Unravelling Darwin's entangled bank: architecture and robustness of mutualistic networks with multiple interaction types

Dáttilo, Wesley; Lara-Rodríguez, Nubia Zoe; Jordano, Pedro; Guimarães, Paulo R.; Thompson, John N.; Marquis, Robert J.; Medeiros, Lucas P.; Ortiz‐Pulido, Raúl; Marcos-García, Ma Ángeles; Rico-Gray, Víctor

doi:10.1098/rspb.2016.1564

Cited by 66 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These "single-type" sub-networks are valuable but they belie the multitude of complex interactions shaping species' abundance, fitness and persistence (Pocock et al 2012;Garc ıa-Callejas et al 2018). Therefore, there has been a recent emphasis on networks that contain multiple interaction types (Meli an et al 2009;Fontaine et al 2011;Mougi & Kondoh 2012D attilo et al 2016;Sauve et al 2016;Lurgi et al 2016;Astegiano et al 2017;Pilosof et al 2017;Ramirez et al 2018;Garc ıa-Callejas et al 2018;Delmas et al 2019;Hutchinson et al 2019). We specifically use the term "hybrid" here to mean networks that combine two or more types of interactions, like antagonisms (À/+) and mutualisms (+/+) (as in Mougi & Kondoh 2014;Suweis et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural intensification drives changes in hybrid network robustness by modifying network structure

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within ecological communities, species engage in myriad interaction types, yet empirical examples of hybrid species interaction networks composed of multiple types of interactions are still scarce. A key knowledge gap is understanding how the structure and stability of such hybrid networks are affected by anthropogenic disturbance. Using 15,169 interaction observations, we constructed 16 hybrid herbivore‐plant‐pollinator networks along an agricultural intensification gradient to explore changes in network structure and robustness to local extinctions. We found that agricultural intensification led to declines in modularity but increases in nestedness and connectance. Notably, network connectance, a structural feature typically thought to increase robustness, caused declines in hybrid network robustness, but the directionality of changes in robustness along the gradient depended on the order of local species extinctions. Our results not only demonstrate the impacts of anthropogenic disturbance on hybrid network structure, but they also provide unexpected insights into the structure‐stability relationship of hybrid networks.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural intensification drives changes in hybrid network robustness by modifying network structure

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The integrity of species interaction networks contributes to the stability of ecological communities (Okuyama & Holland, ). Yet, the species richness in the landscape alone does not explain the type and number of interactions: not all species are equally important in maintaining community stability (Dáttilo et al, ; Emer et al, ; Hagen et al, ). Interaction networks are more sensitive to the loss of those species that interact with many other species (Morris, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fragmented tropical forests lose mutualistic plant–animal interactions

Marjakangas

Abrego

Grøtan

et al. 2019

Diversity and Distributions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Forest fragmentation is among the principal causes of global biodiversity loss, yet how it affects mutualistic interactions between plants and animals at large spatial scale is poorly understood. In particular, tropical forest regeneration depends on animal-mediated seed dispersal, but the seed-dispersing animals face rapid decline due to forest fragmentation and defaunation. Here, we assess how fragmentation influences the pairwise interactions between 407 seed disperser and 1,424 tree species in a highly fragmented biodiversity hotspot.Location: Atlantic Forest, South America. Methods:We predicted interaction networks in 912 sites covering the entire biome by combining verified interaction data with co-occurrence probabilities obtained from a spatially explicit joint species distribution model. We identified keystone seed dispersers by computing a species-specific keystone index and by selecting those species belonging to the top 5% quantile. Results:We show that forest fragmentation affects seed dispersal interactions negatively, and the decreased area of functionally connected forest, rather than increased edge effects, is the main driver behind the loss of interactions. Both the seed disperser availability for the local tree communities and in particular the proportion of interactions provided by keystone seed dispersers decline with increasing degree of fragmentation. Importantly, just 21 keystone species provided >40% of all interactions. The numbers of interactions provided by keystone and non-keystone species, however, were equally negatively affected by fragmentation, suggesting that seed dispersal interactions may not be rewired under strong fragmentation effects. Conclusions:We highlight the importance of understanding the fragmentation-induced compositional shifts in seed disperser communities as they may lead to lagged | 155 MARJAKANGAS et Al.

show abstract

“…Species in ecological communities form networks of interactions (Pocock et al 2012, Dattilo et al 2016). Mutualistic networks (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The topological differences between visitation and pollen transport networks: a comparison in species rich communities of the Himalaya–Hengduan Mountains

Zhao

Lázaro

Ren

et al. 2018

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pollination networks are usually constructed and assessed by direct field observations which commonly assume that all flower visitors are true pollinators. However, this assumption is often invalid and the use of data based on mere visitors to flowers may lead to a misunderstanding of intrinsic pollination networks. Here, using a large dataset by both sampling floral visitors and analyzing their pollen loads, we constructed 32 networks pairs (visitation versus pollen transport) across one flowering season at four elevation sites in the Himalaya–Hengduan Mountains region. Pollen analysis was conducted to determine which flower visitors acted as potential pollinators (pollen vectors) or as cheaters (those not carrying pollen of the visited plants). We tested whether there were topological differences between visitation and pollen transport networks and whether different taxonomic groups of insect visitors differed in their ability to carry pollen of the visited plants. Our results indicated that there was a significantly higher degree of specialization at both the network and species levels in the pollen transport networks in contrast to the visitation networks. Modularity was lower but nestedness was higher in the visitation networks compared to the pollen transport networks. All the cheaters were identified as peripheral species and most of them contributed positively to the nested structure. This may explain in part the differences in modularity and nestedness between the two network types. Bees carried the highest proportion of pollen of the visited plants. This was followed by Coleoptera, other Hymenoptera and Diptera. Lepidoptera carried the lowest proportion of pollen of the visited plants. Our study shows that the construction of pollen transport networks could provide a more in‐depth understanding of plant–pollinator interactions. Moreover, it suggests that detecting and removing cheater interactions when studying the topology of other mutualistic networks might be also important.

show abstract

Unravelling Darwin's entangled bank: architecture and robustness of mutualistic networks with multiple interaction types

Cited by 66 publications

References 47 publications

Agricultural intensification drives changes in hybrid network robustness by modifying network structure

Agricultural intensification drives changes in hybrid network robustness by modifying network structure

Fragmented tropical forests lose mutualistic plant–animal interactions

The topological differences between visitation and pollen transport networks: a comparison in species rich communities of the Himalaya–Hengduan Mountains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About