Suppr超能文献

物种共存网络:它们能揭示生态群落中的营养和非营养相互作用吗?

Species co-occurrence networks: Can they reveal trophic and non-trophic interactions in ecological communities?

机构信息

Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02139, USA.

Department of Physical Oceanography, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 02543, USA.

出版信息

Ecology. 2018 Mar;99(3):690-699. doi: 10.1002/ecy.2142. Epub 2018 Feb 12.

Abstract

Co-occurrence methods are increasingly utilized in ecology to infer networks of species interactions where detailed knowledge based on empirical studies is difficult to obtain. Their use is particularly common, but not restricted to, microbial networks constructed from metagenomic analyses. In this study, we test the efficacy of this procedure by comparing an inferred network constructed using spatially intensive co-occurrence data from the rocky intertidal zone in central Chile to a well-resolved, empirically based, species interaction network from the same region. We evaluated the overlap in the information provided by each network and the extent to which there is a bias for co-occurrence data to better detect known trophic or non-trophic, positive or negative interactions. We found a poor correspondence between the co-occurrence network and the known species interactions with overall sensitivity (probability of true link detection) equal to 0.469, and specificity (true non-interaction) equal to 0.527. The ability to detect interactions varied with interaction type. Positive non-trophic interactions such as commensalism and facilitation were detected at the highest rates. These results demonstrate that co-occurrence networks do not represent classical ecological networks in which interactions are defined by direct observations or experimental manipulations. Co-occurrence networks provide information about the joint spatial effects of environmental conditions, recruitment, and, to some extent, biotic interactions, and among the latter, they tend to better detect niche-expanding positive non-trophic interactions. Detection of links (sensitivity or specificity) was not higher for well-known intertidal keystone species than for the rest of consumers in the community. Thus, as observed in previous empirical and theoretical studies, patterns of interactions in co-occurrence networks must be interpreted with caution, especially when extending interaction-based ecological theory to interpret network variability and stability. Co-occurrence networks may be particularly valuable for analysis of community dynamics that blends interactions and environment, rather than pairwise interactions alone.

摘要

共现方法在生态学中越来越多地被用来推断物种相互作用的网络,在这些网络中,基于经验研究的详细知识很难获得。这种方法的使用特别常见,但不仅限于基于宏基因组分析构建的微生物网络。在这项研究中,我们通过将智利中部岩石潮间带的空间密集共现数据构建的推断网络与来自同一区域的经过良好解析的经验基础的物种相互作用网络进行比较,来测试这种方法的功效。我们评估了每个网络提供的信息的重叠程度,以及共现数据在更好地检测已知的营养或非营养、正或负相互作用方面存在偏见的程度。我们发现,共现网络与已知的物种相互作用之间的对应关系很差,总体敏感性(真实链接检测概率)等于 0.469,特异性(真实非相互作用)等于 0.527。检测相互作用的能力因相互作用类型而异。共生和促进等积极的非营养相互作用的检测率最高。这些结果表明,共现网络不代表经典的生态网络,其中相互作用是通过直接观察或实验操纵来定义的。共现网络提供了有关环境条件、繁殖和在某种程度上生物相互作用的联合空间效应的信息,并且在后者中,它们往往更能检测到扩展生态位的积极非营养相互作用。与社区中的其他消费者相比,知名度较高的潮间带关键种的链接(敏感性或特异性)检测率并没有更高。因此,正如在以前的经验和理论研究中观察到的那样,共现网络中相互作用模式必须谨慎解释,尤其是当将基于相互作用的生态理论扩展到解释网络可变性和稳定性时。共现网络对于分析融合了相互作用和环境的群落动态可能特别有价值,而不仅仅是单独的成对相互作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验