Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:46:59.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluating landscape characteristics of predicted hotspots for plant invasions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2020

Adrián Lázaro-Lobo Open the ORCID record for Adrián Lázaro-Lobo [Opens in a new window] ,
Kristine O. Evans  and
Gary N. Ervin
Adrián Lázaro-Lobo*
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Biological Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS39762, USA
Kristine O. Evans
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS39762, USA
Gary N. Ervin
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS39762, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Adrián Lázaro-Lobo, Graduate Student, Department of Biological Sciences, Mississippi State University, 295 Lee Boulevard, Mississippi State, MS 39762. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Invasive species are widely recognized as a major threat to global diversity and an important factor associated with global change. Species distribution models (SDMs) have been widely applied to determine the range that invasive species could potentially occupy, but most examples focus on predictive variables at a single spatial scale. In this study, we simultaneously considered a broad range of variables related to climate, topography, land cover, land use, and propagule pressure to predict what areas in the southeastern United States are more susceptible to invasion by 45 invasive terrestrial plant species. Using expert-verified occurrence points from EDDMapS, we modeled invasion susceptibility at 30-m resolution for each species using a maximum entropy (MaxEnt) modeling approach. We then analyzed how environmental predictors affected susceptibility to invasion at different spatial scales. Climatic and land-use variables, especially minimum temperature of coldest month and distance to developed areas, were good predictors of landscape susceptibility to invasion. For most of the species tested, human-disturbed systems such as developed areas and barren lands were more prone to be invaded than areas that experienced minimal human interference. As expected, we found that landscape heterogeneity and the presence of corridors for propagule dispersal significantly increased landscape susceptibility to invasion for most species. However, we also found a number of species for which the susceptibility to invasion increased in landscapes with large core areas and/or less-aggregated patches. These exceptions suggest that even though we found the expected general patterns for susceptibility to invasion among most species, the influence of landscape composition and configuration on invasion risk is species specific.

Keywords

EDDMapSinvasive specieslandscape compositionlandscape configurationMaxEnt modelingspecies distribution models
Type
Research Article
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , September 2020 , pp. 163 - 175
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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

Associate Editor: Catherine Jarnevich, U.S. Geological Survey

References

Arif, F, Akbar, M (2005) Resampling air borne sensed data using bilinear interpolation algorithm. IEEE ICM 2005:62–65 Google Scholar
Booth, BD, Murphy, SD, Swanton, CJ (2003) Weed Ecology in Natural and Agricultural Systems. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. 303 pp CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradie, J, Leung, B (2017) A quantitative synthesis of the importance of variables used in MaxEnt species distribution models. J Biogeogr 44:1344–1361 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, BA (2009) Regional analysis of the impacts of climate change on cheatgrass invasion shows potential risk and opportunity. Global Change Biol 15:196–208 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, BA, Wilcove, DS, Oppenheimer, M (2010) Climate change increases risk of plant invasions in the eastern United States. Biol Invasions 12:1855–1872 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, RN, Sawyer, CD (2012) Plant species diversity of highway roadsides in southern New England. Northeast Nat 19:25–42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabra-Rivas, I, Saldaña, A, Castro-Díez, P, Gallien, L (2016) A multi–scale approach to identify invasion drivers and invaders’ future dynamics. Biol Invasions 18:411–426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catford, JA, Vesk, PA, White, MD, Wintle, BA (2011) Hotspots of plant invasion predicted by propagule pressure and ecosystem characteristics. Divers Distrib 17:1099–1110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, AD, Muñoz, ME, Koch, I (2005) Environmental information: placing biodiversity phenomena in an ecological and environmental context. Biodivers Inform 2:24–41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chytry, M, Vojtech, J, Pyseck, P, Hajek, O, Knollova, I, Lubomir, T, Danihelka, J (2008) Separating habitat invasibility by alien plants from the actual level of invasion. Ecology 89:1541–1553 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conn, JS, Stockdale, CA, Werdin-Pfisterer, NR, Morgan, JC (2010) Characterizing pathways of invasive plant spread to Alaska: II. Propagules from imported hay and straw. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:276–285 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crossman, ND, Bass, DA (2008) Application of common predictive habitat techniques for post–border weed risk management. Divers Distrib 14:213–224 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Antonio, CM, Meyerson, LA (2002) Exotic plant species as problems and solutions in ecological restoration: a synthesis. Restor Ecol 10:703–713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeMeester, JE, Richter, DdeB (2010) Differences in wetland nitrogen cycling between the invasive grass Microstegium vimineum and a diverse plant community. Ecol Appl 20:609–619 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, PF, Gedeon, K, Collar, NJ, Spottiswoode, CN, Wondafrash, M, Buchanan, GM (2012) The restricted range of the Ethiopian bush-crow Zavattariornis stresemanni is a consequence of high reliance on modified habitats within narrow climatic limits. J Ornithol 153:1031–1044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dormann, CF, McPherson, JM, Araújo, MB, Bolliger, RBJ, Carl, G, Davies, RG, Hirzel, A, Jetz, W, Kissling, WD, Kühn, I, Ohlemüller, R, Peres-Neto, PR, Reineking, B, Schroder, B, Schurr, FM, Wilson, R (2007) Methods to account for spatial autocorrelation in the analysis of species distributional data: a review. Ecography 30:609–628 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, SJ, Weltzin, JF, Parr, PD (2003) Assessment of non-native invasive plant species on the United States Department of Energy Oak Ridge National Environmental Research Park. Castanea 68:15–30 Google Scholar
Duan, RY, Kong, XQ, Huang, MY, Fan, WY, Wang, ZG (2014) The predictive performance and stability of six species distribution models. PLoS ONE 9:e112764 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[EDDMapS] Early Detection and Distribution Mapping System (2018) EDDMapS home page. University of Georgia–Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health. http://www.eddmaps.org. Accessed: February 5, 2018Google Scholar
Elith, J, Graham, CH, Anderson, RP, Ferrier, S, Guisan, A, Hijmans, RJ, Huettmann, F, Leathwick, JR, Lehmann, A, Li, J, Lohmann, LG, Loiselle, BA, Manion, G, Moritz, C, Nakamura, M, et al. (2006) Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29:129–151 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J, Leathwick, JR (2009) Species distribution models: ecological explanation and prediction across space and time. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:677–697 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elith, J, Phillips, SJ, Hastie, T, Dudík, M, Chee, YE, Yates, CJ (2011) A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers Distrib 17:43–57 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[ESRI] Environmental Systems Research Institute (2018) ArcGIS Desktop. ArcGIS v. 10.5.1. Redlands, CA: ESRIGoogle Scholar
Ficetola, GF, Thuiller, W, Miaud, C (2007) Prediction and validation of the potential global distribution of a problematic alien invasive species—the American bullfrog. Divers Distrib 13:476–485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fick, SE, Hijmans, RJ (2017) Worldclim 2: new 1–km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 37:4302–4315 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fielding, AH, Bell, JF (1997) A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environ Conserv 24:38–49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fournier, AM, White, ER, Heard, SB (2019) Site-selection bias and apparent population declines in long-term studies. Conserv Biol 33:1370–1379 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, J (2009) Mapping Species Distributions: Spatial Inference and Prediction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 319 pp Google Scholar
Hijmans, RJ, Graham, CH (2006) The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effects of climate change on species distributions. Global Change Biol 12:2272–2281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Homer, CG, Dewitz, JA, Yang, L, Jin, S, Danielson, P, Xian, G, Coulston, J, Herold, ND, Wickham, JD, Megown, K (2015) Completion of the 2011 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States—representing a decade of land cover change information. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 81:345–354 Google Scholar
Hui, C, Richardson, DM (2017) Invasion Dynamics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 321 pp CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iannone, BV, Potter, KM, Hamil, KA, Huang, W, Zhang, H, Guo, Q, Oswalt, CM, Woodall, CW, Fei, S (2016) Evidence of biotic resistance to invasions in forests of the eastern USA. Landscape Ecol 31:85–99 Google Scholar
Ibáñez, I, Silander, JA Jr, Allen, JM, Treanor, SA, Wilson, A (2009a) Identifying hotspots for plant invasions and forecasting focal points of further spread. J Appl Ecol 46:1219–1228 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibáñez, I, Silander, JA Jr, Wilson, AM, LaFleur, N, Tanaka, N, Tsuyama, I (2009b) Multivariate forecasts of potential distributions of invasive plant species. Ecol Appl 19:359–375 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kalle, R, Ramesh, T, Qureshi, Q, Sankar, K (2013) Predicting the distribution pattern of small carnivores in response to environmental factors in the Western Ghats. PLoS ONE 8:e79295 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katayama, N, Amano, T, Naoe, S, Yamakita, T, Komatsu, I, Takagawa, SI, Sato, N, Ueta, M, Miyashita, T (2014) Landscape heterogeneity–biodiversity relationship: effect of range size. PLoS ONE 9:e93359 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelly, R, Leach, K, Cameron, A, Maggs, CA, Reid, N (2014) Combining global climate and regional landscape models to improve prediction of invasion risk. Divers Distrib 20:884–894 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, SE, Grace, JB (2000) The effects of soil flooding on the establishment of cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica), a nonindigenous invader of the southeastern United States. Wetlands 20:300–306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhman, TR, Pearson, SM, Turner, MG (2013) Why does land–use history facilitate non–native plant invasion? A field experiment with Celastrus orbiculatus in the southern Appalachians. Biol Invasions 15:613–626 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulmatiski, A, Beard, KH, Stark, JM (2006) Soil history as a primary control on plant invasion in abandoned agricultural fields. J Appl Ecol 43:868–876 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, JC, Leishman, MR (2004) Invasion success of exotic plants in natural ecosystems: the role of disturbance, plant attributes and freedom from herbivores. Biol Conserv 117:215–226 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lázaro-Lobo, A, Ervin, GN (2019) A global examination on the differential impacts of roadsides on native vs. exotic and weedy plant species. Glob Ecol Conserv 17:e00555 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legendre, P (1993) Spatial autocorrelation: trouble or new paradigm? Ecology 74:1659–1673 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maguire, LA (2004) What can decision analysis do for invasive species management? Risk Anal 24:859–868 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mainali, KP, Warren, DL, Dhileepan, K, McConnachie, A, Strathie, L, Hassan, G, Karki, D, Shrestha, BB, Parmesan, C (2015) Projecting future expansion of invasive species: comparing and improving methodologies for species distribution modeling. Global Change Biol 21:4464–4480 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melbourne, BA, Cornell, HV, Davies, KF, Dugaw, CJ, Elmendorf, S, Freestone, AL, Hall, RJ, Harrison, S, Hastings, A, Holland, M, Holyoak, M, Lambrinos, J, Moore, K, Yokomizo, H (2007) Invasion in a heterogeneous world: resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover? Ecol Lett 10:77–94 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mosher, ES, Silander, JA, Latimer, AM (2009) The role of land-use history in major invasions by woody plant species in the northeastern North American landscape. Biol Invasions 11:2317 10.1007/s10530-008-9418-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullahey, J, Shilling, D, Mislevy, P, Akanda, R (1998) Invasion of tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum) into the U.S.: lessons learned. Weed Technol 12:733–736 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswalt, CM, Oswalt, SN, Clatterbuck, WK (2007) Effects of Microstegium vimineum (Trin.) A. Camus on native woody species density and diversity in a productive mixed-hardwood forest in Tennessee. For Ecol Manag 242:727–732 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswalt, SN, Oswalt, CM (2011) The extent of selected nonnative invasive plants on southern forest lands. Pages 447–459 in Fei S, Lhotka JM, Stringer JW, Gottschalk KW, Miller GW, eds. Proceedings of the 17th Central Hardwood Forest Conference. Lexington, KY: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-78Google Scholar
Parks, CG, Radosevich, SR, Endress, BA, Naylor, BJ, Anzinger, D, Rew, LJ, Maxwellc, BD, Dwired, KA (2005) Natural and land use history of the Northwest mountain ecoregions (USA) in relation to patterns of plant invasion. Perspect Plant Ecol Syst 7:137–158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauchard, A, Alaback, PB (2004) Influence of elevation, land use, and landscape context on patterns of alien plant invasions along roadsides in protected areas of south–central Chile. Conserv Biol 18:238–248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, AT, Soberón, J, Pearson, RG, Anderson, RP, Martinez-Meyer, E, Nakamura, M, Araujo, MB (2011) Ecological niches and geographic distributions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 315 pp CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petitpierre, B, Broennimann, O, Kueffer, C, Daehler, C, Guisan, A (2017) Selecting predictors to maximize the transferability of species distribution models: lessons from cross–continental plant invasions. Global Ecol Biogeogr 26:275–287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, SJ (2017) A Brief Tutorial on Maxent. Princeton, NJ: AT&T Research. http://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/maxent/. Accessed: March 21, 2018Google Scholar
Phillips, SJ, Anderson, RP, Dudík, M, Schapire, RE, Blair, ME (2017) Opening the black box: an open-source release of Maxent. Ecography 40:887–893 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, SJ, Dudík, M, Elith, J, Graham, CH, Lehmann, A, Leathwick, J, Ferrier, S (2009) Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecol Appl 19:181–197 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pyšek, P, Richardson, DM (2010) Invasive species, environmental change and management, and health. Annu Rev Environ Resour 35:25–55 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2018) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R–project.org Google Scholar
Ricketts, AM, Sandercock, BK (2016) Patch-burn grazing increases habitat heterogeneity and biodiversity of small mammals in managed rangelands. Ecosphere 7:e01431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riitters, K, Potter, K, Iannone, BV, Oswalt, C, Fei, S, Guo, Q (2017) Landscape correlates of forest plant invasions: a high-resolution analysis across the eastern United States. Divers Distrib 23:1–11 Google Scholar
Robinson, AP, Walshe, T, Burgman, MA, Nunn, M (2017) Invasive Species: Risk Assessment and Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 412 pp CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouget, M, Richardson, DM (2003) Inferring process from pattern in plant invasions: a semimechanistic model incorporating propagule pressure and environmental factors. Am Nat 162:713–724 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sakai, AK, Allendorf, FW, Holt, JS, Lodge, DM, Molofsky, J, With, KA, Baughman, S, Cabin, RJ, Cohen, JE, Ellstrand, NC, McCauley, DE, O’Neil, P, Parker, IM, Thompson, JN, Weller, SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Säumel, I, Kowarik, I (2010) Urban rivers as dispersal corridors for primarily wind–dispersed invasive tree species. Landsc Urban Plann 94:244–249 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sofaer, HR, Jarnevich, CS, Pearse, IS, Smyth, RL, Auer, S, Cook, GL, Edwards, JTC, Guala, GF, Howard, TG, Morisette, JT, Hamilton, H (2019) Development and delivery of species distribution models to inform decision-making. BioScience 69:544–557 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theoharides, KA, Dukes, JS (2007) Plant invasion across space and time: factors affecting nonindigenous species success during four stages of invasion. New Phytol 176:256–273 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tognelli, MF, Roig-Junent, SA, Marvaldi, AE, Flores, GE, Lobo, JM (2009) An evaluation of methods for modelling distribution of Patagonian insects. Rev Chil Hist Nat 82:347–360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trusty, JL, Lockaby, BG, Zipperer, WC, Goertzen, LR (2007) Identity of naturalised exotic Wisteria (Fabaceae) in the south-eastern United States. Weed Res 47:479–487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[USCB] U.S. Census Bureau (2017) Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER). http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger. Accessed: April 5, 2018Google Scholar
[USGS] U.S. Geological Survey (2017) The National Map. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior. https://www.nationalmap.gov. Accessed: April 5, 2018Google Scholar
VanDerWal, J, Falconi, L, Januchowski, S, Shoo, L, Storlie, C (2019) Species Distribution Modelling Tools: Tools for Processing Data. R package. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=SDMTools Google Scholar
Vetter, VM, Tjaden, NB, Jaeschke, A, Buhk, C, Wahl, V, Wasowicz, P, Jentsch, A (2018) Invasion of a legume ecosystem engineer in a cold biome alters plant biodiversity. Front Plant Sci 9:715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vilà, M, Ibáñez, I (2011) Plant invasions in the landscape. Landsc Ecol 26:461–472 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vilà, M, Pujadas, J (2001) Land–use and socio–economic correlates of plant invasions in European and North African countries. Biol Conserv 10:397–401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitousek, PM, D’Antonio, CM, Loope, LL, Rejmanek, M, Westbrooks, R (1997) Introduced species: a significant component of human–caused global change. NZ J Ecol 21:1–16 Google Scholar
Walker, GA, Robertson, MP, Gaertner, M, Gallien, L, Richardson, DM (2017) The potential range of Ailanthus altissima (tree of heaven) in South Africa: the roles of climate, land use and disturbance. Biol Invasions 19:3675–3690 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wavrek, M, Heberling, JM, Fei, S, Kalisz, S (2017) Herbaceous invaders in temperate forests: a systematic review of their ecology and proposed mechanisms of invasion. Biol Invasions 19:3079–3097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welk, E (2004) Constraints in range predictions of invasive plant species due to non-equilibrium distribution patterns: purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in North America. Ecol Model 179:551–567 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, AM, Kumar, S, Brown, CS, Stohlgren, TJ, Bromberg, J (2016) Field validation of an invasive species Maxent model. Ecol Inform 36:126–134 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wisz, MS, Hijmans, RJ, Li, J, Peterson, AT, Graham, CH, Guisan, A (2008) Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Divers Distrib 14:763–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
With, KA (2002) The landscape ecology of invasive spread. Conserv Biol 16:1192–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, KL, Bouchet, PJ, Caley, MJ, Mengersen, K, Randin, CF, Parnell, S, Fielding, AH, Bamford, AJ, Ban, S, Barbosa, AM, Dormann, CF, Elith, J, Embling, CB, Ervin, GN, Fisher, R, et al. (2018) Outstanding challenges in the transferability of ecological models. Trends Ecol Evol 33:790–802 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimmermann, NE, Yoccoz, NG, Edwards, TC, Meier, ES, Thuiller, W, Guisan, A, Schmatz, DR, Pearman, PB (2009) Climatic extremes improve predictions of spatial patterns of tree species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:19723–19728 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Lázaro-Lobo et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S5

Download Lázaro-Lobo et al. supplementary material(File)
File 92.6 KB