Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:59:39.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Insect assemblages associated with the exotic riparian shrub Russian olive (Elaeagnaceae), and co-occurring native shrubs in British Columbia, Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2015

Liana K.D. Collette  and
Jason Pither
Liana K.D. Collette
Affiliation:
Department of Biology and The Okanagan Institute for Biodiversity, Resilience and Ecosystem Services, University of British Columbia, Okanagan campus, ASC 367 – 3187 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, V1V 1V7 Canada
Jason Pither*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology and The Okanagan Institute for Biodiversity, Resilience and Ecosystem Services, University of British Columbia, Okanagan campus, ASC 367 – 3187 University Way, Kelowna, British Columbia, V1V 1V7 Canada
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia Linnaeus; Elaeagnaceae) is an exotic shrub/tree that has become invasive in many riparian ecosystems throughout semi-arid, western North America, including southern British Columbia, Canada. Despite its prevalence and the potentially dramatic impacts it can have on riparian and aquatic ecosystems, little is known about the insect communities associated with Russian olive within its invaded range. At six sites throughout the Okanagan valley of southern British Columbia, Canada, we compared the diversity of insects associated with Russian olive plants to that of insects associated with two commonly co-occurring native plant species: Woods’ rose (Rosa woodsii Lindley; Rosaceae) and Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia (Nuttall) Nuttall ex Roemer; Rosaceae). Total abundance did not differ significantly among plant types. Family richness and Shannon diversity differed significantly between Woods’ rose and Saskatoon, but not between either of these plant types and Russian olive. An abundance of Thripidae (Thysanoptera) on Russian olive and Tingidae (Hemiptera) on Saskatoon contributed to significant compositional differences among plant types. The families Chloropidae (Diptera), Heleomyzidae (Diptera), and Gryllidae (Orthoptera) were uniquely associated with Russian olive, albeit in low abundances. Our study provides valuable and novel information about the diversity of insects associated with an emerging plant invader of western Canada.

Type
Biodiversity & Evolution
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 148 , Issue 3 , June 2016 , pp. 316 - 328
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Justin Schmidt

References

Abelho, M. and Molles, M.C. 2009. Effect of introduced exotic tree litter on consumption patterns of the introduced exotic isopod Armadillidium vulgare . European Journal of Soil Biology, 45: 306–311. doi:10.1016/j.ejsobi.2009.04.004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agosta, S.J. 2006. On ecological fitting, plant-insect associations, herbivore host shifts, and host plant selection. Oikos, 114: 556–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, A.A., Kotanen, P.M., Mitchell, C.E., Power, A.G., Godsoe, W., and Klironomos, J. 2005. Enemy release? An experiment with congeneric plant pairs and diverse above- and belowground enemies. Ecology, 86: 2979–2989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, M. and Walsh, D. 2013. PERMANOVA, ANOSIM, and the Mantel test in the face of heterogeneous dispersions: what null hypothesis are you testing? Ecological Monographs, 83: 557–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atienza, S.G., Torres, A.M., Millán, T., and Cubero, J.I. 2005. Genetic diversity in Rosa as revealed by RAPDs. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus, 70: 75–85.Google Scholar
Ayaz, F.A. and Bertoft, E. 2001. Sugar and phenolic acid composition of stored commercial oleaster fruits. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 14: 505–511. doi:10.1006/jfca.2001.1004. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballard, M., Hough-Goldstein, J., and Tallamy, D. 2013. Arthropod communities on native and nonnative early successional plants. Environmental Entomology, 42: 851–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartomeus, I., Vilà, M., and Santamaría, L. 2008. Contrasting effects of invasive plants in plant-pollinator networks. Oecologia, 155: 761–770. doi:10.1007/s00442-007-0946-l. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basset, Y. 1999. Diversity and abundance of insect herbivores collected on Castanopsis acuminatissima (Fagaceae) in New Guinea: relationships with leaf production and surrounding vegetation. European Journal of Entomology, 96: 381–391.Google Scholar
Bezemer, T.M., Harvey, J.A., and Cronin, J.T. 2014. Response of native insect communities to invasive plants. Annual Review of Entomology, 59: 119–141. doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162104. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borror, D.J., Triplehorn, C.A., and Johnson, N.F. 1989. An introduction to the study of insects, 6th edition, Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.Google Scholar
Campos, R.I., Vasconcelos, H.L., Ribeiro, S.P., Neves, F.S., and Soares, J.P. 2006. Relationship between tree size and insect assemblages associated with Anadenanthera macrocarpa . Ecography, 29: 442–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chau, M.M., Walker, L.R., and Mehltreter, K. 2013. An invasive tree fern alters soil and plant nutrient dynamics in Hawaii. Biological Invasions, 15: 355–370. doi:10.1007/s10530-012-0291-0. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchill, T.B. and Arthur, J.M. 1999. Measuring spider richness: effects of different sampling methods and spatial and temporal scales. Journal of Insect Conservation, 3: 287–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collette, L.K.D. and Pither, J. 2015. Russian-olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) biology and ecology and its potential to invade northern North American riparian ecosystems. Invasive Plant Science and Management, 8: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dix, M.E., Pasek, J.E., Harrell, M.O., and Baxendale, F.P. 1986. Common insect pests of trees in the great plains. Great Plains Agricultural Council, Nebraska Cooperative Extension Service, Lincoln, Nebraska, United States of America.Google Scholar
Dixon, A.F.G. 1970. Quality and availability of food for a sycamore aphid population. In Animal populations in relation to their food resources: a symposium of the British Ecological Society. Edited by A. Watson. Blackwell Science, Oxford, United Kingdom. Pp. 271–287.Google Scholar
Doležal, M., Velíšek, J., and Famfulíková, P. 2001. Chemical composition of less-known wild fruits. In Biologically-active phytochemicals in food. 1st edition. Edited by W. Pfannhauser, G.R. Fenwick, and S. Khokhar. Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Pp. 241–244.Google Scholar
Douglas, G.W., Meidinger, D.V., and Pojar, J. 1999. Illustrated flora of British Columbia, volume 3: Dicotyledons (Diapensiaceae through Onagraceae). British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
Ehrenfeld, J.G. 2010. Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 41: 59–80. doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144650. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emery, S.M. and Doran, P.J. 2013. Presence and management of the invasive plant Gypsophila paniculata (baby’s breath) on sand dunes alters arthropod abundance and community structure. Biological Conservation, 161: 174–181. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.03.015. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Á. and Zajácz, E. 2007. Nectar production for the Hungarian honey industry. The European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology, 1: 125–151.Google Scholar
Frenzel, M. and Brandl, R. 2003. Diversity and abundance patterns of phytophagous insect communities on alien and native host plants in the Brassicaceae. Ecography, 26: 723–730. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2003.03649.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotelli, N.J. and Colwell, R.K. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters, 4: 379–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, R.J., Toft, R.J., Dugdale, J.S., Williams, P.A., and Rees, J.S. 2004. Insect assemblages in a native (kanuka – Kunzea ericoides) and an invasive (gorse – Ulex europaeus) shrubland. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 28: 35–47.Google Scholar
Hawkes, C.V., Belnap, J., D’Antonio, C., and Firestone, M.K. 2006. Arbuscular mycorrhizal assemblages in native plant roots change in the presence of invasive exotic grasses. Plant and Soil, 281: 369–380. doi:10.1007/s11104-005-4826-3. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, B. 1976. Planting the Elaeagnus–Russian and autumn olive for nectar. American Bee Journal, 116: 74–82.Google Scholar
Hill, S.B. and Kotanen, P.M. 2009. Evidence that phylogenetically novel non-indigenous plants experience less herbivory. Oecologia, 161: 581–590. doi:10.1007/s00442-009-1403-0. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hitchcock, C.L., Cronquist, A., Ownbey, M., and Thompson, J.W. 1969. Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
Hladyz, S., Åbjörnsson, K., Giller, P.S., and Woodward, G. 2011. Impacts of an aggressive riparian invader on community structure and ecosystem functioning in stream food webs. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48: 443–452. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01924.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmquist, J.G., Schmidt-Gengenbach, J., and Slaton, M.R. 2011. Influence of invasive palms on terrestrial arthropod assemblages in desert spring habitat. Biological Conservation, 144: 518–525. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.10.007. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jander, G. and Howe, G. 2008. Plant interactions with arthropod herbivores: state of the field. Plant Physiology, 146: 801–803. doi:10.1104/pp.104.900247. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, N.D., Williams, K.S., and Ehrlich, P.R. 1987. Effects of chemical fertilization of Diplacus aurantiacus on the development and persistence of the postdiapause larvae of its Lepidopteran herbivore Euphydryas chalcedona . American Midland Naturalist, 117: 435–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joly, S. and Bruneau, A. 2006. Incorporating allelic variation for reconstructing the evolutionary history of organisms from multiple genes: an example from Rosa in North America. Systematic Biology, 55: 623–636. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16969938 [accessed 7 July 2014].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, G.L. and Shafroth, P.B. 2003. Biology, ecology and management of Elaeagnus angustifolia L. (Russian olive) in western North America. Wetlands, 23: 763–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keane, R.M. and Crawley, M.J. 2002. Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17: 164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, P.C. and Wilson, L.F. 1969. Major insect pests in North Dakota shelterbelts: abundance and distribution by climate and host age. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.Google Scholar
Kirk, W.D.J. 1987. How much pollen can thrips destroy? Ecological Entomology, 12: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lattin, J.D. 1993. Arthropod diversity and conservation in old-growth northwest forests. American Zoologist, 33: 578–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legendre, P. and De Cáceres, M. 2013. Beta diversity as the variance of community data: dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning. Ecology Letters, 16: 951–963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legendre, P. and Gallagher, E. 2001. Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data. Oecologia, 129: 271–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levine, J.M., Vilà, M., D’Antonio, C.M., Dukes, J.S., Grigulis, K., and Lavorel, S. 2003. Mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270: 775–781. doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2327. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, W.H. and Basye, R.E. 1961. Analysis of nine crosses between diploid Rosa species. Proceedings of the American Society for Horticulture Science, 78: 572–579.Google Scholar
Lim, T.K. 2012. Edible medicinal and non-medicinal plants. Volume 4, fruits. Springer, Heidelberg, London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Milliken, F. 1921. Results of work on blister beetles in Kansas. Bulletin 967. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, District of Columbia, United States of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mineau, M.M., Baxter, C.V., and Marcarelli, A.M. 2011. A non-native riparian tree (Elaeagnus angustifolia) changes nutrient dynamics in streams. Ecosystems, 14: 353–365. doi:10.1007/s10021-011-9415-0. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mineau, M.M., Baxter, C.V., Marcarelli, A.M., and Minshall, G.W. 2012. An invasive riparian tree reduces stream ecosystem efficiency via a recalcitrant organic matter subsidy. Ecology, 93: 1501–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkenberg, O.P.J.M. and Ottenheim, J.J.G.W. 1990. Effect of leaf nitrogen content of tomato plants on preference and performance of a leafmining fly. Oecologia, 83: 291–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moline, A.B. and Poff, N.L. 2008. Growth of an invertebrate shredder on native (Populus) and non-native (Tamarix, Elaeagnus) leaf litter. Freshwater Biology, 53: 1012–1020. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2008.01960.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montero-Castaño, A. and Vilà, M. 2012. Impact of landscape alteration and invasions on pollinators: a meta-analysis. Journal of Ecology, 100: 884–893. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2012.01968.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morales, C.L. and Traveset, A. 2009. A meta-analysis of impacts of alien vs. native plants on pollinator visitation and reproductive success of co-flowering native plants. Ecology Letters, 12: 716–728. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01319.x. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mound, L.A. 2005. Thysanoptera: diversity and interactions. Annual Review of Entomology, 50: 247–269. doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.49.061802.123318. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nesom, G. 2006. Plant guide for Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt.). United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, United States of America.Google Scholar
Ness, J.H., Rollinson, E.J., and Whitney, K.D. 2011. Phylogenetic distance can predict susceptibility to attack by natural enemies. Oikos, 120: 1327–1334. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011.19119.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odell, E., Raguso, R.A., and Jones, K.N. 1999. Bumblebee foraging responses to variation in floral scent and color in snapdragons (Antirrhinum: Scrophulariaceae). American Midland Naturalist, 142: 257–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oksanen, J., Blanchet, F.G., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., Minchin, P.R., O’Hara, R.B., et al. 2013. Vegan: community ecology package. Available from http://cran.r-project.org/package=vegan [17 September 2015].Google Scholar
Pavek, P.L.S. and Skinner, D.M. 2013. Plant guide for Woods’ rose (Rosa woodsii Lindl.). United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Pullman, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
Pearson, D.E. 2009. Invasive plant architecture alters trophic interactions by changing predator abundance and behavior. Oecologia, 159: 549–558. doi:10.1007/s00442-008-1241-5. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pendleton, R.L., Pendleton, B.K., and Finch, D. 2011. Displacement of native riparian shrubs by woody exotics: effects on arthropod and pollinator community composition. Natural Resources and Environmental Issues, 16: 1–11.Google Scholar
Potts, S.G., Biesmeijer, J.C., Kremen, C., Neumann, P., Schweiger, O., and Kunin, W.E. 2010. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25: 345–353. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Procheş, Ş., Wilson, J.R.U., Richardson, D.M., and Chown, S.L. 2008. Herbivores, but not other insects, are scarce on alien plants. Austral Ecology, 33: 691–700. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01836.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyšek, P., Jarošík, V., Chytrý, M., Danihelka, J., Kühn, I., Pergl, J., et al. 2011. Successful invaders co-opt pollinators of native flora and accumulate insect pollinators with increasing residence time. Ecological Monographs, 81: 277–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2014. R: a language and environment for statistical computing [online]. Available from http://www.r-project.org [accessed 17 September 2015].Google Scholar
Ribeiro, S.P., Borges, P.A.V., Gaspar, C., Melo, C., Serrano, A.R.M., Amaral, J., et al. 2005. Canopy insect herbivores in the Azorean Laurisilva forests: key host plant species in a highly generalist insect community. Ecography, 28: 315–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricciardi, A. and Ward, J.M. 2006. Comment on “opposing effects of native and exotic herbivores on plant invasions”. Science, 313: 298. doi:10.1126/science.1128946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakai, S. 2002. A review of brood-site pollination mutualism: plants providing breeding sites for their pollinators. Journal of Plant Research, 115: 161–168. doi:10.1007/s102650200021. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simao, M.C.M., Flory, S.L., and Rudgers, J.A. 2010. Experimental plant invasion reduces arthropod abundance and richness across multiple trophic levels. Oikos, 119: 1553–1562. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18382.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spadbery, J.P. 1973. Wasps: an account of the biology and natural history of social and solitary wasps. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.Google Scholar
Spirito, F., Yahdjian, L., Tognetti, P.M., and Chaneton, E.J. 2014. Soil ecosystem function under native and exotic plant assemblages as alternative states of successional grasslands. Acta Oecologica, 54: 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tibbets, T.M. and Molles, M.C. 2005. C : N : P stoichiometry of dominant riparian trees and arthropods along the Middle Rio Grande. Freshwater Biology, 50: 1882–1894. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2005.01465.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triapitsyn, S.V. and Headrick, D.H. 1995. A review of the Nearctic species of the thrips-attacking genus Ceranisus Walker (Hympenoptera: Eulophidae). Transactions of the American Entomological Society, 121: 227–248.Google Scholar
Venables, W.N. and Ripley, B.D. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S, 4th edition. Springer, New York, New York, United States of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Naumann, U., Wright, S.T., and Warton, D.I. 2012. Mvabund–an R package for model-based analysis of multivariate abundance data. Methods in Ecolology and Evolution, 3: 471–474. doi:10.1111/j.2041-210X.2012.00190.x. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weidenhamer, J.D. and Callaway, R.M. 2010. Direct and indirect effects of invasive plants on soil chemistry and ecosystem function. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 36: 59–69. doi:10.1007/s10886-009-9735-0. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiens, J.J., Ackerly, D.D., Allen, A.P., Anacker, B.L., Buckley, L.B., Cornell, H.V., et al. 2010. Niche conservatism as an emerging principle in ecology and conservation biology. Ecology Letters, 13: 1310–1324. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01515.x. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, N.H. and Whitten, W.M. 1983. Orchid floral fragrances and male euglossine bees: methods and advances in the last sesquidecade. Biological Bulletin, 164: 355–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, T.M., Jonas, J.L., and Ferguson, C.J. 2012. The invasive Lespedeza cuneata attracts more insect pollinators than native congeners in tallgrass prairie with variable impacts. Biological Invasions, 14: 1045–1059. doi:10.1007/s10530-011-0138-0. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xin-yao, H., Hui, M., Xiao-ming, W., and Yi-ning, L. 2009. Survey of people’s favorites and chemical analysis on the flowery odour of Russian-olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). Natural Production Research and Development, 21: 480–488.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 231.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Figure S2

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 76.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Figure S3

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 310.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Table S1

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 55.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Table S2

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 127 KB
Supplementary material: File

Collette and Pither supplementary material

Table S3

Download Collette and Pither supplementary material(File)
File 80.9 KB