Back

Ecological networks across interaction types are modular and highly driven by sampling intensity at biogeographical scales

Garcia-Callejas, D.; Thebault, E.; Lajaaiti, I.; Martins, L. P.; Laux, L.; Kefi, S.

2024-12-07 ecology
10.1101/2024.12.04.626839 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Understanding how the structure of ecological communities varies across biotic and abiotic dimensions is a fundamental goal in ecology. This challenge is now approachable due to the increasing availability of data on community structure across the globe. Ecological communities are often defined with respect to the guilds considered and the interactions they engage in, but it is unclear whether interactions of different types respond similarly to large-scale environmental gradients. Therefore, we lack a deeper understanding of how the emergent structure of interaction networks varies across biogeographical gradients, and how this effect may change depending on their constituent interaction types. Here, using a unique dataset of 952 networks across the globe, we provide a first comparison of network structural metrics and their large-scale variability for five overarching interaction types (feeding, frugivory, herbivory, parasitism and pollination). We show that degree distribution, but not connectance alone, helps us understand the observed network structures, and this pattern is maintained across interaction types (with the partial exception of food webs). Moreover, degree distribution descriptors are generally explained by differences across studies, which represent a proxy for variability in sampling and network construction methods. Environ-mental factors show weaker but robust effects on network degree distribution, and food webs are generally more sensitive to changes in environmental factors than networks of other interaction types. By analysing common descriptors of the degree distributions of ecological networks, this study underscores for the first time generalities and differences across networks of different interaction types and their response to environmental and anthropogenic factors.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Oikos
84 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.5%
2
Ecography
54 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.4%
3
Global Ecology and Biogeography
47 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.6%
4
Ecology Letters
135 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
7.6%
50% of probability mass above
5
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.0%
6
Functional Ecology
61 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.9%
7
Ecology
85 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.9%
8
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
9
Journal of Ecology
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.1%
10
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
11
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.3%
12
Journal of Animal Ecology
75 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.3%
13
Journal of Biogeography
46 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.0%
14
Global Change Biology
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
15
Ecological Modelling
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
16
Science of The Total Environment
186 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
17
Ecological Monographs
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
18
Molecular Ecology
336 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
Evolutionary Ecology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
20
Biotropica
17 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
21
The American Naturalist
125 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
22
Oecologia
28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%
23
Journal of Applied Ecology
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
24
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.6%
25
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 46%
0.6%