Coastal ecosystems worldwide are being threatened by invasive plants in the context of global changes. However, how invasive plants influence native faunal communities and whether native faunal communities can recover following the invader removals/controls across global coastal ecosystems are still poorly understood. Here, we present the first global meta‐analysis to quantify the impacts of Spartina species invasions on coastal faunal communities and further to evaluate the outcomes of Spartina species removals on faunal community recovery based on 74 independent studies. We found that invasive Spartina species generally decreased the biodiversity (e.g., species richness), but increased coastal faunal abundance (e.g., individual number) and fitness (e.g., biomass), though the effect on abundance was insignificant. The pattern of influence was strongly dependent on habitat types, faunal taxa, trophic levels, and feeding types. Specifically, Spartina species invasion of mudflats caused greater impacts than invasion of vegetated habitats. Insects and birds at higher trophic levels were strongly affected by invasive Spartina, indicating that invasive plant effects can cascade upward along the food chain. Additionally, impacts of Spartina invasions were more obvious on food specialists such as herbivores and carnivores. Furthermore, our analyses revealed that invader removals were overall beneficial for native faunal communities to recover from the displacement caused by Spartina invasions, but this recovery process depended on specific removal measure and time. For example, the long‐term waterlogging had strong negative impacts on faunal recovery, so it should not be encouraged. Our findings suggest that invasive plants could have contrasting effects on functional responses of native faunal communities. Although invasive plant removals could restore native faunal communities, future functional restorations of invaded ecosystems should take the legacy effects of invasive species on native communities into account. These findings provide insightful implications for future scientific controls of invasive species and ecosystem restoration under intensifying global changes.
The extent by which human activities create an inroad for the invasion of exotic plant species and the mechanisms that drive a disturbed ecosystem's resistance to exotic invasion is largely unknown. We investigated the mechanisms by which salt marsh resists cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) invasion by two key factors: anthropogenic disturbance by ditching and herbivory by the native crab Helice tientsinensis. In northern China, although abiotic resistance (i.e., hyper-stresses) inhibited the landward invasion of cordgrass to high marshes, our transplant experiments showed that anthropogenic ditching created windows of opportunity for cordgrass invasion to high marshes by enhancing propagule pressure and providing favorable (i.e., low-salinity and high-inundation) microhabitats for colonization. Furthermore, a native herbivore exclusion experiment showed that crab grazing strongly suppressed seedling establishment and growth of cordgrass in ditched high marshes, which gradually created native biotic resistance to cordgrass invasion. We conclude that grazing by native herbivores can enhance the resistance of high marshes to cordgrass invasion triggered by anthropogenic ditching disturbance in northern China. These findings highlight that it is critical to investigate ecosystem resistance associated with anthropogenic disturbance to better understand the multiple mechanisms of exotic plant invasion, and we call for integration of these findings into invasion control strategies.
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.