The architecture of mutualistic networks minimizes competition and increases biodiversity

  title={The architecture of mutualistic networks minimizes competition and increases biodiversity},
  author={Ugo Bastolla and Miguel A. Fortuna and Alberto Pascual-Garc{\'i}a and Antonio Ferrera and Bartolo Luque and Jordi Bascompte},
The main theories of biodiversity either neglect species interactions or assume that species interact randomly with each other. However, recent empirical work has revealed that ecological networks are highly structured, and the lack of a theory that takes into account the structure of interactions precludes further assessment of the implications of such network patterns for biodiversity. Here we use a combination of analytical and empirical approaches to quantify the influence of network… 

Complex systems: Cooperative network dynamics

Bastolla et al. look at the mutualistic networks between plants and animals and find that the 'nestedness' of mutualistic interactions acts to minimize competition and enhance biodiversity.

Emergence of structural and dynamical properties of ecological mutualistic networks

This work shows analytically that the abundance of the rarest species is linked directly to the resilience of the community, and provides a unifying framework for studying the emergent structural and dynamical properties of ecological mutualistic networks.

How ecological networks evolve

This work shows that several types of ecological interactions share common evolutionary mechanisms that can be parametrised based on extant interaction data, and finds that a model mimicking birth-death processes for species interactions describes the structure of extant networks remarkably well.

The ecological and evolutionary implications of merging different types of networks.

This work outlines a conceptual framework for studying networks composed of more than one type of interaction, highlighting key questions and research areas that would benefit from their study.

The ghost of nestedness in ecological networks.

It is shown that complex ecological networks are binary nested, but quantitative preferences are non-nested, indicating limited consumer overlap of favoured resources, and it is concluded that species preferences are partitioned to avoid competition, thereby benefiting system-wide resource allocation.

Network Dynamics Contribute to Structure: Nestedness in Mutualistic Networks

It is found that the evolution of these interactions, reflecting the trade-off of resources, could be used to accurately predict that nestedness occurs significantly more often than expect due to chance alone in a mutualistic network.

The joint influence of competition and mutualism on the biodiversity of mutualistic ecosystems

It is found that mutualism does not have the same consequences on the evolution of specialist and generalist species, and that there is a non-trivial profile of biodiversity in the parameter space of competition and mutualism.

Structure and Dynamics of Ecological Networks

An important step forward is taken by comparing the structure and dynamics of antagonistic and mutualistic networks, which are crucial to understanding the suite of ecological, evolutionary, and coevolutionary processes that shape these networks and how they may respond to future changes.

On nestedness in ecological networks

Across the largest set of species interactions considered to date, this work concludes that an unexpectedly large number of interaction networks are patterned in a nested pattern.



The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks

It is shown that mutualistic networks are highly nested; that is, the more specialist species interact only with proper subsets of those species interacting with the more generalists, which generates highly asymmetrical interactions and organizes the community cohesively around a central core of interactions.

Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks

This work uses phylogenetic methods to show that the phylogenetic relationships of species predict the number of interactions they exhibit in more than one-third of the networks, and the identity of the species with which they interact in about half of the Networks.

Network structural properties mediate the stability of mutualistic communities.

It is shown that structural properties can alter the stability of mutualistic communities characterized by nonlinear functional responses among the interacting species, and that interplay between the structure and function of ecological networks in general and consideration of mutualists interactions in particular may be key to understanding complexity-stability relationships of biological communities as a whole.

A simple model of bipartite cooperation for ecological and organizational networks

This work proposes a highly parsimonious model that can reproduce the overall bipartite structure of cooperative partner–partner interactions, as exemplified by plant–animal mutualistic networks, and tests it on ten large pollination data sets.

Habitat loss and the structure of plant-animal mutualistic networks.

This model is the first attempt to describe the dynamics of whole mutualistic metacommunities interacting in realistic ways and shows that the community response to habitat loss is affected by network structure.

Ecological networks and their fragility

E ecological networks, in which species are linked together, either directly or indirectly through intermediate species, have well defined patterns that both illuminate the ecological mechanisms underlying them and promise a better understanding of the relationship between complexity and ecological stability.

Mutualism Promotes Diversity and Stability in a Simple Artificial Ecosystem

The results suggest that the existence of mutualistic relationships improved community stability, and a spatially explicit, individual-based model is presented, in which organisms compete for space and resources.

Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant-animal interactions

This work hypothesizes that plant–animal mutualistic networks follow a build-up process similar to complex abiotic nets, based on the preferential attachment of species, and reveals generalized topological patterns characteristic of self-organized complex systems.