Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33707438›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

An ecological network approach to predict ecosystem service vulnerability to species losses.

Aislyn A Keyes, John P McLaughlin, Allison K Barner, Laura E Dee

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Mapping the "Supply-Demand-Flow" of Ecosystem Services for Ecosystem Management in China.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Ternary network models for disturbed ecosystems.Royal Society open science · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Aislyn A KeyesDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA. Aislyn.Keyes@colorado.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-1735
John P McLaughlinDepeartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA.
Allison K BarnerDepartment of Biology, Colby College, Waterville, ME, USA.
Laura E DeeDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human-driven threats are changing biodiversity, impacting ecosystem services. The loss of one species can trigger secondary extinctions of additional species, because species interact-yet the consequences of these secondary extinctions for services remain underexplored. Herein, we compare robustness of food webs and the ecosystem services (hereafter 'services') they provide; and investigate factors determining service responses to secondary extinctions. Simulating twelve extinction scenarios for estuarine food webs with seven services, we find that food web and service robustness are highly correlated, but that robustness varies across services depending on their trophic level and redundancy. Further, we find that species providing services do not play a critical role in stabilizing food webs - whereas species playing supporting roles in services through interactions are critical to the robustness of both food webs and services. Together, our results reveal indirect risks to services through secondary species losses and predictable differences in vulnerability across services.

Indexed as

EcosystemExtinction, BiologicalFood ChainAnimalsBiodiversityBirdsClimate ChangeFishesHumansModels, Biological

Identifiers

PMID33707438
PMCPMC7952599

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.