Revealing biases in the sampling of ecological interaction networks.

Clicks: 291
ID: 49973
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #71 of 189 articles by views in PeerJ

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 189 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The structure of ecological interactions is commonly understood through analyses of interaction networks. However, these analyses may be sensitive to sampling biases with respect to both the interactors (the nodes of the network) and interactions (the links between nodes), because the detectability of species and their interactions is highly heterogeneous. These ecological and statistical issues directly affect ecologists' abilities to accurately construct ecological networks. However, statistical biases introduced by sampling are difficult to quantify in the absence of full knowledge of the underlying ecological network's structure. To explore properties of large-scale ecological networks, we developed the software , which constructs and samples networks with predetermined topologies. These networks may represent a wide variety of communities that vary in size and types of ecological interactions. We sampled these networks with different mathematical sampling designs that correspond to methods used in field observations. The observed networks generated by each sampling process were then analyzed with respect to the number of components, size of components and other network metrics. We show that the sampling effort needed to estimate underlying network properties depends strongly both on the sampling design and on the underlying network topology. In particular, networks with random or scale-free modules require more complete sampling to reveal their structure, compared to networks whose modules are nested or bipartite. Overall, modules with nested structure were the easiest to detect, regardless of the sampling design used. Sampling a network starting with any species that had a high degree (e.g., abundant generalist species) was consistently found to be the most accurate strategy to estimate network structure. Because high-degree species tend to be generalists, abundant in natural communities relative to specialists, and connected to each other, sampling by degree may therefore be common but unintentional in empirical sampling of networks. Conversely, sampling according to module (representing different interaction types or taxa) results in a rather complete view of certain modules, but fails to provide a complete picture of the underlying network. To reduce biases introduced by sampling methods, we recommend that these findings be incorporated into field design considerations for projects aiming to characterize large species interaction networks.
Reference Key
de-aguiar2019revealingpeerj Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors de Aguiar, Marcus A M;Newman, Erica A;Pires, Mathias M;Yeakel, Justin D;Boettiger, Carl;Burkle, Laura A;Gravel, Dominique;Guimarães, Paulo R;O'Donnell, James L;Poisot, Timothée;Fortin, Marie-Josée;Hembry, David H;
Journal PeerJ
Year 2019
DOI
10.7717/peerj.7566
URL
Keywords
modularity nestedness food webs ecological networks field sampling design network metrics network topology species interaction networks

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.