Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The dimensionality of ecological networks

Open access
Eklöf, Anna, Jacob, Ute, Kopp, Jason, Bosch, Jordi, Castro‐Urgal, Rocío, Chacoff, Natacha P., Dalsgaard, Bo, de Sassi, Claudio, Galetti, Mauro, Guimarães, Paulo R., Lomáscolo, Silvia Beatriz, Martín González, Ana M., Pizo, Marco Aurelio, Rader, Romina, Rodrigo, Anselm, Tylianakis, Jason M., Vázquez, Diego P., Allesina, Stefano·2013·Ecology Letters
DOI 10.1111/ele.12081
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

How many dimensions (trait‐axes) are required to predict whether two species interact? This unanswered question originated with the idea of ecological niches, and yet bears relevance today for understanding what determines network structure. Here, we analyse a set of 200 ecological networks, including food webs, antagonistic and mutualistic networks, and find that the number of dimensions needed to completely explain all interactions is small ( < 10), with model selection favouring less than five. Using 18 high‐quality webs including several species traits, we identify which traits contribute the most to explaining network structure. We show that accounting for a few traits dramatically improves our understanding of the structure of ecological networks. Matching traits for resources and consumers, for example, fruit size and bill gape, are the most successful combinations. These results link ecologically important species attributes to large‐scale community structure.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ele.12081

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. Adiga A. Chandran L.S.&Sivadasan N.(2008).Lower bounds for boxicity. arXiv preprint arXiv:0806.3175. Only in the arXiv. · arXiv
  2. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.06.040 · DOI
  3. 10.1126/science.1156269 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1982.tb13237.x · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1016/j.ecocom.2007.06.013 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01296.x · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1007/s00285-010-0383-3 · DOI
  8. 10.1890/03-9000 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01778.x · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01778.x
  10. 10.1038/nature02327 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01883.x · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.7208/chicago/9780226101811.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/S0304-3800(99)00022-8 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1073/pnas.0910582106 · DOI
  15. 10.1007/s00442-008-1255-z · DOI
  16. 10.1890/10-1594.1 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1098/rspb.2011.2149 · DOI
  18. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0145 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Galetti M., 1996, Fruit eating by birds in a forest fragment in southeastern brazil, Ararajuba, 4, 71
  20. 10.1038/nature10853 · DOI
  21. 10.2307/1936841 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Jacob U., 2005, Trophic Dynamics of Antarctic Shelf Ecosystems – Food Webs and Energy Flow Budgets, Thesis
  23. 10.1016/B978-0-12-386475-8.00005-8 · DOI
  24. 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00403.x · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1016/0166-218X(94)90143-0 · doi:10.1016/0166-218x(94)90143-0
  26. McCullen C.K., 1993, Flower‐visiting insects of the galapagos islands, Pan‐Pac. Entomol., 69, 95
  27. 10.1890/07-1241.1 · doi:10.1890/07-1241.1
  28. Optiz S., 1996, Trophic Interactions in Caribbean Coral Reefs
  29. Petanidou T., 1991, Pollination Ecology in a Phryganic Ecosystem, Thesis
  30. 10.1073/pnas.0710672105 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1016/B978-0-12-381363-3.00003-4 · DOI
  32. Roberts F.S., 1969, On the Boxicity and Cubicity of a Graph
  33. Roberts F.(1978).Food webs competition graphs and the boxicity of ecological phase space. Y. Alavi D. Lick (Eds.) Theory and Applications of Graphs Springer New York pp.477–490. · doi:10.1007/bfb0070404
  34. 10.1098/rsif.2010.0111 · DOI
  35. 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2001.00553.x · DOI
  36. Stouffer D.B., 2006, A robust measure of food web intervality, P. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 103, 19015, 10.1073/pnas.0603844103 · DOI
  37. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01812.x · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.disc.2008.04.011 · doi:10.1016/j.disc.2008.04.011
  39. 10.7208/chicago/9780226118697.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  40. 10.1038/nature05429 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1007/BF00346475 · DOI
  42. 10.1093/aob/mcp057 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.1038/35004572 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1890/11-0200.1 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.11.045 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Eklöf, A., Jacob, U., Kopp, J., Bosch, J., Castro‐Urgal, R., Chacoff, N. P., Dalsgaard, B., de Sassi, C., Galetti, M., Guimarães, P. R., Lomáscolo, S. B., Martín González, A. M., Pizo, M. A., Rader, R., Rodrigo, A., Tylianakis, J. M., Vázquez, D. P., & Allesina, S.
Venue
Ecology Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-02-26
Volume
16
Issue
5
Pages
577-583
ISSN
  • 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-0248
DOI
10.1111/ele.12081
OpenAlex
W2149644666
Cited by
339
References
1
FWCI
27.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

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.