Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 507–515 | Cite as

Community homogenization and the invasiveness of commensal species in Mediterranean afforested landscapes

  • Regev Manor
  • Oded Cohen
  • David Saltz
Original Paper

Abstract

The ecological consequences of homogenization remain relatively unexplored. One example of landscape-homogenizing is the establishment of plantations. We studied the effect of human-made forests by contrasting plant and small-mammal community composition between planted tree stands and adjacent natural habitat in two different Mediterranean habitats in Israel: (1) inland habitat where we focused on pine (Pinus halepensis) and carob (Ceratonia siliqua) stands, and (2) coastal sand dune habitat where we focused on planted acacia (Acacia saligna) stands. We first wanted to verify whether planted trees modify plant species composition, and second, if and how the small-mammal community is affected by the different habitat conditions created in plantations with different canopy cover. We were especially interested in the abundance of the commensal house mouse (Mus musculus). All tree stands underwent biotic homogenization indicated by abundance of house mice coupled with lower diversity of indigenous vegetation and small-mammal abundances and diversities. Habitat structural diversity was positively related with small-mammals diversity and was lower in artificial tree stands in both habitats. Our results suggest that using the abundance of commensal generalist species such as the house mouse relative to other more specialist small-mammals is a good approach to determine ecosystem integrity. Pre-commercial thinning treatment is a potential management tool to maintain a proportion of native tree species within the canopy of planted tree stands. However, until sufficient data is available for making generalizations, the exact level of thinning necessary to reverse the homogenization processes in man-made plantations and keeping indigenous small-mammal communities diverse and less prone to invasion must be determined empirically.

Keywords

Acaciasaligna Afforestation Ceratonia siliqua Invasive species Landscape-homogenization Mus musculus Pinus halepensis Small-mammal community 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge D. Fishbein, N. Ben-Dor, O. Ben-Dor and M. Manor for their involvement in the field work. This is publication # 569 of the Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology.

References

  1. Abramsky Z (1978) Changes in species diversity in response to manipulated productivity. Oecologia 34:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramsky Z (1988) The role of habitat and productivity in structuring rodent communities. Oikos 52:107–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abramsky Z, Strauss E, Subach A, Kotler BP (1996) The effect of barn owls (Tyto alba) on the activity and microhabitat selection of Gerbillus allenbyi and G. pyramidum. Oecologia 105:313–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen RB, Platt KH, Coker REJ (1995) Understorey species composition patterns in a Pinus radiata plantation on the central North Island volcanic plateau, New Zealand. NZ J For Sci 25:301–317Google Scholar
  5. Armstrong AJ, van Hensbergen HJ (1996) Impacts of afforestation with pines on assemblages of native biota in South Africa. S Afr For J 175:35–42Google Scholar
  6. Atauri JA, de Pablo CL, de Agar PM, Schmitz MF, Pineda FD (2004) Effects of management on understory diversity in the forest ecosystems of northern Spain. Env Manage 34(6):819–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berry RJ (1991) House mouse Mus domesticus. In: Corbet GB, Harris S (eds) The handbook of British mammals. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 239–247Google Scholar
  8. Carey AB, Johnson ML (1995) Small mammals in managed, naturally young- and old-growth forests. Ecol Appl 5:336–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carey AB, Wilson SM (2001) Induced spatial heterogeneity in forest canopies: Responses of small mammals. J Wildl Manage 65(4):1014–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Case TJ (1990) Invasion resistance arises in strongly interacting species-rich model competition communities. PNAS 87:9610–9614PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connell JH, Slatyer RO (1977). Mechanisms of succession in natural communities and their role in community stability and organization. Am Nat 111:1119–1144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis MA, Thompson K, Grime JP (2005) Invasibility: the local mechanism driving community assembly and species diversity. Ecography 28:696–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DeGraaf RM, Healy WM, Brooks RT (1991) Effects of thinning and deer browsing on breeding birds in New England oak woodlands. For Ecol Manage 41:179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Leo GA, Levin S (1997) The multifaceted aspects of ecosystem integrity. Conserv Ecology (online) 1(1):3. Available from the Internet. URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art3/
  15. Díaz S, Cabido M (2001) Vive la différence: plant functional diversity matters to ecosystem processes. TREE 16(11):646–655Google Scholar
  16. Elton CS (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. FAO (2001) The state of the world’s forests 2001. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. http://www.fao.org/forestry/FO/SOFO/SOFO2001/sofo2001-e.stm
  18. Fernandez FAS, Dunstone N (1994) Local variation in rodent communities of Sitka spruce plantations: The interplay of successional stage and site-specific habitat parameters. Ecography 17(4):305–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Findlay CS, Houlahan J (1997) Anthropogenic correlates of species richness in southeastern Ontario wetlands. Cons Bio 11:1000–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Geldenhuys CJ (1997) Native forest regeneration in pine and eucalypt plantations in Northern Province, South Africa. For Ecol Manage 99:101–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grunwald C, Schiller G, Conkle MT (1986) lsozyme variation among native stands and plantations of Aleppo pine in Israel. Isr J Bot 35:161–174Google Scholar
  22. Hartley MJ (2002) Rationale and methods for conserving biodiversity in plantation forests. For Ecol Manage 155:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones AG, Chown SL, Gaston KJ (2003) Introduced house mice as a conservation concern on Gough Island. Biodiv Cons 12: 2107–2119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kirkland GL Jr (1990) Patterns of initial small mammal community change after clearcutting of temperate North American forests. Oikos 59:313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kutiel-Bar P, Cohen O, Shoshany M (2004) Invasion rate of the alien species Acacia saligna within coastal sand dune habitats in Israel. Isr J Plant Sci 52(2):115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lautenschlager RA (1993) Response of wildlife to forest herbicide applications in northern coniferous ecosystems. Can J For Res 23:2286–2299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lavery PB, Mead DJ (1998) Pinus radiata: a narrow endemic from North America takes on the world. In: Richardson DM (ed) Ecology and biogeography of pinus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 432–449Google Scholar
  28. Lavi A, Perevolotsky A, Kigel J, Noy-Meir I, (2005) Invasion of Pinus halepensis from plantations into adjacent natural habitats. Appl Veg Sci 8:85–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lehmann T, Perevolotsky A (1992) Small mammals in coniferous plantations and native environment is southern Mt. Carmel, Israel. Mammalia 56:575–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liphschitz N, Biger G (2001) Past distribution of Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) in the mountains of Israel (Palestine). Holocene 11(4):427–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti P, Grime JP, Hector A, Hooper DU, Huston MA, Raffaelli D, Schmid B, Tilman D, Wardle A (2001) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:804–808PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MacLean DA, Wein RW (1977) Changes in understory vegetation with increasing stand age in New Brunswick forests: species composition, cover, biomass and nutrients. Can J Bot 55:2818–2831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Manor R, Saltz D (2004) The impact of free-roaming dogs on gazelle kid/female ratio in a fragmented area. Biol Cons 119(2):231–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McKinney ML, Lockwood JL (1999) Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. TREE 14:450–453PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Menkens GE Jr, Anderson SH (1988) Estimation of small-mammal population size. Ecology 69:1952–1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mitchell RJ, Zutter BR, Gjerstad DH, Glover GR, Wood CW (1999) Competition among secondary-successional pine communities: a field study of effects and responses. Ecology 80:857–872Google Scholar
  37. Moore SE, Allen HL (1999) Plantation forestry. In: Hunter ML Jr (eds) Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 400–433Google Scholar
  38. Naeem S, Knops JMH, Tilman D, Howe KM, Kennedy T, Gale S (2000) Plant diversity increases resistance to invasion in the absence of covarying extrinsic factors. Oikos 91:97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Norton DA (1998) Indigenous biodiversity conservation and plantation forestry: options for the future. NZ For 43(2):34–39Google Scholar
  40. Ogden J, Braggins J, Stretton K, Anderson S (1997) Plant species richness under Pinus radiata stands on the central North Island volcanic plateau, New Zealand. NZ J Ecol 21:17–29Google Scholar
  41. Olden JD (2006) Biotic homogenization: a new research agenda for conservation biogeography. J Biog 33(12):2027–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Olden JD, Poff NL (2004) Ecological processes driving biotic homogenization: testing a mechanistic model using fish faunas. Ecology 85:1867–1875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Olden JD, Poff NL, Douglas MR, Douglas ME, Fausch KD (2004) Ecological and evolutionary consequences of biotic homogenization. TREE 19(1):18–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Otis DL, Burnham KP, White GC, Anderson DR (1978) Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations. Wildl Monog 62, p 135Google Scholar
  45. Palik B, Engstrom RT (1999) Species composition. In: Hunter ML Jr (ed) Maintaining biodiversity in forest ecosystems. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 65–94Google Scholar
  46. Pocock MJO, Hauffe HC, Searle JB (2005). Dispersal in house mice. Biol J Linn Soc 4(3):565–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Qian H, Ricklefs RE, (2006) The role of exotic species in homogenizing the North American flora. Ecol Lett 9:1293–1298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rahel FJ (2002) Homogenization of freshwater faunas. Ann Rev Ecol Sys 33:291–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ricklefs RE (1990) Ecology, 3rd edn. WH Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. Roberts MR (2002) Effects of forest plantation management on herbaceous-layer composition and diversity. Can J Bot 80:378–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosenzweig ML (1995) Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  52. Runciman JB, Sullivan TP (1996) Influence of alternative conifer release treatments on habitat structure and small mammal populations in south central British Columbia. Can J For Res 26(11):2023–2034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schlapfer F, Schmid B (1999) Ecosystem effects of biodiversity: a classification of hypotheses and exploration of empirical results. Ecol Appl 9:893–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schmid-Holmes S, Drickamer LC (2001) Impact of forest patch characteristics on small mammal communities: a multivariate approach. Biol Cons 99(3):293–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smith VR, Avenant NL, Chown SL (2002) The diet and impact of house mice on a sub-Antarctic island. Pol Biol 25(9):703–715Google Scholar
  56. Stachowicz JJ, Whitlatch RB, Osman RW (1999) Species diversity and invasion resistance in a marine ecosystem. Science 286:1577–1579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stachowicz JJ, Fried H, Osman RW, Whitlatch RB (2002) Biodiversity, invasion resistance, and marine ecosystem function: reconciling pattern and process. Ecology 83(9):2575–2590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sullivan TP (1994) Influence of herbicide-induced habitat alteration on vegetation and snowshoe hare populations in sub-boreal spruce forest. J Appl Ecol 31:717–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sullivan TP, Sullivan DS (2001) Influence of variable retention harvests on forest ecosystems. II. Diversity and population dynamics of small mammals. J Appl Ecol 38(6):1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Swihart RK, Gehring TM, Kolozsvary M, Nupp TE (2003) Responses of ‘resistant’ vertebrates to habitat loss and fragmentation: the importance of niche breadth and range boundaries. Diver Distrib 9:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Thysell DR, Carey AB (2001) Manipulation of density of Pseudotsuga menziesii canopies: preliminary effects on understory vegetation. Can J For Res 31:1513–1525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wagner RG (1993) Research directions to advance forest vegetation management in North America. Can J For Res 23:2317–2327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Western D (2001) Human-modified ecosystems and future evolution. PNAS 98(10):5458–5465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioScience 48(8):607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, Blaustein Institute for Desert ResearchBen Gurion UniversitySede BokerIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Geography and Environmental DevelopmentBen-Gurion UniversityBeer-ShevaIsrael

Personalised recommendations