Competitive effects of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae), on the growth and survival of native tree seedlings

Plant Ecology

Volumn 166, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 13-24

  Gorchov, David L ^a   Trisel, Donald E ^a,b  

^a MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FAIRMONT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Acer saccharum; Exotic species; Fraxinus americana; Plant competition; Prunus serotina; Quercus rubra

Indexed keywords

GROWTH; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; INTRODUCED SPECIES; SHRUB; SURVIVAL; TREE;

NORTH AMERICA;

ACER; ACER SACCHARUM; CAPRIFOLIACEAE; CERVIDAE; FRAXINUS; FRAXINUS AMERICANA; LONICERA; LONICERA MAACKII; PINUS SEROTINA; PRUNUS; PRUNUS SEROTINA; QUERCUS; QUERCUS RUBRA; SACCHARUM; SACCHARUM HYBRID CULTIVAR;

EID: 0038332127     PISSN: 13850237     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1023208215796     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Barnes W.J. 1972. The autecology of the Lonicera X bella complex, PhD Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
2. Braun E.L. 1961. The woody plants of Ohio. Ohio State University Press, Columbus.
3. Brothers T.S. and Spingarn A. 1992. Forest fragmentation and alien plant invasion of central Indiana old-growth forests. Conservation Biology 6: 91-100.
4. Coates K.D., Emmingham W.H. and Radosevich S.R. 1991. Conifer-seedling success and microclimate at different levels of herb and shrub cover in a Rhododendron-Vaccinium-Menziesia community of south central British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Forestry Research 21: 858-866.
5. Collier M.H., Vankat J.L. and Hughes M.R. 2002. Diminished plant richness and abundance below Lonicera maackii, an invasive shrub. American Midland Naturalist 147: 60-71.
6. Davis M.A. and Thompson K. 2000. Eight ways to be a colonizer: two ways to be an invader: a proposed nomenclature scheme for invasion ecology. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 81: 226-230.
7. Dillenburg L.R., Whigham D.F., Teramura A.H. and Forseth I.N. 1993. Effects of below- and above-ground competition from the vines Lonicera japonica and Parthenocissus quinquefolia on the growth of the tree host Liquidambar styraciflua. Oecologia 93: 48-54.
8. Ewel J.J., O'Dowd D.J., Bergelson J., Daehler C.C., D'Antonio C.M., Diego Gomez L. et al. 1999. Deliberate introductions of species: research needs. Bioscience 49: 619-630.
9. Fikes J. and Niering W.A. 1999. Four decades of old field vegetation development and the role of Celastrus orbiculatus in the northeastern United States. Journal of Vegetation Science 10: 483-492.
10. Gleason H.A. and Cronquist A. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. 2nd edn. New York Botanical Gardens, Bronx.
11. Gould A.M.A. and Gorchov D.L. 2000. Effects of the exotic invasive shrub Lonicera maackii on the survival and fecundity of three species of native annuals. American Midland Naturalist 144: 36-50.
12. Harrington R.A., Brown B.J. and Reich P.B. 1989. Ecophysiology of exotic and native shrubs in Southern Wisconsin: 1. Relationship of leaf characteristics, resource availability, and phenology to seasonal patterns of carbon gain. Oecologia 80: 356-367.
13. Harty F.M. 1993. How Illinois kicked the exotic habit. In: McKnight B.N. (ed.), Biological pollution: The control and impact of invasive exotic species. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis, pp. 195-209.
14. Hobbs R.J. and Huenneke L.F. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: Implications for conservation. Conservation Biology 3: 324-337.
15. Huenneke L.F. and Thomson J.K. 1995. Potential interference between a threatened endemic thistle and an invasive normative plant. Conservation Biology 9: 416-425.
16. Hutchinson T.L. and Vankat J.L. 1997. Invasibility and effects of Amur honeysuckle in southwestern Ohio forests. Conservation Biology 11: 1117-1124.
17. Ingold J.L. and Craycraft M.J. 1983. Avian frugivory on honey-suckle (Lonicera) in southwestern Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science 83: 256-258.
18. Kareiva P. 1996. Developing a predictive ecology for non-indigenous species and ecological invasions. Ecology 77: 1651-1652.
19. Kobe R.K., Pacala S.W., Silander J.A. and Canham C.D. 1995. Juvenile tree survivorship as a component of shade tolerance. Ecological Applications 5: 517-532.
20. Lemmon P.E. 1956. A spherical densiometer for estimating forest overstory density. Forest Science 2: 314-320.
21. Lodge D.M. 1993. Biological invasions: Lessons for ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8: 133-137.
22. Lovell P.H. and Lovell P.J. 1985. The importance of plant form as a determining factor in competition and habitat exploitation. In: White J. (ed.), Studies on plant demography: a Festschrift for John L. Harper. Academic Press, London, pp. 209-221.
23. Luken J.O. 1988. Population structure and biomass allocation of the naturalized shrub Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Maxim. in forest and open habitats. American Midland Naturalist 199: 258-267.
24. Luken J.O. and Goessling N. 1995. Seedling distribution and potential persistence of the exotic shrub Lonicera maackii in fragmented forests. American Midland Naturalist 133: 124-130.
25. Luken J.O., Kuddes L.M. and Tholemeier T.C. 1997. Response of understory species to gap formation and soil disturbance in Lonicera maackii thickets, Restoration Ecology 5: 229-235.
26. Luken J.O. and Thieret J.W. 1995. Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii; Caprifoliaceae): Its ascent, decline, and fall. Sida 16: 479-503.
27. Luken J.O. and Thieret J.W. 1996. Amur honeysuckle, its fall from grace. BioScience 46: 18-24.
28. Luken J.O., Tholemeier T.C., Kunkel B.A. and Kuddes L.M. 1995. Branch architecture plasticity of Amur honeysuckle (Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder): initial response in extreme light environments. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 122: 190-195.
29. Mack R.N. 1996. Predicting the identity and fate of plant invaders: emergent and emerging approaches. Biological Conservation 78: 107-121.
30. Medley K.E. 1997. Distribution of the non-native shrub Lonicera maackii in Kramer Woods, Ohio. Physical Geography 18: 18-36.
31. Meekins J.F. and McCarthy B.C. 1999. Competitive ability of Alliaria petiolata (Garlic Mustard, Brassicaceae), an invasive, nonindigenous forest herb. International Journal of Plant Science 160: 743-752.
32. Midgley G.F., Rutherford M.C., Davis G.W. and de W. Bosenberg J. 1992. Photosynthetic responses of heliophilous Rhus species to environmental modification by invasive shrubs. Functional Ecology 6: 334-345.
33. Miller K.E. 2001. Effects of the invasive shrub. Lonicera maackii (Amur Honeysuckle), on survival, growth, and fecundity of native understory perennial herbs in southwestern Ohio forests. MS thesis, Miami University, Oxford, USA.
34. Office of Technology Assessment 1993. Harmful non-indigenous species in the United States. US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, DC, USA.
35. Pringle J.S. 1973. Lonicera maackii (Caprifoliaceae) adventive in Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 87: 54-55.
36. Reichard S.H. and Hamilton C.W. 1997. Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America. Conservation Biology 11: 193-203.
37. Rejmánek M. 1996. A theory of seed plant invasiveness: The first sketch. Biological Conservation 78: 171-181.
38. Rejmánek M. and Richardson D.M. 1996. What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77: 1655-1661.
39. Sokal R.R. and Rohlf F.J. 1995. Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 3rd edn. W.H. Freeman, New York.
40. Stohlgren T.J., Binkley D., Chong G.W., Kalkhan M.A., Schell L.D., Bull K.A. et al. 1999. Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity. Ecological Monographs 69: 25-46.
41. Trisel D.E. 1997. The invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii (Rupr.) Herder (Caprifoliaceae): Factors contributing to its success and its effect on native species. PhD Dissertation, Miami University, Oxford, USA.
42. Trisel D.E. and Gorchov D.L. 1994. Regional distribution, leaf phenology, and herbivory of the invasive shrub, Lonicera maackii. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 75: 231-232.
43. Usher M.B. 1988. Biological invasions of nature reserves: A search for generalisations. Biological Conservation 44: 119-135.
44. Vankat J.L., Blackwell H.W. and Hopkins W.E. 1975. The dynamics of Hueston Woods and a review of the question of the successional status of the southern beech-maple forest. Castanea 40: 290-308.
45. Vitousek P.M., D'Antonio C.M., Loope L.L. and Westbrooks R. 1996. Biological invasions as global environmental change. American Scientist 84: 468-478.
46. Walker L.R. and Vitousek P.M. 1991. An invader alters germination and growth of a native dominant tree in Hawaii. Ecology 72: 1449-1455.
47. Weidenhamer J.D., Hartnett D.C. and Romeo J.T. 1989. Density-dependent phytotoxicity: distinguishing resource competition and allelopathic interference in plants. Journal of Applied Ecology 26: 613-624.
48. Williamson M.H. and Fitter A. 1996. The characters of successful invaders. Biological Conservation 78: 163-170.
49. Witkowski E.T.E 1991. Growth and competition between seedlings of Protea repens (L) L and the alien invasive, Acacia saligna (Labill) Wendl in relation to nutrient availability. Functional Ecology 5: 101-110.
50. Woods K.D. 1993. Effects of invasion by Lonicera tatarica L. on herbs and tree seedlings in four New England forests. American Midland Naturalist 130: 62-74.