Fig 1.
Examples of two different dynamic networks, (a) and (b), that lead to the same static network (c) when aggregated over time.
Table 1.
Static and dynamic network measure of Grevy’s zebra and onagers.
Fig 2.
Inferred dynamic communities of (a) Grevy’s zebra and (b) onagers with all costs set equal to 1.
Table 2.
Dynamic community metrics.
Fig 3.
Static communities of Grevy’s zebra and onagers detected using Louvain algorithm ((a) and (b)) and the superimposed dynamic communities, where each node is colored by the majority color of its dynamic communities ((c) and (d)).
Fig 4.
Projection onto the first two principle components of the dynamic communities metrics of all the individuals in both Grevy’s zebra and onagers.
Fig 5.
Projection onto the first two principle components of the dynamic communities metrics of all the females in both Grevy’s zebra and onagers.
Fig 6.
Switching costs of both Grevy’s (red) and onagers (blue), by reproductive status.
The line within the box is the mean value, the box encompasses the 1st quadrille from the mean, the whiskers denote the 3rd quadrille, and the points are at 5% and 95%.
Fig 7.
Projection onto the first two principle components of the dynamic communities metrics of all the males in both Grevy’s zebra and onagers.
Fig 8.
Projection onto the first two principle components of the dynamic communities metrics of all the Grevy’s zebra.
Fig 9.
Projection onto the first two principle components of the dynamic communities metrics of all the onagers.