Cited by 269Evolution and Paleontology StudiesPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology

Compilation and Network Analyses of Cambrian Food Webs

Open access
Dunne, Jennifer A, Williams, Richard J, Martinez, Neo D, Wood, Rachel A, Erwin, Douglas H·2008·PLoS Biology

Abstract

A rich body of empirically grounded theory has developed about food webs--the networks of feeding relationships among species within habitats. However, detailed food-web data and analyses are lacking for ancient ecosystems, largely because of the low resolution of taxa coupled with uncertain and incomplete information about feeding interactions. These impediments appear insurmountable for most fossil assemblages; however, a few assemblages with excellent soft-body preservation across trophic levels are candidates for food-web data compilation and topological analysis. Here we present plausible, detailed food webs for the Chengjiang and Burgess Shale assemblages from the Cambrian Period. Analyses of degree distributions and other structural network properties, including sensitivity analyses of the effects of uncertainty associated with Cambrian diet designations, suggest that these early Paleozoic communities share remarkably similar topology with modern food webs. Observed regularities reflect a systematic dependence of structure on the numbers of taxa and links in a web. Most aspects of Cambrian food-web structure are well-characterized by a simple "niche model," which was developed for modern food webs and takes into account this scale dependence. However, a few aspects of topology differ between the ancient and recent webs: longer path lengths between species and more species in feeding loops in the earlier Chengjiang web, and higher variability in the number of links per species for both Cambrian webs. Our results are relatively insensitive to the exclusion of low-certainty or random links. The many similarities between Cambrian and recent food webs point toward surprisingly strong and enduring constraints on the organization of complex feeding interactions among metazoan species. The few differences could reflect a transition to more strongly integrated and constrained trophic organization within ecosystems following the rapid diversification of species, body plans, and trophic roles during the Cambrian radiation. More research is needed to explore the generality of food-web structure through deep time and across habitats, especially to investigate potential mechanisms that could give rise to similar structure, as well as any differences.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060102

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Reconstructed fossil ecosystems (paleo food webs) share universal patterns with modern ecological networks.

    “We can also reconstruct fossil ecosystems, the so-called ‘paleo food webs’ [298,299] (figure 8a,b), and again find universal patterns shared with modern ecological networks [303].”

    From Fundamental constraints to the logic of living systems (2024) · cites this paper as [303]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 77 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Crame JA 1990 Trophic structure Crame JA Paleobiology: A synthesis Oxford Blackwell 385 391
  2. Brusca RC Brusca GJ 1990 Invertebrates Boston Sinauer Press 922

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dunne, J. A., Williams, R. J., Martinez, N. D., Wood, R. A., & Erwin, D. H.
Affiliations
  • Santa Fe Institute (US)
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Dunne, Jennifer A
Venue
PLoS Biology
Published
2008-04-29
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
e102
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W1986606765
Cited by
269
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 15
FWCI
21.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (0234980)
  • David and Lucile Packard Foundation
  • Santa Fe Institute
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Keywords
Chengjiang biota, Burgess Shale, food web topology, degree distribution, niche models, trophic interactions, Cambrian explosion
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Feeding Behavior, Fossils, Predatory Behavior, Species Specificity, Ecosystem, Food Chain

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