Restoration ecology through the lens of coexistence theory.

Advances in restoration ecology are needed to guide ecological restoration in a variable and changing world. Coexistence theory provides a framework for how variability in environmental conditions and species interactions affects species success. Here, we conceptually link coexistence theory and restoration ecology. First, including low-density growth rates (LDGRs), a classic metric of coexistence, can improve abundance-based restoration goals, because abundances are sensitive to initial treatments and ongoing variability. Second, growth-rate partitioning, developed to identify coexistence mechanisms, can improve restoration practice by informing site selection and indicating necessary interventions (e.g., site amelioration or competitor removal). Finally, coexistence methods can improve restoration assessment, because initial growth rates indicate trajectories, average growth rates measure success, and growth partitioning highlights interventions needed in future.

The EICA is dead? Long live the EICA!

An important hypothesis for how plants respond to introduction to new ranges is the evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA). EICA predicts that biogeographical release from natural enemies initiates a trade-off in which exotic species in non-native ranges become larger and more competitive, but invest less in consumer defences, relative to populations in native ranges. This trade-off is exceptionally complex because detecting concomitant biogeographical shifts in competitive ability and consumer defence depends upon which traits are targeted, how competition is measured, the defence chemicals quantified, whether defence chemicals do more than defend, whether 'herbivory' is artificial or natural, and where consumers fall on the generalist-specialist spectrum. Previous meta-analyses have successfully identified patterns but have yet to fully disentangle this complexity. We used meta-analysis to reevaluate traditional metrics used to test EICA theory and then expanded on these metrics by partitioning competitive effect and competitive tolerance measures and testing Leaf-Specific Mass in detail as a response trait. Unlike previous syntheses, our meta-analyses detected evidence consistent with the classic trade-off inherent to EICA. Plants from non-native ranges imposed greater competitive effects than plants from native ranges and were less quantitatively defended than plants from native ranges. Our results for defence were not based on complex leaf chemistry, but instead were estimated from tannins, toughness traits and primarily Leaf-Specific Mass. Species specificity occurred but did not influence the general patterns. As for all evidence for EICA-like trade-offs, we do not know if the biogeographical differences we found were caused by trade-offs per se, but they are consistent with predictions derived from the overarching hypothesis. Underestimating physical leaf structure may have contributed to two decades of tepid perspectives on the trade-offs fundamental to EICA.

Escape from natural enemies depends on the enemies, the invader, and competition.

The enemy release hypothesis (ERH) attributes the success of some exotic plant species to reduced top-down effects of natural enemies in the non-native range relative to the native range. Many studies have tested this idea, but very few have considered the simultaneous effects of multiple kinds of enemies on more than one invasive species in both the native and non-native ranges. Here, we examined the effects of two important groups of natural enemies-insect herbivores and soil biota-on the performance of Tanacetum vulgare (native to Europe but invasive in the USA) and Solidago canadensis (native to the USA but invasive in Europe) in their native and non-native ranges, and in the presence and absence of competition.In the field, we replicated full-factorial experiments that crossed insecticide, T. vulgare-S. canadensis competition, and biogeographic range (Europe vs. USA) treatments. In greenhouses, we replicated full-factorial experiments that crossed soil sterilization, plant-soil feedback, and biogeographic range treatments. We evaluated the effects of experimental treatments on T. vulgare and S. canadensis biomass.The effects of natural enemies were idiosyncratic. In the non-native range and relative to populations in the native range, T. vulgare escaped the negative effects of insect herbivores but not soil biota, depending upon the presence of S. canadensis; and S. canadensis escaped the negative effects of soil biota but not insect herbivores, regardless of competition. Thus, biogeographic escape from natural enemies depended upon the enemies, the invader, and competition. Synthesis: By explicitly testing the ERH in terms of more than one kind of enemy, more than one invader, and more than one continent, this study enhances our nuanced perspective of how natural enemies can influence the performance of invasive species in their native and non-native ranges.

Enemy release from the effects of generalist granivores can facilitate Bromus tectorum invasion in the Great Basin Desert.

The enemy release hypothesis (ERH) of plant invasion asserts that natural enemies limit populations of invasive plants more strongly in native ranges than in non-native ranges. Despite considerable empirical attention, few studies have directly tested this idea, especially with respect to generalist herbivores. This knowledge gap is important because escaping the effects of generalists is a critical aspect of the ERH that may help explain successful plant invasions. Here, we used consumer exclosures and seed addition experiments to contrast the effects of granivorous rodents (an important guild of generalists) on the establishment of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) in western Asia, where cheatgrass is native, versus the Great Basin Desert, USA, where cheatgrass is exotic and highly invasive. Consistent with the ERH, rodent foraging reduced cheatgrass establishment by nearly 60% in western Asia but had no effect in the Great Basin. This main result corresponded with a region-specific foraging pattern: rodents in the Great Basin but not western Asia generally avoided seeds from cheatgrass relative to seeds from native competitors. Our results suggest that enemy release from the effects of an important guild of generalists may contribute to the explosive success of cheatgrass in the Great Basin. These findings corroborate classic theory on enemy release and expand our understanding of how generalists can influence the trajectory of exotic plant invasions.

Granivory from native rodents and competition from an exotic invader strongly and equally limit the establishment of native grasses.

Seed predation and resource competition are fundamental biotic filters that affect the assembly of plant communities, yet empirical studies rarely assess their importance relative to one another. Here, we used rodent exclosures and experimental seed additions to compare how rodent granivory and resource competition affected the net establishment of an exotic invader (Bromus tectorum) and two native bunchgrasses (Pseudoroegneria spicata and Elymus elymoides) in the Great Basin Desert, USA. Rodent granivory limited the establishment of both native grasses, but had no significant effect on B. tectorum. Competition from B. tectorum limited the establishment of both native grasses, but neither native grass imposed a significant competitive effect on B. tectorum. Interestingly, we found that rodent granivory and B. tectorum competition limited the establishment of native grasses to the same extent, suggesting that these biotic interactions may impose equally important barriers to the local establishment of P. spicata and E. elymoides. By evaluating the strength of multiple biotic interactions in simultaneous, coordinated experiments, we can understand their relative contributions to community-level patterns.

Increased Primary Production from an Exotic Invader Does Not Subsidize Native Rodents.

Invasive plants have tremendous potential to enrich native food webs by subsidizing net primary productivity. Here, we explored how a potential food subsidy, seeds produced by the aggressive invader cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), is utilized by an important guild of native consumers--granivorous small mammals--in the Great Basin Desert, USA. In a series of field experiments we examined 1) how cheatgrass invasion affects the density and biomass of seed rain at the ecosystem-level; 2) how seed resources from cheatgrass numerically affect granivorous small mammals; and 3) how the food preferences of native granivores might mediate the trophic integration of cheatgrass seeds. Relative to native productivity, cheatgrass invasion increased the density and biomass of seed rain by over 2000% (P < 0.01) and 3500% (P < 0.01), respectively. However, granivorous small mammals in native communities showed no positive response in abundance, richness, or diversity to experimental additions of cheatgrass seeds over one year. This lack of response correlated with a distinct preference for seeds from native grasses over seeds from cheatgrass. Our experiments demonstrate that increased primary productivity associated with exotic plant invasions may not necessarily subsidize consumers at higher trophic levels. In this context, cheatgrass invasion could disrupt native food webs by providing less-preferred resources that fail to enrich higher trophic levels.