EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX FOOD WEB STRUCTURE BASED ON MASS EXTINCTION

Similar documents
Spatial and Temporal Behaviors in a Modified Evolution Model Based on Small World Network

Multiobjective Optimization of an Extremal Evolution Model

Nonlinear Dynamical Behavior in BS Evolution Model Based on Small-World Network Added with Nonlinear Preference

Self-organized scale-free networks

A Modified Earthquake Model Based on Generalized Barabási Albert Scale-Free

A Simple Model of Evolution with Variable System Size

Mass Extinction in a Simple Mathematical Biological Model. Abstract

Self-organized Criticality in a Modified Evolution Model on Generalized Barabási Albert Scale-Free Networks

EVOLUTION. HISTORY: Ideas that shaped the current evolutionary theory. Evolution change in populations over time.

arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.dis-nn] 4 May 2000

adap-org/ Jan 1994

EVOLUTION change in populations over time

6.207/14.15: Networks Lecture 12: Generalized Random Graphs

Review Session #5. Evolu0on Ecology

EVOLUTION change in populations over time

Parameter Sensitivity In A Lattice Ecosystem With Intraguild Predation

Self-organized Criticality and Synchronization in a Pulse-coupled Integrate-and-Fire Neuron Model Based on Small World Networks

T he studies of ecological networks, in particular food webs, have focused on the structure1 3 and dynamics of

Small-world structure of earthquake network

Stability of a model food web

Effects of Interactive Function Forms in a Self-Organized Critical Model Based on Neural Networks

Reproduction- passing genetic information to the next generation

A Simple Model of Self-organized Biological Evolution. Abstract

Lecture notes for /12.586, Modeling Environmental Complexity. D. H. Rothman, MIT October 20, 2014

arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 6 Mar 2008

REVIEW 6: EVOLUTION. 1. Define evolution: Was not the first to think of evolution, but he did figure out how it works (mostly).

arxiv:nlin/ v1 [nlin.ao] 20 Feb 2000

Theory a well supported testable explanation of phenomenon occurring in the natural world.

A case study for self-organized criticality and complexity in forest landscape ecology

Opinion Dynamics on Triad Scale Free Network

Emergence of complex structure through co-evolution:

THINGS I NEED TO KNOW:

Spiral Waves Emergence in a Cyclic Predator-Prey Model

Deterministic scale-free networks

Structural dynamics and robustness of food webs. Phillip Staniczenko Department of Physics and Saïd Business School

Evolution and Community Ecology Chapter 5 HOMEWORK. Name. Period TEACHER

Chapter 22: Descent with Modification: A Darwinian View of Life

Modes of Macroevolution

Complex Systems Theory and Evolution

overproduction variation adaptation Natural Selection speciation adaptation Natural Selection speciation

Part 2: Models of Food-Web Structure

The Sandpile Model on Random Apollonian Networks

arxiv: v1 [q-bio.mn] 26 Oct 2013

arxiv: v1 [physics.soc-ph] 15 Dec 2009

Social Networks- Stanley Milgram (1967)

NOTES Ch 17: Genes and. Variation

Chapter 17: Population Genetics and Speciation

Studying Long-term Evolution with Artificial Life

The Structure of Ecological Networks and Consequences for Fragility

Controlling chaos in random Boolean networks

poster presented at: Complex Networks: from Biology to Information Technology Pula (CA), Italy, July 2-6, 2007

How Scale-free Type-based Networks Emerge from Instance-based Dynamics

Group Formation: Fragmentation Transitions in Network Coevolution Dynamics

How Communities Evolve

arxiv:cond-mat/ v2 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 3 Oct 2005

Networks as a tool for Complex systems

Evolutionary dynamics on graphs

Shlomo Havlin } Anomalous Transport in Scale-free Networks, López, et al,prl (2005) Bar-Ilan University. Reuven Cohen Tomer Kalisky Shay Carmi

Major questions of evolutionary genetics. Experimental tools of evolutionary genetics. Theoretical population genetics.

Biology. Slide 1 of 25. End Show. Copyright Pearson Prentice Hall

Mini course on Complex Networks

A SIMPLE MODEL FOR THE EVOLUTION OF EVOLUTION

Evolution and Natural Selection

Branching Process Approach to Avalanche Dynamics on Complex Networks

Requirements for Prospective Teachers General Science. 4.1a Explain energy flow and nutrient cycling through ecosystems (e.g., food chain, food web)

Ch.5 Evolution and Community Ecology How do organisms become so well suited to their environment? Evolution and Natural Selection

Emergence of diversity in a biological evolution model

Biology Unit Overview and Pacing Guide

THIELE CENTRE. Disordered chaotic strings. Mirko Schäfer and Martin Greiner. for applied mathematics in natural science

An Ecological Approach to the Evolution of Organism Complexity. Mikel Maron Evolutionary and Adaptive Systems University of Sussex August 26, 2004

Complex networks and evolutionary games

Numerical evaluation of the upper critical dimension of percolation in scale-free networks

Scale-free network of earthquakes

Network Biology: Understanding the cell s functional organization. Albert-László Barabási Zoltán N. Oltvai

Properties of Life. Levels of Organization. Levels of Organization. Levels of Organization. Levels of Organization. The Science of Biology.

Chapter 5 Evolution of Biodiversity

Lecture 10. Under Attack!

Regents Biology REVIEW 6: EVOLUTION. 1. Define evolution:

Extinction: Bad Genes or Weak Chaos?

Biology 11 UNIT 1: EVOLUTION LESSON 2: HOW EVOLUTION?? (MICRO-EVOLUTION AND POPULATIONS)

The Science of Biology. Chapter 1

Phase Transitions in Nonequilibrium Steady States and Power Laws and Scaling Functions of Surface Growth Processes

Complex-Network Modelling and Inference

Evolving network with different edges

Effects of Interactive Function Forms and Refractoryperiod in a Self-Organized Critical Model Based on Neural Networks

CRITICAL BEHAVIOR IN AN EVOLUTIONARY ULTIMATUM GAME WITH SOCIAL STRUCTURE

-The study of the interactions between the different species in an area

arxiv:q-bio/ v1 [q-bio.pe] 23 Jan 2006

5/31/2012. Speciation and macroevolution - Chapter

Coevolution of learning and niche construction. Reiji Suzuki, Yasunori Noba and Takaya Arita

arxiv: v2 [q-bio.pe] 12 Sep 2012

Darwin s Observations & Conclusions The Struggle for Existence

CS224W: Analysis of Networks Jure Leskovec, Stanford University

arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.dis-nn] 24 Mar 2005

Chapter 5. Evolution of Biodiversity

What is Evolution? Evolution = Most changes occur gradually, but can happen on a shorter time scale Variations in populations come from

Evolution 1 Star. 6. The different tools used during the beaks of finches lab represented. A. feeding adaptations in finches

Next Generation Science Standards Crosscutting Concepts for MS

ECS 253 / MAE 253 April 26, Intro to Biological Networks, Motifs, and Model selection/validation

of EVOLUTION???????????? states that existing forms of life on earth have arisen from earlier forms over long periods of time.

Transcription:

EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX FOOD WEB STRUCTURE BASED ON MASS EXTINCTION Kenichi Nakazato Nagoya University Graduate School of Human Informatics nakazato@create.human.nagoya-u.ac.jp Takaya Arita Nagoya University Graduate School of Information Science arita@nagoya-u.jp ABSTRACT We demonstrate that complex food webs may originate from mass extinctions. For this purpose, a minimal computational model for the evolution of food webs is constructed. In the model, food web structure is represented by a kind of dynamic random graph with some biological constraints, and evolves under the condition without fitness, competition among species, nor population dynamics. It is shown that the behavior of the system has three different phases, among which the Class B (mid-phase) exhibits complex nonequilibrium dynamics and can reproduce the empirical observations. Key words: complex networks, food webs, mass extinction, phase transition, power law, macroevolution 1. INTRODUCTION Significant advances have been made in the field of complex networks in recent years [1, 6]. Especially the structure and the evolutionary dynamics of food webs are among the central issues under discussion [7, 15, 9, 4]. A food web is represented by a directed graph consisting of vertices (species) and directed edges (trophic links). Several reports have shown that such graphs do not have network topology of classical Erdösh-Renyi s random graph, but rather are described as small world or scale-free [7, 15, 4]. Besides empirical analysis, there are theoretical approaches with some different classes of models [5]. The first class is characterized by static models, and suggest that food webs have some universal properties [16, 4]. The second is characterized by dynamic models, which include traditional population dynamics. And the last is concerned with food web properties of longer time scales or macroevolution. While the first two classes lack the combined view of dynamics and structure, this class targets such a combined view. Among them, scientists have taken a new approach based on toy models in recent years, where the patterns of mass extinctions in the fossil record or self-organized critical phenomena are focused [2, 14, 3, 11]. Recently several reports have investigated on the patterns of mass extinctions in the fossil record. Among them, one of the most striking common features is that mass extinction follows power law distribution: f(s) s τ, (1) where s is the size of mass extinctions, and f(s) is frequency, with an exponent τ 2 [1]. Furthermore, quantitative models have been proposed to explain this power law distribution, and some relationships between food webs and mass extinctions are suggested [11, 2]. The essential problem can be summarized by two questions. What is the cause of mass extinction, and what is the mechanism of selecting victims [2]? Specifically, this paper focuses on the question: what mechanisms could generate the non-random but complex topology of food webs in nature? According to the emerging complex networks theory, such non-random structures can be formed through network growing or some specific rewiring processes [6]. However, it is unlikely that food webs have perpetual growth in size or such specific rewiring mechanisms. Therefore, we investigate another simple mechanism which can reproduce such non-random topology. Our basic idea is that mass extinctions may bring about non-random topology to food webs, in other words, mass extinctions keep food webs far away from equilibrium state and at the same time complex structure gradually evolves through symmetry breaking. In genaral, symmetry breaking occurs in a situation where, given a symmetrical equlibrium state, a self-amplifying mechanism of fluctuation exists which can be activated by asymmetric input or flow. Such a self-organized structure in a situation of this type is known as dissipative structure [12], where the fluctuation is essential. Therefore, were it not for any constraint in the evolution of species, food web structure would be like random graph. However, living organisms have evolutionary constraints such as natural selection at least at the level of individuals within a population (microevolution). We believe that mass extinctions may function as the amplifying mechanism at the level of stable species (macroevolution). With these issues in mind, we construct a minimal model of food web evolution which has following two key features.

The model has an evolutionary mechanism which is represented by random rewiring. Thus food webs are destined to random networks as equilibrium state but for any other mechanisms. At the same time, a mass extinction mechanism is adopted, which potentially drives the networks to nonrandom state through symmetry breaking. At least in principle, the model could generate non-random network topology and show both the power law distribution of extinction sizes and scale-free degree distribution of networks. The degree distribution is the distribution of number of edges attached to each vertex. These features are based on the idea that fitness or interspecies competition might not be the driving force of macroevolution [8, 13]. This paper is organized as follows. First, we describe a minimal model for macroevolution. Then we investigate its statistical and structural properties based on the computer experiments. Finally we discuss some biological implications and conclude the paper. 2. MODEL A food web is represented by a directed graph, in which each node expresses a species and each arrow from one node to another indicates a trophic link, in other words, an energy flow from a resource species (prey) to a consumer species (predator). The single root node represents the energy source like the sun. The dynamics of the system is governed by two mechanisms. The first one represents an evolutionary process realized by random rewiring of edges (addition or removal). This mechanism has a tendency to increase the system s entropy towards a maximum. The second mechanism has the potential to cause mass extinctions. Extinctions occur in two cases. The first case is random accident; a species is selected for extinction randomly. The other is co-extinction; a vertex lost all in-edges becomes also extinct. Note that if all of a species prey become extinct, then it too becomes extinct (recursively). So, avalanches of extinction (mass extinction) can occur. This mechanism is based on Amaral- Meyer [2]. After these processes, randomly selected species will be duplicated immediately. Thus the size of network N will be kept in constant. The model is summarized as the following repetition of steps: 1. A random accident occurs with a probability P accident, which means that a vertex is selected randomly and all edges connected to it and itself are deleted. Otherwise, the following rewriting process is executed. First, a pair of vertices is selected randomly. Then addition of the edge is attempted with the probability P adde. Otherwise removal of the edge (if any) N P accident P adde Table 1: Parameters. the size of network the rate of random accident at each steps the rate at which adding edge is attempted is attempted. In case of addition, the direction of the new edge is determined based on the trophic level; the edge would be directed from vertex of a lower trophic level to upper one. The trophic level of a vertex is the path length from the root to it. 2. All vertices with no in-edge and all edges connected to them are deleted recursively. 3. The process that randomly selected vertex and all edges connected to it are copied is repeated until the size of the network reaches to the constant value N. In the case that there is no vertex other than the root, a new vertex is generated, and the root and the vertex are connected by a new edge. 3.1. General behavior 3. RESULTS First, we focus on the trophic diversity so as to explore the general behavior of the system. The trophic diversity is defined as the number of trophic species. Here, trophic species are the groups of vertices that share the same set of trophic relations. Figure 1 shows the trophic diversity determined by temporal average at each run with parameter sets. We see that it is steady nearly at the upper limit in the region of low P accident and high P adde. In contrast, the highest P accident or lowest P adde region has the trophic diversity of the lower limit 1. The transition region between them is limited to the narrow area. A time-series of the trophic diversity is examined in order to investigate the evolutionary activity and the transition process (Figure 2). Note that P adde is increased linearly at a constant rate every time step. Trophic diversity has the value of the lower limit at start-up (Class A), then an explosive growth up to the upper limit occurs as P adde increases. In this phase, intensive fluctuation is seen (Class B). After that, the number of fluctuation comes down (Class C). Considering the way of the extinction and replication mechanisms adopted in the model, it is clear that the fluctuation indicates mass extinction. Next, we conducted an analysis in order to reveal statistical features of the system. Figure 3 shows the frequency distribution of sizes of extinction (the number of deleted

trophic diversity 3 25 2 15 5-4 3 25 2 15 5 frequency f(s) 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 P adde =1.x1-5.5x1-3 1.x1-3 1.5x1-3 2.x1-3 2.5x1-3 log 1 P accident -.5. 1-2 1.25 1-2 P adde 2.5 1-2 1-7 1-8 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 size of extinction event s Figure 1: The landscape of trophic diversity; X: P adde, Y: P accident (log scale), Z: trophic diversity. N = 3. Figure 3: Frequency distributions of size of extinction. P accident =.1. Network size N = 3. trophic diveersity Class A 3 25 2 15 5 Class B Class C 3.2. Behavior in each class Class A, B and C are investigated individually in order to do more detailed analysis. Firstly, we investigated the relation between parameter sets and the evolutionary behavior. The result is shown in Figure 5. Parameter sets of the area shaded black or dark gray (the left or upper side) produce the behavior classified as class A. White area (the lower right large area) of parameter sets corresponds to class C. Class B corresponds to the parameter sets in the light gray area between class A and class C. 1 5 1 7 1 1 8 Figure 2: Transition process of trophic diversity. P accident =.1. P adde follows linear function of time step T ; P adde = T 2.5 1 1. Network size N = 3. vertices at one step). It is shown that it approximately follows the power law F (s) s τ with exponent τ = 1.5 4., in which as P adde increases the exponent τ also increases. We also examined the network topology by its degree distributions. Figure 4 shows the degree distributions of networks. As we see from the figure, the distribution can be clearly divided into three types: exponential, scale free and poissonian distributions. The terms Class A, B and C used in the above description are defined based on this observation. Exponential distribution arises at very low P adde, which correspond to Class A. It has been also shown that scale free distribution arises in Class B, and poissonian distribution arises in Class C. 3.2.1. Class A (frozen state) In this class, the system is in the frozen equilibrium state. It appears when adding of an edge is rare, and random accident is frequent. In this class, almost all vertices are linked directly to the root vertex at all times. Thus, the networks have always the star network topology. As for the dynamics (Figure 6), trophic diversity is kept around the lower limit 1, and at the same time mass extinction is rare, which is an inevitable corollary. The state in this class is summarized as low diversity, high stability, and high spatial symmetry. 3.2.2. Class B (complex state) In this class, the system exhibits complex and inhomogeneous behaviors. As shown in Figure 4, the degree distribution follows the power law behavior. However, degree distribution at every step has a significant deviation from that (in Figure 9). In many cases, they seem to be exponential rather than power-law distribution. From the dynamical view point, the networks always fluctuate intensively in contrast to the class A. In conjunction with such network

frequency 1 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 P adde =1.x1-3 5.x1-3 9.x1-3 13.x1-3 17.x1-3 21.x1-3 Class B Class A Class C 1-7 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 network degree log 1 Paccident -.5-4. 1-2 Class A Class B 1.25 1-2 P adde Class C 2.5 1-2 3 25 2 15 5 Figure 5: Phase diagram. Gray scale represents trophic diversity. Network size N = 3. The border lines are not accurate, but rough sketches. Figure 4: Degree distributions of networks. P accident = 1. 1 3, Network size N = 3. dynamics, this class has many punctuated mass extinctions with different sizes (1 N) as shown in Figure 7. 3.2.3. Class C (chaotic state) In this class, the system exhibits chaotic or random behavior. In other words, the system is in the homogenous equilibrium state. Networks are random graph at all times. The number of mass extinctions is smaller than that in class B, and the size of mass extinctions are homogenous; small extinction or annihilation as shown in Figure 8. Annihilations occur when the trophic link is removed for some reason, given that it is just one trophic link from the root in the network. After such annihilations occur, the network takes back a random topology swiftly. Thus, in this class the system shows an equilibrium state at almost all times. Dynamics in this class is summarized as an equilibrium homogenous behavior with exception of annihilations and prompt recovery from it. 4. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION This paper has proposed a minimal model for the evolution of food webs using a kind of dynamic random graphs with some biological features, so as to examine the possibility that mass extinctions may originate complex food web structure. It was shown that the system consists of three phases: frozen, complex and chaotic, one of which emerges according to the parameter sets. The dominant factor here determining the behavior is the balance between the rate of randomization (evolution) and the frequency of accidents (ex- trophic diveersity 18 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 1 1 1 7 2 1 7 Figure 6: Evolution in Class A. N = 3. P adde = 1. 1 5. P accident =.1. tinction). When the rate of randomization is high compared with accidents, in other words evolution of each species is sufficiently quick or ecosystems have few accidents, the food web evolves toward a random graph in which the system is in a chaotic state. On the contrary, in a too risky environment with many accidents, the system could never evolve its diversity and remains in a frozen state which consists of only autotrophic species. The most suggestive state is the complex state (Class B: mid-state). It is inhomogeneous and in nonequilibrium, and is maintained through a self-amplifying mechanism of fluctuation: 1) mass extinctions cause deviation from equilibrium through replicating process, 2) copied vertices accelerate the growth of deviation after the mass extinctions. Thus, symmetry breaking could occur in this phase through mass extinctions. With regard to topology in this class, the degree distribution at every time step seems to have an exponential dis-

trophic diveersity 3 25 2 15 5 1 1 1 7 2 1 7 Figure 7: Evolution in Class B. N = 3. P adde = 3. 1 3. P accident = 1. 1 3. trophic diveersity 3 25 2 15 5 1 1 1 7 2 1 7 Figure 8: Evolution in Class C. N = 3. P adde =.2. P accident =.1. tribution typically rather than power law distribution. This observation corresponds to empirical data [7]. On the other hand, when measuring the degree distribution in a long time scale it seems to have a power law degree distribution as shown in Figure 4. Though it seems very difficult to collect such empirical data in a long time scale, these results suggest that the real food webs might have a power law degree distribution, if longer time scale is in scope. Also, it is worth noting that in this class the exponent τ of power law in mass extinction takes a value in 1.9 2.5, which is parallel with the empirical data (τ 2). These observations lead to the conjecture that real food webs may be an embodiment of this complex class. That is, food webs might have been maintained in a nonequilibrium complex state through mass extinctions. In contrast to the mid-phase, the chaotic state with a topology of random graphs has no empirical data. The chaotic state in this model is realized under the condition with the low extinction rate cumulative distribution 1 1-1 1-2 1-3.1 1 1 network degree/(2l/s) Figure 9: Cumulative degree distribution at each time step. N = 3. P adde = 3. 1 3. P accident = 1. 1 3. 5 networks are randomly sampled from 2 1 7 steps. The data are normalized by the number of edges/vertices (=L/S) in each network. compared to the rate of evolution, in other words, under the quiet and stable environment, which seems contrary to the nature of ecological systems on earth. These results support the idea that the main driving force behind macroevolution might not be the competition among species known as the survival of the fittest based on the fitness. Alternatively, another mechanism might be the main driving force: the natural selection or accident, which acts not on individual species but on the segments or clusters in ecological networks, forms the structure of ecosystems. That is, as for macroevolution, the unit exposed to selection might not be individual but the structure of ecological networks. The discussion can be summarized in the following two hypotheses. Real food webs may be an embodiment of the nonequilibrium complex class formed through mass extinctions. Degree distribution of the real food webs at longer time scale may follow the power law. 5. REFERENCES [1] R. Albert and A. -L. Barabási, Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 47-97, 22. [2] L. A. N. Amaral and M. Meyer, Environmental Changes, Coextinction, and Patterns in the Fossil Record, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 652-655, 1999.

[3] P. Bak and K. Sneppen, Punctuated equilibrium and criticality in a simple model of evolution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 483-486, 1993. [4] J. Camacho, R. Guimerá, and L. A. N. Amaral, Robust Patterns in Food Web Structure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 22812, 22. [5] B. Drossel and A. J. McKane, Modelling food webs in: Handbook of Graphs and Networks. (eds. S.Bornholdt and H.G.Schuster) Wiley-VCH, Berlin, 23. [6] S. N. Dorogovtsev and J. F. F. Mendes, Evolution of Networks. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 23. [7] J. A. Dunne, R. J. Williams, and N. D. Martinez, Food web structure and network theory: The role of connectance and size, PNAS 99, 12917-12922, 22. [8] S. J. Gould and N. Eldredge, Punctuated equilibrium comes of age, Nature 366, 223-227, 1996. [9] J. M. Montoya and R. V. Solé, Small World Patterns in Food Webs, J. Theor. Biol. 214, 45-412, 22. [1] M. E. J. Newman, Self-organized criticality, evolution, and the fossil extinction record, Proc. R. Soc. London B 263, 165-161, 1996. [11] M. E. J. Newman and R. G. Palmer, Modeling Extinction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 23. [12] G. Nicolis and I. Prigogine, Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems. Wiley, New York, 1977. [13] D. M. Raup, Extinctions: Bad Genes or Bad Luck?, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993. [14] R. V. Solé and S. C. Manrubia, Extinction and selforganized criticality in a Model of Large-Scale Evolution, Phys. Rev. E 54, R42, 1996. [15] R. V. Solé and J. M. Montoya, Complexity and fragility in ecological networks, Proc. R. Soc. London B 268, 239-245, 21. [16] R. J. Williams and N. D. Martinez, Simple rules yield complex food webs, Nature 44, 18-183, 2.