Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 1345–1360 | Cite as

No consistent association between changes in genetic diversity and adaptive responses of Australian acacias in novel ranges

  • Carla J. Harris
  • Eleanor E. Dormontt
  • Johannes J. Le Roux
  • Andrew Lowe
  • Michelle R. Leishman
Original Paper

Abstract

Common garden studies comparing trait differences of exotic species between native and introduced ranges rarely incorporate an analysis of genetic variation, but simply infer that trait shifts between ranges are genetically determined. We compared four growth-related traits (total biomass, relative growth rate RGR, specific leaf area SLA, and root to shoot ratio R:S) of five invasive Fabaceae species (Acacia cyclops, A. longifolia, A. melanoxylon, A. saligna, Paraserianthes lophantha), grown in a common garden experiment using seeds from introduced and native ranges across Australia. Chloroplast microsatellite loci were used to compare genetic diversity of native and introduced populations to determine standing genetic diversity and infer introduction history. We asked whether shifts in traits associated with faster growth due to enemy release in the introduced range were associated with levels of genetic diversity associated with introduction history. We found differences in traits between ranges, although these traits varied among the species. Compared to native-range populations, introduced-range Acacia longifolia had greater biomass and larger SLA; A. cyclops had greater RGR; and A. melanoxylon displayed lower R:S. Genetic diversity in the introduced range was lower for one of those species, A. longifolia, and two others that did not show differences in traits, A. saligna and P. lophantha. Diversity was higher in the introduced range for A. melanoxylon and did not differ among ranges for A. cyclops. These patterns of genetic diversity suggest that a genetic bottleneck may have occurred following the introduction of A. longifolia, A. saligna and P. lophantha. In contrast greater or comparable genetic diversity in the introduced range for A. melanoxylon and A. cyclops suggests introductions from multiple sources. This study has shown that a reduction in genetic diversity in the introduced range is not necessarily associated with a reduced capacity for adaptive responses or invasion potential in the novel range.

Keywords

Acacia Adaptive capacity Common garden Genetic variation Invasive plants Relative growth rate Specific leaf area 

Supplementary material

10682_2012_9570_MOESM1_ESM.docx (30 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 29 kb)

References

  1. Barney JN, Whitlow TH, DiTommaso A (2009) Evolution of an invasive phenotype: shift to belowground dominance and enhanced competitive ability in the introduced range. Plant Ecol 202:275–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bastlová D, Kv′t J (2002) Differences in dry weight partitioning and flowering phenology between native and non-native plants of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicari L.). Flora 197:332–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blumenthal DM, Hufbauer RA (2007) Increased plant size in exotic populations: a common-garden test with 14 invasive species. Ecology 88:2758–2765PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bossdorf O, Auge H, Lafuma L, Rogers WE, Siemann E, Prati D (2005) Phenotypic and genetic differentiation between native and introduced plant populations. Oecologia 144:1–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caño L, Escarré J, Fleck I, Blanco-Moreno JM, Sans FX (2008) Increased fitness and plasticity of an invasive species in its introduced range: a study using Senecio pterophorus. J Ecol 96:468–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chun YJ, Kim CG, Moloney KA (2010) Comparison of life history traits between invasive and native populations of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) using nonlinear mixed effects model. Aq Bot 93:221–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chun YJ, Le Corre V, Bretagnolle F (2011) Adaptive divergence for a fitness-related trait among invasive Ambrosia artemisiifolia populations in France. Mol Ecol 20:1378–1388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colautti R, Maron JL, Barrett SCH (2009) Common garden comparisons of native and introduced plant populations: latitudinal clines can obscure evolutionary inferences. Evol App 2:187–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Costello DA, Lunt ID, Williams JE (2000) Effects of invasion by the indigenous shrub Acacia sophorae on plant composition of coastal grasslands in south-eastern Australia. Biol Cons 96:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crawley MJ (1987) What makes a community invasible? In: Gray AJ, Crawley MJ, PJ E (eds) Colonization, succession and stability—the 26th symposium of the British ecological society held jointly with the linnean society of London. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 429–453Google Scholar
  11. Cripps MG, Hinz HL, McKenney JL, Price WJ, Schwarzlander M (2009) Evolution of an invasive phenotype: shift to belowground dominance and enhanced competitive ability in the introduced range. Basic Appl Ecol 10:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeWalt JS, Denslow J, Hamrick JL (2004) Biomass allocation, growth, and photosynthesis of genotypes from native and introduced ranges of the tropical shrub Clidemia hirta. Oecologia 138:521–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dlugosch KM, Parker IM (2007) Molecular and quantitative trait variation across the native range of the invasive species Hypericum canariense: evidence for ancient patterns of colonization via pre-adaptation? Mol Ecol 16:4269–4283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dlugosch KM, Parker IM (2008) Founding events in species invasions: genetic variation, adaptive evolution, and the role of multiple introductions. Mol Ecol 17:431–449PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dormontt EE, Lowe AJ, Prentis PJ (2011) Is rapid adaptive evolution important in successful invasions? In: Richardson DM (ed) Fifty years of invasion ecology: the legacy of Charles Elton. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 175–193Google Scholar
  16. El-Keblawy A, Lovett-Doust J (1998) Persistent, non-seed size maternal effects on the life history traits in the progeny generation in squash, Cucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae). New Phyt 140:655–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ellstrand NC, Schierenbeck KA (2000) Hybridization as a stimulus for the evolution of invasiveness in plants? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:7043–7050PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Emms J, Virtue JG, Preston C, Bellotti WD (2005) Legumes in temperate Australia: a survey of naturalisation and impact in natural ecosystems. Biol Cons 125:323–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gaertner M, Den Breeyen A, Hui C, Richardson DM (2009) Impacts of alien plant invasions on species richness in mediterranean-type ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Prog Phys Geog 33:319–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Genton BJ, Shykoff JA, Giraud T (2005) High genetic diversity in French invasive populations of common ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, as a result of multiple sources of introduction. Mol Ecol 14:4275–4285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. George N, Byrne M, Maslin B, Yan G (2005) Genetic differentiation among morphological variants of Acacia saligna (Mimosaceae). Tree Genet Genomes 2:109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guswell S, Jakobs G, Weber E (2006) Native and introduced populations of Solidago gigantea differ in shoot production but not in leaf traits or litter decomposition. Funct Ecol 20:575–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamilton MA, Murray BR, Cadotte MW, Hose GC, Baker AC, Harris CJ, Licari D (2005) Life-history correlates of plant invasiveness at regional and continental scales. Ecol Lett 8:1066–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Handley RJ, Steinger T, Treier UA, Müller-Schärer H (2008) Testing the evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis (EICA) in a novel framework. Ecology 89:407–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harden G (2002) Flora of New South Wales, vol 2. UNSW Press, KensingtonGoogle Scholar
  26. Hodgins KA, Rieseberg L (2011) Genetic differentiation in life-history traits of introduced and native common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) populations. J Evol Biol 24:2731–2749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jakobs G, Weber E, Edwards PJ (2004) Introduced plants of the invasive Solidago gigantea (Asteraceae) are larger and grow denser than conspecifics in the native range. Divers Distrib 10:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kang M, Buckley Y, Lowe AJ (2007) Testing the role of genetic factors across multiple independent invasions of the shrub Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius). Molec Ecol 16:4662–4673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kull CA, Tassin J, Rambeloarisoa G, Sarrailh J-M (2008) Invasive Australian acacias on Western Indian Ocean islands: a historical and ecological perspective. Af J Ecol 46:684–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lavergne S, Molofsky J (2007) Increased genetic variation and evolutionary potential drive the success of an invasive grass. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:3883–3888PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Le Maitre DC, Gaertner M, Marchante E, Ens EJ, Holmes PM, Pauchard A, O’Farrell PJ, Rogers AM, Blanchard R, Blignaut J, Richardson DM (2011) Impacts of invasive Australian acacias: implications for management and restoration. Divers Distrib 17:1015–1029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Le Roux JJ, Wieczorek AM, Wright MG, Tran CT (2007) Super-genotype, global monoclonality defies the odds of nature. PLoS ONE 2:e590PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Le Roux JJ, Brown GK, Byrne M, Ndlovu J, Richardson DM, Thompson GD, Wilson JRU (2011) Phylogeographic consequences of different introduction histories of invasive Australian Acacia species and Paraserianthes lophantha (Fabaceae) in South Africa. Divers Distrib 17:861–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leger EA, Rice KJ (2003) Invasive California poppies (Eschscholzia californica cham.) grow larger than native individuals under reduced competition. Ecol Lett 6:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leishman MR, Haslehurst T, Ares A, Baruch Z (2007) Leaf trait relationships of native and invasive plants: community and global-scale comparisons. New Phyt 176:635–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maron JL, Vilà M, Bommarco R, Elmendorf S, Beardsley P (2004) Rapid evolution of an invasive plant. Ecol Mono 74:261–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marrs RA, Sforza R, Hufbauer RA (2008) Evidence for multiple introductions of Centaurea stoebe micranthos (spotted knapweed, Asteraceae) to North America. Mol Ecol 17:4197–4208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maslin B, McDonald M (2004) Acacia Search: evaluation of Acacia as a woody crop option for southern Australia. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Barton, ACTGoogle Scholar
  39. Maslin BR, Miller JT, Seigler DS (2003) Overview of the generic status of acacia (Leguminosae: Mimosoideae). Aust System Bot 16:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Millar MA, Byrne M, O’Sullivan W (2011) Defining entities in the Acacia saligna (Fabaceae) species complex using a population genetics approach. Aust J Bot 59:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moloney KA, Holzapfel C, Tielborger K, Jeltsch F, Schurr F (2009) Rethinking the common garden in invasion research. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 11:311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moore J, Wheeler J (2008) Southern weeds and their control. Department of Agriculture, WAGoogle Scholar
  43. Musil C (1993) Effect of invasive Australian acacias on the regeneration, growth and nutrient chemistry of South African lowand fynbos. J Appl Ecol 30:361–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Muyt A (2001) Bush invaders of South-East Australia. A guide to the identification and control of environmental weeds found in South-East Australia. R.G. and F.J. Richardson, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  45. Naciri-Graven Y, Goudet J (2003) The additive genetic variance after bottlenecks is affected by the number of loci involved in epistatic interactions. Evolution 57:706–716PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R (1975) The bottleneck effect and genetic variability of populations. Evolution 29:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Novak SJ, Mack RN, Soltis PS (1993) Genetic variation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae): introduction dynamics in North America. Can J Bot 71:144–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Peakall R, Smouse P (2006) Genalex 6: Genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes 6:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prentis P, Dormontt E, Wilson A, Richardson D, Lowe A (2008) Adaptive evolution in invasive species. Trends Plant Sci 13:288–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Prentis PJ, Sigg DP, Raghu S, Dhileepan K, Lowe A (2009) Understanding invasion history: genetic structure and diversity of two globally invasive plants and implications for their management. Divers Distrib 15:822–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Randall RP (2007) A global compendium of weeds. www.hear.org.au/gcw
  52. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM, Higgins SI, Pitcairn MJ, Grotkopp E (2005) Ecology of invasive plants: state of the art. In: Mooney HA, McNeely JA, Nevile L, Schei PJ, Waage JK (eds) Invasive Alien species: a new synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC, pp 104–116Google Scholar
  53. Richardson DM, Rejmànek M (2011) Trees and shrubs as invasive alien species—a global review. Divers Distrib 17:788–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Richardson DM, Macdonald IA, Forsyth GG (1989) Reductions in plant species richness under stands of alien trees and shrubs in the fynbos biome. Sth Af Forest Jnl 149:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rogers WE, Siemann E (2005) Herbivory tolerance and compensatory differences in native and invasive ecotypes of Chinese Tallow Tree (Sapium sebiferum). Plant Ecol 181:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schlaepfer DR, Glättli M, Fischer M, Kleunen Mv (2010) A multi-species experiment in their native range indicates pre-adaptation of invasive alien plant species. New Phytol 185:1087–1099PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423, 623–656Google Scholar
  59. Siemann E, Rogers WE (2001) Genetic differences in growth of an invasive tree species. Ecol Lett 4:514–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Simberloff D (2009) The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:81–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tassin J, Médoc JM, Kull CA, Rivière JN, Balent G (2009) Can invasion patches of Acacia mearnsii serve as colonizing sites for native plant species on Réunion (Mascarene archipelago)? Af J Ecol 47:422–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van Kleunen M, Schmid B (2003) No evidence for an evolutionary increased competitive ability in an invasive plant. Ecology 84:2816–2823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vila M, Gomez A, Maron JL (2003) Are alien plants more competitive than their native conspecifics? A test using Hypericum perforatum L. Oecologia 137:211–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Virtue JG, Melland RL (2003) The environmental weed risk of revegetation and forestry plants South Australia. Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity ConservationGoogle Scholar
  65. Weber E (2003) Invasive plants of the world: a reference guide to environmental weeds. CABI Publishing, CAB International, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  66. Weising K, Gardner RC (1999) A set of conserved PCR primers for the analysis of simple sequence repeat polymorphisms in chloroplast genomes of dicotyledonous angiosperms. Genome 42:9–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Willis AJ, Memmott J, Forrester RI (2000) Is there evidence for the post-invasion evolution of increased size among invasive plant species? Ecol Lett 3:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wilson JRU, Dormontt EE, Prentis PJ, Lowe AJ, Richardson DM (2009) Something in the way you move: dispersal pathways affect invasion success. Trends Ecol Evol 24:136–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Witkowski ETF (1994) Growth of seedlings of the invasives, Acacia saligna and Acacia cyclops in relation to soil phosphorus. Aust Ecol 19:290–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yelenik SG, Stock WD, Richardson DM (2004) Ecosystem level impacts of invasive Acacia saligna in the South African fynbos. Restor Ecol 12:44–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zou J, Rogers WE, Siemann E (2008) Increased competitive ability and herbivory tolerance in the invasive plant Sapium sebiferum. Biol Invas 10:291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carla J. Harris
    • 1
  • Eleanor E. Dormontt
    • 2
  • Johannes J. Le Roux
    • 3
  • Andrew Lowe
    • 2
    • 4
  • Michelle R. Leishman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Australian Centre for Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity, School of Earth and Environment SciencesUniversity of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Botany and Zoology, Centre for Invasion BiologyStellenbosch UniversityMatielandSouth Africa
  4. 4.Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Science Resource CentreState Herbarium of South AustraliaNorth TerraceAustralia

Personalised recommendations