Outbreaks of conifer bark beetles in Europe and North America have increased in scale and severity in recent decades. In this study, we identify existing fossil records containing bark beetle remains from the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (~14,000 cal. yr BP) to present day using the online databases Neotoma and BugsCEP and literature searches, and compare these data with modern distribution data of selected tree-killing species. Modern-day observational data from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) database was used to map recorded distributions from AD 1750 to present day. A total of 53 fossil sites containing bark beetle remains, from both geological and archeological sites, were found during our searches. Fossil sites were fewer in Europe (n = 21) than North America (n = 32). In Europe, 29% of the samples in which remains were found were younger than 1000 cal. yr BP, while in North America, remains were mainly identified from late Glacial (~14,000–11,500 cal. yr BP) sites. In total, the fossil records contained only 8 of 20 species we consider important tree-killing bark beetles in Europe and North America based on their impacts during the last 100 years. In Europe, Ips sexdentatus was absent from the fossil record. In North America, Dendroctonus adjunctus, Dendroctonus frontalis, Dendroctonus jeffreyi, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae, Dryocoetes confusus, Ips calligraphus, Ips confusus, Ips grandicollis, Ips lecontei, Ips paraconfusus, and Scolytus ventralis were absent. Overall, preserved remains of tree-killing bark beetles are rare in the fossil record. However, by retrieving bulk material from new and existing sites and combining data from identified bark beetle remains with pollen, charcoal, tree rings, and geochemistry, the occurrence and dominance of bark beetles, their outbreaks, and other disturbance events can be reconstructed.

Owing to its specialised methodology, palaeoecology is often regarded as a separate field from ecology, even though it is essential for understanding long-term ecological processes that have shaped the ecosystems that ecologists study and manage. Despite advances in ecological modelling, sample dating, and proxy-based reconstructions facilitating direct comparison of palaeoecological data with neo-ecological data, most of the scientific knowledge derived from palaeoecological studies remains siloed. We surveyed a group of palaeo-researchers with experience in crossing the divide between palaeoecology and neo-ecology, to develop Ten Simple Rules for publishing your palaeoecological research in non-palaeo journals. Our 10 rules are divided into the preparation phase, writing phase, and finalising phase when the article is submitted to the target journal. These rules provide a suite of strategies, including improved networking early in the process, building effective collaborations, transmitting results more efficiently to improve cross-disciplinary accessibility, and integrating concepts and methodologies that appeal to ecologists and a wider readership. Adhering to these Ten Simple Rules can ensure palaeoecologists’ findings are more accessible and impactful among ecologists and the wider scientific community. Although this article primarily shows examples of how palaeoecological studies were published in journals for a broader audience, the rules apply to anyone who aims to publish outside specialised journals.

This study presents the first subfossil beetle (Coleoptera) records from Lithuania, from Late Glacial organic deposits. Bulk sediment samples were collected from the Pamerkiai and Zervynos Outcrops in SE Lithuania, and from the Ventė Outcrop at the eastern coast of the Curonian Lagoon, W Lithuania. Radiocarbon dating determined that the studied sediments accumulated between ~15,000–11,300 cal BP. The beetle assemblages (29–177 individuals per sample) consist of many cold-adapted species that are common from Late Glacial deposits in the British Isles, Southern Sweden, and continental Europe. True arctic species are absent from the assemblages, and it is likely that the Lithuanian beetle fauna was most similar to nearby southern regions (e.g., Poland) during the Late Glacial. Besides a variety of aquatic species and typical wetland species, many beetle species living in open environments and on sandy soils were identified. In almost all the samples, taxa associated with pine trees, willows, and birches were found, confirming previous reconstructions of a sparsely forested landscape during the climatic periods GI-1e–GI-1a (Bølling-Allerød). The species assemblages from the youngest samples, associated with GS-1 (Younger Dryas), indicate the disappearance of large aquatic macrophytes and decreasing temperatures in Southern Lithuania, but a persistence of trees in the region.

Due to a specialised methodology, palaeoecology is often regarded as a separate field from ecology even though it is essential to understand long-term ecological processes that have shaped ecosystems that ecologists study and manage. Even though advances in ecological modelling, sample dating, and proxy-based reconstructions have enabled direct comparison of palaeoecological data with neo-ecological data, most of the scientific knowledge derived from palaeoecological studies remains siloed. We have surveyed a group of palaeo-researchers with experience in crossing the divide between palaeoecology and neo-ecology, with the goal to provide a set of Ten Simple Rules to publish your palaeo-ecological research in non-palaeo journals. Our ten rules are divided into the preparation phase, writing phase, and finalising phase when the article is submitted to the target journal. These rules provide a suite of strategies, including improved and early-on networking and effective collaborations, transmitting results in a more efficient and cross-disciplinary manner, and integrating concepts and methodologies that appeal to ecologists and a wider readership. Following these Ten Simple Rules can help palaeoecologists ensure that their work is disseminated and understood by mainstream ecological scientists. Although this article shows primarily examples of how palaeoecological studies were published in journals for a broader audience, the rules would apply to anyone who aims to publish outside specialised journals.