Does Darwin’s Naturalization Hypothesis Explain Fish Invasions? Authors
First Online: 21 April 2006 Received: 11 April 2005 Accepted: 18 January 2006 DOI:
Cite this article as: Ricciardi, A. & Mottiar, M. Biol Invasions (2006) 8: 1403. doi:10.1007/s10530-006-0005-6 Abstract
Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis predicts that introduced species tend not to invade areas containing congeneric native species, because they would otherwise compete with their close relatives and would likely encounter predators and pathogens that can attack them. An opposing view is that introduced species should succeed in areas where native congeners are present because they are more likely to share traits that pre-adapt them to their new environment. A test of both these hypotheses using data on fish introductions from several independent regions fails to support either viewpoints. In contrast to studies of nonindigenous plants, our results suggest that taxonomic affiliation is not an important general predictor of fish invasion success.
Keywords biotic resistance colonization exotic species invasion success nonindigenous species prediction References
Baltz DM and Moyle PB (1993). Invasion resistance to introduced species by a native assemblage of Californian stream fishes.
Case TJ (1990). Invasion resistance arises in strongly interacting species-rich model competition communities.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Colautti RI, Ricciardi A, Grigorovich IA and MacIsaac HJ (2004). Is invasion success explained by the Enemy Release Hypothesis?.
Cudmore-Vokey B and Crossman EJ (2000) Checklists of the fish fauna of the Laurentian Great Lakes and their connecting channels. Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, No. 2550
Curnutt JL (2000). Host-area climatic-matching: similarity breeds exotics.
Daehler CC (2001). Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis revisited.
Darwin C (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. John Murray, London
Duggan IC, Rixon AM and MacIsaac HJ (2006). Popularity and propagule pressure: determinants of introduction and establishment of aquarium fish.
Duncan RP and Williams PA (2002). Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis challenged.
Fofonoff PW, Ruiz GM, Steves B, Hines AH and Carlton JT (2003) National Exotic Marine and Estuarine Species Information System. http://invasions/si.edu/nemesis/
Froese R and Pauly D (2004) FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. www.fishbase.org, version (10/2004)
Harvey BC, White JL and Nakamoto RJ (2004). An emergent multiple predator effect may enhance biotic resistance in a stream assemblage.
Ecology 85: 127–133
Kolar CS and Lodge DM (2001). Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution
Kolar CS and Lodge DM (2002). Ecological predictions and risk assessments for alien fishes in North America.
Leach JH (2003). Unusual invaders of Lake Erie.
Point Pelee Natural History News 3(1): 1–5
Leppäkoski E and Olenin S (2000). Non-native species and rates of spread: lessons from the brackish Baltic Sea.
Levine JM, Adler PB and Yelenik SG (2004). A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions.
Lockwood JL (1999). Using taxonomy to predict success among introduced avifauna: relative importance of transport and establishment.
Lockwood JL, Cassey P and Blackburn T (2005). The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions.
Trends in Ecology and Evolution
MacIsaac HJ, Grigorovich IA and Ricciardi A (2001). Reassessment of species invasions concepts: the Great Lakes basin as a model.
Marchetti MP, Moyle PB and Levine R (2004). Alien fishes in California watershed: characteristics of successful and failed invaders.
Ecological Applications 14: 587–596
Mills EL, Scheuerell MD, Carlton J and Strayer DL (1997) Biological invasions in the Hudson River basin: an inventory and historical analysis. New York State Museum Circular No. 57, New York State Education Department, Albany
Moyle PB and Light T (1996). Fish invasions in California: do abiotic factors determine success.
Rejmanek M (1996). A theory of seed plant invasiveness: the first sketch.
Rejmanek M (1998). Invasive plant species and invadible ecosystems. In: Sandlund, OT, Schei, PJ and Vilken, A (eds) Invasive Species and Biodiversity Management, pp 79–102. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Ricciardi A and Rasmussen JB (1998). Predicting the identity and impact of future biological invaders: a priority for aquatic resource management.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
Ross ST (1991). Mechanisms structuring stream fish assemblages: are there lessons from introduced species.
Environmental Biology of Fishes
Shurin JB (2000). Dispersal limitation, invasion resistance and the structure of pond zooplankton communities.
Sokal RR and Rohlf FJ (1995). Biometry. Freeman, New York
Williamson MH and Fitter A (1996). The varying success of invaders.