Abstract
Understanding processes and landscape features governing connectivity among individuals and populations is fundamental to many ecological, evolutionary, and conservation questions. Network analyses based on graph theory are emerging as a prominent approach to quantify patterns of connectivity with more recent applications in landscape genetics aimed at understanding the influence of landscape features on gene flow. Despite the strong conceptual framework of graph theory, the effect of incomplete networks resulting from missing nodes (i.e. populations) and their genetic connectivity network interactions on landscape genetic inferences remains unknown. We tested the violation of this assumption by subsampling from a known complete network of breeding ponds of the Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris) in the Bighorn Crags (Idaho, USA). Variation in the proportion of missing nodes strongly influenced node-level centrality indices, whereas indices describing network-level properties were more robust. Overall incomplete networks combined with network algorithm types used to link nodes appears to be critical to the rank-order sensitivity of centrality indices and to the Mantel-based inferences made regarding the role of landscape features on gene flow. Our findings stress the importance of sampling effort and topological network structure as they both affect the estimation of genetic connectivity. Given that failing to account for uncertainty on network outcomes can lead to quantitatively different conclusions, we recommend the routine application of sensitivity analyses to network inputs and assumptions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson BS, Butts C, Carley K (1999) The interaction of size and density with graph-level indices. Soc Netw 21(3):239–267
Anderson CD, Epperson BK, Fortin MJ, Holderegger R, James PMA, Rosenberg MS, Scribner KT, Spear S (2010) Considering spatial and temporal scale in landscape-genetic studies of gene flow. Mol Ecol 19(17):3565–3575
Bowcock AM, Ruizlinares A, Tomfohrde J, Minch E, Kidd JR, Cavallisforza LL (1994) High-resolution of human evolutionary trees with polymorphic microsatellites. Nature 368(6470):455–457
Brassel KE, Reif D (1979) A procedure to generate Thiessen polygons. Geogr Anal 325:31–36
Clauset A, Moore C, Newman MEJ (2008) Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks. Nature 453(7191):98–101
Conover WJ, Johnson ME, Johnson MM (1981) A comparative study of tests for homogeneity of variances, with applications to the outer continental shelf bidding data. Technometrics 23:351–361
Costenbader E, Valente TW (2003) The stability of centrality measures when networks are sampled. Soc Netw 25(4):283–307
Dale MRT, Fortin MJ (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:21–38
Dijkstra EW (1959) A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math 1:269–271
Dunne JA, Williams RJ, Martinez ND (2002) Network structure and biodiversity loss in food webs: robustness increases with connectance. Ecol Lett 5(4):558–567
Dyer RJ, Nason JD (2004) Population graphs: the graph theoretic shape of genetic structure. Mol Ecol 13:1713–1727
Evans I (1972) In: Chorley RJ (ed) Spatial analysis in geomorphology. Harper & Row, New York, pp 17–90
Fedor A, Vasas V (2009) The robustness of keystone indices in food webs. J Theor Biol 260(3):372–378
Fogelqvist J, Niittyvuopio A (2010) Cryptic population genetic structure: the number of inferred clusters depends on sample size. Mol Ecol Resour 10(2):314–323
Fortin MJ, Dale MRT (2005) Spatial analysis: a guide for ecologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fortuna MA, Albaladejo RG, Fernandez L, Aparicio A, Bascompte J (2009) Networks of spatial genetic variation across species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(45):19044–19049
Freeman LC (1977) Set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40(1):35–41
Freeman LC (1979) Centrality in social networks 1: conceptual clarification. Soc Netw 1(3):215–239
Funk WC, Blouin MS, Corn PS, Maxell BA, Pilliod DS, Amish S, Allendorf FW (2005) Population structure of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) is strongly affected by the landscape. Mol Ecol 14(2):483–496
Gabriel KR, Sokal RR (1969) A new statistical approach to geographic variation analysis. Syst Zool 18(3):259–278
Garroway CJ, Bowman J, Carr D, Wilson PJ (2008) Applications of graph theory to landscape genetics. Evol Appl 1:620–630
Griffith D, Amrhein C (1997) Multivariate statistical analysis for geographers. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
Holderegger R, Wagner HH (2006) A brief guide to landscape genetics. Landsc Ecol 21(6):793–796
Koen EL, Bowman J, Garroway CJ, Mills SC, Wilson PJ (2012) Landscape resistance and American marten gene flow. Landsc Ecol 27:29–43
Kossinets G (2006) Effects of missing data in social networks. Soc Netw 28(3):247–268
Laita A, Monkkonen M, Kotiaho JS (2010) Woodland key habitats evaluated as part of a functional reserve network. Biol Conserv 143(5):1212–1227
Legendre P, Dale MRT, Fortin MJ, Gurevitch J, Hohn M, Myers D (2002) The consequences of spatial structure for the design and analysis of ecological field surveys. Ecography 25(5):601–615
Mantel N (1967) Detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res 27(2P1):209–220
Minor ES, Urban DL (2008) A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22(2):297–307
Murphy M, Evans J, Cushman S, Storfer A (2008) Evaluation of a novel approach for representing “populations” as continuous surfaces in landscape genetics. Ecography 31:685–697
Murphy MA, Dezzani R, Pilliod DS, Storfer A (2010a) Landscape genetics of high mountain frog metapopulations. Mol Ecol 19(17):3634–3649
Murphy MA, Evans JS, Storfer A (2010b) Quantifying Bufo boreas connectivity in Yellowstone National Park with landscape genetics. Ecology 91(1):252–261
Pilliod DS, Peterson CR (2001) Local and landscape effects of introduced trout on amphibians in historically fishless watersheds. Ecosystems 4:322–333
Pilliod DS, Peterson CR, Ritson PI (2002) Seasonal migration of Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris) among complementary resources in a high mountain basin. Can J Zool 80:1849–1862
R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
Rayfield B, Fortin M-J, Fall A (2011) Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. Ecology 92:847–858
Regan HM, Colyvan M, Burgman MA (2002) A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecol Appl 12(2):618–628
Rehfeldt GE (2006) A spline model of climate for the Western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-165. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO
Rozenfeld AF, Arnaud-Haond S, Hernandez-Garcia E, Eguiluz VM, Serrao EA, Duarte CM (2008) Network analysis identifies weak and strong links in a metapopulation system. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(48):18824–18829
Sole RV, Montoya JM (2001) Complexity and fragility in ecological networks. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 268(1480):2039–2045
Spear S, Balkenhol N, Fortin MJ, McRae BH, Scribner KT (2010) Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: considerations for parameterization and analysis. Mol Ecol 19:3576–3591
Storfer A, Murphy MA, Evans JS, Goldberg CS, Robinson S, Spear SF, Dezzani R, Delmelle E, Vierling L, Waits LP (2007) Putting the ‘landscape’ in landscape genetics. Heredity 98(3):128–142
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2007) Using multivariate statistics, 5th edn. Allyn and Bacon, Inc., Boston
Taylor PD, Fahrig L, Henein K, Merriam G (1993) Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure. Oikos 68(3):571–573
Van Oppen MJ, Peplow LM, Kininmonth S, Berkelmans R (2011) Historical and contemporary factors shape the population genetic structure of the broadcast spawning coral, Acropora millepora, on the Great Barrier Reef. Mol Ecol 20:4899–4914
Acknowledgments
This work was conducted as part of the Distributed Graduate Seminar (DGS) course on Landscape Genetics, supported in part by the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, a Center funded by NSF (Grant #EF-0553768), the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the State of California. INL was supported by NSERC, YR by CONACYT, MJF by NSERC Discovery grant, and MAM by Colorado State University (W. C. Funk) and University of Wyoming. The authors thank Rodney Dyer for assistance with programming enquiries and the DGS Landscape Genetics group for valuable input.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Naujokaitis-Lewis, I.R., Rico, Y., Lovell, J. et al. Implications of incomplete networks on estimation of landscape genetic connectivity. Conserv Genet 14, 287–298 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-012-0385-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-012-0385-3