Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Drivers of species richness, biomass, and dominance of invasive macrophytes in temperate lakes

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biological Invasions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Presence and abundance of invasive species depend on likelihood of introduction and environmental limitations to their distributions. Propagule pressure and anthropogenic disturbance are hypothesized to increase invasions, yet assessing the importance of propagule pressure and anthropogenic factors independently is challenging, and properties of invaded systems (e.g., habitat availability) likely contribute to invasions. We sampled macrophyte assemblages in 20 lakes in New York, varying in boater visitations and number of previous waterbodies visited, to test if increased propagule risk (proxy for propagule pressure measuring potential for introducing invasives from different sources) resulted in greater species richness, biomass (g/m2) and dominance (% invasive biomass) of invasive macrophytes. We then tested watershed land use, in-lake water properties, and lake morphology on presence, abundance, and dominance of invasive macrophytes. Increased propagule risk resulted in greater species richness of invasive macrophytes. In invaded lakes, increased abundance of invasive macrophytes was correlated with increased agriculture in watersheds and littoral:total area. Increased dominance of invasive macrophytes was observed in lakes with greater littoral:total areas. Results suggest propagule risk can explain spatial variability in macrophyte invasions, while area-specific biomass in invaded lakes can be correlated with watershed and in-lake water properties. In lakes with increased suitable habitat (relative proportion of littoral:total area ratio), invasive macrophytes may dominate aquatic plant assemblages. Many factors correlated with the abundance of invasive macrophytes are not easily managed (e.g., watershed agricultural land use and lake morphology). Limiting introductions of propagules is likely the best approach to prevent macrophyte invasions, especially at high risk lakes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson LG, Rocliffe S, Haddaway NR, Dunn AM (2015) The role of tourism and recreation in the spread of non-native species: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 10:e0140833

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle KE, Downing JA (2001) The influence of watershed land use on lake N:P in a predominately agricultural landscape. Limnol Oceanogr 46:970–975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrhenius O (1921) Species and area. J Ecol 9:95–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baruch Y (1999) Response rate in academic studies – a comparative analysis. Hum Relat 52(4):421–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaulac MN, Reckhow KH (1982) An examination of land use – nutrient export relationships. Water Resour Bull 18:1013–1024

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown JE, Stepien CA (2009) Invasion genetics of the Eurasian round goby in North America: tracing source and spread patterns. Mol Ecol 18:64–79

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Browne RA (1981) Lakes as islands: biogeographic distribution, turnover rates, and species composition in lakes of central New York. J Biogeogr 8:75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan LAJ, Padilla DK (1999) Estimating the probability of long-distance overland dispersal of invading alien species. Ecol Appl 9:254–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan LAJ, Padilla DK (2000) Predicting the likelihood of Eurasian watermilfoil presence in lakes, a macrophyte monitoring tool. Ecol Appl 10:1442–1455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwell TB, Engelhardt KAM (2008) Effects of pre-existing submerged vegetation and propagule pressure on the invasion success of Hydrilla verticillata. J Appl Ecol 45:515–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers PA, Kalff J (1985) Depth distribution and biomass of submerged aquatic macrophyte communities in relation to Secchi depth. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 42:701–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colautti RI, Grigorovich IA, MacIsaac HJ (2006) Propagule pressure: a null model for biological invasions. Biol Invasions 8:1023–1037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crow GE, Hellquist CB (2000a) Aquatic and wetland plants of northeastern North America. Volume 1. Pteridophytes, gymnosperms and angiosperms: dicotyledons. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow GE, Hellquist CB (2000b) Aquatic and wetland plants of northeastern North America. Volume 2. Angiosperms: monocotyledons. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  • Debinski DM, Holt RD (2000) A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments. Conserv Biol 14:342–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dlugosch KM, Parker IM (2008) Founding events in species invasions: genetic variation, adaptive evolution, and the role of multiple introductions. Mol Ecol 17:431–449

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drake JM, Lodge DM (2006) Allee effects, propagule pressure and the probability of establishment: risk analysis for biological invasions. Biol Invasions 8(2):365–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (2011) ArcGIS desktop: release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A (2007) G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 39:175–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Funk JL (2008) Differences in plasticity between invasive and native plants form a low resource environment. J Ecol 96:1162–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallardo B, Clavero M, Sanchez MI, Vila M (2015) Global ecological impacts of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems. Glob Chang Biol 22:151–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Ellison AM (2013) A primer of ecological statistics, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Gratwicke B, Speight MR (2005) The relationship between fish species richness, abundance and habitat complexity in a range of shallow tropical marine habitats. J Fish Biol 66:650–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heck KL, Wetstone GS (1977) Habitat complexity and invertebrate species richness and abundance in tropical seagrass meadows. J Biogeogr 4:135–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmlund E, Coleates H, Henderson L, O’Reilly S, Parslow J, Paul E, Regalado S, Sann J, Wiley K (2016) Adirondack watershed institute stewardship program: summary of programs and research 2016. Paul Smith’s College Adirondack Watershed Institute Report No. AWI-2017-01. 217 p

  • Homer CG, Dewitz JA, Yang L, Jin S, Danielson P, Xian G, Coulston J, Herold ND, Wickham JD, Megown K (2015) Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous Unites States – Representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 81:345–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Horsh EJ, Lewis DJ (2009) The effects of aquatic invasive species on property values: evidence from a quasi-experiment. Land Econ 85:391–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jauni M, Gripenberg S, Ramula S (2015) Non-native plant species benefit from disturbance: a meta-analysis. Oikos 124:122–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings MJ, Emmons EE, Hatzenbeler GR, Edwards C, Bozek MA (2003) Is littoral habitat affected by residential development and land use in watersheds of Wisconsin lakes? Lake Reserv Manag 19:272–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson LE, Ricciardi A, Carlton JT (2001) Overland dispersal of aquatic invasive species: a risk assessment of transient recreational boating. Ecol Appl 11:1789–1799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirk H, Paul J, Straka J, Freeland JR (2011) Long-distance dispersal and high genetic diversity are implicated in the invasive spread of the common reed, Phragmites australis (Poaceae), in northeastern North America. Am J Bot 98:1180–1190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn DD, Walsh DM (1994) Plant species richness – the effect of island size and habitat diversity. J Ecol 82(2):367–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laxson CL, Yerger EC, Regalado SA, Kelting DL (2016) Adirondack lake assessment program: 2015 report. Paul Smith’s College Adirondack Watershed Institute. Report No. PSCAWI 2016–04. 181 p

  • Le Roux JJ, Wieczorek AM, Meyer J-M (2008) Genetic diversity and structure of the invasive tree Miconia calvescens in Pacific islands. Divers Distrib 14:935–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SW, Hwang SJ, Lee SB, Hwang HS, Sung HC (2009) Landscape ecological approach to the relationships of land-use patterns in watersheds to water quality characteristics. Landsc Urban Plan 92:80–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung B, Bossenbroek JM, Lodge DM (2006) Boats, pathways, and aquatic biological invasions: estimating dispersal potential with gravity models. Biol Invasions 8:241–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo VB, Levings CD, Chan KMA (2012) Quantifying propagule pressure of aquatic invasive species from the commercial shipping industry in Canada. Mar Pollut Bull 64:295–302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luhtala H, Tolvanen H (2013) Optimizing the use of Secchi depth as a proxy for euphotic depth in coastal waters: an empirical study from the Baltic Sea. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2:1153–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchetti MP, Moyle PB, Levine R (2004) Alien fishes in California watersheds: characteristics of successful and failed invaders. Ecol Appl 14:587–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller N, Kishbaugh S (2015) New York Citizen Statewide Lake Assessment Program: sampling protocol – physical and chemical sampling. Available from http://nysfola.mylaketown.com/uploads/tinymce/nysfola/2015%20CSLAP%20protocol.pdf

  • Pulliam HR (1988) Sources, sinks, and population regulation. Am Nat 132:652–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (1996) What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:1655–1661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roman J, Darling JA (2007) Paradox lost: genetic diversity and the success of aquatic invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 22:454–464

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rothlisberger JD, Chadderton WL, McNulty J, Lodge DM (2010) Aquatic invasive species transport via trailered boats: what is being moved, who is moving it, and what can be done. Fisheries 35:121–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz GM, Fofonoff PW, Ashton G, Minton MS, Miller AW (2013) Geographic variation in marine invasions among large estuaries: effects of ships and time. Ecol Appl 23:311–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schindler DW, Hecky RE, Findlay DL, Stainton MP, Parker BR, Paterson MJ, Beaty KG, Lyng M, Kasian SEM (2008) Eutrophication of lakes cannot be controlled by reducing nitrogen input: results of a 37-year whole-ecosystem experiment. PNAS 105:11254–11258

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sepulveda AJ (2018) Novel application of explicit dynamics occupancy models to ongoing aquatic invasions. J Appl Ecol 55:917–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shea K, Chesson P (2002) Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 17:170–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (2009) The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:81–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soranno PA, Hubler SL, Carpenter SR, Lathrop RC (1996) Phosphorus loads to surface waters: a simple model to account for spatial pattern of land use. Ecol Appl 6:865–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vis C, Hudon C, Carignan R (2003) An evaluation of approaches used to determine the distribution and biomass of emergent and submerged aquatic macrophytes over large spatial scales. Aquat Bot 77:187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitousek P, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmanek M, Westbrooks R (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. N Z J Ecol 21:1–16

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the stakeholders of the Cortland-Onondaga Federation of Kettle Lake Associations (C-OFOKLA), and the stakeholders of Echo Lake and Gatehouse Pond, who graciously supported this project. Thanks to the Adirondack Watershed Institute at Paul Smith’s College for publicly available boat launch data for the Adirondacks. This project was supported by the Edna Bailey Sussman Foundation, the Samuel Grober Graduate Research Fellowship program, and the Northeast Aquatic Plant Management Society (NEAPMS) Graduate Scholarship program. We thank Tony Eallonardo for input on an earlier version of this manuscript. The Associate Editor and two anonymous reviewers provided insightful comments that improved this manuscript. Ryan Smith, Chad Walz, and Jacob Gillette assisted with field data collection. Tyler Mack, Greg Kronish, Peter Zimmer, and Patricia Dombrowski assisted with laboratory analyses. Boat launch and homeowner questionnaires for a subset of lakes were conducted with approvals of the Syracuse University Institutional Review Board (IRB, 11-182). ASB and KLS participated in field work in support of this research. ASB and VAL developed and administered questionnaires. ASB prepared the manuscript with assistance from VAL and KLS.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of New York, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA

    Andrew S. Brainard & Kimberly L. Schulz

  2. Ramboll, 333 West Washington Street, Syracuse, NY, 13202, USA

    Andrew S. Brainard

  3. Department of Environmental Studies, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of New York, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA

    Valerie A. Luzadis

Authors
  1. Andrew S. Brainard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Valerie A. Luzadis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kimberly L. Schulz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew S. Brainard.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brainard, A.S., Luzadis, V.A. & Schulz, K.L. Drivers of species richness, biomass, and dominance of invasive macrophytes in temperate lakes. Biol Invasions 23, 1069–1085 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02418-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02418-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation