Diversity in a complex ecological network with two interaction types

Most studies on ecological networks consider only a single interaction type (e.g. competitive, predatory or mutualistic), and try to developrules for system stability based exclusively on properties of this interaction type. However, the stability of ecological networks may be more dependent on the way different interaction types are combined in real communities. To address this issue, we start by compiling an ecological network in the Doñana Biological Reserve, southern Spain, with 390 species and 798 mu-tualistic and antagonistic interactions. We characterize network structure by looking at how mutualistic and antagonistic interactions are combined across all plant species. Both the ratio of mutualistic to antagonistic interactions per plant, and the number of basic modules with an antagonistic and a mutualistic interaction are very heterogeneous across plant species, with a few plant species showing very high values for these parameters. To assess the implications of these network patterns on species diversity, we study analytically and by simulation a model of this ecological network. We find that the observed correlation between strong interaction strengths and high mutualistic to antagonistic ratios in a few plant species significantly increases community diversity. Thus, to predict the persistence of biodiversity we need to understand how interaction strength and the architecture of ecological networks with different interaction types are combined.     

The effects of space and diversity of interaction types on the stability of complex ecological networks

The relationship between structure and stability in ecological networks and the effect of spatial dynamics on natural communities have both been major foci of ecological research for decades. Network research has traditionally focused on a single interaction type at a time (e.g. food webs, mutualistic networks). Networks comprising different types of interactions have recently started to be empirically characterized. Patterns observed in these networks and their implications for stability demand for further theoretical investigations. Here, we employed a spatially explicit model to disentangle the effects of mutualism/antagonism ratios in food web dynamics and stability. We found that increasing levels of plant-animal mutualistic interactions generally resulted in more stable communities. More importantly, increasing the proportion of mutualistic vs. antagonistic interactions at the base of the food web affects different aspects of ecological stability in different directions, although never negatively. Stability is either not influenced by increasing mutualism—for the cases of population stability and species’ spatial distributions—or is positively influenced by it—for spatial aggregation of species. Additionally, we observe that the relative increase of mutualistic relationships decreases the strength of biotic interactions in general within the ecological network. Our work highlights the importance of considering several dimensions of stability simultaneously to understand the dynamics of communities comprising multiple interaction types.     

Disentangling the effect of hybrid interactions and of the constant effort hypothesis on ecological community stability

In the last years, a remarkable theoretical effort has been made in order to understand the relation between stability and complexity in ecological communities. Yet, what maintains species diversity in real ecological communities is still an open question. The non‐random structures of ecological interaction networks have been recognized as one key ingredient impacting the maximum number of coexisting species within the ecological community. However most of the earlier theoretical studies have considered communities with only one interaction type (either antagonistic, competitive or mutualistic). Recently, it has been proposed that multiple interaction types might stabilize ecosystems and that, in this hybrid case, increasing complexity increases stability. Here we show that these results depend on ad hoc hypothesis that the authors used in their model and we highlight the need to disentangle the role of multiple interaction types and constant interaction effort allocation on community stability. Indeed, we find that mixing of mutualistic and predator–prey interaction types does not stabilize the community dynamics and we demonstrate that a positive correlation between complexity and stability is observed only if a constant effort allocation is imposed in the ecological interactions. Synthesis In recent years a sparkling research has been devoted to the search of new theoretical mechanisms to explain way ecosystems may persist despite their complexity. Here we show that, contrary to what recently suggested (Mougi et al. 2012), the mismatch between theoretical results and empirical evidences on the stability of ecological community is still there also for communities with both mutualistic and antagonistic interactions, and the ‘complexity‐stability’ paradox is still alive. Indeed, we demonstrate that their results arise as an artifact of the peculiar rescaling of the interaction strengths they imposed. Our study suggests that further theoretical studies and experimental evidences are still needed to better understand the role of interaction strengths in real ecological communities.     

Structure–stability relationships in networks combining mutualistic and antagonistic interactions

The relationship between the structure of ecological networks and community stability has been studied for decades. Recent developments highlighted that this relationship depended on whether interactions were antagonistic or mutualistic. Different structures promoting stability in different types of ecological networks, i.e. mutualistic or antagonistic, have been pointed out. However, these findings come from studies considering mutualistic and antagonistic interactions separately whereas we know that species are part of both types of networks simultaneously. Understanding the relationship between network structure and community stability, when mutualistic and antagonistic interactions are merged in a single network, thus appears as the next challenge to improve our understanding of the dynamics of natural communities. Using a theoretical approach, we test whether the structural characteristics known to promote stability in networks made of a single interaction type still hold for network merging mutualistic and antagonistic interactions. We show that the effects of diversity and connectance remain unchanged. But the effects of nestedness and modularity are strongly weakened in networks combining mutualistic and antagonistic interactions. By challenging the stabilizing mechanisms proposed for networks with a single interaction type, our study calls for new measures of structure for networks that integrate the diversity of interaction.     

Top‐down network analysis characterizes hidden termite–termite interactions

The analysis of ecological networks is generally bottom‐up, where networks are established by observing interactions between individuals. Emergent network properties have been indicated to reflect the dominant mode of interactions in communities that might be mutualistic (e.g., pollination) or antagonistic (e.g., host–parasitoid communities). Many ecological communities, however, comprise species interactions that are difficult to observe directly. Here, we propose that a comparison of the emergent properties from detail‐rich reference communities with known modes of interaction can inform our understanding of detail‐sparse focal communities. With this top‐down approach, we consider patterns of coexistence between termite species that live as guests in mounds built by other host termite species as a case in point. Termite societies are extremely sensitive to perturbations, which precludes determining the nature of their interactions through direct observations. We perform a literature review to construct two networks representing termite mound cohabitation in a Brazilian savanna and in the tropical forest of Cameroon. We contrast the properties of these cohabitation networks with a total of 197 geographically diverse mutualistic plant–pollinator and antagonistic host–parasitoid networks. We analyze network properties for the networks, perform a principal components analysis (PCA), and compute the Mahalanobis distance of the termite networks to the cloud of mutualistic and antagonistic networks to assess the extent to which the termite networks overlap with the properties of the reference networks. Both termite networks overlap more closely with the mutualistic plant–pollinator communities than the antagonistic host–parasitoid communities, although the Brazilian community overlap with mutualistic communities is stronger. The analysis raises the hypothesis that termite–termite cohabitation networks may be overall mutualistic. More broadly, this work provides support for the argument that cryptic communities may be analyzed via comparison to well‐characterized communities.     

Phylogenetic and Experimental Tests of Interactions among Mutualistic Plant Defense Traits in Viburnum (Adoxaceae)

Abstract Plant traits that mediate mutualistic interactions are widespread, yet few studies have linked their macroevolutionary patterns with the ecological interactions they mediate. Here we merged phylogenetic and experimental approaches to investigate the evolution of two common mutualistic plant traits, extrafloral nectaries (EFNs) and leaf domatia. By using the flowering plant clade Viburnum, we tested whether macroevolutionary patterns support adaptive hypotheses and conducted field surveys and manipulative experiments to examine whether ecological interactions are concordant with evolutionary predictions. Phylogenetic reconstructions suggested that EFN-bearing species are monophyletic, whereas the evolution of domatia correlated with leaf production strategy (deciduous or evergreen) and climate. Domatia were also more common in the EFN clade, suggesting that the two traits may jointly mediate ecological interactions. This result was further investigated in a common-garden survey, where plants with domatia and EFNs on the leaf blade had more mutualistic mites than plants with other trait combinations, and in manipulative field experiments, where the traits additively increased mutualist abundance. Taken together, our results suggest that mutualistic traits in Viburnum are not ecologically independent, as they work in concert to attract and retain mutualists, and their long-term evolution may be influenced by complex interactions among multiple traits, mutualists, and geography.     

Asymmetries in specialization in ant-plant mutualistic networks

Mutualistic networks involving plants and their pollinators or frugivores have been shown recently to exhibit a particular asymmetrical organization of interactions among species called nestedness: a core of reciprocal generalists accompanied by specialist species that interact almost exclusively with generalists. This structure contrasts with compartmentalized assemblage structures that have been verified in antagonistic food webs. Here we evaluated whether nestedness is a property of another type of mutualism-the interactions between ants and extrafloral nectary-bearing plants--and whether species richness may lead to differences in degree of nestedness among biological communities. We investigated network structure in four communities in Mexico. Nested patterns in ant-plant networks were very similar to those previously reported for pollination and frugivore systems, indicating that this form of asymmetry in specialization is a common feature of mutualisms between free-living species, but not always present in species-poor systems. Other ecological factors also appeared to contribute to the nested asymmetry in specialization, because some assemblages showed more extreme asymmetry than others even when species richness was held constant. Our results support a promising approach for the development of multispecies coevolutionary theory, leading to the idea that specialization may coevolve in different but simple ways in antagonistic and mutualistic assemblages.     

Pattern of functional extinctions in ecological networks with a variety of interaction types

There is a strong trend of declining populations in many species of both animals and plants. Dwindling numbers of species can eventually lead to their functional extinction. Functional, or ecological, extinction occurs when a species becomes too rare to fulfill its ecological, interactive role in the ecosystem, leading to true (numerical) extinction of other depending species. Recent theoretical work on food webs suggests that the frequency of functional extinction might be surprisingly high. However, little is known about the risk of functional species extinctions in networks with other types of interactions than trophic ones. Here, we explore the frequency of functional extinctions in model ecological networks having different proportions of antagonistic and mutualistic links. Furthermore, we investigate the topological relationship between functionally and numerically extinct species. We find that (1) the frequency of functional extinctions is higher in networks containing a mixture of antagonistic and mutualistic interactions than in networks with only one type of interaction, (2) increased mortality rate of species having both mutualistic and antagonistic links is more likely to lead to extinction of another species than to extinction of the species itself compared to species having only mutualistic or antagonistic links, and (3) trophic distance (shortest path) between functionally and numerically extinct species is, on average, longer than one, indicating the importance of indirect effects. These results generalize the findings of an earlier study on food webs, demonstrating the potential importance of functional extinction in a variety of ecological network types.     

Species abundance and asymmetric interaction strength in ecological networks

The strength of interactions among species in a network tends to be highly asymmetric. We evaluate the hypothesis that this asymmetry results from the distribution of abundance among species, so that species interactions occur randomly among individuals. We used a database on mutualistic and antagonistic bipartite quantitative interaction networks. We show that across all types of networks asymmetry was correlated with abundance, so that rare species were asymmetrically affected by their abundant partners, while pairs of interacting abundant species tended to exhibit more symmetric, reciprocally strong effects. A null model shows that abundance provides a sufficient explanation of the asymmetry structure in some networks, but suggests the role of additional factors in others. Although not universal, our hypothesis holds for a substantial fraction of networks analyzed here, and should be considered as a null model in all studies aimed at evaluating the ecological and evolutionary consequences of species interactions.     

Tolerance traits and the stability of mutualism

Identifying factors which allow the evolution and persistence of cooperative interactions between species is a fundamental issue in evolutionary ecology. Various hypotheses have been suggested which generally focus on mechanisms that allow cooperative genotypes in different species to maintain interactions over space and time. Here, we emphasise the fact that even within mutualisms (interactions with net positive fitness effects for both partners), there may still be inherent costs, such as the occasional predation by ants upon aphids. Individuals engaged in mutualisms benefit from minimising these costs as long as it is not at the expense of breaking the interspecific interaction, which offers a net positive benefit. The most common and obvious defence traits to minimise interspecific interaction costs are resistance traits, which act to reduce encounter rate between two organisms. Tolerance traits, in contrast, minimise fitness costs to the actor, but without reducing encounter rate. Given that, by definition, it is beneficial to remain in mutualistic interactions, the only viable traits to minimise costs are tolerance-based 'defence' strategies. Thus, we propose that tolerance traits are an important factor promoting stability in mutualisms. Furthermore, because resistance traits tend to propagate coevolutionary arms races between antagonists, whilst tolerance traits do not, we also suggest that tolerance-based defence strategies may be important in facilitating the transition from antagonistic interactions into mutualisms. For example, the mutualism between ants and aphids has been suggested to have evolved from parasitism. We describe how phenotypic plasticity in honeydew production may be a tolerance trait that has prevented escalation into an antagonistic arms race and instead led to mutualistic coevolution.     

Are flowers red in teeth and claw? Exploitation barriers and the antagonist nature of mutualisms

The romantic perception of plant–animal mutualisms as a cooperative endeavour has been shattered in the last decades. While the classic theory of plant–pollinator coevolution assumed that partner coevolution is largely mutualistic, an increasing appreciation of the inherent conflict of interests between such partners has led to the realization that genes that confer a reproductive advantage to plants may have negative effects on their pollinators (and vice versa), giving rise to an apparent paradox: that antagonistic processes may drive coevolution among mutualistic partners. Under this new paradigm, mutualistic partners are bound by mutual interest but shaped by “selfish” antagonistic processes. Exploitation barriers mediated by resource competition among pollinators are a key element of this paradigm. Exploitation barriers involve traits such as tubular corollas, red flowers, toxic or deterrent rewards, and attractants of floral predators. Exploitation barriers result in resource partitioning, increasing floral fidelity of favoured pollinators and therefore plant fitness; but they often entail a physiological, behavioural or developmental cost for such favoured pollinators. Resource partitioning mediated by exploitation barriers is a very powerful driver of floral diversification, robust to variation in pollinator assemblages; hence, it may contribute to elucidating the occurrence of co-evolutionary changes in multi-species contexts. Exploitation barriers provide also a mechanistic basis for trait-based modelling of interaction networks, and represent a reason for caution in assuming fixed interaction identity or strength when modelling such networks (e.g. in rarefaction procedures used to estimate secondary extinctions). We propose to replace the misleading metaphor that depicts flowers and pollinators as cooperative partners by a metaphor in which plants and pollinator are traders, seeking to obtain different services from each other in complete disregard for the benefit of their mutualistic partner.     

Interactions of fungi with other organisms

Living organisms establish complex networks of mutualistic and antagonistic interactions in nature, which impact strongly on their own survival and on the stability of the whole population. Fungi, in particular, can shape natural as well as man-managed ecosystems due to their ubiquitous occurrence and the range of interactions they establish with plants, animals and other microbes. This review describes some examples of mutualistic and antagonistic fungal interactions that are of particular interest for their ecological role, or because they can be exploited by man to improve plant health and/or productivity in sustainable agriculture and forestry.     

Neutral biogeography of phylogenetically structured interaction networks

Little is known about how biogeographic processes affect the dynamics of species interactions in space and time, although it is widely accepted that they drive community assemblage. In functional interactions, such as pollination and seed dispersal, species that share common ancestry tend to retain a common number of interactions and interact with similar sets of species, a pattern more commonly observed for animals than plants. On the one hand, the most coherent explanation for the phylogenetic structure of pollination and seed dispersal networks is that species retain ecological traits over evolution, which would cause the conservation of interaction partners. On the other hand, fundamental processes of biodiversity, such as dispersal and evolutionary rates seem to have important roles shaping the observed phylogenetic structure of mutualistic networks, but no model has been created to study the effect of these processes in the phylogenetic structure of mutualistic interactions. Here, we developed a stochastic simulation model to study the evolution of two interacting groups of species, which evolve independently over the same geographical domain. In our model, individuals of the same interaction group share ecological traits, whereas individuals of different trophic groups are ecologically distinct. We show that even in the absence of ecological differences between individuals, and disregarding any conservation of phenotypical and phenological traits between species, the interplay of dispersal and speciation is still a major driver of complex phylogenetic structure of functional interactions, such as pollination and seed dispersal.     

Control in mutualisms: Combined implications of partner choice and bargaining roles

When two species form a mutualistic association, the degree of control that each has over the interaction may be pivotal in determining the relative benefit each obtains. We incorporate the capacity for partner choice into a model of mutualism based on the exchange of goods and/or services, where one guild of mutualists plays the role of proposer (proposing a price at which the goods and/or services will be exchanged) and the other plays the role of responder (accepting or rejecting the deal). We show how the payoff structure in this scenario and other closely related ones correspond to the ultimatum and demand games of economics. In the model, there are both costs and benefits to a guild whose players have control over interactions. Control over interactions in the sense of being able to exercise partner choice can benefit a guild by selecting for mutualism in its partners, but is most effective in selecting against moderately exploitative partners, and so can give highly exploitative partners an advantage. This can generate dynamics similar to taxon cycles or those seen in models with competition-colonization tradeoffs, wherein increasingly more mutualistic partners (acting as superior competitors) are selected for up to a tipping point, at which highly exploitative strategies (akin to superior colonizers) gain an advantage. Control over interactions in the sense of being able to appropriate ‘surplus’ payoffs in each interaction, which is selected for within-guild and is equivalent to playing the role of responders, selects against high demands (and so for mutualism) in the guild with control. Combining the two mechanisms, a high degree of mutualism in both guilds and coexistence of more mutualistic and more exploitative strategies within each are both consistent with control over the interaction being highly skewed toward one side that does what is in its own short-term interests.     

Ant aggression and evolutionary stability in plant-ant and plant-pollinator mutualistic interactions

Mutualistic partners derive a benefit from their interaction, but this benefit can come at a cost. This is the case for plant-ant and plant-pollinator mutualistic associations. In exchange for protection from herbivores provided by the resident ants, plants supply various kinds of resources or nests to the ants. Most ant-myrmecophyte mutualisms are horizontally transmitted, and therefore, partners share an interest in growth but not in reproduction. This lack of alignment in fitness interests between plants and ants drives a conflict between them: ants can attack pollinators that cross-fertilize the host plants. Using a mathematical model, we define a threshold in ant aggressiveness determining pollinator survival or elimination on the host plant. In our model we observed that, all else being equal, facultative interactions result in pollinator extinction for lower levels of ant aggressiveness than obligatory interactions. We propose that the capacity to discriminate pollinators from herbivores should not often evolve in ants, and when it does it will be when the plants exhibit limited dispersal in an environment that is not seed saturated so that each seed produced can effectively generate a new offspring or if ants acquire an extra benefit from pollination (e.g. if ants eat fruit). We suggest specific mutualism examples where these hypotheses can be tested empirically.     

Biology,Methodology or Chance? The Degree Distributions of Bipartite Ecological Networks

The distribution of the number of links per species, or degree distribution, is widely used as a summary of the topology of complex networks. Degree distributions have been studied in a range of ecological networks, including both mutualistic bipartite networks of plants and pollinators or seed dispersers and antagonistic bipartite networks of plants and their consumers. The shape of a degree distribution, for example whether it follows an exponential or power-law form, is typically taken to be indicative of the processes structuring the network. The skewed degree distributions of bipartite mutualistic and antagonistic networks are usually assumed to show that ecological or co-evolutionary processes constrain the relative numbers of specialists and generalists in the network. I show that a simple null model based on the principle of maximum entropy cannot be rejected as a model for the degree distributions in most of the 115 bipartite ecological networks tested here. The model requires knowledge of the number of nodes and links in the network, but needs no other ecological information. The model cannot be rejected for 159 (69%) of the 230 degree distributions of the 115 networks tested. It performed equally well on the plant and animal degree distributions, and cannot be rejected for 81 (70%) of the 115 plant distributions and 78 (68%) of the animal distributions. There are consistent differences between the degree distributions of mutualistic and antagonistic networks, suggesting that different processes are constraining these two classes of networks. Fit to the MaxEnt null model is consistently poor among the largest mutualistic networks. Potential ecological and methodological explanations for deviations from the model suggest that spatial and temporal heterogeneity are important drivers of the structure of these large networks.     

Coevolution by different functional mechanisms modulates the structure and dynamics of antagonistic and mutualistic networks

A central problem in the study of species interactions is to understand the underlying ecological and evolutionary mechanisms that shape and are shaped by trait evolution in interacting assemblages. The patterns of interaction among species (i.e. network structure) provide the pathways for evolution and coevolution, which are modulated by how traits affect individual fitness (i.e. functional mechanisms). Functional mechanisms, in turn, also affect the likelihood of an ecological interaction, shaping the structure of interaction networks. Here, we build adaptive network models to explore the potential role of coevolution by two functional mechanisms, trait matching and exploitation barrier, in driving trait evolution and the structure of interaction networks. We use these models to explore how different scenarios of coevolution and functional mechanisms reproduce the empirical network patterns observed in antagonistic and mutualistic interactions and affect trait evolution. Scenarios assuming coevolutionary feedback with a strong effect of functional mechanism better reproduce the empirical structure of networks. Antagonistic and mutualistic networks, however, are better explained by different functional mechanisms and the structure of antagonisms is better reproduced than that of mutualisms. Scenarios assuming coevolution by strong trait matching between interacting partners better explain the structure of antagonistic networks, whereas those assuming strong barrier effects better reproduce the structure of mutualistic networks. The dynamics resulting from the feedback between strong functional mechanisms and coevolution favor the stability of antagonisms and mutualisms. Selection favoring trait matching reduces temporal trait fluctuation and the magnitude of arms races in antagonisms, whereas selection due to exploitation barriers reduces temporal trait fluctuations in mutualisms. Our results indicate that coevolutionary models better reproduce the network structure of antagonisms than those of mutualisms and that different functional mechanisms may favor the persistence of antagonistic and mutualistic interacting assemblages.     

Stability of a diamond-shaped module with multiple interaction types

Indirect interactions among species emerge from the complexity of ecological networks and can strongly affect the response of communities to disturbances. To determine these indirect interactions and understand better community dynamics, ecologists focused on the interactions within small sets of species or modules. Thanks to their analytical tractability, modules bring insights on the mechanisms occurring in complex interaction networks. So far, most studies have considered modules with a single type of interaction although numerous species are involved in mutualistic and antagonistic interactions simultaneously. In this study, we analyse the dynamics of a diamond-shaped module with multiple interaction types: two resource species sharing a mutualist and a consumer. We describe the different types of indirect interaction occurring between the resource species and the conditions for a stable coexistence of all species. We show that the nature of indirect interactions between resource species (i.e. apparent facilitation, competition or antagonism), as well as stable coexistence, depend on the species generalism and asymmetry of interactions, or in other words, on the distribution of interaction strengths among species. We further unveil that a balance between mutualistic and antagonistic interactions at the level of resource species favours stable coexistence, and that species are more likely to coexist stably if there is apparent facilitation between the two resource species rather than apparent competition. Our results echo existing knowledge on the trophic diamond-shaped module, and confirm that our understanding of communities combining different interaction types can gain from module analyses.     

Strategy Diversity Stabilizes Mutualism through Investment Cycles,Phase Polymorphism,and Spatial Bubbles

There is continuing interest in understanding factors that facilitate the evolution and stability of cooperation within and between species. Such interactions will often involve plasticity in investment behavior, in response to the interacting partner''s investments. Our aim here is to investigate the evolution and stability of reciprocal investment behavior in interspecific interactions, a key phenomenon strongly supported by experimental observations. In particular, we present a comprehensive analysis of a continuous reciprocal investment game between mutualists, both in well-mixed and spatially structured populations, and we demonstrate a series of novel mechanisms for maintaining interspecific mutualism. We demonstrate that mutualistic partners invariably follow investment cycles, during which mutualism first increases, before both partners eventually reduce their investments to zero, so that these cycles always conclude with full defection. We show that the key mechanism for stabilizing mutualism is phase polymorphism along the investment cycle. Although mutualistic partners perpetually change their strategies, the community-level distribution of investment levels becomes stationary. In spatially structured populations, the maintenance of polymorphism is further facilitated by dynamic mosaic structures, in which mutualistic partners form expanding and collapsing spatial bubbles or clusters. Additionally, we reveal strategy-diversity thresholds, both for well-mixed and spatially structured mutualistic communities, and discuss factors for meeting these thresholds, and thus maintaining mutualism. Our results demonstrate that interspecific mutualism, when considered as plastic investment behavior, can be unstable, and, in agreement with empirical observations, may involve a polymorphism of investment levels, varying both in space and in time. Identifying the mechanisms maintaining such polymorphism, and hence mutualism in natural communities, provides a significant step towards understanding the coevolution and population dynamics of mutualistic interactions.     

Instability of a hybrid module of antagonistic and mutualistic interactions

Mutualistic and antagonistic interactions coexist in nature. However, little is understood about their relative roles and interactive effects on multispecies coexistence. Here, using a three-species population dynamics model of a resource species, its exploiter, and a mutualist species, we show that a mixture of different interaction types may lead to dynamics that differ completely from those of the isolated interacting pairs. More specifically, a combination of globally stable antagonistic and mutualistic subsystems can lead to unstable population oscillations, suggesting the potential difficulty in the coexistence of antagonism and mutualism. Mutualism-induced instability arises from the indirect positive effect of mutualism on the exploiter. Furthermore, for a three-species system with a stronger mutualistic interaction to persist stably, a weaker antagonistic interaction is required. Network studies of communities composed of one type of interaction may not capture the dynamics of natural communities.