Ergebnis für URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076 IFRAME: [1]//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-TP26BH
IFRAME: [2]//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MQQMGF
[3]Skip to main content
Advertisement
[4]PLOS ONE
* Publish
+ Submissions
o [5]Getting Started
o [6]Submission Guidelines
o [7]Figures
o [8]Tables
o [9]Supporting Information
o [10]LaTeX
o [11]What We Publish
o [12]Preprints
o [13]Revising Your Manuscript
o [14]Submit Now
o [15]Calls for Papers
+ Policies
o [16]Best Practices in Research Reporting
o [17]Human Subjects Research
o [18]Animal Research
o [19]Competing Interests
o [20]Disclosure of Funding Sources
o [21]Licenses and Copyright
o [22]Data Availability
o [23]Complementary Research
o [24]Materials, Software and Code Sharing
o [25]Ethical Publishing Practice
o [26]Authorship
o [27]Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
+ Manuscript Review and Publication
o [28]Criteria for Publication
o [29]Editorial and Peer Review Process
o [30]Editor Center
o [31]Resources for Editors
o [32]Guidelines for Reviewers
o [33]Accepted Manuscripts
o [34]Comments
Submit Your Manuscript
Discover a faster, simpler path to publishing in a high-quality journal. PLOS
ONE promises fair, rigorous peer review, broad scope, and wide readership - a
perfect fit for your research every time.
[35]Learn More [36]Submit Now
* About
+ [37]Why Publish with PLOS ONE
+ [38]Journal Information
+ [39]Staff Editors
+ [40]Editorial Board
+ [41]Section Editors
+ [42]Advisory Groups
+ [43]Find and Read Articles
+ [44]Publishing Information
+ [45]Publication Fees
+ [46]Press and Media
+ [47]Contact
* Browse
Search
Search
____________________ (BUTTON)
[48]advanced search
Browse Subject Areas
?
Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.
For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click [49]here.
* Loading metrics
Open Access
Peer-reviewed
Research Article
Pollinator Foraging Adaptation and Coexistence of Competing Plants
* Tomás A. Revilla ,
* E-mail: [50]tomrevilla@gmail.com
Affiliation Institute of Entomology, Biology Center, Czech Academy of
Sciences, Ceské Budejovice, Czech Republic
x
* Vlastimil Krivan
Affiliations Institute of Entomology, Biology Center, Czech Academy of
Sciences, Ceské Budejovice, Czech Republic, Department of Mathematics and
Biomathematics, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Ceské
Budejovice, Czech Republic
x
Pollinator Foraging Adaptation and Coexistence of Competing Plants
* Tomás A. Revilla,
* Vlastimil Krivan
PLOS
x
* Published: August 9, 2016
* [51]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
*
* [52]Article
* [53]Authors
* [54]Metrics
* [55]Comments
* Media Coverage
* [56]Reader Comments
* [57]Figures
Figures
Fig 1
Table 1
Fig 2
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5
Fig 6
Fig 7
Abstract
We use the optimal foraging theory to study coexistence between two plant species
and a generalist pollinator. We compare conditions for plant coexistence for
non-adaptive vs. adaptive pollinators that adjust their foraging strategy to
maximize fitness. When pollinators have fixed preferences, we show that plant
coexistence typically requires both weak competition between plants for resources
(e.g., space or nutrients) and pollinator preferences that are not too biased in
favour of either plant. We also show how plant coexistence is promoted by
indirect facilitation via the pollinator. When pollinators are adaptive foragers,
pollinator's diet maximizes pollinator's fitness measured as the per capita
population growth rate. Simulations show that this has two conflicting
consequences for plant coexistence. On the one hand, when competition between
pollinators is weak, adaptation favours pollinator specialization on the more
profitable plant which increases asymmetries in plant competition and makes their
coexistence less likely. On the other hand, when competition between pollinators
is strong, adaptation promotes generalism, which facilitates plant coexistence.
In addition, adaptive foraging allows pollinators to survive sudden loss of the
preferred plant host, thus preventing further collapse of the entire community.
Citation: Revilla TA, Krivan V (2016) Pollinator Foraging Adaptation and
Coexistence of Competing Plants. PLoS ONE 11(8): e0160076.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
Editor: Takeshi Miki, National Taiwan University, TAIWAN
Received: April 4, 2016; Accepted: July 13, 2016; Published: August 9, 2016
Copyright: © 2016 Revilla, Krivan. This is an open access article distributed
under the terms of the [58]Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The data used by figures was generated using computer code
which is provided as supplementary information. The source code is available
here: [59]https://github.com/tomrevilla/pollifor.
Funding: This work was supported by Institute of Entomology RVO:60077344 awarded
to VK and European Union's Horizon 2020 RISE grant 690817 awarded to VK.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Et il se sentit trčs malheureux. Sa fleur lui avait raconté qu'elle était
seule de son espčce dans l'univers. Et voici qu'il en était cinq mille, toutes
semblables, dans un seul jardin!
Le Petit Prince, Chapitre XX - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
The diversity and complexity of mutualistic networks motivate ecologists to
investigate how they can remain stable and persistent over time. Mathematical
models and simulations show that some properties of mutualistic networks (e.g.,
low connectance and high nestedness) make them more resistant against cascading
extinctions [[60]1], more likely to sustain large numbers of species [[61]2], and
more stable demographically [[62]3]. However, simulations [[63]4, [64]5] also
indicate that mutualism increases competitive asymmetries, causing complex
communities to be less persistent. These studies consider large numbers of
species, parameters and initial conditions, making it difficult to understand the
interplay between mutualisms (e.g., between plant and animal guilds) and
antagonisms (e.g., resource competition between plants). These questions are
easier to study in the case of community modules consisting of a few species only
[[65]6].
In this article we consider a mutualistic module with two plant species and one
pollinator species ([66]Fig 1a). This module combines several direct and indirect
interactions that are either density- or trait-mediated (sensu [[67]7]). These
include plant intra- and inter-specific competition (for e.g., space), plant
competition for pollinator services, and pollinator intra-specific competition
for plant resources (e.g., nectar). Some of these interactions depend on changes
in population densities only (e.g., intra- and inter-specific plant competition),
while the others depend also on individual morphological and behavioural traits.
As some of them have positive and some of them negative effect on plant
coexistence, it is difficult to predict their combined effects on species
persistence and stability.
[68]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Fig 1. Community module consisting of plant 1 and 2, and pollinator A.
(a) Plants affect each other directly (solid arrows) by competition for space or
resources (c[1], c[2]), and indirectly (dashed arrows) via shared pollinator with
plant preferences u[1] and u[2]. (b) When pollinator preferences are fixed and
not too biased, a large density of plant 1 maintains a large pollinator density,
which has an indirect positive effect on low density plant 2. In (c,d) pollinator
preferences for plants are adaptive (dashed arrows change thickness). When
pollinators are rare (c), preferences favour abundant plant 1, which results in a
negative indirect effect on rare plant 2. When pollinators become abundant (d),
competition between pollinators lead to balanced preferences, and the indirect
effect on plant 2 becomes positive. The viability of plant 2 depends on the
balance between indirect and direct effects. Image sources for panel (a) were
taken from: [69]https://openclipart.org.
[70]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
First, we will assume that pollinator preferences for plants are fixed. In this
case, there is a negative effect of one plant on the other by direct competition
and a positive indirect effect that is mediated by the shared pollinators, called
facilitation [[71]8-[72]10]. As one plant population density increases,
pollinator density increases too, which, in turn, increases pollination rate of
the other plant ([73]Fig 1b). This is an indirect interaction between plants that
is mediated by changes in abundance of the pollinator (i.e., density mediated
indirect interaction). Because facilitation has the opposite effect to direct
plant competition (see [74]Fig 1b) it is important to clarify under which
situations the positive effect of facilitation prevails, and we study this
question by using a mathematical model.
Second, we will assume that pollinator preferences are adaptive. We will assume
that pollinator fitness is defined as the per capita pollinator population growth
rate that depends on plant (that produce resources for pollinators) as well as on
pollinator densities. First, pollinators benefit from nectar quality and nectar
abundance (which correlates with plant population density). Second, pollinators
compete for resources. This competition will play an important effect when
pollinator population densities are high. A game theoretical approach to
determine the optimal pollinator strategy is the Ideal Free Distribution (IFD)
[[75]11, [76]12]. This theory predicts that when pollinators are at low numbers,
they will specialize on one plant only. As their population density will
increase, they become generalists feeding on and pollinating both plants. This
mechanism causes a negative effect of the preferred plant on the other plant,
because when at low densities, pollinators will specialize on one plant only
([77]Fig 1c). This is an example of a positive feedback where "the rich becomes
richer and the poor get poorer". Competition for pollinators is an example of a
trait-mediated effect caused by pollinator behaviour. Pollinator specialization
on one plant only is detrimental for the other plant. However, as pollinator
population density will increase, competition for resources among pollinators
will increase too [[78]13], and the IFD predicts that they become generalists,
which promotes plant coexistence ([79]Fig 1d). Once again, combination of
positive and negative effects between plants creates complicated feedbacks
between population densities and pollinator behaviour that are impossible to
disentangle without an appropriate mathematical model.
Our main goal is to study how pollinator preferences and plant competition affect
plant coexistence. First, we study the dynamics of the plant-pollinator module
when pollinator preferences are fixed. Second, we calculate the pollinator's
evolutionarily stable foraging strategy (ESS) at fixed plant and pollinator
population densities, and we study plant coexistence assuming pollinators
instantaneously track their ESS. This case corresponds to time scale separation
where population dynamics operate on a slow time scale, while pollinator foraging
preferences operate on a fast time scale. Finally, we consider the situation
without time scale separation and we model preference dynamics with the
replicator equation. Overall, we show that pollinator foraging adaptation has
complex effects, sometimes equivocal, on plant coexistence. On the one hand
pollinator adaptation increases competitive asymmetries among plants, promoting
competitive exclusion. On the other hand competition for plant resources among
pollinators promotes generalism over specialization, which can prevent the loss
of pollination services for some plants and promote coexistence.
Methods
Mutualistic community model
Let us consider two plant species P[i] (i = 1, 2) and one pollinator species A
([80]Fig 1a). Plants produce resources F[i] (i = 1, 2) such as nectar at a rate
a[i] per plant. Resources not consumed by the pollinator decrease with rate w[i]
(e.g., nectar can be re-absorbed, decay or evaporate). Resources are consumed by
pollinators at rate b[i] per resource per pollinator. Pollinator's relative
preferences for either plant are denoted by u[i] with u[1] + u[2] = 1. Plant
birth rates are proportional to the rate of pollen transfer that is concomitant
with resource consumption. Thus, we assume that plant birth rates are
proportional to pollinator resource consumption rates (u[i] b[i] F[i] A)
multiplied by conversion efficiency r[i]. Pollinator birth rates are proportional
to resource consumption with corresponding conversion efficiency e[i]. Plants and
pollinators die with the per capita mortality rate m[i] (i = 1, 2) and d,
respectively.
Assuming that plant resources equilibrate quickly with current plant and
pollinator densities [[81]14], i.e., dF[i]/dt = 0, plants and pollinator
population dynamics are described by the following model ([82]S1 Appendix)
[journal.pone.0160076.e001] (1a) [journal.pone.0160076.e002] (1b)
[journal.pone.0160076.e003] (1c) in which plant growth rates are regulated by
competition for non-living resources (e.g., light, nutrients, space) according to
the Lotka-Volterra competition model, where c[j] is the negative effect of plant
j on plant i relative to the effect of plant i on itself (i.e., competition
coefficient), and K[i] stands for the habitat carrying capacity [[83]4]. Notice
that plant growth rates saturate with pollinator density (e.g.,
[journal.pone.0160076.e004] ) and pollinator growth rates decrease due to
intra-specific competition for plant resources (e.g., [journal.pone.0160076.e005]
) [[84]15]. In this model plants and pollinators are obligate mutualists, i.e.,
without pollinators plants go extinct and without plants the pollinator goes
extinct. We do not model facultative mutualism because this introduces additional
factors (e.g. alternative pollinators, vegetative growth), which complicate the
analysis of direct and indirect effects of the three species module.
Fixed pollinator preferences
We start our analyses assuming that pollinator preferences for plants (u[1] and
u[2] = 1 - u[2]) are fixed at particular values ranging from 0 to 1. This means
that for u[1] = 1 or 0 pollinators are plant 1 or plant 2 specialists,
respectively, while for 0 < u[1] < 1 they are generalists. Since model [85]Eq
(1a) is non-linear, analytical formulas for interior equilibria and corresponding
stability conditions are out of reach. However, it is possible to obtain
coexistence conditions by means of invasibility analysis. First, we obtain
conditions for stable coexistence of a single plant-pollinator subsystem at an
equilibrium. Second, we ask under what conditions the missing plant species can
invade when the resident plant-pollinator subsystem is at the equilibrium. In
particular, we are interested in the situation where each plant species can
invade the other one, because this suggests coexistence of both plants and
pollinators. Derivation of invasion conditions are provided in [86]S1 Appendix.
In general, invasibility does not guarantee coexistence [[87]16, [88]17]. Also, a
failure to invade when rare does not rule out possibility of invasion success
when the invading species is at large densities. For these reasons we complement
our invasibility analysis by numerical bifurcation analysis using XPPAUT
[[89]18], and parameter values given in [90]Table 1. While not empirical, the
values fall within ranges typically employed by consumer-resource models (e.g.,
[[91]19]). Plant-specific parameters are equal except for e[i] and u[i] (i = 1,
2). We assume that e[1] > e[2], i.e., plant 1 provides pollinators with higher
energy when compared to plant 2.
[92]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Table 1. Parameters of [93]Model (1a) and [94]Eq (4).
[95]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
Adaptive pollinator preferences
When pollinators behave as adaptive foragers their plant preferences should
maximize their fitness. The pay-off a pollinator gets when pollinating only plant
i is defined as the per capita pollinator growth rate on that plant, i.e.,
[journal.pone.0160076.e006] (2)
We observe that these pay-offs depend both on plant and pollinator densities and
on the pollinator distribution u[1], i.e., they are both density and frequency
dependent. Now let us consider fitness of a generalist mutant pollinator with
strategy [journal.pone.0160076.e007] . Its fitness is then defined as the average
pay-off, i.e., [journal.pone.0160076.e008] (3)
Using this fitness function we will calculate the evolutionarily stable strategy
[[96]20, [97]21] of pollinator preferences at current plant and pollinator
densities. When pollinators adjust their preferences very fast as compared to
changes in population densities, we will use the ESS together with population
dynamics [98]Eq (1a) to model effects of pollinator plasticity on population
dynamics. This approach corresponds to time scale separation where population
densities (plants and animals) change very slowly compared to pollinator
adaptation. We are also interested in the situation when the two time scales are
not separated, but pollinators foraging preferences still tend to the ESS. In
these cases we use the replicator equation [[99]21] to model dynamics of
pollinator preferences u[1] for plant 1 (u[2] = 1 - u[1])
[journal.pone.0160076.e009] (4) where n >= 0 is the adaptation rate. [100]Eq (4)
assumes that pollinator's preferences evolve towards a higher energy intake and
its equilibrium coincides with the ESS. Thus, if pollinators obtain more energy
when feeding on plant 1, preferences for plant 1 increases. When n >= 1,
adaptation is as fast as population dynamics or faster. This describes plastic
pollinators that track changing flower densities very quickly (i.e., within an
individual life-span). This is the case when adaptation is a behavioural trait.
In fact, for n tending to infinity pollinators adopt the ESS instantaneously.
Adaptation can also involve morphological changes requiring several generations
(i.e., evolution). In that case n < 1, and adaptation lags behind population
dynamics (i.e., changes in preferences require more generations). And the n = 0
case applies to non-adaptive pollinators. We remark that perfect specialization
on plant 1 or plant 2 correspond to the equilibrium u[1] = 1 or u[1] = 0,
respectively.
Using [101]Model (1a) and replicator [102]Eq (4), we simulate the effects of
pollinator adaptation and plant direct inter-specific competition on coexistence.
We consider four common inter-specific competition coefficients: c[1] = c[2] = c
= 0, 0.4, 0.8, and 1.2, and four adaptation rates: n = 0, 0.1, 1 and n = infty.
Level n = 0 extends our analysis for non-adaptive pollinators (fixed preferences)
beyond invasion conditions. Level n = 0.1 implies slow evolutionary adaptation,
like in adaptive dynamics [[103]22]. At n = 1 adaptation is as fast as
demography, i.e., pollinators adapt during their lifetime. For n = infty
adaptation is infinitely fast when compared to population densities and
preferences are given by the ESS.
Community dynamics and the dynamics of pollinator preferences can be sensitive to
initial conditions. There are four degrees of freedom for the initial conditions
(P[1], P[2], A and u[1] at t = 0). We reduce this number to two degrees of
freedom. First, we vary P[1](0) from 0 to K in 100 steps while P[2](0) = K -
P[1](0), where K = K[1] = K[2] = 50 is the common carrying capacity. The choice K
= 50 is high enough to avoid pollinator extinction due to the Allee effect in the
majority of the simulations. Second, we consider two scenarios:
1. Scenario I: Initial pollinator density A(0) varies from 0 to 50 in 100 steps
and initial pollinator preference is equal to the ESS.
2. Scenario II: Initial pollinator preference u[1](0) varies from 0.001 to 0.999
in 100 steps [0.001, 0.01, 0.02, ..., 0.98, 0.99, 0.999] and initial
pollinator density is kept at A(0) = 2.
Scenario I assumes that pollinators preferences are at the ESS for given initial
plant and pollinator densities, with an exception when the ESS is 0 or 1 in which
case we perturb it to u[1] = 0.001 or u[1] = 0.999. This is necessary because the
replicator [104]Eq (4) does not consider mutations that may allow specialists to
evolve towards generalism.
Scenarios I and II complement each other. In both of them initial plant
composition (P[1]: P[2]) influences the outcome. For scenario II we also used
A(0) = 50, but we did not find important qualitative differences. Thus, for both
scenarios we simulate Models ([105]1a) and ([106]4) with 100 × 100 = 10^4
different initial conditions. This systematic approach allows us to delineate
boundaries between plant coexistence and extinction regions. Models ([107]1a) and
([108]4) is integrated (Runge-Kutta 4th, with Matlab [[109]23]) with the rest of
the parameters taken from [110]Table 1. A plant is considered extinct if it
attains a density less than 10^-6 after time t = 20000.
Results
Fixed preferences
[111]System (1a) models obligatory mutualism between plants and pollinators.
Plants cannot grow in absence of pollinators and pollinators cannot reproduce
without plants. Thus, the trivial equilibrium at which all three species are
absent (P[1] = P[2] = A = 0) is always locally asymptotically stable [[112]24,
[113]25], because when at low population densities, pollinators cannot provide
enough pollination services to plants that will die and, similarly, when at low
densities, plants do not provide enough nectar to support pollinators.
By setting dP[1]/dt = dA/dt = 0 with P[1] > 0, P[2] = 0, A > 0 in [114]Eq (1a)
and (1c), non-trivial plant 1-pollinator equilibria are
[journal.pone.0160076.e010] (5) where D[1] = -4b[1] de[1] K[1] m[1] r[1] u[1]
w[1]+ (b[1] e[1] K[1](m[1] - a[1] r[1])u[1] + dr[1] w[1])^2. These two equilibria
are feasible (positive) if a[1] r[1] > m[1] and D[1] > 0. The first is a growth
requirement: if not met, even an infinite number of specialized pollinators (with
u[1] = 1) cannot prevent plant 1 extinction. The second condition is met when
pollinator preference for plant 1 (u[1]) is above a critical value
[journal.pone.0160076.e011] (6)
By symmetry, there are two non-trivial plant 2-pollinator equilibria (P[2±],
A[2±]). They are feasible if a[2] r[2] > m[2] and D[2] > 0 (D[2] is like D[1]
with interchanged sub-indices). The second condition is met when pollinator
preferences for plant 2 are strong enough (i.e., preferences for plant 1 are weak
enough) so that u[1] is below a critical value u[1b] [journal.pone.0160076.e012]
(7) In both cases the equilibrium that is closer to the origin ((P[1-], A[1-])
when plant 2 is missing and (P[2-], A[2-]) when plant 1 is missing) is unstable.
This instability indicates critical threshold densities. When plant i and
pollinator densities are above these thresholds, coexistence is possible.
Otherwise, the system converges on the extinction equilibrium mentioned before.
This is a mutualistic Allee effect [[115]26, [116]27].
The equilibrium that is farther from the origin ((P[1+], A[1+]) when plant 2 is
missing and (P[2+], A[2+]) when plant 1 is missing) will be called the resident
equilibrium. Resident equilibria are stable with respect to small changes in
resident plant and pollinator densities, but may be unstable against invasion of
small densities of the missing plant species. In the case of the plant
1-pollinator equilibrium (P[1+], A[1+]), plant 2 invades (i.e., achieves a
positive growth rate when rare) if the competitive effect of plant 1 on plant 2
(c[1]), is smaller than [journal.pone.0160076.e013] (8) whereas plant 1 invades
the plant 2-pollinator equilibrium (P[2+],A[2+]) if the competitive effect of
plant 2 on plant 1 (c[2]), is smaller than [journal.pone.0160076.e014] (9)
Functions a(u[1]) and b(u[1]) are real when D[1] > 0 and D[2] > 0, respectively.
In other words, invasibility only makes sense when the plant 1-pollinator
resident equilibrium exists (u[1] > u[1a]) or, when the plant 2-pollinator
resident equilibrium exists (u[1] < u[1b]), respectively. The graphs of Eqs
([117]6), ([118]7), ([119]8) and ([120]9) divide the pollinator
preference-competition parameter space into several regions ([121]Fig 2 where c =
c[1] = c[2]). Notice that because a and b are only feasible to the right of u[1a]
and to the left of u[1b], respectively, their graphs may or may not intersect
depending on the position of u[1a] and u[1b] (cf. panel a vs. b). We show this by
setting a common plant carrying capacity K = K[1] = K[2] and making it larger or
smaller than a critical value ([122]S1 Appendix) [journal.pone.0160076.e015] (10)
[123]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Fig 2. Interaction outcomes as a function of competition strength and fixed
pollinator preferences.
Solid lines (coloured, found analytically) determine regions where single plant
equilibria exist and whether they can be invaded or not. Dashed lines (in black,
found numerically, like g) determine outcomes that cannot be predicted by
invasibility analysis. Plant 2 can invade Plant 1 in the region between the red
vertical line u[1a] and the red curve a. Plant 1 can invade plant 2 in the region
between the green curve b and the green vertical line u[1b]. The final
composition of the community is indicated by P1 = plant 1 wins, P2 = plant 2
wins, P1 + P2 = coexistence, EXT = extinction of all species; the "or" separator
indicates that the outcome depends on the initial conditions. Parameters from
[124]Table 1, with (a) K[i] = 60 and (b) K[i] = 35 (i.e., above and below
critical K* = 37.5, see [125]Eq (10)). Representative dynamics for parameter
combinations at a-o, b-o, c-o and d-o are illustrated in corresponding panels of
[126]Fig 3.
[127]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
Productive environments (K > K*) support coexistence of both plant-pollinator
resident equilibria for intermediate pollinator preferences. This is not so in
unproductive environments (K < K*), where resident equilibria occur within
separated ranges of pollinator preferences (see below).
First, we assume a high plant carrying capacity satisfying K > K*. Then u[1a] <
u[1b], and a(u[1]) and b(u[1]) intersect like in [128]Fig 2a. This leads to
several plant invasion scenarios. We start with preferences satisfying u[1a] <
u[1] < u[1b]. Such intermediate pollinator preferences allow each species to
coexist with the pollinator at a stable equilibrium. If competition is weak
enough (see the region denoted as "P1 + P2" in [129]Fig 2a), the missing plant
can invade the resident plant-pollinator equilibrium which leads to both plant
coexistence. In contrast, if competition is strong enough (see the region denoted
as "P1 or P2" in [130]Fig 2a), the missing plant cannot invade. Thus, either
plant 1 or plant 2 wins depending on the initial conditions (i.e., the resident
plant that establishes first wins). In between these two outcomes of mutual
invasion and mutual exclusion, there are two wedge-shaped regions (see regions
denoted as "P1", and "P2" in [131]Fig 2a). In the right (left) region plant 1
(plant 2) invades and replaces plant 2 (plant 1) but not the other way around.
The outcomes in the regions of [132]Fig 2a that are either to the left of u[1a],
or to the right of u[1b] are very different, because whether the missing plant
can invade or not when rare depends entirely on facilitation by the resident
plant. Indeed, let us consider the region of the parameter space in [133]Fig 2a
to the right of the vertical line u[1b] and below the curve a. In this region
(denoted by "P1 + P2") pollinator preference for plant 2 is so low that plant 2
alone cannot support pollinators at a positive density. It is only due to
presence of plant 1 that allows plant 2 survival through facilitation ([134]Fig
3a). Indeed, when plant 1 is resident, it increases pollinator densities to such
levels that allow plant 2 to invade. In other words, plant facilitation due to
shared pollinators widens plant niche measured as the range of pollinator
preferences at which the plant can survive at positive densities. When
inter-specific plant competition is too high (see the region above the curve a
and to the right of u[1b]) plant 2 cannot invade. Similarly, when pollinator
preferences for plant 1 are too low (i.e., to the left of the line u[1a]),
coexistence relies on facilitation provided by plant 2 (resident) to plant 1
(invader) and on plant competition being not too strong (below curve b); if
competition is too strong (above b) plant 1 cannot invade.
[135]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Fig 3. [136]Model (1a) dynamics with fixed pollinator preferences.
Population densities are represented by: green squares = plant 1, red diamonds =
plant 2 and pink circles = pollinator. Panels (a) K[i] = 60, u[1] = 0.8, c[i] =
0.4, (b) K[i] = 60, c[i] = 1.2, u[1] = 0.605, (c) K[i] = 60, c[i] = 1.2, u[1] =
0.607 and (d) K[i] = 35, u[1] = 0.4, c[i] = 0.8 correspond to positions of points
a-o, b-o, c-o and d-o in [137]Fig 2. Other parameters as in [138]Table 1.
[139]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
Second, we assume low plant carrying capacity satisfying K < K*. Then u[1a] >
u[1b], and a(u[1]) and b(u[1]) never intersect ([140]Fig 2b) in the positive
quadrant of the parameter space. For intermediate pollinator preferences
satisfying u[1b] < u[1] < u[1a] coexistence by invasion of the rare plant is not
possible. The reason is that in this region neither plant 1, nor plant 2, can
coexist with pollinators. So, there is no resident system consisting of one plant
and pollinators that could be invaded by the missing rare plant. In regions to
the left of u[1b] plant 2 coexists with pollinators and to the right of u[1a]
plant 1 coexists with pollinators at a stable equilibrium and invasion conditions
for the missing plant when rare are similar to the case where K > K*. Once again,
in these regions coexistence of both plants can be achieved because of the
resident plant facilitates the other plant invasion. The important prediction of
this invasion analysis is that the density mediated indirect interaction between
plants through the shared pollinator, i.e., plant facilitation, increases the set
of parameter values for which coexistence of both plants is possible.
Although invasion analysis proves to be very useful when analysing [141]Model
(1a), it does not answer the question whether there are some other attractors
that cannot be reached by invasion of the missing species when rare. Using
numerical bifurcation software (XPPAUT [[142]18]), we found additional outcomes
not predicted by invasibility analysis. When K > K* ([143]Fig 2a) invasibility
analysis predicts that plant 2 cannot grow when rare for strong inter-specific
plant competition when c > a. However, our numerical analysis shows that it is
still possible for plant 2 to invade provided its initial population density is
large enough. The community dynamics then either oscillate along a limit cycle
([144]Fig 3b), or converge to a stable equilibrium ([145]Fig 3c). Such behaviour
was observed in the region denoted by "P1 or P1 + P2" of [146]Fig 2a. This shows
that [147]Model (1a) has multiple attractors (including a limit cycle). The right
dashed boundary of that region corresponds to a fold bifurcation where a locally
stable interior equilibrium merges with an unstable equilibrium and disappears
for higher values of u[1]. Between the two dashed curves there is another Hopf
bifurcation curve (not shown in [148]Fig 2a) where the interior equilibrium
looses its stability and a limit cycle emerges. As preference for plant 1
decreases towards the left dashed boundary, the amplitude of the limit cycle
tends to infinity.
When K < K* we found a curve g(u[1]) that further divides the parameter space
([149]Fig 2b). For the intermediate pollinator preferences (u[1b] < u[1] < u[1a])
where neither plant can be a resident, and below g curve ("P1 + P2 or EXT"),
coexistence is achievable if both plants and the pollinator are initially at high
enough densities. This is an extreme example of plant facilitation. If combined
plant abundances are not large enough, then both plants and the pollinator go
extinct as already predicted by the invasion analysis. Also, if one plant species
is suddenly removed, extinction of pollinator and the other plant follows. Above
the g curve, plant competition is too strong to allow any coexistence and the
outcome is always global extinction ("EXT"). When preference for plant 1 is low
(u[1] < u[1b]), the g curve is slightly above the b curve so that the possible
coexistence region is slightly larger than the coexistence region obtained by
invasion of the rare plant ("P2 or P1 + P2"). However, plant coexistence in the
region between the two curves depends on the initial density of plant 1: if
P[1](0) is very low, plant 2 wins as predicted by the invasion analysis, but if
P[1](0) is large enough, plant 1 will invade and coexist at an interior
equilibrium with plant 2. In the opposite situation, where preference for plant 1
is very high (u[1] > u[1a]), g divides the region where plant 2 can invade
(assuming c < a) as follows. Below g, competition is weak and plant 2 invasion is
followed by stable coexistence thanks to resident facilitation. Above g,
competition is strong and plant 2 invasion causes plant 1 extinction followed by
plant 2 extinction. This is because pollinator preference for plant 1 is too
strong (u[1] > u[1b]) which does not allow pollinators to survive on plant 2.
Thus, invasion by plant 2 leads to global extinction ("EXT"). [150]Fig 3d shows
an example of such global extinction caused by invasion. Once again, invasion of
plant 2 is possible due to facilitation by plant 1. As plant 2 invades, it has
also an indirect positive effect on plant 1 through facilitation. But this
positive effect does not outweigh the direct negative effect plant 2 has on plant
1 due to direct competition for resources. Apart from this case of global
extinction caused by invasion, numerical analysis with parameters from [151]Table
1 confirms predictions of our invasion analysis that in the case where one or
both equilibria with one plant missing exist(s), the invasibility conditions c <
a and c < b predict the existence of a locally stable interior equilibrium at
which both plants coexist with the pollinator.
Adaptive preferences
Evolutionarily stable strategy and time scale.
We calculate the evolutionarily stable strategy for fitness defined by [152]Eq
(3). At the interior (i.e., generalist) behavioural equilibrium the two pay-offs
[153]Eq (2) must be the same, i.e., V[1] = V[2], which yields
[journal.pone.0160076.e016] (11) provided [journal.pone.0160076.e017] is between
0 and 1. If V[1](u[1])>V[2](u[1]) for all u[1], the ESS is
[journal.pone.0160076.e018] and if V[1](u[1]) e[2]), causing plant 2 to decline and to go extinct,
eventually. However, as pollinator densities start to increase relative to plant
densities, pollinators can become generalists which favours plant coexistence. We
start with the assumption that pollinator preferences track instantaneously
population numbers (panel a: n = infty), i.e., [journal.pone.0160076.e027] is
given by the the ESS [168]Eq (11) (see the star-line -*-*- in [169]Fig 5a). We
observe that as pollinator abundance increases, pollinators become generalists
approximately at t ~= 3, which is fast enough to prevent plant 2 extinction, and
population densities will tend to an interior equilibrium. When pollinators
preference is described by the replicator equation (panel b: n = 1), we observe
that pollinators will become generalists at a latter time (t ~= 11) due to the
time lag with which pollinators preferences follow population abundances. Even
with this delay, the decline of plant 2 stops and we obtain convergence to the
same population and evolution equilibrium. However, when adaptation is yet
slower, the pollinator preferences will follow changing population densities with
a longer time delay (panel c: n = 0.25), and we get a qualitatively different
outcome with plant 2 extinction. This is because when pollinators start to behave
as generalists (t ~= 100), plant 2 abundance is already so low that it is more
profitable for pollinators to switch back to pollinate plant 1 only. We obtain
similar results as in [170]Fig 5 when e.g., c[1] = c[2] = 0.4, but coexistence
becomes impossible when direct competition becomes too strong.
[171]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Fig 5. [172]Model (1a) dynamics with pollinator adaptive preferences.
Population densities (units in left axes) are represented by: green squares =
plant 1, red diamonds = plant 2, pink circles = pollinator. Pollinator preference
for plant 1 (u[1], units in right axes) is represented by the black line. Initial
population densities in all panels P[1](0) = P[2](0) = 25, A(0) = 1. Preferences
in (a) are given by the ESS [173]Eq (11). Preferences in (b) and (c) are given by
the replicator [174]Eq (4) with n = 1, 0.25 respectively and u[1](0) = 0.999.
Parameters as in [175]Table 1, with K[i] = 50, c[i] = 0.
[176]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
In the next section we study combined effects of initial conditions, plant
competition for resources (c[i] > 0), and time scales on plant coexistence.
Scenario I (variation of initial plant and pollinator densities).
Here we study the combined effects of population dynamics [177]Eq (1a) and
adaptive pollinator preferences [178]Eq (4) on species coexistence. [179]Fig 6
shows regions of coexistence (pink), exclusion of one plant species (red or
green), and global extinction (both plants and the pollinator, white) for
different initial plant and pollinator densities. For this scenario combined
initial plant densities are fixed (P[1](0) + P[2](0) = 50). We contrast these
predictions with the situation where population densities are fixed, i.e., when
population dynamics are not considered and pollinator preferences are at the ESS.
In this latter case the necessary condition for both plants to survive is that
pollinators behave as generalists which corresponds to the region between the two
curves d[0] and d[1] in [180]Fig 6. These are the curves along which the ESS
predicts switching between specialist and generalist pollinator behaviour at
initial population densities. These curves are found by solving [181]Eq (11) for
A, when [journal.pone.0160076.e028] which yields [journal.pone.0160076.e029] (12)
and when [journal.pone.0160076.e030] which yields [journal.pone.0160076.e031]
(13)
[182]thumbnail
Download:
* PPT
PowerPoint slide
* PNG
larger image
* TIFF
original image
Fig 6. Effects of foraging adaptation (n rows) and inter-specific competition (c
columns) on plant coexistence under scenario I (variation of initial plant and
pollinator densities).
P[2](0) = 50 - P[1](0) and u[1](0) given by [183]Eq (11)). Pollinators begin as
specialists on plant 1 to right of line d[1], on plant 2 to the left of line
d[0], and generalists in between. Initial conditions in red and green result in
extinction of plant 1 or 2, respectively. Initial conditions in pink and white
result in coexistence or community extinction, respectively.
[184]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
If population densities do not change, initial conditions to the left (right) of
d[0] (d[1]) lead to exclusion of plant 1 (plant 2) because pollinators specialize
on plant 2 (plant 1). Population and pollinator preference dynamics do change
these predictions. The main pattern observed in the simulations is that plant
coexistence becomes less likely as the plant competition coefficient (c)
increases. This is not surprising because a higher inter-specific competition
between plants decreases plant population abundance which makes coexistence of
both plants less likely or impossible (panels c, d, g, h, k, l, o, p). In fact,
when inter-specific plant competition is too strong and the pollinators do not
adapt, plant densities can become so low that the system collapses due to
mutualistic Allee effects (panel d, white region).
The effect of pollinator adaptation rate (n) on coexistence is more complex, in
particular when plant competition is moderate or weak (i.e., c 0 in [223]Eq (4)).
We assumed that plant competition affects growth rather than death rates [[224]4,
[225]30]. This assumption is sound when plants are mainly limited by space, or by
resources whose access are linked to space, such as light. In such circumstances
a plant could produce many seeds thanks to pollination, but space puts a limit on
how many will recruit as adults. It remains to see how our results would change
if competition is considered differently, when adult plant mortality is affected
by competition (e.g., [[226]2]). This can be very important under scenarios of
interference like allelopathy or apparent competition caused by herbivores
[[227]31].
Adaptive preferences and population feedbacks
The ESS [228]Eq (11) predicts that when at low densities, pollinators will
pollinate only the plant that is most profitable, while at higher densities they
will tend to pollinate both plants. This positive relationship between
pollinator/consumer abundance and generalism was experimentally demonstrated for
bumblebees [[229]13].
Plant and pollinator densities are not static, they change within the limits
imposed by several factors: e.g., space and nutrients in the case of plants, or
plant resources such as nectar in the case of pollinators. On the other hand,
plants and pollinators require minimal critical densities of each other in order
to compensate for mortality. Thus, a given ESS at which one plant is excluded
from the pollinator's diet will cause that plant to decrease in density, and,
possibly, to go extinct. However, as population densities change the ESS can also
change in ways that may favour coexistence. These outcomes will depend on the
time scale of pollinator foraging adaptation. For this reason, we introduced the
replicator [230]Eq (4) as a dynamic description of pollinator preferences and we
coupled it with population dynamics. One of the main consequences of introducing
replicator dynamics is the disappearance of complex dynamics such as limit cycles
or global extinctions triggered by invasion ([231]Fig 3b and 3d). In contrast,
the dynamics with pollinator adaptation are characterized by fewer stable
outcomes (plant 1 only, plant 2 only, coexistence) with strong dependence on the
initial conditions.
Whether or not adaptive pollinator preferences promote plant coexistence depends
critically on the strength of competition (i.e., competition coefficient) and the
rate of pollinator adaptation (n). In our simulations, we determined the region
of initial population densities and pollinator preferences leading towards plant
coexistence, as a function of these two factors. The larger this region, the more
likely plant coexistence. As competition strength increases, coexistence becomes
less likely as expected from competition theory [[232]19]. As pollinator
adaptation rates increase the pattern is more complex and sometimes equivocal, as
adaptation can increase or decrease the likelihood of coexistence (Figs [233]6
and [234]7). For example, when competition is weak or moderate in simulation
scenario I, we see that the region of coexistence is generally wider when
pollinator densities are initially large and more narrow when pollinators are
initially rare ([235]Fig 6 for c e[2]) while we keep all the other plant-specific parameters
equal. We also ran simulations with plant 1 being better with respect to other
plant-specific parameters (e.g., r[1] > r[2] or w[2] > w[1], keeping e[i] = 0.1
and the rest of parameters as in [251]Table 1). In these simulations (not shown
here) coexistence is generally more difficult to attain (e.g., coexistence
regions as those in [252]Fig 6 get smaller). The reason is that in our model,
plant rewards (e[i]) affect plants only indirectly, by influencing pollinator
preferences. In contrast, other plant-specific parameters affect plant dynamics
directly. Finally, the larger c[i] and K[i] the more likely plant i always win in
competition, but this is a natural result expected in models derived from the
Lotka-Volterra competitive equations.
Some predictions from our model are in qualitative agreement with experiments.
For example [[253]10] shows transitions from plant facilitation to competition
for pollinators [[254]8] when one plant species (Raphanus raphanistrum) is
exposed to increasing numbers of an alternative plant (Cirsium arvense). In the
same study, the relative visitation frequency of a plant (Raphanus) declines
faster than predicted by the decline in the relative proportion of its flowers
[[255]10]. The ESS can explain this outcome as the superposition of a relative
resource availability effect and a resource switching effect (i.e., first and
second terms respectively, in the right-hand-side of [256]Eq (11)), as shown by
[257]Fig 4 (compare it with Fig 6 in [[258]10]). The effect of resource
competition on the relationship between pollinator density and generalism, was
demonstrated by another experiment [[259]13]. Other studies show that invasive
plant species can take advantage of changing pollinator preferences, increasing
their chances to get included into native communities [[260]36]. Finally, one
meta-analysis indicates that pollinators can be taken away by invasive plants,
affecting native plants adversely [[261]28].
Inter-specific pollen transfer effects
[262]Model (1a) considers only one single pollinator species. This makes
pollinator generalism (i.e., u[1] strictly between 0 or 1) a requisite for
coexistence. However, when pollinators are generalists, rare plants would
experience decreasing pollination quality, due to the lack of constancy of
individual pollinators delivering non-specific pollen or losing con-specific
pollen [[263]37-[264]39]. We do not consider inter-specific pollen transfer
effects (IPT) in this article. Modelling IPT effects requires additional
assumptions about visitation probabilities [[265]30], pollen carry-over [[266]4]
or pollinator structure [[267]35, [268]40]. Nevertheless, we simulated scenarios
I and II again, but replacing our [269]Eq (1a) by a system of equations that
considers IPT [[270]30]. We found that most of our results hold qualitatively,
i.e., the coexistence regions display the same patterns like in Figs [271]6 and
[272]7 (results not shown).
There is no question that IPT affects pollination efficiency. However, the
relative importance of IPT may also depend on the structure of the environment
where interactions occur. A survey of field and laboratory results [[273]39]
reports that in spite of strong IPT effects on plant reproduction for certain
systems, many studies found little or no significant effects in other systems.
One reason could be the scale of the system under study, which can influence the
way mobile pollinators experience the resource landscape: fine grained or coarse
grained, e.g., well mixed or patchy. Thus, if plant species are not totally
intermingled, but also not isolated in clumps, the negative effects of IPT on
seed set (a proxy for plant fitness) could be reduced [[274]41]. In addition,
unless we consider a single flower per plant at any time, the resource is almost
always patchy. This means that IPT effects in self-compatible plants would be
stronger just after pollinator arrival, decreasing for the remaining flowers
before the pollinator leaves the plant.
From modules to networks and from adaptation to co-evolution
The scope of our work is limited to adaptation in a single pollinator species
only. In real life settings adaptation can be affected by (i) competition among
several pollinator species, and by (ii) plant-pollinator co-evolution.
With respect to point (i), large community simulations [[275]30] indicate that
inter-specific competition can force pollinators to change their preferences in
order to minimise niche overlap. This can promote coexistence and specialization
on rare plants at risk of competitive exclusion. Song and Feldman [[276]35]
discovered a similar mechanism, with a polymorphic pollinator, i.e., consisting
of specialist and generalist sub-populations. Thus, adding a second pollinator
would be a next step to consider, in order to address inter-specific competition.
Addressing point (ii) will require trade-offs in plant traits. We showed how
differences in pollinator efficiencies (e[i]) indirectly affect plant dynamics
[277]Eq (1a). However, pollinator efficiencies can depend on plant allocation
patterns, which can affect their growth, mortality or competitive performance
(r[i], m[i], c[i]). Plant adaptation likely happens over generations, so a
replicator equation approach or adaptive dynamics [[278]22] will be useful to
study plant-pollinator co-evolution.
In spite of the complexity of real plant pollinator networks, small community
modules will remain useful to tease apart the mechanisms that regulate their
diversity. Models of intermediate complexity like [279]Eq (1a) can help us
discover important results concerning interaction dynamics, pollinator foraging
patterns (e.g., pollinator ESS) and the consequences of differences between
ecological vs. adaptation time scales.
Supporting Information
[280]S1 Appendix. Analysis with fixed preferences.
[281]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s001
(PDF)
[282]S1 File. Source codes used to generate figures and simulations.
[283]https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s002
(ZIP)
Author Contributions
1. Conceived and designed the experiments: TAR VK.
2. Performed the experiments: TAR VK.
3. Analyzed the data: TAR VK.
4. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: TAR VK.
5. Wrote the paper: TAR VK.
References
1. 1. Memmott J, Waser NM, Price MV. Tolerance of pollination networks to
species extinctions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 2004;271:2605-2611.
pmid:15615687
+ [284]View Article
+ [285]PubMed/NCBI
+ [286]Google Scholar
2. 2. Bastolla U, Fortuna MA, Pascual-García A, Ferrera A, Luque B, Bascompte J.
The architecture of mutualistic networks minimizes competition and increases
biodiversity. Nature. 2009;458:1018-1020. pmid:19396144
+ [287]View Article
+ [288]PubMed/NCBI
+ [289]Google Scholar
3. 3. Okuyama T, Holland JN. Network structural properties mediate the stability
of mutualistic communities. Ecology Letters. 2008;11:208-216. pmid:18070101
+ [290]View Article
+ [291]PubMed/NCBI
+ [292]Google Scholar
4. 4. Benadi G, Blüthgen N, Hovestadt T, Poethke HJ. When can plant-pollinator
interactions promote plant diversity? American Naturalist. 2013;182:131-146.
pmid:23852349
+ [293]View Article
+ [294]PubMed/NCBI
+ [295]Google Scholar
5. 5. Bewick S, Brosi BJ, Armsworth PR. Predicting the effect of competition on
secondary plant extinctions in plant-pollinator networks. Oikos.
2013;122:1710-1719.
+ [296]View Article
+ [297]Google Scholar
6. 6. Holt RD. Community modules. In: Gange AC, Brown VK, editors. Multitrophic
Interactions in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Blackwell Science; 1997. p. 333-349.
7. 7. Bolker B, Holyoak M, Krivan V, Rowe L, Schmitz O. Connecting theoretical
and empirical studies of trait-mediated interactions. Ecology.
2003;84:1101-1114.
+ [298]View Article
+ [299]Google Scholar
8. 8. Rathcke B. Competition and facilitation among plants for pollination. In:
Real L, editor. Pollination Biology. Academic Press; 1983. p. 305-329.
9. 9. Moeller DA. Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators.
Ecology. 2004;85(12):3289-3301.
+ [300]View Article
+ [301]Google Scholar
10. 10. Ghazoul J. Floral diversity and the facilitation of pollination. Journal
of Ecology. 2006;94:295-304.
+ [302]View Article
+ [303]Google Scholar
11. 11. Fretwell SD, Lucas HL. On territorial behavior and other factors
influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta
Biotheoretica. 1969;19:16-36.
+ [304]View Article
+ [305]Google Scholar
12. 12. Krivan V, Cressman R, Schneider C. The ideal free distribution: a review
and synthesis of the game-theoretic perspective. Theoretical Population
Biology. 2008;73:403-425. pmid:18282592
+ [306]View Article
+ [307]PubMed/NCBI
+ [308]Google Scholar
13. 13. Fontaine C, Collin CL, Dajoz I. Generalist foraging of pollinators: diet
expansion at high density. Journal of Ecology. 2008;96:1002-1010.
+ [309]View Article
+ [310]Google Scholar
14. 14. Revilla TA. Numerical responses in resource-based mutualisms: a time
scale approach. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2015;378:39-46. pmid:25936757
+ [311]View Article
+ [312]PubMed/NCBI
+ [313]Google Scholar
15. 15. Schoener TW. Alternatives to Lotka-Volterra competition: models of
intermediate complexity. Theoretical Population Biology. 1976;10:309-333.
pmid:1013908
+ [314]View Article
+ [315]PubMed/NCBI
+ [316]Google Scholar
16. 16. Armstrong RA, McGehee R. Coexistence of two competitors on one resource.
Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1976;56:499-502. pmid:944840
+ [317]View Article
+ [318]PubMed/NCBI
+ [319]Google Scholar
17. 17. Armstrong RA, McGehee R. Competitive exclusion. American Naturalist.
1980;115:151-170.
+ [320]View Article
+ [321]Google Scholar
18. 18. Ermentrout B. Simulating, Analyzing, and Animating Dynamical Systems: A
Guide to XPPAUT for Researchers and Students. Society for Industrial and
Applied Mathematics; 2002.
19. 19. Grover JP. Resource Competition. vol. 19 of Population and Community
Biology Series. London: Chapman & Hall; 1997.
20. 20. Maynard Smith J, Price GR. The logic of animal conflict. Nature.
1973;246:15-18.
+ [322]View Article
+ [323]Google Scholar
21. 21. Hofbauer J, Sigmund K. Evolutionary Games and Population Dynamics.
Cambridge University Press; 1998.
22. 22. Geritz SAH, Kisdi E, Meszena G, Metz JAJ. Evolutionarily singular
strategies and the adaptive growth and branching of the evolutionary tree.
Evolutionary Ecology. 1998;12:35-57.
+ [324]View Article
+ [325]Google Scholar
23. 23. MATLAB. version 7.10.0 (R2010a). Natick, Massachusetts: The MathWorks
Inc.; 2010.
24. 24. May RM. Models for two interaction populations. In: May RM, editor.
Theoretical Ecology: Principles and Applications. Saunders; 1976. p. 78-104.
25. 25. Vandermeer J, Boucher DH. Varieties of mutualistic interaction in
population models. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 1978;74:549-558.
pmid:732344
+ [326]View Article
+ [327]PubMed/NCBI
+ [328]Google Scholar
26. 26. Courchamp F, Berec L, Gascoigne J. Allee Effects in Ecology and
Conservation. Oxford University Press; 2008.
27. 27. Bronstein JL. Mutualism. Oxford University Press; 2015.
28. 28. Morales CL, Traveset A. A meta-analysis of impacts of alien vs. native
plants on pollinator visitation and reproductive success of co-flowering
native plants. Ecology Letters. 2009;12:716-728. pmid:19453616
+ [329]View Article
+ [330]PubMed/NCBI
+ [331]Google Scholar
29. 29. Gyllenberg M, Yan P, Wang Y. Limit cycles for
competitor-competitor-mutualist Lotka-Volterra systems. Physica D.
2006;221:135-145.
+ [332]View Article
+ [333]Google Scholar
30. 30. Valdovinos FS, Moisset de Espanés P, Flores JD, Ramos-Jiliberto R.
Adaptive foraging allows the maintenance of biodiversity of pollination
networks. Oikos. 2013;122:907-917.
+ [334]View Article
+ [335]Google Scholar
31. 31. Holt RD. Predation, apparent competition, and the structure of prey
communities. Theoretical Population Biology. 1977;12:197-229. pmid:929457
+ [336]View Article
+ [337]PubMed/NCBI
+ [338]Google Scholar
32. 32. Krivan V. Dynamic ideal free distribution: Effects of optimal patch
choice on predator-prey dynamics. American Naturalist. 1997;149:164-178.
+ [339]View Article
+ [340]Google Scholar
33. 33. Kondoh M. Foraging adaptation and the relationship between food-web
complexity and stability. Science. 2003;299:1388-1391. pmid:12610303
+ [341]View Article
+ [342]PubMed/NCBI
+ [343]Google Scholar
34. 34. Krivan V. Competition in di-and tri-trophic food web modules. Journal of
Theoretical Biology. 2014;343:127-137. pmid:24316384
+ [344]View Article
+ [345]PubMed/NCBI
+ [346]Google Scholar
35. 35. Song Z, Feldman MW. Adaptive foraging behaviour of individual pollinators
and the coexistence of co-flowering plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society
B. 2014;281:20132437. pmid:24352943
+ [347]View Article
+ [348]PubMed/NCBI
+ [349]Google Scholar
36. 36. Brown BJ, Mitchell RJ, Graham SA. Competition for pollination between an
invasive species (purple loosestrife) and a native congener. Ecology.
2002;83:2328-2336.
+ [350]View Article
+ [351]Google Scholar
37. 37. Levin DA, Anderson WW. Competition for pollinators between simultaneously
flowering species. American Naturalist. 1970;104:455-467.
+ [352]View Article
+ [353]Google Scholar
38. 38. Murcia C, Feinsinger P. Interspecific pollen loss by hummingbirds
visiting flower mixtures: Effects of floral architecture. Ecology.
1996;77:550-560.
+ [354]View Article
+ [355]Google Scholar
39. 39. Morales CL, Traveset A. Interspecific pollen transfer: magnitude,
prevalence and consequences for plant fitness. Critical Reviews in Plant
Sciences. 2008;27:221-238.
+ [356]View Article
+ [357]Google Scholar
40. 40. Kunin W, Iwasa Y. Pollinator foraging strategies in mixed floral arrays:
density effects and floral constancy. Theoretical Population Biology.
1996;49:232-263. pmid:8813024
+ [358]View Article
+ [359]PubMed/NCBI
+ [360]Google Scholar
41. 41. Thomson JD. Patterns of visitation by animal pollinators. Oikos.
1982;39:241-250.
+ [361]View Article
+ [362]Google Scholar
[363]Download PDF
* [364]Citation
* [365]XML
[366]Print
Share
* [367]Reddit Reddit
* [368]Facebook Facebook
* [369]LinkedIn LinkedIn
* [370]Mendeley Mendeley
* [371]Twitter Twitter
* [372]Email Email
Check for updates via CrossMark
Advertisement
Subject Areas
?
For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click [373]here.
We want your feedback. Do these Subject Areas make sense for this article? Click
the target next to the incorrect Subject Area and let us know. Thanks for your
help!
* [374]Population density
Is the Subject Area "Population density" applicable to this article? (BUTTON)
Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [375]Species extinction
Is the Subject Area "Species extinction" applicable to this article? (BUTTON)
Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [376]Population dynamics
Is the Subject Area "Population dynamics" applicable to this article?
(BUTTON) Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [377]Evolutionary adaptation
Is the Subject Area "Evolutionary adaptation" applicable to this article?
(BUTTON) Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [378]Foraging
Is the Subject Area "Foraging" applicable to this article? (BUTTON) Yes
(flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [379]Invasive species
Is the Subject Area "Invasive species" applicable to this article? (BUTTON)
Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [380]Flowering plants
Is the Subject Area "Flowering plants" applicable to this article? (BUTTON)
Yes (flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [381]Pollination
Is the Subject Area "Pollination" applicable to this article? (BUTTON) Yes
(flagno) No
Thanks for your feedback.
* [382]Publications
* [383]PLOS Biology
* [384]PLOS Climate
* [385]PLOS Complex Systems
* [386]PLOS Computational Biology
* [387]PLOS Digital Health
* [388]PLOS Genetics
* [389]PLOS Global Public Health
*
* [390]PLOS Medicine
* [391]PLOS Mental Health
* [392]PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
* [393]PLOS ONE
* [394]PLOS Pathogens
* [395]PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
* [396]PLOS Water
* [397]Home
* [398]Blogs
* [399]Collections
* [400]Give feedback
* [401]LOCKSS
* [402]Privacy Policy
* [403]Terms of Use
* [404]Advertise
* [405]Media Inquiries
* [406]Contact
PLOS PLOS is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation, #C2354500, based in San
Francisco, California, US
References
Visible links:
1. https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-TP26BH
2. https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MQQMGF
3. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#main-content
4. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/.
5. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/getting-started
6. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines
7. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures
8. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/tables
9. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information
10. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/latex
11. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/what-we-publish
12. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/preprints
13. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/revising-your-manuscript
14. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now
15. https://collections.plos.org/s/calls-for-papers
16. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting
17. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/human-subjects-research
18. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/animal-research
19. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests
20. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/disclosure-of-funding-sources
21. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright
22. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability
23. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/complementary-research
24. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-software-and-code-sharing
25. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/ethical-publishing-practice
26. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/authorship
27. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/corrections-expressions-of-concern-and-retractions
28. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/criteria-for-publication
29. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/editorial-and-peer-review-process
30. https://plos.org/resources/editor-center
31. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/resources-for-editors
32. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/reviewer-guidelines
33. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/accepted-manuscripts
34. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/comments
35. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/static/publish
36. https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/default.asp
37. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/static/publish
38. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/journal-information
39. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/staff-editors
40. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/static/editorial-board
41. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/section-editors
42. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/advisory-groups
43. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/find-and-read-articles
44. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/publishing-information
45. https://plos.org/publication-fees
46. https://plos.org/press-and-media
47. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/contact
48. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search
49. https://github.com/PLOS/plos-thesaurus/blob/master/README.md
50. mailto:tomrevilla@gmail.com
51. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
52. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
53. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/authors?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
54. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/metrics?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
55. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/comments?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
56. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/comments?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
57. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
58. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
59. https://github.com/tomrevilla/pollifor
60. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref001
61. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref002
62. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref003
63. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref004
64. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref005
65. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref006
66. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
67. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref007
68. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
69. https://openclipart.org/
70. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
71. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref008
72. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref010
73. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
74. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
75. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref011
76. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref012
77. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
78. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref013
79. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
80. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
81. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref014
82. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.s001
83. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref004
84. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref015
85. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
86. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.s001
87. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref016
88. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref017
89. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref018
90. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
91. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref019
92. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
93. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
94. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
95. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
96. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref020
97. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref021
98. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
99. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref021
100. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
101. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
102. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
103. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref022
104. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
105. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
106. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
107. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
108. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
109. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref023
110. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
111. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
112. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref024
113. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref025
114. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
115. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref026
116. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref027
117. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e011
118. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e012
119. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e013
120. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e014
121. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
122. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.s001
123. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
124. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
125. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e015
126. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
127. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
128. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
129. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
130. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
131. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
132. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
133. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
134. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
135. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
136. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
137. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
138. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
139. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
140. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
141. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
142. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref018
143. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
144. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
145. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
146. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
147. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
148. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
149. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
150. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
151. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
152. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e008
153. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e006
154. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref020
155. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref021
156. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref011
157. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref012
158. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
159. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g004
160. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g004
161. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
162. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
163. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g004
164. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
165. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
166. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
167. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
168. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
169. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
170. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
171. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
172. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
173. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
174. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
175. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
176. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
177. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
178. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
179. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
180. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
181. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
182. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
183. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
184. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
185. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
186. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
187. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
188. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
189. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
190. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?size=medium&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g007
191. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g007
192. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
193. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
194. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
195. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
196. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
197. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
198. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
199. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
200. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref025
201. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref027
202. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
203. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
204. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
205. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref007
206. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref008
207. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
208. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref008
209. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref009
210. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref010
211. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref028
212. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref008
213. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
214. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref019
215. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e015
216. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
217. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
218. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
219. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
220. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g002
221. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
222. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref029
223. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
224. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref004
225. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref030
226. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref002
227. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref031
228. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
229. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref013
230. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e009
231. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g003
232. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref019
233. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
234. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
235. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
236. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
237. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
238. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
239. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
240. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
241. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref032
242. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref034
243. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
244. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g001
245. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref035
246. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g005
247. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref004
248. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref030
249. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref015
250. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref014
251. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-t001
252. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
253. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref010
254. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref008
255. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref010
256. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e016
257. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g004
258. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref010
259. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref013
260. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref036
261. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref028
262. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
263. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref037
264. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref039
265. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref030
266. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref004
267. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref035
268. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref040
269. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
270. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref030
271. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g006
272. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone-0160076-g007
273. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref039
274. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref041
275. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref030
276. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref035
277. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
278. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.ref022
279. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076#pone.0160076.e001
280. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=supplementary&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s001
281. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s001
282. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?type=supplementary&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s002
283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.s002
284. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2004.2909
285. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15615687
286. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tolerance+of+pollination+networks+to+species+extinctions+Memmott+2004
287. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07950
288. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19396144
289. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=The+architecture+of+mutualistic+networks+minimizes+competition+and+increases+biodiversity+Bastolla+2009
290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01137.x
291. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18070101
292. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Network+structural+properties+mediate+the+stability+of+mutualistic+communities+Okuyama+2008
293. https://doi.org/10.1086/670942
294. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23852349
295. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=When+can+plant-pollinator+interactions+promote+plant+diversity%3F+Benadi+2013
296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2013.00016.x
297. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Predicting+the+effect+of+competition+on+secondary+plant+extinctions+in+plant%E2%80%93pollinator+networks+Bewick+2013
298. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084%5B1101:CTAESO%5D2.0.CO;2
299. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Connecting+theoretical+and+empirical+studies+of+trait-mediated+interactions+Bolker+2003
300. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-0810
301. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Facilitative+interactions+among+plants+via+shared+pollinators+Moeller+2004
302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2006.01098.x
303. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Floral+diversity+and+the+facilitation+of+pollination+Ghazoul+2006
304. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
305. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=On+territorial+behavior+and+other+factors+influencing+habitat+distribution+in+birds.+I.+Theoretical+development+Fretwell+1969
306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2007.12.009
307. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18282592
308. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=The+ideal+free+distribution%3A+a+review+and+synthesis+of+the+game-theoretic+perspective+K%C5%99ivan+2008
309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01405.x
310. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Generalist+foraging+of+pollinators%3A+diet+expansion+at+high+density+Fontaine+2008
311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.04.012
312. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25936757
313. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Numerical+responses+in+resource-based+mutualisms%3A+a+time+scale+approach+Revilla+2015
314. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(76)90022-8
315. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1013908
316. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alternatives+to+Lotka-Volterra+competition%3A+models+of+intermediate+complexity+Schoener+1976
317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(76)80089-6
318. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/944840
319. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Coexistence+of+two+competitors+on+one+resource+Armstrong+1976
320. https://doi.org/10.1086/283553
321. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Competitive+exclusion+Armstrong+1980
322. https://doi.org/10.1038/246015a0
323. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=The+logic+of+animal+conflict+Maynard+Smith+1973
324. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006554906681
325. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Evolutionarily+singular+strategies+and+the+adaptive+growth+and+branching+of+the+evolutionary+tree+Geritz+1998
326. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(78)90241-2
327. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/732344
328. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Varieties+of+mutualistic+interaction+in+population+models+Vandermeer+1978
329. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01319.x
330. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19453616
331. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A+meta-analysis+of+impacts+of+alien+vs.+native+plants+on+pollinator+visitation+and+reproductive+success+of+co-flowering+native+plants+Morales+2009
332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physd.2006.07.016
333. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Limit+cycles+for+competitor%E2%80%93competitor%E2%80%93mutualist+Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra+systems+Gyllenberg+2006
334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20830.x
335. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Adaptive+foraging+allows+the+maintenance+of+biodiversity+of+pollination+networks+Valdovinos+2013
336. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-5809(77)90042-9
337. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/929457
338. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Predation%2C+apparent+competition%2C+and+the+structure+of+prey+communities+Holt+1977
339. https://doi.org/10.1086/285984
340. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Dynamic+ideal+free+distribution%3A+Effects+of+optimal+patch+choice+on+predator-prey+dynamics+K%C5%99ivan+1997
341. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1079154
342. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12610303
343. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Foraging+adaptation+and+the+relationship+between+food-web+complexity+and+stability+Kondoh+2003
344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.11.020
345. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24316384
346. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Competition+in+di-and+tri-trophic+food+web+modules+K%C5%99ivan+2014
347. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2437
348. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24352943
349. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Adaptive+foraging+behaviour+of+individual+pollinators+and+the+coexistence+of+co-flowering+plants+Song+2014
350. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083%5B2328:CFPBAI%5D2.0.CO;2
351. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Competition+for+pollination+between+an+invasive+species+%28purple+loosestrife%29+and+a+native+congener+Brown+2002
352. https://doi.org/10.1086/282680
353. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Competition+for+pollinators+between+simultaneously+flowering+species+Levin+1970
354. https://doi.org/10.2307/2265629
355. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Interspecific+pollen+loss+by+hummingbirds+visiting+flower+mixtures%3A+Effects+of+floral+architecture+Murcia+1996
356. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352680802205631
357. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Interspecific+pollen+transfer%3A+magnitude%2C+prevalence+and+consequences+for+plant+fitness+Morales+2008
358. https://doi.org/10.1006/tpbi.1996.0013
359. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8813024
360. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Pollinator+foraging+strategies+in+mixed+floral+arrays%3A+density+effects+and+floral+constancy+Kunin+1996
361. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544491
362. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Patterns+of+visitation+by+animal+pollinators+Thomson+1982
363. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076&type=printable
364. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/citation?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
365. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076&type=manuscript
366. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
367. https://www.reddit.com/submit?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076
368. https://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076&t=Pollinator%20Foraging%20Adaptation%20and%20Coexistence%20of%20Competing%20Plants
369. https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076&title=Pollinator%20Foraging%20Adaptation%20and%20Coexistence%20of%20Competing%20Plants&summary=Checkout%20this%20article%20I%20found%20at%20PLOS
370. https://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076
371. https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076&text=%23PLOSONE%3A%20Pollinator%20Foraging%20Adaptation%20and%20Coexistence%20of%20Competing%20Plants
372. mailto:?subject=Pollinator%20Foraging%20Adaptation%20and%20Coexistence%20of%20Competing%20Plants&body=I%20thought%20you%20would%20find%20this%20article%20interesting.%20From%20PLOS%20ONE:%20https%3A%2F%2Fdx.plos.org%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0160076
373. https://github.com/PLOS/plos-thesaurus/blob/master/README.md
374. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Population+density&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
375. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Species+extinction&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
376. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Population+dynamics&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
377. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Evolutionary+adaptation&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
378. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Foraging&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
379. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Invasive+species&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
380. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Flowering+plants&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
381. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/search?filterSubjects=Pollination&filterJournals=PLoSONE&q=
382. https://plos.org/publications/journals/
383. https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/
384. https://journals.plos.org/climate/
385. https://journals.plos.org/complexsystems/
386. https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/
387. https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/
388. https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/
389. https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/
390. https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/
391. https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/
392. https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/
393. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/
394. https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/
395. https://journals.plos.org/sustainabilitytransformation/
396. https://journals.plos.org/water/
397. https://plos.org/
398. https://blogs.plos.org/
399. https://collections.plos.org/
400. mailto:webmaster@plos.org
401. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/lockss-manifest
402. https://plos.org/privacy-policy
403. https://plos.org/terms-of-use
404. https://plos.org/advertise/
405. https://plos.org/media-inquiries
406. https://plos.org/contact
Hidden links:
408. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
409. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076
410. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
411. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
412. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g001
413. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
414. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
415. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.t001
416. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
417. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
418. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g002
419. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
420. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
421. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g003
422. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g004
423. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g004
424. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g004
425. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
426. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
427. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g005
428. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
429. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
430. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g006
431. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/powerpoint?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g007
432. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=large&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g007
433. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure/image?download&size=original&id=10.1371/journal.pone.0160076.g007
Usage: http://www.kk-software.de/kklynxview/get/URL
e.g. http://www.kk-software.de/kklynxview/get/http://www.kk-software.de
Errormessages are in German, sorry ;-)