Ecology

1.
Foley, J. A. et al. Global consequences of land use. Science 309, 570–574 (2005).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Ellis, E. C., Goldewijk, K. K., Siebert, S., Lightman, D. & Ramankutty, N. Anthropogenic transformation of the biomes, 1700 to 2000. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 19, 589–606 (2010).
Google Scholar 

3.
Concepción, E. D., Moretti, M., Altermatt, F., Nobis, M. P. & Obrist, M. K. Impacts of urbanisation on biodiversity: the role of species mobility, degree of specialisation and spatial scale. Oikos 124, 1571–1582 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Lowry, H., Lill, A. & Wong, B. B. M. Behavioural responses of wildlife to urban environments. Biol. Rev. 88, 537–549 (2013).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Callaghan, C. T. et al. Generalists are the most urban-tolerant of birds: a phylogenetically controlled analysis of ecological and life history traits using a novel continuous measure of bird responses to urbanization. Oikos 128, 845–858 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Ducatez, S., Sayol, F., Sol, D. & Lefebvre, L. Are urban vertebrates city specialists, artificial habitat exploiters, or environmental generalists? Integr. Comp. Biol. 58, 929–938 (2018).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Murray, M. H. et al. City sicker? A meta-analysis of wildlife health and urbanization. Front. Ecol. Environ. 17, 575–583 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Lyons, J., Mastromonaco, G., Edwards, D. B. & Schulte-Hostedde, A. I. Fat and happy in the city: eastern chipmunks in urban environments. Behav. Ecol. 28, 1464–1471 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Meillère, A. et al. Corticosterone levels in relation to trace element contamination along an urbanization gradient in the common blackbird (Turdus merula). Sci. Total Environ. 566–567, 93–101 (2016).
ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

10.
Soto-Calderón, I., Acevedo-Garcés, Y., Álvarez-Cardona, J., Hernandez, C. & García, G. Physiological and parasitological implications of living in a city: the case of the white-footed tamarin (Saguinus leucopus). Am. J. Primatol. 78, (2016).

11.
Sillero-Zubiri, C., Sukumar, R. & Treves, A. Living with wildlife: the roots of conflict and the solutions. In Key Topics in Conservation Biology (eds. MacDonald, D. & Service, K.) 255–272 (2006).

12.
Muegge, B. D. et al. Diet drives convergence in gut microbiome functions across mammalian phylogeny and within humans. Science 332, 970–974 (2011).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Hanning, I. & Diaz-Sanchez, S. The functionality of the gastrointestinal microbiome in non-human animals. Microbiome 3, 51 (2015).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Tremaroli, V. & Bäckhed, F. Functional interactions between the gut microbiota and host metabolism. Nature 489, 242–249 (2012).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Pickard, J. M., Zeng, M. Y., Caruso, R. & Núñez, G. Gut microbiota: role in pathogen colonization, immune responses, and inflammatory disease. Immunol. Rev. 279, 70–89 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Mockler, B. K., Kwong, W. K., Moran, N. A. & Koch, H. Microbiome structure influences infection by the parasite Crithidia bombi in bumble bees. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 84, e02335-e2417 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Suzuki, T. A. Links between natural variation in the microbiome and host fitness in wild mammals. Integr. Comp. Biol. 57, 756–769 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Kirchoff, N. S., Udell, M. A. & Sharpton, T. J. The gut microbiome correlates with conspecific aggression in a small population of rescued dogs (Canis familiaris). PeerJ 7, e6103 (2019).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

19.
Walter, J. Ecological role of lactobacilli in the gastrointestinal tract: implications for fundamental and biomedical research. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 74, 4985–4996 (2008).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Teyssier, A. et al. Inside the guts of the city: urban-induced alterations of the gut microbiota in a wild passerine. Sci. Total Environ. 612, 1276–1286 (2018).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Murray, M. H. et al. Gut microbiome shifts with urbanization and potentially facilitates a zoonotic pathogen in a wading bird. PLoS ONE 15, 1–16 (2020).
Google Scholar 

22.
Phillips, J. N., Berlow, M. & Derryberry, E. P. The effects of landscape urbanization on the gut microbiome: an exploration into the gut of urban and rural white-crowned sparrows. Front. Ecol. Evol. 6, 148 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Teyssier, A. et al. Diet contributes to urban-induced alterations in gut microbiota: experimental evidence from a wild passerine. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 287, (2020).

24.
Stothart, M. R., Palme, R. & Newman, A. E. M. It’s what’s on the inside that counts: stress physiology and the bacterial microbiome of a wild urban mammal. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, (2019).

25.
Becker, C. G., Longo, A. V., Haddad, C. F. B. & Zamudio, K. R. Land cover and forest connectivity alter the interactions among host, pathogen and skin microbiome. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 284, 20170582 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Bestion, E. et al. Climate warming reduces gut microbiota diversity in a vertebrate ectotherm. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0161 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Barelli, C. et al. Habitat fragmentation is associated to gut microbiota diversity of an endangered primate: implications for conservation. Sci. Rep. 5, 14862 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Trevelline, B. K., Fontaine, S. S., Hartup, B. K. & Kohl, K. D. Conservation biology needs a microbial renaissance: a call for the consideration of host-associated microbiota in wildlife management practices. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 286, (2019).

29.
Nelson, T. M., Rogers, T. L., Carlini, A. R. & Brown, M. V. Diet and phylogeny shape the gut microbiota of Antarctic seals: a comparison of wild and captive animals. Environ. Microbiol. 15, 1132–1145 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Wasimuddin, et al. Gut microbiomes of free-ranging and captive Namibian cheetahs: diversity, putative functions and occurrence of potential pathogens. Mol. Ecol. 26, 5515–5527 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Amato, K. R. et al. Evolutionary trends in host physiology outweigh dietary niche in structuring primate gut microbiomes. ISME J. 13, 576–587 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Gehrt, S. D. & Riley, S. P. D. Coyotes (Canis latrans). in Urban Carnivores: Ecology, Conflict, and Conservation (eds. Gehrt, S. D., Riley, S. P. D. & Cypher, B. L.) 79–95 (2010).

33.
Breck, S. W., Poessel, S. A., Mahoney, P. & Young, J. K. The intrepid urban coyote: a comparison of bold and exploratory behavior in coyotes from urban and rural environments. Sci. Rep. 9, 2104 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

34.
Gier, H. T. Coyotes in Kansas. (1968).

35.
Murray, M. H. et al. Greater consumption of protein-poor anthropogenic food by urban relative to rural coyotes increases diet breadth and potential for human-wildlife conflict. Ecography 38, 001–008 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Massolo, A., Liccioli, S., Budke, C. & Klein, C. Echinococcus multilocularis in North America: the great unknown. Parasite 21, 73 (2014).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Murray, M. H., Edwards, M. A., Abercrombie, B. & St. Clair, C. C. Poor health is associated with use of anthropogenic resources in an urban carnivore. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 282, 20150009 (2015).

38.
Murray, M. H., Hill, J., Whyte, P. & St. Clair, C. C. Urban compost attracts coyotes, contains toxins, and may promote disease in urban-adapted wildlife. Ecohealth 13, 285–292 (2016).

39.
Luong, L. T., Chambers, J. L., Moizis, A., Stock, T. & St. Clair, C. Helminth parasites and zoonotic risk associated with urban coyotes (Canis latrans) in Alberta, Canada. J. Helminthol. 94, e25 (2020).

40.
Corbin, E. et al. Spleen mass as a measure of immune strength in mammals. Mamm. Rev. 38, 108–115 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Newsome, S. D., Ralls, K., Van Horn Job, C., Fogel, M. L. & Cypher, B. L. Stable isotopes evaluate exploitation of anthropogenic foods by the endangered San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). J. Mammol. 91, 1313–1321 (2010).

42.
Huot, J., Poulle, M. & Crate, M. Evaluation of several indices for assessment of coyote (Canis latrans) body composition. Can. J. Zool. 73, 1620–1624 (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Tucker, C. M. et al. A guide to phylogenetic metrics for conservation, community ecology and macroecology. Biol. Rev. 92, 698–715 (2016).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Reese, A. T. & Dunn, R. R. Drivers of microbiome biodiversity: a review of general rules, feces, and ignorance. MBio 9, e01294-e1318 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Pilla, R. & Suchodolski, J. S. The role of the canine gut microbiome and metabolome in health and gastrointestinal disease. Front. Vet. Sci. 6, 498 (2020).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Conlon, M. A. & Bird, A. R. The impact of diet and lifestyle on gut microbiota and human health. Nutrition 7, 17–44 (2015).
Google Scholar 

47.
Makki, K., Deehan, E. C., Walter, J. & Bäckhed, F. The impact of dietary fiber on gut microbiota in host health and disease. Cell Host Microbe 23, 705–715 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

48.
Schnorr, S. L. et al. Gut microbiome of the Hadza hunter-gatherers. Nat. Commun. 5, 3654 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Vieco-Saiz, N. et al. Benefits and inputs from lactic acid bacteria and their bacteriocins as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters during food-animal production. Front. Microbiol. 10, 1–17 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Karasov, W. H. & Douglas, A. E. Comparative digestive physiology. Comp. Physiol. 3, 741–783 (2013).
Google Scholar 

51.
Wang, T. et al. Structural segregation of gut microbiota between colorectal cancer patients and healthy volunteers. ISME J. 6, 320–329 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
AlShawaqfeh, M. K. et al. A dysbiosis index to assess microbial changes in fecal samples of dogs with chronic inflammatory enteropathy. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 93, 1–8 (2017).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

53.
Beldomenico, P. M. & Begon, M. Disease spread, susceptibility and infection intensity: vicious circles? Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 21–27 (2010).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Newsome, S. D., Garbe, H. M., Wilson, E. C. & Gehrt, S. D. Individual variation in anthropogenic resource use in an urban carnivore. Oecologia 178, 115–128 (2015).
ADS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Henderson, G. et al. Rumen microbial community composition varies with diet and host, but a core microbiome is found across a wide geographical range. Sci. Rep. 5, 14567 (2015).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Brennan, C. A. & Garrett, W. S. Fusobacterium nucleatum – symbiont, opportunist and oncobacterium. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 17, 156–166 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Bermingham, E. N., Maclean, P., Thomas, D. G., Cave, N. J. & Young, W. Key bacterial families (Clostridiaceae, Erysipelotrichaceae and Bacteroidaceae) are related to the digestion of protein and energy in dogs. PeerJ 5, e3019 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

58.
Alessandri, G. et al. Metagenomic dissection of the canine gut microbiota: insights into taxonomic, metabolic and nutritional features. Environ. Microbiol. 21, 1331–1343 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Schmidt, M. et al. The fecal microbiome and metabolome differs between dogs fed Bones and Raw Food (BARF) diets and dogs fed commercial diets. PLoS ONE 13, e0201279 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

60.
Sandri, M., Dal Monego, S., Conte, G., Sgorlon, S. & Stefanon, B. Raw meat based diet influences faecal microbiome and end products of fermentation in healthy dogs. BMC Vet. Res. 13, 1–11 (2017).
Google Scholar 

61.
Moon, C. D., Cookson, A. L., Young, W., Maclean, P. H. & Bermingham, E. N. Metagenomic insights into the roles of Proteobacteria in the gastrointestinal microbiomes of healthy dogs and cats. Microbiologyopen 7, e677 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Wu, X. et al. Analysis and comparison of the wolf microbiome under different environmental factors using three different data of next generation sequencing. Sci. Rep. 7, 11332 (2017).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

63.
Wang, B. & Wang, X.-L. Species diversity of fecal microbial flora in Canis lupus familiaris infected with canine parvovirus. Vet. Microbiol. 237, 108390 (2019).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Chen, L. et al. NLRP12 attenuates colon inflammation by maintaining colonic microbial diversity and promoting protective commensal bacterial growth. Nat. Immunol. 18, 541–551 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

65.
Martínez, I. et al. Gut microbiome composition is linked to whole grain-induced immunological improvements. ISME J. 7, 269–280 (2013).
PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

66.
Liu, Y. et al. Splenectomy leads to amelioration of altered gut microbiota and metabolome in liver cirrhosis patients. Front. Microbiol. 9, 1–13 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Demas, G. E., Zysling, D. A., Beechler, B. R., Muehlenbein, M. P. & French, S. S. Beyond phytohaemagglutinin: assessing vertebrate immune function across ecological contexts. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 710–730 (2011).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Sugden, S. A., St. Clair, C. C. & Stein, L. Y. Individual and site-specific variation in a biogeographical profile of the coyote intestinal microbiota. Microb. Ecol. (2020).

69.
David, L. A. et al. Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome. Nature 505, 559–563 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Leung, J. M., Graham, A. L. & Knowles, S. C. L. Parasite-microbiota interactions with the vertebrate gut: synthesis through an ecological lens. Front. Microbiol. 9, 843 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Ezenwa, V. O., Gerardo, N. M., Inouye, D. W., Medina, M. & Xavier, J. B. Animal behavior and the microbiome. Science 338, 198–199 (2012).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Stewart, R. E. A., Stewart, B. E., Stirling, I. & Street, E. Counts of growth layer groups in cementum and dentine in ringed seals. Mar. Mammal Sci. 12, 383–401 (1996).
Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Linhart, S. B. & Knowlton, F. F. Determining age of coyotes by tooth cementum layers. J. Wildl. Manage. 31, 362–365 (1967).
Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Jahren, A. H. & Kraft, R. A. Carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes in fast food: signatures of corn and confinement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 105, 17855–17860 (2008).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

75.
Parnell, A. C. simmr: a stable isotope mixing model. (2019).

76.
Caporaso, J. G. et al. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108, 4516–4522 (2011).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

77.
Hsieh, T. C., Ma, K. H. & Chao, A. iNEXT: an R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers). Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1451–1456 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

78.
Davis, N. M., Proctor, D. M., Holmes, S. P., Relman, D. A. & Callahan, B. J. Simple statistical identification and removal of contaminant sequences in marker-gene and metagenomics data. Microbiome 6, 226 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Trachsel, D., Deplazes, P. & Mathis, A. Identification of taeniid eggs in the faeces from carnivores based on multiplex PCR using targets in mitochondrial DNA. Parasitology 134, 911–920 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

80.
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. (2019).

81.
Chao, A. et al. Rarefaction and extrapolation of phylogenetic diversity. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 380–388 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

82.
Kembel, S. et al. Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26, 1463–1464 (2010).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

83.
Giam, X. & Olden, J. D. Quantifying variable importance in a multimodel inference framework. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 388–397 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

84.
Cade, B. S. Model averaging and muddled multimodel inferences. Ecology 96, 2370–2382 (2015).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

85.
Fernandes, A., Macklaim, J. M., Linn, T., Reid, G. & Gloor, G. B. ANOVA-like differential expression (ALDEx) analysis for mixed population RNA-Seq. PLoS ONE 8, e67019 (2013).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar  More

Ethnographic accounts from around the world have reported the widespread use of insects as food by people1,2,3. In some cases, such as among the Shoshone and other Great Basin tribes of the U.S., swarms of grasshoppers and crickets were driven into pits and blankets4, while among the Paiute the larvae of Pandora moths (Coloradia pandora lindseyi) were smoked out of trees to fall into prepared trenches, where they would be cooked5. Across the world, insects could be mass-harvested, often seasonally, offering high nutritional value especially in fat, protein and vitamins6. The harvesting of insects in the past has ranged from opportunities to feed large communal gatherings during times of plenty, to more individualistic economic pursuits such as in the search for delicacies or the exploitation of low-ranked resources when other foods were scarce or depleted7,8,9. Irrespective of the catch, insects often represented an important component of the diet, and of the reliability and thus dependability of locales as resource zones, with implications for social scheduling and cultural practice. However, a paucity of archaeological studies of insect food remains has resulted in a downplay or omission of the use of insects from archaeological narratives and deep-time community histories10.
In Australia, a wide range of insects is known to have been eaten by Aboriginal groups, in particular the larvae (‘witchetty grubs’) of cossid moths (especially Endoxyla leucomochla) in arid and semi-arid areas11,12,13. Of particular interest to archaeologists and behavioural ecologists has been the seasonal consumption of Bogong moths by mass gatherings of Aboriginal groups in the southern portions of the Eastern Uplands14 (Fig. 1). However, no conclusive archaeological evidence has ever been reported for the processing or use of Bogong moths.
Figure 1

(A) Bogong moth, Agrotis infusa (photo: Ajay Narendra). (B) Thousands of moths per square metre aestivating on a rock surface (photo: Eric Warrant).

Full size image

The Cloggs Cave grindstone
Cloggs Cave is located 72 m above sea level in the southern foothills of the Australian Alps, in the lands of the Krauatungalung clan of the GunaiKurnai Aboriginal peoples of southeastern Australia (Fig. 2). The cave is a small, 12 m long × 5 m wide × 6.8 m high limestone karst formation that is today entered through a walk-through opening on the side of a cliff (Fig. 3). Indirect sunlight dimly illuminates the cave for much of the day (Supplementary Fig. S1).
Figure 2

Location of Cloggs Cave and the area of the GunaiKurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Corporation, at the southern foothills of the Australian Alps. Esri ArcMap 10.5 (https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/) and Adobe Illustrator CC 2017 (21.0) (https://helpx.adobe.com/au/illustrator/release-note/illustrator-cc-2017-21-0-release-notes.html) were used by CartoGIS Services, College of Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University, to create the map.

Full size image

Figure 3

Cloggs Cave cliffline above the Buchan River flood plain, showing location of cave entrance (white rectangle) (photo: Bruno David).

Full size image

Archaeological excavations were first undertaken in 1971–197214, followed by a new program of excavations in 2019–2020, initiated by the GunaiKurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Corporation and directed by Bruno David. The new excavations were aimed at better determining the site’s stratigraphy and the antiquity of Aboriginal occupation (Supplementary Fig. S2). An intensive dating programme showed that the oldest excavated evidence for human activity dates to between 19,330–19,730 cal BP (median age of 19,530 cal BP; cal BP = before AD1950) and 20,590–23,530 cal BP (median age of 21,690 cal BP) (all calibrated radiocarbon ages in the text are presented at 95.4% probability range. See “Methods”; Supplementary Fig. S3)15,16,17.
During the 2019 excavations, a small, flat grindstone was found. The finely stratified hearth layers of stratigraphic unit (SU) 2 in which it was found were radiocarbon-dated to 1567–1696 cal BP at their top (uncalibrated: 1724 ± 16 BP; median age of 1632 cal BP) and 2002–2117 cal BP at their base (uncalibrated: 2091 ± 16 BP; median age of 2062 cal BP). The grindstone therefore dates to between 1600 and 2100 years ago (see “Methods”; Supplementary Figs. S3 and S4)17. No other grindstone has been found at Cloggs Cave.
The grindstone is a tabular fragment of sandstone with two flat and parallel ground surfaces (Surfaces A and B), in the form of a flat dish (Fig. 4). It measures 10.5 cm long × 8.3 cm wide × 2.2 cm thick and weighs 304 g. The outer, intact margin is elliptical in plan view; the other three margins indicate old breaks that have been subsequently worn from use. Therefore, prior to its deposition at Cloggs Cave, the grindstone had been used in its current form.
Figure 4

The Cloggs Cave grindstone. (A) Surface A, with the accretion that formed across parts of the surface after its use. (B) Surface B. (C) Margin A. (D) Margin B. (E) Narrow end. The numbers in circles are the residue sample numbers; the ‘control’ samples are in areas where grinding did not take place (photos: Richard Fullagar).

Full size image

To understand how the grindstone was used, we undertook use-wear and residue analyses (see “Methods”). The central area of both its surfaces contain fine unidirectional striations (Supplementary Figs. S5A and S5B), a lowered but not levelled topography, and areas of missing or ripped quartz grains (Supplementary Figs. S5C and S5D). Its use to shape ground stone axes is an unlikely function because the Cloggs Cave grindstone surfaces are relatively flat with only very slight concavities, and the lowered surface topography (Fig. 4) lacks broad grooves typical of axe grinding.
When viewed at lower (up to 5 ×) magnification under a stereozoom microscope with a point source of light, each surface appears relatively rough compared with grindstones used for processing seeds, which, in Australia, tend to be highly smoothed and polished18,19. There are numerous ‘pits’ where sand grains have been plucked from the surface during use (Supplementary Fig. S5D). The presence of a lowered surface topography (Supplementary Fig. S5C) with a lack of smooth, developed polish suggests that the stone was not used to process siliceous plants.
The repeated mechanical action of grinding has been shown to force residues into the voids and interstitial spaces of ground surfaces, where they become trapped20,21,22. Residue analyses conducted on grindstones worldwide have relied on microscopic observations of individual residue morphologies. However, visually diagnostic features can be altered by the mechanical forces of grinding, heat, and contact with water and various environmental factors, which can cause residues to swell or become amorphous21,22,23,24. The distinctiveness of residue identifications can be enhanced significantly with the introduction of biochemical staining that can be observed under high-power microscopy and is best used in conjunction with microscopic use-wear analysis and identification of residue morphologies22.
We extracted nine samples, or ‘lifts’, for residue analysis from across Surface A and Surface B of the Cloggs Cave grindstone, including a control sample from an unworked part of each surface (Fig. 4; see “Methods”). These samples were analysed using a recently developed biochemical staining technique that enables residues to be identified from colorimetric changes occurring at a cellular level, rather than relying solely on structural features (see “Methods”)22. We used the collagen stain Picrosirius Red (PSR) to differentiate between plant and animal residues (see “Methods”). When PSR comes into contact with collagen (a protein unique to animals), it reacts to produce clear and distinctive staining and enhanced birefringence in cross-polarised light22,25.
Residues extracted from the grindstone
A range of residues were identified in the lifts, including amorphous collagen, collagen fibres, collagen structures, partially woven collagen, possible bone-like fragments, moth wing segments, a possible moth hind leg, amorphous cellulose, wood-like structures with pits, carbonised material, bordered pits and minerals (see below).
We found collagenous residues in mid-range densities across Samples 1 and 4 from Surface B and across Sample 5 from Surface A (Supplementary Fig. S6). These extractions were taken from central areas across each modified surface. In all cases, the frequency of the collagenous residues was approximately three times greater than the collagenous residues associated with the control samples. Residues include damaged collagen fibres of varying thicknesses, including some reticular fibres.
Woven collagen structures clearly show birefringence in cross-polarised light across Sample 1. Woven collagen, which forms quickly, is mechanically weak and usually associated with immature bone. Although woven collagen may persist as tendon and ligament attachments to bone, it is generally replaced by organised parallel collagen fibre bundles at skeleton maturity26. Collagen fibrils are found in the connective tissues of vertebrates as well as in invertebrates such as insects27, and may be present as individual strands, woven structures or parallel bundles, including among the Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies)28.
The density and combination of collagenous residues on the Cloggs Cave grindstone indicates that it was used to process fauna. A variety of collagenous materials (including woven collagen) were found in association with carbonised residues across Sample 2, which was extracted from a crystalline layer. The residues present on Samples 1 and 2 suggest that an insect or immature vertebrate was prepared and cooked using the grindstone.
We identified a moderate density of carbonised plant residues across Sample 2, in particular, wood-like structures with pits. These ranged from being partially to completely carbonised. Partially carbonised residues were also seen across Sample 4. In addition, bordered pits in small clusters were identified, along with pits within the carbonised structures. Bordered pits are cavities that are essential components in the water-transport system of higher-order plants and are found in the lignified cell walls of xylem conduits (vessels and tracheids). The pit membrane allows water to pass between xylem conduits, but limits the spread of embolism and vascular pathogens in the xylem29. Small quantities of lignin were also present (see “Methods”). Lignin is found in the cell walls of vascular plants (especially in wood and bark) and is responsible for the rigidity of plant structures.
The residues identified via biochemical staining are consistent with the use of twigs and bark as fuel for fires such as those of the microstratified ashy layers in which the grindstone was found (see Supplementary Fig. S3)17. Partially carbonised wood-like material was also noted across Sample 5. The density and distribution of carbonised residues varies across extractions. Our observations suggest either that: (a) the stone has been placed in or near fires; or (b) ash, embers or fires of varying heat were placed or lit across the stone, for varied durations of time.
We identified especially high densities (frequency of residue particles per unit volume of sample) of amorphous cellulose across Samples 1, 2, 4 and 5 (Supplementary Fig. S7). The presence of partially carbonised amorphous cellulose indicates that the plant residues were associated with fire. While the high density is indicative of a plant-processing event, there is no evidence of combinations of plant residues normally expected from plant processing. In particular, no starch grain or phytolith was seen in any of the extractions. While low heat can damage starch and cause its structure to be disrupted and its characteristic extinction-cross to be lost, low heat does not completely destroy starch visibility30. Similarly, phytoliths can be reshaped but not destroyed by fire31. The presence of animal and mineral residues but absence of starches and phytoliths is thus interpreted as a true absence of plant processing activities rather than a taphonomic effect of environmental factors negatively impacting their preservation.
We found a high density of variably carbonised insect wings in Sample 6 (Surface A), and lower densities in Samples 2 and 4. These wing fragments contain regular patterning or structure and exhibit distinct birefringence in cross-polarised light. A portion of proteinaceous material was associated with a ‘tangle’ of these structures (Fig. 5). To assess whether the insect remains were those of the Bogong moth, we compared the residues on Samples 2, 4 and 6 with a comparative reference sample (see “Methods”). All 26 cases of wing segments from the grindstone matched the metrical and morphological characteristics of those from Bogong moths in the reference material. The recorded damage on the archaeological wing segments, such as ripped wing structures, small rectangular wing fragments and tearing in various states of carbonisation, is what would be expected from ethnohistoric accounts of Bogong moth processing. Aboriginal people from across the region are known to have cooked Bogong moths on heated earth during the early and mid-nineteenth century. The moths were stirred during cooking, causing the wings and legs to be broken off by friction and heat. Some of the moths were pounded and ground into a paste which could then be smoked to preserve the food for weeks1,2.
Figure 5

Examples of Bogong moth segments from lifted samples (all at × 400 magnification). (A) Partially carbonised wing structures from Sample 2 (pp). (B) Partially carbonised wing structure and carbonised material from Sample 2 (pp). (C) Partially carbonised moth wing segment from Sample 4 (pp). (D–E) Damaged moth wing segment from Sample 6 (D pp; E xp). (F–G) Damaged moth wing segment from Sample 6 (F pp; G xp). (H) Damaged moth wing segment with proteinaceous material, from Sample 6 (pp). (I) Unburnt moth wing segment from Sample 4 (pp). (J) Damaged moth wing segment with attachment, from Sample 6 (pp). (K) Damaged moth wing segments from Sample 6 (pp). (L–M) Probable moth hind leg from Sample 6 (L pp; M xp). (N) Damaged moth wing segment from Sample 6 (pp). (O) Damaged moth wing segment with attachment, from Sample 6 (pp). Light source = plane (pp), part polarised (part pol) and cross-polarised (xp) (photos: Birgitta Stephenson).

Full size image More

Though the time and place of the origin of this bloom is unknown, the presumable causes of it were high temperatures, abundant nutrients, low tidal amplitude, and little current. According to fishermen, these bioluminescent blooms were first seen about 15 nautical miles offshore of the Mandapam coast between India and Sri Lanka on 6th September, and subsequently moved towards the shore (Fig. 2). Bloom of N. scintillans in 2008 was reported to affect all the marine organisms including corals in GoM12. On 14th September, our preliminary assessment revealed that corals in Shingle and Krusadai islands were possibly affected by the bloom. A great multitude of N. scintillans cells were found settled on corals and other benthic organisms in the affected areas. A greenish settlement was observable on live coral colonies and other benthic organisms including macro algae, coralline algae and sponges etc.(Fig. S2). Settling of N. scintillans on benthic organisms has been reported to cause significant damage to the reef organisms through asphyxiation12. At Shingle Island, the area of significant impact was about 8.1 hectares on the shoreward side of the Island (79°14′14.38″E, 9°14′44.23″N) at depths between 1 and 3 m (Fig. 3). At Krusadai Island, an area of 2.1 hectares in the shoreward side was found affected by the bloom (79°13′20.78″E, 9°15′00.88″N) at depths between 1 and 2 m. The rest of the reef areas in both of these islands were healthy without any impact. The settled cells of N. scintillans were found to be washed ashore during subsequent surveys. In addition to dead fishes, a multitude of benthic communities such as crustaceans, mollusks and echinoderms were also found dead on the bottom in the impacted areas. Surveys between 15 and 18th September 2019 confirmed that corals in other islands (Pullivasal, Poomarichan, Manoliputti, Manoli and Hare) were in good health, and without any noticeable impact due to the bloom. Shingle and Krusadai islands occur closest to the mainland, and the concentrated bloom appeared to get trapped by currents between the mainland shore and islands.
Figure 2

(a) Green tide of Noctiluca scintillans in the Gulf of Mannar; (b) image of N.scintillans cells; size of the grid is 1 mm2 (N. scintillans exhibits bioluminescence when disturbed).

Full size image

Figure 3

Map showing the affected islands in the Mandapam group shown in Fig. 1. Base map was prepared by digitizing the georeferred Toposheet of Survey of India (http://www.surveyofindia.gov.in/) and field data using Open source GIS software (QGIS 3.10.6; https://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/download.html).

Full size image

On 14th September, coral mortality was not observed in the affected areas though the colonies were observed to be disturbed by the settling N. scintillans cells. Low dissolved oxygen levels have been reported to be the primary cause of benthic mortality during algal blooms22. Dissolved oxygen levels were 1.48 mg l−1 at Shingle Island and 2.02 mg l−1 at Krusadai Island in the affected areas. This compares to ‘normal’ levels for coral reefs of 5–8 mg l−1, and Haas et al.11 found that dissolved oxygen content less than 4 mg l−1 is detrimental to acroporid corals. Moreover, branching coral forms have been reported to be more susceptible to hypoxic episodes than spherical or massive forms5. Corals are routinely exposed to fluctuations in oxygen levels at the tissue level due to photosynthesis and respiration processes of endosymbionts7, but are negatively impacted when (sub-) lethal thresholds of hypoxia exposure are exceeded1,5,11. Lethal hypoxia thresholds appear to differ considerably between coral species, ranging between 0.5 and 4 mg O2 l−11,5,11, while sub-lethal hypoxia thresholds for corals are almost entirely unknown5.
Seawater temperature can significantly impact dissolved oxygen levels23,24. Water temperature was 29.9 and 29.8º C (Table 1) at Shingle and Krusadai islands respectively and these levels are marginally higher than the normal levels for this particular time of the year. Apart from the summer months (April to June), temperature levels in GoM do not go higher than 29º C20. The concentration of N. scintillans was 43.4 × 105 and 27.3 × 105 cells l−1 at Shingle and Krusadai Islands respectively; pH and TDS were also high in the affected area (Table 1). Dissolved oxygen levels in other sites of these two islands and in other five islands were higher than 5 mg l−1.
Table 1 Environmental characterization at the affected sites in Shingle and Krusadai Islands.
Full size table

During the next assessment on 17th of September 2019, severe coral mortality was observed at the affected sites. At Shingle Island, overall coral colony density was 134.25 (SE ± 3.28) no.100 m−2 (n = 537) within ten 20 m belt transects which is dominated by Acropora (64%) followed by Montipora (15%). Out of total 537 colonies, 33.52% (n = 180) were found dead (Fig. 4), which include 34.5 (SE ± 1.05) no.100 m−2 (n = 138) of Acropora, 7.75 (SE ± 0.75) no.100 m−2 (n = 31) of Montipora and 2.75 (SE ± 0.35) no.100 m−2 (n = 11) of Pocillopora. The death of coral colonies was so rapid that the coral tissue was intact on the colony surface and still had its natural colour (Fig. 5). When wafted with water by hand or with scuba air, the tissue peeled off exposing the skeleton (Supplementary video). Other observed genera such as Dipsastraea, Favites, Porites, Hydnophora, Goniastrea, Echinopora, Turbinaria, Platygyra, Goniopora and Symphyllia in the same site were all alive (Fig. S3), though with excess mucus production. This may be explained by differential lethal thresholds for oxygen levels at species and growth form levels5,19. At Krusadai Island, the overall coral density on 17th September was 66 (SE ± 2.54) no.100 m−2 (n = 132), dominated by Acropora. Among the counted colonies, 6 (SE ± 1.03) no.100 m−2 of Acropora were found recently dead while mortality was not observed in other available genera such as Montipora, Pocillopora, Dipsastraea, Favites, Porites and Turbinaria. Dissolved oxygen levels had increased to 3.78 mg l−1 at Shingle Island and to 4.02 mg l−1 at Krusadai Island at the affected sites and the water had started to become clear. The concentration of N. scintillans had reduced to 1.63 × 103 cells l−1 and 0.88 × 103 cells l−1 at Shingle and Krusadai Islands, respectively (Table 1).
Figure 4

Density of live and dead colonies of affected coral genera (Acropora, Montipora and Pocillopora) in Shingle Island, by date; the green line indicates the drastic decline of Acropora density between 17.09.2019 and 27.09.2019.

Full size image

Figure 5

Rapid mortality of corals presumably due to low oxygen levels caused by Noctiluca scintillans; (a, b) Acropora; (c) Montipora; (d) Pocillopora.

Full size image

Assessment on 27th September 2019 at the impacted area in Shingle Island, showed that the overall density of coral colonies within ten 20 m transects was 135.75 (SE ± 2.82) no.100 m−2 (n = 543) and of them 70.35% (n = 382) of colonies belonging to Acropora, Montipora and Pocillopora were found dead revealing that the impact of algal bloom was more severe than expected (Fig. 4). It was almost two weeks since the corals had died and hence secondary algae had started colonizing the dead colonies. On the same day at the impacted area of Krusadai Island, overall coral density within five belt transects was 65.5 (SE ± 1.83) no.100 m−2 (n = 131), of which 9.09% (n = 12) of colonies belonging to Acropora were found dead. By 27th September, dissolved oxygen levels had increased to 6.02 and 5.73 mg l−1 respectively at the affected areas of Shingle and Krusadai islands (Table 1). N. scintillans cells were absent in all the sites indicating the end of bloom. On 04th October 2019, the overall coral colony density within 20 m belt transects was 138 (SE ± 2.08) no.100 m−2 (n = 552) and of them 71.23% (n = 393) colonies belonging to Acropora, Montipora and Pocillopora were found dead at the area of impact in Shingle Island (Fig. 4). No further mortality was witnessed in the affected area of Krusadai Island. Secondary algae have completely overgrown the dead coral colonies making the reef look green (Fig. S4). Dissolved oxygen levels were reasonably high at 7.13 and 7.24 mg l−1 respectively at Shingle and Krusadai Islands during this time (Table 1).
Coral mortality due to algal bloom and consequent hypoxia has rarely been reported12,13,25. The present study reports that the impact of blooms can be severe on corals. Different coral species respond differently to low oxygen levels according to their respiration and photosynthesis5,26. Thus, low oxygen levels can orchestrate the coral mortality by affecting coral’s productivity and respiration7. Further, fast growing corals such as Acropora and Pocillopora have been reported to be more susceptible to low oxygen levels11,13,27. Fast growing coral species have faster metabolism rates28 and hence metabolic oxygen requirements are higher11,29. Thus, the mortality of fast growing species in the present study was presumably due to the low oxygen levels induced by N.scintillans bloom.
Bleaching episodes in 2010 and 2016 had also caused significant mortality to these fast growing species in GoM19,20. Corals in GoM start to bleach when water temperature exceeds 30º C and the temperature levels during this bloom period ranged between 28.4 and 29.9º C. Though bleaching was not observed, heat stress might also have played its role in coral mortality along with low oxygen levels as the temperature level almost reached 30º C. Similar temperature levels were reported during the bloom of N. scintillans in 2008 in GoM12.
Corals in Gulf of Mannnar are still recovering from the 2016 bleaching episode20 and hence the present decline is significant. Phase shifts on coral reefs are predominantly associated with shifts from hard coral-dominated communities to macroalgae-dominated ones30. Space competition between corals and other organisms such as algae and sponges has been reported to negatively impact the corals of GoM after the 2016 bleaching event20,31. At present, secondary algae have completely occupied the dead coral colonies, which will affect the coral recovery by hindering the attachment of new coral recruits during the next spawning season32. Recent studies suggest hypoxia increases coral susceptibility to bleaching27, and may increase disease prevalence and algal proliferation7. Thus algal blooms add to the existing array of threats to corals of GoM that needs to be understood more with further focused research.
On account of the problems related to climate change, there has been a steady and severe decline of coral reefs in the past two decades. Bleaching and diseases have been reported to cause mass coral mortalities within a very short time. The observations of the present study alert us to possible mass mortality due to short-term hypoxic condition caused by algal blooms. Algal blooms and hypoxic conditions are predicted to occur more frequently in the future due to climate change14. Hence, it is likely that shallow water coral reefs will be affected more frequently by temporary low oxygen levels caused by algal blooms. More studies are, however, required to understand the mechanism of coral mortality due to algal blooms, impacts on community composition and the potential for subsequent recovery. More

1.
Ekesi, S., Chabi-Olaye, A., Subramanian, S. & Borgemeister, C. Horticultural pest management and the African economy: successes, challenges and opportunities in a changing global environment. Acta Hortic. 911, 165–183 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Pratt, C. F., Constantine, K. L. & Murphy, S. T. Economic impacts of invasive alien species on African smallholder livelihoods. Glob. Food Secur. 14, 31–37 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Desneux, N., Luna, M. G., Guillemaud, T. & Urbaneja, A. The invasive South American tomato pinworm, Tuta absoluta, continues to spread in Afro-Eurasia and beyond: the new threat to tomato world production. J. Pest Sci. 84, 403–408 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Idriss, G. E. A. et al. Host range and effects of plant species on preference and fitness of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). J. Econ. Entomol. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa002 (2020).
Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

5.
Aigbedion-Atalor, P. O. et al. The South America tomato leafminer, Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae), spreads its wings in Eastern Africa: distribution and socioeconomic impacts. J. Econ. Entomol. 112, 2797–2807 (2019).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Biondi, A., Guedes, R. N. C., Wan, F.-H. & Desneux, N. Ecology, worldwide spread, and management of the invasive South American tomato pinworm, Tuta absoluta: past, present, and future. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 63, 239–258 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Desneux, N. et al. Biological invasion of European tomato crops by Tuta absoluta: ecology, geographic expansion and prospects for biological control. J. Pest Sci. 83, 197–215 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Guedes, R. N. C. C. et al. Insecticide resistance in the tomato pinworm Tuta absoluta: patterns, spread, mechanisms, management and outlook. J. Pest Sci. 92, 1329–1342 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Dimbi, S., Maniania, N. K. & Ekesi, S. Horizontal transmission of Metarhizium anisopliae in fruit flies and effect of fungal infection on egg laying and fertility. Insects 4, 206–216 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Maniania, N. K., Ekesi, S. & Dolinski, C. Entomopathogens routinely used in pest control strategies: orchards in tropical climate. In Microbial Control of Insect and Mite Pests: From Theory to Practice (Elsevier Inc., 2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803527-6.00018-4.

11.
Mweke, A. et al. Evaluation of the entomopathogenic fungi Metarhizium anisopliae, Beauveria bassiana and Isaria sp. for the management of Aphis craccivora (Hemiptera: Aphididdae). J. Econ. Entomol. 111, 1587–1594 (2018).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Akutse, K. S. et al. Ovicidal effects of entomopathogenic fungal isolates on the invasive Fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Appl. Entomol. 143, 626–634 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Akutse, K. S., Subramanian, S., Khamis, F. M., Ekesi, S. & Mohamed, S. A. Entomopathogenic fungus isolates for adult Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) management and their compatibility with Tuta pheromone. J. Appl. Entomol. https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12812 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Inglis, G. D., Goettel, M. S., Butt, T. M. & Strasser, H. Use of hyphomycetous fungi for managing insect pests. In Fungi as Biocontrol Agents: Progress, Problems and Potential (eds. Butt, T. M. & Magan, M.) 23–69 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851993560.0023.

15.
Behie, S. W. & Bidochka, M. J. Ubiquity of insect-derived nitrogen transfer to plants by endophytic insect-pathogenic fungi: an additional branch of the soil nitrogen cycle. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80, 1553–1560 (2014).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

16.
Akutse, K. S., Khamis, F. M., Ekesi, S., Wekesa, S. & Subramanian, S. Effect of endophytically-colonized tomato and nightshade host plants on life-history parameters of Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). (International Congress on Invertebrate Pathology and Microbial Control and 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society for Invertebrate Pathology & 17th Meeting of the IOBC‐WPRS Working Group “Microbial and Nematode Control of Invertebrate Pests”, 2019).

17.
Wilson, D. Endophyte: the evolution of a term, and clarification of its use and definition. Oikos 73, 274–276 (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Quesada-Moraga, E., Muñoz-Ledesma, F. J. & Santiago-Álvarez, C. Systemic protection of Papaver somniferum L. against Iraella luteipes (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae) by an endophytic strain of Beauveria bassiana (Ascomycota: Hypocreales). Environ. Entomol. 38, 723–730 (2009).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Barelli, L., Moonjely, S., Behie, S. W. & Bidochka, M. J. Fungi with multifunctional lifestyles: endophytic insect pathogenic fungi. Plant Mol. Biol. 90, 657–664 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Latz, M. A. C., Jensen, B., Collinge, D. B. & Jørgensen, H. J. L. Endophytic fungi as biocontrol agents: elucidating mechanisms in disease suppression. Plant Ecol. Divers. 11, 555–567 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Ownley, B. H. et al. Beauveria bassiana: endophytic colonization and plant disease control. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 98, 267–270 (2008).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Akello, J. & Sikora, R. Systemic acropedal influence of endophyte seed treatment on Acyrthosiphon pisum and Aphis fabae offspring development and reproductive fitness. Biol. Control 61, 215–221 (2012).
Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Akutse, K. S., Maniania, N. K., Fiaboe, K. K. M., Van den Berg, J. & Ekesi, S. Endophytic colonization of Vicia faba and Phaseolus vulgaris (Fabaceae) by fungal pathogens and their effects on the life-history parameters of Liriomyza huidobrensis (Diptera: Agromyzidae). Fungal Ecol. 6, 293–301 (2013).
Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Russo, M. L. et al. Endophytic effects of Beauveria bassiana on Corn (Zea mays) and its herbivore, Rachiplusia nu (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Insects 10, 2–9 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Lahrmann, U. et al. Host-related metabolic cues affect colonization strategies of a root endophyte. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 13965–13970 (2013).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Fadiji, A. E. & Babalola, O. O. Elucidating mechanisms of endophytes used in plant protection and other bioactivities with multifunctional prospects. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8, 1–20 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Gathage, J. W. et al. Prospects of fungal endophytes in the control of Liriomyza leafminer flies in common bean Phaseolus vulgaris under field conditions. Biocontrol 61, 741–753 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Muvea, A. M. et al. Colonization of onions by endophytic fungi and their impacts on the biology of Thrips tabaci. PLoS ONE 9, 1–7 (2014).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

29.
Powell, W. A., Klingeman, W. E., Ownley, B. H. & Gwinn, K. D. Evidence of endophytic Beauveria bassiana in seed-treated tomato plants acting as a systemic entomopathogen to larval Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 44, 391–396 (2009).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Klieber, J. & Reineke, A. The entomopathogen Beauveria bassiana has epiphytic and endophytic activity against the tomato leaf miner Tuta absoluta. J. Appl. Entomol. 140, 580–589 (2016).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Resquín-romero, G., Garrido-jurado, I., Delso, C., Ríos-moreno, A. & Quesada-moraga, E. Transient endophytic colonizations of plants improve the outcome of foliar applications of mycoinsecticides against chewing insects. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 136, 23–31 (2016).
PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

32.
Mutune, B. et al. Fungal endophytes as promising tools for the management of bean stem maggot Ophiomyia phaseoli on beans Phaseolus vulgaris. J. Pest Sci. 89, 993–1001 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Posada, F., Aime, M. C., Peterson, S. W., Rehner, S. A. & Vega, F. E. Inoculation of coffee plants with the fungal entomopathogen Beauveria bassiana (Ascomycota: Hypocreales). Mycol. Res. 111, 748–757 (2007).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Bing, L. A. & Lewis, L. C. Suppression of Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) by endophytic Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin. Environ. Entomol. 20, 1207–1211 (1991).
Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Behie, S. W., Jones, S. J., Bidochka, M. J. & Hyde, K. Plant tissue localization of the endophytic insect pathogenic fungi Metarhizium and Beauveria. Fungal Ecol. 13, 112–119 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Akello, J. et al. Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin as an endophyte in tissue culture banana (Musa spp.). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 96, 34–42 (2007).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Posada, F. J. & Vega, F. E. A new method to evaluate the biocontrol potential of single spore isolates of fungal entomopathogens. J. Insect Sci. 5, 1–10 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Demers, J. E., Gugino, B. K. & del Jiménez-Gasco, M. Highly diverse endophytic and soil Fusarium oxysporum populations associated with field-grown tomato plants. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 81, 81–90 (2015).
PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

39.
Bogner, C. W. et al. Fungal root endophytes of tomato from Kenya and their nematode biocontrol potential. Mycol. Prog. 15, 1–17 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

40.
Hardoim, P. R. et al. The hidden world within plants: ecological and evolutionary considerations for defining functioning of microbial endophytes. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 79, 293–320 (2015).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Martin, J. T. Role of cuticle in the defense against plant disease. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2, 81–100 (1964).
Article  Google Scholar 

42.
Jensen, R. E., Enkegaard, A. & Steenberg, T. Increased fecundity of Aphis fabae on Vicia faba plants following seed or leaf inoculation with the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana. PLoS ONE 14, 1–12 (2019).
Google Scholar 

43.
Landa, B. B. et al. In-planta detection and monitorization of endophytic colonization by a Beauveria bassiana strain using a new-developed nested and quantitative PCR-based assay and confocal laser scanning microscopy. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 114, 128–138 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Bing, L. A. & Lewis, L. C. Endophytic Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin in corn: The influence of the plant growth stage and Ostrinia nubilalis (Hubner). Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2, 39–47 (1992).
Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Greenfield, M. et al. Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium anisopliae endophytically colonize cassava roots following soil drench inoculation. Biol. Control 95, 40–48 (2016).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

46.
Card, S., Johnson, L., Teasdale, S. & Caradus, J. Deciphering endophyte behaviour: the link between endophyte biology and efficacious biological control agents. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 92, 1–19 (2016).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

47.
Philippot, L., Raaijmakers, J. M., Lemanceau, P. & Van Der Putten, W. H. Going back to the roots: the microbial ecology of the rhizosphere. Nat. Publ. Gr. 11, 789–799 (2013).
CAS  Google Scholar 

48.
Tumuhaise, V. et al. Pathogenicity and performance of two candidate isolates of Metarhizium anisopliae and Beauveria bassiana (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) in four liquid culture media for the management of the legume pod borer Maruca vitrata (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 35, 34–47 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Branine, M., Bazzicalupo, A. & Branco, S. Biology and applications of endophytic insect-pathogenic fungi. PLoS Pathog. 15, 1–7 (2019).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

50.
Barelli, L., Moreira, C. C. & Bidochka, M. J. Initial stages of endophytic colonization by Metarhizium involves rhizoplane colonization. Microbiology 164, 1531–1540 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Wyrebek, M., Huber, C., Sasan, R. K. & Bidochka, M. J. Three sympatrically occurring species of Metarhizium show plant rhizosphere specificity. Microbiology 157, 2904–2911 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Muvea, A. M. et al. Behavioral responses of Thrips tabaci Lindeman to endophyte-inoculated onion plants. J. Pest Sci. 88, 555–562 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Slansky, F. Jr. Insect nutrition: an adaptationist’s perspective. Florida Entomol. 65, 45–71 (1982).
Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Carroll, G. Fungal endophytes in stems and leaves: from latent pathogen to mutualistic symbiont. Ecology 69, 2–9 (1988).
Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Allegrucci, N., Velazquez, M. S., Russo, M. L., Perez, E. & Scorsetti, A. C. Endophytic colonisation of tomato by the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana: the use of different inoculation techniques and their effects on the tomato leafminer Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera : Gelechiidae). J. Plant Prot. Res. 54, 331–337 (2017).
Google Scholar 

56.
Barta, M. In planta bioassay on the effects of endophytic Beauveria strains against larvae of horse-chestnut leaf miner (Cameraria ohridella). Biol. Control 121, 88–98 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

57.
Russo, M. L. et al. Effect of endophytic entomopathogenic fungi on soybean Glycine max (L.) Merr. growth and yield. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 31, 728–736 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Contreras-cornejo, H. A., Macías-rodríguez, L. & Larsen, J. The root endophytic fungus Trichoderma atroviride induces foliar herbivory resistance in maize plants. Appl. Soil Ecol. 124, 45–53 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Contreras-Cornejo, H. A., Macías-Rodríguez, L., Del Val, E. & Larsen, J. Ecological functions of Trichoderma spp. and their secondary metabolites in the rhizosphere: interactions with plants. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 92, 1–17 (2016).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

60.
Coppola, M. et al. Trichoderma harzianum enhances tomato indirect defense against aphids. Insect Sci. 24, 1025–1033 (2017).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Meera, M. S., Shivanna, M. B., Kageyama, K. & Hyakumachi, M. Persistence of induced systemic resistance in cucumber in relation to root colonization by plant growth promoting fungal isolates. Crop Prot. 14, 123–130 (1995).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Lewis, L. C., Berry, E. C., Obrycki, J. J. & Bing, L. A. Aptness of insecticides (Bacillus thuringiensis and carbofuran ) with endophytic Beauveria bassiana, in suppressing larval populations of the European corn borer. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 57, 27–34 (1996).
Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Qayyum, M. A., Wakil, W., Arif, M. J., Sahi, S. T. & Dunlap, C. A. Infection of Helicoverpa armigera by endophytic Beauveria bassiana colonizing tomato plants. Biol. Control 90, 200–207 (2015).
Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Jallow, M. F. A., Dugassa-Gobena, D. & Vidal, S. Influence of an endophytic fungus on host plant selection by a polyphagous moth via volatile spectrum changes. Arthropod. Plant. Interact. 2, 53–62 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

65.
Jaber, L. R. & Vidal, S. Fungal endophyte negative effects on herbivory are enhanced on intact plants and maintained in a subsequent generation. Ecol. Entomol. 35, 25–36 (2010).
Article  Google Scholar 

66.
Davis, T. S., Crippen, T. L., Hofstetter, R. W. & Tomberlin, J. K. Microbial volatile emissions as insect semiochemicals. J. Chem. Ecol. 39, 840–859 (2013).
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Silva, D. B., Bueno, V. H. P., Lins, J. C. & Van Lenteren, J. C. Life history data and population growth of Tuta absoluta at constant and alternating temperatures on two tomato lines. Bull. Insectol. 68, 223–232 (2015).
Google Scholar 

68.
Pereyra, P. C. & Sánchez, N. E. Effect of two solanaceous plants on developmental and population parameters of the tomato leaf miner, Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Neotrop. Entomol. 35, 671–676 (2006).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

69.
Dash, C. K. et al. Endophytic entomopathogenic fungi enhance the growth of Phaseolus vulgaris L. (Fabaceae) and negatively affect the development and reproduction of Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae). Microb. Pathog. 125, 385–392 (2018).
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Akello, J., Dubois, T., Coyne, D. & Kyamanywa, S. Endophytic Beauveria bassiana in banana (Musa spp.) reduces banana weevil (Cosmopolites sordidus) fitness and damage. Crop Prot. 27, 1437–1441 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Golo, P. S. et al. Production of destruxins from Metarhizium spp. fungi in artificial medium and in endophytically colonized cowpea plants. PLoS ONE 9, 1–9 (2014).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

72.
Goettel, M. S. & Inglis, D. G. Fungi: Hyphomycetes. Manual of Techniques in Insect Pathology (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012432555-5/50013-0.

73.
Schulz, B., Guske, S., Dammann, U. & Boyle, C. Endophyte-host interactions. II. Defining symbiosis of the endophyte–host interaction. Symbiosis 25, 213–227 (1998).
Google Scholar 

74.
Inglis, G. D., Enkerli, J. & Goettel, M. S. Laboratory Techniques Used for Entomopathogenic Fungi. Hypocreales. Manual of Techniques in Invertebrate Pathology (Elsevier, New York, 2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386899-2.00007-5
Google Scholar 

75.
Petrini, O. & Fisher, P. J. Fungal endophytes in Salicornia perennis. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 87, 647–651 (1986).
Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Aigbedion-Atalor, P. O. et al. Host stage preference and performance of Dolichogenidea gelechiidivoris (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), a candidate for classical biological control of Tuta absoluta in Africa. Biol. Control 144, 1–8 (2020).
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

77.
Oliveira, F. A., da Silva, D. J. H., Leite, G. L. D., Jham, G. N. & Picanço, M. Resistance of 57 greenhouse-grown accessions of Lycopersicon esculentum and three cultivars to Tuta absoluta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Sci. Hortic. (Amsterdam) 119, 182–187 (2009).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

78.
Shapiro, S. S. & Wilk, M. B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52, 591–611 (1965).
MathSciNet  MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
De Mendiburu, F. agricolae: statistical procedures for agricultural research. R package version 1.3–2 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=agricolae (2020).

80.
Therneau, T. A Package for Survival Analysis in R. R package version 3.1-12, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival. (2020).

81.
Crawley, M. J. The R Book (Wiley, New York, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470515075.
Google Scholar 

82.
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2019).
Google Scholar  More

1.
McKintosh, E., Tabrizi, S. J. & Collinge, J. Prion diseases. J. Neuro. Virol. 9, 183–193 (2003).
CAS  Google Scholar 
2.
Chen, C. & Dong, X. P. Epidemiological characteristics of human prion diseases. Infect. Dis. Poverty 5, 47 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Huor, A. et al. The emergence of classical BSE from atypical/Nor98 scrapie. PNAS 116, 26853–26862 (2019).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Prusiner, S. B. Prion diseases and the BSE crisis. Science 278, 245–251 (1997).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Wadsworth, J. D. F. et al. The origin of the prion agent of kuru: molecular and biological strain typing. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 363, 3747–3753 (2008).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Liberski, P. P., Gajos, A., Sikorska, B. & Lindenbaum, S. Kuru, the first human prion disease. Viruses 11, 232 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

7.
Haley, N. J. & Hoover, E. A. Chronic Wasting Disease of cervids: current knowledge and future perspectives. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 3, 305–325 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Benestad, S. L., Mitchell, G., Simmons, M., Ytrehus, B. & Vikøren, T. First case of chronic wasting disease in Europe in a Norwegian free-ranging reindeer. Vet. Res. 47, 88 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Becker, R. Deadly animal prion disease appears in Europe. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.19759 (2016).
Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

10.
Stokstad, E. Norway seeks to stamp out prion disease. Science 356, 12 (2017).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

11.
Sutherland, W. J. et al. A 2018 horizon scan of emerging issues for global conservation and biological diversity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 47–58 (2018).
Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Nonno, R., Di Bari, M. A., Pirisinu, L., et al. Studies in bank voles reveal strain differences between chronic wasting disease prions from Norway and North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA in press, (2020).

13.
Sutcliffe, A. J. Similarity of bones and antlers gnawed by deer to human artefacts. Nature 246, 428–430 (1973).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

14.
Gambín, P., Ceacero, F., Garcia, A. J., Landete-Castillejos, T. & Gallego, L. Patterns of antler consumption reveal osteophagia as a natural mineral resource in key periods for red deer (Cervus elaphus). Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 63, 39 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Klaus, G. & Schmid, B. Geophagy at natural licks and mammal ecology: a review. Mammalia 62, 481–497 (1999).
Google Scholar 

16.
Mahaney, W. C. & Krishnamani, R. Understanding geophagy in animals: standard procedures for sampling soils. J. Chem. Ecol. 29, 1503–1523 (2003).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Bazely, D. R. Carnivorous herbivores: mineral nutrition and the balanced diet. Trends Ecol. Evol. 4, 155–156 (1989).
Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Loe, L. E. et al. Antler growth as a cost of reproduction in female reindeer. Oecologia 189, 601–609 (2019).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Clutton-Brock, T. H., Albon, S. D. & Harvey, P. H. Antlers, body size and breeding group size in the Cervidae. Nature 285, 565–567 (1980).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Schaefer, J. A. & Mahoney, S. P. Antlers on female caribou: biogeography of the bones of contention. Ecology 82, 3556–3560 (2001).
Article  Google Scholar 

21.
Angers, R. C. et al. Chronic wasting disease prions in elk antler velvet. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 15, 696–703 (2009).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Nieto-Diaz, M. et al. Deer antler innervation and regeneration. Front Biosci. 17, 1389–1401 (2012).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

23.
Guiroy, D. C. et al. Neuronal degeneration and neurofilament accumulation in the trigeminal ganglia in creutzfeldt-jakob disease. Ann Neurol. 25, 102–106 (1989).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
Rolf, H. J. & Enderle, A. Hard fallow deer antler: a living bone till antler casting?. Anat. Rec. 255, 69–77 (1999).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Huor, A. et al. Infectivity in bone marrow from sporadic CJD patients. J. Pathol. 243, 273–278 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Davenport, K. A. et al. PrPC expression and prion seeding activity in the alimentary tract and lymphoid tissue of deer. PLoS ONE 12, e0183927 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Mysterud, A. et al. The demographic pattern of infection with chronic wasting disease in reindeer at an early epidemic stage. Ecosphere 10, e02931 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Pirisinu, L. et al. A novel type of Chronic Wasting Disease detected in European moose (Alces alces) in Norway. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 24, 2210–2218 (2018).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Vikøren, T. et al. First detection of Chronic Wasting Disease in a wild red deer (Cervus elaphus) in Europe. J. Wildl. Dis. 55, 970–972 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Buschmann, A. et al. Atypical BSE in Germany – Proof of transmissibility and biochemical characterization. Vet. Microbiol. 117, 103–116 (2006).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Benestad, S. L. et al. Cases of scrapie with unusal features in Norway and designation of a new type, Nor98. Vet. Rec. 153, 2002–2008 (2003).
Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Estevez, J. A., Landete-Castillejos, T., García, A. J., Ceacero, F. & Gallego, L. Population management and bone structural effects in composition and radio-opacity of iberian red deer (Cervus elaphus hispanicus) antlers. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 54, 215–223 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Norman, G. Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Adv. Health. Sci. Educ. 15, 625–632 (2019).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Collinge, J. & Clarke, A. R. A general model of prion strains and their pathogenicity. Science 318, 930 (2007).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Marion, M. S. et al. Experimental oral transmission of atypical scrapie to sheep. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 17, 848 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Angers, R. C. et al. Prion strain mutation determined by prion protein conformational compatibility and primary structure. Science 328, 1154 (2010).
ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Igel-Egalon, A., Béringue, V., Rezaei, H. & Sibille, P. Prion strains and transmission barrier phenomena. Pathogens 7, (2018).

38.
Le Dur, A. et al. Divergent prion strain evolution driven by PrPC expression level in transgenic mice. Nat. Commun. 8, 14170 (2017).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar  More

1.
Karl DM, Wirsen CO, Jannasch HW. Deep-sea primary production at the Galapagos hydrothermal vents. Science (80-). 1980;207:1345–7.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 
2.
Yamamoto M, Takai K. Sulfur metabolisms in epsilon-and gamma-Proteobacteria in deep-sea hydrothermal fields. Front Microbiol. 2011;2:192.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Kato S, Nakamura K, Toki T, Ishibashi J-I, Tsunogai U, Hirota A, et al. Iron-based microbial ecosystem on and below the seafloor: a case study of hydrothermal fields of the southern mariana trough. Front Microbiol. 2012;3:89.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

4.
Winkel M, de Beer D, Lavik G, Peplies J, Mußmann M. Close association of active nitrifiers with Beggiatoa mats covering deep-sea hydrothermal sediments. Environ Microbiol. 2014;16:1612–26.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Fortunato CS, Larson B, Butterfield DA, Huber JA. Spatially distinct, temporally stable microbial populations mediate biogeochemical cycling at and below the seafloor in hydrothermal vent fluids. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:769–84.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Kendall B, Anbar AD, Kappler A, Konhauser KO. The global iron cycle. In: Knoll AH, Canfield DE, Konhauser KO (eds). Fundamentals of Geobiology, 1st ed. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2012. pp. 65–92.

7.
McAllister SM, Moore RM, Gartman A, Luther GW, Emerson D, Chan CS. The Fe(II)-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria: historical, ecological, and genomic perspectives. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2019;95:fiz015.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
Kato S, Kobayashi C, Kakegawa T, Yamagishi A. Microbial communities in iron-silica-rich microbial mats at deep-sea hydrothermal fields of the Southern Mariana Trough. Environ Microbiol. 2009;11:2094–111.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

9.
Hassenrück C, Fink A, Lichtschlag A, Tegetmeyer HE, de Beer D, Ramette A. Quantification of the effects of ocean acidification on sediment microbial communities in the environment: The importance of ecosystem approaches. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;92:fiw02.
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

10.
Kato S, Yanagawa K, Sunamura M, Takano Y, Ishibashi J, Kakegawa T, et al. Abundance of Zetaproteobacteria within crustal fluids in back-arc hydrothermal fields of the Southern Mariana Trough. Environ Microbiol. 2009;11:3210–22.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

11.
McAllister SM, Davis RE, McBeth JM, Tebo BM, Emerson D, Moyer CL. Biodiversity and emerging biogeography of the neutrophilic iron-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:5445–57.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

12.
Makita H, Kikuchi S, Mitsunobu S, Takaki Y, Yamanaka T, Toki T, et al. Comparative analysis of microbial communities in iron-dominated flocculent mats in deep-sea hydrothermal environments. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82:5741–55.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

13.
Scott JJ, Breier JA, Luther GW III, Emerson D. Microbial iron mats at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and evidence that Zetaproteobacteria may be restricted to iron-oxidizing marine systems. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0119284.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

14.
Scott JJ, Glazer BT, Emerson D. Bringing microbial diversity into focus: high-resolution analysis of iron mats from the Lō’ihi Seamount. Environ Microbiol. 2017;19:301–16.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

15.
Hager KW, Fullerton H, Butterfield DA, Moyer CL. Community structure of lithotrophically-driven hydrothermal microbial mats from the Mariana Arc and Back-Arc. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1578.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Forget NL, Murdock SA, Juniper SK. Bacterial diversity in Fe-rich hydrothermal sediments at two South Tonga Arc submarine volcanoes. Geobiology. 2010;8:417–32.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

17.
Vander Roost J, Thorseth IH, Dahle H. Microbial analysis of Zetaproteobacteria and co-colonizers of iron mats in the Troll Wall Vent Field, Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0185008.
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

18.
Rassa AC, McAllister SM, Safran SA, Moyer CL. Zeta-Proteobacteria dominate the colonization and formation of microbial mats in low-temperature hydrothermal vents at Loihi Seamount, Hawaii. Geomicrobiol J. 2009;26:623–38.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Fullerton H, Hager KW, McAllister SM, Moyer CL. Hidden diversity revealed by genome-resolved metagenomics of iron-oxidizing microbial mats from Lo’ihi Seamount, Hawai’i. ISME J. 2017;11:1900–14.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

20.
Field EK, Sczyrba A, Lyman AE, Harris CC, Woyke T, Stepanauskas R, et al. Genomic insights into the uncultivated marine Zetaproteobacteria at Loihi Seamount. ISME J. 2015;9:857–70.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

21.
Chan CS, McAllister SM, Leavitt AH, Glazer BT, Krepski ST, Emerson D. The architecture of iron microbial mats reflects the adaptation of chemolithotrophic iron oxidation in freshwater and marine environments. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:796.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

22.
Fleming EJ, Davis RE, McAllister SM, Chan CS, Moyer CL, Tebo BM, et al. Hidden in plain sight: discovery of sheath-forming, iron-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria at Loihi Seamount, Hawaii, USA. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2013;85:116–27.
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Barco RA, Emerson D, Sylvan JB, Orcutt BN, Jacobson Meyers ME, Ramírez GA, et al. New insight into microbial iron oxidation as revealed by the proteomic profile of an obligate iron-oxidizing chemolithoautotroph. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:5927–37.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

24.
McAllister SM, Polson SW, Butterfield DA, Glazer BT, Sylvan JB, Chan CS. Validating the Cyc2 neutrophilic iron oxidation pathway using meta-omics of Zetaproteobacteria iron mats at marine hydrothermal vents. mSystems. 2020;5:e00553–19.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Singer E, Emerson D, Webb EA, Barco RA, Kuenen JG, Nelson WC, et al. Mariprofundus ferrooxydans, PV-1 the first genome of a marine Fe(II) oxidizing Zetaproteobacterium. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e25386.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

26.
Mori JF, Scott JJ, Hager KW, Moyer CL, Küsel K, Emerson D. Physiological and ecological implications of an iron- or hydrogen-oxidizing member of the Zetaproteobacteria, Ghiorsea bivora, gen. nov., sp. nov. ISME J. 2017;11:2624–36.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Zimmerman AE, Howard-Varona C, Needham DM, John SG, Worden AZ, Sullivan MB, et al. Metabolic and biogeochemical consequences of viral infection in aquatic ecosystems. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2020;18:21–34.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

28.
Bennett SA, Hansman RL, Sessions AL, Nakamura K, Edwards KJ. Tracing iron-fueled microbial carbon production within the hydrothermal plume at the Loihi seamount. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2011;75:5526–39.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Jesser KJ, Fullerton H, Hager KW, Moyer CL. Quantitative PCR analysis of functional genes in iron-rich microbial mats at an active hydrothermal vent system (Lō’ihi Seamount, Hawai’i). Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:2976–84.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Singer E, Heidelberg JF, Dhillon A, Edwards KJ. Metagenomic insights into the dominant Fe(II) oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria from an iron mat at Lō’ihi, Hawai’i. Front Microbiol. 2013;4:52.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

31.
Chiu BK, Kato S, McAllister SM, Field EK, Chan CS. Novel pelagic iron-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria from the Chesapeake Bay oxic-anoxic transition zone. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:1280.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

32.
Makita H, Tanaka E, Mitsunobu S, Miyazaki M, Nunoura T, Uematsu K, et al. Mariprofundus micogutta sp. nov., a novel iron-oxidizing zetaproteobacterium isolated from a deep-sea hydrothermal field at the Bayonnaise knoll of the Izu-Ogasawara arc, and a description of Mariprofundales ord. nov. and Zetaproteobacteria classis. Arch Microbiol. 2017;199:335–46.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

33.
Laufer K, Nordhoff M, Halama M, Martinez RE, Obst M, Nowak M, et al. Microaerophilic Fe(II)-oxidizing Zetaproteobacteria isolated from low-Fe marine coastal sediments: Physiology and characterization of their twisted stalks. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017;83:e03118–16.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Glazer BT, Rouxel OJ. Redox speciation and distribution within diverse iron-dominated microbial habitats at Loihi Seamount. Geomicrobiol J. 2009;26:606–22.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Sylvan JB, Wankel SD, LaRowe DE, Charoenpong CN, Huber JA, Moyer CL, et al. Evidence for microbial mediation of subseafloor nitrogen redox processes at Loihi Seamount, Hawaii. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2017;198:131–50.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

36.
Sedwick PN, McMurtry GM, Macdougall JD. Chemistry of hydrothermal solutions from Pele’s Vents, Loihi Seamount, Hawaii. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 1992;56:3643–67.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

37.
Karl DM, Brittain AM, Tilbrook BD. Hydrothermal and microbial processes at Loihi Seamount, a mid-plate hot-spot volcano. Deep Sea Res Part A, Oceanogr Res Pap. 1989;36:1655–73.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

38.
Bryce C, Blackwell N, Schmidt C, Otte J, Huang YM, Kleindienst S, et al. Microbial anaerobic Fe(II) oxidation—ecology, mechanisms and environmental implications. Environ Microbiol. 2018;20:3462–83.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

39.
Laufer K, Byrne JM, Glombitza C, Schmidt C, Jørgensen BB, Kappler A. Anaerobic microbial Fe(II) oxidation and Fe(III) reduction in coastal marine sediments controlled by organic carbon content. Environ Microbiol. 2016;18:3159–74.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

40.
Robertson EK, Roberts KL, Burdorf LDW, Cook P, Thamdrup B. Dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium coupled to Fe(II) oxidation in sediments of a periodically hypoxic estuary. Limnol Oceanogr. 2016;61:365–81.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

41.
Glöckner FO, Yilmaz P, Quast C, Gerken J, Beccati A, Ciuprina A, et al. 25 years of serving the community with ribosomal RNA gene reference databases and tools. J Biotechnol. 2017;261:169–76.
PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

42.
Nurk S, Meleshko D, Korobeynikov A, Pevzner PA. metaSPAdes: a new versatile metagenomic assembler. Genome Res. 2017;27:824–34.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Sieber CMK, Probst AJ, Sharrar A, Thomas BC, Hess M, Tringe SG, et al. Recovery of genomes from metagenomes via a dereplication, aggregation and scoring strategy. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:836–43.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

44.
Wu Y-W, Tang Y-H, Tringe SG, Simmons BA, Singer SW. MaxBin: an automated binning method to recover individual genomes from metagenomes using an expectation-maximization algorithm. Microbiome. 2014;2:26.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Kang DD, Froula J, Egan R, Wang Z. MetaBAT, an efficient tool for accurately reconstructing single genomes from complex microbial communities. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1165.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

46.
Alneberg J, Bjarnason BS, De Bruijn I, Schirmer M, Quick J, Ijaz UZ, et al. Binning metagenomic contigs by coverage and composition. Nat Methods. 2014;11:1144–6.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

47.
Graham ED, Heidelberg JF, Tully BJ. BinSanity: unsupervised clustering of environmental microbial assemblies using coverage and affinity propagation. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3035.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

48.
Eren AM, Esen ÖC, Quince C, Vineis JH, Morrison HG, Sogin ML, et al. Anvi’o: an advanced analysis and visualization platform for ‘omics data. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1319.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

49.
Quinlan AR, Hall IM. BEDTools: A flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:841–2.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Wagner GP, Kin K, Lynch VJ. Measurement of mRNA abundance using RNA-seq data: RPKM measure is inconsistent among samples. Theory Biosci. 2012;131:281–5.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

51.
Anders S, Huber W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 2010;11:R106.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Overbeek R, Olson R, Pusch GD, Olsen GJ, Davis JJ, Disz T, et al. The SEED and the rapid annotation of microbial genomes using subsystems technology (RAST). Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:D206–14.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Kanehisa M, Sato Y, Morishima K. BlastKOALA and GhostKOALA: KEGG Tools for functional characterization of genome and metagenome sequences. J Mol Biol. 2016;428:726–31.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Anantharaman K, Brown CT, Hug LA, Sharon I, Castelle CJ, Probst AJ, et al. Thousands of microbial genomes shed light on interconnected biogeochemical processes in an aquifer system. Nat Commun. 2016;7:13219.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

55.
Garber AI, Nealson KH, Okamoto A, McAllister SM, Chan CS, Barco RA, et al. FeGenie: a comprehensive tool for the identification of iron genes and iron gene neighborhoods in genome and metagenome assemblies. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:37.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Camacho C, Coulouris G, Avagyan V, Ma N, Papadopoulos J, Bealer K, et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinforma. 2009;10:421.
Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

57.
Parks DH, Chuvochina M, Waite DW, Rinke C, Skarshewski A, Chaumeil P-A, et al. A standardized bacterial taxonomy based on genome phylogeny substantially revises the tree of life. Nat Biotechnol. 2018;36:996–1004.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

58.
Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: Improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:D590–6.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Pruesse E, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. SINA: Accurate high-throughput multiple sequence alignment of ribosomal RNA genes. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:1823–9.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Stamatakis A, Hoover P, Rougemont J. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML web servers. Syst Biol. 2008;57:758–71.
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Moore RM, Harrison AO, McAllister SM, Polson SW, Wommack KE. Iroki: automatic customization and visualization of phylogenetic trees. PeerJ. 2020;8:e8584.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Darling AE, Jospin G, Lowe E, Matsen FA, Bik HM, Eisen JA. PhyloSift: phylogenetic analysis of genomes and metagenomes. PeerJ. 2014;2:e243.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

63.
Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from. Genome Res. 2015;25:1043–55.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

64.
Roux S, Enault F, Hurwitz BL, Sullivan MB. VirSorter: mining viral signal from microbial genomic data. PeerJ. 2015;3:e985.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

65.
Wommack KE, Bhavsar J, Polson SW, Chen J, Dumas M, Srinivasiah S, et al. VIROME: a standard operating procedure for analysis of viral metagenome sequences. Stand Genom Sci. 2012;6:421–33.
CAS  Google Scholar 

66.
Bolduc B, Jang HBin, Doulcier G, You Z-Q, Roux S, Sullivan MB. vConTACT: an iVirus tool to classify double-stranded DNA viruses that infect Archaea and Bacteria. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3243.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Gregory AC, Zayed AA, Conceição-Neto N, Temperton B, Bolduc B, Alberti A, et al. Marine DNA viral macro- and microdiversity from pole to pole. Cell. 2019;177:1109–23.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

68.
Nasko DJ, Ferrell BD, Moore RM, Bhavsar JD, Polson SW, Wommack KE. CRISPR spacers indicate preferential matching of specific virioplankton genes. MBio. 2019;10:e02651–18.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

69.
Lau MCY, Aitchison JC, Pointing SB. Bacterial community composition in thermophilic microbial mats from five hot springs in central Tibet. Extremophiles. 2009;13:139–49.
PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

70.
Qiu Y, Hanada S, Ohashi A, Harada H, Kamagata Y, Sekiguchi Y. Syntrophorhabdus aromaticivorans gen. nov., sp. nov., the first cultured anaerobe capable of degrading phenol to acetate in obligate syntrophic associations with a hydrogenotrophic methanogen. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74:2051–8.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

71.
Nobu MK, Narihiro T, Tamaki H, Qiu Y, Sekiguchi Y, Woyke T, et al. The genome of Syntrophorhabdus aromaticivorans strain UI provides new insights for syntrophic aromatic compound metabolism and electron flow. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:4861–72.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

72.
Omoregie EO, Mastalerz V, de Lange G, Straub KL, Kappler A, Røy H, et al. Biogeochemistry and community composition of iron- and sulfur-precipitating microbial mats at the Chefren mud volcano (Nile deep sea fan, eastern Mediterranean). Appl Environ Microbiol. 2008;74:3198–215.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

73.
Konstantinidis KT, Rosselló-Móra R, Amann R. Uncultivated microbes in need of their own taxonomy. ISME J. 2017;11:2399–406.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

74.
Williamson SJ, Cary SC, Williamson KE, Helton RR, Bench SR, Winget D, et al. Lysogenic virus–host interactions predominate at deep-sea diffuse-flow hydrothermal vents. ISME J. 2008;2:1112–21.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

75.
Sharma A, Schmidt M, Kiesel B, Mahato NK, Cralle L, Singh Y, et al. Bacterial and Archaeal viruses of Himalayan hot springs at Manikaran modulate host genomes. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:3095.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

76.
Anderson RE, Sogin ML, Baross JA. Evolutionary strategies of viruses, bacteria and archaea in hydrothermal vent ecosystems revealed through metagenomics. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e109696.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

77.
Emerson D, Moyer CL. Neutrophilic Fe-oxidizing bacteria are abundant at the Loihi Seamount hydrothermal vents and play a major role in Fe oxide deposition. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2002;68:3085–93.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

78.
Emerson D, Fleming EJ, McBeth JM. Iron-oxidizing bacteria: an environmental and genomic perspective. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2010;64:561–83.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

79.
Hernsdorf AW, Amano Y, Miyakawa K, Ise K, Suzuki Y, Anantharaman K, et al. Potential for microbial H2 and metal transformations associated with novel bacteria and archaea in deep terrestrial subsurface sediments. ISME J. 2017;11:1915–29.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

80.
Quaiser A, Bodi X, Dufresne A, Naquin D, Francez A-J, Dheilly A, et al. Unraveling the stratification of an iron-oxidizing microbial mat by metatranscriptomics. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e102561.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

81.
Kato S, Chan C, Itoh T, Ohkuma M. Functional gene analysis of freshwater iron-rich flocs at circumneutral ph and isolation of a stalk-forming microaerophilic iron-oxidizing bacterium. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013;79:5283–90.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

82.
Hemp J, Gennis RB. Diversity of the heme-copper superfamily in Archaea: Insights from genomics and structural modeling. Results Probl Cell Differ. 2008;45:1–31.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

83.
Ferris FG. Biogeochemical properties of bacteriogenic iron oxides. Geomicrobiol J. 2005;22:79–85.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

84.
Sowers TD, Harrington JM, Polizzotto ML, Duckworth OW. Sorption of arsenic to biogenic iron (oxyhydr)oxides produced in circumneutral environments. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2017;198:194–207.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

85.
Bennett SA, Toner BM, Barco R, Edwards KJ. Carbon adsorption onto Fe oxyhydroxide stalks produced by a lithotrophic iron-oxidizing bacteria. Geobiology. 2014;12:146–56.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

86.
Rentz JA, Turner IP, Ullman JL. Removal of phosphorus from solution using biogenic iron oxides. Water Res. 2009;43:2029–35.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

87.
Chan CS, Fakra SC, Emerson D, Fleming EJ, Edwards KJ. Lithotrophic iron-oxidizing bacteria produce organic stalks to control mineral growth: implications for biosignature formation. ISME J. 2011;5:717–27.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

88.
Bennett SA, Toner BM, Barco R, Edwards KJ. Carbon adsorption onto Fe oxyhydroxide stalks produced by a lithotrophic iron-oxidizing bacteria. Geobiology. 2014;12:146–56.
CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

89.
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 

90.
Chen J, Strous M. Denitrification and aerobic respiration, hybrid electron transport chains and co-evolution. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2013;1827:136–44.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

91.
Choi PS, Naal Z, Moore C, Casado-Rivera E, Abruña HD, Helmann JD, et al. Assessing the impact of denitrifier-produced nitric oxide on other bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72:2200–5.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

92.
Klueglein N, Kappler A. Abiotic oxidation of Fe(II) by reactive nitrogen species in cultures of the nitrate-reducing Fe(II) oxidizer Acidovorax sp. BoFeN1 – questioning the existence of enzymatic Fe(II) oxidation. Geobiology. 2013;11:180–90.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

93.
Hafenbradl D, Keller M, Dirmeier R, Rachel R, Roßnagel P, Burggraf S, et al. Ferroglobus placidus gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel hyperthermophilic archaeum that oxidizes Fe2+ at neutral pH under anoxic conditions. Arch Microbiol. 1996;166:308–14.
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

94.
He S, Tominski C, Kappler A, Behrens S, Roden EE. Metagenomic analyses of the autotrophic Fe(II)-oxidizing, nitrate-reducing enrichment culture KS. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82:2656–68.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

95.
Straub KL, Benz M, Schink B, Widdel F. Anaerobic, nitrate-dependent microbial oxidation of ferrous iron. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1996;62:1458–60.
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

96.
Blöthe M, Roden EE. Composition and activity of an autotrophic Fe(II)-oxidizing, nitrate-reducing enrichment culture. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2009;75:6937–40.
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

97.
Emerson D, Scott JJ, Leavitt A, Fleming E, Moyer C. In situ estimates of iron-oxidation and accretion rates for iron-oxidizing bacterial mats at Lō’ihi Seamount. Deep Res Part I Oceanogr Res Pap. 2017;126:31–9.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

98.
Jenkins WJ, Hatta M, Fitzsimmons JN, Schlitzer R, Lanning NT, Shiller A, et al. An intermediate-depth source of hydrothermal 3He and dissolved iron in the North Pacific. Earth Planet Sci Lett. 2020;539:116223.
CAS  Article  Google Scholar  More

Macroscopic inspection of the 17 unhatched Black Grouse eggs showed that no embryonic tissues/development was visible in 12 of them, while very early chick development ( More

1.
Bardgett, R. D. & van der Putten, W. H. Belowground biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Nature 515, 505–511 (2014).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 
2.
Bahram, M. et al. Structure and function of the global topsoil microbiome. Nature 560, 233–237 (2018).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

3.
Luan, L. et al. Coupling bacterial community assembly to microbial metabolism across soil profiles. mSystems 5, e00298–20 (2020).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

4.
Stegen, J. C. et al. Groundwater–surface water mixing shifts ecological assembly processes and stimulates organic carbon turnover. Nat. Commun. 7, 11237 (2016).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

5.
Thompson, L. R. et al. A communal catalogue reveals Earth’s multiscale microbial diversity. Nature 551, 457–463 (2017).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

6.
Tedersoo, L. et al. Global diversity and geography of soil fungi. Science 346, 1256688 (2014).
PubMed  Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

7.
Oliverio, A. M. et al. The global-scale distributions of soil protists and their contributions to belowground systems. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax8787 (2020).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

8.
van den Hoogen, J. et al. Soil nematode abundance and functional group composition at a global scale. Nature 572, 194–198 (2019).
ADS  PubMed  Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

9.
Nemergut, D. R. et al. Patterns and processes of microbial community assembly. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 77, 342–356 (2013).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

10.
Martiny, J. B. H. et al. Microbial biogeography: putting microorganisms on the map. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 4, 102–112 (2006).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

11.
Hanson, C. A., Fuhrman, J. A., Horner-Devine, M. C. & Martiny, J. B. H. Beyond biogeographic patterns: processes shaping the microbial landscape. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 10, 497–506 (2012).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

12.
Vellend, M. Conceptual synthesis in community ecology. Q. Rev. Biol. 85, 183–206 (2010).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

13.
Dini-Andreote, F., Stegen, J. C., Van Elsas, J. D. & Falcão Salles, J. Disentangling mechanisms that mediate the balance between stochastic and deterministic processes in microbial succession. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E1326–E1332 (2015).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

14.
Zhou, J. & Ning, D. Stochastic community assembly: does it matter in microbial ecology? Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 81, e00002–e00017 (2017).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

15.
Chave, J. Neutral theory and community ecology. Ecol. Lett. 7, 241–253 (2004).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

16.
Letten, A. D., Ke, P.-J. & Fukami, T. Linking modern coexistence theory and contemporary niche theory. Ecol. Monogr. 87, 161–177 (2017).
Article  Google Scholar 

17.
Stegen, J. C., Lin, X. J., Fredrickson, J. K. & Konopka, A. E. Estimating and mapping ecological processes influencing microbial community assembly. Front. Microbiol. 6, 370 (2015).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

18.
Li, P. et al. Distinct Successions of common and rare bacteria in soil under humic acid amendment – a microcosm study. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2271 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

19.
Stearns, S. C. The Evolution of Life Histories (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1992).

20.
Villarino, E. et al. Large-scale ocean connectivity and planktonic body size. Nat. Commun. 9, 142 (2018).
ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

21.
Woo, C., An, C., Xu, S., Yi, S. M. & Yamamoto, N. Taxonomic diversity of fungi deposited from the atmosphere. ISME J. 12, 2051–2060 (2018).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

22.
Soininen, J., Korhonen, J. J. & Luoto, M. Stochastic species distributions are driven by organism size. Ecology 94, 660–670 (2013).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

23.
Farjalla, V. F. et al. Ecological determinism increases with organism size. Ecology 93, 1752–1759 (2012).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

24.
Thuiller, W., Lavorel, S. & Araújo, M. B. Niche properties and geographical extent as predictors of species sensitivity to climate change. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 14, 347–357 (2005).
Article  Google Scholar 

25.
Li, P. et al. Responses of microbial communities to a gradient of pig manure amendment in red paddy soils. Sci. Total Environ. 705, 135884 (2020).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

26.
Brown, J. H., Gillooly, J. F., Allen, A. P., Savage, V. M. & West, G. B. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85, 1771–1789 (2004).
Article  Google Scholar 

27.
Foissner, W. Protist diversity and distribution: some basic considerations. Biodivers. Conserv. 17, 235–242 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

28.
Pimm, S. L., Jones, H. L. & Diamond, J. On the risk of extinction. Am. Nat. 132, 757–785 (1988).
Article  Google Scholar 

29.
Jiang, Y. et al. Crop rotations alter bacterial and fungal diversity in paddy soils across East Asia. Soil Biol. Biochem. 95, 250–261 (2016).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

30.
Li, P. et al. Spatial variation in soil fungal communities across paddy fields in subtropical China. mSystems 5, e00704–e00719 (2020).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

31.
Peay, K. G., Kennedy, P. G. & Talbot, J. M. Dimensions of biodiversity in the Earth mycobiome. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 14, 434–447 (2016).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

32.
Geisen, S. et al. Soil protists: a fertile frontier in soil biology research. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 42, 293–323 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

33.
Tucker, C. M., Shoemaker, L. G., Davies, K. F., Nemergut, D. R. & Melbourne, B. A. Differentiating between niche and neutral assembly in metacommunities using null models of β-diversity. Oikos 125, 778–789 (2016).
Article  Google Scholar 

34.
Doledec, S., Chessel, D. & Gimaret-Carpentier, C. Niche separation in community analysis: a new method. Ecology 81, 2914–2927 (2000).
Article  Google Scholar 

35.
Sloan, W. T., Woodcock, S., Lunn, M., Head, I. M. & Curtis, T. P. Modeling taxa-abundance distributions in microbial communities using environmental sequence data. Microb. Ecol. 53, 443–455 (2007).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

36.
De Wit, R. & Bouvier, T. Everything is everywhere, but, the environment selects; what did BaasBecking and Beijerinck really say. Environ. Microbiol. 8, 755–758 (2006).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

37.
Zinger, L. et al. Body size determines soil community assembly in a tropical forest. Mol. Ecol. 28, 528–543 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

38.
Chase, J. M. et al. Embracing scale-dependence to achieve a deeper understanding of biodiversity and its change across communities. Ecol. Lett. 21, 1737–1751 (2018).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

39.
Zhalnina, K. et al. Dynamic root exudate chemistry and microbial substrate preferences drive patterns in rhizosphere microbial community assembly. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 470–480 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

40.
De Bie, T. et al. Body size and dispersal mode as key traits determining metacommunity structure of aquatic organisms. Ecol. Lett. 15, 740–747 (2012).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

41.
Lowe, W. H. & McPeek, M. A. Is dispersal neutral? Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 444–450 (2014).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

42.
O’Brien, E. M., Whittaker, R. J. & Field, R. Climate and woody plant diversity in Southern Africa: relationships at species, genus and family levels. Ecography 21, 495–509 (1998).
Article  Google Scholar 

43.
Brown, J. H. Why are there so many species in the tropics? J. Biogeogr. 41, 8–22 (2014).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

44.
Li, X. et al. Agriculture erases climate constraints on soil nematode communities across large spatial scales. Glob. Change Biol. 26, 919–930 (2020).
ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

45.
Briones, M. J. I. Soil fauna and soil functions: a jigsaw puzzle. Front. Environ. Sci. 22, 7 (2014).
Google Scholar 

46.
Martiny, J. B. H., Jones, S. E., Lennon, J. T. & Martiny, A. C. Microbiomes in light of traits: a phylogenetic perspective. Science 350, 9323 (2015).
ADS  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

47.
Pansu, M. & Gautheyrou, J. Handbook of Soil Analysis: Mineralogical, Organic, and Inorganic Methods. (Springer, 2006).

48.
Biddle, J. F., Fitz-Gibbon, S., Schuster, S. C., Brenchley, J. E. & House, C. H. Metagenomic signatures of the Peru Margin subseafloor biosphere show a genetically distinct environment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 10583–10588 (2008).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

49.
Gardes, M. & Bruns, T. D. ITS primers with enhanced specificity for basidiomycetes – application to the identification of mycorrhizae and rusts. Mol. Ecol. 2, 113–118 (2008).
Article  Google Scholar 

50.
Stoeck, T. et al. Multiple marker parallel tag environmental DNA sequencing reveals a highly complex eukaryotic community in marine anoxic water. Mol. Ecol. 19, 21–31 (2010).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

51.
Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336 (2010).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

52.
Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C. & Knight, R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27, 2194–2200 (2011).
CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

53.
Zhang, Y. & Sun, Y. HMM-FRAME: accurate protein domain classification for metagenomic sequences containing frameshift errors. BMC Bioinform. 12, 198 (2011).
Article  Google Scholar 

54.
Li, W. & Godzik, A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 22, 1658–1659 (2006).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

55.
Quast, C. et al. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D590–D596 (2013).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

56.
Nilsson, R. H. et al. The UNITE database for molecular identification of fungi: handling dark taxa and parallel taxonomic classifications. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D259–D264 (2019).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

57.
Guillou, L. et al. The Protist Ribosomal Reference database (PR2): a catalog of unicellular eukaryote small sub-unit rRNA sequences with curated taxonomy. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D597–D604 (2012).
PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

58.
Zhao, J. et al. Size spectra of soil nematode assemblages under different land use types. Soil Biol. Biochem. 85, 130–136 (2015).
CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

59.
Soininen, J., McDonald, R. & Hillebrand, H. The distance decay of similarity in ecological communities. Ecography 30, 3–12 (2007).
Article  Google Scholar 

60.
Dray, S., Legendre, P. & Peres-Neto, P. R. Spatial modelling: A comprehensive framework for principal coordinate analysis of neighbor matrices (PCNM). Ecol. Model. 196, 483–493 (2006).
Article  Google Scholar 

61.
Chen, W., Jiao, S., Li, Q. & Du, N. Dispersal limitation relative to environmental filtering governs the vertical small‐scale assembly of soil microbiomes during restoration. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 402–412 (2020).
Article  Google Scholar 

62.
Jiao, S., Yang, Y., Xu, Y., Zhang, J. & Lu, Y. Balance between community assembly processes mediates species coexistence in agricultural soil microbiomes across eastern China. ISME J. 14, 202–216 (2020).
PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

63.
Elzhov, T. V., Mullen, K. M., Spiess, A.-N. & Bolker, B. Minpack. lm: R Interface to the levenberg–marquardt nonlinear least-squares algorithm found in MINPACK, plus support for bounds (CRAN Repository, 2016).

64.
Harrell, F. E. Jr. Hmisc: harrell miscellaneous. R. package version 3.0−12 (2013). .

65.
Davison, J. et al. Global assessment of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus diversity reveals very low endemism. Science 349, 970–973 (2015).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

66.
Fiore-Donno, A. M., Weinert, J., Wubet, T. & Bonkowski, M. Metacommunity analysis of amoeboid protists in grassland soils. Sci. Rep. 6, 19068 (2016).
ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

67.
Heger, T. J. et al. High-throughput environmental sequencing reveals high diversity of litter and moss associated protist communities along a gradient of drainage and tree productivity. Environ. Microbiol. 20, 1185–1203 (2018).
CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

68.
Oksanen, J. et al. Vegan: community ecology package. R. package version 2.5−4 (2019).

69.
Field, A., Miles, J. & Field, Z. Discovering Statistics Using R. London (Sage publications, 2012). More