Advertisement

Plant Ecology

, Volume 216, Issue 6, pp 823–833 | Cite as

Invasions across secondary forest successional stages: effects of local plant community, soil, litter, and herbivory on Hovenia dulcis seed germination and seedling establishment

  • M. S. DechoumEmail author
  • R. D. Zenni
  • T. T. Castellani
  • S. M. Zalba
  • M. Rejmánek
Article

Abstract

Species abilities for seed germination and seedling survival under different situations are good predictors of their capacity to colonize a broad range of habitats. Biotic conditions related to understory cover, and abiotic factors such as litter thickness and soil moisture can be determinants of plant establishment. We evaluated seed germination, seedling survival, and growth of the invasive tree Hovenia dulcis under experimental field conditions in three successional stages (open, semi-open, and closed vegetation) of a fragmented seasonal deciduous forest in southern Brazil. Our hypotheses were that H. dulcis seed germination, seedling survival, and seedling growth decrease along the successional gradient, that these factors are positively affected by soil moisture and percentage of bare soil, and negatively affected by understory cover and litter thickness. We also tested the hypothesis that herbivory on H. dulcis would decrease along the successional gradient. Our main finding was that H. dulcis can germinate and establish along all forest successional stages because it is shade-tolerant. Abiotic factors were more important than biotic factors for seed germination. Soil moisture positively affected seed germination while litter thickness negatively influenced seed germination. Percentage of bare soil negatively influenced seedling survival. Germination rates were higher in closed vegetation, whereas seedling survival was higher in semi-open vegetation, and growth rates were higher in open vegetation. There was no difference in herbivory among successional stages. The results of our study show that intermediate forest succession stages congregate the most favorable conditions for H. dulcis establishment, likely making them more susceptible to invasion.

Keywords

Growth Survival Invasive alien species Biotic resistance Shade tolerance Deciduous forest 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Financial support was received from Tractebel Energia S.A., PPGECO/UFSC, and FAPESC. M. S. D. is supported by CAPES, Brazil. R. D. Z. acknowledges support from CNPq-Brazil. S. M. Z. received support from the Universidad Nacional del Sur and CONICET, Argentina. Sílvia Ziller and Clark Richter helped improve the language. Two anonymous referees' comments and suggestions substantially improved the manuscript.

References

  1. Bardall ML, Roderjan CV, Galvão F, Curcio GR (2004) Caracterização florística e fitossociológica de um trecho sazonalmente inundável de floresta aluvial, em Araucária, PR. Ciência Florestal 14(2):37–50Google Scholar
  2. Baskin CC, Baskin JM (2014) Seeds: ecology, biogeography, and evolution of dormancy and germination. Elsevier, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazzaz FA (1979) The physiological ecology of plant succession. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 10:351–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biswas SR, Kotanen PM, Kambo D, Wagner HH (2014) Context-dependent patterns, determinants and demographic consequences of herbivory in an invasive species. Biol Invasions 17(1):165–178. doi: 10.1007/s10530-014-0715-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blakesley D, Elliot S, Kuarak C, Navakitbumurung P, Zangkum S, Anusarnsunthorn V (2002) Propagating framework tree species to restore seasonally dry tropical forest: implications of seasonal seed dispersal and dormancy. For Ecol Manag 164:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boeni BO (2011) Riqueza, estrutura e composição de espécies em floresta secundária invadida por Hovenia dulcis Thunb., caracterização do seu nicho de regeneração e efeitos alelopáticos. Thesis, Vale dos Sinos University, São Leopoldo, Rio Grande do SulGoogle Scholar
  7. Boulant N, Garnier A, Curt T, Lepart J (2009) Disentangling the effects of land use, shrub cover and climate on the invasion speed of native and introduced pines in grasslands. Divers Distrib 15:1047–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bufford JL, Daehler CC (2011) Life history strategies. In: Simberloff D, Rejmánek R (eds) Encyclopedia of biological invasions. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, pp 437–441Google Scholar
  9. Buono RA, Oliveira AB, Paiva EAS (2008) Anatomy, ultrastructure and chemical composition of food bodies of Hovenia dulcis (Rhamnaceae). Ann Bot 101:1341–1348PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carvalho PER (1994) Ecologia, silvicultura e usos da uva-do-japão (Hovenia dulcis Thunberg). Circular Técnica EMBRAPA Florestas, ColomboGoogle Scholar
  11. Catford JA, Daehler CC, Murphy HT, Sheppard AW, Hardesty BD, Westcott DA, Rejmánek M, Bellingham PJ, Pergl J, Horvitz CC, Hulme PE (2012) The intermediate disturbance hypothesis and plant invasions: implications for species richness and management. Perspect Plant Ecol Evol Syst 14:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cipollini D, Lieurance DM (2012) Expression and costs of induced defense traits in Alliaria petiolata, a widespread invasive plant. Basic Appl Ecol 5:432–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coutts SR, van Klinken RD, Yokomizo H, Buckley YM (2011) What are the key drives of spread in invasive plants: dispersal, demography or landscape: and can we use this knowledge to aid management? Biol Invasions 13:1649–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawson W, Burslem DFRP, Hulme PE (2009) Factors explaining alien plant invasion success in a tropical ecosystem differ at each stage of invasion. J Ecol 97:657–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dechoum MS, Castellani TT, Zalba SM, Rejmánek M, Peroni N, Tamashiro JY (2014) Community structure, succession and invasibility in a seasonal deciduous forest in southern Brazil. Biol Invasions. doi: 10.1007/s10530-014-0827-6 Google Scholar
  16. Dostál P, Allan E, Dawson W, van Kleunen M, Bartish I, Fischer M (2013) Enemy damage of exotic plant species is similar to that of natives and increases with productivity. J Ecol 101:388–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duncan RP (2011) Propagule pressure. In: Simberloff D, Rejmánek R (eds) Encyclopedia of biological invasions. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, pp 561–563Google Scholar
  18. Eriksson O (1995) Seedling recruitment in deciduous forest herbs: the effects of litter, soil chemistry and seed bank. Flora 190:65–70Google Scholar
  19. Fine PVA (2002) The invasibility of tropical forests by exotic plants. J Trop Ecol 18:687–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Flory SL, Clay K (2009) Effects of roads and forest successional age on experimental plant invasions. Biol Conserv 142(11):2531–2537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Foster BL (2001) Constraints on colonization and species richness along a grassland productivity gradient: the role of propagule availability. Ecol Lett 4:530–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fridley JD (2011) Invasibility, of communities and ecosystems. In: Simberloff D, Rejmánek R (eds) Encyclopedia of biological invasions. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, pp 356–360Google Scholar
  23. Giffard B, Jactel H, Corcket E, Barbaro L (2012) Influence of surrounding vegetation on insect herbivory: a matter of spatial scale and herbivore specialisation. Basic Appl Ecol 13:458–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. González-Muñoz N, Castro-Díez P, Godoy O (2014) Lack of superiority of invasive over co-occurring native riparian tree seedling species. Biol Invasions 16:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Green PT, Lake PS, O’Dowd DJ (2004) Resistance of island rainforest to invasion by alien plants: influence of microhabitat and herbivory on seedling performance. Biol Invasions 6:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guimarães CDC, Viana JPR, Cornelissen T (2014) A meta-analysis of the effects of fragmentation on herbivorous insects. Environ Entomol 43(3):537–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hendges CD, Fortes VB, Dechoum (2012) Consumption of the invasive alien species Hovenia dulcis Thunb. (Rhamnaceae) by Sapajus nigritus Kerr, 1792 in a protected area in southern Brazil. Rev Bras Zoociências 14(1,2,3):255–260Google Scholar
  28. Hobbs RJ (2011) Land use. In: Simberloff D, Rejmánek R (eds) Encyclopedia of biological invasions. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, pp 425–427Google Scholar
  29. Hubbel SP, Foster RB, O’brien ST, Harms KE, Condit R, Wechsler B, Wright SJ, Lao SL (1999) Light-gap disturbance, recruitment limitation, and tree diversity in a neotropical forest. Science 283:554–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hui C, Richardson DM, Robertson MP, Wilson JRU, Yates CJ (2011) Macroecology meets invasion ecology: linking the native distributions of Australian acacias to invasiveness. Divers Distrib 17:872–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hyatt LA (2008) Does seedling ecology matter for biological invasions? In: Leck MA, Parker T, Simpson RL (eds) Seedling ecology and evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hyun TK, Eom SH, Yu CY, Roitsch T (2010) Hovenia dulcis: an Asian traditional herb. Planta Med 76:943–949PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kimura Y, Kobayashi Y, Takeda T, Ogihara Y (1981) Three new saponins from the leaves of Hovenia dulcis (Rhamnaceae). J Chem Soc 1:1923–1927Google Scholar
  34. Klein RM (1978) Mapa fitogeográfico do estado de Santa Catarina. In: Klein (ed) Flora Ilustrada Catarinense. Herbário Barbosa Rodrigues, ItajaíGoogle Scholar
  35. Kopachon S, Suriya K, Hardwick K, Pakaad G, Maxwell JF, Anusarnsunthorn V, Blakesley D, Garwood NC, Elliott S (1996) Forest restoration research in northern Thailand: 1. The fruits, seeds and seedlings of Hovenia dulcis Thunb. (Rhamnaceae). Nat Hist Bull Siam Soc 44:41–52Google Scholar
  36. Levine J (2000) Species diversity and biological invasions: relating local process to community pattern. Science 288:852–854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewis KC, Bazzaz FA, Liao Q (2006) Geographic patterns of herbivory and resource allocation to defense, growth and reproduction in an invasive biennial, Alliaria petiolata. Oecologia 148:384–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lima REL (2014) Dispersão de sementes de Hovenia dulcis Thunb. (Rhamnaceae) - uma espécie invasora em área de Floresta Estacional Decidual. Thesis, Federal University of Santa Catarina, FlorianopolisGoogle Scholar
  39. Major KC, Nosko P, Kuehne C, Campbell D, Bauhus J (2013) Regeneration dynamics of non-native northern red oak (Quercus rubra L.) populations as influenced by environmental factors: a case study in managed hardwood forests of southwestern Germany. For Ecol Manag 291:144–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin PH, Marks PL (2006) Intact forests provide weak resistance to a shade-tolerant invasive Norway maple (Acer platanoides L.). J Ecol 94:1070–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Martin PH, Canham CD, Marks PL (2009) Why forests appear resistant to exotic plant invasions: intentional introductions, stand dynamics, and the role of shade tolerance. Front Ecol Environ 7:142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martin PH, Canham CD, Kobe RK (2010) Divergence from the growth–survival trade-off and extreme high growth rates drive patterns of exotic tree invasions in closed-canopy forests. J Ecol 98:778–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mazia CN, Chaneton EJ, Ghersa CM, León RJC (2001) Limits to tree species invasion in pampean grassland and forest plant communities. Oecologia 128:594–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McAlpine KG, Jesson LK (2008) Linking seed dispersal, germination and seedling recruitment in the invasive species Berberis darwinii (Darwin’s barberry). Plant Ecol 197:119–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Melbourne BA, Cornell HV, Davies KF, Dugaw CJ, Elmendorf S, Freestone AL, Hall RJ, Harrison S, Hastings A, Holland M, Holyoak M, Lambrinos J, Moore K, Hiroyuki Y (2007) Invasion in a heterogeneous world: resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover? Ecol Lett 10:77–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moles AT, Westoby M (2004) Why do seedlings die from, and what are the implications for evolution of seed size. Oikos 106:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moles AT, Flores-Moreno H, Bonser SP, Warton DI, Helm A, Warman L, Eldridge DJ, Jurado E, Hemmings FA, Reich PB, Cavender-Bares J, Seabloom EW, Mayfield MM, Sheil D, Djietror JC, Peri PL, Enrico L, Cabido MR, Setterfield SA, Lehmann CE, Thomson FJ (2012) Invasions: the trail behind, the path ahead, and a test of a disturbing idea. J Ecol 100:116–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moodley D, Geerts S, Richardson DM, Wilson JRU (2013) Different traits determine introduction, naturalization and invasion success in woody plants: Proteaceae as a test case. PLoS ONE 8(9):e75078. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075078 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Natale E, Zalba SM, Oggero A, Reinoso H (2010) Establishment of Tamarix ramosissima under different conditions of salinity and water availability: implications for its management as an invasive species. J Arid Environ 74:1399–1407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pyšek P, Jarosik V, Pergl J, Randall R, Chytrý M et al (2009) The global invasion success of Central European plants is related to distribution characteristics in their native range and species traits. Divers Distrib 15:891–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Radtke A, Ambra S, Zerbe S, Tonon G, Fontana V, Ammer C (2013) Traditional coppice forest management drives the invasion of Ailanthus altissima and Robinia pseudoacacia into deciduous forests. For Ecol Manag 291:308–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Reinhart KO, Gurnee J, Tirado R, Callaway RM (2006) Invasion through quantitative effects: intense shade drives native decline and invasive success. Ecol Appl 16:1821–1831PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (1996) What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77(6):1655–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (2013) Trees and shrubs as invasive species - 2013 update on the global database. Divers Distrib 19:1093–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM, Pyšek P (2013) Plant invasions and invisibility of plant communities. In: van der Maarel E, Franklin J (eds) Vegetation ecology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 387–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Richardson DM, Carruthers J, Hui C, Impson FAC, Miller JT, Robertson MP, Rouget M, Le Roux JJ, Wilson JRU (2011) Human-mediated introductions of Australian acacias: a global experiment in biogeography. Divers Distrib 17:771–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ridenour WM, Vivanco JM, Feng Y, Jun-Ichiro H, Callaway RM (2006) No evidence for trade-offs: Centaurea plants from North America are better competitors and defenders. Ecol Monogr 78:369–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scariot A (2000) Seedling mortality by litterfall in Amazonian forest fragments. Biotropica 32:662–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schaff LB, Filho AF, Galvão F, Sanquetta CR, Longhi SJ (2006) Modificações florístico-estruturais de um remanescente de Floresta Ombófila Mista Montana no período de 1979 e 2000. Ciência Florestal 16(3):271–291Google Scholar
  60. Silva EH (2008) As transformações do território a partir dos processos de criação e planejamento do Parque Estadual Fritz Plaumann (Concórdia, SC). Thesis, Federal University of Santa Catarina, FlorianopolisGoogle Scholar
  61. Siminski A, Fantini AC, Guries RP, Ruschel AR, Reis (2011) Secondary forest succession in the Mata Atlantica, Brazil: floristic and phytosociological trends. ISRN Ecol. doi: 10.5402/2011/759893 Google Scholar
  62. R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Available via http://www.R-project.org/
  63. Vibrans AC, Sevegnani L, de Gasper AL, Lingner DV (2012) Inventário Florístico Florestal de Santa Catarina: Floresta Estacional Decidual, vol 2. Edifurb, BlumenauGoogle Scholar
  64. Vilà M, Ibáñez I (2011) Plant invasions in the landscape. Landsc Ecol 26:461–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Warren RJ II, Bahn V, Bradford MA (2013) Decoupling litter barrier and soil moisture influences on the establishment of an invasive grass. Plant Soil 367:339–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zenni RD, Simberloff D (2013) Number of source populations as a potential driver of pine invasions in Brazil. Biol Invasions 15:1623–1639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zenni RD, Ziller SR (2011) An overview of invasive plants in Brazil. Rev Bras Bot 34(3):431–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zenni RD, Bailey JK, Simberloff D (2014) Rapid evolution and range expansion of an invasive plant are driven by provenance-environment interactions. Ecol Lett 17:727–735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zhou Y, Newman C, Xie Z, Macdonald DW (2013) Peduncles elicit large-mammal endozoochory in a dry-fruited plant. Ann Bot 112(1):85–93PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. S. Dechoum
    • 1
    Email author
  • R. D. Zenni
    • 2
  • T. T. Castellani
    • 1
  • S. M. Zalba
    • 3
  • M. Rejmánek
    • 4
  1. 1.Plant Ecology Lab, Department of Ecology and Zoology, Biological Sciences CenterFederal University of Santa Catarina - UFSCFlorianópolisBrazil
  2. 2.Department of EcologyThe University of BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Biology, Biochemistry and PharmacyUniversidad Nacional del SurBahía BlancaArgentina
  4. 4.Department of Evolution and EcologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations