Experimental evidence for indirect facilitation among invasive plants

Flory, S. Luke; Bauer, Jonathan T.

doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12186

Cited by 98 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 48 publications

(62 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Griffith (2011) argues that targeting multiple species simultaneously may increase the efficiency of eradication programs as a result of interactions between species. This hypothesis is reinforced by experimental results obtained by Flory and Bauer (2014) in an artificial ecosystem, as well as by the analysis of Orchan et al (2012) regarding interactions among invasive birds.…”

Section: Related Literature On Species Prioritizationmentioning

confidence: 76%

A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species

Courtois

Figuières

Mulier

et al. 2018

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological invasions entail massive biodiversity losses and tremendous economic impacts that justify significant management efforts. Because the funds available to control biological invasions are limited, there is a need to identify priority species. This paper first review current invasive species prioritization methods and explicitly highlights their pitfalls. We then construct a cost-benefit optimization framework that incorporates species utility, ecological value, distinctiveness, and species interactions. This framework offers the theoretical foundations of a simple and operational method for the management of invasive species under a limited budget constraint. It takes the form of an algorithm for the prioritization of multiple biological invasions.

show abstract

Section: Related Literature On Species Prioritizationmentioning

confidence: 76%

A Cost–Benefit Approach for Prioritizing Invasive Species

Courtois

Figuières

Mulier

et al. 2018

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plant invasions may do so by altering the composition of native communities and patterns of dominance among plant functional types, including herbaceous vs. woody plants, C 3 vs. C 4 species, or nitrogen-fixing vs. non nitrogen-fixing species. These changes can strongly affect the distribution and dynamics of soil nutrients and other resources (e.g., Vitousek et al, 1987; Fogarty and Facelli, 1999; Gill and Burke, 1999; Ehrenfeld, 2010), by alterations in nutrient availability associated with the introduction of nitrogen-fixing invaders (Vitousek and Walker, 1989; Gioria et al, 2011), increased light availability via a reduction in the biomass of resident species (Flory and Bauer, 2014), or reductions in the amount of available water by deeply-rooted invaders, such as salt cedar Tamarix (Vitousek and Walker, 1989). …”

Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resource competition in plant invasions: emerging patterns and research needs

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasions by alien plants provide a unique opportunity to examine competitive interactions among plants. While resource competition has long been regarded as a major mechanism responsible for successful invasions, given a well-known capacity for many invaders to become dominant and reduce plant diversity in the invaded communities, few studies have measured resource competition directly or have assessed its importance relative to that of other mechanisms, at different stages of an invasion process. Here, we review evidence comparing the competitive ability of invasive species vs. that of co-occurring native plants, along a range of environmental gradients, showing that many invasive species have a superior competitive ability over native species, although invasive congeners are not necessarily competitively superior over native congeners, nor are alien dominants are better competitors than native dominants. We discuss how the outcomes of competition depend on a number of factors, such as the heterogeneous distribution of resources, the stage of the invasion process, as well as phenotypic plasticity and evolutionary adaptation, which may result in increased or decreased competitive ability in both invasive and native species. Competitive advantages of invasive species over natives are often transient and only important at the early stages of an invasion process. It remains unclear how important resource competition is relative to other mechanisms (competition avoidance via phenological differences, niche differentiation in space associated with phylogenetic distance, recruitment and dispersal limitation, indirect competition, and allelopathy). Finally, we identify the conceptual and methodological issues characterizing competition studies in plant invasions, and we discuss future research needs, including examination of resource competition dynamics and the impact of global environmental change on competitive interactions between invasive and native species.

show abstract

“…These interactions, involving both native and non-native organisms, may hinder (Davis et al, 2000;Yang et al, 2011) or facilitate (Simberloff and Von Holle, 1999;Flory and Bauer, 2014;Martorell and Freckleton, 2014) plant invasions. Understanding how these interactions affect species composition, community structure and invasion success or failure is central to ecology (Agrawal et al, 2007) and vital to increase prevention and management success of invasive species (Hulme et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Target non-natives are also positively associated with earthworms (Nuzzo et al, 2009;Whitfeld et al, 2014) and, in fact, rarely occur at high densities at sites with low earthworm abundance (personal observation). Considering that these stressors co-occur and that mounting evidence indicates that populations and impacts of invasive plants, earthworms and deer are characterized by complex non-additive interactions (Waller and Maas, 2013;Dávalos et al, 2014;Flory and Bauer, 2014) it is paramount to quantify their combined effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%