It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The discourse surrounding the structural organization of mutualistic interactions mostly revolves around modularity and nestedness. The former is known to enhance the stability of communities, while the latter is related to their feasibility, albeit compromising the stability. However, it has recently been shown that the joint emergence of these structures poses challenges that can eventually lead to limitations in the dynamic properties of mutualistic communities. We hypothesize that considering compound arrangements—modules with internal nested organization—can offer valuable insights in this debate. We analyze the temporal structural dynamics of 20 plant–pollinator interaction networks and observe large structural variability throughout the year. Compound structures are particularly prevalent during the peak of the pollination season, often coexisting with nested and modular arrangements in varying degrees. Motivated by these empirical findings, we synthetically investigate the dynamics of the structural patterns across two control parameters—community size and connectance levels—mimicking the progression of the pollination season. Our analysis reveals contrasting impacts on the stability and feasibility of these mutualistic communities. We characterize the consistent relationship between network structure and stability, which follows a monotonic pattern. But, in terms of feasibility, we observe nonlinear relationships. Compound structures exhibit a favorable balance between stability and feasibility, particularly in mid-sized ecological communities, suggesting they may effectively navigate the simultaneous requirements of stability and feasibility. These findings may indicate that the assembly process of mutualistic communities is driven by a delicate balance among multiple properties, rather than the dominance of a single one.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details




1 Grupo Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos (GISC), Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid , Av. Universidad, 30 (edificio Sabatini), 28911 Leganés (Madrid) , Spain
2 Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3), Universitat Oberta de Catalunya , Rambla del Poblenou, 154 08018, Barcelona, Catalonia , Spain