Tripartite networks show that keystone species can multitask

Keystone species are disproportionately important for ecosystem functioning. While all species engage in multiple interaction types with other species, keystone species importance is often defined based on a single dimension of their Eltonian niche, that is, one type of interaction (e.g. keystone predator). It remains unclear whether the importance of keystone species is unidimensional or if it extends across interaction types. We conducted a meta-analysis of tripartite interaction networks examining whether species importance in one dimension of their niche is mirrored in other niche dimensions, and whether this is associated with interaction outcome, intimacy or species richness. We show that keystone species importance is positively associated across multiple ecological niche dimensions, independently of abundance, and find no evidence that multidimensionality of keystone species is influenced by the explanatory variables. We propose that the role of keystone species extends across multiple ecological niche dimensions, with important implications for ecosystem resilience and conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.Fil: Timóteo, Sérgio. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: Albrecht, Jörg. Senckenberg Biodiversität Und Klima Forschungszentrum; AlemaniaFil: Rumeu, Beatriz. Universidad de Cádiz; EspañaFil: Norte, Ana C.. University Of Coimbra, Marine And Environmental Sciences Center; PortugalFil: Traveset, Anna. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados; EspañaFil: Frost, Carol M.. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Marchante, Elizabete. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: López Núñez, Francisco A.. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: Peralta, Guadalupe. University of Canterbury; Nueva Zelanda. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Memmott, Jane. University Of Bristol; Reino UnidoFil: Olesen, Jens M.. University Aarhus; DinamarcaFil: Costa, José M.. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: da Silva, Luís P.. Cibio - Centro de Investigação Em Biodiversidade E Recursos Genéticos; PortugalFil: Carvalheiro, Luísa G.. Universidade Federal de Goiás; Brasil. Universidade de Lisboa; PortugalFil: Correia, Marta. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: Staab, Michael. Universitat Technische Darmstadt; AlemaniaFil: Blüthgen, Nico. Universitat Technische Darmstadt; AlemaniaFil: Farwig, Nina. Philipps-universität Marburg; AlemaniaFil: Hervías Parejo, Sandra. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Instituto Mediterráneo de Estudios Avanzados; EspañaFil: Mironov, Sergei. Zoological Institute Of The Russian Academy Of Sciences; RusiaFil: Rodríguez Echeverría, Susana. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; PortugalFil: Heleno, Ruben. University Of Coimbra, Centre For Functional Ecology; Portuga