IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v306y2015icp160-173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring sensitivity of robustness and network indices for an estuarine food web model under perturbations

Author

Listed:
  • Mukherjee, Joyita
  • Scharler, Ursula M.
  • Fath, Brian D.
  • Ray, Santanu

Abstract

Robustness is a universal feature of ecological systems which promotes sustainability over time. Robustness of an aquatic ecosystem, specifically an estuarine system, is investigated here using indicators derived from ecological network analysis. Estuaries provide us with many ecosystem services and these are consequently prone to face anthropogenic stresses. In South Africa, temporarily open/closed estuaries occupy a significant percentage of coastal boundaries. One of the South African estuaries, namely Mdloti, is studied here using network-based, Ecopath software. The estuarine energy flow networks are perturbed following different scenarios, which are assumed to be a result of selected anthropogenic stresses (eutrophication, overfishing) to the system. Several network indices such as total system throughput (TST), redundancy (R), Finn’s Cycling Index (FCI) and ascendency over development capacity ratio (A/C) are calculated and analyzed for the original field-based network and three perturbed networks under different scenarios (change of autotrophic biomass, fish yield, and detritus import). The change of ecosystem robustness from the unperturbed network is more pronounced in the perturbed networks of fish biomass change and detritus import than change in autotrophic biomass scenario. These indicators reliably reflected the relative change of flow pattern if any changes occur and magnitude in the networks in different scenarios. From the present study, we show that certain common network indices as mentioned above provide a measure of robustness and can be used for the assessment of ecosystem organization and function. ENA properties and also robustness change depending on the type and magnitude of stress imposed on the system.

Suggested Citation

  • Mukherjee, Joyita & Scharler, Ursula M. & Fath, Brian D. & Ray, Santanu, 2015. "Measuring sensitivity of robustness and network indices for an estuarine food web model under perturbations," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 306(C), pages 160-173.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:306:y:2015:i:c:p:160-173
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.10.027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380014005006
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.10.027?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 67-72, April.
    2. Kharrazi, Ali & Rovenskaya, Elena & Fath, Brian D. & Yarime, Masaru & Kraines, Steven, 2013. "Quantifying the sustainability of economic resource networks: An ecological information-based approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 177-186.
    3. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    4. F. Stuart Chapin III & Erika S. Zavaleta & Valerie T. Eviner & Rosamond L. Naylor & Peter M. Vitousek & Heather L. Reynolds & David U. Hooper & Sandra Lavorel & Osvaldo E. Sala & Sarah E. Hobbie & Mic, 2000. "Consequences of changing biodiversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6783), pages 234-242, May.
    5. Fath, Brian D. & Scharler, Ursula M. & Ulanowicz, Robert E. & Hannon, Bruce, 2007. "Ecological network analysis: network construction," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(1), pages 49-55.
    6. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-15, April.
    7. Fath, Brian D. & Scharler, Ursula M. & Baird, Dan, 2013. "Dependence of network metrics on model aggregation and throughflow calculations: Demonstration using the Sylt–Rømø Bight Ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 214-219.
    8. Ulanowicz, Robert E., 2009. "The dual nature of ecosystem dynamics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(16), pages 1886-1892.
    9. Baird, Dan & Fath, Brian D. & Ulanowicz, Robert E. & Asmus, Harald & Asmus, Ragnhild, 2009. "On the consequences of aggregation and balancing of networks on system properties derived from ecological network analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(23), pages 3465-3471.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Canning, A.D. & Death, R.G., 2017. "Trophic cascade direction and flow determine network flow stability," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 355(C), pages 18-23.
    2. Francisco Orlando Rosales & Brian D. Fath & Grace Yolanda Llerena, 2023. "Quantifying a virtual water metabolic network of the Metropolitan District of Quito, Ecuador using ecological network methods," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(5), pages 1304-1318, October.
    3. Borrett, Stuart R. & Sheble, Laura & Moody, James & Anway, Evan C., 2018. "Bibliometric review of ecological network analysis: 2010–2016," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 382(C), pages 63-82.
    4. Ali Kharrazi & Brian D. Fath & Harald Katzmair, 2016. "Advancing Empirical Approaches to the Concept of Resilience: A Critical Examination of Panarchy, Ecological Information, and Statistical Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Solovjova, N.V., 2019. "Ecological risk modelling in developing resources of ecosystems characterized by varying vulnerability levels," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 406(C), pages 60-72.
    6. Ali Kharrazi & Elena Rovenskaya & Brian D Fath, 2017. "Network structure impacts global commodity trade growth and resilience," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-13, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Borrett, Stuart R. & Sheble, Laura & Moody, James & Anway, Evan C., 2018. "Bibliometric review of ecological network analysis: 2010–2016," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 382(C), pages 63-82.
    2. Lercari, Diego & Defeo, Omar & Ortega, Leonardo & Orlando, Luis & Gianelli, Ignacio & Celentano, Eleonora, 2018. "Long-term structural and functional changes driven by climate variability and fishery regimes in a sandy beach ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 41-51.
    3. Rees, Siân E. & Fletcher, Stephen & Gall, Sarah C. & Friedrich, Laura A. & Jackson, Emma L. & Rodwell, Lynda D., 2014. "Securing the benefits: Linking ecology with marine planning policy to examine the potential of a network of Marine Protected Areas to support human wellbeing," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 335-341.
    4. Parks, Sarah & Gowdy, John, 2013. "What have economists learned about valuing nature? A review essay," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 1-10.
    5. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    6. Reed, James & van Vianen, Josh & Foli, Samson & Clendenning, Jessica & Yang, Kevin & MacDonald, Margaret & Petrokofsky, Gillian & Padoch, Christine & Sunderland, Terry, 2017. "Trees for life: The ecosystem service contribution of trees to food production and livelihoods in the tropics," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 62-71.
    7. Bergstrom, John & Holmes, Tom & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan, 2001. "Testing a Computer-Assisted Valuation Panel Approach for Valuing Watershed Ecosystem Restoration," Western Region Archives 321683, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    8. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    9. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    10. Cao, Yanni & Kong, Lingqiao & Zhang, Lufeng & Ouyang, Zhiyun, 2021. "The balance between economic development and ecosystem service value in the process of land urbanization: A case study of China’s land urbanization from 2000 to 2015," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    11. Ran Li & Guixia Qian, 2021. "Spatial and Temporal Evolution of Dairy Farming Coordination between Economy and Ecology in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    12. Fouad Ouardighi & Hassan Benchekroun & Dieter Grass, 2014. "Controlling pollution and environmental absorption capacity," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 111-133, September.
    13. Samuel Kaheesi Kusiima & Anthony Egeru & Justine Namaalwa & Patrick Byakagaba & David Mfitumukiza & Paul Mukwaya & Sylvanus Mensah & Robert Asiimwe, 2022. "Interconnectedness of Ecosystem Services Potential with Land Use/Land Cover Change Dynamics in Western Uganda," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, November.
    14. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    15. Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago & Conceição, Pedro & Belbute, José, 2005. "Constraints on dematerialisation and allocation of natural capital along a sustainable growth path," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 382-396, September.
    16. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    17. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    18. repec:dgr:rugcds:200218 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Panyam, Varuneswara & Huang, Hao & Davis, Katherine & Layton, Astrid, 2019. "Bio-inspired design for robust power grid networks," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    21. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:306:y:2015:i:c:p:160-173. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.