ArticlePDF Available

Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: A meta-analysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems

Abstract and Figures

Ecology Letters (2011) 14: 702–708 Biological invasions cause ecological and economic impacts across the globe. However, it is unclear whether there are strong patterns in terms of their major effects, how the vulnerability of different ecosystems varies and which ecosystem services are at greatest risk. We present a global meta-analysis of 199 articles reporting 1041 field studies that in total describe the impacts of 135 alien plant taxa on resident species, communities and ecosystems. Across studies, alien plants had a significant effect in 11 of 24 different types of impact assessed. The magnitude and direction of the impact varied both within and between different types of impact. On average, abundance and diversity of the resident species decreased in invaded sites, whereas primary production and several ecosystem processes were enhanced. While alien N-fixing species had greater impacts on N-cycling variables, they did not consistently affect other impact types. The magnitude of the impacts was not significantly different between island and mainland ecosystems. Overall, alien species impacts are heterogeneous and not unidirectional even within particular impact types. Our analysis also reveals that by the time changes in nutrient cycling are detected, major impacts on plant species and communities are likely to have already occurred.
Content may be subject to copyright.
REVIEW AND
SYNTHESIS Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: a meta-analysis of
their effects on species, communities and ecosystems
Montserrat Vila
`,
1
* Jose
´L. Espinar,
1
Martin Hejda,
2
Philip E. Hulme,
3
Vojte
ˇch Jaros
ˇı
´k,
2,4
John L. Maron,
5
Jan Pergl,
2,6
Urs Schaffner,
7
Yan
Sun
7
and Petr Pys
ˇek
2,4
Abstract
Biological invasions cause ecological and economic impacts across the globe. However, it is unclear whether
there are strong patterns in terms of their major effects, how the vulnerability of different ecosystems varies
and which ecosystem services are at greatest risk. We present a global meta-analysis of 199 articles reporting
1041 field studies that in total describe the impacts of 135 alien plant taxa on resident species, communities and
ecosystems. Across studies, alien plants had a significant effect in 11 of 24 different types of impact assessed.
The magnitude and direction of the impact varied both within and between different types of impact.
On average, abundance and diversity of the resident species decreased in invaded sites, whereas primary
production and several ecosystem processes were enhanced. While alien N-fixing species had greater impacts
on N-cycling variables, they did not consistently affect other impact types. The magnitude of the impacts was
not significantly different between island and mainland ecosystems. Overall, alien species impacts are
heterogeneous and not unidirectional even within particular impact types. Our analysis also reveals that by the
time changes in nutrient cycling are detected, major impacts on plant species and communities are likely to have
already occurred.
Keywords
Biological invasions, bottom-up effects, diversity, ecological complexity, ecosystem functioning, effect size,
exotic species, island, N-fixing, weeds.
Ecology Letters (2011) 14: 702–708
INTRODUCTION
Given the increasing pace of global change, it is becoming more
important than ever to understand how human activities are altering
biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (Tylianakis et al. 2008). A key
driver of change is the invasion of ecosystems by alien species, many
of which attain sufficiently high abundance to influence biodiversity.
In contrast to the extensive literature and syntheses on the processes
leading to biological invasions (Jeschke & Strayer 2005; LePrieur et al.
2008; Van Kleunen et al. 2010a,b), a robust framework to understand
impacts has yet to be developed (Parker et al. 1999). For example,
various invasive plants are known to decrease local plant species
diversity (Vila` et al. 2006; Gaertner et al. 2009; Hejda et al. 2009;
Powell et al. 2011), increase ecosystem productivity and alter the rate
of nutrient cycling (Liao et al. 2008; Ehrenfeld 2010), and hence
impact upon ecosystem services and human well-being (Pejchar &
Mooney 2009). However, while there are a growing number of studies
reporting impacts of alien plants, we still lack broad quantitative
syntheses of how impacts vary depending on the attributes of
recipient ecosystems and of the invaders themselves (Levine et al.
2003). This absence of a broad-scale assessment limits our ability to
generalize and predict when and where impacts might be most
deleterious.
To address this key issue in invasion biology, we undertake a
quantitative synthesis on the effects of alien plant species on a wide
range of ecological response variables using a meta-analytical
approach (Rosenberg et al. 2000). Meta-analysis provides an oppor-
tunity to explore heterogeneity among studies and identify large-scale
patterns across species and geographic regions (Steward 2010). Our
goal was to determine how the magnitude and direction of alien
species impacts vary across levels of ecological complexity. An alien
plant species that reaches a high abundance and dominates an
ecosystem will potentially influence the performance of individual
resident species and their population dynamics (Vila` & Weiner 2004),
and as a consequence, it will have both direct and indirect effects on
plant community structure and ecosystem functioning (Levine et al.
2003). In this study, we assess how impacts on species compare with
those on community properties and ecosystem processes.
1
Estacio
´n Biolo
´gica de Don
˜ana (EBD-CSIC), Avda. Ame
´rico Vespucio s n, Isla de
la Cartuja, E-41092 Sevilla, Spain
2
Institute of Botany, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ-252 43
Pru
˚honice, Czech Republic
3
The Bio-Protection Research Centre, PO Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury,
New Zealand
4
Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Vinic
ˇna
´7,
CZ-128 01 Prague, Czech Republic
5
Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812,
USA
6
Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, CH-3012 Bern,
Switzerland
7
CABI Europe-Switzerland, 2800 Dele
´mont, Switzerland
*Correspondence: E-mail: montse.vila@ebd.csic.es
Nomenclature as in Weber (2003).
Ecology Letters, (2011) 14: 702–708 doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01628.x
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
We focus on two aspects that have for long been pivotal in the
biological invasion literature. First, do N-fixing alien species exert
greater ecological impacts than non-N-fixing species? Although there
has been considerable research examining how species traits might
influence plant invasiveness (Daehler 2003; Pys
ˇek & Richardson 2007;
Van Kleunen et al. 2010a,b), the effect of particular plant traits on the
type of impact is unclear with the exception of studies reporting
N-fixing alien species having a significant impact on N-cycling
(Vitousek 1990; Ehrenfeld 2003, 2010; Liao et al. 2008). As strong
impacts on nutrient cycling subsequently affect plant performance
(e.g. plant resource allocation, plant competitive ability, plant
resistance to herbivory, etc.) and hence community structure, we
assumed N-fixing plants to have greater community impacts than
non-N-fixing species.
Second, we assess whether island ecosystems are more vulnerable to
impacts than mainland ecosystems. Islands often support large
regional pools of alien species (Lonsdale 1999; Pys
ˇek et al. 2010)
and are often considered to be highly impacted by invaders (but see
Diez et al. 2009). Certainly, introduced predators can trigger strong
trophic cascades on islands and these indirect effects can importantly
influence primary production and plant community structure (Croll
et al. 2005). However, doubts have been expressed about the relative
vulnerability of island ecosystem to the impacts of alien plants (Sax &
Gaines 2008) but as yet no formal assessment of the vulnerability of
island ecosystems to impacts has been undertaken.
METHODS
Literature search
We used several data sources to gather quantitative evidence from the
literature on the ecological impacts of alien plants upon: (1) individual
plant and animal species performance, (2) characteristics of the
recipient community and (3) ecosystem processes (see Table 1 for
definitions and examples of these measures). We searched for relevant
articles on the ISI Web of Knowledge (http://apps.isiknowledge.com)
database on 11 March 2009 with no restriction on publication year,
using the following search term combinations: (plant invader OR
exotic plant OR alien plant OR plant invasion*) AND (impact* OR
effect*) AND (community structure* OR diversity* OR ecosystem
process* OR competition*). As the next step, we also screened the
reference lists from all retrieved articles for other relevant publica-
tions. As some of those articles were reviews (e.g. Levine et al. 2003)
that were also based on the Ôgrey literatureÕ, we achieved a reasonably
good coverage of the literature on impacts of alien plants, not
restricted to that indexed in Web of Science.
We examined each article to assess their potential for meeting the
selection criteria for inclusion in the review. The main selection
criterion required studies to compare quantitatively any ecological
pattern or process in both invaded and uninvaded plots in natural or
semi-natural ecosystems. We did not include studies conducted in
agricultural systems as this topic has been reviewed elsewhere (Vila`
et al. 2004). This resulted in an initial set of 515 articles from which the
following criteria for data inclusion were adopted:
(1) Replicated field studies that were either observational (i.e.
comparing non-manipulated invaded and uninvaded sites) or
experimental (i.e. removal or addition of target plants) were
included where they explicitly mentioned the identity of the alien
plant taxon causing impact. We only selected studies focusing on
the impact of a single alien species rather than that of
multispecies alien assemblages. We also excluded all studies
addressing the effects of expanding or colonizing native species
such as Ôshrub encroachmentÕ(the review of Liao et al. 2008
included many studies on native species).
(2) Where the same article examined different alien species, several
ecosystems and or more than one response variable, we
considered each of these separately as they represented different
examples of ecological impacts. A possible criticism is that using
all measures represents a form of pseudo-replication in the meta-
analysis. However, the same approach has previously used in
meta-analysis (Liao et al. 2008; Rey-Benayas et al. 2009). The
influence of pseudo-replication was tested with a randomly
selected single effect size per article for impact types with large
sample sizes (see next section).
(3) When a response variable was measured at different times (e.g.
sampling at different seasons or years), we made an informed
decision on whether to take the mean value across times or
consider each measure as independent. In some instances, we
only used the final measurement (see Criterion 5).
Table 1 Summary of the ecological impacts due to alien plant species classified by
levels of ecological complexity, impact types and response variables examined in the
meta-analysis
Level Impact type Variables
Plant species Fitness Seed set, germination rate, seedling
establishment, survival, mortality ())
Growth Increase in size of whole plants or
plant parts
Plant
communities
Production Biomass, NPP
Abundance Plant number, density, cover
Diversity Alpha diversity, richness, evenness
Animal species Fitness Egg production, adult emergence,
survival, mortality ())
Growth Increase in size of whole animals
at any life stage
Animal
communities*
Production Biomass
Abundance Density, visits, counts
Diversity Alpha diversity, richness
Behaviour Grazing, predation, mobility,
activity
Ecosystems Soil OM Soil organic matter
C pools Soil, litter, plant C
N pools Soil, litter, plant N
N available NO
3
and or NH
4
in soil
N mineralization N mineralization rate
N nitrification N nitrification rate
P pools Soil, litter, plant P
CN Soil, litter, plant C N
Microbial activity Activity of soil bacteria, fungi
or enzymes
pH pH
Litter
decomposition
Litter decomposition rate
Salinity Soil Na, electrical conductivity
Soil moisture Soil water content
As low mortality indicates high survival, the sign of the effect sizes of the former
variable was changed ()).
*Although they refer mostly to animals, they also include impacts on micro-
organisms (e.g. bacteria, fungi and protozoa).
Review and Synthesis Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants 703
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
(4) There were also studies conducted on the same species in
similar ecosystems but at different locations. We made an
informed decision whether to consider studies as independent if
locations were from clearly distinct regions (e.g. different
islands, different countries) and considered the effects across
locations if they represented similar ecosystems under the
influence of the same environmental conditions. If the study
manipulated other ecological factors (e.g. N-addition, distur-
bance levels) only results from non-manipulated plots were
considered.
(5) When the study investigated the effects of different degrees of
invasion (e.g. heavily vs. less invaded sites) and different
residence times (i.e. old vs. recent invasions) we only considered
the putative largest contrast. That is, we examined differences
between the least invaded sites (i.e. often uninvaded) and the
most invaded sites, or differences between uninvaded sites and
sites with the longest time since invasion.
Data extraction
A total of 199 articles representing 1041 cases of invasion across 135
taxa (all at the species level except four hybrids and one subspecies)
met our criteria (Appendix S1). In the vast majority of studies,
invaded sites had high alien abundance and although the measures of
plant abundance were not always given, the study sites were usually
described as having high or > 50% cover. Furthermore, the alien
species considered were in many cases explicitly described as invasive
in the study region. Thus, our results summarize the impact of
invasive alien plant species.
Among the alien plant species investigated, perennial herbs (344
cases) and trees (202 cases) were more often represented than other
life-forms and there were only 18 N-fixing species (156 cases). Almost
half of the studies (478) have been conducted in temperate regions
and one-third (340) in grasslands. Twenty-four per cent of studies
(245) were conducted on islands.
In most cases, field assessments of impact were based on
comparisons of several ecological variables in long-standing invaded
vs. uninvaded sites nearby. Only 14% of the studies involved
manipulative experiments (i.e. removal or addition of species). The
impact variables measured most frequently concerned N pools (103
cases), plant species diversity (136), animal abundance (94) and plant
biomass and production (90). Individual response variables were
related to species performance, community structure and ecosystem
processes in invaded and uninvaded plots. These levels of ecological
complexity were further classified into 24 types of impact (Table 1).
Many impact types contain different variables and sometimes the
same variable has been estimated by using different methods.
However, using different variables to estimate effect sizes within a
category is intrinsic to meta-analysis (e.g. Cardinale et al. 2006; Winfree
et al. 2009; Van Kleunen et al. 2010b). Although the inclusion of
heterogeneous data has prompted some criticism of meta-analytical
methods, they provide the opportunity to quantitatively identify large-
scale patterns (Steward 2010) as the effect size is a unit-free metric
that accounts for sample size bias (see below).
We extracted mean, statistical variation (usually SE or SD) and
sample size values for invaded and uninvaded plots for each response
variable. These data were extracted directly from tables or from graphs
using the
DATATHIEF II
software (B. Thumers; http://www.datat-
hief.org) or, in some cases, also by measuring mean and statistical
variation ÔmanuallyÕusing a ruler. For other studies, we obtained data
directly from the corresponding authors.
Response ratios
For each pair of invaded (i) and uninvaded (ni) sites per case study, we
calculated HedgesÕdas a measure of effect size. HedgesÕdis an
estimate of the standardized mean difference that is not biased by
small sample sizes (Rosenberg et al. 2000). From each pair of mean
values (X) the individual effect size dwas calculated as:
d¼
XiXni

SJ;
where Sis the pooled standard deviation and Ja weighting factor
based on the number of replicates (N) per treatment. Jwas calculated
as:
J¼13
4Nni þNi2ðÞ1:
The variance of HedgesÕd,Vd was calculated as:
Vd ¼Nni þNi
Nni Niþd2
2ðNni þNiÞ:
HedgesÕdis a unit-free index which ranges from )¥to +¥and
estimates the size of the impact and its direction. As in classical
statistical analysis, the highest effect sizes are from those studies
showing large differences between invaded and uninvaded plots when
the plots have low variability. Zero dvalues signify no difference in the
variable measured between invaded and uninvaded plots; positive and
negative dvalues imply a general trend following invasion for an
increase and decrease, respectively. HedgesÕdcalculations and
statistical analysis were conducted with the MetaWin v2.1 Software
(Rosenberg et al. 2000).
For each impact type, we calculated the weighted mean effect size
(d
+
) across the sample of studies with information on the relevant
response variable. To test whether d
+
differed significantly from zero
(i.e. no change with invasion), we assessed whether the bias-corrected
95% bootstrap-confidence interval (CI) of d
+
did not overlap zero
based on 999 iterations (Rosenberg et al. 2000). We also tested
whether effects sizes across studies were homogeneous, using the
Q
total
statistic based on a chi-squared test (Q
t
hereafter). A significant
Q
t
indicates that the variance among effect sizes is greater than that
expected by sampling error alone (i.e. effect sizes are not equal across
studies). The mean percentage of change in a response variable was
estimated as (e
R+
)1) ·100 where R
+
is the weighted mean response
ratio (R) across studies (Rosenberg et al. 2000). The natural logarithm
of Ris calculated as:
ln R¼ln Xi
Xni
!
:
For categorical comparisons (e.g. N-fixing vs. non-N-fixing), we
examined P
random
values associated to Q
between
statistic (Q
b
hereafter),
which describe the variation in effect sizes that can be ascribed to
differences between categories. We also tested whether the remaining
within-group heterogeneity (Q
w
) was significant using a chi-squared
test. Data were analysed using random-effects models which are
704 M. Vila
`et al. Review and Synthesis
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
preferable in ecological data synthesis because their assumptions are
more likely to be satisfied (Rosenberg et al. 2000).
Many studies reported data on the effect of the same alien species
on different response variables or in different ecosystems. To avoid
pseudoreplication, we also ran the analyses with a randomly selected
single effect size per article, for three response variables with the
largest sample sizes: plant diversity, animal abundance and N pools.
The mean effect sizes for each of these types of impact were similar to
those obtained for all studies and the bias-corrected 95% bootstrap-
confidence interval (CI) overlapped between the whole dataset and the
reduced dataset (Appendix S2). As a consequence, we felt confident
to include all the data in our analyses. The inclusion of all case studies
enabled us to screen for differences in impact within levels of
ecological complexity in a manner similar to the amalgamated meta-
analysis performed by Rey-Benayas et al. (2009) or Liao et al. (2008).
In studies on ecological impact, there might be a bias against
publishing negative results and studies with larger sample sizes might
have more power to detect significant impacts. We examined
standardized effect sizes of the raw data to test these potential biases
and found that they were slightly negatively (Spearman r=)0.099)
but significantly (P= 0.001) associated with sample size. This might
suggest that studies with small sample sizes are slightly more likely to
be published when they found bigger differences between invaded and
uninvaded sites (Rosenberg et al. 2000). However, a plot of the effect
sizes against the sample size revealed a funnel-shaped distribution of
the data points (Appendix S3), as would be expected in the absence of
a sampling bias (Palmer 1999).
Following Rosenthal (1979), we estimated the fail-safe number, that
is, the number of studies that would have to be added to change the
results of the meta-analysis from significant to non-significant, to be
37 689. As this value is larger than 5N+ 10 = 5215 where
N= number of case studies in our dataset, we are confident that
the observed results can be treated as a reliable estimate of the true
effect (Rosenberg 2005). Moreover, a plot of the standardized effect
sizes against the normal quantiles revealed a straight line (Appen-
dix S3) indicating that the effect sizes are normally distributed (Wang
& Bushman 1998). Overall, this indicates that there was only a mild
publication bias unlikely to change the overall meaning of the results.
RESULTS
Averaged across all studies, there was considerable variability in the
effect sizes (Q
t
= 2257.36, d.f. = 1039, P< 0.0001) ranging over 5
orders of magnitude. Mean effect sizes differed significantly among
the impact types examined (Q
b
= 316.78, d.f. = 23, P= 0.001) not
only in magnitude but also in direction (Figs 1 and 2; Appendix S4).
The mean effect size within impact types was also heterogeneous
(Q
w
= 1940.57, d.f. = 1016, P< 0.0001; see Appendix S4 for Q
t
of
each impact type). This result indicates that even for particular impact
types the magnitude and direction of the effect size varied significantly
across studies. For 11 of the 24 impact types examined, the CI of the
mean effect size overlapped zero (Figs 1 and 2). Therefore, for these
impact types, we could not support the hypothesis that the variables
examined changed uniformly with invasion, due to heterogeneity in
the direction of effects found for different studies (Appendix S4).
Alien plants significantly reduced fitness and growth of resident
plant species by 41.7 and 22.1%, respectively, and changed plant
community structure by decreasing speciesÕabundance (43.5%) and
diversity (50.7%). However, total community production increased by
56.8% following invasion (Fig. 1a). Alien plants also significantly
decreased animal speciesÕfitness by 16.5% and abundance by 17.3%
(Fig. 1b). For the other variables related to animal species perfor-
mance and animal community structure the CI of the mean effect size
overlapped zero. Thus, although the trend was towards a decrease in
the other variables with invasion, the direction of effect sizes were not
uniform across studies.
With regard to ecosystem impacts, alien plants enhanced microbial
activity by 32.3%, available N (53.7%), N, P and C pools (22.1, 19.7
and 11.6%, respectively), and decreased pH (3%), but for the impacts
on the other variables, the CI of the mean effect size overlapped zero
(Fig. 2; Appendix S4). For instance, on average, invasion decreased
litter decomposition by 15.6% but there was a significant heteroge-
neity among studies (Q
t
= 24.14, d.f. = 12, P= 0.02) with almost as
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
2
–1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2–2
Effect size
Effect size
(a)
(b)
Plant fitness (25, 0, 0)
Plant diversity (113, 2, 21)
Plant abundance (40, 0, 3)
Plant growth (22, 0, 10)
Plant production (32, 0, 58)
Animal fitness (14, 0, 4)
Animal growth (8, 0, 3)
Animal abundance (61, 1, 32)
Animal production (15, 0, 7)
Animal diversity (29, 1, 15)
Animal behaviour (11, 1, 10)
Figure 1 Mean effect size (HedgesÕd) of differences between alien plant species
impacts to (a) plant species and communities and (b) animal species and
communities. The bars around the means denote bias-corrected 95%-bootstrap
confidence intervals. A mean effect size is significantly different from zero when its
95% confidence interval do not bracket zero. Positive mean effect sizes indicate
that the invaded plots had on average greater values for variables describing a
particular impact type. The sample sizes with HedgesÕd< 0, HedgesÕd= 0 and
HedgesÕd> 0 are given next to the bars.
2–1 0 1 234 5
C/N (18, 0, 21)
N nitrification (3, 0, 8)
N pools (36, 2, 65)
P pools (17, 2, 31)
N available (15, 0, 32)
Microbial activity (5, 0, 9)
N mineralization (10, 1, 15)
Soil OM (10, 1, 15)
Salinity (10, 0, 9)
C pools (26, 2, 35)
Litter decomposition (7, 0, 6)
pH (55, 2, 5)
Soil moisture (14, 1, 15)
Figure 2 Mean effect size (HedgesÕd) of differences between ecosystem impacts
with indication of significant differences between N-fixing (closed triangles) and
non-N-fixing (open triangles) alien plant species. Otherwise as in Figure 1.
Review and Synthesis Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants 705
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
many studies showing increases as decreases in litter decomposition
due to invasion (Fig. 2).
Compared with non-N-fixing species, the alien N-fixing species
increased the impact on N pools and N nitrification significantly
(d
+
= 1.94 vs. d
+
= 0.19; d
+
= 1.83 vs. d
+
= 0.02, respectively).
By contrast, while N-fixing species decreased C N, non-N-fixing
species increased the value of this variable (d
+
=)0.65 vs. d
+
= 0.10).
The impact of N-fixing alien plants was not significantly different
from that of non-N-fixing species for any of the other impact type
addressed in this study (Table 2).
There were no significant differences in the mean effect sizes
between studies conducted on islands and on the mainland (Table 2).
DISCUSSION
Our analysis provides rigorous evidence that alien plant species exert
significant impacts on many ecological variables. However, the
magnitude and direction of these impacts vary among different levels
of ecological complexity. In absolute terms, impacts on plant species
and communities were substantial whereas those on nutrient cycling
were relatively minor. This indicates that by the time impacts on
nutrient cycling are detected, plant species and communities are likely
to have already been affected by invasion. Nevertheless, the causal
links between plant community and ecosystem impacts remain largely
unexplored (Levine et al. 2003). There are only a few experiments that
teased apart the direct impacts on nutrient cycling from the indirect
impacts via changes in community structure (but see Belnap et al.
2005; Allison et al. 2006 for exceptions).
Our analysis also shows that alien plants have bottom-up impacts
on higher trophic levels, although on average these effects are of lower
magnitude than those within the same trophic level. The effect of alien
plants on taxa at higher trophic levels might depend on the degree of
their dependence on alien plants as a food resource (de Groot et al.
2007; Gerber et al. 2008) but indirect effects may occur when alien
plants increase habitat heterogeneity (Pearson 2009). Studies which
have simultaneously investigated the impacts of alien plants on
primary producers and on other trophic levels are scarce (Valtonen
et al. 2006; de Groot et al. 2007; Gerber et al. 2008) and more are
needed to understand how frequent feedback impacts occur across
trophic levels.
One of the most striking findings of our study is that alien plant
species reduced local plant species diversity and increased plant
production of the invaded community. This is contrary to what
diversity-ecosystem functioning experiments would predict and
supports the importance of sampling effects in the patterns observed
in such studies (Cardinale et al. 2006). Experimental work has shown
that a strong invader can essentially reverse the positive diversity–
productivity relationship in a manner consistent to what we have
found (Zavaleta & Hulvey 2004; Maron & Marler 2008). Our analysis
suggests that alien plant invasions may result in a sampling effect
where ecosystem production is driven by the addition of a single
highly productive species, even if overall species diversity declines.
A prediction which our analysis did not support is generally greater
impact of alien N-fixing species compared with alien non-N-fixing
species. Seminal work on the impact of Myrica faya, an N-fixing
introduced tree in Hawaii, on early stages of primary succession
(Vitousek et al. 1987) motivated the idea that alien N-fixing species
can exert large impacts on recipient ecosystems. Current evidence
suggests that compared with non-N-fixing species, N-fixing alien
species more strongly affect N and C cycling (Liao et al. 2008), but our
results indicate that no such differences are found for impacts on
other ecosystem processes or on community structure.
Another unexpected result is that we did not find greater impacts on
islands than on mainland ecosystems. The generally accepted
assumption that islands are more threatened by plant invaders than
the mainland is largely drawn form the fact that their floras are
proportionally more dominated by alien species and ecosystems are
more disturbed (DÕAntonio & Dudley 1994). Indeed, compared with
corresponding mainland ecosystems, islands often harbour more alien
species (Lonsdale 1999) and individual alien plants can often be more
widespread (Gimeno et al. 2006). This might suggest greater impacts
but our results indicate that the magnitude of the impact is not
significantly greater than in mainland ecosystems and imply that
invasion success does not necessarily translate into greater impacts at a
local scale (Parker et al. 1999).
Our results summarize the impacts of strongly dominating alien
plant species prone to cause changes in species, communities or
ecosystems (Vila` et al. 2010). The data available did not allow us to
determine how impacts might increase as a function of alien plant
abundances. This seems to be a major gap in our understanding of
biological invasion regarding whether the relationship between alien
plant abundance and impact is saturating, sigmoid or linear (Ehrenfeld
Table 2 Heterogeneity between (Q
b
) the impact of N-fixing and non-N-fixing alien
plant species and for studies conducted in islands and in mainland ecosystems with
indication of sample sizes and P-values (significant results are in bold)
Level Impact type
N-fixing Insularity
Q
b
N
yes
,N
no
PQ
b
N
yes
,N
no
P
Plant species Fitness 1.31 8, 18 0.29 0.77 2, 23 0.46
Growth 1.08 8, 46 0.37
Plant
communities
Production 7.25 4, 86 0.06 4.74 13, 77 0.14
Abundance 1.92 11, 42 0.17 0.66 4, 49 0.45
Diversity 3.60 15, 121 0.09 1.03 25, 111 0.34
Animal species Fitness – – – –
Growth – – – –
Animal
communities*
Production 0.00 4, 18 1 0.45 3, 19 0.46
Abundance 4.45 11, 83 0.06 0.00 34, 60 0.97
Diversity 0.12 3, 42 0.74 1.19 12, 33 0.30
Behaviour – – – –
Ecosystems Soil OM 1.31 8, 18 0.29 0.34 3, 23 0.60
C pools 2.62 7, 56 0.14 0.46 3, 19 0.46
N pools 28.21 25, 78 0.001 0.04 34, 69 0.87
N available 1.96 13, 34 0.22 0.17 10, 37 0.71
N mineralization 0.19 7, 18 0.71 0.08 4, 21 0.82
N nitrification 8.35 3, 8 0.01 0.96 2, 9 0.35
P pools 4.33 13, 37 0.06 4.25 12, 38 0.10
CN 3.99 7, 32 0.05 0.73 20, 19 0.42
Microbial
activity
0.86 3, 11 0.39
pH 0.14 11, 51 0.77 0.00 25, 37 0.96
Litter
decomposition
0.01 2, 11 0.97 2.30 3, 10 0.27
Salinity 0.11 5, 14 0.75 0.17 4, 15 0.69
Soil moisture 0.23 3, 17 0.66 0.73 3, 17 0.41
Significance values of Q
b
are based on randomization tests. Empty cells denote the
analysis could not be conducted due to the lack of replicates.
*Although they refer mostly to animals, they also include impacts on micro-
organisms (e.g. bacteria, fungi and protozoa).
706 M. Vila
`et al. Review and Synthesis
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
2010). It is of interest to know whether there are thresholds or
ÔbreakpointsÕwhere impacts of alien plants may not scale linearly with
their abundances, and how this relationship may vary among invading
species (Andreu et al. 2009) and the spatial scale of study (Powell et al.
2011). The experimental studies examining this relationship found it
to either scale linearly (Maron & Marler 2008) or not at all (Meffin
et al. 2010) with invader abundance. Thus, additional experiments are
needed before we can make generalizations about the nature of this
relationship (Parker et al. 1999; Levine et al. 2003). This topic remains
at the core of whether the impact of alien species is related to their
ecological success.
In conclusion, our analyses have highlighted that alien plants pose
significant impacts at the species, community and ecosystem level.
Current understanding of invasive plant impacts is restricted to
relatively few dominant alien species (Pys
ˇek et al. 2008). However,
possibly because our database had different representation of alien
plant life forms and ecosystems, the magnitude of the impacts was
very variable and even for a given impact type, the direction of the
ecological change was context-dependent. Our quantitative approach
to value impacts could be further developed as the basis for scoring
alien species and recipient ecosystems for risk assessment of invasions
(Nentwig et al. 2009). We hope this article helps to re-invigorate this
area of research by highlighting the association among impacts at
several levels of ecological complexity and also the links between
invasion success and invasion impacts.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Discussions with J.M. Levine, C.M. DÕAntonio, J.S. Dukes, K. Grigulis
and S. Lavorel at a European Science Foundation Workshop held in
Barcelona in 2001 inspired portions of this work. We thank I. Parker
and two anonymous referees for comments on an early draft of this
article. Funding was provided by PRATIQUE (KBBE-212459) and
STEP (244090-STEP-CP-FP) of the EU 7FP; the Spanish Ministerio
de Ciencia e Innovacio´n project RIXFUTUR (CGL2009-7515) and
MONTES (CSD2008-00040); the Junta de Andalucı
´a RNM-4031; the
Czech Science Foundation (206 09 0563); the Academy of Sciences
of the Czech Republic Projects No. AV0Z60050516 and
MSM0021620828; the Ministry of Environment of the Czech
Republic project LC06073 and the Swiss National Science Foundation
(NCCR ÔPlant SurvivalÕ). P.P. acknowledges the support by Praemium
Academiae award from AS CR and J.P. from SCIEX.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
MV, PP, US and PEH designed research; MV, JLE, MH, JP and YS
prepared the database; MV and VJ analysed data; and MV, PP, VJ,
JLM, US and PEH wrote the article.
REFERENCES
Allison, S.D., Nielsen, C. & Hughes, R.F. (2006). Elevated enzyme activities in soils
under the invasive nitrogen-fixing tree Falcataria moluccana.Soil Biol. Biochem., 38,
1537–1544.
Andreu, J., Vila`, M. & Hulme, P.E. (2009). An assessment of stakeholder per-
ceptions and management of alien plants in Spain. Environ. Manag., 43, 1244–
1255.
Belnap, J., Phillips, S.L., Sherrod, S.K. & Moldenke, A. (2005). Soil biota can change
after exotic plant invasion: does this affect ecosystem processes? Ecology, 86,
3007–3017.
Cardinale, B.J., Srivastava, D.S., Duffy, J.E., Wright, J.P., Downing, A.L., Sankaran,
M. et al. (2006). Effects of biodiversity on the functioning of trophic groups and
ecosystems. Nature, 443, 989–992.
Croll, D.A., Maron, J.L., Estes, J.A., Danner, E.M. & Byrd, G.V. (2005). Introduced
predators transform subarctic islands from grassland to tundra. Science, 307, 1959–
1961.
Daehler, C.C. (2003). Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien
invasive plants: Implications for conservation and restoration. Annu. Rev. Ecol.
Evol. Syst., 34, 183–211.
DÕAntonio, C. & Dudley, T. (1994). Biological invasions as agents of change on
islands versus mainlands. In: Islands: Biological Diversity and Ecosystem Function (eds
Vitousek, P.M., Loope, L. & Andersen, H.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 103–
121.
Diez, J.M., Williams, P.A., Randall, R.P., Sullivan, J.J., Hulme, P.E. & Duncan, R.P.
(2009). Learning from failures: testing broad taxonomic hypotheses about plant
naturalization. Ecol. Lett., 12, 1174–1183.
Ehrenfeld, J.G. (2003). Effect of exotic plant invasions on soil nutrient cycling
processes. Ecosystems, 6, 503–523.
Ehrenfeld, J.G. (2010). Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Annu. Rev.
Ecol. Evol. Syst., 41, 59–80.
Gaertner, M., Breeyen, A.D., Hui, C. & Richardson, D.M. (2009). Impacts of alien
plant invasions on species richness in Mediterranean-type ecosystems: a meta-
analysis. Progr. Phys. Geogr., 33, 319–338.
Gerber, E., Krebs, C., Murrell, C., Moretti, M., Rocklin, R. & Schaffner, U. (2008).
Exotic invasive knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) negatively affect native plant and
invertebrate assemblages in European riparian habitats. Biol. Cons., 141, 646–
654.
Gimeno, I., Vila`, M. & Hulme, P.E. (2006). Are islands more susceptible to plant
invasion than continents? A test using Oxalis pes-caprae in the western Mediter-
ranean. J. Biogeogr., 33, 1559–1565.
de Groot, M., Kleijn, D. & Jogan, N. (2007). Species groups occupying different
trophic levels respond differently to the invasion of semi-natural vegetation by
Solidago canadensis.Biol. Cons., 136, 612–617.
Hejda, M., Pys
ˇek, P. & Jaros
ˇı
´k, V. (2009). Impact of invasive plants on the species
richness, diversity and composition of invaded communities. J. Ecol., 97, 393–
403.
Jeschke, J.M. & Strayer, D.L. (2005). Invasion success of vertebrates in Europe and
North America. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 102, 7198–7202.
LePrieur, F., Beauchard, O., Blanchet, S., Oberdorff, T. & Brosse, S. (2008). Fish
invasions in the worldÕs river systems: when natural processes are blurred by
human activities. PLoS Biol., 6, 404–410.
Levine, J.M., Vila`, M., DÕAntonio, C.M., Dukes, J.S., Grigulis, K. & Lavorel, S.
(2003). Mechanisms underlying the impact of exotic plant invasions. Proc. R. Soc.
London, Serie B, 270, 775–781.
Liao, C., Peng, R., Luo, Y., Zhou, X., Wu, X., Fang, C. et al. (2008). Altered
ecosystem carbon and nitrogen cycles by plant invasion: a meta-analysis. New
Phytol., 177, 706–714.
Lonsdale, W.M. (1999). Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of
invasibility. Ecology, 80, 1522–1536.
Maron, J.L. & Marler, M. (2008). Effects of native species diversity and resource
additions on invader impact. Am. Nat., 172, S18–S33.
Meffin, R., Miller, A.L., Hulme, P.E. & Duncan, R.P. (2010). Experimental intro-
duction of the alien weed Hieracium lepidulum reveals no significant impact on
montane plant communities in New Zealand. Diversity Distrib., 16, 804–815.
Nentwig, W., Ku
¨hnel, E. & Bacher, S. (2009). A generic impact-scoring system
applied to alien mammals in Europe. Cons. Biol., 24, 302–311.
Palmer, A.R. (1999). Detecting publication bias in meta-analysis: a case study of
fluctuating asymmetry and sexual selection. Amer. Nat., 154, 220–233.
Parker, I.M., Simberloff, D., Lonsdale, W.M., Goodell, K., Wonham, M., Kareiva,
P.M. et al. (1999). Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological
effects of invaders. Biol. Invas., 1, 3–19.
Pearson, D.A. (2009). Invasive plant architecture alters trophic interactions by
changing predator abundance and behaviour. Oecologia, 159, 549–558.
Pejchar, L. & Mooney, H.A. (2009). Invasive species, ecosystem services and hu-
man well-being. Trends Ecol. Evol., 24, 497–504.
Powell, K.I., Chase, J.M. & Knight, T.M. (2011). A synthesis of plant invasion
effects on biodiversity across spatial scales. Am. J. Bot., 98, 539–548.
Review and Synthesis Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants 707
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
Pys
ˇek, P. & Richardson, D.M. (2007). Traits associated with invasiveness in alien
plants: where do we stand? In: Biological Invasions, Ecological Studies 193 (ed.
Nentwig, W.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin & Heidelberg, pp. 97–125.
Pys
ˇek, P., Richardson, D.M., Pergl, J., Jaros
ˇı
´k, V., Sixtova´, Z. & Weber, E. (2008).
Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol., 23,
237–244.
Pys
ˇek, P., Bacher, S., Chytry
´, M., Jaros
ˇı
´k, V., Wild, J., Celesti-Grapow, L. et al.
(2010). Contrasting patterns in the invasions of European terrestrial and fresh-
water habitats by alien plants, insects and vertebrales. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr., 19,
319–331.
Rey-Benayas, J.M., Newton, A.C., Diaz, A. & Bullock, J.M. (2009). Enhancement of
biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis.
Science, 325, 1121–1124.
Rosenberg, M.S. (2005). The file-drawer problem revisited: a general weighted
method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution, 59, 464–468.
Rosenberg, M.S., Adams, D.C. & Gurevitch, J. (2000). Metawin: Statistical Software for
Meta-Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The ‘‘file-drawer problem’’ and tolerance for null results.
Psychol. Bull., 86, 638–641.
Sax, D.F. & Gaines, S.D. (2008). Species invasions and extinction: the future of
native biodiversity on islands. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 105, 11409–11497.
Steward, G. (2010). Meta-analysis in applied ecology. Biol. Lett., 6, 78–81.
Tylianakis, J.M., Didham, R.K., Bascompte, J. & Wardle, D.A. (2008). Global
change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol. Lett., 11, 1–13.
Valtonen, A., Jantunen, J. & Saarinen, K. (2006). Flora and lepidoptera fauna
adversely affected by invasive Lupinus polyphyllus along road verges. Biol. Cons.,
133, 389–396.
Van Kleunen, M., Dawson, M., Schaepfer, D., Jeschke, J.M. & Fischer, M. (2010a).
Are invaders different? A conceptual framework of comparative approaches for
assessing determinants of invasiveness. Ecol. Lett., 13, 947–958.
Van Kleunen, M., Weber, E. & Fischer, M. (2010b). A meta-analysis of trait dif-
ferences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecol. Lett., 13, 235–
245.
Vila`, M. & Weiner, J. (2004). Are invasive plant species better competitors than
native plant species? Evidence from pair-wise experiments. Oikos, 105, 229–238.
Vila`, M., Williamson, M. & Lonsdale, M. (2004). Competition experiments in alien
weeds with crops: lessons for measuring invasive impact? Biol. Invas., 6, 59–69.
Vila`, M., Tessier, M., Suehs, C.M., Brundu, G., Carta, L., Galanidis, A. et al. (2006).
Local and regional assessment of the impacts of plant invaders on vegetation
structure and soil properties of Mediterranean islands. J. Biogeogr., 33, 853–861.
Vila`, M., Basnou, C., Pys
ˇek, P., Josefsson, M., Genovesi, P., Gollasch, S. et al.
(2010). How well do we understand the impacts of alien species on ecosystem
services? A pan-European cross-taxa assessment. Front. Ecol. Environ., 8, 135–
144.
Vitousek, P.M. (1990). Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an
integration of population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos, 57, 7–13.
Vitousek, P.M., Walker, L., Whiteaker, L., Mueller-Dombois, D. & Matson, P.
(1987). Biological invasion by Myrica faya alters ecosystem development in Ha-
waii. Science, 238, 802–804.
Wang, M.C. & Bushman, B.J. (1998). Using the normal quartile plot to explore
meta-analytic data sets. Psychol. Methods, 3, 46–54.
Weber, E. (2003). Invasive Plant Species of the World: A Reference Guide to Environmental
Weeds. CAB International Publishing, Wallingford.
Winfree, R., Aguilar, R., Va´zquez, D.P., LeBuhn, G. & Aizen, M.A. (2009). A meta-
analysis of beesÕresponses to anthropogenic disturbance. Ecology, 90, 2068–2076.
Zavaleta, E.S. & Hulvey, K.B. (2004). Realistic species losses disproportionately
reduce grassland resistance to biological invaders. Science, 306, 1175–1177.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online
version of this article:
Appendix S1 List of studies for meta-analysis on alien plant species
impact on species, communities and ecosystems.
Appendix S2 Total heterogeneity (Q
t
) with indication of sample size,
effect sizes (d
+
) and 95% CI for three impact types of alien plant
species when considering all case studies (whole) and only one study
per article (reduced).
Appendix S3 MetaWin output for (a) normal quartile plot and (b)
funnel-plot of effect sizes (HedgesÕd) of the raw data vs. sample size.
Appendix S4 Total heterogeneity (Q
t
) with indication of P-values,
mean effect sizes (d
+
), degrees of freedom (d.f.) and 95% CI for
different impact types of alien plant species.
As a service to our authors and readers, this journal provides
supporting information supplied by the authors. Such materials are
peer-reviewed and may be re-organized for online delivery, but are not
copy-edited or typeset. Technical support issues arising from
supporting information (other than missing files) should be addressed
to the authors.
Editor, Elsa Cleland
Manuscript received 11 April 2011
First decision made 16 December 2010
Manuscript accepted 12 April 2011
708 M. Vila
`et al. Review and Synthesis
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/CNRS
... Since much research has focused on invasive species, one can use the well-established invasive species framework to examine overabundant species. Once the populations of invasive or overabundant species are established in new territories, they may lead to the extinction or extirpation of native species (Bellard et al., 2016;Doherty et al., 2016;Pimentel et al., 2005), fitness reduction of native competitors (Gurnell et al., 2004;Vilà et al., 2011), hybridization (Vilà et al., 2000), and the emergence of zoonotic diseases (Hulme, 2014). Highly effective means by which overabundant species influence their introduced environments are modifications of the physical environment as ecosystem engineers (Crooks, 2002;Ehrenfeld, 2010;Sousa et al., 2009) and the re-shaping of food webs via trophic cascades (Allombert et al., 2005;Dexter et al., 2013;Koons et al., 2014). ...
... Highly effective means by which overabundant species influence their introduced environments are modifications of the physical environment as ecosystem engineers (Crooks, 2002;Ehrenfeld, 2010;Sousa et al., 2009) and the re-shaping of food webs via trophic cascades (Allombert et al., 2005;Dexter et al., 2013;Koons et al., 2014). These effects may change over time (Strayer et al., 2006) and as a function of specific invaded habitat characteristics, making them context-dependent (Vilà et al., 2011) and thus hard to predict. ...
Article
The intensification of land alterations promotes the spread of invasive and overabundant species. Yet, controlling such species is not always derived from extensive impact assessments. We explored the consequences of the Hooded Crow (Corvus cornix) expansion into the arid region of Israel on the local biota. Crow activities and their potential effects were examined in a nature reserve and its surrounding agricultural lands. We used line transect counts and Global Positioning System (GPS) tagging to assess crow habitat utilization patterns. To measure crow impact on the local community, we compared artificial nest predation rates between agrarian and natural land types. Compositional analysis of the GPS-tagged crows' home range indicated a preference for arable lands, with low utilization of natural areas, limited to the vicinity of the nature reserve edges. Accordingly, Hooded Crows were among the dominant nest predators, mainly in agricultural lands or near their borders. These findings suggest that crow impact on natural habitats is low and limited to highly exploratory individuals. As crow abundance constantly increases, we call for short and long-term management actions, including establishing agri-environmental schemes to boost the local community's resistance to overabundant and invasive species.
... Biological invasions have been shown to cause considerable changes in native species extinction likelihood, genetic composition of native populations, behavior patterns, species richness and abundance, phylogenetic and taxonomic diversity, trophic networks, ecosystem productivity, nutrient cycling, hydrology, habitat structure, and various components of disturbance regimes (Vila et al. 2011;Ricciardi et al. 2013;Schowalter, 2022). According to reports on worldwide economic losses over the previous 50 years, invasive alien species (IAS) are responsible for at least US$ 1.288 trillion in damages (Diagne et al. 2021), a figure that is continuously growing. ...
Article
Full-text available
Biological invasions are regarded as a major threat to native biodiversity, with cascading ecological and economic consequences within invaded areas. Anticipating and managing these invasions requires a better understanding of the interactions between non-native and native species. We compiled a list of alien plant species and their native insect herbivores from various terrestrial habitats in the Kashmir Himalaya. On alien plants, a total of 15 native insect herbivores were found, four of which were specialists (Aglais caschmirensis on Urtica dioica, Agrotis sp. and Chrysolina herbacea on Mentha longifolia and Nezara viridula on Verbascum thapsus) and the rest were generalists. Altica himensis is the most common native insect herbivore, feeding on nearly 31 alien plants. Various diversity indices show a quantitative estimate of the alien plant and native insect herbivore network. A total of 42 alien plants were recorded throughout the course of 2 years (2018–2020), with Plantago major having the highest relative abundance of 9.7. The study provides a baseline information on the challenging issue of biological invasion by highlighting the role of native insect herbivores as natural biocontrol agents against invasive alien plants.
... In multiply invaded ecosystems, invasive alien species often interact with each other as well as with native species (Green et al. 2011). Invasive species often negatively interact with native species through herbivory, parasitism, predation, and competition, which can negatively impact the abundance and diversity of native species and disrupt ecosystem processes (Mack et al. 2000;Wikelski et al. 2004;Parker, Burkepile & Hay 2006;Oduor, Gómez & Strauss 2010;Vilà et al. 2011;Ricciardi et al. 2013;Schirmel et al. 2016;Stephens et al. 2019). Nevertheless, there are also instances of invasive species having facilitated native species diversity (Callaway, Kikvidze & Kikodze 2000;Oduor et al. 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
Many ecosystems are now co-invaded by alien plant and herbivore species. The evolutionary naivety of native plants to alien herbivores can make the plants more susceptible to detrimental effects of herbivory than co-occurring invasive plants, in accordance with the apparent competition hypothesis. Moreover, the invasional meltdown hypothesis predicts that in multiply invaded ecosystems, invasive species can facilitate each other's impacts on native communities. Although there is growing empirical support for these hypotheses, facilitative interactions between invasive plants and herbivores remain underexplored in aquatic ecosystems. Many freshwater ecosystems are co-invaded by aquatic macrophytes and mollusks and simultaneously experience nutrient enrichment. However, the interactive effects of these ecological processes on native macrophyte communities remain an underexplored area. To test these effects, we performed a freshwater mesocosm experiment in which we grew a synthetic native community of three macrophyte species under two levels of invasion by an alien macrophyte Myriophyllum aquaticum (invasion vs. no-invasion) and fully crossed with two levels of nutrient enrichment (enrichment vs. no-enrichment) and herbivory by an invasive snail Pomacea canaliculata (herbivory vs. no-herbivory). In line with the invasional meltdown and apparent competition hypotheses, we found that the proportional above-ground biomass yield of the invasive macrophyte, relative to that of the native macrophyte community, was significantly greater in the presence of the invasive herbivore. Evidence of a reciprocal facilitative effect of the invasive macrophyte on the invasive herbivore is provided by the results showing that the herbivore produced greater egg biomass in the presence than in the absence of M. aquaticum. However, nutrient enrichment reduced the mean proportional above-ground biomass yield of the invasive macrophyte. Our results suggested that herbivory by invader P. canaliculata may enhance invasiveness of M. aquaticum. However, nutrient enrichment of habitats that already harbor M. aquaticum may slow down invasive spread of the macrophyte. Broadly, our study underscores the significance of considering several factors and their interactions when assessing the impact of invasive species, especially considering that many habitats experience co-invasion by plants and herbivores and simultaneously undergo various other disturbances, including nutrient enrichment.
... The spread of invasive species is among the leading threats to biodiversity conservation (Simberloff et al., 2013). Invasive alien plants (IAPs) outcompete native plants (Vilà et al., 2011), alter hydrological and nutrient cycles (Miniat et al., 2021), and increase fire propensity, leading to further invasion and habitat degradation (Brooks et al., 2004). Given the widespread negative impacts of IAPs ranging from species to ecosystems, it is critical to understand the mechanisms of IAPs spread to mitigate their invasion. ...
Article
Lantana camara (hereafter, Lantana) is among the worst invasive alien plants spread extensively across Africa, Australia and Asia at an alarming rate, posing significant challenges to conservation of native biodiversity. While, Lantana invasion is widely recognised to be more pronounced in open-canopy habitats (including deciduous forests, forest edges and gaps), the potential role of variation in seed dispersal across habitats varying in overstory canopy cover is poorly understood. Avian frugivores are among primary seed dispersers of the fleshy-fruited Lantana. We monitored 45 Lantana shrubs across a gradient of overstory canopy cover to determine the relationship between fruiting intensity and canopy cover. We watched 80 Lantana shrubs (240 h) across a canopy cover gradient to determine 1) differences in frugivore assemblage visiting Lantana across open- and closed-canopy habitats, 2) drivers of frugivore visitation on Lantana, and 3) relationship between seed disperser visitation rate and overstory canopy cover. We found that Lantana shrubs under low overstory canopy cover had higher fruit abundance than those in high canopy cover. Frugivore assemblage differed between Lantana shrubs in open- versus closed-canopy cover habitats. Drivers of frugivore visitation on Lantana varied across different frugivore species with a greater probability of occurrence of bulbuls (the primary seed dispersers of Lantana) on shrubs under low overstory canopy cover. Visitation rates of the effective seed dispersers were higher on shrubs under low overstory canopy cover. Thus, there was greater chances of dispersal of seeds in habitats with low overstory canopy cover. The study demonstrates variable fruiting intensity and fruit removal rate as a driver of differences in dispersal of seeds across habitats. It highlights greater vulnerability of open habitats to invasion and the need to prioritise Lantana management efforts in open habitats. Anthropogenic activities that lead to canopy openings (e.g. tree lopping and logging) likely facilitate Lantana invasion through greater fruit production and seed dispersal.
Article
Full-text available
Creeping thistle, Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop, is one of the most common weeds in temperate climates. Frequently classified as an invasive species, it is the cause of massive herbicide and tillage use. Especially in organic systems, the plant is hard to manage. Little is known about creeping thistle being entirely edible and having diverse medicinal properties. Additionally, it has potential to be used as food preservative and provides essential ecosystem services. This systematic literature review provides evidence of creeping thistle uses from 56 peer-reviewed journals and 37 popular media references. It discusses potential uses and phytochemical properties of specific plant parts. Findings identify the stem as the most promising part for food use. Creeping thistle has elevated flavonoid (flower) and inulin (root) contents, with anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-diabetic properties respectively. The discussion contrasts the potential of creeping thistle of becoming a multi-purpose crop with its classification as a noxious weed.
Article
Full-text available
The global degradation of wetlands is increasing their susceptibility to invasions, which is greatly determined by a niche overlap between native and invasive species. We analyze its role in regulating the coexistence of the native Mediterranean stripe-necked terrapin Mauremys leprosa and the invasive Red-eared Slider Trachemys scripta elegans in a coastal wetland. We analyzed both water chemistry and landscape attributes, using variance-partitioning analysis to isolate the variance explained by each set of variables. Then, the influence of environmental variables on species co-occurrence patterns was assessed by using latent variable models (LVM), which account for correlation between species that may be attributable to biotic interactions or missing environmental covariates. The species showed a very low niche overlap, with clear differences in their response to environmental and landscape filters. The distribution of T. s. elegans was largely explained by landscape variables, preferring uniform landscapes within the daily movement buffer, whereas at larger scales, it was associated with a high diversity of habitats of small and uniform relative sizes. A high percentage of the distribution of M. leprosa was unexplained by the measured variables and may be related to the competitive exclusion processes with T. s. elegans. The species was positively related with large patches with high perimeter values or ecotone area at medium spatial scales, and it was benefited from a marked heterogeneity in the patches’ size at larger scale. According to latent variable models, both species had wide eutrophication and salinity tolerance ranges, but they showed different environmental preferences. T. s. elegans was related to eutrophic freshwater environments, whereas M. leprosa was related to more saline and less eutrophic waters. Our results suggest that M. leprosa modifies its habitat use in order to avoid interaction with the T. s. elegans. Thus, management actions aimed at removing the invasive species from the territory and promoting habitat heterogeneity might be needed to protect M. leprosa and avoid local extinctions.
Preprint
Full-text available
Alien species can modify ecosystem functions and ecological processes in natural communities, and potentially become invasive. In the Brazilian Pampean grasslands, reports of changes in land use and invasions of alien plant species are becoming more frequent. This study aimed to investigate species composition and phylogenetic relationships between native and alien plants across four sites of Brazilian Pampean grasslands under distinct land uses (NOM: no agricultural management; GRZ: grazed pastures; AGR: agrarian crops; ROAD: roadside). The phylogenetic relationship between native and alien species was analyzed at two scales: inter-site (large scale) and intra-site (small scale). We found inter-site differences in phylogenetic diversity. Overall, across all sites we found random phylogenetic relationships among alien and native species. In the most disturbed site (ROAD) we found significant phylogenetic clustering among all species (alien and natives), while at the small scale, clustering was only found among natives. We conclude that clustering of phylogenetic relationships among alien and native species is only evident at small sampling scales in environments subject to high levels of disturbance (i.e., road sides) in the studied Pampean Grasslands, suggesting that environmental filtering plays an important role in local community assembly. Keywords : disturbance, land use, phylogenetic pattern, plant invasion, native communities
Preprint
Alien species can modify ecosystem functions and ecological processes in natural communities, and potentially become invasive. In the Brazilian Pampean grasslands, reports of changes in land use and invasions of alien plant species are becoming more frequent. This study aimed to investigate species composition and phylogenetic relationships between native and alien plants across four sites of Brazilian Pampean grasslands under distinct land uses (NOM: no agricultural management; GRZ: grazed pastures; AGR: agrarian crops; ROAD: roadside). The phylogenetic relationship between native and alien species was analyzed at two scales: inter-site (large scale) and intra-site (small scale). We found inter-site differences in phylogenetic diversity. Overall, across all sites we found random phylogenetic relationships among alien and native species. In the most disturbed site (ROAD) we found significant phylogenetic clustering among all species (alien and natives), while at the small scale, clustering was only found among natives. We conclude that clustering of phylogenetic relationships among alien and native species is only evident at small sampling scales in environments subject to high levels of disturbance (i.e., road sides) in the studied Pampean Grasslands, suggesting that environmental filtering plays an important role in local community assembly
Chapter
Plant invasion is a key contemporary issue in the community ecology owing to its outrageous economic and ecological repercussions. Alien plant species with competitive superiority establish, propagate, and eventually become invasive in the introduced ranges, whereby they cause considerable changes in the natural ecosystems. With an unprecedented expansion of trade, transportation, and tourism, the geographical patterns of species distribution are shifting more rapidly than ever. Successful plant invasions are an outcome of miscellaneous processes, modulated by the characteristics of introduced plant species, the composition of resident flora and fauna, presence/absence of natural enemies, and susceptibility of the invaded ecosystem. At present, naturalized alien plant species represent nearly 3.9% of the world’s total extant flora and 2.6% of India’s total vascular flora. Estimates suggest that one-sixth of the global geographical area, including the world’s major biodiversity hotspots, is susceptible to invasion. Coupled with natural and anthropogenic disturbances, invasive plant species can strongly influence the extinction trajectories of the native flora and fauna. Therefore, it is imperative to discuss the issue of plant invasion among conservation ecologists, so as to enhance the understanding of the phenomenon and its consequences, and to address the challenges associated with the management of invasive plant species.KeywordsBiological invasionEcological impactsNational statisticsInternational statisticsPlant invasionSocio-economic impacts
Article
Some corbiculids (bivalve clams in the genus Corbicula) are invasive, having spread nearly worldwide and are thought to impact native unionid mussels. To determine the density and distributional associations of invasive corbiculids co‐occurring with native unionids, corbiculid clam and unionid mussel surveys were conducted at 122 sites in the Kalamazoo River catchment, Michigan, U.S.A. Unionid densities ranged from 0 to 97 (x̅ = 7.45 ± 15.38 SD) live unionids found per person hour while corbiculid densities varied from 0 to 0.24 (0.012 ± 0.037) g/cm3. Corbiculid distributions were clumped (Moran's I test: Index = 0.281, Z = 2.228, p = 0.026) and highest along the main branch of the river. Unionid distributions, both individual species and at family level, were found to be randomly distributed throughout the catchment (Moran's I test: Index = 0.343 to −0.022, Z = 1.913 to −0.118, p value = 0.056 to 0.970). Overall, unionid species richness, as well as the distribution of 13 unionid species, were negatively associated with corbiculid density. Although corbiculids can inhabit the same river reaches with unionids, unionid species richness and densities may be negatively influenced by the presence of corbiculids. Although many species of unionids were negatively associated with corbiculid density, our research showed that they can co‐exist in the same river reaches. Overall, unionids were positively correlated with corbiculids throughout the catchment, probably because the two groups have similar habitat requirements. It is therefore important to consider unionids and corbiculids concurrently in conservation planning and the management of invasive corbiculids.
Article
Full-text available
This chapter reviews the literature to understand the significance of making decisions about the prevention and/or control of invasive alien species (IAS) that ignore impacts on ecosystem services. It reports damage costs associated with IAS in monetary terms. The costs presented for various provisioning, regulating, and cultural services may be roughly comparable since most of the literature mostly clusters around the early 2000s. Whether damage costs of any magnitude will change the way IAS is managed will naturally depend on the benefits of the activities that lead to the introduction and spread of each species. Identifying potential damage costs and estimating their magnitude is a positive first step towards properly accounting for the full impact of IAS.
Article
Full-text available
Recent comprehensive data provided through the DAISIE project (www.europe-aliens.org) have facilitated the development of the first pan-European assessment of the impacts of alien plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates — in terrestrial, freshwater, and marine environments — on ecosystem services. There are 1094 species with documented ecological impacts and 1347 with economic impacts. The two taxonomic groups with the most species causing impacts are terrestrial invertebrates and terrestrial plants. The North Sea is the maritime region that suffers the most impacts. Across taxa and regions, ecological and economic impacts are highly correlated. Terrestrial invertebrates create greater economic impacts than ecological impacts, while the reverse is true for terrestrial plants. Alien species from all taxonomic groups affect "supporting", "provisioning", "regulating", and "cultural" services and interfere with human well-being. Terrestrial vertebrates are responsible for the greatest range of impacts, and these are widely distributed across Europe. Here, we present a review of the financial costs, as the first step toward calculating an estimate of the economic consequences of alien species in Europe.
Article
Full-text available
Aim There is debate over whether alien plants necessarily alter the communities they invade or can coexist with native species without discernable impacts. We followed the fate of montane plant communities in response to the experimental sowing of the alien weed Hieracium lepidulum, looking for changes in plant community composition and structure over 6 years. Location Craigieburn Range, New Zealand. Methods We used a replicated randomised block design, with 30 × 30 cm plots (n = 756) subdivided into 5 × 5 cm cells to examine and compare the effects of H. lepidulum at 0.09 m2 (plot) and 0.0025 m2 (cell) scales. Plots were sown with between 0 and 15,625 H. lepidulum seeds in 2003, forming gradients of invader density and cover. Measurements comprised community richness, evenness and diversity along with H. lepidulum density and cover at both scales. The relationships between the invader and local community attributes were modelled using hierarchical mixed-effect models. Results Plant communities differed in the extent to which they became invaded, with H. lepidulum cover in the plots ranging from 0% to 52%, with a mean of only 1.89%. Plot species richness increased from 2003 to 2009, with a component of this increase (+0.002 species per year) associated with increasing H. lepidulum density. Other relationships between the plant community and H. lepidulum were generally non-significant. Main conclusions In these montane plant communities, it appears H. lepidulum coexists with the native community with no measurable negative effects after 6 years on species richness, evenness or diversity, even where density and cover of the invader are highest. We suggest H. lepidulum has persisted preferentially at those sites with abiotic conditions sufficient to support a species-rich assemblage.
Article
Aims Although biological invasions occur throughout the world, and some invaders are widespread in many habitats, few studies on the ecological impact of invaders have examined multiple sites. We tested how the impact of three widespread plant invaders changed depending on the identity of the species and the invaded island. We also tested whether relative species loss was lower in species-rich communities than in species-poor ones. Location We conducted floristic surveys and soil analyses in eight Mediterranean Basin islands: Crete and Lesbos (Greece), Sardinia (Italy), Corsica, Bagaud and Porquerolles (France), and Mallorca and Menorca (Spain). Methods We compared native species richness and diversity, proportion of life forms, soil percentage nitrogen, percentage organic carbon, C/N, and soil pH in nearby paired plots of 2 x 2 m: one control and one invaded by either the deciduous tree Ailanthus altissima, the succulent subshrubs Carpobrotus spp. or the annual geophyte Oxalis pes-caprae, across eight Mediterranean Basin islands. Results On average, the presence of invaders reduced species diversity, Carpobrotus spp. exhibiting the largest impact and Oxalis the least. However, the relative impact was island-dependent, and was positively but weakly associated with the species richness of the recipient community. Therophytes were the life form that experienced the largest decrease across islands. The effects of invasion on soil properties were very variable. Total N changed (increased) only in plots invaded by Ailanthus, significantly decreasing the C/N ratio. The presence of this tree increased soil pH, whereas the opposite was found in plots invaded by the other two species. Organic C increased in plots invaded by Ailanthus and Carpobrotus species. Main conclusions By conducting an analysis at multiple sites, we found that the three plant invaders had an impact on plant community structure not entirely concordant with changes in soil properties. The impacts depended on the identity of the species and of the invaded island, suggesting that impact of invaders is context-specific. The impact in terms of species loss was not lower in species-rich than in species-poor communities.
Article
Ecology Letters (2010) 13: 947–958 What determines invasiveness of alien organisms is among the most interesting and urgent questions in ecology. In attempts to answer this question, researchers compare invasive alien species either to native species or to non-invasive alien species, and this is done in either the introduced or native ranges. However, inferences that can be drawn from these comparisons differ considerably, and failure to recognize this could hamper the search for determinants of invasiveness. To increase awareness about this issue, we present a framework of the various comparisons that can be used to test for determinants of invasiveness, and the specific questions each comparison can address. Moreover, we discuss how different comparisons complement each other, and therefore should be used in concert. For progress in invasion biology, it is crucial to realize that different comparisons address different biological questions and that some questions can only be answered unambiguously by combining them.
Article
Although the impacts of exotic plant invasions on community structure and ecosystem processes are well appreciated, the pathways or mechanisms that underlie these impacts are poorly understood. Better exploration of these processes is essential to understanding why exotic plants impact only certain systems, and why only some invaders have large impacts. Here, we review over 150 studies to evaluate the mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions on plant and animal community structure, nutrient cycling, hydrology and fire regimes. We find that, while numerous studies have examined the impacts of invasions on plant diversity and composition, less than 5% test whether these effects arise through competition , allelopathy, alteration of ecosystem variables or other processes. Nonetheless, competition was often hypothesized, and nearly all studies competing native and alien plants against each other found strong competitive effects of exotic species. In contrast to studies of the impacts on plant community structure and higher trophic levels, research examining impacts on nitrogen cycling, hydrology and fire regimes is generally highly mechanistic, often motivated by specific invader traits. We encourage future studies that link impacts on community structure to ecosystem processes, and relate the controls over invasibility to the controls over impact.
Article
■ Abstract In the search to identify factors that make some plant species trou- blesome invaders, many studies have compared various measures of native and alien invasive plant performance. These comparative studies provide insights into the more general question "Do alien invasive plants usually outperform co-occurring native species, and to what degree does the answer depend on growing conditions?" Based on 79 independent native-invasive plant comparisons, the alien invaders were not statisti- cally more likely to have higher growth rates, competitive ability, or fecundity. Rather, the relative performance of invaders and co-occurring natives often depended on grow- ing conditions. In 94% of 55 comparisons involving more than one growing condition, the native's performance was equal or superior to that of the invader, at least for some key performance measures in some growing conditions. Most commonly, these con- ditions involved reduced resources (nutrients, light, water) and/or specific disturbance regimes. Independently of growing conditions, invaders were more likely to have higher leaf area and lower tissue construction costs (advantageous under high light and nutrient conditions) and greater phenotypic plasticity (particularly advantageous in disturbed environments where conditions are in frequent flux). There appear to be few "super in- vaders" that have universal performance advantages over co-occurring natives; rather, increased resource availability and altered disturbance regimes associated with hu- man activities often differentially increase the performance of invaders over that of natives.