Selection on stability across ecological scales

Borrelli, Jonathan J.; Allesina, Stefano; Amarasekare, Priyanga; Arditi, Roger; Chase, Ivan D.; Damuth, John; Holt, Robert D.; Logofet, Dmitrii O.; Novák, Márk; Rohr, Rudolf P.; Rossberg, Axel G.; Spencer, Matthew; Tran, Jonathan; Ginzburg, Lev

doi:10.1016/j.tree.2015.05.001

Cited by 94 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…See Pimm (1984), Logofet (2005), Ives and Carpenter (2007), Donohue et al (2013), and Borrelli et al (2015) for additional reviews on different stability concepts.…”

Section: Nestednessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity and stability of ecological networks: a review of the theory

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our planet is changing at paces never observed before. Species extinction is happening at faster rates than ever, greatly exceeding the five mass extinctions in the fossil record. Nevertheless, our lives are strongly based on services provided by ecosystems, thus the responses to global change of our natural heritage are of immediate concern. Understanding the relationship between complexity and stability of ecosystems is of key importance for the maintenance of the balance of human growth and the conservation of all the natural services that ecosystems provide. Mathematical network models can be used to simplify the vast complexity of the real world, to formally describe and investigate ecological phenomena, and to understand ecosystems propensity of returning to its functioning regime after a stress or a perturbation. The use of ecological-network models to study the relationship between complexity and stability of natural ecosystems is the focus of this review. The concept of ecological networks and their characteristics are first introduced, followed by central and occasionally contrasting definitions of complexity and stability. The literature on the relationship between complexity and stability in different types of models and in real ecosystems is then reviewed, highlighting the theoretical debate and the lack of consensual agreement. The summary of the importance of this line of research for the successful management and conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services concludes the review.

show abstract

“…See Pimm (1984), Logofet (2005), Ives and Carpenter (2007), Donohue et al (2013), and Borrelli et al (2015) for additional reviews on different stability concepts.…”

Section: Nestednessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity and stability of ecological networks: a review of the theory

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only recently have investigators begun to explore the synergism between these two perspectives, suggesting that food‐web topology and population stability combine to produce a single conceptual framework (Rooney & McCann ; Borrelli et al . ). These studies have suggested that species assemble in ways that maximize energy transfer (Milo et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Borrelli et al . (), for example, suggested a non‐adaptive selection process governing the occurrence of modules (small topological components of communities). This process would act on intrinsic properties of population stability to produce a single consistent topological pattern.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causal relationships between population stability and food‐web topology

Monteiro

Faria

2017

Functional Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Historically, food‐web theory has examined the aspects of natural communities that are responsible for maintaining stability in complex communities. The two main lines of research emphasize either topological aspects damping the propagation of perturbations, or population–stability mechanisms that regulate population outbreaks and prevent a total system destabilization. Recent studies, however, have demonstrated that these two aspects act synergistically to produce a single conceptual framework. Nevertheless, causal relationships are still unexplored: it remains uncertain if topological patterns maintain population stability, or alternatively, if population stability promotes food‐web topology. In this contribution, we explored the causal relationships between food‐web topology and population stability within complex communities. We generated food webs, using three models with specific biological assumptions, and measured three population‐stability variables, i.e. the proportion of locally stable three‐species and four‐species modules and the proportion of stable matrices; and two topological variables, i.e. modularity and degree of omnivory. We then used path analysis to evaluate two causality hypotheses, in which (i) topology promotes population stability, and (ii) population stability promotes food‐web topology. We found that population stability promoted food‐web topology for all models, despite the different biological assumptions. We also observed consistent causal relationships between variables, in accordance with recent literature. These results suggest that studies that intend to discuss the appearance of omnivorous behaviour or the stabilization aspect of compartmentalization, should first consider the stability of population dynamics. Additionally, they strongly support a recently proposed theory of an intrinsic mechanism to natural communities, selecting topologies capable of producing an equilibrium point where all species could coexist, and shaping natural communities to a similar and consistent pattern. A http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2435.12833/suppinfo is available for this article.

show abstract

“…Our model dynamics is governed solely by the competition among species and in the absence of competition any species will reach a fixed carrying capacity K, accordingly it provides an example of evolution via nonadaptive selection as defined in Borrelli et al (2015). Upon speciation, the daughter species inherits its mother's traits up to small modifications, specifically, the strength of its competition with other species, as expressed by the relevant terms of the competition matrix.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%