The evolution of trophic structure

The trophic relationships of an ecological community were represented by digital individuals consuming resources or prey within a simulated ecosystem and producing offspring that may differ from their parents. When individuals meet, a few simple rules are used to decide the outcome of their interaction. Trophically complex systems persist for long periods of time even in finite communities, provided that the strength of predator–prey interaction is sufficient to repay the cost of maintenance. The topology of the food web and important system-level attributes such as overall productivity follow from the rules of engagement: that is, the macroscopic properties of the ecosystem follow from the microscopic attributes of individuals, without the need to invoke the emergence of novel processes at the level of the whole system. Evolutionarily stable webs exist only when the pool of available species is small. If the pool is large, or speciation is allowed, species composition changes continually, while overall community properties are maintained. Ecologically separate and topologically different source webs based on the same pool of resources usually coexist for long periods of time, through negative frequency-dependent selection at the level of the source web as a whole. Thus, the evolved food web of species-rich communities is a highly dynamic structure with continual species turnover. It both imposes selection on each species and itself responds to selection, but selection does not necessarily maximize stability, productivity or any other community property.

[1]  M. Conrad,et al.  Evolution experiments with an artificial ecosystem. , 1970, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  Guido Caldarelli,et al.  Universal scaling relations in food webs , 2003, Nature.

[3]  J. E. Cohen,et al.  Global stability, local stability and permanence in model food webs. , 2001, Journal of theoretical biology.

[4]  Alan J. McKane,et al.  Evolving complex food webs , 2004 .

[5]  Nicolas Loeuille,et al.  Evolutionary emergence of size-structured food webs. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  S. Hall,et al.  Food-web patterns : lessons from a species-rich web , 1991 .

[7]  L. Vitt,et al.  Food Web Laws or Niche Theory? Six Independent Empirical Tests , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[8]  R. Solé,et al.  Topological properties of food webs: from real data to community assembly models Oikos 102 , 2003 .

[9]  Christopher Quince,et al.  Topological structure and interaction strengths in model food webs , 2004, q-bio/0402014.

[10]  E. Temeles,et al.  The evolution of sexual dimorphism in animals: Hypotheses and tests. , 1989, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[11]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

[12]  John H. Holland,et al.  Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence , 1992 .

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

[14]  K. Christensen,et al.  Tangled nature: a model of evolutionary ecology. , 2001, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  G. Yedid,et al.  Macroevolution simulated with autonomously replicating computer programs , 2002, Nature.

[16]  P. Warren.  Making connections in food webs. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  Henrik Jeldtoft Jensen,et al.  Time-dependent extinction rate and species abundance in a tangled-nature model of biological evolution. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[18]  Mark Smith,et al.  Using massively-parallel supercomputers to model stochastic spatial predator-prey systems , 1991 .

[19]  C. Langton.  An Evolutionary Approach to Synthetic Biology: Zen and the Art of Creating Life , 1997 .

[20]  K. Havens,et al.  Scale and Structure in Natural Food Webs , 1992, Science.

[21]  M. Lässig,et al.  Shape of ecological networks. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[22]  Michael L. Pace,et al.  Ecosystem size determines food-chain length in lakes , 2022 .

[23]  D. Mason,et al.  Compartments revealed in food-web structure , 2003, Nature.

[24]  G. Yedid,et al.  Microevolution in an Electronic Microcosm , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[25]  Paul A. Murtaugh,et al.  VARIATION OF TROPHIC FRACTIONS AND CONNECTANCE IN FOOD WEBS , 1997 .

[26]  Carlos J. Melián,et al.  Complex networks: two ways to be robust? , 2002 .

[27]  Neo D. Martinez.  Artifacts or Attributes? Effects of Resolution on the Little Rock Lake Food Web , 1991 .

[28]  Philip H. Warren,et al.  Spatial and temporal variation in the structure of a freshwater food web , 1989 .

[29]  Stuart L. Pimm,et al.  Food web design and the effect of species deletion , 1980 .

[30]  Richard Law,et al.  PERMANENCE AND THE ASSEMBLY OF ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES , 1996 .

[31]  G. Booth,et al.  Modelling food web complexity: The consequences of individual-based, spatially explicit behavioural ecology on trophic interactions , 1997, Evolutionary Ecology.

[32]  G. E. Hutchinson,et al.  Homage to Santa Rosalia or Why Are There So Many Kinds of Animals? , 1959, The American Naturalist.

[33]  D. Tilman.  Resource competition and community structure. , 1983, Monographs in population biology.

[34]  R. Ulanowicz,et al.  The Seasonal Dynamics of The Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem , 1989 .

[35]  Caldarelli,et al.  Modelling Coevolution in Multispecies Communities. , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[36]  Robert M. May,et al.  Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[37]  Thomas S. Ray,et al.  An Approach to the Synthesis of Life , 1991 .

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

[39]  J. G. Baretta-Bekker,et al.  Microbial dynamics in the marine ecosystem model ERSEM II with decoupled carbon assimilation and nutrient uptake , 1997 .

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

[41]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Simple rules yield complex food webs , 2000, Nature.

[42]  A. Hastings,et al.  Weak trophic interactions and the balance of nature , 1998, Nature.

[43]  B. Drossel,et al.  The influence of predator--prey population dynamics on the long-term evolution of food web structure. , 2000, Journal of theoretical biology.

[44]  Neo D. Martinez,et al.  Predators, parasitoids and pathogens: species richness, trophic generality and body sizes in a natural food web , 2000 .

[45]  M Conrad,et al.  The artificial worlds approach to emergent evolution. , 1989, Bio Systems.

[46]  McIntosh,et al.  Disturbance, resource supply, and food-web architecture in streams , 1998 .

[47]  Neo D. Martinez.  Scale-Dependent Constraints on Food-Web Structure , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[48]  G. Sugihara,et al.  Scale invariance in food web properties. , 1989, Science.

[49]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Individual-based modeling of ecological and evolutionary processes , 2005 .

[50]  R. Paine,et al.  Food-web analysis through field measurement of per capita interaction strength , 1992, Nature.

[51]  Friedrich Recknagel,et al.  Simulation of aquatic food web and species interactions by adaptive agents embodied with evolutionary computation: a conceptual framework , 2003 .

[52]  Dietrich Stauffer,et al.  Evolutionary ecology in silico: evolving food webs, migrating population and speciation , 2005 .

[53]  Joel E. Cohen,et al.  Food web patterns and their consequences , 1991, Nature.

[54]  Joel E. Cohen,et al.  Community Food Webs: Data and Theory , 1990 .

[55]  J. Holland,et al.  Artificial Adaptive Agents in Economic Theory , 1991 .

[56]  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.