Ecology

Levett, R. Sustainability indicators—integrating quality of life and environmental protection. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 161, 291–302 (1998).Article 

Google Scholar 
Harrison, P. A. Ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: an introduction to the RUBICODE project. Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 2767–2772 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Otero, I. et al. Biodiversity policy beyond economic growth. Conserv. Lett. 13, e12713 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Seppelt, R., Lautenbach, S. & Volk, M. Identifying trade-offs between ecosystem services, land use, and biodiversity: a plea for combining scenario analysis and optimization on different spatial scales. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 5, 458–463 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2019); accessed from https://ipbes.net/document-library-categoriesDinerstein, E. et al. A “Global Safety Net” to reverse biodiversity loss and stabilize Earth’s climate. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb2824 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ostrom, E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325, 419–422 (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bennett, E. M. et al. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 14, 76–85 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Haines-Young, R & Potschin, M. in Ecosystem Ecology: A New Synthesis (eds Raffaelli, D. & Frid, C.) 110–139 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Tallis, H. M. & Kareiva, P. Shaping global environmental decisions using socio-ecological models. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 562–568 (2006).Article 

Google Scholar 
Steffen, W. et al. Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 8252–8259 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wilson, K. A. et al. Conserving biodiversity efficiently: what to do, where, and when. PLoS Biol. 5, e223 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moilanen, A. et al. Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 1885–1891 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moilanen, A. et al. Balancing alternative land uses in conservation prioritization. Ecol. Appl. 21, 1419–1426 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kremen, C. et al. Aligning conservation priorities across taxa in Madagascar with high-resolution planning tools. Science 320, 222–226 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pressey, R. L., Cabeza, M., Watts, M. E., Cowling, R. M. & Wilson, K. A. Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22, 583–592 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sayer, J. et al. Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 8349–8356 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Watts, M. E. et al. Marxan with Zones: software for optimal conservation based land- and sea-use zoning. Environ. Model. Softw. 24, 1513–1521 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Arkema, K. K. et al. Embedding ecosystem services in coastal planning leads to better outcomes for people and nature. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA` 112, 7390–7395 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wyborn, C. & Evans, M. C. Conservation needs to break free from global priority mapping. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1322–1324 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jenkins, C. N., Pimm, S. L. & Joppa, L. N. Global patterns of terrestrial vertebrate diversity and conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, e2602–e2610 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brum, F. T. et al. Global priorities for conservation across multiple dimensions of mammalian diversity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 7641–7646 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Silveira, F. A. et al. Biome Awareness Disparity is BAD for tropical ecosystem conservation and restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14060 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bond, W. J. & Parr, C. L. Beyond the forest edge: ecology, diversity and conservation of the grassy biomes. Biol. Conserv. 143, 2395–2404 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Veach, V., Di Minin, E., Pouzols, F. M. & Moilanen, A. Species richness as criterion for global conservation area placement leads to large losses in coverage of biodiversity. Divers. Distrib. 23, 715–726 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Venter, O. et al. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001891 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Potapov, P. et al. The last frontiers of wilderness: tracking loss of intact forest landscapes from 2000 to 2013. Sci. Adv. 3, e1600821 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jung, M. et al. Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1499–1509 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
First Draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (CBD, 2021); accessed from www.cbd.int/conferences/post2020Westgate, M. J., Barton, P. S., Lane, P. W. & Lindenmayer, D. B. Global meta-analysis reveals low consistency of biodiversity congruence relationships. Nat. Commun. 5, 3899 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cadotte, M. W. & Tucker, C. M. Difficult decisions: strategies for conservation prioritization when taxonomic, phylogenetic and functional diversity are not spatially congruent. Biol. Conserv. 225, 128–133 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Madhusudhan, M. D. & Vanak, A. T. (2022). Mapping the distribution and extent of India’s semi-arid open natural ecosystems. Journal of Biogeography 00, 1–11; https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.14471Wastelands Atlas of India 2019 (Department of Land Resources, Ministry of Rural Development and the National Remote Sensing Centre, Indian Space Research Organisation, Department of Space, Government of India, 2019); www.dolr.gov.in/documents/wasteland-atlas-of-indiaKrishnaswamy, J., John, R. & Joseph, S. Consistent response of vegetation dynamics to recent climate change in tropical mountain regions. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 203–215 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Parida, B. R., Pandey, A. C. & Patel, N. R. Greening and browning trends of vegetation in India and their responses to climatic and non-climatic drivers. Climate 8, 92 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Piao, S. et al. Characteristics, drivers and feedbacks of global greening. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 14–27 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Martin, D. A. et al. Land-use trajectories for sustainable land system transformations: identifying leverage points in a global biodiversity hotspot. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2107747119 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pandit, M. K. & Grumbine, R. E. Potential effects of ongoing and proposed hydropower development on terrestrial biological diversity in the Indian Himalaya. Conserv. Biol. 26, 1061–1071 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nayak, R. et al. Bits and pieces: forest fragmentation by linear intrusions in India. Land Use Policy 99, 104619 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Srinivasan, U. et al. Oil palm cultivation can be expanded while sparing biodiversity in India. Nat. Food 2, 442–447 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vasudev, D., Goswami, V. R., Srinivas, N., Syiem, B. L. N. & Sarma, A. Identifying important connectivity areas for the wide‐ranging Asian elephant across conservation landscapes of Northeast India. Divers. Distrib. 27, 2510–2526 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Goswami, V. R., Vasudev, D., Joshi, B., Hait, P. & Sharma, P. Coupled effects of climatic forcing and the human footprint on wildlife movement and space use in a dynamic floodplain landscape. Sci. Total Environ. 758, 144000 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rodrigues, R. G., Srivathsa, A. & Vasudev, D. Dog in the matrix: envisioning countrywide connectivity conservation for an endangered carnivore. J. Appl. Ecol. 59, 223–237 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ghosh-Harihar, M. et al. Protected areas and biodiversity conservation in India. Biol. Conserv. 237, 114–124 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hesselbarth, M. H., Sciaini, M., With, K. A., Wiegand, K. & Nowosad, J. landscapemetrics: an open‐source R tool to calculate landscape metrics. Ecography 42, 1648–1657 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brennan, A. et al. Functional connectivity of the world’s protected areas. Science 376, 1101–1104 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Alves-Pinto, H. et al. Opportunities and challenges of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) for biodiversity conservation. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 19, 115–120 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Joshi, A. A., Sankaran, M. & Ratnam, J. ‘Foresting’ the grassland: historical management legacies in forest-grassland mosaics in southern India, and lessons for the conservation of tropical grassy biomes. Biol. Conserv. 224, 144–152 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Chisholm, R. A. Trade-offs between ecosystem services: water and carbon in a biodiversity hotspot. Ecol. Econ. 69, 1973–1987 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Clark, B., DeFries, R. & Krishnaswamy, J. India’s commitments to increase tree and forest cover: consequences for water supply and agriculture production within the Central Indian Highlands. Water 13, 959 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paul, S., Ghosh, S., Rajendran, K. & Murtugudde, R. Moisture supply from the Western Ghats forests to water deficit east coast of India. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 4337–4344 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Almond, R. E. A, Grooten, M., Juffe Bignoli, D. & Petersen, T. (eds) Living Planet Report 2022—Building a Nature-Positive Society (WWF, 2022).Srivathsa, A. et al. Opportunities for prioritizing and expanding conservation enterprise in India using a guild of carnivores as flagships. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 064009 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vira, B. et al., Negotiating trade-offs: choices about ecosystem services for poverty alleviation. Econ. Polit. Wkly 67–75 (2012).Ravindranath, N. H. & Murthy, I. K. Greening India mission. Curr. Sci. 99, 444–449 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Fedele, G., Donatti, C. I., Bornacelly, I. & Hole, D. G. Nature-dependent people: mapping human direct use of nature for basic needs across the tropics. Glob. Environ. Change 71, 102368 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strassburg, B. B. et al. Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration. Nature 586, 724–729 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Belote, R. T. et al. Beyond priority pixels: delineating and evaluating landscapes for conservation in the contiguous United States. Landsc. Urban Plan. 209, 104059 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bawa, K. S. et al. Securing biodiversity, securing our future: a national mission on biodiversity and human well-being for India. Biol. Conserv. 253, 108867 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodgers, W. A. & Panwar, H. S. Planning a Wildlife Protected Area Network in India. Vol. 1. A Report (Wildlife Institute of India, 1988).Watts, M., Klein, C. J., Tulloch, V. J., Carvalho, S. B. & Possingham, H. P. Software for prioritizing conservation actions based on probabilistic information. Conserv. Biol. 35, 1299–1308 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Moilanen, A. et al. Zonation: spatial conservation planning methods and software. Version 4. User Manual. C-BIG; https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/33733621.pdf (2014).Sierra-Altamiranda, A. et al. Spatial conservation planning under uncertainty using modern portfolio theory and Nash bargaining solution. Ecol. Model. 423, 109016 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Silvestro, D., Goria, S., Sterner, T. & Antonelli, A. Improving biodiversity protection through artificial intelligence. Nat. Sustain. 5, 415–424 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Delavenne, J. et al. Systematic conservation planning in the eastern English Channel: comparing the Marxan and Zonation decision-support tools. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 69, 75–83 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Roy, P. S. et al. Development of decadal (1985–1995–2005) land use and land cover database for India. Remote Sens. 7, 2401–2430 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Champion, H. G. & Seth, S. K. A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India (Government of India, 1968).BirdLife International World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA Partnership, version March 2021); accessed from www.keybiodiversityareas.org/kba-data/requestKoschke, L., Fürst, C., Frank, S. & Makeschin, F. A multi-criteria approach for an integrated land-cover-based assessment of ecosystem services provision to support landscape planning. Ecol. Indic. 21, 54–66 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sarkar, T., Mishra, M. & Singh, R. B. in Regional Development Planning and Practice (eds Mishra, M. et al.) 205–232 (Springer, 2022). More

Oil palm plantations can supplant once biodiverse tropical forests. As planted areas expand, it is vital to plan landscapes to better balance biodiversity and oil palm production. Strategic ‘set-asides’ offer a key approach.In recent decades, oil palm has expanded spectacularly in some of the most biodiverse areas of the tropics, especially in Indonesia and Malaysia. This expansion has caused extensive deforestation (including loss of more than 2.1 million ha of primary forests in Borneo2, as well as other forests and agroforests), and management of plantations often relies heavily on clearing, herbicides and pesticides. This has generated many direct and indirect impacts on wildlife, ecosystems, climate and human communities3. Further expansion is ongoing, and global demand continues to rise4. More

de Sousa, L. L., Silva, S. M. & Xavier, R. DNA metabarcoding in diet studies: Unveiling ecological aspects in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Environ. DNA 1, 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.27 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pompanon, F. et al. Who is eating what: Diet assessment using next generation sequencing. Mol. Ecol. 21, 1931–1950. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05403.x (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Liu, M. X., Clarke, L. J., Baker, S. C., Jordan, G. J. & Burridge, C. P. A practical guide to DNA metabarcoding for entomological ecologists. Ecol. Entomol. 45, 373–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/een.12831 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Traugott, M., Thalinger, B., Wallinger, C. & Sint, D. Fish as predators and prey: DNA-based assessment of their role in food webs. J. Fish Biol. 98, 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.14400 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Clare, E. L. Molecular detection of trophic interactions: Emerging trends, distinct advantages, significant considerations and conservation applications. Evol. Appl. 7, 1144–1157. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12225 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deagle, B. E. et al. Counting with DNA in metabarcoding studies: How should we convert sequence reads to dietary data?. Mol. Ecol. 28, 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14734 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Ando, H. et al. Methodological trends and perspectives of animal dietary studies by noninvasive fecal DNA metabarcoding. Environ. DNA 2, 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1002/edn3.117 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Masonick, P., Hernandez, M. & Weirauch, C. No guts, no glory: Gut content metabarcoding unveils the diet of a flower-associated coastal sage scrub predator. Ecosphere. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2712 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Eitzinger, B. et al. Assessing changes in arthropod predator–prey interactions through DNA-based gut content analysis-variable environment, stable diet. Mol. Ecol. 28, 266–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14872 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kim, T. N. et al. Using high-throughput amplicon sequencing to determine diet of generalist lady beetles in agricultural landscapes. Biol. Control. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2022.104920 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wallinger, C. et al. The effect of plant identity and the level of plant decay on molecular gut content analysis in a herbivorous soil insect. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 13, 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12032 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Seabra, S. G. et al. PCR-based detection of prey DNA in the gut contents of the tiger-fly, Coenosia attenuata (Diptera: Muscidae), a biological control agent in Mediterranean greenhouses. Eur. J. Entomol. 118, 335–343. https://doi.org/10.14411/eje.2021.035 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Panni, S. & Pizzolotto, R. Fast molecular assay to detect the rate of decay of Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae) DNA in Pterostichus melas (Coleoptera: Carabidae) gut contents. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 53, 425–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13355-018-0564-x (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Greenstone, M. H., Payton, M. E., Weber, D. C. & Simmons, A. M. The detectability half-life in arthropod predator–prey research: What it is, why we need it, how to measure it, and how to use it. Mol. Ecol. 23, 3799–3813. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12552 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fülöp, D., Szita, E., Gerstenbrand, R., Tholt, G. & Samu, F. Consuming alternative prey does not influence the DNA detectability half-life of pest prey in spider gut contents. PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.7680 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, G. F., Lu, Z. C., Wan, F. H. & Lovei, G. L. Real-time PCR quantification of Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) B-biotype remains in predator guts. Mol. Ecol. Notes 7, 947–954. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01819.x (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Weber, D. C. & Lundgren, J. G. Detection of predation using qPCR: Effect of prey quantity, elapsed time, chaser diet, and sample preservation on detectable quantity of prey DNA. J. Insect Sci. https://doi.org/10.1673/031.009.4101 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paula, D. P. et al. Detection and decay rates of prey and prey symbionts in the gut of a predator through metagenomics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 15, 880–892. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12364 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hindson, B. J. et al. High-throughput droplet digital PCR system for absolute quantitation of DNA copy number. Anal. Chem. 83, 8604–8610. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac202028g (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wood, S. A. et al. A comparison of droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR), quantitative PCR and metabarcoding for species-specific detection in environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 19, 1407–1419. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13055 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nathan, L. M., Simmons, M., Wegleitner, B. J., Jerde, C. L. & Mahon, A. R. Quantifying environmental DNA signals for aquatic invasive species across multiple detection platforms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 12800–12806. https://doi.org/10.1021/es5034052 (2014).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kim, T. G., Jeong, S. Y. & Cho, K. S. Comparison of droplet digital PCR and quantitative real-time PCR for examining population dynamics of bacteria in soil. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98, 6105–6113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-5794-4 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Thalinger, B., Pütz, Y. & Traugott, M. Endpoint PCR coupled with capillary electrophoresis (celPCR) provides sensitive and quantitative measures of environmental DNA in singleplex and multiplex reactions. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254356 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mata, V. A. et al. How much is enough? Effects of technical and biological replication on metabarcoding dietary analysis. Mol. Ecol. 28, 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14779 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sint, D., Guenay, Y., Mayer, R., Traugott, M. & Wallinger, C. The effect of plant identity and mixed feeding on the detection of seed DNA in regurgitates of carabid beetles. Ecol. Evol. 8, 10834–10846. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4536 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nielsen, J. M., Clare, E. L., Hayden, B., Brett, M. T. & Kratina, P. Diet tracing in ecology: Method comparison and selection. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, 278–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12869 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Schrader, C., Schielke, A., Ellerbroek, L. & Johne, R. PCR inhibitors—Occurrence, properties and removal. J. Appl. Microbiol. 113, 1014–1026. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05384.x (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Juen, A. & Traugott, M. Amplification facilitators and multiplex PCR: Tools to overcome PCR-inhibition in DNA-gut-content analysis of soil-living invertebrates. Soil Biol. Biochem. 38, 1872–1879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.11.034 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wallinger, C. et al. Evaluation of an automated protocol for efficient and reliable DNA extraction of dietary samples. Ecol. Evol. 7, 6382–6389. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3197 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Marotz, C. et al. DNA extraction for streamlined metagenomics of diverse environmental samples. Biotechniques 62, 290–293. https://doi.org/10.2144/000114559 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dingle, T. C., Sedlak, R. H., Cook, L. & Jerome, K. R. Tolerance of droplet-digital PCR vs real-time quantitative PCR to inhibitory substances. Clin. Chem. 59, 1670–1672. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2013.211045 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Racki, N., Dreo, T., Gutierrez-Aguirre, I., Blejec, A. & Ravnikar, M. Reverse transcriptase droplet digital PCR shows high resilience to PCR inhibitors from plant, soil and water samples. Plant Methods https://doi.org/10.1186/s13007-014-0042-6 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Juen, A. & Traugott, M. Detecting predation and scavenging by DNA gut-content analysis: A case study using a soil insect predator-prey system. Oecologia 142, 344–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1736-7 (2005).Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar 
Lundgren, J. G. & Lehman, M. Bacterial gut symbionts contribute to seed digestion in an omnivorous beetle. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010831 (2010).Article 

Google Scholar 
Waldner, T. & Traugott, M. DNA-based analysis of regurgitates: A noninvasive approach to examine the diet of invertebrate consumers. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 12, 669–675. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2012.03135.x (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kamenova, S. et al. Comparing three types of dietary samples for prey DNA decay in an insect generalist predator. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 18, 966–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12775 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cheeseman, M. T. & Pritchard, G. Spatial organization of digestive processes in an adult carabid beetle, Scaphinotus marginatus (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Can. J. Zool. 62, 1200–1203. https://doi.org/10.1139/z84-173 (1984).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunderland, K. D. Diet of some predatory arthropods in cereal crops. J. Appl. Ecol. 12, 507–515. https://doi.org/10.2307/2402171 (1975).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sunderland, K. D., Lovei, G. L. & Fenlon, J. Diets and reproductive phenologies of the introduced ground beetles Harpalus affinis and Clivina australasiae (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in New Zealand. Aust. J. Zool. 43, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1071/zo9950039 (1995).Article 

Google Scholar 
Deagle, B. E. & Tollit, D. J. Quantitative analysis of prey DNA in pinniped faeces: Potential to estimate diet composition?. Conserv. Genet. 8, 743–747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9197-7 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Snider, A. M., Bonisoli-Alquati, A., Perez-Umphrey, A. A., Stouffer, P. C. & Taylor, S. S. Metabarcoding of stomach contents and fecal samples provide similar insights about Seaside Sparrow diet. Ornithol. Appl. https://doi.org/10.1093/ornithapp/duab060 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Paula, D. P., Timbo, R. V., Togawa, R. C., Vogler, A. P. & Andow, D. A. Quantitative prey species detection in predator guts across multiple trophic levels by mapping unassembled shotgun reads. Mol Ecol Resour 23, 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13690 (2023).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Elbrecht, V. & Leese, F. Can DNA-based ecosystem assessments quantify species abundance? Testing primer bias and biomass-sequence relationships with an innovative metabarcoding protocol. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130324 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Krehenwinkel, H. et al. Estimating and mitigating amplification bias in qualitative and quantitative arthropod metabarcoding. Sci. Rep. 7, 17668. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17333-x (2017).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Piñol, J., San Andrés, V., Clare, E. L., Mir, G. & Symondson, W. O. C. A pragmatic approach to the analysis of diets of generalist predators: The use of next-generation sequencing with no blocking probes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 14, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12156 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Baksay, S. et al. Experimental quantification of pollen with DNA metabarcoding using ITS1 and trnL. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61198-6 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Valentini, A. et al. New perspectives in diet analysis based on DNA barcoding and parallel pyrosequencing: The trnL approach. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 9, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02352.x (2009).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Murray, D. C. et al. DNA-based faecal dietary analysis: A comparison of qPCR and high throughput sequencing approaches. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025776 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hansen, B. K. et al. From DNA to biomass: Opportunities and challenges in species quantification of bulk fisheries products. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 77, 2557–2566. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa115 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pawluczyk, M. et al. Quantitative evaluation of bias in PCR amplification and next-generation sequencing derived from metabarcoding samples. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 407, 1841–1848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-014-8435-y (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Piñol, J., Mir, G., Gomez-Polo, P. & Agusti, N. Universal and blocking primer mismatches limit the use of high-throughput DNA sequencing for the quantitative metabarcoding of arthropods. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 15, 819–830. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12355 (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Czernik, M. et al. Fast and efficient DNA-based method for winter diet analysis from stools of three cervids: Moose, red deer, and roe deer. Acta Theriol. 58, 379–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13364-013-0146-9 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Richardson, R. T. et al. Quantitative multi-locus metabarcoding and waggle dance interpretation reveal honey bee spring foraging patterns in Midwest agroecosystems. Mol. Ecol. 28, 686–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14975 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Taberlet, P. et al. Power and limitations of the chloroplast trnL (UAA) intron for plant DNA barcoding. Nucleic Acids Res. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl938 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Briem, F. et al. Identifying plant DNA in the sponging-feeding insect pest Drosophila suzukii. J. Pest. Sci. 91, 985–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-018-0963-3 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Frei, B., Guenay, Y., Bohan, D. A., Traugott, M. & Wallinger, C. Molecular analysis indicates high levels of carabid weed seed consumption in cereal fields across Central Europe. J. Pest. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-019-01109-5 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Luff, M. L. The biology of the ground beetle Harpalus rufipes in a strawberry field in Northumberland. Ann. Appl. Biol. 94, 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1980.tb03907.x (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
Illumina. Effects of index Misassignment on multiplexing and downstream analysis. https://www.illumina.com/content/dam/illumina-marketing/documents/products/whitepapers/index-hopping-white-paper-770-2017-004.pdf?linkId=36607862 accessed 2022-11-10 (2018).Guenay-Greunke, Y., Bohan, D. A., Traugott, M. & Wallinger, C. Handling of targeted amplicon sequencing data focusing on index hopping and demultiplexing using a nested metabarcoding approach in ecology. Sci. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98018-4 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Staudacher, K., Wallinger, C., Schallhart, N. & Traugott, M. Detecting ingested plant DNA in soil-living insect larvae. Soil Biol. Biochem. 43, 346–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.10.022 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Espunyes, J. et al. Comparing the accuracy of PCR-capillary electrophoresis and cuticle microhistological analysis for assessing diet composition in ungulates: A case study with Pyrenean chamois. PLoS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216345 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Wallinger, C. et al. Detection of seed DNA in regurgitates of granivorous carabid beetles. Bull. Entomol. Res. 105, 728–735. https://doi.org/10.1017/s000748531500067x (2015).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Taberlet, P., Gielly, L., Pautou, G. & Bouvet, J. Universal primers for amplification of 3 noncoding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Mol. Biol. 17, 1105–1109. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00037152 (1991).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
FastQC: A Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data [Online]. (2010).Danecek, P. et al. Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools. Gigascience https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giab008 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. Next Gener. Seq. Data Anal. https://doi.org/10.14806/ej.17.1.200 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Edgar, R. C. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics 26, 2460–2461. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq461 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Camacho, C. et al. BLAST plus: Architecture and applications. BMC Bioinform. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 (2009).Article 

Google Scholar 
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2018).Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. (Springer, 2016).Arnold, J. B. ggthemes: Extra Themes, Scales and Geoms for ‘ggplot2’. R package version 4.2.0 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggthemes (2019).Hebbali, A. olsrr: Tools for Building OLS Regression Models. R package version 0.5.3. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=olsrr (2020).Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. An {R} Companion to Applied Regression. 2nd ed. (Sage, 2011).Zeileis, A. & Hothorn, T. Diagnostic checking in regression relationships. R News 2, 7–10 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Zeileis, A. Econometric computing with HC and HAC covariance matrix estimators. J. Stat. Softw. 11, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v011.i10 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zeileis, A., Köll, S. & Graham, N. Various versatile variances: An object-oriented implementation of clustered covariances in {R}. J. Stat. Softw. 95, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v095.i01 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions v. R package version 1.3-28 (2021).Davison, A. C. & Hinkley, D. V. Bootstrap Methods and Their Applications. (Cambridge University Press, 1997). More

Analysis of FTIRUnderstanding the functional groups involved in the biosorption of toxic metals is essential to elucidate the mechanism of this process. Groups such as carboxylic, hydroxyl and amine are among the main responsible for the absorption of metals by cellulose34 In the Fig. 1, show the FTIR of ECx.Figure 1FTIR of ECx before and after of adsorptions of Cr (VI).Full size imageAccording to13 the bandwidth at 3000–3600 cm−1 corresponds to bonds related to the -OH group. These hydrogen bonds are useful tools for cation exchange with heavy metals. This evidenced in the color spectrum (dark green) that represents an ECx sample with attached Cr (VI) after the adsorption process, where the stretching of the (OH) group lost part of its extension. The change observed in the peak from 3420 cm−1 of ECx to 3440 cm−1 in ECx-Cr indicates that these groups have a participation in the bond with the Cr (VI) ions. The variation of bands in the peak of the amines after adsorption confirms the participation of these groups in the adsorption process. This result confirmed by the ion exchange evaluation experiment discussed later in section SEM–EDX.The change in peak 3280, after Cr (VI) adsorption, indicates that EC removed Cr (VI) based on interaction with (OH), part of (OH) lost due to formation of vibrations of ascension O–Cr. Also, after Cr (VI) biosorption on ECx, the peak of the EC-S group is shifted to 590. This can be explained by surface complexation or ion exchange35.In general, comparable results reported in the literature for cellulose in the absorption of other toxic metals, as for other cellulose-derived biosorbentes in the removal of Cr (VI) ions36.One way to corroborate the information presented in the FTIR measurements is through SEM images since with these images it is possible to observe the distribution of the reagents in the ECx biomass treatment and subsequently the Cr (VI) adsorption process.SEM–EDXFigure 2 shows the micrographs obtained for the biomass before (a) the adsorption of Cr (VI), in addition to showing the distribution of the different biomass chemical modifications in (b) and in (c) it shows the distribution of chromium around all biomasses.Figure 2Biomass before (a) Cr (VI) adsorption, biomass chemical modifications in (b) and shows the distribution of chromium around the whole biomass (c).Full size imageFrom Fig. 2a, it can see that the biomass has a very irregular rough surface, with macropores and cracks. Many of these irregularities may associated with damage caused by the delignification process of E. crassipes cellulose with NaOH14. In Fig. 2b it is possible to visualize the components of the cellulose xanthogenate, coming from sodium, distributed throughout the biomass, a result like that reported in other studies35 The colored dots represent the elements in the samples, green dots represent carbon, red dots represent oxygen, and yellow dots represent the places where sodium lodged.Table 2 shows that, in addition to carbon and oxygen, the element with the greatest presence in the composition of pure waste is sodium and sulfur from the xanthogenate cellulose transformation process. Table 2 shows the physicochemical characterization of the ECx sample, through EDS.Table 2 Features of sample of ECx.Full size tableCellulose xanthogenate, is one of the cellulose transformations to improve the adsorption performance of heavy metals, this compound produced from dry and ground biomass, mixing with sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to remove lignin, creating alkaline biomass, then disulfide (CS2) added13,14. (CS2) reacts with hydratable hydroxycellulose, forming C-SNa complexes; these are responsible for the cation exchange with heavy metals. Metal ions enter the interior of E. crassipes with (CS2), exchanging with Na36,37.The SEM morphology of ECx and coupled with the high content of sulfides (7.3%) determined by the spectrum in Table 2, it further confirms that xanthate groups are successfully grafted onto the biomass of E. crassipes, and Fig. 3 represents this information based on13,36,37,38.Figure 3Prototype.Full size imageExchange biochemistry is usually identified as the main mechanism for the adsorption of metals in cellulose and its derivatives35 and through the evaluation of EDS this process could verify. Similar observations were made by36 where the adhesion of Cr (VI) in this biomass was observed. Also, in xanthogenate cellulose processes, the adhesion of Pb (II) to this type of biomass verified, concluding that this cellulose is important in the removal of heavy metals from water13.The SEM morphology of ECx with Cr (VI) coupled with the high content of sulfides determined by the spectrum in Table 3, was the determinate for the chemisorption’s of Cr (VI). The mechanism of Cr (VI) sorption by cellulose xanthate is:$$left[ {{4}left( {{text{C}}_{{6}} {text{H}}_{{{12}}} {text{O}}_{{6}} } right)} right]*{text{2CS}}_{{2}} {text{Na }} + {text{ Cr}}_{{2}} {text{O}}_{7}^{ – 2} to left{ {left[ {{4}left( {{text{C}}_{{6}} {text{H}}_{{5}} {text{O}}_{{6}} } right)} right] , *{text{2CS}}_{{2}} } right}*{mathbf{Cr}}_{{mathbf{2}}} + {text{Na}} + {text{7H}}_{{2}} {text{O}}$$where [4(C6H12O6)] *2CS2Na represents the xanthogenate biomass, and Cr2O7–2 represents the Cr (VI), that 4 parts of glucose xanthate react with the dichromate. In the Tables 3 and 4, the relationship between cellulose xanthogenate and Cr (VI), with related weights of 10.4 for Cr (VI).Table 3 Features of sample of ECx with Cr (VI).Full size tableTable 4 Researcher of process of the desorption.Full size tableMass balance in treatmentAdsorption is the phenomenon through which the removal of Cr (VI) achieved in the treatment systems; this quantified by means of the general balance equation of the treatment system as shown in Fig. 3.Adsorption is the phenomenon through which the removal of Cr (VI) achieved in treatment systems, this quantified by mass balance. Equation (1) shows the general balance of matter in the treatment system, together with the accumulation, inputs, and outputs of the system and the chemical process of adsorption.$${text{Acumulation }}upvarepsilon *frac{{partial {text{Cr}}left( {{text{VI}}} right)}}{{partial {text{t}}}} = {text{In}} frac{{partial {text{Cr}}left( {{text{VI}}} right)_{0} }}{{partial {text{t}}}} – {text{Out}}frac{{partial {text{Cr}}left( {{text{VI}}} right)}}{{partial {text{t}}}} – {text{Adsortion}},{rho b}frac{{partial {text{q}}}}{{partial {text{t}}}}$$
(1)
Accumulation represents by Eq. (1), where ∂C(VI) is the contaminant input to the treatment system, (ε) is the porosity of the bed, which calculated as the ratio between the density of the bed of treatment and the density of the microparticle of this biomass. This parameter must be above 0.548 achieved using particle diameters less than 0.212 mm, which favors contact between the contaminant and the particle49. The contaminant input to the treatment system represents by the design speed and the amount of contaminant that the system could treat. The output in the treatment system represents by the same input speed and the amount of contaminant that comes out. With these equations, the general material balance will be complete, summarized in Eq. (2), where it can see that the accumulation is equal to the input to the system, minus the output, and minus the adsorption.$$upvarepsilon *frac{{partial {text{Cr}}left( {{text{VI}}} right)}}{{partial {text{t}}}} = frac{{partial {text{Cr}} left( {{text{VI}}} right)}}{{partial {text{t}}}} – frac{{partial {text{Cr}} left( {{text{VI}}} right)}}{{partial {text{t}}}} – frac{{text{M}}}{{text{V}}}*frac{{partial {text{q}}}}{{partial {text{t}}}}$$
(2)
where V = System volume (ml), ε = Porosity, Co = Initial concentration of Cr (VI) (mg/ml), C = Final concentration Cr (VI) in the treated solution (mg/ml), Q = design flow (ml/min), Tb = Breaking time (Min), M = amount of biomass used (g), q = Adsorption capacity of the biomass used (mg/g).$${text{V}}*upvarepsilon *{text{Co}} = {text{Q}}*{text{Tb}}*{text{Co}} – {text{Q}}*{text{Tb}}*{text{C}} – {text{M}}*{text{q}}$$
(3)
Depending on the most important parameters when building a treatment system, Eq. (3) could use to model and validate the best form of treatment, for example, the necessary amount of biomass to use to treat a certain amount of contaminant, in the present investigation it used to establish the adsorption capacity in these initial treatment conditions. The remaining Eq. (4) determines the adsorption capacity.$${text{q}} = frac{{{text{QTbCo}}}}{{text{M}}} – frac{{{text{QTbCf}}}}{{text{M}}} – frac{{upvarepsilon {text{VCo}}}}{{text{M}}}$$
(4)
Adsorption capacity is generally taken through Eq. (5) for both batch and continuous experiments20,21But unlike Eqs. (5), (4) takes into account design variables such as flow rate (Q), rupture time (Tb), particle bed porosity ε, and vessel design volume (v).$${text{q}} = frac{{{text{v}}left( {{text{Co}} – {text{C}}} right)}}{{text{m }}}$$
(5)
where m: Mass used in the treatment, V: Volume, Co: Initial concentration, C: Final Concentration, Q: adsorption capacity.However, unlike Eqs. (5),  (4) considers the design variables such as flow rate (Q), rupture time (Tb), particle bed porosity ε and vessel design volume (v).When a desorption-elution process is involved for the reuse of biomass, Eq. (4) would be:$${text{q}}_{{text{T}}} = mathop sum limits_{j = 1}^{n} left[ {frac{{{text{QTbjCo}}}}{{text{M}}} – frac{{{text{QTbjCj}}}}{{text{M}}} – frac{{upvarepsilon {text{VCo}}}}{{text{M}}}} right]$$
(6)
where Q = design flow (ml/min), Tbj = Break time of use number j (Min), Co = Initial concentration of Cr (VI) (mg/ml), C = Final concentration Cr (VI) in the treated solution (mg/ml), V = System volume (ml), ε = Porosity, M = amount of biomass used (g), q_T = Total adsorption capacity of the biomass used (mg/g).This model (6) is design to determine the adsorption capacity when different elution processes have conducted, it will used to determine the new adsorption capacity and is one of the contributions of the present investigation.Result process of adsorptionsIn Fig. 4 shows the Cr (VI) adsorption process of the system.Figure 4Percentages of Cr (VI) removal the system for ECx.Full size imageVarious researchers have extensively studied the influence of factors such as bed height, flow rate and metal inlet concentration on rupture (Tb) curves. For example, the influence and similarity of the initial contaminant concentrations should be reflected as in the case of a tannery, with initial concentrations of 600 mg/l. Figure 4 shows the progress curves obtained for the study of Cr (VI) removal by the studied biomasses, reflecting the percentage of Cr (VI) removal in contrast to the treated volume, which is a very important parameter to time to scale the process.Regarding the effect of the input concentration, it can see in Fig. 5 that the breakpoint had a better performance in all the initial concentrations in the ECx biomass. comparing it with the EC-Na biomass (see Fig. 5), always obtaining breakpoints with more treated volume.Figure 5Percentages of Cr (VI) removal the system for EC-Na.Full size imageThe difference between the rupture curves between ECx and EC-Na indicates that the cellulose xanthate modification scheme should completed, although it can also elucidate that the EC-Na biomass has high yields compared to other biomass studied. for example, in Ref.34 investigate the biomass of E. crassipes without modifying, having removals below this alkaline cellulose.Adsorption capacitiesThrough Eq. (3), the adsorption capacity of ECx, using the initial concentration of 600 mg/l, since it was the maximum concentration used.The break point was around 1200 ml according to Fig. 6 and together with the flow rate of 15 ml/min; the break time obtained in 80 min.$${text{q}} = frac{{80{*}15{*}0.6}}{40} – frac{{80{*}15{*}0.04}}{40} – frac{{0.66{*}78{*}0.6}}{40}$$q: Adsorption capacity, Co: 0.6 mg/ml, C: 0.06 mg/ml, M: 40 g, Tb: rupture time 80 min, Q: 15 Flow rate ml/min, ε: 0.6649, V: Occupied volume: 70 ml.Figure 6Adsorption capacities in the different adsorption processes in the biomass ECx.Full size imageA result of 16 mg/g obtained in this continuous study for the biomass ECx. With this same equation it gives the capacity of the biomass EC-Na, with 11 mg/g.Desorption-Elution and reuseThrough Eq. (6), the sum of the Cr (VI) adsorption capacities established, after different biomass reuses due to EDTA elution. In the second treatment process, it yielded the following results under concentrations of 6 g/l of EDTA.$${text{q}}left( {text{T}} right) = frac{{60{*}15{*}0.6}}{40} – frac{{50{*}15{*}0.06}}{40} – frac{{0.66{*}68{*}0.6}}{40}$$Co: 0.6 mg/ml, C: 0.06 mg/ml, M: 45 g Biomass eluted with EDTA, Tb: rupture time: 60 min, Q: 15 Flow ml/min, ε: 0.6649, V: Occupied volume: 68 ml, q: 10 mg/g.Five Cr (VI) adsorption cycles performed using ECx and EC-Na cellulose in a continuous system to evaluate the regeneration and reuse potential. Between each biosorption cycle, a desorption cycle performed using three different concentrations of EDTA eluent.According to Figs. 6 and 7, although the adsorption capacity gradually decreases from the first adsorption process, it could consider that it is a satisfactory biomass recycling process and a design parameter for later stages of this treatment system.Figure 7Adsorption capacities in the different adsorption processes in the biomass EC-Na.Full size imageIn the experiments with concentrations of 6 g/l, five reuse processes obtained, obtaining a final sum of 52 mg/g. In concentrations of 3 g/l of EDTA, final capacities of 51 mg/g obtained lower than concentrations of 6 g/l but with half of this reagent. With concentrations of 1 g/l, final capacities of 33 mg/g obtained.The desorption processes of the EC-Na biomass with initial capacities of 11 mg/g were also evaluated and through desorption processes with EDTA of 3 g/l this biomass recycled on 5 occasions, reaching 32 mg/l in capacities of adsorption and like the EC-Na biomass, the ideal concentration in the process for desorption processes is 3 g/l, due to the considerable increase in reuse processes and low concentration compared to 6 g/l, which, although higher, does not this value is significant in the absorption capacity.Through Eq. (6) and with different bibliographic references, representative data obtained to feed this equation, determining the capacities of each of these biomasses together with the new capacities determining the desorption power of the different eluents shown and summarized in Table 4.For the EDTA eluent and with Eq. (6), satisfactory results evidenced by removing Al (II), reaching almost 150% of its adsorption capacity, corroborating what presented in the present investigation, also the EDTA reagent obtained interesting yields to recycle the cassava biomass increasing up to 40 mg/g. In Ref.39 used the biomass of Phanera vahlii to remove Cr (VI) obtaining results of 30 mg/g and with NaOH they reached capacities in the reuse process of this biomass up to 62 mg/g, reaching almost double of its total capacity41, also used NaOH for desorption processes with green synthesized nanocrystalline chlorapatite biomass, achieving results of 75% more. The eluent HCl is also a good chemical agent to use in desorption processes since it reached more than 100% in the reuse of biochar alginate for Cr (VI) but not so significant with biomass A. barbadensis Miller to remove Ni (II) and in40 significant results were also obtained to remove Pb (II) with pine cone Shell biomass. With the chemical agent HNO3, interesting contaminant recycling processes obtained, since more than 100% of the adsorption capacity of the biomasses used in this process used1,45.Mathematical models of adsorptionIn general, the models presented R2 greater than 0.95 for the adjustment of all the advance curves, which indicates a good adherence to the data, the model that best describes the behavior of the ECx system was the phenomenological model Thomas, which presented all the R2 values above 0.99.This model could use for the extension of the Cr (VI) ion biosorption system using cellulose xanthogenate, in the literature it is possible to observe that this model often tends to better adapt to the experimental data of the adsorption systems that use cellulose for the absorption of toxic metals28,30,31.With qt values remarkably close to the experimental values of Eq. (4) designed and presented in this investigation, indicating the validity of this equation where it reflects the maximum capacity obtained. Table 5 shows the adsorption constant of the Thomas model (Kt), which corresponds to the adsorption rate of Cr (VI) in the biomass49 This value was 0.048 (ml/mg*min) reflecting the speed with which Cr (VI) is chemisorbed in the biomass of ECx, in the EC-Na cellulose there was a Thomas model speed of 0.039 (ml/ mg*min) evidencing a lower adsorption rate than ECx. In the adsorption of Cr (VI) by rice biomass, the Thomas constant is 0.1 (ml/mg*min)47,50 also in the adsorption of Cr (VI) by biomass. Nanocrystalline chlorapatite biomass obtained at the Thomas constant 0.013 (ml/mg*min)49.Table 5 Summary of the experiments obtained with material ECx.Full size tableIn the Table 6, it presents summary of the experiments obtained with material EC-Na.Table 6 Summary of the experiments obtained with material EC-Na.Full size tableThe Cr (VI) adsorption process in the EC-Na biomass represented through the Bohart equation, since the sorption rate is proportional to the biomass capacity, obtaining an adsorption rate of 0.85(ml/mg*min). Having an alkalized biomass represents this model due to the homogeneity of this adsorbent.Mathematical models in desorption processesThe continuous desorption process with its fit to the Thomas model for biomass ECx always shows the fit of this model with significance, because this type of model fits representatively to desorption processes with good performance32,51 It can also verify that with values of qt it is close to the experimental values of Eq. (6) designed and presented in this research, indicating the validity of this equation again, where it reflects the maximum capacity obtained.In the Table 7. Show Summary of the experiments obtained with material ECx in process of desorption’s.Table 7 Summary of the experiments obtained with material ECx in process of desorption’s.Full size tableIn the Table 8 the EC-Na biomass had a different behavior and in its second and third cycle it adjusted to the Yoon model and later to the Bohart model.Table 8 Summary of the experiments obtained with material EC-Na in process of desorption’s.Full size tableThis behavior is due to the alkalinization of the biomass and this process makes the biomass a little more unstable. The values of qt, although a resemblance evidenced, were not so representative due to the little adjustment that there was with respect to the Thomas model. More

Eilers, E. J., Kremen, C., Smith Greenleaf, S., Garber, A. K. & Klein, A. M. Contribution of pollinator-mediated crops to nutrients in the human food supply. PLoS ONE 6, 21363 (2011).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Williams, P. H. The dependence of crop pollination within the European Union on pollination by honey bees. Agric. Zool. Rev. 6, 229–257 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Burd, M. Bateman’s principle and plant reproduction: the role of pollen limitation in fruit and seed set. Bot. Rev. 60, 83–139 (1994).MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
Aguilar, R., Ashworth, L., Galetto, L. & Aizen, M. A. Plant reproductive susceptibility to habitat fragmentation: Review and synthesis through a meta-analysis. Ecol. Lett. 9, 968–980 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Potts, S. G. et al. Declines of managed honey bees and beekeepers in Europe. J. Apic. Res. 49, 15–22 (2010).
Google Scholar 
van Engelsdorp, D., Hayes, J., Underwood, R. M. & Pettis, J. A survey of honey bee colony losses in the U.S., fall 2007 to spring 2008. PLoS ONE 3, e4071 (2008).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Aizen, M. A. & Harder, L. D. The global stock of domesticated honey bees is growing slower than agricultural demand for pollination. Curr. Biol. 19, 915–918 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Van Engelsdorp, D. et al. Colony collapse disorder: A descriptive study. PLoS ONE 4, e6481 (2009).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Genersch, E. American foulbrood in honeybees and its causative agent, Paenibacillus larvae. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 103(suppl 1), 10–19 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Graystock, P., Yates, K., Darvill, B., Goulson, D. & Hughes, W. O. H. Emerging dangers: Deadly effects of an emergent parasite in a new pollinator host. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 114, 114–119 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Insolia, L. et al. Honey bee colony loss linked to parasites, pesticides and extreme weather across the United States. Sci. Rep. 12(1), 20787. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24946-4 (2022).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sanchez-Bayo, F. & Goka, K. Pesticide residues and bees: A risk assessment. PLoS ONE 9(4), e94482 (2014).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Bolognesi, C. & Merlo, F. D. Pesticides: Human health effects. Encyclop. Environ. Health 1, 438–453 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Mullin, C. A. et al. High levels of miticides and agrochemicals in North American apiaries: Implications for honey bee health. PLoS ONE 1, e9754 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Calatayud-Vernich, P., Calatayud, F., Simó, E. & Picó, Y. Pesticide residues in honey bees, pollen and beeswax: Assessing beehive exposure. Environ. Pollut. 241, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.062 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Woodcock, B. A. et al. Impacts of neonicotinoid use on long-term population changes in wild bees in England. Nat. Commun. 2016(7), 12459 (2016).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Zhao, H. et al. Review on effects of some insecticides on honey bee health. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 188, 105219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2022.105219 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ludicke, J. C. & Nieh, J. C. Thiamethoxam impairs honey bee visual learning, alters decision times, and increases abnormal behaviors. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 193, 110367 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tison, L., Duer, A., Púčiková, V., Greggers, U. & Menzel, R. Detrimental effects of clothianidin on foraging and dance communication in honey bees. PLoS ONE 15(10), e0241134 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fent, K., Schmid, M. & Christen, V. Global transcriptome analysis reveals relevant effects at environmental concentrations of cypermethrin in honey bees (Apis mellifera). Environ. Pollut. 259, 113715 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Christen, V., Krebs, J., Bünter, I. & Fent, K. Biopesticide spinosad induces transcriptional alterations in genes associated with energy production in honey bees (Apis mellifera) at sublethal concentrations. J. Hazard. Mater. 378, 120736 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Christen, V., Krebs, J. & Fent, K. Fungicides chlorothanolin, azoxystrobin and folpet induce transcriptional alterations in genes encoding enzymes involved in oxidative phosphorylation and metabolism in honey bees (Apis mellifera) at sublethal concentrations. J. Hazard. Mater. 377, 215–226 (2019).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Fent, K., Haltiner, T., Kunz, P. & Christen, V. Insecticides cause transcriptional alterations of endocrine related genes in the brain of honey bee foragers. Chemosphere 260, 127542 (2020).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Christen, V., Grossar, D., Charrière, J. D., Eyer, M. & Jeker, L. Correlation between increased homing flight duration and altered gene expression in the brain of honey bee foragers after acute oral exposure to thiacloprid and thiamethoxam. Insect Sci. 1, 1–15 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Mao, W., Schuler, M. A. & Berenbaum, M. R. Disruption of quercetin metabolism by fungicide affects energy production in honey bees (Apis mellifera). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(10), 2538–2543 (2017).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Christen, V., Kunz, P. Y. & Fent, K. Endocrine disruption and chronic effects of plant protection products in bees: Can we better protect our pollinators?. Environ. Pollut. 243(Pt B), 1588–1601 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Testai, E., Buratti, F. & Di Consiglio, E. Chlorpyrifos Hayes’ Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology 1505–1526 (Academic Press, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Eastmond, D. & Balakrishnan, S. Genotoxicity of Pesticides Hayes’ Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology 357–380 (Academic Press, 2010).
Google Scholar 
Urlacher, E. et al. Measurements of chlorpyrifos levels in forager bees and comparison with levels that disrupt honey bee odor-mediated learning under laboratory conditions. J. Chem. Ecol. 42(2), 127–138 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Li, Z. et al. Effects of sublethal concentrations of chlorpyrifos on olfactory learning and memory performances in two bee species, Apis mellifera and Apis cerana. Sociobiology 64, 174 (2017).
Google Scholar 
DeGrandi-Hoffman, G., Chen, Y. & Simonds, R. The effects of pesticides on queen rearing and virus titers in honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Insects 4, 71–89 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Cutler, G. C., Purdy, J., Giesy, J. P. & Solomon, K. R. Risk to pollinators from the use of chlorpyrifos in the United States. In Ecological Risk Assessment for Chlorpyrifos in Terrestrial and Aquatic Systems in the United States Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology (eds Giesy, J. & Solomon, K.) (Springer, 2014).
Google Scholar 
Christen, V. & Fent, K. Exposure of honey bees (Apis mellifera) to different classes of insecticides exhibit distinct molecular effect patterns at concentrations that mimic environmental contamination. Environ. Pollut. 226, 48–59 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stevenson, J. H. The acute toxicity of unformulated pesticides to worker honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Plant Pathol. 27, 38–40 (1978).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bartlett, D. W. et al. The strobilurin fungicides. Pest. Manag. Sci. 58, 649–662 (2002).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ostiguy, N. et al. Honey bee exposure to pesticides: A four-year nationwide study. Insects. 10, 13 (2019).
Google Scholar 
Inoue, L. V. B., Domingues, C. E. C., Gregorc, A., Silva-Zacarin, E. C. M. & Malaspina, O. Harmful effects of pyraclostrobin on the fat body and pericardial cells of foragers of africanized honey bee. Toxics 10, 530. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10090530 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nicodemo, D. et al. Mitochondrial respiratory inhibition promoted by pyraclostrobin in fungi is also observed in honey bees. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 39, 1267–1272 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Domingues, C. E. C., Inoue, L. V. B., Silva-Zacarin, E. C. M. & Malaspina, O. Foragers of Africanized honeybee are more sensitive to fungicide pyraclostrobin than newly emerged bees. Environ. Pollut. 266, 115267 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Tadei, R. et al. Late effect of larval co-exposure to the insecticide clothianidin and fungicide pyraclostrobin in Africanized Apis mellifera. Sci. Rep 9, 3277 (2019).ADS 

Google Scholar 
Zioga, E., Kelly, R., White, B. & Stout, J. C. Plant protection product residues in plant pollen and nectar: A review of current knowledge. Environ. Res. 189, 109873 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Corona, M. et al. Vitellogenin, juvenile hormone, insulin signaling, and queen honey bee longevity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 7128–7133 (2007).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Winston, M. L. The Biology of the Honey Bee (Harvard University Press, 1987).
Google Scholar 
Ueno, T., Nakaoka, T., Takeuchi, H. & Kubo, T. Differential gene expression in the hypopharyngeal glands of worker honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) associated with an age-dependent role change. Zool. Sci. 8, 557–563 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Kubo, T. et al. Change in the expression of hypopharyngealgland proteins of the worker honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) with age and/or role. J. Biochem. 119, 291–295 (1996).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ohashi, K., Sawata, M., Takeuchi, H., Natori, S. & Kubo, T. Molecular cloning of cDNA and analysis of expression of the gene for alpha-glucosidase from the hypopharyngeal gland of the honeybee Apis mellifera L. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 221, 380–385 (1996).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ohashi, K., Natori, S. & Kubo, T. Expression of amylase and glucose oxidase in the hypopharyngeal gland with an age dependent role change of the worker honeybee (Apis mellifera L.). Eur. J. Biochem. 265, 127–133 (1999).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Chanchao, C., Padoongsupalai, R. & Sangvanich, P. Expression and characterization of α-glucosidase III in the dwarf honeybee, Apis florea (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Apidae). Insect Sci. 14(4), 283–293 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Corby-Harris, V. & Snyder, L. A. Measuring hypopharyngeal gland acinus size in honey bee (Apis mellifera) Workers. J. Vis. Exp. 139, 58261 (2018).
Google Scholar 
Yamada, T. & Yamada, K. Comparison of long-term changes in size and longevity of bee colonies in mid-west Japan and Maui with and without exposure to pesticide, cold winters, and mites. PeerJ 8, e9505 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Rinkevich, F. D. et al. Genetics, synergists, and age affect insecticide sensitivity of the honey bee, Apis mellifera. PLoS ONE 10(10), e0139841 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Weidenmüller, A. The control of nest climate in bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) colonies: Interindividual variability and self reinforcement in fanning response. Behav. Ecol. 15(1), 120–128 (2004).MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
Flatt, T., Tu, M. P. & Tatar, M. Hormonal pleiotropy and the juvenile hormone regulation of Drosophila development and life history. BioEssays 27, 999–1010 (2005).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wu, M. C., Chang, Y. W., Lu, K. H. & Yang, E. C. Gene expression changes in honey bees induced by sublethal imidacloprid exposure during the larval stage. Insect. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 88, 12–20 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ament, S. A., Corona, M., Pollock, H. S. & Robinson, G. E. Insulin signaling is involved in the regulation of worker division of labor in honey bee colonies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 4226–4231 (2008).ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nicodemo, D. et al. Fipronil and imidacloprid reduce honeybee mitochondrial activity. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 33(9), 2070–2075 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Syromyatnikov, M. Y., Lopatin, A. V., Starkov, A. A. & Popov, V. N. Isolation and properties of flight muscle mitochondria of the bumblebee Bombus terrestris (L.). Biochemistry 78(8), 909–914 (2013).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dayer, F. C. Coadaptation of colony design and worker performance in honeybees. In Diversity in the Genus Apis (ed. Smith, D. R.) 2133–2245 (Westview Press, 1991).
Google Scholar 
Simon-Delso, N., Amaral-Rogers, V. & Belzunces, L. P. Systemic insecticides (neonicotinoids and fipronil): Trends, uses, mode of action and metabolites. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 22, 5–34 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Evans, J. D. et al. Immune pathways and defence mechanisms in honey bees Apis mellifera. Insect. Mol. Biol. 5, 645–656 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Pankiw, T. & Page, R. E. Response thresholds to sucrose predict foraging division of labor in honeybees. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 47, 265–267 (2000).
Google Scholar  More

Bay, R. A. et al. Genetic coupling of female mate choice with polygenic ecological divergence facilitates stickleback speciation. Curr. Biol. 27, 3344–3349 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Johannesson, K., Butlin, R. K., Panova, M. & Westram, A. M. Population Genomics: Marine Organisms (eds. Oleksiak, M. F. & Rajora, O. P.) 277–301 (Springer, 2017).Riesch, R. et al. Transitions between phases of genomic differentiation during stick-insect speciation. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1–13 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Feder, J. L. & Nosil, P. The efficacy of divergence hitchhiking in generating genomic islands during ecological speciation. Evolution 64, 1729–1747 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Rosenblum, E. B., Hickerson, M. J. & Moritz, C. A multilocus perspective on colonization accompanied by selection and gene flow. Evolution 61, 2971–2985 (2007).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Nosil, P., Egan, S. P. & Funk, D. J. Heterogeneous genomic differentiation between walking‐stick ecotypes: “isolation by adaptation” and multiple roles for divergent selection. Evolution 62, 316–336 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Orsini, L., Vanoverbeke, J., Swillen, I., Mergeay, J. & Meester, L. Drivers of population genetic differentiation in the wild: isolation by dispersal limitation, isolation by adaptation and isolation by colonization. Mol. Ecol. 22, 5983–5999 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Sexton, J. P., Hangartner, S. B. & Hoffmann, A. A. Genetic isolation by environment or distance: which pattern of gene flow is most common? Evolution 68, 1–15 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Roderick, G. K. & Gillespie, R. G. Speciation and phylogeography of Hawaiian terrestrial arthropods. Mol. Ecol. 7, 519–531 (1998).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Juan, C., Emerson, B. C., Oromı́, P. & Hewitt, G. M. Colonization and diversification: towards a phylogeographic synthesis for the Canary Islands. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 104–109 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brown, R. P., Hoskisson, P. A., Welton, J. H. & Báez, M. Geological history and within‐island diversity: a debris avalanche and the Tenerife lizard Gallotia galloti. Mol. Ecol. 15, 3631–3640 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Connell, K. A., Prates, I., Scheinberg, L. A., Mulder, K. P. & Bell, R. C. Speciation and secondary contact in a fossorial island endemic, the São Tomé caecilian. Mol. Ecol. 30, 2859–2871 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Malhotra, A. & Thorpe, R. S. The dynamics of natural selection and vicariance in the Dominican anole: patterns of within‐island molecular and morphological divergence. Evolution 54, 245–258 (2000).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brown, R. P., Woods, M. & Thorpe, R. S. Historical volcanism and within-island genetic divergence in the Tenerife skink (Chalcides viridanus). Biol. J. Linnean Soc. 122, 166–175 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Losos, J. Lizards in an Evolutionary Tree: Ecology and Adaptive Radiation of Anoles (University of California Press, 2009).Mahler, D. L., Revell, L. J., Glor, R. E. & Losos, J. B. Ecological opportunity and the rate of morphological evolution in the diversification of Greater Antillean anoles. Evolution 64, 2731–2745 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Wang, I. J., Glor, R. E. & Losos, J. B. Quantifying the roles of ecology and geography in spatial genetic divergence. Ecol. Lett. 16, 175–182 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Beerli, P. & Felsenstein, J. Maximum-likelihood estimation of migration rates and effective population numbers in two populations using a coalescent approach. Genetics 152, 763–773 (1999).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hey, J. & Nielsen, R. Multilocus methods for estimating population sizes, migration rates and divergence time, with applications to the divergence of Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis. Genetics 167, 747–760 (2004).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hey, J. Recent advances in assessing gene flow between diverging populations and species. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 16, 592–596 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Excoffier, L., Dupanloup, I., Huerta-Sánchez, E., Sousa, V. C. & Foll, M. Robust demographic inference from genomic and SNP data. PLoS Genet. 9, 1003905 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Butlin, R. K. et al. Parallel evolution of local adaptation and reproductive isolation in the face of gene flow. Evolution 68, 935–949 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Rosenblum, E. B., Hoekstra, H. E. & Nachman, M. W. Adaptive reptile color variation and the evolution of the MCIR gene. Evolution 58, 1794–1808 (2004).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rosenblum, E. B. Convergent evolution and divergent selection: lizards at the White Sands ecotone. Am. Nat. 167, 1–15 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Sumner, F. B. An analysis of geographic variation in mice of the Peromyscus polionotus group from Florida and Alabama. J. Mammal. 7, 149–184 (1926).
Google Scholar 
Davenport, J., & Dellinger, T. Melanism and foraging behaviour in an intertidal population of the Madeiran lizard Podarcis (= Lacerta) dugesii (Milne-Edwards, 1829). Herpetol. J. 5, 200–203 (1995).
Google Scholar 
Galán, P. Demography and population dynamics of the lacertid lizard Podarcis bocagei in north-west Spain. J. Zool. 249, 203–218 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Censky, E. J., Hodge, K. & Dudley, J. Over-water dispersal of lizards due to hurricanes. Nature 395, 556 (1998).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rolán‐Alvarez, E., Erlandsson, J., Johannesson, K. & Cruz, R. Mechanisms of incomplete prezygotic reproductive isolation in an intertidal snail: testing behavioural models in wild populations. J. Evol. Biol. 12, 879–890 (1999).
Google Scholar 
Ludt, W. B. & Rocha, L. A. Shifting seas: the impacts of Pleistocene sea‐level fluctuations on the evolution of tropical marine taxa. J. Biogeogr. 42, 25–38 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Lambeck, K. Late Pleistocene, Holocene and present sea-levels: constraints on future change. Glob. Planet Change 3, 205–217 (1990). & J.
Google Scholar 
Rosenblum, E. B. The role of phenotypic plasticity in color variation of Tularosa Basin lizards. Copeia 2005, 586–596 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Jin, Y. et al. Dorsal pigmentation and its association with functional variation in MC1R in a lizard from different elevations on the Qinghai–Tibetan plateau. Genome Biol. Evol. 12, 2303–2313 (2020).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Corl, A. et al. The genetic basis of adaptation following plastic changes in coloration in a novel environment. Curr. Biol. 28, 2970–2977 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sacchi, R. et al. Genetic and phenotypic component in head shape of common wall lizard Podarcis muralis. Amphib.-Reptilia 37, 301–310 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Dice, L. R. Variation of the deer-mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) on the Sand Hills of Nebraska and adjacent areas. Contrib. Lab Vertebrate Biol. Univ. Mich. 15, 1–19 (1941).
Google Scholar 
Vitt, L. J., Caldwell, J. P., Zani, P. A. & Titus, T. A. The role of habitat shift in the evolution of lizard morphology: evidence from tropical Tropidurus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 3828–3832 (1997).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pfeifer, S. P. et al. The evolutionary history of Nebraska deer mice: local adaptation in the face of strong gene flow. Mol. Biol. Evol. 35, 792–806 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Scherrer, R., Donihue, C. M., Reynolds, R. G., Losos, J. B. & Geneva, A. J. Dewlap colour variation in Anolis sagrei is maintained among habitats within islands of the West Indies. J. Evol. Biol. 35, 680–692 (2022).
Google Scholar 
Janson, K. Selection and migration in two distinct phenotypes of Littorina saxatilis in Sweden. Oecologia 59, 58–61 (1983).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Richardson, J. L., Urban, M. C., Bolnick, D. I. & Skelly, D. K. Microgeographic adaptation and the spatial scale of evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 165–176 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Engelstoft, C., Robinson, J., Fraser, D. & Hanke, G. Recent rapid expansion of common wall lizards (Podarcis muralis) in British Columbia, Canada. Northwest. Naturalist 101, 50–55 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Cascio, P. L. & Pasta, S. Preliminary data on the biometry and the diet of a microinsular population of Podarcis wagleriana (Reptilia: Lacertidae). Acta Herpetol. 1, 147–152 (2006).
Google Scholar 
Janssen, J., Towns, D. R., Duxbury, M. & Heitkönig, I. M. Surviving in a semi-marine habitat: dietary salt exposure and salt secretion of a New Zealand intertidal skink. Comp. Biochem Physiol. A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 189, 21–29 (2015).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Grismer, L. L. Three new species of intertidal side-blotched lizards (genus Uta) from the Gulf of California, Mexico. Herpetologica 50, 451–474 (1994).
Google Scholar 
Sepúlveda, M., Sabat, P., Porter, W. P. & Fariña, J. M. One solution for two challenges: the lizard Microlophus atacamensis avoids overheating by foraging in intertidal shores. PLoS One 9, 97735 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Hobson, E. S. Observations on diving in the Galapagos marine iguana, Amblyrhynchus cristatus (Bell). Copeia 1965, 249–250 (1965).Balakrishna, S., Amdekar, M. S. & Thaker, M. Morphological divergence, tail loss, and predation risk in urban lizards. Urban Ecosyst. 24, 1391–1398 (2021).
Google Scholar 
Falvey, C. H., Aviles-Rodriguez, K. J., Hagey, T. J. & Winchell, K. M. The finer points of urban adaptation: intraspecific variation in lizard claw morphology. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 131, 304–318 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Marnocha, E., Pollinger, J. & Smith, T. B. Human‐induced morphological shifts in an island lizard. Evol. Appl 4, 388–396 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Rocha, R., Paixão, M. & Gouveia, R. Predation note: Anthus berthelotii madeirensis (Passeriformes: Motacillidae) catches Teira dugesii mauli (Squamata: Lacertidae) in Deserta Grande, Madeira Archipel. Herpetol. Notes 3, 77–78 (2010).
Google Scholar 
Völkl, W. & Brandl, R. Tail break rate in the Madeiran lizard (Podarcis dugesii). Amphibia-Reptilia 9, 213–218 (1988).Malhotra, A. & Thorpe, R. S. Microgeographic variation in Anolis oculatus, on the island of Dominica, West Indies. J. Evol. Biol. 4, 321–335 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Thorpe, R. S. & Brown, R. P. Microgeographic variation in the colour pattern of the lizard Gallotia galloti within the island of Tenerife: distribution, pattern and hypothesis testing. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 38, 303–322 (1989).
Google Scholar 
Brown, R. P., Thorpe, R. S. & Báez, M. Parallel within-island microevolution of lizards on neighbouring islands. Nature 352, 60–62 (1991).
Google Scholar 
Báez, M. & Brown, R. P. Testing multivariate patterns of within‐island differentiation in Podarcis dugesii from Madeira. J. Evol. Biol. 10, 575–587 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Cook, L. M. Density of lizards in Madeira. Bocagiana (Funchal) 66, 1–3 (1983).
Google Scholar 
Sadek, R. A. The diet of the Madeiran lizard Lacerta dugesii. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 73, 313–341 (1981).
Google Scholar 
Brehm, A. et al. Phylogeography of the Madeiran endemic lizard Lacerta dugesii inferred from mtDNA sequences. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 26, 222–230 (2003).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Suárez, N. M., Pestano, J. & Brown, R. P. Ecological divergence combined with ancient allopatry in lizard populations from a small volcanic island. Mol. Ecol. 23, 4799–4812 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Towns, D. R. Ecology of the black shore skink, Leiolopisma suteri (Lacertilia: Scincidae), in boulder beach habitats. N. Z. J. Zool. 2, 389–407 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Cook, L. M. Variation in the Madeiran lizard Lacerta dugesii. J. Zool. 187, 327–340 (1979).
Google Scholar 
Troscianko, J. & Stevens, M. Image calibration and analysis toolbox–a free software suite for objectively measuring reflectance, colour, and pattern. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 1320–1331 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rohlf, F. J. The tps series of software. Hystrix, Ital. J. Mammal. 26, 9–12 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Bookstein, F. L. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology (Cambridge University Press, 1991).Klingenberg, C. P. MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 11, 353–357 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Rohlf, F. J. & Slice, D. Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Syst. Biol. 39, 40–59 (1990).
Google Scholar 
Klingenberg, C. P., Barluenga, M. & Meyer, A. Shape analysis of symmetric structures: quantifying variation among individuals and asymmetry. Evolution 56, 1909–1920 (2002).
Google Scholar 
Andrews, S. FastQC: a Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. Babraham Bioinformatics version 0.11.7. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/ (2010).Melo, A. T., Bartaula, R. & Hale, I. GBS-SNP-CROP: a reference-optional pipeline for SNP discovery and plant germplasm characterization using variable length, paired-end genotyping-by-sequencing data. BMC Bioinform. 17, 1–15 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Sabadin, F., Carvalho, H. F., Galli, G. & Fritsche-Neto, R. Population-tailored mock genome enables genomic studies in species without a reference genome. Mol. Genet. Genom. 297, 33–46 (2022).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Danecek, P. et al. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27, 2156–2158 (2011).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pfeifer, B., Wittelsbürger, U., Ramos-Onsins, S. E. & Lercher, M. J. PopGenome: an efficient swiss army knife for population genomic analyses in R. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 1929–1936 (2014).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Team, R. C. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (2022).Jombart, T. adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24, 1403–1405 (2008).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Luu, K., Bazin, E. & Blum, M. G. pcadapt: an R package to perform genome scans for selection based on principal component analysis. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 17, 67–77 (2017).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Günther, T. & Coop, G. Robust identification of local adaptation from allele frequencies. Genetics 195, 205–220 (2013).
Google Scholar 
Dray, S. et al. Package ‘adespatial.’ Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/package=adespatial (2018).Montano, V. & Jombart, T. An eigenvalue test for spatial principal component analysis. BMC Bioinform. 18, 1–7 (2017).
Google Scholar 
Pickrell, J. K. & Pritchard, J. K. Inference of population splits and mixtures from genome-wide allele frequency data. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002967 (2012).CAS 

Google Scholar  More

Muller, Z. et al. Giraffa camelopardalis. The IUCN red list of threatened species 2016:e.T9194A109326950 (2018).Oconnor, D. et al. Updated geographic range maps for giraffe, Giraffa spp., throughout sub-Saharan Africa, and implications of changing distributions for conservation. Mamm. Rev. 49, 285–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12165 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, M. B. et al. Conservation status of giraffe: Evaluating contemporary distribution and abundance with evolving taxonomic perspectives. Ref. Module Earth Syst. Environ. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821139-7.00139-2 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dunn, M. E. et al. Investigating the international and pan-African trade in giraffe parts and derivatives. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 3, e390. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.390 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hassanin, A. et al. Mitochondrial DNA variability in Giraffa camelopardalis: Consequences for taxonomy, phylogeography and conservation of giraffes in West and Central Africa. C.R. Biol. 330, 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2007.02.008 (2007).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Groves, C. & Grubb, P. Ungulate Taxonomy (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011).Book 

Google Scholar 
Fennessy, J. et al. Multi-locus analyses reveal four giraffe species instead of one. Curr. Biol. 26, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.036 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Winter, S., Fennessy, J. & Janke, A. Limited introgression supports division of giraffe into four species. Ecol. Evol. 8, 10156–10165. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4490 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bercovitch, F. B. Giraffe taxonomy, geographic distribution, and conservation. Afr. J. Ecol. 58, 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12741 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Petzold, A. & Hassanin, A. A comparative approach for species delimitation based on multiple methods of multi-locus DNA sequence analysis: A case study of the genus Giraffa (Mammalia, Cetartiodactyla). PLoS ONE 15, e0217956. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217956 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Petzold, A. et al. First insights into past biodiversity of giraffes based on mitochondrial sequences from museum specimens. Eur. J. Taxon. 703, L57-63. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217956 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Coimbra, R. T. F. et al. Whole-genome analysis of giraffe supports four distinct species. Curr. Biol. 31, 2929-2938.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.04.033 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Muneza, A. B. et al. Giraffa camelopardalis ssp. reticulata. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018:e.T88420717A88420720 (2018).Miller, M. F. Dispersal of Acacia seeds by ungulates and ostriches in an African Savanna. J. Trop. Ecol. 12, 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467400009548 (1996).Article 

Google Scholar 
Palmer, T. M. et al. Breakdown of an ant-plant mutualism follows the loss of large herbivores from an African savanna. Science 319, 192–195. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151579 (2008).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kalema, G. Investigation of a skin disease in giraffe in Murchison Falls National Park. Report Submitted to Uganda National Park. Uganda National Parks. Kampala, Uganda (1996).Muneza, A. B. et al. Regional variation of the manifestation, prevalence, and severity of giraffe skin disease: A review of an emerging disease in wild and captive giraffe populations. Biol. Conserv. 198, 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.04.014 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Epaphras, A. M., Karimuribo, E. D., Mpanduji, D. G. & Meing’ataki, G. E. Prevalence, disease description and epidemiological factors of a novel skin disease in giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis) in Ruaha National Park, Tanzania. Res. Opin. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2, 60–65 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Lee, D. E. & Bond, M. L. The occurrence and prevalence of giraffe skin disease in protected areas of northern Tanzania. J. Wildl. Dis. 52, 753–755. https://doi.org/10.7589/2015-09-24 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Muneza, A. B. et al. Examining disease prevalence for species of conservation concern using non-invasive spatial capture–recapture techniques. J. Appl. Ecol. 54, 709–717. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12796 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, M. Murchison falls giraffe project: Field report. Giraffid 9, 5–10 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Muneza, A. B. et al. Quantifying the severity of an emerging skin disease affecting giraffe populations using photogrammetry analysis of camera trap data. J. Wildl. Dis. 55, 770–781. https://doi.org/10.7589/2018-06-149 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Han, S. et al. Giraffe skin disease: Clinicopathologic characterization of cutaneous filariasis in the critically endangered Nubian giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis camelopardalis). Vet. Pathol. https://doi.org/10.1177/03009858221082606 (2022).Article 

Google Scholar 
Whittier, C. A. et al. Cutaneous filariasis in free-ranging Rothschild’s giraffes (Giraffa Camelopardalis rothschildi) in Uganda. J. Wildl. Dis. 56, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.7589/2018-09-212 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pellew, R. Food consumption and energy budgets of the giraffe. J. Appl. Ecol. 21, 141–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2403043 (1984).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strauss, M. K. L. & Packer, C. Using claw marks to study lion predation on giraffes of the Serengeti. J. Zool. 289, 134–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2012.00972.x (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Muneza, A. B. et al. Exploring the connections between giraffe skin disease and lion predation. J. Zool. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12930 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lindsey, P. A. et al. The bushmeat trade in African savannas: Impacts, drivers, and possible solutions. Biol. Conserv. 160, 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.12.020 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Becker, M. et al. Evaluating wire-snare poaching trends and the impacts of by-catch on elephants and large carnivores. Biol. Conserv. 158, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.08.017 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Mudumba, T., Jingo, S., Heit, D. & Montgomery, R. A. The landscape configuration and lethality of snare poaching of sympatric guilds of large carnivores and ungulates. Afr. J. Ecol. 59, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12781 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Strauss, M. K. L., Kilewo, M., Rentsch, D. & Packer, C. Food supply and poaching limit giraffe abundance in the Serengeti. Popul. Ecol. 57, 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-015-0499-9 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Munn, J. Effects of injury on the locomotion of free-ranging chimpanzees in the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. In Primates of Western Uganda: Developments in Primatology: Progress and Prospects (eds. Newton-Fisher, N. E., Notman, H., Paterson, J. D., & Reynolds, V.) 259–280 (Springer, 2006).Yersin, H., Asiimwe, C., Voordouw, M. J. & Zuberbühler, K. Impact of snare injuries on parasite prevalence in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Int. J. Primatol. 38, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-016-9941-x (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dagg, A. I. Gaits of the giraffe and okapi. J. Mammal. 41, 282–282. https://doi.org/10.2307/1376381 (1960).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dagg, A. I. The role of the neck in the movements of the giraffe. J. Mammal. 43, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/1376883 (1962).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dagg, A. I. & Vos, A. D. The walking gaits of some species of Pecora. J. Zool. 155, 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1968.tb03031.x (1968).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alexander, R. M. N., Langman, V. A. & Jayes, A. S. Fast locomotion of some African ungulates. J. Zool. 183, 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1977.tb04188.x (1977).Article 

Google Scholar 
Basu, C., Deacon, F., Hutchinson, J. R. & Wilson, A. M. The running kinematics of free-roaming giraffes, measured using a low cost unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). PeerJ 7, e6312. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6312 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Basu, C., Wilson, A. M. & Hutchinson, J. R. The locomotor kinematics and ground reaction forces of walking giraffes. J. Exp. Biol. 222, jeb159277. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.159277 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hildebrand, M. The adaptive significance of tetrapod gait selection. Am. Zool. 20, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/20.1.255 (1980).Article 

Google Scholar 
Flower, F. C., Sanderson, D. J. & Weary, D. M. Hoof pathologies influence kinematic measures of dairy cow gait. J. Dairy Sci. 88, 3166–3173. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(05)73000-9 (2005).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brown, M. B., Bolger, D. T. & Fennessy, J. All the eggs in one basket: A countrywide assessment of current and historical giraffe population distribution in Uganda. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 19, e00612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00612 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Foster, J. B. The giraffe of Nairobi National Park: Home range, sex ratios, the herd, and food. Afr. J. Ecol. 4, 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.1966.tb00889.x (1966).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bond, M. L., Strauss, M. K. L. & Lee, D. E. Soil correlates and mortality from giraffe skin disease in Tanzania. J. Wildl. Dis. 52, 953–958. https://doi.org/10.7589/2016-02-047 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dunham, N. T., McNamara, A., Shapiro, L., Hieronymus, T. & Young, J. W. A user’s guide for the quantitative analysis of substrate characteristics and locomotor kinematics in free-ranging primates. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 167, 569–584. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23686 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Rueden, C. T. et al. Imagej 2: Imagej for the next generation of scientific image data. BMC Bioinform. 18, 529. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-017-1934-z (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cartmill, M., Lemelin, P. & Schmitt, D. Support polygons and symmetrical gaits in mammals. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 136, 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1096-3642.2002.00038.x (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Hildebrand, M. Analysis of the symmetrical gaits of tetrapods. Folia Biotheoretica 6, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/1379571 (1966).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shapiro, L. J. & Young, J. W. Kinematics of quadrupedal locomotion in sugar gliders (Petaurus breviceps): Effects of age and substrate size. J. Exp. Biol. 215, 480–496. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.062588 (2012).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shapiro, L. J., Young, J. W. & VandeBerg, J. L. Body size and the small branch niche: Using marsupial ontogeny to model primate locomotor evolution. J. Hum. Evol. 68, 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.12.006 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dunham, N. T., McNamara, A., Shapiro, L., Phelps, T. & Young, J. W. Asymmetrical gait kinematics of free-ranging callitrichines in response to changes in substrate diameter, orientation, and displacement. J. Exp. Biol. 223, jeb217562. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.217562 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Robinson, R., Herzog, W. & Nigg, B. Use of force platform variables to quantify the effects of chiropractic manipulation on gait symmetry. J. Manipulative Physiol. Ther. 10, 172–176 (1987).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Vanden Hole, C. et al. How innate is locomotion in precocial animals? A study on the early development of spatiotemporal gait variables and gait symmetry in piglets. J. Exp. Biol. 220, 2706–2716. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.157693 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jacobs, B. Y., Kloefkorn, H. E. & Allen, K. D. Gait analysis methods for rodent models of osteoarthritis. Curr. Pain Headache Rep. 18, 456–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-014-0456-x (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Pfau, T., Spence, A., Starke, S., Ferrari, M. & Wilson, A. Modern riding style improves horse racing times. Science 325, 289–289. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1174605 (2009).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019). http://www.R-project.org/.Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B. & Christensen, R. H. B. LmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Length, R. emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least‐squares means. R package version 0.9. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans (2017).Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 57, 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x (1995).Article 
MathSciNet 
MATH 

Google Scholar 
Merkens, H. W. & Schamhardt, H. C. Evaluation of equine locomotion during different degrees of experimentally induced lameness I: Lameness model and quantification of ground reaction force patterns of the limbs. Equine Vet. J. 20, 99–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.1988.tb04655.x (1988).Article 

Google Scholar 
Fanchon, L. & Grandjean, D. Accuracy of asymmetry indices of ground reaction forces for diagnosis of hind limb lameness in dogs. Am. J. Vet. Res. 68, 1089–1094. https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.68.10.1089 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bragança, F. M. S., Rhodin, M. & van Weeren, P. R. On the brink of daily clinical application of objective gait analysis: What evidence do we have so far from studies using an induced lameness model?. Vet. J. 234, 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.01.006 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown, M. B. & Bolger, D. T. Male-biased partial migration in a giraffe population. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 524. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2019.00524 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Dagg, A. I. Giraffe: Biology, Behaviour and Conservation (Cambridge University Press, 2014).Book 

Google Scholar 
Castles, M. P. et al. Relationships between male giraffes’ colour, age and sociability. Anim. Behav. 157, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.08.003 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar  More

Anae, J. et al. Recent advances in biochar engineering for soil contaminated with complex chemical mixtures: Remediation strategies and future perspectives. Sci. Total Environ. 767, 144351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144351 (2021).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kiran, B. R. & Prasad, M. N. V. Biochar and rice husk ash assisted phytoremediation potentials of Ricinus communis L. for lead-spiked soils. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 183, 109574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109574 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bolan, N. et al. Remediation of heavy metal(loid)s contaminated soils – To mobilize or to immobilize?. J. Hazard. Mater. 266, 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.12.018 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Burachevskaya, M. et al. The effect of granular activated carbon and biochar on the availability of Cu and Zn to Hordeum sativum distichum in contaminated soil. Plants https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10050841 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cao, P. et al. Mercapto propyltrimethoxysilane- and ferrous sulfate-modified nano-silica for immobilization of lead and cadmium as well as arsenic in heavy metal-contaminated soil. Environ. Pollut. 266, 115152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115152 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ok, Y. S. et al. Ameliorants to immobilize Cd in rice paddy soils contaminated by abandoned metal mines in Korea. Environ. Geochem. Health 33(Suppl 1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-010-9364-0 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Qin, Y. et al. Dual-wastes derived biochar with tailored surface features for highly efficient p-nitrophenol adsorption. J. Clean. Prod. 353, 131571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131571 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Rajput, V. D. et al. Nano-biochar: A novel solution for sustainable agriculture and environmental remediation. Environ. Res. 210, 112891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.112891 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ding, Y. et al. Biochar to improve soil fertility. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 36, 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-0372-z (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Oni, B. A., Oziegbe, O. & Olawole, O. O. Significance of biochar application to the environment and economy. Ann. Agric. Sci. 64, 222–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aoas.2019.12.006 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
He, E. et al. Two years of aging influences the distribution and lability of metal(loid)s in a contaminated soil amended with different biochars. Sci. Total Environ. 673, 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.037 (2019).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Netherway, P. et al. Phosphorus-rich biochars can transform lead in an urban contaminated soil. J. Environ. Qual. 48, 1091–1099. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2018.09.0324 (2019).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
O’Connor, D. et al. Biochar application for the remediation of heavy metal polluted land: A review of in situ field trials. Sci. Total Environ. 619–620, 815–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.132 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Xu, X. et al. Effect of physicochemical properties of biochar from different feedstock on remediation of heavy metal contaminated soil in mining area. Surf. Interfaces 32, 102058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2022.102058 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Melo, L. C. A. et al. Sorption and desorption of cadmium and zinc in two tropical soils amended with sugarcane-straw-derived biochar. J. Soils Sediments 16, 226–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-015-1199-y (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Uchimiya, M., Chang, S. & Klasson, K. T. Screening biochars for heavy metal retention in soil: Role of oxygen functional groups. J. Hazard. Mater. 190, 432–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.03.063 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jatav, H. S. et al. Sustainable approach and safe use of biochar and its possible consequences. Sustainability https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810362 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Varalta, F. & Sorvari, J. In Organic Waste Composting through Nexus Thinking: Practices, Policies, and Trends (eds Hettiarachchi, H. et al.) 213–232 (Springer International Publishing, 2020).Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Pinotti, L. et al. Recycling food leftovers in feed as opportunity to increase the sustainability of livestock production. J. Clean. Prod. 294, 126290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126290 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jafri, N., Wong, W. Y., Doshi, V., Yoon, L. W. & Cheah, K. H. A review on production and characterization of biochars for application in direct carbon fuel cells. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 118, 152–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.06.036 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jin, Y. et al. Characterization of biochars derived from various spent mushroom substrates and evaluation of their adsorption performance of Cu(II) ions from aqueous solution. Environ. Res. 196, 110323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110323 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tomczyk, A., Sokołowska, Z. & Boguta, P. Biomass type effect on biochar surface characteristic and adsorption capacity relative to silver and copper. Fuel 278, 118168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118168 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
FAO. Food Outlook – Biannual Report on Global Food Markets: November 2020. Rome. Phytoremediation of copper-contaminated soil by Artemisia absinthium: comparative effect of chelating agents. Environmental Geochemistry and Health. (2020). https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1993enRussian-Statistical-Year-Book. Statistical handbook. P76 M., 2020 – 700 p. ISBN 978-5-89476-497-9 (2020).Cheng, C.-H., Lehmann, J., Thies, J. E. & Burton, S. D. Stability of black carbon in soils across a climatic gradient. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 113, 55. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JG000642 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Singh, B. P., Cowie, A. L. & Smernik, R. J. Biochar carbon stability in a clayey soil as a function of feedstock and pyrolysis temperature. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 11770–11778. https://doi.org/10.1021/es302545b (2012).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
He, Y. et al. Effects of biochar application on soil greenhouse gas fluxes: A meta-analysis. GCB Bioenergy 9, 743–755. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12376 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Janu, R. et al. Biochar surface functional groups as affected by biomass feedstock, biochar composition and pyrolysis temperature. Carbon Resour. Convers. 4, 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crcon.2021.01.003 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tan, X. et al. Application of biochar for the removal of pollutants from aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 125, 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.12.058 (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ni, B.-J. et al. Competitive adsorption of heavy metals in aqueous solution onto biochar derived from anaerobically digested sludge. Chemosphere 219, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.12.053 (2019).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Park, J.-H. et al. Competitive adsorption of heavy metals onto sesame straw biochar in aqueous solutions. Chemosphere 142, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.05.093 (2016).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Methodological-Guidelines. Methodological guidelines for the determination of heavy metals in the soils of agricultural land and crop production – M., TSINAO, 61 (1992)Zhang, A., Li, X., Xing, J. & Xu, G. Adsorption of potentially toxic elements in water by modified biochar: A review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 8, 104196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2020.104196 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Avramiotis, E., Frontistis, Z., Manariotis, I. D., Vakros, J. & Mantzavinos, D. On the performance of a sustainable rice husk biochar for the activation of persulfate and the degradation of antibiotics. Catalysts 11, 1303 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Maiti, S., Dey, S., Purakayastha, S. & Ghosh, B. Physical and thermochemical characterization of rice husk char as a potential biomass energy source. Biores. Technol. 97, 2065–2070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2005.10.005 (2006).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Herrera, K., Morales, L. F., Tarazona, N. A., Aguado, R. & Saldarriaga, J. F. Use of biochar from rice husk pyrolysis: Part A: Recovery as an adsorbent in the removal of emerging compounds. ACS Omega 7, 7625–7637. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c06147 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Szewczuk-Karpisz, K., Tomczyk, A., Grygorczuk-Płaneta, K. & Naveed, S. Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii exopolysaccharide and sunflower husk biochar as factors affecting immobilization of both tetracycline and Cd2+ ions on soil solid phase. J. Soils Sediments 22, 2620–2639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-022-03255-3 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hubetska, T. S., Kobylinska, N. G. & García, J. R. Sunflower biomass power plant by-products: Properties and its potential for water purification of organic pollutants. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 157, 105237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2021.105237 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Braghiroli, F. L. et al. The influence of pilot-scale pyro-gasification and activation conditions on porosity development in activated biochars. Biomass Bioenerg. 118, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.08.016 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Braghiroli, F. L. et al. The conversion of wood residues, using pilot-scale technologies, into porous activated biochars for supercapacitors. J. Porous Mater. 27, 537–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10934-019-00823-w (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Boraah, N., Chakma, S. & Kaushal, P. Attributes of wood biochar as an efficient adsorbent for remediating heavy metals and emerging contaminants from water: A critical review and bibliometric analysis. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10, 107825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.107825 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Phillips, C. L. et al. Towards predicting biochar impacts on plant-available soil nitrogen content. Biochar 4, 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42773-022-00137-2 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sun, L. & Gong, K. Silicon-based materials from rice husks and their applications. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40, 5861–5877. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie010284b (2001).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Islam, T. et al. Synthesis of rice husk-derived magnetic biochar through liquefaction to adsorb anionic and cationic dyes from aqueous solutions. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 46, 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-020-04537-z (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Mohan, D. et al. Biochar production and applications in soil fertility and carbon sequestration – a sustainable solution to crop-residue burning in India. RSC Adv. 8, 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA10353K (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Li, F. et al. Preparation and characterization of biochars from Eichornia crassipes for cadmium removal in aqueous solutions. PLoS ONE 11, e0148132. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148132 (2016).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Song, H. et al. Potential of novel biochars produced from invasive aquatic species outside food chain in removing ammonium nitrogen: Comparison with conventional biochars and clinoptilolite. Sustainability https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247136 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Yang, G. et al. Effects of pyrolysis temperature on the physicochemical properties of biochar derived from vermicompost and its potential use as an environmental amendment. RSC Adv. 5, 40117–40125. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA02836A (2015).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Enders, A., Hanley, K., Whitman, T., Joseph, S. & Lehmann, J. Characterization of biochars to evaluate recalcitrance and agronomic performance. Bioresour. Technol. 114, 644–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.03.022 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, Y., Wang, J. & Feng, Y. The effects of biochar addition on soil physicochemical properties: A review. CATENA 202, 105284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2021.105284 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Özçimen, D. & Ersoy-Meriçboyu, A. Characterization of biochar and bio-oil samples obtained from carbonization of various biomass materials. Renew. Energy 35, 1319–1324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.042 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Lin, Q. et al. Effects of biochar-based materials on the bioavailability of soil organic pollutants and their biological impacts. Sci. Total Environ. 826, 153956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153956 (2022).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Yang, H. et al. Thermogravimetric analysis−fourier transform infrared analysis of palm oil waste pyrolysis. Energy Fuels 18, 1814–1821. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef030193m (2004).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pasangulapati, V. et al. Effects of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin on thermochemical conversion characteristics of the selected biomass. Biores. Technol. 114, 663–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.03.036 (2012).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kim, P. et al. Surface functionality and carbon structures in lignocellulosic-derived biochars produced by fast pyrolysis. Energy Fuels 25, 4693–4703. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef200915s (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Keiluweit, M., Nico, P. S., Johnson, M. G. & Kleber, M. dynamic molecular structure of plant biomass-derived black carbon (biochar). Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 1247–1253. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9031419 (2010).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wijeyawardana, P. et al. Removal of Cu, Pb and Zn from stormwater using an industrially manufactured sawdust and paddy husk derived biochar. Environ. Technol. Innov. 28, 102640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2022.102640 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kołodyńska, D., Krukowska, J. & Thomas, P. Comparison of sorption and desorption studies of heavy metal ions from biochar and commercial active carbon. Chem. Eng. J. 307, 353–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.08.088 (2017).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Uchimiya, M. et al. Immobilization of heavy metal ions (CuII, CdII, NiII, and PbII) by broiler litter-derived biochars in water and soil. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58, 5538–5544. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf9044217 (2010).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Misono, M., Ochiai, E. I., Saito, Y. & Yoneda, Y. A new dual parameter scale for the strength of lewis acids and bases with the evaluation of their softness. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 29, 2685–2691. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1902(67)80006-X (1967).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
McBride, M. B. Environmental Chemistry of Soils (Oxford University Press, 1994).
Google Scholar 
Basta, N. T. & Tabatabai, M. A. Effect of cropping systems on adsorption of metals by soils: III. Competitive adsorption1. Soil Sci. 153, 331–337 (1992).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sposito, G. The Chemistry of Soils (Oxford University Press, 2016).Bauer, T. V. et al. Application of XAFS and XRD methods for describing the copper and zinc adsorption characteristics in hydromorphic soils. Environ. Geochem. Health 44, 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-020-00773-2 (2022).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Abd-Elfattah, A. L. Y. & Wada, K. Adsorption of lead, copper, zinc, cobalt, and cadmium by soils that differ in cation-exchange materials. J. Soil Sci. 32, 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1981.tb01706.x (1981).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Etesami, H., Fatemi, H. & Rizwan, M. Interactions of nanoparticles and salinity stress at physiological, biochemical and molecular levels in plants: A review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 225, 112769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112769 (2021).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Soria, R. I., Rolfe, S. A., Betancourth, M. P. & Thornton, S. F. The relationship between properties of plant-based biochars and sorption of Cd(II), Pb(II) and Zn(II) in soil model systems. Heliyon 6, e05388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05388 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Alfarra, A., Frackowiak, E. & Béguin, F. The HSAB concept as a means to interpret the adsorption of metal ions onto activated carbons. Appl. Surf. Sci. 228, 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2003.12.033 (2004).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hu, J., Zhou, X., Shi, Y., Wang, X. & Li, H. Enhancing biochar sorption properties through self-templating strategy and ultrasonic fore-modified pre-treatment: Characteristic, kinetic and mechanism studies. Sci. Total Environ. 769, 144574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144574 (2021).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ward, J., Rasul, M. G. & Bhuiya, M. M. K. Energy recovery from biomass by fast pyrolysis. Proced. Eng. 90, 669–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.11.791 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Al-Wabel, M. I., Al-Omran, A., El-Naggar, A. H., Nadeem, M. & Usman, A. R. A. Pyrolysis temperature induced changes in characteristics and chemical composition of biochar produced from conocarpus wastes. Biores. Technol. 131, 374–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.12.165 (2013).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Calvelo Pereira, R. et al. Contribution to characterisation of biochar to estimate the labile fraction of carbon. Org. Geochem. 42, 1331–1342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orggeochem.2011.09.002 (2011).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Vorob’eva, L. A. Theory and Practice Chemical Analysis of Soils (GEOS Press, Moscow, 2006).
Google Scholar 
Pinskii, D. L. et al. Copper adsorption by chernozem soils and parent rocks in Southern Russia. Geochem. Int. 56, 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016702918030072 (2018).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Q., Wang, B., Lee, X., Lehmann, J. & Gao, B. Sorption and desorption of Pb(II) to biochar as affected by oxidation and pH. Sci. Total Environ. 634, 188–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.189 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Pourret, O. & Houben, D. Characterization of metal binding sites onto biochar using rare earth elements as a fingerprint. Heliyon 4, e00543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00543 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Huang, L. et al. High-resolution insight into the competitive adsorption of heavy metals on natural sediment by site energy distribution. Chemosphere 197, 411–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.01.056 (2018).Article 
ADS 
MathSciNet 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Ming, H. et al. Competitive sorption of cadmium and zinc in contrasting soils. Geoderma 268, 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.01.021 (2016).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Musso, T. B., Parolo, M. E., Pettinari, G. & Francisca, F. M. Cu(II) and Zn(II) adsorption capacity of three different clay liner materials. J. Environ. Manag. 146, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.07.026 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Cui, H. et al. Immobilization of Cu and Cd in a contaminated soil: One- and four-year field effects. J. Soils Sediments 14, 1397–1406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-014-0882-8 (2014).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Elbana, T. A. et al. Freundlich sorption parameters for cadmium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc for different soils: Influence of kinetics. Geoderma 324, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.03.019 (2018).Article 
ADS 
CAS 

Google Scholar  More