OJE  Vol.4 No.11 , August 2014
Comparisons and Contrasts between Asymmetry and Nestedness in Interacting Ecological Networks
Abstract: We compare and contrast asymmetry and nestedness, two concepts used in the characterisation of the specialist-generalist balance in bipartite ecological interaction networks. Our analysis is relevant to mutualistic networks such as those consisting of flowering plants and pollinators, or fruiting plants and frugivores, or antagonistic networks such as those consisting of plants and herbivores, in an ecological community. We shall refer to the two sets of species in the bipartite network as plants and animals, the usual but not the only ecological situation. By asymmetry we mean either connectivity asymmetry or dependence asymmetry, which are essentially equivalent. Asymmetry expresses two attributes: generalists interact preferentially with specialists, and specialists avoid interacting with each other. Nested patterns, in principle, should express these same two features and one more: the presence of a core of interactions among generalists. We compute the full set of perfectly nested patterns that are possible in an L × L matrix with N interactions representing an ecological network of L plants and L animals, and point out that the number of nested arrangements grows exponentially with N. In addition, we analyse asymmetry for the full set of perfectly nested patterns, and identify extremes of asymmetry inside the universe of nested patterns. The minimal asymmetry is marked by a modular core of interactions between species that are neither specialists nor generalists. On the other hand, the case of maximal asymmetry is formed by a set of few generalists and many specialists with equal connectivity. The stereotypic case of nestedness with a core of interactions among generalists has intermediate asymmetry.
Cite this paper: Corso, G. and Britton, N. (2014) Comparisons and Contrasts between Asymmetry and Nestedness in Interacting Ecological Networks. Open Journal of Ecology, 4, 653-661. doi: 10.4236/oje.2014.411055.

[1]   Bascompte, J. and Jordano, P. (2013) Mutualistic Networks, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

[2]   Fointaine, C. (2013) Abundant Equals Nested. Nature, 500, 411-412.

[3]   Dormann, C.F., Fründ, J., Blüthgen, N. and Gruber, B. (2009) Indices, Graphs and Null Models: Analyzing Bipartite Ecological Networks. The Open Journal of Ecology, 2, 7-24.

[4]   Ings, T.C., Montoya, J.M., Bascompte, J., Blüthgen, N., Brown, L., Dormann, C.F., et al. (2009) Ecological Networks—Beyond Food Webs. Journal of Animal Ecology, 78, 253-269.

[5]   Bascompte, J. (2009) Disentangling the Web of Life. Science, 325, 416-419. 10.1126/science.1170749

[6]   Suweis, S., Simini, F., Banavar, J.R. and Maritan, A. (2013) Emergence of Structural and Dynamics Properties of Ecological Mutualistic Networks. Nature, 500, 449-452.

[7]   Thébault, E. and Fontaine, C. (2010) Stability of Ecological Communities and the Architecture of Mutualistic and Trophic Networks. Science, 329, 853-856.

[8]   Vázquez, D.P. and Aizen, M.A. (2004) Asymmetric Specialisation: A Pervasive Feature of Plant-Pollinator Interactions. Ecology, 85, 1251-1257.

[9]   Bascompte, J., Jordano, P. and Olesen, J.M. (2006) Asymmetric Coevolutionary Networks Facilitate Biodiversity Maintenance. Science, 312, 431-433.

[10]   Blüthgen, N., Menzel, F. and Blüthgen, N. (2006) Measuring Specialization in Species Interaction Networks. BMC Ecology, 6, 9.

[11]   Ulrich, W., Almeida-Neto, M. and Gotelli, N.J. (2009) A Consumer’s Guide to Nestedness Analysis. Oikos, 118, 3-17.

[12]   Bascompte, J., Jordano, P, Melián, C.J. and Olesen, J.M. (2003) The Nested Assembly of Plant-Animal Mutualistic Networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, 9383-9387.

[13]   Guimaraes Jr., P.R., Rico-Gray, V., dos Reis, S.F. and Thompson, J.N. (2006) Asymmetries in Specialization in Ant Plant Mutualistic Networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2041-2047.

[14]   Araujo, A.I.L., Corso, G., Almeida, A.M. and Lewinsohn, T.M. (2010) An Analytic Approach to Nestedness Index of Bipartite Networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 389, 1405-1411.

[15]   Brualdi, R.A. and Sanderson, J.G. (1999) Nested Species Subsets, Gaps, and Discrepancy. Oecologia, 119, 256-264.

[16]   Blüthgen, N. (2010) Why Network Analysis Is Often Disconnected from Community Ecology: A Critique and An Eco logist’s Guide. Basic and Applied Ecology, 11, 185-195.

[17]   Hardy, G.H. and Wright, E.M. (1938) An Introduction to the Theory of Numbers. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

[18]   Hardy, G.H. and Ramanujan, S. (1918) Asymptotic Formulae in Combinatory Analysis. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 17, 75-115.

[19]   Lewinsohn, T.M., Prado, P.I., Jordano, P., Bascompte, J. and Olesen, J.M. (2006) Structure in Plant-Animal Interaction Assemblages. Oikos, 113, 174.

[20]   Fortuna, M.A., Stouffer, D.B., Olesen, J.M., Jordano, P., Mouillot, D., Krasnov, B.R., et al. (2010) Nestedness versus Modularity in Ecological Networks: Two Sides of the Same Coin? Journal of Animal Ecology, 79, 811-817.

[21]   Corso, G., Araujo, A.I.L. and Almeida, A.M. (2011) Connectivity and Nestedness in Bipartite Networks from Community Ecology. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 285, Article ID: 012009.

[22]   Almeida-Neto, M., Guimaraes, P.R. and Lewinsohn, T.M. (2007) On Nestedness Analyses: Rethinking Matrix Temperature and Anti-Nestedness. Oikos, 116, 716-722.

[23]   Patterson, B.D. and Atmar, W. (1986) Nested Subsets and the Structure of Insular Mammalian Faunas and Archipelagos. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 28, 65-82.

[24]   Gotelli, N.J. and Graves, G.R. (1996) Null Models in Ecology. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.