Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 315–331 | Cite as

Abiotic constraints and biotic resistance control the establishment success and abundance of invasive Humulus japonicus in riparian habitats

  • Guillaume Fried
  • Lucie Mahaut
  • Amandine Pinston
  • Marta Carboni
Original Paper

Abstract

Dispersal, abiotic and biotic constraints are all involved in explaining the success of invasive plants but how these factors influence the different life stages of an invader remains poorly known. Focusing on highly invaded riparian habitats we asked: (1) how do propagule pressure, resource availability and resident vegetation influence the success of the invasive Asian vine Humulus japonicus at different stages of its life cycle (i.e. seedling, vegetative and flowering) (2) what is the influence of increasing resource availability on the performance and trait plasticity of H. japonicus compared to a functionally similar co-occurring native species? To answer the first question we performed a repeated field survey along the Gardon River (S France) with detailed measurements of distance to the riverbed, soil characteristics, light availability, and resident vegetation cover. To answer the second question we used a greenhouse experiment to compare the biomass and three functional traits of H. japonicus and Galium aparine along a gradient of increasing water and nitrogen availability. Initial germination success was only determined by abiotic constraints, while the role of biotic resistance increased for later stages with establishment success favoured by the interaction of low resident vegetation cover and high soil fertility, and final integrated success favoured by high light availability. H. japonicus performed better and showed higher plasticity in plant height than G. aparine under increased resource availability while their biomass did not differ in the lower part of the resource gradient. Our study demonstrates that by combining field and experimental studies and analysing responses at different life stages we can gain a more complete understanding of how ecological filters shape successful invasions in the course of the life cycle.

Keywords

Community invasibility Ecological filters Fitness differences Life stages Niche differences Plasticity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for useful comments improving a previous version of the manuscript, Jean-Philippe Reygrobellet and the Syndicat Mixte d’Aménagement et de Gestion Equilibrée (SMAGE) des Gardons which funded the study and the two MSc grants of AM in 2013 and LM in 2014. We also thank Dane F. Panetta for useful comments on a previous version of the manuscript, Jean-Marie Ramel (Anses) and Aurélien Belaud for field assistance, and Bruno Serrate (CBGP) for access to greenhouse facilities.

Supplementary material

10530_2017_1533_MOESM1_ESM.docx (232 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 233 kb)

References

  1. Balogh L, Dancza I (2008) Humulus japonicus, an emerging invader in Hungary. In: Tokarska-Guzik B, Brock JH, Brundu G, Child L, Daelher CC, Pyšek P (eds) Plant invasions: human perceptions, ecological impacts and management. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 73–91Google Scholar
  2. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1):1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg JA, Meyer GA, Young EB (2016) Propagule pressure and environmental conditions interact to determine establishment success of an invasive plant species, glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus), across five different wetland habitat types. Biol Invasions 18(5):1363–1373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Booth BD, Murphy SP, Swanton CJ (2003) Weed ecology in natural and agricultural systems. CABI Publishing, WallingfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brunel S, Schrader G, Brundu G, Fried G (2010) Emerging invasive alien plants for the Mediterranean Basin. EPPO Bulletin 40:219–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Byun C, Blois S, Brisson J (2013) Plant functional group identity and diversity determine biotic resistance to invasion by an exotic grass. J Ecol 101(1):128–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byun C, de Blois S, Brisson J (2015) Interactions between abiotic constraint, propagule pressure, and biotic resistance regulate plant invasion. Oecologia 178:285–296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Carboni M, Münkemüller T, Lavergne S, Choler P, Borgy B, Violle C, Essl F, Roquet C, Munoz F, DivGrass Consortium, Thuiller W (2016) What it takes to invade grassland ecosystems: traits, introduction history and filtering processes. Ecol Lett 19:219–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Catford J, Jansson R, Nilsson C (2009) Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework. Divers Distrib 15(1):22–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chesson P (2000) Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31(1):343–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chytrý M, Jarošík V, Pyšek P, Hájek O, Knollová I, Tichý L, Danihelka J (2008) Separating habitat invasibility by alien plants from the actual level of invasion. Ecology 89:1541–1553CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invisibility. J Ecol 88:528–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dietz H, Edwards PJ (2006) Recognition that causal processes change during plant invasion helps explain conflicts in evidence. Ecology 87(6):1359–1367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dray S, Dufour AB (2007) The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. J Stat Softw 22(4):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eschtruth AK, Battles JJ (2011) The importance of quantifying propagule pressure to understand invasion: an examination of riparian forest invasibility. Ecology 92(6):1314–1322CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks. http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion
  17. Frazer GW, Canham CD, Lertzman KP (1999) Gap light analyzer (GLA): users manual and program documentation. Simon Frazer University, Burnaby, British Columbia, and the Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Fried G, Carboni M, Mahaut L, Violle C (in prep.) Improved understanding of the impact of an invasive plant on resident community diversity and homogenization using a trait-based approach: lessons from a two-year removal experimentGoogle Scholar
  19. Gallien L, Carboni M (2016) The community ecology of invasive species: where are we and what’s next? Ecography 39:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gallien L, Mazel F, Lavergne S, Renaud J, Douzet R, Thuiller W (2015) Contrasting the effects of environment, dispersal and biotic interactions to explain the distribution of invasive plants in alpine communities. Biol Invasions 17:1407–1423CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Gerhardt F, Collinge SK (2003) Exotic plant invasions of vernal pools in the Central Valley of California, USA. J Biogeogr 30:1043–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hood WG, Naiman RJ (2000) Vulnerability of riparian zones to invasion by exotic vascular plants. Plant Ecol 148:105–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hothorn T, Hornik K, Zeileis A (2006) Unbiased recursive partitioning: a conditional inference framework. J Comput Graph Stat 15(3):651–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Julve P (1998 +) Baseflor. Index botanique, écologique et chorologique de la flore de France. (1998) http://philippe.julve.pagesperso-orange.fr/catminat.htm. Accessed 21 Mar 2016
  25. Kleyer M, Bekker RM, Knevel IC, Bakker JP, Thompson K, Sonnenschein M, Poschlod P, Van Groenendael JM, Klimes L, Klimesová J, Klotz S, Rusch GM, Hermy M, Adriaens D, Boedeltje G, Bossuyt B, Dannemann A, Endels P, Götzenberger L, Hodgson JG, Jackel A-K, Kühn I, Kunzmann D, Ozinga WA, Römermann C, Stadler M, Schlegelmilch J, Steendam HJ, Tackenberg O, Wilmann B, Cornelissen JHC, Eriksson O, Garnier E, Peco B (2008) The LEDA Traitbase: a database of life-history traits of Northwest European flora. J Ecol 96:1266–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lemoine NP, Shue J, Verrico B, Erickson D, Kress WJ, Parker JD (2015) Phylogenetic relatedness and leaf functional traits, not introduced status, influence community assembly. Ecology 96:2605–2612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecol Lett 7:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. MacDougall AS, Turkington R (2005) Are invasive species the drivers or passengers of change in degraded ecosystems? Ecology 86:42–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. MacDougall AS, Gilbert B, Levine JM (2009) Plant invasions and the niche. J Ecol 97(4):609–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maechler M, Rousseeuw P, Struyf A, Hubert M, Hornik K (2017) Cluster: cluster analysis basics and extensions. R package version 2.0.6Google Scholar
  32. Mayfield MM, Levine JM (2010) Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities. Ecol Lett 13:1085–1093CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Moyle PB, Light T (1996) Biological invasions of fresh water: empirical rules and assembly theory. Biol Conserv 78:149–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pinston A (2013) Étude de la plasticité écologique d’une plante invasive: Humulus japonicus Siebold & Succ. M.Sc. dissertation. Anses, MontpellierGoogle Scholar
  35. Planty-Tabacchi AM, Tabacchi E, Naiman RJ, Deferrari C, Decamps H (1996) Invasibility of species rich communities in riparian zones. Conserv Biol 10:598–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2007) Traits associated with Invasiveness in alien plants: where do we stand? Ecol Stud 193:97–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/
  38. Richards CL, Bossdorf O, Muth NZ, Gurevitch J, Pigliucci M (2006) Jack of all trades, master of some? On the role of phenotypic plasticity in plant invasions. Ecol Lett 9:981–993CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Richardson DM, Holmes PM, Esler KJ, Galatowitsch SM, Stromberg JC, Kirkman SP, Pyšek P, Hobbs RJ (2007) Riparian vegetation: degradation, alien plant invasions, and restoration prospects. Divers Distrib 13:126–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (2016) Seed information database (SID). Version 7.1. http://data.kew.org/sid/. Accessed 24 July 2016
  41. Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stohlgren TJ, Binkley D, Chong GW, Kalkhan MA, Schell LD, Bull KA, Otsuki Y, Newman G, Bashkin M, Son Y (1999) Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity. Ecol Monogr 69:25–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thuiller W, Gallien L, Boulangeat I, de Bello F, Munkemuller T, Roquet C, Lavergne S (2010) Resolving Darwin’s naturalization conundrum: a quest for evidence. Divers Distrib 16(3):461–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tilman D (1999) The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology 80(5):1455–1474Google Scholar
  45. Tison J-M, de Foucault B (2014) Flora Gallica: Flore de France. Biotope, MèzeGoogle Scholar
  46. Truscott AM, Palmer SCF, Soulsby C, Hulme PE (2008) Assessing the vulnerability of riparian vegetation to invasion by Mimulus guttatus: relative importance of biotic and abiotic variables in determining species occurrence and abundance. Divers Distrib 14:412–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wallace JM, Prather TS (2016) Invasive spread dynamics of Anthriscus caucalis at an ecosystem scale: propagule pressure, grazing disturbance and plant community susceptibility in canyon grasslands. Biol Invasions 18(1):145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zefferman E, Stevens JT, Charles GK, Dunbar-Irwin M, Emam T, Fick S, Morales LV, Wolf KM, Young DJN, Young TP (2015) Plant communities in harsh sites are less invaded: a summary of observations and proposed explanations. AoB Plants 7:plv056. doi: 10.1093/aobpla/plv056 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unité Entomologie et Plantes Invasives, Laboratoire de la Santé des VégétauxAnsesMontferrier-sur-LezFrance
  2. 2.Université de MontpellierMontpellier Cedex 5France
  3. 3.Université de BourgogneDijonFrance
  4. 4.Université Grenoble Alpes, Laboratoire d’Écologie Alpine (LECA)CNRSGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations