Advertisement

Foreword to Chapter Seven

  • Daniel SimberloffEmail author
  • Anthony Ricciardi
Chapter
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

In his classic text, Animal Ecology , [ IV ] Elton developed the concept of food chains and defined the “niche” of an animal in terms of its trophic relations. It is to be expected that he would apply the food chain concept to the ecology of invasions.

References

  1. I.
    Cock, M.J.W., S.T. Murphy, M.T.K. Kairo, E. Thompson, R.J. Murphy, and A.W. Francis. 2016. Trends in the classical biological control of insect pests by insects: an update of the BIOCAT database. BioControl 61: 349–363.Google Scholar
  2. II.
    Colautti, R.I., A. Ricciardi, I.A. Grigorovich, and H.J. MacIsaac. 2006. Is invasion success explained by the enemy release hypothesis? Ecology Letters 7: 721–733.Google Scholar
  3. III.
    Danthanarayana, W., and A. Kathiravetpillai. 1969. Studies on the ecology and causes of outbreaks of Ectropis bhurmitra Wkr. (Geometridae), twig caterpillar of tea in Ceylon. Journal of Applied Ecology 6: 311–322.Google Scholar
  4. IV.
    Elton, C.E. 1927. Animal Ecology. Sidgwick & Jackson, London.Google Scholar
  5. V.
    Evans, E.W. 2016. Biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and classical biological control. Applied Entomology and Zoology 51: 173–184.Google Scholar
  6. VI.
    Ferguson, K.I., and P. Stiling 1996. Non-additive effects of multiple natural enemies on aphid populations. Oecologia 108: 375–379.Google Scholar
  7. VII.
    Flaherty, L., J.D. Sweeney, D. Pureswaran, and D.T. Quiring. 2011. Influence of host tree condition on the performance of Tetropium fuscum (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Environmental Entomology 40: 1200–1209.Google Scholar
  8. VIII.
    Foit, K., O. Kaske, and M. Liess. 2012. Competition increases toxicant sensitivity and delays the recovery of two interacting populations. Aquatic Toxicology 106/107: 25–31.Google Scholar
  9. IX.
    Jezorek, H., A.J. Baker, and P. Stiling. 2012. Effects of Cactoblastis cactorum on the survival and growth of North American Opuntia. Biological Invasions 14: 2355–2367.Google Scholar
  10. X.
    Johnsen, K., C.S. Jacobsen, V. Torsvik, and J. Sørensen. 2001. Pesticide effects on bacterial diversity in agricultural soils—A review. Biology and Fertility of Soils 33: 443–453.Google Scholar
  11. XI.
    Keane, R.M., and M.J. Crawley. 2002. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17: 164–170.Google Scholar
  12. XII.
    Luck, R.F., and D.L. Dahlsten. 1975. Natural decline of a pine needle scale (Chionaspis pinifoliae [Fitch]), outbreak at South Lake Tahoe, California following cessation of adult mosquito control with malathion. Ecology 56: 893–904.Google Scholar
  13. XIII.
    Messerli, A., and S. Larrue. 2015. Effets de l’arbuste envahissant Rhododendron ponticum L. sur quelques espèces indigènes de l’Île de Rum (Écosse du Nord-Ouest). Revue d’Écologie – La Terre et La Vie 70: 68–79.Google Scholar
  14. XIV.
    Milne, R.I., and R.J. Abbott. 2006. Origin and evolution of invasive naturalized material of Rhododendron ponticum L. in the British Isles. Molecular Ecology 9: 541–556.Google Scholar
  15. XV.
    Pauly, D., V. Christensen, J. Dalsgaard, R. Froese, and F. Torres. 1998. Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279: 860–863.Google Scholar
  16. XVI.
    Purse, B.V., P. Graeser, K. Searle, C. Edwards, and C. Harris. 2013. Challenges in predicting invasive reservoir hosts of emerging pathogens: mapping Rhododendron ponticum as a foliar host for Phytophthora ramorum and Phytophthora kernoviae in the U.K. Biological Invasions 15: 529–545.Google Scholar
  17. XVII.
    Ricciardi, A., T.M. Blackburn, J.T. Carlton, J.T.A. Dick, P.E. Hulme, J.C. Iacarella, J.M. Jeschke, A.M. Liebhold, J.L. Lockwood, H.J. MacIsaac, P. Pyšek, D.M. Richardson, G.M. Ruiz, D. Simberloff, W.J. Sutherland, D.A. Wardle, and D.C. Aldridge. 2017. Invasion science: a horizon scan of emerging challenges and opportunities. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 32: 464–474.Google Scholar
  18. XVIII.
    Ricciardi, A., M.F. Hoopes, M.P. Marchetti, and J.L. Lockwood. 2013. Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of non-native species. Ecological Monographs 83: 263–282.Google Scholar
  19. XIX.
    Sih, A., G. Englund, and D. Wooster. 1998. Emergent effects of multiple predators on prey. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13: 350–355.Google Scholar
  20. XX.
    Simon, K.S., and C.R. Townsend. 2003. Impacts of freshwater invaders at different levels of ecological organisation, with emphasis on salmonids and ecosystem consequences. Freshwater Biology 48: 982–994.Google Scholar
  21. XXI.
    Smith, G., and J.E. Hurley. 2000. First North American record of the Palearctic species Tetropium fuscum (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Coleopterists Bulletin 54: 540.Google Scholar
  22. XXII.
    Stiling, P. 2000. A worm that turned. Natural History 109(5): 40–43.Google Scholar
  23. XXIII.
    Stiling, P. 2004. Biological control not on target. Biological Invasions 6: 151–159.Google Scholar
  24. XXIV.
    Stiling, P. 2010. Death and decline of a rare cactus in Florida. Castanea 75: 190–197.Google Scholar
  25. XXV.
    Stout, J.C., J.A.N. Parnell, J. Arroyo, and T.P. Crowe. 2006. Pollination ecology and seed production of Rhododendron ponticum in native and exotic habitats. Biodiversity and Conservation 15: 755–777.Google Scholar
  26. XXVI.
    Thomas, S.M., M. Kiljunen, T. Malinen, A.P. Eloranta, P.A. Amundsen, M. Lodenius, and K.K. Kahilainen. 2016. Food-web structure and mercury dynamics in a large subarctic lake following multiple species introductions. Freshwater Biology 61: 500–517.Google Scholar
  27. XXVII.
    Tiedeken, E.J., P.A. Egan, P.C. Stevenson, G.A. Wright, M.J.F. Brown, E.F. Power, I. Farrell, S.M. Matthews, H., and J.C. Stout. 2016. Nectar chemistry modulates the impact of an invasive plant on native pollinators. Functional Ecology 30: 885–893.Google Scholar
  28. XXVIII.
    Tompkins, D.M., A.R. White, and M. Boots. 2003. Ecological replacement of native red squirrels by invasive greys driven by disease. Ecology Letters 6: 189–196.Google Scholar
  29. XXIX.
    Williamson, M., and A. Fitter. 1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77: 1661–1666.Google Scholar
  30. XXX.
    Zangerl, A.R., and M.R. Berenbaum. 2005. Increased toxicity of an invasive weed after reassociation with its coevolved herbivore. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 102: 15529–15532.Google Scholar
  31. XXXI.
    Zaret, T.M., and R.T. Paine. 1973. Species introduction in a tropical lake. Science 182: 449–455.Google Scholar
  32. XXXII.
    Zimmermann, H.G., V.C. Moran, and J.H. Hoffmann. 2001. The renowned cactus moth, Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Its natural history and threat to native Opuntia floras in Mexico and the United States of America. Florida Entomologist 84: 543–551.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA
  2. 2.Redpath Museum and McGill School of EnvironmentMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations