School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2
-
ItemDisentangling the four demographic dimensions of species invasiveness(WILEY, 2016-11)A definitive list of invasive species traits remains elusive, perhaps due to inconsistent ways of identifying invasive species. Invasive species are typically identified using one or more of four demographic criteria (local abundance, geographic range, environmental range, spread rate), referred to here as the demographic dimensions of invasiveness. In 112 studies comparing invasive and non‐invasive plant traits, all 15 combinations of the four demographic dimensions were used to identify invasive species; 22% of studies identified invasive species solely by high abundance, while 25% ignored abundance. We used demographic data of 340 alien herbs classified as invasive or non‐invasive in Victoria, Australia, to test whether the demographic dimensions are independent and which dimensions influence invasive species listing in practice. Species' abundances, spread rates and range sizes were independent. Relative abundance best explained the invasiveness classification. However, invasive and non‐invasive species each spanned the full range of each demographic dimension, indicating that no dimension clearly separates invasive from non‐invasive species. Graminoids with longer minimum residence times were more frequently classified as invasive, as were forbs occurring near edges of native vegetation fragments. Synthesis. Conflating multiple forms of invasiveness, by not distinguishing invasive species that are identified using different demographic criteria, may obscure traits possessed by particular subsets of invasive species. Traits promoting high abundance likely differ from those enabling fast spread and broad ranges. Examining traits linked with the four demographic dimensions of invasiveness will highlight species at risk of becoming dominant, spreading quickly or occupying large ranges.
-
ItemPlant functional traits reflect different dimensions of species invasiveness(WILEY, 2021-05)Trait-based invasiveness studies typically categorize exotic species as invasive or noninvasive, implicitly assuming species form two homogenous groups. However, species can become invasive in different ways (e.g., high abundance, fast spread), likely relying on different functional traits to do so. As such, binary classification may obscure traits associated with invasiveness. We tested whether (1) the way in which invasiveness is quantified influences its correlation with functional traits and (2) different demography-based metrics are related to different sets of traits. Using a case study of 251 herbs exotic to Victoria, Australia, we quantified species' invasiveness using 10 metrics: four continuous, demography-based dimensions of invasiveness (spread rate, local abundance, geographic and environmental range sizes) and six binary classifications of invasiveness (based on alternative sources and invasion criteria). We examined the correlation between species' invasiveness and a set of four traits known to relate to plant demography and invasion. Then, we examined whether different demographic dimensions of invasiveness were better explained by different sets of traits. We found that the way invasiveness was quantified was important: different traits were linked with different invasiveness metrics, and some traits showed opposite effects across metrics. Species with fast spread were either tall with small seeds (i.e., good colonizers), or had heavy, animal-dispersed seeds. Plants with a large environmental range had greater plasticity for some traits. Locally abundant plants had low SLA and heavy seeds (i.e., strong competitors). Animal dispersal was also key to reach a large geographic range. No traits were consistently related to the six binary classifications. Our results indicate that exotic plants are invasive in different ways and rely on different combinations of traits to be so. Some traits (e.g., seed mass) had complex relationships with invasion: they apparently promote, hampered, or had no influence on different dimensions of invasiveness. Our findings are consistent with the notion that plant species use strategies that may be near optimal under some, but not all, ecological conditions. Compared to binary classifications of invasiveness, the use of invasiveness dimensions advances clearer hypothesis testing in invasion science.