Search

Background and Aims A common hypothesis to explain plants' invasive success is that release from natural enemies in the introduced range selects for reduced allocation to resistance traits and a subsequent increase in resources available for growth and competitive ability (evolution of increased competitive ability, EICA). However, studies that have investigated this hypothesis have been incomplete as they either did not test for all aspects of competitive ability or did not select appropriate competitors. Methods Here, the prediction of increased competitive ability was examined with the invasive plant Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) in a set of common-garden experiments that addressed these aspects by carefully distinguishing between competitive effect and response of invasive and native plants, and by using both intraspecific and interspecific competition settings with a highly vigorous neighbour, Urtica dioica (stinging nettle), which occurs in both ranges. Key Results While the intraspecific competition results showed no differences in competitive effect or response between native and invasive plants, the interspecific competition experiment revealed greater competitive response and effect of invasive plants in both biomass and seed production. Conclusions The use of both intra- and interspecific competition experiments in this study revealed opposing results. While the first experiment refutes the EICA hypothesis, the second shows strong support for it, suggesting evolutionarily increased competitive ability in invasive populations of L. salicaria. It is suggested that the use of naturally co-occurring heterospecifics, rather than conspecifics, may provide a better evaluation of the possible evolutionary shift towards greater competitive ability. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background and Aims The enemy release hypothesis assumes that invasive plants lose their co-evolved natural enemies during introduction into the new range. This study tested, as proposed by the evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis, whether escape from enemies results in a decrease in defence ability in plants from the invaded range. Two straightforward aspects of the EICA are examined: (1) if invasives have lost their enemies and their defence, they should be more negatively affected by their full natural pre-invasion herbivore spectrum than their native conspecifics; and (2) the genetic basis of evolutionary change in response to enemy release in the invasive range has not been taken sufficiently into account. Methods Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) from several populations in its native (Europe) and invasive range (North America) was exposed to all above-ground herbivores in replicated natural populations in the native range. The experiment was performed both with plants raised from field-collected seeds as well as with offspring of these where maternal effects were removed. Key Results Absolute and relative leaf damage was higher for introduced than for native plants. Despite having smaller height growth rate, invasive plants attained a much larger final size than natives irrespective of damage, indicating large tolerance rather than effective defence. Origin effects on response to herbivory and growth were stronger in second-generation plants, suggesting that invasive potential through enemy release has a genetic basis. Conclusions The findings support two predictions of the EICA hypothesis – a genetically determined difference between native and invasive plants in plant vigour and response to enemies – and point to the importance of experiments that control for maternal effects and include the entire spectrum of native range enemies. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]