2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.04.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Devil's tongue weed (Grateloupia turuturu Yamada) in northern Portugal: Passenger or driver of change in native biodiversity?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The ability of fragments of the invasive seaweed, C. taxifolia , to establish and grow was markedly lower in seagrass control and partial removal (SC and SPR) than in unvegetated plots (BS and STR), suggesting that both above‐ and below‐ground seagrass biomass sustain resistance to invasion. These results are in accordance with previous studies from marine (Ceccherelli et al, ; Glasby, ; Mulas & Bertocci, ; Scheibling & Gagnon, ; South & Thomsen, ; Thomsen et al, ; Valentine & Johnson, ) and terrestrial habitats (D'Antonio & Vitousek, ; Diez et al, ; Hobbs & Huenneke, ) showing that invasive macrophytes are often opportunistic species that rely on native community disruption for establishment and spread. Such opportunistic behaviour of invaders does not imply weak effects on natives; in fact, once established, invasive species can trigger novel positive feedback mechanisms that facilitate their persistence at the expense of native habitat‐formers and associated species (Bauer, ; Bulleri, Benedetti‐Cecchi, Ceccherelli, & Tamburello, ; Gaertner et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The ability of fragments of the invasive seaweed, C. taxifolia , to establish and grow was markedly lower in seagrass control and partial removal (SC and SPR) than in unvegetated plots (BS and STR), suggesting that both above‐ and below‐ground seagrass biomass sustain resistance to invasion. These results are in accordance with previous studies from marine (Ceccherelli et al, ; Glasby, ; Mulas & Bertocci, ; Scheibling & Gagnon, ; South & Thomsen, ; Thomsen et al, ; Valentine & Johnson, ) and terrestrial habitats (D'Antonio & Vitousek, ; Diez et al, ; Hobbs & Huenneke, ) showing that invasive macrophytes are often opportunistic species that rely on native community disruption for establishment and spread. Such opportunistic behaviour of invaders does not imply weak effects on natives; in fact, once established, invasive species can trigger novel positive feedback mechanisms that facilitate their persistence at the expense of native habitat‐formers and associated species (Bauer, ; Bulleri, Benedetti‐Cecchi, Ceccherelli, & Tamburello, ; Gaertner et al, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In recent decades, this seaweed was recorded on the Atlantic Coast of Europe [ 9 ], likely originating from aquaculture activities related to oyster farming and/or global shipping [ 10 ]. Although G. turuturu is non-native species to the Atlantic and may have been erroneously labelled as an invasive species [ 11 ], it does not seem to have any negative impacts in coastal environments. In fact, G. turuturu seems to contribute to the maintenance of autochthonous seaweed species and to preserve natural biodiversity [ 12 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be noted that the models are not mutually exclusive, and intermediate situations may occur. However, this bipartition enabled the researchers to conclude that G. turuturu did not have an invasive character as they did not detect any ecological changes caused by its presence, but rather a temporary character, not damaging the ecosystem (taking advantage of only one already fragile) [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%