Mutualism between co-introduced species facilitates invasion and alters plant community structure

Prior, Kirsten M.; Robinson, Jennifer M.; Dunphy, Shannon A. Meadley; Frederickson, Megan E.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2846

Cited by 54 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 61 publications

(142 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Coevolutionary associations are inherently dynamic and, across species ranges, they proceed at varying rates, generating a diverse geographical mosaic of variable states [42]. Species translocations can disrupt coevolved adaptations, exposing both native and non-native species to novel interactions [9,40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most visible invasions, and those with the most damaging consequences for ecosystem services, tend to receive the greatest attention. These cases strongly bias our understanding of the impacts of invasions [6,7], because impacts of invasive species can often, at least initially, be subtle and affect local processes and species interactions [8][9][10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Population-specific responses to an invasive species

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting the impacts of non-native species remains a challenge. As populations of a species are genetically and phenotypically variable, the impact of non-native species on local taxa could crucially depend on populationspecific traits and adaptations of both native and non-native species. Bitterling fishes are brood parasites of unionid mussels and unionid mussels produce larvae that parasitize fishes. We used common garden experiments to measure three key elements in the bitterling-mussel association among two populations of an invasive mussel (Anodonta woodiana) and four populations of European bitterling (Rhodeus amarus). The impact of the invasive mussel varied between geographically distinct R. amarus lineages and between local populations within lineages. The capacity of parasitic larvae of the invasive mussel to exploit R. amarus was higher in a Danubian than in a Baltic R. amarus lineage and in allopatric than in sympatric R. amarus populations. Maladaptive oviposition by R. amarus into A. woodiana varied among populations, with significant population-specific consequences for R. amarus recruitment. We suggest that variation in coevolutionary states may predispose different populations to divergent responses. Given that coevolutionary relationships are ubiquitous, population-specific attributes of invasive and native populations may play a critical role in the outcome of invasion. We argue for a shift from a species-centred to population-centred perspective of the impacts of invasions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Population-specific responses to an invasive species

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding invasive species influences on other alien species, the ‘invasional meltdown’ hypothesis proposes that the establishment of one invasive species in a community may facilitate the establishment of further invasive species. In fact a newly established alien may favor newcomers by altering the local biotic interaction dynamics (O’Dowd et al , Grosholz , Green et al , Prior et al ), or by modifying the local abiotic environment (e.g. increasing nitrogen availability, soil salinity or fire frequency; Simberloff and Holle ).…”

Section: ) Integrating the Impacts Of Invasive Species On Native Spementioning

confidence: 99%

The community ecology of invasive species: where are we and what's next?

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alien species are continually introduced in most regions of the world, but not all survive and coexist with the resident native species. Approaches analyzing the functional (or phylogenetic) similarity between invasive species and native communities are increasingly employed to infer the processes underlying successful invasions and to predict future invaders. The relatively simple conceptual foundations have made these approaches very appealing and therefore widely used, often leading to confusion and hampering generalizations. We undertook a comprehensive review and synthesis of the functional similarity approach in invasion community ecology to clarify its advantages and limitations, to summarize what has been learned thus far, and to suggest avenues for future improvement. We first present the methodological state of the art and provide general guidelines. Second, by organizing the published literature around seven key questions in invasion ecology we found cumulative evidence that: at large spatial scales phylogenetic relatedness of invasive and native species is a good predictor of invasion success, but a poor predictor of invasion impacts; at fine spatial scales, community resistance to invasion tends to increase with native species diversity and with similarity to the invaders, consistent with patterns emerging from biotic interactions. In general, the processes filtering invaders appear to vary across species’ invasion stage and along environmental gradients. Nonetheless, we found conflicting evidence for differences in community assembly processes between invasive and native species, and between the invader's native and adventive ranges. Finally, we propose four important avenues for overcoming some of the identified methodological and conceptual limitations of the approach, in particular by integrating observational and experimental analyses and by explicitly considering species’ demographic rates and complex biotic interactions. Although the functional similarity approach bears intrinsic limitations, it still offers many opportunities in invasion community ecology at large spatial scales.

show abstract

“…, Prior et al . ). Interestingly, many myrmecochorous plants have prostrate fruits, but T. ulmifolia seeds stay attached to the valves of fruits during dehiscence, meaning most seeds (~92%) are removed from on (rather than beneath) the plant, where they remain close to extrafloral nectaries (Cuautle et al .…”

Section: Results Of the Generalized Linear Models For Ant Visitation mentioning

confidence: 97%