Urban Ecosystems

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 1135–1140 | Cite as

Urban ornamental trees: a source of current invaders; a case study from a European City

  • Natálie Čeplová
  • Zdeňka Lososová
  • Veronika Kalusová


Human made habitats are considered to be important hotspots of biodiversity of native as well as alien plant species. Due to high propagule pressure caused by human activities they serve as a source of introduction of alien plant species. We used the database of planted ornamental trees and shrubs for Brno, Czech Republic, to determine the significance of introduction effort given by intensity of planting as a factor in woody plant naturalization. Of all planted woody taxa, 15% were recognized as spontaneously growing in the urban area and there was a significant relationship between the number of planted individuals and the ability of a species to spontaneously occur in the urban area. The most often spontaneously escaping species originated in Europe (55%), followed by neophytes from North America (21%) and Central and Eastern Asia (14%). Although only a minor portion of planted woody species is able to escape from cultivation, this still could represent a potential risk for the native vegetation.


Archaeophytes Europe Invasive biology Native species Neophytes Propagule pressure 



We thank Jozef Kasala, director of Public Greenery Agency of Brno, Magdaléna Chytrá, director of Botanical Garden of the Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, for providing data about taxa and numbers of planted individuals and Petra Štěpánková for provision and digitization of data from Arboretum of Mendel University. This work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation, project 14-10723S.


  1. Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CG (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth International Group, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  2. Clement EJ, Foster MC (1994) Alien plants of the British isles. Botanical Society of the British Isles, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. DAISIE (2009) Handbook of alien species in Europe. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Danihelka J, Chrtek J Jr, Kaplan Z (2012) Checklist of vascular plants of the Czech Republic. Preslia 84:647–811Google Scholar
  5. De’ath G, Fabricius KE (2000) Classification and regression trees: a powerful yet simple technique for ecological data analysis. Ecology 81:3178–3192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Perrings C, Williamson M (2007a) A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Divers Distri 13:527–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Perrings C, Williamson M (2007b) The horticultural trade and ornamental plant invasion in Britain. Conserv Biol 21:224–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Donaldson JE, Hui C, Richardson DM, Robertson MP, Webber BL, Wilson JRU (2014) Invasion trajectory of alien trees: the role of introduction pathway and planting history. Glob Change Biol 20:1527–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Essl F, Bacher S, Blackburn TM, Booy O, Brundu G, Brunel S, Cardoso A-C, Eschen R, Gallardo B, Galil B, García-Berthou E, Genovesi P, Groom Q, Harrower C, Hulme PE, Katsanevakis S, Kenis M, Kühn I, Kumschick S, Martinou AF, Nentwig W, O’Flynn C, Pagad S, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Rabitsch W, Richardson DM, Roques A, Roy HE, Scalera R, Schindler S, Seebens H, Vanderhoeven S, Vilà M, JRU W, Zenetos A, Jeschke JM (2015) Crossing frontiers in tackling pathways of biological invasions. Bioscience 65:769–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaertner M, Den Breyen A, Hui C, Richardson DM (2009) Impacts of alien plant invasions on species richness in Mediterranean-type ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Prog Phys Geogr 33:319–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hanspach J, Kühn I, Pyšek P, Boos E, Klotz S (2008) Correlates of naturalization and occupancy of introduced ornamentals in Germany. Perspect Plant Ecol 10:241–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hulme PE, Bacher S, Kenis M, Klotz S, Kühn I, Minchin D, Nentwig W, Olenin S, Panov V, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Roques A, Sol D, Solarz W, Vilà M (2008) Grasping at the routes of biological invasions: a framework for integrating pathways into policy. J Appl Ecol 45:403–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jenerette GD, Clarke LW, Avolio ML, Pataki DE, Gillespie TW, Pincetl S, Nowak DJ, Hutyra LR, McHale M, McFadden JP, Alonzo M (2016) Climate tolerances and trait choices shape continental patterns of urban tree biodiversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:1367–1376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Křivánek M, Pyšek P, Jarošík V (2005) Planting history and propagule pressure as predictors of invasion by Woody species in a temperate region. Conserv Biol 20(5):1487–1498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Křivánek M, Pyšek P (2006) Predicting invasions by woody species in a temperate zone: a test of three risk assessment schemes in the Czech Republic (Central Europe). Divers Distrib 12:319–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kühn I, Durka W, Klotz S (2004) BIOLFLOR – a new plant-trait database as a tool for plant invasion ecology. Divers Distrib 10:363–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lambdon PW, Pyšek P, Basnou C, Hejda M, Arianoutsou M et al (2008) Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs. Preslia 80:101–149Google Scholar
  18. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Moro MF, Castro ASF (2015) A check list of plant species in the urban forestry of Fortaleza, Brazil: where are the native species in the country of megadiversity? Urban Ecosyst 18:47–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mulvaney M (2001) The effect of introduction pressure on the naturalization of ornamental woody plants in south-eastern Australia. In: Groves RH, Panetta FD, Virtue JG (eds) Weed risk assessment. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, Australia, pp 186–193Google Scholar
  21. Parker JD, Torchin ME, Hufbauer RA et al (2013) Do invasive species perform better in their new ranges? Ecology 94:985–994CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Pyšek P, Danihelka J, Sádlo J, Chrtek J Jr, Chytrý M, Jarošík V, Kaplan Z, Krahulec F, Moravcová L, Pergl J, Štajerová K, Tichý L (2012) Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic (2nd edition): checklist update, taxonomic diversity and invasion patterns. Preslia 84:155–255Google Scholar
  23. Pyšek P, Jarošík V (2005) Residence time determines the distribution of alien plants. In: Inderjit (ed) invasive plants: ecological and agricultural aspects. Birkhäuser Verlag, Switzerland, pp 77–96Google Scholar
  24. Pyšek P, Jarošík V, Pergl J (2011) Alien plants introduced by different pathways differ in invasion success: unintentional introductions as a threat to natural areas. PLoS One 6(9):e24890CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Pyšek P, Jarošík V, Pergl J, Moravcová L, Chytrý M, Kühn I (2014) Temperate trees and shrubs as global invaders: the relationship between invasiveness and native distribution depends on biological traits. Biol Invasions 16:577–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pyšek P, Manceur AM, Alba C, McGregor KF, Pergl J, Štajerová K, Chytrý M, Danihelka J, Kartesz J, Klimešová J, Lučanová M, Moravcová L, Nishino M, Sádlo J, Suda J, Tichý L, Kühn I (2015) Naturalization of central European plants in North America: species traits, habitats, propagule pressure, residence time. Ecology 96(3):762–774CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pyšek P, Sádlo J, Mandák B (2002) Catalogue of alien plants of the Czech Republic. Preslia 74:97–186Google Scholar
  28. R Core team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  29. Saul W-C, Roy HE, Booy O, Carnevali L, Chen H-J, Genovesi P, Harrower CA, Hulme PE, Pagad S, Pergl J, Jeschke JM (2016) Assessing patterns in introduction pathways of alien species by linking major invasion data bases. J Appl Ecol doi. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12819 Google Scholar
  30. Simberloff D, Souza L, Nuñez MA, Barrios-Garcia MN, Bunn W (2012) The natives are restless, but not often and mostly when disturbed. Ecology 93:598–607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Taylor KT, Maxwell BD, Pauchard A, Nuñez MA, Rew LJ (2016) Native versus non-native invasions: similarities and differences in the biodiversity impacts of Pinus contorta in introduced and native ranges. Divers Distrib 22:578–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. USDA, NRCS (2017) The PLANTS Database (, 30 January 2017). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401–4901 USA
  33. Williamson M (1996) Biological invasions. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Williamson M (1999) Invasions. Ecography 22:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wu Z, Raven PH, Hong D (1994–2012) Flora of China. Science press and Missouri botanical garden press. Beijing or St, LouisGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of ScienceMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Faculty of EducationMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations