Ecology

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.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

Dataset of beneficial plantsI collated a species-level dataset of plant benefits (presence/absence data) starting from the information gathered by Kleunen et al.32. These authors extracted data from the WEP database (National Plant Germplasm System GRIN-GLOBAL; https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/taxon/taxonomysearcheco.aspx, Accessed 7 Jan 2016), which is based on the book by Wiersema and León20. Their dataset included 84 categories and subcategories of plant benefits pertaining human and animal nutrition, materials, fuels, medicine, useful poisons, social and environmental benefits. Subcategories of benefits, which often included very few records, were merged here into 25 standard and major categories following the guidelines in the Economic Botany Data Collection Standard33 as in Molina-Venegas et al.13, namely ornamental plants, soil improvers, hedging/shelter, human food, human-food additives, vertebrate food, invertebrate food, fuelwood, charcoal, other biofuels, timber, cane/stems, fibres, tannins/dyestuffs, beads, gums/resins, lipids, waxes, essential oils/scents, latex/rubber, medicines, invertebrate poison, vertebrate poison, smoking materials/drugs and symbolic/inspirational plants (Fig. 1). A few records (n = 93) that could not be assigned to any of the above categories were disregarded, and so was the category ‘gene source’ because unlike other benefits, any species is intrinsically a potential gene donor and hence there is not a clear link between the benefit and species features. Note that this is not to say that preserving genetic diversity, which indeed is the underlying message of this research, is a meaningless goal. Infraspecific taxa were collapsed at the species level, and the very few fern taxa in the original database32 were excluded. In total, I gathered 15,834 plant-benefit records sorted in a matrix of 25 types of benefits and 9521 species of seed plants. Most species (83.74%) provided only one or two benefits representing 62.83% of the records in the dataset, and the maximum number of benefits per species was 10 (only three species). Although the WEP database is the largest species-level database on plant benefits32, it does not claim to be comprehensive20. Yet, the size of the dataset I gathered here represented 76.19% of the total seed-plant genus-level records collated for the same types of benefits in a more comprehensive survey by Molina-Venegas et al.13 that based on Mabberley’s Plant-book34. Moreover, the total number of records per category (at the genus-level) strongly correlated between the datasets (Pearson r = 0.94, p  More

1.Feely, R. A., Sabine, C. L., Hernandez-Ayon, J. M., Ianson, D. & Hales, B. Evidence for upwelling of corrosive “acidified” water onto the continental shelf. Science 320, 1490–1492 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
2.Hofmann, G. E. et al. High-frequency dynamics of ocean ph: A multi-ecosystem comparison. PLoS ONE 6(12), e28983 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
3.Kroeker, K. J. et al. Interacting environmental mosaics drive geographic variation in mussel performance and predation vulnerability. Ecol. Lett. 19, 771–779 (2016).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Gutiérrez, D. et al. Coastal cooling and increased productivity in the main upwelling zone off Peru since the mid-twentieth century. Geophys. Res. Lett. 38, L07603. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046324 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Aiken, C. M., Navarrete, S. A. & Pelegrí, J. L. Potential changes in larval dispersal and alongshore connectivity on the central Chilean coast due to an altered wind climate. J. Geophys. Res. 116, G04026. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JG001731 (2011).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Lagos, N. A., Castilla, J. C. & Broitman, B. Spatial Environmental correlates of intertidal recruitment: A test using barnacles in northern Chile. Ecol. Monogr. 78, 245–261 (2008).
Google Scholar 
7.Vargas, C. A. et al. Species-specific responses to ocean acidification should account for local adaptation and adaptive plasticity. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 84. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0084 (2017).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
8.Broitman, B. R. et al. Phenotypic plasticity is not a cline: Thermal physiology of an intertidal barnacle over 20° of latitude. J. Anim. Ecol. 00, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13514 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Ramajo, L. et al. Physiological responses of juvenile Chilean scallops (Argopecten purpuratus) to isolated and combined environmental drivers of coastal upwelling. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 76, 1836e1849 (2019).
Google Scholar 
10.Saavedra, L. M., Saldías, G., Broitman, B. & Vargas, C. Carbonate chemistry dynamics in shellfish farming areas along the Chilean coast: Natural ranges and biological implications. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 78, 323–339 (2021).
Google Scholar 
11.Lardies, M. A. et al. Physiological and histopathological impacts of increased carbon dioxide and temperature on the scallops Argopecten purpuratus cultured under upwelling influences in northern Chile. Aquaculture 479, 455–466 (2017).
Google Scholar 
12.Ramajo, L. et al. Upwelling intensity modulates the fitness and physiological performance of coastal species: Implications for the aquaculture of the scallop Argopecten purpuratus in the Humboldt Current System. Sci. Total Environ. 745, 140949 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Bakun, A. Global climate change and intensification of coastal ocean upwelling. Science 247, 198–201 (1990).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Wang, D. et al. Intensification and spatial homogenization of coastal upwelling under climate change. Nature 518, 390–394 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Kim, T. W., Barry, J. P. & Micheli, F. The effects of intermittent exposure to low-pH and low-oxygen conditions on survival and growth of juvenile red abalone. Biogeosciences 10, 7255–7262 (2013).ADS 

Google Scholar 
16.Ramajo, L. et al. Plasticity and trade-offs in physiological traits of intertidal mussels subjected to freshwater-induced environmental variation. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 553, 93–109 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
17.Leung, J. Y., Connell, S. D., Nagelkerken, I. & Russell, B. D. Impacts of near-future ocean acidification and warming on the shell mechanical and geochemical properties of gastropods from intertidal to subtidal zones. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 12097–12103 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
18.Findlay, H. et al. Calcification, a physiological process to be considered in the context of the whole organism. Biogeosciences Discuss. 6, 2267–2284 (2009).ADS 

Google Scholar 
19.Waldbusser, G. et al. Saturation-state sensitivity of marine bivalves larvae to ocean acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 273–280 (2015).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Tunnicliffe, V. et al. Survival of mussels in extremely acidic waters on a submarine volcano. Nat. Geosci. 2, 344–348 (2009).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
21.Ries, J. B., Cohen, A. L. & McCorkle, D. C. Marine calcifiers exhibit mixed responses to CO2-induced ocean acidification. Geology 37, 1131–1134 (2009).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
22.Leung, J. Y., Russell, B. D. & Connell, S. D. Mineralogical plasticity acts as a compensatory mechanism to the impacts of ocean acidification. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51, 2652–2659 (2017).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Duarte, C. et al. The energetic physiology of juvenile mussels, Mytilus chilensis (Hupe): The prevalent role of salinity under current and predicted pCO2 scenarios. Environ. Pollut. 242, 156–163 (2018).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
24.Rodolfo-Metalpa, R. et al. Coral and mollusc resistance to ocean acidification adversely affected by warming. Nat. Clim. Change. 1, 308–312 (2011).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
25.Waldbusser, G. et al. Slow shell building, a possible trait for resistance to the effects of acute ocean acidification. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 1969–1983 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
26.Fitzer, S. C. et al. Ocean acidification and temperature increase impact mussel shell shape and thickness: Problematic for protection?. Ecol. Evol. 5, 4875–4884 (2015).PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
27.Fitzer, S. C., Phoenix, V. R., Cusack, M. & Kamenos, N. A. Ocean acidification impacts mussel control on biomineralization. Sci. Rep. 28, 6218 (2014).
Google Scholar 
28.Fitzer, S. C., Cusack, M., Phoenix, V. R. & Kamenos, N. A. Ocean acidification reduces the crystallographic control in juvenile mussel shells. J. Struct. Biol. 188, 39–45 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
29.Fitzer, S. C. et al. Biomineral shell formation under ocean acidification: A shift from order to chaos. Sci. Rep. 6, 21076 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
30.Lagos, N. A. et al. Effects of temperature and ocean acidification on shell characteristics of Argopecten purpuratus: Implications for scallop aquaculture in an upwelling-influenced area. Aquac. Environ. Interact. 8, 357–370 (2016).
Google Scholar 
31.Ramajo, L. et al. Biomineralization changes with food supply confer juvenile scallops (Argopecten purpuratus) resistance to ocean acidification. Glob. Chang. Biol. 22, 2025–2203 (2016).ADS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
32.Osores, S. J. et al. Plasticity and inter-population variability in physiological and life-history traits of the mussel Mytilus chilensis: A reciprocal transplant experiment. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 490, 1–12 (2017).
Google Scholar 
33.Telesca, L. et al. Plasticity and environmental heterogeneity predict geographic resilience patterns of foundation species to future change. Glob. Chang. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14758 (2020).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
34.Grenier, C. et al. The combined effects of salinity and pH on shell biomineralization of the edible mussel Mytilus chilensis. Environ. Pollut. 263, 114555 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
35.Kroeker, K. J. et al. Impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms: Quantifying sensitivities and interaction with warming. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 1884–1896 (2013).ADS 

Google Scholar 
36.Mackenzie, C. L. et al. Ocean warming, more than acidification, reduces shell strength in a commercial shellfish species during food limitation. PLoS ONE 9(1), e86764 (2014).ADS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Rykaczewski, R. R. et al. Poleward displacement of coastal upwelling-favorable winds in the ocean’s eastern boundary currents through the 21st century. Geophys. Res. Lett. 42, 6424–6431 (2015).ADS 

Google Scholar 
38.Rodríguez-Navarro, A. B. Rapid quantification of avian eggshell microstructure and crystallographic-texture using two-dimensional X-ray diffraction. Br. Poult. Sci. 48, 133–144 (2007).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
39.Rodríguez-Navarro, A. B. XRD2DScan: New software for polycrystalline materials characterization using two-dimensional X-ray diffraction. J. Appl. Cryst. 39, 905–909 (2006).
Google Scholar 
40.Li, S. et al. Interactive effects of seawater acidification and elevated temperature on biomineralization and amino acid metabolism in the mussel Mytilus edulis. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 3623–3631 (2015).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
41.Li, S. et al. Interactive effects of seawater acidification and elevated temperature on the transcriptome and biomineralization in the pearl oyster Pinctada fucata. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 1157–1165 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
42.Gestoso, I., Arenas, F. & Olabarria, C. Ecological interactions modulate responses of two intertidal mussel species to changes in temperature and pH. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 474, 116–125 (2016).
Google Scholar 
43.Babarro, J. M., Abad, M. J., Gestoso, I., Silva, E. & Olabarria, C. Susceptibility of two co-existing mytilid species to simulated predation under projected climate change conditions. Hydrobiologia 807, 247–261 (2018).
Google Scholar 
44.Barthelat, F., Rim, J. E. & Espinosa, H. D. A review on the structure and mechanical properties of mollusk shells: Perspectives on synthetic biomimetic materials. In Applied Scanning Probe Methods XIII (eds Bhushan, B. & Fuchs, H.) 17–44 (Springer, 2009).
Google Scholar 
45.Leung, J. Y. et al. Calcifiers can adjust shell building at the nanoscale to resist ocean acidification. Small 16, 2003186 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
46.Chatzinikolaou, E., Grigoriou, P., Keklikoglou, K., Faulwetter, S. & Papageorgiou, N. The combined effects of reduced pH and elevated temperature on the shell density of two gastropod species measured using micro-CT imaging. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 74, 1135–1149 (2017).
Google Scholar 
47.Nienhuis, S., Palmer, R. & Harley, C. Elevated CO2 affects shell dissolution rate but not calcification rate in a marine snail. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 277, 2553–2558 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
48.Bourdeau, P. E. Prioritized phenotypic responses to combined predators in a marine snail. Ecology 90, 1659–1669 (2009).PubMed 

Google Scholar 
49.Weiner, S. & Addadi, L. Crystallization pathways in biomineralization. Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 41, 21–40 (2011).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Nudelman, F. Nacre biomineralisation: A review on the mechanisms of crystal nucleation (In Seminars in cell & developmental biology), 2–10 (Academic Press, 2015).51.Harper, E. M., Checa, A. G. & Rodríguez-Navarro, A. B. Organization and mode of secretion of the granular prismatic microstructure of Entodesma navicular (Bivalvia: Mollusca). Acta Zool. 90, 132e141 (2009).
Google Scholar 
52.Pennington, B. J. & Currey, J. D. A mathematical model for the mechanical properties of scallop shells. J. Zool. 202, 239–263 (1984).
Google Scholar 
53.Yevenes, M. A., Lagos, N. A., Farías, L. & Vargas, C. A. Greenhouse gases, nutrients and the carbonate system in the Reloncaví Fjord (Northern Chilean Patagonia): Implications on aquaculture of the mussel, Mytilus chilensis, during an episodic volcanic eruption. Sci. Total Environ. 669, 49–61 (2019).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
54.Dickinson, G. H. et al. Interactive effects of salinity and elevated CO2 levels on juvenile eastern oysters, Crassostrea virginica. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 29–43 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
55.Gaylord, B. et al. Functional impacts of ocean acidification in an ecologically critical foundation species. J. Exp. Biol. 214, 2586–2594 (2011).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.O’Toole-Howes, M. et al. Deconvolution of the elastic properties of bivalve shell nanocomposites from direct measurement and finite element analysis. J. Mater. Res. 34, 2869–2880 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
57.Auzoux-Bordenave, S. et al. Ocean acidification impacts growth and shell mineralization in juvenile abalone (Haliotis tuberculata). Mar. Biol. 167, 11 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
58.Torres, R. et al. Evaluation of a semiautomatic system for long-term seawater carbonate chemistry manipulation. Rev. Chil. Hist. Nat. 86, 443–451 (2013).
Google Scholar 
59.IPCC. Climate Change 2021. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Eds. Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou). Cambridge University Press. In Press. (2021).60.DOE. Handbook of methods for the analysis of the various parameters of the carbon dioxide system in seawater; version 2 (eds. Dickson, A.G. & Goyet, C.), (ORNL/CDIAC, 74, 1994).61.Meinshausen, M. et al. The RPC greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Clim. Change. 109, 213–241 (2011).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
62.Rahn, D. A., Rosenblüth, B. & Rutllant, J. A. Detecting subtle seasonal transitions of upwelling in North-Central Chile. J. Phys. Oceanogr. 45, 854–867 (2015).ADS 

Google Scholar 
63.Meng, Y., Guo, Z., Yao, H., Yeung, K. W. & Thiyagarajan, V. Calcium carbonate unit realignment under acidification: A potential compensatory mechanism in an edible estuarine oyster. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 139, 141–149 (2019).CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
64.Rasband, W. S. ImageJ U.S. National Institute of Health, Maryland, USA (1997–2020). More

Study populationWe studied wild meerkats at the Kuruman River Reserve (a ~63 km2 area comprising dry riverbeds, herbaceous flats and grassy dunes) in the Kalahari region of South Africa (26°58′S, 21°49′E)28,48. Our study period (Nov 2011–Apr 2015) included an extended drought, during which female reproductive success tracked rainfall22 (Supplementary Fig. 1). The annual mean population size was 270 animals, in 22 established clans of 4–39 animals15,22. Habituated to close observation ( More