Research Article |
Corresponding author: Marija Milanović ( marija.milanovic@ufz.de ) Academic editor: Johannes Kollmann
© 2020 Marija Milanović, Sonja Knapp, Petr Pyšek, Ingolf Kühn.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Milanović M, Knapp S, Pyšek P, Kühn I (2020) Trait–environment relationships of plant species at different stages of the introduction process. NeoBiota 58: 55-74. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.58.51655
|
The success of alien plant species can be attributed to differences in functional traits compared to less successful aliens as well as to native species, and thus their adaptation to environmental conditions. Studies have shown that alien (especially invasive) plant species differ from native species in traits such as specific leaf area (SLA), height, seed size or flowering period, where invasive species showed significantly higher values for these traits. Different environmental conditions, though, may promote the success of native or alien species, leading to competitive exclusion due to dissimilarity in traits between the groups. However, native and alien species can also be similar, with environmental conditions selecting for the same set of traits across species. So far, the effect of traits on invasion success has been studied without considering environmental conditions. To understand this interaction we examined the trait–environment relationship within natives, and two groups of alien plant species differing in times of introduction (archaeophytes vs. neophytes). Further, we investigated the difference between non-invasive and invasive neophytes. We analyzed the relationship between functional traits of 1,300 plant species occurring in 1000 randomly selected grid-cells across Germany and across different climatic conditions and land-cover types. Our results show that temperature, precipitation, the proportion of natural habitats, as well as the number of land-cover patches and geological patches affect archaeophytes and neophytes differently, regarding their level of urbanity (in neophytes negative for all non-urban land covers) and self-pollination (mainly positive for archaeophytes). Similar patterns were observed between non-invasive and invasive neophytes, where additionally, SLA, storage organs and the beginning of flowering were strongly related to several environmental factors. Native species did not express any strong relationship between traits and environment, possibly due to a high internal heterogeneity within this group of species. The relationship between trait and environment was more pronounced in neophytes compared to archaeophytes, and most pronounced in invasive plants. The alien species at different stages of the invasion process showed both similarities and differences in terms of the relationship between traits and the environment, showing that the success of introduced species is context-dependent.
archaeophytes, functional traits, GABLIS, indigenous plants, introduced species, invasive species, native species, neophytes
Invasive alien species (IAS) have a large ecological impact on the diversity and abundance of native plant species (
The distribution of alien species is habitat-dependent (
To perform comparative studies of the invasiveness of species, several approaches are possible, as conceptualized by
Functional traits can be used to characterize the success of alien species over natives. Alien species (‘exotic’ or ‘non-native’ species) are classified, based on their residence time in the area, into ‘archaeophytes’ (alien species introduced before 1500 CE), and ‘neophytes’ (introduced after 1500 CE). Representatives of both groups can be classified according to the stage they reached in the invasion process into casual, naturalized or invasive; the latter term applies if they spread rapidly, become widely distributed (
A range of environmental variables such as land cover, climate, and geological bedrock, have been shown to affect native and different groups of non-native species differently, and changes in land cover (providing a proxy for habitat) and/or climatic factors (particularly changes in temperature and rainfall amount and range) may particularly benefit invasive species (
The reason why native and alien species may respond differently to environmental factors is often attributed to their functional traits.
Evaluating the relationships between the environment and plant functional traits is crucial for understanding the response of species of different origin and different stages in the invasion process to changing environmental conditions (climate change, land-cover change). Here, we quantified the relationships between climate, land cover and bedrock with relevant plant traits using a dataset with 1,300 plant species in Germany. We examined several groups of plants including natives and different subgroups of alien species across 1,000 randomly selected grid cells in Germany. The following questions are addressed: (i) Is there a relationship between plant traits and environment in native and alien species? (ii) How do these relationships depend on the residence time of plant species (with archaeophytes being introduced earlier and neophytes more recently)? (iii) How do these relationships differ between non-invasive and invasive neophytes?
Species occurrence data was obtained from FLORKART (Federal Agency for Nature Conservation / Network Phytodiversity Germany; http://www.floraweb.de) for the period 1950–2013. FLORKART includes over 14 million records on species occurrences collected by thousands of volunteers. Species were analyzed at a spatial resolution of grid cells with 10' longitude × 6' latitude (~ on average 130 km2 ranging from 117 to 140 km2). A presence/absence matrix was generated for a random sample of 1000 grid cells that contained at least 45 (out of 50) species that can be reasonably assumed to occur in every grid cell and serve as proxy for mapping quality (
Trait data for all plant species were obtained from the Database on Biological and Ecological Traits of the Flora of Germany, BiolFlor (
Functional traits, environmental associations (hemerobic level and urbanity) and invasiveness data (GABLIS list) and sources used for the analysis.
Trait | Values | Units/description | Source |
---|---|---|---|
Mean specific leaf area (SLA) | metric | mm2/mg | LEDA |
Seed mass | metric | mg | LEDA |
Mean plant height | metric | m | LEDA |
Storage organs | yes / no / multiple | Presence | BiolFlor |
Absence | |||
Multiple storage organs | |||
Pollen vector | multiple / insect/ wind / self | Multiple pollination types | BiolFlor |
Wind pollination | |||
Self-pollination (including two subgroups: selfing by a neighboring flower and selfing in an unopened flower) | |||
Insect pollination | |||
Flowering period | months | Beginning of flowering period | BiolFlor |
End of flowering period | |||
Duration of flowering period | |||
Urbanity | 1–5 values for different states of urbanity | 1 – urbanophobic (species grows exclusively outside urban areas) | BiolFlor |
2 – moderately urbanophobic (species prefers non-urban areas) | |||
3 – urbanoneutral (species has no preference), | |||
4 – moderately urbanophilic (species grows predominantly in urban areas) | |||
5 – urbanophilic (species grow exclusively in urban areas) | |||
Hemerobic level | level of naturalness with values 1–9 | Polyhemerob and α-euhemerob, values 1–2 (species preference for artificial habitats) | BiolFlor |
β-euhemerob and α-mesohemerob, values 3–4 (species prefers altered habitats) | |||
β-mesohemerob and α-oligohemerob, values 5–6 (species preference for moderately altered habitats); | |||
β-oligohemerob and γ-oligohemerob, values 7–8 (species prefers semi-natural habitats) | |||
Ahemerob, value of 9 (species preference for natural habitats) | |||
GABLIS sublist | no / ML / AL | Neophytes not present on the list | GABLIS |
Neophytes on the management Black list (ML) | |||
Neophytes on the action Black list (AL) |
Climate data (temperature, precipitation; Table
Environmental variables and their sources used in the 4th corner analyses of trait–environment relationships of plant species in Germany.
Variable | Abbreviation | Categories | Unit | Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
Temperature | tmn | - mean temperature of the coldest month | °C | Fronzek, Carter and Jylhä 2012 |
tmx | - mean temperature of the warmest month | |||
Precipitation | - mean annual precipitation | mm | Fronzek Carter and Jylhä 2012 | |
- precipitation range of the year | ||||
Land cover | arable land (%) | Land cover proportion of: | proportion | Corine Land Cover (CLC) |
natural cover (%) | - arable land | |||
urban cover (%) | - natural and semi natural areas | |||
- urban areas | ||||
Number of CLC patches | CLC patches | Total number of land cover patches per grid cell | Corine Land Cover | |
Geological types | Proportion of subsoils: | proportion | Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe | |
- calcareous | ||||
- loess | ||||
- sand | ||||
Number of geological patches | Geological patches | Total number of geological patches per grid cell (regardless of the number of geological types). | Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe |
We analyzed the relationship between traits and environment across native and alien plant species. For each group (natives, archaeophytes, neophytes, non-invasive and invasive neophytes) matrices of species presence/absence × grid cell were created (S). Correspondingly, environmental matrices (environment × grid cell, E) and trait matrices (traits × species, T) for every status group were compiled. To directly associate matrices S with E and T, we used a fourth corner approach as implemented in the function traitglm ()of mvabund in R (
The data analysis was performed using R, version 3.6.1 (R Core Team 2017). The analysis of a larger matrix (e.g. native species) took 19 days on a Dell PowerEdge R930 Server with 4 * CPU E7-8867 v4 2.4 GHz (72 Cores) and 6 TB RAM with Windows 2016.
Overall, there was an increase in the number of prominent trait–environment relationships from native species to non-invasive archaeophytes, non-invasive and invasive neophytes (Fig.
Fourth-corner plots for a archaeophytes b all neophytes lumped together regardless of status c non-invasive neophytes, and d invasive neophytes. Figure shows standardized interaction coefficients for plant traits (y-axis) and environmental variables (x-axis). Strong relationships are shown in blue (positive) and red (negative) while color intensity shows interaction strength with coefficient values on log scale. Abbreviations: tmn – mean temperature of the coldest month; tmx – mean temperature of the warmest month; CLC patches – total number of Corine Land Cover patches per grid cell.
Native species in Germany showed high heterogeneity in their functional traits and habitat conditions; thus the relationships between traits and environment were weak (ranging from -0.0003 to 0.01; Suppl. material
The frequency of archaeophytes well adapted to urban environmental conditions (urbanity; Fig.
With higher temperatures of the warmest month, species with high seed mass, wind- or self-pollination, high level of naturalness and those beginning to flower early will increase, while those with a long flowering period will decrease. Increasing amounts of precipitation disadvantaged small species that prefer artificial habitats but promoted species with high SLA, seed mass, presence of storage organs and multiple storage, self-pollination, as well as early beginning and late end of flowering.
Mean annual precipitation and number of CLC patches showed a strong positive relationship with multiple storage organs, yet mean temperature of the coldest month negatively affected this trait (Fig.
Increasing winter temperature positively affected wind- and self-pollination and flowering duration, whereas tall urbanophilic species were negatively affected (Fig.
The temperature of the warmest month was positively related to SLA, multiple storage organs, self-pollination and negatively to duration of flowering (Fig.
Differences among invasive neophytes (black list) were positively associated with land cover and mostly negatively with geological predictors. Neophytes with a limited distribution in Germany (action list) had positive relationships with all three types of land cover and with number of CLC patches and negative associations with calcareous, sandy substrates and number of geological patches.
Archaeophytes and neophytes showed several contrasting trait–environment relationships (Fig.
Further, we observed differences between non-invasive neophytes and invasive neophytes (Fig.
We did not record any strong trait–environment relationships for native species, which may be due to the heterogeneity of different ecological groups. Preliminary tests (not shown) indicated that this scarcity of trait–environment relationships was not an artifact of the large sample size of native species. This is because (overall) native species colonize a much wider range of environmental conditions in their native range than species alien to that range. Alien species, for example, are rarely found under extreme environmental conditions such as in mountains, seashores, xeric habitats, bogs or fens (
We observed a lower number of strong trait–environment relationships for archaeophytes than neophytes, whereas in invasive neophytes (i.e. those on the GABLIS list) strong relationships were most frequent. Climatic variables had a high explanatory power in all groups. Traits of neophytes were mainly affected by climate and different geological types, and rarely by land cover. Most of the traits of archaeophytes were only affected by climatic conditions, such as temperature and mean annual precipitation (while precipitation range had little effect on their traits) and rarely by other environmental variables. Archaeophytes in Central Europe were predominantly introduced from the Mediterranean and the Middle East (
We observed that relationships between environment and traits for different groups of alien species are more often similar rather than contrasting (e.g. height decreases with annual precipitation for both neophytes and archaeophytes; beginning of flowering shifts to earlier months with increasing winter temperature and precipitation for invasive and non-invasive neophytes, etc.). Plant growth (e.g. biomass, height, leaf size) and phenology are directly influenced by temperature (
As to the best of our knowledge, no statistical test allows the formal comparison of results across different fourth-corner analyses; we have to interpret differences among the trait-environment responses of different groups qualitatively. Trait-environment relationships were similar (positive or negative, respectively) for archaeophytes and neophytes in 13 cases but differed in seven cases. Primarily, urbanity expressed contrasting relationships, suggesting human-induced propagule pressure as an important driver. Neophytes tend to be more urbanophilic, thus the increase in temperature was positively related to this trait (urban heat island effect;
The majority of neophytes (especially invasive) are pollinated either by insects or wind, whereas archaeophytes are often self-pollinated (
Flowering phenology is important for the successful spread of invasive species (
Alien plants that have often been introduced for their aesthetic features as ornamental plants can attract pollinators (colorful and fragrant flowers) and divert them from native plants (
Climatic factors did not have a different effect on the occurrence of invasive species from the management or action black list. Species on the action list are more likely to be found in all three types of land cover than those from the management list. We can, therefore, expect that species which are invasive but still of limited distribution, will spread, especially as habitats become more fragmented (occurrence of action list species shows an increase with CLC number of patches).
Geological bedrocks did not have a major effect on most of the traits in different groups, despite explaining roughly a quarter of plant distribution variability in Germany (
Different land-cover types as well as the number of land-cover patches and geological patches had an effect on most of the traits of invasive neophytes, and very little (or no effect) on archaeophytes. Furthermore, landscape transformation and heterogeneity have an effect on invasive species in different stages of invasion and fragmentation of the landscape may facilitate the spread of invasive species (
Many studies have shown that functional traits of alien species are associated with invasiveness (
Invasive neophytes mainly show positive trait-environment relationships. Since the values for most of the traits increased with the incorporated environmental factors (especially climatic and land cover variables), we can expect future climate and land-cover change to affect invasive neophytes more strongly than other alien groups. We showed that climate may affect in particular SLA, insect pollination and phenology of invasive species, whereas land cover may mainly influence height, seed mass and wind pollination. Climate change could affect archaeophytes as well. They mainly showed positive relationships with climatic variables, and their values increased with the increase in temperature and precipitation. Future studies on the relationship between functional traits and environment of invasive plants are required in order to examine the effects of climate change or land cover changes. There is evidence that climate change may promote invasiveness (
We acknowledge funding from the Helmholtz Association (Research School ESCALATE, VH-KO-613, Marija Milanović). Petr Pyšek was supported by EXPRO grant no. 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation) and long-term research development project RVO 67985939 (Czech Academy of Sciences).
Tables S1, S2
Data type: model output
Explanation note: Table S1. Coefficient values from traitglm model for (a) native species, (b) archaeophytes, (c) neophytes, (d) non-invasive neophytes, (e) invasive neophytes in Germany. Coefficients describe how traits are related to environmental conditions; values show strength of interaction and direction (positive/negative). Table S2. Results of anova.traitglm for different groups of non-native species with 99 permutations (probability integral transform residual bootstrap (PIT-trap) block resampling which accounts for correlation in testing).