Limiting similarity and Darwin's naturalization hypothesis: understanding the drivers of biotic resistance against invasive plant species.

Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain biotic resistance of a recipient plant community based on reduced niche opportunities for invasive alien plant species. The limiting similarity hypothesis predicts that invasive species are less likely to establish in communities of species holding similar functional traits. Likewise, Darwin's naturalization hypothesis states that invasive species closely related to the native community would be less successful. We tested both using the invasive alien Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and Solidago gigantea Aiton, and grassland species used for ecological restoration in central Europe. We classified all plant species into groups based on functional traits obtained from trait databases and calculated the phylogenetic distance among them. In a greenhouse experiment, we submitted the two invasive species at two propagule pressures to competition with communities of ten native species from the same functional group. In another experiment, they were submitted to pairwise competition with native species selected from each functional group. At the community level, highest suppression for both invasive species was observed at low propagule pressure and not explained by similarity in functional traits. Moreover, suppression decreased asymptotically with increasing phylogenetic distance to species of the native community. When submitted to pairwise competition, suppression for both invasive species was also better explained by phylogenetic distance. Overall, our results support Darwin's naturalization hypothesis but not the limiting similarity hypothesis based on the selected traits. Biotic resistance of native communities against invasive species at an early stage of establishment is enhanced by competitive traits and phylogenetic relatedness.

Global patterns in threats to vertebrates by biological invasions.

Biological invasions as drivers of biodiversity loss have recently been challenged. Fundamentally, we must know where species that are threatened by invasive alien species (IAS) live, and the degree to which they are threatened. We report the first study linking 1372 vertebrates threatened by more than 200 IAS from the completely revised Global Invasive Species Database. New maps of the vulnerability of threatened vertebrates to IAS permit assessments of whether IAS have a major influence on biodiversity, and if so, which taxonomic groups are threatened and where they are threatened. We found that centres of IAS-threatened vertebrates are concentrated in the Americas, India, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand. The areas in which IAS-threatened species are located do not fully match the current hotspots of invasions, or the current hotspots of threatened species. The relative importance of biological invasions as drivers of biodiversity loss clearly varies across regions and taxa, and changes over time, with mammals from India, Indonesia, Australia and Europe are increasingly being threatened by IAS. The chytrid fungus primarily threatens amphibians, whereas invasive mammals primarily threaten other vertebrates. The differences in IAS threats between regions and taxa can help efficiently target IAS, which is essential for achieving the Strategic Plan 2020 of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Density-dependent effects of prey defences.

In this study, we show that the protective advantage of a defence depends on prey density. For our investigations, we used the predator-prey model system Chaoborus-Daphnia pulex. The prey, D. pulex, forms neckteeth as an inducible defence against chaoborid predators. This morphological response effectively reduces predator attack efficiency, i.e. number of successful attacks divided by total number of attacks. We found that neckteeth-defended prey suffered a distinctly lower predation rate (prey uptake per unit time) at low prey densities. The advantage of this defence decreased with increasing prey density. We expect this pattern to be general when a defence reduces predator success rate, i.e. when a defence reduces encounter rate, probability of detection, probability of attack, or efficiency of attack. In addition, we experimentally simulated the effects of defences which increase predator digestion time by using different sizes of Daphnia with equal vulnerabilities. This type of defence had opposite density-dependent effects: here, the relative advantage of defended prey increased with prey density. We expect this pattern to be general for defences which increase predator handling time, i.e. defences which increase attacking time, eating time, or digestion time. Many defences will have effects on both predator success rate and handling time. For these defences, the predator's functional response should be decreased over the whole range of prey densities.