Biodiversity: The role of interaction diversity

Pugh, Brittany E.; Field, Richard M.

doi:10.1016/j.cub.2022.03.063

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The metanetwork concept, when coupled with metacommunity theory, sheds light on the processes underlying the assembly of network structures across different spatial scales in biogeography (Figure 1). It allows for the examination of large‐scale factors such as geographic area, co‐evolution, immigration and diversification, and their influence on the size and structure of local networks (O'Connor et al, 2020; Pugh & Field, 2022; Saravia et al, 2022). The metanetwork also serves as a baseline for potential interactions, enabling the construction of null models for local interaction networks.…”

Section: From Fundamental Knowledge and Data Integration To Metanetworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating the integration of biotic interactions in biogeography

Thuiller,

Calderón‐Sanou,

Chalmandrier

et al. 2023

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biotic interactions are widely recognised as the backbone of ecological communities, but how best to study them is a subject of intense debate, especially at macro‐ecological scales. While some researchers claim that biotic interactions need to be observed directly, others use proxies and statistical approaches to infer them. Despite this ambiguity, studying and predicting the influence of biotic interactions on biogeographic patterns is a thriving area of research with crucial implications for conservation. Three distinct approaches are currently being explored. The first approach involves empirical observation and measurement of biotic interactions' effects on species demography in laboratory or field settings. While these findings contribute to theory and to understanding species' demographies, they can be challenging to generalise on a larger scale. The second approach centers on inferring biotic associations from observed co‐occurrences in space and time. The goal is to distinguish the environmental and biotic effects on species distributions. The third approach constructs extensive potential interaction networks, known as metanetworks, by leveraging existing knowledge about species ecology and interactions. This approach analyses local realisations of these networks using occurrence data and allows understanding large distributions of multi‐taxa assemblages. In this piece, we appraise these three approaches, highlighting their respective strengths and limitations. Instead of seeing them as conflicting, we advocate for their integration to enhance our understanding and expand applications in the emerging field of interaction biogeography. This integration shows promise for ecosystem understanding and management in the Anthropocene era.

show abstract

Section: From Fundamental Knowledge and Data Integration To Metanetworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating the integration of biotic interactions in biogeography

Thuiller,

Calderón‐Sanou,

Chalmandrier

et al. 2023

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Global change has far-reaching impacts on various facets of biodiversity (Scherer-Lorenzen, 2014). One key facet that has been little studied to date is interaction diversity, which is of fundamental importance as trophic interactions form food webs and maintain ecosystem functions and services (Pugh & Field, 2022). This interaction diversity links a variety of ecosystems together.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying the utilisation of blue, green and brown resources by riparian predators: A combined use of amino acid isotopes and fatty acids

Saboret,

Drost,

Kowarik

et al. 2024

Methods Ecol Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global change drives multiple facets of biodiversity including interaction diversity, which is fundamental for ecosystem functioning. However, studying trophic interactions is challenging in meta‐ecosystems, that is ecosystems connected by spatial flows of energy, materials and organisms across ecosystem boundaries. While analytical methods based on abundances of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) and stable isotopes of amino acids (AAs) are being increasingly used, it has never been explored if both approaches could be: (i) combined in mixing models to enhance precision in dietary inference (ii) compared to disentangle transfers of various PUFAs and proteins in food webs in the wild. We explore the utility of analytical approaches based on PUFA abundances and AA isotopes to resolve resource transfers in a natural riparian food web. We focus on spiders and their potential prey from blue, green and brown sources to address three important and persisting methodological issues in food‐web ecology, namely whether (i) essential AA carbon isotopes can resolve protein origin from blue, green and brown resources, (ii) PUFA relative abundance and AA isotopes can be combined in a mixing model to provide higher precision estimates (i.e. narrower intervals) and (iii) combining the two approaches can unveil the coupling of protein and PUFA transfers in food webs. Our research demonstrates the power of AA isotopes and PUFAs to distinguish blue, green, and brown sources and their transfer up to consumers. We show that combining PUFA relative abundance and AA isotopes in a mixing model provides overall estimates similar to the individual estimates but significantly increases precision. In addition, we showcase how combining approaches unveil the coupling of protein and PUFA transfers. For instance, we show that most PUFAs are less concentrated from prey to predators, relative to proteins, highlighting uncoupling of PUFAs and protein transfer along food chains. We show for the first time the effectiveness of combining AA isotopes and PUFA abundances, particularly relevant for complex trophic interactions in a meta‐ecosystem context. Our study illustrates the trophic uncoupling of proteins and PUFAs, highlighting the necessity in combining both approaches.

show abstract

“…In spite of those broader analysis of biodiversity in recent years, a missing component of diversity in several studies of biodiversity loss is the diversity of ecological interactions (Valiente-Banuet et al 2015;Gaüzère et al 2022;Pugh & Field 2022). This Eltonian dimension (i.e., interactions between species and their effects on each other) may be crucial for understanding how biodiversity loss translates into the loss of ecological processes (Dehling & Stouffer 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decoupled responses of biodiversity facets driven from anuran vulnerability to climate and land use changes

Ceron¹,

Sales²,

Santana³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic climate and land use changes are the main drivers of biodiversity loss, promoting a major reorganization of the biota in all ecosystems. Biodiversity loss implies not only in the loss of species, but also entails losses in other dimensions of biodiversity, such as functional diversity, phylogenetic diversity and the diversity of ecological interactions.Yet, each of those facets of biodiversity may respond differently to extinctions. Here, we examine how extinction, driven by climate and land-use changes may affect different facets of diversity (functional, phylogenetic, and interaction diversity) by combining empirical data on interaction networks between anurans and their prey, species distribution modeling and extinction simulations.We used species distribution modeling to forecast the redistribution of anurans and create a species vulnerability rank based on expected range changes, then we simulate the extinction of anurans based on this rank. Next, we computed the variation in the functional, phylogenetic, and interaction diversities resulting from projected extinctions in four different ecoregions in the Neotropics. We found that the anuran vulnerability to climate and land-use change varies according to the level of trophic specialization. We also found a mismatch in the response of functional, phylogenetic, and interaction diversity to species’ extinction, whereby the effects on interaction diversity are stronger than those on phylogenetic and functional diversity. Although it is often assumed that interaction patterns are reflected by functional diversity, assessing the interaction patterns is necessary to understand how species loss may translate into the loss of ecosystem functions.

show abstract

Biodiversity: The role of interaction diversity

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Navigating the integration of biotic interactions in biogeography

Navigating the integration of biotic interactions in biogeography

Quantifying the utilisation of blue, green and brown resources by riparian predators: A combined use of amino acid isotopes and fatty acids

Decoupled responses of biodiversity facets driven from anuran vulnerability to climate and land use changes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About