Article

Linking topological structure and dynamics in ecological networks

Departamento Biología Animal, Biología Vegetal y Ecología, Universidad de Jaén, Spain.
The American Naturalist (Impact Factor: 4.45). 08/2012; 180(2):186-99. DOI: 10.1086/666651
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Interaction networks are basic descriptions of ecological communities and are at the core of community dynamics models. Knowledge of their structure should enable us to understand dynamical properties of ecological communities. However, the relationships between dynamical properties of communities and qualitative descriptors of network structure remain unclear. To improve our understanding of such relationships, we develop a framework based on the concept of strongly connected components, which are key structural components of networks necessary to explain stability properties such as persistence and robustness. We illustrate this framework for the analysis of qualitative empirical food webs and plant-plant interaction networks. Both types of networks exhibit high persistence (on average, 99% and 80% of species, respectively, are expected to persist) and robustness (only 0.2% and 2% of species are expected to disappear following the extinction of a species). Each of the networks is structured as a large group of interconnected species accompanied by much smaller groups that most often consist of a single species. This low-modularity configuration can be explained by a negative modularity-stability relationship. Our results suggest that ecological communities are not typically structured in multispecies compartments and that compartmentalization decreases robustness.

2 Followers
 · 
157 Views
  • Source
    • "Furthermore, many studies have been of static networks, and most dynamical studies to date have dealt exclusively with food webs (e.g. Brose, 2008; Alcántara and Rey, 2012; Boit et al., 2012; Heckmann et al., 2012). The relationships thus found may not necessarily hold true in a real ecosystem, where multiple non-predator–prey interaction types co-occur and interact with one another and with trophic interactions (Golubski and Abrams, 2011) in ways that are time-sensitive. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The fundamental debate on complexity–stability relationships in ecosystems is becoming more important in the face of dramatic contemporary changes. Most research using network approaches to address this challenge has focused on predator–prey interactions and static networks. We describe a stochastic ecological network simulation model that combines predator–prey interactions with mutualism, parasitism and basal species competition. Network topology is based on a generalized niche model, while temporal dynamics are specified using bioenergetic models with noise terms. We use the model to explore the effects of non-predator–prey interactions, color of environmental noise, and the degree of synchronization of environmental noise across species on the coefficients of variation of total ecosystem energy content and Shannon entropy over time. In regression trees derived by binary recursive partitioning, the presence or absence of synchrony gave the greatest difference in the means of data points for both system energy and Shannon entropy, followed in turn by white versus colored noise and pink versus red and black noise. The effects are present despite the large variation in the Monte Carlo simulations reflecting the variability of real ecosystems. Non-predator–prey interactions explained relatively small proportions of the total deviance, and each had different effect signs depending on the presence of the other interaction types and on whether energy or entropy was measured. These results underscore the importance of modeling more realistic colors of environmental noise in understanding and predicting the dynamics of food webs and ecological communities.
    Ecological Modelling 08/2013; 263:162–173. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.05.007 · 2.07 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Furthermore, many studies have been of static networks, and most dynamical studies to date have dealt exclusively with food webs (e.g. Brose, 2008; Alcántara and Rey, 2012; Boit et al., 2012; Heckmann et al., 2012). The relationships thus found may not necessarily hold true in a real ecosystem, where multiple non-predator–prey interaction types co-occur and interact with one another and with trophic interactions (Golubski and Abrams, 2011) in ways that are time-sensitive. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background/Question/Methods The relationship between complexity and stability is not only a fundamental ecological debate but also an important and current multidisciplinary issue. The network paradigm is ideally suited to inquiry in this area and continues to be widely used to probe the dynamics of complex systems in nature and society. Most ecological network research, however, has so far focused on particular interaction types, dynamics of highly simplified systems or empirical energy flows applicable only to specific systems. Few have tried to overcome these limitations concurrently by constructing realistically complex systems using simple rules and examining their emergent properties under a general theoretical framework. In this study, we first designed a simulation model combining ecological network topology, bioenergetics and population dynamics using fundamental ecological principles and mechanistic equations. We then used the model to investigate how the addition of different types of non-predator-prey interactions (competition, mutualism, parasitism) to food webs affect their resilience. Resilience was quantified in terms of the mean time taken to recover half the energy lost in perturbations. We accounted for parameter uncertainty via Monte Carlo simulations. Results/Conclusions Linear mixed-effects regression, with presence or absence of interaction types as dummy variables and model parameterization as a random effect, associated mutualism with shorter recovery time and parasitism with longer recovery time (n = 212, p << 0.0001). Direct competition among basal species was also associated with longer recovery time but the effect was less significant (p = 0.004). Mutualism had the aforementioned effect regardless of the presence or absence of parasitism. A separate simulation experiment, keeping connectance constant across model configurations with and without mutualism and the number of species constant across configurations with and without parasitism, produced qualitatively identical results for mutualism and parasitism (n = 2102, p << 0.0001). The effects are present despite the large variation across simulated ecosystems that reflects the variety of real ecosystems. We discuss possible ecological mechanisms by which non-predator-prey interactions can affect ecosystem resilience as evidenced by the simulations. Our findings illustrate the potential effects of non-predator-prey interactions and support the cause for accounting for these interactions in investigations of ecological communities. We advocate systems approaches as part of our arsenal of tools for better understanding and anticipation of the trajectories of complex ecosystems under rapid anthropogenic change.
    97th ESA Annual Convention 2012; 08/2012
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The relationship between facilitation and evolutionary ecology is poorly understood. We review five issues elucidating how the phylogenetic relatedness of species provides insight into the role of facilitation in community assembly: (a) Are the facilitative interactions more common between species that differ in a regeneration niche? (b) Are facilitative interactions more common between distantly related species? (c) Do communities governed by facilitation (rather than competition) have higher phylogenetic diversity? (d) As facilitated juvenile plants mature, do they compete with their nurses more often if they are closely related to them? (e) How does the phylogenetic signature in a community reveal ecological processes, such as succession, regeneration dynamics, indirect interactions, and coextinction cascades? The evolutionary history of lineages explains the regeneration niche of species, which ultimately determines the facilitation-competition balance and therefore community assembly and dynamics. We apply this framework to the conservation of biodiversity and propose future research avenues.
    Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 11/2012; DOI:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135855 · 10.98 Impact Factor
Show more