Patterns in intraspecific interaction strengths and the stability of food webs
- 812 Downloads
A common approach to analyse stability of biological communities is to calculate the interaction strength matrix. Problematic in this approach is defining intraspecific interaction strengths, represented by diagonal elements in the matrix, due to a lack of empirical data for these strengths. Theoretical studies have shown that an overall increase in these strengths enhances stability. However, the way in which the pattern in intraspecific interaction strengths, i.e. the variation in these strengths between species, influences stability has received little attention. We constructed interaction strength matrices for 11 real soil food webs in which four patterns for intraspecific interaction strengths were chosen, based on the ecological literature. These patterns included strengths that were (1) similar for all species, (2) trophic level dependent, (3) biomass dependent, or (4) death rate dependent. These four patterns were analysed for their influence on (1) ranking food webs by their stability and (2) the response in stability to variation of single interspecific interaction strengths. The first analysis showed that ranking the 11 food webs by their stability was not strongly influenced by the choice of diagonal pattern. In contrast, the second analysis showed that the response of food web stability to variation in single interspecific interaction strengths was sensitive to the choice of diagonal pattern. Notably, stability could increase using one pattern and decrease using another. This result asks for deliberate approaches to choose diagonal element values in order to make predictions on how particular species, interactions, or other food web parameters affect food web stability.
KeywordsFood web stability Interaction strength matrix Intraspecific interaction strength Press perturbations
We thank two anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments. This research was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), as project 645.000.013.
- Andrén O, Lindberg T, Boström U, Clarholm M, Hansson A-C, Johansson G, Lagerlöf J, Paustian K, Persson J, Petterson R, Schnürer J, Sohlenius B, Wivstad MIOA, Lindberg T, Paustian K, Rosswall T (1990) Ecology of Arable land—organisms, carbon, and nitrogen-cycling 40: organic carbon and nitrogen flows. Ecol Bull 40:85–125Google Scholar
- Banašek-Richter C, Bersier L-F, Cattin M-F, Baltensperger R, Gabriel J-P, Merz Y, Ulanowicz RE, Tavares AF, Williams DD, de Ruiter PC, Winemiller KO, Naisbit RE (2009) Complexity in quantitative food webs. Ecology 90:470–1477Google Scholar
- Berlow EL, Neutel AM, Cohel JE, de Ruiter PC, Ebenman B, Emmerson M, Fox JW, Jansen VAA, Jones JI, Kokkoris GD, Logofet DO, McKane AJ, Montoya JM, Petchey O (2004) Interaction strengths in food webs: issues and opportunities. Journal of Animal Ecology in pressGoogle Scholar
- Hofbauer J, Sigmund K (1988) The theory of evolution and dynamical systems. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Hunt HW, Coleman DC, Ingham ER, Ingham RE, Elliott ET, Moore JC, Rose SL, Reid CPP, Morley CR (1987) The detrital food web in a shortgrass prairie. Biol Fertil Soils 3:57–68Google Scholar
- May RM (1973) Stability and complexity in model ecosystems, 2nd edn. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Schmitz OJ (1997) Press perturbations and the predictability of ecological interactions in a food web. Ecology 78:55–69Google Scholar
- Yodzis P (1988) The indeterminacy of ecological interactions as perceived by perturbation experiments. Ecology 72:1964–1972Google Scholar