2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102271
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deciphering trophic interactions in a mid-Cambrian assemblage

Abstract: Network analysis of wellpreserved fossil communities can predict probable interactions Clustering analyses of these interactions reveal possible ecological categories Agent-based models can help infer/map these categories to known ecological patterns High agreement of predictions to hypothesized trophic interactions from literature

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To explore the effect of sampling efforts on the final structure of the fine-scale species- and genus-level networks, we performed a rarefaction analysis in which we subsampled different proportions of the data (from 0.01 to 1, in increments of 0.01; each repeated 200 times) from each of the four assemblages and measured the Hamming distance (Deza and Deza 2009) between the reconstructed subsampled network and the originally reconstructed network with all the data and normalized for each location for effective comparison. In this context, (normalized) Hamming distance, which takes values from 0 to 1, summarizes the proportion of interactions recovered from the subsampled data in comparison to the whole dataset and can inform about the relative sampling efforts and how strongly the network structure depends on sampling effort (Swain et al 2021). This exercise was performed for networks constructed at the species and genus level and at the major plant group level for each of the four localities.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To explore the effect of sampling efforts on the final structure of the fine-scale species- and genus-level networks, we performed a rarefaction analysis in which we subsampled different proportions of the data (from 0.01 to 1, in increments of 0.01; each repeated 200 times) from each of the four assemblages and measured the Hamming distance (Deza and Deza 2009) between the reconstructed subsampled network and the originally reconstructed network with all the data and normalized for each location for effective comparison. In this context, (normalized) Hamming distance, which takes values from 0 to 1, summarizes the proportion of interactions recovered from the subsampled data in comparison to the whole dataset and can inform about the relative sampling efforts and how strongly the network structure depends on sampling effort (Swain et al 2021). This exercise was performed for networks constructed at the species and genus level and at the major plant group level for each of the four localities.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This, coupled with the possibility that A. canadensis would have damaged the ventral endites and dorsal spines of the frontal appendages on the substrate if trying to rapidly grab prey from the seafloor (as indicated by our FEA results), contradicts the idea that it was primarily a demersal predator [ 30 , 76 ], particularly of benthic trilobites [ 22 , 27 29 , 31 , 32 ]. Instead, A. canadensis had a large diversity of nektonic and pelagic soft-bodied animals to potentially feed upon, including a variety of other euarthropods (especially the common isoxyids and hymenocarines such as Waptia and Canadaspis ), as well as ctenophores, nectocaridids and vetulicolians [ 73 , 75 , 77 , 78 ], leaving other Burgess Shale radiodonts (e.g. Hurdia [ 8 , 79 ], Cambroraster [ 11 ], Stanleycaris [ 21 ] and Titanokorys [ 12 ]), artiopodans (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, in insect social networks, we might expect to see more informative higher scales that capture more of the emergent coordination of the collective as a whole (e.g. in ant colonies; see Swain, Devereux, et al, 2021).…”
Section: Causal Emergence: Informative Higher Scalesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The kind of noise introduced through observation will often be specific to particular systems under study. Past work has focused on the estimation, and in rare cases, the correction of such noise (Newman, 2018; Freilich et al, 2020; Swain, Devereux, et al, 2021). Beyond such estimation, it can often be difficult to deal with the noise that is inherently present in complex biological systems regardless of whether the noise is from measurement or is inherent to the system in question.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%