Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 20, Issue 12, pp 3399–3407 | Cite as

Rainfall and removal method influence eradication success for Lantana camara

  • Ayesha Prasad
  • Jayashree Ratnam
  • Mahesh Sankaran
Invasion Note

Abstract

The success of invasive species eradication depends on a variety of factors, including those that initially facilitated the invasion, as well as removal and post-removal protocols. Two factors that appear to influence invasion by, and eradication of, the Neotropical shrub Lantana camara (L.), in southern Indian deciduous forests, are rainfall and removal method. However, their role in influencing eradication success is yet to be quantified, and remains unclear. We conducted an experiment to clarify how rainfall (high vs. low) and removal method (cutting vs. uprooting Lantana) influence re-invasion by Lantana, and native plant recovery. Rainfall influenced both eradication effort and outcomes—drier forest had lower starting levels of invader biomass, requiring less initial eradication effort, as well as lower subsequent Lantana re-invasion (from seed and rootstock) whereas wetter forest typically had greater starting levels of invader biomass, requiring considerably greater initial eradication effort, and greater Lantana re-invasion. However, wetter forest also showed greater native tree and forb recovery. Therefore, the availability of funds, local environmental gradients, and restoration priorities should inform the selection of restoration sites. With regard to removal method, uprooting combined with weeding of germinating Lantana, particularly after the rainy season, minimized overall re-invasion. Therefore, uprooting, followed by regular weeding of germinating Lantana and secondary invaders, is crucial to long-term Lantana eradication success.

Keywords

Invasion Rainfall Regeneration Tropical deciduous forest Uprooting Weeding 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (Asian Elephant Conservation Fund) for funding this Project, and Tamil Nadu Forest Department for permits to carry out field research in MTR. We also appreciate the assistance of K. Maadan, B. Maadan, Kumar, Bomma, R. Gangadhar, Mohan, Vaishnavi Ramesh, and Suneha Jagannathan in field methods.

Supplementary material

10530_2018_1785_MOESM1_ESM.jpg (499 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (JPEG 499 kb)

References

  1. Aronson J, Alexander S (2013) Ecosystem restoration is now a global priority: time to roll up our sleeves. Restor Ecol 21:293–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babu S, Love A, Babu CR (2009) Ecological restoration of Lantana-invaded landscapes in Corbett Tiger Reserve, India. Ecol Rest 27(4):467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S, Christensen RHB, Singmann H, Dai B, Grothendieck G, Green P (2017) Package ‘lme4’Google Scholar
  4. Bhagat SA, Breman E, Thekaekara T, Thornton TF, Willis KJ (2012) A battle lost? report on two centuries of invasion and management of Lantana camara L. in Australia, India and South Africa. PLoS ONE 7:e32407.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broughton S (2000) Review and evaluation of Lantana biocontrol programs. Biol Control 17:272–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buckley YM, Bolker BM, Rees M (2007) Disturbance, invasion and re-invasion: managing the weed-shaped hole in disturbed ecosystems. Ecol Lett 10:809–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. D’Antonio C, Meyerson LA (2002) Exotic plant species as problems and solutions in ecological restoration: a synthesis. Restor Ecol 10:703–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duggin JA, Gentle CB (1998) Experimental evidence on the importance of disturbance intensity for invasion of Lantana camara L. in dry rainforest-open forest ecotones in north-eastern NSW, Australia. For Ecol Manag 109:279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flory SL, Clay K (2009) Invasive plant removal method determines native plant community responses. J Appl Ecol 46:434–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foxcroft LC, Richardson DM (2003) Managing alien plant invasions in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. In: Child LE, Brock JH, Brundu G, Prach K, Pyšek P, Wade PM, Williamson M (eds) Plant invasions: ecological threats and management solutions. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 385–403Google Scholar
  11. Gooden B, French K, Turner PJ (2009a) Invasion and management of a woody plant, Lantana camara L., alters vegetation diversity within wet sclerophyll forest in southeastern Australia. For Ecol Manag 257:960–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gooden B, French K, Turner PJ, Downey PO (2009b) Impact threshold for an alien plant invader, Lantana camara L., on native plant communities. Biol Conserv 142:2631–2641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hobbs RJ, Huenneke LF (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holm LG, Plucknett DL, Pancho JV, Herberger JP (1991) The world’s worst weeds: distribution and biology. The University Press of Hawaii, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2015) Package ‘lmerTest’. R package version, 2(0)Google Scholar
  16. Langeland KA, Ferrell JA, Sellers B, MacDonald GE, Stocker RK (2011) Integrated management of non-native plants in natural areas of Florida. In: Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainseville, FL. SP, 242Google Scholar
  17. Love A, Babu S, Babu CR (2009) Management of Lantana, an invasive alien weed, in forest ecosystems of India. Curr Sci India 97:1421–1429Google Scholar
  18. Norton DA (2009) Species invasions and the limits to restoration: learning from the New Zealand experience. Science 325:569–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prasad AE (2010) The impacts of an exotic plant invasion on forest understory vegetation in a tropical dry forest in southern India. Conserv Biol 24:747–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Prasad AE (2012) Landscape-scale relationships between the exotic invasive shrub Lantana camara and native plants in a tropical deciduous forest in southern India. J Trop Ecol 28:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Raman TR, Mudappa D, Kapoor V (2009) Restoring rainforest fragments: survival of mixed-native pecies seedlings under contrasting site conditions in the Western Ghats, India. Rest Ecol 17(1):137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramaswami G, Sukumar R (2013) Long-term environmental correlates of invasion by Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) in a seasonally dry tropical forest. PLoS ONE 8(10):e76995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ramaswami G, Prasad S, Westcott D, Subuddhi SP, Sukumar R (2014) Addressing the management of a long-established invasive shrub: the case of Lantana camara in Indian forests. Indian For 140(2):129–136Google Scholar
  24. Sharma BD, Shetty BV, Vivekananthan K, Rathakrishnan NC (1977) Flora of Mudumalai Wildlife Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 75:13–42Google Scholar
  25. Sundaram B, Hiremath AJ (2012) Lantana camara invasion in a heterogeneous landscape: patterns of spread and correlation with changes in native vegetation. Biol Invasions 14:1127–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ayesha Prasad
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jayashree Ratnam
    • 1
  • Mahesh Sankaran
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.National Centre for Biological SciencesTata Institute of Fundamental ResearchBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Madras Crocodile Bank TrustMamallapuramIndia
  3. 3.School of BiologyUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations