IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v220y2009i21p2899-2907.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trophic field overlap: A new approach to quantify keystone species

Author

Listed:
  • Jordán, Ferenc
  • Liu, Wei-chung
  • Mike, Ágnes

Abstract

It is a current challenge to better understand the relative importance of species in ecosystems, and the network perspective is able to offer quantitative tools for this. It is plausible to assume, in general, that well-linked species, being key interactors, are also more important for the community. Recently a number of methods have been suggested for quantifying the network position of species in ecological networks (like the topological importance metric, TI). Most of them are based on node centrality indices and it may happen that the two most important species in a food web have very similar interaction structure and they can essentially replace each other if one becomes extinct. For conservation considerations it is a challenge to identify species that are richly connected and, at the same time, have a relatively unique and irreplaceable interaction pattern. We present a new method and illustrate our approach by using the Kuosheng Bay trophic network in Taiwan. The new method is based on the interaction matrix, where the strength of the interaction between nodes i and j depends only on topology. By defining a threshold separating weak and strong interactors, we define the effective range of interactions for each graph node. If the overlaps between pairs of these ranges are quantified, we gain a metric expressing how unique is the interaction pattern of a focal node (TO). The combination of centrality (TI) and uniqueness (TO) is called topological functionality (TF). We compare the nodal importance rank provided by this metric to others based on a variety of centrality measures. The main conclusion is that shrimps seem to have the most unique interaction pattern despite that their structural importance has been underestimated by all conventional centrality indices. Also, our network analysis suggests that fisheries disturb the ecosystem in a more critical network position than the impingement by the local power plant.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordán, Ferenc & Liu, Wei-chung & Mike, Ágnes, 2009. "Trophic field overlap: A new approach to quantify keystone species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(21), pages 2899-2907.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:21:p:2899-2907
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.12.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380008005838
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.12.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jordán, Ferenc & Benedek, Zsófia & Podani, János, 2007. "Quantifying positional importance in food webs: A comparison of centrality indices," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 205(1), pages 270-275.
    2. Stephen P. Borgatti, 2006. "Identifying sets of key players in a social network," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 21-34, April.
    3. Jordán, Ferenc & Okey, Thomas A. & Bauer, Barbara & Libralato, Simone, 2008. "Identifying important species: Linking structure and function in ecological networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 216(1), pages 75-80.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pier Francesco Moretti & Domenico D’Alelio & Aldo Drago & Jaime Pitarch & Patrick Roose & Isa Schön & Mario Sprovieri & Federico Falcini, 2024. "A Process-Based Approach to Guide the Observational Strategies for the Assessment of the Marine Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Liu, Wei-Chung & Chen, Hsuan-Wien & Tsai, Tsung-Hsi & Hwang, Hsien-Kuei, 2012. "A fish tank model for assembling food webs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 245(C), pages 166-175.
    3. Torres-Alruiz, Maria Daniela & Rodríguez, Diego J., 2013. "A topo-dynamical perspective to evaluate indirect interactions in trophic webs: New indexes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 363-369.
    4. Patonai, Katalin & Jordán, Ferenc, 2017. "Aggregation of incomplete food web data may help to suggest sampling strategies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 352(C), pages 77-89.
    5. Móréh, Ágnes & Endrédi, Anett & Piross, Sándor Imre & Jordán, Ferenc, 2021. "Topology of additive pairwise effects in food webs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 440(C).
    6. Lai, Shu-mei & Liu, Wei-chung & Jordán, Ferenc, 2015. "A trophic overlap-based measure for species uniqueness in ecological networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 299(C), pages 95-101.
    7. Jordán, Ferenc, 2022. "The network perspective: Vertical connections linking organizational levels," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 473(C).
    8. Navia, Andrés Felipe & Cruz-Escalona, Víctor Hugo & Giraldo, Alan & Barausse, Alberto, 2016. "The structure of a marine tropical food web, and its implications for ecosystem-based fisheries management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 328(C), pages 23-33.
    9. Ferenc Jordán & Anett Endrédi & Wei-chung Liu & Domenico D’Alelio, 2018. "Aggregating a Plankton Food Web: Mathematical versus Biological Approaches," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Torres-Alruiz, Maria Daniela & Rodríguez, Diego J., 2013. "A topo-dynamical perspective to evaluate indirect interactions in trophic webs: New indexes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 363-369.
    2. Almpanidou, Vasiliki & Mazaris, Antonios D. & Mertzanis, Yorgos & Avraam, Ioannis & Antoniou, Ioannis & Pantis, John D. & Sgardelis, Stefanos P., 2014. "Providing insights on habitat connectivity for male brown bears: A combination of habitat suitability and landscape graph-based models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 286(C), pages 37-44.
    3. Losapio, Gianalberto & Jordán, Ferenc & Caccianiga, Marco & Gobbi, Mauro, 2015. "Structure-dynamic relationship of plant–insect networks along a primary succession gradient on a glacier foreland," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 314(C), pages 73-79.
    4. Mark J. O. Bagley, 2019. "Networks, geography and the survival of the firm," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 1173-1209, September.
    5. De Montis, Andrea & Ganciu, Amedeo & Cabras, Matteo & Bardi, Antonietta & Mulas, Maurizio, 2019. "Comparative ecological network analysis: An application to Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 714-724.
    6. Hosseinali Salemi & Austin Buchanan, 2022. "Solving the Distance-Based Critical Node Problem," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1309-1326, May.
    7. Capponi, Agostino & Corell, Felix & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2022. "Optimal bailouts and the doom loop with a financial network," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 35-50.
    8. Zhao, Shuying & Sun, Shaowei, 2023. "Identification of node centrality based on Laplacian energy of networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 609(C).
    9. Raddant, Matthias & Takahashi, Hiroshi, 2019. "The Japanese corporate board network," Kiel Working Papers 2130, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Liberati, Caterina & Marzo, Massimiliano & Zagaglia, Paolo & Zappa, Paola, 2012. "Structural distortions in the Euro interbank market: the role of 'key players' during the recent market turmoil," MPRA Paper 40223, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2015. "Lattices in Social Networks with Influence," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-18.
    12. Andrea Galeotti & Benjamin Golub & Sanjeev Goyal, 2020. "Targeting Interventions in Networks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2445-2471, November.
    13. Marco Di Summa & Syed Md Omar Faruk, 2023. "Critical node/edge detection problems on trees," 4OR, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 439-455, September.
    14. Venel, Xavier, 2021. "Regularity of dynamic opinion games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 305-334.
    15. Gallo, Julie Le & Plunket, Anne, 2020. "Regional gatekeepers, inventor networks and inventive performance: Spatial and organizational channels," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    16. Yadira Méndez-Lemus & Antonio Vieyra & Lorena Poncela, 2017. "Peri-urban local governance? Intra-government relationships and social capital in a peripheral municipality of Michoacán, Mexico," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 17(1), pages 1-23, January.
    17. Yuming Guo, 2023. "Towards the efficient generation of variant design in product development networks: network nodes importance based product configuration evaluation approach," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 615-631, February.
    18. Vincent Leon & S. Rasoul Etesami & Rakesh Nagi, 2022. "Limited-Trust in Diffusion of Competing Alternatives over Social Networks," Papers 2206.06318, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    19. Mahyar, Hamidreza & Hasheminezhad, Rouzbeh & Ghalebi K., Elahe & Nazemian, Ali & Grosu, Radu & Movaghar, Ali & Rabiee, Hamid R., 2018. "Compressive sensing of high betweenness centrality nodes in networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 497(C), pages 166-184.
    20. Heetae Kim & Petter Holme, 2015. "Network Theory Integrated Life Cycle Assessment for an Electric Power System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-15, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:220:y:2009:i:21:p:2899-2907. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.