Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:33:55.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenology, Growth, and Fecundity as Determinants of Distribution in Closely Related Nonnative Taxa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Robin G. Marushia ,
Matthew L. Brooks  and
Jodie S. Holt
Robin G. Marushia*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
Matthew L. Brooks
Affiliation:
U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Yosemite Field Station, El Portal, CA 95318
Jodie S. Holt
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Invasive species researchers often ask: Why do some species invade certain habitats while others do not? Ecological theories predict that taxonomically related species may invade similar habitats, but some related species exhibit contrasting invasion patterns. Brassica nigra, Brassica tournefortii, and Hirschfeldia incana are dominant, closely related nonnative species that have overlapping, but dissimilar, distributions. Brassica tournefortii is rapidly spreading in warm deserts of the southwestern United States, whereas B. nigra and H. incana are primarily limited to semiarid and mesic regions. We compared traits of B. tournefortii that might confer invasiveness in deserts with those of related species that have not invaded desert ecosystems. Brassica tournefortii, B. nigra and H. incana were compared in controlled experiments conducted outdoors in a mesic site (Riverside, CA) and a desert site (Blue Diamond, NV), and in greenhouses, over 3 yr. Desert and mesic B. tournefortii populations were also compared to determine whether locally adapted ecotypes contribute to desert invasion. Experimental variables included common garden sites and soil water availability. Response variables included emergence, growth, phenology, and reproduction. There was no evidence for B. tournefortii ecotypes, but B. tournefortii had a more rapid phenology than B. nigra or H. incana. Brassica tournefortii was less affected by site and water availability than B. nigra and H. incana, but was smaller and less fecund regardless of experimental conditions. Rapid phenology allows B. tournefortii to reproduce consistently under variable, stressful conditions such as those found in Southwestern deserts. Although more successful in milder, mesic ecosystems, B. nigra and H. incana may be limited by their ability to reproduce under desert conditions. Rapid phenology and drought response partition invasion patterns of nonnative mustards along a gradient of aridity in the southwestern United States, and may serve as a predictive trait for other potential invaders of arid and highly variable ecosystems.

Keywords

Black mustard, Brassica nigra (L.) KochSahara mustard, Brassica tournefortii Gouanshortpod mustard, Hirschfeldia incana (L.) Lagr.-Foss.Annualdesertforbinvasionmustardexoticdroughtclimate
Type
Research Article
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 2012 , pp. 217 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

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

Current address: Research Associate, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Toronto, Scarborough, ON M1C 1A4 Canada

References

Literature Cited

Bangle, D. N., Walker, L. R., and Powell, E. A. 2008. Seed germination of the invasive plant Brassica tournefortii (Sahara mustard) in the Mojave Desert. West. North Am. Nat. 68:334–342.Google Scholar
Barrows, C. W., Allen, E. B., Brooks, M. L., and Allen, M. F. 2009. Effects of an invasive plant on a desert sand dune landscape. Biol. Invasions 11:673–686.Google Scholar
Beatley, J. C. 1974. Phenological events and their environmental triggers in Mojave Desert ecosystems. Ecology 55:856–863.Google Scholar
Bell, D. T. and Muller, C. H. 1973. Dominance of California annual grasslands by Brassica nigra . Am. Midl. Nat. 90:277–299.Google Scholar
Bowers, J. E. 2005. El Niño and displays of spring-flowering annuals in the Mojave and Sonoran deserts. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 132:38–49.Google Scholar
Brandle, M., Stadler, J., Klotz, S., and Brandl, R. 2003. Distributional range size of weedy plant species is correlated to germination patterns. Ecology 84:136–144.Google Scholar
Broennimann, O., Treier, U. A., Muller-Scharer, H., Thuiller, W., Peterson, A. T., and Guisan, A. 2007. Evidence of climatic niche shift during biological invasion. Ecol. Lett. 10:701–709.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. 1999. Habitat invasibility and dominance by alien annual plants in the western Mojave Desert. Biol. Invasions 1:325–337.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. 2009. Spatial and temporal distribution of non-native plants in upland areas of the Mojave Desert. Pages 101–124 in Webb, R. H., Fenstermaker, L. F., Heaton, J. S., Hughson, D. L., McDonald, E. V., and Miller, D. M., eds. The Mojave Desert: Ecosystem Processes and Sustainability. Reno, NV University of Nevada Press.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. and Berry, K. H. 2006. Dominance and environmental correlates of alien annual plants in the Mojave Desert, USA. J. Arid. Environ. 67:100–124.Google Scholar
Brooks, M. L. and Klinger, R. 2009. Practical considerations for early detection monitoring of plant invasions. Pages 9–33 in Inderjit, , ed. Management of Invasive Weeds. Heidelberg, Germany Springer.Google Scholar
Burk, J. H. 1982. Phenology, germination, and survival of desert ephemerals in Deep Canyon, Riverside County, California. Madroño 29:154–163.Google Scholar
Cadotte, M. W., Hamilton, M. A., and Murray, B. R. 2009. Phylogenetic relatedness and plant invader success across two spatial scales. Divers. Distrib. 15:481–488.Google Scholar
CalFlora Database. 2009. Calflora: Information on California Plants for Education, Research and Conservation. http://www.calflora.org. Accessed 4 June 2009.Google Scholar
Cal-IPC. 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-02. Berkeley, California California Invasive Plant Council. http://www.cal-ipc.org. Accessed 4 June 2009.Google Scholar
Chesson, P., Gebauer, R. L. E., Schwinning, S., Huntly, N., Wiegand, K., Ernest, M. S. K., Sher, A., Novoplansky, A., and Weltzin, J. F. 2004. Resource pulses, species interactions, and diversity maintenance in arid and semi-arid environments. Oecologia 141:236–253.Google Scholar
Daehler, C. C. 1998. The taxonomic distribution of invasive angiosperm plants: ecological insights and comparison to agricultural weeds. Biol. Conserv. 84:167–180.Google Scholar
Diez, J. M., Williams, P. A., Randall, R. P., Sullivan, J. J., Hulme, P. E., and Duncan, R. P. 2009. Learning from failures: testing broad taxonomic hypotheses about plant naturalization. Ecol. Lett. 12:1174–1183.Google Scholar
Evans, R. D., Rimer, R., Sperry, L., and Belnap, J. 2001. Exotic plant invasion alters nitrogen dynamics in an arid grassland. Ecol. Appl. 11:1301–1310.Google Scholar
Franks, S. J., Sim, S., and Weis, A. E. 2007. Rapid evolution of flowering time by an annual plant in response to a climate fluctuation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104:1278–1282.Google Scholar
Gibson, A. C. 1996. Structure-Function Relations of Warm Desert Plants. Berlin; New York Springer. 216 p.Google Scholar
Hendry, G. W. and Kelley, M. P. 1925. The plant content of adobe bricks. Calif. Hist. Soc. Q. 4:361–73.Google Scholar
Hereford, R., Webb, R. H., and Longpre, C. I. 2006. Precipitation history and ecosystem response to multidecadal precipitation variability in the Mojave Desert region, 1893–2001. J. Arid Environ. 67:13–34.Google Scholar
Kudoh, H., Nakayama, M., Lihová, J., and Marhold, K. 2007. Does invasion involve alternation of germination requirements? A comparative study between native and introduced strains of an annual Brassicaceae, Cardamine hirsuta . Ecol. Res. 22:869–875.Google Scholar
Lambers, H., Chapin, F. S., and Pons, T. L. 1998. Plant Physiological Ecology. New York Springer. 540 p.Google Scholar
Levine, J. M., Vila, M., D'Antonio, C. M., Dukes, J. S., Grigulis, K., and Lavorel, S. 2003. Mechanisms underlying the impacts of exotic plant invasions. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B-Biol. Sci. 270:775–781.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, W. M. 1999. Global patterns of plant invasions and the concept of invasibility. Ecology 80:1522–1536.Google Scholar
MacDougall, A. S., Gilbert, B., and Levine, J. M. 2009. Plant invasions and the niche. J. Ecol. 97:609–615.Google Scholar
Maron, J. L. 2006. The relative importance of latitude matching and propagule pressure in the colonization success of an invasive forb. Ecography 29:819–826.Google Scholar
Marushia, R. G. 2009. Brassica tournefortii: Phenology, Interactions and Management of an Invasive Mustard. PhD dissertation. Riverside University of California, Riverside. 143 p.Google Scholar
Marushia, R. G., Cadotte, M. W., and Holt, J. S. 2010. Phenology as a basis for management of exotic annual plants in desert invasions. J. Appl. Ecol. 47:1290–1299.Google Scholar
Minnich, R. A. and Sanders, A. C. 2000. Brassica tournefortii Gouan. Pages 68 in Bossard, C. C., Randall, J. M., and Hoshovsky, M. C., eds. Invasive Plants of California's Wildlands. Berkeley University of California Press.Google Scholar
Parish, S. B. 1920. The immigrant plants of southern California. Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci. 19:3–30.Google Scholar
Pearson, R. G. and Dawson, T. P. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 12:361–371.Google Scholar
Proches, S., Wilson, J. R. U., Richardson, D. M., and Rejmanek, M. 2008. Searching for phylogenetic pattern in biological invasions. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 17:5–10.Google Scholar
Rice, K. J. and Mack, R. N. 1991. Ecological genetics of Bromus tectorum I: a hierarchical analysis of phenotypic variation. Oecologia 88:77–83.Google Scholar
Sexton, J. P., McKay, J. K., and Sala, A. 2002. Plasticity and genetic diversity may allow saltcedar to invade cold climates in North America. Ecol. Appl. 12:1652–1660.Google Scholar
Smith, S. D., Monson, R. K., and Anderson, J. E. 1997. Physiological ecology of North American desert plants. Berlin; New York Springer. 286 p.Google Scholar
Tevis, L. 1958. Germination and growth of ephemerals induced by sprinkling a sandy desert. Ecology 39:681–688.Google Scholar
Trader, M. R., Brooks, M. L., and Draper, J. V. 2006. Seed production by the non-native Brassica tournefortii (Sahara mustard) along desert roadsides. Madroño 33:313–320.Google Scholar
[USDA NRCS] U.S. Departmentof Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2009. The PLANTS Database. Greensboro, NC National Plant Data Team. http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed June 4, 2009Google Scholar
van Kleunen, M., Weber, E., and Fischer, M. 2010. A meta-analysis of trait differences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecol. Lett. 13:235–245.Google Scholar
Went, F. W. 1949. Ecology of desert plants. II. The effect of rain and temperature on germination and growth. Ecology 80:1–13.Google Scholar
Went, F. W. 1979. Germination and seedling behavior of desert plants. Pages 477–489 in Perry, R. A., and Goodall, D. W., eds. Arid-Land Ecosystems: Structure, Functioning and Management. Volume 1. Cambridge Cambridge University Press. 923 p.Google Scholar
Werner, C., Zumkier, U., Beyschlag, W., and Maguas, C. 2010. High competitiveness of a resource demanding invasive acacia under low resource supply. Plant Ecol. 206:83–96.Google Scholar
Williamson, M. and Fitter, A. 1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77:1661–1666.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Marushia supplementary material

Supplementary material

Download Marushia supplementary material(File)
File 278.7 KB