More Like this

1. Invaders responded more positively to soil biota than native or noninvasive introduced species, consistent with enemy escape

   https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/P7WVQ  

   Liu, Yu; Zheng, Yu-Long; Jahn, Lydia V.; Burns, Jean H. (January 2021, OSF)

   Understanding the mechanisms governing biological invasions has implications for population dynamics, biodiversity, and community assembly. The enemy escape hypothesis posits that escape from enemies such as herbivores and predators that were limiting in the native range helps explain rapid spread in the introduced range. While the enemy escape hypothesis has been widely tested aboveground, data limitations have prevented comparisons of below- ground mechanisms for invasive and noninvasive introduced species, which limits our understanding of why only some introduced species become invasive. We assessed the role of soil biota in driving plant invasions in a phylogenetic meta−analysis, incorpo- rating phylogeny in the error structure of the models, and comparing live and sterilized conditioned soils. We found 29 studies and 396 effect size estimates across 103 species that compared live and sterilized soils. We found general positive effects of soil biota for plants (0.099, 95% CI 0.0266, 0.1714), consistent with a role of soil mutualists. The effect size of soil biota among invaders was 3.2× higher than for natives, the strength of effects was weaker for older conditioning species with a longer introduced history, and enemy escape was stronger for distant relatives. In addition, invasive species had a weaker allocation tradeoff than natives. By demonstrating that the net effect of soil biota is more positive for invasive than native and noninvasive introduced species, weakens over time since introduction, and strengthens as phy- logenetic distance increasing, we provide mechanistic insights into the considerable role of soil biota in bio- logical invasions, consistent with the predictions of the enemy escape hypothesis. 

   more » « less
2. Escape from natural enemies depends on the enemies, the invader, and competition

   https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6737  

   Lucero, Jacob E.; Arab, Nafiseh Mahdavi; Meyer, Sebastian T.; Pal, Robert W.; Fletcher, Rebecca A.; Nagy, David U.; Callaway, Ragan M.; Weisser, Wolfgang W. (September 2020, Ecology and Evolution)

   Abstract The enemy release hypothesis (ERH) attributes the success of some exotic plant species to reduced top‐down effects of natural enemies in the non‐native range relative to the native range. Many studies have tested this idea, but very few have considered the simultaneous effects of multiple kinds of enemies on more than one invasive species in both the native and non‐native ranges. Here, we examined the effects of two important groups of natural enemies–insect herbivores and soil biota–on the performance ofTanacetum vulgare(native to Europe but invasive in the USA) andSolidago canadensis(native to the USA but invasive in Europe) in their native and non‐native ranges, and in the presence and absence of competition.In the field, we replicated full‐factorial experiments that crossed insecticide,T. vulgare–S. canadensiscompetition, and biogeographic range (Europe vs. USA) treatments. In greenhouses, we replicated full‐factorial experiments that crossed soil sterilization, plant–soil feedback, and biogeographic range treatments. We evaluated the effects of experimental treatments onT. vulgareandS. canadensisbiomass.The effects of natural enemies were idiosyncratic. In the non‐native range and relative to populations in the native range,T. vulgareescaped the negative effects of insect herbivores but not soil biota, depending upon the presence ofS. canadensis; andS. canadensisescaped the negative effects of soil biota but not insect herbivores, regardless of competition. Thus, biogeographic escape from natural enemies depended upon the enemies, the invader, and competition. Synthesis:By explicitly testing the ERH in terms of more than one kind of enemy, more than one invader, and more than one continent, this study enhances our nuanced perspective of how natural enemies can influence the performance of invasive species in their native and non‐native ranges. 

   more » « less
3. Soil origin corresponds with variation in growth of an invasive Centaurea , but not of non‐invasive congeners

   https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.3141  

   Montesinos, Daniel; Callaway, Ragan M. (August 2020, Ecology)

   Abstract Why only a small proportion of exotic species become invasive is an unresolved question. Escape from the negative effects of soil biota in the native range can be important for the success of many invasives, but comparative effects of soil biota on less successful exotic species are poorly understood. Studies of other mechanisms suggest that such comparisons might be fruitful. Seeds of three closely relatedCentaureaspecies with overlapping distributions in both their native range of Spain and their nonnative range of California were grown to maturity in pots to obtain an F1 generation of full sibling seeds with reduced maternal effects. Full sibling F1 seeds from both ranges were subsequently grown in pots with inoculations of soil from either the native or nonnative ranges in a fully orthogonal factorial design. We then compared plant biomass among species, regions, and soil sources. Our results indicate that escape from soil pathogens may unleash the highly invasiveCentaurea solstitialis, which was suppressed by native Spanish soils but not by soils from California. In contrast, the two non‐invasiveCentaureaspecies grew the same on all soils. These results add unprecedented phylogenetically controlled insight into why some species invade and others do not. 

   more » « less
4. Reciprocal human-natural system feedback loops within the invasion process

   https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.62.52664  

   Sinclair, James S.; Brown, Jeffrey A.; Lockwood, Julie L. (October 2020, NeoBiota)

   null (Ed.)

   Biological invasions are inextricably linked to how people collect, move, interact with and perceive non-native species. However, invasion frameworks generally do not consider reciprocal interactions between non-native species and people. Non-native species can shape human actions via beneficial or detrimental ecological and socioeconomic effects and people, in turn, shape invasions through their movements, behaviour and how they respond to the collection, transport, introduction and spread of non-natives. The feedbacks that stem from this ‘coupled human and natural system’ (CHANS) could therefore play a key role in mitigating (i.e. negative feedback loops) or exacerbating (i.e. positive feedback loops) ongoing and future invasions. We posit that the invasion process could be subdivided into three CHANS that span from the source region from which non-natives originate to the recipient region in which they establish and spread. We also provide specific examples of feedback loops that occur within each CHANS that have either reduced or facilitated new introductions and spread of established non-native species. In so doing, we add to exisiting invasion frameworks to generate new hypotheses about human-based drivers of biological invasions and further efforts to determine how ecological outcomes feed back into human actions. 

   more » « less
5. Global test of the enemy release hypothesis reveals similar patterns of herbivory across native and non-native plants

   https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.21.619365  

   Galmán, Andrea; Hahn, Philip G; Inouye, Brian D; Underwood, Nora; Liu, Yanjie; Whitehead, Susan R; Wetzel, William C (October 2024, bioRxiv)

   The Enemy Release Hypothesis (ERH) proposes that non-native plants escape their co-evolved herbivores and benefit from reduced herbivory in their introduced ranges. Numerous studies have tested this hypothesis, with conflicting results, but previous studies focus on average levels of herbivory and overlook the substantial within-population variability in herbivory, which may provide unique insights into the ERH. We tested differences in mean herbivory and added a novel approach to the ERH by comparing within-population variability in herbivory between native and non-native plant populations. We include several covariates that might mask an effect of enemy release, including latitude, regional plant richness, plant growth form and plant cover. We use leaf herbivory data collected by the Herbivory Variability Network for 788 plant populations (616 native range populations and 172 introduced range populations) of 503 different native and non-native species distributed worldwide. We found no overall differences in mean herbivory or herbivory variability between native and non-native plant populations. Taken together, our results indicate no evidence of enemy release for non-native plants, suggesting that enemy release is not a generalized mechanism favoring the success of non-native species. 

   more » « less