外来植物物种优于本地植物物种吗?荟萃分析

IF 3 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Christine S. Sheppard , Nora Lüpke
{"title":"外来植物物种优于本地植物物种吗?荟萃分析","authors":"Christine S. Sheppard ,&nbsp;Nora Lüpke","doi":"10.1016/j.baae.2024.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Biological invasions are a major threat to biodiversity because of invasive alien species’ high population growth rates and spread in new ranges. The inherent superiority hypothesis states that particular characteristics of alien species cause them to perform better than native species. Using a meta-analysis of 127 studies and more than 900 experimental observations comparing alien and native plant performance, we investigated, whether: (1) studies comparing alien and native performance generally support the inherent superiority hypothesis; (2) the direction and magnitude of superiority depend on the choice of performance measure; and (3) it depends on other aspects of the study design or species. We found that the inherent superiority hypothesis was overall supported, although the strength of this result depended on the chosen measure of effect size (a significant effect for the standardized mean difference SMD (Hedge's g) but not for the log response ratio LRR). Alien plant species were more likely to be found superior compared to natives if performance was measured in terms of growth, reproduction or response to natural enemies. Measuring survival or abundance was less likely to result in alien superiority, while for measurements of physiology and response to mutualists results were mixed. Furthermore, aspects of experimental design, selection and number of study species played an important role. We thus quantitatively showed across a broad range of conditions how choice of performance measure and experimental design affect the direction and magnitude of alien superiority found in small-scale studies. Furthermore, our review pointed out a lack of studies that assessed population growth as a direct determinant of true superiority. Conducting studies using performance measures relevant for superiority, while also considering other potentially important factors such as residence time, will shed more light on how common true alien superiority is and in which contexts it is to be expected.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8708,"journal":{"name":"Basic and Applied Ecology","volume":"77 ","pages":"Pages 16-25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1439179124000252/pdfft?md5=796df1c7338cd5cfba2ee1713fb76278&pid=1-s2.0-S1439179124000252-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are alien plant species superior to natives, and is this determined by performance measure and study design? A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Christine S. Sheppard ,&nbsp;Nora Lüpke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.baae.2024.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Biological invasions are a major threat to biodiversity because of invasive alien species’ high population growth rates and spread in new ranges. The inherent superiority hypothesis states that particular characteristics of alien species cause them to perform better than native species. Using a meta-analysis of 127 studies and more than 900 experimental observations comparing alien and native plant performance, we investigated, whether: (1) studies comparing alien and native performance generally support the inherent superiority hypothesis; (2) the direction and magnitude of superiority depend on the choice of performance measure; and (3) it depends on other aspects of the study design or species. We found that the inherent superiority hypothesis was overall supported, although the strength of this result depended on the chosen measure of effect size (a significant effect for the standardized mean difference SMD (Hedge's g) but not for the log response ratio LRR). Alien plant species were more likely to be found superior compared to natives if performance was measured in terms of growth, reproduction or response to natural enemies. Measuring survival or abundance was less likely to result in alien superiority, while for measurements of physiology and response to mutualists results were mixed. Furthermore, aspects of experimental design, selection and number of study species played an important role. We thus quantitatively showed across a broad range of conditions how choice of performance measure and experimental design affect the direction and magnitude of alien superiority found in small-scale studies. Furthermore, our review pointed out a lack of studies that assessed population growth as a direct determinant of true superiority. Conducting studies using performance measures relevant for superiority, while also considering other potentially important factors such as residence time, will shed more light on how common true alien superiority is and in which contexts it is to be expected.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8708,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Basic and Applied Ecology\",\"volume\":\"77 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 16-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1439179124000252/pdfft?md5=796df1c7338cd5cfba2ee1713fb76278&pid=1-s2.0-S1439179124000252-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Basic and Applied Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1439179124000252\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basic and Applied Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1439179124000252","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生物入侵是生物多样性的一个主要威胁,因为外来入侵物种的种群增长率很高,并在新的地区扩散。与生俱来的优越性假说认为,外来物种的特殊性使其表现优于本地物种。通过对 127 项研究和 900 多个实验观察结果进行荟萃分析,我们研究了外来植物和本地植物的表现比较:(1)外来植物和本地植物的表现比较研究是否普遍支持固有优越性假说;(2)优越性的方向和大小取决于表现测量的选择;(3)优越性是否取决于研究设计或物种的其他方面。我们发现,固有优越性假说总体上得到了支持,尽管这一结果的强度取决于所选择的效应大小衡量标准(标准化均值差异 SMD(Hedge's g)有显著效应,但对数反应比 LRR 没有显著效应)。如果以生长、繁殖或对天敌的反应来衡量外来植物物种的表现,则外来植物物种更有可能优于本地物种。外来物种的存活率或丰度不太可能导致其优越性,而生理机能和对互惠者的反应方面的测量结果则好坏参半。此外,实验设计、研究物种的选择和数量也起着重要作用。因此,我们在广泛的条件下定量展示了性能测量和实验设计的选择如何影响小规模研究中发现的外来优势的方向和程度。此外,我们的综述还指出,缺乏对种群增长作为真正优势的直接决定因素进行评估的研究。使用与优越性相关的性能指标进行研究,同时考虑其他潜在的重要因素(如居住时间),将能更清楚地了解真正的外来优越性有多普遍,以及在哪些情况下会出现这种优越性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Are alien plant species superior to natives, and is this determined by performance measure and study design? A meta-analysis

Are alien plant species superior to natives, and is this determined by performance measure and study design? A meta-analysis

Biological invasions are a major threat to biodiversity because of invasive alien species’ high population growth rates and spread in new ranges. The inherent superiority hypothesis states that particular characteristics of alien species cause them to perform better than native species. Using a meta-analysis of 127 studies and more than 900 experimental observations comparing alien and native plant performance, we investigated, whether: (1) studies comparing alien and native performance generally support the inherent superiority hypothesis; (2) the direction and magnitude of superiority depend on the choice of performance measure; and (3) it depends on other aspects of the study design or species. We found that the inherent superiority hypothesis was overall supported, although the strength of this result depended on the chosen measure of effect size (a significant effect for the standardized mean difference SMD (Hedge's g) but not for the log response ratio LRR). Alien plant species were more likely to be found superior compared to natives if performance was measured in terms of growth, reproduction or response to natural enemies. Measuring survival or abundance was less likely to result in alien superiority, while for measurements of physiology and response to mutualists results were mixed. Furthermore, aspects of experimental design, selection and number of study species played an important role. We thus quantitatively showed across a broad range of conditions how choice of performance measure and experimental design affect the direction and magnitude of alien superiority found in small-scale studies. Furthermore, our review pointed out a lack of studies that assessed population growth as a direct determinant of true superiority. Conducting studies using performance measures relevant for superiority, while also considering other potentially important factors such as residence time, will shed more light on how common true alien superiority is and in which contexts it is to be expected.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Basic and Applied Ecology
Basic and Applied Ecology 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
103
审稿时长
10.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Basic and Applied Ecology provides a forum in which significant advances and ideas can be rapidly communicated to a wide audience. Basic and Applied Ecology publishes original contributions, perspectives and reviews from all areas of basic and applied ecology. Ecologists from all countries are invited to publish ecological research of international interest in its pages. There is no bias with regard to taxon or geographical area.
×
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