Engineering by an invasive species alters landscape‐level ecosystem function, but does not affect biodiversity in freshwater systems

Anderson, Christopher B.; Lencinas, María Vanessa; Wallem, Petra K.; Valenzuela, Alejandro E. J.; Simanonok, Michael P.; Pastur, Guillermo Martínez

doi:10.1111/ddi.12147

Cited by 34 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It appears that eucalypts may be altering ecosystem function more dramatically than biodiversity. This is similar to a recent study which found that ecosystem engineering by an invasive species (American beaver [Castor canadensis] in Tierra del Fuego) strongly altered landscape-level ecosystem function but not landscape biodiversity (Anderson et al 2014).…”

Section: Similarity In Community Indices and Compositionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Biodiversity effects and rates of spread of nonnative eucalypt woodlands in central California

Fork

Woolfolk

Akhavan

et al. 2015

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Woodlands comprised of planted, nonnative trees are increasing in extent globally, while native woodlands continue to decline due to human activities. The ecological impacts of planted woodlands may include changes to the communities of understory plants and animals found among these nonnative trees relative to native woodlands, as well as invasion of adjacent habitat areas through spread beyond the originally planted areas. Eucalypts (Eucalyptus spp.) are among the most widely planted trees worldwide, and are very common in California, USA. The goals of our investigation were to compare the biological communities of nonnative eucalypt woodlands to native oak woodlands in coastal central California, and to examine whether planted eucalypt groves have increased in size over the past decades. We assessed site and habitat attributes and characterized biological communities using understory plant, ground-dwelling arthropod, amphibian, and bird communities as indicators. Degree of difference between native and nonnative woodlands depended on the indicator used. Eucalypts had significantly greater canopy height and cover, and significantly lower cover by perennial plants and species richness of arthropods than oaks. Community composition of arthropods also differed significantly between eucalypts and oaks. Eucalypts had marginally significantly deeper litter depth, lower abundance of native plants with ranges limited to western North America, and lower abundance of amphibians. In contrast to these differences, eucalypt and oak groves had very similar bird community composition, species richness, and abundance. We found no evidence of "invasional meltdown," documenting similar abundance and richness of nonnatives in eucalypt vs. oak woodlands. Our time-series analysis revealed that planted eucalypt groves increased 271% in size, on average, over six decades, invading adjacent areas. Our results inform science-based management of California woodlands, revealing that while bird communities would probably not be affected by restoration of eucalypt to oak woodlands, such a restoration project would not only stop the spread of eucalypts into adjacent habitats but would also enhance cover by western North American native plants and perennials, enhance amphibian abundance, and increase arthropod richness.

show abstract

Section: Similarity In Community Indices and Compositionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Biodiversity effects and rates of spread of nonnative eucalypt woodlands in central California

Fork

Woolfolk

Akhavan

et al. 2015

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Collingsworth & Kohler, ), a wide range of ecological niches, and food resources (Thomaz & da Cunha, ; e.g. Anderson et al, , Table ). For instance, fish abundance and biomass associated with invasive Lagarosiphon major (a submerged plant), was higher than amongst native macrophyte species or unvegetated littoral areas in a freshwater lake in New Zealand (Bickel & Closs, ), probably due to increases in food and habitat availability (Schultz & Dibble, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Romero et al, ); a particular species (e.g. Anderson et al, ); a guild of species as ecosystem engineers (e.g. invasive bivalves; Sousa, Novais, Costa, & Strayer, ); native engineers in particular freshwater habitats (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwaters: A review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive species are a key stressor in freshwater ecosystems. When these species are also ecosystem engineers, their impacts are exacerbated because they modulate resource availability for a wide range of other species. The aim of this review is to synthesise existing knowledge of the impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwaters and identify knowledge gaps requiring further research. The four questions explored in this review are: (1) What are the trends in research into invasive ecosystem engineers? (2) What are common negative effects of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwater? (3) Do all impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers have negative consequences for biodiversity? (4) What happens when multiple ecosystem engineers interact? Four literature searches in Web of Science have been used to identify articles for the review and to estimate relative research effort between terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems. The number of research articles focusing on ecosystem engineers across all ecosystem types is increasing. Despite well‐known examples of ecosystem engineer species in freshwaters (e.g. beaver), more research has focussed on terrestrial environments and invasive species. The effects of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwater systems are varied and often context dependent. Their effects on biodiversity or native ecosystem engineers are often shown to be negative; however, not all effects associated with these species are deleterious to native species. For instance, some invasive ecosystem engineers support native species through the provision of food or refuges. Although freshwater ecosystems are often influenced by multiple species of ecosystem engineers (including native, invasive or both), little is known about interactions between these species or the combined effects of multiple ecosystem engineers. More research is also needed that relates the results of laboratory experiments to the field and develops methods for measuring factors that govern the impact of engineers on ecosystems. Understanding the spatial variability of the impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers as well as their interaction with anthropogenic stressors (e.g. hydrologic modification) is also necessary. The lag in research surrounding invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwater compared to other biomes is concerning, as freshwater ecosystems support biodiversity disproportionate to the area they occupy. Creating predictive models of the impacts of freshwater ecosystem engineers would help anticipate the effects of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwater and add to the broader understanding of their effects in other biomes.

show abstract

“…However, studies have suggested that beaver ponds do not increase species diversity, but rather increase habitat availability for lentic species already occurring in natural pools (Anderson et al, 2014). However, studies have suggested that beaver ponds do not increase species diversity, but rather increase habitat availability for lentic species already occurring in natural pools (Anderson et al, 2014).…”

Section: Con Clus Ionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beavers alter stream macroinvertebrate communities in north‐eastern Utah

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Understanding changes in macroinvertebrate communities is important because they play a large role in stream ecosystem functioning, and they are an important food resource for fish. Beaver-induced changes to stream morphology could alter macroinvertebrate communities, which in turn could affect food webs and ecosystem function. However, studies investigating the effects of North American beaver activities on macroinvertebrates are rare in the inter-mountain west, an area with high potential for beaver-assisted restoration.2. The aim of this study was to quantify differences in the macroinvertebrate community between unaltered segments of streams and within beaver ponds in northeastern Utah, U.S.A. We assessed macroinvertebrate species richness, biomass, density, functional feeding group composition, mobility group composition, and macroinvertebrate habitat characteristics to test the hypothesis that macroinvertebrate communities will differ among habitat types (undammed stream segments and beaver ponds) in beaver-occupied streams.3. Beaver pond communities significantly differed from lotic reach communities in many ways. Beaver ponds were less diverse with 25% fewer species. Although there was variability among streams, in general, beaver ponds had 75% fewer individuals and 90% lower total macroinvertebrate biomass compared to lotic reaches.4. Regarding functional feeding groups, beaver ponds contained more engulfers, while lotic reaches contained more scrapers, filterers, and gatherers. For mobility groups, beaver ponds had more sprawlers, while lotic reaches had more clingers.Swimmers were also more prevalent in lotic reaches, although this is probably due to the abundance of Baetis within lotic reaches. More beaver pond taxa were classified as lentic-dwelling insects, while more lotic reach taxa were categorised as preferring lotic habitats.5. The creation of ponds by beavers fundamentally altered the macroinvertebrate community in north-eastern Utah streams. Such changes to stream macroinvertebrate communities suggest that recolonisation of beavers across North America may be altering stream functioning and food webs. Our study highlights the need to further investigate the effects of beaver recolonisation on stream communities.

show abstract

Engineering by an invasive species alters landscape‐level ecosystem function, but does not affect biodiversity in freshwater systems

Cited by 34 publications

References 32 publications

Biodiversity effects and rates of spread of nonnative eucalypt woodlands in central California

Biodiversity effects and rates of spread of nonnative eucalypt woodlands in central California

The impacts of invasive ecosystem engineers in freshwaters: A review

Beavers alter stream macroinvertebrate communities in north‐eastern Utah

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About