Relationships between centrality indices and trophic levels in food webs
In the last decades, many works investigated the trophic structure of communities stressing, in particular, the role played by species in food webs (e.g., their trophic level and, more recently, their centrality). There exist some encouraging applications, but few details are known about the relationships between centrality measurements and trophic levels. In addition, these studies almost refer to unweighted trophic networks, despite the acknowledged need of investigating weighted webs. Here we aim to contribute to the synthetic treatment of these complementary issues by analyzing several indices of centrality and trophic level. Studying 19 ecosystems, we ranked the nodes according to their positional importance values (based on various centrality indices) and we compared the rank order of coefficients with unweighted or weighted trophic levels. Our goal was revealing potential biases in finding high centrality nodes among basal, intermediate and top species. We found that key species occupy intermediate positions of the trophic hierarchy. In case of unweighted data, trophic levels of key nodes do not deviate from trends displayed by the whole dataset. Significant differences were observed when using weighted data. These results contradict the common belief of many ecologists that identified top-predators and charismatic megafauna as main targets of conservation policies. We discuss the potential consequences of the observed features on ecosystem dynamics.
KeywordsKey species Trophic networks Trophic level
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Abrams, P.A., B.A. Menge, G.G. Mittelbach et al. 1996. The role of indirect effects in food webs. In: Polis, G.A. and K.O. Winemiller (eds), FooD Webs: Integration of Patterns and Dynamics. Chapman and Hall, pp. 371–395.Google Scholar
- Bauer, B., F. Jordán and J. Podani. 2009. Node centrality indices in food webs: rank orders versus distributions. Ecol. Complex. doi: 10.1016/ecocom.2009.11.006.Google Scholar
- Chakravarti, I.M., R.G. Laha and J. Roy. 1967. Handbook of Methods of Applied Statistics, Volume I. John Wiley and Sons, pp. 392–394.Google Scholar
- Jones, C.G. and J.H. Lawton (eds). 1995. Linking Species and Ecosystems, Chapman and Hall, London,.Google Scholar
- Livi, C.M., F. Jordán, P. Lecca and T.A. Okey. Identifying key species in ecosystems with stochastic sensitivity analysis. Submitted..Google Scholar
- Margalef, R. 1991. Networks in ecology. In: Higashi, M. and Burns, T.P. (eds), Theoretical Studies of Ecosystems - The Network Perspective. Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 41–57.Google Scholar
- Odum, W.E. and E.J. Heald. 1975. The detritus-based food web of an estuarine mangrove community. In: Cronin, L.E. (ed.), Estu-arine Research, vol. 1. Academic Press, New York, pp. 265–286.Google Scholar
- Ulanowicz, R.E. 1986. Growth and Development - Ecosystems Phenomenology. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.