, Volume 189, Issue 2, pp 537–548 | Cite as

Community composition influences the population growth and ecological impact of invasive species in response to climate change

  • Danielle DenleyEmail author
  • Anna Metaxas
  • Katja Fennel
Global change ecology – original research


Predicting long-term impacts of introduced species is challenging, since stressors related to global change can influence species–community interactions by affecting both demographic rates of invasive species and the structure of the invaded ecosystems. Invasive species can alter ecosystem structure over time, further complicating interactions between invasive species and invaded communities in response to additional stressors. Few studies have considered how cumulative impacts of species invasion and global change on the structure of invaded ecosystems may influence persistence and population growth of introduced species. Here, we present an empirically based population model for an invasive epiphytic bryozoan that can dramatically alter the structure of its invaded kelp bed ecosystems. We use this model to predict the response of invasive species to climate change and associated changes in the invaded community. Population growth of the bryozoan increased under near-future projections of increasing ocean temperature; however, the magnitude of population growth depended on the community composition of invaded kelp beds. Our results suggest that, in some cases, indirect effects of climate change mediated through changes to the structure of the invaded habitat can modulate direct effects of climate change on invasive species, with consequences for their long-term ecological impact. Our findings have important implications for management of invasive species, as modifying invaded habitats at local to regional scales may be more logistically feasible than addressing stressors related to global climate change.


Population dynamics Population model Kelp beds Bryozoan Temperature 



We thank J. Lindley, R. E. Scheibling, J. O’Brien, C. Feehan, K. Sorochan, K. Filbee-Dexter, E. Simonson, and K. Desilets for assistance with field work. R. E. Scheibling and two anonymous reviewers provided comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This research was funded by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) Discovery grant to A.M, and a Dalhousie Faculty of Graduate Studies scholarship, Nova Scotia Scholarship, NSERC Canada Graduate Scholarship, and Dalhousie Killam Scholarship to D.D.

Author contribution statement

DD collected and analysed field data, developed the study design and matrix population model, analysed model output, and wrote the manuscript. AM supervised the study design and analysis and edited the manuscript, KF supervised the development of the matrix population model and analysis of model output and edited the manuscript.


This study was funded by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discover grant (NSERC RGPIN-2016-04,878) to AM.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable national and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed in accordance with the recommendations of the Canadian Council on Animal Care and the policies of Dalhousie University.

Supplementary material

442_2018_4334_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (3.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 3547 kb)
442_2018_4334_MOESM2_ESM.txt (65 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (TXT 65 kb)


  1. Barlow ND, Kean JM (2004) Resource abundance and invasiveness: a simple model. Biol Invasions 6:261–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Lockwood KL (2009) The role of species traits in the establishment success of exotic birds. Glob Change Biol 15:2852–2860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohn K, Richardson CA, Jenkins SR (2015) The distribution of the invasive non-native gastropod Crepidula fornicata in the Milford Haven Waterway, its northernmost population along the west coast of Britain. Helgol Mar Res 69:313–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Byers JE, Noonburg EG (2003) Scale dependent effects of biotic resistance to biological invasion. Ecology 84:1428–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlton JT (1996) Pattern, process, and prediction in marine invasion ecology. Biol Conserv 78:97–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlton JT (2000) Global change and biological invasions in the ocean. In: Mooney HA, Richard JH (eds) invasive species in a changing world. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 31–54Google Scholar
  7. Caswell H (2001) Matrix population models. Sinauer Associates, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  8. Cockrell ML, Sorte CJB (2013) Predicting climate-induced changes in population dynamics of invasive species in a marine epibenthic community. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 440:42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crooks JA (2002) Characterizing ecosystem-level consequences of biological invasions: the role of ecosystem engineers. Oikos 97:153–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dafforn KA, Johnson EL, Glasby TM (2009) Shallow moving structures promote marine invader dominance. Biofouling 25:277–287CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Denley D, Metaxas A (2016) Quantifying mortality of modular organisms: a comparison of partial and whole colony mortality in a colonial bryozoan. Ecosphere 7(10):e01483. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Denley D, Metaxas A (2017a) Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on reproduction of an ecologically significant invasive bryozoan: implications for invasion success. Mar Biol 164:145. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Denley D, Metaxas A (2017b) Lack of substrate specificity contributes to invasion success and persistence of Membranipora membranacea in the northwest Atlantic. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 580:117–129. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dick JTA, Alexander ME, Ricciardi A, Laverty C, Downey PO, Xu M, Jeschke JM, Saul W-C, Hill MP, Wasserman R, Barrios-O’Neil D, Weyl OLF, Shaw RH (2017) Functional responses can unify invasion ecology. Biol Invasions 19:1667–1672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Didham RK, Tylianakis JM, Gemmell NJ, Rand TA, Ewers RM (2007) Interactive effects of habitat modification and species invasion on native species decline. Trends Ecol Evol 22:489–496CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Drake JM, Baggenstos P, Lodge DM (2005) Propagule pressure and persistence in experimental populations. Biol Lett 1:480–483CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Drayton B, Primack RB (1999) Experimental extinction of garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) populations: implications for weed science and conservation biology. Biol Invasions 1:159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dukes JS, Mooney H (1999) Does global change increase the success of biological invaders? Trends Ecol Evol 14:135–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Filbee-Dexter K, Feehan CJ, Scheibling RE (2016) Large-scale degradation of a kelp ecosystem in an ocean warming hotspot. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 543:141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Forrest BM, Fletcher LM, Atalah J, Piola RF, Hopkins GA (2013) Predation limits spread of Didemnum vexillum into natural habitats from refuges on anthropogenic structures. PLoS One 8(12):e82229. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Fridley JD, Stachowicz JJ, Naeem S, Sax DF, Seabloom EW, Smith MD, Stohlgren TJ, Tilman D, Von Holle B (2007) The invasion paradox: reconciling pattern and process is species invasions. Ecology 88:3–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gehman A-LM, Hall RJ, Byers JE (2018) Host and parasite thermal ecology jointly determine the effect of climate warming on epidemic dynamics. PNAS 21:12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gonzalez A, Lambert A, Ricciardi A (2008) When does ecosystem engineering cause invasion and species replacement? Oikos 117:1247–1257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Halpern BS, Selkoe KA, Micheli F, Kappel CV (2007) Evaluating and ranking the vulnerability of global marine ecosystems to anthropogenic threats. Conserv Biol 21:1301–1315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris LG, Tyrrell MC (2001) Changing community states in the Gulf of Maine: synergism between invaders, overfishing and climate change. Biol Invasions 3:9–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hellmann JJ, Byers JE, Bierwagen BG, Dukes JS (2008) Five potential consequences of climate change for invasive species. Conserv Biol 22:534–543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hulme PE, Pysek P, Jarosík V, Pergl J, Schaffner U, Vilà M (2013) Bias and error in understanding plan invasion impacts. Trends Ecol Evol 28:212–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Iacarella JC, Dick JTA, Alexander ME, Ricciardi A (2015) Ecological impacts of invasive alien species along temperature gradients: testing the role of environmental matching. Ecol Appl 25:706–716CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kean JM, Barlow ND (2000) A spatial model for successful biological control of Sitona discoideus by Microctonus aethiopoides. J Appl Ecol 10:689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kirtman B, Power SB, Adedoyin JA, Boer GJ, Bojariu R, Camilloni I, Doblas-Reyes FJ, Fiore AM, Kimoto M, Meehl GA, Prather M, Sarr A, Schär C, Sutton R, van Oldenborgh GJ, Vecchi G, Wang HJ (2013) Near-term climate change: projections and predictability. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PH (eds) Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16:199–204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Krumhansl KA, Scheibling RE (2011) Detrital production in Nova Scotia kelp beds: patterns and processes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 421:67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krumhansl KA, Lee JM, Scheibling RE (2011) Grazing damage and encrustation by an invasive bryozoan reduce the ability of kelps to withstand breakage by waves. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 407:12–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Krumhansl KA, Lauzon-Guay J-S, Scheibling RE (2014) Modeling effects of climate change and phase shifts on detrital production of a kelp bed. Ecology 95:763–774CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Lambert G (2003) Marine biodiversity of Guam: the Ascidiacea. Micronesica 35–36:588–597Google Scholar
  36. Lefkovitch LP (1965) The study of population growth in organisms grouped by stages. Biometrics 21:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Levin PS, Coyer JA, Petrik K, Good TP (2002) Community-wide effects of nonindigenous species on temperate rocky reefs. Ecology 83:3182–3193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Loder WL, van der Baaren A, Yashayaev I (2015) Climate comparisons and change projections for the northwest Atlantic from six CMIP5 models. Atmos Ocean 53:529–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lodge DM (1993a) Biological invasions: lessons for ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 8:133–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Lodge DM (1993b) Species invasions and deletions: community effects and responses to climate and habitat change. In: Kareiva PM, Kingsolver JG, Huey RB (eds) Biotic interactions and global change. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, pp 367–387Google Scholar
  41. MacDougall AS, Turkington R (2005) Are invasive species the drivers or passengers of change in degraded ecosystems? Ecology 86:42–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mech AM, Tobin PC, Teskey RO, Rhea JR, Gandhi KJK (2018) Increases in summer temperatures decrease the survival of an invasive forest insect. Biol Invasions 20:365–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. O’Brien J (2018) Processes reinforcing regime shift to turf-forming algae in a kelp bed ecosystem. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  44. Occhipinti-Ambrogi A (2007) Global change and marine communities: alien species and climate change. Mar Pollut Bull 55:342–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Pimm SL (1989) Theories of predicting success and impact of introduced species. In: Drake JA, Mooney HA, di Castri F, Groves RH, Kruger FJ, Rejmànek M, Williamson M (eds) Biological invasions: a global perspective. Wiley, Chichester, pp 351–367Google Scholar
  46. Rahel FJ, Olden JD (2008) Assessing the effects of climate change on aquatic invasive species. Conserv Biol 22:521–533CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Rejmánek M (1995) What makes a species invasive? In: Pysek P, Prach K, Rejmánek M, Wade PM (eds) Plant invasions. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 3–13Google Scholar
  48. Ricciardi A, Jones LA, Kestrup AM, Ward JM (2011) Impacts of biological invasions on freshwater ecosystems. In: Richardson DM (ed) Fifty years of invasion ecology: the legacy of Charles Elton. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Chichester, pp 225–235Google Scholar
  49. Ricciardi A, Hoopes MF, Marchetti MP, Lockwood JL (2013) Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species. Ecol Monogr 83:263–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rius M, Clusella-Trullas S, McQuaid CD, Navarro RA, Griffiths CL, Matthee CA, von der Heyden S, Turon X (2014) Range expansions across ecoregions: interactions of climate change, physiology and genetic diversity. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 23:76–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosecchi E, Thomas F, Crivelli AJ (2001) Can life-history traits predict the fate of introduced species? A case study of two cyprinid fish in southern France. Freshw Biol 46:845–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Saunders M, Metaxas A (2007) Temperature explains settlement patterns of the introduced bryozoan Membranipora membranacea in Nova Scotia, Canada. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 344:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saunders M, Metaxas A (2008) High recruitment of the introduced bryozoan Membranipora membranacea is associated with kelp bed defoliation in Nova Scotia, Canada. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 369:139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Saunders M, Metaxas A (2009a) Effects of temperature, size, and food on the growth of Membranipora membranacea in laboratory and field studies. Mar Biol 156:2267–2276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Saunders M, Metaxas A (2009b) Population dynamics of a nonindigenous epiphytic bryozoan Membranipora membranacea in the western North Atlantic: effects of kelp substrate. Aquat Biol 8:83–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Saunders MI, Metaxas A, Filgueira R (2010) Implication of warming temperatures for population outbreaks of nonindigenous species (Membranipora membranacea, Bryozoa) in rocky subtidal ecosystems. Limnol Oceanogr 55:1627–1642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Scheibling RE, Gagnon P (2009) Temperature-mediated outbreak dynamics of the invasive bryozoan Membranipora membranacea in Nova Scotian kelp beds. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 309:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Simberloff D (2011) How common are invasion-induced ecosystem impacts? Biol Invasions 13:1255–1268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Simons RD, Page HM, Zaleski S, Miller R, Dugan JE, Schroeder DM, Doheny B (2016) The effects of anthropogenic structures on habitat connectivity and the potential spread of non-native invertebrate species in the offshore environment. PLoS One 11(3):e0152261. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Simonson EJ, Scheibling RE, Metaxas A (2015) Kelp in hot water: I. Warming seawater temperature induces weakening and loss of kelp tissue. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 537:89–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sorte CJB, Stachowicz JJ (2011) Patterns and processes of compositional change in a California epibenthic community. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 435:63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sorte CJB, Williams SL, Zerebecki RA (2010) Ocean warming increases threat of invasive species in a marine fouling community. Ecology 91:2198–2204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Stachowicz JJ, Terwin JR, Whitlatch RB, Osman RW (2002) Linking climate change and biological invasions: ocean warming facilitates nonindigenous species invasions. PNAS 99:15497–15500CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Strayer DL (2012) Eight questions about invasions and ecosystem functioning. Ecol Lett 15:1199–1210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Vitousek PM (1990) Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an integration of population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos 57:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmánek M, Westbrooks R (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. N Z J Ecol 21:1–16Google Scholar
  67. Williamson M (1996) Biological invasions. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  68. Yorke AF, Metaxas A (2012) Relative importance of kelps and fucoids as substrata of the invasive epiphytic bryozoan Membranipora membranacea in Nova Scotia, Canada. Aquat Biol 16:17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yoshioka PM (1973) The population dynamics and ecology of the encrusting ectoproct Membranipora serrilamella. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego, California, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OceanographyDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations