Evolution of increased competitive ability may explain dominance of introduced species in ruderal communities

IF 7.1 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
José L. Hierro, Özkan Eren, Jan Čuda, Laura A. Meyerson
{"title":"Evolution of increased competitive ability may explain dominance of introduced species in ruderal communities","authors":"José L. Hierro,&nbsp;Özkan Eren,&nbsp;Jan Čuda,&nbsp;Laura A. Meyerson","doi":"10.1002/ecm.1524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis encapsulates the importance of evolution and ecology for biological invasions. According to this proposition, leaving specialist herbivores at home frees introduced plant species from investing limited resources in defense to instead use those resources for growth, selecting for individuals with reduced defense, enhanced growth, and, consequently, increased competitive ability. We took a multispecies approach, including ancestral and non-native populations of seven weeds, as well as seven coexisting local weeds, to explore all three predictions (i.e., lower defense, greater growth, and better ability to compete in non-native than ancestral populations), the generality as an invasion mechanism for a given system, and community-level consequences of EICA. We assessed plant defenses by conducting herbivory trials with a generalist herbivore. Therefore, finding that non-native populations are better defended than ancestral populations would lend support to the shifting defense (SD) hypothesis, an extension of EICA that incorporates the observation that introduced species escape specialists, but encounter generalists. We also manipulated water additions to evaluate how resource availability influences competition in the context of EICA and plant plasticity in our semiarid system. We found that non-native populations of one study species, <i>Centaurea solstitialis</i>, were better defended, grew faster, and exerted stronger suppression on locals than ancestral populations, offering support to EICA through the SD hypothesis. The other species also displayed variation in trait attributes between ancestral and non-native populations, but they did not fully comply with the three predictions of EICA. Notably, differences between those populations generally favored the non-natives. Moreover, non-native populations were, overall, superior at suppressing locals relative to ancestral populations under low water conditions. There were no differences in plasticity among all three groups. These results suggest that evolutionary change between ancestral and non-native populations is widespread and could have facilitated invasion in our system. Additionally, although trading growth for shifted defense does not seem to be the main operational path for evolutionary change, it may explain the dominance of some introduced species in ruderal communities. Because introduced species dominate communities in disturbed environments around the world, our results are likely generalizable to other systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":11505,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Monographs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Monographs","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecm.1524","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis encapsulates the importance of evolution and ecology for biological invasions. According to this proposition, leaving specialist herbivores at home frees introduced plant species from investing limited resources in defense to instead use those resources for growth, selecting for individuals with reduced defense, enhanced growth, and, consequently, increased competitive ability. We took a multispecies approach, including ancestral and non-native populations of seven weeds, as well as seven coexisting local weeds, to explore all three predictions (i.e., lower defense, greater growth, and better ability to compete in non-native than ancestral populations), the generality as an invasion mechanism for a given system, and community-level consequences of EICA. We assessed plant defenses by conducting herbivory trials with a generalist herbivore. Therefore, finding that non-native populations are better defended than ancestral populations would lend support to the shifting defense (SD) hypothesis, an extension of EICA that incorporates the observation that introduced species escape specialists, but encounter generalists. We also manipulated water additions to evaluate how resource availability influences competition in the context of EICA and plant plasticity in our semiarid system. We found that non-native populations of one study species, Centaurea solstitialis, were better defended, grew faster, and exerted stronger suppression on locals than ancestral populations, offering support to EICA through the SD hypothesis. The other species also displayed variation in trait attributes between ancestral and non-native populations, but they did not fully comply with the three predictions of EICA. Notably, differences between those populations generally favored the non-natives. Moreover, non-native populations were, overall, superior at suppressing locals relative to ancestral populations under low water conditions. There were no differences in plasticity among all three groups. These results suggest that evolutionary change between ancestral and non-native populations is widespread and could have facilitated invasion in our system. Additionally, although trading growth for shifted defense does not seem to be the main operational path for evolutionary change, it may explain the dominance of some introduced species in ruderal communities. Because introduced species dominate communities in disturbed environments around the world, our results are likely generalizable to other systems.

竞争能力增强的进化可能解释了引进物种在原始群落中的优势
增强竞争能力的进化(EICA)假说概括了进化和生态对生物入侵的重要性。根据这一命题,把专门的食草动物留在家里,可以使引进的植物物种免于将有限的资源用于防御,而是将这些资源用于生长,选择防御能力较低、生长能力较强的个体,从而提高竞争能力。我们采用多物种方法,包括7种杂草的祖先种群和非本地种群,以及7种共存的本地杂草,以探索所有三个预测(即较低的防御,更大的生长和更好的竞争能力),作为给定系统的入侵机制的普遍性,以及EICA的社区水平后果。我们通过对一只多面手食草动物进行草食试验来评估植物防御能力。因此,发现非本地种群比祖先种群具有更好的防御能力将为转移防御假说(SD)提供支持,这是EICA的延伸,包含了引入物种逃避专家,但遇到通才的观察结果。我们还操纵了水分添加量,以评估资源可用性如何影响EICA和半干旱系统中植物可塑性背景下的竞争。我们发现,与祖先种群相比,研究物种Centaurea solstitialis的非本地种群防御更好,生长更快,对本地种群的抑制更强,通过SD假设支持EICA。其他物种在祖先种群和非本地种群之间也表现出性状属性的差异,但它们并不完全符合EICA的三个预测。值得注意的是,这些种群之间的差异通常有利于非本地人。此外,总体而言,在低水条件下,非本地种群对本地种群的抑制优于祖先种群。三组之间的可塑性没有差异。这些结果表明,祖先和非本地种群之间的进化变化是广泛的,可能促进了入侵我们的系统。此外,尽管用生长换取防御转移似乎不是进化变化的主要操作路径,但它可以解释一些引入物种在原始群落中的优势地位。由于引进物种在世界各地受干扰的环境中占主导地位,我们的结果可能可以推广到其他系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecological Monographs
Ecological Monographs 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The vision for Ecological Monographs is that it should be the place for publishing integrative, synthetic papers that elaborate new directions for the field of ecology. Original Research Papers published in Ecological Monographs will continue to document complex observational, experimental, or theoretical studies that by their very integrated nature defy dissolution into shorter publications focused on a single topic or message. Reviews will be comprehensive and synthetic papers that establish new benchmarks in the field, define directions for future research, contribute to fundamental understanding of ecological principles, and derive principles for ecological management in its broadest sense (including, but not limited to: conservation, mitigation, restoration, and pro-active protection of the environment). Reviews should reflect the full development of a topic and encompass relevant natural history, observational and experimental data, analyses, models, and theory. Reviews published in Ecological Monographs should further blur the boundaries between “basic” and “applied” ecology. Concepts and Synthesis papers will conceptually advance the field of ecology. These papers are expected to go well beyond works being reviewed and include discussion of new directions, new syntheses, and resolutions of old questions. In this world of rapid scientific advancement and never-ending environmental change, there needs to be room for the thoughtful integration of scientific ideas, data, and concepts that feeds the mind and guides the development of the maturing science of ecology. Ecological Monographs provides that room, with an expansive view to a sustainable future.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信