Plant Ecology

, Volume 193, Issue 2, pp 293–303 | Cite as

No difference in competitive ability between invasive North American and native European Lepidium draba populations

  • Jessica L. McKenney
  • Michael G. Cripps
  • William J. Price
  • Hariet L. Hinz
  • Mark SchwarzländerEmail author
Original Paper


The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis states that plants introduced into a new range experience reduced herbivory, which in turn results in a shift in resource allocation from herbivore defense to growth. If genotypes of an invasive plant species from its native and introduced ranges are grown under common conditions, introduced genotypes are expected to grow more vigorously than conspecific native genotypes. We tested predictions of the EICA hypothesis with the invasive species Lepidium draba by comparing the growth of genotypes from its native European and introduced western US ranges under common conditions. To test potential differences in competitive ability, we grew L. draba from both continents with either Festuca idahoensis, a weak competitor native to North America, or Festuca ovina, a strong competitor native to Europe. Contrary to EICA predictions, there were no differences in the performance of native and introduced L. draba, independent of whether plants were grown with F. idahoensis, F. ovina, or alone. The strong competitor, F. ovina impaired the growth of L. draba more than the weak competitor F. idahoensis and conversely, F. idahoensis was generally more impaired by L. draba than was F. ovina. While the native F. idahoensis was equally affected by L. draba regardless of range, F. ovina was not: US L. draba had a stronger negative effect on F. ovina growth than European L. draba. Our data suggest that the EICA hypothesis is not suitable to explain the invasion success of L. draba in the US. Instead, the greater competitive effect of L. draba on the North American F. idahoensis and the asymmetric competitive effect of L draba from different origins on F. ovina may indicate superior competitive ability for resources, or the presence of allelopathic traits in L. draba, to which plant species in non-native ranges are maladapted.


Biological control Biological invasion Hoary cress Invasion mechanism Novel weapons 



We thank S. Gersdorf and J. Andreas for assistance in the greenhouse. Joseph McCaffrey, John Lloyd and two anonymous reviewers gave helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was funded by a grant to M.S. from the USDA NRI Agreement no. IDA00108-CG. Additional funding was provided by grants to M.S. from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This research is supported by the Idaho Agricultural Experiment Station. This study complies with current laws of the USA.


  1. Agrawal AA (2005) Future directions in the study of induced plant responses to herbivory. Entomol Exp Appl 115:97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aiken SG, Dallwitz MJ, McJannet CL, Consaul LL (1996) Festuca of North America: descriptions, illustrations, identification, and information retrieval, 12th edn. Scholar
  3. Ball PW (1964) Cardaria Desv. In: Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burges NA, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DA (eds) Flora Europaea, Vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 333Google Scholar
  4. Bais HP, Vepachedu R, Gilroy S, Callaway RM, Vivanco JM (2003) Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion: from molecules and genes to species interactions. Science 301:1377–1380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barret SCH, Husband BC (1990) Isozyme variation in colonizing plants. In: Soltis D, Soltis P (eds) Isozymes in plant biology. Dioscorides press, Portland, pp 106–126Google Scholar
  6. Blair AC, Wolfe LM (2004) The evolution of an invasive plant: an experimental study with Silene latifolia. Ecology 85:3035–3042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blossey B, Nötzold R (1995) Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. J Ecol 83:887–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boodley JW, Sheldrake R Jr. (1977) Cornell peat-lite mixes for commercial plant growing. New York State, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Information Bulletin 43:8Google Scholar
  9. Booth BD, Murphy SD, Swanton CJ (2003) Weed ecology in natural and agricultural systems. CABI Publishing, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Borek V, Morra MJ, Brown PD, McCaffrey JP (1994) Allelochemicals produced during sinigrin decomposition in soil. J Agric Food Chem 42:1030–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borek V, Morra MJ, McCaffrey JP (1996) Myrosinase activity in soil extracts. Soil Sci Soc Am J 60:1792–1797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bossdorf O, Prati D, Auge H, Schmid B (2004) Reduced competitive ability in an invasive plant. Ecol Lett 7:346–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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
  14. Brown AHD, Marshall DR (1981) Evolutionary changes accompanying colonization in plants. In: Scudder GGE, Reveal JL (eds) Evolution today. Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Systematics and Evolutionary Biology, Hunt Institute of Botanical Documentation, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, pp 73–98Google Scholar
  15. Brown PD, Morra MJ, McCaffrey JP, Auld DL,Williams IL (1991) Allelochemicals produced during glucosinolate degradation in soil. J Chem Ecol 17:2021–2034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Buschmann H, Edwards PJ, Dietz H (2005) Variation in growth pattern and response to slug damage among native and invasive provenances of four perennial Brassicaceae species. J Ecol 93:322–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Callaway RM, Aschehoug ET (2000) Invasive plants versus their new and old neighbors: a mechanism for exotic invasion. Science 290:521–523PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Callaway RM, Ridenour WM (2004) Novel weapons: invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Front Ecol Environ 2:436–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Choesin DN, Boerner REJ (1991) Allyl isothiocyanate release and the allelopathic potential of Brassica napus (Brassicaceae). Am J Bot 78:1083–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crawley MJ (1997) Plant ecology. Blackwell, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  21. Cripps MG (2005) Enemy release and the evolution of increased competitive ability as potential invasion mechanisms of Lepidium draba L. in the Western United States, M.Sc. Thesis, University of Idaho, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  22. Cripps MG, Schwarzländer M, McKenney JL, Hinz HL, Price WJ (2006) Biogeographic comparison of the arthropod herbivore communities associated with Lepidium draba in its native, expanded and introduced ranges. J Biogeogr 33:2107–2119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Daehler CC (2003) Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: implications for conservation and restoration. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:183–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. D’Antonio CM, Vitousek PM (1992) Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87Google Scholar
  25. Daubenmire R (1968) Soil moisture in relation to vegetation distribution in the mountains of northern Idaho. Ecology 49:431–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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
  27. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Gaudet CL, Keddy PA (1988) A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits. Nature 334:242–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gaskin JF, Schaal BA (2002) Hybrid Tamarix widespread in US invasion and undetected in native Asian range. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:11256–11259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gaskin JF, Bon M-C, Zhang D-Y (2005) Invasion of Lepidium draba (Brassicaceae) in the western USA: distributions and origins of chloroplast DNA haplotypes. Mol Ecol 14:2331–2341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Goldberg DE (1996) Competitive ability: definitions, contingency and correlated traits. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 351:1377–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Goodwin JR, Doescher PS, Eddleman LE, Zobel DB (1999) Persistence of Idaho fescue on degraded sagebrush-steppe. J Range Manage 52:187–198Google Scholar
  33. Grassland Index (2005) Festuca ovina L. Cited 15 April 2005Google Scholar
  34. Herms DA, Mattson WJ (1992) The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Q Rev Biol 67:283–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hierro JL, Maron JL, Callaway RM (2005) A biogeographical approach to plant invasions: the importance of studying exotics in their introduced and native range. J Ecol 93:5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hinz HL, Schwarzlaender M (2004) Comparing invasive plants from their native and exotic range: what can we learn for biological control? Weed Tech 18:1533–1541Google Scholar
  37. Hitchcock AS (1971) Manual of the grasses of the United States. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, pp 642Google Scholar
  38. Hitchcock L, Cronquist A (1991) Flora of the Pacific Northwest, 8th edn. University of Washington Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. Joshi J, Vrieling K (2005) The enemy release and EICA hypothesis revisited: incorporating the fundamental difference between specialist and generalist herbivores. Ecol Lett 8:704–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  41. Kartesz JT, Meacham CA (1999) Synthesis of the North American flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, NCGoogle Scholar
  42. Keane RM, Crawley MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol 17:164–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kiemnec GL, McInnis ML (2002) Hoary cress (Cardaria draba) root extract reduces germination and root growth of five plant species. Weed Tech 16:231–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kingsbury JM (1964) Poisonous plants of the United States and Canada. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  45. 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
  46. Lyons KE (1998) Elemental Stewardship Abstract for Cardaria draba (L.) Desv. Heart podded Hoary Cress, Cardaria chalepensis (L.) Hand-Maz., Lens-podded Hoary Cress and Cardaria pubescens (C.A. Meyer) Jarmolenko, Globe-podded Hoary Cress. The Nature Conservancy, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  47. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz F (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. May KW, Willms WD, Mengli Z, Lysyk TJ (2004) An assessment of variation in Idaho fescue [Festuca idahoensis (Elmer)] in southern Alberta. Can J Plant Sci 84:1077–1084Google Scholar
  49. McKenney JL (2005) An inter-continental comparison of vigor and herbivory for the invasive plant Lepidium draba, M.Sc. Thesis. University of Idaho, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  50. Mewis I, Appel HM, Hom A, Raina R, Schultz JC (2005) Major signaling pathways modulate Arabidopsis glucosinolate accumulation and response to both phloem-feeding and chewing insects. Plant Physiol 138:1149–1162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Miller HC, Clausnitzer D, Borman MM (1999) Medusahead. In: Sheley RL, Petroff JK (eds) Biology and management of noxious rangeland weeds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, pp 278Google Scholar
  52. Mitchell CE, Power AG (2003) Release of invasive plants from fungal and viral pathogens. Nature 421:625–627PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mooney HA, Cleland EE (2001) The evolutionary impact of invasive species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:5446–5451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mueggler WF (1967) Response of mountain grassland vegetation to clipping in southwestern Montana. Ecology 48:942–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Müller C, Martens N (2005) Testing predictions of the ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ hypothesis with an invasive crucifer. Evol Ecol 19:533–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mulligan GA, Findlay JN (1974) The biology of Canadian weeds. 3. Cardaria draba, C. chalepensis, and C. pubescens. Can J Plant Sci 54:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mulligan GA, Frankton CE (1962) Taxonomy of the genus Cardaria with particular reference to the species introduced into North America. Can J Bot 40:1411–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. (OTA) Office of Technology Assessment (1993) Harmful non-indigenous species in the United States. Office of Technology Assessment, US Government Printing Office, Washington, Publication no. OTA-F-565Google Scholar
  59. 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
  60. Qasem JR (1994) Allelopathic effect of white top (Lepidium draba) on wheat and barley. Allelopathy J 1:29–40Google Scholar
  61. Qasem JR (2001) Allelopathic potential of white top and Syrian sage on vegetable crops. Agron J 93:64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Qasem JR (2004) Allelopathic plants: 11. Cardaria draba (L.) Desv. Allelopathy J 13:165–172Google Scholar
  63. Radosevich SR (1988) Methods to study crop and weed interactions. In: Altieri MA, Liebman M (eds) Weed management in agroecosystems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 121–142Google Scholar
  64. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM, Higgins SI, Pitcairn MJ, Grotkopp E (2002) Ecology of invasive plants: state of the art. In: Mooney HA, McNeely JA, Neville L, Schei PJ, Waage JK (eds) Invasive alien species: searching for solutions. Island press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  65. Reichard SH, Hamilton CW (1997) Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America. Conserv Biol 11:193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 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 weeds. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. SAS Institute Inc. (2001) Online Doc. Version 8.0, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  68. Scurfield G (1962) Cardaria draba (L.) Desv. (Lepidium draba L.). J Ecol 50:489–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Smoliak S, Ditterline RL, Scheetz JD, Holzworth LK, Sims JR, Wiesner LE, Baldridge DE, Tibke GL (2001) Sheep Fescue (Festuca ovina). Cited 15 April 2005Google Scholar
  71. Strauss SY, Rudgers JA, Lau JA, Irwin RE (2002) Direct and ecological costs of resistance to herbivory. Trends Ecol Evol 17:278–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Thill DC, Roché CT, Zamora DL (1999) Common crupina. In: Sheley RL, Petroff JK (eds) Biology and management of noxious rangeland weeds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, pp 198Google Scholar
  73. Tilman D (1982) Resource competition and community structure. Monographs in population biology, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  74. USDA-NRCS (2004) The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 ( National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LAGoogle Scholar
  75. van Kleunen M, Schmid B (2003) No evidence for an evolutionary increased competitive ability in an invasive plant. Ecology 84:2816–2823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vermeij GJ (1991) When biotas meet: understanding biotic interchange. Science 253:1099–1104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Vilà M, Gómez A, Maron JL (2003) Are alien plants more competitive than their native conspecifics? A test using Hypericum perforatum L. Oecologia 137:211–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Vilà M, Maron JL, Marco L (2005) Evidence for the enemy release hypothesis in Hypericum perforatum. Oecologia 142:474–479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LI, Westbrooks R (1996) Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am Sci 84:468–478Google Scholar
  80. Warton B, Matthiessen JN, Shackleton MA (2003) Cross-enhancement: enhanced biodegradation of isothiocyanates in soils previously treated with metham sodium. Soil Biol Biochem 35:1123–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wiliamson M (1996) Biological invasions. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  82. Williamson MH, Fitter A (1996) The characters of successful invaders. Biol Conserv 78:163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica L. McKenney
    • 1
  • Michael G. Cripps
    • 1
  • William J. Price
    • 2
  • Hariet L. Hinz
    • 3
  • Mark Schwarzländer
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Entomology, Department of Plant Soil and Entomological SciencesUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  2. 2.Statistical Programs, College of Agricultural and Life SciencesUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  3. 3.CABI Bioscience Switzerland CentreDelémontSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations