Ecology

1.
Wommack KE, Colwell RR. Virioplankton: viruses in aquatic ecosystems. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2000;64:69–114.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Keen EC, Dantas G. Close encounters of three kinds: bacteriophages, commensal bacteria, and host immunity. Trends Microbiol. 2018;26:943–54.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Sausset R, Petit MA, Gaboriau-Routhiau V, De Paepe M. New insights into intestinal phages. Mucosal Immunol. 2020;13:205–15.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Van Belleghem J, Dąbrowska K, Vaneechoutte M, Barr J, Bollyky P. Interactions between bacteriophage, bacteria, and the mammalian immune system. Viruses. 2018;11:205–15.
Google Scholar 

5.
Wilhelm SW, Suttle CA. Viruses and nutrient cycles in the sea: viruses play critical roles in the structure and function of aquatic food webs. BioScience. 1999;49:781–8.
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Thingstad TF. Elements of a theory for the mechanisms controlling abundance, diversity, and biogeochemical role of lytic bacterial viruses in aquatic systems. Limnol Oceanogr. 2000;45:1320–2.
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Winter C, Bouvier T, Weinbauer MG, Thingstad TF. Trade-offs between competition and defense specialists among unicellular planktonic organisms: the “killing the winner” hypothesis revisited. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2010;74:42–57.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Minot S, Bryson A, Chehoud C, Wu GD, Lewis JD, Bushman FD. Rapid evolution of the human gut virome. PNAS. 2013;110:12450–5.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Thurber RV, Haynes M, Breitbart M, Wegley L, Rohwer F. Laboratory procedures to generate viral metagenomes. Nat Protocols. 2009;4:470–83..

10.
Leigh BA, Bordenstein SR, Brooks AW, Mikaelyan A, Bordenstein SR. Finer-scale phylosymbiosis: insights from insect viromes. mSystems. 2018a;3:e00131–18.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Wille M, Shi M, Klaassen M, Hurt AC, Holmes EC. Virome heterogeneity and connectivity in waterfowl and shorebird communities. ISME J. 2019;13:2603–16.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Jahn MT, Arkhipova K, Markert SM, Stigloher C, Lachnit T, Pita L et al. A phage protein aids bacterial symbionts in eukaryote immune evasion. Cell Host Microbe. 2019;26:542–50.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13.
Leigh BA, Djurhuus A, Breitbart M, Dishaw LJ. The gut virome of the protochordate model organism, Ciona intestinalis subtype A. Virus Res. 2018b;244:137–46.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

14.
Shkoporov AN, Clooney AG, Sutton TDS, Ryan FJ, Daly KM, Nolan JA, et al. The human gut virome is highly diverse, stable, and individual specific. Cell Host Microbe. 2019;26:527–41.e525.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Fuhrman JA. Marine viruses and their biogeochemical and ecological effects. Nature. 1999;399:541–8.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

16.
Paul JH. Prophages in marine bacteria: dangerous molecular time bombs or the key to survival in the seas? ISME J. 2008;2:579–89.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

17.
Touchon M, Bernheim A, Rocha EP. Genetic and life-history traits associated with the distribution of prophages in bacteria. ISME J. 2016;10:2744–54.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Howard-Varona C, Hargreaves KR, Abedon ST, Sullivan MB. Lysogeny in nature: mechanisms, impact and ecology of temperate phages. ISME J. 2017;11:1511–20.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Weitz JS. Quantitative viral ecology dynamics of viruses and their microbial hosts. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2015.

20.
Bondy-Denomy J, Qian J, Westra ER, Buckling A, Guttman DS, Davidson AR, et al. Prophages mediate defense against phage infection through diverse mechanisms. ISME J. 2016;10:2854–66.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Herold S, Karch H, Schmidt H. Shiga toxin-encoding bacteriophages–genomes in motion. Int J Med Microbiol. 2004;294:115–21.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

22.
Kim M-S, Bae J-W. Lysogeny is prevalent and widely distributed in the murine gut microbiota. ISME J. 2018;12:1127–41.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Reyes A, Wu M, McNulty NP, Rohwer FL, Gordon JI. Gnotobiotic mouse model of phage–bacterial host dynamics in the human gut. PNAS. 2013;110:20236–41.

24.
Bonilla-Rosso G, Steiner T, Wichmann F, Bexkens E, Engel P. Honey bees harbor a diverse gut virome engaging in nested strain-level interactions with the microbiota. PNAS. 2020;117:7355–62.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

25.
Sweere JM, Van Belleghem JD, Ishak H, Bach MS, Popescu M, Sunkari V, et al. Bacteriophage trigger antiviral immunity and prevent clearance of bacterial infection. Science. 2019;363:eaat9691.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Hadas E, Marie D, Shpigel M, Ilan M. Virus predation by sponges is a new nutrient-flow pathway in coral reef food webs. Limnol Oceanogr. 2006;51:1548–50.
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Rix L, Ribes M, Coma R, Jahn MT, de Goeij JM, van Oevelen D, et al. Heterotrophy in the earliest gut: a single-cell view of heterotrophic carbon and nitrogen assimilation in sponge-microbe symbioses. ISME J. 2020;14:2554–67.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Lurgi M, Thomas T, Wemheuer B, Webster NS, Montoya JM. Modularity and predicted functions of the global sponge-microbiome network. Nat Commun. 2019; 10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08925-4.

29.
Reveillaud J, Maignien L, Eren AM, Huber JA, Apprill A, Sogin ML, et al. Host-specificity among abundant and rare taxa in the sponge microbiome. ISME J. 2014;8:1198–209.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Laffy PW, Wood-Charlson EM, Turaev D, Jutz S, Pascelli C, Botte ES, et al. Reef invertebrate viromics: diversity, host specificity and functional capacity. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:2125–41.
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Taylor MW, Radax R, Steger D, Wagner M. Sponge-associated microorganisms: evolution, ecology, and biotechnological potential. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2007;71:295–+.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Pascelli C, Laffy PW, Botté E, Kupresanin M, Rattei T, Lurgi M, et al. Viral ecogenomics across the Porifera. Microbiome. 2020;8:144.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Allers E, Moraru C, Duhaime MB, Beneze E, Solonenko N, Barrero-Canosa J, et al. Single-cell and population level viral infection dynamics revealed by phageFISH, a method to visualize intracellular and free viruses. Environ Microbiol. 2013;15:2306–18.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Edwards RA, McNair K, Faust K, Raes J, Dutilh BE. Computational approaches to predict bacteriophage-host relationships. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2016;40:258–72.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Horn H, Slaby BM, Jahn MT, Bayer K, Moitinho-Silva L, Forster F, et al. An enrichment of CRISPR and other defense-related features in marine sponge-associated microbial metagenomes. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:1751.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Slaby BM, Hackl T, Horn H, Bayer K, Hentschel U. Metagenomic binning of a marine sponge microbiome reveals unity in defense but metabolic specialization. ISME J. 2017;11:2465.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Fiore CL, Labrie M, Jarett JK, Lesser MP. Transcriptional activity of the giant barrel sponge, Xestospongia muta Holobiont: molecular evidence for metabolic interchange. Front Microbiol. 2015; 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00364.

38.
Ryu T, Seridi L, Moitinho-Silva L, Oates M, Liew YJ, Mavromatis C, et al. Hologenome analysis of two marine sponges with different microbiomes. BMC Genom. 2016;17:1–11.
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

39.
Tully BJ, Sachdeva R, Graham ED, Heidelberg JF. 290 metagenome-assembled genomes from the Mediterranean Sea: a resource for marine microbiology. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3558.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

40.
Biswas A, Staals RHJ, Morales SE, Fineran PC, Brown CM. CRISPRDetect: a flexible algorithm to define CRISPR arrays. BMC Genom. 2016;17:356–356.
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

41.
Biswas A, Gagnon JN, Brouns SJ, Fineran PC, Brown CM. CRISPRTarget: bioinformatic prediction and analysis of crRNA targets. RNA Biol. 2013;10:817–27.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Burstein D, Harrington LB, Strutt SC, Probst AJ, Anantharaman K, Thomas BC, et al. New CRISPR–Cas systems from uncultivated microbes. Nature. 2016;542:237.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

43.
Lowe TM, Chan PP. tRNAscan-SE On-line: integrating search and context for analysis of transfer RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:W54–57.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, Baliga NS, Wang JT, Ramage D, et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 2003;13:2498–504.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
McNair K, Bailey BA, Edwards RA. PHACTS, a computational approach to classifying the lifestyle of phages. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:614–8.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Grazziotin AL, Koonin EV, Kristensen DM. Prokaryotic Virus Orthologous Groups (pVOGs): a resource for comparative genomics and protein family annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:D491–8.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

47.
Jones P, Binns D, Chang HY, Fraser M, Li W, McAnulla C, et al. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics. 2014;30:1236–40.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Jahn MT, Markert SM, Ryu T, Ravasi T, Stigloher C, Hentschel U, et al. Shedding light on cell compartmentation in the candidate phylum Poribacteria by high resolution visualisation and transcriptional profiling. Sci Rep. 2016;6:35860.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Chin CR, Perreira JM, Savidis G, Portmann JM, Aker AM, Feeley EM, et al. Direct visualization of HIV-1 replication intermediates shows that capsid and CPSF6 modulate HIV-1 intra-nuclear invasion and integration. Cell Rep. 2015;13:1717–31.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Reynolds ES. The use of lead citrate at high pH as an electron-opaque stain in electron microscopy. J Cell Biol. 1963;17:208–12.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Paul-Gilloteaux P, Heiligenstein X, Belle M, Domart MC, Larijani B, Collinson L, et al. eC-CLEM: flexible multidimensional registration software for correlative microscopies. Nat Methods. 2017;14:102–3.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

52.
Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods. 2012;9:671–5.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. In: Computing RFfS (ed): Vienna, Austria 2020.

54.
Bayer K, Jahn MT, Slaby BM, Moitinho-Silva L, Hentschel U. Marine sponges as Chloroflexi hot spots: genomic insights and high-resolution visualization of an abundant and diverse symbiotic clade. mSystems. 2018;3:e00150–18.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Thomas T, Moitinho-Silva L, Lurgi M, Bjork JR, Easson C, Astudillo-Garcia C, et al. Diversity, structure and convergent evolution of the global sponge microbiome. Nat Commun. 2016;7:11870.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Lima-Mendez G, Van Helden J, Toussaint A, Leplae R. Reticulate representation of evolutionary and functional relationships between phage genomes. Mol Biol Evol. 2008;25:762–77.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

57.
Bavestrello G, Burlando B, Sara M. The architecture of the canal systems of Petrosia ficiformis and Chondrosia reniformis studied by corrosion casts (Porifera, Demospongiae). Zoomorphology. 1988;108:161–6.
Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Van Soest RWM, Boury-Esnault N, Hooper JNA, Rützler K, de Voogd NJ, Alvarez B et al. World porifera database. 2019.

59.
Oh JH, Alexander LM, Pan M, Schueler KL, Keller MP, Attie AD, et al. Dietary fructose and microbiota-derived short-chain fatty acids promote bacteriophage production in the gut symbiont Lactobacillus reuteri. Cell Host Microbe. 2019;25:273–84 e276.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

60.
De Paepe M, Tournier L, Moncaut E, Son O, Langella P, Petit MA. Carriage of lambda latent virus is costly for its bacterial host due to frequent reactivation in monoxenic mouse intestine. PLoS Genet. 2016;12:e1005861.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

61.
Barr JJ, Auro R, Furlan M, Whiteson KL, Erb ML, Pogliano J, et al. Bacteriophage adhering to mucus provide a non-host-derived immunity. PNAS. 2013;110:10771–6.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

62.
Roux S. A viral ecogenomics framework to uncover the secrets of nature’s “microbe whisperers”. mSystems. 2019;4:e00111–9.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Paez-Espino D, Roux S, Chen IA, Palaniappan K, Ratner A, Chu K, et al. IMG/VR v.2.0: an integrated data management and analysis system for cultivated and environmental viral genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47:D678–86.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

64.
Deng L, Ignacio-Espinoza JC, Gregory AC, Poulos BT, Weitz JS, Hugenholtz P, et al. Viral tagging reveals discrete populations in Synechococcus viral genome sequence space. Nature. 2014;513:242–45.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

65.
Džunková M, Low SJ, Daly JN, Deng L, Rinke C, Hugenholtz P. Defining the human gut host–phage network through single-cell viral tagging. Nat Microbiol. 2019;4:2192–203.
PubMed  Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

66.
Marbouty M, Baudry L, Cournac A, Koszul R. Scaffolding bacterial genomes and probing host-virus interactions in gut microbiome by proximity ligation (chromosome capture) assay. Sci Adv. 2017;3:e1602105.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

67.
Sullivan MB, Waterbury JB, Chisholm SW. Cyanophages infecting the oceanic cyanobacterium Prochlorococcus. Nature. 2003;424:1047–51.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

68.
de Jonge PA, Nobrega FL, Brouns SJJ, Dutilh BE. Molecular and evolutionary determinants of bacteriophage host range. Trends Microbiol. 2019;27:51–63.
PubMed  Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

69.
Kauffman KM, Hussain FA, Yang J, Arevalo P, Brown JM, Chang WK, et al. A major lineage of non-tailed dsDNA viruses as unrecognized killers of marine bacteria. Nature. 2018;554:118–22.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

70.
Flores CO, Valverde S, Weitz JS. Multi-scale structure and geographic drivers of cross-infection within marine bacteria and phages. ISME J. 2013;7:520–32.
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

71.
Soffer N, Zaneveld J, Vega Thurber R. Phage-bacteria network analysis and its implication for the understanding of coral disease. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:1203–18.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Tzipilevich E, Habusha M, Ben-Yehuda S. Acquisition of phage sensitivity by bacteria through exchange of phage receptors. Cell. 2017;168:186–99 e112.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Battich N, Stoeger T, Pelkmans L. Image-based transcriptomics in thousands of single human cells at single-molecule resolution. Nat Methods. 2013;10:1127–33.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Li X-Y, Lachnit T, Fraune S, Bosch TCG, Traulsen A, Sieber M. Temperate phages as self-replicating weapons in bacterial competition. J R Soc Interface. 2017;14:20170563.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

75.
Pascelli C, Laffy PW, Kupresanin M, Ravasi T, Webster NS. Morphological characterization of virus-like particles in coral reef sponges. PeerJ. 2018;6:e5625–5625.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

76.
Sime-Ngando T. Environmental bacteriophages: viruses of microbes in aquatic ecosystems. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:355.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

77.
Knowles B, Silveira CB, Bailey BA, Barott K, Cantu VA, Cobián-Güemes AG, et al. Lytic to temperate switching of viral communities. Nature. 2016;531:466.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

78.
Duerkop BA, Clements CV, Rollins D, Rodrigues JLM, Hooper LV. A composite bacteriophage alters colonization by an intestinal commensal bacterium. PNAS. 2012;109:17621–6.

79.
Thingstad TF, Vage S, Storesund JE, Sandaa RA, Giske J. A theoretical analysis of how strain-specific viruses can control microbial species diversity. PNAS. 2014;111:7813–8.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

80.
Morella NM, Gomez AL, Wang G, Leung MS, Koskella B. The impact of bacteriophages on phyllosphere bacterial abundance and composition. Mol Ecol. 2018;27:2025–38.
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

81.
Wattam AR, Davis JJ, Assaf R, Boisvert S, Brettin T, Bun C, et al. Improvements to PATRIC, the all-bacterial Bioinformatics Database and Analysis Resource Center. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:D535–42.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  More

1.
Seifert, C. A., Azzari, G. & Lobell, D. B. Satellite detection of cover crops and their effects on crop yield in the Midwestern United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 064033 (2018).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
2017 Census of Agriculture, Summary and State Data (USDA, 2019); https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_1_US/usv1.pdf

3.
Basche, A. D. et al. Soil water improvements with the long-term use of a winter rye cover crop. Agric. Water Manag. 172, 40–50 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Schipanski, M. E. et al. A framework for evaluating ecosystem services provided by cover crops in agroecosystems. Agric. Syst. 125, 12–22 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Blanco-Canqui, H. et al. Cover crops and ecosystem services: insights from studies in temperate soils. Agron. J. 107, 2449–2474 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Andrews, S. S. et al. On‐farm assessment of soil quality in California’s central valley. Agron. J. 94, 12–23 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Welch, R. Y., Behnke, G. D., Davis, A. S., Masiunas, J. & Villamil, M. B. Using cover crops in headlands of organic grain farms: effects on soil properties, weeds and crop yields. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 216, 322–332 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Wyland, L. Winter cover crops in a vegetable cropping system: impacts on nitrate leaching, soil water, crop yield, pests and management costs. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 59, 1–17 (1996).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Karlen, D. L. & Doran, J. W. Cover crop management effects on soybean and corn growth and nitrogen dynamics in an on-farm study. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 6, 71–82 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Koch, R. L. et al. On-farm evaluation of a fall-seeded rye cover crop for suppression of soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) on soybean: suppression of soybean aphid with rye cover crop. Agric. For. Entomol. 17, 239–246 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Sayre, N. F., deBuys, W., Bestelmeyer, B. T. & Havstad, K. M. “The Range Problem” after a century of rangeland science: new research themes for altered landscapes. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 65, 545–552 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Kladivko, E. J. et al. State-wide soil health programs for education and on-farm assessment: lessons learned. J. Soil Water Conserv. 74, 12A–17A (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Poeplau, C. & Don, A. Carbon sequestration in agricultural soils via cultivation of cover crops – a meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 200, 33–41 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Vermeulen, S. et al. A global agenda for collective action on soil carbon. Nat. Sustain. 2, 2–4 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Lehmann, J., Bossio, D. A., Kögel-Knabner, I. & Rillig, M. C. The concept and future prospects of soil health. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 544–553 (2020).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Stewart, R. D. et al. What we talk about when we talk about soil health. Agric. Environ. Lett. 3, 180033 (2018).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

17.
Norris, C. E. et al. Introducing the North American project to evaluate soil health measurements. Agron. J. 112, 3195–3215 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Sanderman, J., Savage, K. & Dangal, S. R. S. Mid‐infrared spectroscopy for prediction of soil health indicators in the United States. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 84, 251–261 (2020).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Rorick, J. D. & Kladivko, E. J. Cereal rye cover crop effects on soil carbon and physical properties in Southeastern Indiana. J. Soil Water Conserv. 72, 260–265 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Faé, G. S. et al. Integrating winter annual forages into a no-till corn silage system. Agron. J. 101, 1286–1296 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Wegner, B. R. et al. Soil response to corn residue removal and cover crops in eastern South Dakota. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 79, 1179–1187 (2015).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Karlen, D. L., Goeser, N. J., Veum, K. S. & Yost, M. A. On-farm soil health evaluations: challenges and opportunities. J. Soil Water Conserv. 72, 26A–31A (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Wade, J. et al. Improved soil biological health increases corn grain yield in N fertilized systems across the Corn Belt. Sci. Rep. 10, 3917 (2020).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Bossio, D. A. et al. The role of soil carbon in natural climate solutions. Nat. Sustain. 3, 391–398 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Stanton, C. Y. et al. Managing cropland and rangeland for climate mitigation: an expert elicitation on soil carbon in California. Clim. Change 147, 633–646 (2018).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Lugato, E., Leip, A. & Jones, A. Mitigation potential of soil carbon management overestimated by neglecting N2O emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 219–223 (2018).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Kaye, J. P. & Quemada, M. Using cover crops to mitigate and adapt to climate change. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 37, 4 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Basche, A. D. & DeLonge, M. S. Comparing infiltration rates in soils managed with conventional and alternative farming methods: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 14, e0215702 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Basche, A. & DeLonge, M. The impact of continuous living cover on soil hydrologic properties: a meta-analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 81, 1179–1190 (2017).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Roper, W. R., Osmond, D. L. & Heitman, J. L. A response to “Reanalysis validates soil health indicator sensitivity and correlation with long‐term crop yields”. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 83, 1842–1845 (2019).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
King, A. E., Ali, G. A., Gillespie, A. W. & Wagner-Riddle, C. Soil organic matter as catalyst of crop resource capture. Front. Environ. Sci. 8, 50 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Oldfield, E. E., Bradford, M. A. & Wood, S. A. Global meta-analysis of the relationship between soil organic matter and crop yields. SOIL 5, 15–32 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Oldfield, E. E., Wood, S. A. & Bradford, M. A. Direct evidence using a controlled greenhouse study for threshold effects of soil organic matter on crop growth. Ecol. Appl. 30, e02073 (2020).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Wood, S. A. et al. Opposing effects of different soil organic matter fractions on crop yields. Ecol. Appl. 26, 2072–2085 (2016).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Fine, A. K., van Es, H. M. & Schindelbeck, R. R. Statistics, scoring functions, and regional analysis of a comprehensive soil health database. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 81, 589 (2017).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Fine, A. K., Ristow, A., Schindelbeck, R. R. & van Es, H. M. Update of scoring functions for Cornell Soil Health Test. What’s Cropping Up? Blog https://blogs.cornell.edu/whatscroppingup/2016/11/30/update-of-scoring-functions-for-cornell-soil-health-test/ (2016).

37.
Bradford, M. A. et al. Discontinuity in the responses of ecosystem processes and multifunctionality to altered soil community composition. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 14478–14483 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

38.
Bradford, M. A. et al. Reply to Byrnes et al.: Aggregation can obscure understanding of ecosystem multifunctionality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E5491 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

39.
Kettler, T. A., Doran, J. W. & Gilbert, T. L. Simplified method for soil particle-size determination to accompany soil-quality analyses. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 65, 849–852 (2001).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Moebius, B. N. et al. Evaluation of laboratory-measured soil properties as indicators of soil physical quality. Soil Sci. 172, 895–912 (2007).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Reynolds, W. & Topp, G. in Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis (eds Carter, M. R. & Gregorich, E. G.) 981–997 (CRC Press, 2008).

42.
Nelson, D. & Sommers, D. in Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3 (Sparks, D. L., Page, A. L., Helmke, P. A. & Loeppert, R. H.) 961–1010 (Soil Science Society of America, 1996).

43.
Weil, R. R., Islam, K. R., Stine, M. A., Gruver, J. B. & Samson-Liebig, S. E. Estimating active carbon for soil quality assessment: a simplified method for laboratory and field use. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 18, 3–17 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Haney, R. L. & Haney, E. B. Simple and rapid laboratory method for rewetting dry soil for incubations. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 41, 1493–1501 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Wright, S. F. & Upadhyaya, A. Extraction of an abundant and unusual protein from soil and comparison with hyphal protein of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Soil Sci. 161, 575–586 (1996).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Bunnefeld, N. & Phillimore, A. B. Island, archipelago and taxon effects: mixed models as a means of dealing with the imperfect design of nature’s experiments. Ecography 35, 15–22 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Gelman, A. Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Stat. Med. 27, 2865–2873 (2008).
MathSciNet  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

49.
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2019).

50.
Stan Development Team. RStan: the R interface to Stan. R package v2.17.3 (2018).

51.
Rasmussen, C. et al. Beyond clay: towards an improved set of variables for predicting soil organic matter content. Biogeochemistry 137, 297–306 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Gelman, A. et al. Bayesian Data Analysis 3rd edn (Chapman and Hall, CRC, 2013).

53.
Howard, P. J. A. & Howard, D. M. Use of organic carbon and loss-on-ignition to estimate soil organic matter in different soil types and horizons. Biol. Fertil. Soils 9, 306–310 (1990).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar  More

1.
York, P. H., Hyndes, G. A., Bishop, M. J. & Barnes, R. S. Faunal assemblages of seagrass ecosystems. In Seagrasses of Australia. Structure, Ecology and Conservation (eds A. W. D. Larkum, G. A. Kendrick, & P. J. Ralph) Ch. 17, 541–588 (Springer, Berlin, 2018).
2.
Nordlund, L. M., Koch, E. W., Barbier, E. B. & Creed, J. C. Seagrass ecosystem services and their variability across genera and geographical regions. PLoS ONE 11, e0163091 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Camp, E. F. et al. Mangrove and seagrass beds provide different biogeochemical services for corals threatened by climate change. Front. Mar. Sci. 3, 52 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Gaylard, S. G., Waycott, M. & Lavery, P. S. Review of coast and marine ecosystems in temperate Australia demonstrate a wealth of ecosystem services. Front. Mar. Sci. 7, 453 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Burkholder, J. M., Tomasko, D. A. & Touchette, B. W. Seagrasses and eutrophication. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 350, 46–72 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Kendrick, G. A. et al. Demographic and genetic connectivity: the role and consequences of reproduction, dispersal and recruitment in seagrasses. Biol. Rev. 92, 921–938 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Kendrick, G. A. et al. Australian seagrass seascapes: present understanding and future research directions. In Seagrasses of Australia. Structure, Ecology and Conservation (eds Anthony W.D. Larkum, Gary A. Kendrick, & Peter J. Ralph) Ch. 9, 257–286 (Springer, Berlin, 2018).

8.
Hossain, M. S., Bujang, J. S., Zakaria, M. H. & Hashim, M. The application of remote sensing to seagrass ecosystems: an overview and future research prospects. Int. J. Remote Sens. 36, 61–114 (2015).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

9.
Waycott, M. et al. Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 12377–12381 (2009).
CAS  Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

10.
Lefcheck, J. S. et al. Long-term nutrient reductions lead to the unprecedented recovery of a temperate coastal region. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, 3658–3662 (2018).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

11.
Tomasko, D. et al. Widespread recovery of seagrass coverage in Southwest Florida (USA): temporal and spatial trends and management actions responsible for success. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 135, 1128–1137 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Carmen, B. et al. Recent trend reversal for declining European seagrass meadows. Nat. Commun. 10, 3356 (2019).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

13.
Reise, K. & Kohlus, J. Seagrass recovery in the northern Wadden Sea?. Helgol. Mar. Res. 62, 77 (2008).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

14.
Kendrick, G. A., Holmes, K. W. & Niel, K. P. V. Multi-scale spatial patterns of three seagrass species with different growth dynamics. Ecography 31, 191–200 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Kirkman, H. Community structure in seagrasses in southern Western Australia. Aquat. Bot. 21, 363–375 (1985).
Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Rasheed, M. A. Recovery and succession in a multi-species tropical seagrass meadow following experimental disturbance: the role of sexual and asexual reproduction. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 310, 13–45 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Fearns, P. R. C., Klonowski, W., Babcock, R. C., England, P. & Phillips, J. Shallow water substrate mapping using hyperspectral remote sensing. Cont. Shelf Res. 31, 1249–1259 (2011).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

18.
Kilminster, K. et al. Unravelling complexity in seagrass systems for management: Australia as a microcosm. Sci. Total Environ. 534, 97–109 (2015).
CAS  Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

19.
Tanner, J. E. et al. Seagrass rehabilitation off metropolitan Adelaide: a case study of loss, action, failure, and success. Ecol. Manage. Restor. 15, 168–179 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Sherman, C. D. et al. Reproductive, dispersal and recruitment strategies in australian seagrasses. In Seagrasses of Australia. Structure, Ecology and Conservation (eds Anthony W.D. Larkum, Gary A. Kendrick, & Peter J. Ralph) Ch. 8, 213–256 (Springer, Berlin, 2018).

21.
Hart, D. Near-shore seagrass change between 1949 and 1996 mapped using digital aerial orthophotography, metropolitan Adelaide area, Largs Bay-Aldinga, South Australia. A report prepared for the South Australian EPA. 12 (Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Adelaide, South Australia, 1997).

22.
Cameron, J. Near-shore seagrass change between 1995/6 and 2002 mapped using digital aerial orthophotography, metropolitan Adelaide area, North Haven-Sellicks Beach, South Australia. 21 (South Australian Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide, South Australia, 2003).

23.
Cameron, J. Near-shore seagrass change between 2002 and 2007 mapped using digital aerial orthophotography, metropolitan Adelaide area, Port Gawler-Marino, South Australia. 27 (Environment Protection Authority and Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide, South Australia, 2008).

24.
Hart, D. Seagrass extent change 2007–13 – Adelaide coastal waters. DEWNR technical note 2013/07. 19 (Department of Environment Water and Natural Resources, Adelaide, South Australia, 2013).

25.
Pu, R., Bell, S., Baggett, L., Meyer, C. & Zhao, Y. Discrimination of seagrass species and cover classes with in situ hyperspectral data. J. Coast. Res. 28, 1330–1344 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Hedley, J. D., Harborne, A. R. & Mumby, P. J. Simple and robust removal of sun glint for mapping shallow-water benthos. Int. J. Remote Sens. 26, 2107–2112 (2005).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

27.
Blackburn, D. T. & Dekker, A. G. Remote sensing study of marine and coastal features and interpretation of changes in relation to natural and anthropogenic processes. Final Technical Report. ACWS Technical Report No.6 prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee. 177 (David Blackburn Environmental Pty Ltd and CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, South Australia, 2006).

28.
Bryars, S. & Rowling, K. Benthic habitats of Eastern Gulf St Vincent: major changes in benthic cover and composition following European settlement of Adelaide. Trans. R. Soc S. Aust. 133, 318–338 (2009).
Google Scholar 

29.
Kuo, J., Cambridge, M. L. & Kirkman, H. Anatomy and structure of australian seagrasses. In Seagrasses of Australia. Structure, Ecology and Conservation (eds Anthony W.D. Larkum, Gary A. Kendrick, & Peter J. Ralph) Ch. 4, 93–125 (Springer, Berlin, 2018).

30.
Neverauskas, V. P. Monitoring seagrass beds around a sewage sludge outfall in South Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18, 158–164 (1987).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Bryars, S., Collings, G. & Miller, D. Nutrient exposure causes epiphytic changes and coincident declines in two temperate Australian seagrasses. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 441, 89–103 (2011).
CAS  Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

32.
Neverauskas, V. P. Accumulation of periphyton biomass on artificial substrates deployed near a sewage sludge outfall in South Australia. Est. Coast. Shelf Sci. 25, 509–517 (1987).
Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

33.
Burnell, O. W., Connell, S. D., Irving, A. D. & Russell, B. D. Asymmetric patterns of recovery in two habitat forming seagrass species following simulated overgrazing by urchins. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 448, 114–120 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Westphalen, G. et al. A review of seagrass loss on the Adelaide metropolitan coastline. Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Technical Report No. 2, August 2004. SARDI Aquatic Sciences Publication No. RD04/0073. 68 (South Australian Research & Development Institute, Adelaide, South Australia, 2004).

35.
Bryars, S. & Neverauskas, V. Natural recolonisation of seagrasses at a disused sewage sludge outfall. Aquat. Bot. 80, 283–289 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
McDowell, L.-M. & Pfennig, P. Adelaide Coastal Water Quality Improvement Plan (ACWQIP) 162 (Adelaide, South Australia, 2013).
Google Scholar 

37.
Cheshire, A. C. Adelaide Coastal Waters fore-sighting workshop report. Prepared for SA Environment Protection Authority. 102 (Science to Manage Uncertainty, Adelaide, South Australia, 2018).

38.
Wilkinson, J. et al. Volumes of inputs, their concentrations and loads received by Adelaide metropolitan coastal waters. ACWS Technical Report No. 18 prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee. 83 (Flinders Centre for Coastal and Catchment Environments (Flinders University of SA), Adelaide, South Australia, 2005).

39.
Pattiaratchi, C., Newgard, J. & Hollings, B. Physical oceanographic studies of Adelaide coastal waters using high resolution modelling, in-situ observations and satellite techniques – Sub Task 2 Final Technical Report. ACWS Technical Report No. 20 prepared for the Adelaide Coastal Waters Study Steering Committee. 92 (School of Environmental Systems Engineering (The University of Western Australia), Crawley, Australia, 2007).

40.
van Gils, J., Erftemeijer, P. L. A., Fernandes, M. & Daly, R. Development of the Adelaide Receiving Environment Model. Deltares report 1210877–000. 152 (Delft, the Netherlands, 2017).

41.
Gaylard, S., Nelson, M. & Noble, W. The South Australian monitoring, evaluation and reporting program for aquatic ecosystems: Rationale and methods for the assessment of nearshore marine waters. 70 (Environment Protection Authority, Adelaide, South Australia, 2013).

42.
Richter, R. & Schläpfer, D. Atmospheric/Topographic Correction for Airborne Imagery, ATCOR-4 User Guide, Version 4.2. 125 (DLR, Wessling, Germany, 2007).

43.
Whiteway, T. Australian Bathymetry and Topography Grid. Record 2009/21. (Geoscience Australia, Canberra, 2009). More

1.
Jenkyns, H. C. Geochemistry of oceanic anoxic events. Geochem. Geophy. Geosy. 11, Q03004 (2010).
Google Scholar 
2.
Gambacorta, G., Bersezio, R., Weissert, H. & Erba, E. Onset and demise of Cretaceous oceanic anoxic events: The coupling of surface and bottom oceanic processes in two pelagic basins of the western Tethys. Paleoceanography 31, 732–757 (2016).
Google Scholar 

3.
Palfy, J. & Smith, P. L. Synchrony between Early Jurassic extinction, oceanic anoxic event, and the Karoo–Ferrar flood basalt volcanism. Geology 28, 747–750 (2000).
Google Scholar 

4.
Leckie, R. M., Bralower, T. J. & Cashman, R. Oceanic anoxic events and plankton evolution: Biotic response to tectonic forcing during the mid‐Cretaceous. Paleoceanography 17, 13-11–13-29 (2002).
Google Scholar 

5.
Erba, E. Calcareous nannofossils and Mesozoic oceanic anoxic events. Mar. Micropaleontol. 52, 85–106 (2004).
Google Scholar 

6.
Erbacher, J. V. J. T. & Thurow, J. Influence of oceanic anoxic events on the evolution of mid-Cretaceous radiolaria in the North Atlantic and western Tethys. Mar. Micropaleontol. 30, 139–158 (1997).
Google Scholar 

7.
Harries, P. J. & Little, C. T. The early Toarcian (Early Jurassic) and the Cenomanian–Turonian (Late Cretaceous) mass extinctions: similarities and contrasts. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 154, 39–66 (1999).
Google Scholar 

8.
Danise, S., Twitchett, R. J. & Little, C. T. Environmental controls on Jurassic marine ecosystems during global warming. Geology 43, 263–266 (2015).
CAS  Google Scholar 

9.
Dera, G., Toumoulin, A. & De Baets, K. Diversity and morphological evolution of Jurassic belemnites from South Germany. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 457, 80–97 (2016).
Google Scholar 

10.
Rita, P., Nätscher, P., Duarte, L. V., Weis, R. & De Baets, K. Mechanisms and drivers of belemnite body-size dynamics across the Pliensbachian–Toarcian crisis. Roy. Soc. Open Sci. 6, 190494 (2019).
Google Scholar 

11.
Chun, C. Aus den Tiefen des Weltmeeres, 88 (ed. Fischer, G.) (Schilderungen von der Deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition, 1903).

12.
Seibel, B. A. et al. Vampire blood: respiratory physiology of the vampire squid (Vampyromorpha: Cephalopoda) in relation to the oxygen minimum layer. Exp. Biol. Online 4, 1–10 (1999).
Google Scholar 

13.
Hoving, H. J. T. & Robison, B. H. Vampire squid: Detritivores in the oxygen minimum zone. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 4559–4567 (2012).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

14.
Golikov, A. V. et al. The first global deep-sea stable isotope assessment reveals the unique trophic ecology of Vampire Squid Vampyroteuthis infernalis (Cephalopoda). Sci. Rep. 9, 19099 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

15.
Young, R. & Vecchione, M. Analysis of morphology to determine primary sister taxon relationships within coleoid cephalopods. Am. Malacol. Bull. 12, 91–112 (1996).
Google Scholar 

16.
Strugnell, J. et al. Whole mitochondrial genome of the Ram’s Horn Squid shines light on the phylogenetic position of the monotypic order Spirulida (Haeckel, 1896). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 109, 296–301 (2017).
CAS  Google Scholar 

17.
Sanchez, G. et al. Genus-level phylogeny of cephalopods using molecular markers: current status and problematic areas. PeerJ 6, e4331 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

18.
Lindgren, A. R. et al. A multi-gene phylogeny of Cephalopoda supports convergent morphological evolution in association with multiple habitat shifts in the marine environment. BMC Evol. Biol. 12, 129 (2012).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

19.
Tanner, A. R. et al. Molecular clocks indicate turnover and diversification of modern coleoid cephalopods during the Mesozoic marine revolution. Proc. Biol. Sci. 284, 20162818 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

20.
Lindgren, A. R., Giribet, G. & Nishiguchi, M. K. A combined approach to the phylogeny of Cephalopoda (Mollusca). Cladistics 20, 454–486 (2004).
Google Scholar 

21.
Fara, E. What are Lazarus taxa? Geol. J. 36, 291–303 (2001).
Google Scholar 

22.
Packard, A. Cephalopods and fish: the limits of convergence. Biol. Rev. 47, 241–307 (1972).
CAS  Google Scholar 

23.
Nixon, M. & Young, J. Z. The Brains and Lives of Cephalopods, 1–406 (Oxford University Press, 2003).

24.
Kröger, B. et al. Cephalopod origin and evolution. Bioessays 33, 602–613 (2011).
Google Scholar 

25.
Fuchs, D. Part M, Chapter 9B: the gladius and gladius vestige in fossil Coleoidea. Treatise Online 83, 1–23 (2016).
Google Scholar 

26.
Fuchs, D. et al. The Muensterelloidea: phylogeny and character evolution of Mesozoic stem octopods. Pap. Palaeontol. 6, 31–92 (2019).
Google Scholar 

27.
Fuchs, D. et al. The locomotion system of fossil Coleoidea (Cephalopoda) and its phylogenetic significance. Lethaia 49, 433–454 (2016).
Google Scholar 

28.
Kretzoi, M. Necroteuthis n.gen. (Ceph. Dibr. Necroteuthidae n.f.) aus dem Oligozän von Budapest und das System der Dibranchiata. F.öldt. K.özl. (Bp.) 72, 124–138 (1942).
Google Scholar 

29.
Donovan, D. T. Evolution of the dibranchiate Cephalopoda. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 38, 15–48 (1977).
Google Scholar 

30.
Riegraf, W., Janssen, N., & Schmitt-Riegraf, C. A. in Fossilum Catalogus I. Animalia, Vol. 135 (ed. Westphal, F.), 1–512 (1998).

31.
Fuchs, D. Part M, Coleoidea, chapter 23G: systematic descriptions: octobrachia. Treatise Online 138, 1–52 (2020).
Google Scholar 

32.
Schulz, H. M., Bechtel, A. & Sachsenhofer, R. F. The birth of the Paratethys during the Early Oligocene: from Tethys to an ancient Black Sea analogue? Glob. Planet. Change 49, 163–176 (2005).
Google Scholar 

33.
Bojanowski, M. J. et al. The Central Paratethys during Oligocene as an ancient counterpart of the present-day Black Sea: Unique records from the coccolith limestones. Mar. Geol. 403, 301–328 (2018).
CAS  Google Scholar 

34.
Bizikov, V. A. Evolution of the shell in Cephalopoda, 1–448 (VNIRO, 2008).

35.
Weaver, P. G. et al. Characterization of organics consistent with β-Chitin preserved in the Late Eocene cuttlefish Mississaepia mississippiensis. PLoS ONE 6, e28195 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Kaiho, K. Benthic foraminiferal dissolved-oxygen index and dissolved-oxygen levels in the modern ocean. Geology 22, 719–722 (1994).
CAS  Google Scholar 

37.
Bechtel, A. et al. Facies evolution and stratigraphic correlation in the early Oligocene Tard clay of Hungary as revealed by maceral, biomarker and stable isotope composition. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 35, 55–74 (2012).
CAS  Google Scholar 

38.
Donovan, D. T. Part M., Chapter 9C: composition and structure of gladii in fossil Coleoidea. Treatise Online 75, 1–5 (2016).
Google Scholar 

39.
Nagymarosy, A. et al. The effect of the relative sea-level changes in the north Hungarian Paleogene Basin. Geol. Soc. Greece Spec. Publ. 4, 247–253 (1995).
Google Scholar 

40.
Ozsvárt, P. et al. The Eocene-Oligocene climate transition in the Central Paratethys. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 459, 471–487 (2016).
Google Scholar 

41.
Nyerges, A., Kocsis, T. Á. & Pálfy, J. Changes in calcareous nannoplankton assemblages around the Eocene-Oligocene climate transition in the Hungarian Palaeogene Basin (Central Paratethys). Hist. Biol. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2019.1705295 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Ozsvárt, P. Middle and Late Eocene benthic foraminiferal fauna from the Hungarian Paleogene Basin: systematics and paleoecology. Geol. Pannonica Spec. Pap. 2, 1–129 (2007).
Google Scholar 

43.
Nagymarosy, A. Lower Oligocene nannoplankton in anoxic deposits of the central Paratethys. 8th International Nannoplankton Assoc. Conf., Bremen. J. Nannoplankton Res. 22, 128–129 (2000).
Google Scholar 

44.
Nagymarosy, A. & Voronina, A. A. Calcareous nannoplankton from the Lower Maikopian beds (Early Oligocene, Union of Independent States). In Proc. 4thINA Conf. Prague 1991, Knihovnička ZPN 14b (eds Hamršmíd, B. & Young, J.) 187–221 (Nannoplankton Research, 1992).

45.
Murray, J. W. Ecology and Applications of Benthic Foraminifera, 1–426 (Cambridge University Press, 2006).

46.
Mørk, A. & Bromley, R. G. Ichnology of a marine regressive systems tract: the Middle Triassic of Svalbard. Polar Res. 27, 339–359 (2008).
Google Scholar 

47.
Báldi, T. Mid-Tertiary Stratigraphy and Paleogeographic Evolution of Hungary, 1–201 (Akadémiai Kiadó, 1986).

48.
Khromov, D. N. Distribution patterns in Sepiidae. Smithson. Contr. Zool. 568, 191–206 (1998).
Google Scholar 

49.
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. A model of onshore-offshore change in faunal diversity. Paleobiology 17, 68–77 (1991).
Google Scholar 

50.
Smith, A. B. & Stockley, B. The geological history of deep-sea colonization by echinoids: roles of surface productivity and deep-water ventilation. P. Roy. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 272, 865–869 (2005).
Google Scholar 

51.
Thuy, B. et al. First glimpse into Lower Jurassic deep-sea biodiversity: in situ diversification and resilience against extinction. P. Roy. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 281, 20132624 (2014).
Google Scholar 

52.
Jacobs, D. K. & Lindberg, D. R. Oxygen and evolutionary patterns in the sea: onshore/offshore trends and recent recruitment of deep-sea faunas. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, 9396–9401 (1998).
CAS  Google Scholar 

53.
Zeidberg, L. D. & Robison, B. H. Invasive range expansion by the Humboldt squid, Dosidicus gigas, in the eastern North Pacific. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 12948–12950 (2007).
CAS  Google Scholar 

54.
Rogers, A. D. The role of the oceanic oxygen minima in generating biodiversity in the deep sea. Deep Sea Res. Pt. II 47, 119–148 (2000).
Google Scholar 

55.
Levin, L. A. Oxygen minimum zone benthos: adaptation and community response to hypoxia. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev. 41, 1–45 (2003).
Google Scholar 

56.
Childress, J. J. & Seibel, B. A. Life at stable low oxygen levels: adaptations of animals to oceanic oxygen minimum layers. J. Exp. Biol. 201, 1223–1232 (1998).
CAS  Google Scholar 

57.
Gooday, A. J. et al. Habitat heterogeneity and its influence on benthic biodiversity in oxygen minimum zones. Mar. Ecol. 31, 125–147 (2010).
Google Scholar 

58.
Wood, R. & Erwin, D. H. Innovation not recovery: dynamic redox promotes metazoan radiations. Biol. Rev. 93, 863–873 (2018).
Google Scholar 

59.
Hermoso, M., Minoletti, F. & Pellenard, P. Black shale deposition during Toarcian super‐greenhouse driven by sea level. Clim 9, 2703–2712 (2013).
Google Scholar 

60.
Kruta, I. et al. Proteroctopus ribeti in coleoid evolution. Paleontology 59, 767–773 (2016).
Google Scholar 

61.
Wilby, P. R., Briggs, D. E. & Riou, B. Mineralization of soft-bodied invertebrates in a Jurassic metalliferous deposit. Geology 24, 847–850 (1996).
CAS  Google Scholar 

62.
Etter, W. in Exceptional fossil preservation. A Unique View on the Evolution of Marine Life (eds Bottjer, D. J., Etter, W., Hagadorn, J. W. & Tang, C. M.) 293–305 (Columbia University Press, 2002).

63.
Charbonnier, S., Vannier, J., Gaillard, C., Bourseau, J.-P. & Hantzpergue, P. The La Voulte Lagerstätte (Callovian): Evidence for a deep water setting from sponge and crinoid communities. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 250, 216–236 (2007).
Google Scholar 

64.
Charbonnier, S., Audo, D., Caze, B. & Biot, V. The La Voulte-sur-Rhône Lagerstätte (Middle Jurassic, France). CR Palevol 13, 369–381 (2014).
Google Scholar 

65.
Vannier, J., Schoenemann, B., Gillot, B., S. Charbonnier, S. & Clarkson, E. Exceptional preservation of eye structure in arthropod visual predators from the Middle Jurassic. Nat. Commun. 7, 10320 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

66.
Audo, D. et al. palaeoecology of Voulteryon parvulus (eucrustacea, polychelida) from the Middle Jurassic of La Voulte-sur-Rhône Fossil-Lagerstätte (France). Sci. Rep. 9, 1–13 (2019).
CAS  Google Scholar 

67.
Viohl, G. in Solnhofen. Ein Fenster in die Jurazeit. (eds Arratia, G., Schultze, H.-P., Tischlinger, H. & Viohl, G.) 56–62 (Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, 2015).

68.
Engeser, T. & Reitner, J. Teuthiden aus dem Unterapt (“Töck”) von Helgoland (Schleswig-Holstein, Norddeutschland). Pal. Z. 59, 245–260 (1985).
Google Scholar 

69.
Mutterlose, J., Pauly, S. & Steuber, T. Temperature controlled deposition of early Cretaceous (Barremian–early Aptian) black shales in an epicontinental sea. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 273, 330–345 (2009).
Google Scholar 

70.
Heldt, M., Mutterlose, J., Berner, U. & Erbacher, J. First high-resolution δ13C-records across black shales of the Early Aptian Oceanic Anoxic Event 1a within the mid-latitudes of northwest Europe (Germany, Lower Saxony Basin). Newsl. Stratigr. 45, 151–169 (2012).
Google Scholar 

71.
Bottini, C. & Mutterlose, J. Integrated stratigraphy of Early Aptian black shalesin the Boreal Realm: calcareous nanofossil and stable isotope evidence forglobal and regional processes. Newsl. Stratigr. 45, 115–137 (2012).
Google Scholar 

72.
Landman, N. H. et al. Ammonite extinction and nautilid survival at the end of the Cretaceous. Geology 42, 707–710 (2014).
CAS  Google Scholar 

73.
Fuchs, D., Laptikhovsky, V., Nikolaeva, S., Ippolitov, A. & Rogov, M. Evolution of reproductive strategies in coleoid mollusks. Paleobiology 46, 82–103 (2020).
Google Scholar 

74.
Tajika, A., Nützel, A. & Klug, C. The old and the new plankton: ecological replacement of associations of mollusc plankton and giant filter feeders after the Cretaceous? PeerJ 6, e4219 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

75.
Lu, C. C. & Clarke, M. R. Vertical distribution of cephalopods at 40°N, 53°N and 60°N at 20°W in the North Atlantic. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 55, 143–163 (1975).
Google Scholar 

76.
Clements, T., Colleary, C., De Baets, K. & Vinther, J. Buoyancy mechanisms limit preservation of coleoid cephalopod soft tissues in Mesozoic Lagerstätten. Palaeontology 60, 1–14 (2017).
Google Scholar 

77.
Košťák, M., Kohout, O., Mazuch, M. & Čech, S. An unusual occurrence of vascoceratid ammonites in the Bohemian Cretaceous Basin (Czech Republic) marks the lower Turonian boundary between the Boreal and Tethyan realms in central Europe. Cret. Res. 108, 104338 (2020).
Google Scholar 

78.
Oji, T. in Palaeobiology II (eds Briggs, D. E. G. & Crowther, P. R.) 444–447 (Blackwell Science Ltd, 2001).

79.
Báldi, T. A. in Geológiai Kirándulások Magyarország Közepén (ed. Palotai, M.) 94–129 (Hantken Kiadó, 2010).

80.
Tari, G. et al. Paleogene retroarc flexural basin beneath the Neogene Pannonian Basin: a geodynamic model. Tectonophysics 226, 433–455 (1993).
Google Scholar 

81.
Švábenická, L. et al. Biostratigraphy and paleoenvironmental changes on the transition from the Menilite to Krosno lithofacies (Western Carpathians, Czech Republic). Geol. Carpath. 58, 237–262 (2007).
Google Scholar 

82.
Kováč, M. et al. Paleogene palaeogeography and basin evolution of the Western Carpathians, Northern Pannonian domain and adjoining areas. Glob. Planet. Change 140, 9–27 (2016).
Google Scholar 

83.
Nevesskaja, L. A. et al. History of Paratethys. Ann. Inst. Géol. Hong. 70, 337–342 (1987).
Google Scholar 

84.
Lafuente, B., Downs, R. T., Yang, H. & Stone, N. in Highlights in Mineralogical Crystallography (eds Armbruster, T. & Danisi, R. M.) 1–30 (De Gruyter, 2015).

85.
McCrea, J. M. On the isotopic chemistry of carbonates and a paleotemperature scale. J. Chem. Phys. 18, 849–857 (1950).
CAS  Google Scholar 

86.
Guiry, M. D. & Guiry, G. M. AlgaeBase (World-wide electronic publication, National University of Ireland, Galway, accessed May 18, 2020); https://www.algaebase.org.

87.
Holcová, K. Postmortem transport and resedimentation of foraminiferal tests: relations to cyclical changes of foraminiferal assemblages. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 145, 157–182 (1999).
Google Scholar 

88.
Folk, R. L. Nannobacteria and the formation of framboidal pyrite: Textural evidence. J. Earth Syst. Sci. 114, 369–374 (2005).
Google Scholar 

89.
Zágoršek, K. et al. Bryozoan event from Middle Miocene (Early Badenian) lower neritic sediments from the locality Kralice nad Oslavou (Central Paratethys, Moravian part of the Carpathian Foredeep). Int. J. Earth. Sci. 97, 835–850 (2007).

90.
Košťák, M. et al. Micro-computed tomography data supporting the manuscript: Fossil evidence for vampire squid inhabiting oxygen-depleted ocean zones since at least the Oligocene. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13526024 (2021). More

1.
Sanderson, E. W. et al. The human footprint and the last of the wild. Bioscience 52, 891–904 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Wellbeing: Wetlands and Water. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. https://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.358.aspx.pdf (2005).

3.
Waters, C. N. et al. The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene. Science 351, aad2622. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad2622 (2016).

4.
Halpern, B. S. et al. Recent pace of change in human impact on the world’s ocean. Sci. Rep. 9, 11609 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

5.
Vinebrooke, R. D. et al. Impacts of multiple stressors on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: The role of species co-tolerance. Oikos 104, 451–457 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Hewitt, J. E., Ellis, J. I. & Thrush, S. F. Multiple stressors, nonlinear effects and the implications of climate change impacts on marine coastal ecosystems. Glob. Chang. Biol. 22, 2665–2675 (2016).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Côté, I., Darling, E. & Brown, C. Interactions among ecosystem stressors and their importance in conservation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 283, 20152592. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2592 (2016).

8.
Vörösmarty, C. J. et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561 (2010).
ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

9.
Séguin, A., Gravel, D. & Archambault, P. Effect of disturbance regime on Alpha and Beta diversity of rock pools. Biodivers. J. 6, 1–17 (2014).
Google Scholar 

10.
Halpern, B. S. et al. Spatial and temporal changes in cumulative human impacts on the world’s ocean. Nat. Commun. 6, 1–7 (2015).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

11.
Folt, C. L., Chen, C. Y., Moore, M. V. & Burnaford, J. Synergism and antagonism among multiple stressors. Limnol. Oceanogr. 44, 864–877 (1999).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Brook, B. W., Sodhi, N. S. & Bradshaw, C. J. A. Synergies among extinction drivers under global change. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 453–460 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Crain, C. M., Kroeker, K. & Halpern, B. S. Interactive and cumulative effects of multiple human stressors in marine systems. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1304–1315 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Piggott, J. J., Townsend, C. R. & Matthaei, C. D. Reconceptualizing synergism and antagonism among multiple stressors. Ecol. Evol. 5, 1538–1547 (2015).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Galic, N., Sullivan, L. L., Grimm, V. & Forbes, V. E. When things don’t add up: quantifying impacts of multiple stressors from individual metabolism to ecosystem processing. Ecol. Lett. 21, 568–577 (2018).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Brown, C. J., Saunders, M. I., Possingham, H. P. & Richardson, A. J. Managing for interactions between local and global stressors of ecosystems. PLoS ONE 8, e65765. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065765 (2013).
ADS  CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

17.
Brown, C. J., Saunders, M. I., Possingham, H. P. & Richardson, A. J. Interactions between global and local stressors of ecosystems determine management effectiveness in cumulative impact mapping. Divers. Distrib. 20, 538–546 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Kaplan, I. C., Levin, P. S., Burden, M. & Fulton, E. A. Fishing catch shares in the face of global change: A framework for integrating cumulative impacts and single species management. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 67, 1968–1982 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Ghedini, G., Russell, B. D. & Connell, S. D. Managing local coastal stressors to reduce the ecological effects of ocean acidification and warming. Water (Switzerland) 5, 1653–1661 (2013).
Google Scholar 

20.
Hodgson, E. E., Halpern, B. S. & Essington, T. E. Moving beyond silos in cumulative effects assessment. Front. Ecol. Evol. 7, 1–8 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Schindler, D. E. & Hilborn, R. Prediction, precaution, and policy under global change. Science 347, 953–954 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Ling, S. D., Johnson, C. R., Frusher, S. D. & Ridgway, K. R. Overfishing reduces resilience of kelp beds to climate-driven catastrophic phase shift. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 22341–22345 (2009).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Munday, P. L. et al. Ocean acidification impairs olfactory discrimination and homing ability of a marine fish. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 1848–1852 (2009).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Power, M. Assessing the effects of environmental stressors on fish populations. Aquat. Toxicol. 39, 151–169 (1997).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Hodgson, E. E., Essington, T. E. & Halpern, B. S. Density dependence governs when population responses to multiple stressors are magnified or mitigated. Ecology 98, 2673–2683 (2017).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Griffith, G. P. & Fulton, E. A. New approaches to simulating the complex interaction effects of multiple human impacts on the marine environment. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 71, 764–774 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Harvey, E., Séguin, A., Nozais, C., Archambault, P. & Gravel, D. Identify effects dominate the impacts of multiple species extinctions on the functioning of complex food webs. Ecology 94, 169–179 (2013).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Schmolke, A., Brain, R., Thorbek, P., Perkins, D. & Forbes, V. Population modeling for pesticide risk assessment of threatened species—A case study of a terrestrial plant Boltonia decurrens. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 36, 480–491 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Calosi, P. et al. Adaptation and acclimatization to ocean acidification in marine ectotherms: An in situ transplant experiment with polychaetes at a shallow CO2 vent system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B, Biol. Sci. 368, (2013).

30.
Alsterberg, C., Sundbäck, K. & Hulth, S. Functioning of a shallow-water sediment system during experimental warming and nutrient enrichment. PLoS One 7, (2012).

31.
Rosenberg, R. Eutrophication – The future marine coastal nuisance?. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 16, 227–231 (1985).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Levin, L. A. et al. Effects of natural and human-induced hypoxia on coastal benthos. Biogeosciences 6, 2063–2098 (2009).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
McGlathery, K. J., Sundbäck, K. & Anderson, I. C. Eutrophication in shallow coastal bays and lagoons: The role of plants in the coastal filter. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 348, 1–18 (2007).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Attrill, M. J. & Power, M. Effects on invertebrate populations of drought-induced changes in estuarine water quality. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 203, 133–143 (2000).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
McLusky, D. S., Hull, S. C. & Elliott, M. Variations in the intertidal and subtidal macrofauna and sediments along a salinity gradient in the upper Forth estuary. Netherlands J. Aquat. Ecol. 27, 101–109 (1993).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Levinton, J., Doall, M., Ralston, D., Starke, A. & Allam, B. Climate change, precipitation and impacts on an estuarine refuge from disease. PLoS ONE 6(4), e18849 (2011).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Greimel, F. et al. Hydropeaking impacts and mitigation in Riverine ecosystem management: Science for governing towards a sustainable future (ed. Schmutz, S. & Sendzimir, J.) 91–110 (Aquatic Ecology Series 8, 2018).

38.
Parmesan, C. & Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change. Nature 421, 37–42 (2003).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Jordà, G., Marbà, N. & Duarte, C. M. Mediterranean seagrass vulnerable to regional climate warming. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2, 821–824 (2012).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Lotzel, H. K. & Worm, B. Complex interactions of climatic and ecological controls on macroalgal recruitment. Limnol. Oceanogr. 47, 1734–1741 (2002).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Paerl, H. W. & Scott, J. T. Throwing fuel on the fire: Synergistic effects of excessive nitrogen inputs and global warming on harmful algal blooms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 7756–7758 (2010).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Drejou, E. et al. Biodiversity and habitat assessment of coastal benthic communities in a sub-Arctic industrial harbour area. Water J. 12, 2424. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092424 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Romero, F., Acuña, V., Font, C., Freixa, A. & Sabater, S. Effects of multiple stressors on river biofilms depend on the time scale. Sci. Rep. 9, 15810. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-52320-42 (2019).
ADS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

44.
Borja, A., Franco, J. & Pérez, V. A. A marine biotic index to establish the ecological quality of soft-bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environmentls. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 40, 1100–1114 (2000).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Bourget, E., Ardisson, P.-L., Lapointe, L. & Daigle, G. Environmental factors as predictors of epibenthic assemblage biomass in the St Lawrence system. Estuar. Coast. Shelf. Sci. 57, 641–652 (2003).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
McLusky, D.S. & Allan, D.G. Aspects of the biology of Macoma balthica (L.) from estuarine Firth of Forth. J. Molluscan Stud. 42, 31–45 (1976).

47.
Cottrell, R. S., Kenny, D. B., Hutchison, Z. L. & Last, K. S. The influence of organic material and temperature on the burial tolerance of the blue mussel, Mytilus edulis: Considerations for the management of marine aggregate dredging. PLoS ONE 11, 1. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147534 (2020).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Pearson, T. H. & Rosenberg, R. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. 16, 229–311 (1978).
Google Scholar 

49.
Ratcliffe, P.J., Jones, N.V. & Walters, N.J. The survival of Macoma balthica (L.) in mobile sediments. In Feeding and Survival Strategies of Estuarine Organisms (ed. Jones, N.V & Wolff, W.J.) 91–108 (Plenum Press, 1981).

50.
Riaux-Gobin, C. & Klein, B. Microphytobenthic biomass measurement using HPLC and conventional pigment analysis. In Handbooks of Methods in Aquatic Microbial Ecology, (ed. Kemp, P.F., Sherr, B.F., Sherr, E.B. & Cole, J.J.) 369–376 (Lewis Publishers, 1993).

51.
Davies, B. E. Loss-on-ignition as an estimate of soil organic matter. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 38, 150–151 (1974).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Wentworth, C. K. A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. J. Geol. 30, 377–392 (1922).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Folk, R. L. & Ward, W. C. Brazos River Bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters. J. Sediment. Petrol. 27, 3–26 (1957).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Galbraith, P. et al. Physical oceanographic conditions in the Gulf of St. Lawrence during 2018. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2019/046, iv + 69 p. (2019).

55.
Baden, S., Boström, C., Tobiasson, S., Arponen, H. & Moksnes, P. O. Relative importance of trophic interactions and nutrient enrichment in seagrass ecosystems: A broad-scale field experiment in the Baltic-Skagerrak area. Limnol. Oceanogr. 55, 1435–1448 (2010).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Moksnes, P.-O., Gullström, M., Tryman, K. & Baden, S. Trophic cascades in a temperature seagrass community. Oikos 117, 763–777 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Bonsdorff, E. Establisment, growth and dynamics of a Macoma balthica (L.) population. Limnologica. 15, 403–405 (1984)

58.
Castañeda, R. A., Cvetanovska, E., Hamelin, K. M., Simard, M. A. & Ricciardi, A. Distribution, abundance and condition of an invasive bivalve (Corbicula fluminea) along an artificial thermal gradient in the St Lawrence River. Aquat. Invasions. 13, 379–392 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Baden, S. P. & Eriksson, S. P. Role, routes and effects of manganese in crustaceans. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 44, 61–83 (2006).
Google Scholar 

60.
Page, T. M., Worthington, S., Calosi, P. & Stillman, J. H. Effects of elevated pCO2 on crab survival and exoskeleton composition depend on shell function and species distribution: A comparative analysis of carapace and claw mineralogy across four porcelain crab species from different habitats. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 74, 1021–1032 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Small, D., Calosi, P., White, D., Spicer, J. I. & Widdicombe, S. Impact of medium-term exposure to CO2 enriched seawater on the physiological functions of the velvet swimming crab Necora puber. Aquat. Biol. 10, 11–21 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Marchant, H. K., Calosi, P. & Spicer, J. I. Short-term exposure to hypercapnia does not compromise feeding, acid-base balance or respiration of Patella vulgata but surprisingly is accompanied by radula damage. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK 90, 1379–1384 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Horne, F.R. & Tarsitano, S. The mineralization and biomechanics of the exoskeleton. In The Biology and Fisheries of the Slipper Lobster (ed. Lavalli, K.L & Spanier, E.) 183–189 (CRC Press, 2007).

64.
Tao, J., Zhou, D., Zhang, Z., Xu, X. & Tang, R. Magnesium-aspartate-based crystallization switch inspired from shell molt of crustacean. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 22096–22101 (2009).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Menu-Courey, K. et al. Energy metabolism and survival of the juvenile recruits of the American lobster (Homarus americanus) exposed to a gradient of elevated seawater pCO2. Mar. Environ. Res. 143, 111–123 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Siddon, E. C., Heintz, R. A. & Mueter, F. J. Conceptual model of energy allocation in walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) from age-0 to age-1 in the southeastern Bering Sea. Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr. 94, 140–149 (2013).

67.
Anderson, M. J. Permanova: A fortran computer program for permutational multivariate analysis of variance (University of Auckland, Auckland, Department of Statistics, 2005).
Google Scholar 

68.
Clarke, K.R & Gorley, R.N. PRIMER v6: User Manual/Tutorial (Plymouth Routines in Multivariate Ecological Research). PRIMER-E, Plymouth (2006).

69.
Sih, A., Englund, G. & Wooster, D. Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 350–355 (1998).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Thornton, D. C. O., Dong, L. F., Underwood, G. J. C. & Nedwell, D. B. Factors affecting microphytobenthic biomass, species composition and production in the Colne Estuary (UK). Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 27, 285–300 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Pinckney, J., Paerl, H. W. & Fitzpatrick, M. Impacts of seasonality and nutrients on microbial mat community structure and function. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 123, 207–216 (1995).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Lin, J. & Hines, A. H. Effects of suspended food availability on the feeding mode and burial depth of the Baltic clam Macoma balthica. Oikos 69, 28–36 (1994).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Bougrier, S., Hawkins, A. J. S. & Héral, M. Preingestive selection of different microalgal mixtures in Crassostrea gigas and Mytilus edulis, analyzed by flow cytometry. Aquaculture 150, 123–134 (1997).
Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Cognie, B., Barillé, L. & Rincé, Y. Selective feeding of the oyster Crassostrea gigas fed on a natural microphytobenthos assemblage. Estuaries Coast. 24, 126–131 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

75.
Camargo, J. A. & Alonso, Á. Ecological and toxicological effects of inorganic nitrogen pollution in aquatic ecosystems: A global assessment. Environ. Int. 32, 831–849 (2006).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Davenport, J. & Redpath, K.J. Copper and the mussel Mytilus edulis (L.) in Toxins, drugs and pollutants in marine animals (ed. Bolis, L., Zadunaisky, J. & Gilles, R.) 176–189 (Springler-Verlag, 1984).

77.
Gosling, E. Bivalve Molluscs: Biology, Ecology and Culture (ed. Blackwell Publishing) 95–96 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2003).

78.
Hauton, C. Physiological responses: Effects of salinity as a stressor to aquatic in- vertebrates. In Stressors in the Marine Environment: Physiological and Ecological Responses; Societal Implications (ed. Solan, M & Whiteley, N.M.) 3–24 (Oxford University Press, 2016)

79.
Almada-Villela, P. C. The effects of reduced salinity on the shell growth of small Mytilus edulis. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 64, 171–182 (1984).

80.
Kautsky, N., Johannesson, K. & Tedengren, M. Genotypic and phenotypic differences between Baltic and North Sea populations of Mytilus edulis evaluated through reciprocal transplantations. I. Growth and morphology. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 59, 203–210 (1990).

81.
Westerbom, M., Kilpi, M. & Mustonen, O. Blue mussels, Mytilus edulis, at the edge of the range: Population structure, growth and biomass along a salinity gradient in the north-eastern Baltic Sea. Mar. Biol. 140, 991–999 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

82.
Qiu, J., Tremblay, R. & Bourget, E. Ontogenetic changes in hyposaline tolerance in the mussels Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus: implications for distribution. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 228, 143–152 (2002).

83.
Cederwal, H. & Elmgren, R. Biomass increase of benthic macro- fauna demonstrates eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. Ophelia Suppl. 1, 287–304 (1980).
Google Scholar 

84.
Josefson, A. B. & Rasmussen, B. Nutrient retention by benthic macrofaunal biomass of Danish estuaries: Importance of nutrient load and residence time. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 50, 205–216 (2000).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

85.
Carmichael, R. H., Shriver, A. C. & Valiela, I. Bivalve response to estuarine eutrophication: The balance between enhanced food supply and habitat alterations. J. Shellfish Res. 31, 1–11 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

86.
Lin, J. & Hines, A. Effects of suspended food availability on the feeding mode and burial depth of the Baltic clam. Macoma balthica. Oiko 69, 28–36 (1994).
Article  Google Scholar 

87.
Findlay, H. S. et al. Comparing the impact of high CO2 on calcium carbonate structures in different marine organisms. Mar. Biol. Res. 7, 565–575 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

88.
Ries, J.B., Cohen. A.L. & McCorkle, D.C. Marine calcifiers exhibit mixed responses to CO2-induced ocean acidification. Geology 37, 1131−1134 (2009).

89.
Michaelidis, B., Ouzounis, C., Paleras, A. & Pörtner, H. O. Effects of long-term moderate hypercapnia on acid-base balance and growth rate in marine mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 293, 109–118 (2005).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

90.
Whiteley, N. M., Scott, J. L., Breeze, S. J. & McCann, L. Effects of water salinity on acid-base balance in decapod crustaceans. J. Exp. Biol. 204, 1003–1011 (2001).
CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

91.
Darling, E. S. & Côté, I. M. Quantifying the evidence for ecological synergies. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1278–1286 (2008).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

92.
Withey, J. C. et al. Maximizing return on conservation investment in the conterminous USA. Ecol. Lett. 15, 1249–1256 (2012).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar  More

1.
Nicola, G. G., Elvira, B., Jonsson, B., Ayllon, D. & Almodovar, A. Local and global climatic drivers of Atlantic salmon decline in southern Europe. Fish. Res. 198, 78–85 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Peterman, R. M. & Dorner, B. A widespread decrease in productivity of Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) populations in western North America. Canadian J. Fisheries Aquatic Sci. 69, 1255–1260 (2012).

3.
Chaput, G. Overview of the status of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in the North Atlantic and trends in marine mortality. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 69, 1538–1548 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Mills, K. E., Pershing, A. J., Sheehan, T. F. & Mountain, D. Climate and ecosystem linkages explain widespread declines in North American Atlantic salmon populations. Glob. Chang Biol. 19, 3046–3061 (2013).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

5.
Ward, E. J., Anderson, J. H., Beechie, T. J., Pess, G. R. & Ford, M. J. Increasing hydrologic variability threatens depleted anadromous fish populations. Glob. Chang Biol. 21, 2500–2509 (2015).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

6.
Galbreath, P. F., Bisbee, M. A., Dompier, D. W., Kamphaus, C. M. & Newsome, T. H. Extirpation and tribal reintroduction of Coho salmon to the interior Columbia River basin. Fisheries 39, 77–87 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Wasser, S. K. et al. Population growth is limited by nutritional impacts on pregnancy success in endangered Southern Resident killer whales (Orcinus orca). PLoS ONE 12, 0179824 (2017).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

8.
NMFS, National Marine Fisheries Service. West Coast salmon & steelhead listings. NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region. www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/salmon_steelhead/salmon_and_steelhead_listings/salmon_and_steelhead_listings.html (2014).

9.
NRC, Committee on Protection and Management of Pacific Northwest Anadromous Salmonids. Upstream: salmon and society in the Pacific Northwest. Vol. Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology. Commission on Life Sciences (National Academies Press, 1996).

10.
Lehnert, S. J. et al. Genomic signatures and correlates of widespread population declines in salmon. Nat. Commun. 10, 10 (2019).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

11.
Cunningham, C. J., Westley, P. A. H. & Adkison, M. D. Signals of large scale climate drivers, hatchery enhancement, and marine factors in Yukon River Chinook salmon survival revealed with a Bayesian life history model. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 4399–4416 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Abdul-Aziz, O. I., Mantua, N. J. & Myers, K. W. Potential climate change impacts on thermal habitats of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in the North Pacific Ocean and adjacent seas. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 68, 1660–1680 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Hare, J. A. et al. A vulnerability assessment of fish and invertebrates to climate change on the northeast U.S. continental shelf. PLoS ONE 11, e0146756 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

14.
Crozier, L. G. et al. Climate vulnerability assessment for Pacific salmon and steelhead in the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem. PLoS ONE 14, e0217711 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Healey, M. The cumulative impacts of climate change on Fraser River sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) and implications for management. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 68, 718–737 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Honea, J. M., McClure, M. M., Jorgensen, J. C. & Scheuerell, M. D. Assessing freshwater life-stage vulnerability of an endangered Chinook salmon population to climate change influences on stream habitat. Clim. Res. 71, 127–137 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Battin, J. et al. Projected impacts of climate change on salmon habitat restoration. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 6720–6725 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

18.
Thompson, L. C. et al. Water management adaptations to prevent loss of spring-run Chinook Salmon in California under climate change. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 138, 465–478 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Cheung, W. W. L., Brodeur, R. D., Okey, T. A. & Pauly, D. Projecting future changes in distributions of pelagic fish species of Northeast Pacific shelf seas. Prog. Oceanogr. 130, 19–31 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Morley, J. W. et al. Projecting shifts in thermal habitat for 686 species on the North American continental shelf. PLoS ONE 13, e0196127 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

21.
Burke, B. J. et al. Multivariate models of adult Pacific salmon returns. PLoS ONE 8, e54134 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Newman, M. et al. The Pacific decadal oscillation, revisited. J. Clim. 29, 4399–4427 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Achuthavarier, D., Schubert, S. D. & Vikhliaev, Y. V. North Pacific decadal variability: insights from a biennial ENSO environment. Clim. Dyn. 49, 1379–1397 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Crozier, L. G. et al. Potential responses to climate change in organisms with complex life histories: evolution and plasticity in Pacific salmon. Evolut. Appl. 1, 252–270 (2008).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Litzow, M. A. et al. Non-stationary climate-salmon relationships in the Gulf of Alaska. Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 285, 9 (2018).
Google Scholar 

26.
O’Connor, C. M., Norris, D. R., Crossin, G. T. & Cooke, S. J. Biological carryover effects: linking common concepts and mechanisms in ecology and evolution. Ecosphere 5, 1–11 (2014).

27.
Carlson, S. M. & Seamons, T. R. A review of quantitative genetic components of fitness in salmonids: implications for adaptation to future change. Evol. Appl. 1, 222–238 (2008).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Munsch, S. H. et al. Warm, dry winters truncate timing and size distribution of seaward-migrating salmon across a large, regulated watershed. Ecol. Appl. 29, 14 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Otero, J. et al. Basin-scale phenology and effects of climate variability on global timing of initial seaward migration of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Glob. Change Biol. 20, 61–75 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Crozier, L. G., Scheuerell, M. D. & Zabel, R. W. Using time series analysis to characterize evolutionary and plastic responses to environmental change: A case study of a shift toward earlier migration date in sockeye salmon. Am. Naturalist 178, 755–773 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Gosselin, J. L. et al. Conservation planning for freshwater-marine carryover effects on Chinook salmon survival. Ecol. Evolution 8, 319–332 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
United States v. Oregon. 2018-2027 United States v. Oregon Management Agreement. Case 3:68-cv-00513-MO Document 2607-1. (2018).

33.
IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC, 2014).

34.
IPCC. The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/ (2019).

35.
USGCRP, U.S. Global Change Research Program. Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I. (U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2017).

36.
Gosselin, J. L., Crozier, L. G. & Burke, B. J. Shifting signals: Correlations among freshwater, marine and climatic indices often investigated in Pacific salmon studies. Ecological Indicators, 121, 107167 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107167 (2021).
Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Crozier, L. G., Zabel, R. W. & Hamlett, A. F. Predicting differential effects of climate change at the population level with life-cycle models of spring Chinook salmon. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 236–249 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Zabel, R. W., Scheuerell, M. D., McClure, M. M. & Williams, J. G. The interplay between climate variability and density dependence in the population viability of Chinook salmon. Conserv. Biol. 20, 190–200 (2006).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Ford, M. J. et al. 2015 Status Review Update for Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Listed under the Endangered Species Act: Pacific Northwest. National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center. https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/publications/scipubs/display_doctrack_allinfo.cfm?doctrackmetadataid=8623 (2016).

40.
NMFS, National Marine Fisheries Service. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation. Consultation for the Continued Operation and Maintenance of the Columbia River System. NMFS, Portland, Oregon. https://doi.org/10.25923/3tce-8p07. Report No. Consultation number: WCRO-2020-00113 (2020).

41.
Doney, S. C. et al. Climate Change Impacts on Marine Ecosystems. Annual Review of Marine Science, 4, 11–37 (2012).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

42.
Carlson, S. M., Cunningham, C. J. & Westley, P. A. H. Evolutionary rescue in a changing world. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 521–530 (2014).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

43.
Waples, R. S. Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., and the definition of “species” under the endangered species act. Marine Fisheries Rev. 53, 11–22 (1991).

44.
Waples, R. S. Life-history traits and effective population size in species with overlapping generations revisited: the importance of adult mortality. Heredity 117, 241–250 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
ICTRT & Zabel, R. W. Required survival rate changes to meet Technical Recovery Team abundance and productivity viability criteria for interior Columbia River basin salmon and steelhead populations. http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/trt/col_docs/ictrt_gaps_report_nov_2007_final.pdf (NWFSC, Seattle, Washington, 2007).

46.
Scheuerell, M. D., Zabel, R. W. & Sandford, B. P. Relating juvenile migration timing and survival to adulthood in two species of threatened Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.). J. Appl. Ecol. 46, 983–990 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Crozier, L. G. et al. Snake River sockeye and Chinook salmon in a changing climate: implications for upstream migration survival during recent extreme and future climates. PLoS ONE 15, e0238886 (2020).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

48.
McElhany, P., Ruckelshaus, M. H., Ford, M. J., Wainwright, T. C. & Bjorkstedt, E. P. Viable Salmonid Populations and the recovery of Evolutionarily Significant Units. Report No. Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC 42, 156 (National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA, 2000).

49.
Jorgensen, J. C., Ward, E. J., Scheuerell, M. D. & Zabel, R. W. Assessing spatial covariance among time series of abundance. Ecol. Evol. 6, 2472–2485 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Ohlberger, J., Scheuerell, M. D. & Schindler, D. E. Population coherence and environmental impacts across spatial scales: a case study of Chinook salmon. Ecosphere 7, e01333 (2016).

51.
Zimmerman, M. S. et al. Spatial and temporal patterns in smolt survival of wild and hatchery coho salmon in the Salish Sea. Mar. Coast. Fish. 7, 116–134 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Welch, D. W., Porter, A. D. & Rechisky, E. L. A synthesis of the coast‐wide decline in survival of West Coast Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, Salmonidae). Fish Fish. 22, 194–211 (2021).

53.
Dorner, B., Catalano, M. J. & Peterman, R. M. Spatial and temporal patterns of covariation in productivity of Chinook salmon populations of the northeastern Pacific Ocean. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 75, 1082–1095 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Black, B. A. et al. Rising synchrony controls western North American ecosystems. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 2305–2314 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Jones, L. A. et al. Watershed-scale climate influences productivity of Chinook salmon populations across southcentral Alaska. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 4919–4936 (2020).

56.
Cline, T. J., Ohlberger, J. & Schindler, D. E. Effects of warming climate and competition in the ocean for life-histories of Pacific salmon. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 935–942 (2019).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

57.
Litzow, M. A., Ciannelli, L., Cunningham, C. J., Johnson, B. & Puerta, P. Nonstationary effects of ocean temperature on Pacific salmon productivity. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 76, 1923–1928 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Johnstone, J. A. & Mantua, N. J. Atmospheric controls on northeast Pacific temperature variability and change, 1900-2012. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 14360–14365 (2014).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

59.
Lindenmayer, D. B., Likens, G. E., Krebs, C. J. & Hobbs, R. J. Improved probability of detection of ecological “surprises”. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 21957–21962 (2010).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

60.
Ottersen, G., Kim, S., Huse, G., Polovina, J. J. & Stenseth, N. C. Major pathways by which climate may force marine fish populations. J. Mar. Syst. 79, 343–360 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Chasco, B. E. et al. Competing tradeoffs between increasing marine mammal predation and fisheries harvest of Chinook salmon. Sci. Rep. 7, 15439 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

62.
Ruzicka, J. J., Daly, E. A. & Brodeur, R. D. Evidence that summer jellyfish blooms impact Pacific Northwest salmon production. Ecosphere 7, https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1324 (2016).

63.
Morgan, C. A., Beckman, B. R., Weitkamp, L. A. & Fresh, K. L. Recent ecosystem disturbance in the Northern California current. Fisheries 44, 465–474 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Auth, T. D., Daly, E. A., Brodeur, R. D. & Fisher, J. L. Phenological and distributional shifts in ichthyoplankton associated with recent warming in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Glob. Change Biol. 24, 259–272 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Zeidberg, L. D. & Robison, B. H. Invasive range expansion by the Humboldt squid, Dosidicus gigas, in the eastern North Pacific. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 12948–12950 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

66.
Wells, B. K. et al. Environmental conditions and prey-switching by a seabird predator impact juvenile salmon survival. J. Mar. Syst. 174, 54–63 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Marshall, K. N. et al. Risks of ocean acidification in the California Current food web and fisheries: Ecosystem model projections. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 1525–1539 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Ou, M. et al. Responses of pink salmon to CO2-induced aquatic acidification. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 950–955 (2015).

69.
Williams, C. R. et al. Elevated CO2 impairs olfactory-mediated neural and behavioral responses and gene expression in ocean-phase coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Glob. Change Biol. 25, 963–977 (2019).

70.
Chegwidden, O. S. et al. How do modeling decisions affect the spread among hydrologic climate change projections? Exploring a large ensemble of simulations across a diversity of hydroclimates. Earth’s Future 7, 623–637 (2019).

71.
Paulsen, C. M. & Fisher, T. R. Statistical relationship between parr-to-smolt survival of Snake River spring-summer Chinook salmon and indices of land use. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 130, 347–358 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Justice, C., White, S. M., McCullough, D. A., Graves, D. S. & Blanchard, M. R. Can stream and riparian restoration offset climate change impacts to salmon populations? J. Environ. Manag. 188, 212–227 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Andrews, K. S. et al. The legacy of a crowded ocean: indicators, status, and trends of anthropogenic pressures in the California Current ecosystem. Environ. Conserv. 42, 139–151 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Harvey, C. J. et al. Ecosystem status report of the California current for 2019: a summary of Ecosystem indicators compiled by the california current integrated ecosystem assessment team (CCIEA). NOAA Institutional Repository: https://doi.org/10.25923/mvhf-yk36, https://doi.org/10.25923/p0ed-ke21 (2019).

75.
Harvey, C. J., Reum, J. C. P., Poe, M. R., Williams, G. D. & Kim, S. J. Using conceptual models and qualitative network models to advance integrative assessments of marine ecosystems. Coast. Manag. 44, 486–503 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Wells, B. K. et al. Implementing ecosystem-based management principles in the design of a Salmon ocean ecology program. Front. Marine Sci. 7, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00342 (2020).

77.
Adams, J. et al. A century of Chinook salmon consumption by marine mammal predators in the Northeast Pacific Ocean. Ecol. Inform. 34, 44–51 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

78.
Thorne, K. et al. U.S. Pacific coastal wetland resilience and vulnerability to sea-level rise. Sci. Adv. 4, eaao3270 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Weitkamp, L. A., Bentley, P. J. & Litz, M. N. C. Seasonal and interannual variation in juvenile salmonids and associated fish assemblage in open waters of the lower Columbia River estuary. Fish. Bull. 110, 426–450 (2012).
Google Scholar 

80.
Diefenderfer, H. L. et al. Evidence-based evaluation of the cumulative effects of ecosystem restoration. Ecosphere 7, https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1242 (2016).

81.
Kaplan, I. C. et al. Impacts of depleting forage species in the California current. Environ. Conserv. 40, 380–393 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

82.
Collie, J. S. et al. Ecosystem models for fisheries management: finding the sweet spot. Fish. Fish. 17, 101–125 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

83.
Skalski, J. R. et al. Status after 5 years of survival compliance testing in the federal Columbia river power system (FCRPS). North Am. J. Fish. Manag. 36, 720–730 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

84.
Welch, D. W. et al. Survival of migrating salmon smolts in large rivers with and without dams. PLoS Biol. 6, 2101–2108 (2008).
CAS  Google Scholar 

85.
Environmental Protection Agency U.S.A. Region 10. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Temperature in the Columbia and Lower Snake Rivers, May 18, 2020 TMDL for Public Comment. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/columbiariver/tmdl-temperature-columbia-and-lower-snake-rivers (2020).

86.
Gosselin, J. L. & Anderson, J. J. Combining migration history, river conditions, and fish condition to examine cross-life-stage effects on marine survival in Chinook Salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 146, 408–421 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

87.
Zabel, R. W. & Williams, J. G. Selective mortality in chinook salmon: what is the role of human disturbance? Ecol. Appl. 12, 173–183 (2002).
Article  Google Scholar 

88.
Bond, M. H., Nodine, T. G., Beechie, T. J. & Zabel, R. W. Estimating the benefits of widespread floodplain reconnection for Columbia River Chinook salmon. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 76, 1212–1226 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

89.
National Marine Fisheries Service, W. C. R. ESA recovery plan for Snake river sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/16001 (2015).

90.
Hinrichsen, R. A., Hasselman, D. J., Ebbesmeyer, C. C. & Shields, B. A. The role of impoundments, temperature, and discharge on colonization of the Columbia River basin, USA, by nonindigenous American Shad. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 142, 887–900 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

91.
Herbold, B. et al. Managing for salmon resilience in California’s variable and changing climate. San Franc. Estuary Watershed Sci. 16, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8rb3z3nj (2018).

92.
Chittaro, P. et al. Variability in the performance of juvenile Chinook salmon is explained primarily by when and where they resided in estuarine habitats. Ecol. Freshw. Fish. 27, 857–873 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

93.
Beechie, T. et al. Restoring salmon habitat for a changing climate. River Res. Appl. 29, 939–960 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

94.
Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife & Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Snake River ESU Spring Summer Chinook Natural Origin Spawner Abundance Dataset (1949-2017) (2018).

95.
Nez Perce Tribe East Fork South Fork Salmon River summer Chinook and Secesh River summer Chinook, Natural Origin Spawner Abundance Dataset (1957-2017). (Protocol and methods available at https://www.cbfish.org/Document.mvc/Viewer/P165414. Personal communication with Mari Williams, NOAAF NWFSC/OAI 2019, 2019).

96.
StreamNet. Fish data for the Northwest. http://www.streamnet.org/ (2018).

97.
Faulkner, J. R., Widener, D. L., Smith, S. G., Marsh, T. M. & Zabel, R. W. Survival estimates for the passage of spring migrating juvenile salmonids through Snake and Columbia River dams and reservoirs, 2017. (Draft report of the National Marine Fisheries Service to the Bonneville Power Administration. Portland, Oregon). https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/contact/display_staffprofilepubs.cfm?staffid=1524 (2018).

98.
Lamb, J. J. et al. Monitoring the migrations of wild Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon juveniles: survival and timing, 2017. (Report of the National Marine Fisheries Service to the Bonneville Power Administration. Portland, Oregon. https://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/contact/display_staffprofilepubs.cfm?staffid=550 (2018).

99.
DART. Columbia river data access in real time. http://www.cbr.washington.edu/dart/dart.html (2019).

100.
NOAA Fisheries. Salmon population summary. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/sps-abundance-salmon-population-summary-database (2019).

101.
Kareiva, P., Marvier, M. & McClure, M. Recovery and management options for spring/summer Chinook salmon in the Columbia River basin. Science 290, 977–979 (2000).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

102.
Hartig, F., Calabrese, J. M., Reineking, B., Wiegand, T. & Huth, A. Statistical inference for stochastic simulation models—theory and application. Ecol. Letts. 14, 816–827 (2011).

103.
Csillery, K., Blum, M. G. B., Gaggiotti, O. E. & Francois, O. Approximate Bayesian computation (ABC). Pract. Trends Ecol. Evolution 25, 410–418 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

104.
R. Core Team. R version 3.6.2: A Language and Environmental for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2019).

105.
Gompertz, B. On the nature of the function expressive of the law of human mortality, and on a new mode of determining the value of life contingencies. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 182, 513–585 (1825).
Google Scholar 

106.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B. & Rubin, D. B. Bayesian Data Analysis (Chapman & Hall, 2004).

107.
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A. & Gabry, J. Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Stat. Comput. 27, 1413–1432 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

108.
Zabel, R. W., Burke, B. J., Moser, M. L. & Peery, C. Relating dam passage of adult salmon to varying river conditions using time-to-event analysis. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 61, 153–163 (2008).
Google Scholar 

109.
Chasco, B. E., Burke, B. J., Crozier, L. G. & Zabel, R. W. In press. Differential impacts of freshwater and marine covariates on wild and hatchery Chinook salmon marine survival. Plos One.

110.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Northwestern Division Bureau of Reclamation & Administration, P. N. R. B. P. Columbia River System Operations Draft Environmental Impact Statement, February 2020. DOE/EIS-0529 (2020).

111.
Kristensen, K., Nielsen, A., Berg, C. W., Skaug, H. & Bell, B. M. TMB: automatic differentiation and laplace approximation. J. Stat. Softw. 70, 1–21 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

112.
Brady, R. X., Alexander, M. A., Lovenduski, N. S. & Rykaczewski, R. R. Emergent anthropogenic trends in California Current upwelling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 5044–5052 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

113.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, Climate Change web portal, CMIP5 maps. Available at https://psl.noaa.gov/ipcc/ocn/ccwp.html (2018). (Accessed November 2018).

114.
Yearsley, J. R. A semi-Lagrangian water temperature model for advection-dominated river systems. Water Resour. Res. 45, W12405 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

115.
Brekke, L., Kuepper, B. & Vaddey, S. Climate and hydrology datasets for use in the RMJOC agencies’ longer-term planning studies: Part 1 – Future Climate and Hydrology Datasets. https://www.usbr.gov/pn/climate/planning/reports/index.html (2010). More

1.
Eckert, K. D., Keiter, D. A. & Beasley, J. C. Animal visitation to wild pig (Sus scrofa) wallows and implications for disease transmission. J. Wildl. Dis. 55, 488–493. https://doi.org/10.7589/2018-05-143 (2019).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 
2.
Fenaux, H. et al. Transmission of hepatitis E virus by water: an issue still pending in industrialized countries. Water Res. 151, 144–157 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Atwill, E. R. et al. Prevalence of and associated risk factors for shedding Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts and Giardia cysts within feral pig populations in California. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 63, 3946–3949 (1997).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Hampton, J., Spencer, P. B. S., Elliot, A. D. & Thompson, R. C. A. Prevalence of zoonotic pathogens from feral pigs in major public drinking water catchments in Western Australia. EcoHealth 3, 103–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-006-0018-8 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

5.
McClure, M. L. et al. Modeling and mapping the probability of occurrence of invasive wild pigs across the contiguous United States. PLoS ONE 10, e0133771. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133771 (2015).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

6.
Mayer, J. J. & Beasley, J. C. Ecology and management of terrestrial vertebrate invasive species in the United States 221–250 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2017).
Google Scholar 

7.
Boughton, E. H. & Boughton, R. K. Modification by an invasive ecosystem engineer shifts a wet prairie to a monotypic stand. Biol. Invas. 16, 2105–2114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-014-0650-0 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Hone, J. Feral pig rooting in a mountain forest and woodland: distribution, abundance and relationships with environmental variables. Aust. J. Ecol. 13, 393–400 (1988).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Belden, R. C. & Pelton, M. R. Wallows of the European Wild Hog in the Mountains of East Tennessee. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 51, 91–93 (1976).
Google Scholar 

10.
Kaller, M. & Kelso, W. in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 291–298.

11.
Kaller, M. D. & Kelso, W. E. Swine activity alters invertebrate and microbial communities in a coastal plain watershed. Am. Midl. Nat. 156, 163–178 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Kaller, M. D., Hudson, J. D. III., Achberger, E. C. & Kelso, W. E. Feral hog research in western Louisiana: expanding populations and unforeseen consequences. Hum. Wildl. Confl. 1, 168–177 (2007).
Google Scholar 

13.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Summary of Impaired Waters and TMDL Information, accessed Nov. 20, 2020 at https://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control?p_report_type=T (2020).

14.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Recreational Water Quality Criteria. (Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Science and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 820-F-12-058, 2012).

15.
Hutton, T., DeLiberto, T. J., Owen, S. & Morrison, B. Disease risks associated with increasing feral swine numbers and distribution in the United States. Mich. Bovine Tubercul. Bibliogr. Database 59, 1–15 (2006).
Google Scholar 

16.
Ruiz-Fons, F. A review of the current status of relevant zoonotic pathogens in wild swine (Sus scrofa) populations: changes modulating the risk of transmission to humans. Transb. Emerg. Dis. 64, 68–88 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Shwiff, S., Shwiff, S., Holderieath, J., Haden-Chomphosy, W. & Anderson, A. Ecology and management of terrestrial vertebrate invasive species in the United States 35–60 (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2017).
Google Scholar 

18.
Brown, V., Bowen, R. & Bosco-Lauth, A. Zoonotic pathogens from feral swine that pose a significant threat to public health. Transb. Emerg. Dis. 65, 649–659 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Jay, M. T. et al. Escherichia coli O157:H7 in feral swine near spinach fields and cattle, central California coast. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 13, 1908–1911. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1312.070763 (2007).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

20.
Friebel, A. & Jodice, P. Home range and habitat use of feral hogs in Congaree National Park, South Carolina. Hum. Wildl. Confl. 3, 49–63 (2009).
Google Scholar 

21.
Zengel, S. Wild pig habitat use, substrate disturbance, and understory vegetation at Congaree National Park Ph. D. thesis, Clemson University (2008).

22.
U.S. National Park Service. Final management plan for non-native wild pigs within Congaree National Park (CONG), with Environmental Assessment. (2014).

23.
U.S. National Park Service. National Park Service Visitor Use Statistics, 2020).

24.
McCarthy, S. Bacterial Water Quality Monitoring as Citizen Science in Congaree National Park, South Carolina MSc thesis, University of South Carolina, (2020).

25.
DHEC. The State of South Carolina’s 2016 Integrated Report Part I: Listing of Impaired Waters, accessed Nov. 20, 2020 at https://scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/docs/HomeAndEnvironment/Docs/tmdl_16-303d.pdf (2016).

26.
Meays, C., Broersma, K., Nordin, R. & Mazumder, A. Source tracking fecal bacteria in water: a critical review of current methods. J. Environ. Manag. 73, 71–79 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Bernhard, A. & Field, K. A PCR assay to discriminate human and ruminant feces on the basis of host differences in Bacteroides-Prevotella genes encoding 16S rRNA. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66, 4571–4574 (2000).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Beversdorf, L. J., Bornstein-Forst, S. M. & McLellan, S. L. The potential for beach sand to serve as a reservoir for Escherichia coli and the physical influences on cell die-off. J. Appl. Microbiol. 102, 1372–1381. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.03177.x (2007).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

29.
Byappanahalli, M. N., Nevers, M. B., Korajkic, A., Staley, Z. R. & Harwood, V. J. Enterococci in the Environment. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 76, 685–706. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.00023-12 (2012).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

30.
Byappanahalli, M. N., Roll, B. M. & Fujioka, R. S. Evidence for occurrence, persistence, and growth potential of Escherichia coli and enterococci in Hawaii’s soil environments. Microbes Environ. 27, 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1264/jsme2.ME11305 (2012).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

31.
Bradshaw, J. K. et al. Characterizing relationships among fecal indicator bacteria, microbial source tracking markers, and associated waterborne pathogen occurrence in stream water and sediments in a mixed land use watershed. Water Res https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.05.014 (2016).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

32.
Leray, M. et al. A new versatile primer set targeting a short fragment of the mitochondrial COI region for metabarcoding metazoan diversity: application for characterizing coral reef fish gut contents. Front. Zool. 10, 1 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
McKee, B. A., Molina, M., Cyterski, M. & Couch, A. Microbial source tracking (MST) in chattahoochee river national recreation area: seasonal and precipitation trends in MST marker concentrations, and associations with E. coli levels, pathogenic marker presence, and land use. Water Res. 171, 115435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115435 (2020).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

34.
Allsop, K. & Stickler, J. An assessment fo Bacteroides fragilis group organisms as indicators of human faecal pollution. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 58, 95–99 (1985).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Kreader, C. A. Persistence of PCR-detectable Bacteroides distasonis from human feces in river water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64, 4103–4105. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.64.10.4103-4105.1998 (1998).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
Ballesté, E. & Blanch, A. R. Persistence of Bacteroides Species populations in a river as measured by molecular and culture techniques. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 76, 7608–7616. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.00883-10 (2010).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37.
USNPS. Foundation Document Congaree National Park South Carolina. 76 (U.S. National Park Servic (USNPS), 2014).

38.
Congaree River Keeper. Lower Richland Sewer Project (2014).

39.
McKee, A. M., Bradley, P. M. & Romanok, K. M. Microbial Source Tracking Marker Concentrations in Congaree National Park in 2017–2019, South Carolina, USA: U.S. Geological Survey data release. https://doi.org/10.5066/P9GFT8M7 (2020).

40.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Method 1603: Escherichia coli (E. coli) in Water by Membrane Filtration Using Modified membrane-Thermotolerant Escherichia coli Agar (Modified mTEC). 42 (Washington, D.C., 2009).

41.
Bauer, L. & Alm, E. Escherichia coli toxin and attachment genes in sand at Great Lakes recreational beaches. J. Great Lakes Res. 38, 129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2011.10.004 (2012).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Duris, J. W., Haack, S. K. & Fogarty, L. R. Gene and antigen markers of shiga-toxin producing E. coli from Michigan and Indiana River water: occurrence and relation to recreational water quality criteria. J. Environ. Qual. 38, 1878–1886 (2009).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Myers, D. N., Stoeckel, D. M., Bushon, R. N., Francy, D. S. & Brady, A. M. G. in Book 9, chap. A7, section 7.1, May 2014 (2014).

44.
Videnska, P. et al. Stool sampling and DNA isolation kits affect DNA quality and bacterial composition following 16S rRNA gene sequencing using MiSeq Illumina platform. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–14 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Claassen, S. et al. A comparison of the efficiency of five different commercial DNA extraction kits for extraction of DNA from faecal samples. J. Microbiol. Methods 94, 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2013.05.008 (2013).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

46.
Bradshaw, J. K. et al. Characterizing relationships among fecal indicator bacteria, microbial source tracking markers, and associated waterborne pathogen occurrence in stream water and sediments in a mixed land use watershed. Water Res. 101, 498–509 (2016).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Haugland, R. A. et al. Evaluation of genetic markers from the 16S rRNA gene V2 region for use in quantitative detection of selected Bacteroidales species and human fecal waste by qPCR. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 33, 348–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2010.06.001 (2010).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

48.
Green, H. C. et al. Improved HF183 quantitative real-time PCR assay for characterization of human fecal pollution in ambient surface water samples. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80, 3086–3094 (2014).
Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Mieszkin, S., Yala, J. F., Joubrel, R. & Gourmelon, M. Phylogenetic analysis of Bacteroidales 16S rRNA gene sequences from human and animal effluents and assessment of ruminant faecal pollution by real-time PCR. J. Appl. Microbiol. 108, 974–984. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04499.x (2010).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

50.
Ryu, H. et al. Comparison of two poultry litter qPCR assays targeting the 16S rRNA gene of Brevibacterium sp. Water Res. 48, 613–621 (2014).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Shanks, O. C. et al. Quantitative PCR for detection and enumeration of genetic markers of bovine fecal pollution. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 74, 745–752 (2008).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Imamovic, L., Serra-Moreno, R., Jofre, J. & Muniesa, M. Quantification of Shiga toxin 2-encoding bacteriophages, by real-time PCR and correlation with phage infectivity. J. Appl. Microbiol. 108, 1105–1114 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Mieszkin, S., Furet, J.-P., Corthier, G. & Gourmelon, M. Estimation of pig fecal contamination in a river catchment by real-time PCR using two pig-specific Bacteroidales 16S rRNA genetic markers. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75, 3045–3054 (2009).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Field, J. A. & Lettinga, G. in Plant Polyphenols. Basic Life Sciences, vol 59 (eds Hemingway R.W. & Laks P.E.) (Springer, 1992).

55.
Bradley, P. M. et al. Widespread occurrence and potential for biodegradation of bioactive contaminants in Congaree National Park, USA. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 36, 3045–3056 (2017).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Harestad, A. S. & Bunnel, F. Home range and body weight—a reevaluation. Ecology 60, 389–402 (1979).
Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Sanderson, G. C. The study of mammal movements: a review. J. Wildl. Manag. 30, 215–235 (1966).
Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Wood, G. W. & Brenneman, R. E. Feral hog movements and habitat use in coastal South Carolina. J. Wildl. Manag. 44, 420–427. https://doi.org/10.2307/3807973 (1980).
Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Kurz, J. C. & Marchinton, R. L. Radiotelemetry studies of feral hogs in South Carolina. J. Wildl. Manag. 36, 1240–1248 (1972).
Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Johnston, M. A., Porter, D. E., Scott, G. I., Rhodes, W. E. & Webster, L. F. Isolation of faecal coliform bacteria from the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). J. Appl. Microbiol. 108, 965–973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04498.x (2010).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

61.
Ramos, C. P. et al. Identification and characterization of Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Clostridium perfringens, and C. difficile Isolates from reptiles in Brazil. BioMed Res. Int. 2019, 9530732. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9530732 (2019).
CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

62.
Ballesté, E., García-Aljaro, C. & Blanch, A. R. Assessment of the decay rates of microbial source tracking molecular markers and faecal indicator bacteria from different sources. J. Appl. Microbiol. 125, 1938–1949. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14058 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Hadler, J. L. et al. Ten-year trends and risk factors for non-O157 Shiga Toxin-producing Escherichia coli found through Shiga Toxin testing, Connecticut, 2000–2009. Clin. Infect. Dis. 53, 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir377 (2011).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

64.
Doyle, M. P. & Schoeni, J. L. Survival and growth characteristics of Escherichia coli associated with hemorrhagic colitis. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 48, 855–856 (1984).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Raghubeer, E. V. & Matches, J. R. Temperature range for growth of Escherichia coli serotype O157:H7 and selected coliforms in E. coli medium. J. Clin. Microbiol. 28, 803–805 (1990).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Soller, J. A., Schoen, M. E., Bartrand, T., Ravenscroft, J. E. & Ashbolt, N. J. Estimated human health risks from exposure to recreational waters impacted by human and non-human sources of faecal contamination. Water Res. 44, 4674–4691 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Schoen, M. E. & Ashbolt, N. J. Assessing pathogen risk to swimmers at non-sewage impacted recreational beaches. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 2286–2291 (2010).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Sedmak, G., Bina, D., MacDonald, J. & Couillard, L. Nine-year study of the occurrence of culturable viruses in source water for two drinking water treatment plants and the influent and effluent of a wastewater treatment plant in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (August 1994 through July 2003). Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71, 1042–1050 (2005).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

69.
Medina, R. A. & García-Sastre, A. Influenza A viruses: new research developments. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 9, 590–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro2613 (2011).
CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

70.
Soller, J. A., Bartrand, T., Ashbolt, N. J., Ravenscroft, J. & Wade, T. J. Estimating the primary etiologic agents in recreational freshwaters impacted by human sources of faecal contamination. Water Res. 44, 4736–4747 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

71.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. in EPA 822-R-10-005. (US EPA Office of Water, Washington, DC, 2010).

72.
Fredriksson-Ahomaa, M., Wacheck, S., Bonke, R. & Stephan, R. Different enteropathogenic Yersinia strains found in wild boars and domestic pigs. Foodborne Pathogens Dis. 8, 733–737 (2011).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Lara, G. H. B. et al. Occurrence of Mycobacterium spp. and other pathogens in lymph nodes of slaughtered swine and wild boars (Sus scrofa). Res. Vet. Sci. 90, 185–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2010.06.009 (2011).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

74.
Pond, K. Water recreation and disease, plausibility of associated infections: acute effects, sequelae, and mortality (World Health Organization, London, 2005).
Google Scholar 

75.
Soller, J. et al. Estimated human health risks from recreational exposures to stormwater runoff containing animal faecal material. Environ. Model. Softw. 72, 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.05.018 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Nguyen, K. et al. Determination of wild animal sources of fecal indicator bacteria by microbial source tracking (MST) influences regulatory decisions. Water Res. 144, 424–434 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

77.
Balanson, S. Holding nature responsible: the natural conditions exception to water quality standards of the clean water act. Clev. St. L. Rev. 56, 1057 (2008).
Google Scholar  More

Present study aimed to develop a risk model to identify the risk localities in the dengue high risk areas. Kernel density and Euclidean distance based approaches are widely used in raster development of GIS modelling. Kernel density was used to fit a smoothly tapered surface to point layers while Euclidean distance was used to identify close exposures of polygon layers17. The risk values were ranked for each layer depending on their contribution to the transmission of dengue incidences. Based on the ILWIS Applications Guide18, the maximum risk value for the developed model was assigned as 10. Previous study conducted on mathematical modelling of dengue incidences in the Gampaha District have stated exponential influence of previous month cases on current month disease transmission in the district19. Further, investigation on adult and immature stages of dengue vector mosquitoes indicated that DENV are present in adult dengue vector mosquitoes and significant correlations of entomological indices with patient cases in the same district20,21. Therefore, patient locations and positive breeding container layers were selected as maximum risk variables and assigned the risk value of 10 as these variables are directly involved in disease transmission. In the modelling, dispersed risk distance patient cases and breeding places were selected less than average flight distance of dengue vector mosquitoes which is 400m22. Further, these study areas are considered to be highly congested areas and therefore, total building and home garden layers were given second highest ranking. Previous study conducted in Indonesia reported that consistent high number of dengue cases in larger areas of buildings even though the correlation is weak23. Further, higher dengue vector population densities were reported around home gardens from many countries24,25,26. Therefore, moderate risk level, risk value of 6, was assigned to total buildings and home garden layers. Recent study conducted in the Gampaha District demonstrated the contribution of daily commutes of people for transmission of dengue in the district27. When people visited to urban areas, there is higher probability of acquiring of dengue as these urban and suburban areas may act as dengue hot spots and artificial reservoirs which has been documented previously in Sri Lanka as well as other countries28,29,30,31. Therefore, land use layer for urban areas was given third highest ranking in the risk model. Another study conducted in Sri Lanka reported roads are important aspects for transmission of dengue25 and households in the present study areas located along main roads or have access roads. Further, previous study in Sri Lanka reported the potentials of public places play as artificial reservoirs dengue32 because of higher prevalence of breeding places around public places. It is a well-known fact that distribution of dengue vector mosquitoes varies with the elevation depending on geographical areas. Therefore, roads, public places and elevation layers were ranked in the third position with risk level of 4. However, the lower risk distances were assigned to road and contour layers as the layers are not related directly for transmission of the disease even though they play important role. Previous study conducted in Kenya and Uganda has reported higher dengue vector mosquito populations close to vegetation and marshy lands33 which may provide resting places of dengue vectors, especially for male mosquitos. When considering the study areas, with the exception of the 3rd Kurana study area, all other study areas have close proximity to marshy areas and therefore these areas were included as a variable in the present study. Since it is not directly involving in mosquito population increase or disease transmission, the lowest rank was assigned to marshy areas of land use layers.
When comparing the generated risk maps with satellite imageries, vegetation covers were observed in high risk localities in all study areas. The reason could be the vegetation covers make better resting places for dengue vector mosquitoes. Even though the Ae. aegypti mosquitoes, the main vector of DENV, rest indoors34, previous studies conducted in Malaysia and Kenya reported the preference of Ae. aegypti to rest and breed outdoors due to increased breeding opportunities without affecting lifespan or gonotrophic activity35,36. Meanwhile, it is well-known fact that Ae. albopictus, the subsidiary vector of DENV, prefers vegetation to rest and breeding in both natural and man-made containers37,38.
When comparing the intensity maps generated from the Poisson point process model with generated risk maps, differences in localization of intensities were observed specially in Eriyawetiya and Welikadamulla study areas. In the risk map of Eriyawetiya study area, risk localities were located mainly along the roads in the area and this observation was even statistically significant in Pearson correlation analysis. However, when considering the intensity map from the Poisson point process model, lower predicted intensity was observed in most of the locations in the study area and high intensities were observed around the southern border along the Devasumithrarama road and in central area. When considering the Welikadamulla study area, even though risk map indicates that dengue is high virtually all over the area, the predicted intensity map illustrates that dengue may high in central and northern border of the area along the Welikadamulla road. Interestingly, while the dengue high intensity localities in both Eriyawetiya and Welikadamulla study areas are mainly used as home gardens, these localities have close proximity to crowded public places, such as schools, temples, community halls, etc. Perhaps, these public places may have acted as artificial reservoirs of dengue. This is further observation in the high density localities in Akbar Town and 3rd Kurana study areas. In the Akbar Town area, high intensities were observed around mosques. In the 3rd Kurana study area, many public places, such as schools and churches, are located in the central and southern area where intensities were high. However, the lowest dengue intensities were observed from the 3rd Kurana study area.
In the Poisson point process model, highest intensity range was observed in the Eriyawetiya study area while the lowest was observed from 3rd Kurana. Eriyawetiya study area is located close to the northern border of Colombo, the commercial capital in Sri Lanka, where highest number of dengue cases are reported in the country39. Recent study reported that human commutes to risk areas in Colombo and transportations may play significant role transmission of dengue in the nearby areas, such as Eriyawetiya study area, leading to higher intensities21. However, the overall lowest intensities reported from 3rd Kurana study area may be due to continuous encouragement of dwellers in the area to remove dengue vector mosquito breeding places and use of protective measures by the churches and clergies.
The results of Pearson correlation analysis and Poisson multivariate point process model were also different especially with respect to positive breeding locations and roads layers. Positive correlation was observed between breeding places and patient locations in Pearson correlation analysis, which can be expected as dengue vector mosquitoes are anthropophilic mosquitoes with low flying ranges, were different from the results of Poisson point process model. In the model, no or negative correlation was observed between patient locations and breeding places. In a multivariate model, all explanatory variables are modelled to capture the true variation of the response variable while in Pearson correlation only one explanatory variable is considered at a time. The negative correlation in Poisson model with breeding places may be due to the hidden breeding places. These breeding places may be unidentified due to level of personal expertise, restrictions of accessibility to household, limitations due to inadequate resources, etc. which lead to differences between actual adult population and larval indices21. Further, even though road layers were shown similar behaviours for 3rd Kurana and Welikadamulla study areas both in Pearson correlations and Poisson modelling, differences were observed in Eriyawetiya and Akbar Town. The positive correlations observed between patient locations and road layers could probably be because of high congestion of households alongside the roads and therefore, even single DENV infected mosquitos can spread the disease to all households as these mosquitoes probe many humans during blood feeding. Similar observation has been reported in previous study conducted in West Indies40. The study further states that more dengue cases being found within 1–3 km away from various types of roads. This may be the reason for the observed negative estimates from multivariate Poisson model in Eriyawetiya and Akbar Town study areas as the patient locations are very close to access roads.
When analysing the observed (K) -functions of the developed Poisson multivariate models for the study areas, both clustering and dispersions were observed for Eriyawetiya and 3rd Kurana study areas while only clustering was observed in the Akbar Town and Welikadamulla areas. Interestingly, in Eriyawetiya and 3rd Kurana study areas, clustering was observed a radius of approximately 150 m. This is comparable to the general flying range of dengue vector mosquitoes, especially with regards to the Ae. aegypti41, the main dengue vector mosquito. Further, this may be an indicative of that patients in a small areal cluster are prompted due to a single infected dengue vector mosquito. During the analysis, both isotropic42 and translation43 edge correction methods were considered, therefore, edge effects arising from the unobserved patient locations outside study area can be hampered when estimating the (K)-functions. The estimations of (K)-functions were within the upper and lower envelopes of simulated functions in Akbar Town, 3rd Kurana and Welikadamulla study areas, that is, given particular distance, the data and simulated patterns were statistically equivalent. This indicates that dengue patient locations in the study areas were undergone a complete random pattern or CSR except for Eriyawetiya study area. This observation is further confirmed by the results of Maximum Absolute Deviation (MAD) and the Diggle-Cressie-Loosmore-Ford (DCLF) non-graphical tests44.
Among four monsoon seasons, the first inter-monsoon season occurs during March and April months. The Southwest monsoon period starts in May and it lasts till September. During the October and November, the second inter-monsoon period occurs and the Northeast monsoon lasts for three months from December to February. When analysing the distribution of dengue incidences in the monsoon periods, the highest number of dengue incidences were reported from the Southwest monsoon period in all study areas. The Gampaha District is located in the western part of Sri Lanka and during the monsoon period, the district experiences a rainfall of 750–2000 mm. In other monsoon periods, rainfall of the Gampaha District is less than 1000 mm45. The reason for higher precipitation in the Southwest monsoon period includes the presence of abundant water bodies, such as Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean, leading to higher accumulation of moisture in Southwest monsoon winds46. The higher rainfalls increase not only the availability of the breeding containers for dengue vector mosquitoes, but also favourable environmental conditions, viz. humidity and temperature, for its development. This will lead to increased disease transmission during the Southwest monsoon season compared to other monsoon seasons.
The developed models can be used to identify risk localities easily for healthcare workers and decision makers. The Poisson point process models can be developed using freely available software and packages. Further, road maps can be easily obtained for freely available sources and modified easily using freely available GIS software. With the advantages of technology, correct GPS locations of positive dengue vector mosquito breeding places and patients can be easily obtained using mobile devices with minimum wage during vector control programmes and export directly into GIS software. Since roads, land use, buildings and contour being not changing frequently in a particular area, with the aid of available data on patient locations as well as positive breeding places, it is possible to develop risk maps monthly or biannually to assess the risk levels of high risk areas. Further, when health authorities have risk map of particular area over few years, then it is possible to identify risk localities and transmission of dengue in an area in advance. This is particularly important in outbreaks and epidemic progression, so that they can have a better scenario of undergone situation to use scarce health resources effectively to control disease transmission. Meantime, the model can be further enhanced by incorporating serotype data which may lead identify index cases and initial clusters. A combined approach of predictive mathematical models19 and genetic approaches to identify the virulence of circulating dengue viruses21 will provide sufficient information for health authorities to take timely actions, such as intensive source reduction programmes, targeted intervention programmes or deploy vector reduction tools such as ovitraps9, to manage the situation to prevent propagation of outbreaks and epidemics. More