, Volume 142, Issue 3, pp 474–479 | Cite as

Evidence for the enemy release hypothesis in Hypericum perforatum

Global Change Ecology


The enemy release hypothesis (ERH), which has been the theoretical basis for classic biological control, predicts that the success of invaders in the introduced range is due to their release from co-evolved natural enemies (i.e. herbivores, pathogens and predators) left behind in the native range. We tested this prediction by comparing herbivore pressure on native European and introduced North American populations of Hypericum perforatum (St John’s Wort). We found that introduced populations occur at larger densities, are less damaged by insect herbivory and suffer less mortality than populations in the native range. However, overall population size was not significantly different between ranges. Moreover, on average plants were significantly smaller in the introduced range than in the native range. Our survey supports the contention that plants from the introduced range experience less herbivore damage than plants from the native range. While this may lead to denser populations, it does not result in larger plant size in the introduced versus native range as postulated by the ERH.


Biological control Herbivory Plant invasions Natural enemies hypothesis St John’s Wort 


  1. Blossey B, Nötzold R (1995) Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. J Ecol 83:887–889Google Scholar
  2. Buckley YM, Downey P, Fowler SV, Hill R, Memmot J, Norambuena H, Pitcairn M, Shaw R, Sheppard AW, Winks C, Wittenberg R, Rees M (2003) Are invasives bigger? A global study of seed size variation in two invasive shrubs. Ecology 84:1434–1440Google Scholar
  3. Cox GW (1999) Alien species in North America and Hawaii: impacts on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  4. Crawley MJ (1987) What makes a community invisible? In: Gray AJ, Crawley MJ, Edwards PJ (eds) Colonization, succession and stability. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 429–453Google Scholar
  5. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Grigulis K, Sheppard AW, Ash JE, Groves RH (2001) The comparative demography of the pasture weed Echium plantagineum between its native and invaded ranges. J Appl Ecol 38:281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoffmann JH, Moran VC (1998) The population dynamics of an introduced tree Sesbania punicea in South Africa in response to long-term damage caused by different combinations of three species of biological control agents. Oecologia 114:343–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffmann JH, Moran VC, Zedler DA (1998) Long-term population studies and the development of an integrated management programme for control of Opuntia stricta in Kruger National Park, South Africa. J Appl Ecol 35:156–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Holloway JK, Huffaker CB (1951) The role of Chrysolina gemellata in the biological control of klamath weed. J Econ Entomol 44:244–247Google Scholar
  10. Huffaker CB, Holloway JK (1949) Changes in range plant population structure associated with feeding of imported enemies of klamath weed (Hypericum perforatum L.). Ecology 30:167–175Google Scholar
  11. Jakobs G, Weber E, Edwards PJ (2004) Introduced plants of the invasive Solidago gigantean (Asteraceae) are larger and grow denser than conspecifics in the native range. Divers Distrib 10:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Julien MH, Griffiths MW (1998) Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Knox JP, Dodge AD (1985) Isolation and activity of the photodynamic pigment hypericin. Plant Cell Environ 8:9–25Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. Maron JL, Vilà M (2001) Do herbivores affect plant invasion? Evidence for the natural enemies and biotic resistance hypotheses. Oikos 95:363–373Google Scholar
  16. Maron JL, Vilà M, Bommarco R, Elmendorf S, Beardsley P (2004) Rapid evolution of an invasive plant. Ecol Monogr 74:261–280Google Scholar
  17. Maron J, Vilà M, Arnason J (in press) Loss of natural enemy resistance among introduced populations of St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum). EcologyGoogle Scholar
  18. Memmott J, Fowler SV, Paynter Q, Sheppard AW, Syrett P (2000) The invertebrate fauna on broom. Cytisus scoparius in two native and two exotic habitats. Acta Oecol 21:213–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mitchell CE, Power AG (2003) Release of invasive plants from fungal and viral pathogens. Nature 421:625–627CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva PM, Williamson MH, Von Holle B, Moyle PB, Byers JE, Goldwasser L (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions 1:3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Paynter Q, Downey PO, Sheppard AW (2003) Age structure and growth of the woody legume weed Cytisus scoparius in native and exotic habitats: implications for control. J Appl Ecol 40:470–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sheppard AW, Hodge P, Paynter P, Rees M (2002) Factors affecting invasion and persistence of broom Cytisus scoparius in Australia. J Appl Ecol 39:721–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thébaud C, Simberloff D (2001) Are plants really larger in their introduced ranges? Am Nat 157:231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vilà M, Gómez A, Maron JL (2003) Are alien plants more competitive than their native conspecifics? A test using Hypericum perforatum L. Oecologia 137:211–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Wapshere AJ (1984) Recent work in Europe on biological control of Hypericum perforatum (Guttiferae) for Australia. Entomophaga 29:145–156Google Scholar
  26. Weber E (2003) Invasive plant species of the world: a reference guide to environmental weeds. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Willis AJ, Forrester RI (2000) Is there evidence for the post-invasion evolution of increased size among invasive plant species? Ecol Lett 3:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wolfe LM (2002) Why alien invaders succeed: support for the escape-from-enemy hypothesis. Am Nat 160:705–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Recerca Ecològica i Aplicacions ForestalsUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain
  2. 2.Division of Biological SciencesUniversity of MontanaMissoulaUSA

Personalised recommendations