Ecology

1.Watson, J. E. M., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B. & Hockings, M. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515, 67–73 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
2.Juffe-Bignoli, D. et al. Protected Planet Report 2014 (UNEP-WCMC, 2014).3.Gray, C. L. et al. Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat. Commun. 7, 12306 (2016).4.Xu, W. et al. Strengthening protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in China. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1601–1606 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Naidoo, R. et al. Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav3006 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
6.Geldmann, J. et al. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines. Biol. Conserv. 161, 230–238 (2013).
Google Scholar 
7.Cazalis, V. et al. Effectiveness of protected areas in conserving tropical forest birds. Nat. Commun. 11, 4461 (2020).8.Elsen, P. R., Monahan, W. B., Dougherty, E. R. & Merenlender, A. M. Keeping pace with climate change in global terrestrial protected areas. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay0814 (2020).
Google Scholar 
9.Hoffmann, S., Irl, S. D. H. & Beierkuhnlein, C. Predicted climate shifts within terrestrial protected areas worldwide. Nat. Commun. 10, 4787 (2019).10.Batllori, E., Parisien, M. A., Parks, S. A., Moritz, M. A. & Miller, C. Potential relocation of climatic environments suggests high rates of climate displacement within the North American protection network. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 3219–3230 (2017).
Google Scholar 
11.Ward, M. et al. Just ten percent of the global terrestrial protected area network is structurally connected via intact land. Nat. Commun. 11, 4563 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Jones, K. R. et al. One-third of global protected land is under intense human pressure. Science 360, 788–791 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
13.Parks, S. A., Carroll, C., Dobrowski, S. Z. & Allred, B. W. Human land uses reduce climate connectivity across North America. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 2944–2955 (2020).
Google Scholar 
14.McGuire, J. L., Lawler, J. J., McRae, B. H., Nuñez, T. A. & Theobald, D. M. Achieving climate connectivity in a fragmented landscape. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 7195–7200 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Watson, J. E. M., Iwamura, T. & Butt, N. Mapping vulnerability and conservation adaptation strategies under climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 989–994 (2013).
Google Scholar 
16.Pecl, G. T. et al. Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: impacts on ecosystems and human well-being. Science 355, eaai9214 (2017).
Google Scholar 
17.Jones, C., Giorgi, F. & Asrar, G. The coordinated regional downscaling experiment: CORDEX–an international downscaling link to CMIP5. CLIVAR Exch. 16, 34–40 (2011).
Google Scholar 
18.Hurtt, G. C. et al. Harmonization of global land-use change and management for the period 850-2100 (LUH2) for CMIP6. Geosci. Model Dev. 13, 5425–5464 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
19.Loarie, S. R. et al. The velocity of climate change. Nature 462, 1052–1055 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Ordonez, A., Martinuzzi, S., Radeloff, V. C. & Williams, J. W. Combined speeds of climate and land-use change of the conterminous US until 2050. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 811–816 (2014).
Google Scholar 
21.UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/70/1 (UN, 2015).22.Harrop, S. R. ‘Living in harmony with nature’? Outcomes of the 2010 Nagoya conference of the convention on biological diversity. J. Environ. Law 23, 117–128 (2011).
Google Scholar 
23.Maxwell, S. L. et al. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586, 217–227 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Schloss, C. A., Nuñez, T. A. & Lawler, J. J. Dispersal will limit ability of mammals to track climate change in the Western Hemisphere. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8606–8611 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
25.Chen, I. C., Hill, J. K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D. B. & Thomas, C. D. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333, 1024–1026 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Schwalm, C. R., Glendon, S. & Duffy, P. B. RCP8.5 tracks cumulative CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 19656–19657 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
27.Ando, A. W. & Mallory, M. L. Optimal portfolio design to reduce climate-related conservation uncertainty in the Prairie Pothole Region. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 6484–6489 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
28.Ackerly, D. D. et al. The geography of climate change: implications for conservation biogeography. Divers. Distrib. 16, 476–487 (2010).
Google Scholar 
29.Dobrowski, S. Z. & Parks, S. A. Climate change velocity underestimates climate change exposure in mountainous regions. Nat. Commun. 7, 12349 (2016).30.Hoegh-Guldberg, O. et al. in Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) 175–311 (IPCC, WMO, 2018).31.Sandel, B. et al. The influence of late Quaternary climate-change velocity on species endemism. Science 334, 660–664 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
32.Ordonez, A., Williams, J. W. & Svenning, J.-C. Mapping climatic mechanisms likely to favour the emergence of novel communities. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 1104–1109 (2016).
Google Scholar 
33.Carroll, C. et al. Scale-dependent complementarity of climatic velocity and environmental diversity for identifying priority areas for conservation under climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 4508–4520 (2017).
Google Scholar 
34.Alexander, J. M. et al. Lags in the response of mountain plant communities to climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 563–579 (2018).
Google Scholar 
35.Lawler, J. J. et al. Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 7492–7497 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Stein, B. A. et al. Preparing for and managing change: climate adaptation for biodiversity and ecosystems. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11, 502–510 (2013).
Google Scholar 
37.Elsen, P. R., Monahan, W. B. & Merenlender, A. M. Global patterns of protection of elevational gradients in mountain ranges. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 6004–6009 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
38.Burrows, M. T. et al. The pace of shifting climate in marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Science 334, 652–655 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Burrows, M. T. et al. Geographical limits to species-range shifts are suggested by climate velocity. Nature 507, 492–495 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
40.Fitzpatrick, M. C., Gove, A. D., Sanders, N. & Dunn, R. R. Climate change, plant migration, and range collapse in a global biodiversity hotspot: the Banksia (Proteaceae) of Western Australia. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 1337–1352 (2008).
Google Scholar 
41.Dynesius, M. & Jansson, R. Evolutionary consequences of changes in species’ geographical distributions driven by Milankovitch climate oscillations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 9115–9120 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
42.Geldmann, J., Manica, A., Burgess, N. D., Coad, L. & Balmford, A. A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 23209–23215 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
43.Tittensor, D. P. et al. Integrating climate adaptation and biodiversity conservation in the global ocean. Sci. Adv. 5, eaay9969 (2019).
Google Scholar 
44.Osorio, F., Vallejos, R. & Cuevas, F. SpatialPack: Package for Analysis of Spatial Data. R package version 0.2-3 (2014).45.Williams, K. D. et al. The Met Office Global Coupled model 2.0 (GC2) configuration. Geosci. Model Dev. 8, 1509–1524 (2015).
Google Scholar 
46.Giorgetta, M. A. et al. Climate and carbon cycle changes from 1850 to 2100 in MPI-ESM simulations for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. https://doi.org/10.1002/jame.20038 (2013).47.Knudsen, E. M. & Walsh, J. E. Northern Hemisphere storminess in the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM1-M). Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 2335–2355 (2016).
Google Scholar 
48.Brito-Morales, I. et al. Climate velocity can inform conservation in a warming world. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 441–457 (2018).
Google Scholar 
49.García Molinos, J., Schoeman, D. S., Brown, C. J. & Burrows, M. T. VoCC: an R package for calculating the velocity of climate change and related climatic metrics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 10, 2195–2202 (2019).
Google Scholar 
50.UNEP‐WCMC & IUCN Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA, 2018).51.Visconti, P. et al. Protected area targets post-2020. Science 364, eaav6886 (2019).
Google Scholar 
52.Farr, T. G. et al. The shuttle radar topography mission. Rev. Geophys. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005RG000183 (2007).53.Olson, D. M. et al. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. BioScience 51, 933–938 (2001).54.Ellis, E. C., Antill, E. C. & Kreft, H. All is not loss: plant biodiversity in the anthropocene. PLoS ONE 7, 30535 (2012).55.Asamoah, E. F. Climate Velocity and Land-use Instability 1971–2100 (Figshare, 2021); https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14852955.v4 More

1.Chao, S. Forest Peoples: Numbers Across the World (Forest Peoples Programme, 2021).2.Zomer, R. J. et al. Sci. Rep. 6, 29987 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Schnell, S., Altrell, D., Ståhl, G. & Kleinn, C. Environ. Monit. Assess. 187, 4197 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
4.Brandt, M. et al. Nature 587, 78–82 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Baccini, A. et al. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2, 182–185 (2012).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
6.Miller, D. C., Muñoz-Mora, J. C. & Christiaensen, L. Forest Policy Econ. 84, 47–61 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Mbow, C., Smith, P., Skole, D., Duguma, L. & Bustamante, M. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 6, 8–14 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Brandt, M. et al. Nat. Geosci. 11, 328–333 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Mbow, C. et al. in Climate Change and Agriculture (ed. Deryng, D.) Ch. 10 (Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing, 2020).10.Akinyemi, F. O., Ghazaryan, G. & Dubovyk, O. Land Degrad. Dev. 32, 158–172 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Sitch, S. et al. Biogeosciences 12, 653–679 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Schnell, S., Kleinn, C. & Ståhl, G. Environ. Monit. Assess. 187, 600 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Hansen, M. C. et al. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Kuyah, S. et al. Agrofor. Syst. 86, 267–277 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Nationally Determined Contributions Under the Paris Agreement Synthesis Report by the Secretariat FCCC/PA/CMA/2021/2/Add 2 (UNFCCC, 2021); https://unfccc.int/documents/26857316.Lohbeck, M. et al. Sci. Rep. 10, 15038 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Chomba, S., Sinclair, F., Savadogo, P., Bourne, M. & Lohbeck, M. Front. For. Glob. Chang. 3, 571679 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Griscom, B. W. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 11645–11650 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

1.Weisse, M. & Goldman, E. D. We Lost a Football Pitch of Primary Rainforest Every 6 Seconds in 2019 (World Resources Institute, 2020); https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/06/global-tree-cover-loss-data-20192.Gibson, L. et al. Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 478, 378–381 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
3.Pan, Y. et al. A large and persistent carbon sink in the world’s forests. Science 333, 988–993 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
4.State of the World’s Indigenous Peoples: Rights to Lands, Territories and Resources (UN, 2021).5.Curtis, P. G., Slay, C. M., Harris, N. L., Tyukavina, A. & Hansen, M. C. Classifying drivers of global forest loss. Science 361, 1108–1111 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
6.Larsen, P. B. et al. Understanding and responding to the environmental human rights defenders crisis: the case for conservation action. Conserv. Lett. 14, e12777 (2020).
Google Scholar 
7.Tauli-Corpuz, V., Alcorn, J., Molnar, A., Healy, C. & Barrow, E. Cornered by PAs: adopting rights-based approaches to enable cost-effective conservation and climate action. World Dev. 130, 104923 (2020).
Google Scholar 
8.Dinerstein, E. et al. A global deal for nature: guiding principles, milestones, and targets. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2869 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
9.Dudley, N. et al. The essential role of other effective area-based conservation measures in achieving big bold conservation targets. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 15, e00424 (2018).
Google Scholar 
10.Zero Draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework CBD/WG2020/2/3 (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2020).11.NGO Concerns Over the Proposed 30% Target for Protected Areas and Absence of Safeguards for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (Rainforest Foundation UK, 2021).12.Reyes-García, V. et al. Recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ and local communities’ rights and agency in the post-2020 Biodiversity Agenda. Ambio https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01561-7 (2021).13.Territories of Life: 2021 Report 52 (ICCA Consortium, 2021); https://report.territoriesoflife.org14.Garnett, S. T. et al. A spatial overview of the global importance of Indigenous lands for conservation. Nat. Sustain. 1, 369–374 (2018).
Google Scholar 
15.Fa, J. E. et al. Importance of Indigenous Peoples’ lands for the conservation of intact forest landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 18, 135–140 (2020).
Google Scholar 
16.Vergara-Asenjo, G. & Potvin, C. Forest protection and tenure status: the key role of indigenous peoples and protected areas in Panama. Glob. Environ. Change 28, 205–215 (2014).
Google Scholar 
17.Blackman, A. & Veit, P. Titled Amazon indigenous communities cut forest carbon emissions. Ecol. Econ. 153, 56–67 (2018).
Google Scholar 
18.Walker, W. S. et al. The role of forest conversion, degradation, and disturbance in the carbon dynamics of Amazon indigenous territories and protected areas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 3015–3025 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
19.Nolte, C., Agrawal, A., Silvius, K. M. & Soares-Filho, B. S. Governance regime and location influence avoided deforestation success of protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 4956–4961 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
20.Schleicher, J., Peres, C. A., Amano, T., Llactayo, W. & Leader-Williams, N. Conservation performance of different conservation governance regimes in the Peruvian Amazon. Sci. Rep. 7, 11318 (2017).
Google Scholar 
21.Jusys, T. Changing patterns in deforestation avoidance by different protection types in the Brazilian Amazon. PLoS ONE 13, e0195900 (2018).
Google Scholar 
22.State of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (UN, 2009).23.Jackson, J. E. & Warren, K. B. Indigenous movements in Latin America, 1992–2004: controversies, ironies, new directions. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34, 549–573 (2005).
Google Scholar 
24.Vancutsem, C. et al. Long-term (1990–2019) monitoring of forest cover changes in the humid tropics. Sci. Adv. 7, eabe1603 (2021).
Google Scholar 
25.Hansen, M. C. et al. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science 342, 850–853 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Stuart, E. A. & Rubin, D. B. in Best Practices in Quantitative Methods (ed. Osborne, J.) 155–176 (SAGE Publications, 2008).27.Pfaff, A., Robalino, J., Lima, E., Sandoval, C. & Herrera, L. D. Governance, location and avoided deforestation from protected areas: greater restrictions can have lower impact, due to differences in location. World Dev. 55, 7–20 (2014).
Google Scholar 
28.Leberger, R., Rosa, I. M. D., Guerra, C. A., Wolf, F. & Pereira, H. M. Global patterns of forest loss across IUCN categories of protected areas. Biol. Conserv. 241, 108299 (2020).
Google Scholar 
29.Borrini-Feyerabend, G. et al. Governance of Protected Areas: From Understanding to Action (IUCN, 2013).30.Who Owns the World’s Land? A Global Baseline of Formally Recognized Indigenous and Community Land Rights (Rights and Resources Initiative, 2015); https://rightsandresources.org/wp-content/uploads/GlobalBaseline_web.pdf31.Dubertret, F. & Alden Wily, L. Percent of Indigenous and Community Lands (Landmark, 2015).32.Under the Cover of COVID: New Laws in Asia Favor Business at the Cost of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ Land and Territorial Rights (Rights and Resources Initiative, 2020).33.Domínguez, L. & Luoma, C. Decolonising conservation policy: how colonial land and conservation ideologies persist and perpetuate indigenous injustices at the expense of the environment. Land 9, 65 (2020).
Google Scholar 
34.Pyhälä, A., Orozco, A. O. & Counsell, S. Protected Areas in the Congo Basin: Failing both people and biodiversity? (FAO, 2016).35.Pearson, T. R. H., Brown, S., Murray, L. & Sidman, G. Greenhouse gas emissions from tropical forest degradation: an underestimated source. Carbon Balance Manag. 12, 3 (2017).
Google Scholar 
36.Barlow, J. et al. Anthropogenic disturbance in tropical forests can double biodiversity loss from deforestation. Nature 535, 144–147 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
37.Hansen, A. J. et al. A policy-driven framework for conserving the best of Earth’s remaining moist tropical forests. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1377–1384 (2020).
Google Scholar 
38.Milodowski, D. T. et al. The impact of logging on vertical canopy structure across a gradient of tropical forest degradation intensity in Borneo. J. Appl. Ecol. 58, 1764–1775 (2021).
Google Scholar 
39.Benítez-López, A., Santini, L., Schipper, A. M., Busana, M. & Huijbregts, M. A. J. Intact but empty forests? Patterns of hunting-induced mammal defaunation in the tropics. PLoS Biol. 17, e3000247 (2019).
Google Scholar 
40.Miettinen, J., Stibig, H.-J. & Achard, F. Remote sensing of forest degradation in Southeast Asia—aiming for a regional view through 5–30 m satellite data. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2, 24–36 (2014).
Google Scholar 
41.Yuliani, E. L. et al. Keeping the land: indigenous communities’ struggle over land use and sustainable forest management in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Ecol. Soc. 23, art49 (2018).
Google Scholar 
42.Berkes, F. Sacred Ecology (Routledge, 2017).43.Sheil, D., Boissière, M. & Beaudoin, G. Unseen sentinels: local monitoring and control in conservation’s blind spots. Ecol. Soc. 20, 39 (2015).
Google Scholar 
44.Sasaoka, M. & Laumonier, Y. Suitability of local resource management practices based on supernatural enforcement mechanisms in the local social-cultural context. Ecol. Soc. 17, 6 (2012).
Google Scholar 
45.Asante, E. A., Ababio, S. & Boadu, K. B. The use of indigenous cultural practices by the Ashantis for the conservation of forests in Ghana. SAGE Open 7, 215824401668761 (2017).
Google Scholar 
46.Schwartzman, S. et al. The natural and social history of the indigenous lands and protected areas corridor of the Xingu River basin. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 20120164 (2013).
Google Scholar 
47.Hayes, T. M. & Murtinho, F. Are indigenous forest reserves sustainable? An analysis of present and future land-use trends in Bosawas, Nicaragua. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 15, 497–511 (2008).
Google Scholar 
48.Tellman, B. et al. Illicit drivers of land use change: narcotrafficking and forest loss in central America. Glob. Environ. Change 63, 102092 (2020).
Google Scholar 
49.Bryan, J. For Nicaragua’s indigenous communities, land rights in name only: delineating boundaries among indigenous and black communities in eastern Nicaragua was supposed to guaranteed their land rights. Instead, it did the opposite. NACLA Rep. Am. 51, 55–64 (2019).
Google Scholar 
50.Seymour, F., La Vina, T. & Hite, K. Evidence Linking Community-level Tenure and Forest Condition: An Annotated Bibliography (Climate and Land Use Alliance, 2014).51.Tseng, T.-W. J. et al. Influence of land tenure interventions on human well-being and environmental outcomes. Nat. Sustain. 4, 242–251 (2021).
Google Scholar 
52.Robinson, B. E. et al. Incorporating land tenure security into conservation: conservation and land tenure security. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12383 (2018).
Google Scholar 
53.Smith, D. A., Holland, M. B., Michon, A., Ibáñez, A. & Herrera, F. The hidden layer of indigenous land tenure: informal forest ownership and its implications for forest use and conservation in Panama’s largest collective territory. Int. For. Rev. 19, 478–494 (2017).
Google Scholar 
54.Larson, A. M. & Springer, J. Recognition and Respect for Tenure Rights (IUCN, CEESP, CIFOR, 2016).55.Arizona, Y., Wicaksono, M. T. & Vel, J. The role of indigeneity NGOs in the legal recognition of adat communities and customary forests in Indonesia. Asia Pac. J. Anthropol. 20, 487–506 (2019).
Google Scholar 
56.Malavasi, M. The map of biodiversity mapping. Biol. Conserv. 252, 108843 (2020).
Google Scholar 
57.Witter, R. & Satterfield, T. The ebb and flow of indigenous rights recognitions in conservation policy: indigenous rights recognitions in conservation policy. Dev. Change 50, 1083–1108 (2019).
Google Scholar 
58.Dutta, A. et al. Response to a “global safety net” to reverse biodiversity loss and stabilize Earth’s climate. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb2824 (2021).
Google Scholar 
59.Herrera, D., Pfaff, A. & Robalino, J. Impacts of protected areas vary with the level of government: comparing avoided deforestation across agencies in the Brazilian Amazon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 14916–14925 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
60.Bebbington, A. J. et al. Resource extraction and infrastructure threaten forest cover and community rights. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 13164–13173 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
61.Johnson, C. J., Venter, O., Ray, J. C. & Watson, J. E. M. Growth‐inducing infrastructure represents transformative yet ignored keystone environmental decisions. Conserv. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12696 (2020).62.Davis, K. F., Yu, K., Rulli, M. C., Pichdara, L. & D’Odorico, P. Accelerated deforestation driven by large-scale land acquisitions in Cambodia. Nat. Geosci. 8, 772–775 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
63.Conigliani, C., Cuffaro, N. & D’Agostino, G. Large-scale land investments and forests in Africa. Land Use Policy 75, 651–660 (2018).
Google Scholar 
64.Global Land Analysis & Discovery. Global 2010 Tree Cover (30m) (Department of Geographical Sciences, Univ. Maryland, 2013).65.Global Forest Watch. Tree Cover Loss version 1.6 (World Resources Institute, 2019).66.Hansen, M. C., Stehman, S. V. & Potapov, P. V. Quantification of global gross forest cover loss. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 8650–8655 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
67.Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) (UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, accessed January 2020; www.protectedplanet.net68.Hanson, J. O. wdpar: Interface to the world database on protected areas (CRAN, 2020); https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=wdpar69.Global Forest Watch. Spatial Database of Planted Trees (World Resources Institute, data aaccessed May 2021).70.Transparent World & Global Forest Watch. Tree Plantations (World Resources Institute, date accessed May 2021).71.Nelson, A. & Chomitz, K. M. Effectiveness of strict vs. multiple use protected areas in reducing tropical forest fires: a global analysis using matching methods. PLoS ONE 6, e22722 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
72.Joppa, L. N. & Pfaff, A. High and far: biases in the location of protected areas. PLoS ONE 4, e8273 (2009).
Google Scholar 
73.Global Forest Watch. Tree Cover 2000 version 1.2 (World Resources Institute, 2015).74.Amatulli, G. et al. A suite of global, cross-scale topographic variables for environmental and biodiversity modeling. Sci. Data 5, 180040 (2018).
Google Scholar 
75.Nelson, A. et al. A suite of global accessibility indicators. Sci. Data 6, 266 (2019).
Google Scholar 
76.Global Roads Open Access Data Set Version 1 (gROADSv1) (1980–2010) (NASA SEDAC, 2013).77.Lloyd, C. T., Sorichetta, A. & Tatem, A. J. High resolution global gridded data for use in population studies. Sci. Data 4, 170001 (2017).
Google Scholar 
78.GADM Database of Global Administrative Areas version 3.6 (FAO, 2018).79.Ho, D., Imai, K., King, G. & Stuart, E. matchIt: Nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference (CRAN, 2018); https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MatchIt80.Wood, S. mgcv: Mixed GAM computation vehicle with automatic smoothness estimation (CRAN, 2019); https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=mgcv More

1.Abatzoglou, J. T., Williams, A. P., Boschetti, L., Zubkova, M. & Kolden, C. A. Global patterns of interannual climate-fire relationships (2018). Glob. Change Biol. 24, 5164–5175 (2018).
Google Scholar 
2.Littell, J. S., McKenzie, D., Peterson, D. L. & Westerling, A. L. Climate and wildfire area burned in western US ecoprovinces, 1916-2003. Ecol. Appl. 19, 1003–1021 (2009).
Google Scholar 
3.Abatzoglou, J. T. & Kolden, C. A. Relationships between climate and macroscale area burned in the western United States. Int. J. Wildland Fire 22, 1003–1020 (2013).
Google Scholar 
4.Wang, X. et al. Projected changes in daily fire spread across Canada over the next century. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 025005 (2017).
Google Scholar 
5.Hanes, C. C. et al. Fire-regime changes in Canada over the last half century. Can. J. Res. 49, 256–269 (2019).
Google Scholar 
6.Amiro, B. D. et al. Fire weather index system components of large fires in the Canadian boreal forest. Int. J. Wildland Fire 13, 391–400 (2004).
Google Scholar 
7.Flannigan, M. D., Krawchuck, M. A., de Groot, W. J., Wotton, B. M. & Gowman, L. M. Implications of changing climate for global wildland fire. Int. J. Wildland Fire 18, 483–507 (2009).
Google Scholar 
8.Bowman, D. M. J. S. et al. Human exposure and sensitivity to globally extreme wildfire events. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0058 (2017).
Google Scholar 
9.Coogan, S. C. P., Robinne, F.-N., Jain, P. & Flannigan, M. D. Scientists’ warning on wildfire—a Canadian perspective. Can. J. Res. 49, 1015–1023 (2019).
Google Scholar 
10.Abatzoglou, J. T., Williams, A. P. & Barbero, R. Global emergence of anthropogenic climate change in fire weather indices. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 326–336 (2019).
Google Scholar 
11.Van Wagner, C. E. et al. Development and Structure of the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index System (Canadian Forestry Service Headquarters, 1987); https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/forest-fire-danger-3/camia-et-al.-2008-past12.Flannigan, M. D. & Harrington, J. B. A study of the relation of meteorological variables to monthly provincial area burned by wildfire in Canada (1953-80). J. Appl. Meteorol. 27, 441–452 (1988).
Google Scholar 
13.Flannigan, M. D. et al. Fuel moisture sensitivity to temperature and precipitation: climate change implications. Clim. Change 134, 59–71 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
14.Jolly, W. M. et al. Climate-induced variations in global wildfire danger from 1979 to 2013. Nat. Commun. 6, 7537 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Touma, D., Stevenson, S., Lehner, F. & Coats, S. Human-driven greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions cause distinct regional impacts on extreme fire weather. Nat. Commun. 12, 212 (2021).16.Clarke, H. G., Smith, P. L. & Pitman, A. J. Regional signatures of future fire weather over eastern Australia from global climate models. Int. J. Wildland Fire 20, 550–562 (2011).
Google Scholar 
17.Bedia, J. et al. Sensitivity of fire weather index to different reanalysis products in the Iberian Peninsula. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 12, 699–708 (2012).
Google Scholar 
18.Jain, P., Wang, X. & Flannigan, M. D. Trend analysis of fire season length and extreme fire weather in North America between 1979 and 2015. Int. J. Wildland Fire 26, 1009–1020 (2017).
Google Scholar 
19.Dowdy, A. J. Climatological variability of fire weather in Australia. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 57, 221–234 (2018).
Google Scholar 
20.Zhao, F., Liu, Y. & Shu, L. Change in the fire season pattern from bimodal to unimodal under climate change: the case of Daxing’anling in Northeast China. Agric. Meteorol. 291, 108075 (2020).
Google Scholar 
21.Hersbach, H. et al. The ERA5 global reanalysis. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 146, 1999–2049 (2020).
Google Scholar 
22.Abatzoglou, J. T. & Williams, A. P. Impact of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire across western US forests. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 11770–11775 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
23.Kirchmeier-Young, M. C., Gillet, N. P., Zwiers, F. W., Cannon, A. J. & Anslow, F. S. Attribution of the influence of human-induced climate change on an extreme fire season. Earths Future 7, 2–10 (2019).
Google Scholar 
24.Pausas, J. G. & Ribeiro, E. The global-fire productivity relationship. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 22, 728–736 (2013).
Google Scholar 
25.Cochrane, M. A. Fire science for rainforests. Nature 421, 913–919 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
26.Ziel, R. H. et al. A comparison of fire weather indices with MODIS fire days for the natural regions of Alaska. Forests 11, 516 (2020).
Google Scholar 
27.Giannaros, T. M., Kotroni, V. & Lagouvardos, K. Climatology and trend analysis (1987–2016) of fire weather in the Euro-Mediterranean. Int. J. Climatol. 41, E491–E508 (2021).
Google Scholar 
28.Harris, S. & Lucas, C. Understanding the variability of Australian fire weather between 1973 and 2017. PLoS ONE 14, e0222328 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
29.Climate at a Glance (NOAA, 2021); https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/30.van Oldenborgh, G. J. et al. Attribution of the Australian bushfire risk to anthropogenic climate change. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 21, 941–960 (2021).
Google Scholar 
31.Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Pimont, F., Ruffault, J. & Curt, T. Attributing increases in fire weather to anthropogenic climate change over France. Front. Earth Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.00104 (2020).32.Byrne, M. P. & O’Gorman, P. A. Understanding decreases in land relative humidity with global warming: conceptual model and GCM simulations. J. Clim. 29, 9045–9061 (2016).
Google Scholar 
33.Willett, K. M., Jones, P. D., Gillett, N. P. & Thorne, P. W. Recent changes in surface humidity: development of the HadCRUH dataset. J. Clim. 21, 5364–5383 (2008).
Google Scholar 
34.Matsoukas, C. et al. Potential evaporation trends over land between 1983-2008: driven by radiative fluxes or vapour-pressure deficit? Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 7601–7616 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
35.Grotjahn, R. & Huynh, J. Contiguous US summer maximum temperature and heat stress trends in CRU and NOAA climate division data plus comparisons to reanalyses. Sci. Rep. 8, 11146 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Denson, E., Wasko, C. & Peel, M. C. Decreases in relative humidity across Australia. Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac0aca (2021).37.Barkhordarian, A., Saatchi, S. S., Behrangi, A., Loikith, P. C. & Mechoso, C. R. A recent systematic increase in vapor pressure deficit over tropical South America. Sci. Rep. 9, 15331 (2019).
Google Scholar 
38.Findell, K. L. et al. The impact of anthropogenic land use and land cover change on regional climate extremes. Nat. Commun. 8, 989 (2017).39.McKinnon, K. A., Poppick, A. & Simpson, I. R. Hot extremes have become drier in the United States Southwest. Nat. Clim. Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01076-9 (2021).40.Berg, A. et al. Land–atmosphere feedbacks amplify aridity increase over land under global warming. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 869–874 (2016).
Google Scholar 
41.Mishra, V. et al. Moist heat stress extremes in India enhanced by irrigation. Nat. Geosci. 13, 722–728 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
42.Dong, B. & Dai, A. The influence of the interdecadal Pacific oscillation on temperature and precipitation over the globe. Clim. Dyn. 45, 2667–2681 (2015).
Google Scholar 
43.Fischer, E. M. & Knutti, R. Robust projections of combined humidity and temperature extremes. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 126–130 (2013).
Google Scholar 
44.Tymstra C., Flannigan M. D., Stocks B. J., Cai X. & Morrison K. Wildfire management in Canada: review, challenges and opportunities. Prog. Disaster Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2019.100045 (2020).45.Flannigan, M. D., Stocks, B., Turetsky, M. & Wotton, M. Impacts of climate change on fire activity and fire management in the circumboreal forest. Glob. Change Biol. 15, 549–560 (2009).
Google Scholar 
46.Chen, Y. et al. Future increases in Arctic lightning and fire risk for permafrost carbon. Nat. Clim. Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01011-y (2021).47.Hope, E. S., McKenney, D. W., Pedlar, J. H., Stocks, B. J. & Gauthier, S. Wildfire suppression costs for Canada under a changing climate. PLoS ONE 11, e0157425 (2016).
Google Scholar 
48.Podur, J. & Wotton, B. M. Will climate change overwhelm fire management capacity? Ecol. Modell. 221, 1301–1309 (2010).
Google Scholar 
49.Abatzoglou, J. T., Juang, C. S., Williams, A. P., Kolden, C. A. & Westerling, A. L. Increasing synchronous fire danger in forests of the western United States. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2020GL091377 (2021).
Google Scholar 
50.Olson, D. M. et al. Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on Earth. Bioscience 51, 933–938 (2001).
Google Scholar 
51.Copernicus Climate Change Service Data Store (Copernicus Climate Change Service, accessed 4 March 2020); https://confluence.ecmwf.int/display/CKB/ERA5%3A+data+documentation52.Ramon, J., Lledo, L., Torralba, V., Soret, A. & Doblas-Reyes, F. J. What global reanalysis best represents near-surface winds? Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 145, 3236–3251 (2019).
Google Scholar 
53.Beck, H. E. et al. Daily evaluation of 26 precipitation datasets using stage-IV gauge-radar data for the CONUS. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 23, 207–224 (2019).
Google Scholar 
54.Tarek, M., Brissette, F. P. & Arsenault, R. Evaluation of the ERA5 reanalysis as a potential reference dataset for hydrological modelling over North America. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 24, 2527–2544 (2020).
Google Scholar 
55.Torralba, V., Doblas-Reyes, F. J. & Gonzalez-Reviriego, N. Uncertainty in recent near-surface wind speed trends: a global reanalysis intercomparison. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 114019 (2017).
Google Scholar 
56.Dinerstein, E. et al. An ecoregion-based approach to protecting half the terrestrial realm. BioScience 67, 534–545 (2017).
Google Scholar 
57.Andela, N. et al. The global fire atlas of individual fire size, duration, speed and direction. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 11, 529–552 (2019).
Google Scholar 
58.Wotton, B. M. Interpreting and using outputs from the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System in research applications. Environ. Ecol. Stat. 16, 107–131 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Field, R. D. et al. Development of a global fire weather database. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 1407–1423 (2015).
Google Scholar 
60.Bedia, J. et al. Global patterns in the sensitivity of burned area to fire weather: implications for climate change. Agric. Meteorol. 214–215, 369–379 (2015).
Google Scholar 
61.McElhinny, M., Beckers, J. F., Hanes, C., Flannigan, M. & Jain, P. A high-resolution reanalysis of global fire weather from 1979 to 2018 – overwintering the Drought Code. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 1823–1833 (2020).
Google Scholar 
62.Wotton, B. M. & Flannigan, M. D. Length of the fire season in a changing climate. Forestry Chron. 69, 187–192 (1993).
Google Scholar 
63.Sedano, F. & Randerson, J. T. Vapor pressure deficit controls on fire ignition and fire spread in boreal forest ecosystems. Biogeosciences 11, 1309–1353 (2014).
Google Scholar 
64.Williams, P. A. et al. Correlations between components of the water balance and burned area reveal new insights for predicting forest fire area in the southwest United States. Int. J. Wildland Fire 24, 14–26 (2014).
Google Scholar 
65.Williams, A. P. et al. Observed impacts of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire in California. Earths Future 7, 892–910 (2019).
Google Scholar 
66.Mueller, S. E. et al. Climate relationships with increasing wildfire in the southwestern US from 1984 to 2015. For. Ecol. Manage. 460, 117861 (2020).
Google Scholar 
67.Alduchov, O. A. & Eskridge, R. E. Improved Magnus form approximation of saturation vapor pressure. J. Appl. Meteorol. 35, 601–609 (1996).
Google Scholar 
68.Knauer, J., El-Madany, T. S., Zaehle, S. & Migliavacca, M. Bigleaf—an R package for the calculation of physical and physiological ecosystem properties from eddy covariance data. PLoS ONE 13, e0201114 (2018).
Google Scholar 
69.Friedl, M. A. et al. MODIS Collection 5 global land cover: algorithm refinements and characterization of new datasets. Remote Sens. Environ. 114, 168–182 (2010).
Google Scholar 
70.Loveland, T. R. & Belward, A. S. The IGBP-DIS global 1 km land cover data set, DISCover: first results. Int. J. Remote Sens. 18, 3291–3295 (1997).
Google Scholar 
71.Mann, H. B. Nonparametric tests against trend. Econometrica 13, 245–259 (1945).
Google Scholar 
72.Kendall, M. G. Rank Correlation Methods (Griffin, 1975).
Google Scholar 
73.Theil, H. A rank-invariant method of linear and polynomial regression analysis. I, II, III. Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. 53, part I: 386–392; part II: 521–525; part III: 1397–1412 (1950).74.Sen, P. K. Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall’s tau. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 63, 1379–1389 (1968).
Google Scholar 
75.Yue, S., Pilon, P. & Phinney, B. Canadian streamflow trend detection: impacts of serial and cross-correlation. Hydrol. Sci. J. 48, 51–63 (2003).
Google Scholar 
76.Wilks, D. S. On ‘field significance’ and the false discovery rate. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 45, 1181–1189 (2006).
Google Scholar 
77.Wilks, D. ‘The stippling shows statistically significant grid points’: how research results are routinely overstated and overinterpreted, and what to do about it. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 97, 2263–2273 (2016).
Google Scholar 
78.Libiseller, C. & Grimvall, A. Performance of partial Mann–Kendall tests for trend detection in the presence of covariates. Environmetrics 13, 71–84 (2002).CAS 

Google Scholar 
79.Mediero, L., Santillán, D., Garrote, L. & Granados, A. Detection and attribution of trends in magnitude, frequency and timing of floods in Spain. J. Hydrol. 517, 1072–1088 (2014).
Google Scholar 
80.Dowdy, A. J., Mills, G. A., Finkele, K. & de Groot, W. Index sensitivity analysis applied to the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index and the McArthur Forest Fire Danger Index. Meteorol. Appl. 17, 298–312 (2010).
Google Scholar 
81.Millard, S. P. EnvStats: An R Package for Environmental Statistics (Springer, 2013).82.Pohlert, T. trend: Non-Parametric Trend Tests and Change-Point Detection. R package v.1.1.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=trend (2020). More

1.Russell JB, Cook GM. Energetics of bacterial growth: balance of anabolic and catabolic reactions. Microbiol Rev. 1995;59:48–62.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
2.Klumpp S, Scott M, Pedersen S, Hwa T. Molecular crowding limits translation and cell growth. PNAS. 2013;110:16754–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
3.Pedersen S. Escherichia coli ribosomes translate in vivo with variable rate. EMBO J. 1984;3:2895–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
4.Ran W, Higgs PG. Contributions of speed and accuracy to translational selection in bacteria. PLoS One. 2012;7:e51652.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
5.Vieira-Silva S, Rocha E. The systemic imprint of growth and its uses in ecological (meta)genomics. PLoS Genet. 2009;6:1–15.
Google Scholar 
6.Roller BRK, Stoddard SF, Schmidt TM. Exploiting rRNA operon copy number to investigate bacterial reproductive strategies. Nat Microbiol. 2016;1:1–7.
Google Scholar 
7.Buskirk AR, Green R. Ribosome pausing, arrest and rescue in bacteria and eukaryotes. Philos Trans R Soc B. 2017;372:20160183–11.
Google Scholar 
8.Wohlgemuth I, Brenner S, Beringer M, Rodnina MV. Modulation of the rate of peptidyl transfer on the ribosome by the nature of substrates. J Biol Chem. 2008;283:32229–35.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
9.Pavlov MY, Watts RE, Tan Z, Cornish VW, Ehrenberg M, Forster AC. Slow peptide bond formation by proline and other N-alkylamino acids in translation. PNAS. 2009;106:50–54.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Mandal A, Mandal S, Park MH. Genome-wide analyses and functional classification of proline repeat-rich proteins: potential role of eIF5A in eukaryotic evolution. PLoS One. 2014;9:e111800–13.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
11.Adzhubei AA, Sternberg MJE, Makarov AA. Polyproline-II helix in proteins: structure and function. J Mol Biol. 2013;425:2100–32.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
12.Elam WA, Schrank TP, Campagnolo AJ, Hilser VJ. Evolutionary conservation of the polyproline II conformation surrounding intrinsically disordered phosphorylation sites. Protein Sci. 2013;22:405–17.PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Ball LJ, Kühne R, Schneider-Mergener J, Oschkinat H. Recognition of proline-rich motifs by protein-protein-interaction domains. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2005;44:2852–69.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Starosta AL, Lassak J, Peil L, Atkinson GC, Virumäe K, Tenson T, et al. Translational stalling at polyproline stretches is modulated by the sequence context upstream of the stall site. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:10711–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
15.Woolstenhulme CJ, Guydosh NR, Green R, Buskirk AR. High-precision analysis of translational pausing by ribosome profiling in bacteria lacking EFP. Cell Rep. 2015;11:13–21.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
16.Hersch SJ, Elgamal S, Katz A, Ibba M, Navarre WW. Translation initiation rate determines the impact of ribosome stalling on bacterial protein synthesis. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:28160–71.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
17.Lassak J, Wilson DN, Jung K. Stall no more at polyproline stretches with the translation elongation factors EF‐P and IF‐5A. Mol Microbiol. 2016;99:219–35.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
18.Yanagisawa T, Sumida T, Ishii R, Takemoto C, Yokoyama S. A paralog of lysyl-tRNA synthetase aminoacylates a conserved lysine residue in translation elongation factor P. Nature. 2010;17:1136–43.CAS 

Google Scholar 
19.Park J-H, Johansson HE, Aoki H, Huang BX, Kim H-Y, Ganoza MC, et al. Post-translational modification by beta-lysylation is required for activity of Escherichia coli elongation factor P (EF-P). J Biol Chem. 2012;287:2579–90.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
20.Lassak J, Keilhauer E, Fürst M, Wuichet K, Gödeke J, Starosta AL, et al. Arginine-rhamnosylation as new strategy to activate translation elongation factor P. Nat Chem Biol. 2015;11:266–70.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
21.Tollerson R, Witzky A, Ibba M. Elongation factor P is required to maintain proteome homeostasis at high growth rate. PNAS. 2018;115:1–6.
Google Scholar 
22.Peng WT, Banta LM, Charles TC, Nester EW. The chvH locus of Agrobacterium encodes a homologue of an elongation factor involved in protein synthesis. J Bacteriol. 2001;183:36–45.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
23.Rajkovic A, Hummels KR, Witzky A, Erickson S, Gafken PR, Whitelegge JP, et al. Translation control of swarming proficiency in Bacillus subtilis by 5-amino-pentanolylated elongation factor P. J Biol Chem. 2016;291:10976–85.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
24.Navarre WW, Zou SB, Roy H, Xie JL, Savchenko A, Singer A, et al. PoxA, YjeK, and elongation factor P coordinately modulate virulence and drug resistance in Salmonella enterica. Mol Cell. 2010;39:209–21.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
25.Hummels KR, Kearns DB. Suppressor mutations in ribosomal proteins and FliY restore Bacillus subtilis swarming motility in the absence of EF-P. PLoS Genet. 2019;15:e1008179–27.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
26.Rajkovic A, Erickson S, Witzky A, Branson OE, Seo J, Gafken PR, et al. Cyclic rhamnosylated elongation factor P establishes antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. MBio. 2015;6:1–9.
Google Scholar 
27.Yanagisawa T, Takahashi H, Suzuki T, Masuda A, Dohmae N, Yokoyama S. Neisseria meningitidis translation elongation factor P and its active-site arginine residue are essential for cell viability. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0147907–27.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
28.Krafczyk R, Qi F, Sieber A, Mehler J, Jung K, Frishman D, et al. Proline codon pair selection determines ribosome pausing strength and translation efficiency in bacteria. Commun Biol. 2021;4:1–11.
Google Scholar 
29.Qi F, Motz M, Jung K, Lassak J, Frishman D. Evolutionary analysis of polyproline motifs in Escherichia coli reveals their regulatory role in translation. PLoS Comput Biol. 2018;14:e1005987–19.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
30.Karlin S, Mrázek J, Campbell A, Kaiser D. Characterizations of highly expressed genes of four fast-growing bacteria. J Bacteriol. 2001;183:5025–40.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
31.Dethlefsen L, Schmidt TM. Performance of the translational apparatus varies with the ecological strategies of bacteria. J Bacteriol. 2007;189:3237–45.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
32.Weissman JL, Hou S, Fuhrman JA. Estimating maximal microbial growth rates from cultures, metagenomes, and single cells via codon usage patterns. PNAS. 2021;118:1–10.
Google Scholar 
33.Hersch SJ, Wang M, Zou SB, Moon K-M, Foster LJ, Ibba M, et al. Divergent protein motifs direct elongation factor P-mediated translational regulation in Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli. MBio. 2013;4:1–10.
Google Scholar 
34.Pinheiro B, Scheidler CM, Kielkowski P, Schmid M, Forné I, Ye S, et al. Structure and function of an elongation factor P subfamily in Actinobacteria. Cell Rep. 2020;30:4332–42. e5.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
35.Chen I-MA, Markowitz VM, Chu K, Palaniappan K, Szeto E, Pillay M, et al. IMG/M: integrated genome and metagenome comparative data analysis system. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:D507–D516.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
36.Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res. 2015;25:1043–55.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
37.Chaumeil P-A, Mussig AJ, Hugenholtz P, Parks DH. GTDB-Tk: a toolkit to classify genomes with the Genome Taxonomy Database. Bioinformatics. 2020;36:1925–7.CAS 

Google Scholar 
38.Eddy SR. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1002195–16.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
39.Madin JS, Nielsen DA, Brbic M, Corkrey R, Danko D, Edwards K, et al. A synthesis of bacterial and archaeal phenotypic trait data. Sci Data. 2020;7:1–8.
Google Scholar 
40.Novembre JA. Accounting for background nucleotide composition when measuring codon usage bias. Mol Biol Evol. 2002;19:1390–4.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
41.Erdos G, Dosztányi Z. Analyzing protein disorder with IUPred2A. Curr Protoc Bioinforma. 2020;70:1–15.
Google Scholar 
42.Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1792–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
43.Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. FastTree: computing large minimum evolution trees with profiles instead of a distance matrix. Mol Biol Evol. 2009;26:1641–50.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
44.Pagel M. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature. 1999;401:877–84.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
45.Revell LJ. phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things). Methods Ecol Evol. 2011;3:217–23.
Google Scholar 
46.Orme D, Freckleton R, Thomas G, Petzoldt T, Fritz S, Isaac N, et al. caper: comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. 2018; https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=caper.47.Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. 2016. Springer-Verlag New York.48.Symonds MRE, Blomberg SP. A primer on phylogenetic generalized least squares. In: Garamszegi L (eds). Modern phylogenetic comparative methods and their application in evolutionary biology. (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2014) pp. 105–30.49.Watanabe K, Suzuki Y. Protein thermostabilization by proline substitutions. J Mol Catal B Enzym. 1998;4:167–80.CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Sabath N, Ferrada E, Barve A, Wagner A. Growth temperature and genome size in bacteria are negatively correlated, suggesting genomic streamlining during thermal adaptation. Genome Biol Evol. 2013;5:966–77.PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
51.Goldman BS, Nierman WC, Kaiser D, Slater SC, Durkin AS, Eisen JA, et al. Evolution of sensory complexity recorded in a myxobacterial genome. PNAS. 2006;103:15200–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
52.Long AM, Hou S, Ignacio-Espinoza JC, Fuhrman JA. Benchmarking microbial growth rate predictions from metagenomes. ISME J. 2020;15:1–13.
Google Scholar 
53.Rocha EPC. Codon usage bias from tRNA’s point of view: redundancy, specialization, and efficient decoding for translation optimization. Genome Res. 2004;14:2279–86.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
54.Klappenbach JA, Dunbar JM, Schmidt TM. rRNA operon copy number reflects ecological strategies of bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66:1328–33.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
55.Kanehisa M, Goto S, Sato Y, Furumichi M, Tanabe M. KEGG for integration and interpretation of large-scale molecular data sets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:D109–D114.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
56.Perez J, Castaneda-García A, Jenke-Kodama H, Muller R, Munoz-Dorado J. Eukaryotic-like protein kinases in the prokaryotes and the myxobacterial kinome. PNAS. 2008;105:15950–5.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
57.Shi L, Pigeonneau N, Ravikumar V, Dobrinic P, Macek B, Franjevic D, et al. Cross-phosphorylation of bacterial serine/threonine and tyrosine protein kinases on key regulatory residues. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:1–13.CAS 

Google Scholar 
58.Jakob U, Kriwacki R, Uversky VN. Conditionally and transiently disordered proteins: awakening cryptic disorder to regulate protein function. Chem Rev. 2014;114:6779–805.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
59.Starosta AL, Lassak J, Peil L, Atkinson GC, Woolstenhulme CJ, Virumäe K, et al. A conserved proline triplet in Val-tRNA synthetase and the origin of elongation factor P. Cell Rep. 2014;9:476–83.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
60.Nariya H, Inouye S. A protein Ser/Thr kinase cascade negatively regulates the DNA-binding activity of MrpC, a smaller form of which may be necessary for the Myxococcus xanthus development. Mol Microbiol. 2006;60:1205–17.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
61.Stein EA, Cho K, Higgs PI, Zusman DR. Two Ser/Thr protein kinases essential for efficient aggregation and spore morphogenesis in Myxococcus xanthus. Mol Microbiol. 2006;60:1414–31.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
62.Iakoucheva LM, Radivojac P, Brown CJ, OConnor TR, Sikes JG, Obradovic Z, et al. The importance of intrinsic disorder for protein phosphorylation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32:1037–49.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
63.Elsen S, Swem LR, Swem DL, Bauer CE. RegB/RegA, a highly conserved redox-responding global two-component regulatory system. Microbiol Mol Biol R. 2004;68:263–79.CAS 

Google Scholar 
64.Tawa P, Stewart RC. Kinetics of CheA autophosphorylation and dephosphorylation reactions. Biochemistry. 1994;33:7917–24.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
65.Yoshida T, jian CaiS, Inouye M. Interaction of EnvZ, a sensory histidine kinase, with phosphorylated OmpR, the cognate response regulator. Mol Microbiol. 2002;46:1283–94.CAS 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
66.Cho M-H, Wrabl JO, Taylor J, Hilser VJ. Hidden dynamic signatures drive substrate selectivity in the disordered phosphoproteome. PNAS. 2020;117:1–11.
Google Scholar  More

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

Many seabirds form long-term pairings, but do not necessarily mate for life — and are more likely to ‘break up’ in years when environmental conditions are unfavourable, researchers reveal.

Access options

Access through your institution

Change institution

Buy or subscribe

/* style specs start */
style{display:none!important}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 *{align-content:stretch;align-items:stretch;align-self:auto;animation-delay:0s;animation-direction:normal;animation-duration:0s;animation-fill-mode:none;animation-iteration-count:1;animation-name:none;animation-play-state:running;animation-timing-function:ease;azimuth:center;backface-visibility:visible;background-attachment:scroll;background-blend-mode:normal;background-clip:borderBox;background-color:transparent;background-image:none;background-origin:paddingBox;background-position:0 0;background-repeat:repeat;background-size:auto auto;block-size:auto;border-block-end-color:currentcolor;border-block-end-style:none;border-block-end-width:medium;border-block-start-color:currentcolor;border-block-start-style:none;border-block-start-width:medium;border-bottom-color:currentcolor;border-bottom-left-radius:0;border-bottom-right-radius:0;border-bottom-style:none;border-bottom-width:medium;border-collapse:separate;border-image-outset:0s;border-image-repeat:stretch;border-image-slice:100%;border-image-source:none;border-image-width:1;border-inline-end-color:currentcolor;border-inline-end-style:none;border-inline-end-width:medium;border-inline-start-color:currentcolor;border-inline-start-style:none;border-inline-start-width:medium;border-left-color:currentcolor;border-left-style:none;border-left-width:medium;border-right-color:currentcolor;border-right-style:none;border-right-width:medium;border-spacing:0;border-top-color:currentcolor;border-top-left-radius:0;border-top-right-radius:0;border-top-style:none;border-top-width:medium;bottom:auto;box-decoration-break:slice;box-shadow:none;box-sizing:border-box;break-after:auto;break-before:auto;break-inside:auto;caption-side:top;caret-color:auto;clear:none;clip:auto;clip-path:none;color:initial;column-count:auto;column-fill:balance;column-gap:normal;column-rule-color:currentcolor;column-rule-style:none;column-rule-width:medium;column-span:none;column-width:auto;content:normal;counter-increment:none;counter-reset:none;cursor:auto;display:inline;empty-cells:show;filter:none;flex-basis:auto;flex-direction:row;flex-grow:0;flex-shrink:1;flex-wrap:nowrap;float:none;font-family:initial;font-feature-settings:normal;font-kerning:auto;font-language-override:normal;font-size:medium;font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal;font-style:normal;font-synthesis:weight style;font-variant:normal;font-variant-alternates:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-position:normal;font-weight:400;grid-auto-columns:auto;grid-auto-flow:row;grid-auto-rows:auto;grid-column-end:auto;grid-column-gap:0;grid-column-start:auto;grid-row-end:auto;grid-row-gap:0;grid-row-start:auto;grid-template-areas:none;grid-template-columns:none;grid-template-rows:none;height:auto;hyphens:manual;image-orientation:0deg;image-rendering:auto;image-resolution:1dppx;ime-mode:auto;inline-size:auto;isolation:auto;justify-content:flexStart;left:auto;letter-spacing:normal;line-break:auto;line-height:normal;list-style-image:none;list-style-position:outside;list-style-type:disc;margin-block-end:0;margin-block-start:0;margin-bottom:0;margin-inline-end:0;margin-inline-start:0;margin-left:0;margin-right:0;margin-top:0;mask-clip:borderBox;mask-composite:add;mask-image:none;mask-mode:matchSource;mask-origin:borderBox;mask-position:0% 0%;mask-repeat:repeat;mask-size:auto;mask-type:luminance;max-height:none;max-width:none;min-block-size:0;min-height:0;min-inline-size:0;min-width:0;mix-blend-mode:normal;object-fit:fill;object-position:50% 50%;offset-block-end:auto;offset-block-start:auto;offset-inline-end:auto;offset-inline-start:auto;opacity:1;order:0;orphans:2;outline-color:initial;outline-offset:0;outline-style:none;outline-width:medium;overflow:visible;overflow-wrap:normal;overflow-x:visible;overflow-y:visible;padding-block-end:0;padding-block-start:0;padding-bottom:0;padding-inline-end:0;padding-inline-start:0;padding-left:0;padding-right:0;padding-top:0;page-break-after:auto;page-break-before:auto;page-break-inside:auto;perspective:none;perspective-origin:50% 50%;pointer-events:auto;position:static;quotes:initial;resize:none;right:auto;ruby-align:spaceAround;ruby-merge:separate;ruby-position:over;scroll-behavior:auto;scroll-snap-coordinate:none;scroll-snap-destination:0 0;scroll-snap-points-x:none;scroll-snap-points-y:none;scroll-snap-type:none;shape-image-threshold:0;shape-margin:0;shape-outside:none;tab-size:8;table-layout:auto;text-align:initial;text-align-last:auto;text-combine-upright:none;text-decoration-color:currentcolor;text-decoration-line:none;text-decoration-style:solid;text-emphasis-color:currentcolor;text-emphasis-position:over right;text-emphasis-style:none;text-indent:0;text-justify:auto;text-orientation:mixed;text-overflow:clip;text-rendering:auto;text-shadow:none;text-transform:none;text-underline-position:auto;top:auto;touch-action:auto;transform:none;transform-box:borderBox;transform-origin:50% 50% 0;transform-style:flat;transition-delay:0s;transition-duration:0s;transition-property:all;transition-timing-function:ease;vertical-align:baseline;visibility:visible;white-space:normal;widows:2;width:auto;will-change:auto;word-break:normal;word-spacing:normal;word-wrap:normal;writing-mode:horizontalTb;z-index:auto;-webkit-appearance:none;-moz-appearance:none;-ms-appearance:none;appearance:none;margin:0}.LiveAreaSection-193358632{width:100%}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .login-option-buybox{display:block;width:100%;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-access-options{display:block;font-weight:700;font-size:17px;line-height:30px;color:#222;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child)::before{transform:translateY(-50%);content:”;height:1rem;position:absolute;top:50%;left:0;border-left:2px solid #999}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li:not(:first-child){padding-left:10px}.LiveAreaSection-193358632 .additional-login >li{display:inline-block;position:relative;vertical-align:middle;padding-right:10px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;flex:1;flex-direction:row-reverse;margin:-30px -15px 0}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .box-inner{width:100%;height:100%}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:1;flex-basis:255px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .subscribe-buybox{background-color:#f3f3f3;flex-shrink:1;flex-grow:4;flex-basis:300px;background-clip:content-box;padding:0 15px;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:29%;margin-left:29%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .title-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:24px;line-height:32px;color:#222;padding-top:30px;text-align:center;font-family:Harding,Palatino,serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .asia-link{color:#069;cursor:pointer;text-decoration:none;font-size:1.05em;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:1.05em6}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-readcube{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:10%;margin-left:10%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-asia-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:5%;margin-left:5%;font-size:14px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .access-buybox{display:block;margin:0;margin-right:30%;margin-left:30%;font-size:14px;color:#222;opacity:.8px;padding-top:10px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-buybox{display:block;font-size:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;padding-top:30px;text-align:center}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .price-from{font-size:14px;padding-right:10px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .issue-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;text-align:center;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:19px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .no-price-buybox{display:block;font-size:13px;line-height:18px;text-align:center;padding-right:10%;padding-left:10%;padding-bottom:20px;padding-top:30px;color:#222;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .vat-buybox{display:block;margin-top:5px;margin-right:20%;margin-left:20%;font-size:11px;color:#222;padding-top:10px;padding-bottom:15px;text-align:center;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;line-height:17px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container{display:block;padding-right:20px;padding-left:20px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-container >a:hover,.Button-505204839:hover,.Button-1078489254:hover{text-decoration:none}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .readcube-button{background:#fff;margin-top:30px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-asia{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;margin-top:75px}.BuyBoxSection-683559780 .button-label-asia,.ButtonLabel-3869432492,.ButtonLabel-3296148077{display:block;color:#fff;font-size:17px;line-height:20px;font-family:-apple-system,BlinkMacSystemFont,”Segoe UI”,Roboto,Oxygen-Sans,Ubuntu,Cantarell,”Helvetica Neue”,sans-serif;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;cursor:pointer}.Button-505204839,.Button-1078489254{background:#069;border:1px solid #069;border-radius:0;cursor:pointer;display:block;padding:9px;outline:0;text-align:center;text-decoration:none;min-width:80px;margin-top:10px}.Button-505204839 .readcube-label,.Button-1078489254 .readcube-label{color:#069}
/* style specs end */Subscribe to JournalGet full journal access for 1 year$199.00only $3.90 per issueSubscribeAll prices are NET prices. VAT will be added later in the checkout.Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.Rent or Buy articleGet time limited or full article access on ReadCube.from$8.99Rent or BuyAll prices are NET prices.

Additional access options:

Log in

Learn about institutional subscriptions

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03509-z

References1.Ventura, F., Granadeiro, J. P., Lukacs, P. M., Kuepfer, A. & Catry, P. Proc. R. Soc. B https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2112 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Download references

Subjects

Ecology

Latest on:

Ecology

Link knowledge and action networks to tackle disasters
Correspondence 16 NOV 21

Whales’ gigantic appetites, climate fears — the week in infographics
News 05 NOV 21

COP26 climate pledges: What scientists think so far
News 05 NOV 21

Jobs

Faculty Position in Faculty of Synthetic Biology at SIAT

Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology (SIAT), CAS
Shenzhen, China

Research Associate (m/f/x)

Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden)
01069 Dresden, Germany

Research Associate / PhD Position (m/f/x)

Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden)
01069 Dresden, Germany

Principal Scientist (f/m/d) – High Sensitivity Proteomics

Evotec AG
Munich, Germany More

1.Loisel, J. et al. A database and synthesis of northern peatland soil properties and Holocene carbon and nitrogen accumulation. Holocene 24, 1028–1042 (2014).
Google Scholar 
2.Loisel, J. et al. Insights and issues with estimating northern peatland carbon stocks and fluxes since the Last Glacial Maximum. Earth Sci. Rev. 165, 59–80 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
3.Yu, Z., Loisel, J., Brosseau, D. P., Beilman, D. W. & Hunt, S. J. Global peatland dynamics since the Last Glacial Maximum. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L13402 (2010).4.Scharlemann, J. P., Tanner, E. V., Hiederer, R. & Kapos, V. Global soil carbon: understanding and managing the largest terrestrial carbon pool. Carbon Manag. 5, 81–91 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
5.Chambers, F. M., Barber, K. E., Maddy, D. & Brew, J. A 5500-year proxy-climate and vegetation record from blanket mire at Talla Moss, Borders, Scotland. The Holocene 7, 391–399 (1997).
Google Scholar 
6.Charman, D. J., Blundell, A., Chiverrell, R. C., Hendon, D. & Langdon, P. G. Compilation of non-annually resolved Holocene proxy climate records: stacked Holocene peatland palaeo-water table reconstructions from northern Britain. Quat. Sci. Rev. 25, 336–350 (2006).
Google Scholar 
7.Swindles, G. T. et al. Widespread drying of European peatlands in recent centuries. Nat. Geosci. 12, 922–928 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
8.van der Linden, M. & van Geel, B. Late Holocene climate change and human impact recorded in a south Swedish ombrotrophic peat bog. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 240, 649–667 (2006).
Google Scholar 
9.Clymo, R. S. The limits to peat bog growth. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 303, 605–654 (1984).
Google Scholar 
10.Hessen, D. O., Ågren, G. I., Anderson, T. R., Elser, J. J. & de Ruiter, P. C. Carbon sequestration in ecosystems: the role of stoichiometry. Ecology 85, 1179–1192 (2004).
Google Scholar 
11.Damman, A. W. H. Distribution and movement of elements in ombrotrophic peat bogs. Oikos 30, 480–495 (1978).CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Malmer, N. Patterns in the growth and the accumulation of inorganic constituents in the Sphagnum cover on ombrotrophic bogs in Scandinavia. Oikos 53, 105–120 (1988).CAS 

Google Scholar 
13.Wang, R. et al. Global forest carbon uptake due to nitrogen and phosphorus deposition from 1850 to 2100. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 4854–4872 (2017).
Google Scholar 
14.Du, E. et al. Imbalanced phosphorus and nitrogen deposition in China’s forests. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 16, 8571–8579 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
15.Du, E. et al. Global patterns of terrestrial nitrogen and phosphorus limitation. Nat. Geosci. 13, 221–226 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
16.Bragazza, L. et al. Atmospheric nitrogen deposition promotes carbon loss from peat bogs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 19386–19389 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
17.Bragazza, L. et al. High nitrogen deposition alters the decomposition of bog plant litter and reduces carbon accumulation. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 1163–1172 (2012).
Google Scholar 
18.Aerts, R., Wallén, B. & Malmer, N. Growth-limiting nutrients in Sphagnum-dominated bogs subject to low and high atmospheric nitrogen supply. J. Ecol. 80, 131–140 (1992).
Google Scholar 
19.Brahney, J., Mahowald, N., Ward, D. S., Ballantyne, A. P. & Neff, J. C. Is atmospheric phosphorus pollution altering global alpine Lake stoichiometry? Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 1369–1383 (2015).20.Charman, D. J. et al. Drivers of Holocene peatland carbon accumulation across a climate gradient in northeastern North America. Quat. Sci. Rev. 121, 110–119 (2015).
Google Scholar 
21.Charman, D. J. et al. Climate-related changes in peatland carbon accumulation during the last millennium. Biogeosciences 10, 929–944 (2013).
Google Scholar 
22.Beilman, D. W., MacDonald, G. M., Smith, L. C. & Reimer, P. J. Carbon accumulation in peatlands of West Siberia over the last 2000 years. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23, GB1012 (2009).23.Wang, M., Moore, T. R., Talbot, J. & Richard, P. J. H. The cascade of C:N:P stoichiometry in an ombrotrophic peatland: from plants to peat. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 024003 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
24.Wang, M., Moore, T. R., Talbot, J. & Riley, J. L. The stoichiometry of carbon and nutrients in peat formation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 113–121 (2015).
Google Scholar 
25.Gorham, E. & Janssens, J. A. The distribution and accumulation of chemical elements in five peat cores from the mid-continent to the eastern coast of North America. Wetlands 25, 259–278 (2005).
Google Scholar 
26.Ratcliffe, J. L. et al. Rapid carbon accumulation in a peatland following Late Holocene tephra deposition, New Zealand. Quat. Sci. Rev. 246, 106505 (2020).
Google Scholar 
27.Kylander, M. E. et al. Mineral dust as a driver of carbon accumulation in northern latitudes. Sci. Rep. 8, 6876 (2018).28.Hughes, P. D. M. et al. The impact of high tephra loading on late-Holocene carbon accumulation and vegetation succession in peatland communities. Quat. Sci. Rev. 67, 160–175 (2013).
Google Scholar 
29.Limpens, J., Berendse, F. & Klees, H. How phosphorus availability affects the impact of nitrogen deposition on Sphagnum and vascular plants in bogs. Ecosystems 7, 793–804 (2004).CAS 

Google Scholar 
30.Fritz, C. et al. Nutrient additions in pristine Patagonian Sphagnum bog vegetation: can phosphorus addition alleviate (the effects of) increased nitrogen loads. Plant Biol. 14, 491–499 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
31.White, J. R. & Reddy, K. R. Influence of phosphorus loading on organic nitrogen mineralization of everglades soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64, 1525 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
32.Bledsoe, R. B., Goodwillie, C. & Peralta, A. L. Long-term nutrient enrichment of an oligotroph-dominated wetland increases bacterial diversity in bulk soils and plant rhizospheres. mSphere 5, e00035-20 (2020).
Google Scholar 
33.Lin, X. et al. Microbial community stratification linked to utilization of carbohydrates and phosphorus limitation in a boreal peatland at Marcell Experimental Forest, Minnesota, USA. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80, 3518–3530 (2014).
Google Scholar 
34.Sjögersten, S., Cheesman, A. W., Lopez, O. & Turner, B. L. Biogeochemical processes along a nutrient gradient in a tropical ombrotrophic peatland. Biogeochemistry 104, 147–163 (2011).
Google Scholar 
35.Cheesman, A. W., Turner, B. L. & Ramesh Reddy, K. Soil phosphorus forms along a strong nutrient gradient in a tropical ombrotrophic wetland. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 76, 1496–1506 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
36.Kivimäki, S. K., Sheppard, L. J., Leith, I. D. & Grace, J. Long-term enhanced nitrogen deposition increases ecosystem respiration and carbon loss from a Sphagnum bog in the Scottish Borders. Environ. Exp. Bot. 90, 53–61 (2013).
Google Scholar 
37.Moore, T. R., Knorr, K.-H., Thompson, L., Roy, C. & Bubier, J. L. The effect of long-term fertilization on peat in an ombrotrophic bog. Geoderma 343, 176–186 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
38.Hill, B. H. et al. Ecoenzymatic stoichiometry and microbial processing of organic matter in northern bogs and fens reveals a common P-limitation between peatland types. Biogeochemistry 120, 203–224 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.Vitousek, P. M. et al. Towards an ecological understanding of biological nitrogen fixation. In The Nitrogen Cycle at Regional to Global Scales (eds. Boyer, E. W. & Howarth, R. W.) 1–45 (Springer Netherlands, 2002).40.Larmola, T. et al. Methanotrophy induces nitrogen fixation during peatland development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, 734–739 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
41.van den Elzen, E. et al. Symbiosis revisited: phosphorus and acid buffering stimulate N2 fixation but not Sphagnum growth. Biogeosciences 14, 1111–1122 (2017).
Google Scholar 
42.van den Elzen, E., Bengtsson, F., Fritz, C., Rydin, H. & Lamers, L. P. M. Variation in symbiotic N2 fixation rates among Sphagnum mosses. PLoS ONE 15, e0228383 (2020).
Google Scholar 
43.Toberman, H. et al. Dependence of ombrotrophic peat nitrogen on phosphorus and climate. Biogeochemistry 125, 11–20 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
44.Basilier, K., Granhall, U., Stenström, T.-A. & Stenstrom, T.-A. Nitrogen fixation in wet minerotrophic moss communities of a subarctic mire. Oikos 31, 236 (1978).CAS 

Google Scholar 
45.Lin, X. et al. Microbial metabolic potential for carbon degradation and nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) acquisition in an ombrotrophic peatland. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80, 3531–3540 (2014).
Google Scholar 
46.Kox, M. A. R. et al. Effects of nitrogen fertilization on diazotrophic activity of microorganisms associated with Sphagnum magellanicum. Plant Soil 406, 83–100 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
47.Bubier, J. L., Moore, T. R. & Bledzki, L. A. Effects of nutrient addition on vegetation and carbon cycling in an ombrotrophic bog. Glob. Change Biol. 13, 1168–1186 (2007).
Google Scholar 
48.Fritz, C., Lamers, L. P. M., Riaz, M., van den Berg, L. J. L. & Elzenga, T. J. T. M. Sphagnum mosses – masters of efficient N-uptake while avoiding intoxication. PLoS ONE 9, e79991 (2014).
Google Scholar 
49.Morris, P. J. et al. Global peatland initiation driven by regionally asynchronous warming. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, 4851–4856 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
50.Schillereff, D. N. et al. Long-term macronutrient stoichiometry of UK ombrotrophic peatlands. Sci. Total Environ. 572, 1561–1572 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
51.Sjöström, J. K. et al. Paleodust deposition and peat accumulation rates – bog size matters. Chem. Geol. 554, 119795 (2020).
Google Scholar 
52.Kylander, M. E. et al. Potentials and problems of building detailed dust records using peat archives: an example from Store Mosse (the “Great Bog”), Sweden. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 190, 156–174 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
53.Mahowald, N. et al. Global distribution of atmospheric phosphorus sources, concentrations and deposition rates, and anthropogenic impacts. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 22, 1–19 (2008).
Google Scholar 
54.Tipping, E. et al. Atmospheric deposition of phosphorus to land and freshwater. Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts 16, 1608–1617 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
55.Wang, R. et al. Significant contribution of combustion-related emissions to the atmospheric phosphorus budget. Nat. Geosci. 8, 48–54 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
56.Newman, E. I. Phosphorus inputs to terrestrial ecosystems. J. Ecol. 83, 713–726 (1995).
Google Scholar 
57.Worrall, F., Moody, C. S., Clay, G. D., Burt, T. P. & Rose, R. The total phosphorus budget of a peat-covered catchment. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 121, 1814–1828 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
58.Vitousek, P. M., Porder, S., Houlton, B. Z. & Chadwick, O. A. Terrestrial phosphorus limitation: mechanisms, implications, and nitrogen–phosphorus interactions. Ecol. Appl. 20, 5–15 (2010).
Google Scholar 
59.Bedford, B. L., Walbridge, M. R. & Aldous, A. Patterns in nutrient availability and plant diversity of temperate North American Wetlands. Ecology 80, 2151–2169 (1999).
Google Scholar 
60.Güsewell, S. N: P ratios in terrestrial plants: variation and functional significance: Tansley review. New Phytol. 164, 243–266 (2004).
Google Scholar 
61.Yan, J. et al. Preliminary investigation of phosphorus adsorption onto two types of iron oxide-organic matter complexes. J. Environ. Sci. 42, 152–162 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
62.Barrow, N. J. Comparing two theories about the nature of soil phosphate. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 72, 679–685 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
63.Bridgham, S. D., Pastor, J., Janssens, J. A., Chapin, C. & Malterer, T. J. Multiple limiting gradients in peatlands: a call for a new paradigm. Wetlands 16, 45–65 (1996).
Google Scholar 
64.Kuhry, P. & Vitt, D. H. Fossil carbon/nitrogen ratios as a measure of peat decomposition. Ecology 77, 271–275 (1996).
Google Scholar 
65.Kuhry, P., Halsey, L. A., Bayley, S. E. & Vitt, D. H. Peatland development in relation to Holocene climatic change in Manitoba and Saskatchewan (Canada). Can. J. Earth Sci. 29, 1070–1090 (1992).CAS 

Google Scholar 
66.Malmer, N. & Wallén, B. Input rates, decay losses and accumulation rates of carbon in bogs during the last millennium: internal processes and environmental changes. The Holocene 14, 111–117 (2004).
Google Scholar 
67.Malmer, N. & Holm, E. Variation in the C/N-quotient of peat in relation to decomposition rate and age determination with 210 Pb. Oikos 43, 171–182 (1984).CAS 

Google Scholar 
68.Larsson, A., Segerstrom, U., Laudon, H. & Nilsson, M. Holocene carbon and nitrogen accumulation rates and contemporary carbon export in discharge: a study from a boreal fen catchment. Holocene 27, 48 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616675936.69.Berendse, F. et al. Raised atmospheric CO2 levels and increased N deposition cause shifts in plant species composition and production in Sphagnum bogs. Glob. Change Biol. 7, 591–598 (2001).
Google Scholar 
70.Juutinen, S., Bubier, J. L. & Moore, T. R. Responses of vegetation and ecosystem CO2 exchange to 9 years of nutrient addition at Mer Bleue bog. Ecosystems 13, 874–887 (2010).CAS 

Google Scholar 
71.Lequy, É., Legout, A., Conil, S. & Turpault, M. P. Aeolian dust deposition rates in Northern French forests and inputs to their biogeochemical cycles. Atmos. Environ. 80, 281–289 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
72.Harrison, J. A., Caraco, N. & Seitzinger, S. P. Global patterns and sources of dissolved organic matter export to the coastal zone: results from a spatially explicit, global model. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 19, GB4S04 (2005).73.Yu, Z. Holocene carbon flux histories of the world’s peatlands: global carbon-cycle implications. The Holocene 21, 761–774 (2011).
Google Scholar 
74.Schlesinger, W. H. & Bernhardt, E. S. Biogeochemistry. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2013).
Google Scholar 
75.Peñuelas, J. et al. Human-induced nitrogen–phosphorus imbalances alter natural and managed ecosystems across the globe. Nat. Commun. 4, 2934 (2013).76.Larmola, T. et al. Vegetation feedbacks of nutrient addition lead to a weaker carbon sink in an ombrotrophic bog. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 3729–3739 (2013).
Google Scholar 
77.Li, F. et al. Organic carbon linkage with soil colloidal phosphorus at regional and field scales: insights from size fractionation of fine particles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 5815–5825 (2021).CAS 

Google Scholar 
78.Spohn, M. Increasing the organic carbon stocks in mineral soils sequesters large amounts of phosphorus. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 4169–4177 (2020).
Google Scholar 
79.Sjöström, J. Mid-Holocene Mineral Dust Deposition in Raised Bogs in Southern Sweden: Processes and Links. PhD thesis, Stockholm Univ. (2021).80.Gallego-Sala, A. V. et al. Latitudinal limits to the predicted increase of the peatland carbon sink with warming. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 907–913 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
81.Wilson, R. M. et al. Stability of peatland carbon to rising temperatures. Nat. Commun. 7, 13723 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
82.Dorrepaal, E. et al. Carbon respiration from subsurface peat accelerated by climate warming in the subarctic. Nature 460, 616–619 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
83.Clymo, R. S. & Bryant, C. L. Diffusion and mass flow of dissolved carbon dioxide, methane, and dissolved organic carbon in a 7-m deep raised peat bog. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 72, 2048–2066 (2008).CAS 

Google Scholar 
84.Morris, P. J., Waddington, J. M., Benscoter, B. W. & Turetsky, M. R. Conceptual frameworks in peatland ecohydrology: looking beyond the two-layered (acrotelm-catotelm) model. Ecohydrology 4, 1–11 (2011).
Google Scholar 
85.Rydin, H. & Jeglum, J. The Biology of Peatlands (Oxford University Press, 2013).86.Limpens, J., Heijmans, M. M. P. D. & Berendse, F. The nitrogen cycle in boreal peatlands. Boreal Peatl. Ecosyst. 188, 195–230 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
87.Biester, H., Knorr, K.-H., Schellekens, J., Basler, A. & Hermanns, Y.-M. Comparison of different methods to determine the degree of peat decomposition in peat bogs. Biogeosciences 11, 2691–2707 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
88.Zaccone, C., Plaza, C., Ciavatta, C., Miano, T. M. & Shotyk, W. Advances in the determination of humification degree in peat since: Applications in geochemical and paleoenvironmental studies. Earth-Sci. Rev. 185, 163–178 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
89.Alboukadel Kassambara. ggpubr: ‘ggplot2’ Based Publication Ready Plots. R package version 0.4.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggpubr (CRAN, 2020).90.Legendre, P. & Oksanen, J. lmodel2: Model II Regression. R package version 1.7–3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmodel2 (CRAN, 2018).91.Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2016).
Google Scholar 
92.Tipping, E. et al. Long-term increases in soil carbon due to ecosystem fertilization by atmospheric nitrogen deposition demonstrated by regional-scale modelling and observations. Sci. Rep. 7, 1890 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
93.Bragazza, L. & Limpens, J. Dissolved organic nitrogen dominates in European bogs under increasing atmospheric N deposition. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 18, GB4018 (2004).94.Turunen, J., Roulet, N. T., Moore, T. R. & Richard, P. J. H. Nitrogen deposition and increased carbon accumulation in ombrotrophic peatlands in eastern Canada. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 18, 1–12 (2004).
Google Scholar 
95.Lund, M., Christensen, T. R., Mastepanov, M., Lindroth, A. & Ström, L. Effects of N and P fertilization on the greenhouse gas exchange in two northern peatlands with contrasting N deposition rates. Biogeosciences 6, 2135–2144 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
96.Xu, J., Morris, P. J., Liu, J. & Holden, J. PEATMAP: refining estimates of global peatland distribution based on a meta-analysis. Catena 160, 134–140 (2018).
Google Scholar  More

Study regionsWe conducted the field survey in the Kyushu of southern Japan (Fig. 2a,b). The rice-transplanting schedule in Kyushu, is generally late (in late June24) because it is necessary to delay rice-transplanting timing after the harvest of wheat as a back crop22,23. However, since the technique of early transplanting was established around 1960, early transplanting (in early April24) has been practiced instead of a back crop of wheat in some areas in Kyushu25,26, so the rice-transplanting schedules differ at the regional scale. We established two study regions with early-transplanting schedules (Karatsu in northern Kyushu; N33.4, E129.9 and Amakusa in central Kyushu; N32.5, E130.1), and two study regions with late-transplanting schedules (Itoshima in northern Kyushu; N33.6, E130.2 and Uki in central Kyushu; N32.6, E130.8) (Fig. 2c–f). Each study region is 10–20 km2, and the distances between the regions are 20–140 km. Climatic conditions between the regions are similar (Supplementary Table S3). The size of each region is much larger than the size of the typical territory of breeding buzzards (approximately 500 m radius from the nest18).Figure 2Map of (a) Japan and (b) the entire study regions, (c) Karatsu, (d) Amakusa, (e) Itoshima and (f) Uki. Squares represent study blocks. Light and dark grey areas indicate waterbodies and residential areas, respectively. Background map source is the black map of Japan (http://www.craftmap.box-i.net/japan/line.php) and the topographic data of Fundamental Geospatial Data developed by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (https://www.gsi.go.jp/kiban/).Full size imageBuzzards surveyWe examined the distribution of buzzards in 2019. Buzzards are migratory birds that breed in Japan, northeastern China, and the Russian Far East in summer, and overwinter in the Ryukyu Islands, Southeast Asia, and southern China27. In our study regions, buzzards start breeding in April, soon after returning from their wintering area. Buzzards incubate their eggs from late April until late May when they hatch. Once the eggs hatch, buzzards feed nestlings. Then nestlings start to fledge in late June, but the adults continue feeding their fledglings for several weeks. Buzzards migrate to their wintering grounds around October. The breeding season of buzzards thus overlaps largely with the rice production season, but there is a slight but significant differences in seasonality, i.e., paddies are already planted and flooded before hatching in early rice-transplanting schedules, while not yet flooded in late rice-transplanting schedules.Because breeding buzzards were thought to prefer mosaic landscapes of farmland and forest17,19, we established 62 study blocks that included edges between farmland and forest in each study region (Fig. 2c–f; northern-early: 17 central-early: 11 northern-late: 17 central-late: 17). The study blocks were 400 m square and located at least 700 m apart from each other, a distance determined from the knowledge that buzzards intensively use an area of 200 m from their nests18. To examine the presence/absence of breeding buzzards in each block, we conducted 2 days of 30-min observations during the breeding season (April to July). Using a pilot study, we determined that this observation time was enough to minimize the possibility of missing buzzards. We identified breeding individuals based on displays, feeding behaviors, and territorial behaviors.Land use surveyDuring the brood-rearing period (late June to early July) in 2019, we recorded the land use (forest, grassland, flooded paddies, non-flooded paddies) in each block. We then used these data to create a land use map in each block using QGIS3.16.228 and overlaying it on Google Earth aerial photographs in 2017.Prey species surveyWe surveyed the distribution of prey species in paddies and grasslands in the study regions in 2019 and 2020. Based on the previous studies on the feeding habits of buzzards17,18,19,20,21, we surveyed the distribution of frogs and orthopterans larger than 3 cm as prey of this size is considered their main prey. We established survey transects in paddies and grasslands in our study blocks. We conducted surveys twice each year during the brood-rearing period (late June to early July), when breeding buzzards need a large amount of prey. We walked along the transects and counted the number of prey species observed within 0.5-m of both sides. This survey method is suitable to assess prey availability29 because buzzards visually search for prey (e.g.20,30). A total of 148 20 m-transects were placed in paddies in 34 blocks and 157 15-m transects were placed in grasslands in 37 blocks, and each transect was surveyed in both or either 2019 and 2020. In the paddy transects, we recorded the height and coverage of vegetation, the ditch characteristics (none, concrete ditch, earthen ditch), the surrounding land use (10 m width from the transect: flooded paddy, non-flooded paddy, grassland, forest, stone wall, and road), and flooding or non-flooding in the paddy field adjacent to transects. In grassland transects, we recorded the height and coverage of vegetation and the grassland types on which the transect was located (abandoned land, orchard, farmland, bank, forest edge).Statistical analysisBuzzard modelTo investigate the habitat selection of buzzards, we used a generalized linear model with a binomial error distribution. We used the edge length between the landscape elements and forest as independent variables, because the edge length, rather than the area of the landscape elements, is known to be an important determinant for buzzard distribution19. We prepared a land use map and calculated the edge length between the landscape elements and forest by using the field calculator of QGIS, and values were standardized (mean = 0 and SD = 1).To explore the variation in habitat selection across regions with different transplanting schedules, we first used a model that included the interaction term of transplanting schedules and landscape elements as independent variables. The length of paddy-forest edges, grassland-forest edges, the transplanting schedules, the interaction term of the edge length and the transplanting schedules, and the study regions were included as independent variables (details of independent variables: Supplementary Table S4). The presence/absence of breeding buzzards was included as a dependent variable. We analyzed the full model and all sub-models containing different combinations of all independent variables, including the null model. We regarded models that had ΔAIC values (the difference between the AIC value of the focal model and that of the best-fit model) of  0.6) to avoid serious multicollinearity.We performed all analyses in R 4.0.333, using the glmmTMB packages34 for model fitting, the MuMIn package35 for model selection and averaging, and the ggplot236 for graphic illustration or results. More