Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Food-web interactions govern the resistance of communities after non-random extinctions

Nature volume 429, pages 174–177 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

Growing concern about how loss of biodiversity will affect ecosystems has stimulated numerous studies1,2,3,4,5. Although most studies have assumed that species go extinct randomly6,7,8, species often go extinct in order of their sensitivity to a stress that intensifies through time (such as climate change)9. Here we show that the consequences of random and ordered extinctions differ. Both depend on food-web interactions that create compensation; that is, the increase of some species when their competitors and/or predators decrease in density due to environmental stress. Compensation makes communities as a whole more resistant to stress by reducing changes in combined species densities. As extinctions progress, the potential for compensation is depleted, and communities become progressively less resistant. For ordered extinctions, however, this depletion is offset and communities retain their resistance, because the surviving species have greater average resistance to the stress. Despite extinctions being ordered, changes in the food web with successive extinctions make it difficult to predict which species will show compensation in the future. This unpredictability argues for ‘whole-ecosystem’ approaches to biodiversity conservation, as seemingly insignificant species may become important after other species go extinct.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Example of the response of a tritrophic community to environmental stress.
Figure 2: Responses of species tolerances to environmental degradation in various communities.
Figure 3: Effect of interspecific interaction strength on the change in mean tolerance of species, Δδ̄, when a 20-species community is reduced to a 10-species community through ordered extinction of the most sensitive species.

References

  1. Sala, O. E. et al. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287, 1170–1174 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chapin, F. S. I. et al. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405, 234–242 (2000)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ehrlich, P. & Ehrlich, A. Extinction (Random House, New York, 1981)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Terborgh, J. et al. Ecological meltdown in predator-free forest fragments. Science 294, 1923–1926 (2001)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Naeem, S., Thompson, L. J., Lawler, S. P., Lawton, J. H. & Woodfin, R. M. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature 368, 734–737 (1994)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Naeem, S. Ecology—Power behind diversity's throne. Nature 401, 653–654 (1999)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tilman, D. et al. Diversity and productivity in a long-term grassland experiment. Science 294, 843–845 (2001)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hector, A. et al. Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science 286, 1123–1127 (1999)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J. & Melillo, J. M. Human domination of the Earth's ecosystems. Science 277, 494–499 (1997)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Davis, A. J., Jenkinson, L. S., Lawton, J. H., Shorrocks, B. & Wood, S. Making mistakes when predicting shifts in species range in response to global warming. Nature 391, 783–786 (1998)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ives, A. R. Predicting the response of populations to environmental change. Ecology 76, 926–941 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Case, T. J. & Bender, E. A. Testing for higher order interactions. Am. Nat. 118, 920–929 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Yodzis, P. Introduction to Theoretical Ecology (Harper & Row, New York, 1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Frost, T. M., Carpenter, S. R., Ives, A. R. & Kratz, T. K. in Linking Species and Ecosystems (eds Jones, C. G. & Lawton, J. H.) 224–239 (Chapman and Hall, New York, 1995)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Ives, A. R., Carpenter, S. R. & Dennis, B. Community interaction webs and the response of a zooplankton community to experimental manipulations of planktivory. Ecology 80, 1405–1421 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McGrady-Steed, J. & Morin, P. J. Biodiversity, density compensation, and the dynamics of populations and functional groups. Ecology 81, 361–373 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Tilman, D. Biodiversity: Population versus ecosystem stability. Ecology 77, 350–363 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ostfeld, R. S. & LoGuidice, K. Community disassembly, biodiversity, loss, and the erosion of an ecosystem function. Ecology 84, 1421–1427 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pimm, S. L., Jones, H. L. & Diamond, J. On the risk of extinction. Am. Nat. 132, 757–785 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. MacArthur, R. H. Geographical Ecology (Harper and Row, New York, 1972)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Smith, M. D. & Knapp, A. K. Dominant species maintain ecosystem function with non-random species loss. Ecol. Lett. 6, 509–517 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. May, R. M. Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems 2nd edn (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1974)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pimm, S. L. Food Webs (Chapman and Hall, London, 1982)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Tilman, D., Wedin, D. & Knops, J. Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379, 718–720 (1996)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Peres, C. A. & Dolman, P. M. Density compensation in neotropical primate communities: evidence from 56 hunted and nonhunted Amazonian forests of varying productivity. Oecologia 122, 175–189 (2000)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Klug, J. L., Fischer, J. M., Ives, A. R. & Dennis, B. Compensatory dynamics in planktonic community responses to pH perturbations. Ecology 81, 387–398 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Paine, R. T. Food web complexity and species diversity. Am. Nat. 100, 65–75 (1966)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Diaz, S., Symstad, A. J., Chapin, F. S., Wardle, D. A. & Huenneke, L. F. Functional diversity revealed by removal experiments. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 140–146 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wootton, J. T. Prediction in complex communities: Analysis of empirically derived Markov models. Ecology 82, 580–598 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Laska, M. S. & Wootton, J. T. Theoretical concepts and empirical approaches to measuring interaction strength. Ecology 79, 461–476 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Boughman, S. R. Carpenter, A. E. Forbes, R. Haygood, C. T. Harvey, M. R. Helmus, K. J. Tilmon and M. J. Vander Zanden for help. Funding was provided by the US National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, UW-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706, USA

    Anthony R. Ives & Bradley J. Cardinale

Authors
  1. Anthony R. Ives
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bradley J. Cardinale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony R. Ives.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Methods

Detailed explanations of the mathematical analyses in the paper and generalisations of major results using analytical theory. (PDF 18 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ives, A., Cardinale, B. Food-web interactions govern the resistance of communities after non-random extinctions. Nature 429, 174–177 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02515

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02515

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing