Patterns and mechanisms of invasive plant impacts on North American birds: a systematic review

Nelson, Sarah E.; Coon, Jaime J.; Duchardt, Courtney J.; Fischer, Jason D.; Halsey, Samniqueka J.; Kranz, Adam; Parker, Christine M.; Schneider, Sarah C.; Swartz, Timothy M.; Miller, James R.

doi:10.1007/s10530-017-1377-5

Cited by 47 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have shown that some invasive plants fruit later in the season than native plants, suggesting a potential late‐fruiting invasive niche (White and Stiles, ; Gosper et al., ; Greenberg and Walter, ). This theory is further supported by evidence of invasive seeds in fecal samples in the winter season (Drummond, ), and by evidence that in some cases birds prefer native fruits to invasive fruits (Whelan et al., ; Smith et al., ; Nelson et al., ), making a competition‐avoidance strategy more feasible for invasive species. However, the theory of a late‐fruiting niche for invasive species has not been tested across many native and invasive species in one community.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Herbarium specimens show patterns of fruiting phenology in native and invasive plant species across New England

Gallinat

Russo

Melaas

et al. 2018

American J of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbarium specimens can be used to detect patterns in fruiting times among species. However, the amount of intraspecific variation in fruiting times explained by temporal, geographic, and climatic predictors is small, due to a combination of low temporal resolution of fruiting specimens and the protracted nature of fruiting. Later fruiting times in invasive species, combined with delays in autumn bird migrations in New England, may increase the likelihood that migratory birds will consume and disperse invasive seeds in New England later into the year.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Herbarium specimens show patterns of fruiting phenology in native and invasive plant species across New England

Gallinat

Russo

Melaas

et al. 2018

American J of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An early meta-analysis looked at the inverse, i.e., the role native and exotic herbivores have on invasive plant abundance (Parker, Burkepile, & Hayt, 2006), finding that native herbivores suppress and exotic herbivores facilitate invasive plants. In a systematic review of North American bird species impacted by invasive plants, Nelson et al (2017) found neutral effects on abundance and mortality, but negative impacts on richness. An analogous review in arthropods (Spafford, Lortie, & Butterfield, 2013) found a decrease in species richness on invasive plant hosts compared to native hosts, but was not able to compare trophic levels due to data limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive plants negatively impact native, but not exotic, animals

Fletcher

Brooks

Lakoba

et al. 2019

Global Change Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite our growing understanding of the impacts of invasive plants on ecosystem structure and function, important gaps remain, including whether native and exotic species respond differently to plant invasion. This would elucidate basic ecological interactions and inform management. We performed a meta‐analytic review of the effects of invasive plants on native and exotic resident animals. We found that invasive plants reduced the abundance of native, but not exotic, animals. This varied by animal phyla, with invasive plants reducing the abundance of native annelids and chordates, but not mollusks or arthropods. We found dissimilar impacts among “wet” and “dry” ecosystems, but not among animal trophic levels. Additionally, the impact of invasive plants increased over time, but this did not vary with animal nativity. Our review found that no studies considered resident nativity differences, and most did not identify animals to species. We call for more rigorous studies of invaded community impacts across taxa, and most importantly, explicit consideration of resident biogeographic origin. We provide an important first insight into how native and exotic species respond differently to invasion, the consequences of which may facilitate cascading trophic disruptions further exacerbating global change consequences to ecosystem structure and function.

show abstract

“…In this respect, meta-analyses employing quantitative methods are conceivably more objective than review articles, because they should be less susceptible to preconceived notions. Although some meta-analyses concluded that the impacts of NIS are stronger and/ or more detrimental than those of indigenous species (Ferlian et al, 2018;Paolucci, MacIsaac, & Ricciardi, 2013;Salo, Korpimaki, Banks, Nordstrom, & Dickman, 2007;Simberloff, Souza, Nuñez, Barrios-Garcia, & Bunn, 2012;van Hengstum, Hooftman, Oostermeijer, Tienderen, & Mack, 2014;Vilá et al, 2011;Wood et al, 2017;Yoon & Read, 2016), many suggested positive influences and/or that the purported negative effects of NIS are not supported by evidence (Charlebois, Sargent, & Maherali, 2017;Gurevitch & Padilla, 2004;Norkko et al, 2011;Pintor, Byers, & Anderson, 2015;Radville, Gonda-King, Gómez, Kaplan, & Preisser Evan, 2014;Reise, Olenin, & Thieltges, 2006), and most found variable and context-dependent impacts (Cameron, Vilà, Cabeza, & Sykes, 2016;Guy-Haim et al, 2018;Higgins & Vander Zanden, 2010;Howard, Therriault, & Côté, 2017;Martin, Newton, & Bullock, 2017;Nelson et al, 2017;Potgieter et al, 2017;Pysek et al, 2008;Qiu, 2015;Thomsen et al, 2014;Twardochleb, Olden, & Larson, 2013;Vaz et al, 2018;Ward & Ricciardi, 2007), thus hindering broad generalizations.…”

Section: Interpre Ting and Recon Ciling D Iss Entmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive species denialism: Sorting out facts, beliefs, and definitions

Boltovskoy

Sylvester

Paolucci

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decades, thousands of investigations confirmed the detrimental effects of species translocated by man outside of their native ranges (nonindigenous species, or NIS). However, results concluding that many NIS have null, neutral, or positive impacts on the biota and on human interests are as common in the scientific literature as those that point at baneful impacts. Recently, several scholars confronted the stand that origin per se is not a reliable indicator of negative effects, suggesting that such conclusions are the expression of scientific denialism, often led by spurious purposes, and that their numbers are increasing. When assessed in the context of the growing interest in introduced species, the proportion of academic publications claiming that NIS pose no threats to the environment and to social and economic interests is extremely low, and has not increased since 1990. The widely prevailing notion that many NIS are effectively or potentially harmful does not conflict with the fact that most have mixed (negative, neutral, and positive) impacts. When based on solid grounds, reports of positive or neutral impacts should not be labeled as manipulative or misleading unless proven otherwise, even if they may hamper interest in‐ and funding of research and control bioinvasion programs.

show abstract

Patterns and mechanisms of invasive plant impacts on North American birds: a systematic review

Cited by 47 publications

References 92 publications

Herbarium specimens show patterns of fruiting phenology in native and invasive plant species across New England

Herbarium specimens show patterns of fruiting phenology in native and invasive plant species across New England

Invasive plants negatively impact native, but not exotic, animals

Invasive species denialism: Sorting out facts, beliefs, and definitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About