Plant invasions, generalist herbivores, and novel defense weapons

Ecology

Volumn 92, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 829-835

  Schaffner, Urs ^a,f   Ridenour, Wendy M ^b   Wolf, Vera C ^c   Bassett, Thomas ^b   Müller, Caroline ^c   Müller Schärer, Heinz ^d   Sutherland, Steve ^e   Lortie, Christopher J ^f   Callaway, Ragan M ^b  

^a CABI   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

^c BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF FRIBOURG   (Switzerland)

^e ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^f YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Biological invasions; Biotic resistance; Enemy release; Evolution of increased competitive ability; Herbivorous invertebrates; Novel associations; Plant herbivore interactions

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BIOASSAY; BIOTIC FACTOR; COMPETITIVE ABILITY; DICOTYLEDON; ENEMY RELEASE HYPOTHESIS; ESCAPE BEHAVIOR; GENERALIST; INVERTEBRATE; NATURAL ENEMY; PLANT DEFENSE; PLANT-HERBIVORE INTERACTION; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CENTAUREA; DEMOGRAPHY; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; INTRODUCED SPECIES; INVERTEBRATE; NORTH AMERICA; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMALS; CENTAUREA; DEMOGRAPHY; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; INTRODUCED SPECIES; INVERTEBRATES; NORTH AMERICA;

EUROPE; NORTH AMERICA;

CENTAUREA STOEBE; INVERTEBRATA;

EID: 79955649036     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/10-1230.1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Agrawal, A. A., P. M. Kotanen, C. E. Mitchell, A. G. Power, W. Godsoe, and J. K. Klironomos. 2005. Enemy release? An experiment with congeneric plant pairs and diverse above- and belowground enemies. Ecology 86:2979-2989. (Pubitemid 41677450)
2. Berenbaum, M. R. 1981. Patterns of furanocoumarin distribution and insect herbivory in the Umbelliferae: Plant chemistry and community structure. Ecology 62:1254-1266.
3. Blossey, B., and R. Nötzold. 1995. Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive non-indigenous plants: A hypothesis. Journal of Ecology 83:887-889.
4. 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.
5. Callaway, R. M., D. Cipollini, K. Barto, G. C. Thelen, S. G. Hallett, D. Prati, K. Stinson, and J. Klironomos. 2008. Novel weapons: Invasive plant suppresses fungal mutualists in America but not in its native Europe. Ecology 89:1043-1055. (Pubitemid 351620069)
6. Callaway, R. M., and W. M. Ridenour. 2004. Novel weapons: A biochemically based hypothesis for invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 2:436-443.
7. Cappuccino, N., and J. T. Arnason. 2006. Novel chemistry of invasive exotic plants. Biology Letters 2:189-193. (Pubitemid 43938630)
8. Cappuccino, N., and D. Carpenter. 2005. Invasive exotic plants suffer less herbivory than non-invasive exotic plants. Biology Letters 1:435-438. (Pubitemid 41796588)
9. Carpenter, D., and N. Cappuccino. 2005. Herbivory, time since introduction and the invasiveness of exotic plants. Journal of Ecology 93:315-321. (Pubitemid 40483094)
10. Han, X., S. P. Dendy, K. A. Garrett, L. Fang, and M. D. Smith. 2008. Comparison of damage to native and exotic tallgrass prairie plants by natural enemies. Plant Ecology 198:197-210.
11. Hedges, L. V., J. Gurevitch, and P. S. Curtis. 1999. The metaanalysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80:1150-1156. (Pubitemid 29279919)
12. Higgins, J. P. T., and S. G. Thompson. 2002. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 21:539-1558.
13. Huntly, N. 1990. Herbivores and the dynamics of communities and ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 22:477-503.
14. Jogesh, T., D. Carpenter, and N. Cappuccino. 2008. Herbivory on invasive exotic plants and their non-invasive relatives. Biological Invasions 10:797-804.
15. Joshi, J., and K. Vrieling. 2005. The enemy release and EICA revisited: Incorporating the fundamental difference between specialist and generalist herbivores. Ecology Letters 8:704-714. (Pubitemid 40850019)
16. Keane, R. M., and M. J. Crawley. 2002. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17:164-170. (Pubitemid 34219309)
17. Lind, E. M., and J. D. Parker. 2010. Novel weapons testing: Are invasive plants more chemically defended than native plants? PLoS ONE 5(5):e10429.
18. Mitchell, C. E., et al. 2006. Biotic interactions and plant invasions. Ecology Letters 9:726-740. (Pubitemid 43773914)
19. Müller-Schärer, H., and U. Schaffner. 2008. Classical biological control: Exploiting enemy escape to manage plant invasions. Biological Invasions 10:859-874.
20. Müller-Schärer, H., U. Schaffner, and T. Steinger. 2004. Evolution in invasive plants: Implications for biological control. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19:417-422. (Pubitemid 38991667)
21. Oksanen, L. 2001. Logic of experiments in ecology: Is pseudoreplication a pseudoissue? Oikos 94:27-38. (Pubitemid 32773698)
22. Parker, I. M., and G. S. Gilbert. 2007. When there is no escape: The effects of natural enemies on native, invasive and noninvasive plants. Ecology 88:1210-1224. (Pubitemid 351345251)
23. Parker, J. D., D. E. Burkepile, and M. E. Hay. 2006. Opposing effects of native and exotic herbivores on plant invasions. Science 311:1459-1461. (Pubitemid 43376699)
24. Parker, J. D., and M. E. Hay. 2005. Biotic resistance to plant invasions? Native herbivores prefer non-native plants. Ecology Letters 8:959-967. (Pubitemid 41247271)
25. Ridenour, W. M., J. M. Vivanco, Y. Feng, J.-I. Horiuchi, and R. M. Callaway. 2008. No evidence for tradeoffs: Centaurea plants from America are better competitors and defenders. Ecological Monographs 78:369-386.
26. Rosenberg, M. S., D. C. Adams, and J. Gurevitch. 2000. Meta Win: Statistical software for meta-analysis. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
27. Strauss, S. Y., et al. 2009. Cryptic seedling herbivory by nocturnal introduced generalists impacts survival, performance of native and exotic plants. Ecology 90:419-429.
28. Tallamy, D. W., M. Ballard, and V. D'Amico. 2010. Can alien plants support generalist insect herbivores? Biological Invasions. [doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9639-5]
29. Treier, U. A., O. Broennimann, S. Normand, A. Guisan, U. Schaffner, T. Steinger, and H. Müller-Schärer. 2009. Shift in cytotype frequency and niche space in the invasive Centaurea maculosa. Ecology 90:1366-1377.
30. Verhoeven, K. J. F., A. Biere, J. A. Harvey, and W. H. van der Putten. 2009. Plant invaders and their novel natural enemies: Who is naive? Ecology Letters 12:107-117.
31. Wikström, S. A., M. B. Steinarsdóttir, L. Kautsky, and H. Pavia. 2006. Increased chemical resistance explains low herbivore colonization of introduced seaweed. Oecologia 148:593-601. (Pubitemid 43946117)
32. Wolfe, L. M. 2002. Why alien invaders succeed: Support for the escape-from-enemy hypothesis. American Naturalist 160:705-711. (Pubitemid 36035850)