Abstract
Ecological networks provide a critical framework for understanding the architecture of biodiversity and predicting ecosystem responses to environmental change. However, the application of network ecology is often hindered by a lack of clarity regarding the assumptions inherent in different network representations. Here, we present a hierarchical framework that distinguishes between ‘metawebs’ (representing the fundamental feasibility of interactions) and ‘realised webs’ (representing interactions expressed in specific spatiotemporal contexts). We contrast our conceptual approach with recent data-centric reviews, focusing instead on the theoretical gradients that govern network construction. We identify five core processes that drive the transition from potential to realised interactions: evolutionary compatibility and co-occurrence, which define the feasibility of links; and abundance, diet choice, and non-trophic interactions, which determine their realisation. Furthermore, we map these processes onto a methodological spectrum of network construction, distinguishing between inductive approaches (*e.g.,* trait-matching and stochastic models) that infer structure from observation, and deductive approaches (*e.g.,* neutral and optimal foraging models) that generate structure from mechanistic first principles. By making explicit the assumptions and scale-dependent processes underpinning these different representations, this framework clarifies the scope of inference possible with each approach, ultimately facilitating more robust predictions of biodiversity dynamics in the anthropocene.
Full text
2,441 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.
You must log in to post a comment.
There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.
This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.
Add a Comment
You must log in to post a comment.
Comments
There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.
Ecological networks provide a critical framework for understanding the architecture of biodiversity and predicting ecosystem responses to environmental change. However, the application of network ecology is often hindered by a lack of clarity regarding the assumptions inherent in different network representations. Here, we present a hierarchical framework that distinguishes between ‘metawebs’ (representing the fundamental feasibility of interactions) and ‘realised webs’ (representing interactions expressed in specific spatiotemporal contexts). We contrast our conceptual approach with recent data-centric reviews, focusing instead on the theoretical gradients that govern network construction. We identify five core processes that drive the transition from potential to realised interactions: evolutionary compatibility and co-occurrence, which define the feasibility of links; and abundance, diet choice, and non-trophic interactions, which determine their realisation. Furthermore, we map these processes onto a methodological spectrum of network construction, distinguishing between inductive approaches (*e.g.,* trait-matching and stochastic models) that infer structure from observation, and deductive approaches (*e.g.,* neutral and optimal foraging models) that generate structure from mechanistic first principles. By making explicit the assumptions and scale-dependent processes underpinning these different representations, this framework clarifies the scope of inference possible with each approach, ultimately facilitating more robust predictions of biodiversity dynamics in the anthropocene.
https://doi.org/10.32942/X2JW8K
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Life Sciences, Other Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
food web, network construction, biodiversity, scale and process, interaction modelling
Published: 2026-01-21 17:40
Last Updated: 2026-01-21 17:40
CC BY Attribution 4.0 International
Conflict of interest statement:
None
Data and Code Availability Statement:
Not applicable
Language:
English
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.