Advertisement

Plant Ecology

, Volume 211, Issue 1, pp 65–77 | Cite as

Establishment of the invasive perennial Vincetoxicum rossicum across a disturbance gradient in New York State, USA

  • Kristine M. Averill
  • Antonio DiTommaso
  • Charles L. Mohler
  • Lindsey R. Milbrath
Article

Abstract

Vincetoxicum rossicum (pale swallow-wort) is a non-native, perennial, herbaceous vine in the Apocynaceae. The species’ abundance is steadily increasing in the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada. Little is known about Vincetoxicum species recruitment and growth. Therefore, we conducted a field experiment in New York State to address this knowledge gap. We determined the establishment, survival, and growth of V. rossicum during the first 2 years after sowing in two old fields subjected to four disturbance regimens. We hypothesized that establishment and survival would be higher in treatments with greater disturbance. At the better-drained location, overall establishment was 15 ± 1% [mean ± standard error] and did not differ among treatments. At the poorly drained location, establishment varied by treatment; mowed and control plots had greater establishment [10 ± 2%] than herbicide + tillage and herbicide-only plots [1.6 ± 0.5%]. Of those seedlings that emerged, overall survival was high at both locations (70–84%). Similarly, total (above + belowground) biomass was greater in herbicide + tillage and herbicide-only plots than in mowed and control plots at both locations. Thus, V. rossicum was successful in establishing and surviving across a range of disturbance regimens particularly relative to other old field species, but growth was greater in more disturbed treatments. The relatively high-establishment rates in old field habitats help explain the invasiveness of this Vincetoxicum species in the northeastern U.S. and southeastern Canada.

Keywords

Biotic resistance Dog-strangling vine Environmental gradient Invasibility Pale swallow-wort Weed ecology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Scott Morris, Jeromy Biazzo, Andrew Lewis, Kathy Howard, and Cornell Farm Services for assistance with field operations. We also appreciate data collection support from Melanie Ho, John Means, and Karen Wozniak. Thanks go to Françoise Vermeylen for providing statistical guidance. We are grateful to the Associate Editor and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on a previous version of this manuscript. Financial support was provided by the United States Department of Agriculture—Agricultural Research Service project number 1907-22620-003-01S. This article reports the results of research only; mention of a proprietary product does not constitute an endorsement or a recommendation by the USDA for its use.

References

  1. Addinsoft (2009) XLSTAT data analysis and statistical software, version 2009.3.01. New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Alex J, Switzer CM (1992) Ontario weeds. Descriptions, illustrations and keys to their identification. Ministry of Agriculture and Food College, University of Guelph, Toronto, ONGoogle Scholar
  3. Allison P (1995) Survival analysis using SAS: a practical guide. SAS Press, Gary, NCGoogle Scholar
  4. Barney J, Whitlow T (2008) A unifying framework for biological invasions: the state factor model. Biol Invasions 10:259–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthram GT, Elston DA, Mullins CE (2005) The physical resistance of grass patches to invasion. Plant Ecol 176:79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergelson J, Newman JA, Floresroux EM (1993) Rates of weed spread in spatially heterogeneous environments. Ecology 74:999–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanchard ML, Barney JN, Averill KA, Mohler CL, DiTommaso A (2010) Does polyembryony confer a competitive advantage to the invasive vine Vincetoxicum rossicum (Apocynaceae)? Am J Bot 97:251–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burnside OC, Fenster CR, Evetts LL, Mumm RF (1981) Germination of exhumed weed seed in Nebraska. Weed Sci 29:577–586Google Scholar
  9. Canham CD (1985) Suppression and release during canopy recruitment in Acer saccharum. Bull Torrey Bot Club 112:134–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canham CD, Marks PL (1985) The response of woody plants to disturbance: patterns of establishment and growth. In: Pickett STA, White PS (eds) The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 197–216Google Scholar
  11. Cappuccino N, Mackay R, Eisner C (2002) Spread of the invasive alien vine Vincetoxicum rossicum: tradeoffs between seed dispersability and seed quality. Am Midl Nat 148:263–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casagrande R, Dacey J (2007) Monarch butterfly oviposition on swallow-worts (Vincetoxicum spp.). Environ Entomol 36:631–636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chambers JC, MacMahon JA (1994) A day in the life of a seed: movements and fates of seeds and their implications for natural and managed systems. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 25:263–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Connell JH (1978) Diversity in tropical rain forests and coral reefs. Science 199:1302–1310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc B 34:187–220Google Scholar
  16. Davis MA, Pelsor M (2001) Experimental support for a resource-based mechanistic model of invasibility. Ecol Lett 4:421–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol 88:528–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DiTommaso A, Losey JE (2003) Oviposition preference and larval performance of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) on two invasive swallow-wort species. Entomol Exp Appl 108:205–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DiTommaso A, Brainard D, Webster B (2005a) Seed characteristics of the invasive alien vine Vincetoxicum rossicum are affected by site, harvest date, and storage duration. Can J Bot 83:102–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DiTommaso A, Lawlor F, Darbyshire S (2005b) The biology of invasive alien plants in Canada. 2. Cynanchum rossicum (Kleopow) Borhidi [=Vincetoxicum rossicum (Kleopow) Barbar.] and Cynanchum louiseae (L.) Kartesz & Gandhi [=Vincetoxicum nigrum (L.) Moench]. Can J Plant Sci 85:243–263Google Scholar
  21. Douglass CH (2008) The role of allelopathy, morphology, and genetic diversity in the invasion of swallow-wort species in New York state. Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  22. Douglass CH, Weston LA, DiTommaso A (2009) Chapter 13. Black and pale swallow-wort (Vincetoxicum nigrum and V. rossicum): the biology and ecology of two perennial, exotic, and invasive vines. In: Inderjit (ed) Management of invasive weeds. Springer Science and Business Media B.V., The Netherlands, pp 261–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  24. Gerhardt F, Collinge SK (2007) Abiotic constraints eclipse biotic resistance in determining invasibility along experimental vernal pool gradients. Ecol Appl 17:922–933CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gibson DJ, Middleton BA, Foster K, Honu YAK, Hoyer EW, Mathis M, Pärtel M (2005) Species frequency dynamics in an old-field succession: effects of disturbance, fertilization and scale. J Veg Sci 16:415–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Goldberg DE, Landa K (1991) Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition. J Ecol 79:1013–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gordon DR (1998) Effects of invasive non-indigenous plant species on ecosystem processes: lessons from Florida. Ecol Appl 8:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray AJ, Crawley M, Edwards PJ (1987) Colonization, succession and stability: the 26th symposium of the British ecological society held jointly with the Linnean Society of London. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, OxfordshireGoogle Scholar
  29. Greenberg C, Smith L, Levey D (2001) Fruit fate, seed germination and growth of an invasive vine—an experimental test of ‘sit and wait’ strategy. Biol Invasions 3:363–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Greipsson S, DiTommaso A (2006) Invasive non-native plants alter the occurrence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and benefit from this association. Ecol Restor 24:236–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grime JP (1973) Competitive exclusion in herbaceous vegetation. Nature 242:344–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Grime JP (1977) Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. Am Nat 111:1169–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gurvich DE, Tecco PA, Díaz S, Bakker JP (2005) Plant invasions in undisturbed ecosystems: the triggering attribute approach. J Veg Sci 16:723–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harper JL (1977) Population biology of plants. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Hobbs RJ (1989) The nature and effects of disturbance relative to invasions. In: Drake JA, Mooney HA, di Castri F, Groves RH, Kruger FJ, Rejmanek M, Williamson M (eds) Biological invasions: a global perspective. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, pp 389–405Google Scholar
  36. Hobbs RJ, Huenneke LF (1992) Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 6:324–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hobbs RJ, Humphries SE (1995) An integrated approach to the ecology and management of plant invasions. Conserv Biol 9:761–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hotchkiss EE, DiTommaso A, Brainard DC, Mohler CL (2008) Survival and performance of the invasive vine Vincetoxicum rossicum (Apocynaceae) from seeds of different embryo number under two light environments. Am J Bot 95:447–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jesson L, Kelly D, Sparrow A (2000) The importance of dispersal, disturbance, and competition for exotic plant invasions in Arthur’s Pass National Park, New Zealand. NZ J Bot 38:451–468Google Scholar
  40. Johnson VS, Litvaitis JA, Lee TD, Frey SD (2006) The role of spatial and temporal scale in colonization and spread of invasive shrubs in early successional habitats. Forest Ecol Manag 228:124–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ladd D, Cappuccino N (2005) A field study of seed dispersal and seedling performance in the invasive exotic vine Vincetoxicum rossicum. Can J Bot 83:1181–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Levine JM, D’Antonio CM (1999) Elton revisited: a review of evidence linking diversity and invasibility. Oikos 87:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecol Lett 7:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lindig-Cisneros R, Zedler JB (2002) Phalaris arundinacea seedling establishment: effects of canopy complexity in fen, mesocosm, and restoration experiments. Can J Bot 80:617–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Martin J, Hofherr E, Quigley MF (2003) Effects of Typha latifolia transpiration and harvesting on nitrate concentrations in surface water of wetland microcosms. Wetlands 23:835–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mattila HR, Otis GW (2003) A comparison of the host preference of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) for milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) over dog-strangler vine (Vincetoxicum rossicum). Entomol Exp Appl 107:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mersereau D, DiTommaso A (2003) The biology of Canadian weeds. 121. Galium mollugo L. Can J Plant Sci 83:453–466Google Scholar
  49. Meyer AH, Schmid B (1999) Seed dynamics and seedling establishment in the invading perennial Solidago altissima under different experimental treatments. J Ecol 87:28–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moore RJ (1959) The dog-strangling vine Cynanchum medium, its chromosome number and its occurrence in Canada. Can Field Nat 73:144–147Google Scholar
  51. Orians G (1986) Site characteristics favoring invasions. In: Mooney HA, Drake JA (eds) Ecology of biological invasions of North America and Hawaii. Springer, New York, NY, pp 133–148Google Scholar
  52. Peet RK (1974) The measurement of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 5:285–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prober SM, Thiele KR, Lunt I, Koen TB (2005) Restoring ecological function in temperate grassy woodlands: manipulating soil nutrients, exotic annuals and native perennial grasses through carbon supplements and spring burns. Ecology 42:1073–1085Google Scholar
  54. SAS Institute, Inc (2007) JMP statistical software. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  55. Sheeley S (1992) The distribution and life history characteristics of Vincetoxicum rossicum (Asclepiadaceae): an exotic plant in North America. Thesis, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and ForestryGoogle Scholar
  56. Sheeley S, Raynal D (1996) The distribution and status of species of Vincetoxicum rossicum in eastern North America. Bull Torrey Bot Club 123:148–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sheley RL, Krueger-Mangold J (2003) Principles for restoring invasive plant-infested rangeland. Weed Sci 51:260–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smith LL, DiTommaso A, Lehmann J, Greipsson S (2006) Growth and reproductive potential of the invasive exotic vine Vincetoxicum rossicum in northern New York State. Can J Bot 84:1771–1780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Smith LL, DiTommaso A, Lehmann J, Greipsson S (2008) Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on the exotic invasive vine pale swallow-wort (Vincetoxicum rossicum). Invasive Plant Sci Manag 1:142–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sousa WP (1984) The role of disturbance in natural communities. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15:353–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Storer DA (1984) A simple high sample volume ashing procedure for determination of soil organic matter. Comm Soil Sci Plant Anal 15:759–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. USDA-NRCS (2010) The PLANTS database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA. http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed 10 March 2010
  63. van Es HM, van Es CL (1993) Spatial nature of randomization and its effect on the outcome of field experiments. Agron J 85:420–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. von Holle B, Delcourt HR, Simberloff D, Harcombe P (2003) The importance of biological inertia in plant community resistance to invasion. J Veg Sci 14:425–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Williamson M (2006) Explaining and predicting the success of invading species at different stages of invasion. Biol Invasions 8:1561–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yang LH, Bastow JL, Spence KO, Wright AN (2008) What can we learn from resource pulses? Ecology 89:621–634CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristine M. Averill
    • 1
    • 2
  • Antonio DiTommaso
    • 1
  • Charles L. Mohler
    • 1
  • Lindsey R. Milbrath
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Crop and Soil SciencesCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Crop and Soil SciencesThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.USDA-ARS Robert W. Holley Center for Agriculture and HealthIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations