Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, 11:1451 | Cite as

Does Prunus serotina act as an aggressive invader in areas with a low propagule pressure?

  • Margot Vanhellemont
  • Kris Verheyen
  • Luc De Keersmaeker
  • Kris Vandekerkhove
  • Martin Hermy
Original Paper

Abstract

Since most studies on Prunus serotina in Western Europe focused on heavily invaded areas, we wondered whether P. serotina also acts as an aggressive invader in areas with a low propagule pressure. Based on long-term data for the Liedekerke forest reserve, we found that connectivity to seed sources and light availability were the major drivers of P. serotina presence: long-distance dispersal events and ‘windows of opportunity’ seem to direct P. serotina colonization. In the studied forest, P. serotina could not be considered an aggressive invader since its spread slowed down rather quickly and did not hamper the establishment of native tree species. Furthermore, understory P. serotina showed low growth and seed production, while the high Rubus cover hampered germination and establishment. Nonetheless, calamities opening up the canopy layer in the few areas with high P. serotina sapling density might alter the course of the invasion process.

Keywords

Colonization Connectivity Forest development Diameter growth Invasion pattern Logistic regression Prunus serotina Rubus spp. 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Agency for Nature and Forests for the permission to work in the Liedekerke forest reserve; Bart De Cuyper, Diego Van Den Meersschaut, and the Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO) for the use of the inventory data of 1986, 1996/1998, and 2006, respectively; the fieldwork team of the INBO for the additional field measurements within the framework of this study; Els De Lathauwer for her assistance in the field and with tree ring measurements; Kristof Haneca for the use of and help with the LINTAB; Quinten Vanhellemont for his contribution to the figures; Patrick Huvenne and two anonymous referees for their comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. The first author held a scholarship from the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO), and the study was supported financially by the Special Research Fund of Ghent University (BOF).

References

  1. Anders N (2005) De invloed van Prunus serotina (Amerikaanse vogelkers) op duinbodemeigenschappen in de Amsterdamse waterleidingduinen. Universiteit van Amsterdam, HoornGoogle Scholar
  2. Auclair AN, Cottam G (1971) Dynamics of black cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh.) in Southern Wisconsin oak forests. Ecol Monogr 41:153–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cain ML, Milligan BG, Strand AE (2000) Long-distance seed dispersal in plant populations. Am J Bot 87:1217–1227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Canham CD, Finzi AC, Pacala SW, Burbank DH (1994) Causes and consequences of resource heterogeneity in forests: interspecific variation in light transmission by canopy trees. Can J For Res 24:337–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Closset-Kopp D, Chabrerie O, Valentin B, Delachapelle H, Decocq G (2007) When Oskar meets Alice: Does a lack of trade-off in r/K-strategies make Prunus serotina a successful invader of European forests? For Ecol Manage 247:120–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. D’Orangeville L, Bouchard A, Cogliastro A (2008) Post-agricultural forests: Landscape patterns add to stand-scale factors in causing insufficient hardwood regeneration. For Ecol Manage 255:1637–1646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daniels RF (1976) Simple competition indexes and their correlation with annual loblolly-pine tree growth. For Sci 22:454–456Google Scholar
  8. De Coster K, De Somviele B, Mannaert A, Roovers P, Verheijen W, Van Lerberghe M, Van Nevel L (2006) Opmaak beheerplan Bos—en Natuurcomplex Liedekerkebos—HertigembosGoogle Scholar
  9. De Keersmaeker L, Van de Kerckhove P, Baeté H, Walleyn R, Christiaens B, Esprit M, Vandekerkhove K (2005) Monitoringprogramma integrale bosreservaten: inhoudelijk programma en basishandleiding rapport IBW.Bb.R.2005.003. Instituut voor Bosbouw en Wildbeheer, GeraardsbergenGoogle Scholar
  10. Deckers B, Verheyen K, Hermy M, Muys B (2005) Effects of landscape structure on the invasive spread of black cherry Prunus serotina in an agricultural landscape in Flanders, Belgium. Ecography 28:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeGasperis BG, Motzkin G (2007) Windows of opportunity: historical and ecological controls on Berberis thunbergii invasions. Ecology 88:3115–3125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ellenberg H (1996) Vegetation Mitteleuropas mit den Alpen. 5. Aufl. E. Ulmer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  13. Godefroid S, Phartyal SS, Weyembergh G, Koedam N (2005) Ecological factors controlling the abundance of non-native invasive black cherry (Prunus serotina) in deciduous forest understory in Belgium. For Ecol Manage 210:91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greene DF, Canham CD, Coates KD, Lepage PT (2004) An evaluation of alternative dispersal functions for trees. J Ecol 92:758–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanski I (1994) A practical model of metapopulation dynamics. J Anim Ecol 63:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hochbichler E, O’Sullivan A, van Hees A, Vandekerkhove K (2000) Recommendations for data collection in forest reserves, with an emphasis on regeneration and stand structure. In: COST Action E4 - Forest reserves research network. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp 135–193Google Scholar
  17. Jonášová M, van Hees A, Prach K (2006) Rehabilitation of monotonous exotic coniferous plantations: a case study of spontaneous establishment of different tree species. Ecol Eng 28:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Křivánek M, Pyšek P, Jarošík V (2006) Planting history and propagule pressure as predictors of invasion by woody species in a temperate region. Conserv Biol 20:1487–1498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lohmeyer W, Sukopp H (1992) Agriophyten in der Vegetation Mitteleuropas. Schr Veg 25:1–185Google Scholar
  20. Lorenz K, Preston CM, Krumrei S, Feger KH (2004) Decomposition of needle/leaf litter from Scots pine, black cherry, common oak and European beech at a conurbation forest site. Eur J For Res 123:177–188Google Scholar
  21. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marquis DA (1990) Black cherry Prunus serotina Ehrh. In: Burns RM, Honkala BH (eds) Silvics of forest trees in the United States, Agriculture Handbook 654, Volume 2: Hardwoods. United States Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. Martin PH, Marks PL (2006) Intact forests provide only weak resistance to a shade-tolerant invasive Norway maple (Acer platanoides L.). J Ecol 94:1070–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mountford EP, Savill PS, Bebber DP (2006) Patterns of regeneration and ground vegetation associated with canopy gaps in a managed beechwood in southern England. Forestry 79:389–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Niinemets Ü, Valladares F (2006) Tolerance to shade, drought, and waterlogging of temperate Northern Hemisphere trees and shrubs. Ecol Monogr 76:521–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Brien R, Kaiser MK (1985) MANOVA method for analyzing repeated measures designs: an extensive primer. Psychol Bull 97:316–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pairon M (2007) Ecology and population genetics of an invasive forest tree species: Prunus serotina Ehrh. Ph.D. Dissertation, Université Catholique de LouvainGoogle Scholar
  28. Pairon M, Chabrerie O, Mainer Casado C, Jacquemart A-L (2006a) Sexual regeneration traits linked to black cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh.) invasiveness. Acta Oecol 30:238–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pairon M, Jonard M, Jacquemart A-L (2006b) Modeling seed dispersal of black cherry, an invasive forest tree: how microsatellites may help? Can J For Res 36:1385–1394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol Econ 52:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raspé O, Findlay C, Jacquemart A-L (2000) Sorbus aucuparia L. Biological flora of the British isles no. 214. J Ecol 88:910–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reinhardt F, Herle M, Bastiansen F, Streit B (2003) Economic impact of the spread of alien species in Germany R + D Project 201 86 211 (UFOPLAN)Google Scholar
  33. Rode M, Kowarik I, Müller T, Wendebourg T (2002) Ökosystemare Auswirkungen von Prunus serotina auf norddeutsche Kiefernforsten. Neobiota 1:135–148Google Scholar
  34. Royo AA, Carson WP (2006) On the formation of dense understory layers in forests worldwide: consequences and implications for forest dynamics, biodiversity and succession. Can J For Res 36:1345–1362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sebert-Cuvillier E, Paccaut F, Chabrerie O, Endels P, Goubet O, Decocq G (2007) Local population dynamics of an invasive tree species with a complex life-history cycle: a stochastic matrix model. Ecol Model 201:127–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Starfinger U (1990) Die Einburgerung der Spätblühenden Traubenkirsche (Prunus serotina Ehrh.) in Mitteleuropa. Technische Universität Berlin, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  37. Starfinger U, Kowarik I, Rode M, Schepker H (2003) From desirable ornamental plant to pest to accepted addition to the flora? - the perception of an alien tree species through the centuries. Biol Inv 5:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tack G, Hermy M (1998) Historical ecology of woodlands in Flanders. In: Kirby KJ, Watkins C (eds) The ecological history of European forests. CAB International, OxonGoogle Scholar
  39. Van Den Meersschaut D, Lust N (1997) Monitoring van de bosstructuur en de bossamenstelling in het RTT-domein van Liedekerke. Methodologische studie, Ghent UniversityGoogle Scholar
  40. Vanderhoeven S, Dassonville N, Meerts P (2005) Increased topsoil mineral nutrient concentrations under exotic invasive plants in Belgium. Plant Soil 275:169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vanhellemont M, Verheyen K, Hermy M (2007) Modelling radial growth of Prunus serotina in pine forests. Comm Appl Biol Sci 72:65–68Google Scholar
  42. Verheyen K, Vanhellemont M, Stock T, Hermy M (2007) Predicting patterns of invasion by black cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh.) in Flanders (Belgium) and its impact on the forest understorey community. Divers Distrib 13:487–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wangen SR, Webster CR (2006) Potential for multiple lag phases during biotic invasions: reconstructing an invasion of the exotic tree Acer platanoides. J Appl Ecol 43:258–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wendel GW (1972) Longevity of black cherry seed in the forest floor. USDA Forest Service, Research Note NE–149. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Upper Darby, PAGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zerbe S, Wirth P (2006) Non-indigenous plant species and their ecological range in Central European pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests. Ann For Sci 63:189–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margot Vanhellemont
    • 1
  • Kris Verheyen
    • 1
  • Luc De Keersmaeker
    • 2
  • Kris Vandekerkhove
    • 2
  • Martin Hermy
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory of ForestryGhent UniversityGontrodeBelgium
  2. 2.Research Institute for Nature and ForestGeraardsbergenBelgium
  3. 3.Division ForestNature and Landscape, K. U. LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations