ライフサイエンスコーパス: habitat

1 highest recorded in a Desmophyllum pertusum habitat.

2 lus reference genome, growing in its natural habitat.

3 theus exhibited the largest loss in suitable habitat.

4 ion to increase signal contrast in the local habitat.

5 es in the amount of available marine benthic habitat.

6 at the sea surface or use the material as a habitat.

7 nd abundance of refuges and obstacles in the habitat.

8 l predictions of migrant and resident winter habitat.

9 dgerows are often used to augment pollinator habitat.

10 y across different background types in their habitat.

11 deep rainforests but from savanna and mixed habitats.

12 e of positive interactions across freshwater habitats.

13 ue synchronizing rhythms of life in seasonal habitats.

14 ith populations now thriving in low altitude habitats.

15 opulation monitoring in semi-enclosed marine habitats.

16 d proportion of urban green areas within the habitats.

17 es that occupies highly variable and complex habitats.

18 p of microbial biomass degradation in anoxic habitats.

19 pacting populations from distant continental habitats.

20 accurate match to different types of desert habitats.

21 ich vineyards are surrounded by semi-natural habitats.

22 obably central for its adaptation to benthic habitats.

23 res are key drivers of germination in alpine habitats.

24 munities of the Galapagos, across a range of habitats.

25 ry production of endolithic and other shaded habitats.

26 guiding aquatic animals to key resources or habitats.

27 due to small population sizes and fragmented habitats.

28 nhabiting terrestrial, marine and freshwater habitats.

29 themselves are investigated in their natural habitats.

30 o understand better their feeding habits and habitats.

31 th and possibly even enable extraterrestrial habitats.

32 species by offering more thermally suitable habitats.

33 cies and higher total abundances than simple habitats.

34 cate after they become abundant in their new habitats.

35 ) to great tit nestlings in urban and forest habitats.

36 ssociated with global expansion of temperate habitats.

37 id orienting toward larvae in nearby nursery habitats.

38 ith the connectivity of crop fields to other habitats.

39 mer water temperatures in food-rich littoral habitats.

40 anthropogenic pressures on aquatic wildlife habitats.

41 In this little-explored habitat, 250 soil cores were sampled from 10 plots hosti

42 ay be critically endangered in their natural habitats, 50% may be endangered, and 28% may be vulnerab

43 s, 59 H5 LPAIVs were isolated from wild-bird habitats (a mean annual rate of 5.3% of AIV isolations).

44 ganisms living in naturally more radioactive habitats accumulate more mutations across generations us

45 ence in flowering time and from the other by habitat adaptation (iron tolerance).

46 r agricultural settings to test if enhancing habitat adjacent to crops increases wild bee diversity a

47 hern India, diversifying into new, more arid habitats after environmental conditions stabilized.

48 is proving to be both an important microbial habitat and a tractable model system for asking question

49 cesses, although the influence of bioreactor habitat and ecology on HGT frequency is not well underst

50 y orders of magnitude, associated with their habitat and ecology.

51 x) was constant across species regardless of habitat and elevation.

52 our findings suggest a niche partitioning of habitat and feeding sources amongst the three Typhlatya

53 maging anthropogenic impact on their natural habitat and illegal pet and bushmeat trade.

54 by plant size and architecture, dispersers, habitat and insularity.

55 h ratio, individuals who can sense their sub-habitat and respond in this way have an adaptive advanta

56 e physical capacity for movement through the habitat and subsequent gene flow.

57 zone for white sharks and the use of shared habitat and trophic interactions between squid and white

58 The human oral microbiome with its diverse habitats and abundant, relatively well-characterized mic

59 Provisioning rates were similar across habitats and control and supplemented broods, but supple

60 difficult to catch due to their inaccessible habitats and cryptic coloration.

61 ought and has established itself in many new habitats and different geographic realms.

62 ess likely to mitigate impacts of fishing on habitats and ecosystems compared with the label product.

63 document the recovery of marine populations, habitats and ecosystems following past conservation inte

64 ask how species' vulnerability varies across habitats and elevations, and how climatically buffered m

65 l food webs, as a trophic subsidy to distant habitats and for inshore carbon cycling and (potentially

66 titute strategies spanning life in different habitats and hosts.

67 results for resource production within lake habitats and increase the duration of warmer water tempe

68 FLA) are ubiquitous protozoa in aquatic/soil habitats and known to resist various disinfection method

69 ly binary comparisons of low- versus high-Fe habitats and populations.

70 In a virtual ecosystem, players compete for habitats and resources, unintentionally reproducing many

71 the biological world vary across latitudes, habitats and spatial scales.

72 High pCO(2) habitats and their populations provide an unparalleled o

73 tions via migratory escape from contaminated habitats and transmission hotspots, migratory recovery d

74 Changing climates are altering wildlife habitats and wildlife behavior in complex ways.

75 distinct from the microbiomes of their soil habitat, and soil pH affected amoeba microbiome diversit

76 Understanding how a species utilises its habitat, and the processes that give rise to its movemen

77 pupae count data, type and count of aquatic habitats, and daily rainfall.

78 y correlated with the fitness value of their habitats, and density-dependent habitat selection patter

79 ion addressing wildlife trade, protection of habitats, and reduction of the wildlife-livestock-human

80 ponse to events of importance in the natural habitat, appears to occur, for the most part, at a prede

81 Natural habitats are being impacted by human pressures at an ala

82 and bacteria : fungi ratios in EM-dominated habitats are driven by monodominance of woody vegetation

83 ls move to select habitat, commonly defining habitat as a set of static patches [8, 9].

84 Species expanding into new habitats as a result of climate change or human introduc

85 is a tradeoff between the number and size of habitats: as the number of habitats within a fixed area

86 nsive to predation risk, often seeking safer habitats at the cost of foraging rewards.

87 omposing for 1-5 years in spatially distinct habitats at the landscape scale (top and bottom of water

88 ss-based representation of mosquito breeding habitat availability.

89 ations for the future protection of pangolin habitat based on the location of prey species.

90 ions and occupy a wide range of geographical habitats, but the molecular basis of thermoregulation re

91 ical assembly processes differ between lotic habitats by examining community composition and inferrin

92 sation of lowland inland and higher altitude habitats by this aggressively invasive predator, by maki

93 eneous shrub expansion, but impacts of these habitat changes on range dynamics for large herbivores a

94 of habitats within landscapes and fine-scale habitat characteristics influence community structure an

95 , 23% of nests occurred in wildfire-affected habitats characterized by reduced sagebrush cover and gr

96 ow migratory strategies are shaped by winter habitat choice is largely unknown due to the general ina

97 spatial scales, which could be the result of habitat choices or differential predation.

98 ght to understand how animals move to select habitat, commonly defining habitat as a set of static pa

99 We observed habitat compression of coastal upwelling, changes in ava

100 predator-free patches resulting in so-called habitat compression.

101 nists providing evidence of predator-induced habitat compression.

102 essments of the relative impact of landscape habitat conditions on bee pathogen prevalence are needed

103 demonstrate how climate change may increase habitat connectivity and alter the distributions of shru

104 Habitat connectivity is a key factor influencing species

105 amined leading to a weak characterization of habitat connectivity.

106 Realistic scenarios for harvest and habitat conservation costing an estimated $588 M (2016 U

107 Habitat conservation represents an economically and envi

108 180 species associated with limestone karst habitat, constitutes an ideal system for studying the im

109 re more likely to avoid detection in complex habitats containing a higher abundance of obstacles; how

110 a are well known for their dominance in soil habitats contaminated with various toxins and are best c

111 exist on paper only; thus, while logging and habitat conversion may be banned in these areas, illegal

112 clines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodivers

113 al terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion.

114 Empirical habitat data show that this species is limited to narrow

115 ore urgent short-term forces of poaching and habitat degradation and long-term forces of climate chan

116 g approaches that link conservation funding, habitat delivery, and population response to better inte

117 activities often continue to cause alarming habitat destruction.

118 ing rainfall can provide insights into plant habitat distribution and drought adaptation.

119 Compared with fungi, the cross-habitat distribution pattern of bacteria was more strong

120 but not ancestral lineages from nonsulfidic habitats due to convergent adaptations in the primary to

121 under pressure to abandon their traditional habitats due to ocean warming, and consequently either m

122 termined frogs' current vulnerability across habitats, elevations and microhabitats accounting for ph

123 Scleractinian "stony" corals are major habitat engineers, whose skeletons form the framework fo

124 nian corals (30%-42% of present-day suitable habitat), even smaller refugia locations for the octocor

125 The final Cox model consisted of 4 habitat evolution-based features.

126 s with each possible combination of selected habitat features (river, elephant corridor, agricultural

127 ave highlighted three non-mutually exclusive habitat features that are likely to vary at spatial scal

128 ncentrated in particular locations by marine habitat features, ocean physical processes, and inverteb

129 to successfully establish in newly available habitat following climate warming.

130 n and eastern Australia, which is considered habitat for 832 species of native vertebrate fauna.

131 d archaea, unveiling a previously unreported habitat for microbial life under the surface of the drie

132 wnscaling to map current and projected shrub habitat for moose on the North Slope of Alaska.

133 es, traditionally know as productive aquatic habitats for Ae. aegypti.

134 en woodland and dense thicket being favoured habitats for foraging.

135 function as analogues of novel anthropogenic habitats for insects and mites, analysing a combination

136 oyster larvae and predict the suitability of habitats for larval survival.

137 losphere represents one of the most abundant habitats for microbiota colonization.

138 Shark nurseries are essential habitats for shark survival.

139 vides new insights into the role of seamount habitats for top predators.

140 ally abundant facilitation cascade involving habitat-forming marsh cordgrass and aggregations of ribb

141 -induced damage range from the rapid loss of habitat-forming organisms, through to a reduction in the

142 he consequences of shifts and losses in such habitat-forming species for associated communities and e

143 that anthropogenic modifications leading to habitat fragmentation and a higher genetic diversity and

144 g autumn, suggesting seasonal differences in habitat function and highlighting the vital role of stop

145 ion of microbial taxa and genes across plant habitats has revealed the importance of various ecologic

146 s, including single Phragmites australis (P, habitat I), a mixture of P. australis and Suaeda salsa (

147 ure of P. australis and Suaeda salsa (P + S, habitat II), single S. salsa (S, habitat III), and tidal

148 lsa (P + S, habitat II), single S. salsa (S, habitat III), and tidal flat (TF, habitat IV) across a s

149 itat quality over time that outpaced overall habitat improvement trends across the study site.

150 The annual cycle of sea-ice habitat in KB shifted from a year-round ice platform (~5

151 could result in a potential loss of suitable habitat in Minnesota for both buckthorn species and a po

152 screened 890 bumble bee workers from varied habitats in Pennsylvania, USA for three pathogens (defor

153 and highlighting the vital role of stopover habitats in sustaining migratory communities.

154 etermine what are the most important aquatic habitats in the proliferation of Ae. aegypti in Miami.

155 (Laminaria hyperborea) at multiple subtidal habitats in the United Kingdom (UK).

156 ivity pattern and the physical nature of the habitats in which they live.

157 If conditions provided by such habitats increase reproductive success, they could be vi

158 e configuration of the patches in which that habitat is contained.

159 Degradation and loss of natural habitat is the major driver of the current global biodiv

160 Seasonal animal movement among disparate habitats is a fundamental mechanism by which energy, nut

161 Human advance on natural habitats is a major cause of biodiversity loss.

162 late to local temperature variation in their habitats is crucial to determining vulnerability to glob

163 salsa (S, habitat III), and tidal flat (TF, habitat IV) across a salinity gradient.

164 earchers to account for both individual- and habitat-level covariates.

165 mposition and herbivory differed between the habitats likely due to different macrophyte species rich

166 morphs associated with the three major lake habitats: littoral, pelagic, and profundal.

167 in a more comprehensive understanding of how habitat loss and fragmentation influence genetic variati

168 s Endangered in South Africa, as a result of habitat loss and persecution.

169 tributions, species traits, IUCN assessment, habitat loss and timber extraction for different periods

170 ns of species richness immediately after the habitat loss disturbance, each model significantly under

171 of most species, this is the main reason why habitat loss has been highlighted as the main threat for

172 ught to be due to multiple factors including habitat loss, climate change, increased vulnerability to

173 nserving species density requires minimising habitat loss, irrespective of the configuration of the p

174 io-ecosystems most vulnerable to species and habitat loss.

175 ions of arthropods immediately following 50% habitat loss.

176 ikely to underestimate extinctions caused by habitat loss.

177 ndangered Species Act due to climate-induced habitat loss.

178 Identifying such habitat mismatches between selection and survival facili

179 s the importance of including data about the habitat modification of a community, to better elucidate

180 ement behaviour in response to anthropogenic habitat modification, though caribou data were limited.

181 results, we explored how different types of habitat modifications (that augment or decrease resource

182 Habitat modifications that stabilized resources, either

183 a fixed area increases, the average area per habitat must decrease.

184 Animals that move through complex habitats must frequently contend with obstacles in their

185 cted to increase the spatial cohesion of the habitat network that diminishes effects of fragmentation

186 forcing, conceptualizing wetlands as dynamic habitat nodes in dispersal networks.

187 p and aggregated data layers for body shape, habitat occupancy, geographic distribution, and paleonto

188 exhibit rapid growth and occupy interspersed habitats of contrasting quality.

189 pply, and flood protection but also fragment habitats of freshwater species.

190 ely confers a selective advantage in natural habitats of magnetotactic bacteria, such as aquatic sedi

191 or how climate change may impact the largest habitat on the planet, the deep pelagic realm.

192 ect of light environment (shaded vs full-sun habitat) on leaf toughness and leaf nutritional quality

193 epresents a response to changes in preferred habitat or prey, for example, the decrease in abundance

194 m year to year, season to season, habitat to habitat, or species to species.

195 umenting adult dispersal from natural larval habitat, our results suggest that Ae. aegypti adults dis

196 his species' close association with man-made habitats, our maps predict a high probability of presenc

197 ambitious ecocompensation programs in panda habitat outside reserves [11-13], the protection provide

198 A large body of work has focused on habitat patch area and connectivity (area-isolation para

199 creasing distances from outside of their own habitat patch.

200 fully address how the spatial arrangement of habitat patches (and resulting connectivity) can influen

201 altered by the spatial arrangement of local habitat patches within stream channels, and variation in

202 chness depends on spatial characteristics of habitat patches, especially their size and isolation.

203 erimental landscapes composed of homogeneous habitat patches.

204 We examined the influence of breeding habitat phenology on life history timing of the eastern

205 rated by a decade, and including over 50,000 habitat plots, we examined the panda population and habi

206 aluating the correlation between measures of habitat preference (occurrence, abundance, fidelity, int

207 Our habitat preference results, based on longitudinal GPS da

208 With similar habitat preferences Ostreopsis may serve as an indicator

209 te their seasonal home range differences and habitat preferences.

210 ier ice break-up dates influence within lake habitat production, water temperatures and the habitat u

211 The intersection of changing habitat productivity and warming water temperatures on s

212 e predator, by making previously sub-optimal habitats progressively more suitable.

213 Bird communities in intensive-agricultural habitats proved more susceptible to changes in climate,

214 cts of fragmentation, which improves overall habitat quality and likely expands the range of moose.

215 vironment can disrupt the connection between habitat quality and the cues that species use to identif

216 idual's body condition, foraging success and habitat quality during the nonbreeding season affected i

217 but exhibited a marked increase in foraging habitat quality over time that outpaced overall habitat

218 Where populations are fragmented, habitat quantification is often the first step in conser

219 that warming ocean waters will restrict the habitat range of the narwhal, further suggesting that na

220 have lost an average of 18% of their natural habitat range sizes thus far, and may lose up to 23% by

221 inal GPS data, allowed us to determine ideal habitat ratios (grassland:open woodland:low shrubland of

222 ican cohorts began by foraging in suboptimal habitats relative to the availability of high-quality pa

223 ewts were 1.9 and 3.2 for complex and simple habitats, respectively.

224 plexippus) is projected to require extensive habitat restoration across multiple land use sectors inc

225 e generalizable to other situations, such as habitat restorations, where resource density is enhanced

226 change from wet habitat Sphagnum spp. to dry habitat S. fuscum.

227 s to evaluate caribou, moose, bear, and wolf habitat selection and movement behaviour in response to

228 wn how predators continue to influence these habitat selection behaviours at increasing distances fro

229 We documented adaptive habitat selection for seven species, non-ideal selection

230 Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informa

231 lue of their habitats, and density-dependent habitat selection patterns may help to explain complex p

232 y be incorrect when territoriality indicates habitat selection tactics that deviate from the IFD (e.g

233 Here, we fill this gap by incorporating the habitat selection traits at different flows of a freshwa

234 Using temporally and spatially measured GRD habitat selection traits, we quantified flow-ecology res

235 to >600 individuals), and density-dependent habitat selection was most consistent with the ideal-pre

236 at the manifestation of a specific driver of habitat selection, namely interspecific competition, can

237 odulate climate effects through movement and habitat selection.

238 onlinear and often non-monotonic patterns of habitat selection.

239 they can provide insights into movement and habitat-selection processes at fine-spatial and temporal

240 eciation rates were strongly correlated with habitat shifts linked to particular soil conditions; 81.

241 such as flood control and fish and wildlife habitat, should be considered when creating policy regar

242 ps of differentially expressed genes between habitats showing elevated genetic divergence in multiple

243 esponses of brachiopods and bivalves, and of habitat specialists and generalists, but no effect from

244 ies, represented mainly as a change from wet habitat Sphagnum spp. to dry habitat S. fuscum.

245 such as water filtration, nutrient cycling, habitat stabilization, and food web enhancement, but cau

246 Identifying the factors that determine habitat suitability and hence patterns of wildlife abund

247 e data and environmental parameters to model habitat suitability for key cold-water coral and commerc

248 levels of degradation, severely compromising habitat suitability for wildlife.

249 t whether isolation by distance, topography, habitat suitability, or environment drive the genetic di

250 Living in various habitats, tardigrades play major roles as consumers and

251 nderestimating mining footprints relative to habitats targeted and poor understanding of the sensitiv

252 We define ecological responses as suitable habitat templates with enough usable surface area to sup

253 Structurally complex habitats tend to contain more species and higher total a

254 erved conversion infringed upon high-quality habitat that, relative to unconverted land, had provided

255 duals within a population are free to select habitats that maximize their chances of success.

256 itation, they are increasing in abundance in habitats that they have been absent from for decades.

257 t ubiquitous organisms thrive in hypersaline habitats that they share with haloarchaea.

258 al traps by returning to suboptimal breeding habitats that were dramatically altered by disturbance.

259 crab Aratus pisonii in its historic mangrove habitat, the suboptimal colonized salt marsh ecosystem,

260 aptive for individuals to sense in which sub-habitat they find themselves, using environmental clues,

261 differ from year to year, season to season, habitat to habitat, or species to species.

262 dence that primary remnants provide critical habitat to sensitive bee species.

263 ility to track birds from specific wintering habitats to stopovers or breeding destinations.

264 ution at Eda is a response to climate-driven habitat transformation rather than a direct consequence

265 plots, we examined the panda population and habitat trends inside and outside reserves.

266 tern of bacteria was more strongly driven by habitat type.

267 mmunity assembly processes across four major habitat types (free-living, particle-associated, biofilm

268 introduced by ballast water across different habitat types (fresh, brackish, and marine) in Canada.

269 Grassland and open woodland habitat types were used throughout the year in accordanc

270 he need for research in other ecosystems and habitat types.

271 pronounced predator-mediated shifts in prey habitat use and behavior over much larger spatiotemporal

272 ts to detect and quantify shifts in cetacean habitat use as environmental conditions change and the l

273 Yet, habitat use has never been integrated with passage to un

274 y in MB likely reflect broadscale changes in habitat use in other areas within the species range.

275 id-ranking, or mesopredators, differences in habitat use might have strong demographic effects becaus

276 This study aims at assessing resource and habitat use, niche occupation and trophic interactions f

277 to in situ conservation projects in natural habitats using revenue from visitor attendance, as well

278 ecies having unique strategy of resource and habitat utilization.

279 bitat production, water temperatures and the habitat utilized by, resources obtained and behavior of

280 ds, provided a range of riparian and aquatic habitat variability ideal for studying dragonfly emergen

281 Neogonodactylus oerstedii also show between-habitat variation in dorsal body colouration.

282 ation, snow and soil characteristics) and in habitats varying in their exposure to radiation, moistur

283 , Haliscera conica and Halitrephes) as their habitat volume might increase.

284 ver of Nepal during the low-flow season when habitat was heavily reduced and water demand was highest

285 Prey abundance and habitat was sampled across a 30 x 15 km area by remotely

286 tions that characterize a species' preferred habitat, we provide evidence-based maps predicting the p

287 The largest reductions in suitable habitat were projected for the scleractinian coral Lophe

288 otic (flowing-water) to lentic (still-water) habitats, where the low-plated allele is favoured.

289 s, a subset has successfully colonized urban habitats, where they are often the focus of much public

290 mitations to inorganic carbon in the aquatic habitat, whereas Rubisco in extant land plants reflects

291 afauna) living in deep waters and in benthic habitats, whereas monitoring of ecosystem functioning sh

292 oobenthic production compared to the pelagic habitat which decreased in zooplankton production.

293 he cues that species use to identify quality habitat, which can result in an ecological trap.

294 s created a "resource-rich" littoral-benthic habitat with increases in zoobenthic production compared

295 e cephalopod species therefore changed their habitats with changing environmental conditions over the

296 species of waterlice living in subterranean habitats with contrasted levels of radioactivity.

297 dramatically alter available Arctic coastal habitat, with the potential loss of diversity and declin

298 olf density to underlying classifications of habitat within a hierarchical state-space modelling fram

299 umber and size of habitats: as the number of habitats within a fixed area increases, the average area

300 The arrangement and composition of habitats within landscapes and fine-scale habitat charac