An official website of the United States government
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
This content will become publicly available on August 1, 2026
Global Study of Plant‐Herbivore Interactions Reveals Similar Patterns of Herbivory Across Native and Non‐Native Plants
ABSTRACT A core hypothesis in invasion and community ecology is that species interaction patterns should differ between native and non‐native species due to non‐native species lacking a long evolutionary history in their resident communities. Numerous studies testing this hypothesis yield conflicting results, often focusing on mean interaction rates and overlooking the substantial within‐population variability in species interactions. We explored plant‐herbivore interactions in populations of native and established non‐native plant species by quantifying differences in mean herbivory and added a novel approach by comparing within‐population variability in herbivory. We include as covariates latitude, plant richness, plant growth form and cover. Using leaf herbivory data from the Herbivory Variability Network for 788 plant populations spanning 504 species globally distributed, we found no overall differences in mean herbivory or variability between native and non‐native plants. These results suggest native and established non‐native plants interact similarly with herbivores, indicating non‐native status is not a strong predictor of ecological roles.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2409605
- PAR ID:
- 10633393
- Publisher / Repository:
- Ecology Letters
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ecology Letters
- Volume:
- 28
- Issue:
- 8
- ISSN:
- 1461-023X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Some invasive plant species rapidly evolve greater size and/or competitive ability in their nonnative ranges. However, it is not well known whether these traits transfer back to the native range, or instead represent genotype‐by‐environment interactions where traits are context specific to communities in the new range where the evolution occurred. Insight into transferability vs. context specificity can be tested using experiments performed with individuals from populations from the native and nonnative ranges of exotic invasive species. Using a widespread invasive plant species in Europe,Solidago gigantea, we established reciprocal common garden experiments in the native range (Montana, North America;n = 4) and the nonnative range (Hungary, Europe;n = 4) to assess differences in size, vegetative shoot number, and herbivory between populations from the native and nonnative ranges. In a greenhouse experiment, we also tested whether the inherent competitive ability of genotypes from 15 native and 15 invasive populations differed when pitted against 11 common native North American competitors. In common gardens, plants from both ranges considered together produced five times more biomass, grew four times taller, and developed five times more rhizomes in the nonnative range garden compared to the native range garden. The interaction between plant origin and the common garden location was highly significant, with plants from Hungary performing better than plants from Montana when grown in Hungary, and plants from Montana performing better than plants from Hungary when grown in Montana. In the greenhouse, there were no differences in the competitive effects and responses ofS. giganteaplants from the two ranges when grown with North American natives. Our results suggest thatS. giganteamight have undergone rapid evolution for greater performance abroad, but if so, this response does not translate to greater performance at home.more » « less
-
Interactions between plants and herbivores are central in most ecosystems, but their strength is highly variable. The amount of variability within a system is thought to influence most aspects of plant-herbivore biology, from ecological stability to plant defense evolution. Our understanding of what influences variability, however, is limited by sparse data. We collected standardized surveys of herbivory for 503 plant species at 790 sites across 116° of latitude. With these data, we show that within-population variability in herbivory increases with latitude, decreases with plant size, and is phylogenetically structured. Differences in the magnitude of variability are thus central to how plant-herbivore biology varies across macroscale gradients. We argue that increased focus on interaction variability will advance understanding of patterns of life on Earth.more » « less
-
Abstract Plant–microbe interactions play an important role in structuring plant communities. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) are particularly important. Nonetheless, increasing anthropogenic disturbance will lead to novel plant–AMF interactions, altering longstanding co‐evolutionary trajectories between plants and their associated AMF. Although emerging work shows that plant–AMF response can evolve over relatively short time scales due to anthropogenic change, little work has evaluated how plant AMF responsespecificitymay evolve due to novel plant–mycorrhizal interactions. Here, we examine changes in plant–AMF interactions in novel grassland systems by comparing the mycorrhizal response of plant populations from unplowed native prairies with populations from post‐agricultural grasslands to inoculation with both native prairie AMF and non‐native novel AMF. Across four plant species, we find support for evolution of differential responses to mycorrhizal inocula types, that is, mycorrhizal response specificity, consistent with expectations of local adaptation, with plants from native populations responding most to native AMF and plants from post‐agricultural populations responding most to non‐native AMF. We also find evidence of evolution of mycorrhizal response in two of the four plant species, as overall responsiveness to AMF changed from native to post‐agricultural populations. Finally, across all four plant species, roots from native prairie populations had lower levels of mycorrhizal colonization than those of post‐agricultural populations. Our results report on one of the first multispecies assessment of local adaptation to AMF. The consistency of the responses in our experiment among four species provides evidence that anthropogenic disturbance may have unintended impacts on native plant species' association with AMF, causing evolutionary change in the benefit native plant species gain from native symbioses.more » « less
-
Although many species shift their phenology with climate change, species vary significantly in the direction and magnitude of these responses (i.e., phenological sensitivity). Studies increasingly detect early phenology or high phenological sensitivity to climate in non-native species, which may favor non-native species over natives in warming climates. Yet relatively few studies explicitly compare phenological responses to climate between native vs. non-native species or between non-native populations in the native vs. introduced range, limiting our ability to quantify the role of phenology in invasion success. Here, we review the empirical evidence for and against differences in phenology and phenological sensitivity to climate in both native vs. non-native species and native and introduced populations of non-native species. Contrary to common assumptions, native and non-native plant species did not consistently differ in mean phenology or phenological sensitivity. However, non-native plant species were often either just as or more sensitive, but rarely less sensitive, to climate as natives. Introduced populations of non-native plant species often show earlier reproduction than native populations of the same species, but there was mixed evidence for differences in phenological sensitivity between introduced and native plant populations. We found very few studies comparing native vs. invasive animal phenology. Future work should characterize phenological sensitivity to climate in native vs. non-native plant and animal species, in native vs. introduced populations of non-native species, and across different stages of invasion, and should carefully consider how differences in phenology might promote invasion success or disadvantage native species under climate change.more » « less
