Mutualistic strategies minimize coextinction in plant–disperser networks

Evan C. Fricke, Joshua Tewksbury, Elizabeth M. Wandrag, Haldre S. Rogers

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    10 Citations (Scopus)
    5 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    The global decline of mutualists such as pollinators and seed dispersers may cause negative direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. Mutualistic network models used to understand the stability of mutualistic systems indicate that species with low partner diversity are most vulnerable to coextinction following mutualism disruption. However, existing models have not considered how species vary in their dependence on mutualistic interactions for reproduction or survival, overlooking the potential influence of this variation on species’ coextinction vulnerability and on network stability. Using global databases and field experiments focused on the seed dispersal mutualism, we found that plants and animals that depend heavily on mutualistic interactions have higher partner diversity. Under simulated network disruption, this empirical relationship strongly reduced coextinction because the species most likely to lose mutualists depend least on their mutualists. The pattern also reduced the importance of network structure for stability; nested network structure had little effect on coextinction after simulations incorporated the empirically derived relationship between partner diversity and mutualistic dependence. Our results highlight a previously unknown source of stability in mutualistic networks and suggest that differences among species in their mutualistic strategy, rather than network structure, primarily accounts for stability in mutualistic communities.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article number20162302
    JournalProceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
    Volume284
    Issue number1854
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 17 May 2017

    Fingerprint

    Symbiosis
    mutualism
    Seed Dispersal
    Biodiversity
    seed dispersal
    interspecific variation
    pollinators
    Reproduction
    Seeds
    Databases
    Seed
    biodiversity
    seeds
    animals
    pollinator
    vulnerability
    Animals
    seed
    animal
    simulation

    Cite this

    Fricke, Evan C. ; Tewksbury, Joshua ; Wandrag, Elizabeth M. ; Rogers, Haldre S. / Mutualistic strategies minimize coextinction in plant–disperser networks. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2017 ; Vol. 284, No. 1854.
    @article{6144f0694b2e453a8f8f9cce16bd027f,
    title = "Mutualistic strategies minimize coextinction in plant–disperser networks",
    abstract = "The global decline of mutualists such as pollinators and seed dispersers may cause negative direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. Mutualistic network models used to understand the stability of mutualistic systems indicate that species with low partner diversity are most vulnerable to coextinction following mutualism disruption. However, existing models have not considered how species vary in their dependence on mutualistic interactions for reproduction or survival, overlooking the potential influence of this variation on species’ coextinction vulnerability and on network stability. Using global databases and field experiments focused on the seed dispersal mutualism, we found that plants and animals that depend heavily on mutualistic interactions have higher partner diversity. Under simulated network disruption, this empirical relationship strongly reduced coextinction because the species most likely to lose mutualists depend least on their mutualists. The pattern also reduced the importance of network structure for stability; nested network structure had little effect on coextinction after simulations incorporated the empirically derived relationship between partner diversity and mutualistic dependence. Our results highlight a previously unknown source of stability in mutualistic networks and suggest that differences among species in their mutualistic strategy, rather than network structure, primarily accounts for stability in mutualistic communities.",
    keywords = "Defaunation, Ecological networks, Global change, Mutualism, Plant–animal interactions, Seed dispersal",
    author = "Fricke, {Evan C.} and Joshua Tewksbury and Wandrag, {Elizabeth M.} and Rogers, {Haldre S.}",
    year = "2017",
    month = "5",
    day = "17",
    doi = "10.1098/rspb.2016.2302",
    language = "English",
    volume = "284",
    journal = "Royal Society of London. Proceedings B. Biological Sciences",
    issn = "0962-8452",
    publisher = "Royal Society of London",
    number = "1854",

    }

    Mutualistic strategies minimize coextinction in plant–disperser networks. / Fricke, Evan C.; Tewksbury, Joshua; Wandrag, Elizabeth M.; Rogers, Haldre S.

    In: Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Vol. 284, No. 1854, 20162302, 17.05.2017.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Mutualistic strategies minimize coextinction in plant–disperser networks

    AU - Fricke, Evan C.

    AU - Tewksbury, Joshua

    AU - Wandrag, Elizabeth M.

    AU - Rogers, Haldre S.

    PY - 2017/5/17

    Y1 - 2017/5/17

    N2 - The global decline of mutualists such as pollinators and seed dispersers may cause negative direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. Mutualistic network models used to understand the stability of mutualistic systems indicate that species with low partner diversity are most vulnerable to coextinction following mutualism disruption. However, existing models have not considered how species vary in their dependence on mutualistic interactions for reproduction or survival, overlooking the potential influence of this variation on species’ coextinction vulnerability and on network stability. Using global databases and field experiments focused on the seed dispersal mutualism, we found that plants and animals that depend heavily on mutualistic interactions have higher partner diversity. Under simulated network disruption, this empirical relationship strongly reduced coextinction because the species most likely to lose mutualists depend least on their mutualists. The pattern also reduced the importance of network structure for stability; nested network structure had little effect on coextinction after simulations incorporated the empirically derived relationship between partner diversity and mutualistic dependence. Our results highlight a previously unknown source of stability in mutualistic networks and suggest that differences among species in their mutualistic strategy, rather than network structure, primarily accounts for stability in mutualistic communities.

    AB - The global decline of mutualists such as pollinators and seed dispersers may cause negative direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. Mutualistic network models used to understand the stability of mutualistic systems indicate that species with low partner diversity are most vulnerable to coextinction following mutualism disruption. However, existing models have not considered how species vary in their dependence on mutualistic interactions for reproduction or survival, overlooking the potential influence of this variation on species’ coextinction vulnerability and on network stability. Using global databases and field experiments focused on the seed dispersal mutualism, we found that plants and animals that depend heavily on mutualistic interactions have higher partner diversity. Under simulated network disruption, this empirical relationship strongly reduced coextinction because the species most likely to lose mutualists depend least on their mutualists. The pattern also reduced the importance of network structure for stability; nested network structure had little effect on coextinction after simulations incorporated the empirically derived relationship between partner diversity and mutualistic dependence. Our results highlight a previously unknown source of stability in mutualistic networks and suggest that differences among species in their mutualistic strategy, rather than network structure, primarily accounts for stability in mutualistic communities.

    KW - Defaunation

    KW - Ecological networks

    KW - Global change

    KW - Mutualism

    KW - Plant–animal interactions

    KW - Seed dispersal

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019257949&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1098/rspb.2016.2302

    DO - 10.1098/rspb.2016.2302

    M3 - Article

    VL - 284

    JO - Royal Society of London. Proceedings B. Biological Sciences

    JF - Royal Society of London. Proceedings B. Biological Sciences

    SN - 0962-8452

    IS - 1854

    M1 - 20162302

    ER -