DOI: 10.5061/dryad.3n5tb2rv4
title: Data from: Empirical evidence for the ecological significance of interaction network indices within a mutualistic network

description: Community resilience and stability have often been considered outcomes of
 interaction network structure. These assumptions however have faced strong
 criticism given that the ecological outcomes of the interactions are often
 ignored, leading to the overinterpretation of network structural
 properties. Evaluating the link between network structure and components
 of reproductive success across species can thus help provide a more
 ecologically relevant understanding of the relationship between network
 structure and function (i.e., stability). Specifically, within pollination
 networks, there is a need to integrate knowledge of interaction network
 structure with pollination outcomes that reflect the full complexity of
 the pollination process. Here, we obtained and integrated data on network
 structural properties resulting from the interactions between 20 plant and
 110 floral-visiting species, with multiple estimates of male and female
 reproductive success for all plant species. Network properties
 differentially affected male and female reproductive functions. An
 increase in plant species partner diversity and contribution to nestedness
 positively associated with the proportion of flowers receiving conspecific
 pollen but had no effect on pollen dispersal or tube formation.
 Specialization was the only network property that maximized both
 functions, suggesting this component play a larger role in long-term
 stability of plant communities. These results emphasize the need to
 incorporate empirical knowledge of interaction outcomes into our
 understanding of the functional consequences of network structure. This
 knowledge is key to overcoming fundamental limitations in network ecology
 providing meaningful insights into the resilience and stability of
 ecological systems.
description: This data set was used to evaluate the relationship between
 interaction network properties at species (strength, specialization and
 nestedness) and components of pollination successData collection was
 conducted at a serpentine seep meta-community in the McLaughlin Natural
 Reserve (38.8582º N, 122.4093º W) in Northern California, United States.
 To obtain network indices, we built a visitation-based plant-pollinator
 network containing 20 plants and 110 flower-visiting insect species, and
 calculated species strength, specialization (d') and contribution to
 nestedness for each plant species (n = 20). All flower-visiting insects
 contacting plant reproductive structures (<em>i.e.</em>,
 anthers and stigmas) were collected by 2-3 people that simultaneously
 walked established trails between 09h00 and 15h00 using entomological nets
 from May 9th through June 1st, 2021 (˃ 120 hr of total observation). The
 following components of the pollination succes were quantified for each
 plant species during the same period: 1) proportion of flowers with
 conspecific pollen (CP), 2) mean pollen dispersal on pollinators, 3)
 proportion of pollen loss to heterospecific stigmas, 4) heterospecific
 pollen (HP) receipt, and 5) proportion of pollen tubes formed. For 1, 3, 4
 and 5, we sampled 1319 flowers (styles), with a mean of 65.95 (± 32.62)
 styles per plant species. After appropriate processing, softening and
 staining, the total number of conspecific and heterospecific pollen grains
 on the stigmas were identified and counted. We also recorded the number of
 pollen tubes that reached the base of the style under a fluorescent
 microscope. For 2, we sampled the pollen loads carried by all 744 insects
 collected to estimate pollen dispersal success by counting and identifying
 pollen grains.  Additionally, we estimated flower abundance in the
 flowering season using 40 plots (1x2-meter each) to understand their
 influence on the considered male and female components.
description: # Data from: Empirical evidence for the ecological significance of
 interaction network indices within a mutualistic network
 [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3n5tb2rv4](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.3n5tb2rv4) ## Description of the data and file structure **File 1: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_matrix_updated.txt** Matrix used to build the plant-pollinator network, containing the 20 plant species and 110 flower-visiting insect species/morphospecies. **File 2: Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_success_dataset_updated.csv**    Dataset containing 20 rows (plant species) and 16 columns — variables obtained at the species level, including: plant identification, number of flowers/styles sampled, number of flowers with CP, total number of CP, total number of pollen tubes, total number of HP, pollen loss, mean pollen dispersal, partner diversity, specialization d, contribution to nestedness, partner diversity (z, standardized), specialization d (z, standardized), contribution to nestedness (z, standardized), flower abundance, and log flower abundance (z, standardized). ### Files and variables #### File 1: **Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_matrix_updated.txt** **Description:**  ##### Matrix Plant acronyms as columns (20 plant species) and flower-visiting insect species/morphospecies as rows (110 insect species). | Plant acronyms | Plant species | Plant family | | :------------- | :------------------------------- | :-------------- | | LAMI | *Lagophylla minor* | Asteraceae | | ZIVE | *Zigadenus venenosus* | Melanthiaceae | | CLCO | *Clarkia concinna* | Onagraceae | | MINU | *Mimulus nudatus* | Phrymaceae | | CETR | *Centaurium trichanthum* | Gentianaceae | | ANCO | *Antirrhinum cornutum* | Plantaginaceae | | ALFI | *Allium fimbriatum* | Amaryllidaceae | | DEUL | *Delphinium uliginosum* | Ranunculaceae | | ALAM | *Allium amplectens* | Amaryllidaceae | | CLGR | *Clarkia gracilis* | Onagraceae | | STBR | *Streptanthus breweri* | Brassicaceae | | ANVE | *Antirrhinum vexillocalyculatum* | Plantaginaceae | | MIGU | *Mimulus guttatus* | Phrymaceae | | CARU | *Castilleja rubicundula* | Orobanchaceae | | TROB | *Trifolium obtusiflorum* | Fabaceae | | TRPE | *Triteleia peduncularis* | Asparagaceae | | BREL | *Brodiaea elegans* | Asparagaceae | | MILA | *Mimulus layneae* | Phrymaceae | | TRLA | *Triteleia laxa* | Asparagaceae | | MINDO | *Minuartia douglasii* | Caryophyllaceae | **File 2:** **Arceo-Gomez_Carneiro_network_success_dataset_updated.csv**  **Description:**  ##### Variables * plant species: Plant species ID (see the table above for species names). * number of flowers sampled: Number of flowers (styles) collected to quantify conspecific pollen, heterospecific pollen and pollen tube formation. * number of flowers with CP: Total of sampled flowers per plant species having conspecific pollen. * total number of CP: Total number of conspecific pollen per plant species. * total number of pollen tubes: Total number of pollen tubes formed. * total number of HP: Total number of heterospecific pollen per plant species. * pollen loss: Total number of conspecific pollen found on heterospecific stigmas. * mean pollen dispersal: Mean number of pollen grains of a specific species dispersed by insects. * partner.diversity*: Plant species-level network metric quantifying Shannon diversity (when using logbase="e") or per-species generality/vulnerability (when using logbase=2) of the interactions of each species. * specialization.d*: Plant species-level network metric measuring specialization of each species based on its discrimination from random selection of partners. * contrib.to.nestedness*: Plant species-level network metric that estimates the degree to which the interactions of species increase or decrease community nestedness. * partner.diversity_z: Standardized form used in the models. * specialization.d_z: Standardized form used in the models. * contrib.to.nestedness_z: Standardized form used in the models. * flower abundance: Total number of flower abundance estimated for each species during the sampling period. * log_flower.abund_z: log-transformed flower abundance, standardized to be used as a covariate in the models. *All network metrics were calculated using bipartite v.2.20 in R. ##### **Version changes** List of changes made (30-Sept-2025) 1. *Sidalcea diploscypha* (SIDI) had no value for flower abundance, so it was removed from the data set (file 2) as flower abundance is now a very important covariate in our study. This reduced the number of plant species (from 21 to 20) and flower-visiting insects (from 114 to 110) in the network matrix (file 1). 2. Species-level network metrics were recalculated based now on the interactions among 20 plant species and 110 flower-visiting species. Standardized metrics were also added as columns. The same for log-transformed flower abundance.