Indices, Graphs and Null Models: Analyzing Bipartite Ecological Networks

Many analyses of ecological networks in recent years have introduced new indices to describe network properties. As a consequence, tens of indices are available to address similar questions, differing in specific detail, sensitivity in detecting the property in question, and robustness with respect to network size and sampling intensity. Furthermore, some indices merely reflect the number of species participating in a network, but not their interrelationship, requiring a null model approach. Here we introduce a new, free software calculating a large spectrum of network indices, visualizing bipartite networks and generating null models. We use this tool to explore the sensitivity of 26 network indices to network dimensions, sampling intensity and singleton observations. Based on observed data, we investigate the interrelationship of these indices, and show that they are highly correlated, and heavily influenced by network dimensions and connectance. Finally, we re-evaluate five common hypotheses about network properties, comparing 19 pollination networks with three differently complex null models: 1. The number of links per species ("degree") follow (truncated) power law distributions. 2. Generalist pollinators interact with specialist plants, and vice versa (dependence asymmetry). 3. Ecological networks are nested. 4. Pollinators display complementarity, owing to specialization within the network. 5. Plant-pollinator networks are more robust to extinction than random networks. Our results indicate that while some hypotheses hold up against our null models, others are to a large extent understandable on the basis of network size, rather than ecological interrelationships. In particular, null model pattern of dependence asymmetry and robustness to extinction are opposite to what current network paradigms suggest. Our analysis, and the tools we provide, enables ecologists to readily contrast their findings with null model expectations for many different questions, thus separating statistical inevitability from ecological process.

[1]  D. Simberloff,et al.  Ecological Specialization and Susceptibility to Disturbance: Conjectures and Refutations , 2002, The American Naturalist.

[2]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks , 2007, Nature.

[3]  N. Gotelli.  Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns , 2000 .

[4]  Makoto Kato,et al.  Insect-flower Relationship in the Primary Beech Forest of Ashu, Kyoto : An Overview of the Flowering Phenology and the Seasonal Pattern of Insect Visits , 1990 .

[5]  B. Krasnov,et al.  Connectance and parasite diet breadth in flea-mammal webs , 2008 .

[6]  Diego P. Vázquez,et al.  NULL MODEL ANALYSES OF SPECIALIZATION IN PLANT–POLLINATOR INTERACTIONS , 2003 .

[7]  P. Legendre,et al.  vegan : Community Ecology Package. R package version 1.8-5 , 2007 .

[8]  Paul A. Keddy,et al.  Ecological assembly rules : perspectives, advances, retreats , 1999 .

[9]  J. Bascompte,et al.  Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant-animal interactions , 2002 .

[10]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  Habitat loss and the structure of plant-animal mutualistic networks. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[11]  K. Gaston,et al.  Pattern and Process in Macroecology , 2000 .

[12]  Dolph Schluter,et al.  A Variance Test for Detecting Species Associations, with Some Example Applications , 1984 .

[13]  Paulo R Guimarães,et al.  Asymmetries in specialization in ant–plant mutualistic networks , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  C. Krebs.  Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance , 1973 .

[15]  Jane Memmott,et al.  Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions , 2004, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[16]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Success and its limits among structural models of complex food webs. , 2008, The Journal of animal ecology.

[17]  Wirt Atmar,et al.  Nested subsets and the structure of insular mammalian faunas and archipelagos , 1986 .

[18]  Daniel Simberloff,et al.  Ecological Communities: Conceptual Issues and the Evidence , 1984 .

[19]  N. Gotelli,et al.  NULL MODELS IN ECOLOGY , 1996 .

[20]  Donald L DeAngelis,et al.  Comment on "Asymmetric Coevolutionary Networks Facilitate Biodiversity Maintenance" , 2006, Science.

[21]  Richard A. Brualdi,et al.  Nested species subsets, gaps, and discrepancy , 1999, Oecologia.

[22]  R. May,et al.  Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[23]  Robert Belshaw,et al.  The structure of an aphid–parasitoid community , 1999 .

[24]  Mark Novak,et al.  Estimating nonlinear interaction strengths: an observation-based method for species-rich food webs. , 2008, Ecology.

[25]  Joseph Tzanopoulos,et al.  Long-term observation of a pollination network: fluctuation in species and interactions, relative invariance of network structure and implications for estimates of specialization. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[26]  S. Shen-Orr,et al.  Network motifs: simple building blocks of complex networks. , 2002, Science.

[27]  Josep L. Garcia-Domingo,et al.  Effects of heterogeneous interaction strengths on food web complexity , 2008 .

[28]  Werner Ulrich,et al.  A consistent metric for nestedness analysis in ecological systems: reconciling concept and measurement , 2008 .

[29]  S. Stafford,et al.  Multivariate Statistics for Wildlife and Ecology Research , 2000, Springer New York.

[30]  J. Bascompte,et al.  Ecological networks : beyond food webs Ecological networks – beyond food webs , 2008 .

[31]  Jochen Fründ,et al.  What do interaction network metrics tell us about specialization and biological traits? , 2008, Ecology.

[32]  E. Berlow,et al.  Strong effects of weak interactions in ecological communities , 1999, Nature.

[33]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  Asymmetric Coevolutionary Networks Facilitate Biodiversity Maintenance , 2006, Science.

[34]  M. Newman,et al.  Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks , 2008, Nature.

[35]  Paulo R. Guimarães,et al.  Interaction Intimacy Affects Structure and Coevolutionary Dynamics in Mutualistic Networks , 2007, Current Biology.

[36]  Pedro Jordano,et al.  Patterns of Mutualistic Interactions in Pollination and Seed Dispersal: Connectance, Dependence Asymmetries, and Coevolution , 1987, The American Naturalist.

[37]  Vladimir Batagelj,et al.  Pajek - Analysis and Visualization of Large Networks , 2001, Graph Drawing Software.

[38]  Werner Ulrich,et al.  Null model analysis of species nestedness patterns. , 2007, Ecology.

[39]  R. May.  Food webs. , 1983, Science.

[40]  C. Hennig,et al.  Null model tests of clustering of species, negative co-occurrence patterns and nestedness in meta-communities. , 2007 .

[41]  Lynn V. Dicks,et al.  Compartmentalization in plant–insect flower visitor webs , 2002 .

[42]  Luis Santamaría,et al.  Linkage Rules for Plant–Pollinator Networks: Trait Complementarity or Exploitation Barriers? , 2007, PLoS biology.

[43]  Teja Tscharntke,et al.  Habitat modification alters the structure of tropical host–parasitoid food webs , 2007, Nature.

[44]  Sérgio Furtado dos Reis,et al.  The nested structure of marine cleaning symbiosis: is it like flowers and bees? , 2007, Biology Letters.

[45]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  Ecological networks, nestedness and sampling effort , 2007 .

[46]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  The smallest of all worlds: pollination networks. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[47]  Jeff Ollerton,et al.  Plant-pollinator interactions: from specialization to generalization. , 2005 .

[48]  B. McCune,et al.  Analysis of Ecological Communities , 2002 .

[49]  R. Solé,et al.  Ecological networks and their fragility , 2006, Nature.

[50]  Lars Chittka,et al.  Generalization in Pollination Systems, and Why it Matters , 1996 .

[51]  Alan Roberts,et al.  Island-sharing by archipelago species , 2004, Oecologia.

[52]  P. Abrams.  The Evolution of Predator-Prey Interactions: Theory and Evidence , 2000 .

[53]  Robert K. Swihart,et al.  Toward ecologically explicit null models of nestedness , 2007, Oecologia.

[54]  C. Darwin.  On the Various Contrivances by Which British and Foreign Orchids Are Fertilized by Insects; and on the Good Effects of Intercrossing , 1862, The British and foreign medico-chirurgical review.

[55]  Louis-Félix Bersier,et al.  QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTORS OF FOOD-WEB MATRICES , 2002 .

[56]  Nils Blüthgen,et al.  Specialization, Constraints, and Conflicting Interests in Mutualistic Networks , 2007, Current Biology.

[57]  N. Gotelli,et al.  Co‐occurrence of ectoparasites of marine fishes: a null model analysis , 2002 .

[58]  Rauno V. Alatalo,et al.  Problems in the measurement of evenness in ecology , 1981 .

[59]  Kazuto Nakada,et al.  A General Model for Food Web Structure , 2008 .

[60]  Wirt Atmar,et al.  The measure of order and disorder in the distribution of species in fragmented habitat , 1993, Oecologia.

[61]  Pedro Jordano,et al.  GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS IN PLANT–POLLINATOR MUTUALISTIC NETWORKS , 2002 .

[62]  Werner Ulrich,et al.  Disentangling community patterns of nestedness and species co‐occurrence , 2007 .

[63]  Miguel A. Rodríguez-Gironés,et al.  A new algorithm to calculate the nestedness temperature of presence–absence matrices , 2006 .

[64]  P. Klinkhamer,et al.  Asymmetric specialization and extinction risk in plant–flower visitor webs: a matter of morphology or abundance? , 2007, Oecologia.

[65]  W. Patefield,et al.  An Efficient Method of Generating Random R × C Tables with Given Row and Column Totals , 1981 .

[66]  H. Charles J. Godfray,et al.  Experimental evidence for apparent competition in a tropical forest food web , 2004, Nature.

[67]  J. Tylianakis.  Understanding the Web of Life: The Birds, the Bees, and Sex with Aliens , 2008, PLoS biology.

[68]  J. Bascompte,et al.  The modularity of pollination networks , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[69]  Lewi Stone,et al.  Competitive exclusion, or species aggregation? , 1992, Oecologia.

[70]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[71]  M. Hill,et al.  Data analysis in community and landscape ecology , 1987 .

[72]  K. Burns.  Network properties of an epiphyte metacommunity , 2007 .

[73]  Diego P. Vázquez,et al.  ASYMMETRIC SPECIALIZATION: A PERVASIVE FEATURE OF PLANT-POLLINATOR INTERACTIONS , 2004 .

[74]  J. Bascompte,et al.  Structure in plant–animal interaction assemblages , 2006 .

[75]  Louis-Félix Bersier,et al.  Sampling effects and the robustness of quantitative and qualitative food-web descriptors. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[76]  John Harte,et al.  Response of complex food webs to realistic extinction sequences. , 2007, Ecology.

[77]  K. McCann.  The diversity–stability debate , 2000, Nature.

[78]  A. F. Motten.  Pollination ecology of the spring wildflower community in the deciduous forests of Piedmont, North Carolina , 1982 .

[79]  Gueorgi Kossinets.  Effects of missing data in social networks , 2006, Soc. Networks.

[80]  Diego P. Vázquez,et al.  Changes in interaction biodiversity induced by an introduced ungulate , 2003 .

[81]  D. Schemske,et al.  Geographic patterns in plant-pollinator mutualistic networks: Comment , 2004 .

[82]  N. Blüthgen,et al.  Measuring specialization in species interaction networks , 2006, BMC Ecology.

[83]  Pedro Jordano,et al.  Interaction frequency as a surrogate for the total effect of animal mutualists on plants , 2005 .

[84]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  The ecological consequences of complex topology and nested structure in pollination webs. , 2006 .

[85]  P. Klinkhamer,et al.  Size constraints and flower abundance determine the number of interactions in a plant /flower visitor web , 2006 .

[86]  K. Rohde.  Spatial scaling laws may not apply to most animal species , 2001 .

[87]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Food-web structure and network theory: The role of connectance and size , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[88]  Paulo Guimarães,et al.  Improving the analyses of nestedness for large sets of matrices , 2006, Environ. Model. Softw..

[89]  Carsten F. Dormann,et al.  Introducing the bipartite Package: Analysing Ecological Networks , 2008 .

[90]  Carlos J. Melián,et al.  The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[91]  Neal M. Williams,et al.  Species abundance and asymmetric interaction strength in ecological networks , 2007 .

[92]  Dacheng He,et al.  Statistical analysis of gene regulatory networks reconstructed from gene expression data of lung cancer , 2006 .

[93]  Owen L. Petchey,et al.  Interaction strengths in food webs: issues and opportunities , 2004 .

[94]  Paulo R. Guimarães,et al.  On nestedness analyses: rethinking matrix temperature and anti‐nestedness , 2007 .