Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 185, Issue 5, pp 3931–3957 | Cite as

The new flora of northeastern USA: quantifying introduced plant species occupancy in forest ecosystems

Article

Abstract

Introduced plant species have significant negative impacts in many ecosystems and are found in many forests around the world. Some factors linked to the distribution of introduced species include fragmentation and disturbance, native species richness, and climatic and physical conditions of the landscape. However, there are few data sources that enable the assessment of introduced species occupancy in native plant communities over broad regions. Vegetation data from 1,302 forest inventory plots across 24 states in northeastern and mid-western USA were used to examine and compare the distribution of introduced species in relation to forest fragmentation across ecological provinces and forest types, and to examine correlations between native and introduced species richness. There were 305 introduced species recorded, and 66 % of all forested plots had at least one introduced species. Forest edge plots had higher constancy and occupancy of introduced species than intact forest plots, but the differences varied significantly among ecological provinces and, to a lesser degree, forest types. Weak but significant positive correlations between native and introduced species richness were observed most often in intact forests. Rosa multiflora was the most common introduced species recorded across the region, but Hieracium aurantiacum and Epipactus helleborine were dominant in some ecological provinces. Identifying regions and forest types with high and low constancies and occupation by introduced species can help target forest stands where management actions will be the most effective. Identifying seemingly benign introduced species that are more prevalent than realized will help focus attention on newly emerging invasives.

Keywords

Plant invasions Forest plant communities Inventory Probabilistic sample Fragmentation Ecological regions 

Abbreviations

FIA

Forest Inventory and Analysis

VEG

Vegetation Indicator

NRS

Northern Research Station

r

Pearson correlation coefficient

References

  1. Bailey, R. G. (1995). Descriptions of the ecoregions of the Unites States. 2d ed. Rev. and expanded (1st ed. 1990). Misc. Publ. No. 1391 (rev.), Washington, DC: USDA Forest Service. 108 p. with separate map at 1:7500000.Google Scholar
  2. Bechtold, W. A., & Patterson, P. L. (Eds.). (2005). The enhanced Forest Inventory and Analysis Program—national sampling design and estimation procedures. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-80 (p. 85). Ashville: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station.Google Scholar
  3. Brothers, T. S., & Spingarn, A. (1992). Forest fragmentation and alien plant invasion of central Indiana old-growth forests. Conservation Biology, 6, 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, H., Qian, H., Spyreas, G., & Crossland, M. (2010). BIODIVERSITY RESEARCH: Native-exotic species richness relationships across spatial scales and biotic homogenization in wetland plant communities of Illinois, USA. Diversity and Distributions, 16, 737–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chytrý, M., Maskell, L. C., Pino, J., Pyšek, P., Vilà, M., Font, X., & Smart, S. M. (2008). Habitat invasions by alien plants: a quantitative comparison among Mediterranean, subcontinental and oceanic regions of Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45, 448–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cleland, D. T., Freeouf, J. A., Keys, J. E., Nowacki, G. J., Carpenter, C. A., & McNab, W. H. (2005). Ecological subregions; sections and subsections for the conterminous United States. [Map on CD-ROM [1:3,500,000]]. (A.M. Sloan, cartographer). Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.Google Scholar
  7. Crooks, J. A. (2005). Lag times and exotic species: the ecology and management of biological invasions in slow-motion. Ecoscience, 12, 316–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeGasperis, B. G., & Motzkin, G. (2007). Windows of opportunity: historical and ecological controls on Berberis thunbergii invasions. Ecology, 88(12), 3115–3125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delivering Alien Invasive Species Inventories for Europe (DAISIE). Available at http://www.europe-aliens.org/default.do. Accessed 10 July 2012.
  10. Dengler, J., Jansen, F., Glöckler, F., Peet, R. K., De Cáceres, M., Chytrý, M., Ewald, J., Oldeland, J., Lopez-Gonzalez, G., Finckh, M., Mucina, L., Rodwell, J. S., Schaminée, J. H. J., & Spencer, N. (2011). The Global Index of Vegetation-Plot Databases (GIVD): a new resource for vegetation science. Journal of Vegetation Science, 22, 582–597. doi:10.1111/j.1654-1103.2011.01265.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gartner, D., & Schulz, B. (2009). The vegetation diversity and structure indicator. In J. A. Westfall (Ed.), 2009. FIA national assessment of data quality for forest health indicators. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-53 (p. 80). Newtown Square: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Service.Google Scholar
  12. Gray, A. N. (2009). Monitoring and assessment of regional impacts from exotic invasive plants in forests of the Pacific coast, USA. In R. K. Kohli, S. Jose, H. P. Singh, & D. R. Batish (Eds.), Invasive plants and forest ecosystems (pp. 217–235). Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gray, A. N., & Azuma, D. L. (2005). Repeatability and implementation of a forest vegetation indicator. Ecological Indicators, 5(2005), 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heinz Center. (2006). Filling the gaps: Priority data needs and key management challenges for national reporting on ecosystem condition (p. 104). Washington: H. John Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment.Google Scholar
  15. Homer, C., Huang, C., Yang, L., Wylie, B., & Coan, M. (2004). Development of a 2001 National Landcover Database for the United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 70, 829–840.Google Scholar
  16. Huebner, C. D., & Tobin, P. C. (2006). Invisibility of mature and 15-year-old deciduous forests by exotic invaders. Plant Ecology, 186, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hutchinson, T. F., & Vankat, J. L. (1997). Invasibility and effects of amur honeysuckle in southwestern Ohio forests. Conservation Biology, 11, 117–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ibáñez, I., Silander, J. A., Jr., Allen, J. M., Treanor, S. A., & Wilson, A. (2009). Identifying hotspots for plant invasions and forecasting focal points of further spread. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46, 1219–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Knapp, L. B., & Canham, C. D. (2000). Invasion of an old growth forest in New York by Alianthus altissima: sapling growth and recruitment in canopy gaps. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society, 127, 307–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kuchler, A. W. (1969). Vegetation of Kansas on maps. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, 72(2), 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuhman, T. R., Pearson, S. M., & Turner, M. G. (2010). Effects of land-use history and the contemporary landscape on non-native plant invasion at the local and regional scales in the forest-dominated southern Appalachians. Landscape Ecology, 25, 1433–1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mack, R. N. (2003). Plant naturalizations and invasions in the eastern United States: 1634–1860. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 90, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marchand, P., & Houle, G. (2006). Spatial patterns of plant species along a forest edge: what are their determinants? Forest Ecology and Management, 223, 113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McNab, W. H., Cleland, D. T., Freeouf, J. A., Keys, J. E., Nowacki, G. J., Carpenter, C. A., & comps. (2005). Description of ecological subregions: sections of the conterminous United States [CD-ROM] (p. 80). Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.Google Scholar
  25. Meekins, F. J., & McCarthy, B. C. (2001). Effects of environmental variation on the invasive success of a nonindigenous forest herb. Ecological Applications, 11, 1336–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moser, W. K., Hansen, M. D., & McWilliams, W. H. (2009). Relationship of invasive ground cover plant presence to evidence of disturbance in forests of the upper Midwest of the United States. In R. K. Kohli, S. Jose, H. P. Singh, & D. R. Batish (Eds.), Invasive plants and forest ecosystems (pp. 29–58). Boca Ratan: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  27. North American Weed Management Association (NAWMA). (2002). North American invasive plant mapping standard. http://www.nawma.org/Mapping/MappingMain.pdf. Accessed 24 February 2012.
  28. Noss, R. F. (1999). Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: a suggested framework and indicators. Forest Ecology and Management, 115, 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ohlemüller, R., Walker, S., & Wilson, J. B. (2006). Local vs regional factors as determinants of the invasibility of indigenous forest fragments by alien plant species. Oikos, 112, 493–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olson, C., & Cholewa, A. F. (2009). A guide to nonnative invasive plants inventoried in the north by Forest Inventory and Analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-52 (p. 194). Newtown Square: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station.Google Scholar
  31. Omernik, J. M. (1987). Ecoregions of the conterminous United States, Map (scale 1:7,500,000). Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77, 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pimentel, D., Zuniga, R., & Morrison, D. (2005). Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics, 52, 273–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pluess, T., Cannon, R., JarošíK, V., Pergl, J., Pyšek, P., & Bacher, S. (2012). When are eradication campaigns successful? A test of common assumptions. Biological Invasions. doi:10.1007/s10530-011-0160-2.
  34. Pregitzer, K. S., Goebel, P. C., & Wigley, T. B. (2001). Evaluating forestland classification schemes as tools for maintaining biodiversity. Journal of Forestry, 99, 33–40.Google Scholar
  35. Reichard, S. H., & White, P. (2001). Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States. BioScience, 51, 103–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Richardson, D. M., & Pyšek, P. (2006). Plant invasions: merging concepts of species invasiveness and community invisibility. Progress in Physical Geography, 30(3), 409–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Richardson, D. M., Pyšek, P., Rejmánek, M., Barbour, M. G., Panetta, F. D., & West, C. J. (2000). Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions, 6, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Riitters, K. H., Wickham, J. D., O’Neill, R. V., Jones, K. B., Smith, E. R., Coulston, J. W., Wade, T. G., & Smith, J. H. (2002). Fragmentation of continental United States forests. Ecosystems, 5, 815–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. SAS Institute. (2011). SAS 9.3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. Online documentation http://support.sas.com/documentation. Accessed 27 February 2012.
  40. Schulte, L. A., Mottl, E. C., & Palik, B. J. (2011). The association of two invasive shrubs, common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) and Tartarian honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), with oak communities in the midwestern United States. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 41, 1981–1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schulz, B. K., Bechtold, W. A., & Zarnoch, S. J. (2009). Sampling and estimation procedures for the vegetation diversity and structure indicator. PNW-GTR-781 (p. 53). Portland: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.Google Scholar
  42. Schulz, B., Moser, W. K., Olson, C., & Johnson, K. (2012). Regional distribution of introduced plant species in the forests of the northeastern corner of the United States. In K. M. Potter, B. L. Conkling, (Eds.), Draft Forest Health Monitoring 2011 National Technical Report, Version 1/20/2012. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Health Monitoring Program. 123 p. http://www.fhm.fs.fed.us/pubs/misc/draft_FHM_2010_National_Technical_Report.pdf. Accessed 24 February 2012
  43. Scott, W. A., & Hallam, C. J. (2002). Assessing species misidentification rates through quality assurance of vegetation monitoring. Plant Ecology, 165(1), 101–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stohlgren, T. J., Binkely, D., Chong, G. W., Kalkhan, M. A., Schell, L. A., Bull, K. A., Otsuki, Y., Newman, G., Baskin, M., & Son, Y. (1999). Exotic plant species invade hotspots of native plant diversity. Ecological Monographs, 69(1), 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stohlgren, T. J., Barnett, D., Flather, C., Kartesz, J., & Peterjohn, B. (2005). Plant species invasions along the latitudinal gradient in the United States. Ecology, 89(9), 2298–2309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Swearingen, J., Slattery, B., Reshetiloff, K., & Zwicker, S. (2010). Plant invaders of mid-Atlantic natural areas (4th ed., p. 168). Washington: National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  47. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2007). Forest inventory and analysis national core field guide: field data collection procedures for phase 3 plots. Version 4.0. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington Office. Internal report. On file with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (available online at: http://fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc/).
  48. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). (2000). The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge USA (http://npdc.usda.gov/).
  49. Vilà, M., & Ibàñez, I. (2011). Plant invasions in the landscape. Landscape Ecology, 26, 461–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Warren, R. J., Bahn, V., Kramer, T. D., Tang, Y., & Bradford, M. A. (2011). Performance and reproduction of an exotic invader across temperate forest gradients. Ecosphere, 2(2) Article 14. www.esajournals.org.
  51. Webster, C. R., Jenkins, M. A., & Jose, S. (2006). Woody invaders and the challenges they pose to forest ecosystems in the eastern United States. Journal of Forestry, 104(7), 366–374.Google Scholar
  52. Wiegmann, S. M., & Waller, D. M. (2006). Fifty years of change in north upland forest understories: identity and traits of “winner” and “loser” plant species. Biological Conservation, 129, 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Woodall, C. W., Conkling, B. L., Amacher, M. C., Coulston, J. W., Jovan, S., Perry, C. H., et al. (2010). The Forest Inventory and Analysis Database Version 4.0: database description and users manual for phase 3. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-61 (p. 180). Newtown Square: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station.Google Scholar
  54. Woodall, C. M., Amacher, M. C., Bechtold, W. A., Coulston, J. W., Jovan, S., Perry, C. H., Randolph, K. C., Schulz, B. K., Smith, G. C., Tkacz, B., & Will-Wolf, S. (2011). Status and future of the forest health indicators program of the USA. Environ Monitoring and Assessment, 177, 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yates, E. D., Levai, D. F., & Williams, C. L. (2004). Recruitment of three non-native invasive plants into a fragmented forest in southern Illinois. Forest Ecology and Management, 190, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zenner, E. K., Peck, J. E., Brubaker, K., Gamble, B., Gilbert, C., Heggenstaller, D., Hickey, J., Sitch, K., & Withington, R. (2010). Combining ecological classification systems and conservation filters could facilitate the integration of wildlife and forest management. Journal of Forestry, 108, 296–300.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. (outside the USA) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research StationAnchorageUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research StationCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations