Science Society of America, Inc.; 1989. p. 729–88.56.Zunino H, Borie F, Aguilera S, Martin JP, Haider K. Decomposition of C-14- labeled glucose, plant and microbial products and phenols in volcanic ash-derived soils of Chile. Soil Biol Biochem. 1982;14:37–43.CAS 

Google Scholar 
57.Baldock JA, Nelson PN. In: Sumner ME editor. Handbook of soil science. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2000. B25–B84.58.Matus F, Rumpel C, Neculman R, Panichini M, Mora ML. Soil carbon storage and stabilisation in andic soils: a review. Catena. 2014;120:102–10.CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Nottingham AT, Griffiths H, Chamberlain PM, Stott AW, Tanner EVJ. Soil priming by sugar and leaf-litter substrates: a link to microbial groups. Appl Soil Ecol. 2009;42:183–90.
Google Scholar 
60.McMahon SK, Williams MA, Bottomley PJ, Myrold DD. Dynamics of microbial communities during decomposition of carbon-13 labeled ryegrass fractions in soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 2005;69:1238–47.CAS 

Google Scholar 
61.Vieira S, Sikorski J, Gebala A, Boeddinghaus RS, Marhan S, Rennert T, et al. Bacterial colonization of minerals in grassland soils is selective and highly dynamic. Environ Microbiol. 2020;22:917–33.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
62.Mille-Lindblom C, Fischer H, Tranvik LJ. Antagonism between bacteria and fungi: substrate competition and a possible tradeoff between fungal growth and tolerance towards bacteria. Oikos 2006;113:233–42.
Google Scholar  More

Driven by the land-to-river and upstream-to-downstream WBIF, biodiversity information across terrestrial and aquatic biomes could be detected in riverine water eDNA6,16, and the monitoring effectiveness of riverine water eDNA relies on the transportation effectiveness of corresponding WBIF6,17,18,19,20. The transportation effectiveness of WBIF mainly relies on the transport capacity, degradation rate, and environmental filtration of WBIF15,21,22,23, which can vary with different seasons and weather conditions26. We hypothesized that the monitoring effectiveness would vary with the seasons and weather conditions. In the present case, the bacterial community richness in riparian soil did not vary with season, whereas the bacterial community composition in riverine water was richest in the autumn, followed by the summer (Figs. 2, 3). The transportation effectiveness of riparian-to-river and upstream-to-downstream WBIF in spring frozen days was significantly lower than in summer rainy days and autumn cloudy days (Tables 1, 2, Supplementary Tables S3, S4). Considering the insufficient read depth on the riverine water samples of summer and autumn groups (Supplementary Fig. S1), the riverine water bacterial community richness and the riparian-to-river transportation effectiveness on summer and autumn were already underestimated. It indicates that the monitoring effectiveness varied with different seasons and weather conditions, and summer and autumn were the optimal seasons, along with rainy days being the optimal weather condition, for using riverine water eDNA to simultaneously monitor the holistic biodiversity information in riverine sites and riparian sites.The biodiversity information detected by water eDNA could originate from living and dead organisms23,26. The detection of biodiversity information that originates from a living organism mainly depends on the dispersal of this living organism11,20. The detection of biodiversity information that originates from a dead organism mainly depends on its transport capacity and degradation rate12,22,29. In summer and autumn, as driven by active organisms, more eDNA was input into the river system. In particular, the surface runoff caused by rain can input more eDNA from terrestrial soil into the river system and can preserve them in soil aggregates30. In the present study, the highest proportion of bacteria in riparian soil was detected in riverine water in summer and autumn, and the rain promoted this phenomenon (Fig. 3 and Table 1, Supplementary Table S3). The proportion of effective upstream-to-downstream WBIF was significantly higher in summer and autumn than in spring, as well as being higher on rainy days than on cloudy days (Table 2). eDNA (originated from dead organisms) degrades over time in a logistic manner (a half-life time)12,22,27,31, which was described in this study as degrading by half-life distance in a lotic system, which integrates the transport capacity and the degradation rate. In the present work, as driven by runoff discharge and flow velocity (Supplementary Table S1), the half-life distance of noneffective WBIF was significantly farther in the summer than in autumn and in spring (Table 2).The biodiversity information monitoring effectiveness of riverine water eDNA, as approximated by the transportation effectiveness of WBIF, was impacted by the eDNA degradation rate in WBIF, and there were taxonomy-specific eDNA degradation rates27, species-specific eDNA degradation rates17, and form-specific eDNA degradation rates28. We hypothesized that the monitoring effectiveness of riverine water eDNA would vary with taxonomic communities. In the present case, the results revealed the detection of a significantly higher monitoring effectiveness of riverine water eDNA (both riparian-to-river and downstream-to-upstream) for bacterial communities than for eukaryotic communities (Tables 3, 4). Considering the insufficient read depth on the bacterial community (16S rRNA gene, Supplementary Fig. S2), the detection capacity on bacterial group was already underestimated. A significantly higher monitoring effectiveness of riverine water eDNA was found for micro-eukaryotic communities (fungi) than for overall eukaryotic communities (including micro- and macro-organisms) (Tables 3, 4). This indicates that the monitoring effectiveness varied with different taxonomic communities, and the effectiveness of monitoring eukaryotic communities was significantly lower than for monitoring bacterial communities; in addition, the effectiveness of monitoring macrobe communities was significantly lower than for monitoring microbe communities.eDNA surveys that are based on metabarcoding can actually acquire information across the taxonomic tree of life5,6,11,32,33. However, eDNA that originates from different taxonomic groups has a different probability of being left in the environment and input into water6,8,9,34. van Bochove et al. inferred that the eDNA contained inside of cells and mitochondria is especially resilient against degradation (i.e., intracellular vs. extracellular effects)28. In the present case, more bacteria than eukaryotes and more microorganisms than macroorganisms (both OTU and species levels) in riparian soil could be detected in riverine water (Table 3). The half-life distance of noneffective WBIF for bacteria (detected by the 16 s RNA gene) was much farther than that for unicellular eukaryotes (detected by the ITS gene, which is mainly unicellular), than that for multicellular eukaryotes (as detected by the CO1 gene, which is mainly multicellular) (Table 4). We inferred that the eDNA contained inside of bacterial cells was more resilient against degradation than that contained inside of unicellular eukaryotic cells (i.e., prokaryotic cells vs. eukaryotic cells), as well as compared to the eDNA contained inside of multicellular eukaryotic cells or extracellular mitochondria (i.e., unicellular eukaryotic cells vs. multicellular eukaryotic cells or extracellular mitochondria).In previous studies, the effectiveness of using water eDNA to monitor terrestrial organisms was indicated by the detection probability8,9,34, and the effectiveness of using downstream water eDNA to monitor upstream organisms was indicated by the detectable distance7,12,17,19,20,35. In this study, we approximated the biodiversity information monitoring effectiveness by the WBIF transportation effectiveness and proposed its assessment framework, in which we described the riparian-to-river monitoring effectiveness with the proportion of biodiversity information in riparian soil that was detected by using riverine water eDNA samples. Additionally, we described the downstream-to-upstream monitoring effectiveness with the proportion of biodiversity information in upstream site water eDNA samples that was detected by 1-km downstream site water eDNA samples, and the runoff distance of that 50% of dead bioinformation (i.e., the bioinformation labeling the biological material that lacked life activity and fertility) could be monitored. These indicators provided new usable assessment tools for designing monitoring projects and for evaluating monitoring results.In the optimal monitoring season and weather condition (a summer rainy day) in the Shaliu river basin on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, by using riverine water eDNA, we were able to monitor as much as 87.95% of bacterial species, 76.18% of fungal species, and 53.52% of eukaryotic species from riparian soil, along with as much as 98.69% of bacterial species, 95.71% of fungal species, and 92.41% of eukaryotic species from 1 km upstream (Table 4). The half-life distance of the noneffective WBIF was respectively 17.82 km, 5.96 km, and 5.02 km for bacteria, fungi, and metazoans at the species level (Table 4). When considering the fact that the monitoring effectiveness of eDNA can not only vary with season, weather, and taxonomic communities, but can also vary with rivers and watersheds with different environmental conditions12,17,19,23, more studies on the monitoring effectiveness for each taxonomic community in other watersheds with different environmental conditions are needed.eDNA metabarcoding surveys are relatively cheaper, more efficient, and more accurate than traditional surveys in aquatic systems10,13, although this is certainly not true in all circumstances36. Sales et al. show that the detection probability of using riverine water eDNA to monitor the semi-aquatic and terrestrial mammals in natural lotic ecosystems in the UK was 40–67%, which provided comparable results to conventional survey methods per unit of survey effort for three species (water vole, field vole and red deer); in other words, the results from 3 to 6 water replicates would be equivalent to the results from 3 to 5 latrine surveys and 5–30 weeks of single camera deployment9. In the current case, the riverine water eDNA samples detected 53.52% of eukaryotic species from riparian soil samples. As the bioinformation in WBIF includes the biodiversity information of all taxonomic communities, the information of all taxonomic communities could be monitored by using riverine water eDNA, although variability in monitoring effectiveness exists among different taxonomic communities. We anticipate that, in future biodiversity research, conservation, and management, we will be able to efficiently monitor and assess the aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity by simply using riverine water eDNA samples.In summary, to test the idea of using riverine water eDNA to simultaneously monitor aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity, we proposed a monitoring effectiveness assessment framework, in which the land-to-river monitoring effectiveness was indicated by detection probability, and the upstream-to-downstream monitoring effectiveness was described by the detection probability per kilometer runoff distance and by the half-life distance of dead bioinformation. In our case study, in the Shaliu River watershed on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, and on summer rainy days, 43–76% of species information in riparian sites could be detected in adjacent riverine water eDNA samples, 92–99% of species information from upstream sites could be detected in a 1-km downstream eDNA sample, and the half-life distances of dead bioinformation for bacteria was approximately 13–19 km and was approximately 4–6 km for eukaryotes. The indicators in the assessment framework that describe the monitoring effectiveness provide usable assessment tools for designing monitoring projects and for evaluating monitoring results. In future ecological research, biodiversity conservation, and ecosystem management, riverine water eDNA may be a general diagnostic procedure for routine watershed biodiversity monitoring and assessment. More

1.Dingemanse, N. J. & Wolf, M. Recent models for adaptive personality differences: A review. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 3947–3958. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0221 (2010).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
2.Wolf, M., van Doorn, G., Leimar, O. & Weissing, F. J. Life-history trade-offs favour the evolution of animal personalities. Nature 447, 581–584. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05835 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
3.Dingemanse, N. J., Both, C., Drent, P. J. & Tinbergen, J. M. Fitness consequences of avian personalities in a fluctuating environment. Proc. R. Soc. B. 271, 847–852. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2004.2680 (2004).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
4.Sih, A. & Bell, A. M. Insights for behavioral ecology from behavioral syndromes. Adv. Study Behav. 38, 227–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-3454(08)00005-3 (2008).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Sih, A., Bell, A. M. & Johnson, J. C. Behavioral syndromes: An ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 372–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.04.009 (2004).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
6.Drent, P. J., van Oers, K. & van Noordwijk, A. J. Realized heritability of personalities in the great tit (Parus major). Proc. R. Soc. B. 270, 45–51. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2168 (2003).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
7.Sol, D., Griffin, A. S., Bartomeus, I. & Boyce, H. Exploring or avoiding novel food resources? The novelty conflict in an invasive bird. PLoS ONE 6, e19535. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019535 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
8.Dammhahn, M., Mazza, V., Schirmer, A., Göttsche, C. & Eccard, J. C. Of city and village mice: Behavioural adjustments of striped field mice to urban environments. Sci. Rep. 10, 13056. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69998-6 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
9.Sih, A. & Del Giudice, M. Linking behavioural syndromes and cognition: A behavioural ecological perspective. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 2762–2772. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0216 (2012).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
10.Stoewe, M. & Kotrschal, K. Behavioural phenotypes may determine whether social context facilitates or delays novel object exploration in ravens (Corvus corax). J. Ornithol. 148, S179–S184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-007-0145-1 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Guillette, L. M., Reddon, A. R., Hoeschele, M. & Sturdy, C. B. Sometimes slower is better: Slow-exploring birds are more sensitive to changes in a vocal discrimination task. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 767–773. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.1669 (2011).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Dochtermann, N. A., Schwab, T. & Sih, A. The contribution of additive genetic variation to personality variation: Heritability of personality. Proc. R. Soc. B 282, 20142201. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2201 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
13.Van Oers, K., De Jong, G., Van Noordwijk, A. J., Kempenaers, B. & Drent, P. J. Contribution of genetics to the study of animal personalities: A review of case studies. Behaviour 142, 1185–1206. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853905774539364 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Van Oers, K. & Mueller, J. C. Evolutionary genomics of animal personality. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 365, 3991–4000. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0178 (2010).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
15.Croston, R., Branch, C. L., Kozlovsky, D. Y., Dukas, R. & Pravosudov, V. V. Heritability and the evolution of cognitive traits. Behav. Ecol. 26, 1447–1459. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv088 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Quinn, J. L., Cole, E. F., Reed, T. E. & Morand-Ferron, J. Environmental and genetic determinants of innovativeness in a natural population of birds. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 371, 20150184. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0184 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Evans, J., Boudreau, K. & Hyman, J. Behavioural syndromes in urban and rural populations of song sparrows. Ethology 116, 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2010.01771.x (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Bókony, V., Kulcsár, A., Tóth, Z. & Liker, A. Personality traits and behavioral syndromes in differently urbanized populations of house sparrows (Passer domesticus). PLoS ONE 7, 36639. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036639 (2007).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Charmantier, A., Deyeyrier, V., Lambrechts, M., Perret, S. & Grégoire, A. Urbanization is associated with divergence in pace-of-life in great tits. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2017.00053 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Isaksson, C., Rodewald, A. D. & Gil, D. Editorial: Behavioural and ecological consequences of urban life in birds. Front. Ecol. Evol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00050 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Audet, J.-N., Ducatez, S. & Lefebvre, L. The town bird and the country bird: Problem solving and immunocompetence vary with urbanization. Behav. Ecol. 27, 637–644. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv201 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
22.Miranda, A. C., Schielzeth, H., Sonntag, T. & Partecke, J. Urbanization and its effects on personality traits: A result of microevolution or phenotypic plasticity. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 2634–2644. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12258 (2013).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
23.Riyahi, S., Björklund, M., Mateos-Gonzalez, F. & Senar, J. C. Personality and urbanization: Behavioural traits and DRD4 SNP830 polymorphisms in great tits in Barcelona city. J. Ethol. 35, 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-016-0496-2 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Schinka, J. A., Letsch, E. A. & Crawford, F. C. DRD4 and novelty seeking: Results of meta-analyses. Am. J. Med. Genet. 114, 643–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.10649 (2002).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Chen, C. S., Burton, M., Greenberger, E. & Dmitrieva, J. Population migration and the variation of Dopamine D4 Receptor (DRD4) allele frequencies around the globe. Evol. Hum. Behav. 20, 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00015-X (1999).Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Shimada, M. K. et al. Polymorphism in the second intron of dopamine receptor D4 gene in humans and apes. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 316, 1186–1190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.03.006 (2004).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
27.Fidler, A. E. et al. Drd4 gene polymorphisms are associated with personality variation in a passerine bird. Proc. R. Soc. B. 274, 1685–1691. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.0337 (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Mueller, J. C. et al. Haplotype structure, adaptive history and associations with exploratory behaviour of the DRD4 gene region in four great tit (Parus major) populations. Mol. Ecol. 22, 2797–2809. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12282 (2013).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
29.Korsten, P. et al. Association between DRD4 gene polymorphism and personality variation in great tits: A test across four wild populations. Mol. Ecol. 19, 832–843. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04518.x (2010).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
30.Jiang, W., Shang, S. & Su, Y. Genetic influences on insight problem solving: The role of catechol-O-methyltransferase polymorphisms. Front. Psychol. 6, 1569. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01569 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
31.Hopkins, W. et al. Genetic influences on receptive joint attention in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Sci. Rep. 4, 3774. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03774 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
32.Fitzpatrick, M. J. et al. Candidate genes for behavioural ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.11.017 (2005).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
33.Munafo, M. R., Brown, S. M. & Harkless, K. C. Serotonin transporter (5-HTTLPR) genotype and amygdala activation: A meta-analysis. Biol. Psychiatry 63, 852–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.08.016 (2008).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
34.Staes, N. et al. Serotonin receptor 1A variation is associated with anxiety and agonistic behavior in chimpanzees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 36, 1418–1429. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msz061 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
35.Mueller, J. C. et al. Behaviour-related DRD4 polymorphisms in invasive bird populations. Mol. Ecol. 23, 2876–2885. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12763 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
36.Timm, K., Tilgar, V. & Saag, P. DRD4 gene polymorphism in great tits: Gender-specific association with behavioural variation in the wild. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 69, 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-1887-z (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Riyahi, S., Sánchez-Delgado, M., Calafell, F., Monk, D. & Senar, J. C. Combined epigenetic and intraspecific variation of the DRD4 and SERT genes influence novelty seeking behaviour in great tit Parus major. Epigenetics 10, 516–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592294.2015.1046027 (2015).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
38.Holtmann, B. et al. Population differentiation and behavioural association of the two ‘personality’ genes DRD4 and SERT in dunnocks (Prunella modularis). Mol. Ecol. 25, 706–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13514 (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
39.Krause, E. T., Kjaer, J. B., Lüders, C. & van Phi, L. A polymorphism in the 5′-flanking region of the serotonin transporter (5-HTT) gene affects fear-related behaviors of adult domestic chickens. Behav. Brain Res. 14, 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.04.051 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Timm, K., van Oers, K. & Tilgar, V. SERT gene polymorphisms are associated with risk-taking behaviour and breeding parameters in wild great tits. J. Exp. Biol. 221, jeb171595. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.171595 (2018).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
41.Timm, K., Koosa, K. & Tilgar, V. The serotonin transporter gene could play a role in anti-predator behaviour in a forest passerine. J. Ethol. 37, 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-019-00593-7 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Berger, M., Gray, J. A. & Roth, B. L. The expanded biology of serotonin. Annu. Rev. Med. 60, 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.med.60.042307.110802 (2009).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
43.Lesch, K. P. & Merschdorf, U. Impulsivity, aggression, and serotonin: A molecular psychobiological perspective. Behav. Sci. Law 18, 581–604 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Duke, A. A., Bègue, L., Bell, R. & Eisenlohr-Moul, T. Revisiting the serotonin-aggression relation in humans: A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 139, 1148–1172. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031544 (2013).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
45.Ferrari, P. F., Palanza, P., Parmigiani, S., de Almeida, R. M. & Miczek, K. A. Serotonin and aggressive behavior in rodents and nonhuman primates: Predispositions and plasticity. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 526, 259–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2005.10.002 (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Bacqué-Cazenave, J. et al. Serotonin in animal cognition and behavior. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 1649. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21051649 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
47.Walker, S. C. et al. Selective prefrontal serotonin depletion impairs acquisition of a detour-reaching task. Eur. J. Neurosci. 23, 3119–3123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04826.x (2006).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
48.Cools, R., Roberts, A. C. & Robbins, T. W. Serotoninergic regulation of emotional and behavioural control processes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.10.011 (2008).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
49.Rudnick, G. & Sandtner, W. Serotonin transport in the 21st century. J. Gen. Physiol. 151, 1248–1264. https://doi.org/10.1085/jgp.201812066 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Lesch, K. P. et al. Association of anxiety-related traits with a polymorphism in the serotonin transporter gene regulatory region. Science 274, 1527–1531. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.274.5292.1527 (1996).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Sen, S., Burmeister, M. & Ghosh, D. Meta-analysis of the association between a serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism (5- HTTLPR) and anxiety-related personality traits. Am. J. Med. Genet. 127, 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.b.20158 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Karg, K., Burmeister, M., Shedden, K. & Sen, S. The serotonin transporter promoter variant (5-HTTLPR), stress, and depression meta-analysis revisited: Evidence of genetic moderation. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 68, 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2010.189 (2011).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
53.Beversdorf, D. Q. et al. Influence of serotonin transporter SLC6A4 genotype on the effect of psychosocial stress on cognitive performance: An exploratory pilot study. Cogn. Behav. Neurol. 31, 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000153 (2018).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
54.Canli, T. & Lesch, P.-K. Long story short: The serotonin transporter in emotion regulation and social cognition. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 1103–1109. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1964 (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
55.Jarrell, H. et al. Polymorphisms in the serotonin reuptake transporter gene modify the consequences of social status on metabolic health in female rhesus monkeys. Physiol. Behav. 93, 807–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.11.042 (2008).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.Bennett, A. et al. Early experience and serotonin transporter gene variation interact to influence primate CNS function. Mol. Psychiatry 7, 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.mp.4000949 (2002).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
57.Golebiowska, J. et al. Serotonin transporter deficiency alters socioemotional ultrasonic communication in rats. Sci. Rep. 9, 20283. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56629-y (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
58.Thys, B. et al. The serotonin transporter gene and female personality variation in a free-living passerine. Sci. Rep. 11, 8577. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88225-4 (2021).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
59.Audet, J.-N. et al. Divergence in problem-solving skills is associated with differential expression of glutamate receptors in wild finches. Sci. Adv. 4, eaao6369. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao6369 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
60.Grunst, A. S., Grunst, M. L., Pinxten, R. & Eens, M. Personality and plasticity in neophobia levels vary with anthropogenic disturbance but not toxic metal exposure in urban great tits. Sci. Total Environ. 656, 997–1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.383 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
61.Grunst, A. S., Grunst, M. L., Pinxten, R. & Eens, M. Sources of individual variation in problem-solving performance in urban great tits (Parus major): Exploring effects of metal pollution, urban disturbance and personality. Sci. Tot. Environ. 749, 141436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141436 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Thys, B. et al. The female perspective of personality in a wild songbird: Repeatable aggressiveness relates to exploration behavior. Sci. Rep. 7, 7656. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08001-1 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
63.Grunst, A. S. et al. An important personality trait varies with blood and plumage metal concentrations in a free-living songbird. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53, 10487–10496. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b03548 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
64.Grunst, A. S. et al. Variation in personality traits across a metal pollution gradient in a free-living songbird. Sci. Total Environ. 630, 668–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.19 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
65.Laucht, M. et al. Interaction between the 5-HTTLPR serotonin transporter polymorphism and environmental adversity for mood and anxiety psychopathology: Evidence from a high-risk community sample of young adults. Int. J. Neuropharmacol. 12, 737–747. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1461145708009875 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Wang, Z. et al. Genome-wide gene by lead exposure interaction analysis identifies UNC5D as a candidate gene for neurodevelopment. Environ. Health 16, 81. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-017-0288-3 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
67.Grunst, A. S., Grunst, M. L., Pinxten, R. & Eens, M. Proximity to roads, but not exposure to metal pollution, is associated with accelerated developmental telomere shortening in nestling great tits. Environ. Pollut. 256, 113373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113373 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Dingemanse, N. J. et al. Repeatability and heritability of exploratory behaviour in great tits from the wild. Anim. Behav. 64, 929–937. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2002.2006 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Solé, X. et al. SNPStats: A web tool for the analysis of association studies. Bioinformatics 22, 1928–1929. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti283 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Hecht, M., Bromberg, Y. & Rost, B. Better prediction of functional effects for sequence variants from VarI-SIG 2014: Identification and annotation of genetic variants in the context of structure, function and disease. BMC Genom. 16, S1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-16-S8-S1 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Choi, Y. & Chan, A. PROVEAN web server: A tool to predict the functional effect of amino acid substitutions and indels. Bioinformatics 31, 2745–2747. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btv195 (2015).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
72.Omasits, U., Ahrens, C. H., Müller, S. & Wollscheid, B. Protter: Interactive protein feature visualization and integration with experimental proteomic data. Bioinformatics 30(6), 884–886. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt607 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
73.R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2019). URL https://www.R-project.org/.74.Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
75.Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B. & Christensen, R. H. B. lmerTest Package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. 82, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
76.Stoffel, M. A., Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. rptR: repeatability estimation and variance decomposition by generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 1639–1644. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12797 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
77.Harrison, X. A. Using observation-level random effects to model overdispersion in count data in ecology and evolution. PeerJ 2, e616. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.616 (2014).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
78.Lenth, R. emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package version 1.4.3.01 (2019). https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans.79.Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 57, 289–300. https://doi.org/10.2307/2346101 (1995).MathSciNet 
Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
80.Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
81.Lüdecke, D., Makowski, D., Waggoner, P. & Patil, I. performance: Assessment of Regression Models Performance. R package version 0.4.6 (2020). https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=performance.82.Hartig, F. DHARMa: Residual Diagnostics for Hierarchical (Multi-Level/Mixed) Regression Models. R package version 0.2.6 (2019). https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=DHARMa.83.Mikros, E. & Diallinas, G. Tales of tails in transporters. Open Biol. 9, 190083. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.190083 (2019).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
84.Kern, C. et al. The N teminus specifies the switch between transporter modes of the human serotonin transporter. J. Biol. Chem. 292, 3603–3613. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M116.771360 (2017).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
85.Visser, M. E., Van Noordwijk, A. J., Tinbergen, J. M. & Lessells, C. M. Warmer springs lead to mistimed reproduction in great tits (Parus major). Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 1867–1870. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1998.0514 (1998).Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
86.Hunt, R., Sauna, Z. E., Ambudkar, S. V., Gottesman, M. M. & Kimchi-Sarfaty, C. Silent (Synonymous) SNPs: Should we care about them? In Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Methods in Molecular Biology (Methods and Protocols) Vol. 578 (ed. Komar, A.) (Humana Press, 2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-411-1_2.Chapter 

Google Scholar 
87.Grunst, A.S., Grunst, M.L. & Staes, N., Bert, T., Pinxten, R., Eens, M. Data for: Serotonin Transporter (SERT) Polymorphisms, Personality and Problem-Solving in Urban Great Tits. (Dryad Digital Repository, 2021). More

1.Piao, S. et al. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 1922–1940 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Richardson, A. D. et al. Nature 560, 368–371 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Ma, H. et al. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1110–1122 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Mokany, K., Raison, R. J. & Prokushkin, A. S. Glob. Change Biol. 12, 84–96 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Radville, L., McCormack, M. L., Post, E. & Eissenstat, D. M. J. Exp. Bot. 67, 3617–3628 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Liu, H. et al. Nat. Clim. Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01244-x (2021).7.Freschet, G. T. et al. New Phytol. 232, 1123–1158 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Clemmensen, K. E. et al. Science 339, 1615–1618 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Sokol, N. W. & Bradford, M. A. Nat. Geosci. 12, 46–53 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Jones, D. L., Nguyen, C. & Finlay, R. D. Plant Soil 321, 5–33 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Abramoff, R. Z. & Finzi, A. C. New Phytol. 205, 1054–1061 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Warren, J. M. et al. New Phytol. 205, 59–78 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Blume-Werry, G., Wilson, S. D., Kreyling, J. & Milbau, A. New Phytol. 209, 978–986 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Sloan, V. L., Fletcher, B. J. & Phoenix, G. K. J. Ecol. 104, 239–248 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Fu, Y. H. et al. Nature 526, 104–107 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Baines SB, Pace ML. The production of dissolved organic matter by phytoplankton and its importance to bacteria: patterns across marine and freshwater systems. Limnol Oceanogr. 1991;36:1078–90.
Google Scholar 
2.Williams PJLeB. Heterotrophic bacteria and the dynamics of dissolved organic material. In: Kirchman DL (ed). Microbial Ecology of the Oceans, 1st edn. New York: Wiley-Liss; 2000. p. 153–200.3.Thornton DCO. Dissolved organic matter (DOM) release by phytoplankton in the contemporary and future ocean. Eur J Phycol. 2014;49:20–46.CAS 

Google Scholar 
4.Nagata T. Organic matter-bacteria interactions in seawater. In: Kirchman DL, (ed). Microbial Ecology of the Oceans. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons, Inc; 2008. p. 207–41.
Google Scholar 
5.Kujawinski EB. The impact of microbial metabolism on marine dissolved organic matter. Ann Rev Mar Sci. 2011;3:567–99.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
6.Azam F, Fenchel T, Field JG, Gray JS, Meyerreil LA, Thingstad F. The ecological role of water-column microbes in the sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 1983;10:257–63.
Google Scholar 
7.Cole JJ, Findlay S, Pace ML. Bacterial production in fresh and saltwater ecosystems – a cross-system overview. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 1988;43:1–10.
Google Scholar 
8.Moran MA, Kujawinski EB, Stubbins A, Fatland R, Aluwihare LI, Buchan A, et al. Deciphering ocean carbon in a changing world. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2016;113:3143–51.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
9.Becker KW, Collins JR, Durham BP, Groussman RD, White AE, Fredricks HF, et al. Daily changes in phytoplankton lipidomes reveal mechanisms of energy storage in the open ocean. Nat Comm. 2018;9:5179.
Google Scholar 
10.Boysen AK, Carlson LT, Durham BP, Groussman RD, Aylward FO, Ribalet F, et al. Diel oscillations of particulate metabolites reflect synchronized microbial activity in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre. bioRxiv. 2020: 2020.05.09.086173.11.Durham BP, Boysen AK, Carlson LT, Groussman RD, Heal KR, Cain KR, et al. Sulfonate-based networks between eukaryotic phytoplankton and heterotrophic bacteria in the surface ocean. Nat Microbiol. 2019;4:1706–15.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Burney CM, Davis PG, Johnson KM, Sieburth JM. Diel relationships of microbial trophic groups and in situ dissolved carbohydrate dynamics in the Caribbean Sea. Mar Biol. 1982;67:311–22.CAS 

Google Scholar 
13.Gasol JM, Doval MD, Pinhassi J, Calderon-Paz JI, Guixa-Boixareu N, Vaque D, et al. Diel variations in bacterial heterotrophic activity and growth in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 1998;164:107–24.
Google Scholar 
14.Kuipers B, van Noort GJ, Vosjan J, Herndl GJ. Diel periodicity of bacterioplankton in the euphotic zone of the subtropical Atlantic Ocean. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2000;201:13–25.
Google Scholar 
15.Ottesen EA, Young CR, Gifford SM, Eppley JM, Marin R, Schuster SC, et al. Multispecies diel transcriptional oscillations in open ocean heterotrophic bacterial assemblages. Science 2014;345:207–12.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
16.Aylward FO, Eppley JM, Smith JM, Chavez FP, Scholin CA, DeLong EF. Microbial community transcriptional networks are conserved in three domains at ocean basin scales. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2015;112:5443–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Frischkorn KR, Haley ST, Dyhrman ST. Coordinated gene expression between Trichodesmium and its microbiome over day–night cycles in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre. ISME J 2018;12:997–1007.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
18.Seymour JR, Amin SA, Raina JB, Stocker R. Zooming in on the phycosphere: the ecological interface for phytoplankton-bacteria relationships. Nat Microbiol. 2017;2:17065.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
19.Bjornsen PK. Phytoplankton exudation of organic-matter – why do healthy cells do it. Limnol Oceanogr. 1988;33:151–4.
Google Scholar 
20.Fogg GE. The ecological significance of extracellular products of phytoplankton photosynthesis. Bot Mar. 1983;26:3–14.CAS 

Google Scholar 
21.Amin SA, Hmelo LR, van Tol HM, Durham BP, Carlson LT, Heal KR, et al. Interaction and signalling between a cosmopolitan phytoplankton and associated bacteria. Nature 2015;522:98–101.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
22.Durham BP, Dearth SP, Sharma S, Amin SA, Smith CB, Campagna SR, et al. Recognition cascade and metabolite transfer in a marine bacteria‐phytoplankton model system. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19:3500–13.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Guerrini F, Mazzotti A, Boni L, Pistocchi R. Bacterial-algal interactions in polysaccharide production. Aquat Micro Ecol. 1998;15:247–53.
Google Scholar 
24.Armbrust EV, Berges JA, Bowler C, Green BR, Martinez D, Putnam NH, et al. The genome of the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana: ecology, evolution, and metabolism. Science 2004;306:79–86.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Moran MA, Buchan A, Gonzalez JM, Heidelberg JF, Whitman WB, Kiene RP, et al. Genome sequence of Silicibacter pomeroyi reveals adaptations to the marine environment. Nature 2004;432:910–3.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
26.Uitz J, Claustre H, Gentili B, Stramski D. Phytoplankton class-specific primary production in the world’s oceans: Seasonal and interannual variability from satellite observations. Global Biogeochem Cycles. 2010;24.27.Buchan A, LeCleir GR, Gulvik CA, Gonzalez JM. Master recyclers: features and functions of bacteria associated with phytoplankton blooms. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2014;12:686–98.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
28.Luo HW, Moran MA. Evolutionary ecology of the marine Roseobacter clade. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2014;78:573–87.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
29.Nowinski B, Moran MA. Niche dimensions of a marine bacterium are identified using invasion studies in coastal seawater. Nat Microbiol. 2021;6:524.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
30.Denger K, Lehmann S, Cook AM. Molecular genetics and biochemistry of N-acetyltaurine degradation by Cupriavidus necator H16. Microbiology 2011;157:2983–91.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
31.Schulz A, Stoveken N, Binzen IM, Hoffmann T, Heider J, Bremer E. Feeding on compatible solutes: a substrate-induced pathway for uptake and catabolism of ectoines and its genetic control by EnuR. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19:926–46.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Crossette E, Gumm J, Langenfeld K, Raskin L, Duhaime M, Wigginton K. Metagenomic quantification of genes with internal standards. mBio. 2021;12:e03173-20.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
33.Gifford SM, Becker JW, Sosa OA, Repeta DJ, DeLong EF. Quantitative transcriptomics reveals the growth-and nutrient-dependent response of a streamlined marine methylotroph to methanol and naturally occurring dissolved organic matter. mBio. 2016;7:e01279-16.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.Moran MA, Satinsky B, Gifford SM, Luo HW, Rivers A, Chan LK, et al. Sizing up metatranscriptomics. ISME J 2013;7:237–43.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
35.Guillard RRL, Hargraves PE. Stichochrysis immobilis is a diatom, not a chyrsophyte. Phycologia 1993;32:234–6.
Google Scholar 
36.Uchimiya M, Tsuboi Y, Ito K, Date Y, Kikuchi J. Bacterial substrate transformation tracked by stable-isotope-guided NMR metabolomics: application in a natural aquatic microbial community. Metabolites 2017;7:52.PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Lewis IA, Schommer SC, Markley JL. rNMR: open source software for identifying and quantifying metabolites in NMR spectra. Mag Res Chem. 2009;47:S123–S6.CAS 

Google Scholar 
38.Wishart DS, Jewison T, Guo AC, Wilson M, Knox C, Liu YF, et al. HMDB 3.0-the human metabolome database in 2013. Nuc Acids Res 2013;41:D801–D7.CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Ulrich EL, Akutsu H, Doreleijers JF, Harano Y, Ioannidis YE, Lin J, et al. BioMagResBank Nuc Acids Res. 2008;36:D402–D8.CAS 

Google Scholar 
40.Toukach PV, Egorova KS. Carbohydrate structure database merged from bacterial, archaeal, plant and fungal parts. Nuclic Acids Res. 2016;44:D1229–D36.CAS 

Google Scholar 
41.Landa M, Burns AS, Durham BP, Esson K, Nowinski B, Sharma S, et al. Sulfur metabolites that facilitate oceanic phytoplankton-bacteria carbon flux. ISME J. 2019;13:2536–50.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
42.Boroujerdi AFB, Lee PA, DiTullio GR, Janech MG, Vied SB, Bearden DW. Identification of isethionic acid and other small molecule metabolites of Fragilariopsis cylindrus with nuclear magnetic resonance. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2012;404:777–84.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
43.Walejko JM, Chelliah A, Keller-Wood M, Gregg A, Edison AS. Global metabolomics of the placenta reveals distinct metabolic profiles between maternal and fetal placental tissues following delivery in non-labored women. Metabolites 2018;8:10.PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
44.Schwämmle V, Jensen ON. VSClust: feature-based variance-sensitive clustering of omics data. Bioinformatics 2018;34:2965–72.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Thaben PF, Westermark PO. Detecting rhythms in time series with RAIN. J Biol Rhythms. 2014;29:391–400.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
46.Welsh J (2020). CirHeatmap. Available from: https://github.com/joadwe/cirheatmap.47.Landa M, Burns AS, Roth SJ, Moran MA. Bacterial transcriptome remodeling during sequential co-culture with a marine dinoflagellate and diatom. ISME J. 2017;11:2677–90.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
48.Satinsky BM, Gifford SM, Crump BC, Moran MA Use of internal standards for quantitative metatranscriptome and metagenome analysis. In: DeLong EF (ed). Methods in Enzymology. 2013. 531: p. 237-50.49.Anders S, Pyl PT, Huber W. HTSeq-a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2015;31:166–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
50.Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 2014;15:550.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
51.Becker S, Tebben J, Coffinet S, Wiltshire K, Iversen MH, Harder T, et al. Laminarin is a major molecule in the marine carbon cycle. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2020;117:6599–607.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
52.Neidhardt F, Ingraham J, Schaechter S Physiology of the bacterial cell: a molecular approach. Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates Inc.; 1990.53.Lidbury I, Murrell JC, Chen Y. Trimethylamine N-oxide metabolism by abundant marine heterotrophic bacteria. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2014;111:2710–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
54.Mayer J, Huhn T, Habeck M, Denger K, Hollemeyer K, Cook AM. 2,3-Dihydroxypropane-1-sulfonate degraded by Cupriavidus pinatubonensis JMP134: purification of dihydroxypropanesulfonate 3-dehydrogenase. Microbiology 2010;156:1556–64.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
55.Mou XZ, Sun SL, Rayapati P, Moran MA. Genes for transport and metabolism of spermidine in Ruegeria pomeroyi DSS-3 and other marine bacteria. Aquat Micro Ecol. 2010;58:311–21.
Google Scholar 
56.Biller SJ, Coe A, Roggensack SE, Chisholm SW Heterotroph interactions alter Prochlorococcus transcriptome dynamics during extended periods of darkness. mSystems. 2018; 3 https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00040-18.57.Harding L, Meeson B, Prézelin B, Sweeney B. Diel periodicity of photosynthesis in marine phytoplankton. Mar Biol. 1981;61:95–105.
Google Scholar 
58.Harding L, Prezelin B, Sweeney B, Cox J. Diel oscillations of the photosynthesis-irradiance (PI) relationship in natural assemblages of phytoplankton. Mar Biol. 1982;67:167–78.
Google Scholar 
59.Blough NV, Zepp RG Reactive oxygen species in natural waters. Active oxygen in chemistry. Dordrecht: Springer; 1995. p. 280–333.60.Zafiriou OC, Joussot-Dubien J, Zepp RG, Zika RG. Photochemistry of natural waters. Environ Sci Technol. 1984;18:358A–71A.CAS 

Google Scholar 
61.Ziegelhoffer EC, Donohue TJ. Bacterial responses to photo-oxidative stress. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2009;7:856–63.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
62.Lubin EA, Henry JT, Fiebig A, Crosson S, Laub MT. Identification of the PhoB regulon and role of PhoU in the phosphate starvation response of Caulobacter crescentus. J Bacteriol. 2016;198:187–200.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
63.Yang C, Huang TW, Wen SY, Chang CY, Tsai SF, Wu WF, et al. Genome-wide PhoB binding and gene expression profiles reveal the hierarchical gene regulatory network of phosphate starvation in Escherichia coli. Plos One. 2012;7:e47314.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
64.Hsieh YJ, Wanner BL. Global regulation by the seven-component Pi signaling system. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2010;13:198–203.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
65.Muratore D, Boysen AK, Harke MJ, Becker KW, Casey JR, Coesel SN, et al. Community-scale synchronization and temporal partitioning of gene expression, metabolism, and lipid biosynthesis in oligotrophic ocean surface waters. bioRxiv. 2020: 2020.05.15.098020.66.Giedroc DP. Hydrogen peroxide sensing in Bacillus subtilis: it is all about the (metallo)regulator. Mol Microbiol. 2009;73:1–4.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
67.Wagner GP, Kin K, Lynch VJ. Measurement of mRNA abundance using RNA-seq data: RPKM measure is inconsistent among samples. Theory Biosci. 2012;131:281–5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
68.Weinitschke S, Sharma PI, Stingl U, Cook AM, Smits TH. Gene clusters involved in isethionate degradation by terrestrial and marine bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010;76:618–21.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
69.Nikaido H. Molecular basis of bacterial outer membrane permeability revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003;67:593–656.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
70.Hellebust JA. Excretion of some organic compounds by marine phytoplankton 1. Limnol Oceanogr. 1965;10:192–206.
Google Scholar 
71.Behrenfeld MJ, Halsey KH, Milligan AJ. Evolved physiological responses of phytoplankton to their integrated growth environment. Philos Trans R Soc B: Biol Sci. 2008;363:2687–703.CAS 

Google Scholar 
72.Kiene RP, Linn LJ, Bruton JA. New and important roles for DMSP in marine microbial communities. J Sea Res. 2000;43:209–24.CAS 

Google Scholar 
73.Fredrickson KA, Strom SL. The algal osmolyte DMSP as a microzooplankton grazing deterrent in laboratory and field studies. J Plankton Res. 2009;31:135–52.
Google Scholar 
74.Sunda W, Kieber DJ, Kiene RP, Huntsman S. An antioxidant function for DMSP and DMS in marine algae. Nature 2002;418:317–20.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
75.Lidbury I, Kimberley G, Scanlan DJ, Murrell JC, Chen Y. Comparative genomics and mutagenesis analyses of choline metabolism in the marine Roseobacter clade. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:5048–62.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
76.Cunliffe M. Purine catabolic pathway revealed by transcriptomics in the model marine bacterium Ruegeria pomeroyi DSS-3. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;92:fiv150.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
77.Durham BP, Sharma S, Luo HW, Smith CB, Amin SA, Bender SJ, et al. Cryptic carbon and sulfur cycling between surface ocean plankton. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 2015;112:453–7.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar  More