Dominant network interactions are not correlated with resource availability: A case study using mistletoe host interactions

Oikos

Volumn 122, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 889-895

  Blick, R A J ^a   Burns, K C ^b   Moles, A T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COEXISTENCE; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; CORRELATION; DISEASE SPREAD; HERBIVORE; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; INFECTIOUS DISEASE; INTERSPECIFIC INTERACTION; POPULATION SIZE; SEMIARID REGION; SPECIES OCCURRENCE; TREE; TROPHIC LEVEL;

AUSTRALIA;

VISCUM ALBUM;

EID: 84878210391     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20870.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Aukema J. E. 2003. Vectors, viscin and Viscaceae: mistletoes as parasites, mutualists and resources. Front. Ecol. Environ. 1: 212-219.
2. Aukema J. E. and Martinez del Rio C. 2002. Variation in mistletoe seed deposition: effects of intra- and interspecific host characteristics. Ecography 25: 139-144.
3. Baldock K. C. R. et al. 2011. Daily temporal structure in African savanna flower visitation networks and consequences for network sampling. Ecology 92: 687-698.
4. Bascompte J. et al. 2003. The nested assembly of plant-animal mutualistic networks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100: 9383-9387.
5. Blick R. and Burns K. C. 2009. Network properties of arboreal plants: are epiphytes, mistletoes and lianas structured similarly? Persp. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 11: 41-52.
6. Blick R. A. J. and Burns K. C. 2011. Liana co-occurrence patterns in a temperate rainforest. J. Veg. Sci. 22: 868-877.
7. Blick R. A. J. et al. 2012. Predicting network topology of mistletoe-host interactions: do mistletoes really mimic their hosts? Oikos 121: 761-771.
8. Burns K. C. 2007. Network properties of an epiphyte meta- community. J. Ecol. 95: 1142-1151.
9. Burns K. C. and Zotz G. 2010. A hierarchical framework for investigating epiphyte assemblages: networks, meta- communities and scale. Ecology 91: 377-385.
10. Blüthgen N. 2010. Why network analysis is often disconnected from community ecology: a critique and an ecologist's guide. Basic Appl. Ecol. 11: 185-195.
11. Blüthgen N. et al. 2008. What do interaction network metrics tell us about specialization and biological traits? Ecology 89: 3387-3399.
12. Carnegie A. J. et al. 2009. Distribution, host preference, and impact of parasitic mistletoes (Loranthaceae) in young eucalypt plantations in New South Wales, Australia. Botany 87: 49-63.
13. Carlo T. A. and Aukema J. E. 2005. Female directed dispersal and facilitation between a tropical mistletoe and its dioecious host. Ecology 6: 3245-3251.
14. Cayzer L. W. et al. 2000. Revision of Pittosporum (Pittosporaceae) in Australia. Aust. Syst. Bot. 13: 845-902.
15. Cunningham G. M. et al. 1981. Plants of western New South Wales. - CSIRO.
16. Donohue K. 1995. The spatial demography of mistletoe parasitism on a Yemeni Acacia. Int. J. Plant Sci. 156: 816-823.
17. Dormann C. F. et al. 2009. Indices, graphs and null models: analyzing bipartite ecological networks. Open Ecol. J. 2: 7-24.
18. Diaz-Castelazo C. et al. 2010. Changes of a mutualistic network over time:reanalysis over a 10-year period. Ecology 91: 793-801.
19. Encinas-Viso F. et al. 2012. Phenology drives mutualistic network structure and diversity. Ecol. Lett. 15: 198-208.
20. García D. et al. 2009. Seed dispersal by frugivorous marsupial shapes the spatial scale of a mistletoe population. J. Ecol. 97: 217-229.
21. Genini J. et al. 2011. Mistletoes play different functional roles in a modular host-parasite network. Biotropica 44: 171-178.
22. Gotelli N. J. 2000. Null model analysis of species co-occurrence patterns. Ecology 81: 2606-2621.
23. Gotelli N. J. and Graves G. R. 1996. Null models in ecology. - Smithsonian Inst. Press.
24. Gotelli N. J. and Ulrich W. 2011. Statistical challenges in null model analysis. Oikos 121: 171-180.
25. Guimaraes P. R. et al. 2007. Interaction intimacy affects structure and coevolutionary dynamics in mutualistic networks. Curr. Biol. 17: 1797-1803.
26. Hoffman A. J. et al. 1986. Tristerix tetrandrus (Loranthaceae) and its host-plants in the Chilean matorral: patterns and mechanisms. Oecologia 2: 202-206.
27. Ings T. C. et al. 2009. Ecological networks - beyond food webs. J. Anim. Ecol. 78: 253-269.
28. Jordano P. 1987. Patterns of mutualistic interactions in pollination and seed dispersal: connectance, dependence asymmetries, and coevolution. Am. Nat. 129: 657-677.
29. Kaiser C. N. et al. 2010. The robustness of pollination networks to the loss of species and interactions: a quantitative approach incorporating pollinator behaviour. Ecol. Lett. 13: 442-452.
30. Kavanagh P. and Burns K. C. Mistletoe macroecology: spatial patterns in species diversity and host use across Australia. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., in press.
31. Krishna A. et al. 2008. A neutral-niche theory of nestedness in mutualistic networks. Oikos 117: 1609-1618.
32. Ladley J. J. and Kelly D. 1996. Dispersal, germination and survival of New Zealand mistletoes (Loranthaceae): dependence on birds. N. Z. J. Ecol. 20: 69-79.
33. László Z. and Tóthmérész B. 2011. High host plant aggregation involves uniform gall distribution and high prevalence: the case of wild roses and Bedeguar gall wasps (Diplolepis rosae). N.-W. J. Zool. 7: 112-117.
34. Lavorel S. et al. 1999. Spread of mistletoes (Amyema preissii) in fragmented Australian woodlands: a simulation study. Landscape Ecol. 14: 147-160.
35. Lehsten V. and Harmand P. 2006. Null models for species co-occurrence patterns: assessing bias and minimum iteration number for the sequential swap. Ecography 29: 786-792.
36. Mathiasen R. L. et al. 2008. Mistletoes: pathology, systematics, ecology and management. Plant Dis. 92: 988-1006.
37. Moles A. T. et al. 2011. Putting plant resistance traits on the map: a test of the idea that plants are better defended at lower latitudes. New Phytol. 191: 777-788.
38. Morales J. M. and Vázquez D. P. 2008. The effect of space in plant-animal mutualistic networks: insights from a simulation study. Oikos 117: 1362-1370.
39. Murphy S. R. et al. 1993. Differential passage time of mistletoe fruits through the gut of honeyeaters and flowerpeckers: effects of seedling establishment. Oecologia 93: 171-176.
40. Nash R. and Keegan B. F. 2006. Characteristics of the association between the marine copepod, Gastrodelphys clausii, and its fanworm host Bispira volutacornis. Helgol. Mar. Res. 60: 32-38.
41. Norton D. A. and Carpenter M. A. 1998. Mistletoes as parasites: host specificity and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 101-105.
42. Overton J. 1996. Spatial autocorrelation and dispersal in mistletoes: field and simulation results. Plant Ecol. 125: 83-98.
43. Pires M. M. et al. 2011. The nestedness assembly of individual-resource networks. J. Anim. Ecol. 80: 896-903.
44. Rawsthorne J. et al. 2011. Implications of movement patterns of a dietary generalist for mistletoe seed dispersal. Austral Ecol. 36: 650-655.
45. Reid N. and Smith S. S. 2000. Population dynamics of an arid zone mistletoe (Amyema preissii, Loranthaceae) and its host Acacia victoriae (Mimosaceae). Aust. J. Bot. 48: 45-58.
46. Rist L. et al. 2011. The spatial distribution of mistletoe in a southern Indian tropical forest at multiple scales. Biotropica 43: 50-57.
47. Rödl T. and Ward D. 2002. Host recognition in desert mistletoe: early stages of development are influenced by substrate and host origin. Funct. Ecol. 16: 128-134.
48. Roxburgh L. and Nicolson S. W. 2008. Differential dispersal and survival of an African mistletoe: does host size matter? Plant Ecol. 195: 21-31.
49. Stone L. and Roberts A. 1990. The checkerboard score and species distributions. Oecologia 85: 74-79.
50. Ulrich W. and Gotelli N. J. 2007. Disentangling community patterns of nestedness and species co-occurrence. Oikos 116: 2053-2061.
51. Vázquez D. P. et al. 2005. Interaction frequency as a surrogate for the total effect of animal mutualists on plants. Ecol. Lett. 8: 1088-1094.
52. Vázquez D. P. et al. 2009a. Uniting pattern and process in plant-animal mutualistic networks: a review. Ann. Bot. 103: 1445-1457.
53. Vázquez D. P. et al. 2009b. Evaluating multiple determinants of the structure of plant-animal mutualistic networks. Ecology 90: 2039-2046.
54. Vázquez D. P. et al. 2012. The strength of plant-pollinator inter actions. Ecology 93: 719-725.
55. Walker M. A. et al. 2010. Trickle or clumped infection process? A stochastic model for the infection process of the parasitic roundworm of humans, Ascaris lumbricoides. Int. J. Parasitol. 40: 1381-1388.
56. Watson D. M. 2002. Effects of mistletoe on diversity: a case- study from southern New South Wales. Emu 102: 275-281.
57. Watson D. M. 2009a. Parasitic plants as facilitators: more dryad than Dracula. J. Ecol. 97: 1151-1159.
58. Watson D. M. 2009b. Determinants of parasitic plant distribution: the role of host quality. Botany 87: 16-21.
59. Yan Z. 1990. Host specificity of Lysiana exocarpi subsp. exocarpi and other mistletoes in southern South Australia. Aust. J. Bot. 38: 475-486.
60. Zahng F. et al. 2011. An interaction switch predicts the nested architecture of mutualistic networks. Ecol. Lett. 14: 797-803.