Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A test of the evolution of increased competitive ability in two invaded regions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Evolutionary Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Non-native plant species invasions can have significant ecological and economic impacts. Finding patterns that predict and explain the success of non-native species has thus been an important focus in invasion ecology. The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis has been a frequently used framework to understand invasion success. Evolution of increased competitive ability predicts that (1) non-native populations will escape from coevolved specialist herbivores that were present within the native range and this release from specialist herbivores should result in relaxed selection pressure on specialist-related defense traits, (2) there will be a trade-off between allocation of resources for resistance against specialist herbivores and allocation to traits related to competitive ability, and (3) this shift will allow more allocation to competitive ability traits. We tested the predictions of EICA in the model plant Mimulus guttatus, a native of western North America (WNA). We compared how well the predictions of EICA fit patterns in two non-native regions, the United Kingdom (UK), an older more successful invasion, and eastern North America (ENA), a younger less successful invasion. We completed extensive herbivore surveys and grew plants derived from multiple populations in each region in a common greenhouse environment to test adherence to the predictions of EICA. We found evidence of specialist herbivore escape in the UK, but not the ENA plants. Compared to native plants the UK plants had lower levels of resistance traits, were taller, and produced larger and more flowers, while the ENA plants had mostly equivalent traits to the WNA plants. Plants from the UK conformed to the predictions of EICA more closely than those from ENA. The UK invasion is an older, more successful invasion, suggesting that support for EICA predictions may be highest in more successful invasions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Awmack CS, Leather SR (2002) Host plant quality and fecundity in herbivorous insects. Annu Rev Entomol 47:817–844

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Benrey B, Denno RF (1997) The slow-growth–high-mortality hypothesis: a test using the cabbage butterfly. Ecology 78:987–999

    Google Scholar 

  • Blossey B, Notzold R (1995) Evolution of increased competitive ability in invasive nonindigenous plants: a hypothesis. J Ecol 83:887–889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal DM (2006) Interactions between resource availability and enemy release in plant invasion. Ecol Lett 9 (7):887–895

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bossdorf O, Auge H, Lafuma L, Rogers WE, Siemann E, Prati D (2005) Phenotypic and genetic differentiation between native and introduced plant populations. Oecologia 144:1–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burke MJ, Grime JP (1996) An experimental study of plant community invasibility. Ecol 77(3):776–790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, Maron JL (2006) What have exotic plant invasions taught us over the past 20 years? Trends Ecol Evol 21:369–374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, Ridenour WM (2004) Novel weapons: invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Front Ecol Environ 2(8):436–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway RM, Vivanco JM (2006) Can plant biochemistry contribute to understanding of invasion ecology? Trends Plant Sci 11:574–580

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter D, Cappuccino N (2005) Herbivory, time since introduction and the invasiveness of exotic plants. J Ecol 93(2):315–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr DE, Dudash MR (1995) Inbreeding depression under a competitive regime in Mimulus guttatus: consequences for potential male and female function. Heredity 75:437–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrillo J, McDermott D, Siemann E (2014) Loss of specificity: native but not invasive populations of Triadica sebifera vary in tolerance to different herbivores. Oecologia 174:863–871

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Catford JA, Jansson R, Nilsson C (2009) Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework. Divers Distrib 15:22–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coley PD, Bryant JP, Chapin FS (1985) Resource availability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science 230:895–899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cox GW (2004) Alien species and evolution: the evolutionary ecology of exotic plants, animals, microbes, and interacting native species. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Cripps MG, Hinz HL, McKenney JL, Price WJ, Schwarzländer M (2009) No evidence for an ‘evolution of increased competitive ability for the invasive Lepidium draba. Basic Appl Ecol 10:103–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crooks JA, Soulé ME, Sandlund OT (1999) Lag times in population explosions of invasive species: causes and implications. In Invasive species and biodiversity management, Kluwer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis MA, Thompson K (2001) Invasion terminology: should ecologists define their terms differently than others? No, not if we want to be of any help! Bull-Ecol Soc Am 82(3):206–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Perrings C, Williamson M (2007) A century of the ornamental plant trade and its impact on invasion success. Divers Distrib 13:527–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diez JM, Sullivan JJ, Hulme PE, Edwards G, Duncan RP (2008) Darwin’s naturalization conundrum: dissecting taxonomic patterns of species invasions. Ecol Lett 11:674–681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P (1976) Plant apparency and chemical defense. In: Wallace J (ed) Biochemical interaction between plants and insects. Springer, Boston, pp 1–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Felker-Quinn E, Schweitzer JA, Bailey JK (2013) Meta-analysis reveals evolution in invasive plant species but little support for evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA). Ecol Evol 3:739–751

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gleason HA, Cronquist A (1991) Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Van Nostrand, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gurevitch J, Fox GA, Wardle GM, Taub D (2011) Emergent insights from the synthesis of conceptual frameworks for biological invasions. Ecol Lett 14:407–418

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haukioja E, Neuvonen S (1985) Induced long-term resistance of birch foliage against defoliators: defensive or incidental? Ecology 66:1303–1308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hierro JL, Maron JL, Callaway RM (2005) A biogeographical approach to plant invasions: the importance of studying exotics in their introduced and native range. J Ecol 93:5–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holeski LM (2007) Within and between generation phenotypic plasticity in trichome density of Mimulus guttatus. J Evol Biol 20:2092–2100

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holeski LM, Keefover-Ring K, Bowers MD, Harnenz ZT, Lindroth RL (2013) Patterns of phytochemical variation in Mimulus guttatus (yellow monkeyflower). Chem Ecol 39:525–536

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huang W, Siemann E, Wheeler GS, Zou J, Carrillo J, Ding J (2010) Resource allocation to defence and growth are driven by different responses to generalist and specialist herbivory in an invasive plant. J Ecol 98:1157–1167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keane RM, Crawley MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends Ecol Evol 17:164–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearns CA, Inouye DW (1993) Techniques for pollination biologists. University press of Colorado

  • Keefover-Ring K, Holeski LM, Bowers MD, Clauss AD, Lindroth RL (2014) Phenylpropanoid glycosides of Mimulus guttatus (yellow monkeyflower). Phytochem Lett 10:132–139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kooyers NJ, Blackman BK, Holeski LM (2017) Optimal defense theory explains deviations from latitudinal herbivory defense hypothesis. Ecology 98:1036–1048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lau JA, Schultheis EH (2015) When two invasion hypotheses are better than one. New Phytol 205:958–960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Stiling P, Pemberton RW (2007) Does enemy release matter for invasive plants? Evidence from a comparison of insect herbivore damage among invasive, non-invasive and native congeners. Biol Invasions 9:773–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale MW, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maron JL, Vilà M (2001) When do herbivores affect plant invasion? Evidence for the natural enemies and biotic resistance hypothesis. Oikos 95:361–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin NH (2004) Flower size preferences of the honeybee (Apis mellifera) foraging on Mimulus guttatus (Scrophulariaceae). Evol Ecol Res 6:777–782

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez KA (2018) Comparative ecophysiology of native and invasive plants across populations, species, and continents. Doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University

  • McCune B, Mefford MJ (2011) PC-ORD: multivariate analysis of ecological data. MjM Software Design

  • Minchin PR, (2018) Non-metric multidimensional scaling of community data: myths and misconceptions. Paper presented at the Ecological Society of America, 103rd Annual meeting, New Orleans, LA, 5th–8th Aug

  • Murren CJ, Chang CC, Dudash MR (2009) Patterns of selection of two North American native and nonnative populations of monkeyflower (Phrymaceae). New Phytol 183:691–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Orians CM, Ward D (2010) Evolution of plant defenses in nonindigenous environments. Annu Rev Entomol 55:439–459

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker JD, Hay ME (2005) Biotic resistance to plant invasions? Native herbivores prefer non-native plants. Ecol Lett 8:959–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston CD, Pearman DA, Dines TD (2002) New atlas of the British and Irish Flora. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Puzey J, Vallejo-Marín M (2014) Genomics of invasion: diversity and selection in introduced populations of monkeyflowers (M imulus guttatus). Mol Ecol 23(18):4472–4485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/

  • Rapo C, Müller-Schärer H, Vrieling K, Schaffner U (2010) Is there rapid evolutionary response in introduced populations of tansy ragwort, Jacobaea vulgaris, when exposed to biological control? Evol Ecol 24(5):1081–1099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichard SH, White P (2001) Horticulture as a pathway of invasive plant introductions in the United States: most invasive plants have been introduced for horticultural use by nurseries, botanical gardens, and individuals. Bioscience 51:103–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotter MC, Holeski LM (2017) The lepidopteran herbivores of the model plant. J Lepid Soc 71(3):162–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotter MC, Holeski LM (2018) A meta-analysis of the evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis: genetic-based trait variation and herbivory resistance trade-offs. Biol Invasions 20:2647–2660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotter MC, Couture JJ, Rothwell EM, Garcia J, Holeski LM (2018) Evolutionary ecology of plant resistance traits across the herbivore diet spectrum: a test in the model plant Mimulus guttatus. Evol Ecol Res 19:423–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueden CT, Schindelin J, Hiner MC, DeZonia BE, Walter AE, Arena ET, Eliceiri KW (2017) Image J2: ImageJ for the next generation of scientific image data. BMC Bioinform 18:529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemann E, Rogers WE (2003) Increased competitive ability of an invasive tree may be limited by an invasive beetle. Ecol Appl 13:1503–1507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tokarska-Guzik B, Dajdok Z (2010) NOBANIS. Invasive Alien Species Fact Sheet: Mimulus guttatus. Online Database of the North European and Baltic Network on Invasive Alien Species, NOBANIS. www.nobanis.org

  • Truscott AM, Palmer SC, Soulsby C, Westaway S, Hulme PE (2008) Consequences of invasion by the alien plant Mimulus guttatus on the species composition and soil properties of riparian plant communities in Scotland. Perspect Plant Ecol Syst 10:231–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truscott AM, Soulsby C, Palmer SCF, Newell L, Hulme PE (2006) The dispersal characteristics of the invasive plant Mimulus guttatus and the ecological significance of increased occurrence of high-flow events. J Ecol 94:1080–1091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twyford AD, Friedman J (2015) Adaptive divergence in the monkey flower is maintained by a chromosomal inversion. Evol 69(6):1476–1486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallejo-Marin M, Lye GC (2013) Hybridisation and genetic diversity in introduced Mimulus (Phrymaceae). Heredity 110:111–122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Valverde PL, Arroyo J, Núñez-Farfán J, Castillo G, Calahorra A, Pérez-Barrales R, Tapia-López R (2015) Natural selection on plant resistance to herbivores in the native and introduced range. AoB Plants 7:230–240

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Kleunen M, Fischer M (2008) Adaptive rather than non-adaptive evolution of Mimulus guttatus in its invasive range. Basic Appl Ecol 9:213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vila M, Maron JL, Marco L (2005) Evidence for the enemy release hypothesis in Hypericum perforatum. Oecologia 142:474–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whitney KD, Gabler CA (2008) Rapid evolution in introduced species,‘invasive traits’ and recipient communities: challenges for predicting invasive potential. Div Dist 14:569–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu CA, Lowry DB, Cooley AM, Wright KM, Lee YW, Willis JH (2008) Mimulus is an emerging model system for the integration of ecological and genomic studies. Heredity 100:220–230

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan YW (2018) Monkeyflowers (Mimulus): new model for plant developmental genetics and evo-devo. New Phytol 222:694–700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the members of the Holeski lab group for assistance on various parts of this project. Phil Patterson helped with plant cultivation in the greenhouse. Thanks to Dean Robinson who let us study the plants on his property. Comments from Dr. Tom Whitham and Dr. Richard Hofstetter improved this manuscript.

Funding

Funding was provided by the NAU genes to environment fellowship program and the NAU Department of Biological Sciences. A special thanks to funding from the Michigan Botanical Foundation, Idaho Native Plant Society, and the Utah Native Plant Society.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, PO Box 5640, Flagstaff, AZ, 86011-5640, USA

    Michael C. Rotter & Liza M. Holeski

  2. Biological and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK

    Mario Vallejo-Marin

Authors
  1. Michael C. Rotter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Vallejo-Marin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Liza M. Holeski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael C. Rotter.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2018 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rotter, M.C., Vallejo-Marin, M. & Holeski, L.M. A test of the evolution of increased competitive ability in two invaded regions. Evol Ecol 33, 713–735 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-019-10004-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-019-10004-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation