Factors such as increased mobility of humans, global trade and climate change are affecting the range of many species, and cause large-scale translocations of species beyond their native range. Many introduced species have a strong negative influence on the new local environment and lead to high economic costs. There is a strong interest to understand why some species are successful in invading new environments and others not. Most of our understanding and generalizations thereof, however, are based on studies of plants and animals, and little is known on invasion processes of microorganisms. We conducted a microcosm experiment to understand factors promoting the success of biological invasions of aquatic microorganisms. In a controlled lab experiment, protist and rotifer species originally isolated in North America invaded into a natural, field-collected community of microorganisms of European origin. To identify the importance of environmental disturbances on invasion success, we either repeatedly disturbed the local patches, or kept them as undisturbed controls. We measured both short-term establishment and long-term invasion success, and correlated it with species-specific life-history traits. We found that environmental disturbances significantly affected invasion success. Depending on the invading species’ identity, disturbances were either promoting or decreasing invasion success. The interaction between habitat disturbance and species identity was especially pronounced for long-term invasion success. Growth rate was the most important trait promoting invasion success, especially when the species invaded into a disturbed local community. We conclude that neither species traits nor environmental factors alone conclusively predict invasion success, but an integration of both of them is necessary.
References
[1]
Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics 52: 273–288.
[2]
Foucaud J, Orivel J, Loiseau A, Delabie JHC, Jourdan H, et al. (2010) Worldwide invasion by the little fire ant: routes of introduction and eco-evolutionary pathways. Evolutionary Applications 3: 363–374.
[3]
Vitousek PM, Dantonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmanek M, Westbrooks R (1997) Introduced species: A significant component of human-caused global change. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 21: 1–16.
[4]
Pimentel D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2002) Environmental and economic costs of alien arthropods and other organisms in the United States. Invasive Arthropods in Agriculture: Problems and Solutions: 107–117.
[5]
Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48: 607–615.
[6]
Williamson M, Fitter A (1996) The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77: 1661–1666.
[7]
Litchman E (2010) Invisible invaders: non-pathogenic invasive microbes in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters 13: 1560–1572.
[8]
Warren PH, Law R, Weatherby AJ (2005) Invasion biology as a community process: messages from microbial microcosms. In: Cadotte M, McMahon SM, Fukami T, editors. Conceptual ecology and invasions biology. London: Springer.
[9]
Field CB, Behrenfeld MJ, Randerson JT, Falkowski P (1998) Primary production of the biosphere: Integrating terrestrial and oceanic components. Science 281: 237–240.
[10]
Spaulding SA, Elwell L (2007) Increase in nuisance blooms and geographic expansion of the freshwater diatom Didymosphenia geminata. 38 p.
[11]
van Elsas JD, Chiurazzi M, Mallon CA, Elhottova D, Kristufek V, et al. (2012) Microbial diversity determines the invasion of soil by a bacterial pathogen. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109: 1159–1164.
[12]
Funk J, Cleland EE, Suding KN, Zavaleta ES (2008) Restoration through reassembly: plant traits and invasion resistance. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23: 695–703.
[13]
Hamilton MA, Murray BR, Cadotte MW, Hose GC, Baker AC, et al. (2005) Life-history correlates of plant invasiveness at regional and continental scales. Ecology Letters 8: 1066–1074.
[14]
van Kleunen M, Weber E, Fischer M (2010) A meta-analysis of trait differences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecology Letters 13: 235–245.
[15]
Altermatt F, Hottinger J, Ebert D (2007) Parasites promote host gene flow in a metapopulation. Evolutionary Ecology 21: 561–575.
[16]
Torchin ME, Lafferty KD, Dobson AP, McKenzie VJ, Kuris AM (2003) Introduced species and their missing parasites. Nature 421: 628–630.
[17]
Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16: 199–204.
[18]
Kennedy TA, Naeem S, Howe KM, Knops JMH, Tilman D, et al. (2002) Biodiversity as a barrier to ecological invasion. Nature 417: 636–638.
[19]
Stachowicz JJ, Whitlatch RB, Osman RW (1999) Species diversity and invasion resistance in a marine ecosystem. Science 286: 1577–1579.
[20]
Lake JC, Leishman MR (2004) Invasion success of exotic in natural ecosystems: the role of disturbance, plant attributes and freedom from herbivores. Biological Conservation 117: 215–226.
[21]
Thompson K, Hodgson JG, Grime JP, Burke MJW (2001) Plant traits and temporal scale: evidence from a 5-year invasion experiment using native species. Journal of Ecology 89: 1054–1060.
[22]
Crawley MJ, Harvey PH, Purvis A (1996) Comparative ecology of the native and alien floras of the British Isles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 351: 1251–1259.
[23]
Melbourne BA, Hastings A (2009) Highly Variable Spread Rates in Replicated Biological Invasions: Fundamental Limits to Predictability. Science 325: 1536–1539.
[24]
Sousa WP (1984) The role of disturbances in natural communities. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 15: 353–392.
Carrara F, Altermatt F, Rodriguez-Iturbe I, Rinaldo A (2012) Dendritic connectivity controls biodiversity patterns in experimental metacommunities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109: 5761–5766.
[27]
Altermatt F, Schreiber S, Holyoak M (2011) Interactive effects of disturbance and dispersal directionality on species richness and composition in metacommunities. Ecology 92: 859–870.
[28]
Altermatt F, Bieger A, Carrara F, Rinaldo A, Holyoak M (2011) Effects of connectivity and recurrent local disturbances on community structure and population density in experimental metacommunities. PLoS ONE 6: e19525 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019525.
[29]
Lozon JD, Macisaac HJ (1997) Biological invasions: Are they dependent on disturbance? Environmental Reviews 5: 131–144.
[30]
Altermatt F, Holyoak M (2012) Spatial clustering of habitat structure effects patterns of community composition and diversity. Ecology 93: 1125–1133.
[31]
Crawley MJ (2007) The R Book. Chichester: Wiley. 942 p.
[32]
Jeschke JM, Strayer DL (2005) Invasion success of vertebrates in Europe and North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 9990–9990.
[33]
Holdich DM, Reeve ID (1991) Distribution of freshwater crayfish in the British Isles, with particular reference to crayfish plague, alien introductions and water quality. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 1: 139–158.
[34]
Haddad NM, Holyoak M, Mata TM, Davies KF, Melbourne BA, et al. (2008) Species’ traits predict the effects of disturbance and productivity on diversity. Ecology Letters 11: 348–356.
[35]
Istvanovics V, Shafik HM, Presing M, Juhos S (2000) Growth and phosphate uptake kinetics of the cyanobacterium, Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii (Cyanophyceae) in throughflow cultures. Freshwater Biology 43: 257–275.
