Why nonnative invasive plant species commonly co-occur, despite their competitive superiority and propensity to displace native species, remains a paradox in invasion biology. Negative interactions among competitively dominant invaders are potentially alleviated by two understudied mechanisms: seasonal priority effects, where phenological separation weakens the effect of competition on species with early phenology; and indirect facilitation, where competition between two species is mitigated by a third species. Although phenological separation has been speculated as a mechanism for explaining co-occurrence patterns of invasive plants, it has never been directly tested. In a greenhouse experiment, we tested the effect of phenological separation on direct and indirect interactions between three co-occurring invasive plant species found in the riparian forests of North America. These species have distinct natural phenological separation with reproduction in early spring (Ficaria verna), mid-spring (Alliaria petiolata), and late summer (Microstegium vimineum). When phenology was experimentally synchronized, direct pairwise interactions among invasive species were overwhelmingly negative, asymmetric, and unlikely to promote co-occurrence. However, increasing phenological separation generated seasonal priority effects, which weakened the effect of competition on species with early phenology. Furthermore, the addition of a third species generated indirect facilitative effects, which balanced competitive outcomes among the two weakest competitors. Based on these findings, we conclude that phenological separation modulates the strength of both seasonal priority effects and indirect facilitation within species interaction networks and may promote the co-occurrence of three common invasive species within this study system. We articulate how future studies can test the external validity of these findings in more complex environmental conditions and with a larger range of invasive plants.
Read full abstract