Do species differ in their ability to coexist with the dominant alien Lupinus polyphyllus? A comparison between two distinct invaded ranges and a native range

Abstract

The community-level impacts of invasive plants are likely to vary depending on the character of native species of the target communities and their ability to thrive within the stands of the dominant alien invader. Therefore, I examined the response of native species richness to the cover of the dominant alien Lupinus polyphyllus in two distinct invaded ranges: Czech Republic (Central Europe) and New Zealand. I compared the relation between native species richness and the cover of the dominant alien L. polyphyllus with that in its native range, Pacific Northwest, USA.In the native range, I found no response of native species richness to the cover of L. polyphyllus. In the Czech Republic (central Europe), the richness of native species related to it negativelly, but the relation was only marginally significant. Contrary to that, the richness of species native to New Zealand related to the cover of L. polyphyllus strongly negatively and the negative relation was significantly stronger than that of species native to Europe.Of the two invaded ranges, species native to New Zealand have been documented to be much more vulnerable to the conditions associated with the invasion and dominance of L. polyphyllus, compared to species native to central Europe. This principle has been shown both across these two invaded ranges and in New Zealand, where the aliens of european origin successfully coexist with the dominant invasive alien L. polyphyllus. Similarly, species in the native range of L. polyphyllus showed no relation to its cover, indicating their ability to thrive even in dense stands of this dominant species.

Negative correlations between native macrophyte diversity and water hyacinth abundance are stronger in its introduced than in its native range

“…Finally, it is important to emphasize that our conclusions are not based on raw differences between China and Brazil, but on the differences in plot cumulative richness and beta diversity between dominated and non‐dominated plots within each country (see Hejda, ; Nielsen et al, ). Considering the variability of habitats mainly in China, to detect a distinctive pattern between the dominated and non‐dominated plots across these habitats would be even more supportive to our hypothesis.…”

“…This approach helps testing the frequently accepted (but poorly tested) hypothesis that introduced species promote greater impacts in the introduced range rather than the native one. There are indeed studies showing a more negative impact of invasive terrestrial plants on different aspects of diversity and assemblage composition in their introduced range rather than in their native one (Chen et al, ; Hejda, ; Ledger et al, ; Nielsen, Grøndahl, Callaway, Dickinson, & Ehlers, ; Taylor, Maxwell, Pauchard, Nuñez, & Rew, ). However, to the best of our knowledge, studies on highly invasive aquatic plants are yet to compare communities in native and introduced ranges.…”

Native‐range habitats of invasive plants: are they similar to invaded‐range habitats and do they differ according to the geographical direction of invasion?

“…This phenomenon is likely to be even more pronounced in case of islands such as New Zealand. Native species of New Zealand have been shown to be much less successful when competing with invasive weeds than species originating in Europe (Hejda, 2013). Another evolutionary background may also differentiate species from Eurasia and from North America.…”

Impacts of dominant plant species on trait composition of communities: comparison between the native and invaded ranges

“…The biogeography of plant invasions also affects their community‐level impacts (Hierro et al. , Hejda , Hejda et al. ), and many invasive species also suppress species’ richness and diversity in their native ranges (Callaway et al.…”

“…The biogeography of plant invasions also affects their community-level impacts (Hierro et al 2005, Hejda 2013a, Hejda et al 2017, and many invasive species also suppress species' richness and diversity in their native ranges (Callaway et al 2012, Ledger et al 2015. Such community-level impacts of native dominants can be comparable to those of invasive species (Hejda et al 2017).…”