↓ Skip to main content

Self-regulation and the stability of large ecological networks

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Self-regulation and the stability of large ecological networks
Published in
Nature Ecology & Evolution, October 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41559-017-0357-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

György Barabás, Matthew J. Michalska-Smith, Stefano Allesina

Abstract

The stability of complex ecological networks depends both on the interactions between species and the direct effects of the species on themselves. These self-effects are known as 'self-regulation' when an increase in a species' abundance decreases its per-capita growth rate. Sources of self-regulation include intraspecific interference, cannibalism, time-scale separation between consumers and their resources, spatial heterogeneity and nonlinear functional responses coupling predators with their prey. The influence of self-regulation on network stability is understudied and in addition, the empirical estimation of self-effects poses a formidable challenge. Here, we show that empirical food web structures cannot be stabilized unless the majority of species exhibit substantially strong self-regulation. We also derive an analytical formula predicting the effect of self-regulation on network stability with high accuracy and show that even for random networks, as well as networks with a cascade structure, stability requires negative self-effects for a large proportion of species. These results suggest that the aforementioned potential mechanisms of self-regulation are probably more important in contributing to the stability of observed ecological networks than was previously thought.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 171 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 23%
Researcher 35 20%
Student > Master 23 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 26 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 29%
Environmental Science 37 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Physics and Astronomy 5 3%
Mathematics 4 2%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 46 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,378,492
of 25,321,938 outputs
Outputs from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#1,671
of 2,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,780
of 335,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Ecology & Evolution
#89
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,321,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 150.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.