Data from: Empirical evidence for the ecological significance of interaction network indices within a mutualistic network
Data files
Jan 31, 2025 version files 12.95 KB
-
Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_matrix.txt
6.79 KB
-
Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_success_dataset.csv
1.91 KB
-
README.md
4.25 KB
Abstract
Community resilience and stability have often been considered outcomes of interaction network structure. These assumptions however have faced strong criticism given that the ecological outcomes of the interactions are often ignored, leading to the overinterpretation of network structural properties. Evaluating the link between network structure and components of reproductive success across species can thus help provide a more ecologically relevant understanding of the relationship between network structure and function (i.e., stability). Specifically, within pollination networks, there is a need to integrate knowledge of interaction network structure with pollination outcomes that reflect the full complexity of the pollination process. Here, we obtained and integrated data on network structural properties resulting from the interactions between 21 plant and 114 floral visiting species, with multiple estimates of male and female reproductive success for all plant species. Network structural properties differentially relate to male and female reproductive functions. Specifically, an increase in species interaction strength and contribution to nestedness increased conspecific pollen delivery but decreased pollen tube formation, suggesting a tradeoff between pollen quantity and quality mediated by network structure. Species network specialization was the only network structural property that maximized both, male and female reproductive functions. These results emphasize the need to incorporate empirical knowledge on species interaction outcomes into our understanding and ecological inferences of network structure. This knowledge is key in order to overcome fundamental limitations in the field of network ecology and for it to continue to provide meaningful insights that help predict the resilience and stability of ecological systems.
README: Data from: Empirical evidence for the ecological significance of interaction network indices within a mutualistic network
https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3n5tb2rv4
Description of the data and file structure
File 1: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_matrix.txt
Matrix used to build the plant-pollinator network, containing the 21 plant species and 114 flower-visiting insect species/morphospecies.
File 2: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_success_dataset.csv
Dataset containing 21 rows (plant species) and 12 columns (variables obtained at the species level, including plant identification, number of flowers/styles sampled, number of flowers with CP, total number of CP, total number of pollen tubes, total number of HP, pollen loss, mean pollen dispersal, species strength, specialization d, contribution to nestedness, and flower abundance).
Files and variables
File 1: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_matrix.txt
Description:
Matrix
Plant acronyms as columns (21 plant species) and flower-visiting insect species/morphospecies as rows (114 insect species).
Plant acronym | Plant species | Plant family |
---|---|---|
MIGU | Mimulus guttatus | Phrymaceae |
CLGR | Clarkia gracilis | Onagraceae |
TRPE | Triteleia peduncularis | Asparagaceae |
ANCO | Antirrhinum cornutum | Plantaginaceae |
STBR | Streptanthus breweri | Brassicaceae |
DEUL | Delphinium uliginosum | Ranunculaceae |
ZIVE | Zigadenus venenosus | Melanthiaceae |
ALAM | Allium amplectens | Amaryllidaceae |
SIDI | Sidalcea diploscypha | Malvaceae |
CETR | Centaurium trichanthum | Gentianaceae |
CLCO | Clarkia concinna | Onagraceae |
ALFI | Allium fimbriatum | Amaryllidaceae |
BREL | Brodiaea elegans | Asparagaceae |
ANVE | Antirrhinum vexillocalyculatum | Plantaginaceae |
LAMI | Lagophylla minor | Asteraceae |
TROB | Trifolium obtusiflorum | Fabaceae |
MILA | Mimulus layneae | Phrymaceae |
TRLA | Triteleia laxa | Asparagaceae |
MINU | Mimulus nudatus | Phrymaceae |
CARU | Castilleja rubicundula | Orobanchaceae |
MINDO | Minuartia douglasii | Caryophyllaceae |
File: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_success_dataset.csv
Description:
Variables
- plant species: Plant species ID (see the table above for species names).
- number of flowers sampled: Number of flowers (styles) collected to quantify conspecific pollen, heterospecific pollen and pollen tube formation.
- number of flowers with CP: Total of sampled flowers per plant species having conspecific pollen.
- total number of CP: Total number of conspecific pollen per plant species.
- total number of pollen tubes: Total number of pollen tubes formed.
- total number of HP: Total number of heterospecific pollen per plant species.
- pollen loss: Total number of conspecific pollen found on heterospecific stigmas.
- mean pollen dispersal: Mean number of pollen grains of a specific species dispersed by insects.
- species strength*: Plant species-level network metric quantifying a species’ relevance across all its partners.
- specialization d*: Plant species-level network metric measuring specialization of each species based on its discrimination from random selection of partners.
- contrib to nestedness*: Plant species-level network metric that estimates the degree to which the interactions of species increase or decrease community nestedness.
- flower abundance: Total number of flower abundance estimated for each species during the sampling period.
*All network metrics were calculated using bipartite v.2.20 in R.
NA -Not applicable
Methods
This data set was used to evaluate the relationship between interaction network properties at species (strength, specialization and nestedness) and components of pollination successData collection was conducted at a serpentine seep meta-community in the McLaughlin Natural Reserve (38.8582º N, 122.4093º W) in Northern California, United States. To obtain network indices, we built a visitation-based plant-pollinator network containing 21 plants and 114 flower-visiting insect species, and calculated species strength, specialization (d') and contribution to nestedness for each plant species (n = 21). All flower-visiting insects contacting plant reproductive structures (i.e., anthers and stigmas) were collected by 2-3 people that simultaneously walked established trails between 09h00 and 15h00 using entomological nets from May 9th through June 1st, 2021 (˃ 120 hr of total observation). The following components of the pollination succes were quantified for each plant species during the same period: 1) proporttion of flowers with conspecific pollen (CP), 2) mean pollen dispersal on pollinators, 3) proportion of pollen loss to heterospecific stigmas, 4) heterospecific pollen (HP) receipt, and 5) proportion of pollen tubes formed. For 1, 3, 4 and 5, we sampled 1363 flowers (styles), with a mean of 65 (± 32.2) styles per plant species. After appropriate processing, softening and staining, the total number of conspecific and heterospecific pollen grains on the stigmas were identified and counted. We also recorded the number of pollen tubes that reached the base of the style under a fluorescent microscope. For 2, we sampled the pollen loads carried by all 765 insects collected to estimate pollen dispersal success by counting and identifying pollen grains. Additionally, we estimated flower abundance in the flowering season using 40 plots (1x2-meter each) to understand their influence on the considered male and female components.