Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T07:53:33.960Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Relentless Evolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

Cang Hui  and
David Richardson
Cang Hui
Affiliation:
Stellenbosch University, South Africa
David Richardson
Affiliation:
Stellenbosch University, South Africa
Get access

Summary

This book deals with the roles and impacts of the entangled web of biotic interactions that an alien species partakes in as it infiltrates ecological networks. We partition related issues into six topics (network interactions, structures, stability, dynamics, scaling and invasibility). We start unpacking these issues here and will dive deeper into each in subsequent chapters. To embrace the complexity of ecological networks we need to introduce a few simple mathematical models and associated concepts that are fundamental to network analyses, visualisation and the ideas we develop. We keep the mathematical details to a minimum and provide intuitive explanation of their meaning and rationale; we also discuss, using simple terminology wherever possible, key procedures that lead to deductive conclusions. Most of the models we cite have been elucidated in great detail elsewhere and can be implemented in any computational language. Although we will not provide technical details, readers will be able to design their models and conduct analyses based on what is provided here to suit their own needs. Although we have tried to determine consensus views in the literature, the transdisciplinary nature of this field makes the knowledge landscape rugged and fluid. Answers are often not definite but contextualised. Let our journey begin.

Type
Chapter
Information
Invading Ecological Networks , pp. 50 - 108
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, PA (1990) The effects of adaptive behavior on the type-2 functional response. Ecology 71, 877–885.Google Scholar
Abrams, PA, et al. (1993) Evolutionarily unstable fitness maxima and stable fitness minima of continuous traits. Evolutionary Ecology 7, 465–487.Google Scholar
Adler, LS, et al. (2006) Leaf herbivory and nutrients increase nectar alkaloids. Ecology Letters 9, 960–967.Google Scholar
Aizen, MA, et al. (2012) Specialization and rarity predict nonrandom loss of interactions from mutualist networks. Science 335, 1486–1489.Google Scholar
Aizen, MA, Vázquez, DP (2006) Flowering phenologies of hummingbird plants from the temperate forest of southern South America: Is there evidence of competitive displacement? Ecography 29, 357–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aktas, ME, et al. (2019) Persistence homology of networks: methods and applications. Applied Network Science 4, 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, WJ (2020) Indirect biotic interactions of plant invasions with native plants and animals. In Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (eds.) Plant Invasions: The Role of Biotic Interactions, pp. 308–323. Wallingford: CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allesina, S, Levine, JM (2011) A competitive network theory of species diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108, 5638–5642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allesina, S, Tang, S (2012) Stability criteria for complex ecosystems. Nature 483, 205–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arditi, R, Ginzburg, LR (2012) How Species Interact: Altering the Standard View on Trophic Ecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R (1984) The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R, Hamilton, WD (1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science 211, 1390–1396.Google Scholar
Bairey, E, Kelsic, E, Kishony, R (2016) High-order species interactions shape ecosystem diversity. Nature Communications 7, 12285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basilio, AM, et al. (2006) A year-long plant-pollinator network. Austral Ecology 31, 975–983.Google Scholar
Basten, U, et al. (2011) Trait anxiety modulates the neural efficiency of inhibitory control. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23, 3132–3145.Google Scholar
Becerra, JX, Venable, DL (1999) Macroevolution of insect–plant associations: The relevance of host biogeography to host affiliation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 96, 12626–12631.Google Scholar
Bello, FD, et al. (2013) Hierarchical effects of environmental filters on the functional structure of plant communities: A case study in the French Alps. Ecography 36, 393–402.Google Scholar
Bergelson, J, et al. (2001) Models and data on plant-enemy coevolution. Annual Review of Genetics 35, 469–499.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, C, et al. (2016) Nitrogen-fixing bacterial communities in invasive legume nodules and associated soils are similar across introduced and native range populations in Australia. Journal of Biogeography 43, 1631–1644.Google Scholar
Blackburn, TM, et al. (2011) A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 26, 333–339.Google Scholar
Blossey, B, Notzold, R (1995) Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: A hypothesis. Journal of Ecology 83, 887–889.Google Scholar
Blumenthal, DM (2006) Interactions between resource availability and enemy release in plant invasion. Ecology Letters 9, 887–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolnick, DI, et al. (2011) Why intraspecific trait variation matters in community ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 26, 183–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonawitz, E, et al. (2014) Win-stay, lose-sample: A simple sequential algorithm for approximating Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology 74, 35–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosc, C, et al. (2018) Interactions among predators and plant specificity protect herbivores from top predators. Ecology 99, 1602–1609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braga, RR, et al. (2018) Structuring evidence for invasional meltdown: Broad support but with biases and gaps. Biological Invasions 20, 923–936.Google Scholar
Broekman, MJE, et al. (2019) Signs of stabilisation and stable coexistence. Ecology Letters 22, 1957–1975.Google Scholar
Callaway, RM, Ridenour, WM (2004) Novel weapons: Invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2, 436–443.Google Scholar
Callaway, R, et al. (2004) Soil biota and exotic plant invasion. Nature 427, 731–733.Google Scholar
Callaway, RM, et al. (2008) Novel weapons: Invasive plant suppresses fungal mutualists in America but not in its native Europe. Ecology 89, 1043–1055.Google Scholar
Catford, JA, Jansson, R, Nilsson, C (2009) Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework. Diversity and Distributions 15, 22–40.Google Scholar
Champagnat, N, et al. (2001) The canonical equation of adaptive dynamics: A mathematical view. Selection 2, 73–83.Google Scholar
Chesson, P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31, 343–366.Google Scholar
Christiansen, F (1991) On conditions for evolutionary stability for a continuously varying character. The American Naturalist 138, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Y (2009) Evolutionary distributions. Evolutionary Ecology Research 11, 611–635.Google Scholar
Colautti, RI, et al. (2004) Is invasion success explained by the enemy release hypothesis? Ecology Letters 7, 721–733.Google Scholar
Crawley, MJ, et al. (1999) Invasion-resistance in experimental grassland communities: species richness or species identity? Ecology Letters 2, 140–148.Google Scholar
Cressman, R, Tao, Y (2014) The replicator equation and other game dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111, 10810–10817.Google Scholar
Darwin, CR (1859) On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, CR (1862) On the Various Contrivances by Which British And Foreign Orchids Are Fertilised by Insects, and on the Good Effects of Intercrossing. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, CR (1868) Variation of Plants and Animals under Domestication. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dercole, F, Rinaldi, S (2008) Analysis of Evolutionary Processes: The Adaptive Dynamics Approach and Its Applications. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dieckmann, U, Law, R (1996) The dynamical theory of coevolution: A derivation from stochastic ecological processes. Journal of Mathematical Biology 34, 579–612.Google Scholar
Doebeli, M, Dieckmann, U (2000) Evolutionary branching and sympatric speciation caused by different types of ecological interactions. The American Naturalist 156, S77–S101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, R, Williams, P (2002) Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis challenged. Nature 417, 608–609.Google Scholar
Egas, M, et al. (2005) Evolution of specialization and ecological character displacement of herbivores along a gradient of plant quality. Evolution 59, 507–520.Google Scholar
Egerton, F (2007) Understanding food chains and food webs, 1700–1970. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 88, 50–69.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, PR, Raven, PH (1964) Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution. Evolution 18, 586–608.Google Scholar
Elton, C (1958) The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. London: Metheun.Google Scholar
Enders, M, Jeschke, JM (2018) A network of invasion hypotheses. In Jeschke, JM, Heger, T (eds.) Invasion Biology: Hypotheses and Evidence, pp. 49–59. Wallingford: CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enders, M, et al. (2018) Drawing a map of invasion biology based on a network of hypotheses. Ecosphere 9, e02146.Google Scholar
Enders, M, et al. (2020) A conceptual map of invasion biology: Integrating hypotheses into a consensus network. Global Ecology and Biogeography 29, 978–991.Google Scholar
Eppinga, MB, et al. (2006) Accumulation of local pathogens: A new hypothesis to explain exotic plant invasions. Oikos 114, 168–176.Google Scholar
Eshel, I (1983) Evolutionary and continuous stability. Journal of Theoretical Biology 103, 99–111.Google Scholar
Eubanks, MD, Denno, RF (2000) Health food versus fast food: The effects of prey quality and mobility on prey selection by a generalist predator and indirect interactions among prey species. Ecological Entomology 25, 140–146.Google Scholar
Fantinou, AA, et al. (2009) Preference and consumption of Macrolophus pygmaeus preying on mixed instar assemblages of Myzus persicae. Biological Control 51, 76–78.Google Scholar
Felker-Quinn, E, et al. (2013) Meta-analysis reveals evolution in invasive plant species but little support for evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA). Ecology and Evolution 3, 739–751.Google Scholar
Fortheringham, AS, Wong, DWS (1991) The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A 23, 1025–1044.Google Scholar
Fortuna, MA, Bascompte, J (2006) Habitat loss and the structure of plant–animal mutualistic networks. Ecology Letters 9, 281–286.Google Scholar
Fossette, S, et al. (2012) Does prey size matter? Novel observations of feeding in the leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) allow a test of predator–prey size relationships. Biology Letters 8, 351–354.Google Scholar
Gaertner, M, et al. (2014) Invasive plants as drivers of regime shifts: Identifying high-priority invaders that alter feedback relationships. Diversity and Distributions 20, 733–744.Google Scholar
Gallien, L, et al. (2017) The effects of intransitive competition on coexistence. Ecology Letters 20, 791–800.Google Scholar
Gallien, L, et al. (2018) Emergence of weak-intransitive competition through adaptive diversification and eco-evolutionary feedbacks. Journal of Ecology 106, 877–889.Google Scholar
Gause, GF (1932) Experimental studies on the struggle for existence: I. Mixed population of two species of yeast. Journal of Experimental Biology 9, 389–402.Google Scholar
Geritz, SAH, et al. (1997) Dynamics of adaptation and evolutionary branching. Physical Review Letters 78, 2024–2027.Google Scholar
Geritz, SAH, et al. (1998) Evolutionarily singular strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree. Evolutionary Ecology 12, 35–57.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G, Gaissmaier, W (2011) Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of Psychology 62, 451–482.Google Scholar
Gintis, H (2000) Game Theory Evolving. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gintis, H (2009) The Bounds of Reason: Game Theory and the Unification of the Behavioural Sciences. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gioria, M, et al. (2018) Timing is everything: Does early and late germination favor invasions by herbaceous alien plants? Journal of Plant Ecology 11, 4–16.Google Scholar
Golubski, AJ, et al. (2016) Ecological networks over the edge: Hypergraph trait-Mediated indirect interaction (TMII) structure. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 31, 344–354.Google Scholar
Gomulkiewicz, R, Ridenhour, BJ (2010) When is correlation coevolution? The American Naturalist 175, 525–537.Google Scholar
Grainger, TN, et al. (2019) Applying modern coexistence theory to priority effects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 116, 6028–6210.Google Scholar
Gregory, TR (2009) Understanding natural selection: Essential concepts and common misconceptions. Evolution: Education and Outreach 2, 156–175.Google Scholar
Grilli, J, et al. (2017) Higher-order interactions stabilize dynamics in competitive network models. Nature 548, 210–213.Google Scholar
Gunderson, LH, Holling, CS (eds.) (2002) Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, WD (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour. Journal of Theoretical Biology 7, 1–52.Google Scholar
Heleno, RH, et al. (2013) Seed dispersal networks in the Galapagos and the consequence of alien plant invasions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280, 20122112.Google Scholar
Herrnstein, RJ, Vaughan, W Jr (1980) Melioration and behavioral allocation. In Staddon, JER (ed.) Limits to Action: The Allocation of Individual Behavior, pp. 143–176. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hofbauer, J, Sigmund, K (1998) Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Holling, CS (1959) Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Canadian Entomologist 91, 385–398.Google Scholar
Holt, RD (2009) Bringing the Hutchinsonian niche into the 21st century: Ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106, 19659–19665.Google Scholar
Hui, C, McGeoch, MA (2014) Zeta diversity as a concept and metric that unifies incidence-based biodiversity patterns. The American Naturalist 184, 684–694.Google Scholar
Hui, C, Richardson, DM (2017) Invasion Dynamics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hui, C, Richardson, DM (2019) Network invasion as an open dynamical system: Response to Rossberg and Barabás. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 34, 386–387.Google Scholar
Hui, C, et al. (2015) Adaptive diversification in coevolutionary systems. In Pontarotti, P (ed.), Evolutionary Biology: Biodiversification from Genotype to Phenotype, pp. 167–186. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Hui, C, et al. (2016) Defining invasiveness and invasibility in ecological networks. Biological Invasions 18, 971–983.Google Scholar
Hui, C, et al. (2018a) Modelling coevolution in ecological networks with adaptive dynamics. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences 41, 8407–8422.Google Scholar
Hui, C, et al. (2018b) Ecological and Evolutionary Modelling. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Hui, C, et al. (2020) The role of biotic interactions in invasion ecology: Theories and hypotheses. In Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (eds.) Plant Invasions: The Role of Biotic Interactions, pp. 26–44. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Huston, M (1979) A general hypothesis of species diversity. The American Naturalist 113, 81–101.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, GE (1959) Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? The American Naturalist 93, 145–159.Google Scholar
Imhof, LA, et al. (2005) Evolutionary cycles of cooperation and defection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102, 10797–10800.Google Scholar
Janzen, DH (1985) On ecological fitting. Oikos 45, 308–310.Google Scholar
Jaworski, CC, et al. (2013) Preference and prey switching in a generalist predator attacking local and invasive alien pests. PLoS ONE 8, e82231.Google Scholar
Jeschke, JM, Erhard, F (2018) Darwin’s naturalization and limiting similarity hypotheses. In Jeschke, JM, Heger, T (eds.) Invasion Biology: Hypothesis and Evidence, pp. 140–146. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Jeschke, JM, et al. (2002) Predator functional responses: Discriminating between handling and digesting prey. Ecological Monographs 72, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, IM (1986) Plant invasion windows: A time-based classification of invasion potential. Biological Reviews 61, 369–394.Google Scholar
Jones, LE, et al. (2009) Rapid contemporary evolution and clonal food web dynamics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364, 1579–1591.Google Scholar
Jordano, P, et al. (2003) Invariant properties in coevolutionary networks of plant–animal interactions. Ecology Letters 6, 69–81.Google Scholar
Kaiser-Bunbury, CN, et al. (2010) The robustness of pollination networks to the loss of species and interactions: A quantitative approach incorporating pollinator behaviour. Ecology Letters 13, 442–452.Google Scholar
Keane, RM, Crawley, MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17, 164–170.Google Scholar
Koch, H, et al. (2014) Why rapid, adaptive evolution matters for community dynamics. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 2, 17.Google Scholar
Kolling, N, et al. (2012) Neural mechanisms of foraging. Science 336, 95–98.Google Scholar
Kraines, DP, Kraines, VY (2000) Natural selection of memory-one strategies for the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma. Journal of Theoretical Biology 203, 335–355.Google Scholar
Kuebbing, SE (2020) How direct and indirect non-native interactions can promote plant invasions, lead to invasional meltdown and inform management decisions. In Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (eds.) Plant Invasions: The Role of Biotic Interactions, pp. 153–176. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Latombe, G, et al. (2018) Drivers of species turnover vary with species commonness for native and alien plants with different residence times. Ecology 99, 2763–2775.Google Scholar
Le Roux, JJ, et al. (2017) Co-introduction vs ecological fitting as pathways to the establishment of effective mutualisms during biological invasions. New Phytologist 215, 1354–1360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehtonen, J (2018) The Price equation, gradient dynamics, and continuous trait game theory. The American Naturalist 191, 146–153.Google Scholar
Lengyel, S, et al. (2010) Convergent evolution of seed dispersal by ants, and phylogeny and biogeography in flowering plants: A global survey. Perspectives in Plant Ecology Evolution and Systematics 12, 43–55.Google Scholar
Letten, AD, Stouffer, DB (2019) The mechanistic basis for higher-order interactions and non-additivity in competitive communities. Ecology Letters 22, 423–436.Google Scholar
Levine, JM, et al. (2017) Beyond pairwise mechanisms of species coexistence in complex communities. Nature 546, 56–64.Google Scholar
Lucas-Barbosa, D (2016) Integrating studies on plant–pollinator and plant–herbivore Interactions. Trends in Plant Science 21, 125–133.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R (1970) Species packing and competitive equilibrium for many species. Theoretical Population Biology 1, 1–11.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R, Levins, R (1967) The limiting similarity, convergence, and divergence of coexisting species. The American Naturalist 101, 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, RM (1972) Will a large complex system be stable? Nature 238, 413–414.Google Scholar
Mayfield, M, Stouffer, D (2017) Higher-order interactions capture unexplained complexity in diverse communities. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 0062.Google Scholar
McGill, BJ, et al. (2006) Rebuilding community ecology from functional traits. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21, 178–185.Google Scholar
Metz, JAJ, et al. (1992) How should we define ‘fitness’ for general ecological scenarios? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 7, 198–202.Google Scholar
Minoarivelo, HO, et al. (2014) Detecting phylogenetic signal in mutualistic interaction networks using a Markov process model. Oikos 123, 1250–1260.Google Scholar
Mitchell, CE, et al. (2006) Biotic interactions and plant invasions. Ecology Letters 9, 726–740.Google Scholar
Mohammed, MMA, et al. (2018) Frugivory and seed dispersal: Extended bi-stable persistence and reduced clustering of plants. Ecological Modelling 380, 31–39.Google Scholar
Moran, N, Baumann, P (1994) Phylogenetics of cytoplasmically inherited microorganisms of arthropods. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9, 15–20.Google Scholar
Morgan, CL (1888) Natural selection and elimination. Nature 38, 370.Google Scholar
Morozov, A, Petrovskii, S (2013) Feeding on multiple sources: Towards a universal parameterization of the functional response of a generalist predator allowing for switching. PLoS ONE 8, e74586.Google Scholar
Mouritsen, KN, et al. (2011) Food web including metazoan parasites for an intertidal ecosystem in New Zealand. Ecology 92, 2006.Google Scholar
Murdoch, WW (1969) Switching in general predators: Experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecological Monographs 39, 335–354.Google Scholar
Nnakenyi, CA, et al. (2019) Fine-tuning the nested structure of pollination networks by adaptive interaction switching, biogeography and sampling effect in the Galápagos Islands. Oikos 128, 1413–1423.Google Scholar
Novak, M, et al. (2016) Characterizing species interactions to understand press perturbations: What is the community matrix? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 47, 409–432.Google Scholar
Nowak, M, Sigmund, K (1990) The evolution of stochastic strategies in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Acta Applicandae Mathematicae 20, 247–265.Google Scholar
Nowak, M, Sigmund, KA (1993) A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Nature 364, 56–58.Google Scholar
Nowak, MA (2006) Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314, 156–1563.Google Scholar
Nuismer, SL, et al. (2010) When is correlation coevolution? The American Naturalist 175, 525–537.Google Scholar
Nuwagaba, S, et al. (2015) A hybrid behavioural rule of adaptation and drift explains the emergent architecture of antagonistic networks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 282, 20150320.Google Scholar
Olesen, JM, et al. (2008) Temporal dynamics in a pollination network. Ecology 89, 1573–1582.Google Scholar
Openshaw, S (1984) Concepts and Techniques in Modern Geography, Number 38: The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem. Norwich: Geo Books.Google Scholar
Parker, GA, Begon, M (1986) Optimal egg size and clutch size: Effects of environment and maternal phenotype. The American Naturalist 128, 573–592.Google Scholar
Pauw, A, et al. (2009) Flies and flowers in Darwin’s race. Evolution 63, 268–279.Google Scholar
Pearson, SF, Rohwer, S (2000) Asymmetries in male aggression across an avian hybrid zone. Behavioral Ecology 11, 93–101.Google Scholar
Petanidou, T, et al. (2008) Long-term observation of a pollination network: Fluctuation in species and interactions, relative invariance of network structure and implications for estimates of specialization. Ecology Letters 11, 564–575.Google Scholar
Poveda, K, et al. (2005) Effects of decomposers and herbivores on plant performance and aboveground plant-insect interactions. Oikos 108, 503–510.Google Scholar
Queller, DC (2017) Fundamental theorems of evolution. The American Naturalist 189, 345–353.Google Scholar
Ramanantoanina, A, et al. (2014) Spatial assortment of mixed propagules explains the acceleration of range expansion. PLoS ONE 9, e103409.Google Scholar
Reinhart, KO, Callaway, RM (2006) Soil biota and invasive plants. New Phytologist 170, 445–457.Google Scholar
Rezende, E, et al. (2007) Non-random coextinctions in phylogenetically structured mutualistic networks. Nature 448, 925–928.Google Scholar
Richardson, DM, Pyšek, P (2006) Plant invasions: Merging the concepts of species invasiveness and community invasibility. Progress in Physical Geography 30, 409–431.Google Scholar
Richardson, DM, et al. (2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: Concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions 6, 93–107.Google Scholar
Richardson, LL, et al. (2016) Nectar chemistry mediates the behavior of parasitized bees: consequences for plant fitness. Ecology 97, 325–337.Google Scholar
Rieck, B, et al. (2018) Clique community persistence: A topological visual analysis approach for complex networks. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 822–831.Google Scholar
Rosati, AG, Stevens, JR (2009) Rational decisions: The adaptive nature of context-dependent choice. In Watanabe, S, Blaisdell, AP, Huber, L, Young, A (eds.) Rational Animals, Irrational Humans, pp. 101–117. Tokyo: Keio University Press.Google Scholar
Santamaría, L, Rodríguez-Gironés, MA (2007) Linkage rules for plant–pollinator networks: Trait complementarity or exploitation barriers? PLoS Biology 5, e31.Google Scholar
Sax, DF, et al. (2007) Ecological and evolutionary insights from species invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22, 465–471.Google Scholar
Sher, AA, Hyatt, LA (1999) The disturbed resource-flux invasion matrix: A new framework for patterns of plant invasion. Biological Invasions 1, 107–114.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D, Von Holle, B (1999) Positive Interactions of nonindigenous species: Invasional meltdown? Biological Invasions 1, 21–32.Google Scholar
Smith, CH (2012) Natural selection: A concept in need of some evolution? Complexity 17, 8–17.Google Scholar
Smith, J, Price, G (1973) The logic of animal conflict. Nature 246, 15–18.Google Scholar
Spencer, H (1864) The Principles of Biology. Vol 1. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
Staddon, JER (2010) Adaptive Behavior and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Staddon, JER, Hinson, JM (1983) Optimization: A result or a mechanism? Science 221, 976–977.Google Scholar
Staniczenko, PPA, et al. (2010) Structural dynamics and robustness of food webs. Ecology Letters 13, 891–899.Google Scholar
Stephens, DW, Krebs, JR (1986) Foraging Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, SY, et al. (2006) Evolutionary responses of natives to introduced species: What do introductions tell us about natural communities? Ecology Letters 9, 357–374.Google Scholar
Suweis, S, et al. (2013) Emergence of structural and dynamical properties of ecological mutualistic networks. Nature 500, 449–452.Google Scholar
Terry, JCD, et al. (2017) Trophic interaction modifications: An empirical and theoretical framework. Ecology Letters 20, 1219–1230.Google Scholar
Thompson, JN (2012) The role of coevolution. Science 335, 410–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, JN (2013) Relentless Evolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Toju, H, Sota, T (2006) Imbalance of predator and prey armament: Geographic clines in phenotypic interface and natural selection. The American Naturalist 167, 105–117.Google Scholar
Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (2014) Mutualistic interactions and biological invasions. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 45, 89–113.Google Scholar
Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (eds.) (2020) Plant Invasions: The Role of Biotic Interactions. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
van Baalen, M, et al. (2001) Alternative food, switching predators, and the persistence of predator-prey systems. The American Naturalist 157, 512–524.Google Scholar
Vaughan, W Jr, Herrnstein, RJ (1987) Choosing among natural stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 47, 5–16.Google Scholar
Wallace, AR (1877) The colors of animals and plants. The American Naturalist 11, 641–662.Google Scholar
Wang, Z, et al. (2014) Rewarding evolutionary fitness with links between populations promotes cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 349, 50–56.Google Scholar
Wandrag, EM, Catford, JA (2020) Competition between native and non-native plants. In Traveset, A, Richardson, DM (eds.) Plant Invasions: The Role of Biotic Interactions, pp. 281–307. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Ward, NL, Masters, GJ (2007) Linking climate change and species invasion: An illustration using insect herbivores. Global Change Biology 13, 1605–1615.Google Scholar
Waser, NM (2015) Competition for pollination and the evolution of flowering time. The American Naturalist 185, iii–v.Google Scholar
Waxman, D, Gavrilets, S (2005) 20 questions on adaptive dynamics. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18, 1139–1154.Google Scholar
Weinberg, S (1977) The forces of nature: Gauge field theories offer the prospect of a unified view of the four kinds of natural force-the gravitational and electromagnetic, and the weak and the strong. American Scientist 65. 171–176.Google Scholar
White, EM, et al. (2006) Biotic indirect effects: A neglected concept in invasion biology. Diversity and Distributions 12, 443–455.Google Scholar
Whittall, J, Hodges, S (2007) Pollinator shifts drive increasingly long nectar spurs in columbine flowers. Nature 447, 706–709.Google Scholar
Wilsenach, J, et al. (2017) Evolutionary fields can explain patterns of high-dimensional complexity in ecology. Physical Review E 95, 042401.Google Scholar
Wootton, J (1994) The nature and consequences of indirect effects in ecological communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 25, 443–466.Google Scholar
Worthy, DA, Maddox, WT (2014) A comparison model of reinforcement-learning and win-stay-lose-shift decision-making processes: A tribute to W.K. Estes. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 59, 41–49.Google Scholar
Wright, S (1932) The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding, and selection in evolution. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Genetics 1, 355–366.Google Scholar
Yang, YH, Hui, C (2021) How competitive intransitivity and niche overlap affect spatial coexistence. Oikos 130, 260–273.Google Scholar
Yoshida, T, et al. (2003) Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a predator-prey system. Nature 424, 303–306.Google Scholar
Zhang, F, Hui, C (2014) Recent experience-driven behaviour optimizes foraging. Animal Behaviour 88 , 13–19.Google Scholar
Zhang, F, et al. (2010) The evolution of cooperation on fragmented landscapes: The spatial Hamilton rule. Evolutionary Ecology Research 12, 23–33.Google Scholar
Zhang, F, et al. (2011) An interaction switch predicts the nested architecture of mutualistic networks. Ecology Letters 14, 797–803.Google Scholar
Zhang, F, et al. (2013) Adaptive divergence in Darwin’s race: How coevolution can generate trait diversity in a pollination system. Evolution 67, 548–560.Google Scholar
Zhao, ZH, et al. (2019) The failure of success: Cyclic recurrences of a globally invasive pest. Ecological Applications 29, e01991.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Relentless Evolution
  • Cang Hui, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, David Richardson, Stellenbosch University, South Africa
  • Book: Invading Ecological Networks
  • Online publication: 05 May 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108778374.003
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Relentless Evolution
  • Cang Hui, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, David Richardson, Stellenbosch University, South Africa
  • Book: Invading Ecological Networks
  • Online publication: 05 May 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108778374.003
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Relentless Evolution
  • Cang Hui, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, David Richardson, Stellenbosch University, South Africa
  • Book: Invading Ecological Networks
  • Online publication: 05 May 2022
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108778374.003
Available formats
×