The marine fish food web is globally connected


The productivity of marine ecosystems and the services they provide to humans are largely dependent on complex interactions between prey and predators. These are embedded in a diverse network of trophic interactions, resulting in a cascade of events following perturbations such as species extinction. The sheer scale of oceans, however, precludes the characterization of marine feeding networks through de novo sampling. This effort ought instead to rely on a combination of extensive data and inference. Here we investigate how the distribution of trophic interactions at the global scale shapes the marine fish food web structure. We hypothesize that the heterogeneous distribution of species ranges in biogeographic regions should concentrate interactions in the warmest areas and within species groups. We find that the inferred global metaweb of marine fish—that is, all possible potential feeding links between co-occurring species—is highly connected geographically with a low degree of spatial modularity. Metrics of network structure correlate with sea surface temperature and tend to peak towards the tropics. In contrast to open-water communities, coastal food webs have greater interaction redundancy, which may confer robustness to species extinction. Our results suggest that marine ecosystems are connected yet display some resistance to perturbations because of high robustness at most locations.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Construction of the metaweb.
Fig. 2: Circular representation of inferred trophic interactions among species.
Fig. 3: The global connectivity of the metaweb and local webs provides robustness against species extinctions.
Fig. 4: Spatial distribution of food web properties globally.

Data availability

All data used to calibrate the trophic model are available at The source data on fish presence are available at and the presence/absence data extrapolated from these data are available at

Code availability

The code to create the metaweb has been published and is available at


  1. 1.

    Nelson, J. S. Fishes of the World 4th edn (John Wiley & Sons, 2006).

  2. 2.

    Allesina, S., Bodini, A. & Pascual, M. Functional links and robustness in food webs. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 1701–1709 (2009).

  3. 3.

    Worm, B. et al. Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 314, 787–790 (2006).

  4. 4.

    Newman, E. I. Applied Ecology and Environmental Management (Blackwell Science, 2000).

  5. 5.

    Dunne, J. A., Williams, R. J. & Martinez, N. D. Network structure and robustness of marine food webs. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 273, 291–302 (2004).

  6. 6.

    Ruppert, J. L. W. et al. Human activities as a driver of spatial variation in the trophic structure of fish communities on Pacific coral reefs. Glob. Change Biol. 24, e67–e76 (2018).

  7. 7.

    Estes, J. A. et al. Trophic downgrading of planet Earth. Science 333, 301–306 (2011).

  8. 8.

    Gravel, D. et al. Bringing Elton and Grinnell together: a quantitative framework to represent the biogeography of ecological interaction networks. Ecography 42, 401–415 (2019).

  9. 9.

    Woodward, G. et al. in Advances in Ecological Research: Ecological Networks Vol. 42 (ed. Woodward, G.) 71–138 (Academic Press, 2010).

  10. 10.

    Morales-Castilla, I., Matias, M. G., Gravel, D. & Araújo, M. B. Inferring biotic interactions from proxies. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 347–356 (2015).

  11. 11.

    Albouy, C. et al. From projected species distribution to food-web structure under climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 20, 730–741 (2014).

  12. 12.

    Dunne, J. A. in Ecological Networks: Linking Structure to Dynamics in Food Webs (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).

  13. 13.

    Tittensor, D. P. et al. Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa. Nature 466, 1098–1101 (2010).

  14. 14.

    Dunne, J. A., Williams, R. J. & Martinez, N. D. Food-web structure and network theory: The role of connectance and size. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 12917–12922 (2002).

  15. 15.

    Froese, R. & Pauly, D. FishBase (Fishbase, 2015);

  16. 16.

    Ocean Biogeographic Information System Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (OBIS, 2014);

  17. 17.

    Barnes, C. et al. Predator and prey body size in marine food webs. Ecology 89, 881–881 (2008).

  18. 18.

    Yen, J. D. L. et al. Linking structure and function in food webs: maximization of different ecological functions generates distinct food web structures. J. Anim. Ecol. 85, 537–547 (2016).

  19. 19.

    Grilli, J., Rogers, T. & Allesina, S. Modularity and stability in ecological communities. Nat. Commun. 7, 12031 (2016).

  20. 20.

    Stouffer, D. B. & Bascompte, J. Understanding food-web persistence from local to global scales. Ecol. Lett. 13, 154–161 (2010).

  21. 21.

    Reygondeau, G. et al. Biogeography of tuna and billfish communities. J. Biogeogr. 39, 114–129 (2012).

  22. 22.

    Richardson, A. J. & Schoeman, D. S. Climate impact on plankton ecosystems in the Northeast Atlantic. Science 305, 1609–1612 (2004).

  23. 23.

    Hosseini, M., Nabavi, S. M. B. & Parsa, Y. Bioaccumulation of trace mercury in trophic levels of benthic, benthopelagic, pelagic fish species, and sea birds from Arvand River, Iran. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 156, 175–180 (2013).

  24. 24.

    Macpherson, E. Large-scale species–richness gradients in the Atlantic Ocean. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1715–1720 (2002).

  25. 25.

    Trebilco, R., Baum, J. K., Salomon, A. K. & Dulvy, N. K. Ecosystem ecology: size-based constraints on the pyramids of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 423–431 (2013).

  26. 26.

    Montoya, J. M., Woodward, G., Emmerson, M. C. & Sole, R. V. Press perturbations and indirect effects in real food webs. Ecology 90, 2426–2433 (2009).

  27. 27.

    Bascompte, J., Melián, C. J. & Sala, E. Interaction strength combinations and the overfishing of a marine food web. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 5443–5447 (2005).

  28. 28.

    Gilarranz, L. J., Mora, C. & Bascompte, J. Anthropogenic effects are associated with a lower persistence of marine food webs. Nat. Commun. 7, 10737 (2016).

  29. 29.

    Mougi, A. & Kondoh, M. Food-web complexity, meta-community complexity and community stability. Sci. Rep. 6, 24478 (2016).

  30. 30.

    Plitzko, S. J. & Drossel, B. The effect of dispersal between patches on the stability of large trophic food webs. Theor. Ecol. 8, 233–244 (2015).

  31. 31.

    Pellissier, L. et al. Comparing species interaction networks along environmental gradients. Biol. Rev. 93, 785–800 (2018).

  32. 32.

    Quimbayo, J. P. et al. The global structure of marine cleaning mutualistic networks. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 27, 1238–1250 (2018).

  33. 33.

    Montoya, J. M. & Raffaelli, D. Climate Change, biotic interactions and ecosystem services. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 365, 2013–2018 (2010).

  34. 34.

    Brown, J. H., Gillooly, J. F., Allen, A. P., Savage, V. M. & West, G. B. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85, 1771–1789 (2004).

  35. 35.

    Boyce, D. G., Frank, K. T., Worm, B. & Leggett, W. C. Spatial patterns and predictors of trophic control in marine ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 18, 1001–1011 (2015).

  36. 36.

    Barabás, G. & Allesina, S. Predicting global community properties from uncertain estimates of interaction strengths. J. R. Soc. Interface 12, 20,150,218 (2015).

  37. 37.

    Olivier, P. & Planque, B. Complexity and structural properties of food webs in the Barents Sea. Oikos 126, 1339–1346 (2017).

  38. 38.

    Colléter, M. et al. Global overview of the applications of the Ecopath with Ecosim modeling approach using the EcoBase models repository. Ecol. Model. 302, 42–53 (2015).

  39. 39.

    Hattab, T. et al. Forecasting fine-scale changes in the food-web structure of coastal marine communities under climate change. Ecography 39, 1227–1237 (2016).

  40. 40.

    Roslin, T. & Majaneva, S. The use of DNA barcodes in food web construction—terrestrial and aquatic ecologists unite! Genome 59, 603–628 (2016).

  41. 41.

    Gascuel, D. et al. A future for marine fisheries in Europe (Manifesto of the Association Francaise d’Halieumetrie). Fish. Res. 109, 1–6 (2011).

  42. 42.

    Parravicini, V. et al. Global patterns and predictors of tropical reef fish species richness. Ecography 36, 1254–1262 (2013).

  43. 43.

    Bartomeus, I. et al. A common framework for identifying linkage rules across different types of interactions. Funct. Ecol. 30, 1894–1903 (2016).

  44. 44.

    Williams, R. J. & Martinez, N. D. Simple rules yield complex food webs. Nature 404, 180–183 (2000).

  45. 45.

    Gravel, D., Poisot, T., Albouy, C., Velez, L. & Mouillot, D. Inferring food web structure from predator-prey body size relationships. Methods Ecol. Evol. 4, 1083–1090 (2013).

  46. 46.

    Reygondeau, G. et al. Dynamic biogeochemical provinces in the global ocean. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 27, 1046–1058 (2013).

  47. 47.

    Longhurst, A. Ecological Geography of the Sea (Academic Press, 1998).

  48. 48.

    Pons, P. & Latapy, M. Computing communities in large networks using random walks. J. Graph Algorithms Appl. 10, 191–218 (2006).

  49. 49.

    Bersier, L.-F., Banašek-Richter, C. & Cattin, M.-F. Quantitative descriptors of food-web matrices. Ecology 83, 2394–2407 (2002).

  50. 50.

    Memmott, J., Waser, N. M. & Price, M. V. Tolerance of pollination networks to species extinctions. Proc. Biol. Sci. 271, 2605–2611 (2004).

  51. 51.

    Wessel, P. & Smith, W. H. F. A global, self-consistent, hierarchical, high-resolution shoreline database. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 8741–8743 (1996).

  52. 52.

    Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A. & Stone, C. J. Classification and Regression Trees (Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1984).

  53. 53.

    Quinn, G. P. & Keough, M. J. Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002).

Download references


C.A. was supported by a MELS-FQRNT Postdoctoral Fellowship and a Ressources Aquatique Québec (RAQ) fellowship during the conception and writing of this manuscript. T.P., D.G. and D.B.S. acknowledge financial support by the CIEE through their working group programme. M.B.A. is funded through FCT project No. PTDC/AAG-MAA/3764/2014. A.R.C. is funded by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) PGS-D scholarship. D.G., T.P., M.-J.F., P.A. and S.J.L. are supported by NSERC Discovery Grants. T.P. also acknowledges a FRQNT New Investigator award and a Université de Montréal starting grant. D.B.S. acknowledges support from the Royal Society of New Zealand (via Marsden Fast-Start No. UOC-1101 and a Rutherford Discovery Fellowship). P.A. acknowledges support from a FRQNT special travel fund to build collaboration with OBIS (W.A.) in the context of this manuscript and future projects. We thank all providers of data to OBIS. We also thank F. Leprieur for his support and valuable advice during the writing of the manuscript.

Author information

The design of the study is the result of a working group on the global variation of ecological networks. W.A. provided the data for species occurrences. C.A. computed the data with the help of S.A.W. and conducted the analyses. D.G. contributed the analytical tools to build the metaweb. C.A., T.P., L.P. and D.G. wrote the manuscript with input from all authors.

Correspondence to Camille Albouy.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figs. 1–10 and Tables 1–5.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Albouy, C., Archambault, P., Appeltans, W. et al. The marine fish food web is globally connected. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 1153–1161 (2019).

Download citation

Further reading