Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks

Thais B. Zanata; Bo Dalsgaard; Fernando C. Passos; Peter A. Cotton; James J. Roper; Pietro K. Maruyama; Erich Fischer; Matthias Schleuning; Ana Maria Martin Gonzalez; Jeferson Vizentin-Bugoni; Donald C. Franklin; Stefan Abrahamczyk; Ruben Alarcón; Andrea Cardoso Araujo; Francielle P. Araújo; Severino M. de Azevedo-Junior; Andrea C. Baquero; Katrin Böhning-Gaese; Daniel Wisbech Carstensen; Henrique Chupil; Aline G. Coelho; Rogério R. Faria; David Hořák; Tanja Toftemark Ingversen; Štěpán Janeček; Glauco Kohler; Carlos Lara; Flor M. G. Las-Casas; Ariadna V. Lopes; Adriana O. Machado; Caio G. Machado; Isabel C. Machado; María A. Maglianesi; Tiago S. Malucelli; Jayasilan Mohd-Azlan; Alan C. Moura; Genilda M. Oliveira; Paulo E. Oliveira; Juan Francisco Ornelas; Jan Riegert; Licléia C. Rodrigues; Liliana Rosero-Lasprilla; Ana M. Rui; Marlies Sazima; Baptiste Schmid; Ondřej Sedláček; Allan Timmermann; Maximilian G.R. Vollstädt; Zhiheng Wang; Stella Watts; Carsten Rahbek; Isabela G. Varassin

doi:10.1111/jbi.13045

Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks

Thais B. Zanata^*, Bo Dalsgaard, Fernando C. Passos, Peter A. Cotton, James J. Roper, Pietro K. Maruyama, Erich Fischer, Matthias Schleuning, Ana Maria Martin Gonzalez, Jeferson Vizentin-Bugoni, Donald C. Franklin, Stefan Abrahamczyk, Ruben Alarcón, Andrea Cardoso Araujo, Francielle P. Araújo, Severino M. de Azevedo-Junior, Andrea C. Baquero, Katrin Böhning-Gaese, Daniel Wisbech Carstensen, Henrique ChupilAline G. Coelho, Rogério R. Faria, David Hořák, Tanja Toftemark Ingversen, Štěpán Janeček, Glauco Kohler, Carlos Lara, Flor M. G. Las-Casas, Ariadna V. Lopes, Adriana O. Machado, Caio G. Machado, Isabel C. Machado, María A. Maglianesi, Tiago S. Malucelli, Jayasilan Mohd-Azlan, Alan C. Moura, Genilda M. Oliveira, Paulo E. Oliveira, Juan Francisco Ornelas, Jan Riegert, Licléia C. Rodrigues, Liliana Rosero-Lasprilla, Ana M. Rui, Marlies Sazima, Baptiste Schmid, Ondřej Sedláček, Allan Timmermann, Maximilian G.R. Vollstädt, Zhiheng Wang, Stella Watts, Carsten Rahbek, Isabela G. Varassin

^*Corresponding author for this work

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: Among the world's three major nectar-feeding bird taxa, hummingbirds are the most phenotypically specialized for nectarivory, followed by sunbirds, while the honeyeaters are the least phenotypically specialized taxa. We tested whether this phenotypic specialization gradient is also found in the interaction patterns with their floral resources. Location: Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania/Australia. Methods: We compiled interaction networks between birds and floral resources for 79 hummingbird, nine sunbird and 33 honeyeater communities. Interaction specialization was quantified through connectance (C), complementary specialization (H₂′), binary (Q_B) and weighted modularity (Q), with both observed and null-model corrected values. We compared interaction specialization among the three types of bird–flower communities, both independently and while controlling for potential confounding variables, such as plant species richness, asymmetry, latitude, insularity, topography, sampling methods and intensity. Results: Hummingbird–flower networks were more specialized than honeyeater–flower networks. Specifically, hummingbird–flower networks had a lower proportion of realized interactions (lower C), decreased niche overlap (greater H₂′) and greater modularity (greater Q_B). However, we found no significant differences between hummingbird– and sunbird–flower networks, nor between sunbird– and honeyeater–flower networks. Main conclusions: As expected, hummingbirds and their floral resources have greater interaction specialization than honeyeaters, possibly because of greater phenotypic specialization and greater floral resource richness in the New World. Interaction specialization in sunbird–flower communities was similar to both hummingbird–flower and honeyeater–flower communities. This may either be due to the relatively small number of sunbird–flower networks available, or because sunbird–flower communities share features of both hummingbird–flower communities (specialized floral shapes) and honeyeater–flower communities (fewer floral resources). These results suggest a link between interaction specialization and both phenotypic specialization and floral resource richness within bird–flower communities at a global scale.

Original language	English
Journal	Journal of Biogeography
Volume	44
Issue number	8
Pages (from-to)	1891-1910
Number of pages	20
ISSN	0305-0270
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.13045
Publication status	Published - Aug 2017

Keywords

honeyeaters
hummingbirds
modularity
niche partitioning
ornithophily
plant–animal interactions
specialization
sunbirds

Access to Document

10.1111/jbi.13045

Cite this

Zanata, T. B., Dalsgaard, B., Passos, F. C., Cotton, P. A., Roper, J. J., Maruyama, P. K., Fischer, E., Schleuning, M., Martin Gonzalez, A. M., Vizentin-Bugoni, J., Franklin, D. C., Abrahamczyk, S., Alarcón, R., Cardoso Araujo, A., Araújo, F. P., de Azevedo-Junior, S. M., Baquero, A. C., Böhning-Gaese, K., Carstensen, D. W., ... Varassin, I. G. (2017). Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks. Journal of Biogeography, 44(8), 1891-1910. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.13045

Zanata, TB, Dalsgaard, B, Passos, FC, Cotton, PA, Roper, JJ, Maruyama, PK, Fischer, E, Schleuning, M, Martin Gonzalez, AM, Vizentin-Bugoni, J, Franklin, DC, Abrahamczyk, S, Alarcón, R, Cardoso Araujo, A, Araújo, FP, de Azevedo-Junior, SM, Baquero, AC, Böhning-Gaese, K, Carstensen, DW, Chupil, H, Coelho, AG, Faria, RR, Hořák, D, Ingversen, TT, Janeček, Š, Kohler, G, Lara, C, Las-Casas, FMG, Lopes, AV, Machado, AO, Machado, CG, Machado, IC, Maglianesi, MA, Malucelli, TS, Mohd-Azlan, J, Moura, AC, Oliveira, GM, Oliveira, PE, Ornelas, JF, Riegert, J, Rodrigues, LC, Rosero-Lasprilla, L, Rui, AM, Sazima, M, Schmid, B, Sedláček, O, Timmermann, A, Vollstädt, MGR, Wang, Z, Watts, S, Rahbek, C & Varassin, IG 2017, 'Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks', Journal of Biogeography, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 1891-1910. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbi.13045

@article{680d4f14a7ad45488ec15cccef02819c,

title = "Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks",

abstract = "Aim: Among the world's three major nectar-feeding bird taxa, hummingbirds are the most phenotypically specialized for nectarivory, followed by sunbirds, while the honeyeaters are the least phenotypically specialized taxa. We tested whether this phenotypic specialization gradient is also found in the interaction patterns with their floral resources. Location: Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania/Australia. Methods: We compiled interaction networks between birds and floral resources for 79 hummingbird, nine sunbird and 33 honeyeater communities. Interaction specialization was quantified through connectance (C), complementary specialization (H2′), binary (QB) and weighted modularity (Q), with both observed and null-model corrected values. We compared interaction specialization among the three types of bird–flower communities, both independently and while controlling for potential confounding variables, such as plant species richness, asymmetry, latitude, insularity, topography, sampling methods and intensity. Results: Hummingbird–flower networks were more specialized than honeyeater–flower networks. Specifically, hummingbird–flower networks had a lower proportion of realized interactions (lower C), decreased niche overlap (greater H2′) and greater modularity (greater QB). However, we found no significant differences between hummingbird– and sunbird–flower networks, nor between sunbird– and honeyeater–flower networks. Main conclusions: As expected, hummingbirds and their floral resources have greater interaction specialization than honeyeaters, possibly because of greater phenotypic specialization and greater floral resource richness in the New World. Interaction specialization in sunbird–flower communities was similar to both hummingbird–flower and honeyeater–flower communities. This may either be due to the relatively small number of sunbird–flower networks available, or because sunbird–flower communities share features of both hummingbird–flower communities (specialized floral shapes) and honeyeater–flower communities (fewer floral resources). These results suggest a link between interaction specialization and both phenotypic specialization and floral resource richness within bird–flower communities at a global scale.",

keywords = "honeyeaters, hummingbirds, modularity, niche partitioning, ornithophily, plant–animal interactions, specialization, sunbirds",

author = "Zanata, {Thais B.} and Bo Dalsgaard and Passos, {Fernando C.} and Cotton, {Peter A.} and Roper, {James J.} and Maruyama, {Pietro K.} and Erich Fischer and Matthias Schleuning and {Martin Gonzalez}, {Ana Maria} and Jeferson Vizentin-Bugoni and Franklin, {Donald C.} and Stefan Abrahamczyk and Ruben Alarc{\'o}n and {Cardoso Araujo}, Andrea and Ara{\'u}jo, {Francielle P.} and {de Azevedo-Junior}, {Severino M.} and Baquero, {Andrea C.} and Katrin B{\"o}hning-Gaese and Carstensen, {Daniel Wisbech} and Henrique Chupil and Coelho, {Aline G.} and Faria, {Rog{\'e}rio R.} and David Ho{\v r}{\'a}k and Ingversen, {Tanja Toftemark} and {\v S}t{\v e}p{\'a}n Jane{\v c}ek and Glauco Kohler and Carlos Lara and Las-Casas, {Flor M. G.} and Lopes, {Ariadna V.} and Machado, {Adriana O.} and Machado, {Caio G.} and Machado, {Isabel C.} and Maglianesi, {Mar{\'i}a A.} and Malucelli, {Tiago S.} and Jayasilan Mohd-Azlan and Moura, {Alan C.} and Oliveira, {Genilda M.} and Oliveira, {Paulo E.} and Ornelas, {Juan Francisco} and Jan Riegert and Rodrigues, {Licl{\'e}ia C.} and Liliana Rosero-Lasprilla and Rui, {Ana M.} and Marlies Sazima and Baptiste Schmid and Ond{\v r}ej Sedl{\'a}{\v c}ek and Allan Timmermann and Vollst{\"a}dt, {Maximilian G.R.} and Zhiheng Wang and Stella Watts and Carsten Rahbek and Varassin, {Isabela G.}",

year = "2017",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1111/jbi.13045",

language = "English",

volume = "44",

pages = "1891--1910",

journal = "Journal of Biogeography",

issn = "0305-0270",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks

AU - Zanata, Thais B.

AU - Dalsgaard, Bo

AU - Passos, Fernando C.

AU - Cotton, Peter A.

AU - Roper, James J.

AU - Maruyama, Pietro K.

AU - Fischer, Erich

AU - Schleuning, Matthias

AU - Martin Gonzalez, Ana Maria

AU - Vizentin-Bugoni, Jeferson

AU - Franklin, Donald C.

AU - Abrahamczyk, Stefan

AU - Alarcón, Ruben

AU - Cardoso Araujo, Andrea

AU - Araújo, Francielle P.

AU - de Azevedo-Junior, Severino M.

AU - Baquero, Andrea C.

AU - Böhning-Gaese, Katrin

AU - Carstensen, Daniel Wisbech

AU - Chupil, Henrique

AU - Coelho, Aline G.

AU - Faria, Rogério R.

AU - Hořák, David

AU - Ingversen, Tanja Toftemark

AU - Janeček, Štěpán

AU - Kohler, Glauco

AU - Lara, Carlos

AU - Las-Casas, Flor M. G.

AU - Lopes, Ariadna V.

AU - Machado, Adriana O.

AU - Machado, Caio G.

AU - Machado, Isabel C.

AU - Maglianesi, María A.

AU - Malucelli, Tiago S.

AU - Mohd-Azlan, Jayasilan

AU - Moura, Alan C.

AU - Oliveira, Genilda M.

AU - Oliveira, Paulo E.

AU - Ornelas, Juan Francisco

AU - Riegert, Jan

AU - Rodrigues, Licléia C.

AU - Rosero-Lasprilla, Liliana

AU - Rui, Ana M.

AU - Sazima, Marlies

AU - Schmid, Baptiste

AU - Sedláček, Ondřej

AU - Timmermann, Allan

AU - Vollstädt, Maximilian G.R.

AU - Wang, Zhiheng

AU - Watts, Stella

AU - Rahbek, Carsten

AU - Varassin, Isabela G.

PY - 2017/8

Y1 - 2017/8

N2 - Aim: Among the world's three major nectar-feeding bird taxa, hummingbirds are the most phenotypically specialized for nectarivory, followed by sunbirds, while the honeyeaters are the least phenotypically specialized taxa. We tested whether this phenotypic specialization gradient is also found in the interaction patterns with their floral resources. Location: Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania/Australia. Methods: We compiled interaction networks between birds and floral resources for 79 hummingbird, nine sunbird and 33 honeyeater communities. Interaction specialization was quantified through connectance (C), complementary specialization (H2′), binary (QB) and weighted modularity (Q), with both observed and null-model corrected values. We compared interaction specialization among the three types of bird–flower communities, both independently and while controlling for potential confounding variables, such as plant species richness, asymmetry, latitude, insularity, topography, sampling methods and intensity. Results: Hummingbird–flower networks were more specialized than honeyeater–flower networks. Specifically, hummingbird–flower networks had a lower proportion of realized interactions (lower C), decreased niche overlap (greater H2′) and greater modularity (greater QB). However, we found no significant differences between hummingbird– and sunbird–flower networks, nor between sunbird– and honeyeater–flower networks. Main conclusions: As expected, hummingbirds and their floral resources have greater interaction specialization than honeyeaters, possibly because of greater phenotypic specialization and greater floral resource richness in the New World. Interaction specialization in sunbird–flower communities was similar to both hummingbird–flower and honeyeater–flower communities. This may either be due to the relatively small number of sunbird–flower networks available, or because sunbird–flower communities share features of both hummingbird–flower communities (specialized floral shapes) and honeyeater–flower communities (fewer floral resources). These results suggest a link between interaction specialization and both phenotypic specialization and floral resource richness within bird–flower communities at a global scale.

AB - Aim: Among the world's three major nectar-feeding bird taxa, hummingbirds are the most phenotypically specialized for nectarivory, followed by sunbirds, while the honeyeaters are the least phenotypically specialized taxa. We tested whether this phenotypic specialization gradient is also found in the interaction patterns with their floral resources. Location: Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania/Australia. Methods: We compiled interaction networks between birds and floral resources for 79 hummingbird, nine sunbird and 33 honeyeater communities. Interaction specialization was quantified through connectance (C), complementary specialization (H2′), binary (QB) and weighted modularity (Q), with both observed and null-model corrected values. We compared interaction specialization among the three types of bird–flower communities, both independently and while controlling for potential confounding variables, such as plant species richness, asymmetry, latitude, insularity, topography, sampling methods and intensity. Results: Hummingbird–flower networks were more specialized than honeyeater–flower networks. Specifically, hummingbird–flower networks had a lower proportion of realized interactions (lower C), decreased niche overlap (greater H2′) and greater modularity (greater QB). However, we found no significant differences between hummingbird– and sunbird–flower networks, nor between sunbird– and honeyeater–flower networks. Main conclusions: As expected, hummingbirds and their floral resources have greater interaction specialization than honeyeaters, possibly because of greater phenotypic specialization and greater floral resource richness in the New World. Interaction specialization in sunbird–flower communities was similar to both hummingbird–flower and honeyeater–flower communities. This may either be due to the relatively small number of sunbird–flower networks available, or because sunbird–flower communities share features of both hummingbird–flower communities (specialized floral shapes) and honeyeater–flower communities (fewer floral resources). These results suggest a link between interaction specialization and both phenotypic specialization and floral resource richness within bird–flower communities at a global scale.

KW - honeyeaters

KW - hummingbirds

KW - modularity

KW - niche partitioning

KW - ornithophily

KW - plant–animal interactions

KW - specialization

KW - sunbirds

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021231126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jbi.13045

DO - 10.1111/jbi.13045

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85021231126

SN - 0305-0270

VL - 44

SP - 1891

EP - 1910

JO - Journal of Biogeography

JF - Journal of Biogeography

IS - 8

ER -

Global patterns of interaction specialization in bird–flower networks

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this