Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 16, Issue 12, pp 2529–2541 | Cite as

Community control on growth and survival of an exotic shrub

  • Zachary T. Brym
  • David Allen
  • Inés Ibáñez
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

A top priority in the field of invasion ecology is to investigate the mechanisms that lead to the successful establishment and spread of harmful exotic species. Studying plant invasions in the context of the invaded community can help us to understand those mechanisms. In this study, we follow a community approach where we describe establishment and growth patterns of an exotic shrub, Elaeagnus umbellata, with respect to the local woody plant community. Primarily focusing on a forest ecosystem, we expect light availability to be a driving factor in the recruitment of E. umbellata individuals; however, this is not supported for seedling recruitment as light becomes detrimental to survival in conditions exceeding 30 % full sun. Instead, growth of first year seedlings is primarily affected by soil moisture. Forest census data of adult individuals show that growth of E. umbellata is affected by light and small-scale neighborhood density (i.e., limited in the understory by space or resources), suggesting a shift in resource requirement. Overall, our study indicates that although E. umbellata individuals are likely to recruit and persist in the understory, successful growth to adulthood is controlled by competitive interactions.

Keywords

Temperate forest community Empirical modeling Transplant experiment Light competition Biotic resistance Bayesian analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

A number of individuals have contributed constructive criticism and guidance throughout the writing of this manuscript. Thank you to the D.O. et al., D. R. Zak, J. Lake, A. Ostling, E. Werner, and C. Davis. Funding for the forest census came from a USDA McIntire-Stennis Grant.

Supplementary material

10530_2014_683_MOESM1_ESM.doc (332 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 331 kb)

References

  1. Adams TP, Purves DW, Pacala SW (2007) Understanding height-structured competition in forests: is there an R* for light? Proc R Soc B 274:3039–3048PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmad SD, Sabir SM, Zubair M (2006) Ecotypes diversity in autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata Thunb.), a single plant with multiple micronutrient genes. Chem Ecol 22(6):509–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen D, Vandermeer J, Perfecto I (2009) When are habitat patches really islands? For Ecol Manag 258:2033–2036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson MC (1964) Light relations of terrestrial plant communities and their measurement. Biol Rev 39:425–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes BV, Wagner WH (2004) Michigan trees: a guide to the trees of the Great Lakes region (revised and edited). University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  6. Bazzaz FA (1979) The physiological ecology of plant succession. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 10:351–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Black BL, Fordham IM, Perkins-Veazie P (2005) Autumnberry (Elaeagnus umbellata): a potential cash crop. J Am Pomol Soc 59(3):125–134Google Scholar
  8. Brym ZT, Lake JK, Allen D, Ostling A (2011) Plant functional traits suggest novel ecological strategy for an invasive shrub in an understory woody plant community. J Appl Ecol 48:1098–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callaway RM, Schaffner U, Thelen GC, Khamraev A et al (2012) Impact of Acroptilon repens on co-occurring native plants is greater in the invader’s non-native range. Biol Invasions 14(6):1143–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Catling PM, Oldham MJ, Sutherland DA, Brownell VR, Larson BMH (1997) The recent spread of Autumn-olive, Elaeagnus umbellata, into Southern Ontario and its current status. Can Field Nat 111(3):376–380Google Scholar
  11. Clark JS (2005) Why environmental scientists are becoming Bayesians. Ecol Lett 8:2–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Congdon P (2003) Applied Bayesian modelling. Wiley, West SussexCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cox D (1972) Regression models and life-tables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B 34:187–220Google Scholar
  14. Diez JM, Williams PA, Randall RP, Sullivan JJ et al (2009) Learning from failures: testing broad taxonomic hypotheses about plant naturalization. Ecol Lett 12:1174–1183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ebinger JE (1983) A potential problem in natural areas management in Illinois. Nat Area J 3:3–6Google Scholar
  16. EDDMapS (2014) Early detection and distribution mapping system. University of Georgia. http://www.eddmaps.org/. Last accessed 11 Mar 2014
  17. Edgin B, Ebinger JE (2001) Control of autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata Thunb.) at Beall Woods Nature Preserve, Illinois, USA. Nat Area J 21(4):386–388Google Scholar
  18. Engberg CA, Austin FR (1974) Soil Survey of Livingston County, Michigan. USDA Soil Conservation Service. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/surveylist/soils/survey/state/?stateId=MI
  19. Enquist BJ, Brown JH, West GB (1998) Allometric scaling of plant energetics and population density. Nature 395:163–165Google Scholar
  20. Fargione JE, Tilman D (2005) Diversity decreases invasion via both sampling and complementarity effects. Ecol Lett 8:604–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gabler CA, Siemann E (2012) Environmental variability and ontogenetic niche shifts in exotic plants may govern reinvasion pressure in restorations of invaded ecosystems. Rest Ecol 20(5):545–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB (1995) Bayesian data analysis. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Greiling D (2000) Detailed ESGR soils map. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology and E.S. George Reserve. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sarhaus/courses/NRE530_F1999/04dunrie/detsoils.html
  24. Hunt R (1982) Plant growth curves. The functional approach to plant growth analysis. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Ibáñez I, Schupp EW (2001) Positive and negative interactions between environmental conditions affecting Cercocarpus ledifolius seedling survival. Oecologia 129(4):543–550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnstone IM (1986) Plant invasion windows: a time-based classification of invasion potential. Biol Rev 61:369–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jonsen KH, Bongarten BC (1992) Relationships between nitrogen-fixation and growth in Robina pseudoacacia seedlings—a functional growth analysis approach using N-15. Physiol Plant 85(1):77–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keddy P (1992) Assembly and response rules: two goals for predictive community ecology. J Veg Sci 3(2):157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy PG, Hausmann NJ, Wenk EH, Dawson TE (2004) The importance of seed reserves for seedling performance: an integrated approach using morphological, physiological, and stable isotope techniques. Oecologia 141:547–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. LaFleur NE, Rubega MA, Elphick CS (2007) Invasive fruits, novel foods, and choice: an investigation of European starling and American robin frugivory. Wilson J Ornithol 119(3):429–438Google Scholar
  31. Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecol Lett 7:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lunn D, Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A, Best N (2009) The BUGS project: evolution, critique, and future directions. Stat Med 28:3049–3067PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maroco JP, Rodrigues ML, Lopes C, Chaves MM (2002) Limitations to leaf photosynthesis in field-grown grapevine under drought—metabolic and modelling approaches. Funct Plant Biol 29(4):451–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martin PH, Marks PL (2006) Intact forests provide only weak resistance to a shade-tolerant invasive Norway Maples (Acer platanoides L.). J Ecol 94:1070–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McCarthy-Neumann S, Ibáñez I (2012) Tree range expansion may be enhanced by escape from negative plant–soil feedbacks. Ecology 93(12):2637–2649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mwangi PN, Schmitz M, Scherber C, Roscher C et al (2007) Niche pre-emption increases with species richness in experimental plant communities. J Ecol 95:65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Naeem S, Knops JMH, Tilman D, Howe KM et al (2000) Plant diversity increases resistance to invasion in the absence of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos 91(1):97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Orr SP, Rudgers JA, Clay K (2005) Invasive plants can inhibit native tree seedlings: testing allelopathic mechanisms. Plant Ecol 181:153–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pashke MW, Dawson JO, David MB (1989) Soil nitrogen mineralization in plantation of Juglans nigra interplanted with actinhorhizal Elaeagnus umbellata or Alnus glutinosa. Plant Soil 118:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pimentel D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2000) Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50(1):53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pokorny ML, Sheley RL, Zabinski CA, Engel RE et al (2005) Plant functional group diversity as a mechanism for invasion resistance. Restor Ecol 13(3):448–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Preston DL, Henderson JS, Johnson PTJ (2012) Community ecology of invasions: direct and indirect effects of multiple invasive species on aquatic communities. Ecology 93(6):1254–1261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2007) Ecological Studies, chap 7: traits associated with invasiveness in alien plants: where do we stand?, vol 193. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  44. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (1996) What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:1655–1661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Richardson DM, Bond WJ (1991) Determinants of plant distribution: evidence from pine invasion. Am Nat 137(5):639–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM et al (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Severtson EM. (2005) Monitoring an exotic species invasion using high resolution remote sensing. Master’s Thesis, University of Michigan, School of Natural ResourcesGoogle Scholar
  48. Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:170–176Google Scholar
  49. Theoharides KA, Dukes JS (2007) Plant invasion across space and time: factors affecting nonindigenous species success during four stages of invasion. New Phytol 176:256–273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vitousek PM, Dantonio CM, Loope LL, Westbrooks R (1996) Biological invasions as global environmental change. Am Sci 84(5):468–478Google Scholar
  51. Yates ED, Levia DF, Williams CL (2004) Recruitment of three non-native invasive plants into a fragmented forest in southern Illinois. For Ecol Manag 190:119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyMiddlebury CollegeMiddleburyUSA
  3. 3.School of Natural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options