IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v314y2015icp73-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structure-dynamic relationship of plant–insect networks along a primary succession gradient on a glacier foreland

Author

Listed:
  • Losapio, Gianalberto
  • Jordán, Ferenc
  • Caccianiga, Marco
  • Gobbi, Mauro

Abstract

There is a growing interest in understanding the structure–dynamic relationship of ecological networks. Ecological network changes along primary successions are poorly known: to address such topic, gradient of primary succession on glacier forelands is an ideal model, as sites of different age since deglaciation stand for different ecosystem developmental stages. We aimed to investigate the assembly processes of plant–insect networks and to elucidate its functional implications for ecosystem stability along this time sequence succession. We collected data on the functional role of anthophilous insect groups and performed network analysis to evaluate their relative importance in the structure of plant–insect interaction networks with increasing time since deglaciation along the primary succession of a debris-covered glacier foreland. We sampled anthophilous insects visiting the flowers of two models plant species, Leucanthemopsis alpina and Saxifraga bryoides. Insects were identified and trophic roles were attributed to each taxon (detritivores, parasitoids, phytophagous, pollinators, predators, and opportunists) at five sites representing the primary succession gradient. Plant–insect interactions were visually represented by a bipartite network for each successional stage. For each plant species and insect group, centrality indices were computed quantifying their community importance. For the whole network, centralization and link density were calculated. Pollinators dominated pioneer communities on the debris-covered glacier and in recently deglaciated areas, while parasitoids, predators and opportunists characterised late-succession stages. Plant species centrality varied along the succession. Pollinators showed initially higher but then decreasing centrality, while the centrality of predators and parasitoids increased with time since deglaciation. Along the same gradient link density showed an increasing trend while network centralization tended to decrease. The present study provides new insight into the initial steps of plant–insect network assembly and sheds light on the relationship between structure and dynamic in ecological networks. In particular, during the succession process, more links are formed and plant–anthophilous insect interactions change from a network dominated by pollinators to a functionally more diversified food web. We conclude that applying network theory to the study of primary succession provides a useful framework to investigate the relationship between community structure and ecosystem stability.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:314:y:2015:i:c:p:73-79
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.07.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380015003208
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.07.014?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. José M. Montoya & Stuart L. Pimm & Ricard V. Solé, 2006. "Ecological networks and their fragility," Nature, Nature, vol. 442(7100), pages 259-264, July.
    2. Fath, Brian D. & Killian, Megan C., 2007. "The relevance of ecological pyramids in community assemblages," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 286-294.
    3. 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.
    4. 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. Tenan, S. & Maffioletti, C. & Caccianiga, M. & Compostella, C. & Seppi, R. & Gobbi, M., 2016. "Hierarchical models for describing space-for-time variations in insect population size and sex-ratio along a primary succession," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 329(C), pages 18-28.

    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. 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.
    4. Stefano Allesina & Mercedes Pascual, 2009. "Googling Food Webs: Can an Eigenvector Measure Species' Importance for Coextinctions?," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(9), pages 1-6, September.
    5. Zhang, Yan & Zheng, Hongmei & Yang, Zhifeng & Su, Meirong & Liu, Gengyuan & Li, Yanxian, 2015. "Multi-regional input–output model and ecological network analysis for regional embodied energy accounting in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 651-663.
    6. Dai, Jiangyu & Wu, Shiqiang & Han, Guoyi & Weinberg, Josh & Xie, Xinghua & Wu, Xiufeng & Song, Xingqiang & Jia, Benyou & Xue, Wanyun & Yang, Qianqian, 2018. "Water-energy nexus: A review of methods and tools for macro-assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 393-408.
    7. 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.
    8. Zechen Wang & Zhenqin Shi & Jingeng Huo & Wenbo Zhu & Yanhui Yan & Na Ding, 2023. "Construction and Optimization of an Ecological Network in Funiu Mountain Area Based on MSPA and MCR Models, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, August.
    9. Xiaolong Lin & Zongmu Yao & Xinguang Wang & Shangqi Xu & Chunjie Tian & Lei Tian, 2021. "Water-Covered Depth with the Freeze–Thaw Cycle Influences Fungal Communities on Rice Straw Decomposition," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Huaylla, Claudia A. & Kuperman, Marcelo N. & Garibaldi, Lucas A., 2024. "Comparison of two statistical measures of complexity applied to ecological bipartite networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 642(C).
    11. Leto Peel & Tiago P. Peixoto & Manlio De Domenico, 2022. "Statistical inference links data and theory in network science," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    12. Dina in ‘t Zandt & Zuzana Kolaříková & Tomáš Cajthaml & Zuzana Münzbergová, 2023. "Plant community stability is associated with a decoupling of prokaryote and fungal soil networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Bellingeri, Michele & Cassi, Davide & Vincenzi, Simone, 2013. "Increasing the extinction risk of highly connected species causes a sharp robust-to-fragile transition in empirical food webs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-8.
    14. Zhang, Yan & Wu, Tong & Song, Changsu & Hein, Lars & Shi, Faqi & Han, Mingchen & Ouyang, Zhiyun, 2022. "Influences of climate change and land use change on the interactions of ecosystem services in China’s Xijiang River Basin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    15. Wang, Saige & Chen, Bin, 2016. "Energy–water nexus of urban agglomeration based on multiregional input–output tables and ecological network analysis: A case study of the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei region," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 773-783.
    16. Link, Jason S. & Pranovi, Fabio & Libralato, Simone, 2022. "Simulations and interpretations of cumulative trophic theory," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 463(C).
    17. Zeyang Bian & Dan Liu, 2021. "A Comprehensive Review on Types, Methods and Different Regions Related to Water–Energy–Food Nexus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-24, August.
    18. Móréh, Ágnes & Endrédi, Anett & Piross, Sándor Imre & Jordán, Ferenc, 2021. "Topology of additive pairwise effects in food webs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 440(C).
    19. Ahmad, Shakeel & Jia, Haifeng & Chen, Zhengxia & Li, Qian & Xu, Changqing, 2020. "Water-energy nexus and energy efficiency: A systematic analysis of urban water systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Saucan, Emil & Sreejith, R.P. & Vivek-Ananth, R.P. & Jost, Jürgen & Samal, Areejit, 2019. "Discrete Ricci curvatures for directed networks," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 347-360.

    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:314:y:2015:i:c:p:73-79. 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.