Ecological consequences of pathogen and insect invasions

Current Forestry Reports

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 25-32

  Tobin, Patrick C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Biological invasions; Forest ecosystem; Habitat invisibility; Species invasiveness

Indexed keywords

EID: 84964965469     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21986436     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40725-015-0008-6     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Marshall LG, Webb SD, Sepkoski Jr JJ, Raup DM. Mammalian evolution and the great American interchange. Science. 1982;215: 1351–7.
2. Wallace AR. The geographical distribution of animals. With a study of the relations of living and extinct faunas as elucidating the past changes of the earth’s surface, vol. 1–2. New York: Harper and Brothers; 1876.
3. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl. 2000;10:689–710.
4. Lockwood JL, Hoopes M, Marchetti M. Invasion ecology. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2007.
5. Reichard SH, White P. Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States. Bioscience. 2001;51:103–13.
6. Salisbury M. The JOC top 50 world container ports. J Comm August. 2012;20–27:24–30.
7. Brockerhoff EG, Bain J, Kimberley M, Knížek M. Interception frequency of exotic bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytinae) and relationship with establishment in New Zealand and worldwide. Can J For Res. 2006;36:289–98.
8. Work TT, McCullough DG, Cavey JF, Komsa R. Arrival rate of nonindigenous insect species into the United States through foreign trade. Biol Invasions. 2005;7:323–32.
9. Liebhold AM, Brockerhoff EG, Garrett LJ, Parke JL, Britton KO. Live plant imports: the major pathway for forest insect and pathogen invasions of the United States. Front Ecol Environ. 2012;10: 135–43. Provides an analysis of live plant imports, which are the primary pathway for forest insect and pathogen invasions.
10. Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Perrings C, Williamson M. A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Divers Distrib. 2007;13:527–34.
11. McCullough DG, Work TT, Cavey JF, Liebhold AM, Marshall D. Interceptions of nonindigenous plant pests at US ports of entry and border crossings over a 17-year period. Biol Invasions. 2006;8: 611–30.
12. Williamson M, Fitter A. The varying success of invaders. Ecology. 1996;77:1661–6.
13. Ludsin SA, Wolfe AD. Biological invasion theory: Darwin’s contributions from the origin of species. Bioscience. 2001;51:780–9.
14. Jerde CL, Lewis MA. Waiting for invasions: a framework for the arrival of non-indigenous species. Am Nat. 2007;170:1–9.
15. Liebhold AM, Tobin PC. Population ecology of insect invasions and their management. Annu Rev Entomol. 2008;53:387–408.
16. Davis MA, Grime JP, Thompson K. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. J Ecol. 2000;88: 528–34.
17. Tilman D. Community invasibility, recruitment limitation, and grassland biodiversity. Ecology. 1997;78:81–92.
18. Ohlemüller R, Walker S, Bastow WJ. Local vs. regional factors as determinants of the invasibility of indigenous forest fragments by alien plant species. Oikos. 2006;112:493–501.
19. Crawley MJ. What makes a community invasible? In: Gray AJ, Crawley MJ, Edwards PF, editors. Colonization, succession and stability. Oxford: Blackwell; 1987. p. 429–53.
20. Lonsdale WM. Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. Ecology. 1999;80:1522–36.
21. Tilman D. The ecological consequences of changes in biodiversity: a search for general principles. Ecology. 1999;80:1455–74.
22. Fridley JD, Stachowicz JJ, Naeem S, Sax DF, Seabloom EW, Smith MD, et al. The invasion paradox: reconciling pattern and process in species invasions. Ecology. 2007;88:3–17.
23. Beirne BP. Biological control attempts by introductions against pest insects in the field in Canada. Can Entomol. 1975;107:225–36
24. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T. The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2005;20: 223–8.
25. Memmott J, Craze PG, Harman HM, Syrett P, Fowler SV. The effect of propagule size on the invasion of an alien insect. J Anim Ecol. 2005;74:50–62.
26. Simberloff D. The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 2009;40:81–102.
27. Whitmire SL, Tobin PC. Persistence of invading gypsy moth populations in the United States. Oecologia. 2006;147:230–7.
28. Courchamp F, Berec L, Gascoigne J. Allee effects in ecology and conservation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
29. Tobin PC, Berec L, Liebhold AM. Exploiting Allee effects for managing biological invasions. Ecol Lett. 2011;14:615–24.
30. Lande R. Risks of population extinction from demographic and environmental stochasticity and random catastrophes. Am Nat. 1993;142:911–27.
31. Lee CE. Evolutionary genetics of invasive species. Trends Ecol Evol. 2002;17:386–91.
32. Hufbauer RA, Rutschmann A, Serrate B, Vermeil de Conchard H, Facon B. Role of propagule pressure in colonization success: disentangling the relative importance of demographic, genetic and habitat effects. J Evol Biol. 2013;26:1691–9.
33. Lewis MA, Kareiva P. Allee dynamics and the spread of invading organisms. Theor Popul Biol. 1993;43:141–58.
34. Stephens PA, Sutherland WJ, Freckleton RP. What is the Allee effect? Oikos. 1999;87:185–90.
35. Taylor CM, Hastings A. Allee effects in biological invasions. Ecol Lett. 2005;8:895–908.
36. Tobin PC, Whitmire SL, Johnson DM, Bjørnstad ON, Liebhold AM. Invasion speed is affected by geographic variation in the strength of Allee effects. Ecol Lett. 2007;10:36–43.
37. Courchamp F, Clutton-Brock T, Grenfell B. Inverse density dependence and the Allee effect. Trends Ecol Evol. 1999;14:405–10.
38. Allee WC. The social life of animals. NewYork:W.W. Norton and Company, Inc.; 1938.
39. Berec L, Angulo E, Courchamp F. Multiple Allee effects and population management. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007;22:185–91.
40. Stephens PA, Sutherland WJ. Consequences of the Allee effect for behaviour, ecology and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol. 1999;14: 401–5.
41. Tobin PC, Onufrieva KS, Thorpe KW. The relationship between male moth density and female mating success in invading populations of Lymantria dispar. Entomol Exp Appl. 2013;146:103–11
42. Simberloff D, Gibbons L. Now you see them, now you don’t!— Population crashes of established introduced species. Biol Invasions. 2004;6:161–72.
43. Aukema JE, McCullough DG, Von Holle B, Liebhold AM, Britton K, Frankel SJ. Historical accumulation of nonindigenous forest pests in the continental US. Bioscience. 2010;60:886–97.
44. Government Accountability Office (2006) Invasive forest pests. Lessons learned from three recent infestations may aid in managing future efforts. Government Accountability Office, Report to the Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, GAO-06-353.
45. Keane RM, Crawley MJ. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol. 2002;17:164–70.
46. Shea K, Chesson P. Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2002;17:170–6.
47. Hajek AE, Humber RA, Elkinton JS, May B, Walsh RA, Silver JC. Allozyme and RFLP analyses confirm Entomophaga maimaiga responsible for 1989 epizootics inNorth American gypsy moth populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87:6979–82
48. Torchin ME, Lafferty KD, Dobson AP, McKenzie VJ, Kuris AM. Introduced species and their missing parasites. Nature. 2003;421: 628–30.
49. Fernald CH, Kirkland AH. The brown tailed moth, Euproctis chrysorrhoea: a report on the life history and habits of the imported brown-tail moth. Boston: Wright and Potter; 1903.
50. Burgess AF. Controlling the gipsy [sic] moth and the browntail moth.Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Agriculture Farmer’s Bulletin 1335; 1923.
51. Burgess AF, Crossman SS (1929) Imported insect enemies of the gypsy moth and the brown-tail moth. USDA Technical Bulletin 86, Washington, D.C., USA
52. Elkinton JS, Parry D, Boettner GH. Implicating an introduced generalist parasitoid in the invasive browntail moth’s enigmatic demise. Ecology. 2006;87:2664–72.
53. Colautti RI, Ricciardi A, Grigorovich IA, MacIsaac HJ. Is invasion success explained by the enemy release hypothesis? Ecol Lett. 2004;7:721–33.
54. Desurmont GA, Donoghue MJ, Clement WL, Agrawal AA. Evolutionary history predicts plant defense against an invasive pest. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108:7070–4. doi:10.1073/ pnas.1102891108.
55. Herms DA, Mattson WJ. The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Q Rev Biol. 1992;67:283–335.
56. Gatehouse JA. Plant resistance towards insect herbivores: a dynamic interaction. New Phytol. 2002;156:145–69.
57. Levin DA. The chemical defenses of plants to pathogens and herbivores. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 1976;7:121–59.
58. Tallamy DW, Raupp MJ. Phytochemical induction by herbivores. New York: Wiley-Interscience; 1991.
59. Karban R, Myers JH. Induced plant responses to herbivory. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 1989;20:331–48.
60. Turlings TCJ, Loughrin JH, McCall PJ, Rose USR, Lewis WJ, Tumlinson JH. How caterpillar-damaged plants protect themselves by attracting parasitic wasps. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995;92:4169–74.
61. Després L, David J-P, Gallet C. The evolutionary ecology of insect resistance to plant chemicals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007;22:298–307.
62. Raffa KF, Berryman AA. The role of host plant resistance in the colonization behaviour and ecology of bark beetles. EcolMonogr. 1983;53:27–49.
63. Eyles A, Jones J, Riedl K, Cipollini D, Schwartz S, Chan K, et al. Comparative phloem chemistry of Manchurian (Fraxinus mandshurica) and two North American ash species (Fraxinus americana and Fraxinus pennsylvanica). J Chem Ecol. 2007;33: 1430–48.
64. Raffa KR, Powell EN, Townsend PA. Temperature-driven range expansion of an irruptive insect heightened by weakly coevolved plant defenses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:2193–8.
65. Nielsen DG. Exploiting natural resistance as a management tactic for landscape plants. Fla Entomol. 1989;72:413–8.
66. Poland TM, McCullough DG. Emerald ash borer: invasion of the urban forest and the threat to North America’s ash resource. J For. 2006;104:118–24.
67. Rebek EJ, Herms DA, Smitley DA. Interspecific variation in resistance to emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) among North American and Asian ash (Fraxinus spp.). Environ Entomol. 2008;37:242–6.
68. Anagnostakis SL. Chestnut blight: the classical problem of an introduced pathogen. Mycologia. 1987;79:23–37.
69. Loo JA. Ecological impacts of non-indigenous invasive fungi as forest pathogens. Biol Invasions. 2009;11:81–96. Provides an extensive review of the ecological consequences of non-native forest fungal pathogens.
70. Diskin M, Steiner KC, Hebard FV. Recovery of American chestnut characteristics following hybridization and backcross breeding to restore blight-ravaged Castanea dentata. For Ecol Manag. 2006;223:439–47.
71. Tobin PC, Bai BB, Eggen DA, Leonard DS. The ecology, geopolitics, and economics of managing Lymantria dispar in the United States. Integr J Pest Manag. 2012;53:195–210.
72. Lovett GM, Christenson LM, Groffman PM, Jones CG, Hart JE, Mitchell MJ. Insect defoliation and nitrogen cycling in forests. Bioscience. 2002;52:335–41.
73. Wallner WE. Factors affecting insect population dynamics: differences between outbreak and non-outbreak species. Annu Rev Entomol. 1987;32:317–40.
74. Gandhi JKJ, Herms DA. Direct and indirect effects of alien insect herbivores on ecological processes and interactions in forests of eastern North America. Biol Invasions. 2010;12:389–405. Provides an extensive review of the ecological consequences of non-native forest insects.
75. Randolph KC, Rose AK, Oswalt CM, Brown MJ. Status of black walnut (Juglans nigra L.) in the eastern United States in light of the discovery of thousand cankers disease. Castanea. 2013;78:2–14
76. Tobin PC, Kean JM, Suckling DM, McCullough DG, Herms DA, Stringer LD. Determinants of successful arthropod eradication programs. Biol Invasions. 2014;16:401–14.
77. Liebhold AM, Tobin PC. Growth of newly established alien populations: comparison of North American gypsy moth colonies with invasion theory. Popul Ecol. 2006;48:253–62.
78. Persad AB, Tobin PC (2015) Evaluation of ash tree symptoms associated with emerald ash borer Infestation in urban forests. Arbor Urban For (In Press)
79. Haight RG, Homans FR, Horie T, Mehta SV, Smith DJ, Venette RC. Assessing the cost of an invasive forest pathogen: a case study with oak wilt. Environ Manag. 2011;47:506–17.
80. Sydnor TD, Bumgardner M, Todd A. The potential economic impacts of emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) on Ohio, U.S., communities. Arbor Urban For. 2007;33:48–54.
81. Bigsby KM, Ambrose MJ, Tobin PC, Sills EO. The cost of gypsy moth sex in the city. Urban For Urban Green. 2014;13:459–68.
82. Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Dwyer JF. Compensatory value of urban trees in the United States. J Arboric. 2002;28:194–9.
83. Ranger CM, Tobin PC, Reding ME (2015) Ubiquitous volatile compound facilitates efficient host location by a non-native ambrosia beetle. Biol Invasions (In Press)
84. Fraedrich SW, Harrington TC, Rabaglia RJ, Ulyshen MD, Mayfield AEI, Hanula JL, et al. A fungal symbiont of the redbay ambrosia beetle causes a lethal wilt in redbay and other Lauraceae in the southeastern USA. Plant Dis. 2008;92:215–24.
85. Ploetz RC, Hulcr J, Wingfield MJ, de Beer ZW. Destructive tree diseases associated with ambrosia and bark beetles: black swan events in tree pathology? Plant Dis. 2013;95:856–72.
86. Hulcr J, Dunn RR. The sudden emergence of pathogenicity in insect-fungus symbioses threatens naive forest ecosystems. P Roy Soc B Biol Sci. 2011;278:2866–73.
87. Wratten S, Sandhu H, Cullen R, Costanza R, editors. Ecosystem services in agricultural and urban landscapes. UK: Wiley-Blackwell Oxford; 2013.
88. Redman AM, Scriber JM. Competition between the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar, and the northern tiger swallowtail, Papilio canadensis: interactions mediated by host plant chemistry, pathogens, and parasitoids. Oecologia. 2000;125:218–28.
89. Herms DA. Assessing options for managing gypsy moth. Pestic Outlook. 2003;14:14–8.
90. McCullough DG, Mercader RJ. Evaluation of potential strategies to SLow Ash Mortality (SLAM) caused by emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis): SLAM in an urban forest. Int J Pest Manag. 2012;58:9–23.
91. Martinat PJ, Coffman CC, Dodge K, Cooper RJ, Whitmore RC. Effect of diflubenzuron on the canopy arthropod community in a central Appalachian forest. J Econ Entomol. 1988;81:261–7.
92. Cooper RJ, Dodge KM, Martinat PJ, Donahoe SB, Whitmore RC. Effect of diflubenzuron application on eastern deciduous forest birds. J Wildl Manag. 1990;54:486–93.
93. Manderino R, Crist TO, Haynes KJ. Lepidoptera-specific insecticide used to suppress gypsy moth outbreaks may benefit nontarget forest Lepidoptera. Agric For Entomol. 2014;16:359–68.
94. Clark KL, Skowronski N, Hom J. Invasive insects impact forest carbon dynamics. Glob Chang Biol. 2010;16:88–101.
95. Grady AE, Scanlon TM, Galloway JN. Declines in dissolved silica concentrations in western Virginia streams (1988–2003): gypsy moth defoliation stimulates diatoms? J Geophys Res. 2007;112: G01009.
96. Hicke JA, Allen CD, Desai AR, Dietze MC, Hall RJ, Hogg EH, et al. Effects of biotic disturbances on forest carbon cycling in the United States and Canada. Glob Chang Biol. 2012;18:7–34.
97. Webb JR, Cosby BJ, Deviney Jr FA, Eshleman KN, Galloway JN. Change in the acid-base status of an appalachian mountain catchment following forest defoliation by the gypsy moth. Water Air Soil Pollut. 1995;85:535–40.
98. Dale VH, Joyce LA, McNulty S, Neilson RP, Ayres MP, Flannigan MD, et al. Climate change and forest disturbances. Bioscience. 2001;51:723–34.
99. Eschtruth AK, Battles JJ. Assessing the relative importance of disturbance, herbivory, diversity, and propagule pressure in exotic plant invasion. Ecol Monogr. 2009;79:265–80.
100. Gómez-Aparicio L, Canham CD. Neighborhood models of the effects of invasive tree species on ecosystem processes. Ecol Monogr. 2008;78:69–86.