Defaunation leads to interaction deficits,not interaction compensation,in an island seed dispersal network |
| |
| Authors: | Evan C Fricke Joshua J Tewksbury Haldre S Rogers |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA;2. Colorado Global Hub, Future Earth, Boulder, CO, USA;3. Sustainability, Energy and Environment Complex, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA;4. School of Global Environmental Studies, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Following defaunation, the loss of interactions with mutualists such as pollinators or seed dispersers may be compensated through increased interactions with remaining mutualists, ameliorating the negative cascading impacts on biodiversity. Alternatively, remaining mutualists may respond to altered competition by reducing the breadth or intensity of their interactions, exacerbating negative impacts on biodiversity. Despite the importance of these responses for our understanding of the dynamics of mutualistic networks and their response to global change, the mechanism and magnitude of interaction compensation within real mutualistic networks remains largely unknown. We examined differences in mutualistic interactions between frugivores and fruiting plants in two island ecosystems possessing an intact or disrupted seed dispersal network. We determined how changes in the abundance and behavior of remaining seed dispersers either increased mutualistic interactions (contributing to “interaction compensation”) or decreased interactions (causing an “interaction deficit”) in the disrupted network. We found a “rich‐get‐richer” response in the disrupted network, where remaining frugivores favored the plant species with highest interaction frequency, a dynamic that worsened the interaction deficit among plant species with low interaction frequency. Only one of five plant species experienced compensation and the other four had significant interaction deficits, with interaction frequencies 56–95% lower in the disrupted network. These results do not provide support for the strong compensating mechanisms assumed in theoretical network models, suggesting that existing network models underestimate the prevalence of cascading mutualism disruption after defaunation. This work supports a mutualist biodiversity‐ecosystem functioning relationship, highlighting the importance of mutualist diversity for sustaining diverse and resilient ecosystems. |
| |
| Keywords: | defaunation ecological network extinction functional redundancy mutualism seed dispersal |
|
|
