Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcGarvey, Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorVeech, Joseph A.
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-02T14:58:56Z
dc.date.available2019-08-02T14:58:56Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationMcGarvey, D. J., & Veech, J. A. (2018). Modular structure in fish co-occurrence networks: A comparison across spatial scales and grouping methodologies. PLoS ONE, 13(12), e0208720.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203
dc.identifier.urihttps://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/8439
dc.description.abstractNetwork modules are used for diverse purposes, ranging from delineation of biogeographical provinces to the study of biotic interactions. We assess spatial scaling effects on modular structure, using a multi-step process to compare fish co-occurrence networks at three nested scales. We first detect modules with simulated annealing and use spatial clustering tests (interspecific distances among species' range centroids) to determine if modules consist of species with broadly overlapping ranges; strong spatial clustering may reflect environmental filtering, while absence of spatial clustering may reflect positive interspecific relationships (commensalism or mutualism). We then use non-hierarchical, multivariate cluster analysis as an alternative method to identify fish subgroups, we repeat spatial clustering tests for the multivariate clusters, then compare spatial clustering results among modules and clusters. Next, we compare species lists within modules and clusters, and estimate congruence as the proportion of species assigned to the same groups by the two methods. Finally, we use a well-documented nest associate complex (fishes that deposit eggs in the gravel nests of a common host) to assess whether strong within-group associations may, in fact, reflect positive interspecific relationships. At each scale, 2-4 network modules were detected but a consistent relationship between scale and the number of modules was not observed. Significant spatial clustering was detected at all scales for network modules and multivariate clusters but was less prevalent at smaller scales. Congruence between modules and clusters was always < 90% and generally decreased as the number of groups increased. At all scales, the complete nest associate complex was completely preserved within a single network module, but not within a single multivariate cluster. Collectively, our results suggest that network modules are promising tools for studying positive interactions and that smaller scales may be preferable in this research.en_US
dc.formatText
dc.format.extent20 pages
dc.format.medium1 file (.pdf)
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_US
dc.source.uriPLoS ONE, 2018, Vol. 13, No. 12, e0208720
dc.subjectSpecies interactions
dc.subjectFreshwater fish
dc.subjectNetwork analysis
dc.subjectRivers
dc.subjectClustering algorithms
dc.subjectBiogeography
dc.subjectPermutation
dc.subjectSimulated annealing
dc.titleModular Structure in Fish Co-occurrence Networks: A Comparison across Spatial Scales and Grouping Methodologiesen_US
txstate.documenttypeArticle
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208720
dc.rights.licenseThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
txstate.departmentBiology


Download

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record