Suppr超能文献

当无处可逃时:天敌对本地植物、入侵植物和非入侵植物的影响。

When there is no escape: the effects of natural enemies on native, invasive, and noninvasive plants.

作者信息

Parker Ingrid M, Gilbert Gregory S

机构信息

Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, 1156 High Street, EEB/EMS, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA.

出版信息

Ecology. 2007 May;88(5):1210-24. doi: 10.1890/06-1377.

Abstract

An important question in the study of biological invasions is the degree to which successful invasion can be explained by release from control by natural enemies. Natural enemies dominate explanations of two alternate phenomena: that most introduced plants fail to establish viable populations (biotic resistance hypothesis) and that some introduced plants become noxious invaders (natural enemies hypothesis). We used a suite of 18 phylogenetically related native and nonnative clovers (Trifolium and Medicago) and the foliar pathogens and invertebrate herbivores that attack them to answer two questions. Do native species suffer greater attack by natural enemies relative to introduced species at the same site? Are some introduced species excluded from native plant communities because they are susceptible to local natural enemies? We address these questions using three lines of evidence: (1) the frequency of attack and composition of fungal pathogens and herbivores for each clover species in four years of common garden experiments, as well as susceptibility to inoculation with a common pathogen; (2) the degree of leaf damage suffered by each species in common garden experiments; and (3) fitness effects estimated using correlative approaches and pathogen removal experiments. Introduced species showed no evidence of escape from pathogens, being equivalent to native species as a group in terms of infection levels, susceptibility, disease prevalence, disease severity (with more severe damage on introduced species in one year), the influence of disease on mortality, and the effect of fungicide treatment on mortality and biomass. In contrast, invertebrate herbivores caused more damage on native species in two years, although the influence of herbivore attack on mortality did not differ between native and introduced species. Within introduced species, the predictions of the biotic resistance hypothesis were not supported: the most invasive species showed greater infection, greater prevalence and severity of disease, greater prevalence of herbivory, and greater effects of fungicide on biomass and were indistinguishable from noninvasive introduced species in all other respects. Therefore, although herbivores preferred native over introduced species, escape from pest pressure cannot be used to explain why some introduced clovers are common invaders in coastal prairie while others are not.

摘要

生物入侵研究中的一个重要问题是,成功入侵在多大程度上可以用摆脱天敌控制来解释。天敌主导了对两种交替现象的解释:大多数引入植物无法建立可行种群(生物抗性假说),以及一些引入植物成为有害入侵者(天敌假说)。我们使用了一组18种系统发育相关的本地和非本地三叶草(三叶草属和苜蓿属)以及攻击它们的叶部病原体和无脊椎动物食草动物来回答两个问题。在同一地点,本地物种相对于引入物种是否遭受天敌更大的攻击?一些引入物种是否因为易受当地天敌影响而被排除在本地植物群落之外?我们通过三条证据来解决这些问题:(1)在四年的共同花园实验中,每种三叶草物种受到真菌病原体和食草动物攻击的频率及组成,以及对接种常见病原体的易感性;(2)在共同花园实验中每个物种遭受的叶片损伤程度;(3)使用相关方法和病原体去除实验估计的适合度效应。引入物种没有显示出摆脱病原体的迹象,就感染水平、易感性、疾病流行率、疾病严重程度(有一年对引入物种的损害更严重)、疾病对死亡率的影响以及杀菌剂处理对死亡率和生物量的影响而言,作为一个群体与本地物种相当。相比之下,无脊椎动物食草动物在两年内对本地物种造成了更多损害,尽管食草动物攻击对死亡率的影响在本地物种和引入物种之间没有差异。在引入物种中,生物抗性假说的预测未得到支持:最具入侵性的物种显示出更高的感染率、更高的疾病流行率和严重程度、更高的食草动物发生率,以及杀菌剂对生物量的更大影响,并且在所有其他方面与非入侵性引入物种没有区别。因此,尽管食草动物更喜欢本地物种而非引入物种,但摆脱害虫压力不能用来解释为什么一些引入的三叶草在沿海草原是常见的入侵者而另一些则不是。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验