Abstract
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.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Abbreviations
- TL:
-
Trophic Level
References
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.
Albert, R., H. Jeong and A.-L. Barabási. 2000. Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406: 378–381.
Allesina, S., A. Bodini and C. Bondavalli. 2006. Secondary extinctions in ecological networks. Bottlenecks unveiled. Ecol. Model. 194: 150–161.
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.
Bodini, A. 2000. Reconstructing trophic interactions as a tool for understanding and managing ecosystems: application to a shallow eutrophic lake. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57: 1999–2009.
Bondavalli, C., A. Bodini, G. Rossetti and S. Allesina. 2006. Detecting stress at a whole ecosystem level. The case of a mountain lake: Lake Santo (Italy). Ecosystems 9: 1–56.
Burns, T. P. 1989. Lindeman’s contradiction and the trophic structure of ecosystems. Ecology 70: 1355–1362.
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.
Christian, R.R. and J. Luczkovich. 1999. Organizing and understanding a winter’s seagrass foodweb network through effective trophic levels. Ecol. Model. 117: 99–124.
Coll, M., L.J. Shannon, C.L. Moloney, I. Palomera and S. Tudela. 2006. Comparing trophic flows and fishing impacts of a NW Mediterranean ecosystem with coastal upwelling systems by means of standardized models and indicators. Ecol. Model. 198: 53–70.
Dale, V.H. and S.C. Beyeler. 2001. Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecol. Indicators 1: 3–10.
Dematté, L., C. Priami and A. Romanel. 2008. The Beta Workbench: a computational tool to study the dynamics of biological systems. Briefings in Bioinformatics 9: 437–449.
Dunne, J.A., R.J. Williams and N.D. Martinez. 2002a. Network structure and biodiversity loss in food webs: robustness increases with connectance. Ecol. Lett. 5: 558–567.
Dunne, J.A., R.J. Williams and N.D. Martinez. 2002b. Food-web structure and network theory: the role of connectance and size. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99: 12917–12922.
Dunne, J.A., R.J. Williams and N.D. Martinez. 2004. Network structure and robustness of marine food webs. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 273: 291–302.
Estrada, E. 2007. Characterization of topological keystone species: Local, global and “meso-scale” centralities in food webs. Ecol. Complex. 4: 48–57.
Hairston Jr., N.G. and N.G. Hairston Sr. 1993. Cause-effect relationships in energy flow, trophic structure, and interspecific interactions. Am. Nat. 142: 379–411.
Holt, R.D. and J.H. Lawton. 1994. The ecological consequences of shared natural enemies. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 25: 495–520.
Jones, C.G. and J.H. Lawton (eds). 1995. Linking Species and Ecosystems, Chapman and Hall, London,.
Jordán, F. 2001. Seasonal changes in the positional importance of components in the trophic flow network of the Chesapeake Bay. J. Marine Syst. 27: 289–300.
Jordán, F. 2009. Keystone species and food webs. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364: 1733–1741.
Jordán, F., Z. Benedek and J. Podani. 2007. Quantifying positional importance in food webs: a comparison of centrality indices. Ecol. Model. 205: 270–275.
Jordán, F., W.-C. Liu and A.J. Davis. 2006a. Topological keystone species: measures of positional importance in food webs. Oikos 112: 535–546.
Jordán, F., W.-C. Liu and F.J.F. van Veen. 2003. Quantifying the importance of species and their interactions in a host-parasitoid community. Community Ecol. 4: 79–88.
Jordán, F., W.-C. Liu and T. Wyatt. 2005. Topological constraints on the dynamics of wasp-waist ecosystems. J. Marine Syst. 57: 250–263.
Jordán, F. and I. Scheuring. 2002. Searching for keystones in ecological networks. Oikos 99: 607–612.
Jordán, F. and I.Scheuring. 2004. Network ecology: topological constraints on ecosystems dynamics. Phys. Life Rev. 1: 139–172.
Jordán, F., I. Scheuring, V. Vasas and J. Podani. 2006b. Architectural classes of aquatic food webs based on link distribution. Community Ecol. 7: 81–90.
Jordán, F., A. Takács-Sánta and I. Molnár. 1999. A reliability theoretical quest for keystones. Oikos 86: 453–462.
Kareiva, P.M. and S.A. Levin. 2003. The Importance of Species. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Levine, S. 1980. Several measures of trophic structure applicable to complex food webs. J. Theor. Biol. 83: 195–207.
Lindeman, R. 1942. The trophic-dynamic aspect ofecology. Ecology 23: 399–418.
Livi, C.M., F. Jordán, P. Lecca and T.A. Okey. Identifying key species in ecosystems with stochastic sensitivity analysis. Submitted..
Mann, H.B. and D.R. Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18: 50–60.
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.
Menge, B.A. 1995. Indirect effects in marine rocky intertidal interaction webs: patterns and importance. Ecol. Monogr. 65: 21–74.
Mills, L.S., M.L. Soulé and D.F. Doak. 1993. The keystone-species concept in ecology and conservation. Bioscience 43: 219–224.
Montoya, J.M. and R.V. Solé. 2002. Small world patterns in food webs. J. Theor. Biol. 214: 405–412.
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.
Paine, R.T. 1969. A note on trophic complexity and community stability. Am. Nat. 103: 91–93.
Pauly, D., V. Christensen, J. Dalsgaard, R. Froese and F. Torres Jr. 1998. Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279: 860–863.
Pimm, S.L. 1980. Properties of food webs. Ecology 61: 219–225.
Pimm, S.L. 1982. Food Webs. Chapman & Hall, London.
Post, D.M. 2002. The long and short of food-chain length. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17: 269–277.
Priami, C. 2009. Algorithmic systems biology. Communications of ACM 52: 80–89.
Scotti, M., S. Allesina, C. Bondavalli, A. Bodini and L.G. Abarca-Arenas. 2006. Effective trophic positions in ecological acyclic networks. Ecol. Model. 198: 495–505.
Scotti, M., J. Podani and F. Jordán. 2007. Weighting, scale dependence and indirect effects in ecological networks: A comparative study. Ecol. Complex. 4: 148–159.
Simberloff, D. 1998. Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passé in the landscape area? Biol. Conserv. 83: 247–257.
Solé, R.V. and J.M. Montoya. 2001. Complexity and fragility in ecological networks. Proc. R. Soc. B 268: 2039–2045.
Thode Jr., H.C. 2002. Testing for Normality. Marcel Dekker, New York.
Ulanowicz, R.E. 1986. Growth and Development - Ecosystems Phenomenology. Springer, New York.
Ulanowicz, R.E. and W.M. Kemp. 1979. Toward canonical trophic aggregations. Am. Nat. 114: 871–883.
Valentini, R. and F. Jordán. 2010. CoSBiLab Graph: the network analysis module of CoSBiLab. Environmental Modelling and Software 25: 886–888.
Vasas, V. and F. Jordán. 2006. Topological keystone species in ecological interaction networks: considering link quality and non-trophic effects. Ecol. Model. 196: 365–378.
Wasserman, S. and K. Faust. 1994. Social Network Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Watts, D.J. and S.H. Strogatz. 1998. Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393: 440–442.
Williams, R.J. and N.D. Martinez. 2004. Limits to trophic levels and omnivory in complex food webs: theory and data. Am. Nat. 163: 458–68.
Wulff, F. and R.E. Ulanowicz. 1989. A comparative anatomy of the Baltic Sea and Chesapeake Bay ecosystems. In: Wulff, F., Field, J. G., Mann, K. H. (eds.), Network Analysis in Marine Ecology. Coastal and Estuarine Studies Series. Springer, Berlin, pp. 232–256.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
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.
About this article
Cite this article
Scotti, M., Jordán, F. Relationships between centrality indices and trophic levels in food webs. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY 11, 59–67 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.11.2010.1.9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/ComEc.11.2010.1.9