Ecology

Ammonium and nitrate concentrations, and ammonium/nitrate ratioThe concentrations of ammonium in soil varied significantly due to fertilizer amendments (short rainy season: χ2 = 123.7, df = 2, p  More

Experiments using P. hysterophorus root exudate water samplesInsects for oviposition bioassayAnopheles gambiae mosquitoes (Mbita strain) used in this study were from a colony established in 2018 and maintained at the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), Duduville Campus, Nairobi, Kenya. The adults were reared using standard insectary conditions at 28 ± 2 °C, and 72% relative humidity (RH) under a photoperiod of 12 h: 12 h (L:D). For egg development, the mosquitoes were offered human blood through arm feeding, one to two times weekly and had ad libitum access to a 6% glucose solution (wt:vol). The blood fed females were kept together with males for 2 days and used on the third day for the oviposition experiment. Eggs were laid in oviposition cups (7 cm top diameter, 4 cm base diameter and 7 cm depth) lined with filter paper (Whatman 90 mm, GE Healthcare UK Ltd, Buckinghamshire, London, UK) and transferred to larval rearing trays (39 × 28 × 4 cm depth). Upon hatching, the larvae were separated into groups of ~ 500 larvae per rearing tray and fed on commercial Tetramin® fish food (Tetra, Germany). The rearing room was maintained at 32 ± 2 °C, and 52% RH during the day, and 24 ± 2 °C and 72% RH at night with a photoperiod of L:D 12:12 h15. The rearing water was changed after every 2 days. Pupae were transferred daily to emergence cups containing 15 mL water and placed in a new cage (15 × 15 × 15 cm). Emerged adults (1 day old) were maintained on 6% glucose solution as described above.Collection of root exudate water samples from wild growing P. hysterophorus
Root exudate water samples were collected from wild growing P. hysterophorus (~ 30, 60 and 90 cm tall) on the icipe campus and used in various biological assays (i.e., oviposition response, mosquito growth and development assays). Briefly, wild growing P. hysterophorus were transplanted into a plastic pot (23 cm top diameter, 12 cm base diameter and 22 cm depth; batches of ten plants per pot in garden soil from the icipe campus) and watered with rainwater to obtain root exudate water. The root exudate water was collected from the plants after 1 week: to allow the plants to stabilize and to eliminate possible contamination of it with defense compounds released in response to uprooting. Water obtained from potted soil (same volume as used for the potted P. hysterophorus) without P. hysterophorus plants but from the same site, served as control water.Oviposition response assay with root exudate waterRoot exudate water was evaluated for its ability to influence oviposition response of gravid females in a dual-choice assay (Fig. 1A). The gravid females (n = 12 as described in Dieter et al.18; electronic supplementary material, methods) were presented a choice between the treatment and distilled water contained in similar polypropylene cups and the number of eggs laid counted using a microscope (Leica M127, Switzerland) after every 24 h for four consecutive days7. The cups were placed in opposite corners of the experimental cages and their positions interchanged every 24 h to avoid positional bias. Each cup was lined with a filter paper (Whatman 90 mm, GE Healthcare UK Ltd, Buckinghamshire, London, UK) and filled with 30 mL of the test solution (to keep the filter paper moist; as previously described in19) or an equivalent volume of distilled water as the control. A similar experiment was performed using water obtained from soil without P. hysterophorus plants (Fig. 1A). The bioassays were performed in triplicate as previously described in Ilahi et al.20 and repeated once.Figure 1Effect of root exudate water on oviposition response and aquatic stage development of An. gambiae. (A) A schematic representation showing the setup of the oviposition experiment using root exudate water and soil water. (B) Oviposition activity of root exudate water and soil water. (C) Table summarizing median number of eggs laid and the range. (D) Egg hatch rates was low in root exudate water compared to soil water. (E) Time to pupation (days) for larvae exposed to root exudate water relative to soil water.Full size imageHeadspace collection and analysis of root exudate volatilesTo collect headspace volatiles, 500 mL of the root exudate water were placed in air-tight glass jars and activated charcoal-filtered and humidified air passed over it. The volatiles were collected for 24 h on three pre-cleaned (dichloromethane (DCM) and nitrogen-dried) Super Q adsorbent filters (30 mg each, Analytical Research System, Gainesville, Florida, USA) at a flow rate of 170 mL/min. The three Super-Q filters (each treatment), were each eluted with 200 µL GC-grade DCM (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, Missouri, USA) into 2 mL clear glass vials, each containing 250 µL conical point glass inserts (Supelco, Bellefonte, PA, USA) and immediately analyzed by coupled gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). Also, natural water from depressions harboring growing P. hysterophorus in the field was sampled during the rainy season (described under parthenin detection) to allow comparison of its volatiles with that of the root exudate water. Volatiles collected from distilled water served as negative controls. Compounds were identified by comparison of their mass spectral data with library data: Adams2, Chemeco and NIST11 and confirmed with those of authentic samples. The relative peak area (%) of each constituent as generated by the NIST11 software, following GC/MS analysis was used to determine the natural ratio of the volatiles in the component blend. The volatiles were stored in glass vials at − 80 °C until used for oviposition assays.Oviposition bioassay with identified volatilesDual choice bioassay was performed to determine the role of root exudate volatiles in egg laying behavior of An. gambiae. Of the volatiles identified, seven compounds: α-pinene, β-pinene, 3-carene, (E)-caryophyllene, camphor, α-phellandrene, β-phellandrene were selected and tested based on results obtained from Random Forest Analysis (RFA) (see electronic supplementary material, methods) and their commercial availability21. In dose–response assays, several tests were carried out: (i) a blend of the seven components (7-component blend) mimicking their naturally-occurring ratio in the root exudate volatile extract based on their GC/MS peak areas, (ii) single compounds, and (iii) a blend of the attractive components (5-component blend) guided by the positive attractive responses obtained from (ii). The compounds were dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and serially diluted from a stock solution to generate a concentration ranging from 0.25 to 4 µg/µL. Thereafter, for each concentration tested, 50 µL of each compound or blend solution were dispensed into the oviposition cup containing distilled (50 mL) water and monitored for egg laying. Each concentration was tested against a control (distilled water (50 mL) containing 50 µL of DMSO). The bioassays were performed in triplicate.Mosquito growth and development assaysThe root exudate water and the control water (water from soil) were used separately for mosquito rearing. First, mosquitoes were provided with root exudate water to lay eggs in a no-choice oviposition bioassay. Thereafter, a total of 200 eggs were counted and placed into each rearing tray (24 × 34 × 4 cm) and the number of hatched eggs was determined by counting the first instars larvae that emerged in each tray. The larvae were fed daily on a standardized regimen of ground fish food (Tetramin, Tetra, Germany) and water was changed every other day. Daily survival of larvae (from first instar (L1) to pupation) was recorded, and pupae transferred into cups in experimental cages (30 × 30 × 30 cm) until adult emergence. The conditions of the bioassay room were the same as that of the rearing room described above. All experiments were performed in four replicates.Experiments using partheninDetection of parthenin in root exudate waterOne liter (1 L) of water was collected from flooded depressions/open puddles in which wild P. hysterophorus was growing on the icipe campus and pooled (the field collection was repeated twice, 1 week apart). The habitat had other non P. hysterophorus plants such as grasses. The water was filtered using a muslin cloth and stored at − 80 °C overnight and then freeze-dried (VirTis SP scientific, Model Advantage EL-85) for 72 h to obtain 38 mg of root exudate. This was extracted with dichloromethane (DCM) and analyzed by GC/MS as described under chemical analysis. A similar analysis was carried out on the root exudate water (four replicates) obtained from potted plants described above.Preparation of parthenin stock solutionA sample of parthenin obtained from a methanolic extract of P. hysterophorus from a previous study conducted in our laboratory22, was used as a standard. A sample of this isolate (300 mg) was dissolved in 0.3 mL DMSO and then diluted to 300 mL with distilled water to obtain a stock solution of 1000 ppm.Oviposition response assay with partheninParthenin was evaluated at a concentration of 0.13 µg/µL corresponding to the estimated amount of the root exudate tested (described above). The amount of parthenin in the root exudate was estimated by comparing the relative peak area (%) of parthenin in the root exudate to that recorded for the standard parthenin of known concentration. The oviposition assays were performed as described for root exudate. However, the distilled water which served as a negative control was prepared in 0.1% DMSO. A similar experiment was performed using parthenin water spiked with 50 µL of headspace volatiles collected for 24 h from the plant root exudate. All experiments were performed in triplicates.Mosquito growth and development assays using partheninParthenin prepared as described for the oviposition bioassay was used for mosquito rearing. Mosquitoes reared on distilled water prepared in 0.1% DMSO served as the control group. The experiment was performed as described for root exudate water.To determine the effect of exposure to parthenin on mosquito adult survival, the female mosquitoes that emerged from parthenin treated water and controls were monitored separately in different cages. The mosquitoes were maintained on P. hysterophorus potted plant until their natural death (survival). The conditions in the bioassay rooms were the same as those of the rearing room described above.Chemical analysisGas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)To detect parthenin in the root exudate, the sample was freeze-dried and prepared at a concentration of 600 ng/µL in dichloromethane (DCM) and dried over anhydrous Na2SO4 (Sigma Aldrich, St Louis, MO USA). The standard parthenin sample was prepared at a concentration of 300 ng/µL in DCM. For GC/MS analysis, 1 µL of each sample (parthenin and root exudate) was analyzed on a 7890B gas chromatograph (Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) linked to a 5977A mass selective detector under the following conditions: Inlet temperature 270 °C, transfer line temperature 280 °C, and column oven temperature programmed from 35 to 285 °C, with the initial temperature maintained for 5 min then 10 °C/min to 280 °C for 5.5 min and finally 5 °C/min to 285 °C for 34.9 min. The GC was fitted with a HP-5 MS low bleed capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm i.d., 0.25 µm) (J&W, Folsom, CA USA). Helium at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min served as the carrier gas. The mass selective detector was maintained at ion source temperature of 230 °C and a quadrupole temperature of 180 °C. Electron impact (EI) mass spectra were obtained at the acceleration energy of 70 eV. Compounds were injected in the splitless mode using an auto-sampler 7693 (Agilent Technologies, Inc., Beijing, China). Fragment ions were analyzed over 38–550 m/z mass range in the full scan mode. The filament delay time was set at 3.0 min. Parthenin was identified based on its general fragmentation pattern and compared also with previously published results23. The root exudate samples were analyzed in triplicate, with each replicate collected from a different batch of plants.Statistical analysisThe oviposition activity index (OAI) for dual choice oviposition assay data was calculated according to the formula described in19;$$OAI=frac{mathrm{Nt}-mathrm{Nc}}{mathrm{Nt}+mathrm{Nc}}$$
where Nt is number of eggs laid in the treatment and Nc the number of eggs laid in the control. The OAI ranges from − 1 to + 1, with 0 indicating neutral response, positive value indicating an attraction towards the treatment and a negative value indicating the converse. The oviposition data was analyzed by generalized linear model using negative binomial. The model validity was assessed by inspection of residuals24: Number of eggs deposited served as the response variable while the treatments were used as the predictor variable.Hatch rate of mosquito eggs exposed to different treatments was calculated as follows:$$% hatchability=left(frac{number ; of ; hatched ; eggs}{total ;number ; of ; eggs}right) times 100$$The % hatchability data was also analyzed using generalized linear model with negative binomial error structure. The variation in survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meir method and statistical significance comparisons made using log-ranks test. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 23.0 software (IBM SPSS Statistics) and results considered significance at p  More

Field data and analysisField samplingWe captured adult juncos by mist net or potter trap at sites in Arizona (breeding season), Colorado (breeding), Illinois (non-breeding), Montana (breeding), New Mexico (non-breeding), New York (breeding), South Dakota (non-breeding), and Wyoming (breeding), spanning 16° in latitude and 37° in longitude (Fig. 1). This work was completed with approval from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (MB84376B-1 to M.S.; MB01543B-0 to Z.A.C.; MB758442 to D.L.S.; MB06336A-4 to M.D.C.; MB757670-1 to David Winkler; and MB094297-0 to Christopher Witt,), the State of Arizona Game and Fish Department (SP590760 and SP707897 to D.L.S.), Colorado Parks and Wildlife (10TRb2030A15 to M.D.C.), the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (NH13.5667 to Z.A.C.), the Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks (2016-013 and 2017-067-W to M.S.), the New Mexico Department of Game & Fish (3217 to Christopher Witt), the New York State Division of Fish, Wildlife, & Marine Resources (LCP 1477 to David Winkler), the State of South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks (06-03, 07-02, 08-03 to D.L.S.), Wyoming Game and Fish (754 to M.D.C.), and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees at Cornell University (2001-0051 to David Winkler), the University of Illinois (13385 to Z.A.C.), the University of Montana (010-16ZCDBS-020916 to Z.A.C.), the University of South Dakota (03-08-06-08B to D.L.S), and the University of Wyoming (A-3216-01 to M.D.C.). We classified individuals to taxonomic unit based on plumage (J. h. caniceps, J. h. hyemalis, J. h. mearnsi, J. h. oreganus group, and J. p. palliatus). The J. h. oreganus group encompasses seven subspecies (J. h. montanus, J. h. oreganus, J. h. pinosus, J. h. pontilis, J. h. shufeldti, J. h. thurberi, and J. h. townsendii) with similar plumages and overlapping nonbreeding ranges26,27. For this reason, we were unable to distinguish subspecies of nonbreeding individuals within this group, though all breeding individuals were collected from the J. h. montanus range.Field metabolic assaysBirds were transported from the site of capture to a nearby laboratory ( More

CORRESPONDENCE
20 July 2021

Andes foothills protected by carbon-offset fund

Evert Thomas

0
,

Marleni Ramirez

1
,

Lily Rodriguez

2
&

Manuel Glave

3

Evert Thomas

CIMA Cordillera Azul, Lima, Peru

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Marleni Ramirez

CIMA Cordillera Azul, Lima, Peru

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Lily Rodriguez

CIMA Cordillera Azul, Lima, Peru

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Manuel Glave

CIMA Cordillera Azul, Lima, Peru

View author publications

You can also search for this author in PubMed
 Google Scholar

Share on Twitter
Share on Twitter

Share on Facebook
Share on Facebook

Share via E-Mail
Share via E-Mail

Download PDF

At its creation in 2008, the United Nations REDD (‘reducing emissions from degradation and deforestation’) programme was hailed as a way to finance conservation with tools such as carbon offsets. Thirteen years on, little of that promise has been realized. A REDD transaction signed in March for the Cordillera Azul National Park, in the foothills of the Andes in Peru, offers hope.The deal will support the conservation in perpetuity of the 13,500-square-kilometre park and its rich and pristine biodiversity. A trust fund to cover all expenses is being set up by the non-governmental organization CIMA Cordillera Azul, which manages the park, and the Peruvian Service for Natural Protected Areas.Investments in sustainable livelihoods will strengthen efforts to curb and reverse deforestation in the 23,000‑km2 buffer zone around the park — home to more than 300,000 people. Notably, they will boost development of sustainable products from forest restoration and agroforestry. For example, CIMA has built a cacao-processing plant to promote cacao agroforestry as an alternative to land use that relies on deforestation.To our knowledge, this is the first REDD transaction to ensure that all conservation costs for a national park of this size are financed by private-sector carbon-credit sales, with minimal transaction costs. Similar deals around the globe could help to catalyse the carbon market.

Nature 595, 494 (2021)
doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01958-0

Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.

Related Articles

See more letters to the editor

Subjects

Conservation biology

Climate change

Environmental sciences

Sustainability

Latest on:

Climate change

Solar geoengineering research needs formal global debate
Correspondence 20 JUL 21

Vulnerable nations lead by example on Sustainable Development Goals research
Editorial 20 JUL 21

China launches world’s largest carbon market: but is it ambitious enough?
News 20 JUL 21

Environmental sciences

Huge gaps in detection networks plague emissions monitoring
Comment 19 JUL 21

Southeast Amazonia is no longer a carbon sink
News & Views 14 JUL 21

Pollution from hydrogen fuel could widen inequality
Correspondence 13 JUL 21

Jobs

Postdoctoral Research Fellow (Columbia University Irving Medical Center, NY)

Columbia University Medical Center (CUMC), CU
New York, NY, United States

Professorships (W2) in Molecular Plant Sciences

Philipps-Universität Marburg
Marburg, Germany

Assistant Editor – Food Science and Nutrition

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Multiple locations

Early Detection Research Programme Manager

Cancer Research UK (CRUK)
London, United Kingdom

Nature Briefing
An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Email address

Yes! Sign me up to receive the daily Nature Briefing email. I agree my information will be processed in accordance with the Nature and Springer Nature Limited Privacy Policy.

Sign up More

1.Fuhrman JA, Cram JA, Needham DM. Marine microbial community dynamics and their ecological interpretation. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015;13:133–46.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Falkowski P. Ocean science: the power of plankton. Nature. 2012;483:S17–20.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
3.Bunse C, Pinhassi J. Marine bacterioplankton seasonal succession dynamics. Trends Microbiol. 2017;25:1–12.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
4.Buttigieg PL, Fadeev E, Bienhold C, Hehemann L, Offre P, Boetius A. Marine microbes in 4D-using time series observation to assess the dynamics of the ocean microbiome and its links to ocean health. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2018;43:169–85.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Eiler A, Hayakawa DH, Rappé MS. Non-random assembly of bacterioplankton communities in the subtropical North Pacific Ocean. Front Microbiol. 2011;2.6.Gilbert JA, Steele JA, Caporaso JG, Steinbrück L, Reeder J, Temperton B, et al. Defining seasonal marine microbial community dynamics. ISME J. 2012;6:298–308.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
7.Cram JA, Chow C-ET, Sachdeva R, Needham DM, Parada AE, Steele JA, et al. Seasonal and interannual variability of the marine bacterioplankton community throughout the water column over ten years. ISME J. 2015;9:563–80.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Giner CR, Balagué V, Krabberød AK, Ferrera I, Reñé A, Garcés E, et al. Quantifying long‐term recurrence in planktonic microbial eukaryotes. Mol Ecol. 2019;28:923–35.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Alonso-Sáez L, Díaz-Pérez L, Morán XAG. The hidden seasonality of the rare biosphere in coastal marine bacterioplankton. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:3766–80.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
10.Lambert S, Tragin M, Lozano J-C, Ghiglione J-F, Vaulot D, Bouget F-Y, et al. Rhythmicity of coastal marine picoeukaryotes, bacteria and archaea despite irregular environmental perturbations. ISME J. 2019;13:388–401.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
11.Martin-Platero AM, Cleary B, Kauffman K, Preheim SP, McGillicuddy DJ, Alm EJ, et al. High resolution time series reveals cohesive but short-lived communities in coastal plankton. Nat Commun. 2018;9:266.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
12.Needham DM, Fuhrman JA. Pronounced daily succession of phytoplankton, archaea and bacteria following a spring bloom. Nat Microbiol. 2016;1:16005.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
13.Needham DM, Fichot EB, Wang E, Berdjeb L, Cram JA, Fichot CG, et al. Dynamics and interactions of highly resolved marine plankton via automated high-frequency sampling. ISME J. 2018;12:2417–32.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
14.Chafee M, Fernàndez-Guerra A, Buttigieg PL, Gerdts G, Eren AM, Teeling H, et al. Recurrent patterns of microdiversity in a temperate coastal marine environment. ISME J. 2018;12:237–52.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
15.Lemonnier C, Perennou M, Eveillard D, Fernandez-Guerra A, Leynaert A, Marié L, et al. Linking spatial and temporal dynamic of bacterioplankton communities with ecological strategies across a coastal frontal area. Front Mar Sci. 2020;7:376.Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Lambert S, Lozano J-C, Bouget F-Y, Galand PE. Seasonal marine microorganisms change neighbours under contrasting environmental conditions. Environ Microbiol. 2021;23:2592–604.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Auladell A, Sánchez P, Sánchez O, Gasol JM, Ferrera I. Long-term seasonal and interannual variability of marine aerobic anoxygenic photoheterotrophic bacteria. ISME J. 2019;13:1975–87.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Hutchinson GE. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harb Sym. 1957;22:415–27.Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Cordero OX, Polz MF. Explaining microbial genomic diversity in light of evolutionary ecology. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2014;12:263–73.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Hammarlund SP, Gedeon T, Carlson RP, Harcombe WR. Limitation by a shared mutualist promotes coexistence of multiple competing partners. Nat Commun. 2021;12:619.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Schloss PD. Reintroducing mothur: 10 years later. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2020;86:13.
Google Scholar 
22.Johnson JS, Spakowicz DJ, Hong B-Y, Petersen LM, Demkowicz P, Chen L, et al. Evaluation of 16S rRNA gene sequencing for species and strain-level microbiome analysis. Nat Commun. 2019;10:5029.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
23.VanInsberghe D, Arevalo P, Chien D, Polz MF. How can microbial population genomics inform community ecology? Philos Trans R Soc B. 2020;375:20190253.Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Tromas N, Taranu ZE, Martin BD, Willis A, Fortin N, Greer CW, et al. Niche separation increases with genetic distance among bloom-forming Cyanobacteria. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:438.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
25.Philippot L, Andersson SGE, Battin TJ, Prosser JI, Schimel JP, Whitman WB, et al. The ecological coherence of high bacterial taxonomic ranks. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8:523–9.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
26.Martiny JBH, Jones SE, Lennon JT, Martiny AC. Microbiomes in light of traits: a phylogenetic perspective. Science. 2015;350:aac9323.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
27.Ladau J, Eloe-Fadrosh EA. Spatial, temporal, and phylogenetic scales of microbial ecology. Trends Microbiol. 2019;27:662–9.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Gasol JM, Cardelús C, Morán XAG, Balagué V, Forn I, Marrasé C, et al. Seasonal patterns in phytoplankton photosynthetic parameters and primary production at a coastal NW Mediterranean site. Sci Mar. 2016;80S1:63–77.Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Yentsch CS, Menzel DW. A method for the determination of phytoplankton chlorophyll and phaeophytin by fluorescence. Deep-Sea Res Oceanogr Abstr. 1963;10:221–31.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Grasshoff K, Ehrhardt M, Kremling K. Methods of seawater analysis. 2nd ed. Weinheim: Verlag Chemie; 1983.31.Gasol JM, Morán XAG. Flow cytometric determination of microbial abundances and its use to obtain indices of community structure and relative activity. In: McGenity TJ, Timmis KN, Nogales B, editors. Hydrocarbon and lipid microbiology protocols: single-cell and single-molecule methods. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2016. p. 159–87.32.Massana R, Murray AE, Preston CM, Delong EF. Vertical distribution and phylogenetic characterization of marine planktonic Archaea in the Santa Barbara Channel. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997;63:50–6.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Herlemann DP, Labrenz M, Jürgens K, Bertilsson S, Waniek JJ, Andersson AF. Transitions in bacterial communities along the 2000 km salinity gradient of the Baltic Sea. ISME J. 2011;5:1571–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
34.Apprill A, McNally S, Parsons R, Weber L. Minor revision to V4 region SSU rRNA 806R gene primer greatly increases detection of SAR11 bacterioplankton. Aquat Micro Ecol. 2015;75:129–37.Article 

Google Scholar 
35.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.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 2011;17:10.Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Wright ES. Using DECIPHER v2.0 to analyze big biological sequence data in R. R J. 2016;8:352.Article 

Google Scholar 
38.Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Waite DW, Rinke C, Skarshewski A, Chaumeil P-A, et al. A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36:996–1004.CAS 

Google Scholar 
39.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:D590–6.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Garczarek L, Guyet U, Doré H, Farrant GK, Hoebeke M, Brillet-Guéguen L, et al. Cyanorak v2.1: a scalable information system dedicated to the visualization and expert curation of marine and brackish picocyanobacteria genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2020;49:gkaa958.
Google Scholar 
41.R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2014. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.42.McMurdie PJ, Holmes S. Phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e61217.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan LD, François R, et al. Welcome to the tidyverse. J Open Source Softw. 2019;4:1686.Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Wickham H. ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2016.45.Campbell BJ, Yu L, Heidelberg JF, Kirchman DL. Activity of abundant and rare bacteria in a coastal ocean. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:12776–81.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
46.Shade A, Jones SE, Caporaso JG, Handelsman J, Knight R, Fierer N, et al. Conditionally rare taxa disproportionately contribute to temporal changes in microbial diversity. mBio. 2014;5:1–9.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
47.Willis A, Bunge J, Whitman T.Improved detection of changes in species richness in high diversity microbial communities.J R Stat Soc Ser C-App Stat. 2017;66:963–77.Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Willis AD, Martin BD. Estimating diversity in networked ecological communities. Biostatistics 2020;kxaa015.49.Ruf T. The Lomb-Scargle periodogram in biological rhythm research: analysis of incomplete and unequally spaced time-series. Biol Rhythm Res. 1999;30:178–201.Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Tibshirani R, Walther G, Hastie T. Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic. J R Stat Soc Ser C-Appl Stat. 2001;63:411–23.Article 

Google Scholar 
51.Hastie T, Tibshirani R. Generalized additive models. Stat Sci. 1986;1:297–310.
Google Scholar 
52.Pedersen EJ, Miller DL, Simpson GL, Ross N. Hierarchical generalized additive models in ecology: an introduction with mgcv. PeerJ. 2019;7:e6876.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Quinn TP, Richardson MF, Lovell D, Crowley TM. propr: an R-package for Identifying proportionally abundant features using compositional data analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1–9.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
54.Lovell D, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ, Marguerat S, Bähler J. Proportionality: a valid alternative to correlation for relative data. PLoS Comput Biol. 2015;11:e1004075.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
55.Heiberger RM. HH: statistical analysis and data display: Heiberger and Holland. 2020.56.Martin BD, Witten D, Willis AD. Modeling microbial abundances and dysbiosis with beta-binomial regression. Ann Appl Stat. 2020;14:94–115.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Farrant GK, Doré H, Cornejo-Castillo FM, Partensky F, Ratin M, Ostrowski M, et al. Delineating ecologically significant taxonomic units from global patterns of marine picocyanobacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113:E3365–E3374.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
58.Alonso-Sáez L, Balagué V, Sà EL, Sánchez O, González JM, Pinhassi J, et al. Seasonality in bacterial diversity in north-west Mediterranean coastal waters: assessment through clone libraries, fingerprinting and FISH. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2007;60:98–112.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
59.Mestre M, Höfer J, Sala MM, Gasol JM. Seasonal variation of bacterial diversity along the marine particulate matter continuum. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:1590.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Nunes S, Latasa M, Gasol JM, Estrada M. Seasonal and interannual variability of phytoplankton community structure in a Mediterranean coastal site. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2018;592:57–75.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Lindh MV, Sjöstedt J, Andersson AF, Baltar F, Hugerth LW, Lundin D, et al. Disentangling seasonal bacterioplankton population dynamics by high-frequency sampling: High-resolution temporal dynamics of marine bacteria. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:2459–76.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
62.Viklund J, Martijn J, Ettema TJG, Andersson SGE. Comparative and phylogenomic evidence that the Alphaproteobacterium HIMB59 is not a member of the oceanic SAR11 clade. PLoS One. 2013;8:e78858.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Martijn J, Vosseberg J, Guy L, Offre P, Ettema TJG. Deep mitochondrial origin outside the sampled alphaproteobacteria. Nature. 2018;557:101–5.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Salter I, Galand PE, Fagervold SK, Lebaron P, Obernosterer I, Oliver MJ, et al. Seasonal dynamics of active SAR11 ecotypes in the oligotrophic Northwest Mediterranean Sea. ISME J. 2015;9:347–60.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Guizien K, Charles F, Lantoine F, Naudin J-J. Nearshore dynamics of nutrients and chlorophyll during Mediterranean-type flash-floods. Aquat Living Resour. 2007;20:3–14.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
66.Giovannoni SJ. SAR11 bacteria: the most abundant plankton in the oceans. Annu Rev Mar Sci. 2017;9:231–55.Article 

Google Scholar 
67.Steinberg DK, Carlson CA, Bates NR, Johnson RJ, Michaels AF, Knap AH. Overview of the US JGOFS Bermuda Atlantic Time-series Study (BATS): a decade-scale look at ocean biology and biogeochemistry. Deep Sea Res Part II Top Stud Oceanogr. 2001;48:1405–47.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
68.Cadotte MW, Tucker CM. Should environmental filtering be abandoned? Trends Ecol Evol. 2017;32:429–37.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
69.Tromas N, Taranu ZE, Castelli M, Pimentel JSM, Pereira DA, Marcoz R, et al. The evolution of realized niches within freshwater Synechococcus. Environ Microbiol. 2020;22:1238–50.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
70.Grote J, Thrash JC, Huggett MJ, Landry ZC, Carini P, Giovannoni SJ, et al. Streamlining and core genome conservation among highly divergent members of the SAR11 clade. mBio. 2012;3:e00252–12.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
71.Larkin AA, Martiny AC. Microdiversity shapes the traits, niche space, and biogeography of microbial taxa: the ecological function of microdiversity. Env Microbiol Rep. 2017;9:55–70.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
72.Mestre M, Borrull E, Sala MM, Gasol JM. Patterns of bacterial diversity in the marine planktonic particulate matter continuum. ISME J. 2017;11:999–1010.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
73.Salazar G, Cornejo-Castillo FM, Benítez-Barrios V, Fraile-Nuez E, Álvarez-Salgado XA, Duarte CM, et al. Global diversity and biogeography of deep-sea pelagic prokaryotes. ISME J. 2016;10:596–608.PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
74.Faust K, Lahti L, Gonze D, de Vos WM, Raes J. Metagenomics meets time series analysis: unraveling microbial community dynamics. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2015;25:56–66.PubMed 
Article 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
75.Lee J, Kwon KK, Lim S-I, Song J, Choi AR, Yang S-H, et al. Isolation, cultivation, and genome analysis of proteorhodopsin-containing SAR116-clade strain Candidatus Puniceispirillum marinum IMCC1322. J Microbiol. 2019;57:676–87.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar  More

In our studies with Marandu palisadegrass, a grazing management strategy with continuous stocking where 95% of the light is intercepted by the canopy resulted in forage at a height of 25 cm, a high green leaf proportion, and low amounts of dead material during the growing season23,24. The use of N fertilization4, different stocking rates, and supplementation25,26,27 are crucial for obtaining forage with a high nutritional value, resulting in a high weight gain per animal and area, and a reduction in slaughter age and greenhouse gas emissions. In the present study we did not find any interection N doses with years. Therefore, only the significative effects of N fertilization or variation within year are presented and discussed.Total and non-fibrous carbohydrates and total digestible nutrientsTotal carbohydrate concentrations decreased linearly with increasing N levels (P  More

Download PDF

I was a ten-year-old in Singapore when I received a vervet monkey (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) as a pet. By the time I was 15, I knew that my family did not have the necessary international permit to own it legally. With help from local agencies, we sent the monkey to a rehabilitation sanctuary in Zambia, which ultimately released it into the wild. That experience got me interested in learning more about wild monkeys and how to help them.I research threatened and endangered leaf-eating primates known as Asian colobinae. They have specialized, multi-chambered stomachs, as do cows, and need a long rest after meals. They are shy and hard to find, so there has been less research on them than on orangutans or the great apes.One species I study is the critically endangered Raffles’ banded langur (Presbytis femoralis). Globally, there are just 320 individuals: 70 in Singapore and 250 in Malaysia. I work with national agencies, educational and non-governmental organizations and local communities to help protect these and other monkeys — especially those living between forest and urban areas. For example, in an area prone to roadkill, we installed a rope bridge to let langurs and other animals cross the road safely.One of the biggest threats to these and other monkeys is inbreeding as their numbers shrink. We hope to exchange animals between Singapore and Malaysia to boost their population’s genetic health.In this picture from 2017, I was monitoring primate populations in a reserve in central Singapore when I saw these long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Here, we are observing one another — and respecting each other’s space.I’ve started a website called Primate Watching to help observers learn about these primates and where to see them. People think monkeys are aggressive, but really they are just naturally curious. Still, the public should always keep a safe distance, not put a camera in their faces.

Nature 595, 618 (2021)
doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01995-9

Related Articles

Shell shock: A biologist’s quest to save the endangered painted snail

Mission marmoset

Subjects

Careers

Conservation biology

Ecology

Latest on:

Careers

Why science needs a new reward and recognition system
Career Column 15 JUL 21

Embrace and celebrate diverse names in science
Career Column 14 JUL 21

How a holistic research retreat can help our science
Career Column 08 JUL 21

Ecology

Italy: Forest harvesting is the opposite of green growth
Correspondence 13 JUL 21

Destructive fires serve as pest control for lizards
Research Highlight 13 JUL 21

Newfound ‘fairy lantern’ could soon be snuffed out forever
Research Highlight 07 JUL 21

Jobs

Research Associate / PhD Student

Technische Universität Dresden (TU Dresden)
Dresden, Germany

Head of Human Resources

Research Center for Molecular Medicine (CeMM), ÖAW
Vienna, Austria

M.Sc. or Ph.D. in Physical Oceanography: Glacier-ocean interactions in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago

The University of British Columbia (UBC)
Vancouver, Canada

58971: Student in Aerospace Engineering, Communication Engineering, Electronic Engineering, Physics (f/m/x) – Space Radiation and Shielding Analysis for VHTS Optical Communications Payload

German Aerospace Center (DLR)
Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany

Nature Briefing
An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Email address

Yes! Sign me up to receive the daily Nature Briefing email. I agree my information will be processed in accordance with the Nature and Springer Nature Limited Privacy Policy.

Sign up More

1.Mahanty, B., Pakshirajan, K. & Dasu, V. V. Understanding the complexity and strategic evolution in PAH remediation research. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41, 1697–1746. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2010.481586 (2011).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
2.Meador, J. P. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Encyclopedia of Ecology Vol. 4 (eds Jørgensen, S. E. & Fath, B. D.) 2881–2891 (Oxford: Elsevier, 2008).3.Gong, Z., Alef, K., Wilke, B. M. & Li, P. Activated carbon adsorption of PAHs from vegetable oil used in soil remediation. J. Hazard Mater. 143, 372–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.09.037 (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
4.Smith, M. J., Flowers, T. H., Duncan, H. J. & Alder, J. Effects of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons on germination and subsequent growth of grasses and legumes in freshly contaminated soil and soil with aged PAHs residues. Environ. Poll. 141, 519–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2005.08.061 (2006).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
5.Mackay, D., Shiu, W. Y. & Lee, S. C. Handbook of Physical–Chemical Properties and Environmental Fate for Organic Chemicals (CRC Press, 2006).Book 

Google Scholar 
6.Zhou, Q., Sun, F. & Liu, R. Joint chemical flushing of soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons. Environ. Int. 31, 835–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2005.05.039 (2005).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
7.Wang, C. et al. Elemental carbon components and PAHs in soils from different areas of the Yangtze River Delta region, China and their relationship. CATENA 199, 105086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105086 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
8.Hao, R., Wan, H. F., Song, Y. T., Jiang, H. & Peng, S. L. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in agricultural soils of the southern subtropics, China. Pedosphere 17, 673–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(07)60081-2 (2007).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
9.Dandie, C. E. et al. Assessment of five bioaccessibility assays for predicting the efficacy of petroleum hydrocarbon biodegradation in aged contaminated soils. Chemosphere 81, 1061–1068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.09.059 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
10.Liu, S. et al. Black carbon (BC) in urban and surrounding rural soils of Beijing, China: Spatial distribution and relationship with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Chemosphere 82, 223–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.10.017 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
11.Terytze, K. et al. Detection and determination limits of priority organic pollutants in soil. Chemosphere 31, 3051–3083. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-6535(95)00166-6 (1995).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
12.Han, Y. M. et al. Stronger association of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons with soot than with char in soils and sediments. Chemosphere 119, 1335–1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.02.021 (2015).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
13.Duan, L. et al. Effect of ageing on benzo[a]pyrene extractability in contrasting soils. J. Hazard Mater. 296, 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.04.050 (2015).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
14.Luo, L., Zhang, S. & Ma, Y. Evaluation of impacts of soil fractions on phenanthrene sorption. Chemosphere 72, 891–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.03.051 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
15.Ukalska-Jaruga, A., Debaene, G. & Smreczak, B. Dissipation and sorption processes of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) to organic matter in soils amended by exogenous rich-carbon material. J. Soils Sediments 20, 836–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-019-02455-8 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
16.Błońska, E., Lasota, J., Szuszkiewicz, M., Łukasik, A. & Klamerus-Iwan, A. Assessment of forest soil contamination in Krakow surroundings in relation to the type of stand. Environ. Earth Sci. 75, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6005-7 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
17.Lasota, J. & Błońska, E. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons content in contaminated forest soils with different humus types. Water Air Soil Poll. 229, 204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-018-3857-3 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
18.Pająk, M. et al. Restoration of vegetation in relation to soil properties of spoil heap heavily contaminated with heavy metals. Water Air Soil Poll. 229, 392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-018-4040-6 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
19.Lasota, J., Błońska, E., Łyszczarz, S. & Tibbett, M. Forest humus type governs heavy metal accumulation in specific organic matter fractions. Water Air Soil Poll. 231, 80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-020-4450-0 (2020).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
20.Pająk, M., Błońska, E., Frąc, M. & Oszust, K. Functional diversity and microbial activity of forest soils that are heavily contaminated by lead and zinc. Water Air Soil Poll. 227, 348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-016-3051-4 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
21.Chaudhary, P., Singh, S. B., Chaudhry, S. & Nain, L. Impact of PAH on biological health parameters of soils of an Indian refinery and adjoining agricultural area—A case study. Environ. Monit. Assess. 184, 1145–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2029-3 (2012).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
22.Łukasik, A., Szuszkiewicz, M., Wanic, T. & Gruba, P. Three-dimensional model of magnetic susceptibility in forest topsoil: An indirect method to discriminate contaminant migration. Environ. Pollut. 273, 116491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116491 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
23.Magiera, T., Jabłońska, M., Strzyszcz, Z. & Rachwal, M. Morphological and mineralogical forms of technogenic magnetic particles in industrial dusts. Atmos. Environ. 45, 4281–4290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.04.076 (2011).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
24.Hulett, L. D., Weinberger, A. J., Northcutt, K. J. & Ferguson, M. Chemical species in fly ash from coal-burning power plants. Science 210, 1356–1358. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.210.4476.1356 (1980).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
25.Chaparro, M. A. E., Gogorza, C. S. G., Lavat, A., Pazos, S. & Sinito, A. M. Preliminary results of magnetic characterisation of different soils in the Tandil region (Argentina) affected by pollution by a metallurgical factory. Eur. J. Environ. Eng. Geophys. 7, 35–38 (2002).
Google Scholar 
26.Fabijańczyk, P., Zawadzki, J., Magiera, T. & Szuszkiewicz, M. A methodology of integration of magnetometric and geochemical soil contamination measurements. Geoderma 277, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.05.009 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
27.Łukasik, A., Magiera, T., Lasota, J. & Błońska, E. Background value of magnetic susceptibility in forest topsoil: Assessment on the basis of studies conducted in forest preserves of Poland. Geoderma 264, 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.10.009 (2016).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
28.Yu, X., Wang, Y. & Lu, S. Tracking the magnetic carriers of heavy metals in contaminated soils based on X-ray microprobe techniques and wavelet transformation. J. Hazard Mater. 381, 121114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121114 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
29.Jordanova, N., Jordanova, D. & Tsacheva, T. Application of magnetometry for delineation of anthropogenic pollution in areas covered by various soil types. Geoderma 144, 557–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.01.021 (2008).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
30.Petrovský, E. et al. Magnetic mapping of distribution of wood ash used for fertilization of forest soil. Sci. Total Environ. 626, 228–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.01.095 (2018).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
31.Asgari, N., Ayoubi, S. & Demattê, J. A. M. Soil drainage assessment by magnetic susceptibility measures in western Iran. Geoderma Reg. 13, 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2018.03.003 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
32.Menshov, O. et al. Soil and dust magnetism in semi-urban area Truskavets, Ukraine. Environ. Earth Sci. 79, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-08924-5 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
33.Xu, S. et al. Contents of heavy metals and PAHs and their relationships with magnetic susceptibility in soils of vegetable base in Fuzhou City. Chin. J. Environ. Eng. 11, 4861–4867. https://doi.org/10.12030/j.cjee.201607118 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
34.IUSS Working Group WRB. World reference base for soil resources 2014. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. World Soil Resources Reports No. 106. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479706394902 (2014).35.Sanaullah, M., Razavi, B. S., Blagodatskaya, E. & Kuzyakov, Y. Spatial distribution and catalytic mechanisms of β-glucosidase activity at the root-soil interface. Biol. Fertil. Soils 52, 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-016-1094-8 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
36.Pritsch, K. et al. A rapid and highly sensitive method for measuring enzyme activities in single mycorrhizal tips using 4-methylumbelliferone-labelled fluorogenic substrates in a microplate system. J. Microb. Met. 58, 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2004.04.001 (2004).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
37.Turner, B. L. Variation in ph optima of hydrolytic enzyme activities in tropical rain forest soils. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 76, 6485–6493. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00560-10 (2010).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
38.Jenkinson, D. S. & Powlson, D. S. The effects of biocidal treatments on metabolism in soil-I. Fumigation with chloroform. Soil Biol. Biochem. 8, 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(76)90001-8 (1976).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
39.Vance, E. D., Brookes, P. C. & Jenkinson, D. S. An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19, 703–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(87)90052-6 (1987).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
40.Dearing, J. A. Environmental Magnetic Susceptibility. Using the Bartington MS2 System 2nd edn. (Chi Publishing, 1999).
Google Scholar 
41.Quenea, K., Lamy, I., Winterton, P., Bermond, A. & Dumat, C. Interactions between metals and soil organic matter in various particle size fractions of soil contaminated with waste water. Geoderma 1, 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.037 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
42.Yu, H., Xiao, H. & Wang, D. Effects of soil properties and biosurfactant on the behavior of PAHs in soil-water systems. Environ. Syst. Res. 3, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-2697-3-6 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
43.Singh, S. K. & Haritash, A. K. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Soil pollution and remediation. Inter. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16, 6489–6512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-019-02414-3 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
44.Banach-Szott, M., Debska, B., Wisniewska, A. & Pakula, J. Changes in the contents of selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soils of various types. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 5059–5069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3901-9 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
45.Han, B., Ding, X., Bai, Z., Kong, S. & Guo, G. Source analysis of particulate matter associated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in an industrial city in northeastern China. J. Environ. Monit. 13, 2597–2604. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1em10251f (2011).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
46.Srogi, K. Monitoring of environmental exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 5, 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-007-0095-0 (2007).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
47.Fu, G., Kan, A. T. & Tomson, M. Adsorption and desorption hysteresis of pahs in surface sediment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 13, 1559–1567. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620131003 (1994).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
48.Maliszewska-Kordybach, B. & Smreczak, B. Habitat function of agricultural soils as affected by heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons contamination. Environ. Inter. 28, 719–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-4120(02)00117-4 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
49.Baran, S., Bielińska, J. E. & Oleszczuk, P. Enzymatic activity in an airfield soil polluted with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Geoderma 118, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00205-2 (2004).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
50.Wang, C., Sun, H., Li, J., Li, Y. & Zhang, Q. Enzyme activities during degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by white rot fungus Phanerochaete chrysosporium in soils. Chemosphere 77, 733–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.08.028 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
51.Feng, Y. et al. Soil microbial communities under conventional-till and no-till continuous cotton systems. Soil Biol. Biochem. 35, 1693–1703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2003.08.016 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
52.Dou, F., Wright, A. L., Mylavarapu, R. S., Jiang, X. & Matocha, J. E. Soil enzyme activities and organic matter composition affected by 26 years of continuous cropping. Pedosphere 25, 618–625. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60070-4 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
53.Błońska, E., Lasota, J. & Gruba, P. Enzymatic activity and stabilization of organic matter in soil with different detritus inputs. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 63, 242–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380768.2017.1326281 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
54.Shen, J. P., Zhang, L. M., Guo, J. F., Ray, J. L. & He, J. Z. Impact of long-term fertilization practices on the abundance and composition of soil bacterial communities in Northeast China. Appl. Soil Ecol. 46, 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.06.015 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
55.Li, J. et al. Microbial community structure and functional metabolic diversity are associated with organic carbon availability in an agricultural soil. J. Integr. Agric. 14, 2500–2511. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61229-1 (2015).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
56.Riggs, C. E. & Hobbie, S. E. Mechanisms driving the soil organic matter decomposition response to nitrogen enrichment in grassland soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 99, 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2016.04.023 (2016).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
57.Sinsabaugh, R. L. et al. Stoichiometry of soil enzyme activity at global scale. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1252–1264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01245.x (2008).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
58.Kabata-Pendias, A. Trace Elements in Soils and Plants 4th Edn. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10158 (2010).59.Verla, E. N., Verla, A. W., Osisi, A. F., Okeke, P. N. & Enyoh, C. E. Finding a relationship between mobility factors of selected heavy metals and soil particle size in soils from children’s playgrounds. Environ. Monit. Assess. 191, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7937-7 (2019).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
60.Maliszewska-Kordybach, B. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in agricultural soils in Poland: Preliminary proposals for criteria to evaluate the level of soil contamination. Appl. Geochem. 11, 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-2927(95)00076-3 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
61.Lu, Z., Zeng, F., Xue, N. & Li, F. Occurrence and distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in organo-mineral particles of alluvial sandy soil profiles at a petroleum-contaminated site. Sci. Total Environ. 433, 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.06.036 (2012).ADS 
CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
62.Dearing, J. A. et al. Magnetic susceptibility of soil: An evaluation of conflicting theories using a national data set. Geophys. J. Int. 127, 728–734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1996.tb04051.x (1996).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
63.Hanesch, M. & Scholger, R. The influence of soil type on the magnetic susceptibility measured throughout soil profiles. Geophys. J. Int. 161, 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02577.x (2005).ADS 
CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
64.Blundell, A., Dearing, J. A., Boyle, J. F. & Hannam, J. A. Controlling factors for the spatial variability of soil magnetic susceptibility across England and Wales. Earth-Sci. Rev. 95, 158–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2009.05.001 (2009).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
65.Alekseev, A., Alekseeva, T., Sokołowska, Z. & Hajnos, M. Magnetic and mineralogical properties of different granulometric fractions in the soils of the Lublin Upland Region. Int. Agrophys. 16, 1–6 (2001).
Google Scholar 
66.Quijano, L., Chaparro, M. A. E., Marié, D. C., Gaspar, L. & Navas, A. Relevant magnetic and soil parameters as potential indicators of soil conservation status of Mediterranean agroecosystems. Geophys. J. Int. 198, 1805–1817. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggu239 (2014).ADS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More