Back

Tipping points are typical in ecosystems with higher-order interactions

Lechon-Alonso, P.; Miller, Z. R.; Liaghat, A.; Breiding, P.; Pascual, M.; Allesina, S.

2026-04-28 ecology
10.64898/2026.04.24.720639 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Whether species-rich communities erode gradually or collapse abruptly under environmental change is a central question in ecology [1]. Classical pairwise theory predicts that coexistence is always lost gradually, through smooth declines to extinction [2], yet real ecological interactions are often strongly state-dependent - shaped by nonlinearities that fixed pairwise coefficients cannot capture [3]. Here we show that higher-order (nonlinear) interactions make abrupt, irreversible loss of coexistence a typical route to community collapse: across diverse random communities, the equilibrium supporting coexistence disappears suddenly at a fold bifurcation. Using polynomial homotopy continuation [4] to track equilibria as environmental conditions change, we find that folds progressively dominate the boundary of the coexistence domain as nonlinearity strengthens, replacing the gradual extinctions of pairwise theory. Furthermore, the sign structure of higher-order interactions controls both the onset of tipping-points and whether biodiversity buffers or amplifies collapse. Because higher-order and nonlinear interactions are intimately linked, tipping points also arise generically in pairwise models with strong nonlinearity. Applying our continuation framework to a canonical model of plant-pollinator collapse [5], we formally resolve its bifurcation structure as fold-mediated, and we show that fold bifurcations are typical across published multispecies models spanning mutualistic, competitive, and consumer-resource interactions. These results challenge the expectation that monitoring abundances suffices to anticipate collapse, and unify structural-stability theory, which delineates the safe operating space for coexistence, with critical transition theory, which characterizes the nature of its boundaries.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
26.1%
2
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.8%
3
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.2%
50% of probability mass above
4
Ecology Letters
121 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
5
Physical Review X
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
6
Nature Ecology & Evolution
113 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.9%
7
PRX Life
34 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
8
Current Biology
596 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.4%
9
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.1%
10
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 12%
2.1%
11
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 35%
2.1%
12
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.9%
14
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.7%
15
The ISME Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
16
Nature Physics
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
17
Ecology
70 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
18
PNAS Nexus
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
19
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
20
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 80%
0.5%
21
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.5%
22
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
23
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%