Search

Methane emission by terrestrial invertebrates is restricted to millipedes, termites, cockroaches, and scarab beetles. The arthropod-associated archaea known to date belong to the orders Methanobacteriales, Methanomassiliicoccales, Methanomicrobiales, and Methanosarcinales, and in a few cases also to non-methanogenic Nitrososphaerales and Bathyarchaeales. However, all major host groups are severely undersampled, and the taxonomy of existing lineages is not well developed. Full-length 16S rRNA gene sequences and genomes of arthropod-associated archaea are scarce, reference databases lack resolution, and the names of many taxa are either not validly published or under-classified and require revision. Here, we investigated the diversity of archaea in a wide range of methane-emitting arthropods, combining phylogenomic analysis of isolates and metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) with amplicon sequencing of full-length 16S rRNA genes. Our results allowed us to describe numerous new species in hitherto undescribed taxa among the orders Methanobacteriales (Methanacia, Methanarmilla, Methanobaculum, Methanobinarius, Methanocatella, Methanoflexus, Methanorudis, and Methanovirga, all gen. nova), Methanomicrobiales (Methanofilum and Methanorbis, both gen. nova), Methanosarcinales (Methanofrustulum and Methanolapillus, both gen. nova), Methanomassiliicoccales (Methanomethylophilaceae fam. nov., Methanarcanum, Methanogranum, Methanomethylophilus, Methanomicula, Methanoplasma, Methanoprimaticola, all gen. nova), and the new family Bathycorpusculaceae (Bathycorpusculum gen. nov.). Reclassification of amplicon libraries from this and previous studies using this new taxonomic framework revealed that arthropods harbor only CO2 and methyl-reducing hydrogenotrophic methanogens. Numerous genus-level lineages appear to be present exclusively in arthropods, suggesting long evolutionary trajectories with their termite, cockroach, and millipede hosts, and a radiation into various microhabitats and ecological niches provided by their digestive tracts (e.g., hindgut compartments, gut wall, or anaerobic protists). The distribution patterns among the different host groups are often complex, indicating a mixed mode of transmission and a parallel evolution of invertebrate and vertebrate-associated lineages.

Abstract An animal's choice of foraging habitat reflects its response to environmental cues and is likely to vary among individuals in a population. Analyzing the magnitude of individual habitat selection can indicate how resilient populations may be to anthropogenic habitat change, where individually varying, broadly generalist populations have the potential to adjust their behavior. We collected GPS point data from 39 European nightjars (Caprimulgus europaeus) at a UK breeding site where restoration measures have altered large areas of habitat between breeding seasons. We calculated individual habitat selection over four breeding seasons to observe changes that might align with change in habitat. We also analyzed change in home range size in line with change in habitat availability, to examine functional relationships that can represent trade‐offs made by the birds related to performance of the habitat. Individual explained more of the variation in population habitat selection than year for most habitat types. Individuals differed in the magnitude of their selection for different habitat types, which created a generalist population composed of both generalist and specialist individuals. Selection also changed over time but only significantly for scrub habitat (60% decrease in selection over 4 years). Across the population, individual home range size was 2% smaller where availability of cleared habitat within the home range was greater, but size increased by 2% where the amount of open water was higher, indicating the presence of trade‐offs related to habitat availability. These results highlight that using individual resource selection and specialization measures, in conjunction with functional responses to change, can lead to better understanding of the needs of a population. Pooling specialist and generalist individuals for analysis could hide divergent responses to change and consequently obscure information that could be important in developing effective conservation strategies.