The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant–animal interactions
Open accessAbstract
Plant–animal mutualistic networks are interaction webs consisting of two sets of entities, plant and animal species, whose evolutionary dynamics are deeply influenced by the outcomes of the interactions, yielding a diverse array of coevolutionary processes. These networks are two‐mode networks sharing many common properties with others such as food webs, social, and abiotic networks. Here we describe generalized patterns in the topology of 29 plant–pollinator and 24 plant–frugivore networks in natural communities. Scale‐free properties have been described for a number of biological, social, and abiotic networks; in contrast, most of the plant–animal mutualistic networks (65.6%) show species connectivity distributions (number of links per species) with a power‐law regime but decaying as a marked cut‐off, i.e. truncated power‐law or broad‐scale networks and few (22.2%) show scale‐invariance. We hypothesize that plant–animal mutualistic networks follow a build‐up process similar to complex abiotic nets, based on the preferential attachment of species. However, constraints in the addition of links such as morphological mismatching or phenological uncoupling between mutualistic partners, restrict the number of interactions established, causing deviations from scale‐invariance. This reveals generalized topological patterns characteristic of self‐organized complex systems. Relative to scale‐invariant networks, such constraints may confer higher robustness to the loss of keystone species that are the backbone of these webs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Classes of small-world networks
Amaral, L. A. N., Scala, A., Barthélémy, M., & Stanley, H. E. (2000) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.200327197 · Cited by 3,051
Cited by
The Structure and Function of Complex Networks
Newman, M. E. J. (2003) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/s003614450342480 · Cited by 18,719
The nested assembly of plant–animal mutualistic networks
Bascompte, J., Jordano, P., Melián, C. J., & Olesen, J. M. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1633576100 · Cited by 2,497
Self-citationApproaching a state shift in Earth’s biosphere
Barnosky, A. D., Hadly, E. A., Bascompte, J., Berlow, E. L., Brown, J. H., Fortelius, M., Getz, W. M., Harte, J., Hastings, A., Marquet, P. A., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11018 · Cited by 1,966
Self-citationBody size in ecological networks
WOODWARD, G., EBENMAN, B., EMMERSON, M., MONTOYA, J., OLESEN, J., VALIDO, A., & WARREN, P. (2005) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.005 · Cited by 1,251
Self-citationReview: Ecological networks – beyond food webs
Ings, T. C., Montoya, J. M., Bascompte, J., Blüthgen, N., Brown, L., Dormann, C. F., Edwards, F., Figueroa, D., Jacob, U., Jones, J. I., et al. (2009) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01460.x · Cited by 934
Self-citationInteraction frequency as a surrogate for the total effect of animal mutualists on plants
Vázquez, D. P., Morris, W. F., & Jordano, P. (2005) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00810.x · Cited by 599
Self-citationSchweiger, O., Biesmeijer, J. C., Bommarco, R., Hickler, T., Hulme, P. E., Klotz, S., Kühn, I., Moora, M., Nielsen, A., Ohlemüller, R., et al. (2010) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00125.x · Cited by 431
Pichler, M., Boreux, V., Klein, A., Schleuning, M., & Hartig, F. (2020) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13329 · Cited by 149
Gonzalez, A., Mouquet, N., & Loreau, M. (2009) · Biodiversity, Ecosystem Functioning, and Human Wellbeing · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547951.003.0010 · Cited by 92
Corruption risk in contracting markets: a network science perspective
Wachs, J., Fazekas, M., & Kertész, J. (2021) · International Journal of Data Science and Analytics · doi:10.1007/s41060-019-00204-1 · Cited by 73
Networks and Hierarchies: Approaching Complexity in Evolutionary Theory
Tëmkin, I., & Eldredge, N. (2015) · Interdisciplinary Evolution Research · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-15045-1_6 · Cited by 49
Evolving complexity: how tinkering shapes cells, software and ecological networks.
Solé, R., & Valverde, S. (2020) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0325 · Cited by 37
Impacts of deforestation on plant-pollinator networks assessed using an agent based model
Newton, A. C., Boscolo, D., Ferreira, P. A., Lopes, L. E., & Evans, P. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209406 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Jordano, P., Bascompte, J., & Olesen, J. M.
- Venue
- Ecology Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-12-13
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-81
- ISSN
- 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
- 1461-0248
- OpenAlex
- W2096871615
- Cited by
- 863
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 13.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
