Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Sep 4.
doi: 10.1038/s41559-025-02843-z. Online ahead of print.

Density-dependent network structuring within and across wild animal systems

Gregory F Albery  1   2   3 Daniel J Becker  4 Josh A Firth  5   6 Delphine De Moor  7 Sanjana Ravindran  8 Matthew Silk  8   9   10 Amy R Sweeny  8   11 Eric Vander Wal  12 Quinn Webber  13 Bryony Allen  14   15 Simon A Babayan  16 Sahas Barve  17   18 Mike Begon  14 Richard J Birtles  19 Theadora A Block  20   21 Barbara A Block  22 Janette E Bradley  23 Sarah Budischak  24 Christina Buesching  25 Sarah J Burthe  26 Aaron B Carlisle  27 Jennifer E Caselle  28 Ciro Cattuto  29 Alexis S Chaine  30 Taylor K Chapple  31 Barbara J Cheney  32 Timothy Clutton-Brock  33 Melissa Collier  34 David J Curnick  15 Richard J Delahay  35 Damien R Farine  36   37   38   39 Andy Fenton  14 Francesco Ferretti  40 Laura Feyrer  41   42 Helen Fielding  43   44 Vivienne Foroughirad  34   45 Celine Frere  46 Michael G Gardner  47 Eli Geffen  48 Stephanie S Godfrey  49 Andrea L Graham  50 Phil S Hammond  51 Maik Henrich  52 Marco Heurich  52   53   54 Paul Hopwood  10 Amiyaal Ilany  55 Joseph A Jackson  19 Nicola Jackson  46 David M P Jacoby  56 Ann-Marie Jacoby  57 Miloš Ježek  58 Lucinda Kirkpatrick  59   60 Alisa Klamm  61 James A Klarevas-Irby  36   37   62   63 Sarah Knowles  5 Lee Koren  55 Ewa Krzyszczyk  60 Jillian M Kusch  12   64 Xavier Lambin  65 Jeffrey E Lane  64 Herwig Leirs  59 Stephan T Leu  66 Bruce E Lyon  20 David W Macdonald  67 Anastasia E Madsen  68   69 Janet Mann  34 Marta Manser  37 Joachim Mariën  59 Apia Massawe  70 Robbie A McDonald  44 Kevin Morelle  58   71 Johann Mourier  72   73   74 Chris Newman  67 Kenneth Nussear  75 Brendah Nyaguthii  38   39   62   76 Mina Ogino  36   37   62 Laura Ozella  77 Craig Packer  78 Yannis P Papastamatiou  79 Steve Paterson  80 Eric Payne  81 Amy B Pedersen  8 Josephine M Pemberton  8 Noa Pinter-Wollman  82 Serge Planes  73   74 Aura Raulo  5 Rolando Rodríguez-Muñoz  10 Lauren Rudd  5 Christopher Sabuni  70 Pratha Sah  34 Robert J Schallert  83 Ben C Sheldon  5 Daizaburo Shizuka  68 Andrew Sih  81 David L Sinn  84 Vincent Sluydts  59 Orr Spiegel  48 Sandra Telfer  65 Courtney A Thomason  40   85 David M Tickler  86 Tom Tregenza  10 Kimberley VanderWaal  87 Sam Walmsley  41 Eric L Walters  17 Klara M Wanelik  80   88 Hal Whitehead  41 Elodie Wielgus  52 Jared Wilson-Aggarwal  10   44 Caroline Wohlfeil  47 Shweta Bansal  34
Affiliations

Density-dependent network structuring within and across wild animal systems

Gregory F Albery et al. Nat Ecol Evol. .

Abstract

Theory predicts that high population density leads to more strongly connected spatial and social networks, but how local density drives individuals' positions within their networks is unclear. This gap reduces our ability to understand and predict density-dependent processes. Here we show that density drives greater network connectedness at the scale of individuals within wild animal populations. Across 36 datasets of spatial and social behaviour in >58,000 individual animals, spanning 30 species of fish, reptiles, birds, mammals and insects, 80% of systems exhibit strong positive relationships between local density and network centrality. However, >80% of relationships are nonlinear and 75% are shallower at higher values, indicating saturating trends that probably emerge as a result of demographic and behavioural processes that counteract density's effects. These are stronger and less saturating in spatial compared with social networks, as individuals become disproportionately spatially connected rather than socially connected at higher densities. Consequently, ecological processes that depend on spatial connections are probably more density dependent than those involving social interactions. These findings suggest fundamental scaling rules governing animal social dynamics, which could help to predict network structures in novel systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

    1. Lloyd-Smith, J. O. et al. Should we expect population thresholds for wildlife disease? Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 511–519 (2005). - PubMed
    1. Albery, G. F. Density dependence and disease dynamics: moving towards a predictive framework. Preprint at EcoEvoRxiv https://doi.org/10.32942/osf.io/gaw49 (2022).
    1. Hopkins, S. R., Fleming-Davies, A. E., Belden, L. K. & Wojdak, J. M. Systematic review of modeling assumptions and empirical evidence: does parasite transmission increase nonlinearly with host density? Methods Ecol. Evol. 11, 476–486 (2020).
    1. Begon, M. et al. A clarification of transmission terms in host–microparasite models: numbers, densities and areas. Epidemiol. Infect. 129, 147–153 (2002). - PubMed - PMC
    1. Ferrari, M. J., Perkins, S, E., Pomeroy, L. W. & Bjrnstad, O. N.Pathogens, social networks, and the paradox of transmission scaling. Interdiscip. Perspect. Infect. Dis. 2011, 267049 (2011). - PubMed - PMC

LinkOut - more resources