Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-489z4 Total loading time: 0.353 Render date: 2022-05-21T17:08:21.115Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Article contents

Beta and phylogenetic diversities tell complementary stories about ecological networks biogeography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2021

Gracielle T. Higino*
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiania, Brazil Québec Centre for Biodiversity Sciences, Montreal, Canada
Timothée Poisot
Affiliation:
Québec Centre for Biodiversity Sciences, Montreal, Canada Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Gracielle T. Higino, E-mail: graciellehigino@gmail.com

Abstract

The beta-diversity of interactions between communities does not necessarily correspond to the differences related to their species composition because interactions show greater variability than species co-occurrence. Additionally, the structure of species interaction networks can itself vary over spatial gradients, thereby adding constraints on the dissimilarity of communities in space. We used published data on the parasitism interaction between fleas and small mammals in 51 regions of the Palearctic to investigate how beta-diversity of networks and phylogenetic diversity are related. The networks could be separated in groups based on the metrics that best described the differences between them, and these groups were also geographically structured. We also found that each network beta-diversity index relates in a particular way with phylogenetically community dissimilarity, reinforcing that some of these indexes have a strong phylogenetic component. Our results clarify important aspects of the biogeography of hosts and parasites communities in Eurasia, while suggesting that networks beta-diversity and phylogenetic dissimilarity interact with the environment in different ways.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albery, GF, Eskew, EA, Ross, N and Olival, KJ (2020) Predicting the global mammalian viral sharing network using phylogeography. Nature Communications 11, 2260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baiser, B, Gravel, D, Cirtwill, AR, Dunne, JA, Fahimipour, AK, Gilarranz, LJ, Grochow, JA, Li, D, Martinez, ND, McGrew, A, Poisot, T, Romanuk, TN, Stouffer, DB, Trotta, LB, Valdovinos, FS, Williams, RJ, Wood, SA and Yeakel, JD (2019) Ecogeographical rules and the macroecology of food webs. Global Ecology and Biogeography 28, 12041218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bezanson, J, Edelman, A, Karpinski, S and Shah, VB (2017) Julia: a fresh approach to numerical computing. SIAM Review 59, 6598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruder, A, Salis, RK, Jones, PE and Matthaei, CD (2017) Biotic interactions modify multiple-stressor effects on juvenile brown trout in an experimental stream food web.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canard, EF, Mouquet, N, Mouillot, D, Stanko, M, Miklisova, D and Gravel, D (2014) Empirical evaluation of neutral interactions in host-parasite networks. The American Naturalist 183, 468479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cha, M, Wu, X, Fu, H, Yuan, S, Wu, Y and Zhang, X (2015) An empirical research of rodent metacommunities in Alashan Desert. Acta Ecologica Sinica 35, 56125622. doi: 10.5846/stxb201312092913Google Scholar
Coelho, MTP, Rodrigues, JFM and Rangel, TF (2017) Neutral biogeography of phylogenetically structured interaction networks. Ecography 40, 14671474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalsgaard, B, Trøjelsgaard, K, Martín González, AM, Nogués-Bravo, D, Ollerton, J, Petanidou, T, Sandel, B, Schleuning, M, Wang, Z, Rahbek, C, Sutherland, WJ, Svenning, J-C and Olesen, JM (2013) Historical climate-change influences modularity and nestedness of pollination networks. Ecography 36, 13311340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, TJ and Buckley, LB (2011) Phylogenetic diversity as a window into the evolutionary and biogeographic histories of present-day richness gradients for mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 366, 24142425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desdevises, Y, Morand, S, Krasnov, BR and Claude, J (2015) Comparative analysis: recent developments and uses with parasites. In Morand, S, Krasnov, BR and Littlewood, DTJ (eds), Parasite Diversity and Diversification: Evolutionary Ecology Meets Phylogenetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 337350 doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139794749.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doxford, SW, Ooi, MKJ and Freckleton, RP (2013) Spatial and temporal variability in positive and negative plant-bryophyte interactions along a latitudinal gradient. Journal of Ecology 101, 465474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksson, A, Doherty, J, Fischer, E, Graciolli, G and Poulin, R (2019) Hosts and environment overshadow spatial distance as drivers of bat fly species composition in the Neotropics. Journal of Biogeography 47, 736747. doi: 10.1111/jbi.13757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gravel, D, Baiser, B, Dunne, JA, Kopelke, J-P, Martinez, ND, Nyman, T, Poisot, T, Stouffer, DB, Tylianakis, JM, Wood, SA and Roslin, T (2019) Bringing Elton and Grinnell together: a quantitative framework to represent the biogeography of ecological interaction networks. Ecography 42, 401415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadfield, JD, Krasnov, BR, Poulin, R and Shinichi, N (2013) Data from: A tale of two phylogenies: comparative analyses of ecological interactions. doi: 10.5061/DRYAD.JF3TJ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadfield, JD, Krasnov, BR, Poulin, R and Nakagawa, S (2014) A tale of two phylogenies: comparative analyses of ecological interactions. The American Naturalist 183, 174187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holt, RD (2002) Food webs in space: On the interplay of dynamic instability and spatial processes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, I and Eubanks, MD (2005) Aphids alter the community-wide impact of fire ants. Ecology 86, 16401649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koleff, P, Gaston, KJ and Lennon, JJ (2003) Measuring beta diversity for presence-absence data. Journal of Animal Ecology 72, 367382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
König, MAE, Wiklund, C and Ehrlén, J (2014) Context-dependent resistance against butterfly herbivory in a polyploid herb.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasnov, BR, Shenbrot, GI, Mouillot, D, Khokhlova, IS and Poulin, R (2005) Spatial variation in species diversity and composition of flea assemblages in small mammalian hosts: geographical distance or faunal similarity? Journal of Biogeography 32, 633644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasnov, BR, Morand, S and Poulin, R (2015) Phylogenetic signals in ecological properties of parasites. In Morand, S, Krasnov, BR and Littlewood, DTJ (eds), Parasite Diversity and Diversification: Evolutionary Ecology Meets Phylogenetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 351359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, D, Dinnage, R, Nell, L, Helmus, MR and Ives, A (2020) phyr: An R package for phylogenetic species-distribution modelling in ecological communities. bioRxiv. doi: 10.1101/2020.02.17.952317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muola, A, Mutikainen, P, Lilley, M, Laukkanen, L, Salminen, J-P and Leimu, R (2010) Associations of plant fitness, leaf chemistry, and damage suggest selection mosaic in plant-herbivore interactions. Ecology 91, 26502659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poisot, T and Stouffer, DB (2018) Interactions retain the co-phylogenetic matching that communities lost.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poisot, T, Canard, E, Mouillot, D, Mouquet, N and Gravel, D (2012) The dissimilarity of species interaction networks. Ecology Letters 15, 13531361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poisot, T, Stouffer, DB and Gravel, D (2014) Beyond species: why ecological interaction networks vary through space and time. Oikos 124, 243251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poisot, T, Cirtwill, A, Cazelles, K, Gravel, D, Fortin, M-J and Stouffer, D (2016) The structure of probabilistic networks. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 7, 303312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poisot, T, Guéveneux-Julien, C, Fortin, MJ, Gravel, D and Legendre, P (2017) Hosts, parasites and their interactions respond to different climatic variables. Global Ecology and Biogeography 26, 942951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poisot, T, Banville, F and Dansereau, G (2020 a) EcoJulia/Mangal.jl: v0.3.1. Zenodo doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4299306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poisot, T, Stock, M, Hoebeke, L, Szefer, P, Banville, F and Dalla Riva, GV (2020 b) Ecological networks analyses in Julia. Zenodo doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4302247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulin, R (2010) Network analysis shining light on parasite ecology and diversity. Trends in Parasitology 26, 492498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poulin, R and Krasnov, BR (2010) Similarity and variability of parasite assemblage across geographical space. In Morand, S and Krasnov, BR (eds), The Biogeography of Host-Parasite Interactions. Great Claredon Street, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 115127.Google Scholar
Proulx, S, Promislow, D and Phillips, P (2005) Network thinking in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20, 345353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rall, BC, Brose, U, Hartvig, M, Kalinkat, G, Schwarzmüller, F, Vucic-Pestic, O and Petchey, OL (2012) Universal temperature and body-mass scaling of feeding rates. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, 29232934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2019) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Sebastián-González, E, Dalsgaard, B, Sandel, B and Guimarães, PR (2015) Macroecological trends in nestedness and modularity of seed-dispersal networks: human impact matters. Global Ecology and Biogeography 24, 293303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trøjelsgaard, K and Olesen, JM (2013) Macroecology of pollination networks. Global Ecology and Biogeography 22, 149162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tylianakis, JM and Morris, RJ (2017) Ecological Networks Across Environmental Gradients.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Beta and phylogenetic diversities tell complementary stories about ecological networks biogeography
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Beta and phylogenetic diversities tell complementary stories about ecological networks biogeography
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Beta and phylogenetic diversities tell complementary stories about ecological networks biogeography
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *