Dear community.

I'm new to mailing lists and to this list in particular so this is my first
post. I'm sending this message, because I'd like some advice on an
ecological topic and I would appreciate any input from this community. Many
thanks in advance.

I want to work on antagonistic interaction networks between herbivorous
insects and their woody host plants. My approach is that I want to sample 15
different plots in three different habitat types (forest fragments, forest
edges and forest centers), so 45 plots at the whole. In each plot (20 m x 50
m), I'm going to collect insects from each tree individual by hitting the
branches. Afterwards I want to use No Choice Feeding Assays to find out,
which insects are actually herbivorous. The herbivores will then be
identified by morphospecies and used as a basis for bipartite networks. For
this I want to use the "bipartite" package provided for the programme "R",
so I hope some people out here might already have some practical experience
with this package. My aim is to compare indices the package can calculate
between the three different habitat types. So I should end up with 15
repetitions for each value and for each habitat type.

My questions now are:
Some of the Indices the package can calculate are strongly dependent on
sample size. That means, the value moves into an asymptotic region for
increasingly bigger networks. So if a network for a single plot is too small
to return "asymptotic" values, would you try to fuse together several
networks, albeit risking to loose variation in your repetitions?
And if so, how would you try to compare the then returned indices between
habitats? My approach would have been to then use reiterations like in
species-area curves.

My second problem is somehow connected to this. It might turn out, that 15
plots per habitat are slightly too much to sample in the time I have.
Therefore I have two possibilities: Either reduce plot size and thus lose
tree diversity or reduce plotnumbers/repetitions and thus lose variation in
network-index variation. What's your opinion on that?

My last question is about how to translate feeding herbivores as
interactions into a bipartite matrix. I think an example would be the best
illustration: Let's imagine two tree individuals A and B of the same
species. We observe the same herbivor species on both trees in different
abundances, let's say 15 beetles on tree A and 50 beetles on tree B. How
many interactions would you then count for this tree species? Either two
(the particular beetle species was observed on two tree individuals) or 65
(the whole abundance of this beetle species on the trees). The first
approach would lay more weight on the tree abundance in the matrix, the
latter more weight on the insect abundance. What do you think?

I'm very sorry for this mass of text, I tried to get it as fitting as
possible. As I said, I would appreciate any input whatsoever. Many thanks in
advance and I am curious on what you think.

Regards,

Kevin Bähner

Reply via email to