Invasive plants optimize leaf nitrogen allocation in photosynthesis.

Ozone enrichment and drought stress have more negative effects on invasive leguminous woody species than co-occurring native species

In a recent article in Ecology, Leffler et al. (2014) presented a potentially new perspective on the importance of trait differences between native and invasive exotic plants in explaining invasions in local native communities. The new perspective brought forward is that, if trait differences between invasive and native species are likely to be important in explaining exotic plant invasion, the differences must be larger than those observed between native species in the new community. A meta-analysis of previous studies searching for trait differences was presented, with the general finding that the magnitudes of trait differences between invasive and native species tend not to differ from those observed between native species only. Leffler et al. (2014) interpret this result as evidence that trait differences are highly context dependent, and that mechanisms other than trait differences are likely to be more important in most cases of invasion. We acknowledge that there is no universal explanation of successful exotic invasion into native communities. Moreover, we do not believe that invasive plant species always have trait values that differ substantially from the traits present in the native community, or that trait differences are important for invasion in all cases. However, we cannot agree with the criterion stipulated by Leffler et al. (2014), namely that a trait difference between invasive and native species can only be important to invasion success if it is greater than the differences among natives. Leffler et al. (2014) do not explain the logic behind the criterion, but a flaw of the criterion is that it will discount cases when a successfully invading species has intermediate trait values that are not represented by native species. Leffler et al. (2014) seem to focus on trait differences as representing niche differences among species. Consider the scenarios of niche differences among native and exotic invasive species in Fig. 1. If a trait is related to the niche space occupied by native species in the community and the invader, for a trait difference to be important in invasion success under the criterion of Leffler et al. (2014), only the scenario in Fig. 1a would qualify. Here, the invader occupies a niche at the extreme of the niche space, compared to native species. The average niche-related trait difference between the invasive species and the natives will be greater than the average difference among natives. However, consider Fig. 1b. Here, the invader occupies a vacant niche that is intermediate between the native species (Stachowicz and Tilman 2005), and the invader would have an intermediate, niche-related trait value not represented by the native community. However, the average trait difference between the invader and native species in Fig. 1b will be smaller than the difference among native species, and under the criterion proposed, the native-invasive trait difference would be considered unimportant. Thus, the criterion proposed by Leffler et al. (2014) cannot distinguish between cases where trait values may lie between those of native species but are still distinct and cases where they are very similar to native species. Exotic species may not only invade a community by having different niche-related traits compared to native species. Some of the traits considered in the metaanalysis of Leffler et al. (2014), e.g., biomass, are arguably traits related to fitness. Such fitness-related traits also do not have to be more different between invasive and native species than among natives, for them to be important for invasions. All that is required is for the trait difference to be large enough for invasive species to have greater fitness than the native species (Fig. 1c). If this occurs and there is niche overlap between the invasive species and a native species, then the invasive species should displace the native species (MacDougall et al. 2009). The trait difference between invasive and native species should always be greater than the average native-native difference only when the trait is related to niche space and the invader is occupying a vacant niche at the extremes of the niche space available to the whole community. Thus, cases that meet the Leffler et al. (2014) criterion could be viewed as representing only one of three possible scenarios where differences in traits between native and invasive species are potentially important, and the only scenario where native-native differences are relevant. The challenge is to understand which of the many traits we can measure are actually related to fitness and niches of invasive and native species, and then to identify whether fitness or niche differences (or perhaps even both) have led to invasion. Manuscript received 15 July 2014; revised 7 August 2014; accepted 10 September 2014. Corresponding Editor: D. C. Laughlin. 1 Ecology Lab, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Universitaetsstrassse 10, Konstanz D78457 Germany. 2 E-mail: wayne.dawson@uni-konstanz.de

Human influence on the environment is so extensive that virtually all ecosystems on the planet are now affected by biological invasions. And, often, ecosystems are invaded by multiple co‐occurring non‐native species. Hence, it is important to understand the impacts these invasions are producing on biodiversity and ecosystem processes.Here, we present results of a 2‐year long field experiment where we tested the effects of co‐occurring invasive C4African grasses in a Cerrado area in central Brazil. We compared plant and arthropod communities, plant biomass, and soil nitrogen dynamics and soil chemical characteristics across five experimental treatments:Urochloa decumbensremoval;Melinis minutifloraremoval; bothU.decumbensandM.minutifloraremoval;U.decumbensandM.minutiflorainvaded plots; and uninvaded Cerrado. We hypothesized that selective removal of invasive grasses would have distinct effects on the native ecosystem structure and functioning. We expected that each invasive grass would produce a different type of impact on the native ecosystem and that their impacts would be synergistic when co‐occurring.Removal ofM.minutifloradoubled native plant diversity and biomass when compared to invaded plots, whereas removal ofU.decumbensdid not alter these parameters. Cerrado plots had four times more plant species than plots cleared of invasives. Removal of invasive grasses did not affect the species richness or community composition of soil epigeal fauna. Cerrado soils had lower fertility, organic matter content and pH than invaded soils. The effects were generally higher when both invasive grasses were removed, suggesting impacts were synergistic, butM.minutiflorahad greater effects on plants and soils thanU.decumbens. Both invasive species produced negative impacts, but a single species was the main driver. We also detected persistent effects of the invasive grass species on the ecosystem after 2 years of removal.We conclude that invasive species of the same functional group have similar types of effects in native ecosystems, but the magnitude of impact was largely dependent on invasive species biomass and cover. Where multiple invasive species are present, research and management of invaded ecosystems should tackle the interacting effects of co‐occurring invaders.

Trait divergence and the ecosystem impacts of invading species

Exotic invasive plant species can cause biodiversity loss by outcompeting and replacing native species. Herbicides are commonly used to control invasive plants owing to their low cost and high efficiency. However, herbicide use can have unintended effects on co-occurring native plant species by altering the competitive balance. We studied how herbicide application modifies the competition between an invasive and a native species. We examined the effects of applying glyphosate on the mortality, photosynthetic capacity, and growth of Solidago canadensis, an aggressive invasive species, and Imperata cylindrica, a native species that commonly co-occurs with S. canadensis. We also studied how applying glyphosate affected the competition between these species. Various glyphosate concentrations were applied to the two species grown either together or separately. The mortality rate increased while the photosynthetic capacity and growth decreased with increasing glyphosate concentration. Increasing the glyphosate concentration more negatively affected the parameters of I. cylindrica than those of S. canadensis. Plant growth, especially that of I. cylindrica, was more restricted by intraspecific competition than by interspecific competition as the glyphosate concentration increased. Furthermore, the relative competitive potential of the native species decreased with increasing glyphosate concentration. S. canadensis is more tolerant of glyphosate, which enhances its competitive advantage and hinders the proliferation, reintroduction, and success of native plant species. Future studies should focus on developing techniques to mitigate the negative impacts of invasive plant species, for example, via optimizing methods of spraying herbicides.

Invasive species have been identified as a major threat to native biodiversity and ecosystem functioning worldwide due to their superiority in spread and growth. Such superiority is explained by the invasional meltdown phenomena, which suggests that invasive species facilitate the establishment of more invasive species rather than native species by modifying the plant-soil feedback (PSF). We conducted a two-phase plant-soil feedback experiment using the native Prosopis cineraria and the invasive Prosopis juliflora in Oman. Firstly, we conditioned the soil by planting seedlings of native species, invasive species, native and invasive species "mixed", and unconditioned soil served as a control. Secondly, we tested the feedback of these four conditioned soil on the two species separately by measuring the productivity (total biomass) and the performance in the form of plant functional traits (plant height, specific leaf area (SLA), leaf nitrogen content (Nmass), leaf carbon content (Cmass) and specific root length (SRL) of native and invasive species as well as the nutrient availability in soil (soil organic carbon (SOC) and soil total nitrogen (STN)). We found that the native species produced more biomass, best performance, and higher SOC and STN when grown in soil conditioned by native species, additionally, it gave lower biomass, reduced performance, and lower SOC and STN when grown in the soil conditioned by invasive and mixed species. These results suggest negative PSF for native species and positive PSF for invasive species in the soil conditioned by invasive species, which can be considered as red flag concerning the restoration of P. cineraria as an important native species in Oman, as such positive PSF of the invasive species P. juliflora will inhibit the regeneration of P. cineraria.

Ecohydrology and invasive ecology have become increasingly important in the context of global climate change. This study presents the first in-depth analysis of the water use of invasive and native plants of the same growth form at multiple scales: leaf, plant, and ecosystem. We reanalyzed data for several hundred native and invasive species from over 40 published studies worldwide to glean global trends and to highlight how patterns vary depending on both scale and climate. We analyzed all pairwise combinations of co-occurring native and invasive species for higher comparative resolution of the likelihood of an invasive species using more water than a native species and tested for significance using bootstrap methods. At each scale, we found several-fold differences in water use between specific paired invasive and native species. At the leaf scale, we found a strong tendency for invasive species to have greater stomatal conductance than native species. At the plant scale, however, natives and invasives were equally likely to have the higher sap flow rates. Available data were much fewer for the ecosystem scale; nevertheless, we found that invasive-dominated ecosystems were more likely to have higher sap flow rates per unit ground area than native-dominated ecosystems. Ecosystem-scale evapotranspiration, on the other hand, was equally likely to be greater for systems dominated by invasive and native species of the same growth form. The inherent disconnects in the determination of water use when changing scales from leaf to plant to ecosystem reveal hypotheses for future studies and a critical need for more ecosystem-scale water use measurements in invasive- vs. native-dominated systems. The differences in water use of native and invasive species also depended strongly on climate, with the greater water use of invasives enhanced in hotter, wetter climates at the coarser scales.

Biological invasion has attracted widespread attention because invasive species threaten native biodiversity and weaken ecosystem services. Based on field investigation of vegetation in Nujiang River valley, Northwest Yunnan, we analyzed the spatial patterns of native and invasive species richness, and the effects of topography, climate, and roadside habitat disturbance on the invasive versus native plant species richness. We recorded 26 exotic invasive plant species that belong to 13 families and 21 genera, and 1,145 native plant species, belonging to 158 families and 628 genera. Along the Nujiang River valley, species richness of invasive plants decreased with increasing latitude and altitude, while species richness of native plants increased with increasing latitude, and showed a hump-shaped pattern with elevation. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the roles of roadside disturbance, climate, topography and soil nutrients on the distribution of both native and invasive species richness. Results of hierarchical variation partitioning revealed that roadside habitat disturbance had primary impact on the distribution of two groups of species. Pre·研究报告· 390 生 物 多 样 性 Biodiversity Science 第 24 卷 cipitation was the climatic determinant of invasive species diversity, and small-scale topographic factors, especially aspect, mainly affected native species diversity. It is likely that native species became drought-resistant in the evolutionary process while invasive species failed to adapt themselves to the local arid environments due to the short colonization time. This research supports the hypothesis that resource availability is the main factor limiting plant invasion, and highlights the negative effects of human activity on biodiversity. In addition, results of structural equation modelling revealed that native communities aren’t resistant to plant invasion. The negative relationship between invasive and native species richness reflects the different responses of the two group species to environmental factors.

An invasive and native plant differ in their effects on the soil food-web and plant-soil phosphorus cycle

An explanation for successful invasion is that invasive alien species sustain less pressure from natural enemies than co-occurring native species. Using meta-analysis, we examined whether invasive species: (1) incur less damage, (2) exhibit better performance in the presence of enemies, and (3) tolerate damage more than native species. Invasive alien species did not incur less damage than native species overall. The performance of invasive alien species was reduced compared to natives in the presence of enemies, indicating the invasive alien species were less tolerant to damage than native species. However, there was no overall difference in performance of invasive alien and native species with enemies present. The damage and degree of reduction in performance of invasive alien relative to native species did not depend on relatedness to natives. Our results suggest aliens may not always experience enemy release, and enemy release may not always result in greater plant performance.

Climate change and plant invasion are two of the most important ecological issues facing the world today. Extreme events are likely to play an important role in plant invasion. For example, tolerance to temperature stress is critical for plant germination and survival of seedlings. Nonnative invasive species tend to differ from co-occurring native species in several traits. Increased mean temperatures are known to enhance the risk of plant invasions, but few experimental studies have linked plant invasion to both increasing mean temperature and extreme (low and high) temperatures. Ten plant species from Asteraceae (six nonnative invasive and four native species) were chosen and six temperatures (extremely low, average winter, average annual, average summer, high and extremely high) were used to test the effects of extreme temperatures on plant invasion in southern China. The results showed that nonnative invasive plant species (IS) germinated more readily and the seedlings grew better than those of native plant species (NS) at high temperatures, suggesting that global warming may facilitate invasion. Extreme temperatures decreased the seed germination rate and seedling growth of both IS and NS, although NS were more tolerant of extremely low temperatures (5/0 °C). IS, in turn, were more tolerant of extremely high temperatures (40/35 °C). Extreme high temperatures may increase the risk of plant invasion because IS seedlings are better able to become established, whereas low temperatures may hinder invasion. In addition, the species-specific differences in plant origin (IS and NS) and temperature tolerance were correlated with other climatic factors and should be considered in managing invasive species in a changing world.

Invasive, non-native plant species often outcompete native species and reduce biodiversity. Invasive plants frequently begin growth before native plants, yet few studies have examined whether invasives win in competition partly by colonizing disturbed sites more quickly or by beginning growth earlier in the season than native plants (i.e. due to priority effects). We hypothesized that invasive plant species would benefit more from priority effects than would comparable native species and that earlier growth of invasive species would decrease plant biodiversity. To test this hypothesis, we grew three pairs of invasive and native plant species from three different functional groups/plant families (C3 grasses/Poaceae, non-leguminous forbs/Asteraceae, and legumes/Fabaceae). We seeded each of the species 3 weeks before seeding the other five species into large pots in a greenhouse. Consistent with our hypothesis, we found much stronger priority effects with invasive than native species. Each invasive species formed a near-monocultures when seeded first (97.5 % of total biomass, on average) whereas native species did not similarly dominate (29.8 % of total biomass, on average). Similarly, Simpson’s species diversity was 81 % higher when the initially sown species was native rather than invasive. The literature suggests that invasive species in the field often begin growth earlier in the spring than native species and that climate change may increasingly allow invasives to begin growth before native species, indicating invasive priority effects may become increasingly common.

Sentinel-2 time series based optimal features and time window for mapping invasive Australian native Acacia species in KwaZulu Natal, South Africa

Native plant communities are often invaded by multiple alien species. It is still unclear how increasing diversity of alien invasive species suppresses the growth of native species and thus contributes to invasion success. In the subtropical monsoon region of southeast China, we experimentally created a native plant community with 18 herbaceous species. One week later, we let it be invaded by either zero (controls without invasion), one, two, four or eight alien plant species, with either high or low species evenness. After a four‐month growth period we harvested the aboveground biomass of each species. We found that increasing invasive species richness significantly increased invasive plant biomass, the biomass of all invasive and native plant species within the community, and invasion success (the ratio of invasive plant biomass to the biomass of all native and invasive plants), but it did not significantly reduce native plant biomass. Experimentally manipulating invasive species evenness did not influence invasion success and did not show any differential suppression effects on native plants. One invasive species, Sesbania cannabina , became dominant in terms of plant biomass, irrespective of its proportion in the alien plant mixtures. Throughout this experiment, effects of invasive species richness on invasion success were mainly due to such selection effects among the invasive species. On the other hand, the unchanged biomass of native species under increasing invasive plant richness suggests the presence of at least partly complementary resource niches between invasive and native species.

Effects of co-occurring non-native invasive plant species on old-field succession