Cargando…
Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar
Biological invasion remains a major threat to biodiversity in general and a disruptor to mutualistic interactions in particular. While a number of empirical studies have directly explored the role of invasion in mutualistic pollination networks, a clear picture is yet to emerge and a theoretical mod...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2263 |
_version_ | 1782447362390622208 |
---|---|
author | Minoarivelo, Henintsoa Onivola Hui, Cang |
author_facet | Minoarivelo, Henintsoa Onivola Hui, Cang |
author_sort | Minoarivelo, Henintsoa Onivola |
collection | PubMed |
description | Biological invasion remains a major threat to biodiversity in general and a disruptor to mutualistic interactions in particular. While a number of empirical studies have directly explored the role of invasion in mutualistic pollination networks, a clear picture is yet to emerge and a theoretical model for comprehension still lacking. Here, using an eco‐evolutionary model of bipartite mutualistic networks with trait‐mediated interactions, we explore invader trait, propagule pressure, and network features of recipient community that contribute importantly to the success and impact of an invasion. High level of invasiveness is observed when invader trait differs from those of the community average, and level of interaction generalization equals to that of the community average. Moreover, multiple introductions of invaders with declining propagules enhance invasiveness. Surprisingly, the most successful invader is not always the one having the biggest impact on the recipient community. The network structure of recipient community, such as nestedness and modularity, is not a primary indicator of its invasibility; rather, the invasibility is best correlated with measurements of network stability such as robustness, resilience, and disruptiveness (a measure of evolutionary instability). Our model encompasses more general scenarios than previously studied in predicting invasion success and impact in mutualistic networks, and our results highlight the need for coupling eco‐evolutionary processes to resolve the invasion dilemma. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4979722 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49797222016-08-19 Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar Minoarivelo, Henintsoa Onivola Hui, Cang Ecol Evol Original Research Biological invasion remains a major threat to biodiversity in general and a disruptor to mutualistic interactions in particular. While a number of empirical studies have directly explored the role of invasion in mutualistic pollination networks, a clear picture is yet to emerge and a theoretical model for comprehension still lacking. Here, using an eco‐evolutionary model of bipartite mutualistic networks with trait‐mediated interactions, we explore invader trait, propagule pressure, and network features of recipient community that contribute importantly to the success and impact of an invasion. High level of invasiveness is observed when invader trait differs from those of the community average, and level of interaction generalization equals to that of the community average. Moreover, multiple introductions of invaders with declining propagules enhance invasiveness. Surprisingly, the most successful invader is not always the one having the biggest impact on the recipient community. The network structure of recipient community, such as nestedness and modularity, is not a primary indicator of its invasibility; rather, the invasibility is best correlated with measurements of network stability such as robustness, resilience, and disruptiveness (a measure of evolutionary instability). Our model encompasses more general scenarios than previously studied in predicting invasion success and impact in mutualistic networks, and our results highlight the need for coupling eco‐evolutionary processes to resolve the invasion dilemma. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4979722/ /pubmed/27547328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2263 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Minoarivelo, Henintsoa Onivola Hui, Cang Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title | Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title_full | Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title_fullStr | Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title_full_unstemmed | Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title_short | Invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
title_sort | invading a mutualistic network: to be or not to be similar |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4979722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27547328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2263 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT minoarivelohenintsoaonivola invadingamutualisticnetworktobeornottobesimilar AT huicang invadingamutualisticnetworktobeornottobesimilar |