Comparing invasive plants from their native and exotic range: What can we learn for biological control?

Weed Technology

Volumn 18, Issue SPEC. ISSUE 1, 2004, Pages 1533-1541

  Hinz, Hariet L ^a,b   Schwarzlaender, Mark ^a,b  

^a CABI   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

Biological weed control; Comparative studies; Enemy release hypothesis; Evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744523291     PISSN: 0890037X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1614/0890-037X(2004)018[1533:CIPFTN]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (70)

1. Andow, D. A. and O. Imura. 1994. Specialization of phytophagous arthropod communities on introduced plants. Ecology 75:296-300.
2. Auerbach, M. and D. Simberloff. 1988. Rapid leaf-miner colonization of introduced trees and shifts in sources of herbivore mortality. Oikos 52:41-50.
3. Bais, H. P., R. V. Epachedu, S. Gilroy, R. M. Callaway, and J. M. Vivanco. 2003. Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion: from molecules and genes to species interactions. Science 301:1377-1380.
4. Bastlova, D. and J. Kvet. 2002. Differences in dry weight partitioning and flowering phenology between native and non-native plants of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.). Flora 19:332-340.
5. Bastlova-Hanzelyova, D. 2001. Comparative study of native and invasive populations of Lythrum salicaria: population characteristics, site and community relationships. In G. Brundu, J. Brock, I. Camarda, L. Child, and M. Wade, eds. Plant Invasions: Species Ecology and Ecosystem Management. Leiden, The Netherlands: Backhuys. Pp. 33-40.
6. Blossey, B. and J. Kamil. 1996. What determines the increased competitive ability of invasive non-indigenous plants? In V. C. Moran and J. H. Hoffmann, eds. Proceedings of the IX International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds. Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Cape Town. Pp. 3-9.
7. Blossey, B. and R. Nötzold. 1995. Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. J. Ecol. 83:887-889.
8. Bossdorf, O., S. Schröder, D. Prati, and H. Auge. 2004. Palatability and tolerance to simulated herbivory in native and introduced populations of Alliaria petiolata (Brassicaceae). Am. J. Bot. 91:856-862.
9. Buckley, M. Y., P. Downey, S. V. Fowler, et al. 2003. Are invasives bigger? A global study of seed size variation in two invasive shrubs. Ecology 84:1434-1440.
10. Burdon, J. J., R. H. Groves, and J. M. Cullen. 1981. The impact of biological control on the distribution and abundance of Chondrilla juncea in southeastern Australia. Aust. J. Appl. Ecol. 18:957-966.
11. CAB International. 2004. CABI Publishing Databases on CAB Direct: Web page: http://www.cabdirect.org/. Accessed: September 16, 2003.
12. Callaway, R. M. and E. T. Aschehoug. 2000. Invasive plants versus their new and old neighbors: a mechanism for exotic invasion. Science 290:521-523.
13. Crawley, M. 1987. What makes a community invasible? In A. J. Gray, M. J. Crawley, and P. J. Edwards, eds. Colonization, Succession and Stability. The 26th Symposium of the British Ecological Society held jointly with the Linnean Society of London. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific. Pp. 429-453.
14. Daehler, C. C. 2003. Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien invasive plants: implications for conservation and restoration. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34:183-211.
15. Daehler, C. C. and D. R. Strong. 1997. Reduced herbivore resistance in introduced smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) after a century of herbivore-free growth. Oecologia 110:99-108.
16. DeBach, P. and D. Rosen. 1991. Biological Control by Natural Enemies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 440 p.
17. DeWalt, S. J., J. S. Denslow, and J. L. Hamrick. 2004. Biomass allocation, growth, and photosynthesis of genotypes from native and introduced ranges of the tropical shrub Clidemia hirta. Oecologia 138:521-531.
18. Eckert, C. G., D. Manicacci, and S.C.H. Barrett. 1996. Genetic drift and founder effect in native versus introduced populations of an invading plant, Lythrum salicaria (Lythraceae). Evolution 50:1512-1519.
19. Edwards, K. R., M. S. Adams, and J. Květ. 1998. Differences between European native and American invasive populations of Lythrum salicaria. Appl. Veg. Sci. 1:267-280.
20. Ellstrand, N. C. and K. A. Schierenbeck. 2000. Hybridization as a stimulus for the evolution of invasiveness in plants? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97: 7043-7050.
21. Erfmeier, A. and H. Bruelheide. 2004. Comparison of natural and invasive Rhododendron ponticum populations: growth, reproduction and morphology under field conditions. Flora 199:120-133.
22. Fenner, M. and W. G. Lee. 2001. Lack of pre-dispersal seed predators in introduced Asteraceae in New Zealand. N. Z. J. Ecol. 25:95-99.
23. Gaskin, J. F. and B. A. Schaal. 2002. Hybrid Tamarix widespread in U.S. invasion and undetected in native Asian range. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99: 11256-11259.
24. Goeden, R. D. 1974. Comparative survey of the phytophagous insect faunas of Italian thistle, Carduus pycnocephalus, in southern California and southern Europe relative to biological weed control. Environ. Entomol. 3:464-474.
25. Grigulis, K., A. W. Sheppard, J. E. Ash, and R. H. Groves. 2001. The comparative demography of the pasture weed Echium plantagineum between its native and invaded ranges. J. Appl. Ecol. 38:281-290.
26. Jakobs, G., E. Weber, and P. J. Edwards. 2004a. Introduced plants of the invasive Solidago gigantea (Asteraceae) are larger and grow denser than conspecifics in the native range. Divers. Distrib. 10:11-19.
27. Jakobs, G., E. Weber, and P. J. Edwards. 2004b. Plant invasiveness may evolve in the introduced range-an example from Solidago gigantea. Weed Technol. In press.
28. Jobin, A., U. Schaffner, and W. Nentwig. 1996. The structure of the phytophagous insect fauna on the introduced weed Solidago altissima in Switzerland. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 79:33-42.
29. Julien, M. H. and M. W. Griffiths. 1998. Biological Control of Weeds. A World Catalogue of Agents and Their Target Weeds. Wallingford, UK: CABI. 223 p.
30. Keane, R. M. and M. J. Crawley. 2002. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:164-170.
31. Lankau, R. A., W. E. Rogers, and E. Siemann. 2004. Constraints on the utilisation of the invasive Chinese tallow tree Sapium sebiferum by generalist native herbivores in coastal prairies. Ecol. Entomol. 29:66-75.
32. Leger, E. A. and K. J. Rice. 2003. Invasive California poppies (Eschscholzia californica Cham.) grow larger than native individuals under reduced competition. Ecol. Lett. 6:257-264.
33. Lonsdale, W. M. and R. Segura. 1987. A demographic study of native and introduced populations of Mimosa pigra. In D. Lemerle and A. R. Leys, eds. Proceedings of the 8th Australian Weed Conference. Sydney, Australia: Council of Australian Weed Science Societies. Pp. 163-166.
34. Lym, R. G. and R. B. Carlson. 2002. Effect of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) genotype on feeding damage and reproduction of Aphthona spp: implication for biological weed control. Biol. Control 23:127-133.
35. Lym, R. G., S. J. Nissen, M. L. Rowe, D. J. Lee, and R. A. Masters. 1996. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) genotype affects gall midge (Spurgia esulae) establishment. Weed Sci. 44:629-633.
36. Maron, J. L. and M. Vilà. 2001. When do herbivores affect plant invasion? Evidence for the natural enemies and biotic resistance hypotheses. Oikos 95:361-373.
37. Maron, J. L., M. Vilà, R. Bommarco, S. Elmendorf, and P. Beardsley. 2004. Rapid evolution of an invasive plant. Ecol. Monogr. 74:261-280.
38. Memmott, J., S. V. Fowler, Q. Paynter, A. W. Sheppard, and P. Syrett. 2000. The invertebrate fauna on broom, Cytisus scoparius, in two native and two exotic habitats. Acta Oecol. 21:213-222.
39. Mitchell, C. E. and A. G. Power. 2003. Release of invasive plants from fungal and viral pathogens. Nature 421:625-627.
40. Müller-Schärer, H., U. Schaffner, and T. Steinger. 2004. Evolution in invasive plants: implications for biological control. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:417-422.
41. Noble, I. R. 1989. Attributes of invaders and the invading process: terrestrial and vascular plants. In J. A. Drake, H. A. Mooney, F. di Castri, R. H. Groves, F. J. Burger, M. Rejmanek, and M. Williamson, eds. Biological Invasions: A Global Perspective. Chichester, UK: J. Wiley. Pp. 301-310.
42. Paynter, Q., P. O. Downey, and A. W. Sheppard. 2003. Age structure and growth of the woody legume weed Cytisus scoparius in native and exotic habitats: implications for control. J. Appl. Ecol. 40:470-480.
43. Paynter, Q., S. V. Fowler, H. L. Hinz, J. Memmott, R. Shaw, A. W. Sheppard, and P. Syrett. 1996. Are seed-feeding insects of use for the biological control of broom? In V. C. Moran and J. H. Hoffmann, eds. Proceedings of the IX International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds. Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Cape Town. Pp. 3-9.
44. Paynter, Q., S. V. Fowler, J. Memmott, R. H. Shaw, and A. W. Sheppard. 2000. Determinant of broom (Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link) abundance in Europe. Plant Prot. Q. 15:149-155.
45. Paynter, Q., S. V. Fowler, J. Memmott, and A. W. Sheppard. 1998. Factors affecting the establishment of Cytisus scoparius in southern France: implications for managing both native and exotic populations. J. Appl. Ecol. 35:582-595.
46. Prati, D. and O. Bossdorf. 2002. A comparison of native and introduced populations of the South African ragwort Senecio inaequidens DC. in the field. In S.-W. Breckle, B. Schweizer, and A. Fangmeier, eds. Results of Worldwide Ecological Studies. Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium of the A.F.W. Schimper-Foundation established by H. and E. Walter. Stuttgart, Germany: Verlag Günter Heimbach. Pp. 353-359.
47. Pritchard, T. 1960. Race formation in weedy species with special reference to Euphorbia cyparissias L. and Hypericum perforatum L. In J. L. Harper, ed. The Biology of Weeds. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific. Pp. 61-66.
48. Rees, M. and Q. Paynter. 1997. Biological control of scotch broom: modelling the determinants of abundance and the potential impact of introduced insect herbivores. J. Appl. Ecol. 34:1203-1221.
49. Shea, K. and P. Chesson. 2002. Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:170-176.
50. Sheldon, S. P. and R. P. Cre ed. 1995. Use of a native insect as a biological control for an introduced weed. Ecol. Appl. 5:1122-1132.
51. Sheppard, A. W. 2000. Weed ecology and population dynamics (Chapter 3). In B. Sindel, ed. Australian Weed Management Systems. Melbourne, Australia: R. G. and F. J. Richardson Press. Pp. 39-60.
52. Sheppard, A. W. 2003. Prioritising agents based on predicted efficacy: beyond the lottery approach. In H. Spafford Jacob and D. T. Briese, eds. Improving the Selection, Testing & Evaluation of Weed Biological Control Agents. CRC for Australian Weed Management Technical Series 7. Perth, Western Australia: University of Western Australia. Pp. 11-22.
53. Sheppard, A. W., L. A. Brun, and R. C. Lewis. 1996. A demographic comparison of common heliotrope, Heliotropium europaeum L.: southern Australia and southern France. In R.C.H. Shepherd, ed. Proceedings of the 11th Australian Weeds Conference. Victoria, Australia: Weed Science Society of Victoria. Pp. 286-290.
54. Sheppard, A. W., P. Hodge, Q. Paynter, and M. Rees. 2002. Factors affecting invasion and persistence of broom Cytisus scoparius in Australia. J. Appl. Ecol. 39:721-734.
55. Siemann, E. and W. E. Rogers. 2001. Genetic differences in growth of an invasive tree species. Ecol. Lett. 4:514-518.
56. Siemann, E. and W. E. Rogers. 2003. Herbivory, disease, recruitment limitation, and success of alien and native tree species. Ecology 84:1489-1505.
57. Strong, D. R., J. H. Lawton, and R.E.S. Southwood. 1984. Insects on Plants. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific. Pp. 76-99.
58. Syrett, P., S. V. Fowler, E. M. Coombs, J. R. Hosking, G. P. Markin, Q. E. Paynter, and A. W. Sheppard. 1999. The potential for biological control of scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) (Fabaceae) and related weedy species. Biocontrol News Inf. 20:17-34.
59. Tewksbury, L., R. Casagrande, B. Blossey, P. Häfliger, and M. Schwarzländer. 2002. Potential for biological control of Phragmites australis in North America. Biol. Control 23:191-212.
60. Thebaud, C. and D. Simberloff. 2001. Are plants really larger in their introduced ranges? Am. Nat. 157:231-236.
61. Van, T. K., M. B. Rayamajhi, and T. D. Center. 2001. Understanding the Ecology of Melaleuca quinquenervia: Web page: http://www.weedbiocontrol.org/ report/ecology/. Accessed: May 5, 2004.
62. Van Kleunen, M. and B. Schmid. 2003. No evidence for an evolutionary increased competitive ability in an invasive plant. Ecology 84:2816-2823.
63. Vilà, M., A. Gómez, and J. L. Moran. 2003. Are alien plants more competitive than their native conspecifics? A test using Hypericum perforatum L. Oecologia 137:211-215.
64. Weiss, P. W. and S. Milton. 1984. Chrysanthemoides monilifera and Acacia longifolia in Australia and South Africa. In B. Dell, ed. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Mediterranean Ecosystems. Perth, Australia: Botany Department of the University of Western Australia. Pp. 159-160.
65. Willis, A. J. and B. Blossey. 1999. Benign environments do not explain the increased vigour of non-indigenous plants: a cross-continental transplant experiment. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 9:567-577.
66. Willis, A. J., J. Memmott, and R. I. Forrester. 2000. Is there evidence for the post-invasion evolution of increased size among invasive plant species? Ecol. Lett. 3:275-283.
67. Willis, A. J., M. B. Thomas, and J. H. Lawton. 1999. Is the increased vigour of invasive weeds explained by a trade-off between growth and herbivore resistance? Oecologia 120:632-640.
68. Wilson, C. G., G. J. Flanagan, and J. D. Gillett. 1990. The phytophagous insect fauna of the introduced shrub Mimosa pigra in Northern Australia and its relevance to biological control. Environ. Entomol. 19:776-784.
69. Wolfe, L. M. 2002. Why alien invaders succeed: support for the escape-fromenemy hypothesis. Am. Nat. 160:705-711.
70. Woodburn, T. L. and A. W. Sheppard. 1996. The demography of Carduus nutans as a native and alien weed. Plant Prot. Q. 11:236-238.