Network theory and migration: Avoiding misapplications and misinterpretations

Abstract

Network analysis is becoming a popular tool for the study of animal movement. Proliferation of software enables researchers to use network measures without reflecting on the underlying mathematics and biology. One common use characterizing movement networks, such as migration, with centrality measures. Predominantly developed to evaluate social systems, these measures now appear in applications across disciplines that vary greatly in system properties. Each network measure has a very specific mathematical definition, with implicit assumptions about system properties to which they are applied that often make them inappropriate for migration. We report mismatches between mathematical assumptions and applications of network measures to migration, primarily with bird examples. For example, of 11 trajectory-transmission network-flow processes observed in the real world, only two are applicable to bird migration, neither of which allows valid application of classical centrality measures. We also identify misinterpretations of network measures, such as nodes with the highest degree centrality as locations where individuals intermingle. Other misinterpretations include that a high betweenness score translates to a node that is frequently used or is an important site along a main migratory route. Finally, networks are used in different ways, ranging from descriptive visualization to quantitative prediction and we identify common cases, such as migratory connectivity, where this leads to miscommunication. Network-theoretic approaches to answer ecological research and conservation questions associated with migration are numerous, but new measures need to be developed for animal migration. We provide a guide for researchers of animal movement for measure selection, development, and documentation.