, Volume 40, Issue 3, pp 335–337 | Cite as

World Wide Food Webs: Power to Feed Ecologists

  • Christian Mulder

During the last decade, the active usage of Public Access to the World Wide Web increased in such a huge way, that an ongoing data paucity would be hard to believe. Already in 1993, Cohen et al. (1993) correctly urged other ecologists to combine themselves for a concrete and necessary improvement of food-web knowledge. However, in a recent lecture, Joel E. Cohen still reported one—according to him—“shocking” paucity of directly observed, appropriately organized, and publicly availablewebs (Cohen et al. 2009). The basis for this claim was a brilliant analysis of three datasets on the abundance and distribution of organisms in aquatic ecosystems. Did, thus, the ecological community react in a different way to the World Wide Web, possibly due to missing ways to capture the semantics of complex ecological data (Madin et al.2007) in comparison to the flexible ontology of bio-medical research?

Ecological datasets with comparable complexity are not very frequent, but have been documented on...


World Wide Functional Trait Open Access Journal Multitrophic Interaction Metadata Collection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Allesina, S., and M. Pascual. 2009. Googling food webs: Can an Eigenvector measure species’ importance for coextinctions? PLoS Computational Biology 5: E1000494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bollen, J., H. Van de Sompel, A. Hagberg, and R. Chute. 2009. A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE 4: E6022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourne, P.E., J.L. Fink, and M. Gerstein. 2008. Open access: Taking full advantage of the content. PLoS Computational Biology 4: E1000037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brumfiel, G. 2009. Breaking the convention? Nature 459: 1050–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler, D. 2005. Join efforts. Nature 438: 548–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J.E., R.A. Beaver, S.H. Cousins, D.L. DeAngelis, L. Goldwasser, K.L. Heong, R.D. Holt, A.J. Kohn, et al. 1993. Improving food webs. Ecology 74: 252–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, J.E., D.N. Schittler, D.G. Raffaelli, and D.C. Reuman. 2009. Food webs are more than the sum of their tritrophic parts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 106: 22335–22340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ernest, S.K.M., T.J. Valone, and J.H. Brown. 2009. Long-term monitoring and experimental manipulation of a Chihuahuan Desert ecosystem near Portal, Arizona, USA. Ecological Archives E090–118.Google Scholar
  9. Hale, S.S., M.M. Hughes, C.J. Strobel, H.W. Buffum, J.L. Copeland, and J.F. Paul. 2002. Coastal ecological data from the Virginian Biogeographic Province, 1990–1993. Ecological Archives E083–057.Google Scholar
  10. Hayward, A., M. Khalid, and J. Kolasa. 2009. Population energy use scales positively with body size in natural aquatic microcosms. Global Ecology and Biogeography 18: 553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hemingway, Ernest. 1952. The old man and the sea, 1st ed. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  12. Jones, K.E., J. Bielby, M. Cardillo, S.A. Fritz, J. O’Dell, C.D.L. Orme, K. Safi, W. Sechrest, et al. 2009. PanTHERIA: A species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecological Archives E090–184.Google Scholar
  13. Madin, J., S. Bowers, M. Schildhauer, S. Krivov, D. Pennington, and F. Villa. 2007. An ontology for describing and synthesizing ecological observation data. Ecological Informatics 2: 279–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mulder, C., and J.J. Elser. 2009. Soil acidity, ecological stoichiometry and allometric scaling in grassland food webs. Global Change Biology 15: 2730–2738. (Open Data).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mulder, C., J.E. Cohen, H. Setälä, J. Bloem, and A.M. Breure. 2005. Bacterial traits, organism mass, and numerical abundance in the detrital soil food web of Dutch agricultural grasslands. Ecology Letters 8: 80–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mulder, C., H.A. Den Hollander, and A.J. Hendriks. 2008. Aboveground herbivory shapes the biomass distribution and flux of soil invertebrates. PLoS ONE 3: E3573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mulder, C., H.A. Den Hollander, J.A. Vonk, A.G. Rossberg, G.A.J.M. Jagers op Akkerhuis, and G.W. Yeates. 2009. Soil resource supply influences faunal size-specific distributions in natural food webs. Naturwissenschaften 96: 813–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rossberg, A.G., H. Matsuda, T. Amemiya, and K. Itoh. 2006. Food webs: Experts consuming families of experts. Journal of Theoretical Biology 241: 552–563. (arXiv:q-bio/0508002v1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sterner, Robert W., and James J. Elser. 2002. Ecological stoichiometry: The biology of elements from molecules to the biosphere. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Stouffer, D.B., J. Camacho, W. Jiang, and L.A. Amaral. 2007. Evidence for the existence of a robust pattern of prey selection in food webs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 274 B: 1931–1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM)BilthovenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations