Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31534845›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2019

Revealing biases in the sampling of ecological interaction networks.

Marcus A M de Aguiar, Erica A Newman, Mathias M Pires, Justin D Yeakel, Carl Boettiger, Laura A Burkle, Dominique Gravel, Paulo R Guimarães, James L O'Donnell, Timothée Poisot and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A highly resolved network reveals the role of terrestrial herbivory in structuring aboveground food webs.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  4. Ecology and evolution · 2023
    Article
  5. A roadmap towards predicting species interaction networks (across space and time).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Marcus A M de AguiarInstituto de Física "Gleb Wataghin", Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1379-7568
Erica A NewmanDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6433-8594
Mathias M PiresDepartamento de Biologia Animal, Instituto de Biologia, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Justin D YeakelSchool of Natural Sciences, University of California, Merced, CA, USA.
Carl BoettigerDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1642-628X
Laura A BurkleDepartment of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8413-1627
Dominique GravelDépartement de Biologie, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Paulo R GuimarãesDepartamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
James L O'DonnellSchool of Marine and Environmental Affairs, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Timothée PoisotDépartement de Sciences Biologiques, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0735-5184
Marie-Josée FortinDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
David H HembryDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4907-8912

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The structure of ecological interactions is commonly understood through analyses of interaction networks. However, these analyses may be sensitive to sampling biases with respect to both the interactors (the nodes of the network) and interactions (the links between nodes), because the detectability of species and their interactions is highly heterogeneous. These ecological and statistical issues directly affect ecologists' abilities to accurately construct ecological networks. However, statistical biases introduced by sampling are difficult to quantify in the absence of full knowledge of the underlying ecological network's structure. To explore properties of large-scale ecological networks, we developed the software

Indexed as

Ecological networksField sampling designFood websModularityNestednessNetwork metricsNetwork topologySpecies interaction networks

Identifiers

PMID31534845
PMCPMC6727833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.