Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Manipulating propagule pressure to test the invasibility of subtidal marine habitats

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

Abstract

Global patterns show that estuaries are more invaded than open coasts and artificial habitats are more invaded than natural ones. The contention that artificial habitats in estuaries are more invasible than other habitats may result from variation in propagule supply, however, as artificial habitats are closely linked to vectors of non-native propagules, such as ships and boats. True comparisons of habitat invasibility require manipulations of propagule pressure, which has been historically difficult in marine systems. Using in-situ larval dosing, we delivered propagules of the widespread invasive ascidian Botrylloides violaceus into field mesocosms and assessed how habitat type (floating dock vs. benthic rock), resource availability (occupied vs. unoccupied plates), and propagule number (5, 25 and 50 larvae 225 cm−2) affected settlement (survival after 24 h) and recruitment (survival after 56 days) success. In-situ larval dosing was successful, and after eight weeks there were significant differences in recruitment due to initial dose-size, habitat type, and space availability. At the habitat scale, despite equal propagule delivery, PVC plates in natural benthic rock were not equally invasible and few propagules survived to recruitment. At the organism scale, increased habitat complexity, through facilitation by established fouling species, rather than freedom from space competitors, appears to be more important for B. violaceus to establish. Our results offer greater mechanistic understanding of broader invasion patterns between artificial and natural habitats. This work extends the possibilities for further research to counteract the confounding issue of unknown and unknowable propagule delivery when attempting to explain variation in invasion success.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altieri AH, Silliman BR, Bertness MD (2007) Hierarchical organization via a facilitation cascade in intertidal cordgrass bed communities. Am Nat 169(2):195–206

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barton AM, Brewster LB, Cox AN, Prentiss NK (2004) Non-indigenous woody invasive plants in a rural New England town. Biol Invasions 6:205–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1):1–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman J, Harris L, Lambert W, Buttrick M, Dufresne M (1992) Recent invasions of the Gulf of Maine: three contrasting ecological histories. Conserv Biol 6(3):435–441

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White J-SS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24(3):127–135

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd HC, Brown SK, Harp JA, Weisman IL (1986) Growth and sexual maturation of laboratory-cultured Monterey Botryllus schlosseri. Biol Bull 170(1):91–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton-Simmons KH, Abbott KC (2008) Short- and long-term effects of disturbance and propagule pressure on a biological invasion. J Ecol 96:68–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess SC, Marshall DJ (2011) Are numbers enough? Colonizer phenotype and abundance interact to affect population dynamics. J Anim Ecol 80:681–687

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burke MJW, Grime JP (1996) An experimental study of plant community invasibility. Ecology 77:776–790

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlton JT (1979) History, biogeography, and ecology of the introduced marine ad estuarine invertebrates of the Pacific Coast of North America. PhD dissertation, University of California, Davis, California, USA

  • Carlton JT (1996) Patterns, process, and prediction in marine invasion ecology. Biol Conserv 78:97–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Chytrý M, Jarosik 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(6):1541–1553

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clark GF, Johnston EL (2005) Manipulating larval supply in the field: a controlled study of marine invasibility. Mar Eco Prog Ser 298:9–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark GF, Johnston EL (2009) Propagule pressure and disturbance interact to overcome biotic resistance to marine invertebrate communities. Oikos 118:1679–1686

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark GF, Johnston EL (2011) Temporal change in the diversity-invasibility relationship in the presence of a disturbance regime. Ecol Lett 14:52–57

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Antonio CM (1993) Mechanisms controlling invasion of coastal plant communities by the alien succulent Carpobrotus edulis. Ecology 74:83–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn KA, Johnston EL, Glasby TM (2009) Shallow moving structures promote marine invader dominance. Biofouling 25(3):277–287

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dafforn KA, Glasby TM, Johnston EL (2012) Comparing the invasibility of experimental “reefs” with field observations of natural reefs and artificial structures. PLoS ONE 7(5):e38124. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0038124

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Pelsor M (2001) Experimental support for a resource-based mechanistic model of invasibility. Ecol Lett 4:421–428

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K (2000) Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol 88:528–534

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra J, Harris LG, Westerman E (2007) Distribution and long-term temporal patterns of four invasive colonial ascidians in the Gulf of Maine. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumont CP, Gaymer CF, Theil M (2011) Predation contributes to invasion resistance of benthic communities against the nonindigenous tunicate Ciona intestinalis. Biol Invasions 13:2023–2034

    Google Scholar 

  • Epelbaum A, Therriualt TW, Paulson A, Pearce CM (2009) Botryllid tunicates: culture techniques and experimental procedures. Aquat Invasions 4(1):111–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Eschtruth AK, Battles JJ (2011) The importance of quantifying propagule pressure to understand invasion: an examination of riparian forest invasibility. Ecology 92(6):1314–1322

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fofonoff PW, Ruiz GM, Steves B, Carlton JT (2003) National Exotic Marine and Estuarine Species Information System. http://invasions.si.edu/nemesis/. Accessed 28 Mar 2013

  • Forrest BM, Fletcher LM, Atalah J, Piola RF, Hopkins GA (2013) Predation limits spread of Didemnum vexillum into natural habitats from refuges on anthropogenic structures. PLoS ONE 8(12):e82229. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082229

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth DM, Duncan RP (2001) Propagule size and the relative success of exotic ungulate and bird introductions to New Zealand. Am Nat 157:583–595

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fournier DA, Skaug HJ, Ancheta J, Ianelli J, Magnusson A, Maunder M, Nielsen A, Sibert J (2012) AD Model Builder: using automatic differentiation for statistical inference of highly parameterized complex nonlinear models. Optim Methods Softw 27:233–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Gittenberger A (2007) Recent population expansions of non-native ascidians in the Netherlands. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 342:122–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasby TM (2001) Development of sessile marine assemblages on fixed versus moving substrata. Mar Eco Prog Ser 215:37–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasby TM, Connell SD, Holloway M, Hewitt C (2007) Nonindigenous biota on anthropogenic structures: could habitat creation facilitate biological invasions? Mar Biol 151:887–895

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedge LH, O’Connor WA, Johnston EL (2012) Manipulating the intrinsic parameters of propagule pressure: implications for bio-invasion. Ecosphere 3(6):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs RJ (1989) The nature and effects of disturbance relative to invasions. In: Drake JA et al (eds) Biological Invasions: A Global Perspective, SCOPE 37. Wiley, Chichester, pp 61–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt HL, Scheibling RE (1997) Role of early post-settlement mortality in recruitment of benthic marine invertebrates. Mar Eco Prog Ser 155:269–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeschke JM (2014) General hypotheses in invasion ecology. Divers Distrib 20:1229–1234

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston EL, Piola RF, Clark GF (2009) The role of propagule pressure in invasion success. In: Rilov G, Crooks J (eds) Marine bioinvasions: ecology, conservation, and management perspectives. Springer, Berlin, pp 133–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Kremer LP, da Rocha RM (2016) The biotic resistance role of fish predation in fouling communities. Biol Invasions 18:3223–3227

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert G, Sanamyan K (2001) Distaplia alaskensis sp. Nov. (Ascidiacea, Aplousobranchia) and other new ascidian records from south-central Alaska, with a redescription of Ascidia columbiana (Huntsman, 1912). Can J Zool 79:1766–1781

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambrinos JG (2002) The variable invasive success of Cortaderia species in a complex landscape. Ecology 83:518–529

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn TM (2009) The more you introduce the more you get: the role of colonization pressure and propagule pressure in invasion ecology. Divers Distrib 15:904–910

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonsdale WM (1999) Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. Ecology 80(5):1522–1536

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall DJ, Styan CA, Keough MJ (2000) Intraspecific co-variation between egg and body size affects fertilization kinetics of free-spawning marine invertebrates. Mar Eco Prog Ser 195:305–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Mckinney ML (2002) Influence of settlement time, human population, park shape and age, visitation and roads on the number of alien plant species in protected areas in the USA. Divers Distrib 8:311–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Meekins J, McCarthy B (2001) Effects of environmental variation on the invasive success of a nonindigenous forest herb. Ecol Appl 11:1336–1348

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller AL, Diez JM, Sullivan JJ, Wangen SR, Wiser SK, Meffin R, Duncan RP (2014) Quantifying invasion resistance: the use of recruitment functions to control for propagule pressure. Ecology 95(4):920–929

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Minchin D (2007) Rapid coastal survey for targeted alien species associated with floating pontoons in Ireland. Aquat Invasions 2(1):63–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Minton MS, Mack RN (2010) Naturalization of plant populations: the role of cultivation and population size and density. Oecologia 164(2):399–409

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mukai H, Saito Y, Watanabe H (1987) Viviparous development in Botrylloides (compound ascidians). J Morphol 193:263–276

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2011) Assessing the relationship between propagule pressure and invasion risk in ballast water. National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkol-Finkel S, Zilman G, Sella I, Miloh T, Benayahu Y (2008) Floating and fixed artificial habitats: spatial and temporal patterns of benthic communities in a coral reef environment. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 77:491–500

    Google Scholar 

  • Priesler R, Wasson K, Wolff W, Tyrell M (2009) Invasions of estuaries versus the adjacent open coast: a global perspective. In: Rilov G, Crooks J (eds) Biological invasions in marine ecosystems. Springer, Berlin, pp 587–617

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyšek P, Bacher S, Chytrý M, Jarošík V, Wild J, Celesti-Grapow L, Gassó N, Kenis M, Lambdon PW, Nentwig W, Pergl J, Roques A, Sádlo J, Solarz W, Vilá M, Hulme P (2010) Contrasting patterns in the invasions of European terrestrial and freshwater habitats by alien plants, insects and vertebrates. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:317–331

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

  • Ramsay A, Davidson J, Landry T, Arsenault G (2008) Process of invasiveness among exotic tunicates in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Biol Invasions 10:1311–1316

    Google Scholar 

  • Rius M, Turon X, Marshall DJ (2009) Non-lethal effects of an invasive species in the marine environment: the importance of early life-history stages. Oecologia 159:873–882

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers TL, Byrnes JE, Stachowicz JJ (2016) Native predators limit invasion of benthic invertebrate communities in Bodega Harbor, California, USA. Mar Eco Prog Ser 545:161–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz GM, Carlton JT, Grosholz ED, Hines AH (1997) Global invasions of marine and estuarine habitats by non-indigenous species: mechanisms, extent, and consequences. Am Zool 37:621–632

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz GM, Freestone A, Fofonoff P, Simkanin C (2009) Habitat distribution and heterogeneity in marine invasion dynamics: The importance of hard substrate and anthropogenic structure. In: Wahl W (ed) Marine hard bottom communities: patterns, dynamics, diversity and change. Springer, Berlin, pp 321–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Saito Y, Mukai H, Watanabe H (1981) Studies on Japanese compound styelid Ascidians II. A new species of the genus Botrylloides and redescription of B. violaceus OKA. Publ Seto Mar Biol Lab 26:357–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D (1989) Which insect introductions succeed and which fail? In: Drake JA et al (eds) Biological Invasions: a Global Perspective, SCOPE 37. Wiley, Chichester, pp 61–75

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff D, Wilson EO (1969) Experimental zoography of Islands: the colonization of empty islands. Ecology 50(2):278–296

    Google Scholar 

  • Simkanin C, Davidson IC, Dower JF, Jamieson G, Therriault TW (2012) Anthropogenic structures and the infiltration of natural benthos by invasive ascidians. Mar Ecol 33:499–511

    Google Scholar 

  • Simkanin C, Dower JF, Filip N, Jamieson G, Therriault TW (2013) Biotic resistance to the infiltration of natural benthic habitats: examining the role of predation in the distribution of the invasive ascidian Botrylloides violaceus. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 439:76–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair JS, Arnott SE (2016) Strength in size not numbers: propagule size more important than number in sexually reproducing populations. Biol Invasions 18:497–505

    Google Scholar 

  • Skaug H, Fournier D, Bolker B, Magnusson A, Nielsen A (2016) Generalized linear mixed models using ‘AD Model Builder’. R package, version 0.8.3.3

  • Stachowicz JJ, Byrnes JE (2006) Species diversity, invasion success, and ecosystem functioning: disentangling the influence of resource competition, facilitation, and extrinsic factors. Mar Eco Prog Ser 311:251–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Strathmann MF (1987) Reproduction and development of marine invertebrates of the Northern Pacific Coast: data and methods for the study of eggs, embryos, and larvae. University of Washington Press, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Streftaris N, Zenetos A, Papathanassiou E (2005) Globalisation in marine ecosystems: the story of non-indigenous marine species across European seas. Oceanogr Mar Biol 43:419–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Svane I, Young CM (1989) The ecology and behaviour of ascidian larvae. Oceanogr Mar Biol 27:45–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1997) Community invasibility, recruitment, limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology 78:81–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd CD, Turner SJ (1986) Ecology of intertidal and sublittoral cryptic epifaunal assemblages. I. Experimental rationale and the analysis of larval settlement. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 99:199–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Verling E, Ruiz GM, Smith LD, Galil B, Miller AW, Murphy KR (2005) Supply-side invasion ecology: characterizing propagule pressure in coastal ecosystems. Proc R Soc B 272(1596):1249–1257

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wahl M (1989) Marine epibiosis. I. Fouling and antifouling: some basic aspects. Mar Eco Prog Ser 58:175–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasson K, Fenn K, Pearse JS (2005) Habitat differences in marine invasions of Central California. Biol Invasions 7(6):935–948

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson M (1996) Biological invasions. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuur A, Ieno EN, Walker N, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to marina managers and staff at the Institute of Ocean Sciences and the Royal Victoria Yacht Club who accommodated our sampling. We thank Natalia Filip, Kendra Myer, and Heidi Gartner for field support; Mark Minton for statistical advice; and Isabelle Côté, Kim Juniper, Verena Tunnicliffe, and the anonymous reviewers who provided comments on previous drafts. This research was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) through the Canadian Aquatic Invasive Species Network (CAISN) and the Aquatic Invasive Species program of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, MD, USA

    Christina Simkanin & Ian C. Davidson

  2. Department of Biology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Christina Simkanin & John F. Dower

  3. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, BC, Canada

    Thomas W. Therriault & Glen Jamieson

Authors
  1. Christina Simkanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ian C. Davidson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas W. Therriault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Glen Jamieson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John F. Dower
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christina Simkanin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simkanin, C., Davidson, I.C., Therriault, T.W. et al. Manipulating propagule pressure to test the invasibility of subtidal marine habitats. Biol Invasions 19, 1565–1575 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1379-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1379-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation