Community assembly and coexistence theories predict that both fitness and plant functional traits should influence competitive interactions between native and invasive species. The evolution of the increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis predicts that species will grow larger (a measure of fitness) in their invasive than native range; hence we hypothesized that species might exert greater competitive effects in their invasive range, lessening the importance of functional traits. In a greenhouse experiment we compared traits and competitive interactions between Bromus madritensis (an annual grass) and resident species from its native range in Spain, and its invaded range in Southern California. B. madritensis collected in California grew larger and had a greater competitive effect on resident species than B. madritensis collected in Spain. However, resident species from California also suppressed the growth of B. madritensis more than species from its native range in Spain. Competitive interaction strengths were predicted by different suites of traits in the native versus invasive range of B. madritensis; surprisingly however, size of the competitor (fitness), did not predict variation in competitive interactions. This study shows that different suites of traits may aid in identifying those native species likely to strongly compete with invaders, versus those that will be competitively suppressed by invaders, with important implications for the design of restoration efforts aiming to promote native species growth and prevent invasion. More generally, our study shows that fitness differences may not be as important as traits when predicting competitive outcomes in this system.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.