Natasha de Manincor, Nina Hautekeete, Yves Piquot, Bertrand Schatz, Cédric Vanappelghem, François MassolPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p>For plant-pollinator interactions to occur, the flowering of plants and the flying period of pollinators (i.e. their phenologies) have to overlap. Yet, few models make use of this principle to predict interactions and fewer still are able to compare interaction networks of different sizes. Here, we tackled both challenges using Bayesian Structural Equation Models (SEM), incorporating the effect of phenology overlap in six plant-hoverfly networks. Insect and plant abundances were strong determinants of the number of visits, while phenology overlap alone was not sufficient, but significantly improved model fit. Phenology overlap was a stronger determinant of plant-pollinator interactions in sites where the average overlap was longer and network compartmentalization was weaker, i.e. at higher latitudes. Our approach highlights the advantages of using Bayesian SEMs to compare interaction networks of different sizes along environmental gradients and articulates the various steps needed to do so.</p>
Bayesian model, interaction probability, latent block model, latitudinal gradient, mutualistic network, phenology overlap, species abundance, structural equation model.
